Post/Author/DateTime	Post
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 04-03-04, 03:25 PM	I have noticed that a lot of people are trying to rely on classes and PrC's to give their characters flavor and different from others. Well just giving a class the flavor isn't really the case. The best flavor that goes to your characters should be from your imagination, and certain events that take place during campaigns. It seems that too many people want the ideas already done for them and put in their faces. What happened to using your imagination, or writing that particular background story that gives your character flavor and seperates him or her from the others? Players now are becoming to dependant on whats right there in their faces in the many books that are coming out. A class shouldn't be the flavor, how your character acts, and what you make out of it is the flavor that you need. Not another PrC that gives you more abilities. Think on it.
TheDarkestOfAngels 04-03-04, 03:45 PM	Originally posted by XunValDorl of HouseKilsek I have noticed that a lot of people are trying to rely on classes and PrC's to give their characters flavor and different from others. Well just giving a class the flavor isn't really the case. The best flavor that goes to your characters should be from your imagination, and certain events that take place during campaigns. It seems that too many people want the ideas already done for them and put in their faces. What happened to using your imagination, or writing that particular background story that gives your character flavor and seperates him or her from the others? Players now are becoming to dependant on whats right there in their faces in the many books that are coming out. A class shouldn't be the flavor, how your character acts, and what you make out of it is the flavor that you need. Not another PrC that gives you more abilities. Think on it. its not just a "replacement" for good imagination. It isn't that at all. If I wanted an assassin character, I'd rather *be* as assassin in both form and function, which means PrC instead of strait rogue. Often, PrCs also give focus to a specific set of powers that I might want my character to be espcially good in. For instance, I might want my fighter to be especially good with a greatsword, so I take weapon master prestige class for my fighter. For another example, I might want my sorcerer to be especially good with metamagic, so I take the incantrix prestige class from Player's Guide to Faerun, so I can do just that. prestiging has more to do with function rather than form. Often, the change is made so one compliments the other. THat's what I do anyway. My imagination has more than enough power to have any kind of "roleplay" i could dream up, but I also like having an effective or unique character mechanically as well as through roleplay.
BlaineTog 04-03-04, 03:46 PM	Originally posted by XunValDorl of HouseKilsek I have noticed that a lot of people are trying to rely on classes and PrC's to give their characters flavor and different from others.Um... yes? Is that wrong? Well just giving a class the flavor isn't really the case. The best flavor that goes to your characters should be from your imagination, and certain events that take place during campaigns.You sound like you would really like the Generic Classes in Unearthed Arcana. It seems that too many people want the ideas already done for them and put in their faces. What happened to using your imagination, or writing that particular background story that gives your character flavor and seperates him or her from the others? Players now are becoming to dependant on whats right there in their faces in the many books that are coming out. A class shouldn't be the flavor, how your character acts, and what you make out of it is the flavor that you need.I see your point, and it's somewhat valid. But let me ask you this: If I have a skinny human, is it an elf? It still gets the bonus feat and skill points and the Favored Class: Any. But I'm calling it an elf. If I have a short human, do I have a halfling? If he likes mechancis, is he a gnome? If he's kinda short-ish, but also quite wide, is he a dwarf? If he's big and burly, do I have a half-orc? The whole point of having game mechanics is to give your flavor some hard basis. Let's get more general: byyour logic, there should only be one class: ___ (prnounced "blank"). It does one thing: deal damage. If I'm a fighter, it's swinging a sword. If I'm a theif, it's stabbing them in the eye. If I'm a Wizard, then it's casting a spell. While the fine points of your flavor should be from your imagination, you need mechanics to back it up. Otherwise, you're playing "Make Believe" instead of DnD and your character can do whatever you want it to. Not another PrC that gives you more abilities. Think on it. And again, I think that having specialized mechanics that make your character different from the average fighter, for instance, is good for roleplaying. Besides, some people *need* it spelled out for them.
detectevil 04-03-04, 04:55 PM	Hum... I agree with Xun on that one. Wait, that can't be right. Let me read the thread again...
detectevil 04-03-04, 05:05 PM	My God, I agree with Xun on something. I feel dirty... and the dirt won't come off... eew... But anyhow, I share the same disdain for prestige classes. I feel there are too many PrC's that add nothing to the game except for a mechanical advantage over multiclassed characters or a specific special ability that could easely be made a feat. Personally I prefer using core classes, straight or multiclassed, with the right feats and just a tad of personality (like Glomer, the harressing cleric "Need healing agen? Wat are yool made off? Sugar?"). One thing I certainly hate is the way two of my players simply can't concieve a character concept that is not a Prestige Class. First I tought it was munchkinism. Them I realize it wasn't just that. They don't feel their characters are complete unless they are in a PrC. PS: BlainTog, what have we told you about your sig?
Luminous Crayon 04-03-04, 05:12 PM	Originally posted by detectevil My God, I agree with Xun on something. I feel dirty... and the dirt won't come off... eew... Heh heh heh... I, too, agree with the initial post. People seldom seem to look past the stereotypical examples of each class, and duplicate the same cookie-cutter characters over and over, with little or no actual personality. It makes me very sad. There are so many ways to add uniqueness and flavor to a character, and the vast, vast majority of them have nothing to do with classes, stats, PrCs, or special abilities.
BlaineTog 04-03-04, 05:54 PM	Originally posted by detectevil One thing I certainly hate is the way two of my players simply can't concieve a character concept that is not a Prestige Class. First I tought it was munchkinism. Them I realize it wasn't just that. They don't feel their characters are complete unless they are in a PrC.Have you met Jack Chick? This argument sounds terrifyingly similar to one of his. [For those of you who arn't In The Know, Jack Chick is this guy who thinks DnD is Satan Incarnate. Look in my sig and click "Best. WebPage. Ever." and you'll see what I mean. One of his arguments is that because there are a number of people who take DnD waaaay to seriously and can't see their life w/o it means that *everyone* is like that and the game is thererfore evil.] IMX, PrCs only get taken if it fits the character concept. One of the better uses for a PrC is that it can give you some octane for voluntarily weakening your character, which allows you to do that without having a weakling (which isn't all that fun. And weakling characters get played less that Sor20s ;)). Example: if your character concept what the sort of archer that only liked to take one shot in order to take down one enemy, and you did that using core stuff, you'de have a very weak character. Take my One Hit Wonder PrC and you can pull that off w/o ending up dead. PS: BlaineTog, what have we told you about your sig? ["Emphasis" mine;)]. And what have I told you about the Sig Line Limit in the CP? I've been told that it's been too long--before. Not only is this one mostly links anyway, but it's nowhere near as long as the only one (which was a full screen at 1024x768). Thise one is 1/2 that. The single biggest part is the microrant against Sor/Wiz cure threads. How many of those have you seen recently? ;)
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 04-05-04, 07:08 PM	First of all, thank you for those that agree with me. The thing is, with PrC's it's like the person doesn't have to think anymore. It's like well lets see let me look over this list of PrC's...hmmm that ability looks good i'll go for that until I get it, than go for another PrC with a cool ability. If you get bored because your character doesn't have a lot, or any special abilities then you need to go and play a video game. Flavor comes from the background and personality of the player. If you want some neat things to go with your character come up with some appropriate feats and discuss them with your DM. Use your imgaination and come up with your own, don't rely on a PrC. Playing a straight class from 1st to the end without taking a PrC can be done, and you can have fun doing it. Just takes using the old noggin.
TheDarkestOfAngels 04-05-04, 08:27 PM	Originally posted by XunValDorl of HouseKilsek First of all, thank you for those that agree with me. The thing is, with PrC's it's like the person doesn't have to think anymore. It's like well lets see let me look over this list of PrC's...hmmm that ability looks good i'll go for that until I get it, than go for another PrC with a cool ability. If you get bored because your character doesn't have a lot, or any special abilities then you need to go and play a video game. Flavor comes from the background and personality of the player. If you want some neat things to go with your character come up with some appropriate feats and discuss them with your DM. Use your imgaination and come up with your own, don't rely on a PrC. Playing a straight class from 1st to the end without taking a PrC can be done, and you can have fun doing it. Just takes using the old noggin. are you insinuating that the people who take prestige classes either can't roleplay or can't contemplate making a good character w/o a prestige class? I have two characters in my sig at the hall of heroes of four "major" characters that I have. The two in my sig are a: Human Vampire Shade Ranger/Blackguard/Assassin of Shar and a Dark Elf Rogue/Fighter/Scythe Master the two I haven't entered into hall of heroes are a Half Celestial Sun Elf Sorceress/Incantrix/Archmage/Metamagi and a Strongheart Halfling Rogue/Wizard/Arcane Trickster/Ninja of the Crescent Moon and, more recently, a 1/2 Drow fighter/transmuter/Spellsword/Eldrich knight and a human (was reincarnated after a death as a 1/2 moon elf) bard. All of them, and generally all of the characters I play have some distinct personality, past, feelings, goals, and emotions. I can make all of those happen. Whether or not my characters are single classed or grossly multi/prestiged. --That-- is roleplaying. The whole "thespian" aspect of D&D is giving your character life. Not some notion that the -only- way to be a "true roleplayer" is to gimp your own options at mechanical character development as well as the character's roleplaying development.
Thorak 04-05-04, 08:28 PM	Okay, I'm going to throw my hat in the ring on the side of PrCs. Not because I necessarily think we absolutely need them, but the supporting voices seem pretty thin. If we take this argument further, that any 'specialization' can be done within the core classes without resorting to a PrC, then we can remove many of the core classes. Barbarians, Paladins, and Rangers are all types of Fighter, they just have some different feat choices. And we don't need Sorcerors AND wizards, one is enough. And the bard? That's a rogue/arcane caster with skill point in Perform. We only need 4 classes then; Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, and Mage (to pick a non-sorceror/wizard arcane caster-type name). But wait! Clerics and mages are basically just divine and arcane varieties of each other. So let's just have a Caster class, with a choice made at 1st level. And Rogues are just skill-focused non-casters, while Fighters are combat-focused. So now we're down to two; Caster and Mundane. Everything else is feats and skills. Or we could even make casting a feat chain. Then we're down to a no-class system. That's got to be better, right? You can't be forced down any stereotypical paths, your character is entirely what you make it! For those who missed it, the preceding was all sarcastic. D&D is a class-based system. Classless systems are fine, they work. Feel free to play them if you prefer them. But D&D is a class-based system. And with class creation, comes limitations. And certain character concepts don't fit within those limitations. Hence Prestige Classes. Now, I'll be the first to admit that some PrCs are a bit shady on flavor. An archmage is basically, flavor-wise, a high-level Wizard or Sorceror. But other PrCs have distinct flavor, and their abilities reflect that perfectly. A good example; the Kensai from the Complete Warrior. First, let's not diss whether it's true to what a Kensai should be or has been before in D&D; let's take it on it's own merit, which is basically that of a Ki-powered Knight type character. I decided I wanted a character in this new campaign I was playing who was a 'dark' paladin type, brooding, glum, etc, but still a good guy. He comes from a noble family that has been dishonoured and has lost everything but it's title, and his hero uncle's sword. My character is the last remaining member of the family, and it was his frivolity and inattention as a youth that sealed his family's fate. The guilt is enormous, but he hopes that by becoming a valiant wandering hero, he can perhaps one day redeem his family's honour. And restore his Uncle's blade to glory. Unfortunately, the sword is rusty and chipped. It was once masterwork and enchanted, but now is no better than a normal sword. It is rumoured that the sword's power is directly linked to his family's honour, and the current state of the sword is representative of that. Now, that's a fine concept, I think. Perhaps a bit melodramatic, but I like it. That's what I had going into the character. Now, most classes and PrCs have nothing that lets them use their family weapon from level 1 to whatever they can reach; they have to 'trade in' for the better gear they find. The Kensai, however, has this nifty Ancestral Relic feature that pretty much exactly fits what I'd already envisioned; a knightly type who's honour and inner strength empowers his family blade. So, I'm planning to take Kensai as soon as I can, as my character restores his family's honour. I suppose my roundabout point is; PrCs are just fine, if you're taking them to enhance an existing character concept. If you're doing so to cherry-pick for useful abilities, you're being munchkin. I didn't decide to aim for Kensai because the abilities are great, but because the Kensai flavor and abilities perfectly mesh with how I envision my character. That's all PrCs are; ways to customize your character to more perfectly fit your vision. The core classes aren't always enough.
Jaerom Darkwind 04-05-04, 09:06 PM	for the record, a lot of characters in popular fiction possess signiture moves and are known for cretain special abilities. Why should D&D characters try to avoid such things? PrCs are nice because they give access to abilities that would otherwise be unavailable, and allow you to build the character you want. Not just pretend that its the chracter you want, in spite of the utter lack of support.
Tony Vargas 04-05-04, 09:28 PM	I think it's more often a matter of finding the mechanics of the classes getting in the way of flavor. Trying to do a classic swashbuckling swordsman, for instance, will give you fits - you need the fighter's many feats, the barbarian's uncanny dodge, the rogue's tumble and social skills, and the Monk's armor-independence.... and you just plain can't combine all those classes - you end up with a mess. So, you need a swashbuckler core class or a Duelist PrC or whatever - not to stand in for imagination, but to get the mechanics out of the way your imagination... ;)
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 04-05-04, 09:30 PM	The thing i'm saying is, PrC's are great, but they do not have to be an excuse for flavor. You shouldn't have to rely on a PrC for flavor. I see PrC's being used just to gain abilities. I think there should be a limit to how many PrC's you can have, limit it by a stat modifier or something. Some people want more and more PrC's like an addict needs whatever they are addicted to. Some people are complaining that a core class doesn't have enough PrC's to suit it. Use your imagination and figure something else out, don't become dependant on PrC's to make a character how you want it.
Ax'Orl 04-05-04, 09:56 PM	I suppose I would fall into the category of using too many PRC's...simply because I wanted a "Zorro-esqe" character. (3.0). To do this, I played an elven Bard (Rapier Prof as Elf/Whip as bard) took enough levels to qualify for Duelist then enough levels to qualify for lasher....:angel:
Jaerom Darkwind 04-06-04, 06:52 PM	Heh, I played a Mnk2/Psw2/Ftr2/Rgr1/Dul1/Shd4/Tha6 (3.0; that's duelist, shadow dancer, and thief acrobat). I was going for Blade Dancer, but my DM suddenly decided to disallow it, so I had to settle for combining Shadfow Dancer and Thief Acrobat. Jaerom Darkwind was truly a character to be proud of. I love how all of my favorite PrCs have practically identical Prereqs, too. :D
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 04-06-04, 07:37 PM	In my opinion, PrC's should be like Kits were in 2nd edition. You didn't go up in numeral value in a particular kit. You remained your core class, but when you went up in level from your core class you gained abilities from the core class and you gained abilities from the kit. You didn't have Core Class 5th/Kit 4 it was just Core Class (Kit) 9th. That makes it a whole lot better than having 13 PrC classes just to get one or two abilities from each class that you want. I believe the PrC's should be made differently, or at least have a limit on them.
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 04-09-04, 08:56 PM	:bump:
TheDarkestOfAngels 04-09-04, 10:36 PM	Originally posted by XunValDorl of HouseKilsek In my opinion, PrC's should be like Kits were in 2nd edition. You didn't go up in numeral value in a particular kit. You remained your core class, but when you went up in level from your core class you gained abilities from the core class and you gained abilities from the kit. You didn't have Core Class 5th/Kit 4 it was just Core Class (Kit) 9th. That makes it a whole lot better than having 13 PrC classes just to get one or two abilities from each class that you want. I believe the PrC's should be made differently, or at least have a limit on them. I dislike the notion that prcs should be kits from 2nd edition. the class system in 2e was largely inflexable. 3e and 3.5e however, have a class/prestige class system that's vastly superior to 2e's in... well... every way that I could imagine that it would be superior. new classes and prestige classes in 3.5 are also very easy to replicate and it's much easier to make a new class or prestige class in this system than it was for 2e. so if I can't get something I wan't out of the current plathora of stuff, I can make my own with reletive ease, something Shadowfoot has prooven with a number of high quality workmanship classes and prestige classes across the board. I've even dabbled with prestige classes recently for sorcerers. I can't really think of any reason why having more than 2~4 prestige classes is wrong. (Humans in 2e could dual class w/ much more powerful results than 3.5e prestiging. Elminster is a good example of a character that did that. It's as close as 2e can get to 3e's PrC system.) I also can't think of a plausible reason why prestiging SHOULD be restricted. What if I WAS a player who wanted an epic evil human ranger/blackguard/assassin/conjurer/arcane trickster to complete my character concept? Why must I stick to only having ranger/assassin or somesuch? I like the current system because I can mold it any way I choose (without going so far as generic classes or such rubbish.) FUrthermore, I don't see any reason to change it. Just because a few can use this flexability in order to break it, doesn't mean the whole system needs to be torn down and reworked.
DungeonMaster 04-10-04, 02:58 AM	There's a good thread in Redgar's repository about PrC. I think it's PrC what they are where they are going etc... I've detailed my opinion about them in there. In very short: PrC when used sparingly with prudence by the DM can indeed add spice and flavor. No doubt. PrC when used liberally and without care smother the heroic archetypes, making the setting a mish-mash rather that flavorful, and can become a tangled web of ill-thought out additional variables that combine to a broken whole. I personally ban them all in my games. There is enough room in the game with feats, skills and multiclassing to fit any cultural variant of the archetypes (warrior, rogue, wizard and priest).
XunValDorl of HouseKilsek 04-10-04, 12:04 PM	I believe that kits would have been better because people will stick to the core classes.