Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Belegbeth 03-13-04, 05:44 PM	Here are my suggestions for modifying the Generic Classes in UA. With these changes, I think that you can build characters that reflect most of the basic "adventuring types" in fantasy games (holy warriors, rangers, bards, etc.), but with much more flexibility than is provided in the standard DnD classes. CLASS CHANGES The Expert would get d8 HD, 8 skill points per level, and proficiency with 3 martial weapons (otherwise unchanged). The Spellcaster would get d6 HD (otherwise unchanged). The Warrior would get 4 skill points per level (otherwise unchanged). GENERAL FEAT LIST (add these class abilities to the feats available to all classes) Fast Movement, Favoured Enemy, Favoured Terrain, Woodland Stride. Detect Evil, Smite Evil, Divine Grace (PC must be level 2), Lay on Hands. Rage. [Taking rage (1/day) costs two feats, and should be taken at first level. This reflects the idea that this ability is derived from a certain cultural background. Thus an "expert" from a Viking-like culture might have learned to rage, as might a "priest" from that same culture. The frequency of rage improves with a character's BAB: Rage 2/day at BAB of +4; Rage 3/day at BAB of +8; Rage 4/day at BAB of +12; Rage 5/day at BAB of +16; Rage 6/day at BAB of +20. Greater rage is a separate feat and requires Rage and BAB +11. Tireless rage is a separate feat and requires Greater Rage and BAB +17. Mighty Rage is a separate feat that requires Tireless Rage, and BAB +20.] EXPERT FEAT LIST (these class abilities are available only to the Expert) Evasion, Improved Evasion, Sneak Attack, Improved Sneak Attack, Greater Sneak Attack, Trap Senses, Skill Mastery, Uncanny Dodge. (See UA, p. 76, for the prerequisites for these feats.) Wild Empathy, Camouflage (PC must be level 13), Hide in Plain Sight (PC must be level 17), Venom Immunity (PC must be level 9). Bardic Knowledge, Basic Bardic Song (countersong, fascinate, inspire courage), Inspire Competence (requires 6 ranks of performance and Basic Bardic Song), Suggestion (requires 6 ranks of performance and Inspire Competence), Inspire Greatness (requires 12 ranks of performance and Suggestion), Song of Freedom (requires 15 ranks of performance and Inspire Greatness), Inspire Heroics (requires 18 ranks in performance and Song of Freedom), Mass Suggestion (requires 21 ranks of performance and Inspire Heroics). SPELLCASTER FEAT LIST Bardic Knowledge, Familiar, Turn Undead, Animal Companion. Wild shape (small and medium creatures): 2/day. Requirements: ability to cast 3rd level spells (at least one spell known must be from the "animal" domain). Wild shape (small and medium creatures): 4/day. Requirements: Wild shape 2/day and ability to cast 5th level spells. Wild shape (small and medium creatures): 6/day. Requirements: Wild shape 4/day and ability to cast 9th level spells. Wild shape (large creatures). Requirements: Wild shape (small and medium creatures) and ability to cast 4th level spells. Wild shape (tiny creatures). Requirements: Wild shape (small and medium creatures) and ability to cast 6th level spells. Wild shape (plants). Requirements: Wild shape (small and medium creatures) and ability to cast 6th level spells. Wild shape (huge creatures). Requirements: Wild shape (large creatures) and ability to cast 8th level spells. Wild shape (elementals) 1/day. Requirements:Wild shape (huge creatures) and ability to cast 8th level spells. Can be taken multiple times (each time increases the number of times a PC can wild shape to elemental by 1/day). [Feats that increase the number of times/day that a character can wild shape apply to all creatures into which she can wild shape (e.g. large, huge, and plant) by means of other feats -- except for elementals.] GENERAL COMMENTS With this system I think you can recreate a number of standard "adventuring types," while retaining the flexibility inherent in the Generic Class system. I have tried to group similar class abilities together in different "streams" that players might use to build particular kinds of characters. For example, if you are primarily a warrior, you could construct an "outdoor warrior" by drawing on the feats in the first stream of the General feat list (fast movement, etc.). Add rage to be a "barbarian" warrior. Add a few levels of Expert (with feats drawn from the second stream, including wild empathy, etc.) to be a "ranger." Alternatively, you could choose detect evil, etc. in order to be a "holy warrior." Add a few levels of spellcaster (with the turn undead feat) to create a "paladin." And so forth. The advantage of this system is that you can always throw in a different class ability if you want it. For example, if you are building a "rogue" (using mainly the first stream from the Expert feats), you could add Bardic Knowledge to reflect your character's information-gathering abilities. Or if you are building a "bard" (using the third stream of Expert feats, and a few levels of Spellcaster) you could always add Wild Empathy, Fast Movement, and Woodland Stride to reflect his "outdoor interests" (bards travel a lot). And so forth! :D
caeruleus 03-13-04, 07:35 PM	Nice work Belegbeth. While I might prefer certain roles to be filled by prestige classes (e.g., a "holy warrior"), your way allows to recreate almost all of the standard classes without too much multiclassing, which is good. Draco Caeruleus
Belegbeth 03-13-04, 07:52 PM	Thanks for the compliment, Draco. Monks still lie outside of the system, but I never used them myself (they are culturally incompatible with the kinds of campaigns I run). As for prestige classes, I think that most nonspellcasting prestige classes can work well with this system. But with the possible exception of the prestige Bard, I worry that the Spellcaster's access to both divine and arcane spells renders most spellcasting PrC's too powerful (e.g. Prestige Paladins casting magic missile; Arcane Tricksters with heal; etc.).
caeruleus 03-17-04, 07:20 PM	Yes, I've thought of the notion of the prestige paladin casting fireballs and lightning bolts. Doesn't really fit the flavour. Of course, the prestige paladin presented in UA might not be the best sort of holy warrior if you're using generic classes. It would be better to have either your option, or to make up a new prestige class with specific powers rather than spells. The latter option, however, could take a fair bit of time. Draco
Belegbeth 03-18-04, 03:42 AM	I am starting to think that prestige classes don't really fit well with a Generic Class system. It might be better simply to use "prestige special abilities" that characters can get only at certain levels (if they meet the necessary prerequisites, of course). This might just be part of my growing dislike of prestige classes, as presently used in DnD. I always thought that prestige classes were meant to promote a certain flavour in a DM's campaign world. Instead, they seem to be used to give characters "nifty" new abilities. With a Generic Class system, you don't need to do this with new prestige classes, as the base classes are so flexible. Anyway, it is a bit depressing that there is not more interest in Generic Classes on these boards. This strikes me as one of the more interesting features in UA -- something to make game play both more simple and flexible. But instead a lot more people seem much more interested in the "uber-gaming" options like Gestalt classes. :(
Tenzhi 03-18-04, 04:12 AM	The Generic classes are basically the four basic classes (Fighter, Rogue, Priest, and Mage) with class abilities turned into feats so that the line between classes becomes ever-the-more blurred. This is essentially like the horrible Player's Option: Skills & Powers take on classes in 2nd Ed. that destroyed the lines between classes. Personally, I like to keep my classes fairly segregated. That said, divvying up the feats into more class-specific lists is a good idea that I was already toying with for a normal campaign. Though I was mostly interested in taking the majority of combat-oriented feats out of the hands of other classes and making them the sole domain of the fighter.
Belegbeth 03-18-04, 04:34 AM	Originally posted by Tenzhi That said, divvying up the feats into more class-specific lists is a good idea that I was already toying with for a normal campaign. Though I was mostly interested in taking the majority of combat-oriented feats out of the hands of other classes and making them the sole domain of the fighter. I am not sure whether you are criticizing Generic Classes in your comment, Tenzhi. ;) Anyway, regarding your point about making feats more class-specific, I have been thinking about this as well. View my above post as a "rough draft." Ideally, I would like to distill the Generic Class system down to three basic classes (since the divine/arcane distinction does not make much sense now, and I never liked it anyway). This would minimize the need for multiclassing, and make the game run more smoothly in general, I think. (Also, it makes running games with only 2-4 players more feasible.) Within each Generic Class, there should be a wide range of options -- and I would probably formulate a number of different "career paths" of feats, skills, and spells to reflect coherent "career packages." But the division should perhaps be stricter than my outline suggests. Fighters should fight, Spellcasters should cast, and Experts should disarm traps and backstab! :D (Speaking of simplicity, Tenzhi, whatever happened to your "Basic DnD meets d20" project, that you mentioned over on Dragonsfoot sometime ago?)
Tenzhi 03-18-04, 05:02 AM	Originally posted by Belegbeth I am not sure whether you are criticizing Generic Classes in your comment, Tenzhi. ;) Yes and no. On the one hand I've got no inherent problem with distilling the classes down to 3-4 basic classes, but those classes must be kept disparate and distinct IMO. The class abilities as bonus feats bit (as written in the book) muddies the water too much for my tastes. Anyway, regarding your point about making feats more class-specific, I have been thinking about this as well. View my above post as a "rough draft." I viewed the post and it is why I mentioned that it was a good idea - and one that I had just happened to be toying with myself for a relatively normal campaign (as far as classes go, anyway). Fighters should fight, Spellcasters should cast, and Experts should disarm traps and backstab! :D That's pretty much what I think. Though I still prefer the distinction between arcane and divine spellcasting methods - perhaps I'll make the former prepared spells that can't be readily cast in armour and go all the way to level 9, whilst the latter are spontaneously cast without difficulty in armour and only go up to level 7 or so. (Speaking of simplicity, Tenzhi, whatever happened to your "Basic DnD meets d20" project, that you mentioned over on Dragonsfoot sometime ago?) I wasn't entirely happy with how it was turning out so I scrapped what I had and started to rethink how I was going about it. Then UA came out and showed me how to make the game more like I wanted with less work. The biggest help for me from UA came in the form of Gestalt classes (which I am using as a replacement for multiclassing (along with triple-Gestalts!)) and Level-Independent XP Awards (which allows me to handle the balance of Gestalts easily by making a double-gestalt need twice as much XP to advance and a triple-gestalt to need thrice as much). I was already using a variant skill system similar to those present in UA. There are a number of other modifications I'm using, but I won't go into those here.
Belegbeth 03-18-04, 05:06 AM	Originally posted by Tenzhi There are a number of other modifications I'm using, but I won't go into those here. Elsewhere??? Also, regarding: "That's pretty much what I think. Though I still prefer the distinction between arcane and divine spellcasting methods - perhaps I'll make the former prepared spells that can't be readily cast in armour and go all the way to level 9, whilst the latter are spontaneously cast without difficulty in armour and only go up to level 7 or so." Why not give divine spellcasters the Bard spell progression (a flash back to Basic DnD, when clerics didn't have spells at level one), with armour spellcasting ability (plus the "light" and "medium" armour proficiencies at 1st leve)? Arcane spellcasters get normal progression, but armour problems!
caeruleus 03-18-04, 02:24 PM	Given the bonus feat progression of the expert in UA, don't you find it a little underpowered? Compare the amount of special abilities the expert can get to the special abilities of the rogue, and the rogue comes out ahead. Given the assumption (which could be challenged) that the rogue and the fighter are roughly balanced, and given that the warrior has some advantage over the fighter, it would seem that the expert is indeed underpowered compared to the other generic classes. What would you think about giving the expert the same bonus feat progression as the warrior? (You may recall this was a suggestion I made on another thread, but in my version the expert could only select special abilities while the warrior could only select feats.) Draco
Belegbeth 03-18-04, 06:30 PM	Originally posted by caeruleus Given the bonus feat progression of the expert in UA, don't you find it a little underpowered? Compare the amount of special abilities the expert can get to the special abilities of the rogue, and the rogue comes out ahead. Given the assumption (which could be challenged) that the rogue and the fighter are roughly balanced, and given that the warrior has some advantage over the fighter, it would seem that the expert is indeed underpowered compared to the other generic classes. What would you think about giving the expert the same bonus feat progression as the warrior? (You may recall this was a suggestion I made on another thread, but in my version the expert could only select special abilities while the warrior could only select feats.) Draco The modified Expert does get a better HD than the rogue (d8 versus d6) and better saves. I think that that might be enough to balance the Expert (combined with his greater flexibility in feat and skill selection). But I will think about your suggestion more. Here is the current direction of my thought: 4 Generic classes (warrior, expert, semi-spellcaster, pure spellcaster). Each class has access to both: (a.) a general pool of feats; and (b.) a class-specific pool of feats and special abilities. Certain skills and feats can be grouped together as "common theme packages," but these packages are suggestions only (they can help with quick NPC construction, and give players some guidance when building their own PCs). Rule out multiclassing between the 4 classes. (Each class should be flexible enough to create pretty much any kind of character you want without multiclassing; and multiclassing introduces too many potentially unbalancing variables, as well as encouraging minimaxing, etc.) Introduce a short list of prestige classes that each generic class can choose at higher levels to get previously unattainable abilities (e.g. warriors might get some limited spellcasting this way, etc.). The result, I hope, might be a simple and flexible system!