Weapon Finesse

[hong]

I disagree. Sure, they're optional, maybe even more so than any rule is optional. But if they appear in the core rulebook, isn't that what defines core? That means we can probably expect to see the class actually used in adventures and the like, as has been the case for Assassin and the others.

Well, I can't remember the last time I used a published module without hacking it completely to bits and rewriting it.

In any case, I don't want to have to deal with whiny players saying "but the duelist is core! You GOTS ta let me have it! You GOTTA!!1!" Not that I'm dealing with any such players now but you never know.

 

[BryonD]

So, Hong, are you defining "core" as " a class that the DM is not allowed to ban"?

 

[Umbran]

In any case, I don't want to have to deal with whiny players ...

First off, a whiny player will always find something to whine about.

Second, if said player brings up a "Core" argument, you point them at the DMG core rules, where it says:

"Allowing PCs access to presige classes is purely optional and always under the purview of the DM. Even though a few examples can be found below, prestige classes are idiosyncratic to each sampaign, and DMs may choose to not allow them or to use them only for NPCs."

I seriously doubt that 3.5E will notably change that language. By the core rules a whiny player refers to, not only are PrCs optional, but the ones in the book are only examples, for illustration.

If that's enough for your whiny player, beat 'em over the head with the book until they stop whining. After all this time, hong, you should know about beating people with sticks

 

[hong]

First off, a whiny player will always find something to whine about.

Well, if you want to be really technical, I don't want to have to deal with whiny idiots on messageboards bleating about how the DM is being nasty for not letting him take a "core" prestige class.

 

[SpiderMonkey]

Staying along the lines of the Duelist topic...

one of my players has just made a fighter for our campaign, and has intentions of becoming a Duelist someday. One of the current pre-reqs is Ambidexterity, which is going the way of the do-do in 3.5. Any idea what to replace this with? I'm not sure if TWF seems applicable (even though it looks like she's going for it anyway). Thoughts? Suggestions?

Thanks all!

 

[drnuncheon]

Staying along the lines of the Duelist topic...

one of my players has just made a fighter for our campaign, and has intentions of becoming a Duelist someday. One of the current pre-reqs is Ambidexterity, which is going the way of the do-do in 3.5. Any idea what to replace this with? I'm not sure if TWF seems applicable (even though it looks like she's going for it anyway). Thoughts? Suggestions?

Have her take Ambidexterity now, then wait till July and see what the new requirements for the class are, then allow her to rearrange her feats. That's what we're doing for my PC (also on the Duelist track).

J

 

[ChaosMage]

Not to mention that are scoopers have left out information and had to correct themselves. I appreciate their answering but they need to at least take the time to get it right.

Hey, they've answered something like 250 (probably more) questions in the last couple of days. I think they've put more than enough time into it as it is; I don't think we can blame them for the few errors they have.