"Generic" classes

C&C discussion. Fantasy roleplaying.
New products, general questions, the rules, laws, and the chaos.
Post Reply
User avatar
paladinn
Ulthal
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2022 10:40 pm

"Generic" classes

Post by paladinn »

Back in D&D 3.5, the Unearthed Arcana volume included an option for "generic" classes. There were 3: Warrior, Expert and Spellcaster. Experts were essentially skill monkeys. Casters were exactly that: you could freely choose spells from any class list, but you had to pick a stat to use for casting. Warrior was pretty much the fighter class with less restrictions on feat selection.

I'm considering adapting this concept for C&C. The generic caster is already done: it's the Arcanist class from Amazing Adventures (which is completely C&C-compatible). I'm pondering how to do a generic martial character (not sure what to call it) that could work for either fighter-type or rogue-type characters. Feats and skills aren't really things in C&C, though skills and "advantages" are options in the CKG. In 3.5, fighters didn't have much in the way of class features, but got a lot of feats; and the list of feats was expanded to include a lot of class features like sneak attack, evasion, etc.

Outside of increased HD and BtH, what should a generic martial class look like? Is it enough to just provide "feats" and/or "skills" at every level?

User avatar
Grandpa
Ulthal
Posts: 636
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:59 pm

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by Grandpa »

If I were to do this I'd use the "Creating a New Character Class" section of AD&D 2nd Ed DMG to help design them and assign X.P. chart values.

User avatar
Go0gleplex
Greater Lore Drake
Posts: 4063
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 7:00 am
Location: Keizer, OR

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by Go0gleplex »

Could even use a bit of the Skills & Powers book as well; assign an avg point pool and then purchase abilities. No actual class, just an adventurer that's picked up things and gone for the training they're interested/suitable for.
"Rolling dice and killing characters since September 1976."
"Author of Wardogs! and Contributor to Iron Stars and Starmada-Admiralty ed."
"Certified crazy since 2009."

Fizz
Lore Drake
Posts: 1445
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 8:00 am

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by Fizz »

There have been a few systems that have gone with 3 classes. True20 does that, as does FantasyAGE.

FantasyAGE uses a Stunt system, which allows for special effects during combat, which can grow as the character advances in level (advanced Stunts). That may give some ideas.

The 2nd Ed AD&D book "Skills & Powers" used a point system to customize the base classes. If you combine those options from the fighter, paladin and ranger you'd have a nice selection for your warrior class (warrior is the best name for it, imho) to choose.


-Fizz

User avatar
paladinn
Ulthal
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2022 10:40 pm

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by paladinn »

I'm really looking at the 3.5 generic classes. As I said, the AA Arcanist class is a great option for spellcasters.

The 3.5 Expert is mostly about skills, and the Warrior is All about feats. I'm just not sure if there is a more comprehensive C&C take on skills and feats to make a go of this. Both the 3.5 Fighter and Warrior were "a feat every level", but the Warrior wasn't as limited on the feats one could use.

I'm actually going to look at True20. But I'm not sure how well any of it would work with Siege.

User avatar
paladinn
Ulthal
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2022 10:40 pm

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by paladinn »

So here's what I'm thinking.. For a generic "martial" class, there are basically 2 questions for L1:
1. Dex or Str-based?
2. Melee or Ranged?

L1, the player chooses a fighting style ala 5e. L2 gets either Power Attack (if Str-based) or Weapon Finesse (if Dex-based) or maybe Aim if ranged. L10 gets an extra attack. All get medium armor proficiency (whether you use it or not). Otherwise, the character gets one feat/ure every other level. The features are a combined list of fighter-ish and rogue-ish, everything from Weapon Focus to Shield Blow to Heavy Armor to Sneak Attack to Stealth. Ranger and a few Barbarian abilities too, and Horsemanship from the Knight, and Disguise from the Assassin. You can make your character as fighter-y or rogue-ish as you want. I'm thinking to raid abilities from the Adventurer's Backpack and AA as well.

Work in progress.. Any thoughts?

User avatar
paladinn
Ulthal
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2022 10:40 pm

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by paladinn »

Getting back to this from the "Subclasses" thread. The 3.5 UA book had 3 "generic" classes: the Warrior, the Expert and the Spellcaster. The Warrior was pretty much the fighter with no real limits on which feats could be chosen. The Spellcaster was a sorcerer-analog that could choose spells from any class' list. It would seem very similar to the Amazing Adventures Arcanist class.
In adapting to C&C, I could just use the Arcanist as-written. But the warrior as-written (like the 3e fighter) had virtually no class features; Everything was a feat, and they got a Ton of them.

If I were to model after the C&C fighter, there are only 3 real "class features" till you get to L12: Weapon Specialization (+1 to-hit/damage; +2 after L7); Combat Dominance (L4; +1 attack vs <1 HD creatures; +1 more every 4 levels); and one straight-up extra attack at L10. The CKG also gives a Weapon spec upgrade at L13 and 19 (either a +1 bonus or a new weapon); a Combat Dom upgrade at L16, 20 and 24 (+1 HD on creatures attacked); Shield Blow at L14; +1 AC at L13; and +1 to STR or DEX at L15 and 19.

I've never liked Combat Dominance at-written; I usually replace with Cleave, which can work regardless of the HD of the creatures. Regardless, the 3.5 generic classes allowed abilities like Evasion, Favored Enemy, Sneak Attack, Smite Evil, Turn Undead, Uncanny Dodge, etc. to be selected as feats. I know C&C doesn't have actual "feats"; and these would go well beyond "advantages" in C&C. I am contemplating how to allow some of those on a "generic" class, or what the actual "class features" of a generic Warrior class would look like. Maybe the "skeleton" could be Weapon Spec and Extra Attack and allow the choice of a tactic/advantage/feat/whatever every few levels?

Any thoughts?

serleran
Mogrl
Posts: 14094
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:00 am

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by serleran »

There is one "combat maneuver" from the much beloved classic (non-d20) Rules Cyclopedia available to "fighter types" (which also includes demihumans eventually, at higher levels, seeing as they are race-as-class) called Smash that I've always really loved.

In essence, it is quite similar to d20's Power Attack except there are a few discernible differences:

1) the attack penalty applied is always -5.
2) the damage bonus gained is equal to your actual Strength score, replacing your Strength bonus otherwise - so if you have a Strength of 18, you deal +18 damage on a successful hit.

I personally add a few additional requirements like... you can only Smash once per X rounds (unless you have a very rare form of magic item) and some other, more ad hoc sort of things primarily based on weapon type and any enemy resistance.

Anyway, point is, this is one of the things I really wanted to see C&C get but it didn't happen.

User avatar
paladinn
Ulthal
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2022 10:40 pm

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by paladinn »

serleran wrote:
Fri Dec 02, 2022 7:19 pm
There is one "combat maneuver" from the much beloved classic (non-d20) Rules Cyclopedia available to "fighter types" (which also includes demihumans eventually, at higher levels, seeing as they are race-as-class) called Smash that I've always really loved.

In essence, it is quite similar to d20's Power Attack except there are a few discernible differences:

1) the attack penalty applied is always -5.
2) the damage bonus gained is equal to your actual Strength score, replacing your Strength bonus otherwise - so if you have a Strength of 18, you deal +18 damage on a successful hit.

I personally add a few additional requirements like... you can only Smash once per X rounds (unless you have a very rare form of magic item) and some other, more ad hoc sort of things primarily based on weapon type and any enemy resistance.

Anyway, point is, this is one of the things I really wanted to see C&C get but it didn't happen.
I've definitely wanted to include Smash/ Power Attack as well. Doesn't/ shouldn't that require using a 2-handed weapon?

I know Smash, Parry, Disarm and I would include Cleave are great additions for a melee fighter. Then for ranged fighters, I know there are Aim, Pin, Mighty Shot, Multi-Shot and such. (Thanks, Pandius!) But not sure when/how to allow them. Definitely want to scatter them out and not just allow them all at L9 (ala BECMI).

But I'm thinking specifically of how the 3.5 generic classes allowed other class' features (like Sneak Attack, Evasion, Turn Undead, Smite Evil, and others) to be grabbed as "feats." IDK if they could be used in place of "advantages" in C&C.

serleran
Mogrl
Posts: 14094
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:00 am

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by serleran »

If they can be acquired multiple times, each time giving a level equivalent, like... say, the first time one takes Turn Undead it acts at level -2 or does half damage (or both) and the second time it is obtained it improves so that, unless one was absolutely dedicated to it and only compared to a middling-leveled actual class with the ability, the character doing so could not exceed or equal them than it could probably work.

I'm not sure if all of these can do that.

So, yes, you could make them "advantages" but would need to consider how to split them apart... at least, if going the above which is certainly not the only way.

But, one thing I've done in the past is simply assign XP requirements. However, I am forbidden from providing full details on how this is done as I have promised to not disclose my class deconstruction methods anymore.

User avatar
paladinn
Ulthal
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2022 10:40 pm

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by paladinn »

serleran wrote:
Fri Dec 02, 2022 9:11 pm
If they can be acquired multiple times, each time giving a level equivalent, like... say, the first time one takes Turn Undead it acts at level -2 or does half damage (or both) and the second time it is obtained it improves so that, unless one was absolutely dedicated to it and only compared to a middling-leveled actual class with the ability, the character doing so could not exceed or equal them than it could probably work.

I'm not sure if all of these can do that.

So, yes, you could make them "advantages" but would need to consider how to split them apart... at least, if going the above which is certainly not the only way.

But, one thing I've done in the past is simply assign XP requirements. However, I am forbidden from providing full details on how this is done as I have promised to not disclose my class deconstruction methods anymore.
Understood.. Does that apply to PM as well?

serleran
Mogrl
Posts: 14094
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:00 am

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by serleran »

Afraid so, sorry, as I have disabled the ability to send or receive a PM on these forums, mainly because I simply do not visit them frequently and dislike the idea of "ignoring" someone.

User avatar
paladinn
Ulthal
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2022 10:40 pm

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by paladinn »

So I spread-sheeted the progression for the UA Warrior and the C&C Fighter, and came up with what I think is a good "generic" Warrior (or even a Fighter replacement).

L1, 7, 13, 19 - Weapon Specialization - +1 to-hit and damage with one weapon, adding to existing or a new one. +3 max.
L4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 - Ability Stat Increase - add +1 to any one stat. Recommended in Player's Guide to Aihdre
L5, 10, 15 and 20 - Extra Attack
L1, 3, 6, 11, 16, 18 and 20 - One "advantage", as recommended in the CKG, either from the CKG or adapted from 3.5 UA.

Impressions?

User avatar
paladinn
Ulthal
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2022 10:40 pm

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by paladinn »

I think I've come up with a decent "generic" Expert class, or at least the beginnings of one, using the Rogue as a basis:

At L1, rogues are front-loaded with 8 "skills" that are their class abilities. I'm going to allow an expert to choose any 8 from a list of "skills" that will include rogue abilities and more. Still working on the list. The 8 will all be class abilities for the expert, and allow adding one's class level to ability checks and such.

At L5, 9, 13 and 17, an expert can add another skill to the list Or choose a +1 to an existing. For the ones "enhanced", that bonus will be added to any checks. So if an expert chose Stealth at L1, s/he could end up the stealthiest character ever. Or Spider-Man if he chose Climb. This will be the equivalent of the 5e "Expertise" feature.

At L4, 8, 12, 16 and 20, an Ability Stat Increase - add +1 to any one stat.

At L3, 7, 11, 15 and 19 - One "advantage" as recommended in the CKG. Still working on the list.

Thoughts?

serleran
Mogrl
Posts: 14094
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:00 am

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by serleran »

I'd probably go serleran on it and create several skill packages which contain related themes, like, say, a mechanics area that has find/place/disable traps, picking locks, and maybe even some weapon skills like use of a crossbow and such. Doesn't change much but can give the option to have some races better than others - like, in my Windswept World, dwarves are just better at mechanics than others (except goblins.)

User avatar
paladinn
Ulthal
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2022 10:40 pm

Re: "Generic" classes

Post by paladinn »

I wanted to keep the classes as generic as possible. Warriors can be melee or ranged or some combo, depending on which weapons you specialize in and what "advantages" you take. Experts can choose from Any "skill" set, and likewise with the advantages. Mages can cast spells from any list.

But you're right, I might should recommend some "packages."

Post Reply