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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ambroseji" data-source="post: 6277713" data-attributes="member: 6700516">I agree with Mistwell that the way prestige classes were used in practice was much different than how they were intended to be used.I think that the current 5e style feats can fill the need for any mechanical specialization a character wants to have. They can have prerequisites if needed, and are otherwise available to any class. We've seen Arcane Archer done this way, and I think that as long as similar feats are designed to have a great enough impact on the character, they can function similarly to how prestige classes have been used in the class. Want to play an archer who imbues their arrows with magic? Take the Arcane Archer feat.On the other hand, I think that tying a character into the world should be handled with background-like features, not 'hard' mechanics. For example, a fighter starts off with the soldier background, but over the course of an adventure he has a religious conversion and begins working for the church. As a DM, I would probably use whatever downtime mechanics we end up with to give that character "story-mechanics" that are similar and equivalent to the priest background. Perhaps even proficiency in the Religion skill.To summarize, I think that prestige classes attempted to do two different things, provide unique, flavorful, mechanics, and connect characters to the world and its organizations. I believe 5e would be best served to do those things with separate mechanics.I know that some people want certain fighting styles to be unique to particular orders or secret societies, and if that's the case, then all that needs to be done is add story prerequisites to taking those feats. It would still allow other groups to cherry pick their mechanics without the story elements, if desired.</blockquote>

Verification