NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DMZ2112" data-source="post: 6466180" data-attributes="member: 78752">[MENTION=63245]Evenglare[/MENTION] --I love prestige classes in concept but in execution they have been utter post-vindaloo toilet-clogging rules glut since the 3.5 update.  That is a lot of years of broken trust to overcome.I am not /in principle/ opposed to the idea of highly specialized classes with multiclassing requirements that include advanced level -- certainly, I would rather see these than more base classes.But here's the big problem with increased specialization: to remain relevant, in entails greater effectiveness.  The loss of peripheral abilities has to be repaid with a commensurate gain in capacity for the primary abilities.  And then you're at war with bounded accuracy.And bounded accuracy is /the most important thing/ about this edition.  So if you can't have both relevant prestige classes and functional bounded accuracy, my vote is going to be for functional bounded accuracy every time.I agree that your feat-mediated proposal is a way around this problem, but the problem I see in it is exactly the one you point out -- I do not understand the value of restricting players in this fashion.  Earlier on these boards I had a discussion with some folks about the Knights of Solamnia in Dragonlance, and why I disagreed with using feats to describe that (or any) advancement track.  Feats are an important means of character customization in D&D5, and requiring every PC that wants to follow a certain course of development to use their few feat slots in a prescribed fashion is detrimental to character originality.  Every member of your feat-mediated prestige classes is going to look like every other member.I suppose this will be mitigated if you are planning to follow the original intent of prestige classes -- that they be independent of association with a base class -- but in reality this has not been the implementation of prestige classes since /before/ the 3.5 update.  Prestige classes are almost uniformly specialized versions of base classes, and for good reason -- base classes are archetypal by design.I can't get behind this strategy -- PCs should be free to select whatever feats they desire, irrespective of their faction, class, subclass, background, race, subrace, or even prestige class, should such a thing become available.  Feats are too important to character ownership.</blockquote>

Verification