Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6312755" data-attributes="member: 1465">IIRC the 3e PrCl were invented by Monte Cook. He was the main responsible for the DMG where those were presented anyway, he could have been clearer in the book about their usage. OTOH he had often said (maybe not in the book tho) that the DMG PrCl were supposed to be examples, because the whole PrCl concept was originally an idea for DMs to design their own, and that's why there are only 6 of them in the 3.0 DMG. The DMG did not presented it as a hard-coded system, with rules for creating "balanced" requirements and benefits. Maybe they thought it would have been too hard and restrictive, but maybe also because they weren't thinking PrCls would have become immediately a major feature of 3e. In fact, IMHO had they imagined that, they could have probably put PrCl in the PHB (just like they're doing in 5e with subclasses).Part of the fault was clearly also the editors' or whoever decided to milk the PrCl cow in supplements. Already in the early splatbooks, PrCls were the main 'meat' of the books in terms of page count. Desire to fill many books with them, possibly coupled with a lingering idea that "they are just examples anyway" could be the reason for rushed design.And part of the fault is no doubt the players'. Soon it was the players who demanded more and more PrCls, just by rewarding WotC with buying all those books of PrCls.In real terms, it's hard for me to tell how widespread the problem was, because personally I have only played TT in a few gaming groups, and we never had any player stacking PrCls, but clearly this is not statistically representative. OTOH on PbP games I noticed a more common habit of creating "combos" with PrCls. Where this was really visible, was in online forums, but who knows if those people were ever actually playing those PCs at home, or were instead just playing their own game of combos in online forums? Whatever the truth, they did spread the feeling, that players everywhere were like that, and probably a lot of people who (like me) had no problems at home, still believed that the "world outside" was ravaged by mad PrCl min-maxers.So overall it's a bit of everybody's fault in the community. Whether PrCls were really widely abused or not, what has remained today is this difficulty to talk about the whole idea of PrCls, without people immediately get a rash thinking it will inevitably be abused if done in a new edition.</blockquote>

Verification