Creating Unique Characters

[XXsiriusXX]

Well, if the players are what make characters unique, then it's the characters that shouldn't be restricted. The best option for having the most options is to make everything extremely variable, and in all probablility mildly- to heavily-unbalanced. Let a barbarian toss a few uncanny dodge powers or a rage use to get a druid animal companion, let a fighter take a domain with 1/day per level casting on it because he's from some crazy background, etc. Don't be afraid to let crazy things happen.

I was thinking along the same lines when I started creating my own d20 based system. You can see it in the link below. Keep in mind that it is no where near finished.

http://www.thecbg.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?33872

[LordVreeg]

Well, if the players are what make characters unique, then it's the characters that shouldn't be restricted. The best option for having the most options is to make everything extremely variable, and in all probablility mildly- to heavily-unbalanced. Let a barbarian toss a few uncanny dodge powers or a rage use to get a druid animal companion, let a fighter take a domain with 1/day per level casting on it because he's from some crazy background, etc. Don't be afraid to let crazy things happen.

Which is a wonderful idea, and I strongly advise this for anybody looking for characters that are more unique then the basic archtypes.

Only problem is, as you mentioned, d20 doesn't support this idea very well, unless you're willing to risk unbalancing the game. The better option is to use a skill-based system, like GURPS, as these are designed around that very idea. Assuming Rage and Animal Companion were roughly the same point value, you could make that trade without unbalancing the game at all. If, say, Rage had a higher point value then Animal Companion, you could probably get something else in the tradeoff, too.

Class-based systems like d20 tend not to encourage this degree of flexibility, instead opting for, "no, Barbarian gets Rage, Druid{/i] gets Animal Companion.", which is better suited for people who want to know and expect what they're getting (as opposed to wanting to choose what they're getting).

Totally agreed.
Think I said something similar above, but let me put it in a different way.  A more direct way.

all the machinations and mental gymnastics people are going through in this thread is basically just this:
You are trying to take a class based system
 (which is more rigid by it's name--classification-based)
and trying to make it behave like a skill-based system.

That is all that it looks like from the wide-angle lens.  If you want it to be skill-based, play a skill based game, or be aware that at the purest level, class based and skill based are 2 polar opposites, and once you are requesting a certain amount of fluidity, you might want to look at the polar end of the spectrum that is closest to where you want your game to be.