Talk:Portal:Classes

Rename it?
I realise with 4th Edition coming out this change may be dated, but what about changing this page to 'Portal:Classes' because of the base classes contained in the sourcebooks, such as Archivist and Warmage and to include NPC classes like expert, as well as the obvious barbarian, cleric etc. base classes? I lack the expertise to do this on my own, and I'm not sure that it would not infringe on another portal. Elfinor 07:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Not a bad idea. Also, let's not just assume prestige classes are obsolete. A good many of them are, after all, paragon paths in 4e. However, I do think that the recent trend in deemphasis of game mechanics is a good one, so I expect to see less focus on prestige classes - particularly if they have no lore basis (for instince - an article about Doomguides would be smiled upon since they're both a prestige class / paragon path and an actual part of FR canon). Niirfa-sa 08:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Sounds like a good idea. I'm not sure what to call it though.  "Classes" is generally seen to mean the base classes (in both 4e and 3e).  What's the best way to indicate we mean "Classes, Prestige Classes of 3e, Paragon Paths of 4e, and Epic Destinies of 4e", but in a succinct way? :)  15:43, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * A difficult one, because from an in-game perspective, some of these are occupations, like the Purple Dragon Knights of Cormyr, yet some are more like innate abilities that have manifested themselves. While we don't want to focus too much on the game mechanics and so called "crunch", we really owe it to the Realms community to be a resource for DMs and players too, and there is much interest in prestige classes and paragon paths there. I wouldn't mind simply using "Portal:Classes" because I feel this is probably the best term to encompass everything contained in the portal. Fw190a8 14:41, 27 September 2008 (UTC)