No Prestige Classes

[Technik4]

When I (and the people I started playing with 20 years ago) play a class based game, your character is his class, and multiclassing is the exception, not the rule.

I would have a lot of fun playing in a game like that, especially if you eased up the alignment restrictions too (mainly that Monks must be Lawful). The beauty of multiclassing is not to cherry-pick or become powerful, it is to find interesting intersections that fit a story (or just a character).

I imagine I would try and make a lot of custom feats in that type of campaign (to make up for the lack of PrCs), but otherwise it sounds pretty good.

 

[hong]

Teaching them to roleplay is fine. My players know how to do that, but I powergame unconsciously without realizing it whenever I am a player and so do they. A system that encourages it like 3e multiclassing is not helpful.

D&D is not a morality play. You don't get karma points for suppressing your sinful desires. If you find yourself powergaming, then clearly you're getting a kick out of it, so why stop?

 

[airwalkrr]

D&D is not a morality play. You don't get karma points for suppressing your sinful desires. If you find yourself powergaming, then clearly you're getting a kick out of it, so why stop?

The same reason I don't use cheat codes on video games or play Candyland. It's basically just masturbation. It might be fun for a brief moment but it has no point. If I use cheat codes or powergame I rob myself of the enjoyment that comes along with a challenge. Sure, I might beat a video game in 2 hours instead of 40 or I might kill the BBEG in one round instead of six or seven, but I'm not racing or playing a competitive sport, I'm playing a game. Challenge is part of the game. I may deceive myself into thinking cheating is fun, but after I've seen the end of the game, I often don't care to pick it up again for a long time if at all.

I never remember encounters that were pushovers. I never sit around with my buddies and wish for the good ole' days when we killed colossal red dragons in one round. I remember the encounters that had me on the edge of my seat for 10 long rounds of gruelling tactics and sit around with my buddies talking about how the colossal red dragon killed all but one party member who slew the beast when he had only 5 hp left.

 

[hong]

The same reason I don't use cheat codes on video games or play Candyland. It's basically just masturbation.

You say this like it's a negative thing.

It might be fun for a brief moment but it has no point.

Oh! And here I was thinking that gaming, being a leisure activity with no payoff at the end, was ultimately about enjoyment as opposed to an exercise in material gain or self-improvement. Clearly I was wrong.

If I use cheat codes or powergame I rob myself of the enjoyment that comes along with a challenge. Sure, I might beat a video game in 2 hours instead of 40 or I might kill the BBEG in one round instead of six or seven, but I'm not racing or playing a competitive sport, I'm playing a game.

D00d. If you really felt that way, you wouldn't need to go to the trouble of writing up complex rules to spite yourself. Just say to yourself "I am not going to use broken combo X", and follow through.

Challenge is part of the game. I may deceive myself into thinking cheating is fun,

You certainly seem to be trying really hard to convince yourself it isn't fun.

but after I've seen the end of the game, I often don't care to pick it up again for a long time if at all.

That's your problem.

I never remember encounters that were pushovers. I never sit around with my buddies and wish for the good ole' days when we killed colossal red dragons in one round. I remember the encounters that had me on the edge of my seat for 10 long rounds of gruelling tactics and sit around with my buddies talking about how the colossal red dragon killed all but one party member who slew the beast when he had only 5 hp left.

You are the DM. You can make colossal red dragons that can take anything the party can dish out. That applies whether or not they powergame. So cease making up dubious rationalisations about why you want to stop doing what it is your subconscious wants you to do, and go with what comes naturally.

 

[airwalkrr]

You are the DM. You can make colossal red dragons that can take anything the party can dish out. That applies whether or not they powergame. So cease making up dubious rationalisations about why you want to stop doing what it is your subconscious wants you to do, and go with what comes naturally.

What is the point of having rules if you are going to ignore them? I could just make up everything on the fly, but then it ceases being a game and ends up being me telling a story. That's not what I play D&D for.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

I spent six and a half years seeing how much it discourages archetypes, which I have found is good for roleplaying. Calvin the paladin has a much stronger identity if he has 15 levels of paladin than if he has two levels of paladin, two levels of fighter, one level of marshal and 10 levels taken from various prestige classes. He's now a fighter/paladin/marshal/knight of the chalice/justiciar/kensai/whatever. That is not an archetype, nor does it facilitate building a character identity. It just facilitates a "gotta catch 'em all" philosophy regarding prestige classes.

Its you or your players that are seeing the character as a "fighter/paladin/marshal/knight of the chalice/justiciar/kensai/whatever"

My current Eberron character has a planned progression and a good background. I describe her "class" as Sister of the Order of the Dance of Steel (which annoys the other players because I won't tell them my actual classes). A monastic order that practices a fluid combat style using the longsword. Experienced brothers and sisters eventually learn to use their fluid ballet to confound their opponents, constantly moving about and landing precision sword strikes.

This character would be impossible under your ruling, but it is a very fun character and is not overpowered.

The character is actually a monk/fighter/dervish, but you'll never hear me describing her that way.

Then you have my GH player: "I need more AC when I'm in bear form...level of monk, yay!" To me it's all in the intent. I don't want to punish creative players for the others cheese. And no matter how often I try to teach the cheeseherders the difference intent creates they don't get it.

 

[Crothian]

Teaching them to roleplay is fine. My players know how to do that, but I powergame unconsciously without realizing it whenever I am a player and so do they.

It sounds to me like you do actually know you do it. If you don't like it that much then stop. If you can't stop yourself from doing something that you don't want to do then you might need outside help.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

A character isent defined by his classes. I think the issue is that your not seeing the game beyond stereo type. Classes create stereo types. A fighter will always be a fighter no matter what he does or how he acts. A dm that cant see past the classes i have found treat classes a curtain way. When someone heavily multi classes to archive a concept, some dms and players do not know how to react to that. They don't know what that character is, and see it as a mess. But most of the time, this is because they cannot look beyond the classes system for a way to define the character itself. They think it needs a name like fighter or wizard, when people in real life tend not to fall into such broad generalizations. Why should characters?

I think the benefit of multi classes is you can make a character thats a warrior that could have a back story were he fights spell casters but given the right combo of feats and classes, he could actually show that he is proficient at it when he encounters spell casters. Nothing is more humiliating then saying your X in your back story and being mocked later when the mechanics cannot represent this.

take my favorite martial combo, monk2, fighter2, barbarian2. This combination is a much stronger idea of what I think a well rounded warrior is, compared to just a fighter, or just a monk, or just a barbarian. The back story potential, in turn is in turn offers many more possibilities with this combination, then one could have if they only had class levels in one of the three.

one could be dexterous fighter, or a wise old man who still has moments when the strength of his youth returns to him, or a contemplative young monk who is questioning his place in the world and wishes to seek out martial arts of distant lands and learn the way of the true warrior.

sometimes though, multi classing can aid a single concept, were the abilities accumulated over many classes and prc give credit to that concept and aid it. Sometimes classes don't need to be all verbs. some can be adverbs that enhance a single class that acts as a verb. Sure this can be done with feats, but its so much more effective to do it with classes. It also adds a degree of respect because again, its better to actually be effective in what you claim your character can do, rather then using up all your feats and still falling short. Its almost like penalizing the tumbling fighter or the sneaky wizard.

 

[Thaniel]

Sure this can be done with feats, but its so much more effective to do it with classes.

More effective = powergaming = evil nasty no-no

...Apparently.

 

[Greg K]

Rather than multiclassing and prcs, I would rather use base classes and class variants that reflect the DMs setting.