Well, Gary Gygax thought it was preposterous to conceive extra hit points as anything more than constant physical training, luck, reflexes, divine favour and so forth. He said as much in the 1st Edition DMG, after all.
Well, Gary Gygax thought it was preposterous to conceive extra hit points as anything more than constant physical training, luck, reflexes, divine favour and so forth. He said as much in the 1st Edition DMG, after all.
No disrespect to one of the original creators, but he hasn't been at my gaming table in a while. Please don't disrespect him by dragging out hearsay and old editions to make a point.
What about you, Arakhor? As a player, that's what matters...
I'm not trying to be thick, I just don't understand the "its a penalty" mentality.What I don't get is why people are obsessing over the turn of phrase. Who cares if it's called a "penalty" or a "bonus" or a "racial feature", what benefit does it bring to the game?
From the groups I've played in there has been little trouble keeping archetypes populated. If you want to encourage a race/ class combination then you can easily do so within the racial traits. Why do you need to encourage elf wizards with an arbitrary bonus when the race gets +2 INT and Elven Magic?
Maybe we should be asking why other races have racial traits that don't support the favored class mechanism. For example the gnome illusion racial trait is more supportive of a wizard illusionist but the CHA bonus and favored class supports the sorcerer.
I see enough characters following archetype under core 3.5 that I don't see a need to add another mechanism to pigeon hole them into them.
I'm in favor of keeping the favored class bonus as a means to encourage players to stay in one class. As great as it is to be able to multiclass and make an extremely versatile character, I think multiclassing detracts from the game. First, obviously, is the cherry picking powers muchkinism. But aside from that, having more focused characters fosters teamwork because you'll be good at what you do and you'll need your teammates who are good at what they do. You'll need to work together to accomplish your goals. Too much multiclassing and versatility means players won't need each other as much.
I'm in favor of keeping the favored class bonus as a means to encourage players to stay in one class. As great as it is to be able to multiclass and make an extremely versatile character, I think multiclassing detracts from the game. First, obviously, is the cherry picking powers muchkinism. But aside from that, having more focused characters fosters teamwork because you'll be good at what you do and you'll need your teammates who are good at what they do. You'll need to work together to accomplish your goals. Too much multiclassing and versatility means players won't need each other as much.
I can understand this... then make a way of encouraging single class characters that doesn't punish certain single class characters. There have been several fixes on this thread that do exactly that.
The other issue I have is that this whole idea is just a power up in disguise.
I'm in favor of keeping the favored class bonus as a means to encourage players to stay in one class. As great as it is to be able to multiclass and make an extremely versatile character, I think multiclassing detracts from the game. First, obviously, is the cherry picking powers muchkinism. But aside from that, having more focused characters fosters teamwork because you'll be good at what you do and you'll need your teammates who are good at what they do. You'll need to work together to accomplish your goals. Too much multiclassing and versatility means players won't need each other as much.
I don't think so. Giving something roughly to power of a single feat isn't likely to stop someone from "power dipping" or even reconsider it. If they want the evasion of the rogue, I don't think that they would be worried about losing those 2 hp/skill points.
Also, if the bonus is actually good enough to change a person's mind, wouldn't it also encourage someone playing a elf cleric to "dip" in ranger a few levels to get that extra bonus?
-
I would like to see the favored class bonus go away right now. I would rather the bonus to playing certain classes be moved to racial feats or something else the race can choose to have a significant bonus for playing a certain class. I would rather be able to choose the bonus if I want it, than automatically having the bonus only if I play the class/race combination the DM/designer thinks I should be playing. Something not exactly like but similar to...
Elven Study
Prerequisite: Elf
Benefit: You gain 3 skill points plus 1 skill point per wizard level. Every time you gain a wizard level, you gain another +1 skill point. These skill points must be spent on the Knowledge skill.
I'm in favor of keeping the favored class bonus as a means to encourage players to stay in one class. As great as it is to be able to multiclass and make an extremely versatile character, I think multiclassing detracts from the game. First, obviously, is the cherry picking powers muchkinism. But aside from that, having more focused characters fosters teamwork because you'll be good at what you do and you'll need your teammates who are good at what they do. You'll need to work together to accomplish your goals. Too much multiclassing and versatility means players won't need each other as much.I don't think so. Giving something roughly to power of a single feat isn't likely to stop someone from "power dipping" or even reconsider it. If they want the evasion of the rogue, I don't think that they would be worried about losing those 2 hp/skill points.
Also, if the bonus is actually good enough to change a person's mind, wouldn't it also encourage someone playing a elf cleric to "dip" in ranger a few levels to get that extra bonus?
-
I would like to see the favored class bonus go away right now. I would rather the bonus to playing certain classes be moved to racial feats or something else the race can choose to have a significant bonus for playing a certain class. I would rather be able to choose the bonus if I want it, than automatically having the bonus only if I play the class/race combination the DM/designer thinks I should be playing. Something not exactly like but similar to...
Elven Study
Prerequisite: Elf
Benefit: You gain 3 skill points plus 1 skill point per wizard level. Every time you gain a wizard level, you gain another +1 skill point. These skill points must be spent on the Knowledge skill.
I'll bet you money you'll still have people begrudge that little bonus as well. Perhaps allowing each player choose their favored class at character origination with the bonus. This bonus is lost once a player multiclasses and can never be regained. Existing hps/sps are not lost but just future levels in the favored class will not have it. So everyone gets to play their own class with the benefit but there's the incentive to stay in the one class. Maybe make Human and Half-Elves the exception to this rule. They can multiclass and whenever they take new levels in their favored class, they continue to get the bonus.
|
If I believed that, I might be playing 4e. But since Healing Surges don't feel right to me, I'm still playing 3.5, and want to play PF. And since that point keeps coming up, I think the community needs to accept that there are some of us that DO see HP as toughness and training, period. :)
I'm very sorry that you feel that way but I wasn't referring to 4th edition. I was referring to Dungeons and Dragons. Hit points have been a cumulative effect of those driving forces since AD&D. Gary Gygax himself penned them as such. Check it out. Page 82 of the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons Dungeon Master's Guide Book, 1st edition.
It's ignorant players who don't understand and/or refuse to read the rules which cause the misconception. Your physical toughness is your constitution score. Your hit points are a lot of different things all rolled up into one number.
It seems to me that the Racial bonuses are what really makes us choose a race for our chosen class. If you then give bonuses for continuing to follow that class, you are in effect, penalizing those who don't.
I would just give everyone, regardless of class or race an option of either 1 skill point or 1 hp each level, or dump the whole idea.
actually no
i think in a character concept (usually human, half-elf orelf because those are the races i feel wel portraying) then i think in race and classif what you said was true i would be playing a gnome bard instead of an elven one... i planned to make a rogue witha single level of wizard (to getidentify and detect magic to appraise magical items), but forthe true concept of teh character the bard was right... using performance oratory to order her ship around would be nice...
no skill bonuses, to hp bonuses... and i don't feel penaliced at all :P
It's good that you don't feel penalized. But you are being penalized. Every level you gain you are not getting either one skill point or one hit point, all because you are being creative and I just don't see that as a good thing.
It's ignorant players who don't understand and/or refuse to read the rules which cause the misconception. Your physical toughness is your constitution score. Your hit points are a lot of different things all rolled up into one number.
It isn't ignorant players. I've read the rules. And I've played the game. HP don't _feel_ that way to me. VP points, in the WP/VP do feel the way D&D has described HP. If we want to play a WP/VP system, I'll agree. Until then, HP feels like combat training and toughness, period.
Please don't call me ignorant because my play experience doesn't match what the older books have told me I'm supposed to experience.
|
Perhaps allowing each player choose their favored class at character origination with the bonus. This bonus is lost once a player multiclasses and can never be regained. Existing hps/sps are not lost but just future levels in the favored class will not have it. So everyone gets to play their own class with the benefit but there's the incentive to stay in the one class. Maybe make Human and Half-Elves the exception to this rule. They can multiclass and whenever they take new levels in their favored class, they continue to get the bonus.
This is almost exactly what I suggested earlier - except that along wiht the one the play is allowed to choose - there is ONE arbitrary class too that is a favored class - based on the old D&D race/class combo standards (Dwarf fighter, halfling rogue, etc).
Robert
|
|
Please don't call me ignorant because my play experience doesn't match what the older books have told me I'm supposed to experience.
Gods, forgot this was the internet for a second there. I wasn't calling you specifically ignorant, I was suggesting where the concept that hit points were anything but what they're supposed to be came from. Besides you started it with that 4th edition crack.
I'm not just talking about old editions either. Even in 3.5 there is reference to hit points being divine favor or inner strength. It's on page 142 of the player's handbook. Not the half page description of hit points Mr. Gygax did but it still implies that they're more then just blood.
boys, boys, boys.
Perhaps allowing each player choose their favored class at character origination with the bonus. This bonus is lost once a player multiclasses and can never be regained. Existing hps/sps are not lost but just future levels in the favored class will not have it. So everyone gets to play their own class with the benefit but there's the incentive to stay in the one class. Maybe make Human and Half-Elves the exception to this rule. They can multiclass and whenever they take new levels in their favored class, they continue to get the bonus.This is almost exactly what I suggested earlier - except that along wiht the one the play is allowed to choose - there is ONE arbitrary class too that is a favored class - based on the old D&D race/class combo standards (Dwarf fighter, halfling rogue, etc).
Robert
Yeah but that last little addition doesn't help with incentivizing people to stick with one class. I like one favored class only per player only. That's why it's the "favored" class. Favored above all others.
I'm not really bothered what exactly hit points represent, or rather how to precisely break them down. Some of them are blood and flesh and the rest are training, luck and reflexes.
I'm someone who is actually still a fan of the old 3.5 method of multiclassing to a degree, and while I find the newly-proposed system interesting, I have some issues with it.
To wit, the skill bonus makes sense, but the HP bonus does not. As a race who has a focus in one or another class, it generally makes sense that you would have greater exposure to that class' skills.
It does not make as much sense that you are a naturally tougher individual just because you (as, say, an Elf) choose wizard over sorcerer when deciding what you want to be when you grow up. To resurrect two terms that are horribly overused and cliched. While the skill point bonus seems simulationist, the HP bonus feels gamist. It feels like a rather blunt-force approach.
-Steve Bennett
Depends on your view of hitpoints Steve, though this in itself has been an ongoing argument in various groups of mine over the years... While I see exactly what you mean, or what I think you mean in that. I'll giveya my logic/view on it.
Hitpoints are not only just your toughness. It's also part of your skill... When you're level 1, and that guy swings a sword at you, hitting you for a whole 10 points of damage out of your 12 starting hitpoints, for example. The swing connected and did serious damage to you and your vitals, or limbs, or what have you... When you're level 10, and that sword hits you for a whole 6 damage, it's a mere fleshwound, because you skillfully avoided most of the 'real' damage.
Conversly, in my games at least, if someone is utterly and completely helpless (Not held/stunned/etc during the heat of an ongoing battle)... You give them a second smile from ear to ear... you're not doing a max damage/auto crit or what have you... yer killing them.
-Weave
|
|
Hitpoints are not only just your toughness. It's also part of your skill... When you're level 1, and that guy swings a sword at you, hitting you for a whole 10 points of damage out of your 12 starting hitpoints, for example. The swing connected and did serious damage to you and your vitals, or limbs, or what have you... When you're level 10, and that sword hits you for a whole 6 damage, it's a mere fleshwound, because you skillfully avoided most of the 'real' damage.
-Weave
This is exactly a main element of hit points that I've always imagined; it's not a coincidence that your amount of hit points (higher or lower) is directly correlated to your EXPERIENCE points and level.
The more experience you have - the more hit points you have.
Robert
|
|
Conversly, in my games at least, if someone is utterly and completely helpless (Not held/stunned/etc during the heat of an ongoing battle)... You give them a second smile from ear to ear... you're not doing a max damage/auto crit or what have you... yer killing them.
-Weave
that is called Coup de Grace
ok you need to hit decently but in the middle of the battle the distractions may not let you attend the matter at hand... giving someone a 2nd smile :Pbut yes that is how i see HPs
always criticals or killing blows i describe them in whatever way it happens to be more correct to thekind of weapon used and how much damage it did and how much hps are left.
Another option, of course, is just to kill it entirely. A number of changes made to the classes (which we will discuss later) were designed to encourage folks to stick with one class, which might make this entire subrule obsolete.
Go ahead and kill it.
The favored class rules are unnecessary, the other adjustments to HPS already fix that well enough and the extra point here is just another thing to remember.
|
|
Another idea is what I 'THOUGHT' WOTC was going to do with 4E: a racial level system. Instead of substitute levels or experience bonuses or penalities, what if every character was a Dwarf (for example) as well as a Fighter (for example). Every time you level up, you increased in race level AS WELL AS class level. If properly constucted, you could do all kinds of cool stuff with this (i.e. Dwarves get +1 Con every few levels, some special abilities to choose every few levels [gives customization ability, but within racially-acceptable limits], maybe bonus HP, etc.). Power scale would need to be taken into account, but you could help reward players who wanted to play to 'type' by making the bonuses geared towards these favored classes. HP or armor specialization might be more useful to a fighter than a wizard, but you won't advance slower or be 'penalized' hp or skills for making an 'against type' character choice. [fantasy flight had a similar mechanic for Midnight, in terms of a Path you could choose... though not all were created equal IMHO]
MSG
the Midnight's Path is different and actually i like how it works
but for the benefits asociated with races Arcana Evolved did a good job with Racial Levels... but since backward compatibility is looked here, i doubt they would do any such thing...i will need to review again the Paths of Midnight, they are interesting.
Another thought on this vein:
Racial Feats (which have been mentioned before) can really help 'color' a class differently...
Yes, that has been brought-up a few times (or maybe not in this particular thread. I'd have to check...)
This idea of racial levels, or scalable abilities for races bring the idea of racial feats in a new direction however.
Similarly, if you haven't read the "A though experiment, cafeteria style racial traits" tread, I suggest you take a look. Lots of good stuff there IMHO.
|
I'm in favor of dropping the favored classes. It's a small mechanical subsystem that would be easy to forget about. It's based on race but only conditionally takes effect when leveling up. The only thing similar is the human bonus to skills. That applies every level, but even it can be overlooked when multiclassing. Say you start out a human fighter and are used to your 3 skill points, but then decide to take a level of rogue, you look it up and see the 8 points but forget about your human bonus.
I DM a very casual group of players and know from experience the fewer the isolated subsystems the better. Some of my players only crack a book when it's time to level.
I think both racial substitution levels and racial feats do a good job at supporting flavor and encouraging stereotypes, but I agree they may be more appropriate outside the core rules. I like racial levels as well, but they are definitely non-core.
|
|
I'm in favor of dropping the favored classes. [SNIP]I think both racial substitution levels and racial feats do a good job at supporting flavor and encouraging stereotypes, but I agree they may be more appropriate outside the core rules.
And there's my thought, voiced more succintly by Elendur.
Assumptions like this are always setting-specific and pointlessly restrictive, IMO, and all-too-often just end up being circumvented or bypassed by the addition of a half-dozen subraces, such as Gold/Grey/Moon/High/Aquatic/Wild/Wood/Dark/Grugach Elves, until *everybody* has an elf that has whatever Favored Class they wanted in the first place, and it only took 10 years and 40 pages across two dozen books to demolish an anachronistic flavor restriction that could have been skipped by deleting a single frikkin' sentence from the PHB in the first place.
Dwarves based on the old norse are going to be powerful wizards. Dwarves based on Tolkien are going to be grumpy fighters who are worse than elves in every single way. I don't know which end of the spectrum Golarion's dwarves are going to end up on, but I'd rather that the core rules assume that the 'generic' dwarf can come from a clan that pumps out a lot of Paladins, or from a group that produces a lot of Rogues, or from a group that are 'born of the earth' and produce a lot of geomantic Sorcerers.
If a specific regional assumption has it that most Elves are Bards and most Halflings are Barbarians, then that's fine to have as a sidebar option, with the DM being encouraged to assign Favored Classes, and Favored Class bonuses, as they see fit, and perhaps even to go 'old-school' AD&D and forbid certain races to be certain classes. But those sorts of setting-specific assumptions should, IMO, be left to a sidebar and not used as one-size-fits-all bludgeons on every single dwarf, elf, gnome or halfling in Golarion.
Elves in *your* world are Wizards, because you want a 3E feel? Cool. Elves in *my* world might be Sorcerers, more innately magical than studious book-toting scholars. Or they might be Bards, trained in swordplay and innately magical, with a dash of artistic flair unmatched by many others. Or Rangers, drawing upon the forces of nature and bonding with animals of their native woodlands. But they don't need, IMO, free extra points for doing stuff that fits their game lore so much better than 'Wizard.'
Racial Substitution levels and some specific feats, IMO, work much better at *allowing* a Dwarven Paladin to excel at his class, without giving him extra points above a Human or Halfling Paladin.
Options. Not limitations.
Director of Game Design
|
Hey there all,
Interesting discussion, and one that is happening in numerous threads. Right now, I am seriously considering changing the favored class bonus to work more like humans, for all races. That said, the other option is to eliminate it entirely. What I want out of this mechanic is simple. I would like a mechanic that encourages characters to stick, primarily, with one class. Multiclassing, as it stands in 3.5, gives a number of numerical options with little or no cost (if you pick the right classes) and this rule is intended to offset that. That said, there was initially some intent to make the rule one that reinforces racial stereotypes, but I am beginning to think that the new race design does that well enough on its own.
I should note that I like the idea of racial feats and racial progressions, but I am afraid that the final book will probably not have enough space to gives these systems the treatment that they require.
I am, as always, open to debate.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
What I want out of this mechanic is simple. I would like a mechanic that encourages characters to stick, primarily, with one class.
I feel that you've already taken a huge step in that direction by making the 11-20 levels of classes as filled with class abilities as the first 10 levels. (It was particularly jarring when some classes had two to four class abilities at 1st level, and then big empty gaps at the higher levels, encouraging 'dipping.')
That's, IMO, the best way to encourage single-classing. Make the higher levels of the class worth taking, over 'dipping' a few levels of X or Y.
I should note that I like the idea of racial feats and racial progressions, but I am afraid that the final book will probably not have enough space to gives these systems the treatment that they require.
What about, as another option, remove all the bonuses for favored class and have a few feats that grant benefits for taking levels in your favored class? Something like a feat that grants an extra skill point for every level in your favored class. This would be more bland, but it would take up less space.
Well, I would prefer that favored class does reinforce racial archetypes, though increasing the tendency of characters to stick to one class is an additional benefit. I quite like the mechanic as it stands now and skill points and hit points are the lowest tangible bonuses that can be given per level (other than XP bonuses, but XP bonuses or penalties are not a good mechanic), but I do have some other ideas.
If favored class cannot give bonuses per level, because some think these reinforce racial stereotypes (I would say racial archetypes, as for me this is positive) too much, there are still a few other ways to do have favored class and make it meaningful:
1) Make favored class give a small one-off bonus that is lost if even one level of another class is taken. I have two example suggestions for this (the first is stronger and the second is weaker):
1)a) Favored class gives a +1 bonus to the primary attribute of the class or the race - this could be explained by being at top form while concentrating on one class only.
1)b) Favored class gives an extra class skill and if another class is taken it reverts to being a cross-class skill and no more ranks can be placed into it until it reaches 1/2 level.
2) Penalize non-favored classes [e.g. -1 skill point / level, etc.]... I think this is a bad idea...
3) Have favored class increase options. Because there is no space for racial feats, perhaps taking a favored class could allow the character to swap a class skill for another or something along those lines (perhaps this could even work on a per level [or better, per several levels] basis) or perhaps it could allow the retraining/shifting of one skill point per level to indicate that greater flexibility the race has within the favored class.
|
|
Hey there all,
Interesting discussion, and one that is happening in numerous threads. Right now, I am seriously considering changing the favored class bonus to work more like humans, for all races. That said, the other option is to eliminate it entirely. What I want out of this mechanic is simple. I would like a mechanic that encourages characters to stick, primarily, with one class. Multiclassing, as it stands in 3.5, gives a number of numerical options with little or no cost (if you pick the right classes) and this rule is intended to offset that. That said, there was initially some intent to make the rule one that reinforces racial stereotypes, but I am beginning to think that the new race design does that well enough on its own.
I should note that I like the idea of racial feats and racial progressions, but I am afraid that the final book will probably not have enough space to gives these systems the treatment that they require.
I am, as always, open to debate.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Well, I like the favored class system (+1 HP or skill point per level) as it is, because it *encourages* singleclassing with a small mechanical bonus. Yet it doesn't make singleclassing too appealing, and multiclassing still remains a lucrative option with its own benefits. All in all I've noticed that it makes the system feel more balanced, as players (in my group, at least) now think really hard about multiclassing -- for example, is it really worth taking those couple of levels in monk, fighter, rogue or wizard to get those extra abilities/skill points, if you don't get the "cap" abilities and extra HPs/skill points from singleclassing? It *has* reduced "min/maxing" among my players. Extra HPs/skill points for singleclassing, *AND* removing the XP penalty for taking levels in multiple ("wrong") classes is my "ideal" solution... and it definitely is as simple as it can be! :)
As for racial "substitution" levels... we haven't tried those in my group, but it definitely is one way to enhance the "feel" of playing each race. However, I'm a big fan of racial feats, and in my group we have felt that they do it even better, because they give more options and freedom to "customize" your character. I know that they probably won't fit in the core rules, but I hope to see some in PF Companion, or even in a 'Racial Codex' that would include "fluff" and "crunch" about all the races of Golarion (I know that's hard to do, though). Or how about 'Pathfinder RPG Collected Feats'-type of book? It could include more "generic" feats, as well, and I definitely would buy it...
In any case, I wish that you guys wait till PF RPG is out before publishing any racial feats, because there's not really much point in doing them for 3.5, and although tweaking/converting them may not be hard, it's still extra work nonetheless. For that same reason, we probably won't use the feats in PF Campaign Setting in my group.
|
|
Another thought on this vein:
Racial Feats (which have been mentioned before) can really help 'color' a class differently...
Yes, that has been brought-up a few times (or maybe not in this particular thread. I'd have to check...)
This idea of racial levels, or scalable abilities for races bring the idea of racial feats in a new direction however.
Similarly, if you haven't read the "A though experiment, cafeteria style racial traits" tread, I suggest you take a look. Lots of good stuff there IMHO.
I started the '[THINK TANK] Racial Feats' -thread just for this purpose, and I've posted my suggestions for Elven Racial Feats over there -- feel free to comment on/criticize my ideas, or post your own ideas! :)
|
|
Right now, I am seriously considering changing the favored class bonus to work more like humans, for all races.But that makes humans less attractive race. Isn't it?
That would be my concern. A fact that is not as disconcerting with my idea of simply allowing for one favored class by archtype design, and allowing player to select another; thus allowing for atypical class/race combos like Dwarven Druid, and allowing limited multi-classing with the arch-type favored class; like Dwarven Fighters, and halfling Rogues were once able to do.
This still allows the human and half-elf to have their cake by being able to a) either multi-class freely, or b) have any two classes selected by the player.
Robert
Get rid of multiclassing penalties altogether.
The root of the multiclassing issue is that as a player you see other classes with neat abilities that you want. So instead of being forced to take a different level to get a class ability, why not allow PCs to take a class ability from another class as a feat? They can keep leveling up in their current class but dip into another class for their abilities.
|
Director of Game Design
|
Get rid of multiclassing penalties altogether.
The root of the multiclassing issue is that as a player you see other classes with neat abilities that you want. So instead of being forced to take a different level to get a class ability, why not allow PCs to take a class ability from another class as a feat? They can keep leveling up in their current class but dip into another class for their abilities.
Although I find this idea interesting, I think it is pretty radical departure from the way that multiclassing works in 3.5. The other problem here being, of course, that some class abilities are far more valuable than others, and balancing them into a system that makes sense would be quite a pain.
But... it is something I will store away for later consideration, when we get to feats.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
Director of Game Design
|
If you are going to give a human and half-elf racial benefit to all characters, then races other than human and half-elf each need to lose a minor benefit. I'd recommend dropping conditional bonuses like dwarven hatred and once per day stuff like orc ferocity.
Hmmmm... truth be told, I have been feeling that perhaps the human choice is a little bit too good, so giving this bonus to all the races would be an equalizing factor.
As always though, I am open to debate.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
If you are going to give a human and half-elf racial benefit to all characters, then races other than human and half-elf each need to lose a minor benefit. I'd recommend dropping conditional bonuses like dwarven hatred and once per day stuff like orc ferocity.Hmmmm... truth be told, I have been feeling that perhaps the human choice is a little bit too good, so giving this bonus to all the races would be an equalizing factor.
As always though, I am open to debate.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
i am not sure humans are that poweful
and since we have not arrived to feats.... but we are still in "character creation) where does it go to recommend the useof 2 feats?
|
|
i am not sure humans are that poweful
and since we have not arrived to feats.... but we are still in "character creation) where does it go to recommend the useof 2 feats?
well since we're talking about Races on this forum, if this is something specific to the human race of the game, you should post such a thread under this forum topic.
Robert
We could make multiclassing cost something. Perhaps every multiclass could cost a feat.
Another possibility is a hard limit on the number of classes one can multiclass to. Perhaps a static limit (say 3, 4 or 5) or a limit that rises with level. Perhaps levels 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 (chosen, because in general Pathfinder level progression they don't grant anything) could grant the possibility of multiclassing to another class. This would make some of the most egregious hyper-multiclassed combinations impossible. Truth be told, though, I don't really like hard and fast limits and prefer incentives/disincentives instead. Maybe these levels would be able to forfeit the cost of multiclassing for one extra class - hmm, various combinations of approaches are possible.
Another alternative I can think of would be requiring pre-requisites for multiclassing - sort of a return to the 2nd edition.
|
|
We could make multiclassing cost something. Perhaps every multiclass could cost a feat.
Another possibility is a hard limit on the number of classes one can multiclass to. Perhaps a static limit (say 3, 4 or 5) or a limit that rises with level. Perhaps levels 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 (chosen, because in general Pathfinder level progression they don't grant anything) could grant the possibility of multiclassing to another class. This would make some of the most egregious hyper-multiclassed combinations impossible. Truth be told, though, I don't really like hard and fast limits and prefer incentives/disincentives instead. Maybe these levels would be able to forfeit the cost of multiclassing for one extra class - hmm, various combinations of approaches are possible.
Another alternative I can think of would be requiring pre-requisites for multiclassing - sort of a return to the 2nd edition.
If you're referring to the "Prime Requisites" for each class for dualclassing in AD&D (15 in all the stats for the class you're switching from, and 17 in all the stats for the class you're dualclassing into), I'm not sure I like it... it would require a lot of work of to do that for all the PrCs in 3E, for example.
I rather like the idea of spending a Feat to multiclass... although I'm not sure if it will "invalidate" (in a sense) multiclassing even further. We're still stuck with the problem of Fighter 10/Wizard 10 being less "effective" than, say, Fighter 5/Wizard 5/Eldritch Knight 10.
An idea: Maybe you only need to spend a Feat if you're multiclassing into a Prestige Class? IMO It would surely make certain "broken" builds less effective, if you need to spend a Feat for each PrC you want to take...
|
|
We could make multiclassing cost something. Perhaps every multiclass could cost a feat.
Another possibility is a hard limit on the number of classes one can multiclass to. Perhaps a static limit (say 3, 4 or 5) or a limit that rises with level. Perhaps levels 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 (chosen, because in general Pathfinder level progression they don't grant anything) could grant the possibility of multiclassing to another class. This would make some of the most egregious hyper-multiclassed combinations impossible. Truth be told, though, I don't really like hard and fast limits and prefer incentives/disincentives instead. Maybe these levels would be able to forfeit the cost of multiclassing for one extra class - hmm, various combinations of approaches are possible.
Another alternative I can think of would be requiring pre-requisites for multiclassing - sort of a return to the 2nd edition.
I'm not against favored classes and making characters tend towards a certain element and guide the multi-classing combos.
But I am not keen on putting finite limitations on what can or cannot be multi-classed.
To me - thats not compatible with 3rd edition, and is in fact more in line with the 4E approach - one that I am not fond of.
Robert
We could make multiclassing cost something. Perhaps every multiclass could cost a feat.
I don't think anything needs to be 'charged' for multi-classing, nor do I think they need to be penalized.... however, there should be some SOLID benefits for being single classed, and if you think you not recieving those benefits because you're multi-classed is a penalty.. tough.
As to the Racial preferred classes, I like them to a degree, however I can see entirely the view of "I'm playing a single classed Wizard, who happens to be a dwarf... sorry, I don't get the bonus' of an elf"... while this makes complete sense, sorry, Dwarves have never been known for magical aptitude... this is in some ways a throwback to 1ed.. Okay, you're an elf, you live a thousand years... sorry, you only get to go to a lvl 11 wizard.. Wait, you're Int score is what?... Okay, that's different.. 12.
That was something I generally didn't like in 1ed, of course, it was supposedly balanced out by being Multiclassed back in that incarnation, since humans couldn't do that... and dual classing was... *shudder*
Anyways, You may want to let anyone, regardless of race, pick their favored class at level 1... but give a small bonus of some such, to races that pick their sterotypical lot in life. *shrugs* Could be something from Social negatives amongst their kind, and others, which requires DM decisions on case by case, or something more concrete in a simple modifier to various skill checks.
Weave
If others don't like the favored class system, house-rule it out. But I ask that the rule be left in for the rest of us. For those that say leave it out and if we want it just house-rule it in, my exprerience shows that it is easier to house-rule out than house-rule in.
So we shouldn't try to find someway that makes a larger group of people happy? I don't think that we should be saying that other people should just deal with things they don't like this early in the playtest.
Hey there all,
Interesting discussion, and one that is happening in numerous threads. Right now, I am seriously considering changing the favored class bonus to work more like humans, for all races. That said, the other option is to eliminate it entirely. What I want out of this mechanic is simple. I would like a mechanic that encourages characters to stick, primarily, with one class. Multiclassing, as it stands in 3.5, gives a number of numerical options with little or no cost (if you pick the right classes) and this rule is intended to offset that. That said, there was initially some intent to make the rule one that reinforces racial stereotypes, but I am beginning to think that the new race design does that well enough on its own.
I should note that I like the idea of racial feats and racial progressions, but I am afraid that the final book will probably not have enough space to gives these systems the treatment that they require.
I am, as always, open to debate.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Hey Jason, vie gehts? I'm glad that my thread is contributing to the discussion.
Personally speaking, I think that giving the classes effective higher-level abilities has largely obliviated much of the concerns associated with Multiclassing. Now, if a character takes a level in another class, they will lose out on the 20th-level abilities of their initial class. This encourages them to make a more balanced choice between sticking with their first class and taking a second either out of powergaming desires or fulfilling some character concept. This is the most effective and most viable means of obtaining your design goal without eclipsing the goal of encouraging player choice.
If you feel that you must encourage racial class stereotypes beyond this, then I recommend giving the races powers and abilities that encourage choices in their stereotyped classes. Personally, I'm a fan of the a'la cart method proposed, where the races get a set of culturally-based abilities that they can choose from when building their initial characters.
My biggest concern as the beta stands right now is with power creep. There are already a lot of small bonuses that are being added to both races and classes. Individually, they are not much, but added together, they create a much bigger impact. The Skill Point/HP bonus is yet another bonus, and it's one that we don't need.
As far as racial feats and progressions are concerned, I can see where you're coming from, since the Pathfinder book is already the DMG and the PH in one. I hope you can find room in future supplements though!
-Steve
So we shouldn't try to find someway that makes a larger group of people happy? I don't think that we should be saying that other people should just deal with things they don't like this early in the playtest.I agree. I believe the majority is happy with favored classes in some shape or form. I happen like the beta version. Others like different versions. Not everyone will be happy with the final form of favored classes. Removing favored classes completely will be the surest way of upsetting the vast numbers of us who like them and disconnecting the races from their stereotypical / iconic class combos of the past, which I happen to like.
Scott
There's a big difference between short-run happy and game-design happy. I'm sure it's great having another bonus that you can add to your characters, but from my perspective, as someone who's DMed for a long time, I'm worried about the game balance issues that these modifiers will cause. I also think that there are other ways to encourage iconic class choices, like racial ability design and revising the classes to encourage players to take all 20 levels.
-Steve