Forgive me if this has been done before...for I have never seen it in published form. Ok, with the constant concern about class balance on these forums I have a new/old idea.
Back in 2nd edition in the DMG they had this little, simple table for dms to create new classes. I greatly expanded on that table and birthed a campaign world my group quite enjoyed for a couple years. The idea was to be able to "build" your perfect class, the one that best represents your ideas and playstyle. (I know other game systems have systems like this, but I'm talking dnd or pf here)
I have done a similiar system for 3.5 Dnd, but with our current campaign entering its 8th(?) year I did want to disrupt our group atm. We have done some playtesting, but thats about it.
I doubt Paizo would be interested in such a venture ( and I have no desire to publish my own work for the masses to ridicule) so how about ANYONE out there taking a stab at a point buy character creation system for Pathfinder? I know most novices need their role developed for them at first, but I think many advanced players would be interested in such an idea. And I am not talking about a Skills and Powers approach here, but a true pick your options thing.
I suppose that wouldnt end all player complaints as folks would probably be argueing over "why does ability A cost this much while ability B, etc" but perhaps it would finally bring some true game balance for those seeking it. Additionally, some people (myself included) would enjoy building truly (or mostly) unique pcs.
Just a thought. Anyone know of anything like this still in print and thats any good?
I don't know of such a thing, but it is hard to do this. The closest I have seen is the unearthed arcana book for 3.5, and you had a very limited selection. Even the ARG had issues with races, and they would seem to be a lot easier than doing classes.
It's not specifically Pathfinder, but Eclipse: The Codex Persona is a d20 build-a-character system.
BESM d20 also had a build-your-own-features "Adventurer" class, but isn't being published any more.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem for me is that you have a choice between playing Pathfinder or playing Gurps. If I want point buy character generation I play Gurps.
|
BESM d20 also had a build-your-own-features "Adventurer" class, but isn't being published any more.
The Adventurer class sucked. You didn't even get the full number of points that you were supposed to (200 pts, it got 88% of that).
But you are right that BESM d20 did do the best for this. Every class was built with 200 pts. It even explained how to go about doing it too. You chose the BAB, the skill pts, the saves, and whatever was left, you divided as evenly as possible over 20 levels.
For Pathfinder I wouldn't think that you'd need more points than that. Maybe another 20 pts to compensate for having updated HD based on your BAB.
While the original is out of print, an SRD version has been put online.
You might want to check out the Prestige Class Creation Cookbook. This might have exactly what you are looking for, but this was made for 3.5 ruleset. Enjoy!
I'm against this in principle as well as unsure how it would work in practice. Classes represent the character's training and career path, and to a lesser extent, their outlook on life. A mix-and-match amalgam class doesn't have that, other than a "I was raised by a lot of people and I took a bit from all of them" gary stu-ish background. A class should be a concept that holds together, where the flavor determines the mechanics, not just a table of abilities.
President, Silver Crescent Publishing
|
From my perspective, the closest I would honestly come to this would be a concept similar to that presented in the Skills & Powers book by TSR (all Hail TSR! lol) where you had a standard set of abailities, eachw ith a point value. You could "cashe them in" for those points to spend on alternate abilities.
However, Paizo seems to be headed this direction already with the alternate racial abilities and archetypes. While not quite as versatile, it does provide for some variation in the races and class construction.
Like others have said, from a Game Master perspective it can be very difficult to balance a Pathfinder class, and in my humble opinion, going to a straight point system, while possible, would be a rather difficult endeavor to pursue if you wanted to maintain the game balance, especially when more and more achretypes and variant racial abilities are surfacing from Paizo as well as third party publishers.
To me, balance is only a relative issue. If the class balance fails for you in base PF, then 3x/PF was probably never the best system for you.
Instead of trying to build completely custom classes, I much prefer to use the archetype method to redesign/reflavor existing classes to create my new concepts. I don't need, nor want, a completely customizable class design system for PF. If I wanted that, I'd play GURPS or something - and I've never made that choice.
I create custom classes all the time, most being archetypes or alternates of existing classes, though I have create a few completely unique builds having nothing to do with existing classes. It takes practice to get it right, but is not an impossible challenge. If you study how archetypes are built, you can get a good enough framework to do it yourself.
I don't think a subsystem for complete class customization is warranted for PF.
I'm going to go ahead and agree with the others. If you have "build-a-class," then you have to account for every possible combination. You'd end up with a very generic-looking class.
A system like this wouldn't be possible unless you rebuild the entire system from the ground up with this intent in mind; its why you see it in GURPS; because the system was built with those expectations in mind.
I had been tinkering with something like this a while back. In short, it was an effort to break out the abilities and other factors (BAB, Saves, HD, etc) of the classes and assign a point value to each. Then let someone use those point values as guidelines to build a class. I'd love to get back to it, but just got more into other projects.
I agree it could be abused, but as a tool to start a conversation in cooperation with a GM I think it has a role.