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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Humanophile" data-source="post: 1929640" data-attributes="member: 1049">Terrainmonkey, what you really seem to be against is glut.  I am too.  But publishers need to put out books, and there are certain crunch-bits that are to be expected.  PRC's, feats, and spells are big ones.  The best solution is to realize that you'll never be able to use all of the book, but to find ways to use the bits that strike you as interesting.  It's one thing for a PRC to appear out of thin air.  It's another entirely if you know that a player of yours is interested in that sort of thing, and build in such an organization so that the player can actually feel a sense of prestige in joining the class.Yes, there are players who just like playing with the newest toys.  It's probably wisest to indulge them in ways that won't throw the campaign off.  Giving everyone the chance to make whatever funky high-level builds for a beer and pretzels cage match will probably blow off steam better than DM fiat will, and let you come back to your main game without such disruptive wanderings.As to the original point of this thread, it really depends on the direction we want D&D to take.  Some people want the base classes to be something you can keep taking indefinately, others want a more D20 modern approach where you're expected to class-dip over time.  If your aim is the former, I agree that fighter and caster PRC's should actually have some cost attached.  The question is where you can find a fair thing to take away in balance.  If you see D&D going in the latter direction, it's all about "prestiging up" the more defined classes.  D20 seems like it's testing these ideas to see which one fans end up preferring.</blockquote>

Verification