Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
You Don’t Have To Leave Wolfy Behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' Your Companions Level Up With You!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
PrCs: Anathema, or just lack of interest? (Pick two!)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 7799999" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>Well, there is at least one thing subclasses can't cover: something that, logically, should give every character identical benefits. Like the above suggestion for "vampire" or "werewolf." It seems reasonable that someone could, rather than doing everything to cleanse their curse, instead <em>run</em> with that curse. But why should a Rogue Vampire get different abilities from a Fighter Vampire...and why would different classes pick up their Vampirism only at specific levels? Etc.</p><p></p><p>I agree that past implementations of PrCs aren't necessary and don't work. But the <em>idea</em> of (as said above) a "mini-class" that gives you the same benefits no matter who you are, seems reasonable <em>because of</em> rather than <em>despite</em> subclasses.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Surely this is an implementation issue and not fundamental? That is, don't <em>make</em> PrCs that have ridiculous requirements. Keep them simple, just as 5e keeps basically everything simple.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, exactly this. Instead of creating a runic tradition, and a rune-fighter, and a circle of the standing stones, and a rune domain, and a college of runes, etc., you make it a one-stop shop; if people want runes, they can have them, and if they don't, it's as simple as "no rune scribes."</p><p></p><p>In case people think this is overly specific, you could also have shadow-magic users (a prominent Faerun feature), church inquisitor types, alienists (in the archaic sense of "psychiatrists"), or legendary-legacy type stuff, in addition to the aforementioned vampire/werewolf/etc. Anything where it's too much to squeeze into a feat, but doesn't make sense to distribute out as a ton of individual subclasses for every class. Heck, bring back the oozing-with-flavor playtest Sorcerer, the one that transformed as it used up its spell slots, call it a Metamorphosist or the like.</p><p></p><p></p><p>What about things that can't be squeezed into a single feat? 5e feats are chunky, but granting all the powers of a Vampire with one--even with a level requirement--sounds like too much.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 7799999, member: 6790260"] Well, there is at least one thing subclasses can't cover: something that, logically, should give every character identical benefits. Like the above suggestion for "vampire" or "werewolf." It seems reasonable that someone could, rather than doing everything to cleanse their curse, instead [I]run[/I] with that curse. But why should a Rogue Vampire get different abilities from a Fighter Vampire...and why would different classes pick up their Vampirism only at specific levels? Etc. I agree that past implementations of PrCs aren't necessary and don't work. But the [I]idea[/I] of (as said above) a "mini-class" that gives you the same benefits no matter who you are, seems reasonable [I]because of[/I] rather than [I]despite[/I] subclasses. Surely this is an implementation issue and not fundamental? That is, don't [I]make[/I] PrCs that have ridiculous requirements. Keep them simple, just as 5e keeps basically everything simple. Yes, exactly this. Instead of creating a runic tradition, and a rune-fighter, and a circle of the standing stones, and a rune domain, and a college of runes, etc., you make it a one-stop shop; if people want runes, they can have them, and if they don't, it's as simple as "no rune scribes." In case people think this is overly specific, you could also have shadow-magic users (a prominent Faerun feature), church inquisitor types, alienists (in the archaic sense of "psychiatrists"), or legendary-legacy type stuff, in addition to the aforementioned vampire/werewolf/etc. Anything where it's too much to squeeze into a feat, but doesn't make sense to distribute out as a ton of individual subclasses for every class. Heck, bring back the oozing-with-flavor playtest Sorcerer, the one that transformed as it used up its spell slots, call it a Metamorphosist or the like. What about things that can't be squeezed into a single feat? 5e feats are chunky, but granting all the powers of a Vampire with one--even with a level requirement--sounds like too much. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
PrCs: Anathema, or just lack of interest? (Pick two!)
Top