Bard
Level 3 Conjurer
The dice never lie.
Posts: 87
|
Post by Bard on Jun 11, 2010 4:42:50 GMT -6
What if I use the AD&D rules (PHB, DMG), and just leave out the thief and assassin (and bard, and monk, basically the classes with thief skills)? So it would be some kind of White Box AD&D? Will it work? Have anybody tried something like this?
|
|
|
Post by verhaden on Jun 11, 2010 8:52:08 GMT -6
I don't see why it wouldn't work. I'm sure thousands of people have had games where the only PC classes were fighter, cleric, and magic-user.
|
|
Arminath
Level 4 Theurgist
WoO:CR
Posts: 150
|
Post by Arminath on Jun 11, 2010 9:56:08 GMT -6
It works just fine, actually better since everyone in the party can try to do those things AD&D relegates to Thief skills. It helps keep all of the people interested in what's going on, when normally they would glaze over while the Thief is making rolls.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 11, 2010 11:07:11 GMT -6
I agree, the game works better without those classes. Ideally, I would keep the Thief class NPC-only (when you really need to hire a specialist) and Assassin/Monk/Bard very rare. The Thief gets bored in combat-heavy situations, and in puzzle-heavy situations everyone else is bored. Actually, even the Thief is bored because he or she just makes rolls, as you say, rather than trying to just play cleverly and figure out the puzzles/traps.
My problem is that my wife and other female players prefer to play the Thief. Being especially sneaky and sly and problem-solvers really appeals to them. The only solution I have been able to come up with is suggesting they play Hobbit Fighters or Elf Fighter/Magic-Users instead, both of which they seem to enjoy.
|
|
eris
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 161
|
Post by eris on Jun 11, 2010 14:14:13 GMT -6
I agree, the game works better without those classes. Ideally, I would keep the Thief class NPC-only (when you really need to hire a specialist) and Assassin/Monk/Bard very rare. The Thief gets bored in combat-heavy situations, and in puzzle-heavy situations everyone else is bored. Actually, even the Thief is bored because he or she just makes rolls, as you say, rather than trying to just play cleverly and figure out the puzzles/traps. My problem is that my wife and other female players prefer to play the Thief. Being especially sneaky and sly and problem-solvers really appeals to them. The only solution I have been able to come up with is suggesting they play Hobbit Fighters or Elf Fighter/Magic-Users instead, both of which they seem to enjoy. I try to stress to players that your PC's personality and skills are more how you *play* your PC rather than how you *roll* your PC. In all of the D&D games I've run, I don't think I've every had more than the basic 3 classes (Fighter/Cleric/M-U) available. And I think you could get by just fine with just *one* class...see Searchers of the Unknown or Adventurers!...basically the Fighter. Have any magic, clerical or arcane, come from NPC's, the use of magic items, or the occasional spell that a PC is able to learn after many, many, levels of work.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jun 11, 2010 17:23:22 GMT -6
My problem is that my wife and other female players prefer to play the Thief. Being especially sneaky and sly and problem-solvers really appeals to them. That's interesting, because my sister pretty much always plays thieves for pretty much the same reason. Wonder if there is a gender patter you've picked up on. (My wife only does wizards, however. My daughter any type of fighter with a big sword, but I suspect as she gets older she'll be more interested in more complex characters.) Back to topic, I've never tried "stripped down" AD&D, but since "OD&D plus supplements" is essentially AD&D it seems like "AD&D without frills" would be OD&D. I think....
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 11, 2010 17:43:00 GMT -6
I agree, on some level, that you only really need one or two or three classes. However, I am quite convinced that a wider selection of classes (approximately 11 as in the PHB seems about right) is just plain *fun*. A Druid might be only superficially different from a Cleric; nevertheless, playing one feels like a completely different experience. It’s fun to try any and all that interest you. On the other hand, if character customization is too free (classless systems where you really build your character skill-by-skill), then it’s somehow just boring again. There are too many choices, so you just end up basically building the same character optimized the way you like it over and over again (or just keeping the same character forever if possible).
I am contemplating for my next campaign adding some classes that basically have no particular adventuring abilities. My wife wants to play a Merchant, but I can’t figure out how to make it at all interesting as a class, so I may have to default to Thief unless I think of a better solution. I think the Alchemist would work fine. The Dwarf Craftsman class is awesome, too.
It would also be fun to add in more races. I’m thinking Vulcans (in addition to or instead of Elves?). Maybe also Mon Calamari!
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jun 11, 2010 19:58:20 GMT -6
1. Ask your wife what a Merchant does, then customize rules to fit her concept.
2. If nothing else, assume that Merchants can bargain/haggle for a good deal, perhaps have some level of appraise for item value, maybe the ability to Identify magic as per the spell. Indeed, if you want to give the Merchant some spells you could also incude Hold Portal (to lock chests of valuables) and Knock (to open chests of valuables) and some sort of Alarm (to protect her place of business or caravan at night, and so on. If you play the rules loose enough, there may be a whole bunch of neat things a Merchant could do.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 11, 2010 21:47:28 GMT -6
Right now I am toying with a class list that looks like this (initially only the four base classes would be permitted):
Fighter Paladin Ranger Magic-User Illusionist Pyromancer Cleric Druid Merchant Alchemist Dwarf Craftsman
Those are some good ideas, Finarvyn. I think the Merchant is a great archetype—for some reason I think of Sallah from the two good Indiana Jones movies, but the archetype is common in literature. He is the ultimate sidekick, fat (optional for females), jovial, cowardly, has uncannily good senses (smell, hearing), lots of contacts and people who owe him favors, always seems to know the latest rumors and the most obscure lore, unscrupulous and dishonest to most people but doggedly faithful to his companions.
I think at its core the Merchant will be a Thief albeit without most of the percentile skills—no move silently, hide in shadows, or climb walls. Also, no find/remove traps or open locks percentile checks as such: they would have as much of a chance as other characters if they play cleverly (well, maybe a slightly better chance). Back stab, languages, scroll use is fine. Then add legend lore from Bards. And the ability to appraise, as you say (with a chance of error). That should be a pretty good class, and provide some good justification for campaigning. Now all I need are level titles!
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Jun 14, 2010 12:40:24 GMT -6
You might want to take a look at Dragons at Dawn, if you haven't already---Merchant's a regular class in that game.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 14, 2010 16:20:47 GMT -6
Yes, I did. The mention of a Merchant class in FFC always intrigued me. Unfortunately, I don’t find much inspiration in the D@D writeup.
|
|