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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Capellan" data-source="post: 570564" data-attributes="member: 6294">These are good things, but everybody gets them.  Only a select few can ever be an {insert PrC of choice}.Case in point: my Robin Hood example from above.  Are you really telling me that generating him simply as a Fighter / Ranger would be anywhere near as distinctive and "true to the concept" as a PrC would be?To answer the questions in order:Because it's their character.  Theirs, not mine.  They have every right in the world to have input into how the character should develop, just as I have every right to say: "no, you can't have ability X, because it would break the campaign.  How 'bout we tweak it and make it ability Y?"Yes, players help design the world.  Either intentionally: "you know, it would be cool if XYZ" or unintentionally "is there any way to ABC?  how about people who do DEF?".  I'm always listening to what my players say: there are the germs of some great ideas in there.  Character backgrounds are another great way in which they fill in details of the game world, as well.  (in fact, in arwink's game, PCs are encouraged to develop parts of the game world)Non-standard monsters: during initial development, naturally not.  That would spoil the fun and excitement for them when they encountered the beasts.  I would definitely ask for their opinions after they had fought them, however.  And I'd be more than willing to make adjustments based on their comments, if they made good points.Ditto for dungeons.  (For the record, I consider these questions a fundamentally spurious argument: players not knowing about new monsters and dungeons is a fundamental of the game.  Equally, knowing what their characters can do is also fundamental.  It's apples and oranges.  And suddenly I'm hungry ...)As for custom deities, I would listen to the player's proposal.  If I felt that they were suggesting the deity solely for gains in the game mechanics (eg the deity had all the coolest domains) then I would probably disallow it.  Just as I would a PrC that was designed on the same basi.  If, however, the deity had been designed to fit in with a character concept, and filled a useful niche in my game's pantheon, I'd be happy to accomodate them.Are your players really so insecure that they would see developing a PrC for another player as "improper"?  Do they think you're scheming behind their back if you ever talk to a player away from the table?  There's nothing to stop them from coming up with their own PrC ideas, after all.Over the course of this thread, your argument seems to have shifted from "a character shouldn't have more than 1 PrC" to "a player shouldn't be involved in developing a PrC" to "characters don't need PrCs".Fundamentally, it sounds like you don't like PrCs.  Don't like the concept, don't like the execution, and feel the options they give to players are excess to requirements.  That's fine, and you're entitled to your opinion, but it seems to me like we aren't ever going to get anywhere in this conversation when the basic positions are:incognito: PrCs are a bad ideaCapellan: PrCs are a good ideaO' course, if I've misunderstood your position, feel free to rebut <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification