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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Orius" data-source="post: 1345865" data-attributes="member: 8863">I generally agree.  Back in the later days of 2e, about 5 or 6 years or so ago, I tried putting together a sort of Unified System of Kits.  At this point, I had aquired most of the class books, as well as the entire PO rules (including the DM Option: High Level Campaigns book).  With those books, as well as about 2 or 3 dozen issues of Dragon, and some other suppliments and campaign specific material, I had a lot of NWPs and kits spread out over a fairly extensive 2e library.  I had no intention of throwing the CPHB style kits out in favor of the PO kits, so I wanted to merge the two kit systems.  Part of this was because I had completely adopted the PO NWP system (far better than 2e core).  In PO, it was cheaper to purchace NWPs that were related to kits, and I liked that rule, and wanted to adopt it to all kits.  However, I never got much farther than compiling a list of NWPs.  Once 3e came along, I abandoned that work, because 3e did what I liked in a much smoother way than trying to unify 2e.Well, some of the old kits were heavily front-loaded (cough, bladesinger).  PrCs are an improvement over those kits, since you actually have to train, and often develop skills and feats.  For example, the bladesinger used a fighting style which required a lot of practice.  It was a great concept, but very badly executed as a kit, since the player got all the benefits at first level.  That's why it was so hated, as well as the fact that it was just broken.  By contrast, I really haven't read any complaints from 3e DMs about the bladesinger PrC.  I think that's because the player has to first multi as an elf figher/wizard or take a few levels of bard or any other level advancement that would fit the class ability requirements, as well as take certain feats and train skills to a certain level.  So bladesingers aren't front-loaded (and not as over-powered either), and they do have to go through some amount of training.  And a bad kit became a good PrC.In any case, I see three types of 2e kits, WRT how they can be applied to a 3e game.First are the ones that are pretty much ale (edit: ale? ALE?  That's a typo, and I can't remember what the hell I was trying to say) to be emulated with the right skills and feats.  These are like the real basic kits that had several versions in the various brown books (and some later showed up in S&P).  These are kits like nobles, peasants, outlaws, and so on.  These need neither core or prestige classes.   All the player has to do is look at the recommended proficiency lists to see what kind of skills the character might have, use the kits as a sort of guide to select equipment for the PC and so on.Second are the kits that are perfect for PrCs.  This includes stuff like bladesingers.  If there isn't a PrC that corresponds to the old kits, then the DM should write one up, if he's willing to use it.  This is great for the front-loaded kits that were overpowered at 1st level in 2e, but wouldn't be too bad if the character leveled to meet the requirements for the kit.Last are the kits that were more than just a variant on an existing class, but a seperate class altogether.  Al-Qadim's sha'ir is a perfect example, as they're not really a wizard variant, but a more unique spellcaster.  These probably work best with new core classes, and that's how the sha'ir was handled (and fairly well) in Dragon #315.</blockquote>

Verification