3 Character Types: Fighter, Wizard, Mixed (Bard, Cleric, Monk)

[David Bofinger]

Originally Posted by flankspeed

Fighters: Pay normal cost to learn Talents, pay triple cost to learn Spells.
Wizards: Pay triple cost to learn Talents, pay normal cost to learn Spells.
Mixed: Pay double cost to learn Talents, pay double cost to learn Spells.

Problem: Given these numbers there is no character design for which mixed is superior to both hero and wizard. So why would anyone take it?

If the costs were (1.5, 1.5) that might be playable.

I tried a generalist class. Fighters were (1, 3) and wizards were (2, 1), setting generalist to (1.25, 1.25) gave a reasonable range in the middle where it was the preferred option. But the rounding was a pain.

I also wrote a Druid class which could buy some spells and talents at normal price and the rest were doubled. But listing which spells and talents was too much trouble.

Then I tried splitting up the spells and talents into colleges and letting people choose which ones they got cheap.

I even looked at weird nonlinear envelope functions but thankfully got therapy before I did anything for which I could be prosecuted.

I think abolishing the distinction and going to (1, 1) for all characters is very likely better than any of these. I've played in a game like that but the characters were practically superheroes for other reasons as well so I'm not sure how it would work for a 32 point start.

stereotypical bards, clerics, and monks.

By stereotypical you mean D&D? It's not obvious to me a cleric should be mixed, some are going to be studious theologians who should use the wizard template, for instance, And monks will be piling so much into Unarmed Combat they may not have any to spare for magic and might be better off as fighters.