Did Dragon have to get suckered in too?


Dragon Magazine General Discussion


Did Dragon really have to turn to the way of the "fluffy duffy" prestige class? I looked forward to the hope that Dragon wouldn't get suckered into that new format that half the gamers either hate or see half of it as useless.

Woe to wasted pages in both WotC D&D products and Dragon. :( Having more than 2 pages dedicated to a prestige class is a waste, it's horrible to see them in WotC products, and it's a darn shame to see them in Dragon.

One honest question: Did you guys ~HAVE~ to write the PrC that way or can you simply go back to the way things were? You had small sidebars that hardly took space to help adapt PrC to people's games, what was wrong with sticking with that?

Contributor

Dragon content has to go through WotC approval and follow their format guidelines, so my guess is yes, they *have* to do it.

I know I'm easy to please and always seem to be defending the magazine, but I really do like the expanded PrC format. I need to think of stuff to complain about to keep me balanced. Hm...maybe I can jump on the Hate First Watch bandwagon? I mean, I don't actually *despise* it, but I could certainly live without it...

-Amber S.


I hate complaining as well (unless its about complainers, hey I live in a red state) but Im with Razz on this. The expanded PrC info is a waste. I dont need 4 pages of flavor text about a PrC that will most likly never be seen in my game.

Im all in favor of fluffier content in the WoTC books, but not with PrCs.

Liberty's Edge

Justin Stevens wrote:

I hate complaining as well (unless its about complainers, hey I live in a red state) but Im with Razz on this. The expanded PrC info is a waste. I dont need 4 pages of flavor text about a PrC that will most likly never be seen in my game.

Im all in favor of fluffier content in the WoTC books, but not with PrCs.

I think the point is for every person out there who hates a PrC, or the expanded info, there is at least one gamer who likes it. More than likely, a majority likes it and that's why it's there.

Dark Archive

Saurstalk wrote:
I think the point is for every person out there who hates a PrC, or the expanded info, there is at least one gamer who likes it. More than likely, a majority likes it and that's why it's there.

This is the same reasoning that lead to the vicious debate which ended up getting Wil Save removed from Dungeon.

Paizo Employee Chief Creative Officer, Publisher

We're actually not huge fans of the new prestige class format, so I wouldn't be surprised to see a slimmed down version in the future.

--Erik

Liberty's Edge

Erik Mona wrote:

We're actually not huge fans of the new prestige class format, so I wouldn't be surprised to see a slimmed down version in the future.

--Erik

Joy.

And while I'm thinking about prestige classes, one of the things that bothers me about them (often) is when I look at one and realize it can be made with a couple of base classes and some interesting multi-classing. There isn't much you can't do with a fighter/rogue unless spell casting is involved.

Sometimes, rather than seeing a PrC, I'd love to see a variant class (a la Unearthed Arcana) that lets you do something cool.

For example, let's look at a historical gladiator. We've all seen the image of the "Retarius" or net-fighter. They were equipped with only a net, trident, and small dagger, and the only armor they wore was a shoulder-guard (galerus).

Obviously a normal fighter doesn't quite fit the type. Shield proficiency, medium and heavy armor proficiency are all unnecessary. I'd like to see a feature that shows how to build such a fighter, and perhaps gives a few bonuses for getting rid of unnecessary feats. So, in this example, perhaps it would be as normal fighter, but without the normal armor/shield proficiencies, but in exchange they'd get the feat "exotic proficiency: net" for free, along with perhaps "parry" (from Dragon #301)... Just a thought. Then you could explain what feats would fit the style (I'm guessing dodge, combat expertise, improved disarm, and probably mobility & spring attack)...

Something like that. It can be short. It could even be a "Class Act"....


Not really. I can think of dozens of unique prestige classes. A monk devoted to the powers of the elements with elemental powers such as a sonic monk, frost monk, flame monk, etc.

I mean, a friend of mine has been waiting for a thunder monk-type prestige class to officially produce itself. Interesting ideas would be the ability to call lightning, lightning bolt and control weather certain times per day, monk ability increases (unarmored speed, strike, AC, flurry of blows), a special flurry of blows called lightning strikes where the monk receives 2 extra attacks at a -5 penalty per attack (-4 with improved flurry, -3 with greater), the ability to sunder objects easier with the might of thunder, shock and thundering special qualities for unarmed strikes, etc.

You get my point.

Prestige classes designed for the new classes (Warlock, Swashbuckler, Ninja, etc.) are other sources for great and unique prestige class ideas.

I personally believe you can never have enough of them (this feeling also goes for spells, feats, all manner of crunch). Because 3E is about options, and mainly options for the players. By introducing "baby gamer" material such as all these "how-to" articles on the WotC Website, in the new prestige class format, and in the products lately it makes me wonder what am I spending my money on? To buy a book telling me how to incorporate this PrC into my games, giving me an example NPC I don't need or will tweak anyway, telling me NPC reactions to the PrC, knowledge checks, and all the other fluff info on PrC? As a DM, ~I~ should be doing that. As a player, ~THEY~ should be doing that and if they're not imaginative enough then the DM is supposed to help them.

It feels like D&D is catering to lazy, simple-minded, baby gamers and not those who are experienced or have the talent, determination, or will to play and play for fun and what is right in their games.

And there it is. What else is next, ya know? Wasted pages on visual descriptions, histories, and tactics for each new spell published? A "how-to" guide on playing characters with the Power Attack feat and what sort of background such characters have? Where has the imagination gone!?

It's being spoonfed now! Ugh...

My rant is done.

P.S. While some may argue that I should feel that way about "crunch" material, allow me to note the cons of creating crunch for your games: non-recognition as an official WotC source, the balancing issues, and the pissed off player that had to balance your new prestige class, feat, spell, whatever and watch you change it each and every session whenever a new fix needs to be made. (trust me, I have had a very bad experience with a psychic warrior player when I introduced him a home-made psionic power and had to change it around each session because of how broken it eventually proved to be as time went on) Crunch is what should be fed to us, because there're teams that get paid to create, balance, play-test, and present them to us and in turn we develop the "fluff" with them.

Contributor

Razz wrote:
And there it is. What else is next, ya know? Wasted pages on visual descriptions ... for each new spell published?

Well, sort of. The Spell Compendium being released in December or so is gathering up 1000 spells previously published in WotC products. It's going to convert them to 3.5 if they haven't been already, and it's going to apply any errata. In theory, it's the best spells produced by Wizards outside of the player's handbook. And one thing they're doing is adding information to describe the spell - how it looks, sounds, feels, smells, etc.

Thought you'd be interested in that. ;)

Liberty's Edge

I know a lot of things, but I don't know everything. One of the things I like about D&D is a chance to experiment with characters from histories that I'm not entirely familiar with.

So, telling me how to make a particular gladiator might not be something I need, but describing how to make an appropriate warrior for an Inca style game might.

There was a recent class act on the Roman Legionaire, but while it covered equipment, it didn't go far enough. What feats would a typical legionaire take? What skills? How do I convert the historical idea of a legionaire into D&D terms?

That's always been part of the fun for me. Now, if I already know a lot about the subject, it shouldn't be hard for me to do myself, but I don't know everything.

And I think some prestige classes are okay, but there are an awful lot of them. I don't find them particularly difficult to make, so if a player has an idea, I'd be willing to see it put into practice. Now, the problem as I see it is that most of my players go shopping through prestige classes looking for abilities, and ignore the flavor.

I'd rather start with the flavor and build a class around it, but that's just me.

Edit - And if the concept is cool enough, I'd prefer to develop it into a 20-level base class. I'm very strict about making sure players can't qualify for a prestige class until 6th level or later, but some prestige classes would fit a base class style, and that isn't a problem as far as I'm concerned.

Contributor

DeadDMWalking wrote:
I'd rather start with the flavor and build a class around it, but that's just me.

I've done it both ways, really. I've taken an idea - for example, a Divine Trickster (which didn't exist at the time, but does now) - and worked from there. The flavor was mostly set first in that case.

I've also done it the other way, where I have a cool mechanical idea or two and so I tie them together into a prestige class. As an example, I had a player who really liked the Warmaster class from Sword and Fist. After talking to the player, the aspects he liked were the fact that it guaranteed him a keep he could play around with, and that it vaguely fit into his background idea. So I yanked out the various abilities that grant the buildings, and worked from there. I wrote the flavor text to meld better with his background, and wrote some better abilities (in my opinion) for the rest of the class.

Either one is OK for me - I can work from either angle. I generally prefer writing mechanics over flavor - but I can certainly start with flavor first.

Contributor

I respectfully disagree with your post, Razz. Some of the fun of D&D for me is seeing what other fluff people come up with. Sure I'm an imaginative girl (at least I hope I am, considering I get paid to be), but just as with crunch, I can't think of everything. Fluff is tricky to write - ask anyone who's tried to create a fantasy world that isn't Tolkien. I enjoy letting paid professionals do some of the work for me by creating histories, backgrounds, tactics, and other types of fluff that never would have occurred to me. Lets me try new things without sucking up what little free time I have left.

-Amber S>


Razz, the purpose of RPG rules is to create particular play and story dynamics and represent aspects of the setting and how it works. You seem to like to start with the rules and build the setting around them, altering it to fit what the rules imply, but I'm sure you realize that many others think that's bass-ackwards and that a magazine full of barren 'crunch' would be dull as anything and, of course, useless to anyone who doesn't use one particular ruleset (and 4E looms). The stuff you don't like is what I just call content, and I don't DM or play in such a way that an endlessly growing array of 'options' -- many of which are spurious because they're things the rules already handle anyway (see below) is of any interest.

Crunchy bits in Dragon aren't perfectly playtested, anyway; hence the tweaks that often occur when they're reprinted in WotC books.

DeadDMWalking wrote:
And while I'm thinking about prestige classes, one of the things that bothers me about them (often) is when I look at one and realize it can be made with a couple of base classes and some interesting multi-classing. There isn't much you can't do with a fighter/rogue unless spell casting is involved.

The first instalment of "Faiths of Faerûn" made just this point, and a few issues later it switched over to all prestige classes. Authors' change of heart, or more contrived prestige classes to pander to their perceived popularity?


Erik Mona wrote:

We're actually not huge fans of the new prestige class format, so I wouldn't be surprised to see a slimmed down version in the future.

I hope you keep the new format for setting specific classes (Faiths of Faerun is the only ones I can remember). Anything that adds to the settings are good.

Generic fluff on the other hand is a waste (like in Sword and Fist), and I'd be happy to see that go.

Sovereign Court

Let me say that I am a fan of the new format, but I don't think it should be applied necessarily to every prestige class. I would love to see every organization/secret society/whatever use the same format; if they have a PrC associated with them, then add it, too.


if they are going with DMG II style prestige class fomat, are they planning on going with the magic item format from DMG II in future bazaar of the bizare articles as well?


Shoot, to be honest I haven't even noticed the change in the Prestige Class format. I'm going to go check it but I can't see it's that big an issue :(

Contributor

Polite Elliot wrote:
Shoot, to be honest I haven't even noticed the change in the Prestige Class format. I'm going to go check it but I can't see it's that big an issue :(

Except that a class that used to take two or three pages, tops, to detail now takes five or six. That extra space includes things like what color socks characters of that class where on what day, how often they change their underwear, their favorite flavor of soup, and other useless bits of filler.

Dark Archive Contributor

cwslyclgh wrote:
if they are going with DMG II style prestige class fomat, are they planning on going with the magic item format from DMG II in future bazaar of the bizare articles as well?

As of right now, no. If that changes we'll let you know. :)


what's the main difference between DMG and DMG II magic item format?


BOZ wrote:
what's the main difference between DMG and DMG II magic item format?

the DMGII format is longer, with seperate sections for a description of the item, the items powers, how it is activated and what happens when it is activated, bardic knowledge DC's for what info about the item... etc.

Community / Forums / Archive / Paizo / Books & Magazines / Dragon Magazine / General Discussion / Did Dragon have to get suckered in too? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion