The Prestige Fallacy

[Crissa]

I don't think base classes are the answer to everything.

It's like how many people couldn't imagine a first level paladin back when 3.0 was new. Some ideas sorta need levels under their belts to work - LA, if you must.

I don't want too many base classes, either.

And maybe multiclassing should work better but I still don't see it as being able to represent every idea possible.

And lastly, I kinda really liked the idea of having classes that pertained to a campaign. Once you get a feel for what the DM and you want, you get to organically grow a better idea.

-Crissa

[Talisman]

Agreed.

Many PrCs were poorly implemented, but the idea is sound.

[Draco_Argentum]

I don't think so. Assuming the base classes are broad in the first place PrCs are like a very narrow focus in a base class. You could just do that within the base class and not write the PrC name on your character sheet.

If you use a PrC as intended and take all the levels its like being forced to take certain abilities and putting your progression on rails. It also means theres a bunch of abilities that the base class can't have so everyone loses.

[ckafrica]

What do people think of the 4e idea of having variety of class specific options pop up as benchmarks?

Now don't mistake this for liking what 4e did as a whole, the application was horrible but the concept had some merit in my mind.

[Absentminded_Wizard]

If you're saying what I think you're saying, it's not a bad idea. I'm assuming you mean the idea of every class having selectable features rather than a fixed list. My response to Draco's ideas about PrCs was going to be that they work in a system where class features are selectable, but not in a system like 3.x where at least some classes have all their features selected for them.

[Tequila Sunrise]

What do people think of the 4e idea of having variety of class specific options pop up as benchmarks?

Love it!

TS