With all the advances in the APG, I am wondering as a 3PP do people want more prestige classes for a new setting. Are the classes provided by Pathfinder more than enough or do you want more? I want to here what people think of this.
I'm one of those who think that Presteige Classes should be linked to a setting (eg Red Wizard, Gun Mage, Pathfinder). So when a 3PP brings out a new setting then a new Presteige Class is welcome, it gives players a chance to immerse themselves further into the campaign, to be something they can't be in another D&D/PF world. And while some Presteige classes can seem setting neutral, maybe a box out saying what classes the developer thinks are appropriate could be included (with any necessary tweaks).
Cheers
Mark
|
I really like the idea that a prestige class should exist to fill a more focused roll that the base classes aren't capable of meeting as efficiently. Not like 3rd edition where it was a contest to see who could convert more 2nd edition kits out of handbooks into 3rd edition material! :)
That said, setting specific prestige classes are a nice combination with the traits system to help flavor characters into that setting.
I like PrCs myself. I think each church should have one for example.
Not only don't I want more PrCs, I'm not sure I even want the ones I've already got. I'm increasingly convinced PrCs should be replaced with feat chains and/or just turned into alternate class features.
Mark L. Chance | Spes Magna Games
Not only don't I want more PrCs, I'm not sure I even want the ones I've already got. I'm increasingly convinced PrCs should be replaced with feat chains and/or just turned into alternate class features.
Mark L. Chance | Spes Magna Games
I disagree.
I think PrCs are for niches. Like the Undead Hunter or whatnot
I think arhcetypes should be more broad, replacing broad based class abilities with others. Like the Spell-less Ranger