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="delericho" data-source="post: 2841106" data-attributes="member: 22424">Maybe. My feeling is that 'dipping' is a very poor choice for certain base classes (any spellcaster), but okay for some others. I am also pretty sure it becomes a less attractive option the further you progress in your main class (so, a Rogue 4 is more likely to dip into Ranger than a Rogue 14, for example). I might well be wrong about that.My experience with PrCs is that every player I've seen has selected his PrC at 1st level, and then built his character to get into that PrC as quickly as possible. There were two assumptions behind this:1) A character had to have a PrC to remain competitive.2) You're taking a hit on effectiveness by selecting anything other than the optimal path.This, of course, means that all members of a given PrC have exactly the same set of skills, feats, or whatever - the optimal path tends not to leave a lot of room for other character customisations.It's entirely possible that my players were wrong about #2. I'm pretty sure they were wrong about #1. However, I would prefer it if neither were true - although I'm uncertain whether that means a change should be made to the game or not.It's worth noting that I have no problems with a character taking a PrC (or even multiple PrCs). I don't even mind if every character takes a PrC, if that's what the players want to do. But I do dislike the notion that you have to take a PrC, and have to take it as soon as possible.I'll also readily accept that my experience with PrCs is far from universal.</blockquote>

Verification