Grist for the Iconic mill

[nil]

Iconic Classes: If your level in any base class is higher than your level in either X or Y, the attribute for which your species has the highest attribute modifier is considered to be 2 lower.

Way too wordy and hard to understand. If taking that route, I would suggest each race with iconic classes have associated with it an attribute that drops by 2. This can have the same mechanical effect, but is easier to understand. So, for elves it would be

Iconic Classes: If your level in any base class is higher than your level in either sage or scout, your wisdom score drops by 2.

You could then switch out the relevant attribute depending on the species (changing the classes accordingly). This way it can work even for species without attribute modifiers, such as Rootwalkers.

Hm, you're right that it is easier to understand that way. I just wanted something that was applicable to both present and future species, though a small side note for the GM on which attributes to pick for a new species might take care of that and keep it simple.

I'm also not sure whether -2 to one attribute is harsh enough - both the RAW -2 AD penalty and the 1/2 reputation penalty suggested in the other thread seem more severe to me than what I proposed  - though that is exactly why I suggested it as a change seeing as many people strongly dislike the current penalties for going against the Iconic Classes.

[Sletchman]

Every d20 roll, excepting saves, has a base error range of 1 and a base threat range of 20. An untrained check increases the error range by 2, so in this case it's now 1-3. It's the same with attack checks.

The Iconic penalty would make those base values 1-4/20. So for untrained checks/attacks, the error range would now be 1-6

So by taking a non-iconic class you have a 1-4 error range for everything you do?  That's what I thought the first time I read your OP, I just figured I had to be wrong because it's just way, way to harsh.

Unless I'm still missing it and you mean 1-6 error range for untrained stuff, which isn't a harsh enough penalty if only because most people simply won't take untrained checks.  Most of the guys I know rarely make untrained checks anyway.

[Doublebond]

I'm also not sure whether -2 to one attribute is harsh enough - both the RAW -2 AD penalty and the 1/2 reputation penalty suggested in the other thread seem more severe to me than what I proposed  - though that is exactly why I suggested it as a change seeing as many people strongly dislike the current penalties for going against the Iconic Classes.

There doesn't seem to be any president for species with only a negative modifier, so it's hard to gage its impact on the species bonus scale. Seems rather effective for me.

[Sletchman]

My current thoughts are:

Dwarf: Drop Thick Hide to 2.
Elf:
Goblin / Orc: Swap for Reviled -5.
Rootwalker: Swap for Iconic Specialities.

It's possible for Dwarves you could replace an extra Iconic Class with Thick Hide 1 in the species feats, which means a dwarf with a species feat will be back up to Thick Hide 3.  I also considered Damage Vulnerability for rootwalkers, but coupled with Archilies Heel, it would be a bit extreme.

I'm also thinking of Iconic Class as a bonus, its pretty minimal so I'm thinking its worth at best 0.5pts.  I'm tempted to give it out for free though, it also means species feats can remain as they are. 

Iconic Class: If your level in X or Y is higher then your level in any other base class your legend increases by 1.

[Mister Andersen]

So by taking a non-iconic class you have a 1-4 error range for everything you do?  That's what I thought the first time I read your OP, I just figured I had to be wrong because it's just way, way to harsh.

Unless I'm still missing it and you mean 1-6 error range for untrained stuff, which isn't a harsh enough penalty if only because most people simply won't take untrained checks.  Most of the guys I know rarely make untrained checks anyway.

1-4 may be a bit harsh, so say 1-3; it was more an example to illustrate the point of how it would work. The revision to Iconic Class also needs to work if combined with Banned Checks, which is going to potentially hit a character with 3 permanently untrained checks, and stacking error ranges seems a particularly flavoursome option -- there are things that should give even the most exceptionally atypical example of a type reason for pause

[Sletchman]

It's an interesting idea, but I'm really not sure about a boosted error range for every action the character takes, even just +1.  I think if the rules have to stay as a penalty [which is easiest really] I'd be happiest with -1AD, of all the things talked about thus far.

My opinion of Iconic Class is that the penalty should be:
A) Equal in magnitude to other -1's
B) A reason to want to play the Iconic Classes
C) Make playing non-Iconic Classes still viable

Currently no one wants to play a non-iconic class because the penalty is just too harsh.  So we're looking for something that says "Z's make great X/Y" not "Never play an Z that isn't a X/Y".

[Morganti]

I ment to post this in the other thread, but what about a simple statement at the end of the existing iconic classes text. "Abilities based on starting action dice are unaffected"

[prototype00]

It's an interesting idea, but I'm really not sure about a boosted error range for every action the character takes, even just +1.  I think if the rules have to stay as a penalty [which is easiest really] I'd be happiest with -1AD, of all the things talked about thus far.

My opinion of Iconic Class is that the penalty should be:
A) Equal in magnitude to other -1's
B) A reason to want to play the Iconic Classes
C) Make playing non-Iconic Classes still viable

Currently no one wants to play a non-iconic class because the penalty is just too harsh.  So we're looking for something that says "Z's make great X/Y" not "Never play an Z that isn't a X/Y".

I don't necessarily agree that the solution is to reward races playing iconic classes (after all, how is that in any way fair to the races that don't have iconic classes?), however I am inspired by the truly massive and many armed feats and how they allow you to pick another feat for a -2 to a stat of your choice.

So how about, if your level in a non iconic class is higher than your level in an iconic class, you take a -2 penalty to a stat of your choice (reduced overall competence). The penalty disappears if your iconic class levels equals your non iconic class levels.

Hmm, what do people think? Maybe it's not harsh enough, those knife eared bastards should suffer. 

prototype00

[Sletchman]

I don't necessarily agree that the solution is to reward races playing iconic classes (after all, how is that in any way fair to the races that don't have iconic classes?)

I guess I could have worded that post better, because I agree 100%.  What I meant was that Iconic Classes should encorage you to play certain classes, not effectively force it.

I am inspired by the truly massive and many armed feats and how they allow you to pick another feat for a -2 to a stat of your choice.

So how about, if your level in a non iconic class is higher than your level in an iconic class, you take a -2 penalty to a stat of your choice (reduced overall competence). The penalty disappears if your iconic class levels equals your non iconic class levels.

Hmm, what do people think? Maybe it's not harsh enough, those knife eared bastards should suffer. 

Interesting take, I don't mind that at all.

[nil]

So how about, if your level in a non iconic class is higher than your level in an iconic class, you take a -2 penalty to a stat of your choice (reduced overall competence). The penalty disappears if your iconic class levels equals your non iconic class levels.

Hmm, what do people think? Maybe it's not harsh enough, those knife eared bastards should suffer. 

So almost exactly the same thing I suggested earlier? 

Letting the player pick the attribute that is penalised might not by harsh enough, in my opinion - too easy to pick and choose. Here's some options I think might work (each decreasing a certain attribute):

• fixed attribute appropriate to each species' most prominent stat bonus - so, for example, -2 Wisdom for Elves.
• highest overall attribute is considered to be 2 lower (harsher than the first option)
• free choice of the attribute for the player (the least harsh in my opinion)

[ArawnNox]

When Morgenstern put out the math breakdown for using the 1/2 action die penalty (rounded up) vs the -2 penalty, it looked a lot more attractive as the penalty is a bit more even across all levels. It's not as rough on low level players, but continues to sting at higher levels, and I think that's more what the Crafty guys are going for: a penalty that doesn't cripple, but is still a penalty, none the less.

That said, there's already a wide variety of Species feats that swap Iconic class choices (and give a little extra boost) in the book, and those can be used as a base for creating your own splinter race feats for home-brew worlds.

[Crafty_Alex]

When Morgenstern put out the math breakdown for using the 1/2 action die penalty (rounded up) vs the -2 penalty, it looked a lot more attractive as the penalty is a bit more even across all levels. It's not as rough on low level players, but continues to sting at higher levels, and I think that's more what the Crafty guys are going for: a penalty that doesn't cripple, but is still a penalty, none the less.

Actually, what we're looking for is a way to not have action dice removal be the core of the mechanic. It may not be possible, but my preference is to come up with a different solution rather than just spreading it differently. If six months of the game being available as taught me one thing, it's that people hate losing action dice.

[Uncle Muppet]

Whenever I have problems some game mechanic or story idea, I always go back to the underlying philosophy behind the thing I'm having trouble with.  Specifically, what am I trying to accomplish?

So, what are you Crafty Guys trying to accomplish with the Iconic Class mechanic?

Personally I think, as others have stated, that the IC sub-system should be a bonus, not a penalty.  This is because of how ICs came about.  In my mind, ICs are the stereotypical classes for a given race.  These races became iconic (i.e stereotypical) because the majority of members of a given race are of that class.  Why are they of that class?  In traditional D&D, these class are stereotypes because the race's natural strengths line up with the core mechanics of a given class.

That's why the halfling rogue (thief) is an iconic image.  In D&D, halflings got a bonus to DEX and saving throws.  The D&D rogue is built on DEX and one key game mechanic is tied to saving throws.  So, racial bonii fitting nicely with class mechanics.  Thus, you "always" see halfing rogues because halfings make better rogues.

That's the real issue people are having.  They are used to "as a member of race Z, I can be class I want, but I'm better suited for X or Y" as opposed to "as a member of race Z, I have to be class X or Y because I suck at everything else".  People don't like being told they suck. 

I like the way the Pathfinder system did Favored Classes (i.e. Stereotypical or Iconic).  If you took a level in your FC/IC/SC, you got an extra skill point or hit point - player's choice at each level.  So, you were a better member of the class due to being slightly tougher or more skilled.  Every race but human had two fixed FCs; humans got to pick their FC.  And yes, the FC bonus stacks with the human racial bonus, so a human in Pathfinder can get 2 extra skill points a level.

So, I would much rather see the whole IC mechanic redone to be bonus-based, as opposed to penalty-based.  In the interest of not copying Pathfinder, what other bonii could be had for taking levels in your Iconic Class?

* Gain 1 extra starting action die as long as your level in class X or Y is greater than your levels in any other class.
* Starting action dice are considered 1 die size larger as long as...
-- so, 3d6 at levels 1-5 rather than 3d4.  Of course, 6d12 might be a bit rude...
* Gain 1 extra use of any class ability that has a limited number of uses as long as...
* Untrained skill checks only have +1 error range and max result of 20 as long as...
* Gain a bonus to Lifestyle or Repution or whatever as long as...
* Gain 1 free (or discounted) Favor per adventure as long as...

Well, anyway, you can probably get the idea.  These are things that apply at every level, and people not playing to type are worse off than people who do, but at least they're still effective.

And, as a completely different idea, you could change things to banned classes - there are two classes a certain race is NEVER a member of.  Then the feat to overcome the NEVER lets you be a member of your banned class, but you have 2 less starting action dice...

[Krensky]

So, what are you Crafty Guys trying to accomplish with the Iconic Class mechanic?

Balance the talents against each other.

Personally I think, as others have stated, that the IC sub-system should be a bonus, not a penalty.  This is because of how ICs came about.  In my mind, ICs are the stereotypical classes for a given race.  These races became iconic (i.e stereotypical) because the majority of members of a given race are of that class.  Why are they of that class?  In traditional D&D, these class are stereotypes because the race's natural strengths line up with the core mechanics of a given class.

If they convert it to a bonus they have to recreate the species talents, and possibly all the talents from scratch to account for the fact that you're changing a -1.0 penalty to a bonus of some sort. You analysis of D&D here is wrong, and leads me to believe your experience with it only reaches back to D&D 3 or D&D 3.5. Those classes are stereotypes, because before then those were the only classes those races could be. Go back far enough (BEMCI/Cyclopedia D&D and earlier) races were classes in their own right.

That's why the halfling rogue (thief) is an iconic image.  In D&D, halflings got a bonus to DEX and saving throws.  The D&D rogue is built on DEX and one key game mechanic is tied to saving throws.  So, racial bonii fitting nicely with class mechanics.  Thus, you "always" see halfing rogues because halfings make better rogues.

The halfling rogue is iconic because the halfling thief was iconic because that's pretty much all they could be early on, because Bilbo was (essentially) a thief in The Hobbit.

That's the real issue people are having.  They are used to "as a member of race Z, I can be class I want, but I'm better suited for X or Y" as opposed to "as a member of race Z, I have to be class X or Y because I suck at everything else".  People don't like being told they suck. 

Penalties that don't hurt aren't penalties.

I like the way the Pathfinder system did Favored Classes (i.e. Stereotypical or Iconic).  If you took a level in your FC/IC/SC, you got an extra skill point or hit point - player's choice at each level.  So, you were a better member of the class due to being slightly tougher or more skilled.  Every race but human had two fixed FCs; humans got to pick their FC.  And yes, the FC bonus stacks with the human racial bonus, so a human in Pathfinder can get 2 extra skill points a level.

Yeah, let's not emulate one of PF's gifts to the min-maxers.

So, I would much rather see the whole IC mechanic redone to be bonus-based, as opposed to penalty-based.  In the interest of not copying Pathfinder, what other bonii could be had for taking levels in your Iconic Class?

* Gain 1 extra starting action die as long as your level in class X or Y is greater than your levels in any other class.
* Starting action dice are considered 1 die size larger as long as...
-- so, 3d6 at levels 1-5 rather than 3d4.  Of course, 6d12 might be a bit rude...
* Gain 1 extra use of any class ability that has a limited number of uses as long as...
* Untrained skill checks only have +1 error range and max result of 20 as long as...
* Gain a bonus to Lifestyle or Repution or whatever as long as...
* Gain 1 free (or discounted) Favor per adventure as long as...

Well, anyway, you can probably get the idea.  These are things that apply at every level, and people not playing to type are worse off than people who do, but at least they're still effective.

The problem with any of those bonuses is that they're WAY too powerful. I'd need to look at the list, but at a minimum those will make the species with Iconic Classes 9 point talents rather then 7 points. I'm pretty sure some of those will make them far more then 9 points.

And, as a completely different idea, you could change things to banned classes - there are two classes a certain race is NEVER a member of.  Then the feat to overcome the NEVER lets you be a member of your banned class, but you have 2 less starting action dice...

Said feat would be way underpowered.

[Aziraphale]

Okay, here's another idea:

"When calculating your character level for the purposes of Starting Action Dice, do not count any base class levels except those from the [BLAH] and [BLAH] classes."

Keeps the same feeling, and keeps a permanent penalty.

If that's not severe enough, reduce the total amount by a further -1. That at least partially fixes my problem with Iconic Classes (that they don't provide any penalty to certain characters, and they still get the benefit of the extra build points).

Good exploration, but it has two problems: there is no known value for having 0 levels (trivial) and you get creamed for going into expert or master classes (severe).

Emphasis is mine.

I liked this suggestion from the end of the other thread. If I'm reading this right it would penalize you for not taking an expert class, master class, or iconic class and continuing with a non-iconic class instead.

However an issue with it is that while it can penalize the action dice size and hence the results it also actually increases the odds of getting exploding dice compared to other players.