I think prestige classes as presented in the first DMG, have been a really great idea. What then happened in the setting generic Complete books took a completely wrong turn, in my oppinion. The 3.5e DMG also wasn't so great in that regard.
If you have a specific game world with it's own secret cults and mysterious organizations, which have closely guarded knowledge of some obscure forms of magic or martial techniques, I think PrCs are the perfect way to represent this. But as it is now, PrCs are mainly just for the abilities. And most of them don't represent anything, but have only been made to add more pages to the books.
Funnily enough in AD&D if I recall correctly Rangers and Paladins were 'sub-classes' of the fighter ( Still when I read discussions about fighters I throw rangers and paladins into the mix mentally before remembering the 3.0 + style) same for illusionists for magic-users, druids for clerics and maybe assassins for thieves. Dont know why I brought this up.
Anyway I guess my issue with prestige classes is why have them? If it is to give your character better powers then for mine that isnt a good reason. If it suits a character concept then maybe that is OK but if it isnt needed dont do it. I prefer the character to be as blank a canvas as possible. I mean if he is a dwarven defender shouldnt he be defending something?
If you have a specific game world with it's own secret cults and mysterious organizations, which have closely guarded knowledge of some obscure forms of magic or martial techniques, I think PrCs are the perfect way to represent this. But as it is now, PrCs are mainly just for the abilities. And most of them don't represent anything, but have only been made to add more pages to the books.
I agree completely.
This is also the way i see prestige classes.They should be Prestige classes, reserved to special individuals, who are tested before being accepted in a prestigious (or infamous) organization and receiving the training to enforce whatever credo, cause or crusade of this organization.
Like the young padawans in Star Wars for example. Or Harry Potter.
(Oh Mystra, i made a reference to Harry Potter, i am so ashamed now).
Basically, taking a prestige class should be a reward by itself, an elevation, not just a build plan.
However if it is a secret organization and somehow the player that would actually be interested in the PrC doesn't get to it at the right levels, or ends up not liking it do you simply end his contact with the organization even if it is really one he interacts with a lot?
No. Personally if I want organizations in my campaign I prefer to use the rules for them as presented in the PHB 2, DMG 2, and Cityscape. Those worked, did so well, offered benefits for actually being in the organization and were not dependant upon taking levels in a PrC so the character could still persue the character he wants.
And most of the "generic" prestige classes do offer just what you are complaining they don't offer. The dervish for example is really different than just a "fighter in light armor" or a ranger. The Order of the Bow Initiate focuses on archery a lot requires a large amount of stuff to get in, and builds in one specific direction.
They only "don't feel prestigious" if you as a DM or a Player don't make them feel that way.
Read up on the organizations after the prestige classes. They are right there before the "showcase" version of a character with that class. WotC got even better about this in the later books, however it is present in all of them from Complete Warrior on.
Guess what I'm saying is:
1. Don't be lazy, if it isn't just right, tweak it.
2. Don't be lazy and just read the PrC, read all the details after the PrC write up.
Now, there are some rather abusive PrC's out there (Frenzied Berserker, Thrallherd, Contemplative are first on my mind) that require finesse to pull off without breaking the game
-tApologize for the minor thread jack, but I have a Contemplative Cleric. I did it for flavor reasons only, and honestly, I thought it nerfed the normal cleric progression. Maybe I'm a bad character optimizer, but, what's broken about this PrC?
More on topic: the idea of them was initially good, but they quickly became a means to get "better" characters. Also, too many of them left me w/ information overload. I use them rarely, and only for flavor purposes.
It's usually dipped and with righteous might losing BAB doesn't really matter for a cleric. It's easy to get into and gives a domain real quick as well as several nice "perk" powers.
Thanks for the response. I'm going for a 10/10 cleric/contemplative split, so I'm not a "dipper" I guess. And this particular cleric abhors physical combat, and only fights defensively unless it's a life or death situation for her companions (so no "Righteous Might" spells). The domain I took was Balance (and thanks to revisiting the class, I realize I'm due for another domain in my 10th cleric/5th contemplative split!), to go along w/ Law & Oracle. So the build is thematic for my campaign, and the perk powers rarely come into play to be honest.
But I can see a little better now how the PrC could be optimized, if not exactly abused.
Back on topic, I really like the idea of few prestige classes, that are flavorful and tied into the campaign world (Harrower, Red Mantis Assassin, etc.). For equivalent builds, I'm very close to implementing a Talent Tree system for the base classes; just waiting for the PFRPG to get the new "base" platform.
To me, it's important that a Prestige Class does something the base classes don't do.
The Blackguard is a cleric with Sneak Attack, the mystic theurge is a cleric/wizard, and the Assassin a Rogue with Wizard levels.
On the other hand, loremasters, archmages and shadowdancers do things other classes can't do.
Also, a prestige class should not have anything a base class has, plus something. As in 3.5e, wizards and sorcerers don't have anything but spellcasting, arcane prestige classes should not have full spellcasting advancement. An interesting arcane prc requires you to sacrifice the knowledge of more powerful spells, but in exchange you get to cast your spells in a different way or gain access to spells and abilities formerly unavailable. Which, is the class is well designed, should make up for the loss of other spells. But in any way, you should first lose something for taking a prestige class, and then get something else in return. Specialization over versatility. That's what the shadowdancer does right, but the Assassin does not.
Just getting more without losing anything is just poor design.
|
I've been wondering if a few roleplay and campaign specific feats wouldn't be better in many cases than a whole prestige class. I've seen some feats around, especially from Paizo, that would duplicate the feel of a prestige class instead of taking a whole class.
Take for instance: Sable Company Marine from the CotCT Player's Guide. It gives you a special animal companion if you're a ranger and special bonuses when you use it. The feat does a much better job than most dips into prestige classes like Dragon Rider. You'd definitely have to roleplay into the Sable Company before you'd be able to take this feat, and its easier to meet the prereqs than most prestige classes.
I often think so, too.
The prestige classes for my homebrew setting are currently about to be made into 3 level progressions. Though it somewhat "looks" like dipping on the char sheet, it makes them much easier to design, so that all levels are meaningfull.
I think ideally, at each new level, you should have a hard choice if you advance your base class or add a second class of the PrC. With just 3 levels, you have a far better idea what the character loses and what he would get in trade.
I often think so, too.
The prestige classes for my homebrew setting are currently about to be made into 3 level progressions. Though it somewhat "looks" like dipping on the char sheet, it makes them much easier to design, so that all levels are meaningfull.
I think ideally, at each new level, you should have a hard choice if you advance your base class or add a second class of the PrC. With just 3 levels, you have a far better idea what the character loses and what he would get in trade.
Amen!
I like PrC's when they have a written up flavor reason to fit within given campaigns, which is why I look forward to them with PAizo, they will be done to add/enhance the Golarian setting. Since Golarian is a hodge podge of so many setting flavors, many of these PrC's will likely translate to many campaigns outside of Golarian.
However my biggest problem was that they deviated from their initial design criteria. PrC's were supposed to make a character very exceptional in a very defined role. They were supposed to be noticeably eaker outside of that role. So PrC's made a character more powerful than the core classes, rather than weaker, over all, but more powerful in a specific area.
I've been wondering if a few roleplay and campaign specific feats wouldn't be better in many cases than a whole prestige class. I've seen some feats around, especially from Paizo, that would duplicate the feel of a prestige class instead of taking a whole class.
Take for instance: Sable Company Marine from the CotCT Player's Guide. It gives you a special animal companion if you're a ranger and special bonuses when you use it. The feat does a much better job than most dips into prestige classes like Dragon Rider. You'd definitely have to roleplay into the Sable Company before you'd be able to take this feat, and its easier to meet the prereqs than most prestige classes.
Bingo!
"Prestige feats"
|
I have been here on the board for a while and I see a lot of distain for Prestige Classes and I am really wondering why?You're pointing in the right direction with your reference to WotC's 3.5 marketing strategy. A lot of it is a backlash because of the way the supplements were churned out, each with more (and more powerful) prestige classes.
I don't mean to bite the hand and all that, but isn't Paizo responsible for much of the splat showing up in Dragon and Dungeon over the years? Aren't we as gamers responsible as well, if we didn't like the new shiny power creep toys that were dangled before us we wouldn't have bought those books and all the creators of such products, indy and otherwise would have changed direction?
Seriously isn't Pathfinder RPG in part an act of taking the core classes and rebuffing them to be on par with existing prestige classes?
|
|
My girlfriend is currently running our SCAP game, and she allows us to take skills at each level regardless of our class skills if we go out of our way to train in them. The elven sorceress in our party has ranks in perform dance as a result. I think this kind of play would also be advantageous for fixing a number of the prestige problems, and I think PFRPGs skill system so far has looked like its pretty good at solving this problem.
Besides that, are there any other feats that seem prestigous? If so what are the sources? I think I remember seeing a bunch in a recent suppliment from Paizo (Legacy of Fire guide me thinks), though I could be wrong.
Prestige classes gave options to further customize a character into what you wanted. My group never pays any attention to the class name or fluff as written, because we don't care what the designers had in mind (they don't play your character after all). It's simply a mechanical means to alter the character just so, into whatever it is you really wanted to be.
If you need three, four or ten prestige classes to do that, fine. You probably won't have any great capstone abilities, but you'll have good saves.
As for "crippling" your characters BaB or spell progression... that's really no one's fault/problem but your own.
|
Thanks for the response. I'm going for a 10/10 cleric/contemplative split, so I'm not a "dipper" I guess. And this particular cleric abhors physical combat, and only fights defensively unless it's a life or death situation for her companions (so no "Righteous Might" spells). The domain I took was Balance (and thanks to revisiting the class, I realize I'm due for another domain in my 10th cleric/5th contemplative split!), to go along w/ Law & Oracle. So the build is thematic for my campaign, and the perk powers rarely come into play to be honest.But I can see a little better now how the PrC could be optimized, if not exactly abused.
Back on topic, I really like the idea of few prestige classes, that are flavorful and tied into the campaign world (Harrower, Red Mantis Assassin, etc.). For equivalent builds, I'm very close to implementing a Talent Tree system for the base classes; just waiting for the PFRPG to get the new "base" platform.
Cloistered Cleric x / Contemplative 1: Nets you full Cleric Spellcasting, 4 Domains (inluding powers, one of which is Knowledge). Combined with some other crazy Cleric shenanigans (planar allies, Gate'd allies, Divine Persistent metamagic) and you can have a "Cleric of All Super Badassness"
Just too powerful, IMO. (Frenzied berserker gets the same treatment...unkillable melee machine that does ridiculous damage and will turn on his own party members?)
Thrallherd (and leadership in general) is crazy because it nets you more actions in combat (see planar allies and Gate summons, also), lets you tailor you new "party of PC's," and can lead to situations where one player is doing everything on his "own" (meaning leading his own little party of adventurers...). Something that needs very careful monitoring and a specific kind of player to pull it off.
All of these, I've seen done very badly (well, successfully optimized, but game-killing and annoying), which is why I brought them up.
/threadjack
OT: More awesome PrC's like the Red Mantis Assassin, and good stuff like the new Duelist and Dragon Disciple! Please!
-t
I will admit I have yet to use a Prestige Class. Back in 2E, I liked the kits that you could add on top of a class to customize it, but when I saw the prestige classes I was always seeing what I was giving up to gain something and finding it wanting.
Now, with all the cool things that I'm seeing available for my characters with the Beta and PFRPG, I'm even less likely to give up those options for a prestige class, I think. Will have to see. :)
We have a few simple house rules for PrC's to discourage DIPPING and they seem to work well
Rule 1 No you can't have 3 Prestige classes...we only allow 1 10 level Prestige class to a character... As for 5 and 3 level Prestige classes...we allow a character to have 2 of them as long as they fit the character, the story and the campaign
Rule 2 You must apply for or be recruited by those who train the Prestige Classes.... Make it PRESTIGIOUS
Rule 3 If it doesn't fit your campaign....Don't allow it....though as a GM I try to maintain a degree of openmindedness and even handedness sometimes the edict must be laid down....
I completely disagree with Rules 1 and 2, except in those specific cases where they would also overlap Rule 3.
Is it common for a character to dip in multiple PClasses? No. Would I say something to a player who dipped crazily into several with no reasoning? Very much yes. Would I out of hand deny multiple classes that made sense together and/or simply made sense for the character concept? Hell no!!!!
And I loathe rule 2. (no offense)
If you want to be in the King's Musketeers PClass, then you need the King's Musketeers to bring you under their wing. In this case Rule 2 applies, but only because of Rule 3. But a self-trained "Swashbuckler" should be easily capable of entering into a very similar PClass and obtain similar abilities. Quite possibly identical combat and skill abilities, with other "solo" perks replacing status and team related perks.
A character concept should be set in place and classes (core and PClass) should be leveraged as tools to best realize that character. This freedom should in no way be be constrained to group joining, student characters.
If the circle of flame knows some campaign specific tricks and the player wants to have that ability, then it is entirely reasonable for the DM to require the character go to the circle of flame. That is a very reasonable application of Rule 3, that plays out like Rule 2. But, if the players wants to really dedicate his character's energies into stealing or independently acquiring the same skill, then a good DM should be open to working with that angle, so long as everyone, all players and DM, are having fun with the plot.
We have a few simple house rules for PrC's to discourage DIPPING and they seem to work well
Rule 1 No you can't have 3 Prestige classes...we only allow 1 10 level Prestige class to a character... As for 5 and 3 level Prestige classes...we allow a character to have 2 of them as long as they fit the character, the story and the campaign
Rule 2 You must apply for or be recruited by those who train the Prestige Classes.... Make it PRESTIGIOUS
Rule 3 If it doesn't fit your campaign....Don't allow it....though as a GM I try to maintain a degree of openmindedness and even handedness sometimes the edict must be laid down....
I completely disagree with Rules 1 and 2, except in those specific cases where they would also overlap Rule 3.
Is it common for a character to dip in multiple PClasses? No. Would I say something to a player who dipped crazily into several with no reasoning? Very much yes. Would I out of hand deny multiple classes that made sense together and/or simply made sense for the character concept? Hell no!!!!
And I loathe rule 2. (no offense)
If you want to be in the King's Musketeers PClass, then you need the King's Musketeers to bring you under their wing. In this case Rule 2 applies, but only because of Rule 3. But a self-trained "Swashbuckler" should be easily capable of entering into a very similar PClass and obtain similar abilities. Quite possibly identical combat and skill abilities, with other "solo" perks replacing status and team related perks.
A character concept should be set in place and classes (core and PClass) should be leveraged as tools to best realize that character. This freedom should in no way be be constrained to group joining, student characters.
If the circle of flame knows some campaign specific tricks and the player wants to have that ability, then it is entirely reasonable for the DM to require the character go to the circle of flame. That is a very reasonable application of Rule 3, that plays out like Rule 2....
You are entitled to your opinion...but it works for our Group...and seems to be well received by almost all the players we've had...except the Dippers...by making any PrC available to anyone who qualifies can cause imbalance...as a GM it is often easier to establish a set of Houserules than it is to ajuducate each individual choice or each character, every level...btw...Four GM's run in my group and ALL 4 found these rules acceptable...
As a GM I like to spend my time building the World, the story and the NPC's instead of worrying about my PC's characters being unbalanced... ALSO...they are called PRESTIGE CLASSES...what is prestigous about a class that is just a conglomeration of Prereq's...nothing in my opinion...to make it Prestigous...it must come with PRESTIGE...and that is by definition...Reputation and Influence derived from acheivement... ie recognition.... While this doesn't qualify for all Prestige Classes...like perhaps the Dungeon Delver or even a Frenzied Berserker... its a fact for things like Guild Mage, Knight of the Chalice, Purple Dragon Knight, Red Wizard, Temple Raider etc...
Its true that there is little necessary for some of the more Generic Prestige classes...but they are really misnamed...see earlier in the thread... Prestige Classes like that should probably be referred to as Secondary Classes as they are just extensions of the previous class... Like Exotic Weapon Master...I would agree this might be a self taught class...but it easily could be worked to require a Master to teach it as well...
The house rules we use WORK...very well...so well that we have only had one player complain...and he was the Ftr/Barb/Cleric/Warblade/Pious Templar/Champion of Torm/ guy anyway...
You will note in that part of the thread that we were talking about ways to curb the abuses of Dippers.
The real discussion is HOW to MAINTAIN campaign FLAVOR and BALANCE... and our Houserules do just that...
No GM or Groups Houserules are going to make everyone happy...there will always be people who find fault with what works for others... My suggestion is use what works for you...we will use what works for us...and we'll agree never to be in the same game group
Except of course that dipping into a prestige class is in no way an abuse, just something that busybodies don't like.
You are entitled to your opinion...but it works for our Group...and seems to be well received by almost all the players we've had...except the Dippers...by making any PrC available to anyone who qualifies can cause imbalance...as a GM it is often easier to establish a set of Houserules than it is to ajuducate each individual choice or each character, every level...btw...Four GM's run in my group and ALL 4 found these rules acceptable...
Of course, but on public boards I think alternative views should be aired, particularly when those alternatives are more permissive of options.
I take issue with the concern that imbalance and options must be at odds.
If there is an issue, address that issue.
If the player is the problem, this solution won't solve that.
If the player is not a problem, reasonable case by case discussion is more than adequate and rarely needed.
ALSO...they are called PRESTIGE CLASSES...what is prestigous about a class that is just a conglomeration of Prereq's...nothing in my opinion...to make it Prestigous...it must come with PRESTIGE...and that is by definition...
Nope.
Being a class that *creates* prestige is every bit as valid (and imo even more valid) a meeting of the definition.If a character has a custom class that no one else in the campaign world has ever been in before, then clearly the class brings no prestige whatsoever. But that character gains much prestige through the unique talents they demonstrate.
And even further, I suggest that "prestige class" also is meant to be seen as a class only for those who already HAVE prestige. The class is only available to those characters prestigious enough to meet their requirements.
So that is two other completely different and fully valid interpretations.
And that assumes that limitations should be restricted based on word games. You may as well claim that fighters may not participate in wars because warriors are an npc class.
I'll add that your one complaint is one more than mine.
Add I don't have balance issue (at least not around this issue).
There are vastly more elegant solutions.
As for "crippling" your characters BaB or spell progression... that's really no one's fault/problem but your own.There has got to be some drawback to taking those PrCs, hasn't it?
I don't know that there has to be a drawback, but you shouldn't gain more than you lose; sure. So when a class drops a spell level, it's usually assumed that it makes up with it via other ability gains. Whether that's true or not; the player chose to take the level, so it's on their head.
With a lot of these sorts of discussions, about people who don't allow prestige classes, or pisonics, or certain alignments; I frequently get annoyed because I'm putting myself in the place of someone new to their table. I know what I want to play, I more than likely know how I want the character to progress, and I've already got ideas for how to work with whatever party I'm going to be a part of. At no point am I going to cause problems, or showboat, or be able to stop the DM from tossing whatever he wants at me to kill me.
But then I'm told that basically: Even though it has no particular impact on anyone but me, I can't play the character I want because my fun is not as important to them as their prejudice.
And it gets under my skin to hear it, even from people I'll never game with anyway.
It would be nice if you read the WHOLE post btw...since my first part is as follows
Well... I and my game group do not hate prestige classes...we hate abusers of the system, lame prestige classes and min/maxers... I allow most prestige classes in my game but we have a few house rules to deal with these issues
Those HOUSERULES are to ajudicate PROBLEMS....glad you've never had one in your game... Broken Classes, Dippers, etc... most of our Players NEVER have to worry about this...they have concepts that they wanna stick to...but over the YEARS...and I have been running games for many of them...we've found some folks who need rules to go by...
Elegant solutions are fine...IF THATS YOUR STYLE.... some people like SIMPLE SOLUTIONS.... which is also fine... I deal with complicated elegant solutions all day long at work...at home I like it SIMPLE... ironicly, so do the other players and GM"s in my group, and so do several of the people on these boards... as a matter of fact three people have recently said they would implement these rules into their game... one even suggested that they were elegant in their simplicity... I guess its all about PERCEPTION...but I have 2 groups of players one with 7 players...4 of whom GM...and a group of 6 which 3 of them GM that don't...TAKE ISSUE with these HOUSERULES... as a matter of FACT...we voted on them...and ALL agreed
and I'm not the only one who feels that a Prestige class should be prestiguous...here is one of Paizo's big wigs
James Jacobs wrote:
I quite like prestige classes; I think that prestige classes, feats, and giving all monsters ability scores are the three greatest innovations that came out of 3rd edition, in fact.
I'm not as big a fan of prestige class bloat (or feat bloat), nor am I a fan of characters who do the dip and take one level of a prestige class here, 2 there, and so on. I think part of that problem is encouraged by the fact that there are so many different choices, it's hard to just choose one.
Hopefully, PFRPG prestige classes will be less prolific, and when they DO appear, they'll be supported by delightful flavor. Since I think prestige classes work best when they have a specific campaign world to draw inspiration from, as well, hopefully we'll be able to avoid dull ones. And overpowered ones as well.
Prestige classes should feel PRESTIGIOUS, but they shouldn't feel like obvious choices
Yeah, I saw that post from Jacobs. I tried not to let it bother me, but I wasn't too impressed. He essentially said:
"I'd like players to have fewer options, because then it's easier to pick one."
Awesome.
Out of curiosity, what are these problems you refer to? Just that someone wants to take class levels and you don't approve? Because I've seen some very skilled people do their level best to make broken characters, and they never come out as the unstoppable juggernauts that others claim to have witnessed.
Also, you may want to find the receipt for you laptop or something. It SEEMS your CAPS LOCK is MALFUNCTIONING RANDOMLY.
Hehehe. Sorry, I couldn't resist. ;)
|
Well Kuma to be fair, it is about everyones fun. I have played in groups where everything was allowed. Often someone abuses stuff and ends up with a twink character and that hurts everyone else fun. So is it more fun to limit the one guys fun or let him hurt everyone elses fun?
Neither is wrong or right, just sometimes decisions have to be made for the majority. Most people are ok with being allowed to take what they want, but all it takes is one.
I don't really like PrCs that exist only for the purpose of doing something quirky with the rules. What I do like is to have a PrC that communicates something that represents a specialized, existing role.
For example, I like for priests of various gods have PrCs to shift clerics into being a bit more specialized as a priest of their god, if someone wants that.
I like PrCs that emulate special schools of magic that might be quirky, for example, Bloatmages and other strange cabals like that.
What I don't like are just bland specializing PrCs, like "Guy that Disarms" "Guy that Uses a Longsword" or "Guy that throws Fireballs" especially if there aren't really "flavor" reasons for that PrC to exist.
Then again, I like PrCs that actually feel, well, prestigious. If you start out as a Fighter, or Cavalier, or Knight or whatever, and are a member of the Hellknights, I like a Hellknight PrC to represent the advanced training that a well trusted officer would receive.
I just really don't like PrCs that seemed to exist to either fix a base class (the, "why wouldn't you take this instead of staying in your main class" PrCs), and ones that just boosted characters here and there and begged for existing only in a "build" and having no story value whatsoever.
I love options...hell I love prestige classes...when they work, fit and make sense as a build... I wouldn't mind seeing a plethora of prestige classes...BUT....I'd like them to balance out, and enhance play, not causing undue amounts of ajudication, rules lawyering and general time wasting...I love when a character comes up with a cool concept and invites new role-playing opportunities. The main reasons we HOUSERULE anything...is to fix that which is broken(grappling), sped along play(the Identify spell), or to clarify poor wording in the Rules Canon (Sacred Healing)
Our Houserule about prestige classes came about bc of a pair of players who Liked to min/max and dip...One of these guys actually showed up to a game as Ftr/Barb/Cleric/Pious Templar/Champion of Torm 2/1/1/2... His whole Build was just absurd by our groups standards... and it was very unbalancing.... In his first fight, he raged, used all his smites and his spells...(which were all personal buffs btw) He literally was devastating for about 4 rounds and poof...nothing after that...) the rest of the group just stared at him....then proceded to have to cover his tail for the rest of the session... So...after a great deal of discussion we came up with our Houserules for prestige classes...
When we asked him Why...He said...well I want Fast Movement, the most Feats I can get quickly...I need ranks in Know:(religion) for Pious Templar...bc I wanna smite...and with Champion of Torm I get even more smites... I asked him...why not paladin with a cpl of Fighter levels ...FR has a cpl of options that allow multiclass Pally's...he said no way Paladins are lame...
I just shook my head and walked away
Has anyone mentioned another issue that I have with Prestige Classes? The idea that you have to play for 5 to 7 levels before you can start playing the character you really wanted in the first place?
Our Houserule about prestige classes came about bc of a pair of players who Liked to min/max and dip...One of these guys actually showed up to a game as Ftr/Barb/Cleric/Pious Templar/Champion of Torm 2/1/1/2... His whole Build was just absurd by our groups standards... and it was very unbalancing.... In his first fight, he raged, used all his smites and his spells...(which were all personal buffs btw) He literally was devastating for about 4 rounds and poof...nothing after that...) the rest of the group just stared at him....then proceded to have to cover his tail for the rest of the session... So...after a great deal of discussion we came up with our Houserules for prestige classes...When we asked him Why...He said...well I want Fast Movement, the most Feats I can get quickly...I need ranks in Know:(religion) for Pious Templar...bc I wanna smite...and with Champion of Torm I get even more smites... I asked him...why not paladin with a cpl of Fighter levels ...FR has a cpl of options that allow multiclass Pally's...he said no way Paladins are lame...
I just shook my head and walked away
This is the issue with PRC's. While I enjoy ones that fit both a game and a character build. I do not allow more then 1 and that one must be roleplayed hard to gain it. I may allow 2 only if 1: you finish the first, and 2: it fits the game and the character.
PRC's that only give ability with zero real flavor are never allowed in my games. They should enhance roleplaying not be a ability bump .
Our Houserule about prestige classes came about bc of a pair of players who Liked to min/max and dip...One of these guys actually showed up to a game as Ftr/Barb/Cleric/Pious Templar/Champion of Torm 2/1/1/2... His whole Build was just absurd by our groups standards... and it was very unbalancing.... In his first fight, he raged, used all his smites and his spells...(which were all personal buffs btw) He literally was devastating for about 4 rounds and poof...nothing after that...) the rest of the group just stared at him....then proceded to have to cover his tail for the rest of the session... So...after a great deal of discussion we came up with our Houserules for prestige classes...When we asked him Why...He said...well I want Fast Movement, the most Feats I can get quickly...I need ranks in Know:(religion) for Pious Templar...bc I wanna smite...and with Champion of Torm I get even more smites... I asked him...why not paladin with a cpl of Fighter levels ...FR has a cpl of options that allow multiclass Pally's...he said no way Paladins are lame...
I just shook my head and walked away
This is the issue with PRC's. While I enjoy ones that fit both a game and a character build. I do not allow more then 1 and that one must be roleplayed hard to gain it. I may allow 2 only if 1: you finish the first, and 2: it fits the game and the character.
PRC's that only give ability with zero real flavor are never allowed in my games. They should enhance roleplaying not be a ability bump .
I completely agree...see further up the thread for my groups Houserules on controlling PrC's... lol...though I have been flamed a bit for daring to have rules some don't agree with for their games...lol
Ya know except for Allowing a max of 3( My max is 2 and rare) that is the exact same houserules I use
I like prestige classes. I agree with what James said about dipping... they don't feel all that special if you're just hopping from one to the other to cherry pick the plumpest feats.
This can kill dramatic narrative.
Can you imagine an epic fantasy movie about a guy who starts off as an elven paragon for the first two of three levels before becoming a wizard, then he tries his hand at making mechanical lions with a master of constructs school, then journeys a few miles away to learn how to create walls of protective color with a different elite school, then becomes an archmage, and then takes an epic wizard prestige class? That wouldn't really feel like an epic fantasy story, would it? It would be a character study about a medieval flibbertigibbet who lacks focus. I'm not shelling out money to watch ME in a rennie outfit.
Actually that sounds pretty cool. (Well, except for the part about you in a renaissance outfit :) Wouldn't it be great if real life was like that, and you could easily switch from one thing to another? What a terrific fantasy, really.
Such a character should be the test of a good multi-classing system. You would know that the rules are fully baked when the player of such an eclectic character can explore all his random notions without having to worry about how much his character is going to suck (in terms of power).
... you can drag the Duelist Prestige Class from my cold dead hands.
Your proposal is acceptable.
--Men in Black. :)
I don't have a major problem with Prestige Classes, but I find they work best when they show specialized knowledge but don't radically change the character.
For example my favorite Prestige Classes include just about every thing in Swashbuckling Adventures, Spycraft, and D20 Modern. The base classes are fine in these games, but they're designed to be very generic. The Prestige classes in these books are fairly easy to get, aren't that powerful, and give definition to the characters.
In swashbuckling adventures there are some prestige classes that are actually fighting styles. So instead of being a fighter, you're a fighter with 3 levels of Aldana fighting style.
And I agree that there are too many prestige classes out there, but so many of them are so specific that I'm not sure if it matters.
The only problem I had with Prestige classes were for Clerics and Wizards in 3 Ed. Mainly because those classes don't really change after level 1. Sure more spells and a bonus feat every so often, but deep down no change. So the only disadvantage of taking a Prestige Class was the loss of maybe one level of spells. And most of the time the classes were really random, Blood Mage I'm looking at you.
But Pathfinder, by working on the Base classes has I think fixed that. Now you have more reasons to stay with the Base Class and every time you take a level of a Prestige you have to weigh the pros and cons.
Just my 2 pennies
At one point in time I toyed around with the idea of allowing someone to multi class into one class other than their favored class, and any more, they have to spend a feat to multi class into another class. Similarly, they could take one PrC, but if they want to multi class into more than one PrC, they have to take a multi class feat.
Never really fleshed it out beyond that, because I've never had anyone abuse this too badly, but it was kind of a "fall back" idea that I came up with.
Ya know except for Allowing a max of 3( My max is 2 and rare) that is the exact same houserules I use
Nice to see I'm not alone...lol
not at all , they should be spacial not filler
|
|
Coming in late, so I'll just add my own thoughts which seem similar to many already expressed.
I don't hate Prestige Classes, but I do hate dipping into a PrC to get an ability, then dipping into yet another for some other ability. I prefer a PrC that has enough fluff to make the player want to stick to the PrC. There MIGHT be repercussions from the organization behind the PrC that deters dipping (but not always).
I prefer PrCs that are either 3 or 5 levels. A full 10 or 15 level PrC is just a behemoth to me. Often the first levels have less than desirable abilities (though not always of course).
Also, I seriously dislike some of the requirements to get into some PrCs. A great number of PrCs almost require a player to predesign the character from 1st level so he can play the Prestige Class. I don't really like a character that is pre-planned from level 1 to 20. It always feels "cardboard" to me. Now given the right player and the right concept I am sure it can work, but I think it is rare.
Ultimately the primary reason I dislike PrCs is the players don't use it to enhance their character (as in the roleplaying aspect), but just their powers.
Again this is not a universal blanket feeling, but just a general feeling.
For an example of a PrC done right, look at Hellknights. As far as I know a Hellknight PrC has not yet been published (might be wrong). However there are MANY people who want to play Hellknights. That means the CONCEPT is what is appealing to people, not the pure number crunching of "cool powers." This, to me, embodies what a PrC is all about.
If you can read about the organization, about who they are and never see any crunchy rules, and you STILL want to be a PrC of that organization, then I think it is a good PrC.
Unfortunately there are entire books published with nothing but the crunch and not a single word written about the organization (fluff).
answered my question
Well, sure, he sounds like he had a silly build. But what did he actually do that ruined things for everyone else? 4 rounds of being great, x rounds of sucking wind? Isn't that more a problem for him?
Also, if he was so capable, why wouldn't the rest of the party just leave him to handle himself? Why wouldn't the critters all jump on him?
He'd need barbarian regardless if he was going to get fast movement, and I don't believe there's any way to mix barb and pally. And he had a point... until the pathfinder preview, paladins were lamer than a centipede with one leg. ;)
[EDIT]
I wouldn't say you've been flamed exactly, just subject to criticism that is equally harsh as your house rules. I actually edited a couple of my posts down quite a bit to avoid implications of "fightiness".
Maybe I'll see the light and start limiting players to warrior, expert and adept classes; until they can prove they deserve to be allowed a base class. I'm thinking 10 levels and then they can take fighter, wizard or cleric; but only if it fits the theme of the campaign.
|
|
At one point in time I toyed around with the idea of allowing someone to multi class into one class other than their favored class, and any more, they have to spend a feat to multi class into another class. Similarly, they could take one PrC, but if they want to multi class into more than one PrC, they have to take a multi class feat.
Never really fleshed it out beyond that, because I've never had anyone abuse this too badly, but it was kind of a "fall back" idea that I came up with.
I have had players sit down at the table with their characters written out (including HP) up to level 20. The character would have 2-3 core classes and often 2 or more PrCs. There would be no character history or concept other than "I wanna be a master-kick-ass-bowman," or "I want to be the ultimate shapeshifting druid."
So far, no one has managed to stick with the plan as they find that their one trick ponies don't survive very long or that they contribute very little to the party except in specific circumstances.
One thing I will say in defense of WOTC and PrCs . . . there is a bit of a catch 22 going on when it comes to PrCs, especially when it comes to PrCs that have to do with organizations.
There are a few archetypes that are general enough to warrant PrCs that are truly "universal." On the other hand, an organization that is really fleshed out and has a good reason for having a PrC that has logical abilities doesn't do well if its too fleshed out and its intended to be generic, but without making it generic, it really needs to be tied to a setting, for example, else there is a bit of work in converting the organization to a new setting.
answered my questionWell, sure, he sounds like he had a silly build. But what did he actually do that ruined things for everyone else? 4 rounds of being great, x rounds of sucking wind? Isn't that more a problem for him?
Also, if he was so capable, why wouldn't the rest of the party just leave him to handle himself? Why wouldn't the critters all jump on him?
He'd need barbarian regardless if he was going to get fast movement, and I don't believe there's any way to mix barb and pally. And he had a point... until the pathfinder preview, paladins were lamer than a centipede with one leg. ;)
Well to me the issue seems he did not have a reason in charter to take any of it. He was nothing but a build, there was nothing prestigious about it. If he had come to my table with that I would have needed a lot of resens in charter why. and a good change I would have told him no anyhow as well he just dipped for powers and nothing more
I really like the 10-level PrCs in the PF Beta. I especially like how they make it possible to multi-class and still get a capstone ability (an incentive that encourages more than a dip). I wish there was a way to get a capstone with straight multi-classing.