Most of my players have taken the double approach - yes, good prestige class, nifty features, but they look at it from a roleplaying perspective. "Why would my character take this class?" (I reward my players for good roleplaying, so I'm hoping this is the reason).
Generally I won't allow a prestige class by a player unless they have some plausible reason for them taking it. Most of the time I work the "access" to the prestige class in game.
Most of my players have taken the double approach - yes, good prestige class, nifty features, but they look at it from a roleplaying perspective. "Why would my character take this class?" (I reward my players for good roleplaying, so I'm hoping this is the reason).
Generally I won't allow a prestige class by a player unless they have some plausible reason for them taking it. Most of the time I work the "access" to the prestige class in game.
That's exactly the approach I take. I consider prestige classes similar to the old "name" levels in 1e/2e. The prerequisites for taking a prestige class include role-playing pre-requisites. The character has to join a special society, get rewarded by the King for special service and may now qualify to enter the Holy order of the Deviant Vivisectors, etc.
Aside from the obvious benefit(i.e. more or enhanced powers and abilities), why do you choose to play a prestige class?
Why do I choose any class? Aside from the obvious benefit (you know, extra powers and abilities gained), why shouldn't I just play an Expert, or Warrior, and "define my character" by role-playing him?
I don't really know. I'm sure I'd have plenty of fun playing a Warrior instead of a Fighter, but there doesn't seem to be any good reason not to play as a Fighter. The same is true for prestige classes. If my character meets the prerequisites and the class seems like a good match (mechanically and/or for "roleplaying potential"), why not go for it?
|
I'm in complete accord with Lillith and F2K (shocking, I know). I think Prestige Classes are great if there is a logical reason for them. They allow some interesting texture and options that I might not have thought of trying before.
I have two games that I'm a player in right now...In one, I have a young necromancer that will probably be progressing towared Pale Master. He's the son of an embalmer and got into necromancy in a round about way...and his non-formal wizarding background will pobably cause him problems with how he uses his power as he advances. Similar to the way James Jacobs is running his character, Tyrandi, his use of necromantic energies sometimes puts him at odds with the party. It makes for some interesting interactions within the group.
My other character is a Xvart ranger who I doubt I will progress into any kind of prestige class. He's was his tribes huntsman and I don't foresee anything pushing him away from that type of role. If, during the course of the campaign, the DM introduces threads that make me feel that his role is changing, I would consider it, but at this point, no.
When I've DMed, I agree with Lillith and F2K... You don't become a Darkwood Stalker, just because you're an elf with Dodge and Track feats. You take it because the sight of a non-dead orc is painful to you. You don't become Order of the Bow because you've picked up the whole suite of missile feats, you take it because you're a Zen M-F'er who thinks that the Truth of Life is held in the twang of a bowstring. If you're just taking a Prestige because you want to pick up the ability go gain Impoved Grapple as a class bonus, well, you're probably not playing with the right DM.
|
|
... why not just stay with the class you start with, multi-class if want more versatility, and define your character by your actions and roleplaying rather than a prestige class? Just asking...
I don't know that prestige classes define a character any more or less than feats, classes, and skills do. It just does it differently.
Prestige classes can be a bit "munchkiny", but usually at the cost of something else. They are meant to be VERY focused classes. Smart DMs can exploit that as they see fit.
I like to play prestige classes for a number of reasons. I really like to play complicated characters. I have also played every "standard" class and most races that I care to. I want to play something different and more focused.
And wouldn't you rather be "Gorak the Tempest" instead of "Gorak the Fighter"? Granted it is only a title, but shouldn't people know what that title means?
I also feel that the prestige class needs to make sense -- story wise as well as simple logistics. I wouldn't allow someone to be a "Deepwood Sniper" if the nearest forest was 200 miles away. I don't care if they met the prerequisites.
Nicely put, Gav! I especially like the bit about The Truth of Life being heard in the sound of a bowstring twang...I may have to use that...
And I have to agree with Bill, meeting the prerequisites doesn't mean you can/should take that prestige class.
I have found through the years of running D&D version 3 (and it has been years - I can say that now!) that multiclassing too much hurts the characters in the long run. I have one player who has a Druid 24/Speaker of the City 5 and he can go toe to toe with the best of 'em (must be the wildshape feats he took, ;-) ) and can cast two epic level spells per day, while the other player, a Sorcerer 14/Dragon Disciple 10/War Wizard 4/Argent Savant 3, still has not gotten level 9 spells yet.
Prestige classes are nice, but I'd caution/strongly discourage anyone from taking too many. A strong base class with maybe one to two additional classes is my personal preference.
i have found with my gaming group thatmost only take one prestige class and some dont at all.we have discovered that alot of prestige classes just arnt worth leaving the class they were playing.the whole idea of prestige classes is so one can fine tune that specific kind of character that he or she wishes to play.therefore the roleplaying aspect of it.and i also agree with lilith i think she said it that if you break away sort of speak by seriously multiclassing and prestige classing,that you really fall behind the rest of the group.finding yourself like a jack of all trades but master of none.
Hello All,
Just wanted to say that I liked many of the points already mentioned concerning taking prestige classes along with the rationales as why and why not. I to am a firm believer in that the prestige classes need to make sense in the scope of the campaign.
I think it behooves a GM to take the time to determine what prestige classes he or she wants in his or her campaign at the beginning. I also think that limiting those prestige classes makes them more desirable in the sense that there are not 30 plus different prestige options floating around. That is not to say that the players should not have some input. Far from it, players need to have a voice so that both the GM and themselves are on the proverbial same page. It just seems that by restricting what is offered helps to reinforce that prestige classes are something unique and desirable.
As for the comments on multiclassing and the limited effectiveness there in, I would say that is largely dependent on the type and style of gaming being run. Obviously several prestige classes build off of those multiclassing options and not all of them are combat related.
So in games were roleplaying plays a large part, spreading a character over a few classes can be worthwhile. However, in games were combat plays a key role, only limited mutilclassing seems to be effective and then only when they were combinations that share similar strengths (Barbarian/Rogue, Ranger/Fighter, or Cleric/Necromancer). Typically, it seems going beyond 2 classes (barring certain prestige classes) really impacts a character’s combat related effectiveness if the character is a spell caster of any stripe.
As a final thought related to prestige classes, I think part of the problem with the prestige classes is that when they were first introduced the perception was that they were a hot new item and highly desirable. This caused a glut of prestige classes to be developed and offered, not only by Wizards of the Coast, but also many OGL companies. Often these prestige classes seemed to be nothing more than shoddily converted kits from 2E or poorly designed deadline page filler that were much weaker than the core classes. The glut in turn soured the perception associated with the prestige classes and as a result, the “luster” of a prestige class seemed to be lost.
With the advent of 3.5, it now seems steps are being taken to steer the prestige classes in the right direction. Many products now seem to focus on background organizations or rationales to support the idea of the prestige classes being offered. This helps to reestablish the “luster” of a prestige class and that I feel is definitely a step in the right direction.
Good gaming,
Mark
I have to agree with the notion that prestige classes are a good springboard for role playing and defining a character. Just a few sessions ago a wizard character of mine wrote his first spell. To mark the occasion he acquired (by total chance he leveled up that session too) his first level of arch mage. In my group we take the slant that a wizard memorizes the spells of others while an arch mage works to create his own. I must admit there was something satisfying about my character gaining this distinction. I guess what I am trying to say here is that a prestige class can add a lot to a character and help make him more unique. Wow, that was kind of rambling. Although I can’t speak for quality, I did a search recently online for a list of prestige classes. I wound up finding an index which listed where you could find any of the WotC published books. Wound up there were over SIX HUNDRED listed. With that many choices, there should be something to make even the most picky gamer happy ;)
More often than not, I choose not to take PrCs. I don't even like to multiclass; partly it's the complication. It's annoying having a character with one HD for class x, another hit die for class y, 4+ skills for class x, 2+ skills for class y, and so on. For me, it's so much simpler to advance in a single base class and define my character by feats, skills and roleplaying. Also, I don't like the idea of narrowing my character's abilities; I like to think that my character is ready for anything. For example, I'd rather take pure fighter levels than go into PrC X, so I can load up on feats like Blind-fight that enhance general survivability. The exception to my attitude is prestige classes that allow character types that are just plain not possible otherwise. Entire the prime example, the Mystic Theurge. MTs create a character type, rather than just narrowing/focussing on an existing character type. But for me, even playing a beloved Mystic Theurge is rare.
|
|
I do limit the Prestige Classes to one class now after a bad DM experience.
This was back with 3.0 and a player wanted to do a Deepwood Sniper and an Order of the Bow Initiate. This was broken and after that happened I won't allow anyone to do more than one prestige class.
Basically, the PC could shoot point blank without provoking an attack of opportunity. Their threat range was greatly improved (I think 17-20). The crit damage was huge (at least x4 but maybe x5). He got extra attacks. And combine that with the bonuses on bows and arrows stacked basically meant that he could take on a great wyrm red dragon by himself and take it out before he was ever touched.
Many of the problems with those classes (and others) have been addressed in 3.5 (especially the stacking bonuses of bows and arrows), but I don't want to risk it again.
Newbie to messageboards please be kind. Most people choose the them to specialize a character's abilites and to add some fluff. People get tired of being the same old mage and fighter.
My players have been playing NWN for years, and all they do is build perfect PCs using the most optimal prestige class combos. God love them, but I have to force role-playing explanations for prestige classes. Not that it's a big deal...
Whenever one of my players rolls up a PC, I plan ahead all the way through level 21 what that PC should do concerning feats, prestige classes, etc. My players already know what feats they will be taking at later levels and they know when they'll prestige. Of course, they don't know if they'll live that long, but I think it makes sense to plan ahead like that. I can't imagine doing it any other way.
Of course, there needs to be an explanation for the prestige class (or even the feat) the PC takes, for the simple benefit of adding to the overall, logical story of the campaign.