Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 grogmcgee Jul 14, 2008 12:00:23	First, I'm going to outline what this thread is about: The mechanical effects of having a party of "unclassed" characters. The challenges that I, the DM, have had. Possible Solutions to some of the more bother some challenges What this is not about: The inherent questions of whether this is balanced. Whether this is a good idea. With that out of the way, I'll explain what it is that I'm doing in my adventure. I felt that it would be more fun for my players if they could be the character they wanted, ie, that they would not be limited to the base classes and the powers strictly related to the given class. I made three basic assumptions, I know, that these assumptions are not actually by definition true, but I do feel that they are close to true - at least close enough with my group of players to be true*. * Non of my players are particularly strong optimizers and tend to not produce optimized characters that are making use of any weird tricks.
#2 vestrial Jul 14, 2008 12:19:26	My current feeling on the Hero/ Heroine class is that unless heavily optimized it is in fact far weaker than a real class. I would expect PC1 and 3 to be vastly supperior to their real class counterparts. Was it intentional that four of the five took combat challenge, or did they all create their characters seperately and just happened to pick it up?
#3 generalhenry Jul 14, 2008 12:24:56	how's it been working RP wise?
#4 aluman Jul 14, 2008 12:35:55	Overall I perfer classless, and so shall be watching this closely.
#5 grogmcgee Jul 14, 2008 16:53:09	how's it been working RP wise? They're a mix of players - some are good RPers in general a couple are more of they provide me with a setting and baby-step me through it. Which I'm used to from this group - 3 summers of playing with them. So it varies. They all have character ideas and what they want to act like and they tend do that. The classlessness doesn't seem to be affecting it in any real way. I would expect PC1 and 3 to be vastly supperior to their real class counterparts. Was it intentional that four of the five took combat challenge, or did they all create their characters seperately and just happened to pick it up? PC1 had to leave early - and in the first real encounter, was a bit slow on the uptake - but the constant concealment meant none of the monsters knew he was their, which I agree will make a nasty nasty nasty rogue - assuming he chooses powers intelligently. ;P PC3 is interesting, while quite capable of unloading heavy damage was the least effective in combat; my guess was because he was moving into combat late. The most effective PC was PC4 (Combat Challenge, Combat Superiority, Tactical Presence). He caused havoc all over the place. I'm not sure why every one took CC; since with so many having it; it became useless for them, as they'd tend to go first in combat - all of them. So one would CC a monster, then for what ever reason ?!? another on would challenge. Meaning in general I could attack whoever I want with impunity. Aluman: As I said, I'm noticing that unless optimized the character tends to be somewhat schizo in it's mechanics, which worries me since I feel that any encounter that can't be dealt with by unloading close 50+ damage in a single round will turn into a slaughter fest, ie, a controller/leader and an elite or two and few lesser monsters - lurkers might be equally nasty. The other thing that is sort of bland about the characters is that almost everybody chooses to have at least perception or insight if not both as trained skills... Frankly, I'm of the oppinion that it is a sub-optimal system; that is, the classes are better in general and will keep the DM saner (which is my guiding star). But we'll see next week or the week after... Cheers and I'll keep this posted.
#6 aluman Jul 14, 2008 21:19:37	That has been kind of my fear. Its kind of my fear behind low magic too, it winds up meaning I have to retool all the monsters in the handbook or have mundane bonuses that scale at the rate, which kind of defeats the purpose of 'Low Magic' something has a occurred to me (for your next game) I will post in a new thread rather than clutter up this one. NM only one official controller as of yet.
#7 lurker88 Jul 14, 2008 22:17:45	I'll be watching this closely; I really like the idea of a classless or generic class system. Some quick questions and comments about the classless class: How familiar are your players with 4e? Is it possible that the wierdness of the characters is due to their desire to explore the new options instead of creating strong characters, or that their problems in combat are a result of not using their abilities effectively? What kind of characters does your group normally favor? Could it be the group rather than the class that is causing the skew towards strikers? I too find the use of combat challenge odd; it doesn't really seem to synergize with some of those builds. My suspiscion is that the players picked it based off of the "free" proficiencies and con increase without really thinking about whether the power itself would be useful.
#8 grogmcgee Jul 14, 2008 23:22:24	I'll be watching this closely; I really like the idea of a classless or generic class system. Some quick questions and comments about the classless class: How familiar are your players with 4e? Is it possible that the wierdness of the characters is due to their desire to explore the new options instead of creating strong characters, or that their problems in combat are a result of not using their abilities effectively? We ran 4 session marathon game (1st - 16th level); a sort stress test. So in some senses we're quite familiar, in others ways we're not. From a strict combat sense. In 3.x we rarely used a board for combat... we're sort of odd like that. What kind of characters does your group normally favor? Could it be the group rather than the class that is causing the skew towards strikers Interesting point: PC1's player favours high damage potential - he like rolling lots of dice; he really likes Exalted (do not even get me started on that system :blah: ). Favours Paladins, Fighters, and really like the ... err class from 3.x that could deliver touch spells with a sword... grrr what was that class called ... PC2's player is a big fan of jack of all trades character; not fantastic ant any one thing in particular, but always has a good trick up his sleeve - he tends toward thematic characters, and is a big fan of a mix of magic and combat strengths. (Favours Bards) PC3; he plays really anything, he tends toward clerics and wizards usually. He less experienced with the whole system in general - missed a number of the previous sessions. PC4 - he prefers characters that are unique in the party; of all the dnd classes he liked playing the Binder the best... Likes a class that he can really get into; very much into the Artificer and the Warlord (4e only). PC5 - he likes his character to be effective; doesn't prefer any class or style over any other. He played a cleric in the marathon and in the last 3.x game was a Scout-Dervish (with one or two fighter levels). [Note: the scout-dervish - he didn't come up with the build on his own, I provided a lot of err assistance on the how to make a cool scout. ;)] I too find the use of combat challenge odd; it doesn't really seem to synergize with some of those builds. My suspiscion is that the players picked it based off of the "free" proficiencies and con increase without really thinking about whether the power itself would be useful. I'd agree except that I think they picked it because of the oOOo opportunity attacks. YEAH! PC4 is trying to combine it with reach and warlord and artificer powers - done fairly well ... I unfortunately don't have the sheets on hand so I can't provide the power choices for them all. When I get a chance I will. I'm glad this is proving useful for my fellow DnD fans out there XD
#9 vestrial Jul 15, 2008 10:52:55	Frankly, I'm of the oppinion that it is a sub-optimal system; that is, the classes are better in general and will keep the DM saner (which is my guiding star). But we'll see next week or the week after... I'm not sure how the classes could be better in general. You can take all the relevent abilities for a given class, plus you have the option to cherrypick abilities from other classes. Not to mention free unlimited multiclassing of powers. This system should result in much more powerful characters than the straight classes offer. If not, I submit that it's your players, not the system. Maybe work with them to focus their characters a bit more. You need not totally optimize them, just narrow their range enough to eliminate the schizoid feeling, then you will be able to make a more accurate assessment of the system itself.
#10 grogmcgee Jul 15, 2008 11:17:35	I'm not sure how the classes could be better in general. You can take all the relevent abilities for a given class, plus you have the option to cherrypick abilities from other classes. Not to mention free unlimited multiclassing of powers. This system should result in much more powerful characters than the straight classes offer. If not, I submit that it's your players, not the system. Maybe work with them to focus their characters a bit more. You need not totally optimize them, just narrow their range enough to eliminate the schizoid feeling, then you will be able to make a more accurate assessment of the system itself. I try and guide them a little more when they get to leaving to 2nd level. In fact, if any one has some power suggestions for the PCs feel free to post 'em and I'll suggest 'em to them.
#11 ff6shadow Jul 15, 2008 12:23:18	I love this idea, but I did notice that you can't actually build the core wizard. You don't have enough points to buy three implements, and you can't choose ritual casting as a class feature. It's not that good, but it isn't an option. I don't have a problem with overall reduced weapon proficiency's. You can 't biuild the cleric either. He ends up shorted on two of either Starting HP, Surges, or leveling HP. He also can't purchase Ritual Casting even if it was available. Building a paladin doesn't provide enough points to buy all of Plate, Heavy Shield, Implement and one weapon. It will also leave you short on one of Starting HP, or Surges. It is also not possiblt to duplicate the Paladins 3 +1s to defenses. All though techinically possible to build a ranger, you'll be better than the core ranger since you'll have both fighting style benefits instead of just 1. And unless you pick up the two-blade style, you won't have proper HP. Not to mention you have extra points to spend on proficiencies. Building a Rogue leaves you 1 short on starting HP. Additionally, unlike the ranger, you cannot benefit from both of your build options and still fill you other features. You also cannot have trhe same amount of starting skills. Finally, you cannot start with Shuriken proficiency, since it is a superior weapon, although it superior weapons were valued at 3 points, the rogue has enougb point to grab all of his weapons. The warlock is short on starting HP, leveling HP, and surges. He is also unable to pick up two of his class features. The warlord is going to be short in the HP and surge department again. I like your system but it does have some flaws as far as mimicing core classes are concerned. I'll be watching to see how it works out for you. Not all class features are made equal. Perhaos class features could be broken down into three lists were you pick one from each. Then you could encourage the selection of healing a bit by placing them on a list with weaker features. That might solve the problem of a purely combat group with little heling available. As far as suggesting level 2 powers, the Warlord Utility 2 Aid the Injured sounds pretty useful for this group. Same goes forn the Fighter Utility 2 Boundless Endurnace. And maybe one of the PC's could retrain their encounter power to Cleric 1 Healing Strike. It would help provide longevity during the tougher battles.
#12 vestrial Jul 15, 2008 13:46:22	I try and guide them a little more when they get to leaving to 2nd level. In fact, if any one has some power suggestions for the PCs feel free to post 'em and I'll suggest 'em to them. I would suggest letting them slightly retool their characters now that you've gotten a chance to play a bit. As you said, CC on 4 different people is a waste of a class feature. It's not a sub-optimal choice, its downright bad. ;) Its hard to make a lot of suggestions without knowing their stat array, but here's a rough idea of what I think their abilities favor in terms of role/powers: PC1: Sneak Attack, Shadow Walk, Fighting Style (Two weapon fighting). PC2: Warlock's Curse, Fay Pact, Combat Challenge PC3: Combat Challenge, Fighting Talent (Two Handed), Hunters Quarry PC4: Combat Superiority, Combat Challenge, Tactical Presence. PC5: Combat Challenge, Arcane Implement Mastery, Artful Dodger PC1: Striker. Offensive powers from ranger/rogue/fighter (depending on stat array) with some mobility utility. PC2: Striker/leader. (dump CC in favor of lay on hands) Basically a multiclass warlock/paladin. Pick up offense from the 'lock, and charisma based attacks from the paladin for some party support. PC3: Striker/Defender. All the highest damage and multi-target attacks from fighter, ranger, and paladin. This guy should absolutely annihilate things. PC4: Defender/Leader. Whatever fits his fighting style from any of the melee classes really. And if his int is high enough (I assume its good with tactical presence), some AoEs from the wizard for mass-marking enemies. PC5: controller/striker. Hard to say without knowing his stats, but I'm guessing wizard/warlock/paladin stuff (assuming good int/char). Just given their power options, this team should be really, really powerful. Then letting them take class abilities from different classes just opens it up even more. I'm tempted to let my players run with this for a couple sessions to see how it goes. I expect two of them would break it immediately, and the other two would probably drown in all the options. ;)
#13 grogmcgee Jul 15, 2008 14:19:22	I would suggest letting them slightly retool their characters now that you've gotten a chance to play a bit. As you said, CC on 4 different people is a waste of a class feature. It's not a sub-optimal choice, its downright bad. ;) Its hard to make a lot of suggestions without knowing their stat array, but here's a rough idea of what I think their abilities favor in terms of role/powers: PC1: Striker. Offensive powers from ranger/rogue/fighter (depending on stat array) with some mobility utility. PC2: Striker/leader. (dump CC in favor of lay on hands) Basically a multiclass warlock/paladin. Pick up offense from the 'lock, and charisma based attacks from the paladin for some party support. PC3: Striker/Defender. All the highest damage and multi-target attacks from fighter, ranger, and paladin. This guy should absolutely annihilate things. PC4: Defender/Leader. Whatever fits his fighting style from any of the melee classes really. And if his int is high enough (I assume its good with tactical presence), some AoEs from the wizard for mass-marking enemies. PC5: controller/striker. Hard to say without knowing his stats, but I'm guessing wizard/warlock/paladin stuff (assuming good int/char). Just given their power options, this team should be really, really powerful. Then letting them take class abilities from different classes just opens it up even more. I'm tempted to let my players run with this for a couple sessions to see how it goes. I expect two of them would break it immediately, and the other two would probably drown in all the options. ;) Yeah I'll be letting them retool three first three levels. After the three levels they'll be stuck to pure retraining. PC5 is going to be interesting, his idea is to make a "defender" out of a wizard. He walks into the middle of the enemies and drops AoEs on them from up close... The drowning in options is the really bad part; especially if you have players how can break it with both hands tied behind their backs ;)
#14 vestrial Jul 15, 2008 14:23:24	PC5 is going to be interesting, his idea is to make a "defender" out of a wizard. He walks into the middle of the enemies and drops AoEs on them from up close... I'm actually playing a fighter/wizard in a game. It's definitely not optimized, but it is a lot of fun, and fairly effective. If I could use your rules, I'm sure it would be pretty darn good. ;)
#15 grogmcgee Jul 15, 2008 19:49:03	Of all the ideas my players were playing with I loved the defender wizard - it killed me ... He wants to wield two shields (on in each hand) and then if he gets an OA hit them with a basic attack (ie improvised weapon attack ... the shield) and since he won't have to move much he'll be able drop his move action to a minor and wield an implement, cast spell, wield shield again... I'm not even sure it's legal in any way but it has so much flavour of WIN that I think I'm going to allow it...
#16 eldiran Jul 15, 2008 20:52:24	... and since he won't have to move much he'll be able drop his move action to a minor and wield an implement, cast spell, wield shield again... I'm not even sure it's legal in any way but it has so much flavour of WIN that I think I'm going to allow it... Sounds pretty nifty, but if I recall correctly, removing/equipping a shield is a standard action (due to the belts and buckles required to make effective use of one).
#17 grogmcgee Jul 15, 2008 21:15:15	Sounds pretty nifty, but if I recall correctly, removing/equipping a shield is a standard action (due to the belts and buckles required to make effective use of one). Yeah I know... I just like the flavour so much ... that I think I'm going to allow it... *I think*... I'll be thinking a lot on it...
#18 vestrial Jul 16, 2008 0:45:47	Yeah I know... I just like the flavour so much ... that I think I'm going to allow it... *I think*... I'll be thinking a lot on it... Two shields is pretty funky, but if youre going to allow it, I'd just suggest having him wield a light shield in his main hand since that would let him hold his implement as well. Should probably put spikes and/or blades around his shield to make him at least look scarry... :P
#19 eldiran Jul 16, 2008 1:01:38	Yeah I know... I just like the flavour so much ... that I think I'm going to allow it... *I think*... I'll be thinking a lot on it... Sounds like a call for homebrew feats to me! I can see it now: Quick Shield: Equip/unequip shields as a minor action. ...or something like that. On-topic, the unclassed idea is certainly rather interesting, though I can't say it'd be my preference to play that way. It might make for a fun change of pace. If you aren't worrying about balance, at least.
#20 saoirse Aug 10, 2008 13:34:21	Perhaps class features could be broken down into three lists were you pick one from each. I really liked this idea, to help guide the player's choices towards a more balanced character (not saying the idea of an unclassed PC is unbalanced, but the choices your players have gravitated towards are a bit unbalanced). I went through the class features and split them into three categories: Offense, Defense, and Utility. Not sure if I'm 100% accurate with where I placed each feature, but I think it works.
#21 deviknyte Aug 10, 2008 14:03:31	I was thinking of doing the something along the same thing but haven't quite figured it out yet. I was going to have power access by source redue your HP and Surges. More skills and yatta yatta. I just think you've got it backwards with having certian features raise your stats rather than lower. Or maybe it's just that somethings would raise them while others lowered them. I love the idea of a classless system. Lets you make a character rather than a "insert class here."
#22 DoctorBadWolf Aug 25, 2008 23:14:35	Sorry if this has already been addressed and i missed it somehow, it's been a long day. Have you thought about something like talent trees? Make more of the related powers have a prereq of anoter feat or power, so that people tend to follow at most three or so "talent trees?" i worked out a similar system in star wars saga, and allowing them to pick three talent trees at first level, then have the option of either an extra bonus feat or opening up a new talent tree at every character level feat level allows you to make whatever build you want, without adhering to a class system.