Six Prime Requisites, Six Classes

[mearls]

Over the weekend, I thought a little bit about the three classes. Each class maps to a different attribute.

Fighting Man - Strength
Magic-User - Intelligence
Cleric - Wisdom

What about the other three stats? The thief maps to Dexterity, but I'm not keen on the class as written in supplement 2. I also think there are some classic fantasy characters that don't necessarily map well to the classes, with the Gray Mouser standing out as the most prominent.

In particular, Constitution and Charisma seem the trickiest ones to narrow down. My first thoughts were to create a berserker style class for Con, but I might save that for my alignment based sub-classes (more on those later.) With Charisma, I thought of creating a bard or a trickster style character.

What I'd like to have at the end is one class for each attribute, so a player can simply go with whatever stat is his highest. I don't want to expand the game beyond six classes.

Has anyone messed around with this? Any suggestions for classes to fill those "holes"?

To me, the toughest part lies in making sure the classes don't simply duplicate what the other classes already do. The light armored warrior is the one exception, since I think that's a character type the game fails to support right now.

[wulfgar]

Hmmm, I just had a wacky idea come to me. You can take it or leave it.

For constitution use- ANIMAL COMPANION- as your class. Think about it, it's not that unusual for a party of adventurers to have a dog, horse, or something more exotic- like a bear for example tagging along. I'd say they're main ability is their toughness. This also fits with the little line there in Men and Magic about allowing non-human pc's, so why not?

(I just started reading through the Prydain Chronicles this past weekend, and I think that's where the idea comes from- horses, hawks, and a fortune telling pig are all featured prominently- great stuff!)

As far as Dex or Charisma go, I'd say a thief or woodsman class would fit for dexterity depending on what your campaign world is like, and a bard makes sense for charisma.

[foster1941]

I've got a home-brewed barbarian class that has a triple prime-requisite (str+dex+con) who fills the "lightly armored warrior" niche. I've given some thought to a mountebank/con-man Cugel the Clever type class that would presumably have Charisma as its prime requisite (or perhaps cha+int), but I haven't worked out all the details (especially how to detail the "fast talking" abilities in a way that don't circumvent player-level roleplaying) yet.

[korgoth]

One way to to wrap up all 6 attributes with the given material would be to allow demihumans to use either a "class PR" or their "race PR":

Fighting Man - Str
M-U - Int
Cleric - Wis
Halfling - Dex
Dwarf - Con
Elf - Cha

So a sturdy dwarf will get a bonus even if he has average Str, a quick halfling likewise (and all the more reason to focus on missile weapons!), and an elf... well, aren't they supposed to be pretty and charming and all that annoying stuff?

[foster1941]

I'd probably switch the racial PRs for elves and hobbits. Elves (at least in Tolkien) generally seem pretty cold and aloof, whereas hobbits are good-natured and affable.

[Zulgyan]

Yeah, this is a great idea, and it had popped into my head now and then. Great that you bring it.

So far:

Fighting Man - Strength
Magic-User - Intelligence
Cleric - Wisdom
Thief - Dexterity (the version I'm working on at the other thread)

As mearls says, constitucion is a hard call. I like korgoth's suggestion of the dwarf. I don't believe that OD&D is really race/class game, because in the end, dwarfs can only choose to be 1 class, and so do haflings. Elfs are wierd, but most play them as fighter/mage, making them work as a single class in practice. So reworking the races as classes or just saying that a dwarf fighting men will now use CON as prime instead of STR, should work well. A hobbit fighting man, that changes it's primer requisite to DEX instead of STR should work like a wonder too. Very easy to house rule, and it works. Just change the primer requisite of those races. Korgoth, you are a genius!

But my personal problem, is that I play human only, so I'm looking for a class to fit CON. The barbarian looks good, but I think the fighting men suits him well already, and I would prefer a much more different concept for a CON based class. Barbarians are not that different from a fighter in the end. Not as different as the 4 basic D&D classic between themselves.

Another option for CON should be the monk. But I don't know if I want to introduce this Asian flavored character in my campaign. Nothing against the Asians, it just does not fit in my campaign.

In the case of CHA, as bardish-trickster type looks like the best fit. Considering he is also a D&D classic. The problem is, I don't want social interaction to become too mechanical based, and I prefer good old fashioned role playing. I want everything to stay in the spirit of "pre-supplement I D&D".

Could the illusionist be good fit for a CHA class?

I gotta think about this for a while, because it has GREAT POTENCIAL.

Mearls said:
my alignment based sub-classes (more on those later.)

I wanna hear about that.

Foster said:
I've got a home-brewed barbarian class

That too

[mearls]

Lots of interesting ideas. Thanks, guys!

The animal companion/beast class sounds very intriguing. I like the idea of a class that I can use to match whatever weird concept the players come up with. A "generic" monster class is a pretty nifty idea.

The conflict between mechanics for fast talking and RP is my main concern for a Charisma-based class. A conman would be a lot of fun.

A racial approach is also interesting. Part of me is now stewing over the idea of classes that point toward the races, with a burglar class for hobbits/halflings and an archer class for elves. This model falls down a little unless I can think of a class other than fighter for dwarves, but I don't think it's a big deal.

The burglar runs into the problems I have with the thief and with creating a conman, but maybe there's a better way to skin this cat...

[mearls]

zulgyan said:

Could the illusionist be good fit for a CHA class?

Cool idea. I like that A LOT.

The alignment thing is my attempt to make alignment more important in the game. I really like the simple split between law, neutrality, and chaos. I had an idea for a simple benefit that each class grants depending on your alignment. I don't have anything down for neutrality yet. I need to figure out its exact role in the game.

Fighter
Law (Paladin): Gain lay on hands ability to heal.
Chaos (Berserker): Go into a battle fury once per day.

Magic-User
Law (White Mage): Can use swords, create blasts of cleansing light.
Chaos (Demonologist): Summon minor demonic allies.

Cleric
Law (Crusader): Gain a small pool of extra healing.
Chaos (Conqueror): Gain benefits for slaying enemies and collecting thier souls.

I'm leaning toward a generic self-improvement ability for neutrals. Since they care about themselves, they might get a generic bonus they can apply to a roll once per day.

[foster1941]

zulgyan said:

Foster said:
I've got a home-brewed barbarian class

That too

It's a fairly straightforward adaptation of the AD&D barbarian class (which many people hate, but which has always been one of my favorites). I'll post the write-up over on the Workshop board.

EDIT: Link

[Zulgyan]

Just from the top of my head.

CHA - Noble

He's not necessarily good, and can be evil. He is a natural leader of men, either for good or evil (or law and chaos). He can wear all types of armor and weapons, but his fighting skill would be second class (cleric progression).

His abilities should be based around leading people. Stuff that helps in mass combat and other stuff that helps the whole party. He could have the ability to reach name level faster, and gain followers early. He could have the ability to receive special favors from other people of importance. He could have special contacts that would give him special benefits to help himself or the party.

Fighter
Law (Paladin): Gain lay on hands ability to heal.
Chaos (Berserker): Go into a battle fury once per day.

Magic-User
Law (White Mage): Can use swords, create blasts of cleansing light.
Chaos (Demonologist): Summon minor demonic allies.

Cleric
Law (Crusader): Gain a small pool of extra healing.
Chaos (Conqueror): Gain benefits for slaying enemies and collecting thier souls.

This is looking very good. In my personal campaign, I would change Paladin for Knight. Both are LAW oriented, but the Knight allows the evil possibility. IMO, OD&D is more morally ambiguous with regards good or evil. I prefer classes not to dictate good or evil. But of course this is totally personal, and the other approach is just as good.

[Zulgyan]

Mearls said:
an archer class for elves

Check out: odd74.proboards76.com/index.cgi?board=menmagic&action=display&thread=1202550739

[coffee]

Zulgyan, I have the highest respect for you, but I think we'd be going a little off the rails here with a Noble "class".

Nobility is for each DM to determine in his or her own campaign. I could easily envision a world which was a magocracy, where the Wizards were in charge. Kind of makes the "noble" class irrelevant, I think.

Also, historically (and I am well aware of the hazards of invoking history for a fantasy game, but bear with me...) most Nobles were Fighting-Men. Knighthood is often the lowest rung on the nobility ladder, and it's a martial title from the get go. The highest level fighters are called Lord, which is a term of nobility.

So, with all due respect, I'd have to say that the Noble, as a class, doesn't work for me in D&D.

(And as far as the barbarian someone mentioned, my own personal take is that that's a race, not a class. I've thought this way ever since the AD&D Barbarian came out, in all of it's broken outrageousness; I'd just forgotten about it until this discussion brought it up.)


To add something constructive to this discussion, however, I could easily see either an illusionist or a con-man (or possibly some combination) as the CHA based class. We've already discussed the absence of a "somewhat-magical" class; this could be the guy.

CON is still tough, unless you want to revise the Monk class (which hasn't ever worked for me, since I lean toward the medieval European fantasy type, instead of the Asian, but whatever.)

[kesher]

For the CON class, I'd simply have to go with a Ranger. The Beast Master/Animal Friend thing is interesting, but if you really wanted to you could incorporate elements of that into a Ranger class. The whole "surviving in the waste places" just screams CON to me.

A con man/trickster just doesn't do it for me, whatever the stat it's connected to. I guess it just seems too close to behavior that any character could aspire to, regardless of class.

I agree about the "lightly-armed" Fighting Man. I'd connect it to DEX and call them Rogues; the image that springs to my mind are the members of the Thieves' Guild in Lankhmar. Again, NOT a thief. Simply a nimble fighter--- let them add a +1 to their attack with missle and melee weapons for a DEX 15 or higher.

For CHA, I'd favor a Bard over an Illusionist; another spellcasting class would start to muddy the waters a bit too much for my tastes.

That's about as far as I'd go; expanding each into alignment-based subclasses, well, for me, no thanks. I'm curious, Mike; what's the motivation to add so many more classes? I'm certainly not asking you to justify anything; I really am just curious!

*edited for clarity.

[mearls]

kesher said:

That's about as far as I'd go; expanding each into alignment-based subclasses, well, for me, no thanks. I'm curious, Mike; what's the motivation to add so many more classes? I'm certainly not asking you to justify anything; I really am just curious!

It started when I thought about the thief and how I wasn't crazy about the class, but I did want something to model Leiber's heroes. Dexterity is a good fit for the class's prime requisite.

That led me to think about the other stats. Why don't they have classes associated with them? It's very much driven by a "what if?" than any real need for more classes.

The alignment stuff is sitting poorly with me as I consider it more. I think that the idea is veering too much into good vs. evil rather than law vs. chaos. I'm not sure I will actually use it or detail it much more.

[Stonegiant]

Another option for the CHR PR would be the adventurous merchant/trader, not the stodgy old storekeep but the Renaissance style merchant who went out looking for stuff to bring back and sell for profit. He would also be talented with things like evaluation, item identification, etc.

As to a way to game rule fast talk and bargaining maybe what the DM could do is secretly roll to see how many rounds it will take for them to talk the target into a favorable position, the player wouldn't know how many rounds/turns it would take and if they give up before that time they failed. This would be one of those situations where the interaction would have to be measured in real life time units.

e.g. a mountebank or merchant might have to spend at least 3d6 minutes talking to any target to wear them down. modifying this rolled amount would be the difference in level between the PC and the NPC as well the difference in CHR scores. Both of these are determined by subtracting the NPC from the PC with the result adding or subtracting minutes needed to influence.

[jrients]

Personally, I've kicked around using Dex for some sort of thief or swashbuckler, Con for rangers, and Cha for a psionic class.

But for now the three core classes seem quite sufficient for my needs. Heck, some days I could ditch the cleric!

[Zulgyan]

Answers to coffee:

Zulgyan, I have the highest respect for you, but I think we'd be going a little off the rails here with a Noble "class".

Of course you are in total freedom to disagree! That's all what boards are about. To hear other's people perspective, learn, take different opinions. Be criticized in your own ideas in order to re-think them or discard them completely! I very much like when someone disagrees. Makes discussions much more interesting.

Anyway, I was just thinking aloud. Not trying to say any definite or final. Just ideas that popped out of my head.

Nobility is for each DM to determine in his or her own campaign. I could easily envision a world which was a magocracy, where the Wizards were in charge. Kind of makes the "noble" class irrelevant, I think.

Absolute agree. In fact the "noble" name for the class might be unfortunate.

I thinking of the kind of persons that are trained to lead. People who have been instructed by the wise in war strategy, military tactics, politics, urban management, leadership, etc. People who are lectured in the speeches of Ciceron from Rome, in the knowledge of Aristotle. That kind of folk.
It could also model total natural leaders, that may rise from the lowly tribes, such as Genghis Khan.

The class would be themed out of that.

Mike, is this looking like 4E's Warlord?? ;D LOL

Anyway, again, just thinking aloud.

(And as far as the barbarian someone mentioned, my own personal take is that that's a race, not a class)

I have the same take as you on this issue.

[doc]

In my own game I have a berserker class that favors the CON stat. A berserker isn't always a barbarian either; one of my players is an urban pit fighter with the berserker class. But, yes, a berserker/barbarian would make a good choice for a COn based class.

As for Charisma, I would go with the illusionist, a character that relies on misdirection and pulling the wool over others' eyes. A bard might be a good choice as well, but I hate 'em with a fiery passion and so I will refrain from saying too much about that class as I know I am biased.

As another thought, I've always thought that Charisma, not Wisdom, should really be the main stat for a cleric. Clerics are seen as leaders and figureheads, particularly those strongly associated with a church or similar institution. Also, Charisma as a representation of a force of personality would be more important in banishing undead and facing down devils. In theory at least.

For a more wisdom oriented class that can do distinctly different things than a cleric, how about Druid?

DOc

[Zulgyan]

As for Charisma, I would go with the illusionist, a character that relies on misdirection and pulling the wool over others' eyes. A bard might be a good choice as well, but I hate 'em with a fiery passion and so I will refrain from saying too much about that class as I know I am biased.

Yeah! Illusionists need to convince. To be persuasive. To be appealing and believable. Charisma can help them to become masters of lie and deception.

As another thought, I've always thought that Charisma, not Wisdom, should really be the main stat for a cleric. Clerics are seen as leaders and figureheads, particularly those strongly associated with a church or similar institution. Also, Charisma as a representation of a force of personality would be more important in banishing undead and facing down devils. In theory at least.

Interesting thought...

[Zulgyan]

In fact, if I move Clerics into CHA, I can insert my Psion class into WISDOM.

That might work....

thinking...

thinking aloud...

[ffilz]

This has an appeal, though one question I have is how to choose classes that make sense in a mega-dungeon campaign. The thief is a nice addition to such a campaign. Barbarians and bards don't seem to make so much sense, and to some extent, I'd prefer to figure out a way to make the lightly armored fighter work, and then let barbarians be color applied (mostly) to fighters (I could also see barbarian clerics).

Frank

[Zulgyan]

The only thing that worries me of a CHA based illusionist, is that he would be too much a "leader of men". Also, I think that a 6 INT 17 CHA Illusionist would be rather silly.

What do you guys think?

[coffee]

zulgyan said:

The only thing that worries me of a CHA based illusionist, is that he would be too much a "leader of men". Also, I think that a 6 INT 17 CHA Illusionist would be rather silly.

What do you guys think?

I've never liked Illusionists anyway, so I'm not sure you want to hear what I really think...

[foster1941]

For the illusionist as presented in The Strategic Review Charisma isn't an appropriate prime requisite -- this isn't a beguiler class that fools people into thinking that the false is true, but rather a dark shadow-weaver who calls up nether-forces to warp the shape of reality and blur the line between the real and the imagined. A different concept of the illusionist, something closer to a mountebank or carnival trickster, who relies as much or more on sleight and suggestion than actual magic, could be based on charisma (and is, essentially, a variation on the same thing that's been mentioned a few different time upthread -- the "con-man" character), but not the sinister SR class who deals in madness and insanity, summons shadows and creates spectres, and uses the "phantasmal killer" spell to literally scare his victims to death! This isn't a happy-go-lucky trickster, but rather something straight out of one of those mind-bending acid trip Euro-horror movies of the 60s & 70s.

[Zulgyan]

But CHA does not need to be happy-smiling-entrainer's type of character.

He could be the master of lie and deception. The master of nasty word tricks. The master of making something look as truth, when it is not. Or making truth look false. CHA could help in all that. He need to be convincing. He needs to be believable.

I was thinking about the illusionist of the SR, but with some charm spells added.

Just thinking aloud again.

[Finarvyn]

coffee said:

Zulgyan, I have the highest respect for you, but I think we'd be going a little off the rails here with a Noble "class".

Nobility is for each DM to determine in his or her own campaign. I could easily envision a world which was a magocracy, where the Wizards were in charge. Kind of makes the "noble" class irrelevant, I think.

Maybe ... maybe not.

I can see a Noble class for a Princess Leia type character. A person of high birth who serves in diplomatic sorts of situations. I suppose it would come down to the style of the campaign, but I can see using such a class on occasion. Particulary for a "victorian" type game where a noble or gentleman class might be worthwhile.

[wulfgar]

If you're looking for a race specific classes that work in a megadungeon campaign, then I'd say go with a Miner class for dwarves.

[doc]

How about something like an underdark ranger; a dwarf who is knowledgeable concerning the races that dwell deep beneath the ground and how to best battle them?

Doc

[Stonegiant]

doc said:

How about something like an underdark ranger; a dwarf who is knowledgeable concerning the races that dwell deep beneath the ground and how to best battle them?

Doc

aka Tunnel Rat

+1 to hit and damage with daggers
can only wear leather armor
doesn't loose his DEX bonus when fighting in confined spaces
Tracking and Direction Sense when underground (in addition to Dwarven Traits).
+1 To hear noise

Otherwise advances as a fighting man.

[casey777]

I'd personally not go with racial classes, otherwise I'd just use Basic (Classic) D&D. Not (sorta) having racial classes is a main reason I'm looking at OD&D.

Some suggestions:
Duelist, Pirate, Rake, Swashbucker - Dexterity
Mercenary, Martial Artist, Pugilist, Sellsword, Traveller - Constitution
Bard, Entertainer, Mountebank, or Traveller - Charisma

So for Dexterity you have a high dex low armor fighter who usually is ethically challenged. The well placed hit and not being where their opponent's sword lands are key to their survival.

For Constitution you either have a character that survives. Perhaps a jack of all trades (except anything that requires exclusivity which rules out magic and religious indoctrination) who isn't as skilled at using weapons as others but knows them enough to keep on living to make some coin another day.

For Charisma you have your travelling type who'll sing for supper, or put on a play, sell snake oil, deliver mail, make a map, slit a purse, or plunder a dungeon. They survive by their charm and ability to know how best to present themselves to the situation at hand. Not true wisdom, but enough quick thinking to hopefully stay alive.

Traveller could be seen either way really, depending on how you see the type.

Offhand, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay has some wonderful career names usually from real life, which while more Renaissance, could be good sparks for coming up with flavorful class names.