Bard or barbarian as a favored class for a elf [Archive] - Wizards Community

Bard or barbarian as a favored class for a elf [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Thannin
06-09-06, 06:17 PM Any way of making it so a bard or barbarian is a favored class for a elf?
Thanks in advance.
jago668
06-09-06, 07:04 PM Any way of making it so a bard or barbarian is a favored class for a elf?
Thanks in advance.

Well you could be feral, that gives barbarian as a favored class.
Zephyrus/Sonet
06-09-06, 07:51 PM Could always just dig up or make up the Elven subrace that has it as Favored Class, could probably throw in some new ability mods while your at it. :)
clarkvalentine
06-09-06, 08:28 PM Any way of making it so a bard or barbarian is a favored class for a elf?
Thanks in advance.

Talk to your DM. If you have a good character reason for it, he might Rule 0 it and say "OK".
R2-DS
06-09-06, 08:29 PM Depending upon the campaign world you play in it could be as simple as declaring that each "subrace" of elf has a different favoured class. It would be easily justifiable to make any "wild Elf's" favoured class Barbarian. Not sure which sub race fits Bard the best but with some thought I'm sure you could think of something.
shadow mage
06-09-06, 08:41 PM Talk to your DM. If you have a good character reason for it, he might Rule 0 it and say "OK".
Bingo.

'Course, I think we all know the debate that'll follow these initial posts. :rolleyes:
Ziggaraut
06-09-06, 08:47 PM It just seems like a stupid thing to do really. I mean, why do you need it as your favored class? Only reason your gonna use it is to avoid a exp penalty for dipping.
R2-DS
06-09-06, 08:52 PM It just seems like a stupid thing to do really. I mean, why do you need it as your favored class? Only reason your gonna use it is to avoid a exp penalty for dipping.

It's not stupid if the concept for the character doesnt fit the framework of the existing rules. Remember the 1st rule of DM'ing "There are no rules, only suggestions". It is the DM afterall that has the final word on any ruling. I'd leave this one to the player and his or her DM.
Thorak
06-09-06, 09:13 PM It's not stupid if the concept for the character doesnt fit the framework of the existing rules. Remember the 1st rule of DM'ing "There are no rules, only suggestions". It is the DM afterall that has the final word on any ruling. I'd leave this one to the player and his or her DM.
If your concept is an elf multiclassed between barbarian and something else, then yes, it's stupid to find a way to get a different favored class. The penalty exists for a reason.
R2-DS
06-09-06, 09:29 PM If your concept is an elf multiclassed between barbarian and something else, then yes, it's stupid to find a way to get a different favored class. The penalty exists for a reason.

The penalty for multiclassing would still exist. The only difference here is that either Barbarian or Bard would be the favoured class and not Wizard.
Kresalak
06-09-06, 10:23 PM Depending upon the campaign world you play in it could be as simple as declaring that each "subrace" of elf has a different favoured class. It would be easily justifiable to make any "wild Elf's" favoured class Barbarian. Not sure which sub race fits Bard the best but with some thought I'm sure you could think of something.
It is my belief that all elf subraces, save drow and maybe aquatic elf, should be represented by no more than different subraces and weapon procifiencies.
Votan
06-10-06, 12:15 AM Any way of making it so a bard or barbarian is a favored class for a elf?
Thanks in advance.

You could play a half-elf which would be nicely synergistic with the bard levels. :)

This is, alternatively, within the power level that a feat seems able to grant and a custom feagt might be considered. It's a pretty big penalty just to be an elf, however. Is the elf part vital to the character concept?
Witch
06-10-06, 07:21 AM The penalty exists for a reason.
I disagree.

I believe it is a fairly retarded rule.
Copper_Coins
06-10-06, 09:07 AM DOUBLE POST
Copper_Coins
06-10-06, 09:08 AM I believe it is a fairly retarded rule.

I Agree... Our DM got rid of this rule... I'm thankful for it.
Thannin
06-10-06, 09:15 AM Thanks for all the suggestions.
This was for a campaign called Living planar, was looking at a bard 12/champion of corellian 2/barbarian 1/wild runner 6.

There are a few campaign rules, a couple of which affect this character.
1. Campaign feat: Barbarian focus, essentially makes barbarian my favored class, gives me another feat when I take this, but I'm permanently illiterate.
2.For one feat, for every 3 bardic music I permanently give up, I can get another feat. Cannot be used with extra music or anything that grants temporary music.
3. for one feat, a bard can double stack greater magic weapon and magic weapon(EG a +10 weapon), furthormore in this campaign currently bards are the only ones with access to enhancement bonus spells.
4. elven courtblades are allowed, IE weapon finesse, power attack, all two handed.
5. Theres a bard feat that allows me to put sorcerer/wizard spells as choosable spells, ie polymorph.

Thanks for all the suggestions, in the end found what I was looking for.
HalasterAteMyHamster
06-10-06, 09:53 AM The penalty exists for a reason.
Just out of interest, what reason do you see it as being?

I hardly think that multiclassing makes for an overpowered character; if anything, in most instances, it serves as an underpowering choice. It seems like to the reason multiclassing penalties exists is as a relic of 1st and 2nd edition, when classes were set. In a sense, it exists for the same reason as alignment restrictions on the Monk, Paladin, Barbarian, and Bard; silly playtesters who were stuck in the past.
Votan
06-10-06, 10:39 AM Just out of interest, what reason do you see it as being?

I hardly think that multiclassing makes for an overpowered character; if anything, in most instances, it serves as an underpowering choice. It seems like to the reason multiclassing penalties exists is as a relic of 1st and 2nd edition, when classes were set. In a sense, it exists for the same reason as alignment restrictions on the Monk, Paladin, Barbarian, and Bard; silly playtesters who were stuck in the past.

It is part of the balancing factor of being human vs. non-human. Personally, I loved the variant where a race in it's favored class got +1 skill point per level (humans, with any, get it at all levels as do half elves). In one step you fix the half elf and you encourage people to play the favored class by granting a reward to thsoe who do so.

That makes Elf wizards worth thinking about instead of my current theory that Elves have "Favored Class: Not Really".
Orchomenos
06-10-06, 10:39 AM At worse, you could level up evenly between both classes. This way, you will avoid any penalty...
Mentalmegabody
06-10-06, 10:53 AM The reason the penalty exists IMHO is to make the human race stand out. Any true Munchkin (or powerplayer if you will) knows that if you wish to make an effective multi-class-killing-machine you should choose a human. Now there are exeptions and some of you might disagree, but that is based on my insight.

Now the question about bards and barbarians. It's entirely up to you, but you shouldn't give too many favored classes to a specific race (maybe divide the race to sub-races?) in fear of off-balancing the human race. If your campaign's elves are in anyway similar to those of the basic DnD and Forgotten Realms (can't say about Eberron or others, because I'm not very familiar with them just yet) I would say, elves do not favor the classes in question, sure they exist, but
the question you have to ask is: are the children brought up by grand stories and high praises about elf bards and barbarians. Elves do like nature and they are a little chaotic in nature, but barbarians have entirely different values, culture and sosial structure compared to the educated and highly advanced elves'.
shadow mage
06-10-06, 12:35 PM I so called this argument. ;)

Only thing I have to add is...

Every rule in the Player's Handbook was written for a reason. That doesn't mean you can't change some rules for your own game... Given the creativity of gamers, almost every campaign will, in time, develop its own house rules.

Hard "rules" really are more like suggestions. If it (the rule change) is appropriate due to the setting of the campaign, then, according to the DMG, change the rules accordingly.

RAW is not necessarily always right, since not all settings are the same.

-Shadow Mage
clarkvalentine
06-10-06, 01:54 PM It is part of the balancing factor of being human vs. non-human.

That's what they say, but I don't see it. It serves to reenforce Greyhawk setting conventions about what races should be good at what character archetypes. It makes humans more flexible, not more powerful. In a setting where the Greyhawk racial conventions don't apply, it makes a lot less sense.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Thannin 06-09-06, 06:17 PM	Any way of making it so a bard or barbarian is a favored class for a elf? Thanks in advance.
jago668 06-09-06, 07:04 PM	Any way of making it so a bard or barbarian is a favored class for a elf? Thanks in advance. Well you could be feral, that gives barbarian as a favored class.
Zephyrus/Sonet 06-09-06, 07:51 PM	Could always just dig up or make up the Elven subrace that has it as Favored Class, could probably throw in some new ability mods while your at it. :)
clarkvalentine 06-09-06, 08:28 PM	Any way of making it so a bard or barbarian is a favored class for a elf? Thanks in advance. Talk to your DM. If you have a good character reason for it, he might Rule 0 it and say "OK".
R2-DS 06-09-06, 08:29 PM	Depending upon the campaign world you play in it could be as simple as declaring that each "subrace" of elf has a different favoured class. It would be easily justifiable to make any "wild Elf's" favoured class Barbarian. Not sure which sub race fits Bard the best but with some thought I'm sure you could think of something.
shadow mage 06-09-06, 08:41 PM	Talk to your DM. If you have a good character reason for it, he might Rule 0 it and say "OK". Bingo. 'Course, I think we all know the debate that'll follow these initial posts. :rolleyes:
Ziggaraut 06-09-06, 08:47 PM	It just seems like a stupid thing to do really. I mean, why do you need it as your favored class? Only reason your gonna use it is to avoid a exp penalty for dipping.
R2-DS 06-09-06, 08:52 PM	It just seems like a stupid thing to do really. I mean, why do you need it as your favored class? Only reason your gonna use it is to avoid a exp penalty for dipping. It's not stupid if the concept for the character doesnt fit the framework of the existing rules. Remember the 1st rule of DM'ing "There are no rules, only suggestions". It is the DM afterall that has the final word on any ruling. I'd leave this one to the player and his or her DM.
Thorak 06-09-06, 09:13 PM	It's not stupid if the concept for the character doesnt fit the framework of the existing rules. Remember the 1st rule of DM'ing "There are no rules, only suggestions". It is the DM afterall that has the final word on any ruling. I'd leave this one to the player and his or her DM. If your concept is an elf multiclassed between barbarian and something else, then yes, it's stupid to find a way to get a different favored class. The penalty exists for a reason.
R2-DS 06-09-06, 09:29 PM	If your concept is an elf multiclassed between barbarian and something else, then yes, it's stupid to find a way to get a different favored class. The penalty exists for a reason. The penalty for multiclassing would still exist. The only difference here is that either Barbarian or Bard would be the favoured class and not Wizard.
Kresalak 06-09-06, 10:23 PM	Depending upon the campaign world you play in it could be as simple as declaring that each "subrace" of elf has a different favoured class. It would be easily justifiable to make any "wild Elf's" favoured class Barbarian. Not sure which sub race fits Bard the best but with some thought I'm sure you could think of something. It is my belief that all elf subraces, save drow and maybe aquatic elf, should be represented by no more than different subraces and weapon procifiencies.
Votan 06-10-06, 12:15 AM	Any way of making it so a bard or barbarian is a favored class for a elf? Thanks in advance. You could play a half-elf which would be nicely synergistic with the bard levels. :) This is, alternatively, within the power level that a feat seems able to grant and a custom feagt might be considered. It's a pretty big penalty just to be an elf, however. Is the elf part vital to the character concept?
Witch 06-10-06, 07:21 AM	The penalty exists for a reason. I disagree. I believe it is a fairly retarded rule.
Copper_Coins 06-10-06, 09:07 AM	DOUBLE POST
Copper_Coins 06-10-06, 09:08 AM	I believe it is a fairly retarded rule. I Agree... Our DM got rid of this rule... I'm thankful for it.
Thannin 06-10-06, 09:15 AM	Thanks for all the suggestions. This was for a campaign called Living planar, was looking at a bard 12/champion of corellian 2/barbarian 1/wild runner 6. There are a few campaign rules, a couple of which affect this character. 1. Campaign feat: Barbarian focus, essentially makes barbarian my favored class, gives me another feat when I take this, but I'm permanently illiterate. 2.For one feat, for every 3 bardic music I permanently give up, I can get another feat. Cannot be used with extra music or anything that grants temporary music. 3. for one feat, a bard can double stack greater magic weapon and magic weapon(EG a +10 weapon), furthormore in this campaign currently bards are the only ones with access to enhancement bonus spells. 4. elven courtblades are allowed, IE weapon finesse, power attack, all two handed. 5. Theres a bard feat that allows me to put sorcerer/wizard spells as choosable spells, ie polymorph. Thanks for all the suggestions, in the end found what I was looking for.
HalasterAteMyHamster 06-10-06, 09:53 AM	The penalty exists for a reason. Just out of interest, what reason do you see it as being? I hardly think that multiclassing makes for an overpowered character; if anything, in most instances, it serves as an underpowering choice. It seems like to the reason multiclassing penalties exists is as a relic of 1st and 2nd edition, when classes were set. In a sense, it exists for the same reason as alignment restrictions on the Monk, Paladin, Barbarian, and Bard; silly playtesters who were stuck in the past.
Votan 06-10-06, 10:39 AM	Just out of interest, what reason do you see it as being? I hardly think that multiclassing makes for an overpowered character; if anything, in most instances, it serves as an underpowering choice. It seems like to the reason multiclassing penalties exists is as a relic of 1st and 2nd edition, when classes were set. In a sense, it exists for the same reason as alignment restrictions on the Monk, Paladin, Barbarian, and Bard; silly playtesters who were stuck in the past. It is part of the balancing factor of being human vs. non-human. Personally, I loved the variant where a race in it's favored class got +1 skill point per level (humans, with any, get it at all levels as do half elves). In one step you fix the half elf and you encourage people to play the favored class by granting a reward to thsoe who do so. That makes Elf wizards worth thinking about instead of my current theory that Elves have "Favored Class: Not Really".
Orchomenos 06-10-06, 10:39 AM	At worse, you could level up evenly between both classes. This way, you will avoid any penalty...
Mentalmegabody 06-10-06, 10:53 AM	The reason the penalty exists IMHO is to make the human race stand out. Any true Munchkin (or powerplayer if you will) knows that if you wish to make an effective multi-class-killing-machine you should choose a human. Now there are exeptions and some of you might disagree, but that is based on my insight. Now the question about bards and barbarians. It's entirely up to you, but you shouldn't give too many favored classes to a specific race (maybe divide the race to sub-races?) in fear of off-balancing the human race. If your campaign's elves are in anyway similar to those of the basic DnD and Forgotten Realms (can't say about Eberron or others, because I'm not very familiar with them just yet) I would say, elves do not favor the classes in question, sure they exist, but the question you have to ask is: are the children brought up by grand stories and high praises about elf bards and barbarians. Elves do like nature and they are a little chaotic in nature, but barbarians have entirely different values, culture and sosial structure compared to the educated and highly advanced elves'.
shadow mage 06-10-06, 12:35 PM	I so called this argument. ;) Only thing I have to add is... Every rule in the Player's Handbook was written for a reason. That doesn't mean you can't change some rules for your own game... Given the creativity of gamers, almost every campaign will, in time, develop its own house rules. Hard "rules" really are more like suggestions. If it (the rule change) is appropriate due to the setting of the campaign, then, according to the DMG, change the rules accordingly. RAW is not necessarily always right, since not all settings are the same. -Shadow Mage
clarkvalentine 06-10-06, 01:54 PM	It is part of the balancing factor of being human vs. non-human. That's what they say, but I don't see it. It serves to reenforce Greyhawk setting conventions about what races should be good at what character archetypes. It makes humans more flexible, not more powerful. In a setting where the Greyhawk racial conventions don't apply, it makes a lot less sense.