What traditional fantasy conventions are you tired of?

[GlassJaw]

Not to throw a curve into the really good posts these last few have been, but simply put, the things I'm most tired of in D&D are archetypal or iconic classes. I wish wish wish wish there was a workable and BALANCED system out there for d20 that alllowed you to start with a race and then by purchasing your abilities, skills, feats, and other options, you can truly create a unique and memorable character.

Check out Grim Tales. It uses the generic classes from d20 Modern and expands them a bit more. You can then uses feats and the talent trees to customize your character. Remove multiclass penalties and you're golden.

------------

Has anyone completely removed deities altogether? I'm pretty bored with the concept fo the "pantheon". Has anyone brought back faith-based religions into their world? This of course is more applicable to a low-magic world where there aren't clerics per se. I just like the idea that someone can be a priest without being able to cast spells.

 

[Incenjucar]

There are two main issues with the cleric (and druid, for that matter)

1) They memorize spells. They treat their deities like battery chargers rather than patrons. You'd really think they'd just have an 'allotment of prayers that will be answered per day', which would basically be spontanious casting.

2) They've been upped to being full casters. They weren't full casters in older editions. They only got up to 7th level. This is where much of their power issue comes from. WotC, realistically, should have left them with seven levels, and then created a proper Priest class with full casting but less tankability.

 

[Merlion]

They memorize spells. They treat their deities like battery chargers rather than patrons. You'd really think they'd just have an 'allotment of prayers that will be answered per day', which would basically be spontanious casting.

I agree, although a switch to spontaneous casting would also neccessitate limited spells known, which I think would fit better to in some ways.

UA actually presents a system for this that I think would work well.

2) They've been upped to being full casters. They weren't full casters in older editions. They only got up to 7th level. This is where much of their power issue comes from. WotC, realistically, should have left them with seven levels, and then created a proper Priest class with full casting but less tankability

I agree. But, if they did another Priest class with full casting ability, I think in that case the Cleric should just be scrapped, and let the Paladin (freed from silly alignment restrictions) be the Holy Warrior.

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

Yeah, I've got to agree with you, dungeonmastercal. I've been through being sick of elves and the magical divide and Vancian magic, low magic, high magic. I've sliced the archetypes this way and that. I'd really like to try something like, Buy the Numbers, though I doubt my players would much go for it.

During the days of 2e, we did a Skills and Powers campaign the players really liked a lot, for the very reason you could truly customize a character. Of course, S&P was badly broken and you could have a 1st level character nearly equivalent to a standard 6th level character, but hey... we were having a blast... lol... If there was a balanced method of assigning costs to abilities, I'd love a system like this for 3e.

 

[Warrior Poet]

Seems to me that the Paladin more closely resembles the Holy Warrior archetype. The cleric sits a bit uncomfortably as a D&Dism that sorta resembles a few different archetypes, and is grafted into others where it doesn't fit because there's not a better class out there in typical D&D.

The Holy Warrior, yes. mechanically the Paladin embodies that quite nicely. Mostly a Warrior, but with some "divinely" granted advantages.


The Cleric however is another story. The Cleric is a bizzare mismash. Not just a Holy Warrior, but the Spellcasting Priest, with full progression of spells all the way up to 9th level, plus considerable combat ability.

Good points. Looking back over the thread, I realize I am terribly confused. I think the discussion started out about traditional fantasy conventions grown stale, and somewhere along the way I drifted from Joshua Dyal's initial question, I think, and ended up wondering about the cleric historically. I thought I was addressing something that was not a convention so much, as it seemed to be endemic to D&D (not stories, as someone else pointed out), when, in fact, I was trying to make a case for its basis in history, which has little to do with the convention. Others have already pointed out that it was not a convention; or, alternately, that it is a convention within D&D and, as such, is something of which some have grown weary.

Or was it the other way around in reverse? Regardless, I apologize, as I am very confuzzed, and, like Donnie at the bowling alley, I'm outta my element.

I am the walrus? I am the walrus, dude.

Warrior Poet

Oh, and, uh, traditional flighty totally superior elves, bleah.

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

Seems to me that the Paladin more closely resembles the Holy Warrior archetype. The cleric sits a bit uncomfortably as a D&Dism that sorta resembles a few different archetypes, and is grafted into others where it doesn't fit because there's not a better class out there in typical D&D.

Which is why I'm going to start using this version of the cleric from The Waking Lands website, the Priest.

http://www.wakinglands.com/htm_files/the_classes_page.htm

 

[eris404]

What traditional fantasy conventions have you simply gotten tired of and removed from your homebrew worlds?

Well, the things I am most tired of are:

1. Good v. Evil - it's been talked to death already, so I'll be brief. I am doing away with the alignment system and incorporating the rules for taint from Unearthed Arcana instead. Only slightly different from the standard alignment system, but I think it should put some interesting flavor in the world.

1A. Undead=evil - One of the things I liked about the book The Scar was that there was a country that was ruled by a caste of Undead (lich or mummy-type undead, that is). Being chosen to join the ranks of the undead was a huge honor for living nobles. The exception that undead are noble are the vampires, who are the lowliest creatures in their society and considered little better than junkies. Even the poorest humans scorned them. This is something I think I'm going to steal and suppliment with rules and ideas from the Ghostwalk book.

2. Saving the World plots - I am a huge fan of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, but even the characters on that show got tired of saving the world...again. Rather than being involved in huge, world(s)-sweeping, epic plots, I think the characters will be more like local heroes and/or mercenaries.

3. Ancient Prophecies - just an overused device I'm tired of.

4. The current stereotypes of humanoids - this is mostly a D&D thing, but has it's roots in fantasy literature. I don't dislike these races necessarily, I just wanted to do something a little different.

It took me a while to decide what to do with the standard non-human races; I almost chucked them completely. Instead, I decided to use the Aleithian dwarves (psionic dwarves from WotC's web site) as my standard dwarves, the Glimmerfolk from Dragon Magazine as my standard elves. The elves are dying out and at some point in the past tried to save their race by interbreeding with dwarves and humans. From those unions came the gnomes and half-elves (but the half-elves are actually a new race, not half-breeds). I'm not using half-orcs and halflings (couldn't think of a good way to use them) and added a couple of new races from different sources as well. I am writing new histories and cultures for each.