Discussion on Roleplay Vs. Character Class

I would have to agree to some extent with the comments on the Roleplay/Class change debate. Being that Ronin was taken away and my character's roleplay was based around Ronin, to a big extend (though it may not have seemed it) I was slightly distraught when ronin was disappearing. I was told by many people to just pick up cavalier and roleplay it as ronin. I don't think the solution to this "just changing your class" if you want a different skill. Classes are often heavily based on roleplay, especially in a Live Action Role-play environment, especially like the example given of Dragoon and Chaos warrior.

Arradir Go-Dringol wrote: 1) Do Proficiency, Ranged and Proficiency, Backstab stack when an archer shoots someone from behind with a bow?
2) Given Brute has access to Proficiency, Finesse & Proficiency, Backstab, why is it Beserker does not have access to both Proficiency, Finesse and Proficiency, Might?

A Profession is strictly a list of skills that impact your fighting style/combat abilities. Lower list professions have a huge amount of freedom with how they are roleplayed. If a skill list does not contain the skills that a player wants her character to have, the best bet is to change professions (this is changing your skill list and not necessarily your roleplay, unless you WANT to change your roleplay) or to multiclass

These were the quotes that seemed to spark some of the debate. I'm interested what all of you think about this!

Please remember that everyone here and everyone that worked on the rules are people so please keep this discussion civil.

I moved this discussion to off-topic because it does not belong on the Rules Question forum.

I will say this, Lower list classes are not meant to be character defining like their Heroic counterparts, otherwise we would have to be a lot more strict about what you can and cannot play. Meaning, no one would be allowed to play a Witch Hunter/Necromancer (of which there have been many) or a Berserker/Ronin (of which there have been many) or even a Chaos Warrior/Healer (of where there are many).

So in order to avoid having to enforce such unreasonably strict guidelines, we are intentionally lenient on what a character can be and encourage playing beyond the Profession List you purchase. If you want to pick up Gladiator and call yourself a Warrior, go right ahead. Or if you want to pick up Cavalier and call yourself a Ronin, no one will stop you. In fact, we encourage these kinds of things because it molds your character into someone more than the selection of lower lists you've picked to create your skillset.

Methinks it changes heavily from person to person. Which part(s) of LARPing is most important to you?

Is it Live? Where in an atmospheric world there is a living an breathing entity that you are organically a part of? The flavor and feel given to you through social interaction and being there?

Is it Action? Is it the swinging of a sword and the besting of others? The adrenaline rush of hiding in the brush in the dead of night with an overwhelming was of fear because something is chasing you?

Is it the Role? You have a duty as a character and that character is the be all and end all of the game to you. If taken in a more objective way, can you tell where every one of your had earned build has gone and exactly how to utilize it or in a more subjective light do you know where you fit exactly in the universe and the nuanced in's and out's of your character?

Or is it Play? You come here to have fun and that's that. Win, lose or draw, you're here to roll the dice as intensively or lightly as you want knowing it's going to be a good time.

These definitions change for each person, but ranking and reflecting on what they mean to you could help you decide any action in the game. Does your character card reflecting your IG character mean more, or do you not mind your card not stringently portraying you? It's always up to the player and how you want to go about it.

Aleister wrote: So in order to avoid having to enforce such unreasonably strict guidelines, we are intentionally lenient on what a character can be and encourage playing beyond the Profession List you purchase. If you want to pick up Gladiator and call yourself a Warrior, go right ahead. Or if you want to pick up Cavalier and call yourself a Ronin, no one will stop you. In fact, we encourage these kinds of things because it molds your character into someone more than the selection of lower lists you've picked to create your skillset.

But as it stands you can't use a big sword unless your are insane or a dragon. You HAVE to roleplay those. Unless I can be a dragoon and not have to submit to being dragon man, or just entirely ignore insanities as a game mechanic, that's not the case.

My bad Steve, I thought it would have fit under the realizing your character part, thanks for moving it!

We have explicitly stated you do not need to play an absolutely crazy person or a gung-ho-for-dragons all the time kind of character to play a chaos warrior or dragoon. Additionally, Lore: Chaos is neither a pre-req for any skills, nor does it force a character to have an insanity anymore, so doubly so the character would not need to roleplay the insanity aspect.

As I stated before, I strongly disagree with the idea that lower lists doesnt help define a character.

They are the backbone on how players write their characters back story, and concept.
Without said lower list a player can't ever reach the being that warlord, daredevil, soulwarden etc. yes to some all these thing might not be important. Some people might just like swinging a sword around and lower and higher list mean nothing to them.

But it's those lower list that help mold the decisions and path that the player can and will choose for their characters. Some players even let ingame RP dictate what lists the character will end up with, going against his/hers original concept.

It is for these reasons that disagree with the earlier post. There are many ways to build a character, and to simply tell someone to pick another list, is to tell them to rewrite what they believe in their mind and heart to be the true concept of their character.

There are definitely times when I'm of the "professions as skill set" mindset. You can have a character who has skills off of "rogue" lists who isn't necessarily roguish in nature and the same goes for other types of lists. They could just happen to have that skill or ability as a person and the beauty of KR, is that they don't have to follow strict role-play guidelines merely for having that list.
Having explained that to several people just starting out, it's a question that comes up.

Aleister wrote: We have explicitly stated you do not need to play an absolutely crazy person or a gung-ho-for-dragons all the time kind of character to play a chaos warrior or dragoon. Additionally, Lore: Chaos is neither a pre-req for any skills, nor does it force a character to have an insanity anymore, so doubly so the character would not need to roleplay the insanity aspect.

But I *have* to be aligned chaos, don't I? That's a HUGE roleplay connotation still. I physically have to be part dragon, or have to change my entire alignment. I'm sorry but this is literally writing me into a corner.

My character's religion is aligned order. Doesn't mean that she has to be *lawful*. You can be an evil order character and a good chaos character. They are not mutually exclusive. In addition, you can also have a character have opposing alignments on lower lists. It's only the higher lists that require you to pick an alignment, based on what they've been saying


Also? You can be a dragoon and never pick up spirit of the dragon and call yourself a warrior and be done with it. What you call yourself = the name of your list. There are people with thief list who are 100% not rogues. I've heard them refer to themselves as archeologists and rangers and any variety of things. The name of your list doesn't have to dictate how you play your character.

In looking at the overall revisions of the lists I was under the impression that part of the intention here not to have people buying whole lists for one skill? I can understand buying a list if you want all or a large portion of the list, but not for one non unique skill.

Also, there are always incidents where something affects everyone with a certain list. Or a Marshal asks everyone of a certain list to Contact them. If you took a list just for one skill, you are still that list for those purposes.

I am a large fan of making the classes more lenient, as this can easily give players more agency in terms of how they want to portray their characters; with this belief adopted one could easily play a mage, shaman and hexer as either a 'studious practitioner of the Art', 'sporadic wielder of extraplanar forces' or 'vile champion of powers beyond your comprehension.' Each of those classes could pull off each of those archetypes very well with the lenient classes system shown in this rules preview.

However, if you imagine the 'stereotypical' version of each of these classes, you will find that:
Mages are often studious.
Wild Mages (now Shamans) are either more sporadic or more likely to wield elemental/extraplanar power.
Hexers are more likely to be vile and wield powers that Travance may not entirely understand yet.

The unique abilites of each of those three example classes appear to adhere to each of those stereotypes, considering that mages are capable of reworking the nature of their own magic via an eldritch rune, shamans are capable of lessening the cost of their elemental spells via the use of elemental essences usually dropped by creatures aligned with a certain plane, and Hexers are capable of summoning, an act which between four years ago and now was only accomplished (using the player's section of the rules) by necromancers. These classes, while capable of being played in a multitude of ways, have certain skills and details within them that lead to a particular style of play and roleplay when fluffed and flavored as they normally are within the system.

There's nothing wrong with that in this case, in fact I find it to be the charm of the Knight Realms rules system, but for the people who use Might weapons there is an issue. While it is true that any character (including a certain 19 body mage whose reason for learning magic was not being as strong as his father while working in the fields) is capable of wielding a Might weapon, at the moment there are two classes that are capable of using a Might weapon proficiently. Comparatively, there are six classes with finesse proficiency (Gladiator, Bounty Hunter, Cavalier, Berserker, Cleric and Spellsword). And while it is true that these two classes do not need to be played as an anarchy happy killmonster or a glorious champion of the draconic bloodline, there are skills, skills that are the core to the list, that just don't make sense to take unless your character is open to being slightly more like one of those things. Not getting those skills just leaves you spending 10 build and one or two profession slots because you want that kickass custom greataxe of yours to deal decent damage on the battlefield.

Because of this, Might weapon users that aren't already Dragoons or CWs have three options (in my eyes):
1: Just ignore might proficiency and keep using skills with your 2HE despite dealing only base damage with it.
2: Get one of the two classes just for the sake of might proficiency (or use a legendary work esque abilities to earn the ability to buy might proficiency) and just say that your character knows how to use might weapons.
3: Get might proficiency from one of those other classes alongside other skills on the list you just blew ten build on, only to either ignore the skills like Spirit of the Dragon and Chaotic Alteration (and skills that are just too different from your character concept) or take those skills that normally your character wouldn't have and either fluff them differently or alter the character concept all because you like using two handers.

The question of whether or not a lower list defines a character depends on how much you let it based on the skills you take, but there is a distinct dearth of classes that can purchase might weapon proficiency, so going out of your way to get one of the two classes that can instead of progressing in your regular class may be seen as 'shooting yourself in the foot' solely because you like big swords and you cannot lie. I believe that the two most obvious solutions are either taking one of those two lists and embracing the slight changes that may have on the character or somehow making might proficiency more common.

Whew, that was a lot more text than I was expecting! I'll take the time now to say that this rules update is flat out amazing in terms of quantity, quality and ability to hype me up for KR!

Cara Freeman wrote: My character's religion is aligned order. Doesn't mean that she has to be *lawful*. You can be an evil order character and a good chaos character. They are not mutually exclusive. In addition, you can also have a character have opposing alignments on lower lists. It's only the higher lists that require you to pick an alignment, based on what they've been saying


Also? You can be a dragoon and never pick up spirit of the dragon and call yourself a warrior and be done with it. What you call yourself = the name of your list. There are people with thief list who are 100% not rogues. I've heard them refer to themselves as archeologists and rangers and any variety of things. The name of your list doesn't have to dictate how you play your character.

But if I don't submit to embracing the chaos, wouldn't I be breaking the roleplaying? And if something comes up "Everyone with a dragon spirit feels drawn to this" and I don't, I'll be breaking the rules, won't I? If I can be a chaos warrior or dragoon, JUST for might, and entirely ignore all of Dragoon and Chaos in game rules involving them that raises the question of this whole thread, why have those roleplay specific classes if I'm not required to roleplay the specifics?

This isn't just about swinging a big sword for me, it's about "changing your skill list and not necessarily your roleplay".

The thing is- none of this is stopping him from using the sword. He still has access to that *without* spending any build. He just can't get additional damage profs for that sword. He can still get +5 in damage runes and +5 in buffs and swing 15s.

The problem with that argument is now you're saying "well every warrior skill should be available to every warrior, every rogue skill to every rogue, etc. there's plenty of non-unique rogue skills that aren't on my rogue list. Plenty of combat skills that I would love to have that aren't on my combat list. I had to get warrior as my combat list because I wanted Florentine and most lists don't have it. I've wanted intercept for 12 months and currently cant learn it, period because it's only on cost haven distrusted lists. When the rules change happens and restricted lists aren't a thing, my combat list (gladiator) isn't getting it so I'll have to change my list. I have no intention of learning half the skills on cavalier at this point. But the skills I want are worth the change in lists. We have to pick and choose what is most important to us to have. It happens.

Ok if we're going to get numbers, then here.

Psion 0, Psychic Tether 8, Druid 10, Affinity (Verdant)6, Priest 10, Devotion 8, Prayers 9, Body 1, Holy Vows 90, Caster Spec, 10
161 build altogether. Because it's instant, with vow of sacrifice it can't be stopped. when the first hits. 171 Build all together.
One packet hitting, Vow of Sacrifice, 800 damage per point and click AND healing 5 for each spell.
Total of 72,000 damage and getting 440 health back.
All of this using 152 build.

Conversely would have to spend 180 build in might only, to be able to swing plus strength 7 Putting that together that's 13 damage with a two handed weapon. That's a significant drop in damage, for significantly more build.

But it's NOT about numbers. That's NOT why this thread is here.

I can't roleplay a strong warrior that I want to roleplay without either A: having a dragon spirit within me, Or B: being aligned chaos. Not to mention I can't beat a mage in armwreslting anymore, but that's entirely the point. I have to physically or emotionally change my character for the sake of picking up a bigger stick better.


Edit: Also I am not advocating this is on Berserker, just because I am a Berserker. I think the only two lists might is on have immense Roleplaying baggage. If It was on Gladiator, I'd be fine, or Brute even. I just feel it pigeon holes two handers.

Kurteth wrote:


But if I don't submit to embracing the chaos, wouldn't I be breaking the roleplaying? And if something comes up "Everyone with a dragon spirit feels drawn to this" and I don't, I'll be breaking the rules, won't I? If I can be a chaos warrior or dragoon, JUST for might, and entirely ignore all of Dragoon and Chaos in game rules involving them that raises the question of this whole thread, why have those roleplay specific classes if I'm not required to roleplay the specifics?

This isn't just about swinging a big sword for me, it's about "changing your skill list and not necessarily your roleplay".

Steve has been through... what? 13 different lists? I've had 6 in the 15 months I've been playing. My roleplay between swashbuckler and warrior didn't change. At all. Cara still fights the same when she fights with two swords. Most people had no idea I even switched lists, hell, I'm pretty sure most people think the only reason I can use the shield is because it's an artifact (which it's not).

Everyone roleplays things different ways. You don't have to "embrace" chaos. You can acknowledge it's there and ignore it. No one has to know what your lists are. Become a chaos warrior; don't learn lore chaos, act the same, never tell anyone you're a chaos warrior. You don't have to be over the top insane. That's not a requirement for the class. It's just an interpretation of it.

Hi. Stepping in as a rule marshal and reminding all participants to keep this conversation civil and to hear out both sides. If you feel something should be brought to the attention of the rules team please fill out the Google form.

As always be kind, courtesous, and civil with each other.

Right but even if he doesn't roleplay the Chaos, won't he still take extra damage from Posi? Or if he takes Dragoon, and the ST's say, all dragoons get affected by X, what then? Does he get to ignore those effects? Personally i think its kind of silly that to be able to fight a certain way you have to take detriments or specific roleplay in order to just continue to play the character you've been playing for a while.

And calmly and politely submitting feedback is the way to get it added to other lists. Unfortunately you're coming across as incredibly rude every time you post or comment on anything regarding it.

As for the arguement of "if you have a dragon spirit in you". Did you take Spirit? Guess what. No dragon spirit in you. "If you know about chaos through chaos warrior". Did you take Lore:Chaos? Guess what. Doesn't apply.
Steve has already said Lore:Chaos isn't a pre req for ANY skills.

As for the math argument. That's the point. Casters are SUPPOSED to beat warriors, which is why you don't have spell defenses. I as a rogue should beat casters. Therefore, I have spell defenses, as well as a way to match a casters relocate. Warriors should be beating rogues. Which is why a rogue can't defend your 15 dmg without actually blocking the strike out of game.

Also, if you as the warrior get close to the caster before they finish the verbal and hit them, you stop them from getting the spell off. Therefore they can't do what you listed.

I as Caelvan have had 4 lists for the past year and a half to two years. Do you know what Caelvan has called himself? A Ranger.
Druid? Didn't matter. Ronin? Didn't matter, "not a Ronin." Warrior? " well yeah I'm a warrior, so are you. We both swing swords"

You don't need to be a Dragoon. You can pick up Dragoon and not be a "Dragoon". Just like you can pick up Chaos Warrior, and not be a "Chaos Warrior".

O. Nesterin wrote: Right but even if he doesn't roleplay the Chaos, won't he still take extra damage from Posi? Or if he takes Dragoon, and the ST's say, all dragoons get affected by X, what then? Does he get to ignore those effects? Personally i think its kind of silly that to be able to fight a certain way you have to take detriments or specific roleplay in order to just continue to play the character you've been playing for a while.

m


But Chaos warriors don't take extra damage from posi...

I was under the impression that Chaos takes bane damage from posi. Sure it is not extra damage but does it bane is equally as bad. I could be wrong in this but if a rules marshall would like to give an official ruling I would amend my statement if it were proven wrong.

This is not a post to discuss rules on. Any rules questions need to be directed to the appropriate thread.

Cara Freeman wrote: And calmly and politely submitting feedback is the way to get it added to other lists. Unfortunately you're coming across as incredibly rude every time you post or comment on anything regarding it.

Well, I apologize I am coming across as rude. Honestly, I am not a very cordial person in writing. I am concerned, definitely, but I in no way meant to be rude, so I am sorry. I mean that, truly. I just feel like I'm constantly being ignored, or told conflicting information about roleplaying.

"You should only get a list through roleplay, not because of the skills it has."

"You don't have to roleplay the list's specifics."

I feel like we're going in circles and I don't understand truly why.

If I am told, by the rules team, I can be a Dragoon, and never have to deal with dragon blood issues. Then why have a bloodline class. If I can have Chaos warrior and never deal with alignment chaos issues, or take bane from posi, then why have a Chaos Warrior class?

I am not trying to be uncivil or rude, I just don't understand the point for classes if we don't have to roleplay them. Why not just have 1 list of skills per arche type, and choose what we want?

Edit: Steve is talking to me in private so a lot of things for me are getting cleared up. Thanks.

To the math argument: As Holy Vow stands right now, combined with Psychic Tether and Verdant Affinity, if I hit one spell packet (cast instantly and for free with Holy Vow), then I can insta-cast spells through Line of Sight with Psychic Tether against the same target. So with the aforementioned set of skills, I can point-and-click "Indignation 800 Divine Body" as fast as I can call it, with breaks to say "Holy Vow: Vow of Sacrifice" every 3 casts. Verdant Affinity will heal for the body cost of Holy Vow after two spell casts. I already submitted a feedback form about this specific instance, but it was simply an example of how much damage new lower list Casters can do compared to the new lower list Fighters. Which there should certainly be a difference, but I think (as do many others) that the current damage disparity between any Caster and any Fighter is a bit large.

O. Nesterin wrote: I was under the impression that Chaos takes bane damage from posi. Sure it is not extra damage but does it bane is equally as bad. I could be wrong in this but if a rules marshall would like to give an official ruling I would amend my statement if it were proven wrong.

You are incorrect. Nowhere does it say this would be the case.

Aleister wrote:

O. Nesterin wrote: I was under the impression that Chaos takes bane damage from posi. Sure it is not extra damage but does it bane is equally as bad. I could be wrong in this but if a rules marshall would like to give an official ruling I would amend my statement if it were proven wrong.

You are incorrect. Nowhere does it say this would be the case.

I apologize for my misinformation.

On the note of Alignments though, how should one roleplay a class if they simply wish to have access to a few skills off of an Aligned class? The thought of fallen paladins from tabletops come to mind ...

~ Joe G.

Alignment (in the lower list sense) is quite fluid. There is no higher being watching your every move saying "oh man, when he doesn't exemplify this PERFECTLY, I'm cutting off his power!" You really have to exemplify the opposite for that to happen. For example, a Priest of Valos might by excomminucated by his Church for not being a perfectly great Valosian, but that doesn't mean he can't still get power that draws from the force of Good - maybe either the deity isn't necessarily paying attention until the power is used for the wrong reasons, or maybe a Celestial is granting the power without the deity's knowledge. This is why Faith Infractions are not super commonplace.

If you recall our description of Hexer that was released for the Alt event, and how James has been talking about the list, it basically boils down to "someone who wrestled with the power of Chaos and came out in control of it." Being chaos-aligned doesn't necessarily mean you want to watch the world burn; it's usually somewhere between apathy and selfishness. However, that can mean a lot of different things for a lot of different characters. (And Chaos can drive people crazy, but it doesn't always.)

The Order-alignment - Healers are Order-aligned. They always have been, because Order is Positive Energy. This doesn't mean they follow the laws to the letter, it usually just means they are in tune with the power that makes everything in the world, that is natural. Cavaliers are Order-aligned and typically lawful; Witch Hunters use this power to destroy things that are unnatural, but are generally in it for the money and not the people; and Healers are just born with this power. This is a really good example of how being aligned doesn't mean you have to act in a certain way, since these three lists are all the same alignment but behave completely differently. Even then, there are plenty of selfless Witch Hunters and villainous Cavaliers. While the source and training of a power/profession are going to be the same, it doesn't mean that each person who has gone through that training has the same motivation, attitude, outlook on life, etc.

---

As far as Dragoon goes, there has never been a requirement of being close with your draconic heritage. Think of the other bloodlines - there are randomly Healers and Psionicists born into families all over the place. Dragoon is no different. It just means that somewhere in your character's heritage, there is draconic blood. Some families don't even know or care about it - just that "hey, cousin Jimmy is really powerful, what a talented guy!" With the idea that Spirit of the Dragon is currently on its way to being a continuous skill in mind, your character doesn't even need to consciously be aware of it unless you choose that. Dragon spirits NEVER talk to their Dragoons unless plot is directly involved, so it's only as big of a deal as you make it out to be.