Class Features or "Reskining"

There was an interesting discussion a the OD&D forums about swashbucklers:

http://odd74.proboards.com/thread/9341/swashbuckler

I found this again while looking up inspiration for a "Musketeer" style class I want to include in my games. I love the Three Musketeers (I have the book, and have seen nearly every adaptation I can find), and would love to include some sort of swashbuckling, suave, snappy swordsman in my games. In fact that's how I play nearly ever Bard when I get the chance.

There are some great ideas in the thread, and there's plenty come up with. In fact the 1st Edition AD&D Barbarian, could pull it off rather nicely, with his +2 defense bonus for every point of dexterity over 14 (this is my preferred Barbarian class, not the Berserker nonsense of later games [though a Berserker class, if it was called that, would be great]). However, there are also some really great counter points to this. Mostly along the lines of A) not wearing armor in the middle ages is ridiculous, and B) why should someone not wearing armor get an ARMOR class bonus?

While the first point is a little more about flavor, the second is a great point. While you're not necessarily penalizing characters who wear armor, what is the point? If they're both getting high armor class, are they really different? Two different ways of coming to the same effect, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

A lovely alternative is pointed out, and that is playing on the strength of not wearing armor. Why give him an armor class bonus, when lower Armor Class could be his drawback, and something more appropriate could be his benefit. I like that a lot.

Now before I to far in that direction, something 3rd Edition D&D did that was kind of cool, was offer a level based Armor Class bonus for everyone, based on class (Unearthed Arcana). This was presented as an alternative to armor. I have no problem with campaigns that don't have the usual medieval, armor clad knight aesthetic.

For usual D&D though, or for game rules in general really, do you want to have so many ways of achieving the same result, or do you want truly unique characters, both mechanically and aesthetically?

With Arcane Adventures, I still want it to be firmly grounded in D&D, so I don't mind giving the Barbarian his increased dexterity bonus, because that's what the D&D (er, AD&D), Barbarian is. For Wizards & Warriors though I really want to rethink the usual class abilities.

On one hand, having multiple avenues of approach to the same problem isn't a bad thing. After all, it's how the game has always worked in some regards: Fighters smash open doors, thieves pick locks, etc. On the other hand, there should be meaningful choices. Giving up the ability to wear Armor should mean you don't get a high Armor Class, but it should also mean you get something cool that you wouldn't be able to do wearing armor (like being stealthy).

Of course there is no cut and dry answer, and maybe a Musketeer will get some bonus to Armor Class, but maybe at most a +4 or +5. After all they are still good and fighting, and can defend themselves well enough, but not as well as knight clad in full plate mail. Alternatively some class may be able to achieve a high defense bonus, but it might take them 5, 10, or even 20 levels to achieve that, getting only a +1 per level (like the Monk class).


This is definitely something I won't mind giving careful thought and consideration.