Are there enough PrC's to require all characters to take one?

[Emirikol]

All:

I run campaigns that level up rapidly in the world of Hyboria (Conan the Barbarian). Would it be unreasonable for me to house rule that PC's to need take at least one PrC by 10th level?

Understand first, that I don't bother with PRC skill/feat requirements, I go by whatever level-class could make it had they jumped through those hoops from the beginning.

My goal, is to get players to put some mechanics behind their character personae (which has been lacking lately).

Thoughts?

Jh

 

[CombatWombat51]

In a word, no. I can think of two of my PC's off the top of my head (which is saying a lot since I always DM) that had gads of flavor and personality, but in niether case can I think of PrC for them, prerequisites aside.

That said, what exactly do you mean by...

My goal, is to get players to put some mechanics behind their character personae (which has been lacking lately).

 

[AeroDm]

In a word I'd say Yes. There are enough PrCs out there to require players to take one. However, I really really don't think that having people add 'mechanics to their personae' will get them to RP (which i also assumed is what you wanted/meant). People won't develop a detailed personae about their ability to dodge blows based on insight and cunning just because they took a level of Duelist. IME, the exact opposite will occur.

 

[Spatula]

I don't understand why you'd want to force players into potentially undesireable character concepts.

 

[Emirikol]

I don't understand why you'd want to force players into potentially undesireable character concepts.

Perhaps I should clarify. Role playing isn't the issue. The opposite is true. The players think they can do anything, but don't have take the mechanics to back it up. I'd like to see a little more structure to their madness. Like this:

Minimum mechanical requirements:
sex, race, class, a PrC, skill ranks, etc. IMO, for example "Fighter" is too generic.

Should a player pretend to be a duelist if they aren't one and don't have _any_ skills? You can reward role-playing, but you can't reward CN _player_ behavior where they think they can change their character personality and focus at will.

I know that this argument can break down into, "let the players do what they want," but that would degenerate into "why bother to make them take a race or class at all? Why not just let them use a completely skill-based system..or better yet..no system at all and just role play."

jh

 

[Emirikol]

What if I just 'encourage' it with an x.p. benefit? Say 1000 gp.

jh

 

[AeroDm]

Perhaps I should clarify. Role playing isn't the issue. The opposite is true. The players think they can do anything, but don't have take the mechanics to back it up. I'd like to see a little more structure to their madness. Like this:

Minimum mechanical requirements:
sex, race, class, a PrC, skill ranks, etc. IMO, for example "Fighter" is too generic.

Should a player pretend to be a duelist if they aren't one and don't have _any_ skills? You can reward role-playing, but you can't reward CN _player_ behavior where they think they can change their character personality and focus at will.

So they are trying to declare themself something (a duelist in your example) without having a class to back it up and thus you are upset? Or perhaps more accurately, they are trying to declare themself a duelist and you want them to have abilities to reflect this so that there is an opportunity cost if they choose to no longer be a duelist and decide to become a knight, right?

I guess I can see the desire to end drastic changes, but I am not so sure this is the right way about it. Why not just talk to them? Or even better, offer some XP awards for RPing a character consistently.

 

[Emirikol]

So they are trying to.. if they choose to no longer be a duelist and decide to become a knight, right?
Why not just talk to them? Or even better, offer some XP awards for RPing a character consistently.

This is always easier said than done. I also don't care for arbitrary RPing awards. They're too hard to measure consistently.

Back to my original question though: are there enough prestige classes to allow a character to enter one of the 5 or 6 main pathways for a fighter (or other class)?

jh

 

[smetzger]

Understand first, that I don't bother with PRC skill/feat requirements, I go by whatever level-class could make it had they jumped through those hoops from the beginning.

Ok so you are not encouraging requirements for characters to take new abilities.

My goal, is to get players to put some mechanics behind their character personae (which has been lacking lately).

Ok, your players have taken the next logical step and decided that they don't really need the requisite ability in order to RP it.

I think if you enforce pre-requisites, and failures when PCs try to do something they can't, then your ultimate goal will be accomplished.

 

[Emirikol]

I think if you enforce pre-requisites, and failures when PCs try to do something they can't, then your ultimate goal will be accomplished.

That makes sense. I've probably been too lenient on the requisites. There's an old saying in business: When you get something for free it has little or no value.

Maybe I'll modify my requisites then to be equivalent.

THANKS!

Jay