Crawl! New Class Challenge! Brainstorm (and class proposals)

[reverenddak]

Ok, here's the thread where you propose and suggest what classes will be in the Crawl! New Class Issue.

For this phase, it'll work like this:

Brainstorm: Propose or suggest the classes you want to see in an issue of Crawl! dedicated to new classes. Discuss & debate (keep it friendly) the proposals & suggestions.

The next phase will be selection of the favorite 5, then a the community can submit the write-ups for each class, and the community will vote on the best. The best of those will be published in an upcoming issue of Crawl! Those that get published will see their creation in print, and get a copy of the zine.

I would like to see classic 0e & AD&D 1e classes. I propose the following.

Half-orc (Barbarian-like)
Half-elf (Druid-like or Thief-like)
Monk
Bard
Assassin
Psionist
Gnome (as the Illusionist) - this might need special consideration. I see Illusions working considerably differently than Arcane (and corrupting) magic.

[Colin]

I vote for:

1) Monk
2) Psionicist

[Raven_Crowking]

I think that the Thief as presented covers the Assassin very well.

[Vanguard]

Necromancer!
Orc (I'll drop a few abilities to make it a Halfbreed if you insist)
Bard

I swear I didn't suggest these because I'm working on them already.

[Colin]

I think that the Thief as presented covers the Assassin very well.

Yep. Assassin is even one of the Thief's existing "paths".

Colin

[Vanguard]

I think I'd like to see all of the Wizards specialized too. At least, that's my plan.

[bitflipr]

I'm curious why this has to follow in the footsteps of D&D? What DCC represents to me is a step away from the conventions and boundaries set up by D&D.

Instead of a Gnome/Illusionist, how about a more traditional Gnome that is non-magical, 15 cm tall, a friend of animals, etc.

Instead of Psionist, how about an alien oustider with Psychic powers?

[sheriffharry]

Definitively in for me:
- Straight Orc
- Bard (jack-of-all-trade that would not just pilfer abilities from other classes...)
- Gnome (as the Illusionist with different magic, less-deadly illusions less dangerous to practice +magic resistance.)

Maybe also:
- Monk (I kinda like the "eventually" powerful weaponless combat idea.)
- Anti-paladin/Dark Knight type (powerful but chaotic)

[svaragog]

There could always be an Archer class. Can have some similar to Deeds but only pertaining to arrows and other missile weapons.

I can definately see a Gnome illusionist having its own type of magic system from minor tricks of light and sound to full blown "There is a Dragon coming right for us run, eeek, its breathing fire! I'm on fire!"
A simple system would be having something like a deed die. You describe what type of illusion you want to make roll your deed die and spellcast roll. The deed die (or in this case illusion die) tells you what table to roll on for the overall effectiveness of the illusion. Then compare your results of your spellcast roll on the appropriate table. Or something like that.

Svaragog

[sheriffharry]

I can definately see a Gnome illusionist having its own type of magic system from minor tricks of light and sound to full blown "There is a Dragon coming right for us run, eeek, its breathing fire! I'm on fire!"
A simple system would be having something like a deed die. You describe what type of illusion you want to make roll your deed die and spellcast roll. The deed die (or in this case illusion die) tells you what table to roll on for the overall effectiveness of the illusion. Then compare your results of your spellcast roll on the appropriate table. Or something like that.

Svaragog

Sturdy Illusionist Trick (SIT) based on Mighty Deed of Arm (MDA) mechanics. I like it.
("Sturdy" as in "the illusion suddenly becomes alive/solid/lethal")

The gnome could have access to only a single spell per level, illusion-based, but every use comes with a D3-D4-etc SIT die roll sometimes (on 3+ rolls) making the fairly inoffensive spell something suddenly dangerous and feared! As for MDA, players have the responsibility of describing the SIT with as much details as possible.

[reverenddak]

I can definately see a Gnome illusionist having its own type of magic system from minor tricks of light and sound to full blown "There is a Dragon coming right for us run, eeek, its breathing fire! I'm on fire!"
A simple system would be having something like a deed die. You describe what type of illusion you want to make roll your deed die and spellcast roll. The deed die (or in this case illusion die) tells you what table to roll on for the overall effectiveness of the illusion. Then compare your results of your spellcast roll on the appropriate table. Or something like that.

Svaragog

Sturdy Illusionist Trick (SIT) based on Mighty Deed of Arm (MDA) mechanics. I like it.
("Sturdy" as in "the illusion suddenly becomes alive/solid/lethal")

The gnome could have access to only a single spell per level, illusion-based, but every use comes with a D3-D4-etc SIT die roll sometimes (on 3+ rolls) making the fairly inoffensive spell something suddenly dangerous and feared! As for MDA, players have the responsibility of describing the SIT with as much details as possible.

I really REALLY REALLY like these ideas. Only at really high levels should an illusion be fatal, heart-attack & stress induced by illusions can absolutely be fatal...

MDoA are already missle-attack friendly with a bit of flavor and interpretation, but if someone comes up with a nifty idea, like these illusions... i say why-not.

I'll likely collect a list of about the top 20 suggestions, and will run the poll with those.

I might split this with 2 issues.

[Karaptis]

Antipaladin
Deathmaster (from old Dragon magazine like a necromancer)
Assassin

No really, I'm a nice guy in person!

[Karaptis]

I think that the Thief as presented covers the Assassin very well.

True enough. I withdraw my assassin brainstorm.

[sheriffharry]

Wouldn't it be just awesome to have an Antipaladin in DCC RPG but no Paladin class!!!

[Ravenheart87]

Wouldn't it be just awesome to have an Antipaladin in DCC RPG but no Paladin class!!!

I wrote some ideas about handling paladins, antipaladins in DCC RPG, but right now I'm too lazy to find out which topic it was. Maybe it's time to finish those classes, but alas I didn't have time to play or run a game since May.

[Colin]

Wouldn't it be just awesome to have an Antipaladin in DCC RPG but no Paladin class!!!

Perhaps make it more Chaotic/mutation-prone and call it a Chaos Lord. They're mentioned in DCC modules, and feature prominently in some DCC art too, so it'd fit better thematically.

[Vanguard]

Could we just have a blanket vote for "specialist" Wizards?

[Ravenheart87]

Could we just have a blanket vote for "specialist" Wizards?

But specialist wizards are alrady included.

[beermotor]

I think it has to be sufficiently different to be (truly) interesting. Almost all of the antipaladin/paladin/monk/ranger/archer stuff can be handled by MDoA... so what's the point in cobbling together a new and separate class with that name? As Ravenheart87 said, specialist wizards are also included.

1. A gnome class might be interesting, but I'd want the gnome to be not just a "specialist" wizard with some MDoA-like spell power. See, for example, this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnome

Maybe have a gnome class much more like a svirfneblin from AD&D? (Except not absurdly powerful.) The ability to speak/communicate with normal animals and elementals, or heck, the ability to just speak with everything without penalty, might be kinda cool. And maybe instead of being magical, they're anti-magical. Could be sort of like a magic-sink, like a party's defense against a magical effect (much like a halfling is a good luck charm, a gnome could be a lightning rod, literally).


2. A half-orc class could be interesting too. I'd probably take dwarves as a model, so a HD that was slightly less than a warrior (d12 probably), they still get MDoA, and I'd probably give them a bonus to use a two-handed weapon over a shield, so maybe give them a regular d20 for initiative when using a two handed melee weapon. I also like the idea of them being able to track (and possibly fight in the dark) by scent, so maybe give them a light sensitivity but a bonus underground in standard (dim) torchlight. And maybe, maybe, a set of pre-level-1 occupations involving mechanics, siege engines, making chariots, taming wild animals, or something.

Also, and I know I'm probably the only one, but I really don't like the rage mechanic that was proposed earlier. In my opinion, something like that properly belongs in the role playing side of things, not the system mechanics side. I think it'll just end up being cheesy and overpowered. Instead of that, maybe just make them heal up twice as fast as normal characters (which would be helpful as there aren't any clerics among the orc tribes).

[Vanguard]

I think it has to be sufficiently different to be (truly) interesting. Almost all of the antipaladin/paladin/monk/ranger/archer stuff can be handled by MDoA... so what's the point in cobbling together a new and separate class with that name? As Ravenheart87 said, specialist wizards are also included.

1. A gnome class might be interesting, but I'd want the gnome to be not just a "specialist" wizard with some MDoA-like spell power. See, for example, this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnome

Maybe have a gnome class much more like a svirfneblin from AD&D? (Except not absurdly powerful.) The ability to speak/communicate with normal animals and elementals, or heck, the ability to just speak with everything without penalty, might be kinda cool. And maybe instead of being magical, they're anti-magical. Could be sort of like a magic-sink, like a party's defense against a magical effect (much like a halfling is a good luck charm, a gnome could be a lightning rod, literally).


2. A half-orc class could be interesting too. I'd probably take dwarves as a model, so a HD that was slightly less than a warrior (d12 probably), they still get MDoA, and I'd probably give them a bonus to use a two-handed weapon over a shield, so maybe give them a regular d20 for initiative when using a two handed melee weapon. I also like the idea of them being able to track (and possibly fight in the dark) by scent, so maybe give them a light sensitivity but a bonus underground in standard (dim) torchlight. And maybe, maybe, a set of pre-level-1 occupations involving mechanics, siege engines, making chariots, taming wild animals, or something.

Also, and I know I'm probably the only one, but I really don't like the rage mechanic that was proposed earlier. In my opinion, something like that properly belongs in the role playing side of things, not the system mechanics side. I think it'll just end up being cheesy and overpowered. Instead of that, maybe just make them heal up twice as fast as normal characters (which would be helpful as there aren't any clerics among the orc tribes).

Except there is nothing to differentiate between an Evoker and a Necromancer. To be fair, my idea is less to design whole new classes, but little tweaks that flavor specialist Wizards. The one in the book would be a Universalist. If this doesn't make it in, I'm okay with that. Doesn't mean I'm not tinkering away making variant Wizards behind the scenes.

Regarding my Orc class, please post your feedback in that topic. What I posted was a rough draft, and, as happy as I am for all the praise I got, I would like to hear what doesn't work.

[bitflipr]

1. A gnome class might be interesting, but I'd want the gnome to be not just a "specialist" wizard with some MDoA-like spell power. See, for example, this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnome

Maybe have a gnome class much more like a svirfneblin from AD&D? (Except not absurdly powerful.) The ability to speak/communicate with normal animals and elementals, or heck, the ability to just speak with everything without penalty, might be kinda cool. And maybe instead of being magical, they're anti-magical. Could be sort of like a magic-sink, like a party's defense against a magical effect (much like a halfling is a good luck charm, a gnome could be a lightning rod, literally).

+1

I read the book Gnomes by Wil Huygen and think this would be a good application of the Gnome class. I'm not sure which is more Appendix N flavor, this one or the AD&D variety, but this one seems more unique.

[reverenddak]

1. A gnome class might be interesting, but I'd want the gnome to be not just a "specialist" wizard with some MDoA-like spell power. See, for example, this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnome

Maybe have a gnome class much more like a svirfneblin from AD&D? (Except not absurdly powerful.) The ability to speak/communicate with normal animals and elementals, or heck, the ability to just speak with everything without penalty, might be kinda cool. And maybe instead of being magical, they're anti-magical. Could be sort of like a magic-sink, like a party's defense against a magical effect (much like a halfling is a good luck charm, a gnome could be a lightning rod, literally).

+1

I read the book Gnomes by Wil Huygen and think this would be a good application of the Gnome class. I'm not sure which is more Appendix N flavor, this one or the AD&D variety, but this one seems more unique.

Specialized wizards are covered loosely in the Core Rules as written, and I see some expansion for each specialization being interesting (future issue?! anyone?) But I like the idea that illusion magic works differently than arcane and divine magic. I think Gnome magic really encompasses the concept, especially these traditional gnomes, that it's different. Gnome illusions being some sort of anti-magic? That's very interesting.

I see creative use of the dice-chain as very welcome in DCC RPG, as is the use of Luck. Still wish the Thief used the dice chain instead of static chart.

I also like the concept that Demi-humans are subsystems & hybrids of the basic four core classes.

[Vanguard]

1. A gnome class might be interesting, but I'd want the gnome to be not just a "specialist" wizard with some MDoA-like spell power. See, for example, this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnome

Maybe have a gnome class much more like a svirfneblin from AD&D? (Except not absurdly powerful.) The ability to speak/communicate with normal animals and elementals, or heck, the ability to just speak with everything without penalty, might be kinda cool. And maybe instead of being magical, they're anti-magical. Could be sort of like a magic-sink, like a party's defense against a magical effect (much like a halfling is a good luck charm, a gnome could be a lightning rod, literally).

+1

I read the book Gnomes by Wil Huygen and think this would be a good application of the Gnome class. I'm not sure which is more Appendix N flavor, this one or the AD&D variety, but this one seems more unique.

Specialized wizards are covered loosely in the Core Rules as written, and I see some expansion for each specialization being interesting (future issue?! anyone?) But I like the idea that illusion magic works differently than arcane and divine magic. I think Gnome magic really encompasses the concept, especially these traditional gnomes, that it's different. Gnome illusions being some sort of anti-magic? That's very interesting.

I see creative use of the dice-chain as very welcome in DCC RPG, as is the use of Luck. Still wish the Thief used the dice chain instead of static chart.

I also like the concept that Demi-humans are subsystems & hybrids of the basic four core classes.

Dak, I am down to contribute variant Wizards as I will be making templates for each school, but I think the project is a little big for one issue. I'll have a few details up on the blog on Friday, but I could show you what I'm working on for the Necromancer to give you an idea of what I have in mind.

I also plan on creating one new patron for each new specialization, so maybe we could do a variant wizard, plus a patron?

[sheriffharry]

Brainstorm: Propose or suggest the classes you want to see in an issue of Crawl! dedicated to new classes. Discuss & debate (keep it friendly) the proposals & suggestions.

The next phase will be selection of the favorite 5, then a the community can submit the write-ups for each class, and the community will vote on the best.

I'd like to stick to the plan. No use to work on a class until it's "selected".
When is the selection/vote/poll ?

[reverenddak]

I'd like to stick to the plan. No use to work on a class until it's "selected".
When is the selection/vote/poll ?

I like to keep things loose, especially these first rounds. I don't see myself publishing this until September or November.

Plus I want a nice pool for people to pick from, and so far there are only a few.