Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Spatzimaus" data-source="post: 1026711" data-attributes="member: 3051">I've got to side with Elder-Basilisk on this one.  The Eldritch Knight is EXACTLY what I think DMG PrCs should be like: very generic but balanced, so that the DM uses them as a template for constructing his own classes.  No single powerful ability, and it's not tied around any campaign-specific organizations/spells/gods/whatever.IMC, every PrC is customized, so this isn't an issue; I don't think we use a single splatbook PrC as written.  They've all been tweaked to where both the DM and player are happy with the balance and flavor.But I've been in campaigns where the DM took one look at a good, balanced PrC and said it wouldn't fit into his campaign.  The class had one or two abilities that wouldn't fit, and he couldn't easily figure out how to replace those without destroying the balance of the class.  If the class was centered around one really powerful ability and the DM doesn't like that one, how do you "fix" it?Maybe the class was one that was explicitly tied to a god or organization that didn't exist in that campaign.  Maybe those organizations DO exist but the DM doesn't want them involved in the campaign (see also: Harpers, Red Wizards).  The point is, too much flavor can really hurt the portability of a class.If you accept that the class is balanced as-is (versus single-class characters, not versus the Fighter/Wizard multiclass it's intended to replace) then it's not difficult to add a small number of abilities and some tougher prerequisites without unbalancing the game.</blockquote>

Verification