I'm working up background for another part of my world. It's heavily settled with highly established armies and countries. My idea is that each region (Country) has a specialty for it's armed forces. Obviously that's not the only type of combatant in the army, but, say 50% are of that type. So, for example :
Montalvan Pikemen
Montalvan Legions are famous for their Pikemen. The Pikemen of Montalva are legendary on the battlefield, and the death of any calvary unit sent against them.
To be a Montalvan Pikeman, a character gives up the first 3 feats (or first three fighter feats if they are a fighter) and gains the following three feats in order when they would have gained a feat otherwise (although they must meet the prerequisites, for feats requiring Fighter Level, they count their class level -2 instead) :
Weapon Focus (Longspear/Pike)
Short Haft
Weapon Specialization (Longspear/Pike)
After gaining all three feats, the Montalvan Pikeman gains a +1 Competence bonus to hit with Pikes, as well as a +1 Competence bonus to damage with pikes. Additionally, while adjacent to another Pike armed Pikeman, the Pikeman gains a +1 Circumstance bonus to AC thanks to the training provided in teamwork.
Halvanian Archers
Halvanian forces field more archers than any other country, most protected by shortspear wielding towershieldsmen. The Halvanian archers are known for their accuracy and deadly flurry assaults.
To be a Halvanian Archer, a character gives up the first 3 feats (or first three fighter feats if they are a fighter) and gains the following three feats in order when they would have gained a feat otherwise (although they must meet the prerequisites, for feats requirign Fighter Level, they count their class level -2 instead) :
Point Blank Shot
Weapon Focus (Bow)
Weapon Specialization (Bow)
After gaining all three feats, the Halvanian Archer gains the two following benefits. The Archer may make a full round attack and gain any one of the following benefits.
1) Fire one round (or two if they have the Manyshot feat) and gain a +5 Competence bonus on their attack roll (this is the slow steady aim taught to the Halvanian Archers).
2) Fire one round (or two if they have the Manyshot feat) and increase the range increment of their weapon by 25%.
3) Fire an extra number of rounds equal to their dex bonus at a -10 penalty to all attack rolls in the round (the dreaded anti-army Flurry Shot).
These are just off the cuff examples of what I'm toying with. Does it seem balanced to allow this? I'm trying not to limit the characters to Fighter only, even though some of the feats are Fighter only, allowing them to take them as part of military training even if they are a ranger or rogue, just penalizing them on the effective level.
For the Halvanian Archer, let's say a Ranger wanted to be an Archer. He would give up his first 3 feats (1st, 3rd, and 5th). At first level he'd qualify for PBS, so he'd get that at 1st. At 3rd, he'd qualify for Weapon Focus (Bow). However, at 5th, he would not qualify for WS (Bow) (Fighter 4th, he's only effective fighter 3rd). So instead he'd gain WS (Bow) at 6th level, as well as the benefits of the Halvanian Archer training.
Balanced I'm not so sure about, but I'd say it's great for world flavor. You could figure other classes into specific armies / military unit types as well. Rangers or rogues for a commando type for example. Alternatively you could have feats for some style specialties as another option, i.e. "Formation Fighting" giving AC bonuses for other adjacent characters and allowing characters to move in lockstep. "Volley Fire" (? "Rain of Arrows" sounds nice) for multiple archers eliminating or reducing Dex bonuses or AC when firing at an individual target / formation. "Coordinated Attack" allowing attackers to time their attacks to recieve increasing bonuses to hit one after another. Tie the special stuff up into new Military Feats. That type of thing.
*edit* Have some regular feats as prerequisites for the new Military Feats.
Balanced I'm not so sure about, but I'd say it's great for world flavor. You could figure other classes into specific armies / military unit types as well. Rangers or rogues for a commando type for example. Alternatively you could have feats for some style specialties as another option, i.e. "Formation Fighting" giving AC bonuses for other adjacent characters and allowing characters to move in lockstep. "Volley Fire" (? "Rain of Arrows" sounds nice) for multiple archers eliminating or reducing Dex bonuses or AC when firing at an individual target / formation. "Coordinated Attack" allowing attackers to time their attacks to recieve increasing bonuses to hit one after another. Tie the special stuff up into new Military Feats. That type of thing.
*edit* Have some regular feats as prerequisites for the new Military Feats.
Yep, that's pretty much along the lines I was thinking. :)
I like it too. :] Historically various countries were famous for their military specialty.
I dont see the need for this sort of set-up myself. While I love regional fighting styles that comes down to feat and trait selection to me. No need to rework any of it in my opinion.
I would still lay out the feat trees for various regional fighting styles, but I wouldn't go beyond that and leave it up to the player's selcetion.
-Weylin
I think there are some things that are best considered via new feats, not just feat paths. A lot of this is not oriented to the independent PC types though. From the DMs perspective, I see it as very useful for NPCs. The fighting a soldier does is different from what adventurers do. You might encounter one Archer from X and it wouldn't matter, but mercenary companies? Wars as adventures? Then it becomes highly useful. And the methods of group warfare become important. PCs are going to pick what they want, although some might jump at a good background complete with backstory and feats that they could build off of.
I think there are some things that are best considered via new feats, not just feat paths. A lot of this is not oriented to the independent PC types though. From the DMs perspective, I see it as very useful for NPCs. The fighting a soldier does is different from what adventurers do. You might encounter one Archer from X and it wouldn't matter, but mercenary companies? Wars as adventures? Then it becomes highly useful. And the methods of group warfare become important. PCs are going to pick what they want, although some might jump at a good background complete with backstory and feats that they could build off of.
That's pretty much it. I'm looking for a lot of world flavor, and also wanting to keep the option for border skirmishes and mercenary encounters. And if two PC's are from the same country and have the same military background (say a Ranger and a Fighter in the Pikemen) then they can get the bonus's with each other. But, that's really secondary to me being able to have a well fleshed out world and having options as the GM.
|
If you're looking at human nations, then perhaps treat regional humans as different racial subtypes.
If that's too specific, just say a race loses any weapon proficiencies, bonus feats, and physical or singular ability score bonus.
Instead they gain Weapon Focus and the benefits you describe, although you may want to look at making them more than just additional hit/damage increases.
Problem I see is that in most settings the average soldier is a Warrior not a Fighter.As an NPC Class, Warriors only get feats based on character level not on class levels. So to get three feats they would have to be 5th level (4th for humans). And your average soldier is usually only listed as a 1st to 3rd level Warrior, with NCO being around 4th to 6th and officer usually 7th to 9th (or half that as a Fighter if the NCO/Officer is actually a PC Class).
Taking an example from Sean Reynolds article "A Theory About Peasants (and other non-adventurer NPCs)" on levels and NPC classes. This would means a Warrior, who spends a lot of time in garrison and not actually doing much to earn XP, would be around 35 before he qualified for those three feats.
-Weylin
Yep,
That may be the issue. See, in my settings, in general, warrior is a generic class I use for people with martial training who aren't Military. So, the average town guard is a Warrior, the average bare knuckle brawler, the average bar room bouncer.Military people, on the other hand, are generally more thoroughly trained, so I use a mix of NPC Classes and Fighter/Ranger/Scout/Knight. Usually the first level is Warrior (to represent pre-army knowledge) and then the rest are PC class levels. So the average Military fighter is a 1st level fighter or a 2nd level warrior/fighter. By the time they hit 3rd level, I usually have them convert a Warrior level into Fighter (or ranger, or whatever).
I've never believed a formal military would have Warriors, they'd all be PC classes. Warrior to me is, as I said, for me in my games the city guard, the town militia, irregulars, bouncers, etc.
By the same token, a Wizard's guild doesn't have tons of Adepts in it, it has Wizards. Maybe sorcerers, but not adepts. They might have adepts as assistants or minor workers, but the guild members are wizards or sorcerers, IE: People formally trained.
If you're looking at human nations, then perhaps treat regional humans as different racial subtypes.
If that's too specific, just say a race loses any weapon proficiencies, bonus feats, and physical or singular ability score bonus.
Instead they gain Weapon Focus and the benefits you describe, although you may want to look at making them more than just additional hit/damage increases.
That's another possibility, although I don't really want to do this for everyone from the country, just those who have been formally inducted and trained in the country's military.
Problem I see is that in most settings the average soldier is a Warrior not a Fighter.
As an NPC Class, Warriors only get feats based on character level not on class levels. So to get three feats they would have to be 5th level (4th for humans). And your average soldier is usually only listed as a 1st to 3rd level Warrior, with NCO being around 4th to 6th and officer usually 7th to 9th (or half that as a Fighter if the NCO/Officer is actually a PC Class).
Taking an example from Sean Reynolds article "A Theory About Peasants (and other non-adventurer NPCs)" on levels and NPC classes. This would means a Warrior, who spends a lot of time in garrison and not actually doing much to earn XP, would be around 35 before he qualified for those three feats.
-Weylin
Personally I'd say they would level up a bit faster than SKR, but not much. Green units won't have the skills. Veterin units will. There's a big difference between a green militia unit and the Old Guard. In short, they don't have to start with these neat tricks, they develop them over time just like PCs do. It's just different tricks and, of course, picked up at a slower pace. Let's face it, the typical band of PC adventurers pursue adventure and levelling up with an obsessive zeal. Most people, even NPC adventurers, take time off to smell the roses and live a little. It shocked my current group of PCs when several NPCs they ran with opted to retire / go home after a particulary tough (and gruesome) adventure. Until they though about it. It made sense then. And then my Pcs began to get more involved with the world around them...
Yep,
That may be the issue. See, in my settings, in general, warrior is a generic class I use for people with martial training who aren't Military. So, the average town guard is a Warrior, the average bare knuckle brawler, the average bar room bouncer.Military people, on the other hand, are generally more thoroughly trained, so I use a mix of NPC Classes and Fighter/Ranger/Scout/Knight. Usually the first level is Warrior (to represent pre-army knowledge) and then the rest are PC class levels. So the average Military fighter is a 1st level fighter or a 2nd level warrior/fighter. By the time they hit 3rd level, I usually have them convert a Warrior level into Fighter (or ranger, or whatever).
I've never believed a formal military would have Warriors, they'd all be PC classes. Warrior to me is, as I said, for me in my games the city guard, the town militia, irregulars, bouncers, etc.
By the same token, a Wizard's guild doesn't have tons of Adepts in it, it has Wizards. Maybe sorcerers, but not adepts. They might have adepts as assistants or minor workers, but the guild members are wizards or sorcerers, IE: People formally trained.
The dichotomy of Warrior / Fighter for me has always devolved around their background. A Warrior is some 16-18 year old farm kid who joins the military (or militia or watch or city gurad) with no previous background beyond thinking the uniform is cool. It's a job with them. The Fighter comes from a socio-economic group that involves training through childhood to produce a superior fighter (like the medeival knight or samurai). Personally I would have named the Warrior class "Soldier" and the Fighter class "Warrior". I can see your point about soldiers / Warriors moving to the Fighter class eventually, at least some of them anyway. The ones who seem to "have been born for war", that type of thing.
The dichotomy of Warrior / Fighter for me has always devolved around their background. A Warrior is some 16-18 year old farm kid who joins the military (or militia or watch or city gurad) with no previous background beyond thinking the uniform is cool. It's a job with them. The Fighter comes from a socio-economic group that involves training through childhood to produce a superior fighter (like the medeival knight or samurai). Personally I would have named the Warrior class "Soldier" and the Fighter class "Warrior". I can see your point about soldiers / Warriors moving to the Fighter class eventually, at least some of them anyway. The ones who seem to "have been born for war", that type of thing.
Yeah, I'll agree with that. I often use Warrior for people who were in the military but dropped out. From your example, the 16yo farm kid who joined the army to get away from the farm, but couldn't hack it, so he stayed in the minimum 2 years he signed up for (gained a level of warrior) and then got a job in the Big City as a city guard or bodyguard or bouncer. Anyone who makes a career of the Army should be converting those over to Fighter levels, learning new tricks, etc. I like converting it because then you end up with NPC's still advancing (say, followers who start out as warriors, but they can't level (which always feels dumb), but they can convert to Fighter or Ranger or Rogue or etc). That gives them some advancement to show they've been learning from the PC's.
Yeah, I'll agree with that. I often use Warrior for people who were in the military but dropped out. From your example, the 16yo farm kid who joined the army to get away from the farm, but couldn't hack it, so he stayed in the minimum 2 years he signed up for (gained a level of warrior) and then got a job in the Big City as a city guard or bodyguard or bouncer. Anyone who makes a career of the Army should be converting those over to Fighter levels, learning new tricks, etc. I like converting it because then you end up with NPC's still advancing (say, followers who start out as warriors, but they can't level (which always feels dumb), but they can convert to Fighter or Ranger or Rogue or etc). That gives them some advancement to show they've been learning from the PC's.
*whew* Another batch of grading done. Time for a reward. Motivation is important when you're grading piles of papers :)
Slight thread jack. I'm planning on implementing your idea in my game (which is getting a bit of a Pathfinder reboot). Thanks mdt. I considered something similar with 2E kits, but moved on to 3.0 / 3.5 at about that time. The inspiration was timely.
Anyway, the regional military specialties brings up something else: prestige classes. Some roles are better filled imo by an "add on" class rather than just a feat or three. I use an officer ("Captain" - 10 level) and artillerist ("Siege Engineer" - 5 level) prestige classes to fill mid to upper level officer slots and specialist siege / artillery types. The Captain has no fancy powers, just skills and feats related to command and administration. Included reduced access to base class abilities (casting level, if any, advancing at every other level; Fighters getting their bonus feats, but HD / BAB going to 8 sided and 3/4). Increased skill points with new feats (i.e. Rally and Seize the Moment) / class skills available. I see prestige classes as marking new directions in a profession or some organizational membership (moving from Cleric to Captain is the result of an induction into the Commanderie of the Grand Legion, a special Church organization).
For example my High Church of Law has it's own army -- the Grand Legion. The rank and file are Church soldiers (Warriors mostly, a few Fighters) with Clerics for junior officers (it is a Church organization after all). Senior officers are Cleric / Captains or Cleric / Seige Engineers. The Guard Halbadiers of Torgrave are soldiers (again Warriors mostly) with Fighter junior officers (for the most part) and Fighter / Captains in charge of the major units.
Any other ideas, or existing prestige classes that fit the bill for the above slots? If I'm going to make changes, now is the time.
*whew* Another batch of grading done. Time for a reward. Motivation is important when you're grading piles of papers :)
Slight thread jack. I'm planning on implementing your idea in my game (which is getting a bit of a Pathfinder reboot). Thanks mdt. I considered something similar with 2E kits, but moved on to 3.0 / 3.5 at about that time. The inspiration was timely.
You're welcome, and thanks. :) Glad it was helpful.
Anyway, the regional military specialties brings up something else: prestige classes. Some roles are better filled imo by an "add on" class rather than just a feat or three. I use an officer ("Captain" - 10 level) and artillerist ("Siege Engineer" - 5 level) prestige classes to fill mid to upper level officer slots and specialist siege / artillery types. The Captain has no fancy powers, just skills and feats related to command and administration. Included reduced access to base class abilities (casting level, if any, advancing at every other level; Fighters getting their bonus feats, but HD / BAB going to 8 sided and 3/4). Increased skill points with new feats (i.e. Rally and Seize the Moment) / class skills available. I see prestige classes as marking new directions in a profession or some organizational membership (moving from Cleric to Captain is the result of an induction into the Commanderie of the Grand Legion, a special Church organization).
I like this, I think I'll steal it.
Any other ideas, or existing prestige classes that fit the bill for the above slots? If I'm going to make changes, now is the time.
Well, honestly, although I didn't like the book, Heroes of Battle had some very nice prestige classes. Battle Healer is an excellent prestige class for a combat medic. Legendary Leader is also a nice one for a captain class. Not too overpowered, either one.
I'll work up some more feat/bonus combo's for different types of army specialties and post them as I work them up.
I really like this idea, not sure about balance but I'll let you balance it for your campaign world which makes more sense anyhow.
How does the mechanic work? Is it a trait or a feat? If the character is not a fighter does this ability qualify them for weapon specialization separate from the fighter class and possibly before 4th level? Seems like it does from my quick reading but maybe it should be explicit.
I really like this idea, not sure about balance but I'll let you balance it for your campaign world which makes more sense anyhow.
How does the mechanic work? Is it a trait or a feat? If the character is not a fighter does this ability qualify them for weapon specialization separate from the fighter class and possibly before 4th level? Seems like it does from my quick reading but maybe it should be explicit.
Still working on it, I'm trying to think about how to do it. I'm thinking it might be best to apply it as a template? So if I do it as a template, it would be a Trait.
It doesn't get rid of level requirements, it does allow substituting non-fighter levels for fighter levels with a penalty.
Montalvan Pikemen
Montalvan Legions are famous for their Pikemen. The Pikemen of Montalva are legendary on the battlefield, and the death of any calvary unit sent against them.To be a Montalvan Pikeman, a character gives up the first 3 feats (or first three fighter feats if they are a fighter) and gains the following three feats in order when they would have gained a feat otherwise (although they must meet the prerequisites, for feats requiring Fighter Level, they count their class level -2 instead) :
Weapon Focus (Longspear/Pike)
Short Haft
Weapon Specialization (Longspear/Pike)After gaining all three feats, the Montalvan Pikeman gains a +1 Competence bonus to hit with Pikes, as well as a +1 Competence bonus to damage with pikes. Additionally, while adjacent to another Pike armed Pikeman, the Pikeman gains a +1 Circumstance bonus to AC thanks to the training provided in teamwork.
So, let's take two people, one a Rogue, one a Fighter at first level. Both give up their 1st level feat (the fighter his fighter feat, the rogue his regular feat) and take the Template.
Weapon Focus (Longspear/Pike) has a prerequisite of Proficiency with the weapon, and a +1 BAB. Assuming the rogue is human, he can take the Proficiency (Longspear) at first level. If not, he would have to take the template at second level and lose his 3rd, 5th, and 7th feats. Alternately, the GM could be nice and allow him to take the template at 1st and use his Rogue Talent to pick up the weapon proficiency. Or again, if the GM is being nice, let him take the template at 1st and lose his first rogue talent and his 3rd and 5th feats (using the rogue talent at 2nd level for Weapon Focus(Longspear/Pike). We'll assume the rogue is human though, to make things simple. So he gives up his 1st, 3rd, and 5th feats. The fighter gives up his 1st, 2nd, and 4th Fighter feats.
Level 1 : Fighter qualifies for Weapon Focus (Longspear), gains feat. Rogue takes Martial Weapon (Longspear)
Level 2 : Rogue qualifies for Weapon Focus (Longspear), gains feat.
Level 3 : Fighter qualifies for Short Haft (BAB +3, Weapon Focus), gains feat.
Level 4 : Fighter qualifies for Weapon Specialization (Longspear), gains feat. Fighter has obtained all 3 feats, gains Training Benefit from Template. Rogue qualifies for Short Haft, gains feat.
Level 6 : Rogue qualifies for Weapon Specialization (Longspear) (Weapon Focus, fighter effective level 4). Gains Training Benefit from Template.
So, a character would never get a feat earlier than they could without the template, and no other class should be able to reach a template faster than the fighter (unless it's specifically designed for their class, such as archer styles might be tailored for Rangers).
The rogue would not qualify for any other fighter specific feats, however, the GM might modify the template to allow further weapon focus and weapon specialization tree feat to be taken by the Rogue (again, with a -2 penalty on his level for qualifying).
I actually like that idea (making it a template and letting the template allow the person to continue in the feat tree with a level penalty) because it's an easy way to build new flavored classes. A rogue that took Pikeman Template at 1st level would be focusing himself on being a mobile pikeman, getting into position quickly, possibly sneaking behind enemy lines and setting a pike line in the path of enemy cavalry, popping up from hidden brush to set a pike line in the teeth of cavalry at full gallop where they least expect an attack. It gives a new way of customizing classes without building new base classes.