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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="incognito" data-source="post: 572912" data-attributes="member: 7008">Ok, I'm back - I'm going to speak to capellan's response first, becasue seasong got all the reply soptlight time, last time. Will all due respect Capellan, this is simply not true, if all the PCs end up taking a PrC, or multiple PrC, then they cease to be special.  Also, it can have the side effect of making characters who don't qualify for a PrC feel left out, or less than special.Serveral ENBoarders have asked if my players are so insecure that giving a player a PrC, or the ability to define a PrC would cause grief.  And to that I reply: OF COURSE IT WOULD!  Why?  OK, the player who developed the PrC suddenly has access to a "class" that did not exist before.  Not only that, accoring to some poeples opinions, he should be able to qualify for it right away - so suddenly he HAS some of those new abilities.  The other player chose a different set of feats, skills, based on a knowledge of existing classes, and role-playing considerations (hopefully).  Now he sees options availble to another player that are not availble to him.  He A) might now want to design his own PrC, but does not ahve the time, imagination, or ability  B) might be irritated with a set of feats, or skills he picked and desire the other PrC, or C) might no longer see his own class or classes as desireable as compared with the PrC Yes, he would be as distintive.  It is only the perception of the player/DM that causes him to be any less distinctinve.  Robin Hood was famous for his actions, just as much as he was famous for his abilities.  Don't tell me you need a prestige class to give a character distinction, do you?I don't have all the time in the world.  becasue one player wants to create a custom prestige class for his character, does not mean I have time to work on it with him, play test it, make sure there is not some loophole that I missed AND at the same time make sure the other players don't feel left out of the spotlight - PrCs are (and should be) SPECIAL.And Capellan.  I don't give two figs if it IS thier character.  I am the DM, it's my world!  For example: I think polymorph self is too powerful a spell, as players run around as trolls, until they can run around as Stone Giants.  This is simply my opinion.  And in MY game, if you want to play, you accept the fact that Trolls are considered magical beasts (so you don't keep your items when you x-form), and that Stone giants are 16 HD (15 HD is the Maximum for Poly-self).  If they cannot accept this condition, I certainly do not force them to play.  And no one's left yet...Should players have some say over thier characters?  Absolutely. This is what the core classes are for.  And before I modify a core class ability I consult with my players, as not to do so violates the player-DM contact as I see it.  they can also role-play as they see fit (within the guidelines of thier alignment, lest it change).  They are also oick any path they want in my world, adventuring wise.  That is the player freedom.PrCs are in the DMG, and that's MY book.  Players have no say over what goes on in there, likewise the MM.  If I ASK for input (and I have, in the case where I created a new Monster, and wanted to make sure the chracters thought the CR was correct, but I posted it to the ENboards and other boards too.)  then fine, I ask for it.  But I do not want my playes designing my world. If there were no duelists in my world, then that is exactly correct.  Becasue he could just as easily have said.  Hey, I think the "Spell-casting Prodigy" feat is cool.  And now I have to explain to him why this feat (in my opinion), is broken.  If he wants to play in a game where there are duelists, then there are games where they exist.  Go nuts.  I won't hate him for hit.  But look clsoely at your quote "canny defense and precise strike [snip]...so cool!"Clearly this character is less interested in role-playing, and more interested in abilities.  That is not saying the things they do influence the world.  It does, but it's still my world to influence.  See, I've got to want to run a story line, if there is going to be one.  That's why I don't allow evil chracters.  I don't like those story lines, generally.More thoughts...QUOTE]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".</blockquote>I want to be clear so I say this (sigh) again.A) Characters having more than one PrC is VERY iffyB) PrCs are not needed.  You can run a campaign without anyone taking a level in a PrC.C) PrCs, in my mind, are special.  Thier primary focus should be role-playing based, rather than feat, and skill pre-req based (although I am happy these pre-reqs exist).D) Players who actively seek PrCs and or custom PrC generally DON'T have the best intentions in mind.  They want new toys.  E) If the levels in core class you are currently in does not provide enough toys for your player, the class is either front loaded, or you are a power gamer (or munchkin).F) Being a Power Gamer (or munchkin) is fine if that is what all the players and the DM want.  Otherwise it is annoying, at best.H) Designing or allowing characters access to a PrC, because his class is front loaded, sometimes (IMO usually) does not solve this problem - it also detracts fmor the veracity of C)Finally:Seasong, Capellan, barsoomcore,  Mordane76: If you want your players to be involved in every aspect of your game design, so be it.  I won't tell anyone how to run thier game.  I think most of us stick to "DM makes world."  with respect to cusotmizing the word, I think we all have tweaks, but that many of the basics are maintained.  In this you are probably the exception seasong - your world has pretty non-standard advancement, amogst other things.That being said, I suppose you could make other changes to the world: roll d6's for everything (saving throws, to hit, spell resistance, initiative), and instead of having HP, have wounded conditions (light, moderate, severe).  Ooopps - they have that game already, it's called SHADOWRUN.  A fine game, but it's not DnD.  Within the concept of the DnD game, I am looking for here isthe  nod towards balance, and reason.  Players do not  NEED to be involved in every aspect of the game, in fact.  It is likely to be more detrimetal, than less. I used to play a game call Magic: The Gathering.  It was simple at first.  Play land, tap land for mana to summon creatures or spells, and attack.  Hit your opponent for 20 pts of damage, and he's out.  As the game got more an more complex, it became mroe about arguing about the timing of interrupts and instants (types of cards), and phases (parts of your turn), than it did about playing the cards. Now we call is Magic: the ArguingWhat a buzz kill.  But 3E is rules heavy to start with.  Most of the changes I make, I try to keep simple, so as not to confuse the game.Allowing players too much say in a game tends to turn into to rules arguing, which is not my cup of tea while playing, athough fine when seeking input on the message boards here.[/QUOTE]

Verification