Abilities vs. Classes? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Abilities vs. Classes? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
opticassault
11-09-03, 02:24 AM This is being debated all over the place here, and I think it needs a nice, cozy home so we don't have it in everyone else's threads.

First, let me state that the DM has the final word in your gaming group, regardless of your opinion. There, no one is allowed to use that arguement from now on in the rest of this discussion.

So, here we go: Do you define your character by his abilities or by the classes he has?

I'm an ability man, personally. I don't care how many letters sit next to my character name. In my opinion, it doesn't matter how many different classes you have.

It all comes down to your abilities.

A Wiz5/Incant8/Elemental Savant 6 / Archmage 1 doesn't bother me at all. I see him as a blaster mage who uses one element in particular and tosses lots of metamagic feats on his spells. He uses his banishing powers to send away elementals of types that don't agree with his.

A Barb2/Ftr4/Frenzied Berserker10/Rog3/Berserk 1 is a warrior who has trained somewhat with a specific weapon, knows how to hit you where it hurts with it, and might need some anger management.

Other people would see these as nothing more than a collection of ridiculous classes that make no sense whatsoever.

So there's my two cents, let's see yours.
PhaedrusXY
11-09-03, 02:31 AM I tend to agree with you. I like to add classes to help me build a certain type of character I have in mind. If only one or two classes are enough, that's good. If it is a more complex character and requires 5 or more, that doesn't bother me. I do try to keep it at 5 total classes or under though, because a list of nothing but two and three level dips just looks ridiculous to me. Also, I don't like how the saving throws all just add up. I like the house rule system that I saw on here that adds up all the levels of good and bad saves for each class and averages them. That way you wind up with reasonable base saves, even if you're heavily multiclassed.
Outsider Subtype
11-09-03, 02:46 AM Like opticassault, I tend to interpret the "flavor" of prestige classes liberally. For example, I would be fine with giving Order of the Bow levels to any character devoted to archery above all other forms of combat, not just members of a particular monastic order. Thus, his character descriptions sound just fine to me.

However, I tend to sigh a little when I see builds proposed involving 6 or 7 classes. One reason for this is my own personal aesthetic preference: I like the original cleric archer (Cleric 20) and Wizard 5/Incantatrix 10/Archmage 5 because they are elegant and simple in addition to being effective. Another reason is that whatever I might think, many DMs will look with disfavor on a lot of one-level dips. A third reason is that the epic rules favor those who complete prestige classes by taking all 10 levels.
Endarire
11-09-03, 03:02 AM I'm for abilities as classes are mixes of semi-balanced and related abilities. I also almost always skip class and PrC flavor text.

-EE
Sisyfos
11-09-03, 03:24 AM I was more into abilities, but I've started to read those flavor texts for PrCs as a player and I find it nice to identify my character through them. As a DM I've started to build organizations behind many of the PrCs and both I and the players seem to enjoy it. I have an order of demon fighting knights in my Planescape campaign. I have a few arcane tricksters out there, but there is a story behind those characters (it could be a better story though). I think it enlivens the campaign world and the characters and thus I will continue that way. I allow practically any monster or humanoid race, any class and just about any PrC in my campaigns, but I enforce that there has to be a story behind them.

Sisyfos
GoblinBiter
11-09-03, 03:25 AM i'm in full agreement with those above me.
Neonsamurai
11-09-03, 06:49 AM I go with the abilities approach as well. However i do feel weird when i see that combine fundamentally different campaign settings, oriental adventures and forgotten realms for example. Yeah they might be cool flavour wise but those builds can easily go out of hand.
sereg
11-09-03, 08:19 AM I like the original cleric archer (Cleric 20) and Wizard 5/Incantatrix 10/Archmage 5 because they are elegant and simple in addition to being effective

See, I agree... But you're missing something imo. Melee DO NOT have that option most of the time if they want to stay competitive in levels 10-20. Its all well an good for a cleric to go Cleric10/Auspician 10... But bob the fighter's only HOPE is to prc out of his mind.

Another thing is, all prcs are NOT made equal. We all know and accept this. Its all well and good to go Barbarian10/Runescarred Berseker 10, but Try Fighter10/Divine champion 5/Planar champion 5, hello mediocrity and wasted feats. In addition, prc'ing out the wazzu is the ONLY way a fighter type can gain fun, powerful abilities every level or nearly every level. Casters spells and spells per day always rise, but if you want to have fun as a melee, in my opinion, you need to prc like mad. Going from level 10 to 12 and gaining 2 bab, 1 feat, and +1 save vs divine spells really doesn't do it for me, sorry.

Sereg
Ranthanas
11-09-03, 09:04 AM I go for abilities every time. On the other hand, I ban many PrCs (or rather allow few- I play core+house) and of those I leave, I often allow gentler ways in by RP (e.g. I'd be prepared to allow an archery ranger into OOBI without the Weap Spec under the condition they've RPd it and have good ranks in Craft (Bowyer), Craft (Fletcher) and the FarShot feat (i.e. have done pretty much everything they can to help their archery). For the DM, the pre-requisites are guidelines :smirk:

When a player, abilities all the way and single level dips seem icky (and we've fixed the way they break saves anyway...)
Outsider Subtype
11-09-03, 11:11 AM See, I agree... But you're missing something imo. Melee DO NOT have that option most of the time if they want to stay competitive in levels 10-20. Its all well an good for a cleric to go Cleric10/Auspician 10... But bob the fighter's only HOPE is to prc out of his mind.

While there are a few exceptions like Bladesinger, your point is very valid. The trouble is that most fighter prestige classes are not that good except for dips while for clerics and wizards, almost any class with full spell progression is an improvement over what they would be getting otherwise.
The Club
11-09-03, 11:29 AM Some of you are already making the points I was about to make regarding melee-oriented characters. Try staying with one melee class, and you end up with something with a number of interesting and underpowered abilities (the fighter) or something with pre-programmed interesting and underpowered abilities (the barbarian).

Heck, with the feats available to him, the fighter should be his own prestige class. If we had some good upper-level fighting feats (and maybe an end to this weird idea that guys who get cut and beat up for a living should be lacking in willpower), I think some of the "dipping" and PrC madness wouldn't seem so imperative.

The Club
MoogleEmpMog
11-09-03, 01:20 PM All abilities, all the time, whether as a DM or a player. I tend to ignore the pre-generated flavor text entirely, mix settings freely, and use as many PrCs as I like, and to create my own background for those abilities. While I enjoy existing flavor text for PrCs, I consider that just a suggested background for the class.

For example, if I were to play a Teflammer Shadowlord, I wouldn't have him as a member of a specific guild in Faerun (and he'd probably have some OA/Rokugan levels ;) ) - I'd have a character background describing how this guy gained these shadow abilities either on his own or as part of a local association in my campaign world. The TS levels are simply for the abilities, the character is purely my own.
opticassault
11-09-03, 01:49 PM I tend to do what moogle does in some respects. I try not to blatanly mix campaign settings because I realize certain things were designed with certain classes and feats in mind and would be broken in other settings. However, I tend to take characters who do that on a character by character basis. As long as it isn't too overpowering I will allow it.

As far as some very flavor based PrC's go, if I, for example, want to run a non-FR campaign, many times I will take FR prestige classes and remove the flavor:

War Wizard of Cormyr -> War Wizard
Telflammar Shadowlord -> Shadowlord

and the like. Sometimes it doesn't need to even be done, in cases like Incantrix and Guild Thief. However, if it is TOO ingrained with something in the realms (Red Wizard of Thay, Hathran, Ethran, Talontar Blightlord) then I obviously can't allow it without putting too much Forgotten Realms flavor in a non FR campaign.

Usually, I don't let the flavor of a class get too much in the way of my own RPing, unless that class is acctually a specific order with abilities related to it. You can't really play a Purple Dragon Knight without having some adventures with the purple dragons, and you can't really be a Great Rift skyguard without being around the great rift sometimes.;)

Other than that though... I'm pretty liberal about the PrC's my group uses. If it's 3rd party I'll need to look it over first. It hasn't been too much of a problem, either. I've only had to ban one character, and that's because he singlehandedly took down a level 20 melee cleric with all his buffs on in one shot at level 13 or 14. Of course, when you are a half ogre, half insectile frenzied snow tiger berserker, you tend to do things like that.
opticassault
11-09-03, 01:51 PM As far as upper level fighter feats go, we created some weapon mastery type stuff that worked out well. Fighters got very powerful, the only problem was that every one of the looked alike, because they would all be dual wielding scimitar weapon masters :D
Zrave
11-09-03, 08:42 PM One interesting way of looking at it is that instead of belonging to a number of different classes, your character instead has 20 levels of a home-brew class that gives the same abilities.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
opticassault 11-09-03, 02:24 AM	This is being debated all over the place here, and I think it needs a nice, cozy home so we don't have it in everyone else's threads. First, let me state that the DM has the final word in your gaming group, regardless of your opinion. There, no one is allowed to use that arguement from now on in the rest of this discussion. So, here we go: Do you define your character by his abilities or by the classes he has? I'm an ability man, personally. I don't care how many letters sit next to my character name. In my opinion, it doesn't matter how many different classes you have. It all comes down to your abilities. A Wiz5/Incant8/Elemental Savant 6 / Archmage 1 doesn't bother me at all. I see him as a blaster mage who uses one element in particular and tosses lots of metamagic feats on his spells. He uses his banishing powers to send away elementals of types that don't agree with his. A Barb2/Ftr4/Frenzied Berserker10/Rog3/Berserk 1 is a warrior who has trained somewhat with a specific weapon, knows how to hit you where it hurts with it, and might need some anger management. Other people would see these as nothing more than a collection of ridiculous classes that make no sense whatsoever. So there's my two cents, let's see yours.
PhaedrusXY 11-09-03, 02:31 AM	I tend to agree with you. I like to add classes to help me build a certain type of character I have in mind. If only one or two classes are enough, that's good. If it is a more complex character and requires 5 or more, that doesn't bother me. I do try to keep it at 5 total classes or under though, because a list of nothing but two and three level dips just looks ridiculous to me. Also, I don't like how the saving throws all just add up. I like the house rule system that I saw on here that adds up all the levels of good and bad saves for each class and averages them. That way you wind up with reasonable base saves, even if you're heavily multiclassed.
Outsider Subtype 11-09-03, 02:46 AM	Like opticassault, I tend to interpret the "flavor" of prestige classes liberally. For example, I would be fine with giving Order of the Bow levels to any character devoted to archery above all other forms of combat, not just members of a particular monastic order. Thus, his character descriptions sound just fine to me. However, I tend to sigh a little when I see builds proposed involving 6 or 7 classes. One reason for this is my own personal aesthetic preference: I like the original cleric archer (Cleric 20) and Wizard 5/Incantatrix 10/Archmage 5 because they are elegant and simple in addition to being effective. Another reason is that whatever I might think, many DMs will look with disfavor on a lot of one-level dips. A third reason is that the epic rules favor those who complete prestige classes by taking all 10 levels.
Endarire 11-09-03, 03:02 AM	I'm for abilities as classes are mixes of semi-balanced and related abilities. I also almost always skip class and PrC flavor text. -EE
Sisyfos 11-09-03, 03:24 AM	I was more into abilities, but I've started to read those flavor texts for PrCs as a player and I find it nice to identify my character through them. As a DM I've started to build organizations behind many of the PrCs and both I and the players seem to enjoy it. I have an order of demon fighting knights in my Planescape campaign. I have a few arcane tricksters out there, but there is a story behind those characters (it could be a better story though). I think it enlivens the campaign world and the characters and thus I will continue that way. I allow practically any monster or humanoid race, any class and just about any PrC in my campaigns, but I enforce that there has to be a story behind them. Sisyfos
GoblinBiter 11-09-03, 03:25 AM	i'm in full agreement with those above me.
Neonsamurai 11-09-03, 06:49 AM	I go with the abilities approach as well. However i do feel weird when i see that combine fundamentally different campaign settings, oriental adventures and forgotten realms for example. Yeah they might be cool flavour wise but those builds can easily go out of hand.
sereg 11-09-03, 08:19 AM	I like the original cleric archer (Cleric 20) and Wizard 5/Incantatrix 10/Archmage 5 because they are elegant and simple in addition to being effective See, I agree... But you're missing something imo. Melee DO NOT have that option most of the time if they want to stay competitive in levels 10-20. Its all well an good for a cleric to go Cleric10/Auspician 10... But bob the fighter's only HOPE is to prc out of his mind. Another thing is, all prcs are NOT made equal. We all know and accept this. Its all well and good to go Barbarian10/Runescarred Berseker 10, but Try Fighter10/Divine champion 5/Planar champion 5, hello mediocrity and wasted feats. In addition, prc'ing out the wazzu is the ONLY way a fighter type can gain fun, powerful abilities every level or nearly every level. Casters spells and spells per day always rise, but if you want to have fun as a melee, in my opinion, you need to prc like mad. Going from level 10 to 12 and gaining 2 bab, 1 feat, and +1 save vs divine spells really doesn't do it for me, sorry. Sereg
Ranthanas 11-09-03, 09:04 AM	I go for abilities every time. On the other hand, I ban many PrCs (or rather allow few- I play core+house) and of those I leave, I often allow gentler ways in by RP (e.g. I'd be prepared to allow an archery ranger into OOBI without the Weap Spec under the condition they've RPd it and have good ranks in Craft (Bowyer), Craft (Fletcher) and the FarShot feat (i.e. have done pretty much everything they can to help their archery). For the DM, the pre-requisites are guidelines :smirk: When a player, abilities all the way and single level dips seem icky (and we've fixed the way they break saves anyway...)
Outsider Subtype 11-09-03, 11:11 AM	See, I agree... But you're missing something imo. Melee DO NOT have that option most of the time if they want to stay competitive in levels 10-20. Its all well an good for a cleric to go Cleric10/Auspician 10... But bob the fighter's only HOPE is to prc out of his mind. While there are a few exceptions like Bladesinger, your point is very valid. The trouble is that most fighter prestige classes are not that good except for dips while for clerics and wizards, almost any class with full spell progression is an improvement over what they would be getting otherwise.
The Club 11-09-03, 11:29 AM	Some of you are already making the points I was about to make regarding melee-oriented characters. Try staying with one melee class, and you end up with something with a number of interesting and underpowered abilities (the fighter) or something with pre-programmed interesting and underpowered abilities (the barbarian). Heck, with the feats available to him, the fighter should be his own prestige class. If we had some good upper-level fighting feats (and maybe an end to this weird idea that guys who get cut and beat up for a living should be lacking in willpower), I think some of the "dipping" and PrC madness wouldn't seem so imperative. The Club
MoogleEmpMog 11-09-03, 01:20 PM	All abilities, all the time, whether as a DM or a player. I tend to ignore the pre-generated flavor text entirely, mix settings freely, and use as many PrCs as I like, and to create my own background for those abilities. While I enjoy existing flavor text for PrCs, I consider that just a suggested background for the class. For example, if I were to play a Teflammer Shadowlord, I wouldn't have him as a member of a specific guild in Faerun (and he'd probably have some OA/Rokugan levels ;) ) - I'd have a character background describing how this guy gained these shadow abilities either on his own or as part of a local association in my campaign world. The TS levels are simply for the abilities, the character is purely my own.
opticassault 11-09-03, 01:49 PM	I tend to do what moogle does in some respects. I try not to blatanly mix campaign settings because I realize certain things were designed with certain classes and feats in mind and would be broken in other settings. However, I tend to take characters who do that on a character by character basis. As long as it isn't too overpowering I will allow it. As far as some very flavor based PrC's go, if I, for example, want to run a non-FR campaign, many times I will take FR prestige classes and remove the flavor: War Wizard of Cormyr -> War Wizard Telflammar Shadowlord -> Shadowlord and the like. Sometimes it doesn't need to even be done, in cases like Incantrix and Guild Thief. However, if it is TOO ingrained with something in the realms (Red Wizard of Thay, Hathran, Ethran, Talontar Blightlord) then I obviously can't allow it without putting too much Forgotten Realms flavor in a non FR campaign. Usually, I don't let the flavor of a class get too much in the way of my own RPing, unless that class is acctually a specific order with abilities related to it. You can't really play a Purple Dragon Knight without having some adventures with the purple dragons, and you can't really be a Great Rift skyguard without being around the great rift sometimes.;) Other than that though... I'm pretty liberal about the PrC's my group uses. If it's 3rd party I'll need to look it over first. It hasn't been too much of a problem, either. I've only had to ban one character, and that's because he singlehandedly took down a level 20 melee cleric with all his buffs on in one shot at level 13 or 14. Of course, when you are a half ogre, half insectile frenzied snow tiger berserker, you tend to do things like that.
opticassault 11-09-03, 01:51 PM	As far as upper level fighter feats go, we created some weapon mastery type stuff that worked out well. Fighters got very powerful, the only problem was that every one of the looked alike, because they would all be dual wielding scimitar weapon masters :D
Zrave 11-09-03, 08:42 PM	One interesting way of looking at it is that instead of belonging to a number of different classes, your character instead has 20 levels of a home-brew class that gives the same abilities.