Results 11 to 20 of 153
Thread: Return of the Guilder
-
07-21-2006, 01:46 AM #11
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by gazza666
Read the Background information in the PHB it talks about what the classes are about. All of the color information in the PHB is not included in the SRD so if you are using that as your source (many people do) it lacks a lot of information that helps to fill out what the classes are about.
Paladins in 2nd ed never had to be "knights" either. They are still more than character who can channel their faith into minor healing. There is that Code of Conduct thing (no other class has it) that separates them from clerics and the like. Again the Background information in the PHB is useful.
The major difference between 2nd ed and 3.x as far as classes go is the relative ease with which a character can multiclass. No set class combination restrictions (nor level restricitions) based on race nor any minimum ability score requisites to take a class. A character can choose to be a fighter with a 5 strength if he wanted to (IIRC in 2nd ed the minimum was an 8) he just isn't very good in melee while he could have a relatively high dex and be a capable archer.Duane Eggert
-
07-21-2006, 02:05 AM #12
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Posts
- 190
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by irdeggman
If you want a campaign whereby barbarians are primitive savages, you'll need something besides the core rules to play such a campaign. The core rules allow you to take level 1 as a fighter, level 2-3 as a ranger, level 4 as a barbarian, and then continue on as a fighter for the next couple of levels until you reach level 6 or so when you pick some cool-power prestige class. What does the "background" section have to say about such characters?
You could describe such a character as someone that started off as a trained veteran, then spent some time in the woods, where he kicked around with a bunch of orcs that taught him their primitive ways, before re-enlisting... but does anyone not find that story ludicrous? (Incidentally, if you're human this would not impose any XP penalties).
If you think that this sort of multiclassing is hard to justify for story reasons - that is of course your prerogative. But it's absolutely allowed as far as the 3.5 core rules are concerned.
The major difference between 2nd ed and 3.x as far as classes go is the relative ease with which a character can multiclass. No set class combination restrictions (nor level restricitions) based on race nor any minimum ability score requisites to take a class. A character can choose to be a fighter with a 5 strength if he wanted to (IIRC in 2nd ed the minimum was an 8) he just isn't very good in melee while he could have a relatively high dex and be a capable archer.
-
07-21-2006, 07:25 PM #13
- Join Date
- Jul 2006
- Location
- Lynchburg, Virginia
- Posts
- 6
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by gazza666Originally Posted by gazza666
I'll grant that a character multiclassing into (for example) barbarian can be a little tricky to justify, but the justification can still be "I'm losing control of the beast within" rather than "I want to be able to rage once a day and gain some other abilities for which I'd have to give up the best armor choices." On the other hand, prestige classes are a little different. Regardless of any mechanical benefits which may be the reason some players want to join, prestige classes require that at least lip service be paid to story justifications, in the character having to perform some campaign related goal or take a number of sub-optimal skills or feats.
Originally Posted by gazza666
So yes, you are correct in that the multiclassing system doesn't require any sort of story justification. However, it certainly doesn't contradict or make meaningless class background information, nor disallow or make ludicrous story-based or campaign-based justifications for multiclassing. In fact, the non-numeric descriptions of the races (such as the general personality description, alignment tendencies, and physical description) and the classes (standard backgrounds, origins, and motivations) are not meaningless. Even for characters who do not match these usual characteristics, the standard version plays an important role for the characters, as their differences from the norm are a large part of what make them interesting.
-
07-21-2006, 07:54 PM #14
- Join Date
- Jul 2006
- Location
- Lynchburg, Virginia
- Posts
- 6
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Off Topic before?
Sorry if my last post was a bit off-topic in a thread at least originally intended to promote the reintroduction of the Guilder or at least an exploration of how it could be made to work as a DM specific add-on. I don't necessarily oppose the use of the Guilder, though I'd suggest one needs to be careful in making them to avoid making them either game-breaking in some areas or utterly inferior to other classes. I agree with gazza that the following are definitely problems:
Originally Posted by gazza666
Originally Posted by gazza666
Class Skills
The guilder's class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Craft (Int), Knowledge (all skills, taken individually) (Int), Profession (wis), and any ten additional skills chosen by the player. These skills are chosen at first level and thereafter cannot be changed.
In either case, I'd suggest that the Guilder have equal skills per level to the Rogue (but no more) and generally somewhat weaker (and vastly different) special abilities, but not completely inconsequential ones. Additionally, the second option above could be modified to allow six, eight, or twelve player-chosen class skills as seems appropriate given their other abilities. The good Will saves seem to be another worthwhile difference from the Rogue, either coupled with good Reflex saves or not. Another possibility is to grant the Guilder Medium armor proficiency (and probably only simple weapons), and maybe even d8 hit dice, further differentiating them from the Rogue by leading them away from being so steath-oriented.
Anyway, the Guilder would be a difficult class to make both balanced and useful, but something like this seems like a possibility to get there without stepping on too many toes of the other classes.
-
07-21-2006, 10:13 PM #15
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Here is some things that may be useful.
Follow the link to an old "discussion" about the noble.
There are several documents (i.e., versions) there.
The first one was my original concept for a noble. IMO it does a whole lot towards capturing the guilder issue but it was shot down via polls and we ended up with the current version in the sanctioned chapter.
I've attached the word file to make it easier to "find".
http://www.birthright.net/showthread...ighlight=nobleDuane Eggert
-
07-22-2006, 12:45 AM #16Originally Posted by Fizz
-
07-22-2006, 02:48 AM #17
If you are going to introduce such a class, good ideas are the Illicit Barter ability found in the Star Wars d20 Scoundrel class, as well as The Wheel of Time d20 Wanderer class (I think). Check up on those two classes for a good theme.
Additionally, it's very important to actually give the Guilder some more defining skills: Appraise, Bluff, Craft, Diplomacy, Gather Information, Profession, Spot, and an additional 10 skills as class skills seems to be a sound mechanic (though I would go for 10 + Int modifier); I would also grant him bonus feats chosen from a list, including Cosmopolitan and Skill Focus. Contacts from the Scoundrel and Noble are also a sound mechanic if handled properly.
-
07-24-2006, 01:56 AM #18
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- southwest Ontario, Canada
- Posts
- 563
- Downloads
- 140
- Uploads
- 1
Thanks everyone for the input!
Seems people are worried about the extra-ranks idea. I guess that's not usually a concern of mine since my group doesn't use prestige classes.
While i agree the guilder is sort of a niche class, i've always (even back in 2nd ed) liked the idea of a solely skill-based class. I know that many consider the rogue to be that class for 3E, but it's too sneak-focused for that purpose. In my mind, the guilder should be to the expert what the fighter is to the warrior.
The trick is finding enough special things to make it a worthwhile class. That was easy in 2nd Ed where non-weapon proficiencies were scarce.
I will consider all the stuff stated here and see what i can work up. Any other suggestions are always welcome!
-FizzLast edited by Fizz; 07-24-2006 at 02:01 AM.
-
07-27-2006, 07:49 PM #19
At 08:53 PM 7/19/2006, Birthright.net Message Boards wrote:
>Hi all-
Hello back. Let`s see if this whole interaction between boards/list
is up and going....
>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
As a rule of thumb, I found a couple of things in designing classes
and assigning them skill points. One, they should probably not
exceed 8/level. It just seems to work out well if that`s the cap,
especially if one considers that an INT bonus might bump it up even
higher. In general, I found 1/3 of the current total list of class
skills is a good number. That way there are always things the PC
might be able to do better but he has access to a decent number of
his class skills. In this case that would peg it at right about
8. (23 class skills / 3 = 7.blahblahblah)
>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.)
I`m thinking of just doing away with max ranks entirely, but that`s a
whole `nother screed.
>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.
As for special abilities, I think there should be some effort to
differentiate the class not only from rogues, but to emphasize their
administrative/financial role at the domain level. That is, they
aren`t thieves... they steal from people licitly. Thus, things like
an ability to trade/purchase items, a long-standing relationship with
others. Maybe an income from what we might assume to be a sort of
medieval portfolio (the way certain D20 classes get a daily, weekly
or monthly stipend) might be in order.
G
-
07-27-2006, 08:03 PM #20
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
- Posts
- 124
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
I`ve found instances that would allow any of the core
classes in any of the regions of the Birthright
setting.
The Five Peaks region could easily spawn barbaric
humans. In fact, the northernmost province of
Mhoried, as found in a module, had highland type
people very similar to Scottish people; who were, for
all intents and purposes, still a barbarian people for
many centuries after they were "civilized" by the
English.
Barbaric desert tribes in Khinasi are easily made.
And etc...
I don`t think there is a region in Birthright that
can`t support any class you wish to play.
Just my two pence.
Anthony Edwards
--- "Birthright.net Message Boards"
<brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET> wrote:
> 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.)
>
> I like the idea of having regional base classes.
> There are pleanty of good base classes out there
> that could very well fit into a Birthright campaign.
> For Brechtur, it seems like the Swashbuckler and
> Scout classes are good fits, no?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks