Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Olive" data-source="post: 1563784" data-attributes="member: 1297">This is absurd. A king can award membership to whatever organisation you like. A PrC represents training that can be awarded by the organisation, not a requirement for entry. you've got it mixed up. Show me one place where the core rules say 'membership in an organisation can only be gained by taking an appropriate PrC. Roleplaying is not allowed.' They don't. PrCs are about encouraging roleplaying? Do you want the mighty abilities of the Wizards of the Lost Pool? gain admission to their ranks! Role play it!!!I swear, maybe it was a bad name choice, but the way people talk about PrCs you wouldn't realise that they were a flexible interesting way to create difference in a game system and roleplaying opportunities. They fill a whole range of roles:1) things that core classes can't do. These are the PrCs designed to facilitate multi-classing, or fill a niche that the core classes don't do well, ie Mystic Thurge and Duelist. IMO, this is a much better solution than changing the multiclassing system. A subset of these is the archetype such as the cavalier. You can play a good horse born fighter with core classes, but if you want to specialise in that, then take the cavalier PrC. You'll be great at fighting on horse back, but not so good at other stuff. The guild thief PrC is another good example of this. It's not that you need to take a PrC to be in a guild, but the PrC lets you specialise in a particular role.2) Cool organisations and lost power. I don't want an alienist core class. I love the PrC however. Players and their characters should be developing towards a role, gaining as they progress. PrCs represent that well, much better than core classes. My other favourite RPG, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, has advanced classes that represent this. when I first say PrCs, I didn't think about the name, I thought about those. I never heard anyone complain about advanced classes in WHFRP.There are several issues that people have with PrCs that are misunderstandings IMHO.1) Just because there is a PrC to represent the Knights of the Hart or the mage guild of silverymoon doesn't mean that you have to be a member of the PrC to play a member of the organisation. The PrC represents what many members of that group will train in etc, but it's not the be all and end all of the group. 2) that the class defines the character. Sep has said some good stuff on this. the mechanics are behind the scenes ways to describe a concept. Sep has stated pit fiend fighters. He doesn't think of them as devils trained to fight in a class, he just thinks of the mechanics as the best way to describe a character. I have an NPC in my campaign who is a Necromancer/Cleric/Mystic Thurge/True Necromancer. He didn't travel to Kumquat to become a mystic thurge, he studied ways to blend his magics.3) Just because some PrCs represent organisations, all PrCs represent organisations. They don't. Not all PrCs have the same idea or motivation behind their design.4) That because some PrCs are badly designed, and not everyone is interested in a particular PrC, the concept is therefore bad. The concept is fine.Finally, it seems that far too many people spend a lot of time annoyed about buying books and magazines with PrCs they don't want in them. Don't buy the book if you don't want PrCs. Complaining about badly designed PrCs (and by that I mean over powered, not just fulfilling a role you aren't interested in) is much more valid than just saying 'no one makes books for me'. One of the funny things about all these threads is that people are full of 'I hate PrCs/feats', but I never see people say what they want in their books instead except 'more fluff less crunch'.</blockquote>

Verification