An alternate look at Favoured Classes.

[Sletchman]

Just an idea I'm toying with, but as an alternate for favoured classes, have favoured classes by subgroup.

Ex:

Vanilla Elves - Burglar + Sage
Spider Nation - Assassin + Priest + Sage
Hart Nation - Scout + Sage
Owl Nation - Sage + Keeper + Mage [or perhaps Seer, if your game includes them].

That way you have the same total number of favoured classes, but different types, with the only constant in this instant being Sage.

You could tailor the classes to what that subgroup actually should have most of.

Vanilla Goblins - Lancer + Keeper
East Horde - Explorer + Lancer + Scout
Great Horde - Captain + Lancer + Priest
North Horde - Explorer + Lancer + Scout
South Horde - Lancer + Keeper + Priest
West Horde - Lancer + Scout + Soldier

Just off the top of my head mind.  What do you guys think?  Does it foil the balance aspect of favoured classes?

[VisualStatic]

Just curious, but what's wrong with the ones already listed in the species feats?

[Daedalus]

I don't think there's anything wrong with the ones in Species feats.  I think that Turnip is trying to make the different subcultures behave differently in his setting in such a way that theire representative members are extra different and not just a little different. 

However, adding Burglar to iconic classes for Vanilla Elves is actually a major boon to the race, since they're actually pretty ideal for it...just be careful with that, since it takes away what would normally be a penalty that costs feats/AD.

[Sletchman]

Just curious, but what's wrong with the ones already listed in the species feats?

Absolutely nothing, but in a world where history has the Elves being a downtrodden second class [as stolen from Dragon Age], they will be more likely to turn to crime.  Or a world where goblins are known as the great builders - they aren't likely to all be Priests and Lancers.

My other thought is that in some games some sub-species will vary enough to not be "Elves, but with keepers".

I don't think there's anything wrong with the ones in Species feats.  I think that Turnip is trying to make the different subcultures behave differently in his setting in such a way that theire representative members are extra different and not just a little different. 

However, adding Burglar to iconic classes for Vanilla Elves is actually a major boon to the race, since they're actually pretty ideal for it...just be careful with that, since it takes away what would normally be a penalty that costs feats/AD.

First paragraph - bingo! Exactly my line of thought, it sorta came to me while I was writing up cultural information for my players about every race and subrace in my campaign world.

Second Paragraph - Most of this was spitballing, and I had yet to think through balance issues from certain combinations.  This is one of the reasons for the thread, other views on balance factors.

[Dhampire]

Just curious, but what's wrong with the ones already listed in the species feats?

Absolutely nothing, but in a world where history has the Elves being a downtrodden second class [as stolen from Dragon Age], they will be more likely to turn to crime.  Or a world where goblins are known as the great builders - they aren't likely to all be Priests and Lancers.

It's also useful to mod iconic classes for a world like Dark Sun where elves are thematically different from standard (Burglar & Scout).

[Morgenstern]

Just off the top of my head mind.  What do you guys think?  Does it foil the balance aspect of favoured classes?

To maintain the balance aspect for these localized variations you need just one thing - is the pair of classes a true statement about about that culture that others outside of it can use as an trustworthy guide for their expectations, or is is a boon only to PCs coming from that area. It looks like you have built in some basic cultural understandings and the Iconic classes reflect that.

Your table of classes will work fine for that setting .