Prestige Class Format: Complete Warrior or Champions of Valor?

[Dog Moon]

I'd rather have more PrC. Say I use 10% of all PrCs sometime in my game because only that number is fitting/interesting enough for me to use. When there's only 3 PrC in a book, there's a high chance I won't use a single PrC in the book. That means all that extra information about the PrC is useless to me. I suppose I could use the background info and modify the PrC to what I like, but that's just too much work. So I want more because then the chance of me using at least 1 PrC in a book increases.

For most PrC, I don't care about the background. The only time I care is when it's about an interesting organization the class belongs to. Then, I want to know a little information about the organization. I also don't need the sample NPCs, especially when they waste space by repeating all the abilities just listed in the PrC!

 

[Tarrasque Wrangler]

COV's take is fine in a campaign setting-specific book, but for general purpose I like the stripped down approach of CW.

And I'll echo what many have said: I could do without* the sample NPCs. That's the kind of thing that should be a WOTC website extra, as something you would need the book to decipher but would make sense if you did and be useful if you cared about that sort of thing.






*And by "do without", I mean "quit padding your pagecounts, jerks!".

 

[ForceUser]

I just want the crunchy rules bits. The fluff I can provide myself

Quoted for truth.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

I'd rather have more PrC. Say I use 10% of all PrCs sometime in my game because only that number is fitting/interesting enough for me to use. When there's only 3 PrC in a book, there's a high chance I won't use a single PrC in the book. That means all that extra information about the PrC is useless to me.

My sentiments exactly.

I despair over the new PrC and magic item formats.

Brad

 

[BWP]

Given that people hated the sheer amount of crunch in the Complete Warrior

Which people would that be?

A PrC shouldn't be all crunch, but I don't want the book to waffle on about the role they play "in the world", when the book doesn't know what my world is like.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Cut everything that says "how this PrC fits in in the world". It's meaningless, straightjacketing waffle.

A PrC is a collection of mechanics for doing something with a character that cannot be done without it (and to that end, most PrCs should scrap their organisational ties, unless the PrC is something like "a spellcaster who needs a ritual group" etc.)

Finally - take the pay that the fluff-generators are getting and put it into playtesting with some serious powergamers.

I can make up fluff on the spot. It takes a lot longer to put together balanced mechanics.

 

[SteveC]

I voted "something else," because I want the fluff, but I want good fluff. Most of the stuff in the new format has me scratching my head and saying, "well duh!"

For an example of what I'd call good fluff, see weapons of legacy. That supplement had serious rules problems, but the individual items had interesting stories and backgrounds. More of that and less of telling me things that are obvious from the class descriptions!

 

[Glyfair]

Given a choice between the two, I think I'd prefer Complete Warrior. However, what I'd really like is closer to the newer prestige class format. Cut the description to a little over half of what they have now and you'd be in my sweet spot.

 

[jshelky]

Had to vote for Complete Warrior, As much as I like how they've beefed up the info on PrCs they've kind of gone overboard. A 2 page spread so that you can see all the info at a glance is plenty.

 

[Arnwyn]

I prefer the Champions of Valor format in a campaign-specific book.

Less so for a basic ol' generic rules supplement.