Wilderlands of High Fantasy: High Class Books Question

[jamesmishler]

Hey everyone!

Until I get the forums running on www.adventuregamespubs.com it seems this is the best place, of course, to get feedback from C&C fans.

Of the products listed for the Wilderlands of High Adventure, the High Class Books seem to be the least popular.

Thus, I have a simple question for the fans, and want to see what you want to see out of these books...

Do want to see additional rules for classes that more firmly define certain class-based archetypes, i.e., Anti-Paladins, Necromancers, Amazons, Mountebanks, Shamans, and etc., or do you feel that the classes as written in Castles & Crusades are broad enough to allow for these things with role-playing alone? If yes, why? If no, why not? And in either case, extrapolate as freely as you like on why you hold your opinion.

Note that the classes would be *classes*, not "Prestige Classes," and would be no more complicated than, for example, playing an Illusionist rather than a straight Wizard. The last thing I want is more complexity on the level of d20... what I seek is merely additional options, adding classes that fit the Wilderlands...

Note that, in ANY case, the new classes would be optional, and there would be a listing for free on the AGP website on how to retask classes... for example, an encounter with an Anti-Paladin would simply be with an evil fighter, with his powers being exchanged for a few magic items, while an encounter with a Necromancer would simply convert to a Wizard with a lot of necromancy spells... and, of course, Judges would always be free to mix and match, allowing some new classes and not others, or using her own new classes instead of or in addition to those included...

[Rigon]

Heck yeah! Bring on those new classes.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

[serleran]

I think, for the most part, the classes presented in the PHB are more than enough to accomodate most roleplaying archetypes. However, that said, something like a "spell list" for a spellcasting class (necromancer, shaman, witch, etc) would be more than enough; those classes where cross-classed things might exist (a rogue that gets Exalt instead of Backstab, for example) would just list the changes. Basically, instead of full write ups, all one needs is the basics with some "tips" for roleplaying.

I do not think an explosion of classes for C&C is beneficial to the game. Showing how the bases can be used is.

[seskis281]

I like the idea of including setting specific optional classes - so I am in favor of this on a limited basis - not sure how many should be included, but a few would certainly add "individual flavor" to the setting as a C&C world.

John http://johnwright281.tripod.com/
_________________
John "Sir Seskis" Wright

Ilshara: Lands of Exile:
http://johnwright281.tripod.com/

High Squire of the C&C Society
www.cncsociety.org

[PeelSeel2]

I say BRING THE CLASSES ON!! That is why I want to see the ....ADVENTURERS BACKPACK (Hint, hint). It would be cool if your classes where compatible with that resource, so it could act as an expansion to, and more options for, that core product.

I think 'prestige' classes, if done right, could be a great thing. Along the lines of the Thief-Acrobat in Unearthed Arcanca, the very first (to my knowledge) 'prestige class'. They make a better alternative to Dual-Classing or Multiclassing, which IMO do not meld well with Archetype character classes. The 'Prestige Class' is right in line with Archetype character classes.
_________________
Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire called conscience.

-George Washington

[gideon_thorne]

Actually James, you might consider another approach. Not so much new classes, but a list of abilites and suggestions on how to swap them out for current C&C class abilties. Thus creating only minor variants on the current classes.

What is an amazon, after all, but a fighter of a specific gender with just a bit more weapon focus and cultural leanings? For example.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[moriarty777]

Hi James, I find that what you are doing to be quite exciting and the very LEAST I can do is answering whatever questions you ask of the fans from time to time.

I don't think we need a lot of classes... With thirteen archetypal classes given in C&C, a nice picture is presented. However, I do think some concepts that should receive a 'full class' treatment.

It is interesting that you mention the Anti-Paladin as that is one class I will be dusting off soon. I used one based on an old Dragon Magazine article (reprinted in one of the Best of Dragon Magazines) when I used to play AD&D. I will be porting that one over (using C&C's Paladin in terms of EPP and mirroring the ability progressing) which should be easy. The Witch would be an interesting addition as well and it wold be distinct enough to merrit it's own class. I see less value in the Shaman but I don't dispute it's possible validity depending on the campaign setting. As for a Necromancer... by C&C logic... what's a Necromancer but a Wizard who focuses his abilities casting those type of spells?

Of course... the same could be said of an assassin... what's an assassin but someone who kills for money?

I'm in favor of newer classes... but ONLY if they truely stand out as a category (er... archetype) of their own. The Witch does and can fit a C&C world very well... at least as much as an assassin compared to other existing classes. Ideally in many ways, I personally see a Witch as a cross between a Wizard and a Cleric (or Druid). Some spell casting abilities (like other casters but not as stong) and certain special class abilities to set it apart and balance the class out compared to those same spell casters.

In many ways... if the Paladin is considered a vituous hero in the service of law, justice, and the powers of good. The Anti-Paladin is your #1 bad-boy... the archetype and champion of evil. If you try and argue the idea of an evil knight... you can apply that same argument against a paladin with a good knight.

The Necromancer and Shaman probably don't deserve that same treatment. Do you recall the various complete books TSR put out for AD&D 2nd Edition. The main concept introduced with those were the notion of 'kits'. They didn't add too much... a minor ability here or there... sometimes a new ability replaced an older one.... New equipment restrictions. For something like a Necromancer or Shaman, I see that as possibly working better.

The idea of a prestige class may be an interesting examination but not in the D&D 3.x sense. But I agree that keeping this simple is the best way to go.

Maybe an experience cost for a Wizard to become a Necromancer... along the lines of a few thousand... to account for the 'cost' of new abilities. He'd still be a wizard in everyway with a couple of abilities. (once again we're probably visiting the kit idea)...

Hmm... that gives me a few ideas

I hope this has helped... if you would to expand on this even further... feel free to reply or PM me. If there is anything else I can do the help... I most definitely would like to.

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[DangerDwarf]

I'm torn on this one.

I usually dislike "splat" books as a rule. However, I'd really like to see Witches, Anti-Paladins, Amazons, psionic classes etc in C&C.

Maybe condense the numbers of the High Class books to perhaps 2, give some optional abilities to swap out like some of the others have said.

Really though, if the books were well done. I'd likely pick up all of them just for reference and ideas, even if some of the classes would never be used in my game.

[Omote]

Really, this is something that I want to see.

Take for example the acticle in Crusader #4 that deals with multi-class characters as a single, new class. These classes don't change the rules of the game, but mearly combine certain abilities to form more fluid classes. The WL class books could take this approach, being more of a flavorbook for the setting. I think this could work.

But also, I would love to see classes like the anti-paladin, etc.

...........................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

[Moorcrys]

While I'm not interested in one hundred and fifty new variations on the core classes for C&C, I'm all for rounding out the archetypes. I think there should be a swashbuckling/dex-based fighter (just as I always did with AD&D), I would love to see the necromancer as its own class with its own spell-list (it certainly is an archetype, as much as an illusionist is), and as for personal preference, I'd like to see all of the original AD&D classes treated in C&C, which means I personally would like to see the thief-acrobat make a return. While I agree that most concepts can be fulfilled using the core classes of C&C, I think the above need a bit more than simply class, weapon, and prime choice.

And I've mentioned this before, but I'll say it again... I'd love to see the good creative folks at Troll Lord Games create and release C&C versions of the three 'lost' classes for C&C that Gary Gygax was planning on adding to his second edition. The savant, the mountebank, and the mystic.
_________________
----------------

Moorcrys

[Tadhg]

jamesmishler wrote:
Note that the classes would be *classes*, not "Prestige Classes," and would be no more complicated than, for example, playing an Illusionist rather than a straight Wizard. The last thing I want is more complexity on the level of d20... what I seek is merely additional options, adding classes that fit the Wilderlands...

Note that, in ANY case, the new classes would be optional, and there would be a listing for free on the AGP website on how to retask classes... for example, an encounter with an Anti-Paladin would simply be with an evil fighter, with his powers being exchanged for a few magic items, while an encounter with a Necromancer would simply convert to a Wizard with a lot of necromancy spells... and, of course, Judges would always be free to mix and match, allowing some new classes and not others, or using her own new classes instead of or in addition to those included...

Yes, I would like to see new classes the way you are suggesting. Simple yet interesting to be added for additional flavor and setting enhancement.

We've already seen some of these floating around and I like them.

Amazon, sorcerer, rogue and bard variations. All good, IMO.
_________________
Count Rhuveinus - Lejendary Keeper of Castle Franqueforte

"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax

"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth

[meepo]

Meh - who needs more than Fighter, Magic-User, Thief, and Cleric anyway?!?

[Jyrdan Fairblade]

I wouldn't object to seeing a few new classes. Looking at the original product salvo, the Psychics book has my interest.

And I definitely second a return of the thief-acrobat.

[jman5000]

I'm in favour of new classes being tied to a new setting, as a means to colour and differentiate this setting from TLG's default setting. Being able to rip out the core archtypes and replace them with the Wilderlands archtypes makes this feel like a 'different' game yet using the same mechanics we all love. This is good IMO.

What I am leary of, is seeing the 13 (or so) core classes being replaced with 23 different classes, each with minor variations, or variations which could be equally met by selecting a core archtype and some proper primes (the dex based fighter for example). This has less value to me.

if there are going to be updated and expanded spell lists, then school specializations by way of different caster types (necromancer, illusionist, witch etc. etc. etc.) makes sense and adds flavour to the setting...

hmm. not sure what I'm saying - I guess basically, give me different and unique classes that exist for a reason, that are not just fighters with different primes (which we can already do), or lose the concept of archtypes....

anyway... I'll end my ramblings now.

Cheers,

J.

[Melan]

jamesmishler wrote:
Do want to see additional rules for classes that more firmly define certain class-based archetypes, i.e., Anti-Paladins, Necromancers, Amazons, Mountebanks, Shamans, and etc., or do you feel that the classes as written in Castles & Crusades are broad enough to allow for these things with role-playing alone? If yes, why? If no, why not? And in either case, extrapolate as freely as you like on why you hold your opinion.

I am not automatically opposed to the introduction of new classes or sub-classes - with two caveats.

One, the class should present a really new way of doing things and remain firmly in the AD&D paradigm and the Judges Guild milieu. This means that Amazons (as in Player's Guide to the Wilderlands) are a fitting concept, since they can't be easily reproduced using the standard rules, and they are at home in the WL. The same with Anti-paladins and maybe Necromancers (although it would be fun to see a necromancer who is a conjurer of spirits versus "gross zombie guy", but I digress). On the other hand, there is nothing about Shamans that could not be reproduced with low level priests, wizards, illusionists, druids or a multi-class combination of the four. Mountebanks could be illusionists.

The second caveat is that dedicating full books to these classes is excessive and, in my opinion, contrary to the spirit and design aesthetics of C&C. In fact - and I realise both fan and market pressure is working against me - if it were up to me, there would be no rules-related publication in the line after the CKG - merely adventure/world/etc. support.

Again, simply my opinion.

[edit]First post! Ha![/edit]

[Arioch]

more class are fine if needed for the material

ken
_________________
Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics

Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you

Slice N Dice: Game and Pizza Parlour

WWBYD What would Brigham Young do ?
http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html

[Akrasia]

Looking at the list of products, I have a hard time believing that five books devoted to new classes (and related options) are needed. I suspect that two would probably suffice -- one for psionics-related material (a 'psionics book' essentially, which would be useful for C&C more generally, outside of the Wilderlands), and one for all the 'other' Wilderlands-specific classes (amazons, anti-paladins, alchemists, etc.). I could envision purchasing and using two books. But 5? I just don't see the need.
_________________
While it is unlikely to interest most of you, here is my 'cunning' blog: http://dailyakrasia.blogspot.com/

[Omote]

It might not be that the "class books" will be full of C&C crunch. each of these books could be filled with information regarding organzations, power groups, magic items, small amounts of world information, etc all based around the particular classes featured in the book.

........................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

[Akrasia]

Omote wrote:
... each of these books could be filled with information regarding organzations, power groups, magic items, small amounts of world information, etc ...

I would much rather have that kind of information included in the relevant 'region book' (gazetteer), or 'core setting book' (if there is going to be one).
_________________
While it is unlikely to interest most of you, here is my 'cunning' blog: http://dailyakrasia.blogspot.com/

[sieg]

I'm ok with new classes for the Wilderlands so long as they're genuinely for the setting and not just splatbooks!

For instance, I noticed the Amazon & Knight book. What would be the difference for a Wilderlands Knight over the C&C one? Not trying to be difficult here, I'm honestly curious.
OTT, everything looks good. As a idea, would the class books be softcover or hardback? Rough page count? This will effect my interest as well.
_________________
Always remember, as a first principle of all D&D: playing BtB is not now, never was and never will be old school.- Tim Kask, Dragonsfoot

[Treebore]

First, take a look at the C&C Netbook of Classes.

Second, I think a guide on how to "build" these flavor classes would be best all around. Make the more desired classes your "examples", such as the Witch.

That way you do one book that tells people how to make their own thing, plus a lot of these are already done up for d20 in their Netbook of classes and with the host of PrC's available.

So minimal financial risk to you, maximum service to the consumer. Besides, I thinking forcing people to understand the "mechanics" via class building will be a good thing.

[Maliki]

I like the idea of new classes, even if they are just variations of core classes, as long as they are connected to the setting. The class should feel like it was meant for the setting, the amazon in the Wilderlands should feel different than a female fighter, straight from the PHB, a necromancer should feel different than a wizard who uses necromancer type spells.
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!

[jman5000]

I want half this-half that templates

[ducks and runs very far and very fast]

Cheers,

J.

[Maliki]

Akrasia wrote:
Looking at the list of products, I have a hard time believing that five books devoted to new classes (and related options) are needed. I suspect that two would probably suffice -- one for psionics-related material (a 'psionics book' essentially, which would be useful for C&C more generally, outside of the Wilderlands), and one for all the 'other' Wilderlands-specific classes (amazons, anti-paladins, alchemists, etc.). I could envision purchasing and using two books. But 5? I just don't see the need.

I agree, I think all the classes could be covered in less than 5 books. (The PHB covers 13 in plenty of detail, in a small amount of space.
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!

[Dragonhelm]

I like new classes and new options.

You might consider something along the lines of substitution levels (swapping out one class ability for another) to customize some existing classes as well.

Just make sure that the theme warrants a new class. If an existing class can work in a new role, then all you need are some conversion notes.

Just a thought.
_________________
Trampas Whiteman
---DragonHelm--->
Dragonlance Nexus

[PeelSeel2]

Akrasia wrote:
Looking at the list of products, I have a hard time believing that five books devoted to new classes (and related options) are needed. I suspect that two would probably suffice -- one for psionics-related material (a 'psionics book' essentially, which would be useful for C&C more generally, outside of the Wilderlands), and one for all the 'other' Wilderlands-specific classes (amazons, anti-paladins, alchemists, etc.). I could envision purchasing and using two books. But 5? I just don't see the need.

5? I didn't realize that many where considered. I guess I should actually read! A psionics book would be awesome. You are right, 1 other book should cover the setting specific classes.
_________________
Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire called conscience.

-George Washington

[jamesmishler]

Two books, one with the new, optional classes, plus new Wilderness-specific rules and spells, and the other with psychics, psychic powers, "common" psychic creatures, psychic items, and so forth.

Both to be released around the same time.

The Wilderlands of High Adventure Rules Appendix would include the following:

1) New Classes: Acrobat, Alchemist, Amazon, Anti-Paladin, Beggar, Berserker, Courtesan, Enchanter, Gladiator, Jester, Magician, Mountebank, Mycretian, Necromancer, Pirate, Priest, Sage, Shaman, Slaver, Summoner, Swashbuckler, Viking, and Witch;

2) Core Class Modifications;

3) Wilderlands-specific rules about magic;

4) The Wilderlands Social Caste and Class System (generally common to all regions, with local variations);

5) An official, if very light, skill system;

6) New common weapons and armor; and

7) Official combat rule additions.

All these materials would be OPTIONAL for a normal, casual game or campaign, but would be core rules for tournament play and organized play.

At two pages per class, plus new spells, and all the other stuff, it's a 72-pager at least, but with a lot fewer additional rules than originally proposed. Some of the classes I originally intended to include can be moved to other books or de-vamped as a mod on an existing class, as can a lot of the spells and general details... maybe also a general map of the Northern Wilderlands at 96 miles per inch...

The Psychic Powers & Perils Guide would include the new psychic classes, plus a complete psychic system, with new races, monsters, items, and equipment, plus notes on psychic powers in general in the Wilderlands. This book might also include a general map of the Southern Wilderlands at 96 miles per inch...

[Melan]

As I wrote on the Necromancer boards, that seems much more palatable.

[PeelSeel2]

I would buy both plus some beer.
_________________
Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire called conscience.

-George Washington

[jman5000]

those 2 sound awesome! count me in
Cheers,

J.