|
|
Post by Falconer on Nov 12, 2020 15:58:11 GMT -6
Question about the “Changing Character Class” rules on p. 10 of Men & Magic. I am trying not to read AD&D ideas back into OD&D, here, but if I gather aright, this rule is about humans only. When you change class, do you just… change? You are no longer a Cleric and are now a Fighting-Man, but do you still have spells? Do you still abide by your old weapon strictures?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2020 16:14:03 GMT -6
Question about the “Changing Character Class” rules on p. 10 of Men & Magic. I am trying not to read AD&D ideas back into OD&D, here, but if I gather aright, this rule is about humans only. When you change class, do you just… change? You are no longer a Cleric and are now a Fighting-Man, but do you still have spells? Do you still abide by your old weapon strictures? One would assume that players examining these as a set of wargame rules or as a further expansion for Chainmail would see this in very literal/gamey fashion and you simply transform into a person with a completely different set of abilities. That's not immersive or RP'ey but it's how I imagine folks would see it with those eyes. |
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Nov 12, 2020 16:19:19 GMT -6
To us, "changing class" was never multi-classing but an actual change. A cleric losing faith would become a fighting-man, with all the rules applying - no more spell-casting but more weapon options, for example. A fighting-man finding faith and the patronage of a god may be a cleric.
We thought that "by the book" it meant you kept your level but changed class. So a level-4 FM would become a level-4 cleric. FM privileges lost, cleric privileges gained.
Might not make more sense than multi-classing where you stopped your old class abilities at a certain level and gained abilities of a new class, but (to me) lots of things in OD&D don't make a lot or any sense at all (like monsters all having infravision and losing it upon being in service of the PCs, for example).
We tried to explain it like "A level-5 FM would be recognized by the deity as powerful enough to be granted the same abilities as an acolyte who worked their way up to 5th-level cleric." And a 5th-level cleric becoming a FM because abandoning their faith would have more time to train their martial skills and quickly catch up.
None of that would be possible without an in-game explanation, though. You couldn't just change class because you felt like the group needed another cleric.
|
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Nov 12, 2020 16:34:03 GMT -6
You know, I don't think it's about humans only. At the time of Men & Magic, dwarves and halflings could only be one class anyways, so of course the rule didn't apply to them. Elves can change class, but aren't restricted by the requirement of 16+ Int or Strength. Elves also can't be clerics. Adding another class, like thieves, should in theory loosen the restriction, but Greyhawk also introduced AD&D-style multiclassing for nonhumans, which created the more complicated approach where humans can change classes, but nonhumans can't. The rules are pretty barebone: - Prerequisite for the class you change to must be 16+;
- Prerequisite can't be modified (no raising a score to 16 later;)
- Magic-Users and Clerics are incompatible (once you pick one kind of magic, you're stuck with it.)
If we make a deliberate effort to ignore later ideas about changing classes, only sticking to those rules, I'd say that changing classes stops progression in the old class, but doesn't eliminate the abilities of that class. A Fighter who becomes a Magic-User can use any magic weapon or armor, for example, and a Magic-User who goes the opposite direction can still cast spells, but won't learn how to cast higher level spells. We might also reason that if a character has 16+ in two abilities (Strength and Int, frex,) then they can switch back and forth, like an elf. We could get rid of the debate on how to handle elves by assuming they switch classes just like a human, but ignore any minimum scores for Strength and Int. For other class abilities like combat ability, saving throws, and hit dice, I would say just use the best one available. A fourth level fighter who switches to magic-user would have 4 hit dice and have better attacks until they reached 6th level. |
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Nov 12, 2020 17:41:51 GMT -6
If we make a deliberate effort to ignore later ideas about changing classes, only sticking to those rules, I'd say that changing classes stops progression in the old class, but doesn't eliminate the abilities of that class. A Fighter who becomes a Magic-User can use any magic weapon or armor, for example, and a Magic-User who goes the opposite direction can still cast spells, but won't learn how to cast higher level spells. But isn't that basically multiclassing? To me, that's more of a "class addition" than a "class change". |
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Nov 12, 2020 18:03:26 GMT -6
I'd say that changing classes stops progression in the old class, but doesn't eliminate the abilities of that class. To me, that's more of a "class addition" than a "class change". We always thought it should work as talysman said, if only because it makes more sense (though a cleric actually being excommunicated would lose his spells and turn undead ability). I see where you're coming from as far as the terminology goes hamurai, but another way of looking at it is changing career - I can say from experience you keep your old skills, though they deteriorate over time without practice. Unfortunately, you start the new class at level 1 ...  |
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Nov 12, 2020 19:10:49 GMT -6
If we make a deliberate effort to ignore later ideas about changing classes, only sticking to those rules, I'd say that changing classes stops progression in the old class, but doesn't eliminate the abilities of that class. A Fighter who becomes a Magic-User can use any magic weapon or armor, for example, and a Magic-User who goes the opposite direction can still cast spells, but won't learn how to cast higher level spells. But isn't that basically multiclassing? To me, that's more of a "class addition" than a "class change". Well, if a multiclass character stops progressing in one class, it might look the same... but generally, the multiclass rules imagine starting with more than one class, progressing simultaneously in all (split XP,) and never adding a new class. What I'm thinking is starting with one class, stopping progression at some point, and learning something new. An addition, yeah, but addition is a kind of change... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2020 19:39:42 GMT -6
This captures Thulsa Doom in the movie. He spent his youth pursuing the riddle of steel and later became the cult leader. Today, he no longer pursues the riddle of steel. Was he always a sorcerer of some sort? Don't know but likely...
|
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Nov 13, 2020 0:03:21 GMT -6
An added class certainly makes more sense, I agree. These days, it would probably be what I'd do in my game. I hardly had this come up, though.
How often do players want to change their class in your games?
|
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Nov 13, 2020 10:15:09 GMT -6
An added class certainly makes more sense, I agree. These days, it would probably be what I'd do in my game. I hardly had this come up, though. How often do players want to change their class in your games? Do you mean "How often do they want to play an elf?" I dunno, 25% of the time? |
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Nov 13, 2020 11:03:16 GMT -6
An added class certainly makes more sense, I agree. These days, it would probably be what I'd do in my game. I hardly had this come up, though. How often do players want to change their class in your games? Okay, well here’s the thing. I had the idea that the Knights of Solamnia should be Clerics (Crown Knights) who switch to Fighter (Sword Knights) who switch to Paladin (Rose Knights). The idea that Crown Knights are Clerics comes from the original DL8 module, and of course sword implies Fighter. rabindranath72 pointed out that this works exceptionally well in OD&D+Greyhawk, in which both switches are mentioned, and because you only need a 16 Strength to do the first switch and a 17 Charisma to make the second switch. And the rank-and-file 1st Level Crown Knights naturally have no spells. But my only question is whether a Fighter (former Cleric) can indeed use a Sword. They can, right? Because that’s the whole point of being a Fighter—to be able to use magic swords. But can you also use Cleric spells if you made the switchover at a level higher than 1? |
|
|
|
Post by tombowings on Nov 13, 2020 11:55:24 GMT -6
I thought the answer lied in Gods, Demi-Gods, and Heroes. Unfortunately, when I checked, not one of the heroes (as opposed to gods and demi-gods) is described as having the abilities of both fighters and magic-users/clerics. I'm not entirely sure that to make of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Nov 13, 2020 11:59:27 GMT -6
The original rules are just not clear enough to avoid some form of DM adjudication.
If, for example, a 5th Level Cleric switches to Fighter, do they start at 1st level, 5th level or the level of Fighter matching their current XP?
If they start over as a 1st level fighter, do they get to keep their current HP, or go back to HD 1+1? If they keep their HPs, that's a function of class, so why not also improved clerical fighting ability at L5 and/or clerical spells? If they don't even keep HPs, how is switching class any different from rolling up a new character, other than having a guaranteed high prime in the new class and getting to keep your magic items? Is that worthwhile enough to even have the option?
In the LBBs, there are four possible switches. It might be useful to think of the ramifications for each switch.
Fighter to Cleric
Fighter to MU
Cleric to Fighter
MU to Fighter
|
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Nov 13, 2020 15:41:14 GMT -6
Don't forget Cleric to anti-Cleric and vis versa  |
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Nov 13, 2020 16:33:20 GMT -6
Interesting idea! They way I'd play it today would be that your cleric abilities freeze at the moment of the switch - so if you switched to FM at 5th level, you could turn undead and cast spells as a 5th-level cleric but never progress unless you switched back and gained more cleric levels. Concerning HP, I'd take the new class HP at the same level. So the 5th-level cleric rolls their new HP as a 5th-level FM. |
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Nov 13, 2020 16:35:29 GMT -6
An added class certainly makes more sense, I agree. These days, it would probably be what I'd do in my game. I hardly had this come up, though. How often do players want to change their class in your games? Do you mean "How often do they want to play an elf?" I dunno, 25% of the time? Since the thread is explicitly not about elves and in the course of the discussion we didn't mention elves, I didn't mean elves. My question concerns the other classes, according to the topic. |
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Nov 13, 2020 17:14:31 GMT -6
Do you mean "How often do they want to play an elf?" I dunno, 25% of the time? Since the thread is explicitly not about elves and in the course of the discussion we didn't mention elves, I didn't mean elves. My question concerns the other classes, according to the topic. Sorry, I thought you were still directing your questions to me. I quite definitely did mention elves, and that was deliberate: You know, I don't think it's about humans only. At the time of Men & Magic, dwarves and halflings could only be one class anyways, so of course the rule didn't apply to them. Elves can change class, but aren't restricted by the requirement of 16+ Int or Strength. Elves also can't be clerics. Adding another class, like thieves, should in theory loosen the restriction, but Greyhawk also introduced AD&D-style multiclassing for nonhumans, which created the more complicated approach where humans can change classes, but nonhumans can't. [ ... ] We might also reason that if a character has 16+ in two abilities (Strength and Int, frex,) then they can switch back and forth, like an elf. We could get rid of the debate on how to handle elves by assuming they switch classes just like a human, but ignore any minimum scores for Strength and Int. I'm specifically saying that the way elves work pre-Greyhawk informs the way I think about changing classes, and that nonhuman multiclassing could be simplified by just using the class change rules for everything, with the gimmick that elves (or other "multiclass" races) ignore the 16+ prerequisite for two of their classes. That's pretty much exactly how I ran elves the last time I had someone playing an elf. Other class changes are rare, but that's because 16+ scores are rare if you are using 3d6 in order, and if character levels are low. If I were running a longer campaign where players had a chance to consider class changes, or if I had players who were more used to 3e+ than old school play, I'd expect to see more demands for human characters that change classes. |
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Nov 13, 2020 17:21:52 GMT -6
Don't forget Cleric to anti-Cleric and vis versa Even if one considers those to be different classes - and I personally consider them just different alignments of the same class - the "rule" for changing (switching alignments by choice or act) is so completely different as to not be very illuminating to discussion of the others. There's no minimum prime required for switching, and the implication is that the Cleric/Anti-Cleric stays the same level (although one could argue the books don't actually say that and interpret the character as having to start over at 1st level). |
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Nov 13, 2020 18:33:58 GMT -6
Sure, it was partly tongue in cheek, and partly wondering aloud whether anyone had considered/encountered a situation where a lawful cleric intentionally wanted to switch to chaos, or vis versa? Should the regular restrictions apply?
|
|
|
|
Post by Punkrabbitt on Nov 14, 2020 11:21:09 GMT -6
The original rules are just not clear enough to avoid some form of DM adjudication. This, of course, is a feature, not a bug, of the original D&D rules. As a DM, how do you want to do this in your own game? Then do it that way! There are no D&D secret police that are going to storm your game for playing wrong; this isn't Warhammer 40,000. |
|
|
|
Post by cometaryorbit on Nov 14, 2020 21:28:43 GMT -6
Don't forget Cleric to anti-Cleric and vis versa Even if one considers those to be different classes - and I personally consider them just different alignments of the same class - the "rule" for changing (switching alignments by choice or act) is so completely different as to not be very illuminating to discussion of the others. There's no minimum prime required for switching, and the implication is that the Cleric/Anti-Cleric stays the same level (although one could argue the books don't actually say that and interpret the character as having to start over at 1st level). I think one could argue based on M&M page 7 --
"Note that Clerics of 7th level and greater are either “Law” or “Chaos,” and there is a sharp distinction between them. If a Patriarch receiving the above benefits changes sides, all the benefits will immediately be removed!"
-- that there is no penalty if you are below Patriarch level, and even then all that is lost is "the above benefits" - reduced stronghold cost and followers. Not actual class levels.
OD&D doesn't have the AD&D rule about penalties for alignment change, does it?
|
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Apr 4, 2021 16:50:42 GMT -6
To us, it was equivalent to multi classing. As limited as it was, it worked. You could be just like Gandalf: 5th level Magic User/4th level fighting man. Fake beard and all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Apr 5, 2021 23:53:14 GMT -6
I agree about elves, I think they can be used to provide some context, if we are trying to parse out the book's actual statements instead of going straight to the oral history of how it was supposed to be played. Of course the text wasn't written with this sort of slavish critical parsing in mind (except for where it is) but it's a place to start anyway.
The statement is about "changing class (for other than elves)," which would imply that the thing elves do is "change class," and these are companion rules for everyone else.
Going back to the description for elves, it says they may freely "switch class." Not the same as "change class," but the rules usually stick to descriptive language rather than legal terminology. They are clearly synonyms and clearly talking about moving a character from one class to another, and the special ability of elves is cited in both as if that itself were a clarification: so now we can consider it possible that both "change" and "switch" are being used freely and interchangeably to describe the single phenomenon of how elves move between the two classes.
So, it could then be read as, "While letting humans do what elves do isn't recommended, if you do allow human characters to do the same then you should at least require these restrictions."
So someone with 16 Strength and Intelligence could freely switch between fighter and magic-user just like an elf, but a fighter with 15 strength and 16 intelligence is not so lucky: once he switches to magic-user, he is stuck and cannot switch back.
This interpretation also lends some extra contextual weight to the restriction that characters cannot switch between clerics and magic-users: it seems an odd and oddly "roleplay-ey" rule to throw in if we're really just talking about a one-time switch without retaining abilities, but if you are going back and forth or at least retaining your old spells as you permanently move over to a new class, then it seems a fairly obvious and straightforward restriction on game balance to make.
Edit: I just thought of this while reading the thread, but now I think I may have just convinced myself to try this out as a table rule. Not that it would ever really come up, if it only considers original scores and if you're rolling 3-18 in order. About one in eight PCs could switch class once if they didn't already pick their class off their highest prime requisite, and fewer than one in 200 would be capable of switching back and forth between classes.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaiqueo on May 22, 2021 20:40:26 GMT -6
Starbeard, that's my current interpretation of the rule, but you explained it way better than I ever could. How do you handle hit points when a character change class for the first time?
Elves start as multiclass, so they get only half HD when they go up a level in a class since the beginning. But a high level character changing class for the first time already rolled full HDs for each of his levels.
|
|
|
|
Post by Porphyre on May 24, 2021 15:33:57 GMT -6
Starbeard, that's my current interpretation of the rule, but you explained it way better than I ever could. How do you handle hit points when a character change class for the first time? Elves start as multiclass, so they get only half HD when they go up a level in a class since the beginning. But a high level character changing class for the first time already rolled full HDs for each of his levels. The way I play it (not infering that this is the right one at all...): -The player-character keeps the abilities and Hit points from the former class, unless there is a rationale against it: for instance, a Fighting man embracing a new career as a Magic-user can still use a sword, because he won't forget his former training, but a FM changing class to Cleric won't because the prohibition against edged swords is a deontological one. - The character also keeps his former Hit-points count because these represent his current state of training and overall capacity to survive a fight, but won't add new hit dices as he progress in his new class (after all, imagine a 4-level Hero who becomes a Cleric: how is the the fighting capability of a 1st level Acolyte going to add anything to his combat expertise?), but he still can roll Hit-Points at every level, untill the new score is better. Exempli gratia: Sir Hughes is a 4th level Hero. He fights as such and has 12 HP (3,3,5,1+0 = 12, no Constitution bonus).
He has a change of heart and decides to enter the holy orders. He now is an Acolyte: he still fights as a Hero (4 men) ans has 12 hit points, but can't use his sword anymore, because he has forfeited the shedding of blood. He can turn undead as a 1st level cleric.
1,500 XP later he's an Adept. He rolls 2d6+0 and scores 1,1+0 = 2, so he stands at 12 HP. He still fights as a Hero but now can Turn stronger undead and cast 1st level clerical spells.
After some more undead-smiting, he reaches 3,000XP and becomes a Priest. He rolls 3d6+0 and obtains 4,6,3+0 = 13. He still attacks as Hero (becaus hero beats Priest) but now defends with 13 HP ('caus 13 is better than 12) ans casts 2 firts level spells. |
|
|
|
Post by badger2305 on May 24, 2021 17:38:44 GMT -6
Starbeard, that's my current interpretation of the rule, but you explained it way better than I ever could. How do you handle hit points when a character change class for the first time? Elves start as multiclass, so they get only half HD when they go up a level in a class since the beginning. But a high level character changing class for the first time already rolled full HDs for each of his levels. The way I play it (not infering that this is the right one at all...): -The player-character keeps the abilities and Hit points from the former class, unless there is a rationale against it: for instance, a Fighting man embracing a new career as a Magic-user can still use a sword, because he won't forget his former training, but a FM changing class to Cleric won't because the prohibition against edged swords is a deontological one. - The character also keeps his former Hit-points count because these represent his current state of training and overall capacity to survive a fight, but won't add new hit dices as he progress in his new class (after all, imagine a 4-level Hero who becomes a Cleric: how is the the fighting capability of a 1st level Acolyte going to add anything to his combat expertise?), but he still can roll Hit-Points at every level, untill the new score is better. Exempli gratia: Sir Hughes is a 4th level Hero. He fights as such and has 12 HP (3,3,5,1+0 = 12, no Constitution bonus).
He has a change of heart and decides to enter the holy orders. He now is an Acolyte: he still fights as a Hero (4 men) ans has 12 hit points, but can't use his sword anymore, because he has forfeited the shedding of blood. He can turn undead as a 1st level cleric.
1,500 XP later he's an Adept. He rolls 2d6+0 and scores 1,1+0 = 2, so he stands at 12 HP. He still fights as a Hero but now can Turn stronger undead and cast 1st level clerical spells.
After some more undead-smiting, he reaches 3,000XP and becomes a Priest. He rolls 3d6+0 and obtains 4,6,3+0 = 13. He still attacks as Hero (becaus hero beats Priest) but now defends with 13 HP ('caus 13 is better than 12) ans casts 2 firts level spells. This makes sense to me. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on May 24, 2021 17:46:17 GMT -6
Instead of changing classes (or multi-classing) you could come up with a unique class for every combination.
Spellsword Fighter + Magic-User
Scout Fighter + Thief
Templar Fighter + Cleric
Charlatan Magic-User + Thief
Exorcist Magic-User + Cleric
Inquisitor Cleric + Thief
Bard Fighter + Magic-User + Thief
Prophet Fighter + Magic-User + Cleric
Diabolist Magic-User + Cleric + Thief
Exemplar Fighter + Magic-User + Cleric + Thief
|
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on May 25, 2021 1:29:27 GMT -6
So one way to handle splitting HP is to cut them all in half, but that assumes that the character started with both classes and progresses somewhat evenly between them. If your elf acquires six levels as a magician and then finally switches to fighter, those first six levels will feel quite limiting if they are still cutting HD rolls in half. And if you have a human character who can switch class, you might not even be thinking about it until several levels down the road, in which case you've been rolling full HD the whole time and now need to split it retroactively.
You could keep two separate character sheets and track HP separately, but that only works of you are ruling that switchable-class characters can only act within one class at a time. I think Porphyre's solution is the most sensible, basically you just take whichever HP total is the highest between classes. That method works seamlessly no matter which way you handle multi or dual classing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2021 5:13:34 GMT -6
So one way to handle splitting HP is to cut them all in half, but that assumes that the character started with both classes and progresses somewhat evenly between them. If your elf acquires six levels as a magician and then finally switches to fighter, those first six levels will feel quite limiting if they are still cutting HD rolls in half. And if you have a human character who can switch class, you might not even be thinking about it until several levels down the road, in which case you've been rolling full HD the whole time and now need to split it retroactively. You could keep two separate character sheets and track HP separately, but that only works of you are ruling that switchable-class characters can only act within one class at a time. I think Porphyre's solution is the most sensible, basically you just take whichever HP total is the highest between classes. That method works seamlessly no matter which way you handle multi or dual classing. I think we ended up in the same place. I just watermark the highest HD earned by experience. My daughter started with an elf last campaign, naturally as a Veteran/Medium. She used 1+1 because of the Veteran, and choose to pursue Seer. When obtaining Seer, also 1+1, she did not roll for HP. At Conjurer, she was able to roll 2 HD. Sadly, the elf did not meet a good end, but had she gone back to Fighting-man she would have needed to become a Swordsman (3 HD) to gain another roll. |
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on May 25, 2021 11:08:30 GMT -6
So one way to handle splitting HP is to cut them all in half, but that assumes that the character started with both classes and progresses somewhat evenly between them. If your elf acquires six levels as a magician and then finally switches to fighter, those first six levels will feel quite limiting if they are still cutting HD rolls in half. And if you have a human character who can switch class, you might not even be thinking about it until several levels down the road, in which case you've been rolling full HD the whole time and now need to split it retroactively. You could keep two separate character sheets and track HP separately, but that only works of you are ruling that switchable-class characters can only act within one class at a time. I think Porphyre's solution is the most sensible, basically you just take whichever HP total is the highest between classes. That method works seamlessly no matter which way you handle multi or dual classing. I think we ended up in the same place. I just watermark the highest HD earned by experience. My daughter started with an elf last campaign, naturally as a Veteran/Medium. She used 1+1 because of the Veteran, and choose to pursue Seer. When obtaining Seer, also 1+1, she did not roll for HP. At Conjurer, she was able to roll 2 HD. Sadly, the elf did not meet a good end, but had she gone back to Fighting-man she would have needed to become a Swordsman (3 HD) to gain another roll. Honestly, I've always been a little surprised that this wasn't the written standard for multiclassing in D&D the whole time. A multiclassed character has never had to prorate or average out their saving throw scores or THAC0 between classes, they just take whichever score is best. So why wouldn't you do that with HD too? Sounds like a fun game! I can't wait until my daughter is old enough to play and die at level 3. And after trying a few different ways here and there, I think that's exactly how I would handle the HD gains too. |
|
