Login
User Name:

Password:



Register
Forgot your password?
Vote for Us!
tintin++ ogg sound player script for linux
Author: Robert Smith
Submitted by: Vladaar
6Dragons ogg Soundpack
Author: Vladaar
Submitted by: Vladaar
6Dragons 4.4
Author: Vladaar
Submitted by: Vladaar
LoP 1.46
Author: Remcon
Submitted by: Remcon
LOP 1.45
Author: Remcon
Submitted by: Remcon
Users Online
CommonCrawl, Yandex, DotBot, Bing, joeyfogas

Members: 1
Guests: 11
Stats
Files
Topics
Posts
Members
Newest Member
481
3,735
19,370
618
Micheal64X
Today's Birthdays
There are no member birthdays today.
Related Links
» SmaugMuds.org » General » General Discussions » General Class Questions
Forum Rules | Mark all | Recent Posts

General Class Questions
< Newer Topic :: Older Topic >

Pages:<< prev 1, 2 next >>
Post is unread #1 Feb 15, 2008, 2:40 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

tphegley
Magician
GroupMembers
Posts176
JoinedMay 21, 2006

Hey all,

I've stripped out all classes and am working my way back up from scratch with four main classes before I add any others.

I'm going to start with Mage, Cleric, Rogue, and Warrior.

I guess what I'm asking is for information on your opinions of the classes.

When you think of Mages, what do you think of? What type of powers would they have? What type of role do they play?

When you think of Clerics, what do you think of? What type of offensive skills (if any), defensive skills (besides healing) would they have?

When you think of Rogues, what do you think of? What is their role? Should they be allowed to take money off of players? What kind of skills besides the 'usual (backstab, sneak, hide)' would they possess?

When you think of Warriors, what do you think of? How offensive would you make warriors? Should they be mainly defensive so they wouldn't be overpowering seeing as they would have huge HP/AC?


I wanted to see peoples varying opinions. I do have my own but I like input as well. My goal is to create these 4 classes and then once I get them completely redone then I'll start on hybrids of each.

The four classes make up the basic fighting styles of any game:

A ranged offensive (mage)
A melee offensive (rogue)
A Tank (warrior)
A Healer (cleric)
       
Post is unread #2 Feb 15, 2008, 5:42 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

Might I suggest the Player's Handbook?
       
Post is unread #3 Feb 15, 2008, 6:50 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

tphegley
Magician
GroupMembers
Posts176
JoinedMay 21, 2006

Hey Conner,

I've got quite a bit of DnD stuff, but I'm wanting to kind of start from scratch and create a different story line with classes. I was just wanting input on what others thought even if it was DnD related just to get their opinions. I have a blank canvas and I want to see what others think before I start. I might take a few ideas here and there and mold it to how I think the classes will pan out.
       
Post is unread #4 Feb 15, 2008, 10:49 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

eldhamud
Fledgling
GroupMembers
Posts45
JoinedFeb 16, 2006


'm going to start with Mage, Cleric, Rogue, and Warrior.


Its always been my view that these are like groupings and the real classes are below them, IE. a warrior might be a fighter, barbarian, knight, paladin ect, a rouge might be bard, druid, thief.

I also don't like classes that have no access to magic, pretty much once you get past basic warrior all of the subclasses or epics have some magic access.
       
Post is unread #5 Feb 16, 2008, 8:08 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

Sorry, Tphegley, despite the way I'm sure that read, I wasn't trying to be facetious or condescending or what have you. I read what you were asking and that was pretty much my answer in the most complete yet concise manner I could present it. When I think of those (far too broad) categories of classes, the only thing that comes to mind is the newer versions (3 & 3.5) of D&D as only they would, in my mind, leave things "broken down" to that degree and call it complete. As Eldhamud pointed out, these are classification categories, not classes in themselves.

Finally, I strongly disagree with your final assessment:
tphegley said:

The four classes make up the basic fighting styles of any game:

A ranged offensive (mage)
A melee offensive (rogue)
A Tank (warrior)
A Healer (cleric)

Not only because of what I already said regarding "the four classes" but also because "ranged offensive" need not be mage, it could be archer (warrior classes like archer/bowman, ranger, etc come to mind, in fact, even a rogue class like thief might fit that description as well) and "A melee offensive" hardly sounds fitting for the thief that most easily comes to mind from the title of rogue. I will agree that the "tank" is usually the fighter, but doesn't have to be, and that the "healer" is usually the cleric, but could just as easily, on most worlds, be replaced with potions or scrolls or other magic items.
       
Post is unread #6 Feb 16, 2008, 8:20 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

tphegley
Magician
GroupMembers
Posts176
JoinedMay 21, 2006


Conner said:


Finally, I strongly disagree with your final assessment:
tphegley said:

The four classes make up the basic fighting styles of any game:

A ranged offensive (mage)
A melee offensive (rogue)
A Tank (warrior)
A Healer (cleric)

Not only because of what I already said regarding "the four classes" but also because "ranged offensive" need not be mage, it could be archer (warrior classes like archer/bowman, ranger, etc come to mind, in fact, even a rogue class like thief might fit that description as well) and "A melee offensive" hardly sounds fitting for the thief that most easily comes to mind from the title of rogue. I will agree that the "tank" is usually the fighter, but doesn't have to be, and that the "healer" is usually the cleric, but could just as easily, on most worlds, be replaced with potions or scrolls or other magic items.


What I meant was that in games you usually have those roles. I put my classes that I had in parenthesizes because that's kind of how I saw them to be not that that is what every game has. I play WoW and in my mind I see Rogues standing behind mobs attacking, warriors taking all the damage, mages casting from the sidelines, and clerics healing the warrior. I know you can certainly have different classes take on different roles but for me starting out I have 4 classes and those are the roles in how I see them being played.

I wasn't put off by your remarks, I guess I just didn't ask the right questions at the beginning.
       
Post is unread #7 Feb 16, 2008, 9:08 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

eldhamud
Fledgling
GroupMembers
Posts45
JoinedFeb 16, 2006

What I meant was that in games you usually have those roles. I put my classes that I had in parenthesizes because that's kind of how I saw them to be not that that is what every game has. I play WoW and in my mind I see Rogues standing behind mobs attacking, warriors taking all the damage, mages casting from the sidelines, and clerics healing the warrior. I know you can certainly have different classes take on different roles but for me starting out I have 4 classes and those are the roles in how I see them being played.


I don't see such delineations when it comes to classes. To me there are 3 types of magical classes,

mage classes: use arcane magics, which shouldn't limit them to being nukers, they should have a balance of offense, defense and health skills.

cleric classes: use divine magics, again this does not make them wimpy healers but rather have slightly more defense but ballanced with all the other skills.

psionic classes: they use psi or mental abilities, that can be spells that work like skills or be treated just like all other magics.
       
Post is unread #8 Feb 17, 2008, 8:16 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

Unfortunately, yes, a lot of games try to turn it into that, but I grew up with D&D (since I was 13 back in 1983 anyway) and I have to agree with Eldhamud on this one (I'm agreeing with him far more in this thread than I probably ever had anywhere else... whether I posted about it or not...) that, to me, casters come in three varieties arcane, divine, and psionic. Though I'm also perfectly open to other variations as well, I don't see it being that only divine casters heal (and can't attack) while only arcane casters are offensive (but can't heal) or what have you. As for the "rogues", I tend to think of that term as having three primary connotations, thief types (thieves, assassins, spies, etc - possibly including bards, rangers, and others), devilishly charming fellows (generally not really so applicable to muds except for RP aspects), and non-affiliated folk who are members of professions normally otherwise affiliated with a guild or clan or order of some sort (a rogue mage, a rogue priest of ____, or a rogue blacksmith, as examples). Warriors.. well, that one's just too broad, honestly, to me, anyone who fights with honor is a warrior, regardless if they be a thief, or trained as a fighter, or a mage, or.. the term speaks to me more of a concept than a class. *shrug*

I guess the real issue here is trying to flesh out what you're after as far as input that you couldn't save time with by grabbing a copy of the PH and reading the summaries. ;)
       
Post is unread #9 Feb 17, 2008, 10:05 pm   Last edited Feb 17, 2008, 10:14 pm by eldhamud
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

eldhamud
Fledgling
GroupMembers
Posts45
JoinedFeb 16, 2006

Within my own game what i have done is to divide all the spells into the 8 schools of DnD magic, abjuration, conjuration, divination, enchantment, evocation, illusion, necromancy, and transmutation. now i know these do not really cover the psionic magics as they have schools all of their own, but for my purpose i treat them as if they belong to those schools.

I do not have classes, i see everyone as being a spell caster of some type, and don't like the limitations that a class name can bring to the game, in fact its inherent to my game story that everyone has some magical ability, even if its only a little.

So within each school of magic, the PC gets to select during creation what type of magical skill they will use, being divine, arcane, mental psi or physical psi, this whole system is still being fleshed out but below is an idea of how it will work.

ABJURATIONS: Abjurations are protective spells. They create physical or magical barriers, negate magical or physical abilities, harm trespassers, or even banish the subject of the spell to another plane of existence.
Arcane: Dispel Magic
Divine: Dispel Evil
Mental: Aligned Attack castable psionic attack
Physical: Aligned Attack, skill based psionic attack

I think the think i hate most about seeing a WARRIOR class is that all it ever seems to have is weapons, and a few crappy skills like kick and punch. They never have any of the really cool feats that are available to skill based classes and never ever have access to any of the psionic abilities that would work well with them.

For the most part, DnD seems to treat warrior as a second rate citizen, its more or less the default that gets applied to monsters. Again in my game, we have dispensed with monster mobiles being class warrior, they are of the monster class and thus treated a little differently, they have access to monster only skills and access to a limited range of spells. NPC mobiles on the other hand get classed by what they do, shopkeeper, citizen, mayor etc, and have access to a pool of skills and spells that PC's have access to.

The main reason i have done the above is because once you get away from the base classes of mage cleric rogue and warrior, and enter the lands of the EPIC and PRESTIGE classes, what you have is really a concoction of those 4 base classes rolled into one. IE Paladin, cleric/warrior, Psychic Warrior psionist/warrior, Arcane Trickster mage/rogue
       
Post is unread #10 Feb 18, 2008, 5:30 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

Ok, I'm a little confused here, Eldhamud..
eldhamud said:

I do not have classes, i see everyone as being a spell caster of some type, and don't like the limitations that a class name can bring to the game, in fact its inherent to my game story that everyone has some magical ability, even if its only a little.


eldhamud said:

Again in my game, we have dispensed with monster mobiles being class warrior, they are of the monster class and thus treated a little differently, they have access to monster only skills and access to a limited range of spells. NPC mobiles on the other hand get classed by what they do, shopkeeper, citizen, mayor etc, and have access to a pool of skills and spells that PC's have access to.

Doesn't that mean that you do have classes, even if only for NPCs?

eldhamud said:

The main reason i have done the above is because once you get away from the base classes of mage cleric rogue and warrior, and enter the lands of the EPIC and PRESTIGE classes, what you have is really a concoction of those 4 base classes rolled into one. IE Paladin, cleric/warrior, Psychic Warrior psionist/warrior, Arcane Trickster mage/rogue

Um, ok, I'll grant that Arcane Trickster is a prestige class in D&D, but Paladin and Psychic Warrior are both base classes in my copy of the D&D books... and I thought you were arguing that mage, cleric, rogue, and warrior were not classes unto themselves. :stare: :rolleyes: :surprised:
       
Post is unread #11 Feb 19, 2008, 6:46 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

David Haley
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts903
JoinedJan 29, 2007

Some of this might repeat what others have said, but for simplicity's sake I'll try to lay it out as a coherent whole. (Sorry for being a little long...)

For starters, the mage/cleric distinction is a funny one because it involves not so much the role of the character, but where the magic comes from. It is tradition for clerics to be thought of as primarily healers, but that need not be the case. I think the first question is to figure out where magic comes from in your world. The mage/cleric distinction assumes that you have divine magic (clerics) vs. some kind of natural "Force"-like magic (mages). Then you get psionics, which are another type of magic -- exploring the "physics" of psionics vs. "normal" magic would be an interesting exercise, if you think about it.

The point of the above paragraph is that I'm not sure it makes much sense to differentiate mages and clerics based on the source of their magic. Instead, it makes sense to differentiate between offensive and defensive 'magic'.

That said, let me try to answer your question. :smile:

Mages (offensive magic) -- these characters are weak physically but can seriously mess with the opponent. That is not limited to dealing damage; in fact, arguably the most powerful spells aren't the damage dealing kind. Spells that remove protections, weaken attributes, confuse or charm are the kind of things I am speaking of. And of course, there are the standard blasts, booms and zaps that seem to be a staple of the genre. :wink:



Clerics (defensive magic) -- basically the opposite of the mage, in many ways. Instead of trying to hinder the enemy, you help your friends. Adding protections and resistances, increasing attributes, and so forth are examples of this. Healing is a staple (but I don't see why healing should be limited to the divine).



Both kinds of magic user typically require escort to be worth anything in battle. I believe that a D&D cleric's ability to take moderate amounts of damage is offset by their relatively weak damage-dealing capacity, and relatively smaller set of available spell effects.



Warriors -- these guys are more interesting than they get credit for, IMO. On the one hand you have the very defensive kind whose main job is to take punishment and keep on smiling, while not necessarily being primary damage dealers; on the other hand you have berserkers who run in screaming and inflict massive damage but are also fairly weak. The thing is that the second kind is sort of redundant with offensive magic, other than the point that one uses fireballs and the other uses weapons. But that is an interesting redundancy, as it allows you to have similar roles yet rather different experiences.

Anyhow, I picture warriors as being the most self-sufficient kind of character, able to handle fairly well every single situation except for just one: offensive magic. A party of several warriors could be defeated by a single mage (possibly with an escort) who judiciously uses confusion/charm type spells to prevent the warriors from doing what they do.

Although one often hears archers termed warriors, I tend to think that they are not the best examples of warriors due to the fact that they avoid combat -- they fall more into the category of rogues, which brings us to...



Rogues -- probably one of the most complex characters, at least in my opinion. The common conception is that a rogue is a thief with a strong accent on actually stealing stuff. I think that is a something limiting point of view, because it leaves out a host of other possibilities and nuances. The term "rogue" also implies a certain amount of lawlessness, which I think again tends to bias people in directions that aren't necessarily the most productive. But for lack of a better word at the moment, I will stick with "rogue". (Morrowind calls the category "stealth", but that is a category name, not a class name...)

Let me try describing it this way instead. Whereas the warrior is interested in direct confrontation with opponents, the rogue is interested in indirect confrontation, or perhaps even entirely avoiding confrontation. That could mean attacking from a distance, avoiding detection, setting (and disarming) traps, poisoning, subterfuge and disguise, bluffing, etc. One way, perhaps, to say it is that rogues are more subtle than their warrior counterparts, and in fact must be subtle in order to survive.

The problem I have with this is that it is very hard to translate into a MUD-type game. What exactly does it mean to "trick" NPCs or bluff your way past them? Single-player games allow you to bluff and trick by presenting dialogue choices where you might or might not convince the character you are talking to. But persistent-world multiplayer games typically don't have much interaction with friendly NPCs, let alone potentially hostile ones.

In single-player games, a rogue sometimes gets around by avoiding confrontation completely, e.g. by sneaking past opponents. Since the objective in those games can be more mission-based, it makes sense to avoid enemies if you can still accomplish your goals. But how does that translate into a persistent-world multiplayer game where the goals are not really storyline- or quest-based? Do you sneak past the dragon to pick up the treasure it's guarding? Can you do that over and over and over again? Is that even fun?

I'm somewhat philosophically opposed to in-game theft because its social consequences are too negative. In the real world, there are important consequences for getting caught when you steal, or back in the days, getting killed when caught (by the victim or the legal system). Therefore there was at least some incentive to not steal. On a MUD, that incentive is much less powerful. You die; well, ok, too bad, so sad, respawn and you're done with it. You can even avoid having your equipment looted by not wandering around with it. For other consequences to be meaningful, you need either a very, very active human monitoring staff that can handle these incidents (which is not an efficient use of resources given the relatively small payoff), or an in-game law system. In-game law systems aren't perfect, but actually aren't so bad, all things considered. Anyhow, you still have the problem of being able to all-too-easily remove very hard earned items from characters simply because you happen to have chosen the right class for it. Basically, the role becomes one of a poacher rather than one who accomplishes things.

Let me try to cut this short because it's already longer than I meant it to be. The short version is that the "rogue" is a character that relies on everything but direct confrontation as much as possible; this typically means relying more on wits and guile than brute force. The rogue tries to, and in fact needs to, be clever, whereas the warrior can get away with a more straightforward approach. But what, then, is the real purpose of the rogue in a multiplayer game? That is an interesting question.

The simple answer here is to make the rogue a support class that disables targets physically with things like poison, gouging, ranged weapons, stealth, etc. But I'm really not sure this is a good answer...



In the end of the day, I think that if you want to box people into classes you need to be very careful about the roles you choose for those classes. Sometimes decisions will have to be made that don't "make sense" but are necessary for game play. For instance, it doesn't really make sense that a rogue can hamstring an opponent but a warrior couldn't. (That's a common difficulty: differentiating between the combat roles of a warrior and a rogue.) For these reasons and others, personally I am leaning towards removing classes and letting characters develop "free-form" as in the Elder Scrolls games (at least Morrowind and Oblivion, the ones I have played).

While I know this didn't really answer your question, hopefully it provided some food for thought...
       
Post is unread #12 Feb 20, 2008, 5:44 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Quixadhal
Conjurer
GroupMembers
Posts398
JoinedMar 8, 2005

Actually, just to expand on the cleric/mage distinction a bit...

As David said, in most pen-and-paper role playing games, the distinction between a cleric and a mage has very little to do with the way they use their magic, but rather where (and how) they obtain their power.

The mage draws his power from the world around him. Some magi tap into concentrations of magic that lie in the earth (often called ley lines), and so their power will vary based on physical location. Ancient beliefs in the real world often suggsted that natural forces created these ley lines, and that centuries of human habitation might strengthen or weaken them.

Others might draw their power from life itself. Blood magic was quite popular, and the idea of sacrifice to ritually strengthen the power you obtain from blood is also an old one. The necromancer specialist may not need to use blood itself, but their spells all tend to work by draining life force from beings (themselves or others) and using it as power.

Still others might use celestial objects and their conjunctions and relation to Earth as a source. If the planets line up, this might provide magic for one kind of spell. If the moon is dark, some spells might be easier to cast, others would be easier under a full moon. Sunrise and sunset often affected magic, as does the tides, or the weather.

In all these cases, the mage is drawing power from natural features, events, or living beings. That force is being extracted (given, in some cases) and applied to power their spells. That's why D&D typically used material components in most of their powerful spells. It was a sacrifice by proxy.

Clerics, on the other hand, get their power directly from a higher being, and they have to ask for it. The type of abilities they are granted depends very much on the nature of the being they worship, and their relationship with that being. I don't say god, because it's clear that demi-gods and other very powerful beings can grants spells to their worshipers.

While vanilla D&D has a generic "cleric", which is the model for the one found in MUD's, even they make the distinction between good clerics and evil clerics. Good clerics get spells which offer defense, insight (divination), and healing. Evil clerics get spells that do damage and cause pain. Most DM's would allow an evil cleric to heal themselves, and perhaps an ally if it were the only way to have the party survive (or if they suggest that they're trying to place that person in their debt, or allowing them to feel the power of their god in the hopes of converting them).

Many deities don't offer healing as part of their porfolio. In 2nd edition AD&D, every deity had a portfolio which showed you what classes of spells their followers would have access to. It worked much like the schools of magic that specialist magi got. If your followed a god of war, chances are you'd have plenty of spells that did damage, a good number that offered defense, and little to no healing.

I'm mainly adding this in the hopes that ambitious coders might read it and think it would be a pretty cool idea to break the classic Diku model and actually make clerics and magi distinct classes which really do work differently. Personally, I never cared for the idea of a generic cleric... I would always require that someone devote themselves to a specific deity, and then their actions would be limited by (or affect) their relationship with that deity. If you follow a god of war, and you keep fleeing from combat, you might find you lose access to some of your spells. If you follow a god of healing, drinking healing potions might be considered crass.

That's also why I prefer starting players out as generic "adventurers" and letting them choose their class in the game. If you have rich pantheon of gods, it may take a while to decide which one you want to follow.



Oh, and as for rogues and theft... one way I've seen this dealt with effectively is to brand each item when the player crafts it (or buys it, or loots it). If a rogue steals something, NPC's which uphold the law get a chance to notice the off-branded item in their inventory and call them on it. If a player wants to petition it, you can see who it belonged to. If the rogue manages to steal it, get away, and keep it for some reasonable period of time (24 hours of real playing time perhaps), they can then rebrand the item via a fence service or by learning the skills to do it themselves.

Oh yeah, don't let rogues steal things that are equipped. That's just silly. If a rogue disarms you and then grabs the sword and runs, that's fine... but there's no way they're going to take the cloak off your back -- unless you're a level 1 adventurer, and then why would they bother?
       
Post is unread #13 Feb 20, 2008, 10:37 pm   Last edited Feb 20, 2008, 10:38 pm by Exodus
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Exodus
Fledgling
GroupMembers
Posts12
JoinedOct 9, 2006

First attempt at a post gave me a board error, so here's the quick and dirty version. I'll be more than happy to elaborate in more detail on anything that doesn't make sense.

Basically this is something I set up an idea map for awhile back for a now defunct mud (it can be defunct if it's up but nobody plays it, right?)

I divided their classes up into what I thought were distinct definitions of how I saw them in my head.

[0 ] Mage         Heavy magical offense, light magical defense, heavy magical benedictions, light magical maladictions, weak physical defense/offense
[1 ] Cleric       Heavy magical defense, cures, healing, heavy physical benedictions, light magical maladictions, weak physical defense/offense
[2 ] Thief        Evasion, sneak attacks, heavy physical offense(cheap shots), weak physical defense
[3 ] Warrior      Melee attacks, medium physical defense, heavy physical offense, weak magical defense, no magical offense
[4 ] Vampire      Light shadow magic, medium physical offense/defense, light magical offense/defense
[5 ] Druid        Heavy nature magic, magical beast effects, weak physical offense/defense
[6 ] Ranger       Light nature magic, medium physical offense/defense, heavy ranged attacks, light magical defense, weak magical offense
[7 ] Augurer      Lunar magic, light benedictions/maladictions, light psionic abilities
[8 ] Paladin      Light holy magic, medium physical offense, heavy defense
[9 ] Assassin     medium physical offense, sneak attacks, evasion, poison, traps, medium ranged attacks
[10] Demon        medium physical offense/defense, medium shadow magic, light magical defense/offense
[11] Angel        medium physical offense/defense, medium holy magic, light magical defense/offense
[12] Djinn        Get rid of this one
[13] Dragonkin    Medium physical offense/defense, light magical offense/defense
[14] Bard         heavy song offense, heavy song defense, weak physical offense/defense
[15] Psionicist   Heavy psionic offense/defense, medium benedictions, medium maladictions, light physical defense, weak physical offense
[16] Summoner     Heavy summoned offense/defense, light benedictions, light maladictions
[17] Wyrm         Heavy physical offense, heavy physical defense
[18] Necromancer  Heavy magical offense, light magical defense, heavy magical maladictions, medium summoned offense, weak benedictions

Scale:		Key
Weak	1	Magical
Light	2		Offense: Magical damage; AoE spells (damage and non-damage), damage-over-time and low-power, fast-casting spells
Medium	3		Defense: Abilities that negate, reduce or redirect direct (or sometimes indirect) magical damage (Spells, et al)
Heavy	5	Physical
			Offense: Damage caused by physical attacks, skills and non-magical, non-extraordinary, non-supernatural, non-divine damage.
			Defense: Abilities that negate, reduce or redirect physical damage.
		Benedictions
			Abilities that apply a beneficial effect; blessings, enchantments, ect.
		Maladicitons
			Abilities that apply a detrimental effect; hexes, conditions, ect.
		Cures
			Abilities that remove maladictions.
		Healing
			Abilities that restore lost attribute points, hitpoints, mana, psi, blood, movement, limbs, mental/emotional states, ect.
		Evasion
			Abilities that increase the chance of dodging physical (and sometimes magical) direct damage.
		Sneak Attacks
			Abilities that deal heavy initial damage. Always conditional, often have high failure rates.
		Shadow Magic
			Magic dealing in maladictions and shadow-typed damage as well as attribute drain (life/magic/movement stealing, ect.)
			Often conditional based on alignment, especially where damage is concerned.
		Nature Magic
			Magic dealing in primarily earth and elemental affects. Sometimes conditional (species targeting)
		Lunar Magic
			Magic dealing primarily with energy, often dependent on shamanistic lunar cycles, mild psychic abilities
		Holy Magic
			Magic dealing in benedictions and holy-typed damage as well as restoration abilities (resurrections, regeneration of lost
			attribute life/magic/movement/limbs ect.
			Often conditional based on alignment, especially where damage is concerned.
		Poison
			Ability to create and apply poisons to items or inflict directly (contact, ingested, injected, inhaled, ect.)
			Poisons inflict different statuses and effects, cause damage and often are not instantaneous (damage-over-time, delayed-effect)
		Traps
			Ability to create and set various kinds of snares and traps to hinder opponents.
		Song
			Produces magical effects for all creatures nearby, often target independent.
		Psionics
			Produces non-magical, often non-physical effects and psi-typed damage. Ignores spell resistance and anti-magic effects.
		Summons
			Abilities to call creature to your aid and lend aid with abilities or for attack/defense.

Some considerations
These are dependent on the following affect categories that classify all effects and damage in a somewhat complicated by extremely flexible system.


Affect Types    Dispel  Saves  Spell Resist  Antimagic
--------------  ------  -----  ------------  ---------
Natural         No      Yes    No            No
 - Skills       No      Yes    No            No
Magical         Yes     Yes    Yes           Yes
 - Spells       Yes     Yes    Yes           Yes
 - Psionics     Yes*    Yes    Yes*          No
 - Songs        Yes**   Yes    Yes**         Yes
 - Runes        Yes***  Yes    Yes***        No
Extraordinary   No      Yes    No            No
Spell-like      Yes     Yes    Yes           Yes
Supernatural    No      Yes    No            Yes
Divine          No      No     No            No

* Dispel psionics/psionic resistance
** Songs create magical effects, resistances apply, but towards songs instead of spells.
*** Runic magic can be dispelled and resisted, but functions in antimagic fields.


Basically I think one must sit down and discern how they envision a particular class - how it works, how it acts and then design the game around that definition. Any questions?
       
Post is unread #14 Feb 21, 2008, 11:43 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

Quixadhal said:

While vanilla D&D has a generic "cleric", which is the model for the one found in MUD's, even they make the distinction between good clerics and evil clerics.

Hehehe.. gotta ask, what other flavors does D&D come in? Can I have a scoop of chocolate D&D? :lol:

Exodus said:

Basically this is something I set up an idea map for awhile back for a now defunct mud (it can be defunct if it's up but nobody plays it, right?) [...]

Wow, Exodus, nice response! I would certainly expect that you've given Tphegley exactly the sort of answer he was originally looking for.
       
Post is unread #15 Feb 22, 2008, 8:44 am
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

tphegley
Magician
GroupMembers
Posts176
JoinedMay 21, 2006

Conner said:

Wow, Exodus, nice response! I would certainly expect that you've given Tphegley exactly the sort of answer he was originally looking for.


Yea, I've got some good information from this thread. It's what I was wanting before I started planning.

Thanks everyone for their input.
       
Post is unread #16 Feb 22, 2008, 7:49 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Kayle
Off the Edge of the Map
GroupAdministrators
Posts1,195
JoinedMar 21, 2006

Any input I could give wouldn't apply since we just scrapped the traditional "class" ideas over at MW in favor of a more flexible implementation where every "class" can learn every skill/spell/song/power in the game for variable amounts of points based on the favored styles of the "class".
       
Post is unread #17 Feb 23, 2008, 4:07 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

Kayle said:

Any input I could give wouldn't apply since we just scrapped the traditional "class" ideas over at MW in favor of a more flexible implementation where every "class" can learn every skill/spell/song/power in the game for variable amounts of points based on the favored styles of the "class".

How does that invalidate your opinions of what roles certain classes tend to bring to mind? Or, hadn't you read the original post all the way through.. or the rest of the thread for that matter? :wink: :tongue: :biggrin: :lol:
       
Post is unread #18 Feb 23, 2008, 8:00 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Quixadhal
Conjurer
GroupMembers
Posts398
JoinedMar 8, 2005

You mean you're supposed to RTFA? Oh wait, this isn't slashdot.... :evil:

On a personal level, I'm hoping to find a nice place somewhere in-between the rigid structure of classes, and the everyone-becomes-all-powerful-and-the-same chaos of a pure skill system. I prefer a tiered approach, where anyone can join low-level guilds to gain generic skills and abilities, but the more potent abilities you want, the more specialized and restrictive the guilds become. Add in multiple competing guilds for the same power styles (IE: Joe's Fire Mage guild and Bob's Fire Mage guild. They both teach specialized fire spells, but they teach slightly different ones and you can't join them both), and I think there's some hope for diversity yet.

But I digress...

Vanilla clerics aren't specialized. Originally, D&D let you just be "a cleric", and you got a bunch of spells. Later, they encouraged you to beome a priest of a particular god instead. Perhaps this is a chocolate cleric. :)

My personal favorite was the time I played a cleric of Azetoth (sp?). This is the Great Old One who lives at the center of the universe. He's about 5 miles across, blind, and just being anywhere within a few hundred miles of him causes immediate insanity. All of his clergy are, of course, insane.

Soooo, while most clerics get up in the morning, figure out what they're likely to need today and then sit down to pray to their god in the hopes of getting their shopping list of spells... I did things a little differently. My DM let me fall to my knees and scream (at the top of my lungs) for divine intervention whenever I wanted to cast a spell. If it worked (dice roll, DM's mood, etc), the DM would randomly select a spell from my god's pantheon and that's what happened.

Falling to your knees in the middle of combat and screaming at the oncoming orcs to "repent! Learn the glory of Azetoth and know fear as rapture!" was pretty impressive. It was even more impressive when the result was a mass create food spell, which causes cooked haunches of venison, chickens, and baked potatoes to rain down upon the entire battlefield.

Needless to say, the orcs fled. The rest of my party nearly did too. :stare:
       
Post is unread #19 Feb 23, 2008, 9:50 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Kayle
Off the Edge of the Map
GroupAdministrators
Posts1,195
JoinedMar 21, 2006

Well, I figured he wanted input from someone who had plans to use classes in the same sense, but also any of my other input would have already been received via the D&D discussions.

Quixadhal said:

everyone-becomes-all-powerful-and-the-same chaos of a pure skill system.

We're actually going for more of a tiered approach, we're still working out all the nitty-gritty details of it all, but we're leaning more toward restricting certain skills/spells when you purchase others. for instance, if you take all the acid spells up to the top of the line, kill-all acid spell, you might then only be able to get a third-level fire spell like fireshield. But like I said, we're still working out the full details.
       
Post is unread #20 Feb 24, 2008, 4:28 pm
Go to the top of the page
Go to the bottom of the page

Conner
Sorcerer
GroupMembers
Posts870
JoinedMay 8, 2005

Nah, Kayle, he'd said:
tphegley said:

I'm going to start with Mage, Cleric, Rogue, and Warrior.

I guess what I'm asking is for information on your opinions of the classes.

When you think of [...]

Then he followed that up with:
tphegley said:

I wanted to see peoples varying opinions. I do have my own but I like input as well. My goal is to create these 4 classes and then once I get them completely redone then I'll start on hybrids of each.

so, clearly he was looking for general thoughts, opinions, and input. He wasn't asking what you were going to do with these classes on your mud. ;)
       
Pages:<< prev 1, 2 next >>