Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 7682602" data-attributes="member: 7006">I think this right here illustrates why WotC decided to offer up the idea of the PrC in the first place.  Because your suggestion is to create three different sub-classes for three different classes that... while all based around the similar theme of "runes"... have to be balanced each individually plus fit in within the class from which they come from.  So we're talking four to five abilities for three different classes (upwards of 12 to 15 different abilities.)Now sure... some of those abilities might be the same across your Warlock, Cleric, and Ranger example.  But some probably won't be.  Which means more work for the design, more features to have to come up with and balance, more fluff that has to be written to explain the difference between a warlock rune mage and a ranger rune mage, and a cleric rune mage.Whereas in the PrC format... it's just 5 abilities to parcel out.  Abilities which any class can use.  And the fluff of the mini-class is only written once.I think this is precisely why they went in this direction (rather than a direction like the one you presented.)  But in the end... there's a good chance that if enough people say they don't like the PrC format, then they might not go in that direction after all?</blockquote>