PrCs: How Was It For You?

This is a general open discussion for all ALFA, Neverwinter Nights, and Dungeons & Dragons topics.

Moderator: ALFA Administrators

Zelknolf
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 6139
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:04 pm

Post by Zelknolf »

To bring this thread back onto topic...

The PrC quest was good. Templates, when not taken too literally, were good. (and, despite what many would think, a DM-run template is just DM-approval, plus rp, and the communication amongst team members is just healthy for a server. To be honest, a "[pc] wants to pick up levels in [new class]" merits mention to other DMs in my view, anyway.) My beef is only with the selection.

I think we'd see more diversity if we didn't have the implied restriction that the only PrCs a PC could shoot for were the ones we already have in the game engine. I wouldn't reccomend trying to carpet-bomb additions, of course, but having channels one could go through to ask for a PrC to be added (one that involved people in power - HDMs and the DMA come to mind - having a chance to say "This is unbalanced," (as we often say with weapon masters) "This is cheesy," (like red dragon disciple) or "I think it should be implemented this way..." (as we did with HiPS)).

I wouldn't expect it to be expedient, mind you, but I get the feeling that such a setup could quickly nip the "Everyone's taking the same PrC" problem, and reinforce the "Getting a PrC is a big deal." / "PrCs are rare ICly" points people like.
Veilan
Lead Admin
Posts: 6152
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:33 pm
Location: UTC+1
Contact:

Post by Veilan »

What's wrong with carpet bombing in a swath of new PrCs? Then, actually, the argument "but they add diversity!" would get any semblance of merit. Currently they just don't - jump these special hoops with your base classes to become the same like everyone who wants HipS / DA / bonus feats / whatever it is that makes this PrC the gamey reason you want it.

Could of course also just scrap them and give them out as title tokens for creative ideas and approaches how to reflect something, but of cours then that would not yield the gamey gamey bounty anymore - and some abilities are just necessary for some RP (which some level 1-3 experienced mature leadership types should be reminded of, too *drift*).

Anyway more on topic, Swift is right that the templates aren't too restrictive. Three plus one quest with broad outlines doesn't constitute any bureaucratic hassle, in fact, remarks to that seem not much more than populism, raising the spectre of ALFA's vaunted, and quite imaginary, Central Bureaucracy.

I'd naturally be happy to offer suggestions and feedback on them and their implementation to interested DMs - I can assure you, creative approaches will not be stifled by the template requirements. From what I've seen, all the "harm" they did was inspire DMs with quest ideas that quickly escalated into epic server events involving throngs of PCs without putting the PrC applicant into the single spotlight.

I think the difficulties arise not with the PrC templates, but with PCs that by nature and design are not generally conducive to overall campaign play within a PW. DMs may easily be at a loss how to handle these, for few like to sink in hours of solo DMing, not even if it's a buddy, and considering we're not exactly swimming in a plethora of covered DM hours that is a reasonable attitude. A golden way of amelioration eludes me here, however.
The power of concealment lies in revelation.
Zelknolf
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 6139
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:04 pm

Post by Zelknolf »

Alara wrote:What's wrong with carpet bombing in a swath of new PrCs?
Because that's a lot of fuckin' work, and we're a small enough community that much of said work would be wasted.
User avatar
fluffmonster
Haste Bear
Posts: 2103
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 11:54 pm
Location: Wisconsin, USA

Post by fluffmonster »

It is interesting that Mikayla's "hyperbole" is met with equally extreme claims of how extreme the hyperbole is. Seems to me her plain talk was mostly interpreted in a more extreme and disingenuous manner than to be simply taken at face value. The meat is that its not enough to just point at the template print and say "gee, look how short (or long) it is." You have to look at the actual amount of work the templates require. Frankly, a player's or staff member's perspective has very limited credibility in that regard. Its the people who DM (regardless of whatever badge they wear) who's opinions need to be solicited to get an accurate picture on that account.
User avatar
Swift
Mook
Posts: 4043
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 12:59 pm
Location: Im somewhere where i dont know where i am
Contact:

Post by Swift »

fluffmonster wrote:It is interesting that Mikayla's "hyperbole" is met with equally extreme claims of how extreme the hyperbole is. Seems to me her plain talk was mostly interpreted in a more extreme and disingenuous manner than to be simply taken at face value. The meat is that its not enough to just point at the template print and say "gee, look how short (or long) it is." You have to look at the actual amount of work the templates require.

How is 'the amount of work' a template takes even relevant when DMs are under no obligation whatsoever to even use them?

The templates were made to be examples for DMs that they could freely use if they wished, nothing more. If the guides have proven to be so unworkable or time consuming, why have they not been discarded or rewritten, or why did nobody even bother to look at PrCs and how they were done for 2 years?
Frankly, a player's or staff member's perspective has very limited credibility in that regard. Its the people who DM (regardless of whatever badge they wear) who's opinions need to be solicited to get an accurate picture on that account.
I would think players who have gained a PrC would have just as much insight into the process as anyone who has DMed one. I know i talked alot with the main DMs who ran mine, and i feel somewhat qualified to talk about them.
User avatar
Souvarine
Dire Badger
Posts: 157
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:04 pm
Location: Canada

Post by Souvarine »

Mikayla wrote:Personally, I believe PrCs are simply a part of the game and we should not create an entire bureacracy to authenticate people's aquisition of said PrCs. Simple DM approval, at the DM's discretion, should suffice in my mind. I think the four-step program we currently have is needlessly restrictive and bureacratic. PrCs are supposed to add fun and flavor to the game - submerging them in rules, regulation and bureacratic paper-work drowns that fun and flavor.
Well, surprise...i am in complete agreement with what's written there.

(b) challenge of achieving a PrC for players;
I for one never considered the PrCs to be available to me. Even if i am a good roleplayer, but the requirements seems so ooc. It makes alfa looks like a MMO (if you got alot of free time, know the right people...then you might get the candy...then you need to do quest 1 2 3...).


Open the PrCs to players who want them, the only thing to do is to balance the stuff as it was done, for example,for familiars/companions/summons and other abilities which didn't fit the setting. The most glaring stains are obvious, and the tuning to do is not class-shattering. It's not because there is a "prestige" within the class that there really is more power than a clean 1 class PC. There is a price to be paid most of the time, and the planning required in the first levels is part of it: hiding req for a fighter is ridiculous (given armor penalties)...while he could spend his 2 skill points elsewhere.

As for the popularity of some PrCs, i think it is linked to the stats requirements and the slower character progression in alfa. Since rogue classes have more survivability, they can actually get to a PrC more often than say...fighting classes or wizard ones. Then the requirements for assassins and shadowdancers are, roughly, in line with the main class anyway given the amount of skill points available. Imho the assassin shouldn't even be considered a PrC, but merely a specialisation.
Last edited by Souvarine on Wed Oct 03, 2007 4:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
psycho_leo
Rust Monster
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 2:10 am
Location: Brazil

Re: PrCs: How Was It For You?

Post by psycho_leo »

The templates are fine. DMs should be encouraged to deviate from them if they can do it in a creative (but not wacko :P ) way. Ideally the DMs running those sort of quests should have enough insight on both player and PC to know how to make the quests both challenging and fun, you know, like normal DM quests. I don't see why PrC quests should be any different from any DM planned campaign. PCs might succeed, fail or die. The only difference is that in the end, instead of getting that awesome sword of greatness they get to level in a new class.
Current PC: Gareth Darkriver, errant knight of Kelemvor
Se'rie Arnimane: Time is of the essence!
Nawiel Di'malie: Shush! we're celebrating!
User avatar
Swift
Mook
Posts: 4043
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 12:59 pm
Location: Im somewhere where i dont know where i am
Contact:

Post by Swift »

Since it has been mentioned a number of times:

To all those who have raised the skills and feats requirements argument and how it is OOC etc etc, we were told to follow canon, which i believe we did virtually to the letter (IIRC there were 1 or 2 alterations due to NWN missing some skills, but thats all).

We could do nothing about that, and it would have been far too much work to remake the existing PrCs as custom PrCs simply remove OOC skill requirements.

Go talk with Wizards about that, it is not the fault of anyone in ALFA :D
Mikayla
Valsharess of ALFA
Posts: 3707
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 5:37 pm
Location: Qu'ellar Faen Tlabbar, Noble Room 7, Menzoberranzan, NorthUnderdark

Post by Mikayla »

Swift raises an interesting point regarding the "bureacracy" by comparing my position on the difficulty of obtaining a PrC versus the complexity of our dispute resolution system. Obviously in the case of the dispute resolution system I am strongly in favor of a system that is very "legal" like, complete with rules, procedures, checks and balances. On the other hand, in the case of PrCs, I am in favor of a much more 'hands-off' system where we let the DMs do it without so many requirements or hoops to jump through. At first blush, my positions may seem inconsistent, but let me explain briefly:

The PrC Template system is what stands between a Player and getting a PrC.

The dispute resolution system is the system that stands between a Player and getting Banned.

PrC's are a "good" thing - something Players want. Getting Banned is ALFA's ultimate sanction, and removes all of a Player's rights. So, yes, I think there should be a very fair, patient, thorough process that stands between a Player and getting Banned (or sanctioned in anyway); on the other hand, I do not believe such a process is needed where the end result is something the player wants, like a PrC. So, that is why I have different views about the complexity of the two systems - one system stands in place to safeguard the players from getting banned or sanctioned unfairly, while the other system stands between players and the PrCs.

So, thats my take on it - I realize other people have different views, and thats fine - it would be great if they could express their point of view, as I did initially, without attacking folks who have a different point of view. As they say in the law, 'reasonable minds may differ.'
ALFA1-NWN1: Sheyreiza Valakahsa
NWN2: Layla (aka Aliyah, Amira, Snake and others) and Vellya
NWN1-WD: Shein'n Valakasha
Khazar Stoneblood
Dire Badger
Posts: 191
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 10:21 pm

Post by Khazar Stoneblood »

I always felt that the PRC role play requirements were unreasonable unless the class had specific requirements that had to be RP'd (such as a Purple Knight or Harper Scout).

To be honest, any class change (or even advancement within a single class) has a strong RP element. Heck, that's the POINT of the game. But to require the DM interaction for PrC's just seemed to make the management a lot more difficult then it needed to be.

Here's the thing, if my fighter starts getting levels as a Cleric or Paladin, there is a huge RP element. Having a god grant you superhuman powers is a pretty big RP issue. In fact, it's mostly the SAME RP that becoming a divine champion requires.

Yet being a DC required a LOT of effort that was really a pain in the butt, while being a cleric was just the click of a button.

It seems that for the most part, all the extra requirements for PrC's did was make those who didn't want to mess with it like me choose a different option (My divine champion concept can be just as easily RP'd as a Fighter/Cleric without the fuss), or cause those who REALLY wanted to do it get frustrated (I remember someone waiting 3 months to advance to their first level of a PrC due to issues with DM availability).

Look... if the game handles it for us, why should we make it MORE complicated. I'd rather see it be simple (from a technical and DM-time perspective) to get PrC's and have someone cleanup offenders after the fact than have it be complicated... and less fun.

But that's just the thoughts of a player who's most powerful PC topped out at level 7... so take it for what it's worth.
Current PC: I'm not tellin'. They die when I put their names here.
User avatar
Brokenbone
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 5771
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 1:07 am
Location: London, Ontario, Canada

Post by Brokenbone »

I'm not clear if all contributors are aware that all the "numerical requirements" for PrCs are derived from the sourcebooks.

Some also have a "Special" requirement listed. Oddly, "Assassin" has something listed under "Special" (something about killing someone... which most PCs in D&D do daily, hoping for loot as opposed to payment), and "Shadowdancer" doesn't have any "Specials" listed.

I guess ALFA's implementation puts a lot more emphasis on the "Special" requirements (including invention of what I guess was agreed / voted to be reasonable at implementation), and keeps the numbers as well, though sometimes in substitute skills, such as Forgery, rather than Disguise, for Assassins.

Anyhow, just making sure this point is clear in case there's any misapprehension about ALFA having "invented a bunch of crazy rules"... the PrCs are definitely adapted from what either shipped with the game, or is found in the PnP version, but I don't think a half-bad job was done.
ALFA NWN2 PCs: Rhaggot of the Bruised-Eye, and Bamshogbo
ALFA NWN1 PC: Jacobim Foxmantle
ALFA NWN1 Dead PC: Jon Shieldjack

DMA Staff
User avatar
fluffmonster
Haste Bear
Posts: 2103
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 11:54 pm
Location: Wisconsin, USA

Post by fluffmonster »

Swift wrote: I would think players who have gained a PrC would have just as much insight into the process as anyone who has DMed one. I know i talked alot with the main DMs who ran mine, and i feel somewhat qualified to talk about them.
You might have a perspective to share, but for a player you play your PC and while the PrC quest might take a long time, you are doing what you set out to do which is play your PC. The tradeoff is minor. You give up one RP path for another. While important to the player, it doesn't go beyond that, not from the perspective of evaluating the current process which is what the purpose of this conversation is.

For a DM its different. For a DM, the tradeoffs are more profound. Time dedicated to a PrC means time not spent on server-related plots...the needs of the many are sacrificed for the needs of the few or the one. There are also the costs associated specifically with being gatekeeper for a coveted thing, which can mean coping with pushy players.

If we want to know how burdensome the tradeoffs are, which we should want to know in any proper analysis, then the input of the DMs is how to find out. Sure, any of us could try to repeat what a DM said, but that is a much less reliable mode of inquiry even without having to consider the credibility of the middleman.
Veilan
Lead Admin
Posts: 6152
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:33 pm
Location: UTC+1
Contact:

Post by Veilan »

So all you're saying, fluff, is that Rusty should only have asked the DMs in the first place and that all other opinions are invalid, or at least, not helpful?

Personally I fail to see the disadvantage in getting a broader input from all across ALFA.
fluffmonster wrote:Frankly, a player's or staff member's perspective has very limited credibility in that regard.
This may be your opinion, but equally frank, it is my opinion that an assertion based on lumping together positions as diversive DM liaison, webmaster, DM training head, retention head and player can be dismissed as unqualified.

I agree that DMs are the ones whose input matters heavily, but trying to invalidate everyone else's opinion who may have a stake in PrCs on that alone seems a far stretch.

Regardless, I guess I should apologize for taking the troll bait and assisting in further veering this thread off focus.

So. We all come here with a perspective. The PA with championing the player cause of rules being an obstacle to gratification of PrC aspirations, the training head wanting to make sure it is understood that the templates are guidelines and suggestions and that implementation into party and server operation mode are highly encouraged, the player who felt jumping the hoops was extensive, or the DM who felt having to put up with something he didn't want to maintain fairness in a PCs PrC quest.

All these perspectives are valid and helpful input, and the weighting of their input won't be done by asking them not to post. Otherwise, problems, issues and misunderstandings won't come to light and we cannot consider making adjustments, improving our documentation, or offering training assistance where appropriate.
Last edited by Veilan on Wed Oct 03, 2007 7:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The power of concealment lies in revelation.
User avatar
Rusty
Retired
Posts: 2847
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 10:36 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Post by Rusty »

Cool it.

Feedback from DMs on the burden of managing PrCs is, indeed, particularly valuable. I have received some via PM, which may account for a low hit-rate in this thread.
User avatar
Souvarine
Dire Badger
Posts: 157
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:04 pm
Location: Canada

Post by Souvarine »

Because it has to do with character development, in the end it should be a player's choice, and it should be a rather free decision. If not, why include them at all. The only other fair way would be a poll for all the community to vote on the miscreant's desire to play his assassin as an assassin (since anyone can kill with stealth anyway). Dm's shouldn't have the burden of judging for the community for these decisions...besides they are already having a hard time with all the rules in alfa.

Every class requires roleplaying reason to be followed. You don't see a rampaging paladin rapist very often...even less in alfa, nor do you see clerics talk in game about how stupid their domain spells are. So why would the same people turn EVIL(tm) if given the opportunity to play a PrC?

My point is that, if someone managed to get accepted in alfa, he -can- and should be trusted with the so called prestige class. Let's be honest, most of those classes aren't even more powerful than the regular careers. They are a specialisation option...and in many case, an additional challenge (if only for roleplaying reasons, but many times for social reasons...e.g. blackguards ain't seen as well as fighters).

Some of the PrC do have issues, i'd say that the time spent on all the procedure to decide which player is deemed worthy should be spent on tuning those few balancing issues.

But yeah...my opinion is only as valid as what you want it to be, i haven't been accepted on the list of politcally correct forum trolls of alfa (PCFTA). I failed on the 3rd quest :twisted:
Coming soon in a server near you.
Post Reply