Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Deadguy" data-source="post: 431327" data-attributes="member: 2480">When you see the paradox, my young apprentice, then you are ready for the next step! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />My remark was actually born of a little grumpiness <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> I have read a few threads here and elsewhere like that recently. Basically saying that ' the character I want to play can't get to the prestige class I want to play fast enough'. As if Prestige Classes might take some work! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />But it does raise the point that I recall discussing with someone last month - that many PrCs are written to be approached really only from a single angle because of their requirements. Now for some PrCs that's probably appropriate, but for others? I would like to see a few more PrCs where the requirements are more along the line of: 'needs A, needs B or X and Y'. That way, the path is kept flexible - which is one of the keystones of D&amp;D3e design - whilst still being demanding.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Deadguy, post: 431327, member: 2480"] When you see the paradox, my young apprentice, then you are ready for the next step! :D My remark was actually born of a little grumpiness ;) I have read a few threads here and elsewhere like that recently. Basically saying that ' the character I want to play can't get to the prestige class I want to play fast enough'. As [i]if[/i] Prestige Classes might take some work! ;) But it does raise the point that I recall discussing with someone last month - that many PrCs are written to be approached really only from a single angle because of their requirements. Now for some PrCs that's probably appropriate, but for others? I would like to see a few more PrCs where the requirements are more along the line of: 'needs A, needs B [i]or[/i] X and Y'. That way, the path is kept flexible - which is one of the keystones of D&D3e design - whilst still being demanding. [/QUOTE]

Verification