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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="shilsen" data-source="post: 1929763" data-attributes="member: 198">I really don't think that PrCs necesarily have to be, well, prestigious. It just seems far too narrow a distinction to me and I don't think that's even what they are/were originally designed to be. Sure, some PrCs involve undergoing significant trials to become a member of an elite group (e.g. assassin, red wizard), but there are lots of other possibilities. PrCs can represent narrow specialization in a certain area (loremaster, duelist) or a simultanesous mastery of two unlinked fields (arcane trickster, mystic theurge), focus on an area of racial expertise (arcane archer, dwarven defender), etc. But due to the name, people focus purely on the prestige aspect.  I'm not saying it would have obviated all the complaints, but I do think there'd be less if WotC had just named them "advanced classes" to start with.So, in my campaign, a PrC can be any of the above. It can represent a PC's membership in a specific group, in which case its assumption would probably involve a certain degree of interaction with existing members. But it can also just reflect someone's area of expertise, or be a god-granted role, or the result of poking the wrong sigil while exploring an ancient tomb, etc. And it has no necessary correlation with the respect one gets, since that comes from a mix of context and character. For example, the city councillor, who is probably just a low-level NPC class, in all likelihood gets more respect than the adventurer with levels in spellsword. The latter will get more respect as a warrior, but that's about it.</blockquote>

Verification