An Alternate version of Elite Paths

[The Fiendish Dr. Samsara]

I’m having a love/hate relationship with certain “later supplement” classes and elite paths. Here’s my first thoughts on this.

Here’s my new thoughts:

Start with the three core classes: Warrior, Wizard, and Thief. As mentioned before, combine the Wizard and Cleric spell lists. No Turning at low levels? Right—keep undead scary as hell to low-level guys. This covers levels 1-3, the Basic levels.

Level 4 is the beginning of the heroic levels (a level 4 Fighting-Man is a Hero). When a PC accumulated enough XP to advance to 4th level, he has the option to continue in his original, core class OR to take an elite path (although I don’t really like the name, which smacks of Prestige Class. But I can’t come up with a better one either). Entering an Elite path requires an additional 15% of XP. So, a Wizard needs 10,000 XP to make Level 4 OR 11,500 to make an Elite Level 4.


Here’s a stab at Elite paths:
Warriors—Paladins, Rangers
Wizards—Druid, Illusionists
Thief—Assassins, Bards


Paladins are essentially as described in Book 1 of S&S, although I’m also playing around with the idea of giving them the Turning ability and of removing the other special powers, replacing them with limited spell-casting from the old Cleric Spell list.

Rangers would get some special abilities re sneaking and tracking, favoured enemy bonus, and some limited spell-casting from the old Druid list.

Druids get shape-changing, pass without trace, and an expanded spell list which adds in the old Druid spells.

Illusionsists detect illusions, casting bonus to illusions, and expanded spell lists which adds the old Illusionist spells.

Assassins are essentially as described in the book.

Bards essentially as in the Monstrous Mayhem supplement.



That’s the thought at the moment. Keeps things simple at low levels, when PC’s are almost disposable. Add complexity and customization at mid-level when the PC’s go from wannabes to heroes and player investment sets in. Each class has three options—continue at core class or take one of the two Elite Paths.

I’m also mulling the idea of adding a fourth option, which would be to allow a PC to dual-class at 4th level, making them 4th level at the original class and 1st level at the second class, with all XP divided equally from then on out as per dual-classed demi-humans. But I’m very unsure of that.

Thoughts?

[thegreyelf]

Interesting approach, but this pretty much just turns Elite Paths into Prestige Classes, doesn't it? I also find it intriguing that you dislike the cleric, but purely from an academic standpoint; most old-schoolers dislike the thief!

Also...can we cross-post this at the ELG forums? I'd love to see some discussion get going over there.

[The Fiendish Dr. Samsara]

Fair enough. As I've said, I'm awfully torn on the whole issue. I did like the way the BECM game did Paladins and Druids. So how is that different from Prestige Classes? I am not terribly conversant with 3.141 stuff, so take my analysis with a grain of salt. But I think the essential difference is that taking a Prestige Class was pretty much always a good idea, in terms of character optimization. That's largely the result of standardized XP Tables. So you got some new goodies at no real price.

Whereas this idea of Elite Paths is not. It makes perfect sense to keep on being a regular old Fighter who will advance faster than a Paladin or Ranger. Now I probably need to jigger with the XP requirements (is 15% too low? Too high? I don't know) to make that clear. In soemsense, you are burning XP to get extra powers. And while cool powers are nice, soemtimes just having ahigher level is nicer. Particulary when you play at the lower leves I do and a few hundred XP can make a big difference.

In my mind, I have too ideas: one is my old AD&D fun with Rangers and Illusionists and the other is the stark clarity of White Box classes. I'm thinking that this method sort of reproduces the BECM ideal of starting simple and then adding complexity as you go.

But I don't know.

As regards the Cleric, I hope I expressed my problem with them in that orignal post. It isn't purely academic. Interetsing that right after I resurrected this idea, James at grognardia sounds like he is heading the same direction: renewed appreciation for the Theif and lessening appreciation of the Cleric.

And, you're right, of course, that I should have cross-posted this.

[thegreyelf]

Cross-posted from the ELG fora:

Your point is well taken in regards to BECMI; Paladins, Druids, etc., were indeed some of the earlier examples (along with the original Bard and Thief/Acrobat in AD&D) of prestige classes, so there is precedent for it.

FWIW, in Monstrous Mayhem I do suggest as an optional rule that an XP penalty be imposed on those who choose to advance in an Elite Path.

Regarding the cleric thing: the academic descriptor was meant to apply to my interest. I found, from a purely academic sense, it interesting that you disliked the cleric. I get your reasons; I just find the disparity between that approach and the so-called "Typical" old-school outlook intriguing, is all .

Also, got a kick out of "3.pi"