Additonal Subclasses

[Whira's Luck]

Maybe, just maybe, Whira.. people are tired of making a PC who's trained his whole life as a mercenary/nomadic hunter.. But, when he gets IC, he has to spam train his skills in order to be able to succeed 50% of the time.. Maybe some people would prefer focusing in on the things their character did in their background, as opposed to getting a broad range.. Especially for the older characters.. Who come in at 30, with the skills of a retarded ten year old.. Then magically, in 3 days, get to be able to take on raptors.


Yanno, just maybe.

Maybe they shouldn't die in a few hours expecting themselves to be the badasses they write up in their backround. A bit harsh put that way, but it's true.

Anyhow, warriors don't start with the skills of a retarded ten-year old and it's possible to get to a decent level with such a skillset in a reasonable span of time without the need for twinking.

As per your raptor example, raptors are rapacious, ravenous, clever lizards. They're carnivores. They have evolved, like the majority of the wildlife in Zalanthas, to kill, devour, and breed.

Likely as not, said mercenary/nomad still travelled in groups, not by themselves acrossed the highly dangerous wastes. As such, they didn't have to be a bad-ass to start with.. a group of very mediocre warriors could likely head off most of the hazards at least long enough for most of the other people to run the hell away. Furthur, warriors are warriors. Likely sparring other humans in their youth isn' quite the same as staring down a beady-eyed creature as big as you are with nasty razor-sharp fangs and claws. These aren't tregil's we're talking about.

And I've played several successful adult warriors, so I'm not speaking out of my ass here. Nothing they accomplished hinged on their ability when they started out. If having a skill boost is that important to your character development that there is no way you can play your pc without it, then special app a character to start with that skill boost with a good reason as to why.

Any successful, talented character will achieve a moderate degree of proficiency provided they 1) actually use their skills and 2) live more than a few days. It's really not that difficult at all, especially if they're using skills which are directly related to their main class. So yeah, I could see how fighting subguilds would be important if from the moment you log in you want to run out and kill some raptors and scrabs, but most people aren't that suicidal when it comes to vicious man-eating lizards and horrible insect-beasts with ripping mandibles.

There's so many options available to be able to get to a level of proficiency where you can do that alone, that subguilds that allow you to do it from the word go are useless. Not everyone can or should survive to get to that level, and it should be even harder if you're doing it alone, without people to watch your back.

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

I pretty much agree with Whira's Luck, and how he laid the smack-down on all the previously suggested subguilds. Subguilds should not be there to give teh l337 sl<i11z, but instead to flesh out your character.
With that said, I'm not opposed to new subguilds at all, so long as they make IC sense and fill a niche not already filled. Some jobs some of my characters have had in their backgrounds that didn't really have corresponding subguilds were: raider, errand runner, farmer (keeping in mind that a Zalanthan farmer would not be a proud, pitchfork-wielding property owner, but a practically if not actually enslaved sharecropper. He would likely have skills like steal and forage, as he tried to sneak some of the wheat home to starving family), miner (both independent and slave), and butcher (once again, probably not an independent shop-owner, but one that works in the massive slaughterhouses of the cities).
AC brings up a good point about the 'throw' skill, and since we have at least two (to my knowledge) subguilds that give archery, I don't think its entirely ridiculous to suggest that at least one subguild should get throw. I just plain don't like the idea of a savage subguild, however, because I'm not sure how often a Zalanthan 'savage' would be produced. I cringe to think of what a new player's background for a 'savage' character would look like...

Code Select Expand

Ogg no like gith. He smashes them and bashes them with spears. Ogg swings from vines in Grey Forest and throws fecal matter at his enemies. Ph33r teh Ogg!!!!
So instead of that, perhaps throw could be added or swapped into an existing subguild? Maybe trade out archery in the hunter subclass for throw, with the purpose of throwing spears?
Also, the idea of an 'animal tamer' type character that is not a ranger is feasible, and I would not be against a subguild to support this. I think a good name for such a subguild would be 'stablehand' or something similiar, the background likely stating that the character spent some time working in one of the stables within the city (though one room codedly, those things are probably massive ICly, and would have many workers to tend to all the animals). Since they worked entirely within the city, it would be possible to have something like a pickpocket/stablehand or merchant/stablehand; such characters might even make more sense than a ranger/stablehand (just because you spent your youth grooming animals doesn't mean you know how to track, kill and skin them). I agree with Whira's Luck, however, that taming wild animals is best left to rangers and RP, and that any coded way of mating animals would be downright silly. If such a stablehand subguild were to exist, I'd be happy if they got no benefit other than a hefty bonus to their ability to ride.
Also, I think some thought should be put into retiring the rebel subguild. The Occupation and Rebellion have been over for some time now, and it'd be a stretch to justify taking this subguild with any new character, I think.
Just my two 'sid.

[Whira's Luck]

Five, there actually is a stablehand subguild, you just need to know how to apply it: caravan guide. Maybe I'm just interpreting it broadly, but to me, it doesn't necessarily mean you had to have guided caravans across the waste, you could have been an animal handler for wagons as well, driving wagons in, moving the animals to a stables and taking care of the tame beasts, like hosing the inixes down in ginka juice and picking out the gravel from between mekillot toes or whatnot. Of course, it comes with something you may not need in such a case (language), but that is easily remedied by wishing up or emailing and asking the offending language to be removed from your skills list.

Some of the subguilds are open to a bit of interpretation as to how they are applied to your background. It doesn't have to be an exact match, and you can fudge a bit, especially if you don't actually intend on using the skills included (like with the stealing a little wheat while you were working the fields). Something like that would make a great addition to a background, but it isn't something to imply that you're even close to being a real thief, more like a thief of opportunity, which anyone can be. It isn't even necessary to ever use any skills in your subguild either, so you can pick a subguild which may be the closest match to your background, even if it has some extra skills you don't need that come along as baggage.

Take the subguild of guard, for instance: Maybe you used to help your family along with your brothers by guarding the bags of wheat flour they used to import into Allanak as they were carted off to a grocery store. Maybe your family comes from a long line of house guards for noble house X. Maybe you just used to protect your kid sister from bullies when you were growing up, since you lived in a rough part of town. Maybe you were a personal bodyguard for hire. Maybe your mother (or father) was a prostitute and you used to guard the door when she/he turned tricks so nobody disturbed her room. Maybe you had a pet kank you were extremely protective of.

There are so many possible and very different backgrounds that could come just from this subguild. It doesn't have to be exactly one thing or another, all it is is a small skill or subset of skills that somewhere along the line you picked up the basis for doing, and maybe not even very well.

[da mitey warrior]

Laborer: Strength Bonus
Dancer: Agility Bonus
Runner: Constitution Bonus
Thinker: Wisdom Bonus

For when your character concept depends on having a certain stat.

[Bestatte]

Laborer: Strength Bonus
Dancer: Agility Bonus
Runner: Constitution Bonus
Thinker: Wisdom Bonus

For when your character concept depends on having a certain stat.

That is logical because alot of times you have a description saying you are big and strong looking but when you get your stats you have very poor str. However I can see how this would be abused. So I am doubtfull anything bad would happen.

I don't see how it could be abused. Consider that you might end up with AI wisdom in the first place - a boost would be codedly impossible, and you ended up picking yourself something utterly useless with absolutely no benefit to you whatsoever. You run that risk if you choose something like what's described above. No added skills, just a boost to something that is already as high as it can get. The only way it would help someone is if their roll in the generator was gonna give them something like "below average" and brings them up to average. Since, if you're already "good" then it's not -that- much of a big deal to be "very good".

I like it.

[Cenghiz]

Subguilds are things like 'hobbies'. They are not the primary abilities of your character. Your character used to use those skills.. Did not for some time. And he won't specially study them, if he will, you should choose the guild having the skill instead.
If we have a quick glance, no subguild has a skill that may make a character even slightly stronger than another subguild. 'Scan' is a very very strong skill. So are all of the combat skills. I don't think any magicker will have 'scan' or 'piercing weapons' in his skills list.
A ranger can learn to tame animals in looong looong time, it wouldn't be too wise to have merchants, gemmers, pickpockets and warriors wandering around with creatures they tamed.
Other than that, it could be nice to speak about new subguilds but heh... I don't think most of us had time to try all the subguilds and play them accordingly already.

[Zharal]

Whira, Im with you on this one, me having a long lived character I have to say its not the time spent building the skill, it's the mind behind the player and how they use there skills to their advantage.  It takes a very long time to be really good at something, theres a reason for that.

[Delirium]

I have to say its not the time spent building the skill, it's the mind behind the player and how they use there skills to their advantage.  It takes a very long time to be really good at something, theres a reason for that.

[Sir Diealot]

Again, Whira, just maybe, I was overexaggerating to make a point..  Perhaps, yanno..  We might never be sure, what with the tricksy language I used..

And seriously, da mitey, subguilds are used to flesh out your character in a very specific way, ONLY by choosing hobbies, so instead of being able to app a very weak, thinker type, you should be forced to constantly app nothing more than generic <race> <class> because if you rely on things like certain stats being lower/higher in relation to one another, like a Human who's stronger than he is smart choosing thug, Despite that it would be a less logical choice, that would make your background somewhat less valid.. And honestly, if you don't see how having your stats go the exact opposite way as they did in your background makes it less valid, you're at about the paramecium level of intelligence.. I got off track.. where was I?

Oh, well if you're relying on a logical conclusion that your background (at least in some minor way) should affect your stats (or at least stat order, ie lowest to highest) then you don't understand the point of good Roleplay!

[Whira's Luck]

Again, Whira, just maybe, I was overexaggerating to make a point..  Perhaps, yanno..  We might never be sure, what with the tricksy language I used..

Exagerration is pointless. It only implies a worst/best case senario which is rarely realistic in practice. It is sloppy thinking at best and disingenious at worst, and commits a fallacy of thinking. To quote the fallacy of oversimplification/exagerration: The causation fallacies known as oversimplification and exaggeration occur whenever the series of actual causes for an event are either reduced or multiplied to the point where there is no longer a genuine, causal connection between the alleged causes and the actual effect.

And seriously, da mitey, subguilds are used to flesh out your character in a very specific way

That way being to is a coded effect that can partially what their background experiences taught them. That's all they're there for, at least so far as their purpose, and they don't even need to cover everything. They're not there to flesh your character out with skills you think your main guild should have.

ONLY by choosing hobbies

Hobbies may be part of your background. So may a prior trade. So may things you were taught in passing by your parents so you discarded in favor of a new trade. So are things you picked up by experience (see my example on how the guard subguild would be a good choice for a person who spent a majority of their childhood trying to protect a sibling in a rough environment). A subguild can be a hobby, but it's not ONLY a hobby.

so instead of being able to app a very weak, thinker type, you should be forced to constantly app nothing more than generic <race> <class> because if you rely on things like certain stats being lower/higher in relation to one another, like a Human who's stronger than he is smart choosing thug

A background only exists to describe what your character did and was like before you started playing. If you make one so narrow that you paint yourself into a corner by starting to describe what they are physically capable of, then you've done yourself a disservice. Nowhere in writing a background (even a specific one) are you forced to describe your physical characteristics. A specific background doesn't have to include physical strengths and weaknesses. If you consistantly put them in your background then you'll be consistantly dissapointed.

Despite that it would be a less logical choice, that would make your background somewhat less valid..

See above. Playing a thug doesn't imply inherent stupidity or strength. Playing a thug who has a high intelligence and low strength doesn't make a thug any less or more valid. The only thing that makes it 'valid' or 'invalid' is specifically stating that they are stronger than average, without special apping for a character who is stronger than average to guarantee it.

And honestly, if you don't see how having your stats go the exact opposite way as they did in your background makes it less valid, you're at about the paramecium level of intelligence.. I got off track.. where was I?

Way to go with an ad hominem fallacy. I don't see how anyone's supposed intelligence makes their argument more or less relevant to the discussion at hand other than trying to insult them. If you find yourself always getting shafted on the stats you think you should have, there are two very easy ways to solve it: Special app the character (if approved, you won't be disappointed) or even more easily, quit putting your stats in your background.

Oh, well if you're relying on a logical conclusion that your background (at least in some minor way) should affect your stats (or at least stat order, ie lowest to highest) then you don't understand the point of good Roleplay!

The irony of your use of logic is refreshing since if I'm reading what you wrote correctly in this paragraph, you're contradicting what you said earlier. Earlier you implied: not being able to skew the outcome of your stats to reflect your background is bad. Now you're saying that if someone else thinks the same way, they don't know what roleplaying is?

Logically, if you have no way of guaranteeing a specific outcome of stats (which even stat ordering doesn't provide) then you shouldn't be guaranteeing yourself a specific outcome in your background. QED.

This isn't the fault of the system, or faulty administration, as you are never guaranteed the stats you 'want'. Hence, the fault of a poorly-written or 'invalid' background lies with you, not with the random-rolling aspect of the game.

And I smell another couple logical fallacies in the brewing, a masterful blend of circumstantial ad hominem combined with a sprinkling of argumentum ad verecundiam (appeal to unqualified authority, in this case yours).

And I would challenge you thusly:

What makes you a qualified authority in determining what good roleplay is?

What makes you qualified to pass judgement on whether someone understands what good roleplay is?

What other experts on good roleplay agree that ones ideas on stat ordering are a direct sign of someone not understanding of what good roleplay is?

I may seem to be sarcastic in asking these, but I'm not, I'm dead serious. If you want your arguments to be taken seriously, then back them up with more than insults and contradictions.

[Mulatto_Prophet]

<RANT ALERT>

Sir Diealot:

Oh, well if you're relying on a logical conclusion that your background (at least in some minor way) should affect your stats (or at least stat order, ie lowest to highest) then you don't understand the point of good Roleplay!

This is something I can speak on, despite my general lack of expierence with the Armageddon Mud.

I have been mudding for over a decade, I began in the H&S world where PKing was supreme, to the point I am at now, playing in a mud where RP is enforced. I have seen both the highs and the lows, been to the bottom of the sea to the top of the mountain; and, in all that I have witnessed in the MUD realm, the culmination of all of my experience, I -know- the definition of RP.

Good roleplay is greater than your stats, greater even than your character. Good roleplay is where the -story- is important. Where the experience is greater than the sum of the players.

In my life, my gaming has always been questioned, been discouraged, even been spit upon. I have been told that I am shutting myself off, that I am being socially-retarded, that I am a geek, a loser, a nerd, a loner.

Fuck that noise and understand me, the Prophet.

I just want to be part of a group of people that realize that, while a tree may be pretty, the forest is fucking beautiful.

And I get that here, even if the forest is a make believe one that only exists between the lines of scrolling text.

And I feel that Whira is closer in tune with what I feel than you are, which is why I had to drop this rant, to let -you- know that Whira has better expressed a knowledge of what good rp is than you claim to possess.

But maybe I'm wrong, it's always possible. So tell me, everyone who reads this, WHAT IS GOOD RP?

[Spud]

http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=12940

Take your arguing about RP there.

No need to be arguing over what good RP is in the code discussion part of the board, or in a topic named additional sub-classes.

[jmordetsky]

X-wolf: Metal claw gloves, regeneration
spider person: Webs w/ entangle, climb++++
one-eye flame laser man: fireball+++, crush on f-me.

Oh...Sorry...Wrong board.

[Mulatto_Prophet]

Yeah, don't continue to post about RP on this board. And there is nod need to dreg up old posts.

When I ask tell me, I mean -tell me- like in a PM or something. Let me know if you can relate to how I feel, or if I'm off-base, or if I should stop drinking before I read the boards.

Back on topic:

I agree whole-heartedly with Whira. The subclasses are there, in my opinion, to provide a framework of a character, not the picture of the character itself.

If I write up a background that requires that I have certain stat-levels, and I don't get them, then, rather than try to change how I get stats, I would change how I play the character. To me, it seems like rebuilding a house to fix a leaky sink.

[Sir Diealot]

Exagerration is pointless. It only implies a worst/best case senario which is rarely realistic in practice. It is sloppy thinking at best and disingenious at worst, and commits a fallacy of thinking. To quote the fallacy of oversimplification/exagerration: The causation fallacies known as oversimplification and exaggeration occur whenever the series of actual causes for an event are either reduced or multiplied to the point where there is no longer a genuine, causal connection between the alleged causes and the actual effect.

I too took Critical Thinking 101, and I understand, even agree with, the point you're making, however I think you're expecting a much more mannered discussion than tends to be the norm on the GDB.  I apologize for sticking to the way things tend to be run, as opposed to leaping into your mind and drawing out that you wished this not to be run like every internet argument.. ever.  I'm sorry, exaggeration, the -majority- of internet arguments.

That way being to is a coded effect that can partially what their background experiences taught them. That's all they're there for, at least so far as their purpose, and they don't even need to cover everything. They're not there to flesh your character out with skills you think your main guild should have.

Bolded the important part.  Right now you're actually agreeing with me.  I wasn't very clear, apparently.  I think the very minor stat buff as a subguild is a -good- thing.  It can easily mesh with your experiences, or the type of character you want to play.  I also support the option of not choosing a subguild.  What if none of them seem to fit?  Sure, you could choose one and just not use the skills, but to me that could be easily fixed by adding a 'none' option.

Hobbies may be part of your background. So may a prior trade. So may things you were taught in passing by your parents so you discarded in favor of a new trade. So are things you picked up by experience (see my example on how the guard subguild would be a good choice for a person who spent a majority of their childhood trying to protect a sibling in a rough environment). A subguild can be a hobby, but it's not ONLY a hobby.

Oh noes, I used exaggeration again.  Anyway, lets say your character spent his background on rooftops in <city>, and scrambling through allies to make a living.. But you didn't steal.  You could choose acrobat, or you could choose to get a very minor agility boost.  If you have Poor agility, yet your character has survived on rooftops his whole background then you're kinda screwed..  This is not a twink thing, this is not a 'zomg I trained for 20 years on my strength, so if I choose this I MUST GET AI STRENGTH' this is.. you choose it, it rolls, and then adds one level up, poor to average, etc. etc.. Its making your character feel more like your character.

Lets say that you're playing..  Some guy is chasing you;

think I know, I'll do what I did when I was a kid, grab this ladder and try to escape on the roofs!

climb ladder
You have fallen off the ladder!
climb ladder
You have fallen off the ladder!
climb ladder
You have fallen off the ladder!
climb ladder
[rooftop description]
think yes!
You have fallen!
-45 health
[mantis head]

Do you see, now, how stats (due to the nature of the game, and it being coded and all) affect the way things go?  People follow the road of least resistance..  If it was so difficult that he was always falling and breaking things, that he could, in fact, not even climb the ladder? Then he'd never get to hopping around the roofs, even mildly..  If he had AI strenght, he'd stay down and protect himself that way.  I'm a proponent of ordered stats, not chosen, but ordered.. If you roll average, average, poor, poor.. then you'll get stat 1 average, stat 2 average, stat 3 poor, stat 4 poor..  It just helps you set where your strengths and weaknesses are because they -do- matter in how you play your character, and how your character grew up.. And the 'subclass stat bonus' system is a step in the right direction, in my opinion.

A background only exists to describe what your character did and was like before you started playing. If you make one so narrow that you paint yourself into a corner by starting to describe what they are physically capable of, then you've done yourself a disservice. Nowhere in writing a background (even a specific one) are you forced to describe your physical characteristics. A specific background doesn't have to include physical strengths and weaknesses. If you consistantly put them in your background then you'll be consistantly dissapointed.

See above.. I don't want to write him like Hercules, and be dissappointed when I only get Good strength..  but I do want to write about how because he was stronger than he was smart, so that he used his brawn instead of his brains, thats just giving him personality.  Perhaps I'm spoiled, coming from MUSHes, where your backgrounds are actually somewhat involved ie;2-10 pages, as opposed to a 2 paragraph blurb before the text editor runs out of room, but I like being able to correlate things, to make them work in unison, to not have to make up excuses as to why all of a sudden, your dim, but loyal Human who takes a while to catch on, has AI wisdom..  Oh well, ignore it..  Is that what you're trying to say?

See above. Playing a thug doesn't imply inherent stupidity or strength. Playing a thug who has a high intelligence and low strength doesn't make a thug any less or more valid. The only thing that makes it 'valid' or 'invalid' is specifically stating that they are stronger than average, without special apping for a character who is stronger than average to guarantee it.

See above.  Also, insert bitching about 1-2 month waits on special apps, as opposed to a 1-2 day wait, if the system proposed was installed.

Way to go with an ad hominem fallacy. I don't see how anyone's supposed intelligence makes their argument more or less relevant to the discussion at hand other than trying to insult them. If you find yourself always getting shafted on the stats you think you should have, there are two very easy ways to solve it: Special app the character (if approved, you won't be disappointed) or even more easily, quit putting your stats in your background.

See above.  Internet..  assholes, nobody is nice, and its not a civil playing field.. Oh noes, your poor feelings, and my poor wimpy ad hominem attack.  See above for reasons on why 'stats in the background' isn't what I mean.  Also, see the bitching about 1-2 month waits on Special Apps.

Logically, if you have no way of guaranteeing a specific outcome of stats (which even stat ordering doesn't provide) then you shouldn't be guaranteeing yourself a specific outcome in your background. QED.

No, logically, if theres no way to alter the outcome of your stats, to make your backgrounds and roleplay more realistic, a way should be put in..  Until the way is put in, you shouldn't put it in your background.  All I'm asking is to be better able to flesh out my character, and also be better able to play the character I want to play, not the character the system makes for me.  Unless you want to give me my stats first, so I can make the character to suit them.. I'd be totally down with that as well.

This isn't the fault of the system, or faulty administration, as you are never guaranteed the stats you 'want'. Hence, the fault of a poorly-written or 'invalid' background lies with you, not with the random-rolling aspect of the game.

Yeah, but if this was added as a new feature, yanno, like its being presented here, then I'd be able to write that background, wouldn't I?  You're not really following what I want.  This is a -new- thing, if this -new- thing is added, then I will be better able to customize my character, and play the dumb miner (without AI wisdom!), the smarter-than-he-looks thug (without Abyssmal wisdom!), the roof-crawling street rat (without poor agility!)  I don't do that now, but I'd like to be able to.

What makes you a qualified authority in determining what good roleplay is

I staff currently, and have before, staffed on World of Darkness games, I have GM/ST'd on table top games for over seven years.  I have played table top, MUD, and MUSH RPGs for almost ten years.  This has allowed me to see things, and understand the systems and ways that characters are created.  There might be varying ways to come around to character generation, I've even experimented with them, but I generally get a better feel for my character if the stats mesh with the concept I had in mind, as opposed to having the stats be randomly decided not before, like in DnD, where you can adjust your concept or make a new concept to fit the stats, but after you submit your concept.  After you're put your thoughts out there, yet without any attention paid to your thoughts.

What other experts on good roleplay agree that ones ideas on stat ordering are a direct sign of someone not understanding of what good roleplay is?

Oh, am I supposed to cite sources?  Sorry, I've never read anything on the subject and, as I said before, there are alternate ways of doing it and thinking.  They just don't tend to make as good a character as ones that are created the way I prefer.  At least in my experience.

And I smell another couple logical fallacies in the brewing, a masterful blend of circumstantial ad hominem combined with a sprinkling of argumentum ad verecundiam (appeal to unqualified authority, in this case yours).

OH NOES! AD HOMINEM ARGUMENT! YOU ATTACKED ME AND CALLED ME UNQUALIFIED WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ZOMG IT BURNS LIKE WHEN I PEE.

[Delirium]

Real mature.


I like the idea of a spear-thrower's subclass, or substituting throw for archery and spear-making for fletchery in the hunter's subguild.  Or, if it's a new subguild, perhaps hunt, throw and spearmaking, with a fairly low cap on throw.  Throw is incredibly useful when hunting if used properly, and seems to make a lot more sense than archery in many cases.

The rebel fighter subclass could simply be re-named.  It's a combination of abilities that makes sense to have out in the wastes for ambush-style raiding or fighting, or even in the city for sneakier types.

[Larrath]

I'm very unimpressed with that post, Diealot.
The fact is that if there existed a guild that gave a wisdom bonus, EVERYONE would use it.  Always.

It's perfectly possible for someone to be smarter than he was strong, and then get stronger later on.  Or to take a bad hit to the head to excuse lower wisdom.  Or to have good wisdom with one thing and bad with others - like be a hideously powerful strategist but be bad at learning, or a master learner but bad as reading people's reactions, or just be a slow (not poor) thinker.
Don't base your PCs on attributes like that, or at least do it rarely.  If you absolutely MUST have good stats, email about it - if you want to apply a strongman weight-lifter that MUST have high strength in order to work, mention it in you background at the start.  "*Must have VG Str or higher*".  If you get accepted with that in your background and you have crappy strength, wish up or email about it.

And if you want to be rude, please take it to one of the other terrible, terrible internet forums where that's the norm.  You're not winning any points nor making anyone want to read your posts.

[Sir Diealot]

Thats just it, if you read it, I don't want him to have AI strength.  I don't app strongman weight lifters, but the choices you make in life are partially determined by your strengths and weaknesses.  Yes, you can do anything with any stats, I'm more asking for an ordering system, or the ability to see your stats, before you write the BG (obviously watching people to make sure they don't kill off poorly statted characters)  just so I can write those strengths and weaknesses into the background.

Yes, it is possible to play the character.  Yes I have fun playing the character.  I'd just have more fun if the character I made in my mind was more accurately portrayed in the game...

Also.. I, for one, would -rarely- take the wisdom bonus class, its too twinky for me to take generally.  But I do want the option available.

[Bogre]

Calm down, guys.

We were discussing possible new subguilds, not trying to get into a huge argument over subguilds -now-.

[Manhattan]

i still think we need a Potters subguild

[corona]

i still think we need a Potters subguild

I agree, we can mine 'sid and the like and make things out of it. Why not dig in the clay pits and be able to make some sort of clay ware and ceramics. That would be neato! :wink:

[Maybe42or54]

I'm very unimpressed with that post, Diealot.
The fact is that if there existed a guild that gave a wisdom bonus, EVERYONE would use it.  Always.

Uh. No, they wouldn't?

If we went with just the city subguilds, I would love the shit out of since I have a subguild that has what I want instead of looking through the subguilds, reading the helpfiles that -tell- me about how they got in my background and realizing that, holy shit, that isn't my background.


I don't like how the guild and subguilds tell me what they do and what they don't do. For instance:
Guild_warrior

There is only one calling which warriors follow: to fight, and perhaps to die fighting. Although motivated by innumerable goals, there are a few commonalities among warriors. In nearly all warriors there exists some notion of honour and fairness, and often a vague conception of glory.

Uh.. Not in my pc. Never heard of such a thing in arm.

Subguild_bard

Bards are talented with musical ability, and well versed in the use of various instruments. They can earn a living performing tricks involving small sleights of hand, or by repeating and embellishing stories they have overheard. Their ability to pick up languages will also aid in the diversity of their story-telling.

Yea. Might be my warrior knows an instrument.
I've seena nd heard of a lot of bards pcs that don't have the bard subclass, or versa vice.


More onto the subguilds. What is wrong with having a locale based subguild?

A tuluk, allanak, tablelands, luirs, red desert, red storm, and the plains?

[Forty Winks]

Oh, nice suggestion. That would prevent a Nakki citizen being a rebel, when rebels are more of a northerner subguild. And, that could open up different background options for different places. For example there could be a smuggler in Allanak and a con artist in Tuluk, but both having close to the same skills, maybe slight variations. I like that idea alot.

[edited to add]
Or a thrower in Allanak and an archer in Tuluk.
Or a miner in Allanak and a forester in Tuluk.
Or a linguist in Allanak and Tuluk and a Outpost Linguist in Liur's and RS.
Or a...

The problem is, how would you decide which subguild you get if you havn't even chosen a starting location during character creation? Unless depending on which subguild you choose, your starting locations are limited?

[Angela Christine]

AC brings up a good point about the 'throw' skill, and since we have at least two (to my knowledge) subguilds that give archery, I don't think its entirely ridiculous to suggest that at least one subguild should get throw. I just plain don't like the idea of a savage subguild, however, because I'm not sure how often a Zalanthan 'savage' would be produced.

That isn't so much a problem with the subguild as a problem with the name.  And the name has given me no end of trouble.  I can't find a one-word synonym for "hunter" in english.  Go ahead, try entering "hunter" at www.thesaurus.com, the results are truely awful.  "Spear_hunter" could work, but it looks stupid.     Oh, well.


Angela Christine

[Maybe42or54]

Spearman?

I don't know how the local based subguilds might be put together but you may be able to point to where you go to start.

You could also have a southern based merchant, nothern based merchant subclasses.

Since we all know merchants don't start with much that a southern based merchant can use to get to greener grasses.