# The Constitution based Character



## Minigiant (Aug 6, 2012)

One thing I hope for at the release of D&D Next is for a Constitution based class/theme right out of the book.

Traditionally Constitution is a defensive and inactive ability score. It increased/decrease your hit points, your ability to not drown, your marching distance, your resistance to poisons, disease, petrification, and death, and how quickly you get "soooo drunk last night". I'd prefer that at release there is a class or a suite of themes that allow the character to use their Constitution actively.

I had so much fun playing my star-pact warlock after my first PC died. It was fun describing all the sorts of body horror that crazy naive fool endured as his fingers blew off while casting and regenerated shortly after. And describing him throwing his blood as arcane grenades.

In my experience as a gamer, there are usually 3 way the features attributed to Constitution are used actively.

*1. Conduits*  Basically the character uses their body to channel an outside force. The heather you are, the more power you can absorb or channel.
*
2. Sacrifice.* With Sacrifice, the character is the battery and not just the means of conveying the power. Your health and stamina fuels the power or skill.

*3. Increased body power* With this, your body's toughness and fortitude increases the strength of a natural physical feature it can be used actively. Constitution would affect the toxicity of natural poisons, the power of breath attacks, the sharpness of claws, and the hardness of fists.

Now making Con classes would not be hard as there are many ways to make CON active. The issue is getting them at released. That would require the features that allow CON based activity in manner that is not too contrived or out of place with the default D&D experience. So no X-Men like superpowers without actual magic. I doubt grafting will make the first cut nor do i think Dragonfire adepts could appear as base classes in the fire few books.

The best ways to do this is via *Warlocks* and/or *Monks*. Warlocks already have a history of Constitution based abilities and can run as conduits or sacrificial magic batteries without breaking history. Monks could end up wit a few Constitution based active feature by playing up their fists of steel or casting from hit points for do near magical abilities like all out fighting and Charles Atlas powers. Via themes it could be done through a *Dragon Disciple* theme that as CON-based breath weapons, *Spelltouched *who can cast through their bodies or a *Poisoner* theme that grants a natural poison. Backgrounds could have Constitution effect like.... a *Drunk *background could have Constitution based skill increases when drunk a generic *Totemist* background that gives you some monster parts as skill bonuses.

What say you all?


----------



## Ahnehnois (Aug 6, 2012)

Barbarians are pretty con-based (and could stand to be more so through explicit mechanics).

Also, incarnum was pretty con-based wasn't it? And psychokinesis used to be con-based in 3.0. Maybe they should take another stab at a con-based alternate magic system.


----------



## TrippyHippy (Aug 6, 2012)

Personally, I'd like the Ranger to become the default Constitution based Class. 

The way I'd see them would be as rugged travellers and hunters. I'd give them a _big_ HD (d12), along with healing, tracking and survival abilities. 

They wouldn't get spells (as in previous editions), and wouldn't be especially  trained at complex combat maneuvres (but they would be tough combatants nevertheless). They'd be skilled at what they do, without being skill monkeys.They'd be masters of endurance and perseverance.


----------



## GX.Sigma (Aug 6, 2012)

This is my favorite Constitution class: http://images.wikia.com/memory-gamma/images/3/3e/Constitution-2260s.jpg


----------



## Minigiant (Aug 6, 2012)

*k*



Ahnehnois said:


> Barbarians are pretty con-based (and could stand to be more so through explicit mechanics).
> 
> Also, incarnum was pretty con-based wasn't it? And psychokinesis used to be con-based in 3.0. Maybe they should take another stab at a con-based alternate magic system.




Barbarian works too. Perhaps they could add Con to AC in light and medium armor to represent their hardening and thickening skin.

Incarnum works but I doubt it will make release as a class. Maybe as a theme.



TrippyHippy said:


> Personally, I'd like the Ranger to become the default Constitution based Class.
> 
> The way I'd see them would be as rugged travellers and hunters. I'd give them a _big_ HD (d12), along with healing, tracking and survival abilities.
> 
> They wouldn't get spells (as in previous editions), and wouldn't be especially  trained at complex combat maneuvres (but they would be tough combatants nevertheless). They'd be skilled at what they do, without being skill monkeys.They'd be masters of endurance and perseverance.




But how exactly would they be CON based. Sounds like they just get a high HD. What exactly would a ranger get from high CON that a fighter or wizard won't that a ranger would be a better choice for a CON 17 character?


----------



## TrippyHippy (Aug 6, 2012)

Rangers would be Constitution based because they are fundamentally survivors. They'd be resilient, healthy and enduring - indeed I couldn't imagine a ranger not being these things. While Wisdom and Intelligence would help them live in the wilderness to a degree, they still wouldn't survive long without a strong basic Constitution.

The sort of abilities it would affect would include resisting toxins, abjuring food and drink, surviving hostile environments, swimming, hiking, fast recovery, and so on.


----------



## Minigiant (Aug 6, 2012)

TrippyHippy said:


> Rangers would be Constitution based because they are fundamentally survivors. They'd be resilient, healthy and enduring - indeed I couldn't imagine a ranger not being these things. While Wisdom and Intelligence would help them live in the wilderness to a degree, they still wouldn't survive long without a strong basic Constitution.
> 
> The sort of abilities it would affect would include resisting toxins, abjuring food and drink, surviving hostile environments, swimming, hiking, fast recovery, and so on.




But those are Base Constitution features. Anyone can do those.

What can a Ranger do with their Constitution that a non-Ranger cannot?


----------



## Yora (Aug 6, 2012)

Minigiant said:


> *1. Conduits*  Basically the character uses their body to channel an outside force. The heather you are, the more power you can absorb or channel.
> *
> 2. Sacrifice.* With Sacrifice, the character is the battery and not just the means of conveying the power. Your health and stamina fuels the power or skill.
> 
> *3. Increased body power* With this, your body's toughness and fortitude increases the strength of a natural physical feature it can be used actively. Constitution would affect the toxicity of natural poisons, the power of breath attacks, the sharpness of claws, and the hardness of fists.



But in all these things, Constitution still only determines for how long you can keep doing something before you have to stop. It only provides power, but to wield it you'd still rely on Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma.


----------



## Minigiant (Aug 6, 2012)

Yora said:


> But in all these things, Constitution still only determines for how long you can keep doing something before you have to stop. It only provides power, but to wield it you'd still rely on Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma.




Not necessarily. Many times the CON character does use another ability suck as DEX for the accuracy of their claws and sting and CON for the poison.

Conduits are not always in great control of their powers. This is common with the powerful entity sealed in a lesser body or possessed hero. Many times the conduit is just pointing out targets if they aren't fully possessed.

Then there are the full body techniques like gaze attacks and breath attacks where STR and DEX do little.


----------



## Dausuul (Aug 6, 2012)

I like the idea of a Con-based class, but at the same time, I don't want to see Constitution used as a direct attack stat. That was one of the things that made early 4E classes feel like "cookie-cutters" to me. Instead, Constitution should act as a power source or limiting factor. Maybe you can channel hellfire to boost your damage, and your Con bonus determines how much you can channel without taking damage yourself; or your Con gives you a reserve of stamina which you spend to power your abilities.


----------



## Ahnehnois (Aug 6, 2012)

Minigiant said:


> Then there are the full body techniques like gaze attacks and breath attacks where STR and DEX do little.



There's another potential con-based class: dragonfire adept/dragon shaman. Breath weapons.


----------



## Minigiant (Aug 6, 2012)

Ahnehnois said:


> There's another potential con-based class: dragonfire adept/dragon shaman. Breath weapons.




I mentioned them in the Original Post. I won't bet money on them as classes at release but maybe as Themes.

Theme: Dragonfire adept.
Feat: Dragonfire. You have 15 foot breath weapon that deals 1d6 points of fire damage at will as a standard action. a successful Dexterity save (DC 10 + 1/2 your class level + your Con modifier) halves the damage.


----------



## erleni (Aug 6, 2012)

I would like CON to be the main stat for shadow assassin. Martial ones should be those who kill you with a deft knife in the back, while shadow ones should channel the power of death through their bodies and kill you by fear and their mere presence.


----------



## ComradeGnull (Aug 6, 2012)

A plaguebearer class could be fun- more of a villain role, but rich in Nurgle-y goodness.  Different attacks could add conditions or effects to the target- nauseated, dazed, etc., but with the caveat that any time you apply one of these conditions to a target you add a "tick" of disease to yourself and need to Con check to avoid suffering the same effect.  Diseases continue to stack, increasing the odds of an eventual fail- meaning that you had the option of pushing yourself if you really needed to take someone out, but it would involve risk.  Taking a long rest or magical healing could knock your disease ticker back down either a few steps (for a short rest or healing) or all the way to zero (long rest or major healing spell).


----------



## Mattachine (Aug 6, 2012)

I would like a "toughguy" version of the fighter that relied on Con/defense/survival more than weapons and offense.


----------



## Greg K (Aug 8, 2012)

Dausuul said:


> I like the idea of a Con-based class, but at the same time, I don't want to see Constitution used as a direct attack stat. That was one of the things that made early 4E classes feel like "cookie-cutters" to me. Instead, Constitution should act as a power source or limiting factor. Maybe you can channel hellfire to boost your damage, and your Con bonus determines how much you can channel without taking damage yourself; or your Con gives you a reserve of stamina which you spend to power your abilities.




Pretty much this except that I also don't want to see a  Con bonus to AC unless it is a mystical ability similar to your channeling suggestion.


----------



## Steely_Dan (Aug 8, 2012)

I do like Con as a base, but are we talking about using the Con modifier for melee and ranged weapon attacks?

And it looks like Con will not be used for casting spells.

I would Incarnum to make a come back.


----------



## Bluenose (Aug 9, 2012)

Steely_Dan said:


> I do like Con as a base, but are we talking about using the Con modifier for melee and ranged weapon attacks?




For melee attacks, why not? One of the three classic boxing 'styles' is based on sustaining a high rate of throwing punches, which is extremely energy intensive; and there are also armed combat styles which emphasise a high rate of attack, escrima for example. That would suggest Con would be the most suitable stat.


----------



## ComradeGnull (Aug 9, 2012)

Bluenose said:


> For melee attacks, why not? One of the three classic boxing 'styles' is based on sustaining a high rate of throwing punches, which is extremely energy intensive; and there are also armed combat styles which emphasise a high rate of attack, escrima for example. That would suggest Con would be the most suitable stat.




That's an interesting idea- one thing that is lacking in the combat system for any edition of D&D (or form most games I've ever seen) is the notion of how tiring being in hand-to-hand combat is, particularly if you've not trained for it.  There is no way, for instance, to run a fight using Mohammed Ali's rope-a-dope strategy- even if the attacker swings at you for 100 rounds without landing a telling blow, they never get any worse at attacking you.

I could imagine a Con-based martial class that took on something like a Defender/meat shield role.  Their abilities would do little or no damage, but force the opponent to make increasingly difficult Con checks or acquire a stacking penalty to their defense.  Then, after setting them up for multiple rounds, the guy sucking up the attacks round after round gets an attack with a substantial bonus to attack or crit.  You end up with a fighter-type who operates by giving opponents a lot of opportunities to land attacks (he would need some mechanism to soak some hits, or just high HP) before setting them up for a devastating blow.


----------



## Greg K (Aug 9, 2012)

Bluenose said:


> For melee attacks, why not? One of the three classic boxing 'styles' is based on sustaining a high rate of throwing punches, which is extremely energy intensive; and there are also armed combat styles which emphasise a high rate of attack, escrima for example. That would suggest Con would be the most suitable stat.




For myself, because I see it more of a reason to 
a) add a fatigue mechanism and/or 
b) a Flurry of Blows or Rain of Steel feat that anyone can access with Con as a prerequisite.


----------



## Minigiant (Aug 9, 2012)

So far suggestions for Con based characters are:
1) Physical harmful possession or magical link (Warlock)
2) Natural or Supernatural biological attacker (Dragonfire adept/dragon shaman)
3) Fatigue based warrior (Rage points)
4) Spellcaster who casts from HP (Blood magic)
5) Defensive warrior with a knockout move and rope-a-dope mechanic
6) Rapid firing physical attacker (Rain of Steel/Flurry of Blows)
7) Physical binder (Incarnum)

Any more?


----------



## Mattachine (Aug 10, 2012)

Minigiant said:


> 5) Defensive warrior with a knockout move and rope-a-dope mechanic




Awesome


----------



## Ahnehnois (Aug 12, 2012)

Minigiant said:


> Any more?



I once (seven years ago) wrote a Daredevil class that was basically a con and cha-based rogue: defensive abilities and athletic craziness and some skirmish damage like a scout.

I should really revisit that.


----------

