Hybrids replace prestige classes.

[Feadel]

I started back in 1E. There were 4 basic classes and a few sub-classes. These days there are 11 'base' classes and two or three times as many other 'classes'. Except most of these 'classes' are simply some variant of one or more of the 'base' classes. It gets confusing and annoying.

So, I'm asking for feedback on a simple (yet possibly hugely complex) idea to clean things up a bit.
To accomplish this, I'm suggesting that any class other than the Base classes, requires advancement in one or more of the appropriate classes.
Note that classes like Samurai or Ninja are setting focused classes and could count as the Paladin or Rogue of their setting.

For example, take the Cavalier. In this system to become a cavalier the character would need to advance for at least 1 level as a Fighter, Paladin or even a Ranger. Each of the classes would have specific requirements, usually consisting of 1 or 2 levels and some specific skill points or a feat.
Pretty simple so for, and very much like the prestige class system (only better in my opinion).
Hybrid classes get more complicated. For the hybrids, the character would need levels in both parent classes (usually 2 or 3) and possibly specific feats or class abilities (casting 2nd level spells or something similar).

Now then, what are the glaring problems that I'm missing? How would this be good or bad? What would make it better (ie more balanced)? Would this totally ruin the idea of having hybrid classes?

[Orfamay Quest]

Feadel wrote:

I started back in 1E. There were 4 basic classes and a few sub-classes. These days there are 11 'base' classes and two or three times as many other 'classes'. Except most of these 'classes' are simply some variant of one or more of the 'base' classes. It gets confusing and annoying.

So, I'm asking for feedback on a simple (yet possibly hugely complex) idea to clean things up a bit.
To accomplish this, I'm suggesting that any class other than the Base classes, requires advancement in one or more of the appropriate classes.
Note that classes like Samurai or Ninja are setting focused classes and could count as the Paladin or Rogue of their setting.

For example, take the Cavalier. In this system to become a cavalier the character would need to advance for at least 1 level as a Fighter, Paladin or even a Ranger. Each of the classes would have specific requirements, usually consisting of 1 or 2 levels and some specific skill points or a feat.
Pretty simple so for, and very much like the prestige class system (only better in my opinion).
Hybrid classes get more complicated. For the hybrids, the character would need levels in both parent classes (usually 2 or 3) and possibly specific feats or class abilities (casting 2nd level spells or something similar).

Now then, what are the glaring problems that I'm missing? How would this be good or bad? What would make it better (ie more balanced)? Would this totally ruin the idea of having hybrid classes?

Looks like a solution in search of a problem to me.

It reduces character design flexibility and by extension makes players unable to play what they want. It make design complexity worse, not better. It also saddles most classes with unwanted abilities while depriving them of access to capstone abilities.

Conversely, it doesn't seem to improve the game in any way. All downside and no upside is not a way I recommend going.

[JosMartigan]

Off the top of my head I think the first thing it would ruin is power-gamer's abuse of "level dipping" for "builds" (i.e. exploiting classes for benefits instead of taking levels for roleplaying concept)

That being said, I feel like some hybrid classes are superior to the classes from which they're based. For example: In my perspective, Slayers are superior to either Rangers or Rogues and I would remove both parent classes in favor if including the Slayer from level 1.

Second you'll have to think hard about spell level progression regarding basic classes versus their alternate versions. Example; If I take 2 levels of cleric and then qualify for levels in Oracle (because that's what I really want to play), I'm going to be annoyed at those 2 levels of cleric spells from a purely bookkeeping perspective. Keeping track of more than one spell-progression can be irritating.

Additionally I would look at classes that may give 1 part of a special ability tree at low levels that a player would miss out on when they move to an alternate class. the only thing that comes to mind is Uncanny Dodge and Improved Uncanny Dodge (although that's probably not a great example.

[Feadel]

Orfamay Quest wrote:

Looks like a solution in search of a problem to me.

It reduces character design flexibility and by extension makes players unable to play what they want. It make design complexity worse, not better. It also saddled most classes with unwanted abilities while depriving them of access to capstone abilities.

Conversely, it doesn't seem to improve the game in any way. All downside and no upside is not a way I recommend going.

I've been told that I tend to do this sort of thing, where my attempts at solutions (to problems that other people don't think are problems) tend to be more complicated than necessary.

And I tend to think everyone understands exactly what I'm saying, even when I've forgotten an important part.

What I forgot here, is to mention that I don't limit levels to 20 total, only 20 per class. So that taking a 'splash' won't prevent 'capstones' from being reached. I rarely see characters reaching that level any way, so it's not that big a deal to me.

It would require work to make it what I want, and probably isn't worth the effort if my players aren't going to see any benefits.

[Orfamay Quest]

If you want to discourage taking non-Core classes, which is what this amount to, why not simply run a Core-only campaign?

Otherwise, it's just a level tax on concepts that the designers balanced for free availability.

[Feadel]

JosMartigan wrote:

Off the top of my head I think the first thing it would ruin is power-gamer's abuse of "level dipping" for "builds" (i.e. exploiting classes for benefits instead of taking levels for roleplaying concept)

That being said, I feel like some hybrid classes are superior to the classes from which they're based. For example: In my perspective, Slayers are superior to either Rangers or Rogues and I would remove both parent classes in favor if including the Slayer from level 1.

Second you'll have to think hard about spell level progression regarding basic classes versus their alternate versions. Example; If I take 2 levels of cleric and then qualify for levels in Oracle (because that's what I really want to play), I'm going to be annoyed at those 2 levels of cleric spells from a purely bookkeeping perspective. Keeping track of more than one spell-progression can be irritating.

Additionally I would look at classes that may give 1 part of a special ability tree at low levels that a player would miss out on when they move to an alternate class. the only thing that comes to mind is Uncanny Dodge and Improved Uncanny Dodge (although that's probably not a great example.

Thank you. Good points that I would want to remember, and that I hand't thought about.

I would solve the spell problem by making the base class levels count as levels in the hybrid class. Similar to the PrC ability of gaining a level of spells granted, but in reverse, if you see what I mean. By changing class, you change your spells.

[Dragonchess Player]

You could use the 3.5 OGL Prestigious Character Classes as an inspiration for doing the same for the hybrid classes (although the prestige paladin* fills similar design space as both paladin and warpriest; and the prestige ranger fills similar design space as hunter and ranger). Prestige arcanist -> sorcerer/wizard/arcanist (similar to mystic theurge); prestige bloodrager -> barbarian/sorcerer/bloodrager; etc.

*- note that you can also adapt the Paladins of Freedom, Slaughter, and Tyranny for CG, CE, and LE versions

[Ryan Freire]

I like prestige classes as campaign specific elite faith or organization based groups.

I like archetypes as a narrowing of training within a different class.

I like hybrid classes as a means to introduce or expand fundamental mechanics to the game (martial versatility/fervor/melee deeds etc etc)

I think all three of these options have a place in pathfinder though the overlap between them can get a little murky at times, especially prestige class/archetype.