Topic: Changing class

[Ginger McMurray]

Is there a way for a character to change classes? I'm thinking Cleric -> Evil Cleric or Magician to Evil Magician especially.

[Thot]

Becoming "Evil" doesn't require any actual change though, does it? You just learn a few new spell lists and use them too often, that's it.

But changing a class from, say, Fighter to Magician wouldn't really make sense, as the profession is supposed to simulate learning patterns of a given person, which are part nurtured and part inborn, so changing it wouldn't seem very plausible to me. And from a game point of view, the point is to choose something and stick with it for a long time.

That said, I am sure you could simply put a development point price tag (maybe even costing a full level?) on a class change, while allows the PC to change all his skill costs and bonuses, which keeping existing skill ranks.

[Ginger McMurray]

I'm more thinking of it from an NPC's perspective. As part of the prologue to my campaign the players will learn the system by playing a few characters who later become some of the bad guys. They're not evil at the start, but I'd like to show their descent into dakness by giving the casters among them evil spell lists.

I can always GM Magic it, but I'd like to have an answer for any players that may want to swap out their own base spell lists.

[Jengada]

The slide into evil isn't a class change, as Thot pointed out. Spell Law talks about evil spell casters getting the evil base lists in addition to the normal base lists for their profession, and it also states "evil spell users are always pure spell users". Focusing only on the first point, there's no reason a spell user couldn't have started nonevil and pursuing the normal base lists, then become corrupted and turned to evil, thereby "unlocking" the evil base lists.
In my own campaign, I have no restriction on what spell users can be evil - an evil sorcerer is such an easy step from normal sorcerer. I wouldn't give that spell user access to the cleric base lists, but I would allow spell research to concoct their own evil spells. Right now, I've got a shaman (already an animist that gets access to specific cleric base lists) NPC who has been corrupted, and become a necromancer. He wanted to understand why he could heal life, or take life, but not give it. He kinda sorta found a way to make things live, it's just not quite working the way he'd planned.

Bottom line, to me, is RM2 is flexible enough to make the story you're talking about. It doesn't have to be GM Magic, but I would be sure you have a solid storyline behind it, and if a player wants to do something similar, make sure the story works and the rules stay balanced.

[jdale]

I would consider a profession change from a more specific class to a hybrid/semi. E.g. you aren't ever going to go from Fighter to Cleric or vice versa, but maybe you could go from either to Paladin which is a blend on each. Or you might go from Cleric to a channeling hybrid profession. That reflects that it's easier to learn new things than to forget what you've been all your life. There likely would be a requirement to start purchasing skills/spells from the new focus even before you've changed profession.

Generally I would not change the character's base lists even if the profession changes. The evil base lists would be an exception to that, if you sign on with some kind of evil entity that is capable of granting power, it could come with those base lists.

[Grinnen Baeritt]

I suppose one way could be (with the GM's specific guidance) to gradually "shift" elements of the DP expenditure costs for specific skills/abilities as the character advances...

As I said this would be under careful adjudication by the GM..   so if deliberately "changing class" from one to another, the character might then be required to pay the higher DP cost for the "other class skills" for a couple of advances to initiate the change, then the lower DP costs of the new class start "kicking in", as would some of the increases in DP cost of the "old class" skills as the character gradually adopts the new "mindset". 

Of course, a "GM initiated  change" maybe a lot faster..

[Ginger McMurray]

Thanks everyone! Since my concern is mostly around spell lists and the "evil" casters, here's what I think I'll do:

• I already use the optional rule that lets pure spell users pick their base lists from other classes' base lists. If you become "evil" then you lose some of the lists you've already picked and gain the evil ones instead. the losses come from ones you haven't learned yet first. If there's not five slots available then I'll pick which evil lists the character doesn't have access to. This will be based on the nature of the source for those powers.
• Development points stay the same. All you're changing is your lists.
• Should a non-spell using character somehow be corrupted, I'll work that out with the player. There's always the Dark Temptation background option from RMC I.
• My best bet on that is to simply not supply an opportunity for it. It'll only happen if a player specifically works towards the goal.

IMO the "evil" lists are for casters who draw their power or training from dark sources: Sauron and the like. Just being a baby-torturing bastard isn't enough to grant access to them.

[Cory Magel]

I would be highly, highly, unlikely to allow a player to change their character profession.

Primary reason being is that they paid specific costs to get specific skills that were advantageous during their first profession. Allowing them to now develop a second profession with the same advantages it provides isn't really fair to the rest of the players.  That doesn't mean they can't just pay the required cost to get the skills/spells/etc from another profession as RM already provides that option (assuming the GM allows it - think Channeling/Religious topics).

Simply having them change their base lists up (i.e. not having the original ones and now using different ones) wouldn't be a major concern for me, so I might be good with that. However, Evil base lists do have a slightly different power level that you'd want to keep an eye on.

Now, if they wanted to create a specific idea for a character that doesn't fit within the scope of an existing profession I'd just create a new profession for them (basically the idea behind the Priest in the Channeling Companion - our group did this with Rangers before we ever did it with Clerics/Priests).

[Ginger McMurray]

I would be highly, highly, unlikely to allow a player to change their character profession.

Definitely. For example, if a player rolled up a fighter and wasn't happy, I'd let them change characters completely. If the new one is close to the old one then I'm fine with keeping the name and race and just assuming they were that way all along. No retconning, but no need to kill off the old one and start fresh. For instance, if the fighter wanted to play a rogue instead, I'm cool with that.

I'm usually pretty lenient with character changes for the first few levels in any game. Players should be able to play what they enjoy, not what they thought they'd enjoy. This is doubly true because the players will be new to the system entirely and may not realize some options exist.

That said, major changes would require retirement and a brand new character. For example, going from Fighter to Magician (or even Warrior Mage).

[Malim]

How did all the NPC become fighter/mystic/juggler/clown/magician?

[Ginger McMurray]

They're all Red Skeletons with the Archmage background option.

[Spectre771]

They're all Red Skeletons with the Archmage background option.

I sent one of my groups against a Red Skeleton.  It was a blast!

But to the main topic, I don't allow class changes for the same reasons Corey Magel listed in his reply.  The DP costs are set by professions, but the beauty of RM as compared to another popular RPG, any PC can learn any skill... at a cost.  Fighter wants to learn a spell list?  20 DP for a 5% chance.  He can do it, but he won't be too good at it.  If I use a Fighter for about 5 levels, I'm looking at great fighting skills and bonuses.  If I switch to a spell caster, I have extremely low cost magical abilities, with already high combat skills and who will undoubtedly become a killing machine in a few levels.  Extremely unbalanced and OP.  Not many of our players buy skill ranks past the first ten ranks anyway, at level 4, the primary combat skills are probably maxed out.

Changing from Cleric to Evil Cleric I wouldn't allow either even though it seems like a logical shift.  However, one class can learn spell lists from another class, again with a cost.  If the player wanted to play an Evil Cleric, he should have just rolled up an Evil Cleric from the get go.  "Evil" is a relative term anyway.  Just because a PC has the title "Evil Dude" in his name it doesn't mean he goes around killing every singly human being he meets or wears a sign that says "I'm evil, stay away from me."  Quite the contrary, the evil  person will want to fit in and to draw as little attention to himself as possible as he practices his nefarious ways.

In our gaming world, necromancy is frowned upon and considered "evil" but when there's a Lich attacking a town, the necromancer is sought out for help.  They are like the lawyers of today... a necessary evil   The evil cleric can still be played as a "good" character, he just has access to different spells.  It's how those spells are used that defines evil.  The evil spell lists could be used against an attacker as the Evil Cleric tries to protect a group of missionaries.  A Healer can be just as evil as an Evil Cleric.  Keep healing the bad guy so he pounds the crap out of the Healer's enemy.  A Healer would have Poison Lore and access to poisons and could easily disguise the manner in which a person died. 

What determines "evil" is intent and implementation.  How many times has the Priest leader of a cult turned out to be the bad guy?  To his followers, he wasn't evil, everyone else was.

[Ginger McMurray]

What determines "evil" is intent and implementation.

I agree completely, until it comes to Evil with a capital E. That's a verifiable force in Middle Earth. They come directly from the forces of darkness and using them is an evil act.

[brole]

Is there a way for a character to change classes? I'm thinking Cleric -> Evil Cleric or Magician to Evil Magician especially.

Hello all,
I found in RM2 II 2.2 Changing Character Profession.

For going from "normal" to "evil" perhaps an insidious imposter lurks within the magic order in question.

They secretly instruct the turned initiate in their evil base lists,.

While their orthodox instructors teach the normal base lists the initiate is actually developing them as closed lists, not base lists.

[brole]

Actually section 2.7 of RM2 II

Is there a way for a character to change classes? I'm thinking Cleric -> Evil Cleric or Magician to Evil Magician especially.

Hello all,
I found in RM2 II 2.2 Changing Character Profession.

For going from "normal" to "evil" perhaps an insidious imposter lurks within the magic order in question.

They secretly instruct the turned initiate in their evil base lists,.

While their orthodox instructors teach the normal base lists the initiate is actually developing them as closed lists, not base lists.

[MisterK]

Becoming "Evil" doesn't require any actual change though, does it? You just learn a few new spell lists and use them too often, that's it.

But changing a class from, say, Fighter to Magician wouldn't really make sense, as the profession is supposed to simulate learning patterns of a given person, which are part nurtured and part inborn, so changing it wouldn't seem very plausible to me. And from a game point of view, the point is to choose something and stick with it for a long time.

That said, I am sure you could simply put a development point price tag (maybe even costing a full level?) on a class change, while allows the PC to change all his skill costs and bonuses, which keeping existing skill ranks.

You could take a page from the old AD&D books for dual classing: basically, when the player wants their character to switch professions, have it create a second character sheet (with the same stats and talents) at level 1. This is their character in their new profession.
From then on, the character has an everyday choice to make: either use only the skills, abilities and RRs of the second profession and gain experience, or use even one from the former profession and gain none. Basically, either you really try, or you really don't. If you really try, you get XP to develop your new profession. If you really don't, then you're wasting your time trying and failing to break your habits, and you gain no XP (in either profession).

As an option, the GM can adjudicate that, when the new profession is at a higher level than the old one, then the character can use skills from either profession at will without repercussion (this is the AD&D rule), but I would personally not do it because RM is far more skill-based than AD&D ever was (I would perhaps do it in a modified way : when the character's new profession is at a higher level than the character's old profession, then the character loses half the levels in their old profession - skill ranks and all - and can, from then on, use the best of both without penalty). This would make it far easier to switch professions at low level than at high level, but the eventual gain would be far less.

To make things clear: I have never actually done it. None of my players ever asked to switch professions mid-campaign. I once was a player in a campaign where the GM allowed another player to switch professions (merely by spending some time and adding the new ranks on top of the old ones), and it was a power creep mess. Dual classing in Ad&D could be very powerful but the risk of being killed while trudging in the low level range of the new profession was real, and *that* was the deterrent. If you don't have one, I think it is better to stick to the "it is not possible within the time frame of a campaign" rule.

[Ginger McMurray]

You could take a page from the old AD&D books for dual classing: basically, when the player wants their character to switch professions, have it create a second character sheet (with the same stats and talents) at level 1. This is their character in their new profession.

As you say, AD&D is much less skill-based. How would you handle skills that stacked? For example, the player's fighter already has 3 ranks of perception and he wants to switch to rogue? He buys perception and now has 4. Does he have to artifically limit himself to his new ranks? Effectively "walking around with one eye closed?"

To make things clear: I have never actually done it. None of my players ever asked to switch professions mid-campaign. I once was a player in a campaign where the GM allowed another player to switch professions (merely by spending some time and adding the new ranks on top of the old ones), and it was a power creep mess. Dual classing in Ad&D could be very powerful but the risk of being killed while trudging in the low level range of the new profession was real, and *that* was the deterrent. If you don't have one, I think it is better to stick to the "it is not possible within the time frame of a campaign" rule.

I agree. I don't expect any players to wnt to do this. It was more of a "how can a particular NPC go from normal every day Magician to gaining the Evil Magician spell lists (not necessarily skill costs). I think I've answered that, at least for myself: they lose 5 base lists and pick up the 5 evil ones.

[Ginger McMurray]

I found in RM2 II 2.2 Changing Character Profession.

I'd totally missed that! If a PC decides they want to do it and it makes sense within the context of the campaign, I'll probably use a combination of options 0 and 1. For reference:

Option 0: you have to also have a minimum of 90 in each of the new profession's stats.

Option 1: average development point costs. One interesting thing this does is keep non-spell users from easily entering spell user classes. For example, a fighter (SLA cost of 20) becoming a magician (SLA cost of 1/*) has an averaged SLA cost of 11/13. They won't be picking up a ton of spell lists.

I'll also require at least a year of down time spent training. 8 hours a day, 5 days a week for the character and the person training them.

I don't foresee it happening in a way that couldn't be retconned or done by completely replacing the new character, but if it makes sense and would be fun then I'm all for it.

[intothatdarkness]

I allowed profession changes, but two things always happened: they started over at level one in the new profession and only had HALF of their DPs until they reached their old level in their former profession. Not a big thing if you change profession early on, but huge if you do it later. Also, you're stuck with the profession bonuses from your original profession.

As far as I'm concerned, quite a bit of this depends on your setting and how you view profession. I never subscribed to the "profession as life way" model (no matter what the RAW might state), although many do. There's nothing wrong with that, but I also feel there's nothing wrong with allowing profession changes provided they're properly managed. My groups always felt my rules did that.

[Spectre771]

I allowed profession changes, but two things always happened: they started over at level one in the new profession and only had HALF of their DPs until they reached their old level in their former profession. Not a big thing if you change profession early on, but huge if you do it later. Also, you're stuck with the profession bonuses from your original profession.

That's a really interesting mechanic.  That "1/2 DP purgatory period" would be like apprenticing and learning a new profession.  Once you've gotten the hang of it, you start to use the DP at normal rate again because you're spending less time studying and learning and more time hands-on doing.  Very interesting, very cool.