Long-term planning for D&D characters

[pawsplay]

If planning hurts your creativity, your kind of creativity is probably not that effective when trying to slay red great wyrms.

 

[DonTadow]

I think the main problem would be conflict between those players who have memorized numerous prestige classes from a large number of supplements and those who haven't. The former can plan their characters effectively, while the latter will howl in frustration: "Why didn't anyone tell me about that prestige class 7 levels ago? Now my character can't get into that class!"

Enjoyment of the way your character develops shouldn't hinge on memorizing large numbers of supplements. At least that's my stance, and I am sticking with it.

In this case, this is a DM issue. I prefer to set the reigns of a campaign, let players know of their options up front. I have a huge binder/primer that I use for my ccampaign that has the listings of all accepted material for the campaign. That way, there's no question as to what should and shouldn't be there.

 

[The_Gneech]

It was recently pointed out to me that many players plan their D&D characters a long time in advance - often for five, ten, or even more levels. They need to do this to get precisely the combination of feats and prestige classes they want.

And somehow, this seems vaguely annoying. The life of an adventurer can be extremely varied, and logically, this should mean that a character constantly learns new things in response to his previous experiences - instead of focusing his training on a rigid advance scheme so that he can meet certain prerequisites for his favorite prestige class.

Should we accept this bit of metagaming that characters simply continue to advance into the direction of a specific goal, despite the fact that the character himself might not even have seen reason to learn specific skills or feats? Or should the prerequisite system be overhauled to allow for more spontaneity and variety during character advancement without obstructing future choices?

What are your thoughts on this?

My thoughts are that except in cases of the most extreme "This don't fit!"-ness, players should be allowed to play the characters they want. The DM controls the world, the flow of time, every person/place/thing the character is ever going to encounter in their career -- the player needs to be able to have something they can control themselves.

I know that when I'm a player, I have very definite ideas about what my character should be like, and nothing puts me off a game more than being thwarted in my attempts to make them match my desired concept.

As for overhauling prerequisites, that would have to be taken on a case-by-case basis, but they are there for a reason: opportunity cost. If you want the benefits of a PrC (and most of them do have pretty significant benefits), you have to pay for them somehow.

-The Gneech

 

[scrubkai]

As someone who takes great enjoyment from planning a character, I really don't see any issue with planning ahead. And I really don't see how it's a distraction to anyone else...

A couple of current examples from my games:
I have a very lawful Warblade character in our campaign where we try things out. He has been planned out through level 20 on the assumption that he will never find a prestige class that interests him.... A couple sessions ago, he was exposed to an ability that he though was really cool. To gain that ability himself would require him taking a level or two of another class. So now he has two different character paths that he has to pick between, and based off the actions that happen to him over the next few sessions, he will make his choice. He knows what skills he wants in what order and gets very frustrated when something comes up that disrupts his advancement plan... But that's the character, he expects things to be ordered, and when things don't match that order, he "fixes" it to match it...

I also am playing a Warforged Sorcerer who is obsessed with fire. Part of his backstory is that he hears fire talking to him and feels that the other races have enslaved fire, and that is not right. The character was specifically built with a prestige class in mind. (mainly elemental savant (fire)) He will become that prestige class eventually, what exact level... Ehh, it isn't important, what is important is that someday he can become one with the fire.

Both Characters are planned out. Neither is really happy about changing, but that doesn't bother anyone else at the table, so what's the problem?

Kai

 

[pawsplay]

Or should the prerequisite system be overhauled to allow for more spontaneity and variety during character advancement without obstructing future choices?

What are your thoughts on this?

If the prerequisites are nonsensical, that means the PrC is badly designed.

 

[Darklone]

Most people I know plan from one level to the next...

Same here. Campaigns change from day to day.

 

[Voadam]

It is a poor system design for the type of situation where PCs are introduced to an organization or secret society mid campaign and a PC joins the group and then wants to join that exclusive group's prc. It will then take multiple levels of not being where they want to be before they can then get to the class they want based on past history.

Retraining is a Kludge system that can work, but not perfect.

Multiclassing penalties also constrain the organic development of a character similarly by imposing penalties on paths that don't follow specific patterns of development (single classed, two classes that match each other in levels, favored class dipping, favored class focus with dipping in other classes, the all dip path).

It works to force specific paths by forcing characters to build to meet the specific requirements from the beginning.

 

[Nikosandros]

Personally I am in favor of changing the prerequisites system, so that one doesn't have to plan sever levels ahead.

If at the end of an adventure I befriend the High Master of the Mauve Knights that's when I might decide to join the organization and not 5 levels earlier...

 

[gizmo33]

Should we accept this bit of metagaming that characters simply continue to advance into the direction of a specific goal, despite the fact that the character himself might not even have seen reason to learn specific skills or feats?

Depending on the prestige class, it makes sense that there would be some advertisement of the skills you'd need. In order to take the "Sacred Warrior of Krull" prestige class, it might be necessary to take proficiency in some weird exotic throwing weapon plus get married, for example. Such requirements would be part of the campaign mythos and would be known by characters.

By the same token, I think a character like Conan (at least the impression I get from the books), is someone who gained his skills largely by happenstance, and wherever he happened to be. I would expect most people not to consider Conan a sub-optimal character build. IMO People who are not rules-savants should not have their characters penalized.

The solution I'd prefer would be a balance, where "specialist" characters require some planning, and generalist character's (broadly speaking, like Conan) don't. IMO both personality types should be roughly balanced - regardless if some players enjoy the competetive advantage of maxed character builds.

The whole idea that the player choses his character's skills makes for a good game and gives players something to do, but it's probably a little metagamey and unrealistic. You'd expect a 12th level fighter who lives in the campaign world to pretty much know what the best fighting styles are, and to teach his apprentices those skills.

Also, there is the option of retraining for skills and feats - I think one of the Unearthed Arcanas or Player's Handbook supplements has rules for that.

 

[The_Gneech]

Well, Conan is human (giving him more flexibility in the multiclass department) and generally keeps his leveling in the FTR/BBN/ROG group, all of which multiclass together very nicely.

-The Gneech