Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AFGNCAAP" data-source="post: 1124481" data-attributes="member: 871">I have to agree--the core classes present doesn't really cover all the bases.  However, I'd prefer a shrinking & generalization of the core classes rather than an expansion & specialization of them--Palladium Fantasy, and to a more horrific extent (IMHO) Rifts, have oodles & oodles of Occupational Character Classes (OCCs), which (IMHO) are horrible when it comes to balance--despite the roleplaying impusle to play a Vagabond instead of a Glitter Boy, Apok, or Cosmo-Knight, the poor old Vagabond will die off soon due to the heavies that the GM sends to deal with his Mega-Damage dealing & taking party members.Ideally, I'd like to go with the generic "core three" that I mentioned in my previous post--the Feat-intensive, Skill-intensive, & Magic/Power-intensive.  Character creation will be slower, though--introduce a lot of choice elements & it inevitably takes up time.  However, it'd sure be customizeable, esp. for use in various settings.  Want a low- to rare-magic setting, ala Lankhmar?  Easily done!  Want a high-magic, everybody-except-one-or two-classes-has-some-sort-of-spellcasting-or innate-magical-ability style campaign?  Voila!I see the cleric with a description for the class provided in the 1st ed. AD&D PH (IIRC)--based off of the religious orders of knighthood from Medieval times, sort of like the Templars or Hospitalers.  Whereas the cleric is a mix of fighter & priest, the paladin is a specialized variety that's even more fighter & less priest.With that said, I think that a generic magic/power-intensive class could cover wizards & priests (and psions, to boot).  Besides, what if you want a campaign with no arcane magic at all (and thus, no wizards)?  Or, ala the Ultima games from 4 on up, you want arcane magic only (thus, no priests & divine magic)?  Easily handled by the magic-intensive class--they have 1 general spell list that covers pretty much everything.However, to expand upon the 3 core class idea, I do think that ready-made templates should be available--if you want to quickly make upa particular theme/class idea, then here it is, with all the options pre-chosen for you.  Want to be a Fighter?  Then here's a pre-made option using the Feat-intensive class.  Want to be a Sorcerer (in the 3.5 D&D sense)?  There's a template for the Magic-intensive class, with a limited spell list, increased spells/day, decreased spellcasting requirements, and limited spells known selections.But, I think that the execution of this will look like 3.5E D&D meets d20 Modern meets d20 CoC meets Skills & Powers (from 2nd ed. AD&D optional rules).  In other words, a math-messy, convoluted nightmare.  There will be some players who take up the ready-made templates for ease of use, but there will always be those few players who want to build their own PC, trying to figure out the best way to abuse &/or beat the system in order to create the "uber-PC."(Sigh.) I know I don't want a plethora of core classes to handle every single permutation (e.g., "the rogue & the pirate classes are pretty much the same, except that the pirate can also use a scimitar, has Swim as a class skill, and doesn't get Uncanny Dodge until 2 levels higher than the rogue."), but I'm wary of what a free-form, build-it-yourself system might bring (e.g., "If I take all 12 of these class & spellcasting limitations, then I can cast all of my Evocation spells with a +15 to to their DCs!")  Essentially, I don't want either a Palladium or GURPS.  Just a simpler, more flexible version of D&D.Hmm . . . to tell you the truth, I think that what may work is a reduced set of core classes (either the basic 4 or the 1-per-stat variety  mentioned below), but a good number of prestige classes.  However, these prestige classes should have relatively low-loevel entry requirments (i.e., make it possible for a 2nd or 3rd level character to adopt the PrC).Thus, perhaps the paladin PrC would only require a PC to have 1 level of fighter & 1 level of priest (effectively meeting the requirements at 2nd level, & gaining the PrC at 3rd level).  Or, the druid PrC may have really low requirements so that a 1st level priest, with the right skill, AL, domain, &/or feat selection, can meet the requirements at 1st level & gain access by 2nd level.Sorry for the long post--it's one of those thinking-as-I'm-writing posts.  Hopefully my point came across (if I even put it in there  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> ).</blockquote>

Verification