[Weekend Design] New Classes?

[Alzrius]

I also think that a class should have at least some - if not mostly - new abilities, rather than only having abilities from other classes mixed together.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

Another vote for the "new" versus simply "blended" abilities. Although I'll note: In some cases, it's nice to grab something from one class or another, but because it relies on levels in that particular class, it's not really of much/any use to the blended. Being able to "substitute" one of the new funky abilities for an "old" ability with the ranks of the new class counting would be nice.

If that makes sense.

Basically, if you're going with a "new" class which is a blend/extension of 2 other classes, the new class should have its own abilities. That makes it unique as opposed to simply "multiclassing made easy". On the other hand, being able to substitute an "old" ability from one of the previous classes might be a nice option to includes as well.

Something along the lines of the Alternative Class Features that the PHB2 had. Like Barbarians replaced Rage with Berserk Strength. The Ranger got rid of the animal companion and picked up Distracting Shot.

The Alternative Class features allow a player to play to a different strength of the character and give up something that's not useful for them otherwise. Being able to do something similar with a new blended class might be nice too. Instead of multiclassing through several different classes to get the character type that's envisioned, they can grab a hybrid class and then substitute this or that to tweak it further.

Sorry, it's kinda vague... I'm tired and just finished taking the wife out for her birthday. I'll look this over tomorrow and see if I can make myself clearer.

 

[DItheringFool]

sounds like you're getting more of my money!!!

Hey, when/where can we order a print copy of Trailblazer?

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

sounds like you're getting more of my money!!!

Not for more classes, I won't. I'll post them for free somewhere.

Hey, when/where can we order a print copy of Trailblazer?

There's another thread on that topic in this forum (but you won't find a solid answer there either).

We'll get there when we get there! Now you kids keep quiet or I will turn this car around.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Not for more classes, I won't. I'll post them for free somewhere.

Well it is still more for our $0.00c!
I also vote for new abilities; I can ply my abilities on making a mix and match class pretty well. What I find hard, and like clever clogs like you to do, is design new features (that I can mix and match as well if I want0

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Bump! Back on my plate...

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

4) Not quite the warrior/scholar I've always seen the bard as, but it definitely takes him from "Bards suck" to "Bards Rock!"

It would be an interesting change - I think the Bard in 3E lacks the ability to pull off the warrior part of the warrior/scholar role, so I think I'd like to see a full-progression bard.

Or, you could make the bard your default warrior/arcane half class, which would allow him to fit in the arcane and urban areas you note.

For the urban classes, you could also add in some form of the Urban Ranger, which I quite liked, although I thought he needed to be just a little bit better focused as a class (I ran one for 12 levels, emulating a Sherlock Holmes character in an alternate Victorian England game).

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Regarding the "psionic" variant of the monk and his affiliated brethren, is it:

PSION
PSYCHIC WARRIOR
MONK

or

PSION
MONK
???

etc.

Whatcha reckon?

And yes, for the record, this could force me to do some development work with psionics...

 

[ValhallaGH]

It would be an interesting change - I think the Bard in 3E lacks the ability to pull off the warrior part of the warrior/scholar role, so I think I'd like to see a full-progression bard.

Eh. The bard had the same BAB as the Rogue (and CoDzilla), and everyone told me that they were a fight-y class. Ergo, the bard must have also been.
At least Trailbalzer (I really do like that spelling) acknowledges that a class that fights needs a full-BAB (or equivalent) to actually wreck face.

In line with my own views, and that sweet spine analysis Wulf provided, I'm considering upping bards to full-BAB, to get the warrior skill, with scholar knowledge, and semi-warrior squishyness. I think it would have the right effect but I'm not sure if the class actually needs the boost, so for now I'm running bards as written.

Whatcha reckon?

And yes, for the record, this could force me to do some development work with psionics...

I favor the former, though the monk's BMB implies the latter.
One solution may be to rejig the monk down to the 1/3 BMB; though I do like the flavor of that 1/2 BMB, and the pre-chosen abilities keep the Monk very focused and limited.

Also, I'd enjoy seeing what you come up with for psionics. I've always liked the idea of willpower overcoming reality, but I've never been really happy with the implementation (though 3.5 did better than most, to my eye).

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

A little more brainstorming this weekend, and here's the state of things (see attached jpg).

Self-explanatory?

Quick note about the Barbarian/Scout, Swashbuckler/Rogue columns-- the Arcane/Divine split has no relevance to a non-caster; rather, the split at this level is melee-based or skill-based.

Comments?