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: 573543" data-attributes="member: 6294">With an equal amount of respect, it is true <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=":)" />.  Any D&D game world is full of fighters, wizards and rogues.  They are generally not full of members of any one PrC (though a setting where one particular PrC was rampant might be an interesting mini-campaign).It seems your hypothetical players design their characters in a vacuum, without any sense of theme or intent.  I guess there are players out there like that, but I generally find that my players come to me on day 1 of the campaign and say "I want to play a Legolas-type" or "I have this idea for a holy warrior of St Cuthbert" or some other, capsule concept.Also, I note that you continue to talk as if the player making the PrC has carte blanche to give it whatever abilities and pre-reqs they like.  No-one is suggesting this.  As I and seasong have said - several times now - the DM has the ultimate right of refusal.  Players can propose things, but the DM doesn't have to accept them.From a mechanical perspective, of course you do.  If you make your Robin Hood solely with core classes, you'll have to 'blur' some of the character concept to fit into the rules.  Obviously his first Favoured Enemy is "Normans".  What's his second?  Why the hell does he have spells?  It seems I can't be a nature warrior unless I get magic, but that doesn't fit my character concept.  I better get some levels of Rogue.  But he needs to be tougher, so I'd best get some Fighter, too ... or maybe Barbarian, even though the Rage ability makes no sense for the concept.  At least Barbarians don't wear platemail, which also makes no sense for the concept.PrCs should not be about being 'better' than the core classes - and they certainly shouldn't be about being better than the other players.  They should be about nailing your character concept from a game mechanics perspective.  You can RP your character's personality to the Nth degree, but if the abilities don't match the concept, he will still feel a little 'off'.Note that my issues above are just as much about denying certain abilities to my character as they are about giving him them.  Plate armour, spells and barbarian rages don't match my character concept.  I don't want them.  But if I am stuck using the core classes, it's likely that they will have to get included.If you don't have time to adequately vet a PrC, that's fine.  You simply say that to the player, and explain that because of that, you can't allow it.  Campaign balance - as I have said half a dozen times already - must come first.I sincerely hope that you do give two figs that it is their character.  Because that statement, taken to it's logical extreme, is: "It's my game.  You're just spectators."  But I assume you are just exaggerating for emphasis.The thing is, while you are making a lot of good points about the need for game balance, you are continually tilting at straw men.  You keep telling us that players shouldn't be allowed to just introduce any old thing they like into the game.  But no-one is arguing with you about that!  What we're arguing about is your apparent position that the PCs have no right to suggest things to the DM.I disagree with this statement.  In my experience, a minority of players who seek PrCs (custom or otherwise) are doing so with "improper intentions".  Sure, it happens, but - at least in my experience - most people simply want to portray their character concept as accurately as they can, both from a roleplaying and a game mechanics point of view.You seem to have a very negative opinion of players in general, from your posts in this thread: you seem suspicious of their motives in making suggestions or pursuing a PrC.  Maybe I've been uncommonly blessed, but my players aren't like that (nor would I play with them, if they were).Sorry, but this is a completely spurious argument.  PrCs are a part of the D&D game mechanics.  You might as well say that allowing a PC to research a new spell or create a new magical item is "not D&D".</blockquote>

Verification