Goodman Games

Fan Forums
It is currently Mon Sep 01, 2014 7:44 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Amethyst - Multiclassing, Hybrids, and Player Freedom
PostPosted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 4:51 pm 
Offline
Far-Sighted Wanderer

Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 3:51 pm
Posts: 30
I wanted to mention two points, both involving interesting posts on the DEM forums.

The first regards the definition of disruption and how it affects classes. Martial classes are not magic but the items they wield are. So someone asked if a techan class could dive into fantasy multiclass feats. And the answer is yes, absolutely.

Humans can choose any of the available classes listed, so the four techan classes and the growing list of fantasy (from PHB1, 2 and 3) save for divine and psionic paths (and all arcane save for two). When you choose a class, you fall into the role of echan or techan human at that point...well...not technically. Yes, if you chose a techan class, you are a techan human. When you start using magic, you turn echan, but you could be a techan human fighter and until you start using magic, the choice to wield tech is still there. It’s when you start to use and carry magic when things get difficult.

You can ABSOLUTELY select fantasy multiclass feats if you are a techan class. Obviously, you would have to stick with martial class multiclass feats but that still allows you to tap into fighter, ranger, rogue, warlord, etc.

And by the way, this should also work for hybrids as well. Until you start using magic items, you are still open to use technology. This works the other way around to. Pick a fighter and grab a techan multiclass feat. Or better still pick that along with the Crossroad's Drifter lifepath. Grab an immune gun and presto, you're a magical fighter with double barreled shotgun...all perfectly legal and canon in Amethyst.

The second point involves our motivation for having limitation in the canon Amethyst setting. Specifically, the point involves our "mindset" and if we were still thinking like 3rd Ed player or 4th Ed players. The answer is that there was no "game mindset” when we created Amethyst. It's a very specific playground, as specific as playing in Middle Earth, Harry Potter, or A Song of Ice and Fire. That was the mindset, as a novel or non-game setting that was adapted into a game, rather than a game setting built from the ground up.

This was first brought up with The Tome Show. They mentioned Amethyst is about saying no while 4th Ed is about saying yes. Obviously, I have issues with that. Games, by definition, must limit player freedom. 4th Edition does say no, as do DMs. They say no all the time. Classes are limited in their roles. Powers have specific attributes tied to them (oddly enough NeuroSpasta counters this by offering incredible adaptability). My group made a joke recently that 4th Edition gives the illusion of freedom but in actually is nearly as limiting as the previous edition.

Amethyst has a lot of detail, but I wouldn't say it limits freedom anymore than playing in Middle Earth or Song of Ice and Fire. I think people were expecting Amethyst to be Eberron, meaning its everything D&D offers plus ours. Amethyst was written as a separate setting away from D&D and then it was adapted into 4th Edition.

There was a mindset, but it was not 3rd- or 4th-oriented. Amethyst was a setting created in 1992 and this is an adaption of that setting, in as much as the aforementioned fantasy novels mentioned above. Of course, a lot of people just want the techan rules for their own custom-created game. Some others adapt Amethyst to their own voice, which is also supported and encouraged.

This is only the official canon Amethyst setting. You are free to do what you wish in your own custom game. It's also ironic that WOTC, encouraging "yes", released the GSL, which limited the freedom of 3rd Party Games. “No” and “Yes” and interchangeable. It is correct that we say no to divinity. There is a very good reason why (as further reinforced by the GSL) they were removed. We could also say that we say yes to technology, yes to power armor, yes tanks and robots. We say yes to druids, barbarians, fighters, rogues, shamans, rangers, monks, and others. We have a massive world the size of North America and detail less than 1% of its landmass. 4th Ed has one elf race, we have three. Our humans are the same with additional options for techan paths. In the next book, we say yes to evil races, corrupt magic, and invaders from another planet (might said too much).

You may be surprised some of interesting ideas I have seen players come up with. One DM on the WOTC forum told me of a player that is using a Warforged template to create a robot PC. I think that's really clever. Another group simply pushed more into D&D and has an Amethyst party with tieflings. My group involves the following:

Techan Stalker
Human Monk
Tenenbri Wizard
Narros Ranger
Gimfen Rogue
Human Warlord

The wizard is off and on (more off) so we are about to add a techan grounder into the fray in a few weeks.

Here is another interesting oddity: Next week, we are taking a break from our regularly scheduled campaign to run a one-off WOTC dungeon WITHIN the architecture of Amethyst. It is P3-Assault on Nightwyrm Fortress. There shouldn't be a lot of alterations to make it work. This group consists of a damaskan melee-ranger, a chaparran archer-ranger, a pagus shaman, a pagus barbarian, and a kodiak warden. Not sure why a scholarly and civilized damaskan is wandering around with a bunch of uncultured warmongers but hey, whatever.

Also remember, we removed divine only because the GSL prevented us from modifying them to work within our framework. If we could have, we would have removed the proof-of-god-requirement and fluffed them back in. You're more than welcome to do the same. We also made an exception for runepriest. Also note that all primal classes are in, including druid.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Amethyst - Multiclassing, Hybrids, and Player Freedom
PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 8:41 pm 
Offline
Wild-Eyed Zealot

Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 7:47 pm
Posts: 81
I didn't realize that Amethyst existed before 4E until someone mentioned getting the 3.5 version. Knowing that I understand your limitations to what is allowed. Once I read about Amethyst I determined it wasn't the setting for me but I still have it on my drivethrurpg wishlist. Still hoping D&D 4E compatible Metamorphosis Alpha gets published.

_________________
Dennis Payne
Identical Games


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Amethyst - Multiclassing, Hybrids, and Player Freedom
PostPosted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:27 pm 
Offline
Far-Sighted Wanderer

Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 3:51 pm
Posts: 30
If the setting does not match what your are looking for, the rules themselves may still. There is a chapter at the end that explains how to alter the rules for your own applications.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Amethyst - Multiclassing, Hybrids, and Player Freedom
PostPosted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 8:11 am 
Offline
Wild-Eyed Zealot

Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 7:47 pm
Posts: 81
DiasExMachina wrote:
If the setting does not match what your are looking for, the rules themselves may still. There is a chapter at the end that explains how to alter the rules for your own applications.

That's why it is still on my wishlist. It just isn't needed for my current campaigns so I haven't picked it up yet. I could perhaps use it for paragon levels but I think I'd prefer to hold off until a new campaign.

_________________
Dennis Payne
Identical Games


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group