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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Henry" data-source="post: 573211" data-attributes="member: 158">I think you are using the wrong assumption. First of all, "a nod towards balance" implies lip-service only - which is patently false toward most PrC's. Secondly, properly designed PrC's (of which there are more than a few) will sacrifice other abilities in favor of ones that better fit a character concept. "character concept" is not a code-word for "power-grabbing" it's a code word for "the concept of how a player wants their character to affect and be part of the campaign world. If I want a character that was born with the talent for magic, yet forsook it for life as a warrior, then my Sor1/Fighter3 is not meta-gaming, it's not powergaming, it's not even trying to get more power - it's perfectly balanced against a Sor4 or a Ftr4, and both would survive equally well in a party.Next, WHERE IN THE WORLD did power-gaming and meta-gaming become naughty words? "Charges of powergaming" "so-and-so is clearly meta-gaming?" So what if he is? Let me get the record set straight, that, from my opinion, THERE AIN'T NOTHING INHERENTLY WRONG WITH META-GAMING. If fact, meta-gaming doesn't mean what many people USE it like. Metagaming is using out-of-game knowledge about your DM or a certain item in-game, just because you know it's there. It's NOT picking your character's classes. Therein lies the trap of 1st and second edition; if a certain combination of race and class and abilities is SOOO bad, then Why was it even put into the freaking game in the first place? If an option is available in game, it's there to be used, not admired like the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden. "OOOOOO, shiny! But don't pick it, for that way lies munchkinism, and death." <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />If an option give a player an obvious advantage over others, DON'T even put it in the game. That is your right as DM, to know what your campaign can and cannot handle. But to assume that your campaign is the prototype for all campaigns (to assume that if your game can't handle it, it's not in there) is the height of a false step.Lastly, powergaming is a totally different issue. Powergaming is using high levels and powerful magics in the game as the baseline, rather than low-powered ones. Powergaming is as inherently good and fun to play as games in which PC's fight snakes and dogs with sticks and mud-bombs. <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=":)" />So, in summary:-It is unproven that all Prestige classes, or even most of them, are front-loaded and unbalanced;-What doesn't work from your experience can work like a charm for someone else (this is why I don't criticize others' 'obviously munchkin' games);-what is interesting is a matter of personal desire and experience.And finally, no part of this is meant to be insulting, incognito - just very direct. Feel free to tell me if you feel i've crossed a line here - it's just a fiery topic closer to me than I thought.</blockquote>

Verification