Generic classes in a standard game? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Generic classes in a standard game? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Arkan_Shadesfire
09-22-06, 05:37 AM I'm wondering what people's thoughts are on bringing the generic character classes from UA into a normal D&D campaign--particularly the idea of a PC multiclassing into a generic class.

Would this be a good idea?

What would the advantages and disadvantages be in having the generic Warrior, Specialist, and Spellcaster in the same world as the core classes?

On first glance, it seems like an easy way to get out of making a bazzillion custom classes and having my players only use one or two of them, as well as making sure they can make exactly the kind of character they have in mind--but I'm wondering if there are any hidden balance issues in doing so.
Egarb
09-22-06, 11:24 AM only balancing issue i ever see with them is the super easy ways to meet prc Prereqs. As long as they dont go all munchkiny its ok.

Oh, and id add some other options for the class features feats. They should be able to do more things anyway considering theyre supposed to be a catch all.
Arkan_Shadesfire
09-22-06, 11:51 AM Well, that's what I liked about the idea of multiclassing the generic classes with standard ones--if there's an ability you can't get with a generic class (like a monk's flurry of blows) you just multiclass to pick it up.

It's not a perfect fix but it saves the trouble of houseruling new class feature feats, which are more likely to be unbalanced than published material.
GEEKAZOID
09-23-06, 10:54 PM if there's an ability you can't get with a generic class (like a monk's flurry of blows)Actually, the generic classes variant makes all class abilities from core classes available as bonus feats. In your example of monk, you would take the special abilities and seperate them into feat trees. This way you could have a spellcaster choose unarmed strike as his first feat or an expert with feats from the slow fall tree the same way a warrior can choose sneak attack as a feat. This is the strength of the generic classes... total customization.

So the problem is, if you were to allow the generic player this option but not the players of the core classes, there may be some toes stepped on and angry players. Not allowing this option weakens the generic character. So there may be issues with mixing them in a game.
Arkan_Shadesfire
09-23-06, 11:55 PM No, I don't actually have UA yet--I've just been going over the rules on the SRD (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/home.html)

The thing is, unless the book has more that weren't made open game content, not all of the core classes' abilities have class feats made for them. Yes, I could make my own flurry of blows feat tree, but creating and balancing a bunch of new houseruled feats is precisely what I'd like to avoid.

What I'm suggesting is that instead of homebrewing new class ability feats for the generic classes, you just allow the players to multiclass with the core classes to pick up those abilities they can't get otherwise.

It's better than homebrewing it in my opinion because the internal balance issues have already been taken care of, whereas you have to spend a lot of time making sure that a new class feature feat isn't over or underpowered.

The bottom line is that while I have confidence in my houserules, I trust published material more, because it's usually been looked over and playtested a bit before being introduced in a published book.

The last thing I want is to ruin a long-running campaign by introducing a homebrewed ability that turns out to have a hidden, game-breaking flaw halfway through.

Also, I'm lazy and would rather plug in existing material than take the time to carefully craft and balance my own rules.

Essentially, I'm thinking of using the generic classes as sort of a class creation guide, allowing you to create the class that you want by mixing and matching the features within the guidelines. The question is whether this method produces classes that are balanced against the core ones.

Of course, all that customizability makes it vulnerable to min/maxing, but aside from extreme examples, are the combinations you can create with generic classes more powerful, less powerful, or balanced against the core classes?

That's what I want people's opinions on.
GEEKAZOID
09-24-06, 12:35 PM Essentially, I'm thinking of using the generic classes as sort of a class creation guide, allowing you to create the class that you want by mixing and matching the features within the guidelines.Which is exactly what they are there for The question is whether this method produces classes that are balanced against the core ones...are the combinations you can create with generic classes more powerful, less powerful, or balanced against the core classes?
Well, in the UA it says If you use the generic classes, you shouldn't use the core classes in the PHB No specific reason is mentioned, but it is assumed there are balance issues.
However, it is your game. If you want to try, then do it.
rydi123
09-27-06, 02:31 AM if you run a high powered game, the free form mixing is ok, but not in lower power games (i've tried both).

the only time that the generic classes mix well with core in low power games is when you are making an alternate class. want an agile fighter? make a warrior with good dex, tumble as a class skill, and a couple of fitting class abilities. but do it all up front, don't let the character just decide what the class will be as you go along. basically, only use the generics in an otherwise normal setting if you are interested in making a new base class, and the player intends to use it for more than just a couple of lvls.
Arkan_Shadesfire
09-27-06, 04:52 AM Of course.

Thanks for the advice rydi123. That's essentially the situation I'm in. One of my players had a great (from an RP perspective) idea for his character that he talked with me about, but I've been having a hard time finding a published class that fits what he wanted.

Right now his character is a Tiefling Barbarian/Warlock, and he wanted his character to take some special kind of monk-like training that would teach him how to combine his martial and mystical abilities--essentially his character has a lot of rage and dark powers because of his demonic heritage, and he's trying to find a monestary that can teach him how to control it, instead of being controlled by it or giving it up.

(He's aiming for balance and neutrality rather than "redemption")

I'm looking at the Martial Adept classes in Tome of Battle right now, and one of those might work, but if not I'm probably going to have to homebrew somehting, and I don't want to unbalance a long term character with some class I just threw together. :rolleyes:
rydi123
09-28-06, 02:26 AM understandable. well, the generic classes really don't seem the way to go for that background anyway. it sounds more like you are looking for a prestige class of some sort, and a 3/5 lvl one at that, something that merges the tiefling elements, warlock, and barbarian, with the discipline (but not necessarily the martial skills) of a monk.

so is the character going to try to convert the dark energies into something else, focus them more, or just repress them? i think that is probably the biggest question at this point. from there you can design a 3/5 lvl prestige that fits the character. i can already think of alot of classes that are good candidates for cherrypicking right now, but they might contradict w/flavor.
Arkan_Shadesfire
09-28-06, 09:05 AM Well, I finished reading the classes in Tome of Battle and the Shadow Sun Ninja PrC seems pretty close to what I'm looking for as far as the "learning to embrace your dark side and find a balance between good and evil" aspect (they even say the school was founded by a reformed half-fiend) but the abilities don't quite fit...

...I'll probably use that and Rage Mage as a base and go from there.

Basically the way he's been playing the character is that his barbarian rage and his warlock invocations are more of a violent temper/corrupting power thing, and the warlock levels are treated as an extension/result of being a tiefling, the way that sorcerer levels can come from having draconic heritage. Essentially, the rage is his demonic bloodthirstiness and temper coming to the surface, while the warlock invocations represent tapping into the demonic power that flows in his blood.

I want to give him a class that lets him finish his rage progression (IE: He's learned to harness it and control it, so now he can do it when he wants and doesn't just fly off the handle and fatigue himself) and something that gives him "+1 to previous spellcasting class" to represent learning to control and use his invocations without succumbing to their influence.

I had originally worked up a series of five level PrC's that represented various types of monk-training that different classes could gain to sharpen and improve their existing abilities. I had a school that focused on harnessing Rage abilities, one that worked with the rogue's sneak attack, one for spellcasters that was kind of like a melee version of Arcane Archer, and a couple others--five in all--but I just wasn't sure they were balanced. I was going to have him train in the Fire School and learn better control of his rage, and then take on the Void School and focus on his arcane abilities, (mastering one of the other schools was a prereq for the Void School) so I'll probably do something similar: Make one 5 level class that focuses on physical training and harnessing rage, and then another that focuses on spiritual training and gaining control of the warlock abilities.

Taking up the latter half of his character levels with PrC's might seem a bit much, but that's pretty much how he described his character to me: He starts out just using his inheirent demonic nature, and then joins a monestery that teaches him to harness and control those abilities, and spends the rest of his life trying to follow that path.

Of course, he can always have his character start running amuck if he changes his mind along the way. :rolleyes:
rydi123
09-28-06, 03:01 PM rage mage was one of the classes i was going to suggest actually.

the shadow sun ninja also sounds fitting, though the abilities are mediocre.

if you decide to make up your own, you could go with something that lets you cast and think while in a rage (similar to champion of gwyn out of BoED), and gives a few half-fiend traits while in the rage and/or 1 or 2 caster level increases. not overly powerful, modifies pre-existing abilities in a focused but not overly powerful way, and can be done in 3/5 levels.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Arkan_Shadesfire 09-22-06, 05:37 AM	I'm wondering what people's thoughts are on bringing the generic character classes from UA into a normal D&D campaign--particularly the idea of a PC multiclassing into a generic class. Would this be a good idea? What would the advantages and disadvantages be in having the generic Warrior, Specialist, and Spellcaster in the same world as the core classes? On first glance, it seems like an easy way to get out of making a bazzillion custom classes and having my players only use one or two of them, as well as making sure they can make exactly the kind of character they have in mind--but I'm wondering if there are any hidden balance issues in doing so.
Egarb 09-22-06, 11:24 AM	only balancing issue i ever see with them is the super easy ways to meet prc Prereqs. As long as they dont go all munchkiny its ok. Oh, and id add some other options for the class features feats. They should be able to do more things anyway considering theyre supposed to be a catch all.
Arkan_Shadesfire 09-22-06, 11:51 AM	Well, that's what I liked about the idea of multiclassing the generic classes with standard ones--if there's an ability you can't get with a generic class (like a monk's flurry of blows) you just multiclass to pick it up. It's not a perfect fix but it saves the trouble of houseruling new class feature feats, which are more likely to be unbalanced than published material.
GEEKAZOID 09-23-06, 10:54 PM	if there's an ability you can't get with a generic class (like a monk's flurry of blows)Actually, the generic classes variant makes all class abilities from core classes available as bonus feats. In your example of monk, you would take the special abilities and seperate them into feat trees. This way you could have a spellcaster choose unarmed strike as his first feat or an expert with feats from the slow fall tree the same way a warrior can choose sneak attack as a feat. This is the strength of the generic classes... total customization. So the problem is, if you were to allow the generic player this option but not the players of the core classes, there may be some toes stepped on and angry players. Not allowing this option weakens the generic character. So there may be issues with mixing them in a game.
Arkan_Shadesfire 09-23-06, 11:55 PM	No, I don't actually have UA yet--I've just been going over the rules on the SRD (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/home.html) The thing is, unless the book has more that weren't made open game content, not all of the core classes' abilities have class feats made for them. Yes, I could make my own flurry of blows feat tree, but creating and balancing a bunch of new houseruled feats is precisely what I'd like to avoid. What I'm suggesting is that instead of homebrewing new class ability feats for the generic classes, you just allow the players to multiclass with the core classes to pick up those abilities they can't get otherwise. It's better than homebrewing it in my opinion because the internal balance issues have already been taken care of, whereas you have to spend a lot of time making sure that a new class feature feat isn't over or underpowered. The bottom line is that while I have confidence in my houserules, I trust published material more, because it's usually been looked over and playtested a bit before being introduced in a published book. The last thing I want is to ruin a long-running campaign by introducing a homebrewed ability that turns out to have a hidden, game-breaking flaw halfway through. Also, I'm lazy and would rather plug in existing material than take the time to carefully craft and balance my own rules. Essentially, I'm thinking of using the generic classes as sort of a class creation guide, allowing you to create the class that you want by mixing and matching the features within the guidelines. The question is whether this method produces classes that are balanced against the core ones. Of course, all that customizability makes it vulnerable to min/maxing, but aside from extreme examples, are the combinations you can create with generic classes more powerful, less powerful, or balanced against the core classes? That's what I want people's opinions on.
GEEKAZOID 09-24-06, 12:35 PM	Essentially, I'm thinking of using the generic classes as sort of a class creation guide, allowing you to create the class that you want by mixing and matching the features within the guidelines.Which is exactly what they are there for The question is whether this method produces classes that are balanced against the core ones...are the combinations you can create with generic classes more powerful, less powerful, or balanced against the core classes? Well, in the UA it says If you use the generic classes, you shouldn't use the core classes in the PHB No specific reason is mentioned, but it is assumed there are balance issues. However, it is your game. If you want to try, then do it.
rydi123 09-27-06, 02:31 AM	if you run a high powered game, the free form mixing is ok, but not in lower power games (i've tried both). the only time that the generic classes mix well with core in low power games is when you are making an alternate class. want an agile fighter? make a warrior with good dex, tumble as a class skill, and a couple of fitting class abilities. but do it all up front, don't let the character just decide what the class will be as you go along. basically, only use the generics in an otherwise normal setting if you are interested in making a new base class, and the player intends to use it for more than just a couple of lvls.
Arkan_Shadesfire 09-27-06, 04:52 AM	Of course. Thanks for the advice rydi123. That's essentially the situation I'm in. One of my players had a great (from an RP perspective) idea for his character that he talked with me about, but I've been having a hard time finding a published class that fits what he wanted. Right now his character is a Tiefling Barbarian/Warlock, and he wanted his character to take some special kind of monk-like training that would teach him how to combine his martial and mystical abilities--essentially his character has a lot of rage and dark powers because of his demonic heritage, and he's trying to find a monestary that can teach him how to control it, instead of being controlled by it or giving it up. (He's aiming for balance and neutrality rather than "redemption") I'm looking at the Martial Adept classes in Tome of Battle right now, and one of those might work, but if not I'm probably going to have to homebrew somehting, and I don't want to unbalance a long term character with some class I just threw together. :rolleyes:
rydi123 09-28-06, 02:26 AM	understandable. well, the generic classes really don't seem the way to go for that background anyway. it sounds more like you are looking for a prestige class of some sort, and a 3/5 lvl one at that, something that merges the tiefling elements, warlock, and barbarian, with the discipline (but not necessarily the martial skills) of a monk. so is the character going to try to convert the dark energies into something else, focus them more, or just repress them? i think that is probably the biggest question at this point. from there you can design a 3/5 lvl prestige that fits the character. i can already think of alot of classes that are good candidates for cherrypicking right now, but they might contradict w/flavor.
Arkan_Shadesfire 09-28-06, 09:05 AM	Well, I finished reading the classes in Tome of Battle and the Shadow Sun Ninja PrC seems pretty close to what I'm looking for as far as the "learning to embrace your dark side and find a balance between good and evil" aspect (they even say the school was founded by a reformed half-fiend) but the abilities don't quite fit... ...I'll probably use that and Rage Mage as a base and go from there. Basically the way he's been playing the character is that his barbarian rage and his warlock invocations are more of a violent temper/corrupting power thing, and the warlock levels are treated as an extension/result of being a tiefling, the way that sorcerer levels can come from having draconic heritage. Essentially, the rage is his demonic bloodthirstiness and temper coming to the surface, while the warlock invocations represent tapping into the demonic power that flows in his blood. I want to give him a class that lets him finish his rage progression (IE: He's learned to harness it and control it, so now he can do it when he wants and doesn't just fly off the handle and fatigue himself) and something that gives him "+1 to previous spellcasting class" to represent learning to control and use his invocations without succumbing to their influence. I had originally worked up a series of five level PrC's that represented various types of monk-training that different classes could gain to sharpen and improve their existing abilities. I had a school that focused on harnessing Rage abilities, one that worked with the rogue's sneak attack, one for spellcasters that was kind of like a melee version of Arcane Archer, and a couple others--five in all--but I just wasn't sure they were balanced. I was going to have him train in the Fire School and learn better control of his rage, and then take on the Void School and focus on his arcane abilities, (mastering one of the other schools was a prereq for the Void School) so I'll probably do something similar: Make one 5 level class that focuses on physical training and harnessing rage, and then another that focuses on spiritual training and gaining control of the warlock abilities. Taking up the latter half of his character levels with PrC's might seem a bit much, but that's pretty much how he described his character to me: He starts out just using his inheirent demonic nature, and then joins a monestery that teaches him to harness and control those abilities, and spends the rest of his life trying to follow that path. Of course, he can always have his character start running amuck if he changes his mind along the way. :rolleyes:
rydi123 09-28-06, 03:01 PM	rage mage was one of the classes i was going to suggest actually. the shadow sun ninja also sounds fitting, though the abilities are mediocre. if you decide to make up your own, you could go with something that lets you cast and think while in a rage (similar to champion of gwyn out of BoED), and gives a few half-fiend traits while in the rage and/or 1 or 2 caster level increases. not overly powerful, modifies pre-existing abilities in a focused but not overly powerful way, and can be done in 3/5 levels.