mismatched races and classes

Remove all ads!

Just some opinions from everyone. Two questions: What legal race/class combinations are just ridiculous in your opinion, and what race/class combination aren't allowed, but should be?

My votes:

Most ridiculous legal race/class combo: Elven Beserker. I can't see it, no matter how hard I try.

Not legal, but certainly should be: Gnomes as bards. I mean, why not? They can be illusionists, they tell great stories, and so why couldn't they sing about heroes on an instrument? They can be fighters or illusionists or thieves, so they do everything else that a bard dabbles in, so why not a bard?

 

Elf Paladin
Why not? I can see an elf fight for justice and righteousness.

Elf Druid
I associate both with nature. Why can't elves be druids?

Elf Bard
Being as beautiful as they are (should mean high CHA), they'd make exelent bards.

Elf Monk
Why not? I don't see why an elf couldn't receive the same training a human could.

Elf Berserker and Barbarian
Elves are highly civilized people. They shouldn't let their anger get the best of them.

Gnome Sorcerer
I think gnomes should be the masters of magic. So why shouldn't they be able to be this magic class.

Gnome Barbarian/Fighter
Yeah right, how pathetic would that be...

Halfling Bard
I think they talk a lot and are very cosy people. they'd make great storytellers.

Halfling Paladin
These people are good by heart (usually), so why not let them be paladins?

Halfling Cleric
I think they're much to joyous to be that religious.

Halfling Barbarian
Halflings come from villages. They're civilized, so they're not barbarians.

Half-orc Cleric
Yeah right, like these people have enough brains to think of an explanation for things they don't understand...

And I think Half-elves should be able to choose every class.

 

As Menion Leah said, Elves should definitly able to be druids.
And i think dwarves should be able to become paladins, Moradin is a LG god, why are there no paladins of Moradin?

 

Maybe because there are clerics of Moradin. And dwarfes suffer a penalty to charisma. Not very "paladinistic"

 

Dwarves don't suffer a charisma penalty, do they?
I thought it was +1 CON, -1 DEX.

 

Good points.

I have actually got to the point that I really don't like the whole Paladin class.

Essentially a Paladin is a fighter that fights for his particular mythos - and as a result they get a small number of Priest spell.s

Why not allow "Paladins" of Cyric, Malar, Sune, etc...?

 

@ Menion

Dwarves do suffer a penalty to Charisma. While the minimum charisma is still 3, their maximum is 16. So technically, they don't have the minimum stats for paladinhood.

Totally agree on the elven druid. Very logical combination that isn't allowed.

 

So a dwarf gets +1 CON, -1 DEX and -2 CHA?
That sucks. Why the hell is that? I thought the +'s and -'s of every race would equal to 0. So the dwarf has -2, that's pretty unfair...

Not that it really matters much, since CHA sucks anyway, but still.

 

IMO some stats are worth more than others. CON is one of them, since you can get regeneration in BG1...

 

But if you don't have BG1, you can't get 20 CON, so it still sucks.
Besides, the Half-Orc has 19 CON too...

 

dwarves suffer a -2 chr penalty BUT ONLY TO NONE DWARVES. in accordance to other dwarves they still keep their origional chr.

 

As any player of real D&D should know, some stats are worth a good deal more than others. Generally, cha has the least impact on gameplay. Therefore, it is less important. Dwarves tend to be more reserved, therefore lower cha.

As for combinations, why shouldn't anything be allowed to be anything? That's what I like about 3E games. Sure, half-orcs tend to be stupid, but who says paladins are always smart?

And the one that annoys me the most is that elves can't be bards. I always thought of elves as a perfect race to be bards.

It also annoys me that they can't be monks. They tend to live contemplative lifestyles, why shouldn't they be monks?

 

Gnomish Paladins. Seriously, can you imagine anything more absurd? "Surrender evildoer, or I shall smite your ankles!!!"

 

Agreed on the elven druid here as well.

As far as the dwarf goes, just +1 con is way below the line when you compare its relatively small advantages to how dwarven condition is described in FR lore for example. Also, dwarves should have a considerable bonus against fear and mind-control, as their temper and culture hardly ever causes them to cower in a fight or strike own people.

Even the strength bonus given to half-orcs is hardly anything. When you think that they're supposed to be incredibly strong when compared to casual humans, and the bonuses they get from that even in average barely give them any advantage at all. Or how about the good old example of elves vs humans? Or elves vs dwarves? Elves have always been described as a physically slightly weaker, yet dexterous and beautiful race to look upon. In fights they should rely on finesse to compensate for their lack of strength. Yet in the game they are exactly as strong as any human might be, with a tiny bonus to their dexterity (which is in no way enough to explain for their fluent movements and combat as described in books) and no bonus at all to their charisma.

The 3:rd edition point-buy system that was used in NWN was good in that it allowed for a clear advantage to one's racial bonus stats, when compared to 2:nd edition. Only the ability to raise those stats with a 1 to 1 ratio while leveling ruined this later on. Even though I do agree that you should be able to change your basic stats somewhat, it should happen far slower with a less maximum raising ability (how do you explain a fighter with an intelligence of 6 getting to the intelligence of 10 in just 16 levels? not that 16 levels isn't a helluva lot of levels, but still.. intelligence should be modifiable only by a point or two with non magical means... otherwise you exceed your brain's natural-born physical capacity, thus making the whole thing impossible).

 

I think the idea with the descriptions of races is that it be used as a guideline. The thing with D&D RPGs is that unlike games of strict, clear-cut rules you are given a considerable amount of artistic liscence with your characters.

in Everquest, for example, a high elf is almost guaranteed to be considerably weaker than a human. In D&D however, they simply tend to be weaker, which means that exceptional species such as adventureres might be a little stronger than your average human.

What it all boils down to is what you want you character to be. A half-orc could be weak and an elf strong, but the elf could never be as strong as the half-orc's potential. Do I make sense?

 

you are absolutly right the beast within. a race should not be judged by its overall characteristics. who is to say that a dwarf or half-orc couldnt be chrismatic? these races are figments of our imagination and as such they could be characterized differantly by each individual. which is why id like to believe that any class should be allowed to play any class. for the most part races are generalized but there are exceptions to every rule. who is to say there isnt a gnomish paladin running around somewhere?

 

With Dwarfs, their charisma penalty is not a great disadvantage when you compare this with the abilities they get - attack bonus versus orcs, defence bonus versus giants, resistance to poison and magic, and infravision. They are good abilities, and so some balance is retained by incurring a charisma penalty.