Test-based prerequisites

[Inevitability]

I don't see people on here talking much about Test-Based Prerequisites (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/campaigns/testBasedPrerequisites.htm), a variant rule from UA that suggests replacing prestige class entry requirements with complex in-game tests that would benefit from the entry requirements but do not mandate them.

And, leaving aside the implications for game balance, or the actual enjoyability, it's great from a story perspective. There's something about:


Skills: Move Silently 8 ranks, Hide 10 ranks, Perform (dance) 5 ranks.
Feats: Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Mobility.

that just doesn't stack up to:


Audition in Darkness. On a dimly lit stage in an abandoned theater, the applicant must dance well enough to impress the judges sitting unseen in the audience (a DC 15 Perform [dance] check). Even if she passes the dance audition, she hears a cry of “Get her!” and dozens of guards rush the stage. She must escape the labyrinthine theater any way she can, employing stealth and combat prowess. She isn’t allowed to attack the guards directly, but she can make ripostes (attacks of opportunity, in other words) if she gets the chance. If she gets out of the theater, she’s welcomed into the troupe of shadowdancers with a great revel.

With that in mind, let's come up with some cool tests for entering non-core prestige classes! If possible, present their prior requirements also, so we can see how they got turned into the test. I'll go first:


NIGHTMARE SPINNER:
Prior requirements: Bluff 4 ranks, Intimidate 4 ranks, Sense Motive 4 ranks, ability to cast 3rd-level arcane spells, including a fear spell and a mind-affecting illusion spell.

Test: Trigon of Suspicion. The applicant is given an abstract description of their target (containing no details of appearance, but of life history and personality) and administered a sleeping draught. They awaken in a sealed room with two others, strangers to each other as well as the applicant. Without the strangers growing suspicious, the candidate must first identify the target, and then drive her to despair through illusions, magical fear, or mundane manipulation. As the test concludes, the third person reveals himself as the examiner. Nightmare spinners who showed finesse and guile in their mission are rewarded with membership in the order, but those whose methods were deemed brutish (or who, in error, tried to harm the examiner) are unceremoniously barred from joining.

[Troacctid]

See, I'm not a fan of test-based prerequisites largely because of story reasons. I don't like the idea of every prestige class in the game being its own specific organization that administers tests and only admits you if you pass. It just doesn't make sense for there to be hundreds of these independent organizations all structured in a consistent way that allows for standardized testing and training of applicants. If you can be a sorcerer without being trained by another sorcerer or paying dues to the Sorcerers' Guild, why should you have to travel to Limbo and get your passport stamped by the Prismatic Cabal to be a wild mage? You should be able to unleash your inner chaos on your own, so long as you have the correct mindset, enough skill with Spellcraft, and a sorcerous bloodline with a natural tendency towards the style. Those things are covered much better with the skill, feat, and alignment prerequisites.






...Okay, with all that out of the way, Wayfarer Guide should totally have a test-based prerequisite where they test your ability to quickly and accurately teleport people and cargo to a selected destination along their network.

[animorte]

Queue in the "Test Your Might" music from Mortal Kombat.

I've done certain text-based scenarios of this nature. However, the way I incorporate this is more of an immersion aspect than replacing mechanics. Say, when a martial character is taking their first caster level, I want to display the way they are acquiring it. Perhaps it's from a renowned NPC, a common mentor, or another party member. Or when a character is learning a new feat, maybe I want them to have a small training session with another character (PC or NPC) to show this happening. It's never a requirement, but some settings can benefit from the additional immersion aspect of "where did this come from?"

[Crake]

Test-based prerequisites work best when characters are being built organically as they level up and participate in the story, and such things narratively make sense. However, the way most people on this forum build characters, which is to say, pre-planning their character from 1-20 and having everything already decided before they even sit down at the table for the first time, I don't think really works with this approach.


See, I'm not a fan of test-based prerequisites largely because of story reasons. I don't like the idea of every prestige class in the game being its own specific organization that administers tests and only admits you if you pass. It just doesn't make sense for there to be hundreds of these independent organizations all structured in a consistent way that allows for standardized testing and training of applicants. If you can be a sorcerer without being trained by another sorcerer or paying dues to the Sorcerers' Guild, why should you have to travel to Limbo and get your passport stamped by the Prismatic Cabal to be a wild mage? You should be able to unleash your inner chaos on your own, so long as you have the correct mindset, enough skill with Spellcraft, and a sorcerous bloodline with a natural tendency towards the style. Those things are covered much better with the skill, feat, and alignment prerequisites.

The irony of this statement is that that's exactly what prestige classes were in their initial conception. They were supposed to represent, narratively, the skill and strength of learning and experience at an organizational level. The issue you have, where there's supposed to be hundreds of these organizations, is that people use the prestige classes ala carte, instead of how they're intended to be used, which is supposed to actually just be the DM homebrewing prestige classes to fit his setting. Not every single prestige class is supposed to exist across every single region in every single campaign setting. The notion of there being hundreds of different organizations across an entire setting is quite feasable, but for them to have a chapter literally anywhere the characters are is of course not at all. But then, if you run it narratively, people tend to complain that the DM is blocking them out of the prestige class they want to play, when really, it's supposed to work the other way. The players play base classes, and when a prestige class organization narratively enters the picture, one of the players might opt to join them.

Now, that's not to say that players are doing it wrong in how they want to enter prestige classes, what I am saying though, is that narrative entry requirements require the prestige class to be narratively involved from the get go. You don't just randomly go visit the shadowdancers' dance hall to enter when they haven't been narratively involved up until this point, how would your character even know they exist in the first place to try and hunt them down?

[Troacctid]

The irony of this statement is that that's exactly what prestige classes were in their initial conception. They were supposed to represent, narratively, the skill and strength of learning and experience at an organizational level. The issue you have, where there's supposed to be hundreds of these organizations, is that people use the prestige classes ala carte, instead of how they're intended to be used, which is supposed to actually just be the DM homebrewing prestige classes to fit his setting. Not every single prestige class is supposed to exist across every single region in every single campaign setting. The notion of there being hundreds of different organizations across an entire setting is quite feasable, but for them to have a chapter literally anywhere the characters are is of course not at all. But then, if you run it narratively, people tend to complain that the DM is blocking them out of the prestige class they want to play, when really, it's supposed to work the other way. The players play base classes, and when a prestige class organization narratively enters the picture, one of the players might opt to join them.
I have to disagree. Look at the DMG's descriptions of the prestige classes. Some of them are described as being associated with distinctive organizations, yes, but others are totally independent and untethered to anything like a guild or cabal. Even for the assassin, which literally has a prerequisite of "Kill someone for no other reason than to join the assassins", are usually part of a guild or secret society, but might also be a servant of a powerful evil character, or an independent hired killer who works alone.

[Crake]

I have to disagree. Look at the DMG's descriptions of the prestige classes. Some of them are described as being associated with distinctive organizations, yes, but others are totally independent and untethered to anything like a guild or cabal. Even for the assassin, which literally has a prerequisite of "Kill someone for no other reason than to join the assassins", are usually part of a guild or secret society, but might also be a servant of a powerful evil character, or an independent hired killer who works alone.

I was more referring to this line:


Prestige classes are purely optional and always under the purview of the DM. We encourage you, as the DM, to tightly limit the prestige classes available in your campaign. The example prestige classes are certainly not all encompassing or definitive. They might not even be appropriate for your campaign. The best prestige classes for your campaign are the ones you tailor make yourself.

The individual descriptions are largely irrelevant to my point, im sure you can find plenty of examples of prestige classes that aren't related to organizations, but my point was more about the initial intention of prestige classes before they just became padding for splatbooks.

[ahyangyi]

I have to disagree. Look at the DMG's descriptions of the prestige classes. Some of them are described as being associated with distinctive organizations, yes, but others are totally independent and untethered to anything like a guild or cabal. Even for the assassin, which literally has a prerequisite of "Kill someone for no other reason than to join the assassins", are usually part of a guild or secret society, but might also be a servant of a powerful evil character, or an independent hired killer who works alone.

Most of the DMG prestige classes are generic, due to the generic flavor of the DMG.

But look at the Forgotten Realm ones such as Harper Agent or Black Blood Hunter. I think that's their point.

[Chronos]

Some prestige classes, most of them in the DMG, are just generic parts of the system. There might be organizations of spellcasters who study both arcane and divine magic, but there are probably so many of them that it doesn't matter what their specifics are, and it's probably possible to become a Mystic Theurge outside of any of them. But most of them, in their fluff, do seem to be tied to specific organizations or traditions, and if anything, that's even more true as you get into the splatbooks. Most of the divine prestige classes are exclusive to the church of a specific deity. Many of them are tweaks or customizations of the generic prestige classes. Heck, the Jade Phoenix Mage explicitly says that there are only ever a dozen of them in the entire world, and nobody new can join until one retires or (permanently) dies.

[Crake]

Heck, the Jade Phoenix Mage explicitly says that there are only ever a dozen of them in the entire world, and nobody new can join until one retires or (permanently) dies.

IIRC, aren't they canonically all just reincarnations of the original bunch? Like, when one dies, the next jade phoenix mage that arises is actually their reincarnated soul?

[Inevitability]

Perhaps the discussion on the merits of test-based prerequisites should be moved to another thread? I was mostly intending for this one to be for people who had cool ideas of tests for classes they particularly liked.

[redking]

Perhaps the discussion on the merits of test-based prerequisites should be moved to another thread? I was mostly intending for this one to be for people who had cool ideas of tests for classes they particularly liked.

Not to derail your thread, but are not test based prerequisites in addition to the regular prerequisites, not a replacement for them?

[Inevitability]

Not to derail your thread, but are not test based prerequisites in addition to the regular prerequisites, not a replacement for them?


To make prerequisites seem more “real,” this variant changes them to actual tests that would be observable in the game world. The assassins’ guild, for example, might require potential members to sneak past the castle guards (employing Hide and Move Silently), infiltrate the queen’s banquet (using Disguise), and poison the wine of a minor noble (thus killing someone for no other reason than to join the assassins). It certainly helps to have 4 ranks in Disguise and 8 ranks each in Hide and Move Silently, but the observable result is what the assassins judge.

No: a test is meant to be a challenge where the prerequisites help, but there's no hard-and-fast requirement like traditional PrCs have. Spellcasting requirements are often kept unchanged (dragon disciple, thaumaturgist), and some skill checks have such a high DC that low-level PCs probably can't make them (Hierophant), but there's never a hard limit for feats, skills, or BAB.

[pabelfly]

Let's say I meet the prereqs for Shadowdancer, and I do the proposed audition. I can't take 10 because I'm in a stressful situation, so I roll and end up with a 1, completely failing the dance part of the audition. The guards come and I have to try and escape, but I flub that with several bad rolls as well and the guards end up capturing me. Am I just completely barred from being a Shadowdancer, with multiple feats I wouldn't otherwise want?

[Inevitability]

Let's say I meet the prereqs for Shadowdancer, and I do the proposed audition. I can't take 10 because I'm in a stressful situation, so I roll and end up with a 1, completely failing the dance part of the audition. The guards come and I have to try and escape, but I flub that with several bad rolls as well and the guards end up capturing me. Am I just completely barred from being a Shadowdancer, with multiple feats I wouldn't otherwise want?

You don't have to take those feats, the entire system is a poorly thought-out variant that replaces traditional prerequisites.

Other than that, yes. The linked page explicitly mentions how there will be wildly swingy results both ways, and how players may like or dislike this, and how you're explicitly abandoning the predictability and reliability of PrCs as you gate them behind in-game challenges.

[ahyangyi]

Admittedly still diverting from the question, but I wanted to say that as a player I will probably feel better at failing a test, if there are similar organizations (who provide similar prestige classes) as backups.

The shadowdancer. You failed to pass the test, the followers of Shar refused to see you any more. But perhaps there's a similar version available at the Zhentarim...?

[Crake]

Presumably, if you wanted a second chance joining the shadowdancers, youd have to rp that out, just like getting your first attempt would have.

But also, as I said, that only makes sense if you’re naturally advancing your characters with narrative based progression. If you’re building a character who’s entire progression you already have planned out, and hinges on entering prestige class X at level Y, then this probably isnt the system for you

[wilphe]

Some prestige classes, most of them in the DMG, are just generic parts of the system.

This did change between 3.0 and 3.5 - I suspect at least in part because of how PRCs became treated more as build elements than organisations like Crake said


Also new PRCs became a larger part of new content - partially because of that, but I suspect also that they fill up a lot of page space compared to coming up with new spells or feats


But PRCs like Eldritch Knight and Mystic Theuge which almost entirely mechanical with zero or next to no fluff are new to the 3.5 DMG - they are not there in 3.0 one

[ahyangyi]

Presumably, if you wanted a second chance joining the shadowdancers, youd have to rp that out, just like getting your first attempt would have.

But also, as I said, that only makes sense if you’re naturally advancing your characters with narrative based progression. If you’re building a character who’s entire progression you already have planned out, and hinges on entering prestige class X at level Y, then this probably isnt the system for you

I wasn't asking about the mechanical aspect. A character whose concept revolves "super sneaky in dark" hurts narratively from being unable to be a shadowdancer.

Sure, roleplaying the heartbroken guy who realizes he cannot fulfill his lifetime dream is also something, but...

EDIT: hmm, at this time I realized that perhaps entry tests are narratively at odds with "refluffing". We could refluff a regular rogue as a shadowdancer, and we can't, because the regular rogue failed a test in universe.

[Malphegor]

My solution to the ‘not all prcs have an organisation attached’ for tests is to make it not be based on an organisation.

Think more like Weapons of Legacy’s Rituals: by doing a series of ritualistic provings doing something thematic you manifest new abilities because you gain enlightenment on a possible path for you.

Find the theme of the prc, and find a ritualistic trial to prove, not to some external entity, but yourself, that this new class is who you are now, at the root and bone of the soul.

[Quertus]

I’ve tried not to think about this too much (see “you can tell the caliber of a man by the number of lies he needs to live his life” or whatever), but now I’m in a heated and violent argument with myself.

If my character wants to become a Wild Mage - wants to replace the power source they use from normal to wild magic - that really sounds like something that should be handled by a ritual… and one that is, all things being equal, repeatable. And, honestly, reversible.

Seeing that aside for the moment… what are the odds that my character knew the ritual? Knows that wild mages even exist? Heck, for that matter, what are the odds that Bob’s character knew of platinum / mercurial / Jade, or the keen enchantment? That the archer knew of cold iron arrows, or the splitting enchantment? That the Cleric knew of Vigor, or the Persistent Spell feat? That the guy with item Craft skills (Artificer, maybe) knows what a Ring of Protection or Cloak of Resistance is, or what slots can take what enchantments, or what components to buy to make them? That’s not even asking about all the classes and prestige classes they welded together into their builds to match their concepts for the characters.

Since we can’t even agree on what qualifies for “familiarity”, I’m prepared to have my character become intimately familiar with all published species (and thousands not published) in backstory as part of their training. Because what good mentor wouldn’t make sure of that? Yeah, this also ties in to how I hate Knowledge skills, btw.

Anyway. There’s two (basic) opposed schools of thought here. There’s the engineering concept of “the build”, that makes me put 4 Birds of Paradise and 4 Rancor in a Magic deck, that shutters at any stupid gatekeeping preventing it from doing what it should just be able to do. Grod’s Law will doubtless get shouted here at some point. The other side is (sadly) somewhat related to roleplaying, and has a more nebulous notion of things feeling rights vs feeling wrong. “Your character can’t make gunpowder, even if you know how it is made” is the classic battle cry for this side of things.

And… I can see the good parts of both sides. Thus why my mental constructs are flipping tables and throwing things while yelling obscenities at each other.

Ultimately, 3e is much better suited to the build then it is to a more narrative Exploration of the mechanics. Case in point, how many GM’s actually populate their world with custom spells, items, monsters, and Prestige Classes? Way fewer than previous editions IME, because 3e just isn’t suited for it.

However, if we choose to go against the grain, and try to make organic character building a thing, we should do so right.

What do I mean by that?

Well, organizations might well have tryouts, like the one described in the OP. However, a Wild Mage transformation should be a repeatable, reversible ritual with a cost. Not that failing the OP ritual shouldn’t carry a cost - maybe it’s 1-time only, maybe it’s “RP getting a second chance if you fail the first audition”, maybe it’s more ongoing social stigma (see “My Cousin Vinny” and how many tries Vinny took to pass his test).

But, just as “skill X, Feat Y” feels wrong, so, too, does having just one format for how all Prestige Classes work feel wrong.

I think that the important part is to make the trials and the costs feel appropriate to what the class represents.

——-

With the trial given, my (suboptimal, I know) Dex-based Winged Character (or an invisible character, like a Pixie) could take Shadow Dancer as their very first character level. Does that sound legit?

[Crake]

Case in point, how many GM’s actually populate their world with custom spells, items, monsters, and Prestige Classes? Way fewer than previous editions IME, because 3e just isn’t suited for it.

I dont have much issue with anything else you said, but as someone who does this quite prolifically, I would like to say that 3e is VERY suited to it.

I think the reason why most people DONT do it is actually due to the abundance of content that exists in 3.5 already, that combined with the flood of really poorly written flood of 3rd party content back in the early days of the OGL, gave 3e players an instinct to balk at the notion of non-official content and homebrew.

But 3e is just as compatible with custom content as any other edition of dnd.


Seeing that aside for the moment… what are the odds that my character knew the ritual? Knows that wild mages even exist? Heck, for that matter, what are the odds that Bob’s character knew of platinum / mercurial / Jade, or the keen enchantment? That the archer knew of cold iron arrows, or the splitting enchantment? That the Cleric knew of Vigor, or the Persistent Spell feat? That the guy with item Craft skills (Artificer, maybe) knows what a Ring of Protection or Cloak of Resistance is, or what slots can take what enchantments, or what components to buy to make them? That’s not even asking about all the classes and prestige classes they welded together into their builds to match their concepts for the characters.

To address this point, this is what I meant when I talk about building characters organically. You learn about magical enchantments when they're identified from loot, or when a shopkeeper is explaining them to you, you learn about monsters when you encounter them, you learn about prestige classes when you see an NPC in action that's a member of them, and you join a prestige class when it's narratively fitting for your character to do so.

Now, you by NO MEANS, need to build a character in that manner, but it's definitely (in my humble opinion and that of my players) a much more fulfilling experience to do so, and also removes a lot of the complication out of the 3.5 system, while also bringing general character power more in line with what I think 3.5 expects, rather than what most people bring to the table, which to me is also a win, since I don't like playing rocket tag with my players.


Since we can’t even agree on what qualifies for “familiarity”, I’m prepared to have my character become intimately familiar with all published species (and thousands not published) in backstory as part of their training. Because what good mentor wouldn’t make sure of that? Yeah, this also ties in to how I hate Knowledge skills, btw.

This, I feel, goes entirely against the spirit of an organically built character, and I'd just suggest you stick with the standard "engineered" character as you put it. The two CAN exist in the same game, though the engineered character would need to be brought down in optimization to match the organic characters. To anyone having a knee-jerk reaction toward having downplay your character to match someone else's, note that I'm saying this in the context of a table where organic characters is the expectation, not the exception. Optimize to the table people. I'm saying they CAN exist at the same table, not that they MUST.

[Quertus]

I dont have much issue with anything else you said, but as someone who does this quite prolifically, I would like to say that 3e is VERY suited to it.

I think the reason why most people DONT do it is actually due to the abundance of content that exists in 3.5 already, that combined with the flood of really poorly written flood of 3rd party content back in the early days of the OGL, gave 3e players an instinct to balk at the notion of non-official content and homebrew.

But 3e is just as compatible with custom content as any other edition of dnd.



To address this point, this is what I meant when I talk about building characters organically. You learn about magical enchantments when they're identified from loot, or when a shopkeeper is explaining them to you, you learn about monsters when you encounter them, you learn about prestige classes when you see an NPC in action that's a member of them, and you join a prestige class when it's narratively fitting for your character to do so.

Now, you by NO MEANS, need to build a character in that manner, but it's definitely (in my humble opinion and that of my players) a much more fulfilling experience to do so, and also removes a lot of the complication out of the 3.5 system, while also bringing general character power more in line with what I think 3.5 expects, rather than what most people bring to the table, which to me is also a win, since I don't like playing rocket tag with my players.



This, I feel, goes entirely against the spirit of an organically built character, and I'd just suggest you stick with the standard "engineered" character as you put it. The two CAN exist in the same game, though the engineered character would need to be brought down in optimization to match the organic characters. To anyone having a knee-jerk reaction toward having downplay your character to match someone else's, note that I'm saying this in the context of a table where organic characters is the expectation, not the exception. Optimize to the table people. I'm saying they CAN exist at the same table, not that they MUST.

Balance to the table. Agreed. And… that’s the problem with organic characters: you don’t know where they’ll end up. So, if your group has a rather tight balance range, organic growth is a bad fit.

Now, I personally happen to prefer organic growth. And large balance ranges. I just, paradoxically, happen to prefer (the option for) engineered character creation. That is, I like the (non-3e) systems that allow for Prestige Class-like choices at Character Creation (2e kits / factions / Skills and Powers, for example).

But despite my preference for organic growth, I have no interest in playing 50 different idiots (excuse me, ignoramuses - precision of language!) who all learn about the Keen enchantment in character. And there are many reasons for this.

1) ain’t nobody got time for that! Seriously, as much as I groan when most people talk about wasting table time, do you have any idea just how much time it would eat up to discuss every single PH/DMG/MM spell, feat, skill, item/enchantment, monster, and Prestige Class in character? And even that’s (hopefully obviously) nowhere near the variety of things that exists in 3e… which is kinda one of the selling points of the system. Also, the sheer amount of time spent relearning the basics would make custom content that much more laborious to introduce.

2) oftentimes, I’m playing as the son/daughter/attack helicopter of a previous character. Seems odd that their parents wouldn’t have taught them a thing or two about what they learned, no?

3) also, I play Wizards. Unlike, say, sorcerers, that involves training. Seems odd that my character didn’t learn anything during their apprenticeship under their mentor / in Hogwarts (ok, never mind, Hogwarts doesn’t teach anything useful) / at a place of real learning.

4) I can count on one hand, with fingers to spare, the number of GM’s under whom I’ve had a character have a productive conversation with one of their shopkeepers.

5) if you’ve read about Data encountering a Chinese Finger Trap, and later using it, and Annabeth encountering a Chinese Finger Trap, and later using it, do you really want to read about Bilbo, Luke, Indiana Jones, Bakugo, Green Lantern, and 40 more people all learning about (and maybe using) a Chinese Finger Trap?

Ok, so I realized I’ve got, like, a dozen more bullet points, and it’s kinga boring. So, instead… imagine sitting down to play Magic, except you can only build your deck from the things you’ve roleplayed through learning about… as a group. “Gee, guys, another hour of not touching cards, and we’ve learned about Muck Dwellers, War Elemental, and Mad Dog. Pity I’m playing Blue (and really wanted to play a Time-themed deck, but at this rate that’s never happening). Well, see you next week.”

What a character knows is a combination of what they came to the game knowing, and what they learned during the game. Remove either half, and, well, you’ve got half a character. Knowing things ahead of time isn’t incompatible with learning things during the game - that combination of the two is the only thing worth playing! Otherwise, you’ve got unrealistically ignorant characters, and/or a world lacking in Discovery. More importantly to some, it’s that combination of factors that really makes the game, that makes it unpredictable, that makes it better than single author fiction with extra steps - or, more importantly to me, that… hmmm… how can I put this… that makes it feel like the character is real, and growing from being a real boy, adding new to the old, rather than painting on an unrealistically blank canvas. (While I think that made sense, I don’t think it made the sense I intended. Sigh.)

My personal preference (for 3e character build options) is to assume everything in the books is as known as the players have read them, available to be found in character if the player is unaware but the character asks. And GM custom content can be spoon-fed on top of that, in or out of character. (But ain’t nobody got time for that, either, IME.)

But that’s because I’d rather permanently Silence Bob than listen to his 20th failure to roleplay ignorance of his favorite toy. As far as “no game is better than bad game” goes, I agree on this one - I’ve left groups over this kind of “ignorance” sapping not only my fun, but my will to live. Just… no. Give me idiots who are genuinely ignorant, and who can’t math, and have all the strategy of a lemming, over horribly roleplayed false ignorance.

——-

For happier thoughts, I’m curious how you go about introducing custom spells / feats / Prestige Classes, what their adoption rate is, and how that pans out with multiple adventures.

One of the reasons I don’t think 3e is suited to custom content is related to my MtG example: suppose I created 100 custom Blue cards, with themes ranging from Time to Air to Water to Tide to Control to Artifacts to Debuffs. But, while you’re playing Blue, you’re not playing any of those. You’re playing Merfolk. Or Homerids. Or Tricky Curious Cats. Or flying jellyfish.

Because, IME, that’s what most of the talk on the Playground is like: seeking to make very thematic characters, where most custom content would be unwanted. Much like my experience with MtG (where even non-thematic decks don’t want most cards).

So I’m curious whether your group has higher Abnegation scores than most, or if there’s some other secret to your aberrant statement wrt the suitability of 3e to custom content. What’s your secret sauce, that you pour over these cards to make your players eat them?

[Crake]

Balance to the table. Agreed. And… that’s the problem with organic characters: you don’t know where they’ll end up. So, if your group has a rather tight balance range, organic growth is a bad fit.

Now, I personally happen to prefer organic growth. And large balance ranges. I just, paradoxically, happen to prefer (the option for) engineered character creation. That is, I like the (non-3e) systems that allow for Prestige Class-like choices at Character Creation (2e kits / factions / Skills and Powers, for example).

But despite my preference for organic growth, I have no interest in playing 50 different idiots (excuse me, ignoramuses - precision of language!) who all learn about the Keen enchantment in character. And there are many reasons for this.

Well, quite a post, let's get into it!


1) ain’t nobody got time for that! Seriously, as much as I groan when most people talk about wasting table time, do you have any idea just how much time it would eat up to discuss every single PH/DMG/MM spell, feat, skill, item/enchantment, monster, and Prestige Class in character? And even that’s (hopefully obviously) nowhere near the variety of things that exists in 3e… which is kinda one of the selling points of the system. Also, the sheer amount of time spent relearning the basics would make custom content that much more laborious to introduce.

Well, to address this point: Your character doesn't need to learn about everything in the system. There's no person in real life who has a comprehensive knowledge about everything that exists, so your character doesn't need to know everything either.


2) oftentimes, I’m playing as the son/daughter/attack helicopter of a previous character. Seems odd that their parents wouldn’t have taught them a thing or two about what they learned, no?

Sure, but how long does that transfer of knowledge take? And how complete is it? It takes the son of a master tradesmith well into his 30s at least before he's able to gain the majority of his father's knowledge (not a complete transfer, just a major transfer) and that's just in ONE trade. You're trying to imply that your characters are able to have a near instantaneous, and complete transfer of generational knowledge between each generation, and that this happens before the typical adventuring age? Not so sure about that.


3) also, I play Wizards. Unlike, say, sorcerers, that involves training. Seems odd that my character didn’t learn anything during their apprenticeship under their mentor / in Hogwarts (ok, never mind, Hogwarts doesn’t teach anything useful) / at a place of real learning.

See above.


4) I can count on one hand, with fingers to spare, the number of GM’s under whom I’ve had a character have a productive conversation with one of their shopkeepers.

That may or may not be a self fulfilling prophecy. If players roll their eyes any time the GM tries to make buying magic items an encounter in and of itself, then they will cease doing it, and it will then never happen. A lot of 3.5 players seem to grumble and groan at the mere hint of the idea that magic items are not readily, widely, and completely available, and that the only barrier to buying one would be gold.


5) if you’ve read about Data encountering a Chinese Finger Trap, and later using it, and Annabeth encountering a Chinese Finger Trap, and later using it, do you really want to read about Bilbo, Luke, Indiana Jones, Bakugo, Green Lantern, and 40 more people all learning about (and maybe using) a Chinese Finger Trap?

Are all your campaigns carbon copies of each other? Why is the chinese finger trap a recurring encounter in your games? This seems more like a DM issue if that's the case. Just because the characters are growing organically, doesn't mean they all need to go through the same learning experiences and encounters. Sure, that might be realistic to a degree in character, but it's not fun out of character, so it's up to the DM to provide both the character and the player with a variety of fun and meaningful growth encounters.


Ok, so I realized I’ve got, like, a dozen more bullet points, and it’s kinga boring. So, instead… imagine sitting down to play Magic, except you can only build your deck from the things you’ve roleplayed through learning about… as a group. “Gee, guys, another hour of not touching cards, and we’ve learned about Muck Dwellers, War Elemental, and Mad Dog. Pity I’m playing Blue (and really wanted to play a Time-themed deck, but at this rate that’s never happening). Well, see you next week.”

This is a terrible analogy, because you're comparing two games that have fundamentally different objectives. In MTG, the goal is, quite simply, to beat your opponent. Handicapping yourself is fundamentally counter to that goal. On the other hand, in an RPG, the goal is to tell a fun, engaging, dramatic, and evocative story alongside the other players. In that circumstance, handicapping yourself may actually be a benefit to the goal, as it's much more of an engaging story for an underdog to overcome adversity, than it is for the mary sue to beat yet another opponent.

Unless of course, your goal when playing RPGs is more akin to when playing an MMO, which is to say, your measure of the success of a game is how quickly and handily you beat every encounter thrown at you. In which case, you're more playing a wargame than an RPG, which is totally fine, and fits perfectly with engineered characters, and I would completely and entirely suggest you stay away from organic character growth, as it will not improve your fun at all.


What a character knows is a combination of what they came to the game knowing, and what they learned during the game. Remove either half, and, well, you’ve got half a character. Knowing things ahead of time isn’t incompatible with learning things during the game - that combination of the two is the only thing worth playing! Otherwise, you’ve got unrealistically ignorant characters, and/or a world lacking in Discovery. More importantly to some, it’s that combination of factors that really makes the game, that makes it unpredictable, that makes it better than single author fiction with extra steps - or, more importantly to me, that… hmmm… how can I put this… that makes it feel like the character is real, and growing from being a real boy, adding new to the old, rather than painting on an unrealistically blank canvas. (While I think that made sense, I don’t think it made the sense I intended. Sigh.)

I would disagree with this. Obviously you need to have some level of a backstory. We're not gonna roleplay our characters from birth to retirement, but if every character is a canvas, and you come to the table with half the canvas already painted, or worse, 90% or 99% of the canvas already painted, then there's little to no room for character growth at the table. The more blank your canvas, the more room for you character to grow into the narrative. I've had players bring characters with 1-2 sentence backstories to the table who have grown into campaign staples, and characters who came with 3 page backstories who never really grew past their initial conception.

If you want to think of it in a more comprehensive form of the analogy, character creation should be constructing the canvas, and then playing at the table should be painting said canvas. You want a good foundation to build upon, but not already have a plan on what it's going to look like before it's even started, if that makes sense?


My personal preference (for 3e character build options) is to assume everything in the books is as known as the players have read them, available to be found in character if the player is unaware but the character asks. And GM custom content can be spoon-fed on top of that, in or out of character. (But ain’t nobody got time for that, either, IME.)

This appears to be a case of "suffering from success". You've so hyperanalyzed the entire system, learned all the monsters and seen all the spells, considered all the prestige classes and how they would fit with one another, that you've killed the thrill of discovery for yourself. To compare it to modern MMOs, you've analyzed the fun out of it.

Luckily, dnd has the unique ability for the DM to do literally whatever they want, homebrew, rule 0, modify things however they want, but you appear to have forced yourself into that corner of only being able to enjoy discovering custom content. Maybe it's time to try a new system where you can enjoy that thrill once again?


But that’s because I’d rather permanently Silence Bob than listen to his 20th failure to roleplay ignorance of his favorite toy. As far as “no game is better than bad game” goes, I agree on this one - I’ve left groups over this kind of “ignorance” sapping not only my fun, but my will to live. Just… no. Give me idiots who are genuinely ignorant, and who can’t math, and have all the strategy of a lemming, over horribly roleplayed false ignorance.

It seems again here, you're burdened by the terror of covering the same ground over and over. Do all the players at your table build carbon copies every game, and the GM run the same backdrop, and the set pieces, with the same plot? It seems like a very foreign concept to me, to be worried that you're gonna have to endure re-roleplaying the same scene over and over to such a degree.


For happier thoughts, I’m curious how you go about introducing custom spells / feats / Prestige Classes, what their adoption rate is, and how that pans out with multiple adventures.

It varies. I create based on need. Sometimes it's by player request (had a player who wanted to play a frostwind virago, so i built a 16 level savage progression for them that they played with my custom gestalt rules), campaign theme (had a campaign around hunting a quasi deity dragon ascendant, and one of the players was a tome of battle knight, so i created a prestige class loosely based around the vassal of bahamut prc, minus exalted, with tome of battle progression, and tied to the lore of the campaign), sometimes it's almost exclusively for use by NPCs (I created a lolth vestige, as she was dead in my setting, along with all the other gods for well over a thousand years). Custom feats are typically made to fill out niches carved by other feats, things like wisdom and charisma analogues to initiate of the faerie mysteries, or an electricity variant to piercing cold and searing spell, or sometimes are just made on an ad-hoc basis where a player says "I want to do X thing, can I take it as a feat?". Just recently had a player who wanted to play a binder that was bullied by their vestiges, and had low charisma, so we agreed on a homebrew feat that let them change cha based binder DCs to int instead as an example.

They don't typically see play much beyond the characters that they are made for, but that's fine, because my games typically go for a good while, and so they see good value in just being used for that one character.


One of the reasons I don’t think 3e is suited to custom content is related to my MtG example: suppose I created 100 custom Blue cards, with themes ranging from Time to Air to Water to Tide to Control to Artifacts to Debuffs. But, while you’re playing Blue, you’re not playing any of those. You’re playing Merfolk. Or Homerids. Or Tricky Curious Cats. Or flying jellyfish.

See above for why this is a bad analogy.


Because, IME, that’s what most of the talk on the Playground is like: seeking to make very thematic characters, where most custom content would be unwanted. Much like my experience with MtG (where even non-thematic decks don’t want most cards).

Well, there's a difference between theoretical discussions on this board, and practical play at a table with real people. The reason why custom content isn't wanted is because everyone's table is different, and what works for one table might not for another. Ironically, this equally applies to official content, but I explained earlier how 3.5 has a stigma around custom content due to it being the introduction of the OGL, and the flood of poor quality 3rd party content that came with it.


So I’m curious whether your group has higher Abnegation scores than most, or if there’s some other secret to your aberrant statement wrt the suitability of 3e to custom content. What’s your secret sauce, that you pour over these cards to make your players eat them?

As I said, we don't treat the game like a competitive card game, we treat it as a cooperative storytelling experience.

Hope that helps clear things up a bit! I'm enjoying this conversation greatly!

[Quertus]

I really meant to say "electric jellyfish" instead of "Sliver", but I'm too lazy to fix it. :smallsigh:


I'm enjoying this conversation greatly!

I'm glad of that. My internal mental constructs are arguing violently with one another over this topic. Which is... interesting.


This is a terrible analogy,

bad analogy.

As I said, we don't treat the game like a competitive card game, we treat it as a cooperative storytelling experience.

Hope that helps clear things up a bit!

It does clear things up quite a bit. And, actually, if you look at what you've said.


Sometimes it's by player request (had a player who wanted to play a frostwind virago, so i built a 16 level savage progression for them that they played with my custom gestalt rules), campaign theme (had a campaign around hunting a quasi deity dragon ascendant, and one of the players was a tome of battle knight, so i created a prestige class loosely based around the vassal of bahamut prc, minus exalted, with tome of battle progression, and tied to the lore of the campaign), sometimes it's almost exclusively for use by NPCs (I created a lolth vestige, as she was dead in my setting, along with all the other gods for well over a thousand years). Custom feats are typically made to fill out niches carved by other feats, things like wisdom and charisma analogues to initiate of the faerie mysteries, or an electricity variant to piercing cold and searing spell, or sometimes are just made on an ad-hoc basis where a player says "I want to do X thing, can I take it as a feat?". Just recently had a player who wanted to play a binder that was bullied by their vestiges, and had low charisma, so we agreed on a homebrew feat that let them change cha based binder DCs to int instead as an example.

They don't typically see play much beyond the characters that they are made for, but that's fine, because my games typically go for a good while, and so they see good value in just being used for that one character.

Hopefully you'll see how it's a great analogy: you don't make Sliver cards unless someone's running a Sliver deck, for example.

And that's... fine... and explains why you think it works. But it means explaining to you how it doesn't work is gonna be a real pain, enough so that that my mental constructs stopped throwing things at each other when they realized I was forcibly commandeering their mental space.

So... the problem with Annabeth encountering a Chinese Finger Trap, and then using it later... is... that it makes the story predictable. But, more than that... the fact that we're seeing a Chinese Finger Trap means it's Important to the Plot. The characters don't just encounter fluff. It's never the case that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar in this kind of setup.

I know that's my usual rambling, incoherent way of putting things, but... to me, "the characters don't know anything but The Plot", the idea that, out of the vast content of 3e, or the vast content of MtG, we won't encounter any blue cards that aren't Slivers? It means that Fate is warping our view of the world into something so horrifically twisted from what game reality should look like, so many standard deviations away from "remotely likely for one of the 8 billion people one the planet to have ever seen in a lifetime", that it just doesn't feel believable anymore.

I'm fine with "we've got the 8 billion published magic cards (internet number) plus your 12 new Blue Slivers (plus the other 50 cards you made for the other players' decks)", but not "the only cards you know are 12 Blue Slivers (plus the other 50 cards you made for the other players' decks)" as reasonably representing a character's understanding of the world. Especially because it's not "8 billion cards", but actually "your understanding of the 8 billion cards, or whatever you want to roleplay based on your understanding of those 8 billion cards", which means that it inherently will look like a realistic model of understanding (from a certain point of view).


It seems again here, you're burdened by the terror of covering the same ground over and over. Do all the players at your table build carbon copies every game, and the GM run the same backdrop, and the set pieces, with the same plot? It seems like a very foreign concept to me, to be worried that you're gonna have to endure re-roleplaying the same scene over and over to such a degree.

Been there, done that, don't even have the T-shirt. I got tired of "we need to go see the herbalist / wise woman / outcast / village idiot / whatever to learn that this thing we're fighting is a Werewolf, and that they're vulnerable to Silver" plots after the umpteenth time I had to run a character through that plot, and pretend I didn't know what was going on. :smallyuk: There's just no pay... out? pay... back? pay... day? There's nothing positive about the experience.

And it's far worse when it's Bob failing to roleplay ignorance believably, while trying to obtain the thing they obviously want. :smallyuk::smallyuk: And just let Thanos snap rather than let Bob go after the exact same thing he's gone after with his past 19 characters for the 20th time. :smallyuk::smallyuk::smallyuk:

Bad roleplayers will be predictably bad. Even good roleplayers can struggle to roleplay ignorance believably. Far better for there to be genuine ignorance at play.

Also... wrt


Why is the chinese finger trap a recurring encounter in your games?have you really had parties not show interest in, say, +1 weapons to hit incorporeal creatures / overcome DR / hold enchantments? Stat boosting items? Cloaks/vests of Resistance? It seems like there's an awful lot of staple items one would have to roleplay through learning about every single campaign that just doesn't sound fun to me. And that's before you get a player who's hung up on Necklace of Prayer Beads, Pearls of Power, Boots of Striding, Nipple Clamps of Exquisite Torture, Elven Cloak & Boots, Keen, Splitting, Sun Rods, Cold Iron Arrows, Wand of Lesser Vigor, or some other item/enchantment that just about every one of their characters will get.

Let alone the sheer number of spells Wizards (let alone Clerics or Druids) need to learn every level up in order to have an actual choice of which 2 new spells to choose, or which spells to memorize. I do not want to waste my table time learning about Dispel Magic, Fireball, Fly, Stinking Cloud, Wraithstrike, and whatever other 3rd level spells the GM deigns to teach me in character so that I can choose them as my automatic level-up spells. Nor do I want to damage my clue-by-four on my GM's thick skull when my / the party Cleric prays for spells for a specific purpose, and the GM inevitably fails to respond reasonably.

(How does one damage a verbal clue-by-four on a thick skull? Well, IME, thick skulls tend to lack proper ear holes, leading to their poor owners having as much trouble hearing as they do thinking.)

And, germane to the thread, players do tend, IME, to have certain Prestige Classes they like to take, like Ur-Priest or Initiate of the 7-fold Veil or Arcane Archer or whatever. I expect a world with me playing characters in it will see a lot of Taint-triggers. :smallamused:


This appears to be a case of "suffering from success". You've so hyperanalyzed the entire system, learned all the monsters and seen all the spells, considered all the prestige classes and how they would fit with one another, that you've killed the thrill of discovery for yourself. To compare it to modern MMOs, you've analyzed the fun out of it.

Luckily, dnd has the unique ability for the DM to do literally whatever they want, homebrew, rule 0, modify things however they want, but you appear to have forced yourself into that corner of only being able to enjoy discovering custom content.

Eh, there's some truth to that, in that that's why I (for example) read the minimal number of monster entries as possible to run my games, in order to encounter as many of them for the first time in character.



rule 0

"Rule 0" only covers things that the system doesn't cover. It's probably the last thing you'd want to mention in this scenario.


Maybe it's time to try a new system where you can enjoy that thrill once again?

Nah, until I'm at that point of competence with the system, I'm too busy "fighting the system" to enjoy the game. I really only get to enjoy things when I'm not fighting anything (so, established character, known system, etc), and get to Explore creative, new content. That's when Discovery truly shines.


Well, to address this point: Your character doesn't need to learn about everything in the system. There's no person in real life who has a comprehensive knowledge about everything that exists, so your character doesn't need to know everything either.

Sure, but how long does that transfer of knowledge take? And how complete is it? It takes the son of a master tradesmith well into his 30s at least before he's able to gain the majority of his father's knowledge (not a complete transfer, just a major transfer) and that's just in ONE trade. You're trying to imply that your characters are able to have a near instantaneous, and complete transfer of generational knowledge between each generation, and that this happens before the typical adventuring age? Not so sure about that.

This is the part that's most interesting to me (saving the best for last, apparently). And, well, how much time have I spent on D&D? Would I feel comfortable risking my life based on that knowledge? How much more than me should someone in that world know, for them and their mentors to feel comfortable with them risking their life as an adventurer based on the knowledge base they are working with?

I don't like going to a MtG pre-release unless I've had time to study and digest the new cards. It just isn't worth it to me to come in blind, and fumble around with the fabricated meta of that set with tactical ineptitude. And the same goes for my characters. I know how to roleplay that level of ineptitude, and I prefer some variety in my characters. I don't want all of my characters to be Quertus, unless, you know, I'm actually playing Quertus.

I feel like, someone training for years to be a Fighter, or a Wizard, or some other trained class (so, obviously, Sorceres are welcome to be oblivious), ought to learn at least as much as I know about things. And certainly shouldn't have to learn in character, after the adventure starts, about Wands of Lesser Vigor, the Wraithstrike spell, or that their pants do not, in fact, belong on their head. (unless they are in the Forgotten Realms, where there's apparently something in the water, and everyone proudly wears their pants on their heads if they wear pants at all.)

However.

What I know, and what a character living in the game world knows, aren't exactly identical. And neither would our perspectives on that information. Just like "I have 1 HP left!" when the encounter is over feels a lot different when you're the one who's been stabbed.

So that "same" knowledge wouldn't inherently result in the same optimization one traditionally sees on these forums, for example. Just like I'm probably the only player I know who's buffered their multi-item crafting times with breaks/vacations (not that I really take breaks from things I love, like coding or building Magic decks, but not all my characters have that love for their Craft).

But I still think I'll do a better job attempting to roleplay the perspective of a trained character (who, as a Grey Elf, may be older than me, btw) by starting with my full knowledge than I will starting with the empty set.

[Crake]

So... the problem with Annabeth encountering a Chinese Finger Trap, and then using it later... is... that it makes the story predictable. But, more than that... the fact that we're seeing a Chinese Finger Trap means it's Important to the Plot. The characters don't just encounter fluff. It's never the case that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar in this kind of setup.

Why is it not? A dnd game isn't the same as a written novel after all. I know that in traditional storytelling it's said that a good narrative won't waste time on scenes or plot threads that aren't relevant to the story in some way, but this isn't a traditional narrative. It's an interactive one, and the "main plot" is just one thread that can be woven, and the consumers of this narrative actually have agency over what happens, how, and where. The cigar has room to just be a cigar. And maybe one of the players will want to smoke it. Having a living, breathing, believable world means you need to have things that aren't just plot related, because just like in real life, not everyone is related to every plot.


I know that's my usual rambling, incoherent way of putting things, but... to me, "the characters don't know anything but The Plot", the idea that, out of the vast content of 3e, or the vast content of MtG, we won't encounter any blue cards that aren't Slivers? It means that Fate is warping our view of the world into something so horrifically twisted from what game reality should look like, so many standard deviations away from "remotely likely for one of the 8 billion people one the planet to have ever seen in a lifetime", that it just doesn't feel believable anymore.

I'm fine with "we've got the 8 billion published magic cards (internet number) plus your 12 new Blue Slivers (plus the other 50 cards you made for the other players' decks)", but not "the only cards you know are 12 Blue Slivers (plus the other 50 cards you made for the other players' decks)" as reasonably representing a character's understanding of the world. Especially because it's not "8 billion cards", but actually "your understanding of the 8 billion cards, or whatever you want to roleplay based on your understanding of those 8 billion cards", which means that it inherently will look like a realistic model of understanding (from a certain point of view).

I'll be honest, the MTG analogy is starting to lose me, as I said, I don't feel it fits very well, and what each element is representing is seeming to start to blur.


Been there, done that, don't even have the T-shirt. I got tired of "we need to go see the herbalist / wise woman / outcast / village idiot / whatever to learn that this thing we're fighting is a Werewolf, and that they're vulnerable to Silver" plots after the umpteenth time I had to run a character through that plot, and pretend I didn't know what was going on. :smallyuk: There's just no pay... out? pay... back? pay... day? There's nothing positive about the experience.

And it's far worse when it's Bob failing to roleplay ignorance believably, while trying to obtain the thing they obviously want. :smallyuk::smallyuk: And just let Thanos snap rather than let Bob go after the exact same thing he's gone after with his past 19 characters for the 20th time. :smallyuk::smallyuk::smallyuk:

Bad roleplayers will be predictably bad. Even good roleplayers can struggle to roleplay ignorance believably. Far better for there to be genuine ignorance at play.

I'm not sure if you misunderstood me, but the part that was foreign to me wasn't the distaste toward re-treading plot threads, the part that was foreign to me was re-treading plot threads at all. VERY little of my games have re-tread the same ground, I have had wild shifts between games in terms of theme, location, scale, and characters. To me, the notion of playing out a plot thread multiple times just feels... pointless.


Also... wrt

have you really had parties not show interest in, say, +1 weapons to hit incorporeal creatures / overcome DR / hold enchantments? Stat boosting items? Cloaks/vests of Resistance? It seems like there's an awful lot of staple items one would have to roleplay through learning about every single campaign that just doesn't sound fun to me. And that's before you get a player who's hung up on Necklace of Prayer Beads, Pearls of Power, Boots of Striding, Nipple Clamps of Exquisite Torture, Elven Cloak & Boots, Keen, Splitting, Sun Rods, Cold Iron Arrows, Wand of Lesser Vigor, or some other item/enchantment that just about every one of their characters will get.

I tend to avoid fairly mundane loot like that. Generally I will run the no magic item variant of the automatic bonus progression pathfinder system, and sprinkle in magic items to taste, rather than making them a baseline assumption of the game.


Let alone the sheer number of spells Wizards (let alone Clerics or Druids) need to learn every level up in order to have an actual choice of which 2 new spells to choose, or which spells to memorize. I do not want to waste my table time learning about Dispel Magic, Fireball, Fly, Stinking Cloud, Wraithstrike, and whatever other 3rd level spells the GM deigns to teach me in character so that I can choose them as my automatic level-up spells. Nor do I want to damage my clue-by-four on my GM's thick skull when my / the party Cleric prays for spells for a specific purpose, and the GM inevitably fails to respond reasonably.

Spells themselves are actually pretty straightforward when you think about it. Wizard levelup spells are specifically called out as being representative of off-screen research and experimentation that the wizard has been doing, so they aren't so much creating an existing spell, as much as they are (re)inventing the spell themselves. For divine casters, again, they don't "know" any of their spells, they simply pray to their deity, and their deity provides them power, which is mechanically represented as spells of their choosing. Sorcerers are even easier, they're just kind figuring stuff out as they go.

None of those class abilities thusly would require fore-knowledge to pick the spells they desire. The example of a cleric having to roleplay out their prayers to the DM, and the DM picking the spells is just an example of an overbearing and obtrusive DM.


And, germane to the thread, players do tend, IME, to have certain Prestige Classes they like to take, like Ur-Priest or Initiate of the 7-fold Veil or Arcane Archer or whatever. I expect a world with me playing characters in it will see a lot of Taint-triggers. :smallamused:

And not every character needs to be strictly 100% organic or engineered, they can be a mix. However, relating back to the thead topic, a test-based prerequisite relies on in-world events to occur and unfold, and thus is far more conducive to organic characters than engineered ones. If you're dead-set on entering ur-priest, then having to rely on an in-universe trigger to allow you to enter is clearly a loss for you. On the other hand, a character who happens across a sect of elves who are mixing archery and magic, and throughout the course of the story, they help each other, and after a while, they decide to open their order to the character, and the DM allows the player to start taking levels in arcane archer regardless of pre-requisites, might enter well after they would have normally qualified, but wouldn't mind, because it's where the story beats took them.


"Rule 0" only covers things that the system doesn't cover. It's probably the last thing you'd want to mention in this scenario.

I mean, no, rule 0 covers literally everything and anything in the game that the DM wants to alter in any way for any purpose, and my point was more that, you need to have things be mixed up on you to let you re-experience that sense of discovery.


This is the part that's most interesting to me (saving the best for last, apparently). And, well, how much time have I spent on D&D? Would I feel comfortable risking my life based on that knowledge? How much more than me should someone in that world know, for them and their mentors to feel comfortable with them risking their life as an adventurer based on the knowledge base they are working with?

I don't like going to a MtG pre-release unless I've had time to study and digest the new cards. It just isn't worth it to me to come in blind, and fumble around with the fabricated meta of that set with tactical ineptitude. And the same goes for my characters. I know how to roleplay that level of ineptitude, and I prefer some variety in my characters. I don't want all of my characters to be Quertus, unless, you know, I'm actually playing Quertus.

I feel like, someone training for years to be a Fighter, or a Wizard, or some other trained class (so, obviously, Sorceres are welcome to be oblivious), ought to learn at least as much as I know about things. And certainly shouldn't have to learn in character, after the adventure starts, about Wands of Lesser Vigor, the Wraithstrike spell, or that their pants do not, in fact, belong on their head. (unless they are in the Forgotten Realms, where there's apparently something in the water, and everyone proudly wears their pants on their heads if they wear pants at all.)

However.

What I know, and what a character living in the game world knows, aren't exactly identical. And neither would our perspectives on that information. Just like "I have 1 HP left!" when the encounter is over feels a lot different when you're the one who's been stabbed.

So that "same" knowledge wouldn't inherently result in the same optimization one traditionally sees on these forums, for example. Just like I'm probably the only player I know who's buffered their multi-item crafting times with breaks/vacations (not that I really take breaks from things I love, like coding or building Magic decks, but not all my characters have that love for their Craft).

But I still think I'll do a better job attempting to roleplay the perspective of a trained character (who, as a Grey Elf, may be older than me, btw) by starting with my full knowledge than I will starting with the empty set.

I think we're kinda straying into the territory of discussing the difference between in character and out of character knowledge here, rather than the merits of organic or engineered character growth. I understand that they are tangentially related, in so far as you seem to be under the impression that a character needs to be aware of something before taking it as a character option, to which I would disagree to a certain extent. There are many things which can be represented by characters learning and figuring things out themselves, like the aformentioned wizards (re)inventing spells upon levelup, but feats and skills can also easily fit under this umbrella too, and even, to bring it back to the topic of the thread, prestige classes. However, I would say that's what the prerequisites represent, the bare minimum knowledge and skills to be able to begin figuring it out yourself. This can even apply, to an extend, to crafting magic items. You want to create X effect, you don't need to know if it exists or not beforehand. If you want to make an item that lets you climb walls, you don't need to know a cloak of arachnidia or slippers of spider climbing exist to "(re)invent" them yourself.

It's when you start to claim knowledge of things beyond just your character that issues begin to arise. Now, keep in mind, knowledge of things doesn't have to be black or white. If your character has knowledge in different topics, they may well be able to deduce the potential existence of something, and that's exactly what I think knowledge checks are meant to represent. Not the discreet knowledge that X or Y actually exists, but the cognitive capability to deduce that X and Y could reasonably exist, regardless of whether you know for sure. Sometimes your character can make the deduction, sometimes they can't, hence the roll. For things you outright know, you don't need to roll, you just know them.

Just to circle back around and to make clear my stance on the thread's topic, I'm not saying test-based prerequisites are required for organic characters, and that organic characters don't do well with standard prerequisites, what I am saying is that test-based prerequisites do not mesh well with engineered character choices, purely due to their unpredictable nature.

[ahyangyi]

Ultimately the game is for the players to have fun. If something is old and tired, then either assume characters know it and move on, or do not use it in plot altogether. It's natural that one's first level D&D game plays out differently from their 100th first level D&D game. It's a good thing that the game can adapt itself to the players.

I mean, the earlier sci-fi novels can probably get away with spending pages introducing the concept of wormhole travel, but your new novel in 2023 probably can't do that any more.

As for organic character growth: if the DM can win my trust to provide balanced homebrew options on the fly, then why not. It's just that D&D 3r by default doesn't do that, and I personally don't have much confidence in doing that either.

[Telonius]

Most Prestige Class prereqs center around the choices the player has made. (Did they take the feats, the skills, and so on). Test-based requirements flip that a bit, making it dependent on things the character has done. It's not enough that they have the capacity to do something, they actually have to have done it.

There are some PrCs that do this already. Swiftblade is one that comes to mind - you have to spend a whole level casting nothing but Haste in your third-level spell slot. Green Star Adept (I know, it's terrible) requires the character to get and consume starmetal. And there are tons of them that have the "must be inducted into the order by an existing member" or something similar. Most of the existing ones are things that don't really have that high of a chance of failure. Or, if they do, the failure would be completely within the control of the player. (Did you decide to cast something other than Haste? That's on you. Did you not seek out starmetal? Then get on that). They're not really "tests" with chances of failure, so much as "rituals" that the characters have to go through for growth.

I would really think twice before making a PrC requirement that has a genuine test whose result depends on a die roll. Unless you're ditching all other prereqs except the test, there's simply too much work and planning that goes into qualifying for most Prestige Classes otherwise. If you're keeping the other prereqs, some sort of a ritual would probably be no problem. It's thematic and can create a memorable session, and generally make the player feel awesome.

A ritual for a Divine Caster PrCs would especially make sense. For example, if you're trying to be a Radiant Servant of Pelor, maybe a two-parter. You must meditate in a darkened room at dusk, and create light until the sun rises from your own spells. (At 6th level, you would have 5 castings of Light and at least 3 of Daylight, giving you a minimum of 8 hours; up to you how you get the rest). Rest a day, then go into town and use all your spell slots on Cure spells.

[Crake]

Unless you're ditching all other prereqs except the test, there's simply too much work and planning that goes into qualifying for most Prestige Classes otherwise.

I believe it was noted that yes, the test is meant to replace all other entry requirements.

[Chronos]

Illithid Slayer, at least the version in the book, has a prerequisite of defeating a mindflayer. Which leads to a lot of debate, for theoretical builds, as to just when that's realistic for a character to do. And even once it becomes possible, most sensible characters will do everything possible to avoid encountering mindflayers.

[SirNibbles]

I'll start with Cloud Anchorite (Frostburn, page 52). It already has an entry test. Would that test alone be sufficient to replace all of the other requirements?

Normal Entry Requirements:
Alignment: Any nonchaotic
Base Fortitude Save: +5
Skills: Climb 9 ranks, Jump 9 ranks, Knowledge (religion) 9 ranks, Survival 4 ranks
Feats: Improved Unarmed Combat, Mountaineer
Special: The prospective student must live for a week on her own in a wilderness region, during which time she can travel no lower than 12,000 feet in altitude.

Emphasis mine on wilderness region. Frostburn has an entire section on Frostfell Wilderness Terrain, which includes: Cold Gate; Everfrost Terrain; Frostfell Marsh Terrain; Frostfell Mountain Terrain; Frozen Sea Terrain; Glacier Terrain; Ice Field Terrain; Iceberg Terrain; Skyberg Terrain; Snow Field Terrain; Taiga Forest Terrain; and Tundra Terrain.




This section includes terrain that adventurers may encounter in wilderness settings, though any of these terrain types can also be found within natural or worked snow and ice caves or cavern complexes. A select few—cold gates and ice and snow fields—can exist within traditional dungeon locations, placed there by magic or supernatural forces.

Frostburn, page 21


I would argue that the intent was for a potential Cloud Anchorite to be in a 'wilderness region' in which they would have to encounter at least some of this Frostfell Wilderness Terrain, with Mountain Terrain being the most obvious, but not only option.

I think you could reasonably ignore all of the prerequisites with the exception of the test, Improved Unarmed Strike, and the nonchaotic alignment.

Since Cloud Anchorites eventually acquire immortality, I would posit that given enough time, they would start their own monasteries and thus the specifics of the wilderness test might be a bit different according to each one. Here is one example of a wilderness test I've devised:

Carry a backpack with a statuette from the monastery to the peak of a nearby mountain (no more than 5 km of travel). The statuette should weigh about 50 lbs - just enough to be annoying for monks trying to stay unencumbered - and take up enough space in the backpack to make it difficult to fit food, gear, and warm clothes. Survival checks would be required for navigation and foraging for food. Climb and Jump checks for climbing up mountains and jumping across dangerous gaps. A good fortitude save would help not die from the cold and/or altitude sickness. There should be at least one combat encounter of low difficulty. One or two (not-necessarily easy) encounters could be added in if the Survival checks go poorly: beating these encounters should reward the player with food, shelter, resources, or guide them closer to their goal if they are lost. Failing these encounters should further burden the player's resources or otherwise apply some kind of debuff or outright kill the player.

In the end, the requirement of surviving alone in a wilderness region for about a week is maintained, and the skill requirements are more or less needed as well.

I admit, it's not terribly inspired but I think it gets the job done. Also anyone who tries flying is a filthy cheat and should be attacked by Snow Orcs with Giant Raven mounts. Anyone who teleports should be refused training.

[Inevitability]

In the end, the requirement of surviving alone in a wilderness region for about a week is maintained, and the skill requirements are more or less needed as well.

I really like this one!