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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Storm Raven" data-source="post: 2306983" data-attributes="member: 307">I woudl say that additional choices tend to equal additional choices. Whether they equal additional power depends on the choices. They will offer more flexibility, and many people confuse flexibility for power, but with the design set up that the rules embody, most choices involve giving up a different option in exchange for the one you chose.Most peopel (DungeonMaster among them) tend to think about what high level characters with "X, Y, and Z" options can do, and declare that this combination is "broken". What most of these arguments miss is this: most high level D&D characters are powerful no matter what you do (unless you do the most counterproductive things possible, like building a sorcerer with a 9 Charisma or similar nonsense). What matters is what you gave up to get X, Y, and Z options compared to what X, Y, and Z options give you.Many options allow characters to specialize, which makes them seem powerful, but those options forego other abilities that would give a more diverse array of abilities (the assassin is a good example of this, he gives up a pile of spendable skill points effectively for a handful of spells per day, he gets the very specific death attack ability, but gives up more versatile rogue special abilities, and so forth). Some PrCs are overpowered, but that's not a general issue. It certainly isn't evidenced by the PrCs in the 3.5 DMG (contrary to what DungeonMaster thinks), or PrCs in general. I could point to some PrCs that are overpowered, but that's a design flaw of those PrCs, not the concept of more choices.</blockquote>

Verification