Favored Classes Question

[Number Three]

Favored Classes: If you possess a higher level in any base class than your highest level in either the Scientist or Scout classes, your starting action dice decrease by 2.

OK, so barring any feats that add to the favored class list, if my Centaur is only a Level 1 Intruder, does that mean he's at -2 action dice?  In other words, is it a general class restriction, or does it only affect multi-classing?

[Gatac]

In that scenario, yes, you get docked Action Dice. An Intruder 1 / Scout 1 would be fine, though.

Gatac

[Number Three]

OK.  The question came up with my friends who are more accustomed to SRD d20, where it's more of a multi-classing restriction.

[spinningdice]

I much prefer this way, as it actually gives a reason for most members of the race to be of that class, whereas before, it simply meant that more members of the race will have a level or two in it (and rarely at that, since multiclass for many classes left a lot to be desired in D&D.

[Morgenstern]

In that scenario, yes, you get docked Action Dice. An Intruder 1 / Scout 1 would be fine, though.

That is correct. Spycraft's favored class is not a multiclassing restriction, it's a rather serious "statement of intent" that outstanding (action-die using) characters of that race tend to follow particular paths.

[afrodave]

I like it!  lends itself to players playing more stereotypical members of that race rather than any kind of bizarro stuff. While they can overlook the penalty by single classing in d20.

[Morgenstern]

That's pretty much the idea. I wanted choosing a race to often have strong patterns of behavior associated with it. Breaking with tradition for these races hurts. It's doable, but being a rebel actually involves some sacrifice .

[Minion]

That's pretty much the idea. I wanted choosing a race to often have strong patterns of behavior associated with it. Breaking with tradition for these races hurts. It's doable, but being a rebel actually involves some sacrifice .

Sorry I'm a bit late to the party (the FantasyCraft announcement has prompted me to actually try seriously digesting Spellbound and Light of Olympus!), but I'm a bit curious about the reasoning behind this decision. I've always been faintly uncomfortable with the idea that humans can be whatever they like, whereas non-humans tend to be just one thing.

[Gatac]

Heh. That reminds me of an RPG.net discussion where people tried to figure out what humans as a species are actually good at. Adaptability was a popular choice. (Also, we seem to be scarily proficient at pursuit hunting, with one poster describing humans as "planet Earth's Predator".)

Of course it hurts to give up all those options, but it does allow races in Spycraft to be pretty butch...look Ma, no level adjustment!

Gatac

[Crafty_Alex]

Right. The racial talents with favored class and like restrictions gain benefits far and away better than non-racial ones. In the end, it's easy to look at Spycraft as a game filtered through the human lens - classes are, by and large, developed to fit humans, so how "critters" drop into that human-centric paradigm is more incidental.

[Minion]

Of course it hurts to give up all those options, but it does allow races in Spycraft to be pretty butch...look Ma, no level adjustment!

Aaaaand,

Right. The racial talents with favored class and like restrictions gain benefits far and away better than non-racial ones.

Oh yeah, I'll heartily agree that the mechanical tradeoff for favoured class restrictions is totally fair. And being able to play an (awesome!) centaur without having to worry about highly irritating level adjustment junk is a beautiful thing. I'm just curious about why that particular balancing mechanism was chosen.

I get into arguments with myself about this quite frequently -- how I feel about favoured classes seems to depend upon my mood. The favoured class restrictions in Light of Olympus do a really good job of encouraging people to play characters that fit the mythology (at least as I understand it). I'm sure that was the point, and you guys have succeeded at that admirably.

And yet: when I think of elves (for example) I have a particular image in mind. But I have that image in mind because, really, I'm not thinking about elves in general, I'm thinking about Legolas. It's a bit like basing my idea of what a human is on John McClane.

I dunno. Clearly my opinions on this issue are poorly formed! Plus, it's past my bedtime! 

[Morganti]

Oh yeah, I'll heartily agree that the mechanical tradeoff for favoured class restrictions is totally fair. And being able to play an (awesome!) centaur without having to worry about highly irritating level adjustment junk is a beautiful thing. I'm just curious about why that particular balancing mechanism was chosen.

I get into arguments with myself about this quite frequently -- how I feel about favoured classes seems to depend upon my mood. The favoured class restrictions in Light of Olympus do a really good job of encouraging people to play characters that fit the mythology (at least as I understand it). I'm sure that was the point, and you guys have succeeded at that admirably.

And yet: when I think of elves (for example) I have a particular image in mind. But I have that image in mind because, really, I'm not thinking about elves in general, I'm thinking about Legolas. It's a bit like basing my idea of what a human is on John McClane.

I dunno. Clearly my opinions on this issue are poorly formed! Plus, it's past my bedtime! 

When I think of Elves, I think of Dragerans, or Drow, does that make me a bad person?
~D~

[meadicus]

The thing about non-human races, in a work of fiction, is that if it's only difference from human is physical differences then quite frankly it's a pointless race, there's really nothing interesting there. Physical differences get boring very quickly, it's the social differences which make up the meat of making a race cool. As such non-human races tend to have a nice easily definable social leaning even narrower than any stereotype we may apply to each other, to make the race instantly recognizable.

If you want races for realism then I guess there is no sensible reason why people with pointed ears should have less career choice than people without. But I've always thought the most defining quality of elves is their attitude. Humans to not have a typical attitude in any fictional world I've met, but non-humans almost always do. Favored classes are a good way of applying this.

[Psion]

I dunno... I'm rather on-board with the idea that the whole emphasis of a different race be different. Otherwise, it's just humans with funny ears.

[Minion]

I was thinking about this over my morning coffee, and I reckon it's a bit like cosmic variance. Let's call humanity a "varied, adaptable tool-using race". The person to my left concludes that "varied and adaptable" are features of humanity. The person to my right concludes that "varied and adaptable" are features of tool-using races. We've only got one (real) data point, so we can't rule either conclusion out.

(Incidentally, I use "tool-using" because I just know I'm going to get sentience and sapience confused!)

I agree with both of you, meadicus and Psion, that the interesting thing about non-human races is how their psychology differs. Favoured class is certainly a way to reflect differing psychologies. It might not necessarily be the way I would choose, but I guess that's what Licence to Improvise is all about, huh!

I think this is going to be my take-home message:

In the end, it's easy to look at Spycraft as a game filtered through the human lens - classes are, by and large, developed to fit humans, so how "critters" drop into that human-centric paradigm is more incidental.