NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 7682713" data-attributes="member: 5100">I'm very wary of the return of Prestige Classes. IMO, they were one of the worst aspects of 3E. The concept doesn't suck, but it's open to too much abuse.Still, I kind of like the way it was presented -- it's just another multi-class option, but with entry requirements. The standardized spell progression table should mitigate some of the issues, but may exacerbate others. For example, a Wizard who takes a 3rd level PrC can never gain 9th level spells. That's a trade-off I'm fine with and support, but I could see others disagreeing.The presentation made me think back to the way Paladin and Druid (and, probably, others) were handled in BECMI. They were just PrCs by another name. An interesting "module" would be to pare down the base classes to some arbitrary, atomic list with the other classes being PrCs. Paladin and Barbarian, for sure, seem like great choices for a Fighter to grow into. Ditto for Druid as a Cleric progression. It wouldn't work in all cases; I just don't see Sorcerers growing out of Wizards, or vice versa. But, it definitely gives room for subclasses that are richer than just an "archetype".As far as rune magic, I like the presentation. Runes are interesting enough to have some options around, but (IMO) not interesting enough to devote a ton of space. So, that write-up seemed just about right. A few more runes would be nice, but not critical and easy enough to augment, later. The runes make nice magic items that could be included in published (or home brew) adventures without requiring the use of PrCs or the Rune Caster, specifically.Short form: They took a concept that I've been opposed to bringing into 5E and made it work, at least at first glance. They even managed to sneak in a second rules module in a very, very flexible way. Good job.</blockquote>

Verification