Poll: Do you think any race should be able to be any class?

[Sentay]

Within the context of a tabletop RPG,do you think any race should be able to be any class? Even in the cases where it's strange or bizarre (gnome warriors, Elven Berzerkers, etc)?

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

I think that any race should be able to be any class, but they shouldn't get all the bonuses of that class if their race would interfere. Like for example an Elven Berserker could exist but they wouldn't be able to take a lot of damage or have really high physical attack power since Elves are more typically ranged characters, or are more technique based rather than strength based. So basically an Elven Berserker would throw himself straight into combat despite the fact that it's detrimental to his actually physical ability.

I find it more fun if you let the players do what they want with their classes so long as you can find a story reason for it, even if it's ultimately detrimental to their character. Like the Elf goes into an uncontrollable rage when he sees "X" enemy type because that sort of enemy killed his family, and so he goes Berserk and charges headlong into battle without thinking, despite the fact that he doesn't have the skills for it and the fact that it'll probably ultimately lead to his death if the rest of his party doesn't come to his rescue.

Of course this depends on the tabletop RPG in question and the ruleset about what bonuses different classes give.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Sure, why not? Knock yourself out.

EDIT: You can make your own rules on tabletop, right?

 

[JamesStone]

Dirty Hispter has a point, but I say go further.

Have any race be capable to be of any class, but make diferences between the way they act.

The Elf Berserker for example, instead of focusing of absorving damage and being a High-HP Punchbox who can punch you as hard, would work through a very high dodge chance. So he could tank like a berserker against weapon-wielding oponents but see himself fucked against magic. To compensate, he'd have an higher attack speed than human/orc/whatever Berserkers, because Elf and all.

A Gnome warrior could also work if properly set. Double daggers, and some Rogue-like skills (Smoke bomb, very situational invisibility and the sort) and the little guy could kill a lot of people without them being able to fight back (Most weapons are made with an average human's height in mind).


Subvert a few things and have these "Special classes" achieve the same goal as their class just by different means.

Oooh, oooh, Dwarven Mage

Uses technology as a way of delivering his magic strikes! He could have a special crossbow just to increase the range and force of impact of his ice-balls and fireballs. Or a metal staff to better conduct his electrical strikes. You know, shit like that.

Originality is (usually) always nice.

 

[nomotog_v1legacy]

In the context of a table top RPG, yes. I think you could make the argument that restricting it could improve the gameplay in a video game RPG, but I think a table top game trades on different feelings. In that kind of game it's just more important for the player to make whatever odd ball character they want to play.

 

[RavingSturm]

I wouldnt want that.From a variety perspective it would make characters too samey. Races with physical advantages are obviously suited to warrior/close combat type builds. Making a wizard that is tough as nails, physically, would be OP imho. Of course, if we're talking about a single player RPG like Skyrim, all classes across all races makes sense.

 

[Jamash]

No, because some racial characteristics would make certain classes impractical or impossible.

You couldn't have a Ogre Rogue or Thief, a 10' tall 2000lb mountain of muscle who was light on his feet and adept at climbing up trellises, squeezing though the smallest of windows who could daintily pick someone's pocket with fingers as big as you thigh and somehow sneak up on people (despite blocking out the sun and making the ground tremble) and deliver a backstab with a 'dagger' larger that the target.

Could you have an Ent/Treeant Fire Mage? Seems a bit risky to me. What about an Orc attempting to be a class that is a beguiling temptress or witty rogue that can talk or seduce their way out of situations? Seems highly amusing, but unlikely.

You may be able to have some of these impracticable classes in the context of just one race, so you could have a fearsome Gnome Warrior or agile Ogre Thief, but once these classes have to interact and mingle in a world with other classes, their racial characteristics in the context of other races and world would overcome their special class abilities.

No matter how fearsome, even the most fearsome Gnome Warrior would get squashed by an Ogre and by the same token, even the best and most agile Ogre Thief would struggle to pickpocket a Gnome or sneak into a Gnomish dwelling undetected.

 

[Thebazilly]

No, because some racial characteristics would make certain classes impractical or impossible.

You couldn't have a Ogre Rogue or Thief, a 10' tall 2000lb mountain of muscle who was light on his feet and adept at climbing up trellises, squeezing though the smallest of windows who could daintily pick someone's pocket with fingers as big as you thigh and somehow sneak up on people (despite blocking out the sun and making the ground tremble) and deliver a backstab with a 'dagger' larger that the target.

Could you have an Ent/Treeant Fire Mage? Seems a bit risky to me. What about an Orc attempting to be a class that is a beguiling temptress or witty rogue that can talk or seduce their way out of situations? Seems highly amusing, but unlikely.

I think that all sounds hilarious as hell. In a less serious game, you could play all those unorthodox combos for comedic value. In a more serious game, I don't see why you would forbid a player from doing something like this if they can come up with a decent explanation (and come on, even a serious game needs jokes). Maybe the ogre has a curse that makes him utterly inaudible, even when he's trying to be heard. Maybe the orc seductress is very attractive to other orcs and is confused why it isn't working on the town guards.

You just have to be a little creative, and that's what tabletop games are all about.

 

[Sentay]

So far I'm seeing two dominate opinions:
1 - Any race should be able to be any class BUT they should perform said class in a way that makes sense for their race (tweak all classes to fit each possible permutation).
2 - No, some classes should be off limits for some races BUT only when they are completely incompatible (orc thieves).

I'm glad I'm getting such middling results, I've been wrestling with this question myself for the last 2 or 3 weeks wondering which I should use for the RPG I'm making. Oh and in the spirit of full disclosure your responses / the results of this poll will probably end up deciding this matter for me, and end up shaping the game in a very large way.

 

[The Lunatic]

Could you have an Ent/Treeant Fire Mage? Seems a bit risky to me.

That'd be pretty cool.

Basically be a Ent version of a Blood Mage.


But, I think it depends on Lore.

For example, Phantasy Star Online had robots and magic.

Robots couldn't be magic, as, they're robots. And thus according to the lore, magic came from... Something only organic, or something.

On the flip side, they were better with guns.

But, overall it made the races a bit more interesting. Rather than just something like WoW where the only thing limiting you is the fact the icon is greyed out.

 

[Recusant]

I wouldnt want that.From a variety perspective it would make characters too samey. Races with physical advantages are obviously suited to warrior/close combat type builds. Making a wizard that is tough as nails, physically, would be OP imho. Of course, if we're talking about a single player RPG like Skyrim, all classes across all races makes sense.

I would argue just the opposite- if only dwarves or orcs can be berserkers, it means every berserker is limited by race. If wizards aren't allowed to be brawny, then the potential characteristics of wizards are grossly narrowed. Having standards (or bonuses and penalties) is one thing, but we're talking tabletop here. There are some enormous role-playing hooks inherent in playing against type; if you can't do that, what's the point? Why be generic priest #68,973 of Twizzlethunk, god of gnomes, when you could be Ilgmor, goblin priest of Twizzlethunk? Because it makes no sense for a goblin to be a follower, let alone a priest, of a gnome god? Sure it does, you just need a reason. Maybe you were a newborn when the gnomes attacked your village to disperse the constant threat of goblin raids, and a softhearted gnome soldier decided to spare you and raise you as his own child, so you grew up following his god. Maybe the goblin gods cursed your family line and ordered you cast out of goblin lands generations ago, and now you've returned to wreak vengeance, gnome-style, by preaching the word of Twizzlethunk in the goblin lands and gaining fame as Ilgmor the Redeemer. Maybe you got drunk one night and mistakenly prayed to Qvib'jsa, goddess of traumatic brain injury, who rewarded you with crippling insanity that makes you think you're a gnome- there are lots of possibilities.

I say let it rip, provided you can come up with a story justification.

 

[bluepotatosack]

Absolutely, just make it more difficult for certain combinations. A game called Dragonrealms did it this way. It cost each race a different amount of points to train up each attribute. So for example, it cost a Gnome much more to raise their strength than it did for a Gor'tog (their Orcish race). So you could have a Gnome Barbarian (and plenty of people did), but you'd just have to work a bit harder.

 

[Prince of Ales]

No, because some racial characteristics would make certain classes impractical or impossible.

You couldn't have a Ogre Rogue or Thief, a 10' tall 2000lb mountain of muscle who was light on his feet and adept at climbing up trellises, squeezing though the smallest of windows who could daintily pick someone's pocket with fingers as big as you thigh and somehow sneak up on people (despite blocking out the sun and making the ground tremble) and deliver a backstab with a 'dagger' larger that the target.

That's assuming all ogres live up to this racial stereotype. What about the runt of the litter who's not much taller than a normal man, and only survived because of his quick wits and ability to hide from his more gigantic brothers and sisters?

Ogres are bigger than humans, sure, but that doesn't mean every ogre will be bigger than every human. You can have extreme cases in every race. Some humans are really big, like way bigger than average, so why can't an ogre be smaller and smarter in an extreme case? The extreme cases often make for better stories and backgrounds.

 

[Grumman]

I'd say "not quite". For the most part you should be able to play any race-class combination as long as you aren't a tosser about it, but there is a place for a race that, say, has an innate resistance to magic that also prevents them from becoming sorcerers.

In Prince of Ales' example, I'd let someone play a character who is an Ogre runt, but they'd have to use the rules for an Orc. I've done something similar for one of my best characters, using the rules for a Dwarf with a Barbarian's +10' move speed to represent a particularly hardy human.

If someone wanted to play a normally evil race as a good character I'd allow it, but only if they rose above the cliche. For example, I had a Drow ranger who was still evil, she was just a bit of a sucker by Drow standards. The reason she became a ranger was because she was a daughter of a noble house who failed utterly at becoming a cleric of Lolth, so sending her on patrols with the men was her mother's way of telling her to go sit in the corner where she couldn't hurt herself.

 

[Asita]

So far I'm seeing two dominate opinions:
1 - Any race should be able to be any class BUT they should perform said class in a way that makes sense for their race (tweak all classes to fit each possible permutation).
2 - No, some classes should be off limits for some races BUT only when they are completely incompatible (orc thieves).

Orc thieves I'd actually be inclined to allow given that thievery is skill based. Personally, I find mages to be a better example for this as racial incompatibility with magic (Dragon Age's dwarves, for instance) can reasonably be assumed to be congenital without adversely affecting roleplay ability, to say nothing of potentially helping to flesh out the setting and rules thereof.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

I like the divisions.
It keeps things more varied.

At the same time, a gnome warrior sort of deal could be interesting if done well. So I wouldn't hate having no restrictions, but at the moment I'd say no.

 

[Mrkillhappy]

I would say yes, the reason being some friends of mine use mismatched races and classes to make hilarious joke characters. It can help make the game fun if you have creative people that are willing to be creative. Also in some cases making things harder for yourself that way can also spice up about any game just like any "challenge mode" or restrictions.

 

[Gennadios]

I prefer my Dwarves being the "Dwarf" class, and Elves being the "Elf" class. I'm old school like that.

Now on to being serious, my view is that in most P&P games the player is exceptional in some way, usually having above average stats. I'm sure there would be elf berserkers (Drizzt) and Gnome warriors (at least village guards,) but they're at such a disadvantage racially that they seldom reach hero status without some homebrew custom skill and feat choices.

 

[JimB]

Within the context of a tabletop RPG, do you think any race should be able to be any class?

Of course. What the hell is improved by telling a player, "No, you are not allowed to play what you want because your fun is less important than my right as a creator to tell you what kind of fun you're allowed to have?" The best possible outcome is that it prevents players from choosing mechanically suboptimal race/class combinations, but frankly I think that's a much smaller benefit than allowing people to play what they want.

I know RPGs' greatest ancestor is a game trying desperately to make every game ever be the Lord of the Rings, but not all of us want our gaming table to pull double duty as a shrine to St. Tolkien.

 

[NeutralDrow]

For tabletop? I argue that from multiple perspectives it's a good idea. Extra options to twink out a character satisfies the number-crunchers, minmaxers, and munchkins. Unusual in-world matchups satisfy the roleplayers, budding storytellers, and loonies. The only way it could really go wrong is based on mismatched playstyles/GMing.

Besides, without the variety, we wouldn't have Ork Kommandos, and my WoW main wouldn't be an elven engineer and gunslinger (yes, I know it's a profession and not a class, but the principle is the same).