Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="papastebu" data-source="post: 3396171" data-attributes="member: 40894">A friend of mine recently suggested that the entire game be run as though characters had to become PrCs to actually get any of the higher benefits of playing. There would be two or three archtypes, possibly fighter, expert, and adept, or just fighter and expert.The fighter is a version of the warrior class as it stands, and would remain that way until second level, at which point the player would choose the next step in the character's career. The fighter could continue as he is, or go into the church, becoming a paladin, or learn skills like survival, two-weapon style fighting, and become a ranger. These wouldn't    the only options for the warrior base type, but would allow for something of a starting point for the character to prohgress into later levels.The expert could progress similarly, learning things like spellcasting--given the high intelligence score needed--from someone who already knew it, or intensifying his training to make himselve into the rogue or thief. My friend and I didn't get to go over the subject for long--we were about to play BloodBowl--but these are the vague impressions I carried away from the conversation.Another ideer is to start out with the three NPC classes as basics, and add levels of the classes as they exist now. The expert could take actual levels of fighter and a woodlands-based cleric, intensify certain skills all the while, emerging at third level or so as a 1st-level ranger. Warriors could do the cleric option and emerge as paladins, or take levels in rogue and cleric to become rangers. Adepts, of course, would start out with one of the spellcasting types--player's choice, let's say--and could move in some other direction with other core classes, or continue as clerics, wizards, or sorcerers.It seems like you guys are done talking about this, so I may be talking into the wind, but with a bit of refinement these ideas can help eliminate the cookie-cutterishness that PrCs attempt to ameliorate. You could make PrCs available in only this way, as well. Kind of 1e/2e, so sorry if that's not kosher.Sorry, too, for revenating a dead thread, but we were looking at this thread when we were having the conversation, and I just got back to a computer with internet. <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=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification