Author Topic: Anatomy of a Well Made Class  (Read 9109 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

dman11235

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1544
    • Email
Re: Anatomy of a Well Made Class
« Reply #40 on: August 02, 2008, 01:49:46 AM »
Look at the saves again.  They do follow a pattern from level 1.  It's always 1/3 HD round down.  And good are always 2+1/2 HD.
My sig's Handy Haversack: Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

DaveoftheRave

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
Re: Anatomy of a Well Made Class
« Reply #41 on: August 02, 2008, 10:43:10 AM »
Quote
They do follow a pattern from level 1.  It's always 1/3 HD round down.  And good are always 2+1/2 HD.

I think you've missed the point.

He was saying that the fighter doesn't follow a pattern for his class abilities b/c of the 1st level.  There are a lot of cases where classes have random abilities too which don't follow a pattern, thats okay.

The point is that there should be a logical progression, it should feel as though your character is gaining powers that are equivalent to his experience.

You can look at spell charts if you want too.  Just b/c a class starts with 4 level 0 spells and then gets them from then on in a pattern doesn't mean there is no pattern to it.

Its a silly argument.  Having a random occurrence of powers is bad class design.  I don't think I'm going to be able to convince anyone else of that, but I just don't see why not.

Its like giving a class a d8 hit die for the first 4 levels, and then having a d10 for another 2, and then a d4 for 4 levels and then finally a d6 for the rest.  I'm not trying to argue anything ground breaking, just consistency.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2008, 10:46:16 AM by DaveoftheRave »

dman11235

  • Grape ape
  • *****
  • Posts: 1544
    • Email
Re: Anatomy of a Well Made Class
« Reply #42 on: August 02, 2008, 11:32:08 AM »
Dude.  I already knew that random powers is bad design.  Case in point: monk.

And the reason design is important: it leads to better balance.  And it leads to a more fun to play class.  If it's poorly designed, you aren't going to want to take it, because it just doesn't look good.
My sig's Handy Haversack: Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

DaveoftheRave

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
Re: Anatomy of a Well Made Class
« Reply #43 on: August 02, 2008, 11:54:46 AM »
Quote
Dude.  I already knew that random powers is bad design.  Case in point: monk.

And the reason design is important: it leads to better balance.  And it leads to a more fun to play class.  If it's poorly designed, you aren't going to want to take it, because it just doesn't look good.

(:

Misplaced frustration then, my apologies.

fil kearney

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 210
    • KILLFEAR.COM
    • Email
Re: Anatomy of a Well Made Class
« Reply #44 on: August 04, 2008, 01:55:54 PM »
Too bad about all the :debate crap after the first post. 
It would be nice if all the BS could be cropped out.


What I like about Jaronk's philosophy regarding balance to the party vs. balance to the CR is when alternate rules like Gestalt are used (which is the ONLY style I DM.)  CR's get scrapped just by saying, "Gestalt"... so design MUST build compared to the rest of the team. 

Not to be an ass, but I'm only going to listen to someone with that perspective, because it implies practical experience.  To stay "in step" with the CR's, we would have to nerf ALL full casting PC's and PrC's... it's easier to "step up" non casters to function with full casters at inflated CR's.


I would also agree that a well made class will have logical power increases in a sensible pattern.. that was one of the big deals regarding epic levels... how do you perpetuate a pattern?
The easiest solution is to select a "template" of ability progression seen in other classes, and scale the alotted power appropriately...
unfortunately, few of the non- casting classes can do this effectively.
For a fighter to remain competitive, it would have to be COATED in raw awesome that increases exponentially to maintain balance with cleric 20 and wizard 20. 

The martial classes went a long way to closing the gap, but as has been cited in multiple threads throughout the intarweb, they are also lacking in raw power.. but they are better. 
If the swordsage had been allowed to learn new powers from scrolls to add to his repetoir permanently.. now that would have probably been a new true contender on tier 1 or 2.

Too bad the 3.5 train got shut down.. coulda been a LOT of splat books with new martial power, PrC's and schools.  :pout

my .02
« Last Edit: August 04, 2008, 02:02:46 PM by fil kearney »

CountArioch

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2110
  • I <3 termites
Re: Anatomy of a Well Made Class
« Reply #45 on: August 07, 2008, 06:44:01 PM »
Quote
Dude.  I already knew that random powers is bad design.  Case in point: monk.

And the reason design is important: it leads to better balance.  And it leads to a more fun to play class.  If it's poorly designed, you aren't going to want to take it, because it just doesn't look good.

(:

Misplaced frustration then, my apologies.

You know, whenever I see a smiley written (: instead of :), I think "lol, pig nose".
She hasn't come to crush your bones, nor tear your flesh
She has come to steal your sanity with just one glance

Sacrapos - At First Glance, Eluveitie

wO-_-OdrOw

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 348
  • "I do not exist," we faithfully insist.
    • Facebook
Re: Anatomy of a Well Made Class
« Reply #46 on: August 20, 2008, 10:19:58 AM »
For the longest time I thought <3's were supposed to be penises. I always just thought people were perverts.
Mine's been a yard carefully surface-tended, foxes burrowed underground.
<--Warlord CCG, NOT DnD

Guyr Adamantine

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 586
  • Chaotic Evil and loving it.
    • Email
Re: Anatomy of a Well Made Class
« Reply #47 on: August 20, 2008, 10:49:05 AM »
<=3

Happy now?