[Axel]

ok, there was just so much about the 3e classes that I hated that I did my own. I think I caught all the errors but I'd like to be sure. Please take a look and tell me what's wrong.
http://specaill_ed.t...ns/classes.html

[Dark Knight]

Axel there is just one major problem with the site ... its not there

[Axel]

WOMBAT, you'd think I'd learn after all these typos to check links before posting 'em. fixed it.

[Post Sleeper]

Ok, the spells per day thing...

Why restructure the Spells per day to more closely resemble the original?

[Axel]

I'm not sure what you mean.

[Post Sleeper]

OK, your Spells per day goes like this:

Level Spells
1 3 1
2 3 2

I dont know the exact numbers, but you get thew idea (at level 1, you get 3 "0" level and 1 "1" level spell)

The origanal looks like this:

Level Spells
1 3 1
2 3 2
3 4 2 0
4 4 2 1

Once again, I dont know the exact numbers, at level 3, you might (or might not) get "3" level spells.

Get where I'm coming from? A system like this would award players who place high stats in their Int or Wis.

[Axel]

what's your point? I borrowed from alot of stuff. I stole from alot of stuff. I'm not claiming to have invented it.

[Axel]

Somebody suggested that instead of ragging 3e I should come up with ideas of my own. So I did. I like to think my system fixes all the problems I had with 3e (except of course the insane prices) The overly specific classes, the overavailability of magic, some random nonsense, I think I got rid of them all.
Axel's class system

[Gamemasta]

HOLY POP-UPS!!
I thought I got sucked into the internet on that link.

[Rintaran]

Quote

HOLY POP-UPS!!
I thought I got sucked into the internet on that link.

And that's why I use Netscape. It has a built-in pop-up blocker. I've never been troubled by pop-ups since I started using it.

[Darius]

google toolbar is good if your useing IE , kills the popups and the sites that detect things like webwasher cant see it

D

[Axel]

ok... so once you get over my hosting service (which has the virtue of being free) is there anything about the link you'd like to say?

[Rintaran]

Just give me a bit of time to read it over (like the weekend). I'm sure I'll have comments.

[BrotherMouran]

Just after a quick read through (and I reserve the right to change my opinion after a more thorough perusal) I have to say I find you something of a hypocrite. You talk about overly specific classes, but most of your changes, in my mind, limit characters even more than they already are. Fighters are basically the same.

Rangers are, in your mind, purely two-weapon fighters and have no special talent with the bow (a far more rangerly skill for me). Nature's warrior is an interesting concept.

I give you credit for the Wanderer... nothing specifically like it is in D&D. I've not read the WoT books far enough to know what this is based off of, but it seems interesting.

Sorcerors are the same but limited. The block is interesting, but I see no reason for it. What if I play a character who embraces his new-found power and has a knack for it? No allowances there (so my RPing is limited) Your rules for multi-classing with a wizard are also overly restrictive; there is very little reason for someone to go into that sort of multi.

I also see no reason for reducing the priest class to a d6. If they are supposed to be somewhat capable fighters, then they should have the improved staying power the d8 supplies. When you consider they have the same hit die as your wanderer (who you describe as not having any specialized skills and just gets by) it makes little sense.

All in all, I see very little advantages to your class set-up; a few interesting items, but nothing that couldn't be done in D&D with some good RPing.

[Axel]

Hmmm... I thought I killed the Ranger's free two weapon fighting. Thanks, I'll get rid of that right away.
EDIT: I replaced it with a free Ranged Weapon Proficieny. better?

I gave Sorcerers the block to counter the fact that I gave them higher HP than the Mage. I felt a balance was needed. It also makes sense, even if the character embraces his power, it still is confusing to him.

The bulky sorceror/wizard multiclassing rules are intended for only one purpose: to discourage any such multiclass. If they go through with it the rules exist more for story purposes than anything else.

The priest HD is intended to show that the Priest is not heavy combat. By giving the priest greater divine abilities I had to counter with less combat orientation.

You also note I nixed my 3 least favorite classes: Monk, Druid, and Barbarian. I felt they were limiting to DM world creation. Although I did leave rules for inserting Druid using my setup I think Barbarian can be accomplished just as easily using Fighter.

Also, please note the Prestige classes: Paladin, Battlemage, and Bard. I feel this is important. Battlemage I created just to give the mage something to counter the priest's Paladin. Paladin I felt was too powerful to be a standard class. Bard was so bizarely designed that it needed adjusting, and since the Gleeman I ported it from was a PrC I felt it should be.

Credit is given where credit is due, I did not invent the Wanderer or Nature's Warrior. Full credits are given in the introduction.

If nothing else, I feel these are the most important changes: Wanderer in place of Rogue, Paladin and Bard PrC's, and no Ranger spellcasting.