So after running B/X D&D for my library program for the last year, I'm debating cooking up a more swashbuckling-oriented 17th century variant for one-shots and occasional play.  After years of watching even Savage Worlds bog down under the heavy onslaught of 9-12 players at a time, its been really refreshing to clip at which B/X has managed to move along.  Most of this I attribute to DM procedural rolls and baked in advancement.  So I have been collecting various odds and ends to construct this beautiful monstrosity, but I'm hitting a wall when it comes to classes.

I really want to keep the class load light, in keeping with the spirit of B/X.  Forget the non-human classes for now as I may or may not include any non-humans.  I started with Simon Washbourne's excellent Sabres and Witchery and a baseline.  I'm also planning on using Dyson's subclasses concept or perhaps even the random benefits tables from Dark Albion so that each class can have more variations.

So far, my list of classes include:

The Fighter (duh!  This variant will bake in a lot of what usually goes in Duelist or Swashbuckler classes, too)
The Occultist (an arcane spellcaster that will also have exorcism powers – sort of turn undead light)
The Hunter (outdoor tracker/scout)
The Scoundrel (catch all thief, charlatan)
The Mariner (catch all sailor/pirate seafaring class)

Other classes I'm considering:

The Scholar (a bit of sage knowledge plus the bard's legend lore)
The Witch Finder (evil sorcerer and monster hunter)

I also feel I need something of a Charisma based influence/motivator class – a non-bard bard, if you will.  I'm also debating whether some sort of Artisan or Craftsman classes have merit given the setting.

But the more I add, the more I feel like I'm getting away from my goal (light class load with variations within).  So I'm hoping some folks around here can help me sort this all out.  If this all looks familiar to you, I threw this out on the OSR Google+ community, but things petered out without a satisfying conclusion.

Help?

Tom

Thinking about the genre, here are the key archetypes that need to be represented:

The warrior
The spellcaster
The socialite
The trickster
The philosopher
The explorer
And maybe the Artist

Given a magical world with the presence of monsters, I could also see adding: the monster hunter

Quote from: Blusponge;924933
Given a magical world with the presence of monsters, I could also see adding: the monster hunter

The hunter is always an appropriate archetype. Maybe for swashbuckling, the hunter should use single shot pistols or a single long dagger?

Quote from: Tod13;924936The hunter is always an appropriate archetype. Maybe for swashbuckling, the hunter should use single shot pistols or a single long dagger?

Not a bad idea.  Given the genre, I was thinking about perhaps limiting weapons by weight instead of class.  So an Academic-type could still whip out a foil or a pistol and be competent.  But only the fighter could use heavy weapons.  Plus, I plan to incorporate fighting styles ala Flashing Blades, et al, and the fighter would have more choices in that sense.

Thinking about the monster hunter, since there will be "subclasses" I wonder if perhaps the monster hunter wouldn't be better suited for that?  After all, there is no reason a Trickster couldn't also be a monster hunter.

Tom

This may interest you.

It's 1e AD&D but the conversions to B/X would be trivial.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;924960This may interest you.

It's 1e AD&D but the conversions to B/X would be trivial.

Heh that's an awesome post, I used all those classes in my AD&D campaign.  People who like that Alchemist class, will really keep you on your toes.

Quote from: Blusponge;924940Not a bad idea.  Given the genre, I was thinking about perhaps limiting weapons by weight instead of class.  So an Academic-type could still whip out a foil or a pistol and be competent.  But only the fighter could use heavy weapons.  Plus, I plan to incorporate fighting styles ala Flashing Blades, et al, and the fighter would have more choices in that sense.

When I heard "swashbuckling" and "hunter", I just immediately pictured some effete looking but competent guy. Kind of like some of the hero types from Georgette Heyer's historical fiction. Maybe not really strong, but smart, patient, accurate, and deadly. Like you suggested, limited in weapon choice, but really good with them.

Seems to me there's a distinction, perhaps overlapping, within Fighter between duelists, boxers, fencing masters, soldiers, marines, pirate thugs, and adventurers. They're all different types of fighters, but their backgrounds and ways of fighting are pretty distinct, and often a master of one will be no good at another style.

Quote from: Skarg;924972Seems to me there's a distinction, perhaps overlapping, within Fighter between duelists, boxers, fencing masters, soldiers, marines, pirate thugs, and adventurers. They're all different types of fighters, but their backgrounds and ways of fighting are pretty distinct, and often a master of one will be no good at another style.

That's an interesting distinction...

• Fencing Masters could be Martial Artists, emphasis on the Art.  The style and it's philosophy are paramount.
  
• Now a Soldier to use Gronan's quote from another thread... “I don’t duel, boy. I kill as a soldier kills, which is as a butcher kills, as quickly, efficiently, and with as least risk to myself as I can arrange.”  Surviving by any means necessary is paramount.
  
• Duellists stride between the two, they are killers, men who Duel for honor, coin, reputation, etc... Surviving while keeping your Reputation is paramount.
  

Not to say those are universal definitions, just that within a broad range of "Fighter" there can be many different motivations, that may lead to running a melee differently.

Quote from: Skarg;924972Seems to me there's a distinction, perhaps overlapping, within Fighter between duelists, boxers, fencing masters, soldiers, marines, pirate thugs, and adventurers. They're all different types of fighters, but their backgrounds and ways of fighting are pretty distinct, and often a master of one will be no good at another style.

Right.  Which is why I think using Dyson's subclasses as a concept will do a good job of injecting just the right amount of flavor without kludging things up with rules.

Here, for instance, is my rough list of subclasses for my Fighter with some cribbed notes for abilities that will need to be fleshed out.  It should give you a better idea of what I'm going for with the whole thing:

THE FIGHTER
Subclasses [d12]
1   Soldier: Rank?
2   Sailor: Knows way around a ship
3   Pirate: Dirty Fighter, plus sailor
4   Marksman: Bonus when using ranged weapons; two pistols with no penalty
5   Duelist: Bonus fighting style
6   Radical
7   Pugilist/Brawler: Bonus when unarmed; can fight two-fisted with no penalty
8   Fop/Dandy: Social bonus
9   Criminal: Connections with criminal underground; dirty fighting
11   Spy: Stealth and Surprise bonuses
12   Monster Hunter: Chosen enemy

As of right now, I'm thinking fighters get to start with one fighting style (2 if they are duelists), and then maybe learn a new one ever couple of levels (or maybe I just won't put a limit on them and let them learn them through play).

Quote from: Black Vulmea;924960This may interest you.

It's 1e AD&D but the conversions to B/X would be trivial.

Nice!  Thank you.  Looks like I'm on the right track.  And, of course, there is always the Mighty Fortress book as well.

Tom

You might also want to look at Backswords and Bucklers:).

Quote from: AsenRG;924997You might also want to look at Backswords and Bucklers:).

Looking at the description on Lulu, it's a bit...limited for my tastes. More seedy underbelly of London and less Errol Flynn. No, I want more options than that. But thanks for the suggestion. I didn't even know this was out there until it was mentioned in this thread.

Tom

Beyond the Wall and Other Adventures has a nice set of Fighters' "knacks" to give them a bit of style. Also it has great rules for building multiclass characters Chinese menu style, one from column A, one from column B.

Quote from: DavetheLost;925087Beyond the Wall and Other Adventures has a nice set of Fighters' "knacks" to give them a bit of style. Also it has great rules for building multiclass characters Chinese menu style, one from column A, one from column B.

Are those knacks anything like the Traits in BX Adventurer? Sort of Feats light?

Also, please elaborate a bit more on the multi classing? Is everyone expected to multi class? What's the upside of not doing so?

Tom