Sword and sorcery classes.

FORUM LOCKED AS OF 4/3/12. Forum for open playtest feedback related to character creation, class rules, skills, etc.

Moderators: DJ LaBoss, michaelcurtis, finarvyn, Harley Stroh

Locked
AgeOfFable
Far-Sighted Wanderer
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:49 am
Contact:

Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by AgeOfFable » Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:17 pm

Given the stated aim of the game to be like the stories in Appendix N, I think it would be good to have a section giving alternatives to the demi-human racial classes. Perhaps there could be Barbarian, Pict and Decadent classes that are similar to Dwarf, Halfling and Elf respectively?
Teleleli The people, places, gods and monsters of the great city and the islands around.

User avatar
finarvyn
Cold-Hearted Immortal
Posts: 2482
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:42 am
FLGS: Fair Game
Location: Chicago suburbs
Contact:

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by finarvyn » Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:56 pm

AgeOfFable wrote:Given the stated aim of the game to be like the stories in Appendix N, I think it would be good to have a section giving alternatives to the demi-human racial classes. Perhaps there could be Barbarian, Pict and Decadent classes that are similar to Dwarf, Halfling and Elf respectively?
I believe that Joseph's plan is to establish a core rules set of a reasonable size and if 3rd party groups want to build onto the rules to add on extra classes, etc, they can do so. He doesn't want to create a game that has everything in it -- other RPGs try to do that already and they are really huge.
Marv / Finarvyn
DCC Minister of Propaganda; Deputized 6/8/11
DCC RPG playtester 2011, DCC Lankhmar trivia contest winner 2015; OD&D player since 1975

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own."
-- Gary Gygax
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!"
-- Dave Arneson

goodmangames
Cold-Hearted Immortal
Posts: 2701
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 12:41 pm
Location: San Jose, CA

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by goodmangames » Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:00 pm

Finarvyn hit the nail on the head. That said, I love the idea of a Pict and Decadent class. Thank you for "getting" Appendix N. :) And please feel free to contribute by posting your own ideas on such classes! They're beyond the scope of the DCC RPG (which I am intentionally keeping fairly streamlined) but I bet there are folks who would appreciate them.
Joseph Goodman
Goodman Games
www.goodman-games.com

User avatar
finarvyn
Cold-Hearted Immortal
Posts: 2482
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:42 am
FLGS: Fair Game
Location: Chicago suburbs
Contact:

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by finarvyn » Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:03 pm

goodmangames wrote:Finarvyn hit the nail on the head.
It's that "Minister of Propaganda" thing. It's my starting profession, and because of that I get a hammer. :P
Marv / Finarvyn
DCC Minister of Propaganda; Deputized 6/8/11
DCC RPG playtester 2011, DCC Lankhmar trivia contest winner 2015; OD&D player since 1975

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own."
-- Gary Gygax
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!"
-- Dave Arneson

orcface999
Ill-Fated Peasant
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:05 pm

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by orcface999 » Wed Jun 08, 2011 9:44 pm

I thought you started with a Pack of Lies in propaganda... :lol:

User avatar
finarvyn
Cold-Hearted Immortal
Posts: 2482
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:42 am
FLGS: Fair Game
Location: Chicago suburbs
Contact:

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by finarvyn » Thu Jun 09, 2011 2:50 am

orcface999 wrote:I thought you started with a Pack of Lies in propaganda... :lol:
See, I'd never confess to it even if I had one. That's a big part of what I do.
Marv / Finarvyn
DCC Minister of Propaganda; Deputized 6/8/11
DCC RPG playtester 2011, DCC Lankhmar trivia contest winner 2015; OD&D player since 1975

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own."
-- Gary Gygax
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!"
-- Dave Arneson

Sunsword
Far-Sighted Wanderer
Posts: 45
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 6:11 pm

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by Sunsword » Fri Jun 10, 2011 7:19 am

I think the Warrior does a great job of covering the Barbarian. This is the first "Fighter" class, that to me, really lets you be a bad@$$, according the fiction that inspired the game.

Pict & Decadent would be sweet.

User avatar
finarvyn
Cold-Hearted Immortal
Posts: 2482
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:42 am
FLGS: Fair Game
Location: Chicago suburbs
Contact:

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by finarvyn » Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:13 am

Sunsword wrote:I think the Warrior does a great job of covering the Barbarian.
I would agree. At what point did players get the idea that every character has to be a specialist at something? In the 1970's we started out with the Fighting Man as a class that could represent a knight, a barbarian, a gladiator, a soldier, a swashbucking pirate, or any of a number of types. What does it matter that the fundamental rules were the same for all of the options? You came up with a character concept, then you played it.

Then Greyhawk came up with Paladins. Strategic Review came up with Rangers. Unearthed Arcana gave us the Chavalier. More and more classes, each with special things it could do better than everyone else. Eventually, we reached the point where no one really wants to play a Fighting Man anymore because it's not special. Why would you ever want to play a Fighting Man? As a Paladin you could lay on hands. As a Ranger you could track and get that extra hit die. At high levels, those classes could even cast spells! The fighter might as well have been taken out of the rules altogether.

The same argument can be made for other classes, by the way. The specialist wizards of AD&D (perhaps 2E, I forget) could get more spells if they limited their spell list choices. The 3E sorcerer got more spells at lower levels. More, more, more.

Now we have a chance to start over with DCC. Is it a good thing to create a whole steaming pile of amped-up optional classes, or is it better to develop the basics and encourage players to inject personality into them? Personally, I think it would be good for people to actually playtest some of the options out there already rather than dream up new ones.

Just my two coppers.
Marv / Finarvyn
DCC Minister of Propaganda; Deputized 6/8/11
DCC RPG playtester 2011, DCC Lankhmar trivia contest winner 2015; OD&D player since 1975

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own."
-- Gary Gygax
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!"
-- Dave Arneson

jmucchiello
Chaos-Summoning Sorcerer
Posts: 779
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 3:28 am

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by jmucchiello » Fri Jun 10, 2011 1:29 pm

finarvyn wrote:Now we have a chance to start over with DCC. Is it a good thing to create a whole steaming pile of amped-up optional classes, or is it better to develop the basics and encourage players to inject personality into them? Personally, I think it would be good for people to actually playtest some of the options out there already rather than dream up new ones.

Just my two coppers.
I both agree and disagree. The difference between a barbarian and a ranger can easily be attributed to personality and weapon choice. The difference between a shapeshifter druid and cleric, not so easily. New classes are necessary when vastly different abilities are needed.

I haven't committed myself to it yet (as I still can only see half the game system with the beta). But I'd like to create a gnome "race" that specialized in illusion. Instead of corruption, they just go insane and lose touch with reality. A shapeshifter class (named druid or not) that becomes more animistic over time seems like an awesome fit for DCCRPG. These kinds of ideas do not lend themselves to the "standard seven" as personality quirks. (I suppose a patron-specific corruption chart for the illusionist could work but I'm still on the fence about that.)

Harley Stroh
Cold-Hearted Immortal
Posts: 1803
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 4:02 am
Location: On the run.
Contact:

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by Harley Stroh » Fri Jun 10, 2011 5:40 pm

jmucchiello wrote:[I haven't committed myself to it yet (as I still can only see half the game system with the beta). But I'd like to create a gnome "race" that specialized in illusion. Instead of corruption, they just go insane and lose touch with reality. A shapeshifter class (named druid or not) that becomes more animistic over time seems like an awesome fit for DCCRPG. These kinds of ideas do not lend themselves to the "standard seven" as personality quirks. (I suppose a patron-specific corruption chart for the illusionist could work but I'm still on the fence about that.)
Write up the pdf, publish to RPGNow and make a killing off of Gnomeboy!

//H
The lucky guy who got to write some Dungeon Crawl Classics.

DCC Resource thread: character sheets, judge tools, and the world's fastest 0-level party creator.

jmucchiello
Chaos-Summoning Sorcerer
Posts: 779
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 3:28 am

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by jmucchiello » Fri Jun 10, 2011 6:06 pm

But I haven't published a new book on RPGNow in 5 or 6 years. It'll break my streak.

User avatar
finarvyn
Cold-Hearted Immortal
Posts: 2482
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:42 am
FLGS: Fair Game
Location: Chicago suburbs
Contact:

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by finarvyn » Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:04 am

jmucchiello wrote:I'd like to create a gnome "race" that specialized in illusion. Instead of corruption, they just go insane and lose touch with reality. A shapeshifter class (named druid or not) that becomes more animistic over time seems like an awesome fit for DCCRPG. These kinds of ideas do not lend themselves to the "standard seven" as personality quirks. (I suppose a patron-specific corruption chart for the illusionist could work but I'm still on the fence about that.)
These all sound like fun classes to play, but do they have examples in Appendix N literature? It's possible that creating lots of cool classes may undermine the literary atmosphere that Goodman Games is striving for.

Jedi are cool. Vulcans are cool. Vulcan jedi are neither Star Wars or Star Trek.

Just me thinking out loud...
Marv / Finarvyn
DCC Minister of Propaganda; Deputized 6/8/11
DCC RPG playtester 2011, DCC Lankhmar trivia contest winner 2015; OD&D player since 1975

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own."
-- Gary Gygax
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!"
-- Dave Arneson

jmucchiello
Chaos-Summoning Sorcerer
Posts: 779
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 3:28 am

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by jmucchiello » Sat Jun 11, 2011 9:58 am

finarvyn wrote:These all sound like fun classes to play, but do they have examples in Appendix N literature?
Remove the cleric from the core rulebook and I'll except this as a reason not to create gnomish illusionists.

User avatar
Troy812
Far-Sighted Wanderer
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 11:49 am

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by Troy812 » Sat Jun 11, 2011 1:35 pm

I say keep the class list short and sweet.
If we start making "Barbarian, Pict and Decadent classes " the field get messy very quickly.

If you must have them, make them an occupation for your level 0 characters.

But really I prefer the purity of a short class list.

T

AgeOfFable
Far-Sighted Wanderer
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:49 am
Contact:

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by AgeOfFable » Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:22 pm

They were intended as replacements rather than additions.
Teleleli The people, places, gods and monsters of the great city and the islands around.

User avatar
finarvyn
Cold-Hearted Immortal
Posts: 2482
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:42 am
FLGS: Fair Game
Location: Chicago suburbs
Contact:

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by finarvyn » Sun Jun 12, 2011 3:22 am

jmucchiello wrote:
finarvyn wrote:These all sound like fun classes to play, but do they have examples in Appendix N literature?
Remove the cleric from the core rulebook and I'll except this as a reason not to create gnomish illusionists.
Actually, I started a "kill the cleric" thread back in April with that very suggestion in mind. It was not well received overall because folks like having the cleric in the game, but my contention at the time was that there aren't any good Appendix N examples of Clerics out there.
Marv / Finarvyn
DCC Minister of Propaganda; Deputized 6/8/11
DCC RPG playtester 2011, DCC Lankhmar trivia contest winner 2015; OD&D player since 1975

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own."
-- Gary Gygax
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!"
-- Dave Arneson

jmucchiello
Chaos-Summoning Sorcerer
Posts: 779
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 3:28 am

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by jmucchiello » Sun Jun 12, 2011 5:36 am

finarvyn wrote:
jmucchiello wrote:
finarvyn wrote:These all sound like fun classes to play, but do they have examples in Appendix N literature?
Remove the cleric from the core rulebook and I'll except this as a reason not to create gnomish illusionists.
Actually, I started a "kill the cleric" thread back in April with that very suggestion in mind. It was not well received overall because folks like having the cleric in the game, but my contention at the time was that there aren't any good Appendix N examples of Clerics out there.
I know you did. And the result is quite clear. Those same gamers probably want a gnome illusionist too. But saying, "You shouldn't do that. That's not Appendix N." has no teeth as long as the cleric is still in the game.

User avatar
GnomeBoy
Tyrant Master (Administrator)
Posts: 3629
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:46 pm
FLGS: Bizarro World
Location: Left Coast, USA
Contact:

Re: Sword and sorcery classes.

Post by GnomeBoy » Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:17 pm

Harley Stroh wrote:
jmucchiello wrote:...But I'd like to create a gnome "race" that specialized in illusion. Instead of corruption, they just go insane and lose touch with reality... (I suppose a patron-specific corruption chart for the illusionist could work but I'm still on the fence about that.)
Write up the pdf, publish to RPGNow and make a killing off of Gnomeboy!
You'd also save me the time and effort of making my own along those lines anyway... :mrgreen:
Gnome Boy • DCC playtester @ DDC 35 Feb '11. • Beta DL 2111, 7AM PT, 8 June 11.
Playing RPGs since '77 • Quasi-occasional member of the Legion of 8th-Level Fighters.

Link: Here Be 100+ DCC Monsters

bygrinstow.com

Kuruz, Mendicant, N • AC 8, 4 hp • R-1, F0, W0 • S9 A8 S9 P11 I16 L8
Zend, Grave Digger, L • AC 9, 3 hp • R-1, F0, W1 • S14 A6 S9 P13 I13 L6
Mercer, Outlaw, N • AC 12, 2 hp • R0, F-1, W1 • S7 A9 S6 P13 I8 L13
Dejah, Ropemaker, C • AC 10, 2 hp • R0, F1, W-1 • S8 A12 S15 P7 I11 L7

Locked

Return to “Playtest Feedback: Characters”