What do you think about Monte's new PHB Racial Levels?

[John Crichton]

I love 'em. It's all about the options to me. These classes represent less intense study compared to a class. The +1 to spellcaster levels is a little wonky but easily explainable and workable within the game. A human, half-elf and elf PC has to already have levels in a spellcasting class to continue progression and for the other classes not being as easily advanced by the racial class, so be it - they are a more concentrated area of study anyway. I know if these classes were designed to work with every race/class combo but they could be. No one has to max out a character completely and this seems to be a viable way to give a character a little definition.

I think the fighter-types can benefit from this just as easily as the spellcaster types. Want a human fighter with some more skill points who is a little bit stronger and has a the unique ability to tell if a person is lying or not (Adaptive Learning - concentrated on Sense Motive)? Want a dwarven fighter who is a master crafter, has a decent low-level Will save and can still be a good fighter? In both cases it works.

For spellcasters, the class levels could represent training from a sabbatical where they didn't fully concentrated on their craft but didn't ignore it either. For gnomes it could represent informal training outside of a bard school or away from a master. The increase in illusion abilities could be from more experiementation or simply something learned "on the road" which also advances his current bardic abilities a bit.

Any way you slice it, these classes aren't for everyone but they are interesting options that I could see using in my campaign and taking as a player.

I, too, think that the gnome should have a d8 and can't figure out why the designers gave gnomes a d6 and halflings a d6. I would like an explanation about that become I am curious.

 

[Kalanyr]

In defense of the Gnome Elf HD thing the Gnome is small but gets a racial con bonus ie 1d6+1 average of 4.5 the elf is medium but gets a racial con penalty that is 1d8-1 average of 3.5 the gnome is tougher than the elf, as tough as the average medium critter ie a human, the Dwarf is just super tough with con bonus and 1d10 HD for an average of 6.5 hp.

 

[NiTessine]

Well, these look interesting. I think I'll be throwing them on the table at the game today and see what the players say.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

Personally, I love this concept, though I agree some of the design decisions aren't spot-on. I'll be playing with these rules to see what I can do with them-- and to see about the possibility of expanding them for other races. (For instance, these rules could replace part of a creature's ECL, and many non-Core races could become closer to their natures in similar fashion.)

 

[Zub]

Instead of Racial levels, I would have prefered a way to just spend XP to get the benefits. Similar to how the schools in FFG's Path of Sword, Faith, etc worked.

 

[Hackenslash]

Brilliant Concept but......

Hello,

I think that this is a great idea and I have already printed off the PDF and put it in my DnD Bag and will be using it in my campaign but I might have to make a few tweaks. Like maybe, reducing the Halflings base hit dice to d6 instead of a d8, and increase the Half Orc Hit dice to a d10 instead of a d8. Also I am not too sure that Orcs, Dwarves and Halflings didn't get shafted over Class Specific level increases. I think I might let the Orc gain +1 level of Barbarian at 2nd and 3rd levels, The Dwarf +1 Level of Fighter at 2nd and 3rd Levels and the Halfling +1 Level of Rogue at 2nd and 3rd Levels. How does that sound ? Any thoughts ? Cheers All

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

Instead of Racial levels, I would have prefered a way to just spend XP to get the benefits. Similar to how the schools in FFG's Path of Sword, Faith, etc worked.

I most specifically do not like that mechanic. D&D is a level-based game, and levels are supposed to be the primary measure of a character's power. Adding extra powers to a character that are not represented through his level and class/feat/skill/spell selections degrades that system in my opinion, even if the paths themselves are well-balanced.

 

[buzz]

I most specifically do not like that mechanic. D&D is a level-based game, and levels are supposed to be the primary measure of a character's power.

And, heck, what is it that you're doing when you gain levels? *You're spending XP.* Makes sense to me.

 

[The Little Raven]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is this right?

umm.. you say tomato, I say tomatoe....

The whole tom-ay-to/tom-ah-to argument does not apply to this. You called it a "blatant oversight." I called it a "deliberately skewed game mechanic." This was not a reference to it being discriminatory or not.

"A deliberately skewed game mechanic" sure sounds the same thing to me as being discriminatory against any class other than a prime spellcasting class.

Maybe you should reference things in context. Let's take a look at what I said about it being a "deliberately skewed game mechanic," shall we?

"It's not a blatant oversight. It's a deliberating skewed game mechanic. Just like True Necromancer is skewed towards Necromancy spells."

Nothing in there about it not being discriminatory. In fact, the only thing this states is that it wasn't an oversight, but an intentional design choice. But I did make a comment about it being discriminatory... let's take a look at that comment as well.

"As for it being discrimination against classes... ummm... what? Gearing racial classes towards the race's favored class is about as discriminating as the race having a favored class."

So... I said it was about as discriminating as favored class... which makes perfect sense.

The fact remains, that humans don't have Favored Class: Wizard, so why should human levels give you 2/3rds spellcasting, when it doesn't give you 2/3rd of the benefit of any other class?

No, they have "Favored Class: Any," which means they are supposed to be just as good at being wizards, clerics, bards, druids, rangers, paladins, and sorcerers... even better in some cases. This is because humans are versatile and adaptable. Thus, a human spellcaster would gain some of that versatility with an increased spell progression. A racial class that values "versatility" but shafts you on spellcasting (if you possessed it) wouldn't fit its own concept very well.

That seems to me to be pretty obviously a "Blatant oversight".

Maybe you need a definition of the word "oversight."

o·ver·sight (n.) - An unintentional omission or mistake.

Now... the spellcasting was neither an omission, nor was it a mistake. It was intentionally placed there by the designers, so it was not a "blatant oversight."

It was a fix to mesh the racial levels together better with multiclassing and spellcasters.

 

[reapersaurus]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is this right?

The whole tom-ay-to/tom-ah-to argument does not apply to this. You called it a "blatant oversight." I called it a "deliberately skewed game mechanic."

Dude.
Chill out, and stop being so literal.

Would it make you happier if I say, "Racial levels are skewed towards primary spellcasters, and against every other class?"

Or would "Racial levels give non-prime-spellcasting classes the SHAFT!" be a more appropriate designation/term/moniker/statement?

Take your pick, it's all the same idea to me.