Goodman Games

I wish I had thought of this several months ago. I've figured out how to mesh DCCRPG's limited choices at first level with having more than 7 classes: Prestige Classes. (Don't scream yet.)

Unlike D&D3 Prestige Classes, there would be NO requirements (except perhaps race and even that requirement could be waved if it were a societal requirement) for taking a prestige class. Instead, the base classes would be 5 levels in length and then they would just END. At 6th level, you would choose a prestige class and continue adventuring from there with all of your old class abilities plus your new class abilities.

What other differences are there? Prestige classes have no hit dice. 5th level is the top of the hit point treadmill. Prestige classes have no saving throw bonuses, no attack bonuses. In other words, 6th level is the same as 5th level plus some Prestige ability. The game would have a lot in common with E6, a D&D3 variant.

What else does this do? No spells above 3rd level. No MDoA abilities that exceed the current suggested power levels of rolling a 7. 1st level town guards remain dangerous to "high" level parties.

And folks who don't like "high" level play could just use the "Nothing" prestige class. As you gain experience, you gain no new abilities. Happy adventuring.

Can you give an example of what you envision for a prestige class and the type of abilities they would have?

Are we talking super-hero powers like in 4th edition or something much simpler?

Much simpler. I haven't thought it that far ahead yet. But they would probably be a collection of 5 or so abilities no more powerful than the common 3E Feat. (More blasphemy, I know.) I don't like using the word feat though because most 3E feats are fighter feats and those kinds of abilities are already included in DCCRPG by the MDoA mechanic. IOW, there would not be an Archer PrC with point blank shot, precise shot, ricochet shot, etc. That would be taking my idea in the wrong direction.

RP-wise the classes would be the stuff you can't be coming out of the funnel. King's guard, High Priest, Sage, Assassin (of course), and the class abilities would allow the character to do a little something more than the usually warrior or cleric.

jmucchiello wrote: RP-wise the classes would be the stuff you can't be coming out of the funnel. King's guard, High Priest, Sage, Assassin (of course), and the class abilities would allow the character to do a little something more than the usually warrior or cleric.

Like... Area "lay on hands" for a Theurge.... better crit die/table for backstabs of an Assassin...... "Shield shall be splintered" rule to protect an adjacent ally, not just yourself, for a King's Guard....... extra damage for turn unholy for an Exorcist....

Yeah, i like it. Worth a try for sure

I will also engage in blasphemy, but go even further -- instead of "prestige classes" why not a "class replacement" option that allows a character to take the abilities of another class as its "level." This would be after 5th level, of course. So, for instance, a halfling could take a Thief class at 6th level instead of the standard class bumps for a 6th level halfling. Maybe the character is forced to stay on that track for 5 more levels or can choose to take another halfling class at 7th, etc. Probably wouldn't allow more than two (halfling and thief) in this case, but it would give the characters some fairly low risk (of setting the game a-kilter) options once they get to 5th...as a reward. Obviously humans would be restricted to human classes... though I could see a "fey friend" class that grants a human the class abilities of an elf..dunno.

Just throwing it out there.

ragboy wrote:I will also engage in blasphemy, but go even further -- instead of "prestige classes" why not a "class replacement" option that allows a character to take the abilities of another class as its "level." This would be after 5th level, of course. So, for instance, a halfling could take a Thief class at 6th level instead of the standard class bumps for a 6th level halfling. (...)

Like this as well, and i don't see why they couldn't be both viable options: it's like in 3E, you could go for Fighter/Thief as well as Fighter/Chain Master.

I would say that:
* when you pick a class, basic or prestige, you can't change it, and you have to complete 5 levels with it.
* after 5th level you can only take levels in a prestige class or in a basic class you don't have levels in.
* you only get "special abilities" from levels 6th to 10th , like the ability to cast spells, lay-on-hands, or the use of MDoA.
* If the new class would have an higher BAB than the old one, you can use the new BB (this is in replacement of the old attack bonus, not in addition to it)
* Same with each saving throw
* If the new class would have a higher HD than the previous, you can roll to see if one of these new HDs replace a smaller one. Example: a 5th level Thief decides to take 6th level in Cleric: He rolls 1d8-1d6. If the result is greater than 0, add that number to total HPs and recount HDs as : 4d6+1d8.

This way there wouldnt be many differences (maybe just HPs!) between Jon who started of as a 5th level thief, and then took 5 levels in Cleric, or Noj who did the opposite.

jmucchiello wrote:the base classes would be 5 levels in length and then they would just END. At 6th level, you would choose a prestige class and continue adventuring from there with all of your old class abilities plus your new class abilities.

I suggested something quite similar to this to Joseph back in March and he wasn't too keen on the idea. To me it's a good solution.

An example I gave was fighter. After 5th level you could remain as a fighter for 6-10 or take a "sub class" of paladin or ranger for the next 5 levels until you capped out at 10 total levels.

I thought it was simple. He didn't like it.

finarvyn wrote:

jmucchiello wrote:the base classes would be 5 levels in length and then they would just END. At 6th level, you would choose a prestige class and continue adventuring from there with all of your old class abilities plus your new class abilities.

I suggested something quite similar to this to Joseph back in March and he wasn't too keen on the idea. To me it's a good solution.

An example I gave was fighter. After 5th level you could remain as a fighter for 6-10 or take a "sub class" of paladin or ranger for the next 5 levels until you capped out at 10 total levels.

I thought it was simple. He didn't like it.

I think above 5th Lvel you should specialise by taking a prestige class, just to tone down the one-man eldritch army. After having played weeks at 5th Level I gotta tell you - it isn't a OD&D power curve in practice, it's totally gonzo. If it carries on in the same fashion by 10th Level and we get high level spells it's getting into Exalted territory. This isn't to say it isn't FUN, it just isn't what I expected. See y'all in November

finarvyn wrote:I suggested something quite similar to this to Joseph back in March and he wasn't too keen on the idea. To me it's a good solution.

An example I gave was fighter. After 5th level you could remain as a fighter for 6-10 or take a "sub class" of paladin or ranger for the next 5 levels until you capped out at 10 total levels.

I thought it was simple. He didn't like it.

You weren't selling it right. I specifically trying to cut the power level at 5. The 6+ classes would be weak, but heavily thematic. The suggestion of switching to Warrior/Thief is anathema to my idea. Warrior/Paladin is much more correct as long as the paladin at 10th level 5/5 is not really much more powerful than a 5th level paladin started at level 1. The Paladin class would get a minor lay on hands ability at level 1. Ability to turn undead at the paladin's level (and yes that is weak at character level 6. But at level 10 it is exactly as powerful as the cleric's undead turning (unless they prestige into some kind of exorcist class)).

Just think how much space would have been saved by eliminating spells above 3rd level.

geordie racer wrote:After having played weeks at 5th Level I gotta tell you - it isn't a OD&D power curve in practice, it's totally gonzo. If it carries on in the same fashion by 10th Level and we get high level spells it's getting into Exalted territory.

Well, this is what Joseph was trying to explain to folks back in March or so when posters were demanding 10 levels or they would be disappointed. A 5th level character in DCC is a pretty darned fine character.

jmucchiello wrote:

finarvyn wrote:An example I gave was fighter. After 5th level you could remain as a fighter for 6-10 or take a "sub class" of paladin or ranger...

The suggestion of switching to Warrior/Thief is anathema to my idea. Warrior/Paladin is much more correct as long as the paladin at 10th level 5/5 is not really much more powerful than a 5th level paladin started at level 1.

I didn't suggest a Fighter/Thief.

My suggestion had been that AD&D-style sub-classes could become the next 5 levels or second tier of character development.

Kind of like the old Bard (either in Strategic Review or AD&D, I forget which) where you had to advance in another class first and could become a Bard later.

finarvyn wrote:My suggestion had been that AD&D-style sub-classes could become the next 5 levels or second tier of character development.

That could work too. But my suggestion assumes there are only 5 levels to the base classes.

At the beginning I said I wished this idea had come to me when we were arguing about the 5 vs 10 level game. I'd have been less interested in the 10 level game if I knew everything then that I know now. But that discussion existed even before the Beta came out.

jmucchiello wrote:I wished this idea had come to me when we were arguing about the 5 vs 10 level game. I'd have been less interested in the 10 level game if I knew everything then that I know now. But that discussion existed even before the Beta came out.

I wonder if it's worth going back to that older thread and bringing the discussion back. I know that Joseph had plans to work on the 6-10 level range but haven't seen any playtest docs with this yet, so I don't know how much he has done on it. Perhaps many others now feel they way you do.

They could just post here. If you want to hunt down the old thread and crosspost this thread to it, go right ahead.

I like this idea. But the devil's in the details. I could see it being stunningly elegant or overbearingly complex. Nice idea, though.

smathis wrote:I like this idea. But the devil's in the details. I could see it being stunningly elegant or overbearingly complex. Nice idea, though.

I too like the way this thread is going but the details may also turn out to be the devil!

Finarvyn can you recall or cross post exactly what were Mr G's objections to the original idea? The man has a definite vision for DCC which we all respect. If you can find this, or he himself has the time to give us the short form of his misgivings it will go a long way to help me at least see what could be done with this or other versions of class progression as I have attempted elsewhere.

Ducaster wrote:

smathis wrote:Finarvyn can you recall or cross post exactly what were Mr G's objections to the original idea?

It was in a playtest discussion either by e-mail or PM, so there isn't a direct link I can give to you. It occured well before the beta release, perhaps in March or April, so he may have changed his mind since.

I can search around to see if I still have the exact quotes involved somewhere.