Return of the Guilder

[Fizz]

Hi all-

I've been thinking that the Guilder deserves to be a full class. I mean, if the noble can make it into the 3E rules, a guilder can too. Yes, the rogue has plenty of skills. But not all guilders should be able to sneak attack.

So, i've thought up some ideas for people to consider. Clearly this is no where near done, but just a starting point.

------------------
The Guilder:

Hit Die: d6
Base Attack Bonus: Moderate (as a rogue)
Weapons: Proficient with light armor, simple weapons, plus 2 martial weapons of his choosing.
Saves: Good Will, Good Reflex?, Fort Poor

Class Skills
Administrate (Wis), Appraise (Int), Bluff (Cha), Concentration (Con), Craft (Int), Decipher Script (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Forgery (Int), Gamble (Wis), Gather Information (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (all), Listen (Wis), Perform (Cha), Profession (Wis), Search (Int), Sense Motive (Wis), Sleight of Hand (Dex), Speak Language (Int), Use Rope (Dex)

Plus, the guilder chooses 3 other skills to be class skills.

Skill Points: 10

Class Features:
Expert: The guilder is not constrained by the maximum ranks as other classes are. The maximum ranks he may have in a given skill is equal to 3 + 1.5 times his level. Thus, at 2nd level his max ranks would be 6 instead of the usual 5. At 10th he could have 18 ranks, instead of 13. At 20th he could have 33 instead of 23. (This emulates the 2nd Ed guilder ability of having extra nonweapon proficiency slots.)

Silver Tongue: Constant dealing with others gives the guilder a keen sense of how to make them believe his lies. He may attempt a retry of the Bluff skill, but with a –5 penalty.

Pidgin: Guilders have a knack for communicating despite barriers of an uncommon language. He can communicate and understand simple concepts, such as the need for food, desire to trade, warnings, etc. This works similar to the Decipher Script skill. The guilder makes a Pidgin check equal to d20 plus his Intelligence modifier plus his level. The DC varies with the complexity of information that is trying to be conveyed.

Improvised Tools: The guilder can select any two skills that require tools. With these two skills, the penalty for using improvised tools is halved.

Skill Mastery: As the rogue special ability. (Probably gained a couple times.)

Slippery Mind: As the rogue special ability

--------------------------

I'm not sure if these should all be standard abilities (Expert definitely should be) or optional abilities that he chooses as he advances, the way a rogue gains some special abilities at higher levels.

I'm sure others have some further ideas that would flesh it out a bit more. What does everybody think?


-Fizz

[gazza666]

I see two issues.

Firstly, it is strongly recommended that no character have more skill points than a rogue (the same way that nobody should have a better BAB progression than a fighter). And secondly, the "expert" ability has the potential for great abuse when it comes to qualifying for prestige classes.

Now, one could argue that the guilder - not being very good at combat, and so forth - is not unbalanced even with this issues. However, that fails to take into account the possibility of multiclassing - grabbing a single level of guilder is enough to grant the expert ability, which lets more traditional characters qualify for prestige classes earlier than they are "supposed" to be able to.

I would suggest instead:

• Drop the skill points to 8 per level. It is far too tempting to "dip" into this class for a single level otherwise; you get pre-3.5 ranger syndrome.
• Change the expert ability to instead provide (say) a +2 competence bonus to 3 skills, with possibly the number of skills and the bonus increasing with level. (Or one could treat the progression similar to a ranger's favoured enemy).

[Fizz]

grabbing a single level of guilder is enough to grant the expert ability, which lets more traditional characters qualify for prestige classes earlier than they are "supposed" to be able to.

Actually, i thought about this. Since numbers always get rounded down in 3E, the expert ability wouldn't have any effect at 1st level. One would need at least 2 levels of guilder to gain that extra rank.

I would suggest instead:

• Drop the skill points to 8 per level. It is far too tempting to "dip" into this class for a single level otherwise; you get pre-3.5 ranger syndrome.
• Change the expert ability to instead provide (say) a +2 competence bonus to 3 skills, with possibly the number of skills and the bonus increasing with level. (Or one could treat the progression similar to a ranger's favoured enemy).

The first point is a valid concern. So long as he didn't get anything else (or nothing overly potent) at 1st level, it'd be ok imo. (I mean, every class needs something unique at 1st level right?)

The second point, well, i like the idea of increasing ranks. The idea is to allow him to become a specialist, and qualify for skill-dependent benefits sooner than other classes. He doesn't do much else, but with those few skills he's a true master.

The progression similar to a ranger's favored enemy- that has possibilities. I'll have to think about that.

Thanks for the input!


-Fizz

[gazza666]

Actually, i thought about this. Since numbers always get rounded down in 3E, the expert ability wouldn't have any effect at 1st level. One would need at least 2 levels of guilder to gain that extra rank.

The way it is written, I interpreted this as an ability that was tied to character level rather than class level - which means that it would be possible to take 1 rank of guilder and 3 ranks of rogue, at which point you have a maximum of 9 ranks rather than the usual 7. Most prestige classes
require 8 ranks of skills to get into, with the assumption that you will be at least level 6 before taking taking your first level in a prestige class; this would allow it to occur 1 level earlier. Granted, that may not cause the sky to fall down, but it is a perhaps unintended consequence.

However, if you're saying that only the levels in guilder have this benefit... well, firstly it doesn't actually alter the problem (you can still get into a class early, it's just that now you can't multiclass to do so; for some prestige classes, that may be a worthwhile trade). Secondly, I can't think of how to correctly write such a benefit so that it won't be misinterpreted the way I did above. Maximum skill ranks is always based on character level rather than class level; you'd need some sort of formula to calculate it based on the number of guilder levels you had... messy.

[irdeggman]

No more "core classes" will be added to Chapter 1.

That is the point of the "sanctioning". It was voted on by the community and not something I merely "declared". Now that doesn't mean that there won't be some modifications to things in Chap1 and 2 but in general they stand as written. The variant paladin of Nesirie does need improving and there will probably be included some Prestige Classes that are generic, that is aren't specifically tied to any one region or culture - but rather may cross cultures.

There was specific logic in not including a Guilder core class in the BRCS.

It was always a "weak" class.

The class can basically be consumed via the rogue and noble.

Since it was a regionally specific class - anything along its lines would better fit as a Prestige Class. In fact that would probably be the best way to handle it - a class that is much more oriented towards domain level economics than adventuring.

[Fizz]

The way it is written, I interpreted this as an ability that was tied to character level rather than class level -

Well, it is level-based, but fractions in 3E always round down. The rule i was using was 3 + 1/2 guilder level. So, at first level, that's 4. Same as any other character.

which means that it would be possible to take 1 rank of guilder and 3 ranks of rogue, at which point you have a maximum of 9 ranks rather than the usual 7.

However, if you're saying that only the levels in guilder have this benefit... well, firstly it doesn't actually alter the problem (you can still get into a class early, it's just that now you can't multiclass to do so; for some prestige classes, that may be a worthwhile trade). Secondly, I can't think of how to correctly write such a benefit so that it won't be misinterpreted the way I did above. Maximum skill ranks is always based on character level rather than class level; you'd need some sort of formula to calculate it based on the number of guilder levels you had... messy.

The increased max ranks would apply to guilder levels only. As above, 1 level of guilder won't get you any increase in max ranks. Instead consider a 6/2 rogue/guilder. He'd have 10 for his max ranks, only 1 more than the guilder.

Maybe instead of the formula, it should simply be a bonus max rank at every 2 out of 3 levels. That would remove the confusion from multiclassing.

As for qualifying for a prestige class early, i think that's ok. Remember, this is all the guilder does- skills.

-Fizz

[Fizz]

No more "core classes" will be added to Chapter 1.

I wasn't proposing it should be added to the Sanctioned version. But i hope that doesn't mean it can't be discussed for those of us who want to add it to our own campaigns.

It was always a "weak" class.[/quote]

The class can basically be consumed via the rogue and noble.[/quote]

The Noble is an NPC class improved to be a core class. The Guilder, in my mind, does the same for the Expert NPC class.

But i do see how people could lump the two together. In the way that the Rjurik call Bards `Skalds', maybe the Brecht call Nobles `Guilders'. Still, i think there are enough ideas to warrant a class.

Since it was a regionally specific class - anything along its lines would better fit as a Prestige Class. In fact that would probably be the best way to handle it - a class that is much more oriented towards domain level economics than adventuring.

I find that argument inconsistent with the rest of the setting- Many core classes are regional in Birthright. Barbarians are only found among the Rjurik and Vos, Paladins among Anuireans and Khinasi. The Brechts need one of their own. (And it fits well among the merchants of Khinasi too, anyways.)


-Fizz

[irdeggman]

I wasn't proposing it should be added to the Sanctioned version. But i hope that doesn't mean it can't be discussed for those of us who want to add it to our own campaigns.

Then this should go to the Royal Library thread and not the BRCS one. This thread is supposed to be dedicated to the BRCS itself - questions, changes, etc.

I find that argument inconsistent with the rest of the setting- Many core classes are regional in Birthright. Barbarians are only found among the Rjurik and Vos, Paladins among Anuireans and Khinasi. The Brechts need one of their own. (And it fits well among the merchants of Khinasi too, anyways.)

But the original 2nd requirement for the guilder was specifically to have come from the Great Bay region. That is specific to a region hence the reason I said that it should be in the Atlas (as a Prestige Class).

In the BRCS there is no restriction on the paladin like there was in 2nd ed. There is however a prefered race/culture thing. That does not mean that every class isn't available in all cultures only that they are not very common (and some are extremely rare). Elven clerics/paladins are the one exception.

[Fizz]

Then this should go to the Royal Library thread and not the BRCS one. This thread is supposed to be dedicated to the BRCS itself - questions, changes, etc.

Ooops. Didn't realize putting here meant a `proposal' for BRCS. Thought this area it was more of a generic discussion board for 3E-like conversion. OK, feel free to move the thread over to the Royal Library.


-Fizz

[gazza666]

IMany core classes are regional in Birthright. Barbarians are only found among the Rjurik and Vos, Paladins among Anuireans and Khinasi.

In 3rd edition, classes don't mean what they used to. Someone with a level of barbarian isn't necessarily a primitive savage - it's just someone that can rage in combat. Someone with a level of paladin doesn't necessarily belong to a knightly order - it's just someone that has learned to channel their faith into minor healing abilities. Likewise, a fighter isn't necessarily a soldier (could just be someone that took a course in Power Attack 101), a rogue isn't necessarily a thief, and so forth.

Granted, spellcasters tend to be the exception, but that's only because the mechanics of spell acquisition do not favour multiclassing.