I absolutely hate prestige classes that are linked to social organizations. Social organizations are my job and the campaign world designer's job, not the game mechanics designer's job. When they make prestige classes embedded in a social organization, that social organization is all too often flavorless and contrived. And, invariably, the flavor gets reflected in the abilities and all too often those abilities stink. Worse yet, these PrCs tend to offer things like exceptionally poor spell casting progressions (the ones that give you 4th level cleric spells at the maximum).
On the other hand, *all* of these could be just as validly represented by Feats ...
Most classes are feat-poor, so that makes feats a difficult way to personalize those classes.
|
I absolutely hate prestige classes that are linked to social organizations.
The Red Mantis steps in this direction. Assassins who worship one specific god, use special Exotic Weapons, don't progress previous most previous class abilities and have an insect motif are really, really specific. I'm really fine with them existing as setting detail, but a PrC for them eats up pages that could be devoted to rules that more than one player in a thousand is ever going to use.
It's like the ultimate uber-niche. Players who want to play an Assassin > players who want to play a spellcasting assassin > players willing to eat a Feat on Sawtooth Sabre proficiency > players who like the flavor of a red-clad assassin who worships a giant evil bug >>>>>> players who are okay with the idea of not always having control of their character > etc.
A more 'generic' Prestige Class like 'Druid who develops his Wild Shape to turn into dragons and stuff' or 'Wizard who uber-specializes in fire magic' seems like it would get a hell of a lot more use.
good points...
A more 'generic' Prestige Class like 'Druid who develops his Wild Shape to turn into dragons and stuff' or 'Wizard who uber-specializes in fire magic' seems like it would get a hell of a lot more use.
THIS!
After all just becuase the PrC comes out of the package generic doesn't mean you can't add spice later (want salt on those fries?).
In the case of the wizard that over specializes in fire. The PrC could be generic, then you only allow players that go to a certain area, and participate in a ritual of flames to join a sect of wizards that live on the edge of an active volcano to join in your setting. This way anyone can use the PrC as is, but you add flavor to the PrC in your setting and limit who can access it when by the dangers they must past through to get to the sect of wizards on the volcano.
I'm confused.
What is it that people think prestige classes should be, if not special organizations, brotherhoods, fellowships, wizard circles or mystery cults? They have a focus or a goal or a role that makes sense in the greater storyline
Joining a prestige class is supposed to be more than "Hey, I meet the requirements, hand me my ID card and the first level abilities manual." It should fit the *character* and their motivations; it should drive stories. It should have a place in the greater campaign world or it just seems anachronistic, like horns on a viking helmet.
If driving stories and contributing the campaign is not the purpose, then what would you say is the purpose of a prestige class?
-Ben.
If driving stories and contributing the campaign is not the purpose, then what would you say is the purpose of a prestige class?
To allow a character to do something new and unusual (but not overpowered). Membership in a specific organization is not necessary for that.
To allow a character to do something new and unusual (but not overpowered). Membership in a specific organization is not necessary for that.
That's what feats are for. Prestige classes are supposed to be more involved.
-Ben.
|
|
I hated a lot of the 3.5 Prestige Classes, because all those 'Daggerspell Shapers', 'Masters of the Invisible Hand' and whatnot just didn't make sense -- not to mention that the increasing power curve made the more "sensible" Prestige Classes that were published early seem like poor choices in comparison.
Having said that, I *love* the PrC system in principle, as long as we won't be "flooded" with them in every supplement. I'm not against "organisational" PrCs, as long as they make sense as a PrC, and are not an "updated" version of a core class (i.e. a "better" version of rogue) or an existing PrC.
None of the SRD PrCs are tied to an organization, nor in Pathfinder.
The organization thing may have begun before FR, but it reached its peak in Faerun. Virtually all of the Fr PrCs are religion or organization based. There's nothing wrong with that, but not every character/player that desires a prestige class wants or needs to be tied to an organization.
To me, the prestige class is just that, a class that provides prestige; something extra, beyond the core classes. It can be specialization of a core class or combine features of multiple core classes. Or provide features of membership in an special group. And they are only an option.
In my game, I do not opt to use Epic rules, so if a character gets to level 20 in a single class(very rare) and still wants to advance, he has to multiclass. Prestige classes allow the character to keep advancing without losing the original concept.
The problem is PrCs that are broken. Monte Cook, I believe, wrote an article on prestige class design. In it he stated the main rule for Prcs: there must be a reason to take it and there must be a reason to NOT take it.
Some PrCs are so over the top that there is no reason to not take it. They allow all the core class features to advance with the prestige class features. You don't have to give up anything. Or they grant so much at the first level that a single level dip is too much to pass up. That's why so much changed from 3.0 to 3.5.
Part of the problem too, is that so many classes weren't worth taking after so many levels, so prestige classes looked pretty good. Pathfinder has gone a long way to change that. With PFRPG, if you drop out of a class to multiclass or go prestige, you are giving something up. It may still be worth it, or it may not. Its up to the player and DM.
If all you play are the eleven core classes, and nothing else, it makes for a rather generic game. I like more flavors/colors/options in my game.
-Jack
To allow a character to do something new and unusual (but not overpowered). Membership in a specific organization is not necessary for that.That's what feats are for. Prestige classes are supposed to be more involved.
-Ben.
But there aren't really that many feats available. In PFRPG, a 20th level character only has 10, 11 if human. In the SRD, its only 7, 8 if human.
I hated a lot of the 3.5 Prestige Classes, because all those 'Daggerspell Shapers', 'Masters of the Invisible Hand' and whatnot just didn't make sense -- not to mention that the increasing power curve made the more "sensible" Prestige Classes that were published early seem like poor choices in comparison.
Having said that, I *love* the PrC system in principle, as long as we won't be "flooded" with them in every supplement. I'm not against "organisational" PrCs, as long as they make sense as a PrC, and are not an "updated" version of a core class (i.e. a "better" version of rogue) or an existing PrC.
Wait, what did made Daggerspell Shapers not make sense? You are a Druid who fights with daggers (sub optimal idea though). Not powerful, but not nonsense.
To allow a character to do something new and unusual (but not overpowered). Membership in a specific organization is not necessary for that.That's what feats are for. Prestige classes are supposed to be more involved.
-Ben.
As the other guy said, out of all of the the prestige classes in the DMG, one (or maybe two) involve organizations (Red Wizard of Thay and maybe Assassin).
But there aren't really that many feats available. In PFRPG, a 20th level character only has 10, 11 if human. In the SRD, its only 7, 8 if human.
To allow a character to do something new and unusual (but not overpowered). Membership in a specific organization is not necessary for that.That's what feats are for. Prestige classes are supposed to be more involved.
So you make new feats or find the 3PP feats to fill the absences in what you're looking for in a character concept. Seven to eight options, possibly 10 or 11, is a lot of choices-- especially if you're willing to allow retraining.
You've got a ton of possibilities for those feats, and with all the supplements out there, you can easily customize your character concept through feats. Saying you need a PrC to meet that need seems... excessive. How many powers and abilities are you looking for in a character? Are the powers driving the stories, or is the character development driving stories?
-Ben.
If you dig out copies of the 3E books, that was the concept originally presented for prestige classes.
Somewhere in the next 2 years that concept was completely lost, and prestige classes became nothing but gratuitous power up add-ons that ultimately completely overshadowed the base classes.
Of course it got lost!
Prestige Classes proved to be one of the best ways to justify "splat" books (both by WoTC and most 3rd Party publishers too).
As the other guy said, out of all of the the prestige classes in the DMG, one (or maybe two) involve organizations (Red Wizard of Thay and maybe Assassin).
Let's look:
Arcane Archer -- This is obviously a racial PrC, intended for the elvish.
Arcane Trickster -- No obvious organization.
Archmage -- No obvious organization, but it begs one, like assassin and blackguard.
Assassin -- No obvious organization, but it begs one.
Blackguard -- No obvious organization, but it begs one, especially with the summoning requirement.
Dragon Disciple -- This is very sorcerer focused, and could have built-in organizations, based on color or metal.
Duelist -- No obvious organization, but it begs one, like assassin.
Dwarven Defender -- Like the Arcane Archer, this a focused racial PrC, obviously intended for some kind of honor guard.
Eldritch Knight -- Again, begs an organization.
Hierophant -- Druids, canonically, were all a part of a large organization. Discarding that is a possibility, I guess.
Horizon Walker -- Rangers are usually loners, but this sure seems like something a group would develop.
Loremaster -- Again, implies an organization.
Mystic Theurge -- Both this and Thaumaturgist have a religious component. Priests are usually part of a larger church, which is another large organization.
Shadowdancer -- Just like the Assassin, probably a little more like the Eldritch Knight.
Thaumaturgist -- Just like the MT.
None of these are so plain that you couldn't easily tie an organization to them. The Assassin and Duelist, perhaps the Horizon Walker, could evolve without groups, but the rest are talking about special skills that don't grow naturally out of the skillsets of base classes. They imply special training and education, teaching the secrets of those new talents. To say that you just kind of "figure out" how to do those things robs the game of a lot of potential. It eliminates stories to find those experts, to establish relationships, to earn membership, to complete training. That's a whole story arc right there.
-Ben.
None of these are so plain that you couldn't easily tie an organization to them.
Exactly -- you can easily tie any sort of "fluff" to them you want, but they should be interesting in their own right as well. The game designer doesn't have to have a particular organization being part and parcel of the description (e.g. "all arcane archers come from the country of Elwher and worship the god Apollo"); that should be up to the DM to decide.
See the problem is if all those things are fulfilled then people start saying, "that's too munchkiny!"
I see a prestige class doing one (or more) of five things:
1. Unite two different types of classes in a single entity, with some loss to both (aka eldritch knight or mystic theurge).
2. Take an option that a base class gets and expand on it (i.e. dragon disciple).
3. Build an unique set of class features off of a base concept presented in a core class (assassins, shadowdancers, duelists, and thaumaturgists would be examples of this)
4. Complete some archtype not completely possible with a single core class.
5. Offer a unique set of features based off of some organization.
Now this should (in my opinion) be without fluff so I may add my own as a DM or player. I'm not saying fluff isn't important, I'm saying I shouldn't be told what mine is going to be by the designer thinks of it.
On that last one I don't mind the organization being provided and what have you, but I don't think every Prestige class needs one.
After all some concepts are just classics. Like the rage mage, how and why would they organize? Not saying they couldn't just saying it isn't likely.
|
|
I want a prestige class focused on channeling positive or negative energy in powerful ways.
Oh yes, I want a Prestige Class that goes one step further, and *replaces spellcasting* with a channel energy mechanic. X channelings per day, usable in a wide variety of ways, to heal, to smite, to buff, to put up a protective barrier, etc. Instead of 'praying for spells' like a lame divine wannabe Wizard, the channeling priest will call upon her faith to repel the evildoers or bolster her allies or smite the unrighteous, right at the moment she needs that assistance.
She gets a ton of channelings per day, and that's all she does, channel the power of her faith, and, as levels accrue, she learns new ways to channel her faith (to buff allies or ward away evil) with the very base abilities being channeled healing and channeled smiting.
That would take the 'Cleric' in a sexy new direction that feels more like a 'priest' from fiction, raising their holy symbol and radiating an aura of faith, and less like a fighter/magic-user hybrid with some healing spells.
None of these are so plain that you couldn't easily tie an organization to them.Exactly -- you can easily tie any sort of "fluff" to them you want, but they should be interesting in their own right as well. The game designer doesn't have to have a particular organization being part and parcel of the description (e.g. "all arcane archers come from the country of Elwher and worship the god Apollo"); that should be up to the DM to decide.
The issue that arises, though, is when the DM doesn't create any organization at all and just allows the character to advance within the Prestige Class without any stories or work. At that point, there's nothing "prestigious" about the class at all-- it just becomes a souped up variant of the base classes. It's incumbent upon the DM to create that backstory and properly incorporate the PrC (and hopefully the player builds on it), otherwise the DM's just reducing the story experience for everyone involved.
Then we start to see the attitude of "PrCs suck" because of misuse...
-Ben.
The issue that arises, though, is when the DM doesn't create any organization at all and just allows the character to advance within the Prestige Class without any stories or work. At that point, there's nothing "prestigious" about the class at all-- it just becomes a souped up variant of the base classes.
(a) If the DM doesn't create any interesting organizations for his homebrew world, that's a lazy DM problem, not a PrC problem.
(b) I agree with you on one thing: Prestige classes should not be just souped-up versions of base classes. If you're getting a new, nifty ability PrC, you better be sacrificing something else of value in exchange (not just a couple of feats, say).
I know this is crazy talk, but it is one of the features of 4th Ed that I actually like, that of the Paragon Path and Epic Destiny. You don't leave your base class, but you get prestige class-like abilities and role-playing fluff. This sounds like win-win to me, too bad we can't adopt it for Pathfinder. I've grown weary of the glut of prestige classes and have even been re-working not just the 11 core classes, but some classes like the Hexblade to be more playable. My group has felt the same and we mostly stick with just core classes now, albeit using the better pathfinder versions, of course.
Personally,I think that,as it stands,the Arcane Archer should be renamed "Elven archer",since you have to be an elf to take it.
The prestige class I'd really like to have is 'mage-smith"-that is,a wizard or sorcerer who specializes in making magical items.
I like prestige classes ok but I also like a lot of flexibility in customization of a character and I feel that the prestige class system takes away a lot of this flexibility. Well the class system actually does too, but I can deal with classes pretty well, I can deal with prestige classes pretty well to but I would prefer just to have a collection of alternate class features, feats and the like that would basically to the same thing as a prestige class but you could just pay the price and pin them on as you want. I guess I lean toward what GURPS does with advantages in this area, I think everything would be so much easier to deal with if there was just stuff to add by paying some predefined price rather than having to take the whole package, it a little to much of a cookie cutter approach I guess. I can deal with this much of a cookie cutter approach as long as it doesn't get as cookie cutter as 4e but I definitely lean in favor of ultimate flexibility.
Charles
OK First no idea where this should go... so please move to the proper forum
OK Meat of the question is as the Subject says...
I just cannot get into Prestige Classes. This is a personal thing I am sure. But to me they just seem so contrived, a means to deliver really cool abilities with no real reason to exist for the most part.
For me, a Prestige Class would represent the training undergone by an adventurer who joins an organization which produces soldiers, students, apprentices, and the the faithful to fulfill specific roles.
I agree. for the most part i feel certain classes such as paladins should be a prestige class instead of a core class. Aside from the 1e bard which probably was the basis for the prestige classes of today, the paladin was always a difficult class to qualify for a fighter strolls into a church and declares a local woman to be a witch, the parishoners probably take pause and consider. a paladin declares a person a witch and all of a sudden torches are lit and pitchforks are raised. paladins themselves are that prestigous. I also pine for the old 2e specialist cleric rules. to me at least, not every cleric is a combat savy man of cloth, some clerics are, because of their dieties, meant for the pulpit. i prefer variant rules for the base classes to cover more mundane needs and prefer to use prestige classes for the truly unique needs of the campaign
I use the affiliations in the PH2 as the Prestigious Society that holds the secret training for the PrC.
Then I use pre-requisites as the basis for application. It gets your foot in the door, but doesn't guarantee admission. There are missions the PC must perform (either alone or with a group) to prove their prestigious worthiness to be in the hoity-toity special club (and thus gain the PrC).
The roleplaying drama of *not* getting in are worth it; you get the sponsor who's pulling for the PC to get in and the pompous jerk who tries to keep him/her/it out of their elite club. I always make the test something that a PC has a good chance at failing if they apply when they have only the base requirements.
You, too, will now play this way.
I have spoken.
So let it be written, so let it be done.
PrC as social org are especially annoying. Why do I have to wait until Level 7 to be recognized as a Knight of So-and-so? (Pathfinder has the Red Mantis Assassin PrC, doesn't it? At least it's available to NPCs)
Then there's the game-y aspect to it. There's a whole game to playing PrC chess. Why do I take a level in Knight of Underwhelming in order to get the most levels as a Slimeball of Whoozit?
Why can't someone be a lvl 15 "exactly what the character is meant to be"?
Some gaming systems actually do allow for that. WotC sort of went there with character archetypes in one of the Revised Star Wars splatbooks, although they were specific archetype paths... perhaps some other Wizards products allow for this.
Green Ronin's True20 allows you to build a character class of your own.
It's not impossible to let your characters be who they are meant to be from day 1.
(a) If the DM doesn't create any interesting organizations for his homebrew world, that's a lazy DM problem, not a PrC problem.But sometimes it's a matter of time as well. And I'd much rather include an organization created by the geniuses at Paizo than to include something lame created by myself.
Sure. But using organizations created by Paizo still doesn't necessarily have anything to do with prestige classes.
I admit that there are some organization-related prestige classes that I think are well done (like the Cabinet Trickster or the Moonspeaker from Eberron). But I think there are far more organization-related prestige classes that fall flat for me (like the Daggerspell Mage or the Scar Enforcer) where the organization seems like kind of a lame afterthought.
|
The prestige classes included in the base PRPG rules should reflect the 3.5 panel by design, for conversion purposes. That much is clear.
Nothing stops Paizo (or third party publishers, if Paizo goes ahead with its "Pathfinder compatible" license program) to add to the available panel of PrCs, however.
I for one think Prestige Classes are great tools for three reasons: 1/ when designed appropriately, they help flesh out the world by developing its own character-specific and organization-specific rules; they tie particular characters to the world at large, 2/ they provide almost infinite possibilities of character advancement, and 3/ they provide opportunities for DMs and players to share the fun in designing new mechanical elements for the game.
|
Sure. But using organizations created by Paizo still doesn't necessarily have anything to do with prestige classes.
Agreed. And I don't think that any organization needs a Prestige Class except if it fits the organization's description. (as it does with the Moonspeakers and as it does with the Red Mantis Assassins)
Why can't someone be a lvl 15 "exactly what the character is meant to be"?
Short answer: Because D&D is a class-based system and class-based systems are limited in how far you can personalize a character to match a concept.
Long answer: Because to let everyone have "exactly what the character is meant to be," you would need to completely redesign the level advancement mechanics to give players the ability to effectively design a unique class for every character. Without making it overly complex or unbalanced. True 20, for all it's plusses, has a hard time doing everything that D&D can do with multiclassing, variant classes, and prestige classes; it was designed to be a less complex, stripped-down version of the d20 system, after all. I suppose someone could design an OGL/3.x version of the 2nd Ed AD&D Player's Option books (Combat & Tactics, Skills & Powers, and Spells & Magic) to allow each base class to be modified with various abilities in plug-and-play manner, but the complexity would be much higher than just designing some class variants, prestige classes, and feats as needed to allow similar options.
Besides, if you want "exactly what the character is meant to be," you shouldn't be using a level-based system such as d20. Point-based systems such as GURPS or HERO System do a much better job of character personalization (at the cost of higher complexity).
I like prestige classes a LOT. Especially when they feel prestigious. I don't like when there's a billion of them and they start to look like power creep (here's a class that's an even BETTER wizard than a wizard!). It's best when they're methods to grow and develop world flavor.
I agree. I like the concept as a whole. They make the character more unique. I would prefer a few base classes and then a bunch of prestige classes
|
I loved the d20 modern system of classes, where the 'base' classes only had 10 levels each, you were expected to go into an advanced class between 3 and 6, and then prestige around 10-15. Along with that, multiclassing was strongly encouraged. It allowed for more free-form characters. I know this isn't considered to be the heart of D&D and would never see it's way into Pathfinder but I do worry about others swinging the pendulum too far to the other side.
My two favorite characters:
Catfolk Rogue 3/Fighter 2/Thief-Acrobat 5/Tempest 5
Elf Ranger/Fighter/Order of the Bow Initiate/Deepwood Sniper (forgot the level breakdown)
I decided to kick out all prestige classes and only allow 9 base classes. I created 6 prestige Classes specifically for the setting of our campaign, and they all represent special magical traditions (both arcane and martial), that can only be learned by people who are allready very skilled in their field of profession and possess the required knowledge to understand the underlying concepts.
To me a prestige class has to represent a certain lore or tradition, that is not accessible to everyone. If it just represents something that a base class can do, but does it really good, it's pure number crunching but has no in game relevance.
Blackguard, Shadowdancer, Dragon Disciple: Good idea (though mostly poor execution.)
Assassin, Duelist, Eldritch Knight: Poor ideas.
I want my players to completely forget about the numbers and fully concentrate on the personalties of their characters. With 1000 PrCs, 600 feats and one gazilion spells, it is really hard to accomplish. So for me, it's always PHB only, plus any feat or spell, that seems to fit very well into the overall concept of the game setting. A bit draconic, but good design is never the result of democratic processes.
|
|
What do I want?
I want to see prestige classes that advance all different kinds of abilities from base classes, not just Fighter BAB or rogue sneak attack or sorcerer/wizard/cleric spellcasting.
I want a prestige class with senses so acute they have true seeing and blindsight unless put into total sensory deprivation.
I want a prestige class focused on channeling positive or negative energy in powerful ways.
I really agree with you!
Here is the idea of Prc a good friend came up with but never really made.Mix necromancer and bard for some really nasty effects!
A.K.A.: Deathsinger
Prereqiusets
Bardic music able to cast a necromancy spell of at least 2nd level
Boosts both bardic music and spell casting while giving decent will and fort saves but poor ref saves (long exposure to the powers of death have increased the persons ability to resist death effects but has reduced his/her ability to move out the way (rigor mortis has set in a little))
OK First no idea where this should go... so please move to the proper forum
OK Meat of the question is as the Subject says...
I just cannot get into Prestige Classes. This is a personal thing I am sure. But to me they just seem so contrived, a means to deliver really cool abilities with no real reason to exist for the most part.
After reading this long thread I have a few thoughts to add.
1. I will argue in favor of the flood of prestige classes. Granted, 90% of prestige classes suck, but I think we need the 90% that suck in order to get the 10% that are really great. And even among the 90%, there are some diamonds in the muck that can be very useful to a DM if polished up.
For example, on another forum I saw a post about a homebrew PrC called Divine Duelist. It's probably one of the worst PrCs I've ever seen, but the concept is interesting, and might be worth salvaging.
2. I found prestige classes to be very useful ways to introduce new concepts and tie together things that would otherwise be more difficult to express. What got me to love prestige classes was the PrC of Judge that I created for my homebrew game of Audor.
The Judge is a PrC that probably would not make a lot of sense in most other settings. It is perhaps most like the lawmen of the old west -- they travel around the kingdom making sure that the King's laws are being followed, tracking down outlaws and bringing them to justice, and also keeping the nobles in line.
So who is a Judge? And what do you have to do to become a Judge? And what do you do when you are a Judge? The easiest way for me was to createa Judge PrC, with sensible requirements like Tracking and Knowledge (Law). Then you have to be sponsored by an existing Judge, complete a quest for her, and you are trained in their special combat and investigative techniques and spells.
3. Prestige classes are, in my opinion, a priviledge, not a right. Only the PrCs that I allow are allowed. As a house rule, I require that PCs find a member of a PrC for training, before they can enter a PrC. This allows me to control what PrCs are available by controlling what NPCs the PC encounters.
4. I've come up with a system of rating PrCs according to whether they are Common, Uncommon, Rare, Very Rare, or Unheard of. This indicates their role in the society and how easy it is for PCs to get into the class. If a PrC is Unheard Of, it is not available.
5. I think any class should be able to be taken to any level. I've tried to come up with rules for extending a PrC beyond its last level. I have only made ten level PrCs myself. I find ten level PrCs are easier because you can put more of your wish list without overloading the class.
6. There are multiple ways that I get ideas for PrCs. Thus, there are different types of PrCs. Some PrCs are inspired by a need for an organization in the game, such as the Judge listed above. Others are inspired by some idea for a character concept, such as my idea for a Twisted Sorcerer who uses extreme movements to augment her magic. The latter might not get tied to an organization until I decide to deploy it in a campaign.
7. As DM, I have the right to make any changes to a class that I want. I can change the crunch, or I can change the fluff. In my homebrew, I took the Dwarven Defender, removed the requirement that one be a dwarf, and used it to specialized a monastic order that does happen to have dwarves in it, but is open to all races, and is based on a human religion and culture. This was an easy way for me to define a monastic order and differentiate them from the other orders in the campaign.
8. I have no qualms about multiclassing PrCs. If you can qualify for more than one PrC, that probably means that your character concept is one for which both PrCs make sense for your character. A Cavalier/Judge would make a lot of sense in my own campaign, and I have an NPC with that combination -- that would be a Judge who is really good at riding horses.
One player I know wanted to play a Gladiator/Archmage, and the DM turned him down. I was disappointed -- I really wanted to know how that combination would work out.
9. A lot of prestige class ideas might work better as base classes. I am for Paladin being a base class -- in my homebrew, the paladins are sort of like the marines in that they want to recruit young people who can be molded into their ideals, not old people who have already made up their own decisions.
Cavalier should also be a base class, since that is intended to be people "born and bred for the saddle", but in my homebrew I reconceptualized it as an exclusive club for nobles who loved horses.
I made Mystic Theurg into a base class to avoid the problem of getting through Wizard/Cleric levels.
When considering whether or not to make the Mystic Dervish a base class, I asked myself whether this was a class, like Judge, where you had to prove your worth, or whether this was one which would have novices as members.
10. I would like to see a Twisted Sorcerer PrC in Golaron so that the artists could continue to draw Seoni in her exaggerated poses.
In summary, I see prestige classes as valuable options, and the optional nature of PrCs should be emphasized. Players should not have to choose a PrC to make a viable character. (For this reason, I beefed up the Paladin class after 3.5 came out, so a straight Paladin would be more viable at high levels.) A lot of prestige classes will be junk, and the GM will have to be selective. But the more junky PrCs that get generated, the more gems that there will be.
|
|
Prestige classes are great. If the rules want to put a cap on the number of them you can take, maybe 2-3, fine. But I love them. More options! Feat trees are fine too, but ultimately inferior. I've had a lot of new players recently and they find prestige classes they are interested in much easier than feats. Everything you want in a prestige is clumped together on a page or two, the feats that may work well with your concept are spread out all over the place.
Just keep the prestiges along the same power level as the base classes, create 10% for organizations, the other 90% without...
I dunno. I really would be interested in hearing about some of these great prestige 'combos' everyone mentions. More often then not a lot of them have been fixed by errata or just by re-reading the rules.
I actually like prestige classes a lot. I think they add a lot of flavor to a campaign. I also think they help make characters very unique in their own right. For example, in a Forgotten Realms campaign, I played a cleric of Azuth who was searching for a proto language underlying all magic. He was a bit of a scholarly type, so I took the prestige class Loremaster. Just taking that prestige class made my character feel so much more unique, and exciting than a straight cleric.
That said, I do think prestige classes can be abused. It's one thing to take a prestige class because it fits with your character concept. It's another to take a prestige class because it gives you an additional +4 to your AC. I think DMs need to be careful about what prestige classes they allow and why. Otherwise, they get a little ridiculous.
|
|
In a 3.5 game I played in, the Dm would only allow a PC to take one PRC. The idea was that a character should have only one focus for their career path.
As a player, I was initially against this idea. But i came to realize how "munchkin" it was to take multiple PRCs just for some of the "top loaded" abilities, without any desire to use a PRC for a roleplaying opportunity.
For Example:
The path to become an Assassin PRC is a;most identical to the Shadowdancer. A PC can take one level of Assassin, meeting the requirements for Shadowdancer along the way and never return to that PRC again, but benefiting from Death Attack, and Poison Use prior to Shadowdancer with no lose.
I think PRCs serve a function in the game, but only if they offer an opportunity to advance roleplay, not "roll-play"!
Prestige Classes are an interesting concept, if you don't overdo it. DMG had it right: Make a small number of PrCs custom build for your campaign, here are some examples how these PrCs could be.
Campaign Setting specific PrCs are okay, I suppose, but there are too much for FR and Eberron, I think. But the complete series got it all wrong in my oppinion.
In my campaign, there are 6 prestige classes, all custom build, and no other exist in that world. And even those all represent mastery of esoteric magical energies, that can only be learned by people allready highly skilled in basic magic practices.
If a character concept could be realized with base classes, I think a player should do just that.
If every Prestige Class were stripped down to the class features, and then offered as Feats or Feat Chains (and / or Alternate Class Features), I'd be tickled pink.
Good lord, yes!
Hopefully we can see something like this with the next incarnation of Pathfinder, once everyone feels they've finally gotten their money's worth from 3.5 (and this whole business of backwards compatibility can finally be set aside).
I that case, I probably would look deeper in the posibilities offered by variant classe levels.
|
|
I that case, I probably would look deeper in the posibilities offered by variant classe levels.
Also a key thing. Instead of every Monk getting Ability X at 10th level, different Monks could branch out in different directions *without* having to abandon the Monk class to take a PrC that has as it's first line of text 'advances the following Monk abilities...'
'Cause that's just lame. *Far* too many PrCs, IMO, are, at best, three to five levels long, but are stretched out into 10 level PrCs by 'filler' levels that just advance abilities from your previous class. If a level of a PrC advances your class abilities, why the heck isn't it a level in the previous class?
I that case, I probably would look deeper in the posibilities offered by variant classe levels.Also a key thing. Instead of every Monk getting Ability X at 10th level, different Monks could branch out in different directions *without* having to abandon the Monk class to take a PrC that has as it's first line of text 'advances the following Monk abilities...'
'Cause that's just lame. *Far* too many PrCs, IMO, are, at best, three to five levels long, but are stretched out into 10 level PrCs by 'filler' levels that just advance abilities from your previous class. If a level of a PrC advances your class abilities, why the heck isn't it a level in the previous class?
I think to answer that question, we have to ask, what is a class?
In 3.x, even if exactly one class in the Player's Handbook has Rage or Wild Shape, or Divine Grace or uses spellbooks, the possibily is open that some other class also includes Rage or Wild Shape or Divine Grace or spellbooks.
For example, in the PhB, the Monks have martial arts ability, but in my homebrew world, the Mystic Dervishes also have martial arts ability. They're not monks -- they don't even have to be Lawful. But if you are taking levels of Mystic Dervish, why not take levels of Monk? The same reason an Audorian Judge does not have to take levels in Fighter to improve her BAB -- both Fighter and Audorian Judge train in weapons skills and so both get the benefits of improved BAB.
The other reason is that most PrCs have capstone abilities that require 10 levels of commitment for the class. So if you delay your advancement by taking Monk levels or Cleric levels or Fighter levels, et al, you delay your achievement of the PrC capstone.
Of course, there should be reasons for everything. The Favored of Luthic PrC I developed allows characters to continue to advance their animal companions because it is a nature-themed/witch-type/shaman-type PrC, and so animal companions make a lot of sense. Favored of Luthics do not advance in turning undead or in wildshaping, but advancing their animal companions is one of the benefits of the PrC.
|
Owner-Manager - Tyche's Games
|
To answer the question, Yes, I do.
My usually mechanical description of a PrC is 120% of a base class in what they do and 90% of a base class in everything else. Now that is not true of all PrCs but it seems like a good general rule.
I agree that they need to be hooked into campaign setting not just ways for characters to become more powerful.