Question about the purpose and feel of a few classes

[Emperor Tippy]

I'm working on a project that involves rewriting the OGL (basically everything on the SRD) classes and I've run into a couple of issues. The big one is dealing with the Bard, the Rogue, and the Soulknife.

More specifically, what are they supposed to be thematically? What should they feel like in play? What purpose should they serve? Etc.

Frankly, if it was OGL I would pretty much rip the Factotum whole from Dungeonscape, change a few mechanics, and name it "Bard" but unfortunately that isn't exactly feasible.

The problem with the Rogue is that it is suffering a lot of overlap, especially with the Bard.

I'm thinking of moving it to be more of a scout/thief type class than a skill monkey.

For the Soulknife it's theme and feel is supposed to be "uses his psychic powers to make weapons to use" right? Because that's all I'm tentatively thinking of keeping from the class at the moment.

Sorry that this is kinda lite on specifics and details but basically, I just want peoples opinions on the themes, feel, and signature point of the SRD classes. My specific question has to do with the three previously mentioned classes but I would love to hear peoples answers in regards to all SRD classes.

[Spuddles]

Rogue is basically a carry over from thief class of older editions, but mechanically, you can squeeze it into most "scoundrel" roles- han solo, indiana jones, your typical plucky/clever/lucky protagonist. While a bard may be able to do it better, he has to sing and dance and cast spells. I've always seen rogue as a mundane that uses subterfuge and dex to do what he wants.

Of course, factotum is almost always better for anything you want to make feel like a movie hero.

If I was re-writing rogue, I'd let the SA dice be traded out. For what? Not sure, but at least offer multiple kinds of circumstantial damage dice. Instead of SA, get skirmish, or favored enemy, things along those lines. Then pull a PF and offer a bunch of rogue talents on even levels. Talents that make the rogue better at movement, combat, or skills. Climb speed, a mundane version of disguise self at will, able to escape artist through solid objects, find any consummable magic item of x value after rummaging, cool **** like that.

[Waker]

You just want people's opinion on what each of those classes are thematically?
Bard- Storytellers, keepers of lost lore, vagabonds, entertainers, spies and messengers. As far as mechanics, they tend to be focused in buffing and magic focused around misdirection.
Rogue- Assassins, thieves, spies, thugs, saboteurs. They've got skills, though sadly many of them can be replicated with spells and items. Sneak attacks are ok, but not too impressive.
Soulknife- No idea whatever. Not really familiar with it.
Factotum- The description basically makes it seem like it is the definition of adventurer.

[BowStreetRunner]

If you are trying to sort the classes thematically instead of mechanically, you are in for a lot of subjective criticism. Look at it from the reverse angle - choose a character archetype and then ask around to see how someone would build that character using the classes available. You will get a bunch of very different answers.

I have seen Gandalf described as a level 5 Wizard, a Sorcadin (Paladin/Sorcerer), a Paladin with a Ring of Fire Elemental Command, and several other versions are out there as well I am sure. In the same light, I have seen a dozen Ninja builds that don't include even a single level in the Ninja class.

Whatever you feel is the best way to define a class thematically, someone else may want to use the mechanics along with a very different flavor. Personally, I would encourage this and not try to pigeon-hole all of the classes thematically at all. But that's just me! :smallsmile:

[Emperor Tippy]

You just want people's opinion on what each of those classes are thematically?
Thematically, group role, in play feel, etc.


Like the theme for a Sorcerer is "spontaneous arcane caster"; so a change that gave them spell casting like a wizard would really class while one that gave them casting like a Psion wouldn't (for example).


If you are trying to sort the classes thematically instead of mechanically, you are in for a lot of subjective criticism. Look at it from the reverse angle - choose a character archetype and then ask around to see how someone would build that character using the classes available. You will get a bunch of very different answers.

I have seen Gandalf described as a level 5 Wizard, a Sorcadin (Paladin/Sorcerer), a Paladin with a Ring of Fire Elemental Command, and several other versions are out there as well I am sure. In the same light, I have seen a dozen Ninja builds that don't include even a single level in the Ninja class.

Whatever you feel is the best way to define a class thematically, someone else may want to use the mechanics along with a very different flavor. Personally, I would encourage this and not try to pigeon-hole all of the classes thematically at all. But that's just me! :smallsmile:

I'm not trying to pigeon hole them all but 1) I want to see what the community as a whole thinks (so that the "wrong" feeling is minimized) and 2) it will help me better direct how I rewrite the class.

[georgie_leech]

For me, the Bard has always been the story teller. He knows a little about pretty much everything; he's the jack-of-all-trades, ready to inspire his allies and demoralise or befuddle his foes. Role-wise, I've seen him as a party buffer, knowledge/info source, and backup skill user. I've never seen his role as the guy to turn to for any situation beyond social, but the guy who can give it a shot at least, if no one else can.

The Rogue is just that, the Rogue. He's cunning and efficient rather than brutal. He fights using his wits and evironment, whether that means striking from the shadows, using rocky out croppings to change angles, or shoving someone out a window. Rather than focusing on fighting prowess, he focusses on skills, but they tend to come in handy in a fight. Role for rogues has been to do high single-target burst damage, then to look for a new opening. They should be the ones to get into the area unseen, find the vulnerabilities, maybe do a little sabotage, then get out before anyone's the wiser. They should not be terribly effective in a fair fight, but have plenty of tools to make the fight less fair.

Don't have much experience with the Soulknife. The theme always struck me as someone who manifests his will into a weapon. I'm torn though as to whether the weapon should be something personal about them (i.e. Straight forard people might manifest hammers while a more charming witty fellow would have a rapier) or whether they should be flexible and change the weapon whenever they want, Necrid-style

[Jeff the Green]

You just want people's opinion on what each of those classes are thematically?
Bard- Storytellers, keepers of lost lore, vagabonds, entertainers, spies and messengers. As far as mechanics, they tend to be focused in buffing and magic focused around misdirection.
Rogue- Assassins, thieves, spies, thugs, saboteurs. They've got skills, though sadly many of them can be replicated with spells and items. Sneak attacks are ok, but not too impressive.
Soulknife- No idea whatever. Not really familiar with it.
Factotum- The description basically makes it seem like it is the definition of adventurer.

I agree with all of these, but I'll expand on the bard a bit.

Bards are all of those things, but one of the key archetypes they play well is the spy or messenger masquerading as a storyteller, keeper of lost lore, vagabond, or entertainer. There are so many stories about spies, saboteurs, or rescuers gaining access to the enemy base by playing the fool. The bard is the one class that does a good job of emulating that.

[Waker]

I agree with all of these, but I'll expand on the bard a bit.

Bards are all of those things, but one of the key archetypes they play well is the spy or messenger masquerading as a storyteller, keeper of lost lore, vagabond, or entertainer. There are so many stories about spies, saboteurs, or rescuers gaining access to the enemy base by playing the fool. The bard is the one class that does a good job of emulating that.

Quite so, I definitely agree with that. Kept that original post of mine short though since I was typing on a tablet. But now I'll make some more in-depth posting.


Frankly, if it was OGL I would pretty much rip the Factotum whole from Dungeonscape, change a few mechanics, and name it "Bard" but unfortunately that isn't exactly feasible.
There are many similarities between the class, though I wouldn't drop the Bard class. It does have it's own unique traits like Bardic Knowledge, Music as well as a different spell list. Honestly, if any of the classes were to be dropped in favor of the Factotum, it would be the Rogue.
I like the idea of a Rogue, but the class just doesn't feel complete to me. It's biggest mechanics are lots of skill points, sneak attack and rogue talents. The first one seems considerably less impressive when you remember other classes like Bard, Factotum, Ranger and more have almost as many. The second is a cool idea, but pales in comparison to the damage available to more straight-forward melee classes. And the last seemed a bit too little, too late for my tastes.
Were I to rewrite the Rogue, I would go a bit in the direction that PF went with expanding on the number and availability of Rogue Talents. I however would expand on the power of said talents and make them a bit more than just almost feats and more like mini-acfs that any rogue can take. Here are a few quick examples of what I mean (some of these are stolen or cobbled together from other feats/talents).
Lethal- The Rogue's Sneak Attack damage is multiplied on a critical hit. In addition, the rogue gains a bonus to confirming the critical hit equal to the number of Sneak Attack dice rolled.
Façade- When disguised, an observer attempting to use divination magic must still make a Spot check equal to the Rogue's disguise result. If the observer fails, the spell returns information that supports the rogue's disguise. IE, a Rogue disguised as a Zombie would register as being Undead, Evil, Mindless against divination magic.
Treasure Hunter- A Rogue is automatically entitled to a Search roll when within 10ft of a trap or secret door as if they were actively searching. This range increases by 5ft every X levels.
The goal would be to make Rogue still a mundane character (though they can still use whatever magic items they wanted) while still being able to compete with other skill users or spells.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

A Bard is the character who supports and backs up the main character, and goes on to tell all about their exploits once the main character has retired/died. He's Robin, Tonto, Watson, etc., though in this case he fills a support role in a party rather than a duo. Another part of his job is to be able to do anything that the hero/party cannot, as though he were an expert at it. The Bardic Knack ACF is a great example of this, as is the variety in the Bard spell list. I'd say if you're reworking the classes, this guy should be the one who buffs the party and tricks opponents into fighting illusions or even each other, but is also capable of stepping into any crucial party role when necessary.

Rogue is not a class that I've ever been particularly fond of. The class was only necessary because of traps, and traps were only peppered throughout every dungeon crawl so that the Rogue would feel important. In my group the Trapfinding class feature doesn't exist, anyone who can make the checks can find and disable traps. In exchange for the loss of a class feature, any class that gets Trapfinding instead has a free +2/+2 skill feat at that level, such as Stealthy or Alertness. I actually think Feat Rogue (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#rogue) makes a more useful character than the sneak attack version, because as sneak attack gets better it gradually gets less useful considering what you're fighting. They're ill equipped for scouting because they don't have anything that makes them good at it, especially considering opponents with just darkvision or low-light vision. They lack the HD and AC to survive if discovered during scouting, and they lack the Fort save to survive a poison trap that they fail to disarm. Rogue is not suited to be a scout, and shouldn't need to be a trapmonkey, so it's just an unnecessary class.

Soulknife has a good concept but poor delivery. The class allows a character to focus the power of his mind into a melee weapon on command, and gets various abilities to enhance that weapon. I'd say give it a few more at-will abilities, similar to invocations but psionic in nature and almost exclusively defensive. I'd make Psychic Strike activate as part of a standard action that includes an attack, or as a full round action as part of the bladewind ability.

[Rakoa]

I think one of the problems with the Soulknife was definitely that the weapon he created kinda sucked. It only improves very slowly, to the point where he can throw it like a ranged attack which isn't very impressive, or charge it up for a bit of extra damage. Meanwhile, a Barbarian can wield an enchanted weapon just as powerful, plus has Rage capabilities to make him hit better and can get Pounce pretty easily via ACF. And it isn't like the Soulknife is able to make up for this with defensive capabilities the Barbarian lacks, either. They're about on the same level there from what I can tell.

I think the Soulknife should maintain the same "feel" it does now, but with a good balance of abilities. Most of the abilities it has now are thematically on target, but it needs more balance. A good combination of defensive abilities that can allow the Soulknife to take a hit as well as a few to keep it as a melee threat. With emphasis on the Psionic aspects, of course. Considering it lacks any sort of PP, it should have some pseudo-psionic class features outside of the Blade that would make sense.

[JusticeZero]

the Bard, the Rogue, and the Soulknife.
The Bard is out of the Celts. The original idea was a wandering minstrel who was the news. They learn about what's going on and history and travel around with a photographic knowledge of history and current events from town to town. The Celtic background is why they were given the Druidic spell list originally. Later, it was swapped for the Wizard list as it shifted to a general knowledge expert, then 3e tuned it to a spontaneous caster.

..the Rogue.. I'm thinking of moving it to be more of a scout/thief type class than a skill monkey.
All of the operations that make them able to thief around are skills in 3e. They're assassin/spy types with a side helping of GTA.

Soulknife ..."uses his psychic powers to make weapons to use" right?
Yep, that's the theme. Personally, i'd rather have seen it closer to the PF Gifted Blade or PF Marksman, a full BAB type with a slight helping of psychic ability.

[Emperor Tippy]

The Bard is out of the Celts. The original idea was a wandering minstrel who was the news. They learn about what's going on and history and travel around with a photographic knowledge of history and current events from town to town. The Celtic background is why they were given the Druidic spell list originally. Later, it was swapped for the Wizard list as it shifted to a general knowledge expert, then 3e tuned it to a spontaneous caster.

[quote]All of the operations that make them able to thief around are skills in 3e. They're assassin/spy types with a side helping of GTA.
Except the Assassination role is being rolled into a dedicated base class of its own. I have a fair idea of what I'm going to do for rogue mechanics now.


Yep, that's the theme. Personally, i'd rather have seen it closer to the PF Gifted Blade or PF Marksman, a full BAB type with a slight helping of psychic ability.
Oh I know the mechanics I'm using, that was the easy part. Just making sure that I wasn't totally missing what most people thought of when they thought "Soulknife". I tend not to play with Bard's, Rogues, or Soulknives so I have less of an intuitive feel for them.

Mechanically, reworking the Cleric is actually the most difficult of all the SRD classes for me.

[Chronos]

The problem with the Rogue is that it is suffering a lot of overlap, especially with the Bard.

I'm thinking of moving it to be more of a scout/thief type class than a skill monkey.
"Skill monkey" is a description of how the mechanics of the class work, not of the role. The role of a rogue is, indeed, scouting and thieving, and that's what it uses its skillmonkeying for.

Bard, meanwhile, I see as having two primary features and one secondary: Primarily, the bard is the best-suited for being the "party's face", being the one who does the sweet-talking whenever necessary (whether to convince the bandits to let you go, or to convince the duke to pay you for a mission, or whatever). It's not the only class that can do this, of course, but it is definitely a major strength of the class. The other major role for a bard is that, through their inspiration, they improve the abilities of all of the other party members. While a factotum can do both of these things (after all, a factotum can do pretty much everything), neither one of them is a role for which the factotum is particularly well-suited.

Only after those two traits would I include the bard's third role, that of versatility (where it is in fact outclassed by the factotum). The bard can't scout as well as a rogue... But he's better at it than the fighter is. He can't go into melee as well as the fighter can... But he's better at it than the wizard. He can't use magic as well as the wizard can... But he's better at it than the rogue.

[JusticeZero]

I suspect that elements of the Skald were woven into the Bard class concept somewhere, too. Skalds serve the same basic role as the Bard as stated above. Since they're Viking, people visualize them running around chanting poetry to inspire the troops while raiding villages. I have no idea if they ever did. But they had to get the idea of "I sing to make my party fight better" somewhere. I don't know that it was in 1e.

I disagree that the Bard is a jack of trades by definition. It seems like more of an artifact of the way that they have a selection of abilities that cuts across the Classic Four. They are a JoaT as a consequence of having a different focus that is hard to represent, not as a definition. They're not much different from a Druid or Cleric in that regard; the concept is "Inspirational Knowledge-monkey".

[sonofzeal]

Playing other games lately has made me more aware of the interaction between fluff and crunch. Ideally, the gameplay "feel" of the class lines up with the actual "crunch". Barbarians should be rewarded for playing aggressively; Wizards should be careful and plan ahead; etc. Soooooo.....



Rogue
Clever. Streetsmart. Cagey. Uses the environment around them. Exploits situational advantages. Weak in a slugmatch, but nasty when those situational advantages add up. Good at solving non-combat problems without relying on magic.

Bard
Bright and open, rather than subtle. Supports the team in combat. Excellent in social/political situations. Good at solving non-combat problems BY relying on magic.

Soulknife
Agile, subtle, some burst damage (in theory). Offence-heavy, defence-light. A second-line "striker" with a bit of a warrior-ninja feel, and the capacity to surprise enemies through sudden and decisive application of force.

[Emperor Tippy]

Playing other games lately has made me more aware of the interaction between fluff and crunch. Ideally, the gameplay "feel" of the class lines up with the actual "crunch". Barbarians should be rewarded for playing aggressively; Wizards should be careful and plan ahead; etc. Soooooo.....
Part of the reason for this thread


Rogue
Clever. Streetsmart. Cagey. Uses the environment around them. Exploits situational advantages. Weak in a slugmatch, but nasty when those situational advantages add up. Good at solving non-combat problems without relying on magic.
The bolded part would work except that mechanically, making a class that capitalizes on the environment is close to a recipe in disaster. Especially if the table isn't playing with a detailed map or the like.

[shadow_archmagi]

I think it's an important distinction that the soulknife uses his psychic power to make a weapon, not weapons. This implies some kind of deep connection to his weapon- He can't make it be in more than one place for very long.

I always saw the Soulknife as a psionic version of the Kensai

[Man on Fire]

I have a few questions:

1) Why are you exactly rewriting SRD and what's your purpose in doing so? What do you want to accomplish?
2) Why do you think Bard needs a rewrite? I could get Rogue and Soulknife, to pick them up to at least tier 3, but Bard? Unless that's only fluff here, I think he's fine.
3) Out of curiosity, how do you rewrite Monk for this project?

[Emperor Tippy]

I have a few questions:

1) Why are you exactly rewriting SRD and what's your purpose in doing so? What do you want to accomplish?
For a project. That's all I'm willing to say about it at this point in time.

2) Why do you think Bard needs a rewrite? I could get Rogue and Soulknife, to pick them up to at least tier 3, but Bard? Unless that's only fluff here, I think he's fine.
Because the Bard isn't in line with the rest of the rewritten classes.

3) Out of curiosity, how do you rewrite Monk for this project?
Without much hassle. It took me about twenty minutes, most of which was just typing up the table. It's now high tier 3 that can contribute from levels 1 to 20 and fills its own unique role

Barbarian was honestly more of a pain because it's all pretty much just Rage. I needed to add on a number of minor abilities so that it wasn't "you get this at level one, the numbers improve as you level, that's your class".

[JusticeZero]

Bards have gone away from the basis, and I think it's probably the worse for it.

A Bard is based on Bards/Skalds/Griots/whatever, a person who uses poetry and music to remember a ridiculous amount of knowledge. This music and poetry has the added benefit that it is inspirational to their allies. They travel around the world collecting more information, and are worldly. This is the concept behind the Bard, and it comes out in a character who has a Cleric-like BAB, a decent spread of worldly skills, and some magical ability (even though the exact form of the magic has varied wildly from edition to edition).

The core of the concept is 1: Bardic Knowledge and 2: Bardic Performance. The magic and rogue-ish elements are byproducts of the Bardic Knowledge, though 3e has turned the spells into spellsong, which makes it a Performance derivative.

[Man on Fire]

For a project. That's all I'm willing to say about it at this point in time.

well, that's kinda hard to give advice then, because I don't know if I won't be shooting int oother direction.


Because the Bard isn't in line with the rest of the rewritten classes.

Well, I think that you could make him more...dunno how to say it...climatic, by making all his abilities more connected to bardic performance (spells) and bardic knowledge (skills?). maybe remove some spells that are strange and make him full-fledged illusionist?


Without much hassle. It took me about twenty minutes, most of which was just typing up the table. It's now high tier 3 that can contribute from levels 1 to 20 and fills its own unique role

Barbarian was honestly more of a pain because it's all pretty much just Rage. I needed to add on a number of minor abilities so that it wasn't "you get this at level one, the numbers improve as you level, that's your class".

Okay, now I want to see this project. Will you post it here o nthe forums once it's done?

[Juntao112]

For the Soulknife it's theme and feel is supposed to be "uses his psychic powers to make weapons to use" right? Because that's all I'm tentatively thinking of keeping from the class at the moment.

http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/original/0/4387/561803-136041mace_20windu.jpg

[Emperor Tippy]

well, that's kinda hard to give advice then, because I don't know if I won't be shooting int oother direction.
Which is why I wasn't (and am not) asking for mechanical advice or help. Just what do you see a given classes role as, what do you see as the theme of the class, what do you think of when you (or someone else) says "I'm going to be X".


Okay, now I want to see this project. Will you post it here o nthe forums once it's done?
Maybe partially, but sorta doubtful.

[Phelix-Mu]

The bolded part would work except that mechanically, making a class that capitalizes on the environment is close to a recipe in disaster. Especially if the table isn't playing with a detailed map or the like.

Hmm, well, maybe some kind of abstract ability, like a rogue of x level can convert some bonus from [list of bonuses] into a circumstance bonus, an unusual type. This would improve the bonus stacking for the rogue and represent the rogue's ability to make some chance out of no chance in any situation, which is a nice theme. Living by wits and all. Similarly, the rogue should use a mundane class feature similar to Brains Over Brawn, or to some of the Exemplar PrC features. The bard would use spells to accomplish these high skill checks, but the rogue is stuck with wits, so some more synergy is called for. Choice of mental stat to physical stat checks and skill checks.

Anyway, you mentioned you already have a mechanic, so I'll stop prattling on. Good luck with your endeavor. I respect your insight and knowledge enough to make me very interested in your final project, should you care to share it.:smallsmile:

[Telonius]

If someone says, "I'm playing a Bard," I intuitively think they mean, "I'm going to play a charismatic character with music-based enchantment spells and the ability to inspire his teammates."

For a Rogue: "I'm playing a character that's able to sneak around, disable traps, and use some sort of precision damage-based attacks."

For a Soulknife: "I'm playing a character that can kill a yak from 200 yards away with MIND BULLETS!"

[Man on Fire]

Which is why I wasn't (and am not) asking for mechanical advice or help. Just what do you see a given classes role as, what do you see as the theme of the class, what do you think of when you (or someone else) says "I'm going to be X".


Well, let me think then.
Soulknife: generally when I hear soulknife, I think of this guy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvrUJeJiaEc) and what he does. Maybe that would work - give Soulknife one style of combat, and type of weapon they choose. Soulknife can summon weapons and grant weapons of cosen type additional special abilities (like making them explode when thrown or giving you ability to fly). Or maybe could get specific list of psionic powers based on chosen style? Could also get bonus feats to chosen fighting style, sorta like Ranger in Pathfinder. At higher levels Soulknife could get ability similiar to Gate of Babylon from the same series - summon a number of weapons who fly straight at the enemy. Or Unlimited Blade Works - can grant you a copy of every weapon you ever seen in action to use as long as you mantain connection.

Alternatively you could go Elric with it a bit. Soulknife had choosen a weapon and placed part of his soul in it, bond between him and a weapon allows him to use powers specific on kind of weapon used - different powers for bow, crossobow, two-weapon fighting, one-handed meele weapon, light weapons, two-handed weapons and double-weapons. Maybe even some kinds of weapons could get their own powers (like Orc Waraxe for example)?

Rogue - When I think rogue, I think many things. If we go only by SRD then Rogue has a lot of things to become. He can be scout, swasbuckler, skillmonkey or backstabber. If you was doing more than SRD you could drop the first two, but, well ,there isn't another class in SRD who can fit those roles without using magic (maybe fighter for swasbuckler but it's probably not worth it). Maybe you could make the class customable and allow player to specialize in one of those fields. Maybe something akin to rogue talents from PF to allow even more versality? Rogue is pretty much mundane Jack of all-trades, maybe that's what you should concentrate on?

[Gildedragon]

Soulknife: a feat that got somehow turned into a class. Alternatively a psychic combatant that is gear independent and relies on minor psionic tricks. A less-nature-y totemist.

Bard: Skills, charming personality, swashbuckling, providing some entertainment, minor spellcasting

Rogue: Skills, (possibly) charming personality (but likely more of a fast talker), high precision damage, trap-finding and making, poison-use, acrobatic.

The classes could be rolled together via acf's, look at the pf archaeologist bard archetype which is essentially a Cha rogue. Or the bard set as a rogue PrC

[DMVerdandi]

Truthfully?

I would scrap each one of them.
Instead of bard and rogue as stand alone classes, make them variant classes to the factotum. Find some way to stuff their abilities on top of the factotums without loosing too much.

Got it!
Get rid of Opportunistic Peity AND Arcane dilettante
For those, one can either pick up Sneak attack and evasion(Rogue variant) Or Bardic Knowledge and Music(Bard).
Now instead of them being whole classes, instead they are variants on the same idea of a skilled person. One is skilled more towards guerilla warfare and tactics, while the other is more skilled towards rhetoric and mnemonics.









Make Soulknife into a power.
It can literally be made into a power.

Make it like a first level power that scales with level.
And then a Greater soulknife for the maneuvers.

[Emperor Tippy]

Truthfully?

I would scrap each one of them.
Instead of bard and rogue as stand alone classes, make them variant classes to the factotum. Find some way to stuff their abilities on top of the factotums without loosing too much.
Factotum is not OGL and thus non viable for this project.


Got it!
Get rid of Opportunistic Peity AND Arcane dilettante
For those, one can either pick up Sneak attack and evasion(Rogue variant) Or Bardic Knowledge and Music(Bard).
Now instead of them being whole classes, instead they are variants on the same idea of a skilled person. One is skilled more towards guerilla warfare and tactics, while the other is more skilled towards rhetoric and mnemonics.
Meh, the classes are too similar.


Make Soulknife into a power.
It can literally be made into a power.

Make it like a first level power that scales with level.
And then a Greater soulknife for the maneuvers.
Nah, I like the core idea behind the class; the canon execution just sucked so badly that any appropriate analogy would be me warned by the moderators. Fixing it wasn't that difficult, and now I have a Soulknife that would fit in just fine in any Tier 3 game.

Mechanically my only current problems are with the Ranger, Druid, and Cleric. I just don't have quite enough ideas about what I want to do with the Cleric, can't quite decide how I want to handle the Druid in lite of some design decisions, and making a good Archery class is a pain.

[sonofzeal]

The bolded part would work except that mechanically, making a class that capitalizes on the environment is close to a recipe in disaster. Especially if the table isn't playing with a detailed map or the like.
Well, 3.x does it to a limited degree. Rogues get Sneak Attack if/when they can Flank, or break line of sight to hide, or maneuver enemies to places where they're taking balance checks, etc. It's not huge, but it's something, and it helps give the Rogue its feel. There's definitely room to do that without prohibitive complexity.



Mechanically my only current problems are with the Ranger, Druid, and Cleric. I just don't have quite enough ideas about what I want to do with the Cleric, can't quite decide how I want to handle the Druid in lite of some design decisions, and making a good Archery class is a pain.
Cleric
I'm like a broken record on the subject, but I'm a huge fan of the Evangelist variant for Cleric - spontaneous spellcasting (as Sorcerer), except with domain spells added to Spells Known, and bonus Domains as you go. The details could be tweaked, but a spontaneous caster working primarily off their god's domain lists is actually pretty awesome. Each God thus effectively describes a "specialty caster" like DN/Warmage/Beguiler. Something along those lines would be awesome.

Ranger
I wouldn't worry about making a "good Archery class". Instead, I'd rephrase that in terms of making a good HUNTER class. Obviously many hunters use projectiles, but that's more a means to an end. Still, maybe steal a page from Order of the Bow Initiate, except make the numbers a bit better?

[Threadnaught]

If you aren't using the Soulbow, how about making the Soulknife able to emulate any weapon?
Any weapon.

Maybe they can create weapons for others to use for a while and spend PP to give plusses, abilities and extra duration.

That would require a complete rebuild though, you'd have to tear down the whole class and... Oh that's right.


Nah, I like the core idea behind the class; the canon execution just sucked so badly that any appropriate analogy would be me warned by the moderators. Fixing it wasn't that difficult, and now I have a Soulknife that would fit in just fine in any Tier 3 game.

Dang, Chronotyrned.

[Clistenes]

Paladins are specialized in fighting and destroying evil creatures. I don't care that they suck at almost everything else, so long as they are the best class destroying evil creatures.

A paladin sucks not because he's strongly focused on it, he sucks only if he/she's not good enough at it, which, sadly, happens a lot, since the class' features aren't that powerful. Stuff like SR against evil spells and spells cast by evil creatures, Magic Circle Against Evil, Dispel Evil, giving the Holy and/or Blessed property to their weapons, casting Holy Word, Holy Smite, Holy Aura as spell-like abilities, summoning Celestials, the Exorcism of the Silver Flame's powers, the Fist of Raziel's powers, taking fiends or undead as Favored Enemies all would fit nicely in addition to their current powers.

Bards are based on mythical musicians and singers like Vainamoinen or Orpheus, able to make magic with their music, combined with the role as sages of the celtic priestly bards, the ovates, and with the medieval minstrels who went from castle to castle offering their services.

I think Bards are all about music, and its intrinsical powers.

Druids are basically a modern thing, They are modern ecologists, combined with the vision modern people have of the old pagan religion that worshipped gods of nature. They have nature-themed powers that are reminiscent of those of Shamans and the name of the celtic priestly class.

The Druids give a vibe of an old pagan religion worshipping the gods of woods and streams being chased into the wilderness, only in most D&D worlds there isn't a dominant religion chasing all the others, and nature isn't really threatened by the low human population, so they don't make much sense.

Rangers are woodsmen, hunters, so close to Nature that they have learned a few tricks from her.

Monks are shaolins from the XX century's movies.

[Afool]

Have you looked at the Archer from Monte Cook's Iron Heroes? The system is a bit different than 3.X, but it features a token system (in the case of the Archer, token's are gained by spending actions "Aiming") that is used to fuel class abilities to do things, in the Archer's case, like increase damage, discount levels of cover, and reduce range penalties.

[Clistenes]

About the Bard and the Rogue, why don't you give the Bard all the social skills, add some nice social bonuses and enchantment-like powers, keep their lore, magic and music and reduce a bit their combat power, making them very social-focused characters?

The rogues could keep all their skills, but focus more in all the physical work: hiding, stealing, opening locks, finding, disabing and making traps, backstabbing, poison and maybe receive a few more martial attacks/powers, making them assassins, burglars and brigands

[zlefin]

I think having some overlap is fine, and indeed necessary. Overlap is important, because if there isn't overlap, then there's probably gaps where a character concept has no class that fits it.

I wish I could do a project like that; but not enough people listen to me for it to really work; even if I made one people would just ignore it.

[avr]

The rogue is most often used (that I've seen) by players who want a skilled character who doesn't have integral magic. The bard on the other hand is a class for a skilled character who does, but the additional bard flavour (singing et al.) puts some people off.

The soulknife is a class I've never seen used, but I think the intent is to emulate some anime fighting styles or possibly jedi as mentioned above. It works poorly as written.

[Darrin]

Rogue: Think of it in terms of how they get past obstacles. The Fighter kills things. The wizard casts a spell. The rogue uses his skills to pick the lock, climb a wall, or uses some Lara-Croft-style acrobatics. Or he may bluff/talk his way past something.

Bard: This is tough, because the bard is kind of a kitchen sink of different things. I like the point about the Celtic background, but that's a bit of a problem, because from a mythological standpoint the bard is a Mary Sue character, a demigod that often goes toe-to-toe against gods and goddesses. Sometimes they triumph via magical prowess, but more often they use cleverness and trickery to pull one over on the gods. The D&D version from 2nd/3rd tries to water this down a bit, and makes them a hybrid wizard/rogue type character, trying to make them a bit of a jack of all trades, and somewhat succeeds mostly by locking them out of higher-level spells. While they can do the whole storytelling/singing stuff, most players don't actually spend much time developing that side of the bard. And to a certain extent, they are information brokers and secret-keepers, something like Giles on BtVS: they may work better as NPCs, someone the party can go to when they get stuck to get the BBEG's weak spot or secret command word or whatever. Bards are sort of all that, wrapped up together... I keep coming back to the Mary Sue thing from Celtic myths, and I guess that's the best way to describe the Bard: a watered-down Mary Sue character, not really spectacular at one thing in particular, but good at a lot of different things. I'm not quite sure how you can break that all apart into one single class "archetype", though.

Soul-Knife is the "Weapon Specialist". They have one gimmick or schtick that they use, over and over again, and everything they do revolves around that gimmick. This may be more of a Superhero or Comic Book archetype: The Shoveler (Mystery Men), Green Arrow/Hawk-Eye, and to a certain extent He-Man (Sword of Grayskull) and Voltron (Form Blazing Sword!). Everything revolves around that particular gimmick, to the point it becomes a little absurd: Green Arrow "just happens" to have brought along Shark Repellent arrows! The only thing that can defeat the RoBeast just so happens to be the Blazing Sword (which they inexplicably wait to try LAST, of all things). Chainsaw-Chucker-Man may occasionally be stymied by an immunity to chainsaws, but he will eventually discover a secret technique or new application of his chosen weapon that will circumvent the new immunity. The Kensai or OA Samurai/Ancestral Relic feat may be a much better take on what the Soul-Knife was supposed to do.

[Eldan]

For me, the bard draws not only from celtic, but also scandinavian and Finnish myths. There's two parts here.

First of all, Magic is Music and Music is Magic. This is especially drawn from the Kalevala, I guess, because I just like it a lot. Orpheus also comes into it. If you want to accomplish a deed, anything from building a boat to defeating a foe, you learn the right song to do it. People wager everything on singing duels. The gods sing the world into being. Essentially, the right song makes everything possible.

Second, the travelling lorekeeper. Bards are extremely respected for many things. They know the history of the land, all the customs, laws and contracts. To settle a dispute, a judge may call a bard to retell stories and songs relevant to the matter at hand, of ancient contracts made or obscure laws no one else remembers. No one dares cross a bard, or their legacy will forever be ruined in the songs of all bards, so a bard is always welcome at every table. Bards know everything.

[JusticeZero]

Bard: This is tough, because the bard is kind of a kitchen sink of different things. I like the point about the Celtic background, but that's a bit of a problem, because from a mythological standpoint the bard is a Mary Sue character...
Well, they're also similar to the Skald (which is actually one of the class's titles) or Griot. I say Celtic because that was so very specifically cited in 1E what with them getting Druidic spells and working through things like the MacFuirmidh college after a couple levels. This is the original class description (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/excerpts/excerpt_ph1_bard.pdf) from the core 1E book. In usual Gygax style, it was an odd option tucked away in an odd corner of the book reserved for people who had gotten an outlier roll in character generation - Gygax loved that whole thing of "You randomly made a really high roll in character generation on some weird table somewhere in a forgotten appendix, and now you're a special snowflake!" thing for some reason.

[Talya]

I'm working on a project that involves rewriting the OGL (basically everything on the SRD) classes and I've run into a couple of issues. The big one is dealing with the Bard, the Rogue, and the Soulknife.

More specifically, what are they supposed to be thematically? What should they feel like in play? What purpose should they serve? Etc.

Frankly, if it was OGL I would pretty much rip the Factotum whole from Dungeonscape, change a few mechanics, and name it "Bard" but unfortunately that isn't exactly feasible.


What do you dislike about the bard class that you'd replace it with factotum?

You seem to be addressing several different ideas here. Thematic, feel, and purpose are all very different.

The bard is the entertainer, the travelling storyteller and jack of all trades. To understand the fantasy evolution of the bard, we have to go back to the real history of bards, they were gaelic poets (and, actually, were a class of druids), teachers, historians, lawyers, and musicians. They weren't just armchair historians; each side in an army would employ their own bard. The bard was clearly identified so both sides could recognize them. The bard was more than untouchable in combat. It was such a crime to harm the bard that if one side in an irish feud mistakenly harmed the other side's bard, they'd pretty much give up the battle, it was forfeit. The bard was the chronicler, the one who put the battle into the legends, the one who assured immortality for all combatants. They were in the thick of it as battle progressed, often playing or singing or chanting as they watched the events unfold.

The fantasy bard adopted many of these ideas, but removed the neutral observer and participating noncombatant factors, cause those would kinda be boring in the average fantasy tale. Romanticizing bards for fantasy has given the minstrel certain aspects of a mage in addition to combat focus. They retain their jack of all trades image, and, since so much in fantasy is magical, their performances have real arcane power.

The feel of a bard? I'm not sure how to describe that, but the role of a bard is easy. You're almost right with factotum, the bard should always have something useful to contribute in every situation, but ultimately, the bard should be about making the rest of their party better. The bard might not be the best class to have available in any situation, but they should always be a viable alternative.

My favorite bard builds are the type that really focus on optimizing that versatility. Oh, sure, pump inspire courage through the roof, and take that dragonfire inspiration feat, but that doesn't make you a bard by itself. Replace bardic knowledge with bardic knack, don't multiclass, ever. Keep several types of performance capped (there's a feat for that, as I recall). Pick your spells carefully, and you can do anything. With all the splatbooks available and ACFs on the table, I firmly believe a bard can out-factotum the factotum at their own game.