The only way a character builder could work would be by making it the new class system deep-rooted in the future Pathfinder RPG 2.0 Core Rulebook.
If they could pull it off, that would be a change worthy of a new version (along with an equally integrated race builder, etc.). If you want real pie-in-the-sky, try to make a spell builder.
If we already have a system to custom/create: spells, magical items, monsters and now races, why not classes, is the only thing left. And the optimization classes like a custom rogue better than actual rogue is something that depends on the perspective of each person and a decision between GM and players, I think it is very bad argument.
Another thing that I can not understand is why some people do not want there to be changes in the game, like a anime kind character is not suitable for this game, what is the problem with that, what is the reason? If you don't like something don't use, but why insist that even exist?
|
If we already have a system to custom/create: spells, magical items, monsters and now races, why not classes, is the only thing left. And the optimization classes like a custom rogue better than actual rogue is something that depends on the perspective of each person and a decision between GM and players, I think it is very bad argument.
Nope, it's not a question of perspective. It's a question of game design. According to what you are saying, we don't even need to balance the system since the DM and the players just have to be ok with the final result as long as they feel it's good. If you wish to make it this way, you don't even need a class builder to begin with - just modify an existing class to suit your needs by comparing it to other classes with similar abilities. It will be easier, more balanced and way less time-consuming.
Another thing that I can not understand is why some people do not want there to be changes in the game, like a anime kind character is not suitable for this game, what is the problem with that, what is the reason? If you don't like something don't use, but why insist that even exist?
Irrelevant. It's not, and has never been a matter of "we don't want to have changes in the game". People asked and are still asking for a simpler, more instinctive and less game-breaking spellcasting alternative ; people asked for a race builder ; people are still asking for epic rules. All of them have been provided or are in the works.
The point here is that you simply don't play anime characters in Pathfinder, the same way you don't play one in Call of Cthulhu. The rare exceptions are the exceptional, but not cheated individuals coming from fantasy universes like the Berserk manga.
|
....
The point here is that you simply don't play anime characters in Pathfinder,...
You make it sound as though PF is Golarion, but actually PF is just a system and Golarion is just a setting. PF can be used for any setting despite it being optimized for magic and lower tech. AKA you can use PF to play an all anime game if you wanted.
PF is not a setting so quite treating it like one. If I talk about Golarion I will say "Golarion" not "Pathfinder."
|
|
....
The point here is that you simply don't play anime characters in Pathfinder,...
You make it sound as though PF is Golarion, but actually PF is just a system and Golarion is just a setting. PF can be used for any setting despite it being optimized for magic and lower tech. AKA you can use PF to play an all anime game if you wanted.
PF is not a setting so quite treating it like one. If I talk about Golarion I will say "Golarion" not "Pathfinder."
I'm not speaking about Golarion, but Pathfinder RPG itself.
You obviously may choose to play anything you'd like to within the system ; but Pathfinder RPG is a mish-mash of stone age, medieval, renaissance, fantasy, and oriental mythology that hardly -truly- allows someone to play in a setting with classless versatile characters, anime physics or superhero powers. There are systems out there for that, and Pathfinder simply isn't made to be one of them. You're not close to see rules to simulate those either, as potentially splitting the fan base will probably not be a mistake commited twice by the RPG industry.|
|
Not all anime has weird physics and super hero powers, some like Fairy tail (where the previously mentioned character comes from) is just a world with magic, lots more then Golarion but no crazy physics or anything, at least nothing more crazy then PF has already.
PF as a system can be used for any game that that can be based on it's rules, any expansion to that is good not bad. Look at Gurps, it is a single system with expansions for every genre, in fact a peice of advice received from a game dev was to oneself a series of questions that need to be answered, one of them was "Why is not Gurps?"
This case the answer that I like d20 better, so do many others. Nothing says PF can only be used for certain things.
|
|
Anime physics isn't all about "shattering planets or not", it's also about plot armor, ridiculously flashy/deus ex machina powers, incredible versatility and toughness. I maintain that there are several systems on the market because they fill different roles, and are globally better at their own schtick ; otherwise everyone would play the exact same set of rules.
Pathfinder is a wonderful, versatile system, but I do not expect it to provide the same experience within a specific setting than Call of Chtulhu, Shadowrun, d20 Modern, d20 Anime or Mutants and Masterminds would in a horror, cyberpunk, fallout, anime or superheroes story.
If you want a class builder, the best thing you could do would be to feel free to do like many people like myself did when they understood that what they wanted to see in the game would probably never be made official : write rules for it. I'm curious to see how you will handle it, just beginning with giving a price to the sneak attack variants.
I think if I were to make a classless system, I'd take a page from the WH40K book, and have different abilities cost XP. As such, it'd really be a level-less system as well.
That is how the home rule Pathfinder class-less system from the forum member (I think it was Kirth Gersen) I mentioned earlier works. From reading over it, it looks pretty interesting and fun; it's just that none of my group want to try it.
The rules are (or at least were) free to download and in Word document format. I have a copy I can send out if anyone would like to message me privately.
I'm a little afraid to jump in here, but I wanted to post this link that I saw from a different thread.
I haven't done anything more than take a quick read-through of it, and I am aware that it is not based on the Pathfinder system, but it's close enough for adaptation as guidelines. If you couple this resource with the post that Anthony made earlier in the thread, it's entirely possible to begin piecing together some guidelines.
Pathfinder has already given us some (albeit shaky) guidelines for designing base classes.
-We know that BAB and Hit Dice are tied together. (This is one of those guidelines I really, really, really don't agree with).
-We know that One or Two good saves are standard. Three good saves should be considered a class feature.
-We know based on past precedence that if you have a full BAB you should really only have up to 4th level spells. 3/4 BAB you should have up to 6th level spells if you have class features at every level OR up to 9th level spells if you do not receive a class feature at every level. 1/2 BAB is almost a guarantee that you will get up to 9th level spell casting.
Personally, as much as I'd love a class building guide, I understand that not only would it be an astronomically large undertaking, but it also opens up the possibility for every player (and I'm saying that as a player) to show up to a game session with a custom class that is fine as-per the "rules". If you cannot fathom how much chaos this would cause (and I'm not saying that anyone involved in this thread cannot grasp this), then...yea...
What would be interesting is a resource that contained guidelines for class construction (such as the quote above), or base value equivalencies for certain abilities. Let's say I want to modify an archetype by removing one ability and adding another. If I had a rough idea of how much each ability "cost", I would have an idea pre-playtesting as to whether or not it was still balanced. I'm not even talking about major class abilities here, I'm saying, "what if I want to swap Heavy Armor Proficiency for a ranged feat?" because I know that I will never wear heavy armor and plan to make a ranged character.
Situations like that could easily be answered by a statement of:
"Consider each class's armor proficiency to count as if they had the appropriate feats as bonus feats."
OR
"Armor proficiency granted by a class is not comparable to the feats that grant the same thing due to XYZ (maybe the level investment into the class)."
I didn't talk about multiclassing. Point to me a specific character concept, and you can be sure that there is an official or 3PP way of doing it single-classed thanks to base classes, archetypes and feats.
A Multiverses-load of Video Games, Cartoon, Comic Books, Anime, Manga, Dessins Animés, Bandes Dessinées, Class-Less PnP/TT RPGs, etc characters.
|
Necro'ing.
We got Advanced Class Guide, but even its class building guideline is, hmm, lacking.
UnChained showed that the Monk Three Good Saves wasn't that sacred.
There are still Archetypes and Alternate classes we would like to see.
This thread is like four years old.
This was before the ACG was out.
|
|
How about this, instead of a class builder, how about we just use this thread (or create a new one and let this die), and post classes or archetypes we create here. No magic generator, just community input and out own creativity.
That would rock on a thousand different levels, but there are some people who really would break that whole idea.
|
|
The free beta for Eric Morton's Custom Class Builder was released between the time this thread was originally posted and the present.
Is it good, precious?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I made this a while back: Point-Buy Class Builder
Not updated for anything past ACG, but it's worked pretty well the times I've used it.
|
|
I made this a while back: Point-Buy Class Builder
Not updated for anything past ACG, but it's worked pretty well the times I've used it.
What about custom abilities?
|
|
What about custom abilities?I made this a while back: Point-Buy Class Builder
Not updated for anything past ACG, but it's worked pretty well the times I've used it.
It's simply made to let you do your own version of hybrid classes, and is intentionally less flexible to keep a higher degree of balance. It's not a guide to creating a custom class, which should look like a textbook for a college class, and probably cost money. It is instead a quick, easy, and mostly balanced way for a player or GM to make a class that fits their concept better than current class option allow.
If you want to "weed out unnecessary abilities" and "make some of your custom abilities" this won't fit the bill. It's much less granular than other similar systems specifically to keep it simple.
I think the worst part of a class builder would be that you couldn't make a class without using mechanics that were already existing.
For example, look at the discussion on the Merchant class. What happens when you want to make new abilities from whole cloth.
This is even if you could come up with some miraculously convoluted algebra to point out abilities and proficiencies based on their interactions with each other, etc.
Even with a workable system, we would still be coming to the forums to figure out how a brand new mechanical idea would fit.. And now we can't just look at it from the one class angle, we would have to design it to fit when you do or don't have things like magic, high defense, movement, ranged or melee, etc, because now it has to fit this class builder too.
Building from existing classes (removing and adding what's needed), or creating completely from scratch but as it's own enclosed set of abilities, then having it reviewed and tested, would be the best approach.
Lastly, I suspect that a point buy system would end up with some of the most generic/flavorless/"lego built" classes, by virtue of the requirement of generalizing the abilities. It would be hard to not to gravitate towards that.
And this is coming from someone that tried doing this kind of system in 2e and 3.0e. I really wanted to give a classless d20 a shot, but it is hard to keep the flavour intact when doing it.
I forget who mentioned it, but fantasy games like D&D and Pathfinder seem to "feel" better as class based, while future/modern feels better as classless.
|
|
Building from existing classes (removing and adding what's needed), or creating completely from scratch but as it's own enclosed set of abilities, then having it reviewed and tested, would be the best approach.
I think you're right. It's simple, easy to do, and best of all, gives you an idea of how to pursue a given idea.
To be fair, I do like to look at classes as being more... open? flexible?.. in design.
Like.. for example, I'd like the idea of a Rogue class that can be built around being anything from an assassin or knife fighter, to an artisan or confidence artist, to a spy or thief.
(Although, you know... still be competitive and competent even at higher levels.)
You still have a cohesive chassis with a mechanical impact that pushes the flavour of a Rogue (say, an indirect fighter that uses skills to interact and influence encounters), but it is flexible enough to be tweaked into a range of concepts.
I think Rogue Genius Games' Talented series does some of what's been mentioned in this thread.
I've honestly been working on something that runs similar to the priority system in Shadowrun.
Pathfinder's strength is having massive amounts of pregenerated material which has been play tested and is supposedly balanced. If you want to be able to point buy mash abilities together to create "Just what you want and nothing you don't", then you should be playing HERO system, not pathfinder. HERO is a game with seven(ish) editions of practice being the ultimate gamers toolkit; there is nothing it cannot make.
What is this priority system you speak of, in a nutshell?
What is this priority system you speak of, in a nutshell?
The priority system allows you to determine which areas your character focuses on and which areas they lack in. It does this by defining several categories and allowing you to define which is your best, second best, third best, and so on.
Shadowrun 5th Edition has the categories Race, Attributes, Skills, Magic, and Money. When creating a character, you get priorities A, B, C, D, and E to assign to each category. For example, if you put your "A" in Magic, you get access to the best magic options in the game. However, if you assign "E" to Magic, you pretty much can't cast spells at all.
As a result, you can create an organic character whose strengths always come at the expense in some other area. In addition, the game has other constructs in place to keep the powerful build directions be mutually exclusive.
I made a classless system a while back, and still use it occasionally.
It is an ENORMOUS pain in the ass though. Building a character takes a bit longer than usual, and I've found options paralysis is a huge issue.
Balance is spotty. I'd say you have to balance your game about as well as a Gestalt game just because some things are abusable, and balancing certain things is hard (big offender: Divine Grace basically obsoletes buying All Good Saves).
I'd imagine the same problems abound in most attempts, just because converting a classed game into a classless one either requires a complete overhaul of the game, or an admission that balancing it isn't super possible.
As far as I know, most variations try to make a system that requires the player to build the entire class from the start which gave me way too much of a headache when I tried it.
I made this a while back: Point-Buy Class Builder
Not updated for anything past ACG, but it's worked pretty well the times I've used it.
I like it, but I disagree with the pricing on a few odd things.
What's your method for pricing Spellcasting? They seem all over the place
|
|
I made this a while back: Point-Buy Class Builder
Not updated for anything past ACG, but it's worked pretty well the times I've used it.
I like it, but I disagree with the pricing on a few odd things.
What's your method for pricing Spellcasting? They seem all over the place
Almost all pricing is done by "feel", though there is some method. For spellcasting, generally it's some combination of maximum spell level and quality of the spell list. Basically, how hard can your class lean on spellcasting alone, and how much does the spellcasting you pick need other supporting class features.
The discussion thread for it is here. Feel free to necro that thread if you want to discuss it in more detail, instead of filling this one with it.
Both systems look interesting, hmm. Did you guys actually try building the existing classes using your own systems?
@Riuken: Phew, full sneak attack progression for a single point is quite a budget choice. Especially when combined with full BAB.
@Sundakan: I feel access to 'fighter only' feats might make a solid tertiary class feature.
Both systems look interesting, hmm. Did you guys actually try building the existing classes using your own systems?
Yes. That's what caused the biggest headache, actually, because the Druid (I came to hate the Druid over the course of working on this...) has so many fiddly, barely thematically related abilities that it's hard to create a bundle of abilities that makes sense, and they're too expensive to build normally. I think I eventually fixed it, but not sure.
Cleric and Bard were other problem children, at certain levels, but IIRC I fixed them too, mostly.
@Sundakan: I feel access to 'fighter only' feats might make a solid tertiary class feature.
I explicitly nix the concept of class specific Feats in the first section. No need to manufacture a problem and inflate point costs when you don't need to, especially when many class specific Feats are really class FEATURE specific Feats.
|
|
Both systems look interesting, hmm. Did you guys actually try building the existing classes using your own systems?
Yes. The points values point out a fraction of the class imbalance that I believe currently exists.
@Riuken: Phew, full sneak attack progression for a single point is quite a budget choice. Especially when combined with full BAB.
This was discussed in the thread I linked. It basically came down to "I think it's worth more than 1 point, but less than 2, and I don't really feel like it fits well enough to add to another package. For now it sits at 1 point to encourage use, and if that use shows it to be undervalued I'd increase it to 2 points. If 2 points makes it unused I'll have to find another option."
On the topic of Ezra Scarlet: Spheres of Power has the Armorist which fits her abilities perfectly. It can also be used, via an archetype if I recall, to make Mega Man.
|
|
You could have the cost or magnitude of the ability conditional on attack. You'd have to give accuracy boosters BAB equivalent value based on their magnitude, uptime, conditionality, and action cost, but any damage booster should have variable pricing.Both systems look interesting, hmm. Did you guys actually try building the existing classes using your own systems?Yes. The points values point out a fraction of the class imbalance that I believe currently exists.
@Riuken: Phew, full sneak attack progression for a single point is quite a budget choice. Especially when combined with full BAB.This was discussed in the thread I linked. It basically came down to "I think it's worth more than 1 point, but less than 2, and I don't really feel like it fits well enough to add to another package. For now it sits at 1 point to encourage use, and if that use shows it to be undervalued I'd increase it to 2 points. If 2 points makes it unused I'll have to find another option."
That gets tricky. It's close to saying "power attack should only be 1/2 of a feat on characters with less than full BAB, since it benefits them less" or "bards should get buy-one-get-one-free on metamagic feats since those feats are really made for wizards." I'm not saying that is what you mean, that's just where my logic takes it.
Instead, it's easiest to approximate equivalency based on the average user. Basically, how good is it for most of the characters that are going to take it anyway? In this case, I assume a character taking sneak attack will have some capability to leverage its benefits, usually with high attack accuracy and/or above average number of attacks. That does not change the fact that sneak attack doesn't work in many situations, and even in those where it can work, effort must still be made to apply it, regardless of how much effort you think it really takes.
As the points sit, I don't think it's as valuable as a good fort or will save, or any of the other 2-point options. That means it must cost less than 2 points. It might get overused at 1 point, but as a poster in the discussion thread noted, there weren't enough 1-point options anyway.
Both systems look interesting, hmm. Did you guys actually try building the existing classes using your own systems?
This is an example. Jo is basically a sorcerer with some added abilities. She will never been able to cast 9th level spells but in exchange for that she have much better saving throws.
Sun's system is quite fun I have to say. It is abusable, of course, but so it's core pathfinder.
The only rule I don't like the rule of choosing what mental stat you will use for the ability
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Both systems look interesting, hmm. Did you guys actually try building the existing classes using your own systems?
Actually, I wrote my own, but I never got it on google docs 'cause it's really open to interpretation.
Like, one of my steps said: Playtest till you feel satisfied with what you made.So yeah, I didn't want to post that because it could have a lot of potential loopholes, and who wants to test a homebrew class that might be OP/UP? Like for example:
Joe: Dude, this class is like crappy at tenth level! Can I change my class?
DM: 'Fraid not, you said you wanted to playtest.
Joe: (Rage quits.)