Troll Lord Games

Just wondering how many people allow any race to be any class and multi-class as per C&C PHB?

Or how many houserule in rules against dwarven wizards, gnomish paladins or human multi-classing and the like, similar to older D&D editions?

Personally I houserule in a list of allowed classes for each race. Maybe it is narrow minded but I just prefer something similar to the archetypes I grew up playing. Only demi-humans may multi-class. An asterix means the class is allowed but the race is slightly unsuited and requires 20% more XP per level to advance. ;

Dwarves- ● Ass*, Bbn (Caledonian Dwarves only), Brd, Clc, Drd (Caledonian only)*, Ftr, Rgr*, Rog.


● Dusk Elves +1 with short bow types OR one curved blade; scimitar, falchion or jambiya (dirk/dagger/knife).
● Ass, Brd, Clc, Ftr, Ill, Knt, Mnk, Pal* (no multi-classed paladins), Rgr, Rog, Wiz.

● Northern/Painted Elves- ● Ass, Bbn, Brd, Drd, Ftr, Ill, Rgr, Rog, Wiz.

Gnomes- ● Ass, Brd, Drd, Ftr*, Ill, Rgr*, Rog.

Halflings- ● Brd, Clc, Drd*, Ftr, Rgr, Rog.

Half Elves- Classes available as per elven ancestry ( dusk , northern or painted ) and/or human background depending which line they favour( e.g. no Painted Elf Paladins or Barbarians raised in Rome ).

Half Orcs- Need not be the more monstrous looking types of later editions. If the player prefers they may be more of the Gygaxian, almost human type. So you will be an ugly brute, but many may not initially suspect your ancestry.
● Ass, Bbn, Brd, Clc*, Drd*, Ftr, Ill*, Knt, Mnk, Rgr, Rog, Wiz*

So do you guys find the unrestricted nature of C&C a breath of fresh air or do you reign it in?

I don't have any restrictions of this nature in my game. I would support such restrictions only if it made sense in the current campaign setting. I really hated all of the racial level and class restrictions back in the day with old school D&D because of the fact that some settings just didn't support their default assumptions about Human supremacy and the way it was enforced. YMMV, as always.

I do. Psionic Gnome Illusionists are most definitely not allowed! Neither are Dragon races.

For my campaigns I do based on location. But for my one time dungeon dives, or my endless dungeon games, anything goes.

I've never seen the need, unless I am being specific about the game... like my current urge to play an all-dwarf party (but as a player, I get no say.)

1) I use racial classes.

2) if someone wants to play something not already covered, I create the class with their input.

No, as long as we are playing with the PHB races and classes, I encourage odd combinations. In C&C they aren't as bad as say 3.5, where a gnome monk isn't likely to survive.

I am much more likely to veto a bad mix of classes than a race/class mix.

I don't generally encourage playing monsters as races, but if I allow it, they'll probably get very poor treatment, pay high prices, and run afoul of the law. Definitely no to races that can't fit through a dungeon or tavern door.

Yes I do, but I mitigate this by having more classes: Priest, Crusader, Healer, Shaman, Gladiator, Beast Master, Merchant, Bandit, Loremaster, Gypsy and so on and so forth. As well, I offer expanded race selections: Draconians, Dracons, Centaurs, Half-Ogres, Half-Giants, Half-Dwarfs, Pixie-Fairies, Minotaurs, Wolfen, Froglins and so on and so forth.

As much as I loved the old AD&D game, I never really liked the racial restrictions. Dwarves were MADE to be Paladins IMHO. So no, I don't have them in my game. Dwarf Wizards may seem strange, but they work.

There are no restrictions as to what someone can chose to play. Although some classes, like the Cleric are absent from my native campaign world, and others have undergone dramatic revision like the Knight and Paladin, which aren't classes so much as a collection of abilities one must earn by a long hard road.

An important motif in my presentation of Elves is that they do not have souls, and are incapable of feeling guilt, shame, or even remorse. Consequentially, they are innately unable to comprehend why anyone would worship a god, and can never become Clerics or Paladins. Elves cannot distinguish between "good" and "evil" in an abstract sense, so they are concerned only with "beautiful" and "ugly". Most of them behave in a "good" manner only because evil actions usually create ugly effects.

Gnomes cannot become Paladins, because Gnomes are racially incapable of taking themselves seriously enough to become committed agents of justice. Every Gnome knows innately that all rules need to be bent every so often.

Only race/class restriction I really have in my games is no assassins!

Other than that, anything available in my house rules is golden as long as the PCs are not evil.

Yeah, since 3e it's been open season on race/class combos... but some still seem wrong LOL
but that can be fun too.

No race restrictions, but if you want to play a barbarian, bard, knight, or monk, you don't want to play in my game. Bards are an NPC class, monks don't fit in at all with the gestalt game world implied by the rules, which is distinctly eurocentric, and the other two classes can be handled by decent role playing rather than special abilities.

Traveller wrote:monks don't fit in at all with the gestalt game world implied by the rules, which is distinctly eurocentric

See, that's why I have the Brawler class instead of Monks for base C&C (moving them instead to C&C Oriental Adventures). Basically, the Cestus Gladiators of Rome were the idea.

My new current character is a combination of barbarian and monk, but he's a dwarf. The concept is based on the scenes from Conan the Barbarian, in the pits, and from Randy "The Macho Man" Savage. Gets things like combat sense, intimidate, iron fists, iron body/will, fast healing, improvised weapons and unarmed attack... even a few roguish abilities such as back attack. Interestingly, and without knowing what I was doing, my wife decided to play a female dwarf Valkyrie-inspired character, much like Valeria.

I'm a fan of the archetypes. I'm also a fan of breaking them down.

I have no hard and fast on race/class.
My gut tells me a few things though, like Halfling wizards feel wrong.
I dont automaticaly say no but i want the player to have a good reason and strong sense of character before allowing race/class combos that feel wrong.

Roughly wrong combos to my mind...

Gnome Barbarians
Halfling Wizards
Dwarven monks.... But i have to say Serl's char from above sounds cool.

I guess it comes to concept vs min/max. If it feels like an attempt for power vs conncept of character then i will question the idea alot.

Dwarven monks.... But i have to say Serl's char from above sounds cool.

Khelgar from NWN2 was awesome. Of course, he just acts like a monk until you do his quests and he actually becomes one.

serleran wrote:My new current character is a combination of barbarian and monk, but he's a dwarf. The concept is based on the scenes from Conan the Barbarian, in the pits, and from Randy "The Macho Man" Savage. Gets things like combat sense, intimidate, iron fists, iron body/will, fast healing, improvised weapons and unarmed attack... even a few roguish abilities such as back attack. Interestingly, and without knowing what I was doing, my wife decided to play a female dwarf Valkyrie-inspired character, much like Valeria.

I'm a fan of the archetypes. I'm also a fan of breaking them down.

please post that class!

Interesting, thanks guys.

It seems I am sitting happily in the minority.

zarathustra wrote:Interesting, thanks guys.

It seems I am sitting happily in the minority.

The thing that really matters is that it's 'happily'!

I don't go for hard restrictions, but I will tell players that certain combinations are unlikely and they can expect to face some difficulties because of it. A Dwarven Wizard is going to face a lot of discrimination from their community, and quite a bit of wary disbelief from others. A Halfling barbarian is likely to be a laughingstock amongst most.

KaiserKris wrote:

zarathustra wrote:Interesting, thanks guys.

It seems I am sitting happily in the minority.

The thing that really matters is that it's 'happily'!

I don't go for hard restrictions, but I will tell players that certain combinations are unlikely and they can expect to face some difficulties because of it. A Dwarven Wizard is going to face a lot of discrimination from their community, and quite a bit of wary disbelief from others. A Halfling barbarian is likely to be a laughingstock amongst most.

Yeah it doesn't bother me how other people play so go get 'em, I can understand enjoying the freedom and creativity the RAW allows certainly.

But of my playing group; 2 strongly prefer the older D&D race/class archetypes; 1 slightly prefers that way and the other two are neutral/ambivalent about the issue so the house rules reflect that (similar to older D&D but slightly broader/more flexible).

I do have a caveat that a player who really, really has a great idea & wants to play an unusual combo or selection can just run it past me & the group first for a yay or nay. Hasn't happened yet but I'm sure it will.

If my players did not hate it so much, I would put back the old AD&D race restrictions in a heart-beat. But since it's a game and the object is fun, I let it go.

No restrictions in my games either. However, we play up the old race/class restrictions through roleplay. For example, if you are a dwarven wizard, you are the rarest of the rare and be prepared for certain problems that come along with racial interactions.

~O

Yes, I do. There was a time when I was all for anything goes, but now I have racial restrictions for RPG flavor reasons. I do not have level limits. I play in some of the following Campaign Worlds: Shannara, Corona, or Mithgar.

I don't use them. Most of my players come from after them, and you can usually come up with a reason for near any combination.

I don't 'require' racial class restrictions, but I 'encourage them'. I to stick to the normal PC races. When I was running my Greyhawk campaign, I found out what race each player wanted to play first, then I gave them a handout on that race. Just 1 page, on physical norms, religious norms, naming conventions, where they are found in relation to where the game was taking place, as well as what 'normal' classes, arms and armors were associated with their races. All based on the WoG box set, and some of my own views.

It worked out real well! Everyone really took it heart. When one player wanted a gnome paladin (which was 'non-standard'), I came up with the backstory that 'once every several hundred years, when the gnomes of the Kron Hills face great adversity, Garl Glittergold intervenes and elevates one to paladinhood'. I told my player that only two previous paladins were in recorded history: One from the Hateful Wars of 100 years ago, and one from the Keoland invasion of a few hundred years ago. I told him that each Paladin died at the end of their crusade...but it was not known if that was Fate, or fluke...

It worked out great!! He took his power and responsibility to heart. He even visited the vale where both previous paladins were entombed, to medidate and pay respects! He ended up uniting several gnome villages to defeat a common threat of slavery and oppression and the finale game of massive Mass Combat.

NO!

Maximum opportunity for my group and their PCs.

in my current campaign (described in the Crusades folder - see Hard Times in Narsileon) I have consciously adopted a much more structured approach to class and race. I wanted to emphasize the human dominance of the setting, and to link classes more closely to certain cultural and racial norms.

some of the stuff (off the top of my head) I've imposed:

1. Restrictions and additions to available races: no gnomes, no half-orcs. Added: goblins, ophidians (sort of), fey nobles

2. restrictions and additions to available classes. No monks (they don't fit the setting). added dwarven enchanters, fey nobles, sorcerers

3. cultural restrictions placed on classes:
a. wizards are only those trained in the formal institutions of magical theory and learning, which are monopolized by the dominant human empire (a cross between 10th-century byzantium and Melnibone). Those with magical ability but not trained in one of the academies are sorcerers. As a result there are almost no demi-human wizards (the only exception is elves, but their 'academy' is extremely reclusive and mysterious, and its practitioners are not likely to adventure).
b. Illusionists are a sub-set of wizard, and are represented by one of the 7 academies. only open to dominant human culture
c. knights: only open to PCs of the dominant human culture
d. barbarian: forbidden to PCs hailing from the dominant human culture
e. paladins: limited to humans and half-elves of any culture; but also available to any alignment (with modification of abilities)
f. druids: forbidden to PCs hailing from the dominant human culture
g. sorcerers: those of any culture who have magical ability but who have not been trained in formal magical thought in one of the academies of the dominant human culture

4. Racial limitations:
a. humans of dominant empire: all classes save barbarian and druid
b. 'barbarian' humans (there are 3 distinct sub-types with minor racial abilities): all classes except wizard, illusionists, or knights
c. dwarves: all except wizard, knight, barbarian, paladin and druid. My dwarves are not typical D&D dwarves, but are more like the greedy, secretive, unpleasant dwarves of norse mythology
d. elves: all except knight, paladin, barbarian and cleric [IMC Elves have no religion, and hence no clerics]
e. half-elves - varies by lineage
f. halflings: all except barbarian, wizard, illusionist, knight, druid, and paladin
g. goblins: all except paladin, knight, wizard, illusionist and druids. PCs come from the significant number of goblins enslaved by the dominant human culture in antiquity (although PCs themselves need not be slaves or ex-slaves!! These goblins are a laboring class of the dominant human empire)
h. fey nobles: no class available; theirs is a racial class
i. ophidian (discouraged as PCs): all except paladin, knight, druid, and bard

I have not imposed level limitations on particular race-class combinations (after all, this is C&C!)