NOW LIVE FOR 14 DAYS ONLY! -- Archetype Anthology: A Dozen Archetypes for D&D 5th Edition on Kickstarter! From dual-wielding tempests to planar explorers -- a softcover collection of new archetypes for your 5th Edition game!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 7800250" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Well, part of the reason I ask is that there are some actual PrCs that I  think are worth porting into 5e. I've seen efforts to do so that tried to make one as some feats (severely lackluster ones compared to the inspiration and other 5e feats) and a subclass for a single class and have found it...disappointing, to say the least.As for "mini-class," I'm not sure I entirely agree. Do you really think no one would draw a comparison to PrC rules? It's a small class with possible qualifications (just simple, straightforward ones, not "rigorously prepare everything you do to qualify" ones) that gives up some levels if your main class for focused flavor and alternate benefits. IMO, whatever label we give it, it's doing the same overall thing. It's just cautiously done, keeping very aware of the faults and limitations of prestige classes as they appeared in 3.5e.As an example of one I think could work great: Archmage. It's cool and thematic to give up spell slots in order to get powerful effects, like permanently memorizing two copies of a spell in exchange for two appropriate slots. The original is only 5 levels, and the translated requirements would basically just be "proficiency in Arcana and ability to cast 7th level spells as a bard, wizard, or sorcerer." That's nice and simple, easy to qualify for, and allows someone to pursue a different take on ultimate control of magic (emphasizing how all arcane magic is really the same no matter how you access it...if you learn enough.) Further, because it would only kick in at level 14+, you can definitely balance its features against capstones and high-level single-class features, giving some freedom to be creative and interesting.</blockquote>

Verification