tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post3417312289511264203..comments2024-03-18T02:49:18.084-05:00Comments on Jeffs Gameblog: Crabaugh's critique of classesJeff Rientshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17493878980535235896noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-867379539700595252012-10-11T05:48:05.903-05:002012-10-11T05:48:05.903-05:00I always thought that made perfect sense. The Acol...I always thought that made perfect sense. The Acolyte having to prove his faith and become an Adept before his Deity answers his prayers and grants him access to miracles.Lee Lawrencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01127805337560546059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-15060153288341794232011-11-02T11:57:32.635-05:002011-11-02T11:57:32.635-05:00That clerics didn’t get spells at first level mayb...That clerics didn’t get spells at first level maybe says something about the original conception of the class. That they changed that in AD&D perhaps also says something about a change in that conception.<br /><br />In B/X, spells feel slightly less “core” to the class.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-44263439161506271152011-10-31T19:19:05.682-05:002011-10-31T19:19:05.682-05:00A spellcasting class like the cleric that can'...A spellcasting class like the cleric that can't cast spells at 1st level is bloody absurd.Tetsubohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00339621610619347842noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-43680452808507908252011-10-30T21:06:31.858-05:002011-10-30T21:06:31.858-05:00@RedHobbit, you're crazy! Phineas' T Wizar...@RedHobbit, you're crazy! Phineas' T Wizardton's Sleep spell is the "get out of TPK free" card of B/X D&D.<br /><br />And don't even get me started about Charm Person as a force multiplier. The average enemy gets to save vs spells once per month! If you don't have a gang hench-monsters rolling with the party, you're doing it wrong.<br /><br />;-)cr0mhttp://redvan.wikidot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-3750670901878233122011-10-28T15:29:55.876-05:002011-10-28T15:29:55.876-05:00I agree with your analysis for the most part. I a...I agree with your analysis for the most part. I always felt that Halflings got the short end of the stick (no pun intended)<br /><br />I happen to disagree with the Magic-User though. To me the psuedo-balance between them was that the Fighter progressed Linearly while the Magic-User progressed exponentially in power, this was reflected in their XP requirements.<br /><br />Now at first level it may seem overkill to for the Magic User to require 25% more than the Fighter to level but think for a minute how XP is commonly earned, Fighting monsters and collecting treasure. <br /><br />In both these situations the Fighter is doing most of the work, hacking bad guys and hauling around large sacks of coins. In effect he's doing most of the work, yet the system for the most part rewards each player equally. <br /><br />In that regard you can think of the XP to 2nd level as a measure of who is trying the hardest and putting forth the most exertion to get there. Certainly, not Phinneas V. Fire-and-forget Wizardton who is more than happy to coast while the meatheads do all the work.<br /><br />Out of curiosity, did Crabaugh provide XP requirements for anything past 2nd level?Van Noahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13001103794042256370noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-13347648584237932332011-10-26T20:46:18.972-05:002011-10-26T20:46:18.972-05:00@ Walker, who said "But then I am not aware t...@ Walker, who said "But then I am not aware that any of the early designers really grasped a deep understanding of the mathematics behind the rules."<br /><br />That's ridiculous. Look at some of the design and analysis articles of the time. Most of the designers were coming hard-core off of tabletop wargame and grid-and-counter wargame design.<br /><br />Whether anyone at TSR knew what they were doing is another question, of course, but in general, the notion that the mathy guts of game design is some kind of new discovery is just flat out worthy of ridicule.S. John Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12284417121877141161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-7083405696921003302011-10-26T02:11:59.543-05:002011-10-26T02:11:59.543-05:00I like this system, but I can also see how it coul...I like this system, but I can also see how it could lead to point-buy.anarchisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05546197561922726279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-9853818451324058842011-10-25T21:45:14.623-05:002011-10-25T21:45:14.623-05:00@Chaz: I've gone back and tried some revisions...@Chaz: I've gone back and tried some revisions that discard non-B/X abilities and eliminate zero/negative values. <br /><br />The canonical XP figures are elusive. You get Cleric to work, but the others are off by +/-100XP. Adjust them, and then Cleric is off. Rinse and repeat...<br /><br />Which suggests what we probably already know: the original XP values were based on "feel" instead of some consistent ability-to-XP correspondence. Put another way, devising a class-creation system that (1) works for the canon and (2) is devoid of flaws already pointed out may be an exercise in futility.<br /><br />Not that I've given up, mind you...Erin Smalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16085303583608172242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-60899654841842524212011-10-25T12:25:28.219-05:002011-10-25T12:25:28.219-05:00Great post!
@ Erin
I don't think Steven was &q...Great post!<br />@ Erin<br />I don't think Steven was "gaming the system." Zero cost should not be the baseline for abilities that increase with level, even if those abilities are comparatively the worst of all classes.Chazhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09999923782794868825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-28811189750062060032011-10-25T12:10:50.121-05:002011-10-25T12:10:50.121-05:00I feel like the main classes are balanced against ...I feel like the main classes are balanced against each other pretty perfectly: fighter, wizard and cleric. Dwarf has some advantages over fighters but that's balanced out by them being dwarves! What are they going to do, for example, if someone grabs them by the scruff of the neck? They're superior on paper only. <br /> <br />Thieves at first glance, and at low levels are weak as crap, but check out their skills around level 10 or so...it's 99% across the board...infallible sneaking, hiding, unlocking...yes please! (That doesn't happen in AD&D btw, it's a much slower progression.) Just think what you could do with that. He's Just a slow starting class like the MU. <br /> <br />Elves definitely need the much higher XP requirement; they just do too much. Halflings...I've never really paid that much attention to so I can't rightly say how they balance out! I suspect they're on the weak side. <br /> <br />The actual numbers...it feels like there's something going on. MU and dwarf exactly identical XP amounts? Fighter + MU is 3600 even, exactly 80% of their combined btb value. I too would prefer to see rounder numbers in the 10s digit. <br /> <br />But the whole exercise of class building feels completely wrongheaded. The random generator anarchist posted is creating bland mixes of existing classes. Why not just let your players play something actually fun and eyeball the balance? It's not like it's going out for publication or something, you'll have plenty of chances to tinker with it. Throw away the formula and have a little fun, next thing you know you'll be running the next Arduin.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-57877071232029354892011-10-25T09:44:55.552-05:002011-10-25T09:44:55.552-05:00The Crabaugh article -- as bad as it is -- at leas...<i> The Crabaugh article -- as bad as it is -- at least does not have negative experience point factors in it. </i><br /><br />In my own quixotic attempt at adapting the Crabaugh method, I tried to shy away from negative modifiers too (only using it once), it seems like a rather obvious design flaw in the 2E method. <br /><br />http://hillcantons.blogspot.com/2010/10/homebrewing-new-d-classes.htmlChris Kutalikhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01414743509426875792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-2865646085281511652011-10-25T02:13:57.751-05:002011-10-25T02:13:57.751-05:00In the two campaigns where we used the Dragon arti...In the two campaigns where we used the Dragon article, it was an all-or-nothing approach, where we used the article only and ditched the canonical progression.<br /><br />I never played in a campaign that mixed them, so comparison never came up, really.<br /><br />I remember finding the article fairly mindblowing when I first read it, since I was still in those days very much a D&D player, so the idea of _creating_ a character (rather than just "rolling one up") hadn't sunk in yet.S. John Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12284417121877141161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-29429688672117090812011-10-25T01:02:09.330-05:002011-10-25T01:02:09.330-05:00I have a page that generates a random class based ...I have a page that generates a random class based on this article. Even if you don't use it for PCs it might be useful for important NPCs:<br /><br />http://www.apolitical.info/webgame/class/becmi.phpanarchisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05546197561922726279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-41058307339615351782011-10-24T21:43:16.188-05:002011-10-24T21:43:16.188-05:00I have a copy of Dragon 109, and in early 2010 I b...I have a copy of Dragon 109, and in early 2010 I blogged about my thoughts on the system after creating a couple of character classes. I found the numbers to be a a little off, and not always reflective of how attractive the class seemed on paper.<br /><br />I was going to mention OD&Dities #7, but the previous commenter beat me to it. I think that system, which is based on Dragon 109, is much better in terms of the math feeling right. <br /><br />If you want to see what I came up with from Dragon 109: <br /><a href="http://savevspoison.blogspot.com/2010/01/messing-around-with-dragon-109.html" rel="nofollow">My stab at custom classes</a>DMWieghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03682249561077936507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-46354379254656962322011-10-24T21:38:58.203-05:002011-10-24T21:38:58.203-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.DMWieghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03682249561077936507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-36497405164409938252011-10-24T21:25:24.717-05:002011-10-24T21:25:24.717-05:00There's a simple custom class template for B/X...There's a simple <a href="http://www.pandius.com/custclas.html" rel="nofollow">custom class template</a> for B/X D&D at the Vault of Pandius (also seen in OD&Dities. It's deliberately set up to prevent uber - classes. One feature that I like is that elves always have full magic-user ability. I also took my own stab at a custom template <a href="http://www.freeyabb.com/goblinoidgames/viewtopic.php?t=1433" rel="nofollow">here</a>, designed to match Labyrinth Lord numbers. Personally I think magic users are a little overpriced and halflings a lot overpriced.infornificnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-55469810058364526182011-10-24T21:10:02.131-05:002011-10-24T21:10:02.131-05:00@Chris:
Reading the 2E DMG the other day, it look...@Chris:<br /><br /><i>Reading the 2E DMG the other day, it looks like the Crabaugh Method for creating new classes was later canonised as an "official AD&D©®™ pat.pending optional rule"</i><br /><br />No. The Crabaugh article -- as bad as it is -- at least does not have negative experience point factors in it. Those rules in the 2e DMG are infamous because you can make an all powerful God class that has conjuration spells (wish) and requires 0 EXP per level. Those were some of the worst rules ever created in all of official D&D.<br /><br />The Crabaugh article does not permit this, as everything is additive. With that said, we know that this is a poor way to design a class building system. You simply cannot capture the power of synergistic abilities with an additive mechanic. <br /><br />But then I am not aware that any of the early designers really grasped a deep understanding of the mathematics behind the rules. The earlier editions worked well from a narrative perspective, but you cannot look at the game mechanics too deeply without it falling apart.Walkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14039652384328042542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-79035876488314552082011-10-24T19:26:32.505-05:002011-10-24T19:26:32.505-05:00The fundamental problem with your system is that i...<i>The fundamental problem with your system is that it literally counts many abilities that advance with level as worthless, rather than merely less valuable.</i><br /><br />Fair enough, and I get your point. I just never used the approach for gaming the system, but rather mixing and matching special abilities upon a "chassis" of hit die, saves, to-hit, and weapon/armour choices, to come up with something balanced and non-arbitrary. <br /><br />Again, my original goal was to break down the original classes into individual abilities and XP values. In truth, this is the first I've seen anyone deliberately try to break the system, so my bad. I suppose a revision with non-zero values should be attempted.Erin Smalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16085303583608172242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-23226143947610635172011-10-24T18:54:19.919-05:002011-10-24T18:54:19.919-05:00@Erin
I mean, your archer example is by-the-book,...@Erin<br /><br /><i>I mean, your archer example is by-the-book, but why bother creating one when you could just play a fighter with Weapon Mastery with the bow?</i><br /><br />Because you'd like to have five hit dice and make saves on the 4-6 column when the fighter is still less than halfway to 2nd level?<br /><br />The fundamental problem with your system is that it literally counts many abilities that advance with level as <i>worthless</i>, rather than merely less valuable. A d4 of hp each level is obviously worth fully half of a d8 in mechanical terms, but you don't charge <i>anything</i> for it instead of half as much. <br /><br />What should be 0 xp are things that are <i>truly</i> worthless — 0 hp/level, zero save improvement/level, zero attack progression improvement. Zero-basing something on the grounds that it's the worst any class makes the bottom improve-with-level abilities overpowered for their XP cost. It makes it easy to make new classes that are not consistent with the ones existing in the game.<br /><br />And, incidentally, it would actually explain why you're getting a 900 point discrepancy on the MU XP table; it's because you're giving the MU a bunch of level-advancing abilities for free when they should cost something.Stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05138730966226244399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-22337130865773197202011-10-24T18:31:23.060-05:002011-10-24T18:31:23.060-05:00Check out this thing:
Fighter Level - XP Needed
...Check out this thing: <br /><br />Fighter Level - XP Needed<br />1 - Not a dang thing!<br />2 - 2,000<br />3 - 4,000<br />4 - 8,000<br />5 - 16,000<br />6 - 32,000<br />7 - 64,000<br />8 - 125,000<br />9 - 250,000<br /><br />The XP you need doubles every level. This is pretty standard. What EXP you needed to get all the way to name level, that's what you'll need per level thereafter. <br /><br />However, we have Druid who sputters along not doubling, then heads for Crazytown at 110 MPH at level 12 (you go from needing 100k to level up, to needing 350k, then 750k, then you hit your wall). Assassin does this too. <br /><br />Then we have the M-U, who not only starts out needing 2,500 to level up to 2, but it seems to MORE than double at level 4! Then it requires less than double, then only +50% more for the next few levels. If it had stayed with double every level, the M-U would need 1,280k per level after name level! Illusionist does the same thing 7th to 9th. Thief does it 7th to 10th. These don't correlate to big class ability changes. <br /><br />Monk does a mix of these two, offering a weird easing of XP required 8th to 10th then busts your nuts 13th to 17th. Again, nothing outstanding happens to Monk class abilities on the down side 8th to 10th or the up side 13th to 17th. <br /><br />I guess what I'm getting at is, the advancement tables in the PHB have weird quirks and making a universal XP chart or a chart based on a single XP requirement plus percentage modifier might end up weird. They seem to have been constructed to put you at a certain post-name-level XP cost, or else in classes with a level cap you get shafted at the end so you never reach it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-85532164323615495142011-10-24T18:19:34.409-05:002011-10-24T18:19:34.409-05:00I love this article. I've been working on rewo...I love this article. I've been working on reworking this system for 2e.<br /><br />The thing that bugs me about the 2e class builder is that you are told that the classes you make with the system won't be comparable to the standard classes. Under Table 21 you find:<br /><br /><i>You can't reconstruct the existing character classes using this method. The standard classes give players advantages over custom-designed classes. Standard class characters advance in levels more quickly and, generally, have better abilities than custom-designed characters.</i><br /><br />Anyway, I remember adding a lot of abilities from other classes in Dragon like the Jester and all the India-themed kits. I also added some things from the Player's Options books (need to use them for something). It was funny that when I couldn't build the Fighter up to the canon, I added the Catch/Deflect Object ability to them. The rationale was to provide a method of fighter to deflect fireball and javelins.<br /><br />To get the MU to reach canon, I had to create an entire category of making magic items. Thus, I had a sorcerer class that could cast spells, but couldn't make any magic items, including spell research.<br /><br />One thing I've noticed about any system is that if I create a Fighter type (hit dice, armors and saving throws) with limited weapons, the XP requirement per level winds up around 1200XP. I used it to make a "soldier" class that was good at following orders and had bonuses to mass combat. They could be fun with the right campaign, but not as much fun for adventuring.sycarionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13741233143540350684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-20947789509616592632011-10-24T17:47:20.874-05:002011-10-24T17:47:20.874-05:00@Jeff - Thanks for bringing this article to my att...@Jeff - Thanks for bringing this article to my attention! I did not remember it at all. It's a very interesting read. <br /><br />I especially found the "Editor's Conclusion" to be interesting. In it he posits how the system could be used with AD&D to slightly modify existing classes. His examples are a fighter learning to pick pockets for a 10% xp penalty and a cleric using a sword for an extra 15%. I kinda like that idea. <br /><br />I could also see this concept being used in OD&D to eliminate the thief class.arcadaynhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17025690624100512801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-7605463306235099752011-10-24T16:46:31.523-05:002011-10-24T16:46:31.523-05:00@Stuart,
Well, yeah, if you want to make a 0 XP cl...@Stuart,<br />Well, yeah, if you want to make a 0 XP classe, the system lets you. But I don't think such results are really satisfying, or even viable, in practice. YMMV. <br /><br />I mean, your archer example is by-the-book, but why bother creating one when you could just play a fighter with Weapon Mastery with the bow? He'd have better to-hit and more options with his favoured weapon. Or, better yet, create an archer with some special archery abilities to differentiate him from the fighter who has Weapon Mastery with the bow? <br /><br />If you focus only on HD, save, to-hit, and armament choices, I think you're just as well off with the original classes. My thinking when I wrote the system was that you'd use special abilities, skills, and racial talents to differentiate; hence the need for a balanced approach.Erin Smalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16085303583608172242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-58045636906763257732011-10-24T16:45:12.396-05:002011-10-24T16:45:12.396-05:00I like Crabaugh's numbers. Heck, I modified hi...I like Crabaugh's numbers. Heck, I modified his system for a Rules Cyclopedia game I never ran... Still have that system somewhere, I remember adding many things to it over time.<br /><br />Still wish the man was with us -- his potential influence on Traveller would have been immense.donm61873https://www.blogger.com/profile/07855277967868713114noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7652921.post-1820522425478758612011-10-24T16:01:47.609-05:002011-10-24T16:01:47.609-05:00@Stuart: I'd play that! A B/X thief with bette...@Stuart: I'd play that! A B/X thief with better hp, and only slightly worse thieving abilities!barratariahttp://www.barrataria.comnoreply@blogger.com