Ratpick wrote: For an example: even without the favored class rules a Dwarf Wizard is suboptimal, as it is worse than the best possible Wizard (an Elf). With the favored class rules added in my character is now suboptimal on two levels: not only is he not getting the cool racial benefits the Elf has that synergize well with Wizards, the Elf Wizard is also getting a free pat on the back from the universe for conforming to ethnic stereotypes. "A Dwarf Wizard is suboptimal, as it is worse than the best possible Wizard (an Elf)." I have to ask, should a dwarf wizard be as good at being a wizard as an elf?
As good at using magic, I see no reason why not. They aren't as good at the same type of magic as an elf, but they make much better clerics.
I see nothing wrong here, and I see nothing wrong with encouraging archetypes. In fact, I think Pathfinder hit on a simple, workable solution to do so. They give the equivalent of less than a single feat (Toughness gives 3hp + 1hp/HD) as long as you stick to a favored class; I've allowed a comparable feat IMC for skill points. Hardly an overpowering benefit, but a nice little bump for sticking to racial archetype.
If you don't want to encourage archetypes, don't apply favored class rules.
Personally, I like to encourage archetypes, and would be slightly more generous. Allow both favored classes to get the bonuses -- dwarven fighter/cleric? certainly. Half-orc barbarian/druid? Yes please. Humans and half-elves would get to pick two classes and go with it.
Keith
Meh...it doesn't matter....most of the group I play with wants to be Drow Priestesses wearing very slim 2 piece chainmail bikinis and they use whips!
I wonder what that says about my gaming group??
But on topic
I like the "bribing aspect" of the +1 HP or +1 SP. It gives a very good reason for the player to play an archtype.
Sutekh the Destroyer wrote: PFRPG gives at least two options for favored class (humans and half-elves have even more). That means you are not shoe-horned into just one little box.
You are, on the other hand, strongly encouraged to stay in a core class and play that through your career by the mechanic.
As a DM, I like that.
Indeed.
One of the things that irked me in later 3.x is the propensity for PC builds to consist of just a small number of levels needed to get into the PrC he wants to dip on the way to the Real Power he anticipates through another PrC. (Note that this isn't any particular he, though there was one player I saw this most often with, but a number of them.)
Between this, and better abilities available at higher level, there's actually a reason now to stick with a core class, and one that 'best suits' your race. I like both of these points.
Keith
-Archangel- wrote: I would like to see the removal of favored class mechanic as well, but if that is not possible this mechanic is much better then the 3.5e one.
And if a nerf is needed just leave the +1 skill point per lvl option while removing +1 hp per level.
Frankly, a lot of the time I'd much rather have the extra skill point. Hit points are easy to come by (Toughness, a single feat, is better than this) and easily replenished when used. Skill points are much harder to get more of, and potentially much more useful in the long run.
Keith
Turin the Mad wrote: I do not think the favored class mechanism is in itself flawed. However, I cannot presently come up with an alternative method to encourage certain archetypes.
Although it could be argued that playing "whatever you want" can always happen - it's just a matter of what mechanical effects are to be dealt with.
At one point I was working on a framework that would give a 'feat' at each level. First was a 'racial feat' (available to your race, which might not be possible to take otherwise), second was as 'class feat' (available to your class, which might not be possible to take otherwise), third was a 'general feat' (anything you qualify for). Repeat every three levels.
Elves might have Speed feats, Mobility feats, Evasion feats, Ranged feats, and Metamagic feats as racial feats. Improved Initiative, Evasion (prereq base Reflex +3), the mobility tree, and so on are all available as racial feats. They make good harriers (Scout class), pretty good rogues, rangers, and a certain flavor of wizard or sorcerer. They don't tank so well.
Dwarves might have Armor Proficiency feats (including armored casting), Endurance feats, Fortitude-based feats, and Item Creation feats. They tank up really well, they make good battlemages, they are widely capable item crafters.
Half-orcs might have Armor Proficiency feats, Toughness feats, Fortitude-based feats, Rage feats, and a few others. Yes, the half-orc sorcerer does in fact tank pretty well, and making him lose his temper is a bad thing.
You aren't forced to take any particular class. You are welcome to take others. But you'll find that your abilities lend themselves to a certain range of builds, that you'll best fit certain archetypes.
Not nearly as simple as favored classes. Possibly more effective than Pathfinder's approach to favored classes, but nowhere near as simple.
Keith
Turin the Mad wrote: I do like that the current favored class mechanism strongly discourages multiclassing to ramp up saving throw bonuses, cherry pick class features and other such tripe. Of course, the obvious solution - that is effective - has already been implemented (more or less) in the form of retooling the core classes to be very appealing to play all the way through.
One of my personal house rules is that, no matter what, "base" saving throw bonuses absolutely cap at +12. This was implemented expressly to nip "multiclassing for save bonuses FTW!" thinking.
Long ago I switched to the fractional base attack bonus and base save bonus mechanisms, and you stack levels of like progression before figuring out your bonus. So, no more Ftr1/Clr2 with +5/+0/+3 F/R/W, he's now got +3/+1/+3 -- more balanced, less vulnerable (which was my real impetus for this change, to be honest). It also helps tone down the goofy builds.
Keith
Lord Fyre wrote: Here is the thing about that though. Look at some of the most interresting characters from Fantasy.
Conan, for instance, started as a Barbarian (original culture), but became a Thief (in Zamora), then a Soldier (in the Turanian cavalry), then a Pirate (while with Belit), then a Nobleman (as King of Aquilonia).
So multiclassing, if done for good charater based reasons, is not always a bad thing.
Thing is, in the end he was still a barbarian. He arguably didn't level in rogue (he relied on physical ability rather than cunning or finesse -- I don't remember him ever picking a lock on the canon stories). Good chance he multiclassed ranger, though (track, move silently, spot, listen). Soldier, no reason it was a different class (could've been Fighter, but didn't have to be). He certainly didn't act like a 'nobleman', he thought most of them were worse scum than he encountered in his days in Zamora -- in Zamora at least they had some sense of honor).
So. Barbarian, maybe ranger, maybe fighter. With the right feats chosen (Track, Versatile -- Barbarian doesn't have Spot and Listen as class skills) he doesn't need even that. Give him an extra skill point per level for sticking to his favored class (though he certainly had a lot of hit points) and he'd do quite well.
Job title doesn't necessarily have anything to do with class, after all.
Keith
Mikael Sebag wrote: Unfortunately, I get the feeling that the favored class mechanic persists because of new multiclass freedoms. With the 3.5 penalties for multiclassing gone in PF, the favored class rewards players who progress through a single class. However, the 20th level capstone abilities (perfect self, that weird bardic death song, etc.) already provide very strong incentives to avoid multiclassing. If, and only if, you get to 20th level. Until then, capstone abilities have no practical impact. Unless you have reason to think that you will get there, they lose all whatsoever. Who cares about an ability you will never achieve?
Keith
Kirth Gersen wrote: KaeYoss wrote: We disagree, and you haven't yet convinced us that it is, in fact, terrible. So far in playtesting, I think it's terrible because all half-orcs are either druids or barbarians, almost all elves are either rangers or wizards, and all dwarves are either clerics or fighters. So, it worked as designed then?
Excellent.
Kirth Gersen wrote: I rolled up a dwarf rogue, just to buck the trend... and what do you know, I should have gone with human or halfling instead, to get that extra skill point. Personally, I think the incentive given is unnecessarily strong; I'd prefer to leave it at the existing racial stat mods and abilities. This is not a reasonable preference. Nor is the one implemented by Pathfinder.
Dwarves are not typically noted for being sneaky or agile, or socially-adept (Cha penalty). Good perception (Wis bonus, keen senses, stonecunning), tough (Con bonus, bonus to saves vs. poison, spells, and spell-like abilities), good eye for treasure (Appraise bonus), noted as superior craftsman (no specific bonus presented in PRPG). If you expect him to be a fast-talking ninja-type rogue, you're going to be disappointed. Put his points into Perception, Disable Device, Appraise, and Craft skills, dip fighter (armor and weapon proficiencies -- "tank, flank, and sneak attack with a dwarven war axe" appeals to me).
Yeah, this build has potential. The hit point loss is trivial (go ahead and take Toughness with the Fighter feat), he doesn't need the bonus skill point per level.
Keith
Brian E. Harris wrote: The real question is, does the bonus of the extra skill point or hit point truly unbalance the game in favor of the player with the bonus?
At least with hit points, I can't accept that it does. The hit point discrepancy between Favored-Class Wizard and Non-Favored-Class Wizard isn't going to be next to nothing in the early levels, and quite probably not even the 20 points at level 20. It's really no different than playing a class with a different hit die. If it bothers you so much, pretend that the FC Wiz is a different class than the NFC Wiz.
As a friend said in IM, "if you're a high-level wizard and you're relying on your hit points to keep you alive, you're probably doing it wrong".
Brian E. Harris wrote: I've got to be perfectly honest with you - anything that encourages folks to play the base races/base classes/favored classes is a plus to me. I'm getting sick and tired of the "I want to be different just to be different" mentality that a lot of people have. Agreed.
I'm not looking for homogeneity, but seeing archetypes actually be relatively common is a nice change.
Brian E. Harris wrote: Playing elf wizard, human fighter, halfling rogue - these aren't "uncreative".
Playing a Half-Illithid Yuan-Ti Vampire Soulknife/Blackguard/Dread Necromancer isn't creative.
You're not creative because you play something outside of the base races/classes. You're creative in HOW you play.
Indeed, on all three points.
Keith
Daron Farina wrote: Brian E. Harris wrote: The real question is, does the bonus of the extra skill point or hit point truly unbalance the game in favor of the player with the bonus? It doesn't unbalance the whole game, but it does favor the player over others. Yes, that's what it's for. It works? Good.
Daron Farina wrote: Brian E. Harris wrote: I've got to be perfectly honest with you - anything that encourages folks to play the base races/base classes/favored classes is a plus to me. I'm getting sick and tired of the "I want to be different just to be different" mentality that a lot of people have. Not everyone considers this a problem. If you want to encourage your players to stick with stereotypical race/class combos, then don't allow them to take anything outside of core, except for a case-by-case basis. I had to do this when everyone in my gaming circle decided goliaths were the coolest thing ever. I have to respond, nor does everyone find that encouraging archetypes is a problem.
And I feel compelled to add that there is a big difference between a 'stereotype' and an 'archetype'.
Third, goliaths had some nifty useful benefits that couldn't be easily acquired elsewhere. As I recall they were a munchkin trap, but it was better bait than most.
Daron Farina wrote: I still firmly hold that the favored class rules stifle race/class choice. Let me make an example...
Suppose one is choosing between two universities to attend. University A offers a better degree and education, but man, University B has the most awesome weather ever, and the guy:girl ratio is sick! Now, if the government awarded one an extra $5000 grant just to set foot in University A, it would undoubtedly skew one's choice towards A, even though A is the most optimal choice to begin with.
It might encourage people to go to University A, yes. That's what it's trying to do.
Would it affect me? I'm not sure. I got a lot of bursaries and was in a co-op program; after I started working after my first year of school I didn't need financial aid. I earned my own way through.
And 'better degree' (a dubious distinction at best, I think, but I'm a meritocrat at heart) vs. better weather and more women?
Man, why do you even ask these things? $5,000 against that? Not enough, baby, not enough. A man's got to have his priorities straight.
Keith
Daron Farina wrote: Brian E. Harris wrote: Favor? ... is it actually a factor that contributes to unbalancing the game? I don't see how it's balanced. From a pure mechanical point of view, you're giving someone an arbitrary bonus for making one of few specific choices in character creation. You're right. Let's build a wizard around Str instead of Int. After all, putting a good score into Int is just giving someone an arbitrary bonus for making a single specific choice in character creation.
Daron Farina wrote: Aside from the issue of encouragement, I would still like to stress that the favored class mechanic works against the primary design goal, backwards compatibility. It only adds to the work needed to be done in order to convert NPCs and PCs. How do you figure? Count the favored class levels, give him that many more hit points. Or, if you are interested in putting in the effort, give him more skill points to allocate.
Really, with the relative lack of support for favored classes in 3.x (no reason whatsoever to not be an elven fighter -- the bigger HD helps counter the Con penalty, and he shouldn't be getting close enough to be hit anyway) it doesn't add very much work at all.
Keith
Sueki Suezo wrote: The only real problem is that the 3.0 designers didn't go far enough - they didn't eliminate the alignment restrictions for certain classes and they were loathe to entirely remove the arbitrary rules that served to siphoned players into traditional race/class combos like the Elven Wizard and the Dwarven Fighter. And alas, the Pathfinder RPG Favored Class rules are just as useless and arbitrary as the class/alignment restrictions that were enforced in 3.X, and 1st and 2nd Edition AD&D before that. But they're much more popular this time around because 1) they aren't as invasive as the old rules 2) they help powergamers min/max powerful race/class combos even further and 3) they appeal to the sentiments of grognards that are afraid that these rules are the only thing keeping their games from being overrun by characters that are like something out of a bad video game/anime series. Dude, if you're looking for GURPS it's just over there in Austin, Texas.
Keith
Kirth Gersen wrote: Brian E. Harris wrote: I see a big table of lollys, and a nice gentleman telling me that I can have any lolly I want, but I can only have one. Some lollys are different colors, some are different shapes. Some are longer, where as some are wider. I can have any one of those I want. If I pick the twisty-blue one, and you pick the square red one, you got something I didn't, and I got something you didn't. To continue the analogy, you pick the twisty-blue one, and not the twisty-red one or the square blue one, and the nice man pops up and says "Congratulations! You get a Reece's cup, too, for picking the right combination of colors and shapes! Sueki picked the square red one, so no Reece's cup for him; red lillipops must be round to get the bonus candy!" "And we told you this before you chose!
"And in fact, the square one's a little bit bigger!"
An elven fighter makes a wonderful archer build, or a harrier build, or a duelist, or a few others I could come up with if I were willing to put the time into it. Low-light vision, smarter and more agile and faster than a human? The extra hit points shouldn't make a big difference; as before, if he's depending his hit points to stay alive, with any such builds, he's probably doing it wrong. And Toughness is just over there if he wants it.
This is far from a suboptimal, crippled build. Not receiving a bonus for sticking closer to archetype (and notice that ranger works pretty well for some of these anyway) isn't going to break him.
Keith
Agi Hammerthief wrote: the thing I 'liked' about the 3.5 system was that I could multi-class into a favoured class without penalty,
now I already can get a de facto penalty simply by not taking a favored class.
so count me amongst those who would like to k.i.s.s. this good-by.
.
at max I'd suggest a one time bonus feat when taking the first level of the appointed favoured class.
Is that a dipping noise I hear?
I'd rather see something that encourages you to stick with it, than something that rewards a dip. 3.x had enough of that.
Agi Hammerthief wrote:
or give then a +x bonus on one of the saves they would otherwise suck
i.e.: Half Orc Barbarian
good Fort save
bad Will save - but Orc has a Racial +2 on Wisdom
bad Ref save <- give a +x Favoured Class Bonus here
I'd suggest x=1 whith 1-10 levels in the Fav. Class
and x=2 with 11+ levels in the Fav. Class
Mildly better, I suppose, in that there is encouragement to continue. Unlike the PRPG option (+1 hp/HD), which scales directly with level in the favored class, you still get disproportionate gains -- bigger from 1..4, more or less average at 5 and 6, smaller from 7..10, then repeat the pattern for 11..14, 15 and 16, 17..20.
I still prefer the PRPG option. At one point I considered applying both parts -- you get +1 hit point and +1 skill point per favored class level. I don't think it would be particularly unbalanced, but I like to encourage decision making. Analysis paralysis among my players pleases me.
Keith
kjdavies wrote:
Is that a dipping noise I hear?
yes ;-)
kjdavies wrote:
I'd rather see something that encourages you to stick with it, than something that rewards a dip. 3.x had enough of that.
if you want to hear less dipping, the extra feat could be handed out at 5th level,
that's about when the synergy effect of Racial Traits & Favoured Class drops off in the background noise of Save Progression and Feat/Ability Score Increases.
Hand the feat out at 6th and you'll reward those who don't go PrC at fifth (Favoured Class Level that is, not Character Level).
same goes for the next point:
kjdavies wrote: Mildly better, I suppose, in that there is encouragement to continue. Unlike the PRPG option (+1 hp/HD), which scales directly with level in the favored class, you still get disproportionate gains -- bigger from 1..4, more or less average at 5 and 6, smaller from 7..10, then repeat the pattern for 11..14, 15 and 16, 17..20. the symmetry is there:
the extra Save bonus is equally useful for all Favoured Classes, unlike the extra Skill Point per level for which the Bard, Rogue or INT heavy Wizard don't have to care as much as the (probably INT challenged) Orc Barbarian.
.
Both the feat and the save bonus look more like candy for playing an archetype,
rather than a penalty for playing something more creative than 'off the shelve'.
Agi Hammerthief wrote: kjdavies wrote: I'd rather see something that encourages you to stick with it, than something that rewards a dip. 3.x had enough of that. if you want to hear less dipping, the extra feat could be handed out at 5th level, that's about when the synergy effect of Racial Traits & Favoured Class drops off in the background noise of Save Progression and Feat/Ability Score Increases.
This has some merit. I don't care for how it tastes though, to be honest.
The feat-based solution I mentioned earlier in the thread, while it was going to be a lot of work to set up and balance, would've trivially addressed racial tendancies -- without depending on particular classes. You could fit into various classes, with racial reinforcement (elves would make good wizards, rogues, rangers, mobility-based fighters, archery-based fighters, and so on). The only 'problem' I had was that some races were unusually capable (elves) while others were much less flexible (half-orcs).
Agi Hammerthief wrote: Hand the feat out at 6th and you'll reward those who don't go PrC at fifth (Favoured Class Level that is, not Character Level).
same goes for the next point:
kjdavies wrote: Mildly better, I suppose, in that there is encouragement to continue. Unlike the PRPG option (+1 hp/HD), which scales directly with level in the favored class, you still get disproportionate gains -- bigger from 1..4, more or less average at 5 and 6, smaller from 7..10, then repeat the pattern for 11..14, 15 and 16, 17..20. the symmetry is there:
the extra Save bonus is equally useful for all Favoured Classes, unlike the extra Skill Point per level for which the Bard, Rogue or INT heavy Wizard don't have to care as much as the (probably INT challenged) Orc Barbarian.
OTOH, the Bard, Rogue, and Wizard are more likely to take the hit point, while the Barbarian is likely to take the skill point option.
This is a flexible benefit, and I don't mind that a specific option isn't terribly useful to all characters. I don't think there's anyone who can't use one or the other.
Agi Hammerthief wrote: Both the feat and the save bonus look more like candy for playing an archetype, rather than a penalty for playing something more creative than 'off the shelve'. I still disagree with the 'penalty' thing, but am not inclined to argue it.
I'd like to see a mechanism, a mechanical benefit for pursuing a favored class. It can be as simple as "this races tends to make good $class{}es", or it can be a direct benefit. A bonus feat is very difficult to balance -- you likely get it too early (possibly encouraging dipping), too late (you wait a large part of your career before getting it). A bonus skill point or hit point is a small thing, immediately visible. In the end it's worth about a feat, a minor one at that, and is applied evenly over your career.
This feels about right for what I want it to do. Having it won't break anything, not having it won't break anything, but it is a nice little bump for sticking to racial archetype.
Another approach I've seen, and it's been mentioned here, is racial substitutions. The _Accordlands_ setting from AEG used them heavily (I forget if they're optional or mandatory). I like them in principle -- characters of the same class but different races feel really different because of them -- but it gets really unwieldy to document. Which is a shame, because it really does provide racial color to the various classes, sufficient that it gives archetypal behavior to each.
A Deverian (IIRC spelling) can be a member of pretty much any class (social limitations, mostly), but they'll always be a Deverian.
Keith
"kjdavies wrote: Long ago I switched to the fractional base attack bonus and base save bonus mechanisms, and you stack levels of like progression before figuring out your bonus. So, no more Ftr1/Clr2 with +5/+0/+3 F/R/W, he's now got +3/+1/+3 -- more balanced, less vulnerable (which was my real impetus for this change, to be honest). It also helps tone down the goofy builds.
Keith
Yes, another person who has seen the logic of stacking(adding)levels of classes with the same progression to get the final bonus instead of just adding. Although the use of fractional progression is a toss up.
It makes like class (Barbarian/Fighter?) multi-class better. It would also save on reprinting the progression over and over again. And it would make Prestige Classes cause fewer oddities in BAB and Save progressions.
KaeYoss wrote: Korwin wrote: I'm against Favored Classes...
because, when there are new Base-Classes there is no race who has it as an Favored Class.
Except when there is: "A kenku's favoured classes are ninja and shugenja" could totally happen.. Which races have Crusader, Warblade or Swordsage as Favored Classes?
And if new Classes need new Races because of this Favored Class rule, isnt that against the intention to make the base Races more likeable/useable?
KaeYoss wrote:
Korwin wrote:
And that +1HP or +1Skill is something I wouldn't use, so my vote is to erase that rule.
Yeah. I don't like dwarves. Erase them from the game, too.
If you dont like em, start a new thread ;-)
Reasons against this +1HP +1Skill rule are enough in this thread, didn't want to post it again.
Korwin wrote:
Which races have Crusader, Warblade or Swordsage as Favored Classes?
If I were saying that it will always happen, that would be relevant.
Instead, I only refute the statement that it never happens.
I'll add in the words "HUMANS!" and "HALF-ELVES!" to the mix and rest my case.
I still think that, in many cases, the free skill points/hp are trying to do what ability bonuses and racial abilities are already doing.
Half-orcs (and humans and half-elves, if they choose it) are the only races that get a Str bonus. Half-orcs also get something akin to the Diehard feat. Those are very substantial inducements to make your barbarian a half-orc. You don't need to be bribed beyond that. Also, the Wis bonus means that pretty much all Pathfinder druids are now half-orcs as well. If I took away the free skill points, would-be players of barbarians and druids would STILL be half-orcs. The favored class bonus is pure overkill.
Elves get free Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration, and also get an Intelligence bonus. Aren't those substantial enough inducements to make your wizard an elf?
Some of the options aren't so clear-cut (e.g., elven rangers). I can see the benefit of the free skill point/hp "bribe," in cases like that one, and would support their inclusion for those few cases. But for the three examples given above (and for halfling rogues and bards: +2 Dex, +2 Cha, +4 to Stealth aren't good enough incentive? What more do you want?), etc., no additional bribery is needed or warranted; it's just overkill.
Kirth Gersen wrote: I still think that, in many cases, the free skill points/hp are trying to do what ability bonuses and racial abilities are already doing.
Half-orcs (and humans and half-elves, if they choose it) are the only races that get a Str bonus. Half-orcs also get something akin to the Diehard feat. Those are very substantial inducements to make your barbarian a half-orc. You don't need to be bribed beyond that. Also, the Wis bonus means that pretty much all Pathfinder druids are now half-orcs as well. If I took away the free skill points, would-be players of barbarians and druids would STILL be half-orcs. The favored class bonus is pure overkill.
Elves get free Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration, and also get an Intelligence bonus. Aren't those substantial enough inducements to make your wizard an elf?
Some of the options aren't so clear-cut (e.g., elven rangers). I can see the benefit of the free skill point/hp "bribe," in cases like that one, and would support their inclusion for those few cases. But for the three examples given above (and for halfling rogues and bards: +2 Dex, +2 Cha, +4 to Stealth aren't good enough incentive? What more do you want?), etc., no additional bribery is needed or warranted; it's just overkill.
Ahem. I must respectfully disagree. (Or not).
From what I've seen on this thread, I'd have to say the answer to the Op's Query is a resounding "yes". Apparently, the only way to get anyone to play the "stereotypical [insert class/race combo] is to bribe them, as no one seems to want to play them anymore...
Of course, this is just from observing this thread, and that makes my statement completely based on anecdotal evidence, so, you know, 2cp and all...
In regards to the favored class +1 hp/s.p., I really hope they do not go with this option, it just irks me the same way it irks me that Rogues get d8 Hp.
KaeYoss wrote: Korwin wrote:
Which races have Crusader, Warblade or Swordsage as Favored Classes?
If I were saying that it will always happen, that would be relevant. And if doesnt happen always, my orginal point still stands.
KaeYoss wrote: Instead, I only refute the statement that it never happens.
I'll add in the words "HUMANS!" and "HALF-ELVES!" to the mix and rest my case.
But thats all related, you say Humans and Half-Elves and that means that with new Classes this races get more adaptable (aka powerfull).
And IMHO the core races (at least) should be balanced internaly.
Do you agree?
houstonderek wrote: Apparently, the only way to get anyone to play the "stereotypical [insert class/race combo] is to bribe them, as no one seems to want to play them anymore... Let's look at our playtesting so far, and leave out humans and half-elves (for obvious reasons).
Runelords: half-orc druid (check), elf ranger (check), elf wizard (check), dwarf fighter (check), human rogue (doesn't count). Score: 100% favored classes.
Last Baron: all humans or half-elves; no score (unless Sean's wizard is an elf instead of a half-elf, in which case it's another clean sweep).
Second Darkness: half-orc barbarian (check), half-elf druid (doesn't count), elf fighter/wizard (check, for the wizard half), half-elf sorcerer (doesn't count), dwarf rogue (THE ONLY ONE OUT OF THREE GROUPS OF PCs THAT BREAKS THE FAVORED CLASS STEREOTYPE -- AND IT'S MY CHARACTER, AND I DID IT ON PURPOSE!)
Kirth Gersen wrote: houstonderek wrote: Apparently, the only way to get anyone to play the "stereotypical [insert class/race combo] is to bribe them, as no one seems to want to play them anymore... Let's look at our playtesting so far, and leave out humans and half-elves (for obvious reasons).
Runelords: half-orc druid (check), elf ranger (check), elf wizard (check), dwarf fighter (check), human rogue (doesn't count). Score: 100% favored classes.
Last Baron: all humans or half-elves; no score (unless Sean's wizard is an elf instead of a half-elf, in which case it's another clean sweep).
Second Darkness: half-orc barbarian (check), half-elf druid (doesn't count), elf fighter/wizard (check, for the wizard half), half-elf sorcerer (doesn't count), dwarf rogue (THE ONLY ONE OUT OF THREE GROUPS OF PCs THAT BREAKS THE FAVORED CLASS STEREOTYPE -- AND IT'S MY CHARACTER, AND I DID IT ON PURPOSE!) Yeah, but the reason they're all "favored classes" is because they were bribed! ;)
I mostly play humans in any edition anyway, so I'm a bad example. China just likes elves, she didn't chose for any mechanical reasons. I think Jerry would play a half orc scullery maid, so that shouldn't count either :). Sean? Well, it's Sean...
HoustonDerek wrote:
I think Jerry would play a half orc scullery maid, so that shouldn't count either :).
I respectfully resemble that remark. I cannot give a logical or rational reason I have chosen to play Half-orcs. I suppose it is because I have rarely seen any other players play that race in any game I’ve been in. So I wanted to see if they could be played fairly. Besides I am a “big ugly fat f****er” myself so the stereotype fits.
Dont the ability bonuses and penulties for each race, um already encourage favored class stereotypes. . .
Robert Head wrote: Mairkurion {tm} wrote: Why do people continue to think that not getting a reward or an incentive is a "loss" or a "penalty"? 'Cause it is. There is no mechanical difference between giving one player a bonus or another a penalty. Yes, actually, there is. The difference between 1d6 hit points and 1d6-1 hit points, actually, or the difference between 2+int and 1+int skill points per level.
It's exactly like someone else said: compare two workers. They do the exact same job for the exact same pay, but one of them is just naturally a bit better at it, so he gets an extra $500 check come Christmas time. Is the other guy being penalized? No, he's not. He's just not being rewarded. He still takes home exactly the same pay check every week. He makes less money per year, yes - but he doesn't make less than he should given all other factors.
I'm all out for favored class bonuses though i still think it can be worked upon a bit. I mean i can't see why an elven mage is getting more HP than a human one.
I think HP bonus should be restricted for high BAB classes and skill bonuses should be used by the rest.
Taanyth wrote: I'm all out for favored class bonuses though i still think it can be worked upon a bit. I mean i can't see why an elven mage is getting more HP than a human one. The elven wizard almost certainly wouldn't have more hit points than a human one, all else being equal. Elves have a penalty to Con (one fewer per hit die), humans don't. At best under these rules, the elf would have as many hit points as the human -- assuming the human didn't put his ability score bump on Con (probably didn't) or put his favored class bonus into hit points (good chance he did).
Taanyth wrote: I think HP bonus should be restricted for high BAB classes and skill bonuses should be used by the rest. That does reduce the personal impact of the favored class bonus (you're proposing that characters with good hit points get an additional one per hit die, while those without -- and probably have reasonable skill points already -- get more skill points). This increases the disparity between characters, though. Either you have lots of hit points (and get more if you take a favored class) or you don't, and likewise with the skill points.
I think I've always seen PCs take the one that shores up a weakness, rather than build on their strength, for this point.
Keith
kjdavies wrote: I think I've always seen PCs take the one that shores up a weakness, rather than build on their strength, for this point.Keith I have done this, with one exception. My human rogue in Kirth's RotRL playtest has a decent CON (we rolled 4d6, drop the lowest, and I did fairly well), so I made him a serious skill monkey. The human +1 skill point coupled with the Favored class skill point and the INT bonus allowed me to max out more of the skills I wanted to be quite good in, and have decent scores in several others.
Other than that, yeah, my fighter put points in skills (ditto the cleric I whipped up for a friend (point buy)), and the bard I put together took the hps...
I took the skill point on my wizard, but generally I keep him out of combat (even at the expense of ending combat sooner, it's a character thing... he's a coward).
What is the least played/liked race and class?
Hands down?
Gnome [insert anything?]?
I will never play a 3x monk. I like doing stuff...
I agree with Gnome, but I'm guessing probably Cleric then Bard is the least liked or played class. Anyone know for sure or at least have an edjucated guess?
Bard, maybe, but Cleric? They're in the top three best classes in 3x!
CoDZilla, 'nuff said ;)
Beckett wrote: What is the least played/liked race and class? Hands down? I'm playing a monk in Silverhair's Beta playtest. I will never play one again, unless they're totally overhauled. Not even a human with monk as his favored class, and all the bonuses you can scrape up, makes the monk a viable character, compared to, say, a rogue or even a bard.
I'm not trying to sound like an a**, but just for arguements sake, lets put Favored Class in perspective here. Would it be a good idea to give Gnomish Monks, oh I don't know +8 Str so that more people will play them?
Now who thinks that wouldn't make Halfling Monks a little angry or annoyed?
= Favored Class
Oh god seriously? There is a 5+ page thread on this? Why can't people accept a good thing? Why does giving a good thing to one person mean it's unjust to give it to another? Do we really need affirmative action for classes?
Peter Stewart wrote: Do we really need affirmative action for classes? Isn't that what free skill points or hp amount to?
Dr. Gradgrind wrote: I would like to see favored classes eliminated - otherwise certain race/class combinations are penalized (in effect). Not true. Certain combos can be truly fullfilling.
What is more impressive, a half-orc wizard with a 16(18-2) Int who made it to archmage, or a human witha a 16 Int who did the same?
The dwarven rogue has awesome saves against magic/poison traps and gets a bonus to find 'em in metal or stone!
The 3.5 halfling fighter was a great 'thrower' when it came to range combat and with Wep.Fin. could be great in melee too!
Having a character no one expects can be a good thing!.
Peter Stewart wrote: Oh god seriously? There is a 5+ page thread on this? Why can't people accept a good thing? Why does giving a good thing to one person mean it's unjust to give it to another? Do we really need affirmative action for classes? Because a lot of people do not see it as a good thing. I don't for one, but it's just because it irks me.
One of the big reasons behind multiclassing in 3.x was because a standard SRD class wasn't that strong (unless it was a caster). Pathfinder's solved most of this problem through class fixes.
The races have also been strengthened.
I'm not sure affirmative action for classes is really needed.
I don't believe this is a bribe to play to kind or that it prevents multi classing. What it seems to accomplish in the testing ive done is make one seriously consider the benfits of class dipping. Our group is still going to play to kind or not based on character ideas. But the fighter is less likely to grab a level of Barbarian for rage, or the bard to grab a quick level of theif for backstab.
So how about +1 HP, Save, and/or Skill point at 10th, 15, and 20th Class Level? Not such a spit in the face of someone that doesn't take a specific class, but is a little bit of a boon if you do, later on.
Beckett wrote: So how about +1 HP, Save, and/or Skill point at 10th, 15, and 20th Class Level? Not such a spit in the face of someone that doesn't take a specific class, but is a little bit of a boon if you do, later on. +3 saves is far more of a "spit in the face" (come on, this isn't the Blizzard WoW general forums, can we please cut down on the idiotic wannabe-martyrs?) than +20 hit points. You're just arguing to argue.
Not at all, I'm on the side of not doing anything for favored class at all. I hate the +1 H.p./S.P. per level, but I would not be so put off with a total of +3.
With I minor bump, at the later levels, those who really want it have to work for it by staying with that class. It makes it a lot rarer, so that much more important and special.
Zurai wrote: Beckett wrote: So how about +1 HP, Save, and/or Skill point at 10th, 15, and 20th Class Level? Not such a spit in the face of someone that doesn't take a specific class, but is a little bit of a boon if you do, later on. +3 saves is far more of a "spit in the face" (come on, this isn't the Blizzard WoW general forums, can we please cut down on the idiotic wannabe-martyrs?) than +20 hit points. You're just arguing to argue. And I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, so great job with the comeback and all. . .
wow, in reading the PF beta I totally missed that favored class incentive.
What a stupid idea that is.
Why do we want to encourage people to min/max based on race? Players should pick a race because they want to be an elf or a dwarf or a halfling, not because they need to be a better fighter and they get free hp for picking dwarf.
Favored classes were a horrible idea in 3E to start with. Pathfinder should just drop them entirely, not make them more dominant.
|
