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

[Flunk]

Yes, adventurers are generally the exception and not the rule. People who don't really fit in. Don't change things lke racial bonuses and remember that NPCs should find unusual combinations unexpected and strange. Half-Orc wizard? Nothing draws players in like a consistent behavior like human NPCs constantly assuming that the wizard is a barbarian. Playing with preconceptions can be fun. Remember, your job is to create a fun and consistent experience for the players above all. If players want to be unconventional class/race combinations just roll with it.

 

[Reed Spacer]

No. The whole point is to add a level of strategy to it: "Oh, if I'm this race, I get these abilities, but I can't play this class, which I kind of like."

It's a question of compromising. Plus, you might find you have a better character than what you thought you'd have.

 

[Nieroshai]

Well, in Pathfinder, elves are space aliens who came to Golarion through a stargate and orcs are subterranean entropy-worshipers, not to mention that there are even nanotech androids living alongside mammoth-riding primitives. So in Pathfinder, at least, no trope is beyond reimagining. In addition, a lot of settings assume while there are insular cultures, the typical races are as diverse as humans. An orc can be a wizard because he's smarter than the average orc and goes about crushing his enemies by growing to giant size and wrecking them with a flaming greatclub. An elven barbarian is a fighter who emulates the ferocity of nature rather than the refined fencing and archery of his urbanized brethren, but has no druidic talent. A tiefling cleric of Iomedae hates the foulness that spawned her and wishes to redeem her soul.

 

[Duster]

Well to be truthful the funnest combos are the least realistic ones, such as a twf halfling barbarian that tanks traps with reflex saves and raw hp.

Normally I would say no and agree with reed spacer, but I never have really seen a high fantasy rpg that actually immersed me into it's world or made at least pseudo realistic antagonists and stuff(Oh boy, time to kill the dark lord of evil darkness!), so they may as well go all in with the classes.

 

[Mikeyfell]

Um... well no.
But... this is complicated.

I would prefer some sort of Race/gender/culture thing

Where character race would determine stat scaling
gender would determine base stats
and a combination of race gender and culture would determine what classes were available.

Like if your character was raised in a really progressive civil rights heavy culture they would have more classes available, but if they were raised in a more primitive culture for example warrior classes would only be open to males or Orcs or something like that.

A game like that would revolve extremely heavily around the lore of the world.

 

[Reed Spacer]

Um... well no.
But... this is complicated.

I would prefer some sort of Race/gender/culture thing

Where character race would determine stat scaling
gender would determine base stats
and a combination of race gender and culture would determine what classes were available.

Like if your character was raised in a really progressive civil rights heavy culture they would have more classes available, but if they were raised in a more primitive culture for example warrior classes would only be open to males or Orcs or something like that.

A game like that would revolve extremely heavily around the lore of the world.

Actually Disgaea sort of covers the second point - male and female members of a class have differing stats. Males might be stronger and take less damage, but females are faster and better as spellcasting.

 

[the December King]

No.

At least, not willy-nilly. The DM should make exceptions when it's cool to do so, and bear in mind the rarity or regularity of his descisions. Maybe there are no elven wizards, because although they live to great age, they display little patience for lengthy and sedate endeavours like research or ruminations? Or maybe humans are never born with sorceror's blood UNLESS they are of mixed ancestry? Or maybe only elves? Those options are already present in Pathfinder, but could be molded as you need for your own campaigns. A Human brought up to be an Elven Blade Singer (D&D 3.5), for example, would be really cool... if it was a really great reason, tied into a compelling back story approved by, or tailored by, the DM.

Or a lizardman whelp that was at first held prisoner by the folk of Amindol, a small human-majority hamlet near a small Shrine of Torm. Eventually, through proving himself (and not being subject to abuse, or at least not on the same levels as the Blackscale lizardfolk tribes would have made him suffer in the Sangrothi Fens, were he captured there), he was taken on as a camp guard, and later purified and ordained a neophyte and squire by the Church of Torm for one of the Templar there, an older man who saw in the creature the spark of a redeemed soul. Eventually, as the creature matured and arrived at his full size and strength, the aging weapons-master taught the reptile the ways of the Holy Order and, on his death-bed, passed on his blessing for the lizardfolk to take the Test Of Faith, and become Zalak-Thun, the Paladin Lacertilian of Amindol.

I, totally, got off on a tangent.

So, in summation, my answer is still yes.

...

yes.

 

[Mikeyfell]

Um... well no.
But... this is complicated.

I would prefer some sort of Race/gender/culture thing

Where character race would determine stat scaling
gender would determine base stats
and a combination of race gender and culture would determine what classes were available.

Like if your character was raised in a really progressive civil rights heavy culture they would have more classes available, but if they were raised in a more primitive culture for example warrior classes would only be open to males or Orcs or something like that.

A game like that would revolve extremely heavily around the lore of the world.

Actually Disgaea sort of covers the second point - male and female members of a class have differing stats. Males might be stronger and take less damage, but females are faster and better as spellcasting.

Meh, sort out the nitty gritty later. I just think all 3 of those things should come into play when rolling a character.
I've never played a game (Table top or otherwise) where culture or upbringing really had a serious effect.

It's always race and class and sometimes gender.

An orc raised in a human society might want to be a bard. you don't know.
For a girl raised in a patriarchal society, it might never occur to her that she could be a warrior.

Everyone would just end up min-maxing by the end of it anyway

 

[Ratty]

Yeah, though obviously races will have different aptitudes. A halfling is always gonna have a greater sneak ability than, say, a Minotaur. Though some race-based limitations are BS. Lookin' at you Orc/Half-Orc INT penalties.

 

[Eddie the head]

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.

Honestly all of that sound really fun. I guess if you're going dead serious then it would be a bad idea. But if you're going for silly fun I say go for it.

 

[Ratty]

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.

Honestly all of that sound really fun. I guess if you're going dead serious then it would be a bad idea. But if you're going for silly fun I say go for it.

You're supposed to create the character you want to play, not the one that "makes sense" necessarily. That way lies minmaxing, where all RPing fun goes to die. Unless all you're doing is a dungeon crawl playing against type is half the fun. Find creative ways to combine your class and racial skills, rather than sticking to the obvious path laid out to you. You're an adventurer, take some risks and have some fun.

 

[Godhead]

If it goes against an established mythology that the group has agreed upon, or if it would cause massive balancing issues, then I would say no.

 

[the December King]

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.

Honestly all of that sound really fun. I guess if you're going dead serious then it would be a bad idea. But if you're going for silly fun I say go for it.

You're supposed to create the character you want to play, not the one that "makes sense" necessarily. That way lies minmaxing, where all RPing fun goes to die. Unless all you're doing is a dungeon crawl playing against type is half the fun. Find creative ways to combine your class and racial skills, rather than sticking to the obvious path laid out to you. You're an adventurer, take some risks and have some fun.

While I agree that if the DM doesn't mind you making something you want to try, or just for fun as you say, then sure, do whatever you like- But sometimes a DM wants some structure to his game. It doesn't have to be as extreme as min-maxing, but cohesion or rationalization is not necessarily a buzzkill, either.

Not disagreeing with you, exactly, just adding that it's the DMs goal that should be taken into consideration. This can be easily mediated by having some more 'loose' campaigns. For example, I have several games wherein I needed characters that had ties to the land I was using, and thus followed some specific demands- no gnomes, half-elves were sickened by an old curse, dwarves and elves were really ancient/had no young, too cold for certain monsters, orcs/half orcs and wizard/witches were shunned or hunted. But then there's other games where we cut loose, and make up templated monsters, half-anythings, all sorts of strangeness!

 

[mrdude2010]

Depends on the individual RPG and how farfetched the physical model and skill matchup is, but yes. It would be interesting to build in some advantages/disadvantages based on race applying to class, though. For example, if an equally skilled gnome and and equally skilled orc face off in a sword fight, you know who's going to win that one.

 

[Sable Gear]

Sure, why not? Knock yourself out.

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

This. And why all the talk of hobbling non-standard races in weird class decisions? Systems like DnD and Pathfinder already kind of do that with the ability modifiers. eg. Elves take a CON penalty because they're a bit fragile, therefore building a barbarian is not ideal because you'll have to compensate, but it's still possible.

I don't see why, it's restrictive both mechanically and interactively. I'd say go for it and ask my player for a good story of WHY their elf wants to be a barbarian or whatever. No restrictions puts the fun in the role-playing flavour. Tell me why, I want to know!

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

In general, I think they should. Unless your tabletop game is working firmly in a specific setting and you have some very specific reasons why a certain race cannot be a certain class.

However, if it's even possible for a race to try to be a particular class I think you should allow it. Ogre rogue was mentioned earlier even though it can work fine as long as you break away from the narrow definition of what a rogue should be like. An ogre rogue would work quite well as a thug who uses deception over plain stealth. Fights dirty, feints his attacks, etc...

I always get a kick out of trying to do interesting things with classes, and the more you try to funnel classes into a very narrow archetype, the less fun it is for me as a player. You want players to be able to etch out and define their characters, and the more room you give them, the more interesting ideas will come of it.

In my last Pathfinder game I was determined to make a Paladin archer. He was a paladin at heart, but his approach was far less direct than the usual paladin in both character and combat. He was devoted to good and law, but he had a rather harsh utilitarian view caring more about maximizing good than the goodness of each individual action. (I did have to talk to the DM to clear this approach with him though)

 

[sageoftruth]

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.

On top of that, a rogue doesn't even need to be sneaky. As the D&D player's handbook said (not in these exact words), "A rogue is good at getting something someone else doesn't want him to have." It even mentioned how orc rogues tend to turn towards thuggery. With a strong intimidation feat, an ogre would be great at that.

 

[Thalamus]

Well, no.
Even if you ignore the rules, there are still some logical issues with certain combinations.
e.g Gnomish Archer.

 

[CaitSeith]

I think it should depend on the context of the world. If there are alliances between races, it's logic they can have access to the same classes. But if the races are in conflict or isolated, there must be a exceptional reason to have such freedom of choice.

 

[renegade7]

Can I be the first to say I thought you were going a VERY different direction than that and am very glad that this is about RPGs?