• Pteryx the Puzzle Secretary@dice.camp
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    @deinol @Pteryx@diyrpg.org @copacetic I’d consider the prestige class focus to be more of a mistake, and the base class focus a better idea. Prestige classes as the primary means of large-scale customization warped 3.x play; meanwhile, more base classes and freer multiclassing (the latter of which the author also criticized) meant it was easier to realize different concepts without having to bend over backwards.

    • Thought Punks@dice.camp
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      @pteryx @deinol @Pteryx@diyrpg.org @copacetic

      I think Pathfinder 2e comes closest to a multiclassing equivalent to prestige classes. And while I conceptually like it and it’s OK in limited level short bursts, it’s complex and *exhausting* even over 3e/PF1.

      It feels *to me* like just making the hard choice between plain base classes and add-on specialist classes is best. There’s no good cake and eat it too with that model.

    • Peter Kisner ≈@dice.camp
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      @pteryx @deinol @Pteryx@diyrpg.org @copacetic
      I was a big fan of multiclassing in 3.x to get the type of character I envisioned.

      Most of the prestige classes might have one or two interesting features at most and I couldn’t see the point of building toward them. Though it rarely mattered, since games I played in didn’t often get high enough level to take prestige.