How many PrC's in your campaign?

[robberbaron]

None.

I got really tired reading on EnWorld about the extreme min-max PrCs that people put forward (and even publish) that I decided to do without them. That and the campaign kicked off at the end of a 15-year AD&D1 game and I wanted to continue the same "feel".

I have the usual problem of players wanting to invent new feats - effectively creating their own PrC on the sly - and new spells/powers that are unbalanced in their favour, but I can handle the occasional whiny player.

I am considering moving toward Occupational Memberships (guilds, societies, temples) offering power, access to spells/domains, etc. in return for taking membership feats, but these would be more for flavour and character development than bigger bangs for their bucks (GP).

 

[Ellie_the_Elf]

Anything may be allowed. Any race, any PrC, any feat, any concept. Anything.

Every character (not every component, just the whole thing) must be passed by me first.

If you have a goal, or an amazing tactic in mind, tell me about it and we'll discuss it.

If you come up with something that will contribute in a negative fashion to enjoyment of the game, and that is your intent, expect my displeasure.

If you come up with something that will contribute in a negative fashion to enjoyment of the game, and it was an accident, I'll explain the problem to you, and we'll fix it together. If the solution doesn't work in game, we'll try again.

If you suddenly turn up with something that is game ruining (ie - you just noticed that because you have feat X, spell Y and PrC Z you can kill anyone you wish without having to lift a finger), we'll immediately have a chat and remedy the problem. The remedy may be as simple as you agreeing not to do it, or as harsh as your character having a terrible accident as the fates convene to save the world.

In other words, I trust my players not to want to ruin my game. If they betray that trust, their enjoyment will be the first thing sacrificed to save the game. I find this leads to me having to do a lot less house-ruling and reading through musty tomes than having to specify what is in and what is out up-front.

This pretty much sums up how I handle the whole thing too. And for the most part, I've not experienced any problems as a result.

We're currently playing an epic game in a slightly modified Forgotten Realms setting, which has been going for 18 months now, (we began at first level). All but one of the PCs, and a large number of the recurring NPCs (both allies and enemies) have at least one PrC- the most anyone has is four, and he's planning to take a fifth next level up. I don't really have the issue of what fits into my campaign world or doesn't because we've built our version of FR as a group- so it's our world, not mine, as GM, and my players and their PCs have had a large part in shaping it to make it what it is now.

Yes, it's a very high powered, high magic game as a result. But I also have a group of players who are very invested in both the campaign world and their characters and we're having a great time with it.

Ellie

 

[TheAuldGrump]

First I look at the PrCs in a given book and ask myself - will this fit the theme and mood of my current setting? Then I ask - will this fit the theme and mood of any of my settings?

The ones that get the answer 'yes' get added to a list for that setting.

I then ask myself - is this class generic enough that it would crop up in any event?

These get added to all the lists. Those that fail that question as well go on a list titled 'No!' that gets pulled out when Rob wants to play an Ooze Master in the Iron Kingdoms.

The ones that have passed the tests then get graded, the ones that pass inspection are added to the list the players see, but I reserve the right to use the ones that I don't feel appropriate for player characters. (Mostly evil classes, I have good PCs, I want them to be heroes, not villains.) Some may need tweaking, and spell users may need some taken from other books that seem appropriate.

The Auld Grump

 

[Capellan]

If a PC wants it and the class is (a) interesting and (b) not broken, I allow it. I apply the same logic to myself in designing NPCs.

D&D is about having fun - if part of that fun for the player in question is a PrC, and it won't hurt others' enjoyment of the game, then I have no problem with it.

 

[JoeGKushner]

For the most part, I use what I like when I need it.

Some may wonder what effect that has on the background of the world.

So far the player's havent' asked or dug into it so I've never had to bother to expalin it.

About the only time I do, is when the player's are looking for a specific PrC and then depending on the requirements, they may have to do some training, seek out a mentor, or find an ancient guide to become that PrC.

 

[cjdc1973]

Any WOTC based PrC is open and available to be used in my game. Every character in my main weekly EPIC level campaign has at least one PRc and some as many as three. Even regular villians have multiple PrC's. When your game reaches 25th level or higher, core classes become really boring. Even monsters advanced by character levels have PrC's at this point just to keep combat interesting and the potential for something unique to occur.

 

[Arnwyn]

I tend to have three categories of PrCs:

Those I know have a specific role in my game.
Those I know I will not be using for game balance or campaign concept reasons.
Those that don't immediately inspire me as belonging in the game, but I would consider allowing or adapting such a PrC for game use.

Yeah, what Psion said. This is pretty much exactly how I approach PrCs.

In practice, however, virtually every PrC I've come across so far has fallen into the third category. Those in the first category are almost always from a FR book (since I run a big FR game), so that makes it easy.

The rest, though, generally fall into category #3 because as a DM, I have little time to waste going over PrCs. When making a decision on how to spend my limited resource of time, PrCs are one of the first to go - I'd rather read geographical accessories and modules than PrCs. Thus, every other PrC sits in category #3 until I get some time to actually peruse them.

 

[Ace]

I have none in my campaign so far as the party just hit level 4

I am undecided as too allowing them -- part of me says Yes! as I have several cool ones that would fit -- Another say NO! as they are more things to keep track off

My play group is a bit odd in that we don't use may books. We have PHB, DMG, MM and EXPSIHB and a few other things

I have some third party sources as does everyone else and between all of us we nay have some of the 3x splats as well -- they just haven't come into play

This group is a gaming group that happens to be playing D&D every other week (alternating with Streetfighter) not a D&D group

 

[DragonLancer]

Thanks for the thoughts and ideas, all. I've decided to be a bit more open minded I think. I won't immediately ban any, and let players decide what they would like before hand. I'll consider it then and give a yay or nay. But I'll also make a (short) list of recommended PrC's that I think fit the setting best.

Thanx again for your help.

 

[diaglo]

Actually being used? Two by PCs, more than that by NPCs (can't let my players in on that secret).

I've approved perhaps 25 for use in the campaign, but so far no one has felt like the benefits were worth the effort to meet the RP prerequisites (joining the guild, doing the quest, whatever). PrCs in my campaign simply aren't another class you tack on to a character once you've taken a few feats and skills. They have meaning -- and obligations.

4 out of 6 PCs have PrCs.

Dwarf Monk with one, Halfling with one, Human Cleric with one, and Halfling Bard with one.

only the Gnome Sorc and Human ft/rog are without.

but we did lose the Human Druid and others to player attrition.