Consider this a window for a 3rd party publisher ...goodmangames wrote:At some point in the future, I suspect there will be more options for demi-human characters. BUT that's outside the scope of what I'm intending to do.
//H
Moderators: DJ LaBoss, finarvyn, michaelcurtis, Harley Stroh
Consider this a window for a 3rd party publisher ...goodmangames wrote:At some point in the future, I suspect there will be more options for demi-human characters. BUT that's outside the scope of what I'm intending to do.
Uh yes I think we are saying different thingsreverenddak wrote:I'm still not sure what you're getting at. But I'm guessing you're saying that I'm saying that a player can pick any class, even if their character's occupation is, for example, a dwarven herder--he can choose to be a thief. I'm not saying that, but I am saying is that the rules don't specifically say otherwise. That's all. I think it would be logical (and easy enough for a group to make a ruling) that any character of a dwarven occupation can ONLY pick Dwarf as a class when they make level 1.rabindranath72 wrote: On page 19 there are separate XP tables for demihuman classes. Unless you are suggesting to multiclass, I don't see how you can combine a Dwarf and Thief, for example.
The XP tables refer to level progression by class, that's all. They make no indication of class/occupation restrictions.
And, as I was saying, the only restrictions (RAW) are that humans can't pick demi-human classes.
thus, if that is the case (that officially a character of dwarven occupation can be a thief, cleric or wizard) it would be less confusing if the Dwarf class be called Dwarf Fighter, etc.
If it's not the case (which I'm totally cool with) then it's a non-issue.
+1. I think that's a good idea. It would clear up some misconceptions.buzz wrote:FWIW, I think it would be a good idea to spell out the original intent, as it's obviously confusing people. Providing a clear baseline is vital for a good rulebook. GMs can always change rules once they understand them as-written.
Ergo, my vote would be to clearly state that:
1. If you roll an Elf, Dwarf or Halfling occupation, the PC has the associated basic racial traits (but not the cool class abilities).
2. If you roll an Elf, Dwarf or Halfling occupation, the PC enters the associated racial class at 1st level.
Granted, this strains verisimilitude a bit (e.g., the elf who suddenly can make use of their hundreds of years of magical training), but it at least provides clear guidance.
If I may, can I ask if there was ever a point when you considered not including demihuman classes at all? I'm curious because Appendix N has obviously been a major influence on the feel of DCC RPG, and yet, how many Appendix N authors include friendly non-human (but humanlike) characters in their writings? Without naming names, I'm thinking one or two, tops. I could say the same thing about the Law/Balance/Chaos alignments and the cleric class... sure, there are examples here and there, but how often do these really crop up in classic sword & sorcery?goodmangames wrote:Just as a reminder, these rules are a BETA. I've been playing this game regularly with a wide variety of people across the country for around 18 months...and all the rules are very clear in my head. Why can't you read my mind??
I concur with this. If the intent is to limit zero-level races to their racial classes, then it needs to be spelled out because the way it worded now it is clearly stating that the taking the racial class is an option for that race. It is easily overlooked to those familiar with race as class but I bet newer gamers would read the rule making the race class an option.buzz wrote:FWIW, I think it would be a good idea to spell out the original intent, as it's obviously confusing people. Providing a clear baseline is vital for a good rulebook. GMs can always change rules once they understand them as-written.
Ergo, my vote would be to clearly state that:
1. If you roll an Elf, Dwarf or Halfling occupation, the PC has the associated basic racial traits (but not the cool class abilities).
2. If you roll an Elf, Dwarf or Halfling occupation, the PC enters the associated racial class at 1st level.
Granted, this strains verisimilitude a bit (e.g., the elf who suddenly can make use of their hundreds of years of magical training), but it at least provides clear guidance.
Interesting thought actually. Elves, Dwarves, Gnomes and Halflings are tropes -- especially halflings. S&S / Wierd Fiction, made "the other" strange and rare. It is only with Tolkien that we get your standard fare Elves and Dwarves. The archetype of the other is much more sinister than our genericized version of "fantasy races".reverenddak wrote:I learned a new term today, Fantasy Heartbreaker. Basically means a D&D rip-off, but not necessarily in a bad way. Which, in my opinion, is what DCC is trying NOT to be, but if it keeps tropes like Elves, Dwarves and Halflings it will fall into that trap--whether it wants to or not. Ditching those races, and coming up with rules (or tips) for coming up with new or original PC races would help. It could follow some rules for making original monsters.
just a thought.
I could help with an halforc variant of the cleric - shaman orc!!jmucchiello wrote:I've already volunteered but I worry when Joe wonders why we aren't reading mind about what is missing from this beta. The problem is the beta is still not complete enough to really write new material with any sense of system authority.
I'm planning to start with the gnome (knee high to a human) and add a whole illusionist magic subsystem. I can't imagine calling on distant powers to create illusions. So it has to be different.
This is a tricky one to be sure, a real love it or hate it. But recently and idea was floated my way that I thought I'd toss out here for general comment. Its more 1st Ed cloning that App N I feel but might have some milage in it...PHGraves wrote:I've played this with my group a few times and... the whole race\class thing is a nonstarter for us.
After the first two games we threw out the demihumans and just stuck with the "core four". As someone mentioned above, this fits classic sword & sorcery better (for us, at least).
I'd love to see half-elves in DCC, i have to admit. But i wouldn't allow that to be a choice. Besides "there's no choice apart from alignment" in character creation; using the rule you suggested, you'd get very few pure elves, as only someone with good INT would be Elf: if a character gets just 8 INT and 16 STR, he's better off as a half elf warrior, or if 15 AGI he would go for half elf thief. The balance for the Elf racial class abilities and higher HD than the wiz is the fact that everything is random so you could become a partially efficient, low INT elf, while if you were human you could've chosen a class more suitable for your stats.Ducaster wrote:This is a tricky one to be sure, a real love it or hate it. But recently and idea was floated my way that I thought I'd toss out here for general comment. Its more 1st Ed cloning that App N I feel but might have some milage in it...PHGraves wrote:I've played this with my group a few times and... the whole race\class thing is a nonstarter for us.
After the first two games we threw out the demihumans and just stuck with the "core four". As someone mentioned above, this fits classic sword & sorcery better (for us, at least).
Half elf House-Rule
If you roll any "Elf" result on your 0 level background, but really do not want to play one as a class you may declare your character is actually a Half elf.
This means you can pick from the core four classes as can any human.
Additonally you may either pick ONE (and only one) Elf racial trait that your otherwise Human character has Or
The Gm can assign or dice for two or three elven racial traits to your character. In this latter case the Iron vulnerability should ALWAYS be one of them so you get too "good" traits plus one bad one...
Any comments on that good people? I personally like it and am House ruling it in til there is an "Official" rule on the subject at least. You get just a dash of elf but have the human flexibility. You CANNOT choose this option for a character normally its only available to those lucky enough to get some kind of elf result in the background table. Its simple and should at first glance at least keep Half elves from being the over powered disasters that 1st Ed AD&D had as well I think.