Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="maddman75" data-source="post: 2045949" data-attributes="member: 2673">Getting back on topic (though derailing the thread into a discussion of Hybrid is tempting <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />), I just don't see how saying 'okay, for your shifter character we'll give him the druid's abilities, except we'll lose the spell casting and let him turn into animals or even other things more often' and making a PrC in D&D.  You're making up a class in either case, based on extending the abilities of an existing class.  And I'd say that the PrC is superior, because that can be introduced as a goal of an existing character.  In C&C the only way to do this is to make a new character entirely.  This is what I was talking about with character 'lock in'.  Granted this always exists to some extent, but one of my requirements for an RPG is that the character can branch out after creation.  The multiclassing rules may help when they come out, but with the (IMHO) unfortunate decision to go back to different XP charts its unlikely that it will be as flexible and useful as the 3e multiclassing system.  I would predict lock in here too - you can be a fighter/mage, if you start as one at first level.  Switching classes would probably be reminiscent of dual-classing in AD&D.  I just don't see a way around it without consistant XP charts.</blockquote>

Verification