Why adhere to the "core" classes? Why not deconstruct for flexibility?

[JohnSnow]

GURPS is not built around the 'young man discovers his true talents and rises to become a hero' ideal nearly so much as the 'talented individual finds himself caught up in an adventure' ideal. The difference between a 100 pt. GURPS character and a 200 pt. GURPS character is much different than a 1st and 21st level D&D character. The GURPS character is a little more competent at a few select things, possibly has a few more friends and maybe the backing of an organization. The D&D hero is a farmer boy who rises to a power to rival the gods.

And that is, in a nutshell, why D&D succeeded as a system. The core story of D&D, Mike Mearls' comments about "go and find stuff" aside, is the everyday character who adventures and gains great power. It's classic, it's heroic. We may argue about the flavor or how "powerful" we want such characters to become, but for the most part (I think), we all want to play characters who start as nobodies and become powerful as they embrace their destiny. And that's what D&D gives us.

That "embracing their destiny" thing speaks to classes and archetypes. So leave the classes in place, but make goodrules for multiclassing, so that characters don't have to take a Prestige Class just to fix a mechanical problem. Then have a few classes that characters actually need to "earn" their way into (Prestige Classes with real prestige). That would make me VERY happy.

Then all we'd need would be balanced rules for powering up characters either through magic items OR abilities as you see fit. That way, people can have the "flavor" of fantasy they like in their D&D.

Just my two coppers.

 

[RandomPrecision]

I say leave classes as they are, save for inevitable tweaking. D&D wouldn't be the same without it. Fighters and Barbarians should be different, and they are. If they were the same class, you could still have warriors with either trained or rageful backgrounds, but destroying the class system allows infinitely many characters in between, to the point that we no longer have fighters and barbarians, except in role-playing, while mechanically, we just have warriors with varied abilities. The core classes should allow a player to emulate any concept that they wish to play, and I believe they succeed. Prestige classes are severely overused today, but they shouldn't be discarded. Instead, people should focus more on the role-playing aspects of the game. Not every prestige class should be allowed - in fact, very few should. IMC, a guild or organization might have a prestige class associated with it that characters can take levels in, but I don't just open all several hundred classes for anyone to take. Classes remain a way to role-play character concepts with flavor and allow the character to increase in strength as WizarDru and JohnSnow pointed out. Keep them.

 

[Steverooo]

I WANT BOTH! I want classes in the PHB, AND I want a sensible Class-deconstruction in the DMG...

I want ALL "empty levels" filled in with picks from INDIVIDUALIZED class Feat lists! Fighters, for instance, can have Feats like Uncanny Dodge, Hammer-hand, and Wily Dodge (which gives the Monk's WIS bonus to AC when unarmored), as well as Feats which improve upon Hammer-hand, adding to the 1D6 base damage (1D6 to 1D8 to 1D10 to 1D12 to... whatever). Other classes have their own lists (Barbarians get Tracking, Fast Tracking, extra rages, etc., Druids get Claw, extra wild shapes, and their own list of special options.)

Here are some examples:

================================================

(Portions of the following are Copyright SteveC, 2004-5)

Uncanny Dodge
You can respond to danger before an ordinary person could sense it.
Prerequisite: DEX 13+, Level 2+.
Benefit: You retain your DEX Bonus to AC (if any), regardless of being caught flat-footed, or being attacked by an invisible opponent.
Normal: You lose your DEX Bonus to AC when flat-footed or invisibly attacked.

Uncanny Flank-Dodging
You can respond to opponents on opposite sides of you as easily as a single attacker.
Prerequisite: DEX 13+. Level 5+, Uncanny Dodge.
Benefit: Opponents who flank you do not gain any bonuses. Rogues cannot use a flank to sneak attack you, unless they are five or more levels higher than you.
Normal: Flanking opponents all receive a +2 on attacks against you, and can sneak attack.

Untiring (Ranger, only)
You are indefatigable.
Prerequisite: CON 14+, Endurance.
Benefit: You can continue moving for 24 hours before needing a normal amount of rest (eight hours sleep, or four hours trance, for Elves). Movement may be Balancing, Climbing, driving a cart or wagon via Handle Animals, Jumping, Moving Silently, Profession (Boater, Driver, Sailor), Riding, Swimming, Tumbling, or just walking or hustling.
Normal: Travelling for more than eight hours risks Fatigue.

================================================

The Untiring Feat, you will notice, is Ranger, only... It might also be suitable for Barbarians, or even Druids... The other two come straight from the Rogue class, but apply equally well to any "advance scout" of the Fighter or Ranger class (also Barbarians & Druids). It has some new, sensible pre-requisites added, to make Fighters up their DEX to make use of it, and to keep other classes from getting it before the Rogue does!

This is the type of "Class Deconstruction" that *I* want to see!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Like Runesong42, I once did a nifty Cleric in Player's Option, based on Finno/Russian mythology. Warrior THAC0, Medium Armor, d8 or d10 HD (I don't recall which) and as at home in the wilderness as a Ranger. Longbow, 2hdMaul and 2hdAxe were his weapons. Instead of power over the undead, he inspired Berserker Frenzy.

However, instead of going the power-spell option, he loaded up on Major Access to 5pt "wussy" spell, and minor access to 3pt "less wussy" spells (Finno/Russian heroes not having attack spells), and his wizard school was Abjuration. His entire potential spellbook had 3 offensive spells.

Instead of being artillery, he buffed the party 'till they were all tanks, and safeguarded the camp at night.

Can't do THAT in 3.5Ed.

A system in which abilities were given point values, but where classes gave point breaks could be very easy to work. For instance (Disclaimer- what follows is NOT an actual system, just an example): Fighters would pay "N/2" points for what we think of as fighter abilities, "N" for Rogue Skills, "Nx1.5" for Clerical abilities, and "Nx2" for Arcane abilities, while a Wizard would only pay "N/2" for arcane abilities. Certain oddball abilities would have set costs (like Rage or Turn Undead), but would be part of the core class ability set- and could be given up in exchange for other abilities. So you could have a Half-Orc Shaman (Cleric or Druid) who could Rage (without multiclassing) but might not be able to Turn Undead or Shapechange. Or he could improve his spellcasting ability.

Sorta like what is done for class and cross-class skills. You still have the class system, but you also maximize flexibility.

It also gets rid of that pesky math you have to do with multiclassing.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Hence, the problems with GURPS and super cheesy monkey force hyper team smurfs.

Who's super cheesy!?

-Hyp.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Instead of being artillery, he buffed the party 'till they were all tanks, and safeguarded the camp at night.

Can't do THAT in 3.5Ed.

Why not?

 

[jmucchiello]

This is the type of "Class Deconstruction" that *I* want to see!

The problem with breaking stuff up into feats is that feats alone ignore the synergy provided by combining class features. Giving a wizard the paladin's saving throw bonus is not a problem since neither paladins or wizards need charisma normally. Giving the sorcerer the paladin's saving throw bonus is dangerous since charisma is already super useful for a sorcerer. This is why I went with tracks of abilities in Character Customization.

 

[Arnwyn]

For D&D (or any 'medieval fantasy' type game), I prefer classes.

For modern/futuristic games, on the other hand...

 

[jmucchiello]

Sorta like what is done for class and cross-class skills. You still have the class system, but you also maximize flexibility.

This is sort of how my never-to-be-published superhero system worked back in 2002. Each class of hero had power points granted per level and each power was a class or cross-class power for the various classes. I gave up on it because it was a headache to make characters since 1 point does not equal 1 point. The cool thing though was that tank hero power points were 4 + Str mod per level and speedster power points were 4 + Dex mod per level. It made each archetype extra dependent on its ultimate ability.

 

[francisca]

I like the archetypes. I'd like them to stay in D&D. If 4e ditches archetypes, I'm not following. Actually, I'm unlikely to follow anyway, not that I think about it.

But, if I want to play in a non-archetype heavy game, I'll find something besides D&D, thank you.