|
6 months ago ::
Dec 17, 2012 - 1:26AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
Legends & Lore
Wrapping Up 2012By Mike MearlsIn the last Legends & Lore for the year, Mike discusses prestige classes and invites you to fill out a survey regarding your favorite prestige class.Talk about this column here.
Yan
Montréal, Canada
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 17, 2012 - 1:27AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2001
|
Yay prestige classes.
Expert5/Reindeer Handler10/Ace Sleigh driver 5
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
*pg 30, AD&D 2nd Ed DMG, 1989.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 17, 2012 - 1:35AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Dec 13, 2012
|
Um, are prestige classes the only thing in this packet or did they finally decide to fix the monster math?
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 17, 2012 - 1:46AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jul 23, 2008
|
Prestige classes built upon feats and mechanics is more preferable than how 'characters act in the world and how they pursue their goals'. I just threw up. Balance of play over fluff- any day of the year. Boo to D&D Next!
Moderated by
WotC_Trevor
on Dec 17, 2012 - 09:55AM
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 17, 2012 - 2:22AM
#5
|
|
|
PrCs suck! In 3e/3.5e they were one of the biggest reasons the game broke. Having said that I think as long as they all, without exception, have role-playing requirements for entry it can be okay.
Kalex the Omen Dungeonmaster Extraordinaire Concerning Player Rules Bias
Show
Gaining victory through rules bias is a hollow victory and they know it.
The argument goes, that some idiot at the table might claim that because there is a "default" that is the only true way to play D&D. An idiotic misconception that should be quite easy to disprove just by reading the rules, coming to these forums, or sending a quick note off to Customer Support and sharing the inevitable response with the group. BTW, I'm not just talking about Next when I say this. Of course, D&D has always been this way since at least the late 70's when I began playing.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 17, 2012 - 2:26AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2001
|
Also depends on how they implement them I suspect they will resemble 4th ed paragon paths with the prestige class label on them. I don't think they will be heavily detailed lists of stuff like they were in 3.5.
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
*pg 30, AD&D 2nd Ed DMG, 1989.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 17, 2012 - 2:35AM
#7
|
|
|
I've removed content from this thread because vulgarity is a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_...Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 17, 2012 - 2:42AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Oct 17, 2007
|
So, let me get this straight: priority is the 'core', but we don't get to see a draft of the remaining core classes, we don't get to see a first stab at multiclassing either.
We get Prestige Classes ??
Color me puzzled.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 17, 2012 - 2:46AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Apr 28, 2009
|
As a 4E player primarily. with ancient AD&D and some Pathfinder experience, I was unfamiliar with many of the Prestige Classes in the survey. Doing a little research, some seem pretty interesting...
I definitely want a Forsaker option in 5E!
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 17, 2012 - 2:46AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2006
|
My problem with paragon paths/prestige classes is that it sets the bar on concepts outside low-levels or even 1st level. For example, lets take the Bear Warrior. Prior to 4E the only way to get access to this was to be a Barbarian and enter 8th level. 4E started it as a Paragon path (10th level) but then Themes came along and allowed it at 1st level. I think having them in the game is fine so long as its not the only way go play a particular concept.
|
|
|
