Worthwhile Class? (needs a name, too)

paladin2019 · Post by **paladin2019** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 2:58 am

I'm looking into recreating the elf class from Holmes and BECMI D&D. The base will be wizard, with a liberal armor list, all weapons allowed, the good (not fighter) BtH advance, and d8 HD. The tentative xp table is 4k, 8k, 16k, 32k, etc., topping at 1,600,001 xp required for 12th level.

So, is this class worthwhile? Will it add anything to the game? Does it fit to require two primes? I'm thinking int and either str or dex.

And what do I call it?

And, yeah, elf only.

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 3:14 am

Id call it the Elf class. But I try not to be complicated in my naming conventions.

There's a few folks around here working on race class variations, no reason why they cant add to the game. I'm fond of them myself. One of my first characters was an Elf class.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 3:29 am

Yes, I quite like racial classes, or those which only a particular race can play, even if it it otherwise mostly identical to the standard class (eg, a dwarf paladin might have something other than divine mount or whatever but the rest could remain the same, or not, depending on how they work in the world.) I find such things are a very easy way to "define" a setting, both through the mechanics (makes the game feel slightly different) and "fluff" (the actual feel.)

As far as naming, I tend to just make something up -- it could be something they call themselves, and has no real English meaning, like Saalarian Knight or whatever (maybe that means "wizard-warrior" or maybe it is named after a geographic place in the world.)

That is the beauty of a game that screams "make me yours."
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

jaguar451 · Post by **jaguar451** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 5:49 am

FYI, the Netbook of Classes has the Spellsword class, which could be a start to the 'Elf' class.

Zebulon · Post by **Zebulon** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:07 am

paladin2019 wrote:
I'm looking into recreating the elf class from Holmes and BECMI D&D. The base will be wizard, with a liberal armor list, all weapons allowed, the good (not fighter) BtH advance, and d8 HD. The tentative xp table is 4k, 8k, 16k, 32k, etc., topping at 1,600,001 xp required for 12th level.

So, is this class worthwhile? Will it add anything to the game? Does it fit to require two primes? I'm thinking int and either str or dex.

And what do I call it?

And, yeah, elf only.

If I were to do an elf class, I would base it on the 3e Arcane Archer prestige class. Basically this would become:
Prime: The only class to have two prime requirements: Int and Dex.
Class restriction: elf ony, cannot multiclass
BtH: as ranger
Weapons-armors: As bard plus all bows.
HD: d6 only (since they would be archers, see below)
XP: as paladin
Spells: as wizards, but with AD&D 2e bard spells per day
Skills: Move Silently and Hide; level when in forests, half-level outside forests.
Archery: Elves with their longbow gain a magical bonus to hit and damage (as per the Arcane Archer prestige class). +1 at 2nd level, +2 at 5th level, +3 at 8th level, and +4 at 12th level. In addition they gain the following abilities:

-- Imbue Arrow: At 3rd level, an elf class gains the ability to place an area spell upon an arrow. When the arrow is fired, the spells area is centered on where the arrow lands, even if the spell could normally be centered only on the caster. This ability allows the elf to use the bows range rather than the spells range. It takes a standard action to cast the spell and fire the arrow. The arrow must be fired in the round the spell is cast, or the spell is wasted.

-- Seeker Arrow: At 5th level, an elf can launch an arrow once per day at a target known to her within range, and the arrow travels to the target, even around corners. Only an unavoidable obstacle or the limit of the arrows range prevents the arrows flight. This ability negates cover and concealment modifiers, but otherwise the attack is rolled normally. Using this ability is a standard action (and shooting the arrow is part of the action).

-- Phase Arrow: At 7th level, an elf can launch an arrow once per day at a target known to her within range, and the arrow travels to the target in a straight path, passing through any nonmagical barrier or wall in its way. (Any magical barrier stops the arrow.) This ability negates cover, concealment, and even armor modifiers, but otherwise the attack is rolled normally.

-- Hail of Arrows: At 9th level In lieu of her regular attacks, once per day an elf can fire an arrow at each and every target within range, to a maximum of one target for every level she has earned. Each enemy may only be targeted by a single arrow.

-- Arrow of Death: At 11th level, an elf can create an arrow of death that forces the target, if damaged by the arrows attack, to make a DC 20 Con save or be slain immediately. It takes one day to make an arrow of death, and the arrow only functions for the elf who created it. The arrow of death lasts no longer than one year, and the elf can only have one such arrow in existence at a time.
_________________
www.lythia.com: Free resources for Harn but also adaptable to any medieval setting.

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:43 pm

Maybe somthing esoteric, like the Elven Initiate or Elven Protector.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

MacLeod · Post by **MacLeod** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 8:19 pm

I sometimes wonder what makes a class "racial." Is it because of the powers inherent in that race can only be manifested through that class? Or is it training granted by members of that race whom don't freely give such information out?

Consider the latter. If someone is using that as their explanation, then it really shouldn't be a racial class at all, jyaknow? You can assume that no matter how good, chaotic, lawful or evil an organization/race may be... there will always be a betrayer amongst them. Perhaps one willing to train others in the art of their super secret special "racial" class? For money, revenge or a need to pass on their wonderful training.

/end rant

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:16 pm

MacLeod wrote:
I sometimes wonder what makes a class "racial." Is it because of the powers inherent in that race can only be manifested through that class? Or is it training granted by members of that race whom don't freely give such information out?

Consider the latter. If someone is using that as their explanation, then it really shouldn't be a racial class at all, jyaknow? You can assume that no matter how good, chaotic, lawful or evil an organization/race may be... there will always be a betrayer amongst them. Perhaps one willing to train others in the art of their super secret special "racial" class? For money, revenge or a need to pass on their wonderful training.

/end rant

Well, that's one way to look at it.
If paladin is attempting to summon the spirit of the Holmes and BECMI, then you can't consider their abilities trained...it's a feature of the race. Much like a dwarf's Stability feature in 3.x, the elves in Holmes and BECMI were magical creatures - a race that had some fighting ability and some magic use, plain and simple. If that is what he is trying to recreate, then it's impossible to treat it as a class with secrets unwilling to share. It's who they are. I see your point, MacLeod, but it would be similar to the aforementioned dwarf teaching a halfing how to be "Stable" - it just doesn't work in the structure in which it's presented.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

anonymous · Post by **anonymous** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:59 pm

I'm all in favour of Holmes Basic type elves.

paladin2019 · Post by **paladin2019** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:08 am

Okay, so the Fencing School of Red Holm is officially open.

Is there a specific place to post this or should I just put it here?

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:34 am

I'd put it here, hoss.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

MacLeod · Post by **MacLeod** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:46 am

Do it! I don't know what you are doing but do it here!

I'm too young to know these names you folks use. The only Holmes I know is Sherlock and... well... Lets just go with Sherlock for now.
Anyways... Sounds like a campaign specific thing anyways. My elves are always just a bunch of scrawny, good for nuthins who yodel and play harps while riding bears around forests.

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:26 am

MacLeod wrote:
Do it! I don't know what you are doing but do it here!

I'm too young to know these names you folks use. The only Holmes I know is Sherlock and... well... Lets just go with Sherlock for now.
Anyways... Sounds like a campaign specific thing anyways. My elves are always just a bunch of scrawny, good for nuthins who yodel and play harps while riding bears around forests.

Just take a look at Labyrinth Lord, MacLeod, for an idea of the elf from Olden Days. not too much flavor-wise, but at least you'll get the gist of what paladin is talking about.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:28 am

Naw, go older. Look at the elf from OD&D. Very flexible class.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:30 am

True, true. But since paladin was talking Holmes and/or BECMI as inspiration, I thought Labyrinth Lord a fitting example.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

MacLeod · Post by **MacLeod** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:40 am

You refer to those dusty scrolls they found in one of those Egyptian tombs?

paladin2019 · Post by **paladin2019** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:51 am

In their ancient boughs, the elves practice their ancient traditions. Inherently magical and otherworldly, elves can weave magic easier than walking. Though they prefer frolicking and merrymaking to war, they become fearsome opponents capable of combining deadly spells and the tools of war.

This is a tradition unique to the elves. It is no so much a trained vocation as a focus of the elves natural state. It is unknown among the other races, or even whether they could develop the unique combination of abilities. Roughly translated as the Red Holm in the language of men, the elf is as a calm island in the maelstrom of war.

Abilities

Spellcasting: These elves may cast spells as a wizard of their level.

Prime Attributes: Intelligence and either Strength or Dexterity

Race: Elf

Hit Dice: d8

Alignment: Any

Weapons: Any

Armor: Padded, leather coat, leather, studded leather, chain shirt, breastplate, chainmail, banded mail, plate mail, shields

Abilities: Spell casting

Level HD BtH EPP

1 d8 +0 0

2 d8 +1 4000

3 d8 +2 8000

4 d8 +3 16000

5 d8 +4 32000

6 d8 +5 64000

7 d8 +6 120000

8 d8 +7 250000

9 d8 +8 400000

10 +3 +9 800000

11 +3 +10 1200000

12 +3 +11 1600000

EDIT: If anyone can clean up the table, feel free.

MacLeod · Post by **MacLeod** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:56 am

I think perhaps having both the BTH of a Fighter and the Spell Progression of a wizard is a little juiced... Perhaps one should be compromised and thus the Exp requirements lowered?

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:02 am

MacLeod wrote:
I think perhaps having both the BTH of a Fighter and the Spell Progression of a wizard is a little juiced... Perhaps one should be compromised and thus the Exp requirements lowered?

But that's the point...they're high because he has both abilities. He'll be a bit behind the rest, for certain, but he'll be a diverse and valued member of the party.

And (in case you were serious) there are no dusty scrolls, my acolyte, only Labyrinth Lord.
I think it looks great paladin. Is he having the same spell progression as a wizard? I might go with d6, but that's me.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

MacLeod · Post by **MacLeod** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:15 am

Haha, nah... I just like to poke fun at the old games and their antiquated ideas.
I see your point... I'm so use to the unified Exp progression tables that seeing 4k for 1st level makes me go, . A rogue would be about 1/3 the way to the 4th Level by then.

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:33 am

MacLeod wrote:
Haha, nah... I just like to poke fun at the old games and their antiquated ideas.

Then it suprises me that you're here, seeing how much C&C takes from those "antiquated ideas."
quote="MacLeod"]I see your point... I'm so use to the unified Exp progression tables that seeing 4k for 1st level makes me go, . A rogue would be about 1/3 the way to the 4th Level by then. [/quote]

Seeing some of the charts for the first time freaked me out, so I know what you're talking about.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

paladin2019 · Post by **paladin2019** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:34 am

Lord Dynel wrote:
I think it looks great paladin. Is he having the same spell progression as a wizard? I might go with d6, but that's me.

Yep, same spell stuff as wizards. They're d6 in D&D where dwarves and fighters are d8, clerics d6 and thieves and m-us d4. So with the die increases, d8 fits. That's my data point, anyway. Do what you need to in your game.

MacLeod · Post by **MacLeod** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:50 am

Lord Dynel wrote:
Then it suprises me that you're here, seeing how much C&C takes from those "antiquated ideas."

I like to think that C&C puts a modern spin on it all that makes it very playable.

anonymous · Post by **anonymous** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:00 pm

"Holmes" Basic is named after its author, Dr. John Eric Homes, and was released in a box after OD&D but before AD&D's 1st edition was the finished article. Thus, it's sort of a halfway house. All elves were fighter/magic users.

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:55 pm

MacLeod wrote:
I like to think that C&C puts a modern spin on it all that makes it very playable.

Indeed it does, sir. But I would argue that it was all playable before. It would have driven you crazy, though, with not monster stats, different xp charts, and the like...
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

MacLeod · Post by **MacLeod** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 7:39 pm

Yeah I know! I also seem to recall from my brief scanning of said material that the only folks who had named skills were rogues...? I played AD&D as a kid and I questioned that edition at every turn. I guess I am just very confident in the idea of what a game should be. Perhaps my downfall?

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 8:35 pm

MacLeod wrote:
Yeah I know! I also seem to recall from my brief scanning of said material that the only folks who had named skills were rogues...? I played AD&D as a kid and I questioned that edition at every turn. I guess I am just very confident in the idea of what a game should be. Perhaps my downfall?

Nah, I wouldn't say downfall. I think a lot of it is preconceived notions and perceptions, though. Like the conversation about playing C&C, RAW. Where one would have issue with the rogue having a bunch of skills where others have none, another would see that a rogue don't ahve spells, isn't overly tough or good in combat and see that as okay. Where one would feel the need to "improve" the scenario, another sees no problem. Don't mind me, I'm feeling a little "punky" today, as my wife would call it.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

MacLeod · Post by **MacLeod** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 8:48 pm

Oh yeah, f'r sure, dawg. Rogues shouldn't be able to swing swords as good as a fighter nor cast spells (at all). Its just a weird assumption that other classes don't inherently know things that would resemble a skill. Of course C&C eliminates that problem thankfully.
_________________
In this world of LIES... the TRUTH, it means RESISTANCE!

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 1:15 am

MacLeod wrote:
Oh yeah, f'r sure, dawg. Rogues shouldn't be able to swing swords as good as a fighter nor cast spells (at all). Its just a weird assumption that other classes don't inherently know things that would resemble a skill. Of course C&C eliminates that problem thankfully.

And there ya have it. Even then, it was done for party roles. There was the bruiser, the arcane spellcaster, the healer, and the "troubleshooter." Just as the mage could not pick up a sword and start hacking away, or the fighter start healing members of the group, no others could find the traps or backstab the enemy like the thief could. But yeah, C&C solves this issue.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

paladin2019 · Post by **paladin2019** » Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:21 am

I was looking over what the original D&D class could do and was reminded that they can only achieve 10th level. Would it be worthwhile to modify the spells/day chart to limit this class to 5th or 6th level spells and/or stretch the first 10 (or more) levels of wizard spellcasting to a 20 level progression?

Troll Lord Games

Worthwhile Class? (needs a name, too)

Worthwhile Class? (needs a name, too)

Re: Worthwhile Class? (needs a name, too)

Re: Worthwhile Class? (needs a name, too)