Why bother with classes?


Homebrew and House Rules


"Why bother with classes?" Said my new DM.

The new homebrew that was proposed to me suggested that we use Pathfinders core mechanics and the original base classes but we allow "augmentation" of those classes. So rather than all of that "multiclassing nonsense" and crazy "archetype stacking" you can simply purchase abilities from other classes. You want sneak attack or access to spells you simply use experience points to buy those abilities (they are watered down in most cases) while maintaining your original class. It sounded a bit too video gamish for me but I am wondering if anyone has played anything like this.

Thus far abilities that were up for purchase were:
sneak attack, rage, cleric spells (very limited number), channel, arcane spells (limited), inspire, favored enemy...

Personally, I don't that I would enjoy the game. I mean I have played games where you can design and "augment" your character in almost anyway you want but never in a pathfinder/DnD setting. How might this work? Could it work?

Thoughts? The game if we agree to play it would start in 2 weeks. I think that at the moment this is a very big IF...


well this is worth checking out at least


I think getting something like that to work right will require more work than just putting some abilities up for sale at arbitrary prices. Your GM might want to take a look at Mutants & Masterminds, which is originally based on the d20 system but using a point system to buy abilities instead of having classes. It also replaces hit points with a wound system, and in the latest version changes the attributes as well.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Of course it could work. There are plenty of fantasy games that do just that. Legend and its Runequest predecessors do just that. I have also recently taken an interest in Song of Swords. These systems--nearly unarguably--have a much higher degree of verisimilitude as nothing would stop a real life doctor from learning to fire a gun of mastering plumbing in the real world. So why then should a Cavalier be unable to learn to cast arcane spells? In real life, you and I don't really have a roleplaying class.

However, classes are neat.

A character class evokes our imagination about what type of "archetype" we would want to be. In addition to just giving us a list of options to spark our imagination, it also just makes building certain archetypes far far easier; wanna be Sneakgar McBackstab? There is a class for that and the mechanics to be that guy are all neatly tied up in a little box for your convenience.

It also gives players defined functions and roles. A fighter can't does what a wizard does and and wizard can't do what a fighter can (hopefully) so characters playing those two separate class will naturally tend towards teamwork and specialization. This specialization is a mechanical enforcement of an "adventuring party" even existing. I mean: of course those 4 guys are rolling around together because together they can conquer anything where each individual might fail. Specialization can be done in a "point buy" kind of system as well, but in that sort of game delineating those boundaries of specialization have to be handle by the players and there is a greater risk of people stepping on eachother's toes.

Even aside from all that, classes allow for a wider range of mechanics. Having weapon focus and smite and rage is probably too good right? Well, the class system makes sure that those mechanics stay separate and don't spiral out into there just being one ultimate combat build. It essentially lets you make rules that work fine by themselves without having to worry too too much about their interactions with the abilities of other classes.

There are more reasons to like or hate classes (I omitted more reasons for hating them because you were asking why you should bother with classes) but I think this is a good helicopter view.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mage Evolving: Good luck with your GM's experiment. I speak from experience when I say that it probably won't last long. You'll either end up leaping to a different system, or going back to classes.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Sounds closer to GURPs Pathfinder.

We just need GURPs Rifts to add to Pathfinder and suddenly 75% of my RPG stuff is on the same system (there already were GURPs White Wolf material).

It can work, yet it will make it a very different game. If you can buy several low-cost items, that were formerly kept apart by class limitations, then bring them together in one PC - it might result in something unexpected. (Example, a PC with Barbarian-only and Paladin-only abilities, normally could not be multiclassed due to alignment restrictions). It's not a bad idea, just one to watch out for due to abuse.

Then again, we all have to try different things to learn.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I wrote a bunch of notes for a "class builder" system that a GM can use to either make his own classes or enable a pseudo-classless game. The big twist is that it's all based on progression. In other words, instead of getting X amount of "class points" per level to spend on features, you spend Y points on how those features scale with level. For example, you might spend 9 points to get 9-level spellcasting or 4 points to get spellcasting at 4th level like a paladin or druid. The same goes with how often you get bonus feats and some features like sneak attack and channel energy. While you make all these decisions at character creation, you get to play the character archetype you want to play.


Cyrad wrote:
I wrote a bunch of notes for a "class builder" system that a GM can use to either make his own classes or enable a pseudo-classless game. The big twist is that it's all based on progression. In other words, instead of getting X amount of "class points" per level to spend on features, you spend Y points on how those features scale with level. For example, you might spend 9 points to get 9-level spellcasting or 4 points to get spellcasting at 4th level like a paladin or druid. The same goes with how often you get bonus feats and some features like sneak attack and channel energy. While you make all these decisions at character creation, you get to play the character archetype you want to play.

This sounds interesting. Did you ever put that into practice and play a few games?


KestrelZ wrote:

We just need GURPs Rifts to add to Pathfinder and suddenly 75% of my RPG stuff is on the same system (there already were GURPs White Wolf material).

I wrote up most of a conversion for thisa few years back, gave up when I got to powered armor and vehicles, I didn't study vector calculus to use it for game planning...


KestrelZ wrote:

Sounds closer to GURPs Pathfinder.

This. I thought the same thing.

The Dm described the mechanics as influenced by mutants and mastermind and Vampire the masquerade. Both systems and games I love but two very different things. To shoe horn this into Pathfinder and make use of their beastiary and what not makes me a bit hesitant.


christos gurd wrote:
well this is worth checking out at least

Reading through it now thanks!


I actually did something like this not too long ago. I took all of the classes from the CRB and changed them into four. I created Strength Warrior, Agile Warrior, Holy Mage and Arcane Mage. I then took all of the class features available and separated them out over these four new classes. Any character can take one warrior class and multi-class it with one mage class (if they want). Anyway, long story short, we have a druid who channels for healing, a paladin with no channels and weapon training, a monk with some rogue talents, and a bard with draconic bloodline and evocation school.

We've played through two modules of Carrion Crown and have not come up against anything game breaking from the PC's perspective.

Lantern Lodge

Simon Legrande wrote:

I actually did something like this not too long ago. I took all of the classes from the CRB and changed them into four. I created Strength Warrior, Agile Warrior, Holy Mage and Arcane Mage. I then took all of the class features available and separated them out over these four new classes. Any character can take one warrior class and multi-class it with one mage class (if they want). Anyway, long story short, we have a druid who channels for healing, a paladin with no channels and weapon training, a monk with some rogue talents, and a bard with draconic bloodline and evocation school.

We've played through two modules of Carrion Crown and have not come up against anything game breaking from the PC's perspective.

I am intrigued by this idea and would like to know specifics of how you applied it. I've entertained thoughts of taking something similar and combining it with E6 to turn pathfinder into something without classes and levels.


KestrelZ wrote:

Sounds closer to GURPs Pathfinder.

We just need GURPs Rifts to add to Pathfinder and suddenly 75% of my RPG stuff is on the same system (there already were GURPs White Wolf material).

Oddly enough, there really is a GURPS Pathfinder. Or at least, something about as close as you can get without violating any copyrights.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Maps Subscriber

I would also recommend Mutants and Masterminds if you want to make it classless.

The thing is, classes are actually a good idea. Sure, a character COULD be somewhat decent at many things, but even when I played GURPS for 10 years I found that even in a classless system you still want to specialize in something. Generalists generally suck at, well, everything. Not recommended. It is far more effective to pick a niche, and guess what? Classes already created that niche for you.

Even in Mutants and Masterminds you will want to have some sort of theme for your characters. Again, having a minor hobby in everything is generally a Bad Idea.


SeeleyOne wrote:

I would also recommend Mutants and Masterminds if you want to make it classless.

The thing is, classes are actually a good idea. Sure, a character COULD be somewhat decent at many things, but even when I played GURPS for 10 years I found that even in a classless system you still want to specialize in something. Generalists generally suck at, well, everything. Not recommended. It is far more effective to pick a niche, and guess what? Classes already created that niche for you.

Even in Mutants and Masterminds you will want to have some sort of theme for your characters. Again, having a minor hobby in everything is generally a Bad Idea.

I think that's why the DM has suggested that we pick a core class and then add to it via some sort ability buy system.

So you are fighter, first and foremost, you can get all the fighter abilities and what not, but for a cost of some sort you can be a roguish fighter (sneak attack) without the need to take a rogue level.

Too be honest I am not sure how this will work exactly but after reading Rynjin "Freeform Class Selection" thread I think it could be fun. I think I will need to hear my DM out on his mechanics.


Cyrad wrote:

I wrote a bunch of notes for a "class builder" system that a GM can use to either make his own classes or enable a pseudo-classless game. The big twist is that it's all based on progression. In other words, instead of getting X amount of "class points" per level to spend on features, you spend Y points on how those features scale with level.

{. . .}

This sounds like what TSR tried out with Player's Option ("D&D 2.5", which unfortunately never became widespread, probably due to TSR's business troubles and impending takeover by WotC). The implementation needed some refinement, but the idea was cool.

And let me put in my vote that a hybrid of Pathfinder with Mutants & Masterminds would be awesome.

If you want to have a flexible system but still encourage specialization, just offer classic combinations of abilities at a discount.


UnArcaneElection wrote:
Cyrad wrote:

I wrote a bunch of notes for a "class builder" system that a GM can use to either make his own classes or enable a pseudo-classless game. The big twist is that it's all based on progression. In other words, instead of getting X amount of "class points" per level to spend on features, you spend Y points on how those features scale with level.

{. . .}

This sounds like what TSR tried out with Player's Option ("D&D 2.5", which unfortunately never became widespread, probably due to TSR's business troubles and impending takeover by WotC). The implementation needed some refinement, but the idea was cool.

And let me put in my vote that a hybrid of Pathfinder with Mutants & Masterminds would be awesome.

If you want to have a flexible system but still encourage specialization, just offer classic combinations of abilities at a discount.

You don't need to offer a discount. Just put together some sample archetypes along with some suggestions for customization. Experienced players who already have a good idea what they want to do can ignore them, but players who are new to the system or genre, or who don't have any really good creative ideas will find them extremely helpful.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One thing to keep in mind is that point-based character systems implicitly assume a great deal of GM involvement in character creation. Don't expect players to be able to just show up at the game with their characters ready to play. Among other things, the simple fact that a certain combination of abilities can be put together at a given point cost does not necessarily mean it will work well in your campaign. You'll need to guide your players not just in what is and isn't allowed, but in making recommendations about how to best build the kind of character they're interested in playing. Also in suggesting alternatives if what they want to play doesn't look like it will fit.


I just read GUPRS basic combat for 4e (free set) and gave up...no way in hell will I run this...

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Why bother with classes? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules