Starting without a character class [Archive] - Wizards Community

Starting without a character class [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
mkill
01-01-07, 11:56 AM There is an old AD&D adventure where characters start without a selected character class. The adventure is set on an island, and they can come across several items that they can try to use, such as a sword and a spellbook. At the end of the adventure, the characters select their class. The character that picked up the spellbook to try to memorize a spell might become a wizard, the one that picked up the sword might become a fighter, and so on.

Now the question is, how to translate that idea to 3.5th edition? How to create useful starting characters that can pick up a class later?

Here is what I came up with. Note that the characters created using this system start with a few more hit points and skills than usual 1st level characters. This is intended. I always thought that 1st level characters should have some background knowledge and I think they should have a little higher survivability.

Starting characters without a class

Characters under this system are obviously created in a different way from standard D&D 3.5. Use the following:

1. Select a race (gain racial traits and ability modifiers)

2. Roll attributes or use your favorite point-buy system

2a. Do not select a class

3. You gain a number of skill points equal to your Intelligence score. You can buy up to three ranks in each skill. There are no class or cross-class skills, each rank costs one point.
If you buy two ranks in any Knowledge, Craft, or Profession, you gain a third rank free.

4. Select two abilities for your character. These can be any of the following:
a) any 1st level class special of any class
b) any feat you meet the prerequisites for (but see below)
c) the spellcasting ability of a wizard, sorcerer, druid, or favored soul. You only gain the 0-level spells of the 1st class level, your caster level is 1
d) one psionic power point and one 1st-level power known
e) pathetic invocation: cast one 0-level spell as a spell-like ability at will, save is based on Cha
f) +1 to base attack bonus
g) +2 to one save

All characters also gain proficiency with simple weapons.

5. Hit points
Your hit point total is equal to your Constitution score

6. Base attack bonus and base saves are all +0

7. Starting gold is 100 gp

8. In every other way character creation is as described in the PHB

----

Gaining first level

The characters gain first level after the first adventure, or at 500 XP.

Each characters now select a class. He (or she) gains this classes BAB, saves, class specials, and spellcasting (if any).
Changes from normal 1st level:
* He gains hit points as per class starting from 2nd level
* He gains double base skill points at 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level. Int bonus skill points are not doubled.
(Otherwise the rogue would be at a big disadvantage)
* If he takes a class where he gains a class special, feat, spellcasting ability or psionic power he already took at character creation, he gains a free feat.
(Otherwise characters would be penalized to take the class they aimed for at the start).
* He does not gain the normal 1st-level feat, as he already took it during character creation.

----

Minor issues

* A number of feats should be available at character creation, even though characters won't fulfill their prerequisite (mainly BAB+1). These are Weapon Focus (includes free martial proficiency with weapon)

* Since all characters gain proficiency with simple weapons, which benefits wizards. Rogues will have less skill points at start compared to the standard system, but even out at 3rd level. Other characters have a broader skill selection, so abilities are more broadly distributed in the group.

* Starting characters without a class should be able to take a CR 1 encounter. They have fewer tricks up their sleeve, but more hp and skills. Level 1 characters created using this system are stronger, as they have an additional feat (or even class specials from another class), and more hp. They should be able to tackle CR 2 encounters. With level advancement, these advantages fade.
AmericanYeti
01-01-07, 01:20 PM Why not just have the characters start as Commoners? That wouldn't require the same rules conversions and would be quicker to stat up, methinks.
CryoSilver
01-01-07, 01:45 PM I played in a game like this once.

Everyone starts as a level 1 commoners, with all 10's and one 12 for abilities. The adventure was to rescue a coule people from a local goblin tribe. Everything we did was recorded on a little chart the DM had, and at the end of the adventure, was all put into a table that determined our race and character class at ECL 5.

Itwas very cool.
DarkRhystar
01-01-07, 02:35 PM What does this add to the game that you couldn't otherwise gain simply by playing a normal game?
Ra-Tiel
01-01-07, 02:36 PM I played in a game like this once.

Everyone starts as a level 1 commoners, with all 10's and one 12 for abilities. The adventure was to rescue a coule people from a local goblin tribe. Everything we did was recorded on a little chart the DM had, and at the end of the adventure, was all put into a table that determined our race and character class at ECL 5.

Itwas very cool.
Sounds very interesting, but sort of reminds me of all these online "character" or "alignment" tests, where you answer 17000 question to find out that you're a chaotiv evil half-celestial goblin warmage. :uh-huh: :rofl:
CryoSilver
01-01-07, 02:55 PM Well, I ended up a LE half black dragon barbarian...
mkill
01-02-07, 01:08 AM What does this add to the game that you couldn't otherwise gain simply by playing a normal game?

You have more freedom at character creation. Instead of thinking in narrow terms of class, you can start at the character background and add skills and abilities more freely. If done right, this means more rounded-out characters, with a few background skills like Craft or Profession. D&D leaves very few space for shaping individual characters at first level, as any ressource must go into getting the main abilities of your character to work. You can't really, for example, start as a wizard who lived as a petty street thief kid before he was taken in as an apprentice.

Why not just have the characters start as Commoners? That wouldn't require the same rules conversions and would be quicker to stat up, methinks.

Possible, but I would like the characters to start somewhat above average, that they already show some of the hero in them.
DarkRhystar
01-02-07, 07:53 PM You have more freedom at character creation. Instead of thinking in narrow terms of class, you can start at the character background and add skills and abilities more freely. If done right, this means more rounded-out characters, with a few background skills like Craft or Profession.

I don't understand. Craft and Profession are class skills for every single class for a reason.

D&D leaves very few space for shaping individual characters at first level, as any ressource must go into getting the main abilities of your character to work.

You get skill points to spend. You can purchase ranks in Craft and Profession. You even get a feat to spend on whatever you like. Seems like there's a lot of room there.

Seems to me the view that there is "very few space" is purely psychological in nature resulting from the pressing need to optimize and the feeling that you're sacrificing something if you do not.

You can't really, for example, start as a wizard who lived as a petty street thief kid before he was taken in as an apprentice.

Sure you can. That's usually all part of your character's back-story. There's no hard rule about what your character did before gaining his or her first class level.

One Wizard may become such by attending a wizardry school whereas another may simply be a farmhand who discovered an old spell book in the family attic and began studying.

The limits you seem to be putting on your character's back story are self-imposed.

Now, I'm not saying this is a bad idea. I'm just saying that your reasoning as to what value it adds to the game is sketchy. :)
Xavon
01-02-07, 08:17 PM Not bad, except "f)" should be +1 base attack, and "g)" should be +2 to one save.
mkill
01-03-07, 12:04 AM I don't understand. Craft and Profession are class skills for every single class for a reason.

You get skill points to spend. You can purchase ranks in Craft and Profession. You even get a feat to spend on whatever you like. Seems like there's a lot of room there.

Yes, but as an average Int Hexblade, Sorcerer, Fighter etc. you hardly have enough skill points to cover basic survival skills like Spot, Listen, Swim, Concentration, which are often cross-class on top of that.
Same with feats: You only get 7 of these in your whole 20-level career (in the worst case). I don't see any room to waste feats there, especially as you need them to get a few basic combat maneuvers or more flexibility with your magic.
Yes, you can get some background-fluff feat, but none of these is really worth it. Sooner or later +2/+2 to any two skills is not worth it anymore.

Seems to me the view that there is "very few space" is purely psychological in nature resulting from the pressing need to optimize and the feeling that you're sacrificing something if you do not.

First level characters being starved of skill points and dying easily is not "purely psychological", it's the way the game is designed and I don't like that.

In fact, I'd rather have a game that does not scale in such an extreme way like D&D. For my taste, characters should start more competent, and gain new flashy stuff as they gain levels, such as combat maneuvers and spells, but the sheer numbers should not rise so extremely. Why does a CR 20 encounter (wyrm black dragon) need 100 times as many hit points as a CR 1/2 encounter (orc)? The game would be as much fun if numbers would rise more slowly, and you could have more believable game world. The game would also be easier to balance.

Sure you can. That's usually all part of your character's back-story. There's no hard rule about what your character did before gaining his or her first class level.

Well, there should be some rules helping to add background to a character. Another option that I would like to see in 4th edition is selecting a background for your character.
For example, if elf is your race, and Valenar elf your background, you get proficiency with the scimitar. If you're human and you select "academic background", you get a few Knowledges as class skills and bonus skill points. Something like that.

In D&D 3.5, backgrounds are fused with the races, which creates stereotypes. Or you have to take a feat, but feats also serve many other purposes in the game and are one of the scarcest ressources.

If, instead, you add a step 5a to character creation "select a background", you make sure that everybody has one and characters don't get penalized for doing so (i.e. they don't lack a feat). And you can remove social background abilities from races, such as stonecunning and attack bonus against orcs.

Living Greyhawk already has a mechanic for background region, this is a start. Background packages also help to distinguish game worlds and to make players think about a character history.

One Wizard may become such by attending a wizardry school whereas another may simply be a farmhand who discovered an old spell book in the family attic and began studying.

Yeah, but both would end up as the same first-level character if they happened to learn the same spells. :(

The limits you seem to be putting on your character's back story are self-imposed.

My character's backstory is not limited by self-imposed rules, it is limited by the few tools the game gives me to build individual first-level characters and by the sheer necessity of surviving CR1 encounters. A good background is nice but it is wasted if I don't make it past the first game session.
DarkRhystar
01-03-07, 08:21 PM Yes, but as an average Int Hexblade, Sorcerer, Fighter etc. you hardly have enough skill points to cover basic survival skills like Spot, Listen, Swim, Concentration, which are often cross-class on top of that.
Same with feats: You only get 7 of these in your whole 20-level career (in the worst case). I don't see any room to waste feats there, especially as you need them to get a few basic combat maneuvers or more flexibility with your magic.
Yes, you can get some background-fluff feat, but none of these is really worth it. Sooner or later +2/+2 to any two skills is not worth it anymore.

That's because those skills are not for flavor.

Flavor is a very intangible part of the game and I think you're restricting it unnecessarily.

You don't need ranks in Profession (Cook) to cook food in D&D or at least you don't in my games (How many characters would starve to death then...).

As for the fluff feats and the like I'd direct you to statement directly below the part you had quoted. ;)

First level characters being starved of skill points and dying easily is not "purely psychological", it's the way the game is designed and I don't like that.

Starved of skill points? You get FOUR times the skill points of every other level. That's a lot.

What if the maximum ranks you could purchase was your level + 1? You could "max out" twice the number of skills you already can. Would they still be starved skill-wise?

Next consider if the maximum ranks you could purchase was your level + 7? You could only "max out" half the number of skills you normally could. Are you now more skill-starved?

It's all a matter of perspective thus psychological in nature.

In fact, I'd rather have a game that does not scale in such an extreme way like D&D...

Many level-based systems run into this problem. You take the good with the bad.

Well, there should be some rules helping to add background to a character.

I would hate this with a passion.

The fewer rules and mechanics associated with flavor the better. I don't want to play in a system where my character's background is dictated to me or I have to make any form of mechanical sacrifices to have the background flavor I want. It's just a bad idea.

Yeah, but both would end up as the same first-level character if they happened to learn the same spells. :(

For as much good as the large amount of rules and structured format of 3.x has done, it has also created the problem you just exhibited.

It is a fundamental problem in the thought process. It is the mentality that you must have a matching mechanic for every tiny piece of flavor. No creativity outside the rules. We just can't have that can we?

My character's backstory is not limited by self-imposed rules, it is limited by the few tools the game gives me to build individual first-level characters and by the sheer necessity of surviving CR1 encounters. A good background is nice but it is wasted if I don't make it past the first game session.

Your character's backstory is limited only by you. Try separating flavor from mechanics. :)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
mkill 01-01-07, 11:56 AM	There is an old AD&D adventure where characters start without a selected character class. The adventure is set on an island, and they can come across several items that they can try to use, such as a sword and a spellbook. At the end of the adventure, the characters select their class. The character that picked up the spellbook to try to memorize a spell might become a wizard, the one that picked up the sword might become a fighter, and so on. Now the question is, how to translate that idea to 3.5th edition? How to create useful starting characters that can pick up a class later? Here is what I came up with. Note that the characters created using this system start with a few more hit points and skills than usual 1st level characters. This is intended. I always thought that 1st level characters should have some background knowledge and I think they should have a little higher survivability. Starting characters without a class Characters under this system are obviously created in a different way from standard D&D 3.5. Use the following: 1. Select a race (gain racial traits and ability modifiers) 2. Roll attributes or use your favorite point-buy system 2a. Do not select a class 3. You gain a number of skill points equal to your Intelligence score. You can buy up to three ranks in each skill. There are no class or cross-class skills, each rank costs one point. If you buy two ranks in any Knowledge, Craft, or Profession, you gain a third rank free. 4. Select two abilities for your character. These can be any of the following: a) any 1st level class special of any class b) any feat you meet the prerequisites for (but see below) c) the spellcasting ability of a wizard, sorcerer, druid, or favored soul. You only gain the 0-level spells of the 1st class level, your caster level is 1 d) one psionic power point and one 1st-level power known e) pathetic invocation: cast one 0-level spell as a spell-like ability at will, save is based on Cha f) +1 to base attack bonus g) +2 to one save All characters also gain proficiency with simple weapons. 5. Hit points Your hit point total is equal to your Constitution score 6. Base attack bonus and base saves are all +0 7. Starting gold is 100 gp 8. In every other way character creation is as described in the PHB ---- Gaining first level The characters gain first level after the first adventure, or at 500 XP. Each characters now select a class. He (or she) gains this classes BAB, saves, class specials, and spellcasting (if any). Changes from normal 1st level: * He gains hit points as per class starting from 2nd level * He gains double base skill points at 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level. Int bonus skill points are not doubled. (Otherwise the rogue would be at a big disadvantage) * If he takes a class where he gains a class special, feat, spellcasting ability or psionic power he already took at character creation, he gains a free feat. (Otherwise characters would be penalized to take the class they aimed for at the start). * He does not gain the normal 1st-level feat, as he already took it during character creation. ---- Minor issues * A number of feats should be available at character creation, even though characters won't fulfill their prerequisite (mainly BAB+1). These are Weapon Focus (includes free martial proficiency with weapon) * Since all characters gain proficiency with simple weapons, which benefits wizards. Rogues will have less skill points at start compared to the standard system, but even out at 3rd level. Other characters have a broader skill selection, so abilities are more broadly distributed in the group. * Starting characters without a class should be able to take a CR 1 encounter. They have fewer tricks up their sleeve, but more hp and skills. Level 1 characters created using this system are stronger, as they have an additional feat (or even class specials from another class), and more hp. They should be able to tackle CR 2 encounters. With level advancement, these advantages fade.
AmericanYeti 01-01-07, 01:20 PM	Why not just have the characters start as Commoners? That wouldn't require the same rules conversions and would be quicker to stat up, methinks.
CryoSilver 01-01-07, 01:45 PM	I played in a game like this once. Everyone starts as a level 1 commoners, with all 10's and one 12 for abilities. The adventure was to rescue a coule people from a local goblin tribe. Everything we did was recorded on a little chart the DM had, and at the end of the adventure, was all put into a table that determined our race and character class at ECL 5. Itwas very cool.
DarkRhystar 01-01-07, 02:35 PM	What does this add to the game that you couldn't otherwise gain simply by playing a normal game?
Ra-Tiel 01-01-07, 02:36 PM	I played in a game like this once. Everyone starts as a level 1 commoners, with all 10's and one 12 for abilities. The adventure was to rescue a coule people from a local goblin tribe. Everything we did was recorded on a little chart the DM had, and at the end of the adventure, was all put into a table that determined our race and character class at ECL 5. Itwas very cool. Sounds very interesting, but sort of reminds me of all these online "character" or "alignment" tests, where you answer 17000 question to find out that you're a chaotiv evil half-celestial goblin warmage. :uh-huh: :rofl:
CryoSilver 01-01-07, 02:55 PM	Well, I ended up a LE half black dragon barbarian...
mkill 01-02-07, 01:08 AM	What does this add to the game that you couldn't otherwise gain simply by playing a normal game? You have more freedom at character creation. Instead of thinking in narrow terms of class, you can start at the character background and add skills and abilities more freely. If done right, this means more rounded-out characters, with a few background skills like Craft or Profession. D&D leaves very few space for shaping individual characters at first level, as any ressource must go into getting the main abilities of your character to work. You can't really, for example, start as a wizard who lived as a petty street thief kid before he was taken in as an apprentice. Why not just have the characters start as Commoners? That wouldn't require the same rules conversions and would be quicker to stat up, methinks. Possible, but I would like the characters to start somewhat above average, that they already show some of the hero in them.
DarkRhystar 01-02-07, 07:53 PM	You have more freedom at character creation. Instead of thinking in narrow terms of class, you can start at the character background and add skills and abilities more freely. If done right, this means more rounded-out characters, with a few background skills like Craft or Profession. I don't understand. Craft and Profession are class skills for every single class for a reason. D&D leaves very few space for shaping individual characters at first level, as any ressource must go into getting the main abilities of your character to work. You get skill points to spend. You can purchase ranks in Craft and Profession. You even get a feat to spend on whatever you like. Seems like there's a lot of room there. Seems to me the view that there is "very few space" is purely psychological in nature resulting from the pressing need to optimize and the feeling that you're sacrificing something if you do not. You can't really, for example, start as a wizard who lived as a petty street thief kid before he was taken in as an apprentice. Sure you can. That's usually all part of your character's back-story. There's no hard rule about what your character did before gaining his or her first class level. One Wizard may become such by attending a wizardry school whereas another may simply be a farmhand who discovered an old spell book in the family attic and began studying. The limits you seem to be putting on your character's back story are self-imposed. Now, I'm not saying this is a bad idea. I'm just saying that your reasoning as to what value it adds to the game is sketchy. :)
Xavon 01-02-07, 08:17 PM	Not bad, except "f)" should be +1 base attack, and "g)" should be +2 to one save.
mkill 01-03-07, 12:04 AM	I don't understand. Craft and Profession are class skills for every single class for a reason. You get skill points to spend. You can purchase ranks in Craft and Profession. You even get a feat to spend on whatever you like. Seems like there's a lot of room there. Yes, but as an average Int Hexblade, Sorcerer, Fighter etc. you hardly have enough skill points to cover basic survival skills like Spot, Listen, Swim, Concentration, which are often cross-class on top of that. Same with feats: You only get 7 of these in your whole 20-level career (in the worst case). I don't see any room to waste feats there, especially as you need them to get a few basic combat maneuvers or more flexibility with your magic. Yes, you can get some background-fluff feat, but none of these is really worth it. Sooner or later +2/+2 to any two skills is not worth it anymore. Seems to me the view that there is "very few space" is purely psychological in nature resulting from the pressing need to optimize and the feeling that you're sacrificing something if you do not. First level characters being starved of skill points and dying easily is not "purely psychological", it's the way the game is designed and I don't like that. In fact, I'd rather have a game that does not scale in such an extreme way like D&D. For my taste, characters should start more competent, and gain new flashy stuff as they gain levels, such as combat maneuvers and spells, but the sheer numbers should not rise so extremely. Why does a CR 20 encounter (wyrm black dragon) need 100 times as many hit points as a CR 1/2 encounter (orc)? The game would be as much fun if numbers would rise more slowly, and you could have more believable game world. The game would also be easier to balance. Sure you can. That's usually all part of your character's back-story. There's no hard rule about what your character did before gaining his or her first class level. Well, there should be some rules helping to add background to a character. Another option that I would like to see in 4th edition is selecting a background for your character. For example, if elf is your race, and Valenar elf your background, you get proficiency with the scimitar. If you're human and you select "academic background", you get a few Knowledges as class skills and bonus skill points. Something like that. In D&D 3.5, backgrounds are fused with the races, which creates stereotypes. Or you have to take a feat, but feats also serve many other purposes in the game and are one of the scarcest ressources. If, instead, you add a step 5a to character creation "select a background", you make sure that everybody has one and characters don't get penalized for doing so (i.e. they don't lack a feat). And you can remove social background abilities from races, such as stonecunning and attack bonus against orcs. Living Greyhawk already has a mechanic for background region, this is a start. Background packages also help to distinguish game worlds and to make players think about a character history. One Wizard may become such by attending a wizardry school whereas another may simply be a farmhand who discovered an old spell book in the family attic and began studying. Yeah, but both would end up as the same first-level character if they happened to learn the same spells. :( The limits you seem to be putting on your character's back story are self-imposed. My character's backstory is not limited by self-imposed rules, it is limited by the few tools the game gives me to build individual first-level characters and by the sheer necessity of surviving CR1 encounters. A good background is nice but it is wasted if I don't make it past the first game session.
DarkRhystar 01-03-07, 08:21 PM	Yes, but as an average Int Hexblade, Sorcerer, Fighter etc. you hardly have enough skill points to cover basic survival skills like Spot, Listen, Swim, Concentration, which are often cross-class on top of that. Same with feats: You only get 7 of these in your whole 20-level career (in the worst case). I don't see any room to waste feats there, especially as you need them to get a few basic combat maneuvers or more flexibility with your magic. Yes, you can get some background-fluff feat, but none of these is really worth it. Sooner or later +2/+2 to any two skills is not worth it anymore. That's because those skills are not for flavor. Flavor is a very intangible part of the game and I think you're restricting it unnecessarily. You don't need ranks in Profession (Cook) to cook food in D&D or at least you don't in my games (How many characters would starve to death then...). As for the fluff feats and the like I'd direct you to statement directly below the part you had quoted. ;) First level characters being starved of skill points and dying easily is not "purely psychological", it's the way the game is designed and I don't like that. Starved of skill points? You get FOUR times the skill points of every other level. That's a lot. What if the maximum ranks you could purchase was your level + 1? You could "max out" twice the number of skills you already can. Would they still be starved skill-wise? Next consider if the maximum ranks you could purchase was your level + 7? You could only "max out" half the number of skills you normally could. Are you now more skill-starved? It's all a matter of perspective thus psychological in nature. In fact, I'd rather have a game that does not scale in such an extreme way like D&D... Many level-based systems run into this problem. You take the good with the bad. Well, there should be some rules helping to add background to a character. I would hate this with a passion. The fewer rules and mechanics associated with flavor the better. I don't want to play in a system where my character's background is dictated to me or I have to make any form of mechanical sacrifices to have the background flavor I want. It's just a bad idea. Yeah, but both would end up as the same first-level character if they happened to learn the same spells. :( For as much good as the large amount of rules and structured format of 3.x has done, it has also created the problem you just exhibited. It is a fundamental problem in the thought process. It is the mentality that you must have a matching mechanic for every tiny piece of flavor. No creativity outside the rules. We just can't have that can we? My character's backstory is not limited by self-imposed rules, it is limited by the few tools the game gives me to build individual first-level characters and by the sheer necessity of surviving CR1 encounters. A good background is nice but it is wasted if I don't make it past the first game session. Your character's backstory is limited only by you. Try separating flavor from mechanics. :)