Generic Classes

[AvatarVecna]

Some friends were putting together some characters based on an interesting idea, and one of them brought up mixing generic classes (from Unearthed Arcana) with the normal character classes and prestige classes. I'm personally pretty nervous about this and wanted to get advice from other DMs. Would you allow this in your games, no question? Would you need to work closely with them to make sure it isn't abused? Would you flat-out forbid it? Any advice is welcome.

[Troacctid]

I don't think I'd allow mixing them with the classes they're intended to replace, but for something like, I dunno, Warlock or Swordsage, that would be fine.

[Red Fel]

Per the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/genericClasses.htm):
If you use these generic classes, you shouldn't also use the standard character classes (or variants of those classes). You can still include prestige classes, if you wish to add that level of complexity to your game, but you may have to tweak some prestige class prerequisites that include class features not available to these classes.

Technically, it's not a "you cannot," but there's pretty good reason not to include the standard classes when using generics - you can quite effectively replicate most base classes with them. Frankly, the Generic Warrior is in some ways superior to the Fighter, because he can choose his skills, and because he is not limited to Fighter feats for his bonus feats.

[AvatarVecna]

you both make really good points. And I've noticed the Fighter vs. G. Warrior thing; it's part of what makes me nervous. The others aren't much better.
From what I've seen, the issue boils down to that, while any particular path doesn't make them more powerful than any other class, the fact that they get to choose saves/skills/spells instead of being stuck with the classes limits makes them more versatile; versatility is the basis of the tier system for a reason.

[Troacctid]

They're not actually more versatile gameplay-wise. You don't get to switch your saves, class skills, and bonus feats on the fly. They're just more customizable. Yes, Generic Warrior is more powerful than a Fighter, but that's because the Fighter sucks, not because Generic Warrior is overpowered.

Re: prestige classes--the same line Red Fel quoted that says you shouldn't use the standard classes also says you can still use prestige classes. They should be fine.

[Brookshw]

Personally I wouldn't permit it, the generic classes high customization lends itself well to many (not all) ideas, and the shortages I call the trade off. They work okay as is.

[AvatarVecna]

They're not actually more versatile gameplay-wise. You don't get to switch your saves, class skills, and bonus feats on the fly. They're just more customizable. Yes, Generic Warrior is more powerful than a Fighter, but that's because the Fighter sucks, not because Generic Warrior is overpowered.

Re: prestige classes--the same line Red Fel quoted that says you shouldn't use the standard classes also says you can still use prestige classes. They should be fine.

You make some good points. But the Generic Warrior is hardly the best way to break this, it's just the simplest way to show the issue. The thing about PrCs is relevant; thanks for reminding me of that.