PrCs

[Kzach]

From what we've seen, I'm guessing that paths are more like 2e kits than prcs.

They're more about flavour and focusing your character down a particular road than the radical change prcs always felt like to me. With prcs you were essentially starting all over again rather than evolving your character.

It would seem that paths are much more organic and simply shape your character in a more defined manner than their previous class and role did. To that end, they give certain power choices that better reflect that focus.

And, of course, much like 'builds', they're more suggestions than straightjackets. I can see paths being fairly open and easy to create your own, even just from the powers given throughout all the official books.

At least, that's the gist I'm getting of them.

 

[Torchlyte]

Perhaps some of the multi-PrC customization will be adequately replaced by power selection. This would be especially effective given the new direction of cross-class training.

 

[neceros]

The reasons they don't want Players choosing from hundreds of PrCs is because some of them were so worthless they made you unworthy of the paper you wrote the character on, and others made you Gods.

It's a balance design. You pick one class: That's your role.

I don't think it's such a big problem with Paragon Paths. I see no reason not to allow a change or even a Multi class.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Prestige classes were packages of Kewl powers.

Umm... all we gotta get are the powers now.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

I think they are the solution to the multiple, and much abused, small dips into prestige classes that characters would often have. Heck, if you only had four classes, really, you weren't that good

 

[Carnivorous_Bean]

If prestige classes are truly gone, then there shall be great rejoicing in my soul.

 

[Lord Zack]

I'm thinking of using the multi-classing mechanics to make prestige classes of sort.

 

[Alkiera]

I'm thinking of using the multi-classing mechanics to make prestige classes of sort.

Multiclassing preview next Wednesday (April 30). Sooo looking forward to it. I'm very curious about just what they have in mind; the 'dip' multiclassing seems well handled by the mentioned 'Wizard Training' type feats, but I'm hoping there's an answer for those who want to be a more even multiclass, like a 10/10 ftr/rog in 3E (Only less useless)

 

[DandD]

You know what I hope not to see anymore? To make prestige classes like the Arcane Trickster, the Mysthic Thaumaturge, or the Eldritch Knight, which basically were simply Rogue/Wizards, Wizard/Clerics and Wizard/Fighters-multiclasses that did suck less than their pure non-prestige-class-equivalents, because they didn't lag 10 levels behind everybody else and sucked in every way possible. D&D 3.X-multiclassing was one big failure. The system only worked for low-level character, where the discrepancies in Basic Attack Boni, spells per day and skill points weren't that grave. But as soon as you went over level 8, those who multiclassed in spellcaster/mundane-classes were horribly bad. And to counter this, they created such boring prestige classes like those above-mentioned, to somehow remedy the gaping weakness of multiclass-characters...

I sure hope that 4th edition gets this right, so that multiclassing characters don't become a pure burden for everybody else. But I admit that I doubt that they've found a way to make the concept of multiclasses sound, without being broken...

 

[Mort_Q]

With the new powers structure, fair and balanced mutliclassing would seem to be easier to do.

I look forward to next Wed. as well.