I’m working on a Compendium Class for one of my players.

I’m working on a Compendium Class for one of my players.

I’m working on a Compendium Class for one of my players. He’s a Ranger and wanted to move towards an Inspiring Leader who leads men to fight against injustice. Specifically he plans to free Slaves and rally them to him to help free more slaves.

Seeing a Bit of a resemblance to Robin Hood I started work on this. This is my first draft. What do people think?  


9 thoughts on “I’m working on a Compendium Class for one of my players.”

  1. Looks really good, just two things i found:

    The Batman Gambit is crazy powerful. It’s not bad in any way; that’s okay for a 6-10 move but might i suggest an alternative? 


    Replaces ‘Man with a Plan’

    When you form a plan that every ally present (PC’s included) follows, roll+INT. On a 10+ gain 3 hold, on a 7-9 gain 2. 

    You can spend your hold 1 for 1 to 

    – Give an ally +1 ongoing as long as they abide by your stated plan

    – Have something useful exactly where you need it right now

    – Recall an important detail that can be used to your advantage.

    Or something like that. Feels more like beeing crazy prepared that way. 

    “At any time the Rebel Leader does not already have a Bond related to a cause to right injustice, he may choose to add one.”

    this could in theory be exploited to create infinite bonds.

    Why not “when you take this move, write a new bond related to righting injustice. When you resolve this bond, the new bond you write must still be related to that topic” 

    Should give you the same thing. 

  2. Batman Gambit. That’s an awesome re-write. I’m going to incorporate it right away. 

    Bond: The idea is that if you have a cause bond you cant make another. So it can’t be infanate because as soon as he adds one he’s at his limit. Perhaps I need to work on the wording. I don’t want to force the player to make a new cause bond as soon as he resolves the old one, because story-wise he may not have a new cause yet.

    Thanks a bunch for your input. 

  3. Infinite bonds works like this: 

    I have no bond with justice. I get one. I resolve this bond and rewirte it to be a bond with the bard. I have no justice bond. I write one. I resolve this one and write a bond with the Paladin instead. I have no justice bond. So i get one…. 

  4. Maybe drop the word ‘bond’ entirely and just call it the ’cause’? E.g. “The Rebel leader may take up to one Cause. While the leader is pursuing their Cause, they gain the following advantages…”

    Awesome start by the way!

  5. Good idea Joe, but I enjoy utilising the tools the game already gives us and the Bonds seem to fit. I guess it’s a weigh up between the potential ambiguity of my intention, and the the benifit of keeping it as a Bond. I’ll keep your idea in mind as other people give me feedback on this particular issue. Ta.

    And thanks, I’m quite proud of it.

  6. To the bond/cause confusion: “The Rebel Leader gains the Cause ability, which functions like a Bond but does not add to or replace her existing class Bonds. If at any time the Rebel Leader does not have a Cause, she may choose to add one. The Cause must be a specific goal or ideal to which she is committed etc etc”

  7. What Shawn McCarthy said. Perhaps you could include some example causes, the way classes start with example bonds, to further highlight how they work the same and are “compatible” with each other for the purposes of bonuses? I get what you and Tim Franzke are saying though – it might be easier to say “it’s a bond, but…” rather than “it’s something else, but like a bond in these ways”.

Comments are closed.