How much are abilities worth? Let's Switch

[Fizzban]

How much is uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, trap sense, and indomitable will worth?

Say you wanted to create a ranger styled barbarian what could you gain from the ranger by giving up uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, trap sense, and indomitable will from the barbarian?

What could you give up from the ranger to get rage progression and damage reduction?

I’m aware of most variants. I haven’t seen any that I like for this situation. However I will say that the ranger variant without spell cast had a lot of nice things, but just not for this idea.

Any Ideas?

Fizz

[Saurstalk]

Fizzban wrote:

How much is uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, trap sense, and indomitable will worth?

Say you wanted to create a ranger styled barbarian what could you gain from the ranger by giving up uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, trap sense, and indomitable will from the barbarian?

What could you give up from the ranger to get rage progression and damage reduction?

I’m aware of most variants. I haven’t seen any that I like for this situation. However I will say that the ranger variant without spell cast had a lot of nice things, but just not for this idea.

Any Ideas?

Fizz

Why not just multi-class?

[Fizzban]

Saurstalk wrote:

Fizzban wrote:

How much is uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, trap sense, and indomitable will worth?

Say you wanted to create a ranger styled barbarian what could you gain from the ranger by giving up uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, trap sense, and indomitable will from the barbarian?

What could you give up from the ranger to get rage progression and damage reduction?

I’m aware of most variants. I haven’t seen any that I like for this situation. However I will say that the ranger variant without spell cast had a lot of nice things, but just not for this idea.

Any Ideas?

Fizz

Why not just multi-class?

Well because that's not what I asked, sorry couldn't stop myself. Mainly curiosity but lets say I don't want to lose rage progression if you multi-class you wouldn't be able to get mighty rage or tireless rage depending on how many levels you took.

It's kind of like asking why take the Thug varient vs. dual classing rogue/fighter, it's just a different feel.

Fizz

[Timespike]

Well, let's see. To compensate for rage from the ranger, you'd probably want to drop the animal companion and combat styles. That would about do it, I'd think.

[Rezdave]

Fizzban wrote:

How much is uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, trap sense, and indomitable will worth?

I do this kind of thing all the time. Basically, I decide for each class whether a given Special Ability is equal to a full Feat and what is about 2/3rd Feat-worthy. Then trade them out as you see fit. Don't tell my Players, but I do wing it a little.

I routinely let Rogues trade off Sneak Attack dice for other, "concept-appropriate" abilities, I've let Fighters and Rangers have Rage and in my current campaign I have a Ranger who took her Animal Companion at 2nd Level and will gain her Combat Style at 4th.

Personally, I basically model every class after Fighter and just assign them "Greater" and "Lesser" Special Ability slots like the Fighter's Bonus Feats that can be filled in any DM-approved, concept appropriate way.

Of course, I did drop Barbarian, Monk, Bard and some others, but now Rangers, Fighters and Rogues with their Special Abilities and Feats twisted around (and/or some multi-classing) fill those roles nicely within a more streamlined Class system.

HTH,

Rez

[seekerofshadowlight]

what I would do is if you gave that up give him track and the ranger combat styles at 2nd,6th and 11th levels not sure what level i would give him track maybe 2nd then maybe combat styles at 3rd 8th and 12th maybe making it slightly behind the ranger.

[Fizzban]

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

what I would do is if you gave that up give him track and the ranger combat styles at 2nd,6th and 11th levels not sure what level i would give him track maybe 2nd then maybe combat styles at 3rd 8th and 12th maybe making it slightly behind the ranger.

I'm thinking about doing this. Thanks! I have a player who's character died he was wanting to make another, and he asked about dropping and picking. I think he may want an animal companion. I'll check with him, but do you think an animal companion as the ranger is worth all of the above I mentioned?

Fizz

[Rezdave]

Fizzban wrote:

I have a player who's character died he was wanting to make another, and he asked about dropping and picking. I think he may want an animal companion. I'll check with him, but do you think an animal companion as the ranger is worth all of the above I mentioned?

I think he'd be better off playing a Ranger (or Fighter/Ranger) and drop Favored Enemy and a few abilities in order to Rage and add Barbarian abilities than the other way around.

Rez

[ericthecleric]

Fizzban, I did a ton of work on such things. Check out my "Regarding Class Variants" thread (now archived, I think), and you'll gain the answers you want. The article I wrote was 8,000 words, so its long, but good. Feel free to say nice things about it too, as I hate to think all that effort was wasted!

[Fizzban]

ericthecleric wrote:

Fizzban, I did a ton of work on such things. Check out my "Regarding Class Variants" thread (now archived, I think), and you'll gain the answers you want. The article I wrote was 8,000 words, so its long, but good. Feel free to say nice things about it too, as I hate to think all that effort was wasted!

I had a long post praising your greatness, and asking several question, but the board ate my post...now I'm at work so short verison.

Great Job! It looks like you put alot of work and thought into this project.

I did a quick over view so forgive me I didn't have alot of time to soak up everything on the first pass. I do have a few questions.

Core class abilities can be swapped around for other core class abilities. Is this correct?

If so how do you deal with placement of such abilities? Some abilities are obviously meant to be acquired later in the game, what do you do to prevent X number of dead levels or how do you add several abilities to a class that still has several abilities and still keep the correct power level? I did see the section on delayed abilities I speaking more so front load of level loading then having a bunch of dead levels

Correct me if I'm wrong as I go over the abilities I mentioned in my post above.
If the barbarian gave up X he could receive X.
Trap Sense = 1 feat
Uncanny Dodge = 1 feat
Improved Uncanny Dodge = 1 feat
Indomitable Will = 1 feat

Again Great Work

Fizz

[ericthecleric]

Answering the what could you gain from dropping those abilities in the OP, that would give you 4 bonus feats worth of abilities. So you could give the variant barbarian any combination of the following, as long as it equals four bonus feats worth of abilities: two extra skill points per level (with 4 extra class skills) for 2 bonus feats, ranger’s evasion for 1 feat, Ranger Nature Abilities (Track, Woodland Stride, Swift Tracker, Camouflage, and Hide in Plain Sight) for 2 feats, and Ranger Spells for 2 feats.

If so how do you deal with placement of such abilities?
The placement of class abilities would be the same as per the original class gains it at. Eg. if a variant rogue has fast movement (barbarian version), they’d gain it at 1st-level, just like a barbarian, but if that variant rogue has fast movement (monk version), they’d gain the first speed boost at 3rd-level, just like a monk; however, the class levels monk and variant rogue would stack for that ability.

dead levels
It’s possible that you could have a bunch of dead levels. If that really bothered you, you could always adjust things a little, but I wouldn’t recommend lowering the level that an ability is gained at.

Core class abilities can be swapped around for other core class abilities. Is this correct?
No, those are the only abilities that can’t be switched. Originally, when I pitched it to Dragon, I did have it that they could be. But a Paizo staffer thought that there should be certain class abilities that are “signature abilities” of the class and so couldn’t be dropped. After some thought, I thought that the point was a good one.
Of course, Dragon was pulled when this was in the slush pile. :-(

[Fizzban]

Ok thanks! So you can't just get feats right? You just get abilities that are worth a "feat-standard" or abilities of an equal worth.

Sorry you didn't get the chance to get this through pazio. It would have been a great addition.

Fizz

[ericthecleric]

Ok thanks! So you can't just get feats right? You just get abilities that are worth a "feat-standard" or abilities of an equal worth.
Yes, you can do that instead as well, on a 1-for-1 basis; just make sure it fits the concept.

Sorry you didn't get the chance to get this through pazio. It would have been a great addition.
Thanks. I don’t blame Paizo for it. It would have been nice though. (sigh)

[Fizzban]

ericthecleric wrote:

Ok thanks! So you can't just get feats right? You just get abilities that are worth a "feat-standard" or abilities of an equal worth.

Yes, you can do that instead as well, on a 1-for-1 basis; just make sure it fits the concept.

Sorry you didn't get the chance to get this through pazio. It would have been a great addition.
Thanks. I don’t blame Paizo for it. It would have been nice though. (sigh)

Thanks again! If you have anything else you would like to share your want an opinion on feel free to drop me a line at [e-mail] I really enjoy your work.

Fizz

[Rezdave]

ericthecleric wrote:

dead levels

It’s possible that you could have a bunch of dead levels.
SNIP
Core class abilities can be swapped around for other core class abilities. Is this correct?
SNIP
[A] Paizo staffer thought that there should be certain class abilities that are “signature abilities” of the class and so couldn’t be dropped. After some thought, I thought that the point was a good one.

Fizz ...

I do much the same thing in my game. Frankly, I dropped a bunch of classes (barbarian, bard, cleric - divided into homebrew Priest and Templar, monk, paladin and sorcerer) and eliminated all Prestige Classes. Then, I opened up most of the class Special Abilities as "slots" like a Fighter has and use the eliminated classes and PrCs as inspiration.

At the same time as I was developing this (about when 3.5 came out) I laid out all of the classes and their features in a spreadsheet to calculate and crosscheck values and balance.

As you know, all Feats are not created equal and the same goes for SAs.

For the most part what I found is that SA = 3/4 Feat, so you need to be careful what trades you allow. "Weak" feats cannot be traded for "Good" ones, and Eric is correct that some are integral to the "concept" of the class. One of my Ranger Players who just hit 3rd level wanted to trade Endurance for something mondo-Archery and I didn't let her. Some SAs or "lesser" feats have to stay around simply for flavor.

Still, I think the key is to remember that Good Feat = Good Feat, Weak Feat = Weak Feat or most SAs.

Also, do not let them trade out a non-progressive Feat or Ability for a progressive one. If a Conan-inspired Fighter-Rogue wanted to trade off his first Sneak Attack die to gain Rage, then he's trading +1d6 for 1/day Rage but without the progression increase. If he wants to rage additional times per day he needs to sacrifice more Sneak Attack dice or use Fighter Feats. Increasing Trapsense is not equal to Rage and shouldn't be allowed no matter how hard your player cries that he's trading one progression for another.

Oh ... and "dead levels" never really bothered me. You always get HP and Skill Points, though 5th level does suck for a few classes other than Wizards and Rogues. Still, that's life. My group is more about character and story and we don't allow power-gamers so dead levels aren't an issue with us.

HTH,

Rez

[Fizzban]

Rezdave wrote:

If he wants to rage additional times per day he needs to sacrifice more Sneak Attack dice or use Fighter Feats. Increasing Trapsense is not equal to Rage and shouldn't be allowed no matter how...

Oh no I complete agree with you. He wanted to drop trapsense for a feat or something from the ranger...yeah kind of vague. I think he wanted a animal companion or two-weapon fighting or what ever the bow feat is (point blank?) I think he wanted to drop uncanny dodge for the animal and trapsense for a style feat.

He not much of a power gamer. IMO a ranger's animal companion is not equal to uncanny dodge, but hey if he wants a furry buddy. I didn't have a solid idea it was like hey can I get some ranger stuff? I dont really want this stuff. I looked at him and shrugged and said why not.

Fizz

[Rezdave]

.
Fizz ... If you didn't get my email yet, check your Spam folder ... Rez

[Fizzban]

Rezdave wrote:

.

Fizz ... If you didn't get my email yet, check your Spam folder ... Rez

Got it. Just sent one back.

Fizz

[ericthecleric]

Fizzban, I tried sending you something. Let me know if you got it please.

[Fizzban]

ericthecleric wrote:

Fizzban, I tried sending you something. Let me know if you got it please.

Yes I did. Thanks, more great stuff.

Fizz

[Fizzban]

ericthecleric wrote:

Fizzban, I tried sending you something. Let me know if you got it please.

Ok I just had more time to look over it. First off Great back ground Second no joke on the brutal factor lol. We just started over a few weeks ago we are at level 3 at the moment, but I will use this at 18th lv or so, and tell you how it goes.

I would really appericate the class acts you have.

Thanks for the great material! Thank you both Eric and Rez!

Fizz

[ericthecleric]

Well, I consider it about as dangerous as an AP adventure, so you'd best have 6 19th-level PCs undertaking it.

[Fizzban]

ericthecleric wrote:

Well, I consider it about as dangerous as an AP adventure, so you'd best have 6 19th-level PCs undertaking it.

LOL I'll keep that in mind. I noticed looking over it even the random encounters are killers.

Fizz

[Khartan]

Rezdave wrote:

Of course, I did drop Barbarian, Monk, Bard and some others, but now Rangers, Fighters and Rogues with their Special Abilities and Feats twisted around (and/or some multi-classing) fill those roles nicely within a more streamlined Class system.

You know, this kind of harkens back to the 2nd edition concept of “kits.” I know prestige classes are supposed to be like that, but sometimes you just don’t get the flavor you want.

On the one hand, you could create more classes (or prestige classes). On the other hand, you could have less classes with more customizing ability. In fact, didn’t it used to be in 1st edition that Paladin and Ranger were sub-classes of Fighter? Monk was a sub-class of something, too (Cleric, maybe?) And bard fell under Thief (which would now be rogue).

I always felt that the rules should be as simple as possible giving the player the flexibility to create any type of character he wants.

Okay, for example, let’s say you want to create a character based on Xena. Okay, she’s a Fighter. But she has that one ability to do that nerve block. That’s a monk thing. So you should have to multiclass just to gain that one ability? Especially since you don’t want anything else monk related.

Sorry. I know this doesn’t advance the conversation any, but I was just inspired and wanted to comment. Thanks for listening.

[Rezdave]

Khartan wrote:

You know, this kind of harkens back to the 2nd edition concept of “kits.” I know prestige classes are supposed to be like that, but sometimes you just don’t get the flavor you want.

I never liked kits, mostly because I thought they were crutches for poor role-palyers and I could generally create them with the plain classes anyway just be being a little flexible (or in the case of Rogues simply with proper Point Allocation).

I hate PrCs, which I find hard to qualify for and overpowered once you get them.

Khartan wrote:

On the one hand, you could create more classes (or prestige classes). On the other hand, you could have less classes with more customizing ability.

Obviously I went the latter route. Eliminated more than half the classes, opened up the flexibility of the rest, and added a house-rules spell oriented Priest and a fighting oriented Templar to fill some gaps.

Khartan wrote:

In fact, didn’t it used to be in 1st edition that Paladin and Ranger were sub-classes of Fighter? Monk was a sub-class of something, too (Cleric, maybe?) And bard fell under Thief (which would now be rogue).

Yep ... Fighter and Ranger were "sub-classes". Monk was kind of its own weird thing, while Bard was a class for which you needed to "qualify" by first gaining a certain number of Fighter, Thief and Wizard levels. It was the ultimate PrC.

Khartan wrote:

Okay, for example, let’s say you want to create a character based on Xena. Okay, she’s a Fighter. But she has that one ability to do that nerve block. That’s a monk thing. So you should have to multiclass just to gain that one ability? Especially since you don’t want anything else monk related.

The D&D "Shaolin" monk is really just a Fighter that specializes in Improved Unarmed Fighting and nothing more. Maybe a little Rogue as well, but a Fighter-Rogue combo makes a fine "monk".

Rez