| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Diffan |
Posted - 24 Apr 2011 : 17:27:08
This was brought up over on Loremaster as well as a few other RPG-sites and I think it's a pretty interesting article/idea.
Classless 4e
Though I guess you couldn't really call it "classless" because you still utilize class features, and powers and your role is still prominent in your build. I think the name Source-4E is more appropriate, espically with the modifications I'm putting in place.
At first I was appalled and though balance was thrown out the window but I've come to see some of it's elegance. Though for my own sanity I need to put in some balancing points. So if I were to run this sort of game, I'd put in restrictions (of a sort) for power selection.
For example, you still have to choose a base class to gain healing surges, at least 1 at-will power, class features, etc. Other options like your 2nd (or 3rd if human) at-will power, encounter power, and daily power could only come from the same power source as your base class. So a base-fighter could chose Ranger, Rogue, or Warlord based powers for his at-will, encounter, and daily allotment.
At 11th level, you automatically gain a 2nd power source to choose from (Arcane, Divine, Shadow, Primal, Psionic) and you can choose any power of that specific source. At 21st level, you can then select powers from a 3rd source. You are by no means required to choose additional powers from these sources, just that the access is there.
Also, Multi-class feats work to allow you specific powers withing that specific class. So the same base-Fighter could take MC feat for say the Barbarian and now can choose ANY power that Barbarian has to offer. This completly takes out the point for further multiclass feats unless you want to Paragon Multi-class. Taking additional MC feats (like Adept Power) gains you 1 more additional power selection (so your not swapping but have access to select either) NOTE: This would NOT gain you one more usage, just further expands your repitoire (like a Wizard's spellbook).
So the role of the class pretty much remains intact, as a fighter would still be the main defender, who's attacks still mark and his flavor OF a fighter are consistent yet he can branch off for that nice multi-attack of a Ranger or that one Utility power of a Warlord that gains his allies THP or a nice Bow attack. Further expansion into other power sources is almost ingrained into the game as fighters are exposed to different versions of magic and the like. Maybe that fighter is bitten by a Vampire and gains some of those abilities or maybe he finds a specialized Tome that he feels the need to learn and thus gain some Wizard or Sorcerer Utility powers. This is all because the character expands through Role-Playing not just what build or epic-combo works for Winning the game.
I understand that this style is better run by people not concerned with Min/Maxing or finding cool combos or even putting forth HUGE effort to make their character the best that they can be. It's designed for those who like having fun at the table, exploring the plot and story. Not worrying about such things as "Frost-cheese" and the near constant Errata that may affect their character with the next up-date.
What do you think?
|
| 4 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Diffan |
Posted - 24 Jul 2011 : 14:09:37
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
Hi Diffan,
A lot would have to be done in order to make this system adaptation work well, but I am glad that it inspired you think about it, and that you took it a step further! That is always my intent when I write short editorial pieces such as that. I have always planned to go back and expand upon those ideas and come up with a working model. I might just have to do that later this year when time opens up.
Hey buddy,
I think the idea is a solid one and one that's at least worth looking at as an alternative to character creation. As for more work for system adaptation, your correct and playtesting out the butt to boot.
But I'm actually taking it a step further (and yet another process) to work outside the scope of "Roles" and classes. The idea is completly based off the 4E design (which I really enjoy) but extreamly loose when it comes to providing roles and features.
So here's the skinny:
"Source 4E v2.0" works as I intended above, but with the removal of the class system. Instead, each class feature is assigned points. Everything from class features such as the Fighter's Combat Challenge and the Wizard's Implement Mastery feature to weapon/armor proficiencies. The more a feature works with a role, the more expensive it is. The less focused a class feature is, the less points it has. A fighter's weapon proficiencies aren't very useful to a Wizard because they don't have Weapon-based powers. But it has to be balances because a Cleric might want the Fighter's weapon proficiencies since a lot of his powers are based off of Weapons.
Of course, this is all theoritical and I might keep classes as a sort of "Husk" that just feeds the HP, Surge/value, and Skill availability to a player. This way, certain classes will have varying degrees of points to spend on non-class based features such as a Fighter spending all his points on a Paladin's Lay on Hands power, a Wizard spending his points to get 1 Channel Divinity, or even a Rogue to get a fighter's Combat Superority feature.
That way, each player can really make a diverse character that doesn't feel or look at all the same. For an example, my Paladin of Kelemvore could exchanged his Channel Divinity power for a cleric's Turn Undead but still function like a paladin. This might be different from another Paladin of Kelemvore who exchanged his Channel Divinity power to gain the Avenger's Censure or Invoker's Abjure Undead. |
| Matt James |
Posted - 23 Jul 2011 : 19:05:32
Hi Diffan,
A lot would have to be done in order to make this system adaptation work well, but I am glad that it inspired you think about it, and that you took it a step further! That is always my intent when I write short editorial pieces such as that. I have always planned to go back and expand upon those ideas and come up with a working model. I might just have to do that later this year when time opens up. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 02 May 2011 : 10:50:44
quote:
Originally posted by Galuf the Dwarf
Pardon, I haven't read that article yet (don't know how my anti-virus scanner may react to it), but I wonder if people had made similar complaints in the past about following editions (ex: 2nd, 3rd, 3.5). Maybe it just takes time and trial periods to really warm up to things?
True. At first, I was comparing the idea of a Classless (or in my words "Source 4E") to that of v3.5 Gestalt characters. But it's not really like that because of something called Action Economy. Basically, just because you merge two classes together or in 4E case, blend in powers from other classes/sources, you gaining a larger variety of powers which lead to great combos. This is balanced by the fact that you can still only perform 1 minor, 1 move, and 1 standard action in a round (not counting free actions). So it still is pretty well balanced to the original game but can lead to greater power-gaming. |
| Galuf the Dwarf |
Posted - 02 May 2011 : 04:48:04
Pardon, I haven't read that article yet (don't know how my anti-virus scanner may react to it), but I wonder if people had made similar complaints in the past about following editions (ex: 2nd, 3rd, 3.5). Maybe it just takes time and trial periods to really warm up to things? |
|
|
