Healers & Gladiators - Sign & Portents #50

[Strom]

Two new classes for the Conan RPG - Healers and Gladiators - in this month's Sign & Portents - Roleplayer #50 download:

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/home/detail.php?qsID=1552&qsSeries=13

 

[Yogah of Yag]

The Healer is a nice addition. I was racking my brain about a year ago trying to come up with a leech/physician-type NPC. (Not all that hard, really. I'm just lazy! :lol: ) The Gladiator thing seems like it might have been covered already in an article or in Argos/Zingara(?). Correct me if I'm wrong...

 

[The King]

This isn't really what one can call canon material.

 

[Krushnak]

i think both classes are pretty well done, unlike the martial disciple of awhile back. i particularly like the healer class and im considering just giving the healer class abilities as optional abilities for the scholar to take instead of magic.

 

[VincentDarlage]

This isn't really what one can call canon material.

I agree. Making 20 level classes for such minor aspects of the Hyborian age seems... very D&D. To me, a healer is a scholar who has a lot of ranks in Heal and some healing specific feats, and a gladiator is someone (of any class) forced to fight for the public amusement of others. I just don't see Hyborian age gladiators really doing a lot of "stunts." It would be life and death - and brutal.

Neither of the classes screamed "Hyborian-age specific" to me. A lot of cultures at that time simply would not have the medical knowledge the Healer class seems to have (pressure points, physical process, et. al.).

And the Staunch the Blood ability? The healer can heal people from five feet away as a full round action? Also, the healer at high level can know exactly how many hit points a person has left? What would that mean to a healer? If someone has six hit points left, that can mean totally different things to a 1st level character as opposed to an 18th level character - and how does he express that knowledge? "Ah, I see you are down to two hit points, warrior. I shall see what I can do."

The hit point knowledge of the Healer also presupposes that hit points are totally a function of the physical, when hit points actually represent far more than just how much physical damage one can sustain. How can medical (physical) knowledge help with that? That would require some occult knowledge, but this is not mentioned at all in the description.

Some of it is just too mechanical and not culture specific. A Shemite healer deals more with casting out demons and divining what sin the sick person committed than using pressure points and modern medical knowledge. The class is presented as generic for all Hyborian age cultures when it is completely inappropriate for most of them. The healer class has more of a Renaissance feel to it than a Hyborian feel.

A Hyrkanian healer (a shaman) would have a completely different approach than a Nemedian healer (an apothoker, or leech, or the like). This class does not even begin to handle that. The scholar class, however, can be used easily to represent both.

These two classes simply do not examine culture at all, yet are narrowly defined in their activities while being presented as generic for all cultures as the same time - and, as a result, they come across as extremely D&Dish. The other classes in Conan are broad enough to encompass any culture in their techniques and methods, but the Healer and Gladiator classes are narrow in purpose and description; they presume the Hyborian age is fairly homogenous in its methods, technology and learning.

I really don't think Conan needs more generic classes. Culture-specific, perhaps, but not D&D generic.

 

[Dpetroc]

This isn't really what one can call canon material.

I agree. Making 20 level classes for such minor aspects of the Hyborian age seems... very D&D. To me, a healer is a scholar who has a lot of ranks in Heal and some healing specific feats, and a gladiator is someone (of any class) forced to fight for the public amusement of others. I just don't see Hyborian age gladiators really doing a lot of "stunts." It would be life and death - and brutal.

Neither of the classes screamed "Hyborian-age specific" to me. A lot of cultures at that time simply would not have the medical knowledge the Healer class seems to have (pressure points, physical process, et. al.).

And the Staunch the Blood ability? The healer can heal people from five feet away as a full round action? Also, the healer at high level can know exactly how many hit points a person has left? What would that mean to a healer? If someone has six hit points left, that can mean totally different things to a 1st level character as opposed to an 18th level character - and how does he express that knowledge? "Ah, I see you are down to two hit points, warrior. I shall see what I can do."

Some of it is just too mechanical and not culture specific. A Shemite healer deals more with casting out demons and divining what sin the sick person committed than using pressure points and modern medical knowledge. The class is presented as generic for all Hyborian age cultures when it is completely inappropriate for most of them. The healer class has more of a Renaissance feel to them than a Hyborian feel.

A Hyrkanian healer (a shaman) would have a completely different approach than a Nemedian healer (an apothoker, or leech, or the like). This class does not even begin to handle that. The scholar class, however, can be used easily to represent both.

These two classes simply do not examine culture at all, yet are narrowly defined in their activities - and, as a result, they come across as extremely D&Dish. The other classes in Conan are broad enough to encompass any culture in their techniques and methods, but the Healer and Gladiator classes are narrow in purpose and description; they presume the Hyborian age is fairly homogenous in its methods, technology and learning.

I really don't think Conan needs more generic classes. Culture-specific, perhaps, but not D&D generic.

In Conan erat verbum, et verbum erat apud Vincent.
A good argument. I thought the healer was a bit too...clerical...but didn't think of it in terms of not being applicable across the diverse Hyborian cultures. I *like* the idea of some kind of leech/healer... but it would differ culture to culture - some of the battlefield treatment for the Healer seems more appropriate to a more martial race like the Vanir or Asgard, who would probably consider such a figure as a source of weakness... hmmm..

 

[The King]

This isn't really what one can call canon material.

I agree. Making 20 level classes for such minor aspects of the Hyborian age seems... very D&D. To me, a healer is a scholar who has a lot of ranks in Heal and some healing specific feats, and a gladiator is someone (of any class) forced to fight for the public amusement of others. I just don't see Hyborian age gladiators really doing a lot of "stunts." It would be life and death - and brutal.

Neither of the classes screamed "Hyborian-age specific" to me. A lot of cultures at that time simply would not have the medical knowledge the Healer class seems to have (pressure points, physical process, et. al.).

And the Staunch the Blood ability? The healer can heal people from five feet away as a full round action? Also, the healer at high level can know exactly how many hit points a person has left? What would that mean to a healer? If someone has six hit points left, that can mean totally different things to a 1st level character as opposed to an 18th level character - and how does he express that knowledge? "Ah, I see you are down to two hit points, warrior. I shall see what I can do."

Some of it is just too mechanical and not culture specific. A Shemite healer deals more with casting out demons and divining what sin the sick person committed than using pressure points and modern medical knowledge. The class is presented as generic for all Hyborian age cultures when it is completely inappropriate for most of them. The healer class has more of a Renaissance feel to them than a Hyborian feel.

A Hyrkanian healer (a shaman) would have a completely different approach than a Nemedian healer (an apothoker, or leech, or the like). This class does not even begin to handle that. The scholar class, however, can be used easily to represent both.

These two classes simply do not examine culture at all, yet are narrowly defined in their activities - and, as a result, they come across as extremely D&Dish. The other classes in Conan are broad enough to encompass any culture in their techniques and methods, but the Healer and Gladiator classes are narrow in purpose and description; they presume the Hyborian age is fairly homogenous in its methods, technology and learning.

I really don't think Conan needs more generic classes. Culture-specific, perhaps, but not D&D generic.

Your reply is more detailed than mine and you are right.

The problem is that is such classes are allowed in a game, you don't follow anymore the Sword & Sorcery style.
If I were to add a class, I would developp something like a witch, akin to the crone Conan encountered in The hour of the Dragon and even in the movie.
(I know the scholar is the catch-all-class for this but scholarship implies studies and books. My conception of the witch is more the knowledge of things unwritten).

In fact , in Conan the Hunter (by Sean A. Moore), there is a priest which cast D&D healing spell (with bluish effect) after a short prayer to his god and I thought this killed the story.

 

[Castel]

Actually i think that the healer class is a nice addition, it does give an easy to use "cleric" class that is much needed in the game... but in my opinion it should work based on "Herbalism"... without herbs you can´t help much... and do that healing "magic"!

"Inspiring presence" is the ability that the noble is missing since 1st edition, and that i always thought it should have (ignore the damaged rule, a more "noble" flavor trigger should be used)!
It´s just wrong for a healer...

Scholars take too much time to make, and you always get an evil one... so healer would be the way to go if you whant a healer!
But more spirit related habilities are important since for many hyborian cultures, if not all, body and soul are connected... (i´m i wrong?)

"Knowledge is dangerous" is the only thing that´s really disturbing, it transforms the healer in one of the most dangerous classes with a bow...
Just give it as an borderer specific archery tree feat... and we are all happy!
(Borderer should be the real defenition of archer, armor restrictions make it flavor and mechanically perfect... and still he is still a sad sad class...)

The gladiator... well... i think that that class could be substituted by a single feat, "son of the arena"!

So yes to the healer, no to the gladiator...
But this is just what i think, thanks for reading!

 

[VincentDarlage]

Actually i think that the healer class is a nice addition, it does give an easy to use "cleric" class that is much needed in the game.

Why do so many people think a cleric class is "much needed"? I have been playing this game from the beginning and never found it needed at all. Besides, rules and tips for healers within a cultural context can be found in most of the sourcebooks and in the Hyboria's F series. The lack of cultural consideration is what I disliked the most about this particular Healer class.

Scholars take too much time to make, and you always get an evil one...

Since when? Stay away from Demonic Pacts, and your scholar should be fine.

"Knowledge is dangerous" is the only thing that´s really disturbing, it transforms the healer in one of the most dangerous classes with a bow.

I hadn't thought of that.

So yes to the healer, no to the gladiator!

I am going to say no to both. They are both unnecessary, lacking in Hyborian flavour, and too D&D appropriate.

 

[LucaCherstich]

My only problem is that in other sourcebooks "Gladiators" are explained in other ways, such as the "Nemedian Barbarians" in Hyboria's fiercest p.28.
But is this a right combination or is it just a modification of a "core class" (the Barbarian) for a completely different use?
After all Nemedians should not be Barbarian "strictu sensu".
I get the feeling that the limit narrowly defined/core class is very thin...but anything can be decided just on the base of the setting.

Vicent said:These two classes simply do not examine culture at all, yet are narrowly defined in their activities - and, as a result, they come across as extremely D&Dish. The other classes in Conan are broad enough to encompass any culture in their techniques and methods, but the Healer and Gladiator classes are narrow in purpose and description; they presume the Hyborian age is fairly homogenous in its methods, technology and learning.

I think that the "narrowly defined" argument is here more important than any presumed "D&D" heritage.
By themselves core classes like the "Pirate" and the "nomad" are also narrowly defined. The nomad is a variant of the Borderer/Barbarian type and the Pirate i just a variant of the Thief (although I would have given them an higher BAB since I think the typical pirates fight more often than typical Barbarians...).
Nevertheless, I'm pretty convinced that pirates and nomads are right core classes in Conan because of the setting.
The REH stories display (or just mention) numerous varieties of Pirates (Barachan, Black corsairs, etc..) and Nomads (Shemite, Hyrkanian, etc.), so Pirates and Nomads are good core classes.
However, all this reasoning is just part of the story.
Gladiatorial games are diffused in different Hyborian nations (Argos, Nemedia, maybe also Zamora), so possibly also the "gladiator" could be just a core class with possible multiple varities...so the galdiator could be not a narrowly defiend class.
The problem here is that there is no canon REH material about varieties of gladiators, however I do not think that limiting the campaigns just to what REH mantion is very fun.
I do not say that I want to put Paladins of Tymora, Xyna the warrior-princess and the Power Rangers in Hyboria...but I think that the possible presence of varieties of Gladiators is not competely aganinst the flavour of canon Hyboria.
After all sourcebooks like Stygia and Aquilonia are full of non REH material, but I can feel their coherence with the general flavour of Hyboria.
In any case, I think that that article should have been written in a better way.
I would have put just one of the classes (e.g. the gladiator) but I would have spent the remaining pages to give some background to the class and to propose some possible varieties in two or three of the Hyborian nations.

 

[VincentDarlage]

I would have put just one of the classes (e.g. the gladiator) but I would have spent the remaining pages to give some background to the class and to propose some possible varieties in two or three of the Hyborian nations.

That would have been better. I am not opposed to a gladiator class if it takes that into account, but the special abilities of this particular gladiator class really emphasizes just one kind of gladiator - the highly specialized (but often non-lethal) gladiator of the late Roman period. That is what I mean by limited scope.

The Animal Bane power is just strange. Historically, the bestiarii were the lowest-ranking gladiators, and not trained to fight people, just animals (and some were not trained at all, the beast fights were often just elaborate executions). This class gets increased training in fighting beasts no matter what kind of gladiator they are. I get the impression the author did very little historical research, and that he just made a character class based on his impressions of what a gladiator was, giving it "cool" abilities to create a "cool" class, instead of one that attempts for some measure of accuracy.

One of these "cool" abilities revolves around the Celebrity ability. The celebrity status would only apply in regions where gladiator combats are highly developed, I would think. One does not get a sense of celebrity helping in the fight when watching the pit gladiators of the movie, Conan the Barbarian. This "celebrity" power is the one that overly narrows the scope of the class to one particular culture, IMHO.

A possible fix to that would be something along the lines of the benefits of success. The more a gladiator wins for his owner, the better his treatment and/or training. Again, to reference the gladiator fights in Conan the Barbarian, once Conan started winning a lot, he got women and weapons training. True, a lot of those early sequences in the movie are more allegorical than anything else, but it seems logical.

The Combat Trick ability states the gladiator spends hours training to do things no one else would or could do - then it goes on to give standard combat manouevres (or feats) that many Players use! They might be able to do them better, but none of those are things no one else cannot or would not do. If the author is going to advertise an ability like that, he should at least offer some unique tricks - and I would have given cultural variations. The whole article is replete with these kinds of exaggerations which don't really pan out in the execution. It is as if the author is trying to convince us his classes are awesome, without actually giving us an awesome class.

The class also makes the gladiator a power house even in regular combat; gladiators as highly trained as this class would rarely be placed in a truly lethal combat, but be trained and choreographed for "show" fights. By the time gladiators historically reached this level of training, their owners had so much vested in them that some historians claim only 1 in 10 fights were lethal - and most of those were accidents. Would a show fighter really be able to hold his own in real combat? Could a professional wrestler (used to choreographed and highly stylized matches), for example, be expected to defeat a combat-experienced US Marine fighting for his life? Since the offered Gladiator class seems to emphasize the showman aspect, it should probably have a Thief BAB progression.

Frankly, the "Gladiators of Messantia" article in S&P 38 (by Tim Bancroft) was MUCH better. It put the gladiator into a specific setting/culture - and went on to describe other Hyborian age gladiator types (such as the Stygian style). It was firmly grounded in both history and the Hyborian age.

 

[Hervé]

Even though I'm ready to accept non canon material, I think these two classes just don't fit in the Hyborian setting. D&D clerics in Hyboria? Nah, that just sucks...
I know there's still a lot of unpublished material (from Vincent and others), especially stuff that has been cut down from regional sourcebooks. So why do we get D&Dish classes? Who needs them? Apparently, most posts on this thread are against this sort of stuff.
Sometimes it seems to me that Mongoose just want to screw everything with the 2nd Edition...

 

[LucaCherstich]

I checked the Bancroft' article in S&P 38 and I really want more articles like that.
Vincent, I agree with you about teh faults of the Gladiatorial class in S&P 50.
Maybe we could take that Gladiatorial class, underpower it a bit, and offer different options at different levels. Something like the different combat styles of Borderers.
I would like to switch a bit the focus to another side of this discussion.
You spoke about the presence of the Healer as bad D&D influences and you are right...but I think that, even after so much re-working, there is still some D&D nonsense in the Conan system.
For example, borderers in Conan are D&D Rangers minus the Robin Hood flavour and with a lot of the Balthus type of "beyond the Black river", and I like it.
But Why should he have different Fighting styles?
I agree that you expanded those styles according to the ethnics in the Hyboria's fiercest, but why we should limit it to the borderer?
OK, I know that other classes can mimic the styles through the relevant feats...but don't you think that the whole concern of giving a borderer the fighting style is a nonsense heritage or the D&D ranger?
Another example is the pirate.
If there is any gamedesigner here, please correct me, but I think that the pirate is just a modification of the thief class and this, I think, explains their low BAB.
However, I think the low BaB is simply nonsense in background terms.
A 5th level warrior of the black kingdoms, a suba or a wadai, is a Barbarian with a BAB of +5 which he rightly earned after years of intra-tribal wars and village looting.
On the other hand, a 5th level warrior of the Southern Islands, with roughly the same culture of the above mentioned black warrior, is a 5th level pirate with a BAB of +3.
Why this difference?
The Black Corsair maybe earned his skill destryong vessels and looting coastal villages, but I think the difference in BAB with his "cousin" from the Mainland is senseless.
They simply had roughly similar lifes, although the context (sea or jungles) is different.
Now look at a typical Barachan Barbarian from Tortage...he fights quite more often than the typical Cimmerian Barbarian.
Maybe the Cimmerian exercises his skills fighting vs Vanir invaders and wild animals...but for the rest he is just a farmer or a herdsman.
Conan is an atypical Cimmerian, all the other Cimemrian just remain home and spend their "Barbarian" lifes as they can.
I do not think they should be "commoner" (their life is wilder than those of Hybroain commoners), they are Barbarians, but this does not mean they have more violent lifes than the pirates.
On the other hand the Barachan pirate fights to substain his bloody life every single day.
He fights to loot villages and vessels, he fights other pirates in taverns.
I find that the typical pirate's life i much more violent than the typical Barbarian life, so I do not understand why they should have a lower BAB...I mean, I do not want a lower BAB for Barbarians but I woudl like to have a higher BAB for Pirates.
I think the lower BAB for Pirates is only a remain of the base "thief" class off which the pirate was modelled: am I wrong?
Is this nothing else but poor D&D influence/inheritance?

 

[VincentDarlage]

While not a game designer, here are my thoughts:

1. I like the fighting styles because they are so easily modified for culture. I like the borderer because it describes people who are used to fighting to defend their lands/homes, but are not barbarians or soldiers.

2. Pirates have a lower BAB because pirates don't actually fight a lot. They typically fight people who put up minimal resistance if possible (they are bullies, essentially). They run from people who can effectively resist. So a Black Kingdom pirate should fight less well than his mainland cousin, who has to defend his life and property (and conduct raids) on a fairly constant basis (and who would be condemned as cowardly if he ran, whereas his pirate cousin would be applauded for his daring escape if he ran). The pirate may loot coastal villages, but most of them fight unarmed (or poorly armed) villagers, not warriors.

3. I would prefer a classless system for Conan. That is the biggest single unnecessary holdover from D&D. Given the class artifice of D&D, Conan has done an incredible job, though, giving the classes a thorough Hyborian age grounding - which the Healer and Gladiator classes in S&P 50 failed to do.

4. If one is going to completely change a topic in a thread, one should create a new thread.

 

[Halfbat]

Frankly, the "Gladiators of Messantia" article in S&P 38 (by Tim Bancroft) was MUCH better. It put the gladiator into a specific setting/culture - and went on to describe other Hyborian age gladiator types (such as the Stygian style). It was firmly grounded in both history and the Hyborian age.

From you, that means a lot - thanks. ::blush:: It was the tone I was trying to achieve.
Tim

 

[VincentDarlage]

It was the tone I was trying to achieve.
Tim

You achieved it. Yours is one of the articles I printed out and put into my reference binder of material written by other authors I don't want to accidentally contradict in later writings I might do.

It is probably needless to say this, but the current article (especially the Healer) will NOT be in that binder, especially since it directly contradicts almost everything previously written about healing and healers in the Hyborian age. I got the feeling that the author of that article did very little (if any) research into what was already written on the topic - or if he did, he chose to discard all of it as irrelevant.

Anyway, your gladiator article in 38 is the official word on Hyborian age Messantian gladiators in my campaigns. Maybe Mongoose will do a Compendium II someday, and it can see hardbound status.

 

[Sutek]

Here's a thought, having not read the new classes and thier associated aticles nor possessing 2ed Conan yet....(lol)

Was the Gladiator inclusion strictly to get nets and other gladiator weapons in there? My recolection is fuzzy, but various combat nets didn't have rules in AE, did they?

Conversely, could this class have just as easily (if not better) have been a series of "instructions" on how to create a gladiator using strictly combat manuvers, feats, weapons, etc.?

Same with the Healer. I agree with Vincent 100% that a player spending time tracking down all the right feats and paying close attention to skill points will always be more satisfied, not to mention have the capability to leverage the GM for skills and feats created from scratch that suit the campaign.

No additional classes were even needed. The best addition has been the Temptress because it adds so much flavor and fills a specific role, but even that class could have been just a modified thief.

I hope this isn't an indication of a new game writing paradigm at Mongoose, and is instead just a lark.

 

[VincentDarlage]

Was the Gladiator inclusion strictly to get nets and other gladiator weapons in there? My recolection is fuzzy, but various combat nets didn't have rules in AE, did they?

Nets and tridents appeared in Argos and Zingara.

Conversely, could this class have just as easily (if not better) have been a series of "instructions" on how to create a gladiator using strictly combat manuvers, feats, weapons, etc.? Same with the Healer.

Yes.

Also, I wish authors would stop calling the world "Hyboria." There is no such place during the Hyborian age. It is the Hyborian AGE, not Hyboria. The article here did that in the introductory paragraph to BOTH classes (not to mention making the ludicrous claim that every Hyborian age city has gladiator arenas; Stygia does not have gladiatorial combats, for example, nor does Shem. I would be surprised to learn Aquilonia has them. I think he makes this unresearched claim to make his class appear more important and widespread than it actually is).

The Gladiator description carried this description of "Hyboria" as a place in several places. It really showed how little the author researched the world of the Hyborian age. He writes of the "cities of Hyboria," "Hyboria's wilder regions," and so on. Misusing the word "Hyboria" and slapping a "Conan" label on does not make a generic class into a Hyborian age class.

 

[LucaCherstich]

While not a game designer, here are my thoughts:

1. I like the fighting styles because they are so easily modified for culture. I like the borderer because it describes people who are used to fighting to defend their lands/homes, but are not barbarians or soldiers.

2. Pirates have a lower BAB because pirates don't actually fight a lot. They typically fight people who put up minimal resistance if possible (they are bullies, essentially). They run from people who can effectively resist. So a Black Kingdom pirate should fight less well than his mainland cousin, who has to defend his life and property (and conduct raids) on a fairly constant basis (and who would be condemned as cowardly if he ran, whereas his pirate cousin would be applauded for his daring escape if he ran). The pirate may loot coastal villages, but most of them fight unarmed (or poorly armed) villagers, not warriors.

3. I would prefer a classless system for Conan. That is the biggest single unnecessary holdover from D&D. Given the class artifice of D&D, Conan has done an incredible job, though, giving the classes a thorough Hyborian age grounding - which the Healer and Gladiator classes in S&P 50 failed to do.

4. If one is going to completely change a topic in a thread, one should create a new thread.

1. OK, I like borderers and fighting styles too. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that the problem itself of giving a fighting style to a borderer is an holdover from D&D ranger and his 2 weapons or archer style. I prefer a system where all the classes can have fightying styles, but this can be obtained through feats.


2.OK, but the culture of Black Corsairs is different from the culture of Zingarans. The villages they loot are usually defended by those Black Kingdoms warriors with Barbarian levels (certainly not people who cannot resist).
Furthermore, I think that even Zingarans are not just weak bullies (although Conan in Pool of the Black ones complaints abut the physical fragility of Zingarans....). I still think that pirates are not just "bullies". I know you are an authority in "Hyborean-related" topics but I think that what you say it is based on your own vision of pirates. Which is not wrong, but it is just your own vision. In my vision I see pirates fighting as much as soldiers, and sometimes even more. They do not have to spend time in worthless "watch and partrol" duties, they just fight, whether against poor fishermen or the Stygian marines. And they fight also among themselves, and this accounts for the "defend his life and property" duty of Black Kingdoms barbarians.
On the other hand even Professional mercenaries can be seen as "bullies". They have soldier class but, quite often, they face poor conscripts (commoners) or they just loot and pillage villages inhabited by poor farmers. Not so much different from a pirate. Same argument can be applied to nomads.


3. You are right. A classless system would solve many problems. I have played GURPS Conan and thinsg were different...nevertheless I am partially against classless games. My players have real lifes with real jobs and classless games (e.g. Gurps) take longer to create PCs. I know it sounds "un-professional" from the gamer's point of view, but this is reality. In any case, I would not throw away Mongoose Conan rpg. I would solve the problem creating a sourcebook (Player guide II??) in which (among the other things) every player for each level advancement has the option to take a normal class level in the normal way OR to just pick a skill from a class or the BAB from another class.
This could be done dividing the bonuses and abilities of each level in each class and give them a cost, for a fixed total point per level (e.g. 30 points).
We could then give to each player for each level they gain those 30 points to divide as they want.
Maybe I could become a "bully" pirate with low BAB (which could cost maybe 10 points) but a higher sneak attack (maybe 15 or 20 points) or a I can be a pirate swordmaster with high BAB (15-20 point) but with with a low sneak attack ability (maybe 10 point).
Somebody could say that the pirate swordmatser (in other words highr BAB) could be obtained with 2-3 levels of soldier...but I still do not see why a pirate should have a soldier's formation bonus (and why he should have a low BAB is he has just the pirate class).
I know he system I propose sounds crazy and laborious (and it is so...) but, from my point of view is also fascinating...I wish to have more time and the possibility to develop something like that...but real life, for the moment, rules!


4.Sorry. I'm Italian. We like to speak a lot and to do it in a chaotic way. This explains also why my english is so bad.... :?

Also, I wish authors would stop calling the world "Hyboria." There is no such place during the Hyborian age. It is the Hyborian AGE, not Hyboria.

You are completely right but why some of the books you wrote bear the "Hyboria" title? (e.g. Ruins of Hyboria, Hyboria's f. series).
Did they give you the title without possibility of discussing it?

 

[VincentDarlage]

2.OK, but the culture of Black Corsairs is different from the culture of Zingarans. The villages they loot are usually defended by those Black Kingdoms warriors with Barbarian levels (certainly not people who cannot resist).

1. That is a problem with classed systems. However, I would argue that the Black Corsairs will have more levels in Barbarian than in Pirate to begin with than the Zingarans.
2. Most defenders would be low-level barbarians (who rarely have the opportunity to adventure and gain exp), and the pirates (who live a life of adventure) would generally be higher level.
3. In the end, this is just conjecture as I didn't design the classes. Ask Ian Sturrock.

You are completely right but why some of the books you wrote bear the "Hyboria" title? (e.g. Ruins of Hyboria, Hyboria's f. series).
Did they give you the title without possibility of discussing it?

I submitted the Ruins book as "Ruins of the Hyborian Age." I argued with the editor about the title of the Hyboria's F series as well. The final titles of those books were editorial decisions made despite my strong objections.

I really think the ruins book is one of my best efforts, but I wince whenever I see the title.

Anyway, I did discuss it with them, but Mongoose just didn't see it my way at the time. Things may be changing though. When I was assigned "Player's Guide to Hyboria" I objected again and was told the title would be changed to "Player's Guide to the Hyborian Age." New editors, new policies.