I must say that, beyond what abilities may be unbalancing or not, the Summoner's overall idea presented today is the best fulfillment of a class I've seen many people look for in D&D for years.
Anyway I wanted to discuss a different thing (which maybe it's been discussed elsewhere, but I couldn't find it).
The four classes presented by now and the two coming next, like the common base classes presented in the core book, are all 20-levels.
Opposedly to what we had in 3/3.5, they are just too good to be multiclassed, even if the new class is a prestige one.
I mean, take any one class and look: the things you'll get by proceeding in it are far better than what you could get by multiclassing, in a great variety of ways (except only the flavour of the charachter, which depends solely on the imagination of the players). Just think to the newborn Summoner; it's hard to see a reason why someone should want to multiclass it and lose the opportunity of further developing its cool not-imaginary best friend.
Not that I deem this to be a bad thing; I personally hated those old chars made of 5 or so different classes for a wide range of reasons, and thus appreciate a lot the fact that a full monoclass in Pathfinder gets better things than a multiclass, but personal taste is not the point.
The point is: why not turn the prestige classes to 20-levels classes as well? To take the easiest of examples, no more crappy mixes of Ranger (or Fighter) and Wizard (or Sorcerer) levels to become an Arcane Archer who can't hit well nor cast decent spells. It just turns to a class with its own spell list and other privileges, and it's done.
Same for all others. Full classes, full flavour, as I see it.
Also, we'd have a far easier conversion from Paladin to Black Guard if the latter was to become a 20 level class, whenever we have to deal with a Paladin who turns to evil (or vice versa).
Last, just to throw a bait in the lake, if a fallen Paladin can turn to a Black Guard and a fallen Cleric can worship a new deity, why not create something for Druids and Monks too? Maybe a fallen Druid could be something like that class in the old Book of Vile Darkness who was about diseases, Tumor-Familiar and other ill-natured things (just saying the first thing coming to my mind, and I can't remember the class' name), while a Monk... uhm, I can't figure out anything at this moment, but it should be a way to make it turn to Chaotic or Neutral, of course, since Monk's bond is Law.
Because prestige classes aren't "prestige" if you can get into them at level 1? Part of the premise of prestige classes is that GMs use them to add flavor to the campaign by defining them as special organizations that don't let in every bumpkin who asks. :)
I think generally, A base class should be an archetype, and a prestige class should be zeroing in on an actual specific class concept. I think also that the way Paizo is doing the classes, with options for customization built in, makes prestige classes unnecessary, for the most part.
Because prestige classes aren't "prestige" if you can get into them at level 1? Part of the premise of prestige classes is that GMs use them to add flavor to the campaign by defining them as special organizations that don't let in every bumpkin who asks. :)
Yep, but the problem is that there is little prestige, other than flavour, when you lose more than you earn. Organizations and such can easily be a separate thing.
I personally prefer base classes to prestige classes. There should be some prestige classes for very specific things, but I think a base class will do more and be more useful then a prestige class. They are easier to balance with other classes as you dont have to fit the abilities that make them special into a shorter span, and you dont have groups that dont go into high levels often left out in the cold, not to mention players dont need to wait months or more of real life time to see their characters really start to take shape in what they want them to do. I would much rather the kind of base classes paizo seems to be creating that are versatile and interesting then comparable amounts of prestige classes.
|
The point is: why not turn the prestige classes to 20-levels classes as well?
The way many prestige classes have been created, you have a good point. However, what it points out is that prestige classes tend to drift too far off into their own realm and would actually be better suited as base classes.
The best prestige classes I've seen tend to focus on one part of a base class' features and diminish the others (Sublime Chord, for example).
I wouldn't have a problem with losing Prestige Classes entirely and having only Base Classes. Combine that with an overhaul of the Multiclassing rules and you have yourself a winner, IMO.
|
|
I look at prestige classes as being a very focused class. If I might make an analogy, a base class is a flash light, and a prestige class is a laser pointer. Both emit light, but the flashlight is less focused and illuminates a larger area than a laser pointer. For example, take the ranger and the bloodhoud (from Complete Adventurer). The ranger is an effective tracker and wilderness warrior. The bloodhound is a bounty hunter who specializes in tracking and capturing beings that others want found and brought to "justice." The bloodhound would make a poor base class because it is so focused. On the other hand, it gets lots of nifty things that a ranger does not. Ultimately it all depends on what type of game you want to play.
Because prestige classes aren't "prestige" if you can get into them at level 1? Part of the premise of prestige classes is that GMs use them to add flavor to the campaign by defining them as special organizations that don't let in every bumpkin who asks. :)Yep, but the problem is that there is little prestige, other than flavour, when you lose more than you earn. Organizations and such can easily be a separate thing.
I agree that there are plenty of prestige classes that would make sense to convert to new base classes, or even better, alternate class features to existing classes (e.g. the Loremaster could easily be a cleric/wizard variant). But I think there's merit to the idea of prestige classes, too, especially ones that are open to any class. For instance, the 3.5 Dervish prestige class is a fighting technique that's open to fighters, monks, barbarians, rogues, paladins, rangers, etc.; it's not just "a druid, but slightly different", like the 3.5 Nature's Warrior prestige class.
|
I would like to see prestige classes become something that is more interesting and flavorful than just something to tack onto your PC to make him/her stronger than a base class. I have seen too many PCs with 2-3 different base classes and then 2 or more prestige classes tacked on top of that. There should be a 1 PRC limit IMO, and a prestige classes advantages should be more flavor than just an excuse to make your PC stronger than if you stuck with a base class. I feel that the power level in Pathfinder PRCs seems to have been kept on the level of the base classes and I hope that trend continues along with the idea that more base classes is better than a glut of prestige classes.
I agree that there are plenty of prestige classes that would make sense to convert to new base classes, or even better, alternate class features to existing classes (e.g. the Loremaster could easily be a cleric/wizard variant). But I think there's merit to the idea of prestige classes, too, especially ones that are open to any class. For instance, the 3.5 Dervish prestige class is a fighting technique that's open to fighters, monks, barbarians, rogues, paladins, rangers, etc.; it's not just "a druid, but slightly different", like the 3.5 Nature's Warrior prestige class.
Aye, but as you said yourself, that whole thing is about 3.5, where the average base class/prestige class switching ranges from equal power to far greater power.
A 3.5 Fighter (to take the quickest example) loses only his bonus feats, but the privileges of the prestige class might be far better than all the feats he would have taken. In Pathfinder, beside the fact that feat choice is a lot wider and a lot better, a Fighter who switches class also loses the growth of his other privileges (Armor/Weapon training, Bravery, etc.). Now, it's hard to say that something like Weapon Mastery is something worth sacrificing for other things.Same for all other base classes.
This problem would be solved by transforming prestige classes to templates that apply over the growth of base classes, but that would overpower the characters. So, the better solution I can see at present is turning them into 20-levels classes.
|
I don't know, I like Prestige Classes. I like being able to customize your character which Prestige Classes allow that no base Class can. I really am not a fan of how PF has treated many prestige classes, making them suboptimal choices. That being said, I think a great many of the 3E Prestige Classes could go away, but there are others that I think are very much part of the 3E (&PF) experience. Iconic, if you will. I wouldn't want a game that didn't have a Frenzied Berserker, for example, or a Frost Mage. Both give options that can no be gained any other way, and add something (not mechanical) to the charcter and the game. I'm not a huge fan of stacking classes and prestige classes, but that is not difficult to rule (something like minimume 5 levels). Maxing out a Prestige Class is not always the goal, so that is not a good rule to imply, but 5 is enough to make you stick with something a while.
I like prestige, but I don't like TONS of prestige, and it's the same thing with Base classes, in fact, although the new classes they did now are very cool, I think most of them are unecessary. All of those could easilly be prestige, or even better, options.
Options for classes are the best way to go for me, like in second edition the good old KIT, we all loved it, and I think it should be back. And hopefully it will in players options.
|
I would like to see prestige classes become something that is more interesting and flavorful than just something to tack onto your PC to make him/her stronger than a base class. I have seen too many PCs with 2-3 different base classes and then 2 or more prestige classes tacked on top of that. There should be a 1 PRC limit IMO, and a prestige classes advantages should be more flavor than just an excuse to make your PC stronger than if you stuck with a base class. I feel that the power level in Pathfinder PRCs seems to have been kept on the level of the base classes and I hope that trend continues along with the idea that more base classes is better than a glut of prestige classes.Not to derail, but I houseruled that you MUST finish a PrC once you started it. No going back, no switching elsewhere. That not only made the PrC choice difficult vs base classes or multiclassing, but pegged the player into that character concept and eliminated crazy multi-PrC builds.
It also made the player consider if they REALLY wanted to take that 10 lvl PrC, knowing it would dominate the rest of their adventuring career...
I think this is a sound option but I'd allow them to mix it up with base classes. One thing this does highlight though is the power curve of many prestige classes towards base classes and a good 75% of prestige classes fall short. Many could do with a boost and some got that with the Core rulebook (heres looking at you dragon disciple).
If I was to force people to stick with a PrC then I would have to boost them all with at least an equivalent capstone ability to what they lose from leaving a core class.
Kits however are something I also loved and while PrCs are a modern version of kits, kits did add a unique way to customise existing classes, especially with the racial books (my favourite dwarf was a rapid response rider I had Jeff Easley Immortalise some years ago at a UK Gen Con). I think there's definitely an option to have kits alongside prestige classes with an emphasis on a flavor effect plus a single benefit (that may or may-not improve as you level) vs a special hindrance.
For example The savage warrior kit may grant a character a +1 to hit with a club, quarterstaff or spear, and sling, but suffers -1 to hit with all other weapons. as a special benefit the character gains an additional rage point once every 5 levels as a special hindrance they cannot gain proficiency in heavy armor. Kits wouldn't have to be tied to specific classes either - I could see a wizard taking the savage warrior kit just as much as a barbarian - it would be cheesy just to get a +1 to hit with a quarterstaff but as long as there were better wizard themed kits then it wouldn't really be game breaking.
I also think kits would be a better approach for cultural differences in the base classes instead of prestige classes. I never saw the point of a savage prestige class like the bear warrior that you couldn't take until 5th level.
I think the kids are today players options for classes, trading some abilities for or others, like exists in many books, expecially Unnerthed. I think they r kinda coming back, But I hope some prestiges do too (Frenzied Berserker I'm looking at you ;)
What convinced me to like Prestige Classes in 3rd Edition was when I was developing my homebrew, and trying to define the concept of "Judge" for the Kingdom of Audor.
My idea was that the "Judges" go around the kingdom, making sure the laws are upheld. But what are they? You can't expect a first level character to go out and suddenly start "Judging". And while many Judges would be Paladins, many Judges would not.
The prestige class idea tied all my ideas into a nice package. Upon demonstrating a level of ability and focus (defined by meeting the prerequisites), a character could be certified as a Judge, and given special combat, arcane, and deductive training, represented by the PrC's class abilities. Fighters would probably have to multiclass to meet the prerequisites before 10th level, but most other classes could apply if built appropriately.
In a way, the Judge PrC I designed is not so much a focussing as a pulling together of elements from different classes for a particular mission. It would be difficult to do this with multiclassing, but the Judge gets enough of each ability to do his job. True to Monte Cooke's dictum, there were reasons to take this PrC, and reasons not to.
In defining the Mystic Dervish and the Celestial Druid, I reasoned that a beginning character should be able to start a career in that kind of character, and so made them base classes. I also defined a base class for Mystic Theurge, based on the same logic.
OTOH, my idea for the Knight of True Faith requires a prestige class, because part of it is that characters have to demonstrate a devotion to the faith.
The question is where this fits in the concept I am developing.
|
|
I'd sell my grandmother to the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal for the return of Kits, but it'll never happen.
Ugh, kits suffered from most of the same problems PrC do. The vast majority of them could be built just by taking the right proficiencies, and they just seemed very unfocused as a whole. I really dislike kits.
|
Just throwing my hat into the ring to state I love prestige classes and always have. However since Pathfinder I've found a lot of the core classes have done a wonderful job of being worth it all the way.
I think Pathfinder has done a wonderful job so far of keeping the base classes up (adding more soon) and keeping Prestige Classes interesting and only introducing when they feel like they SHOULD over because they COULD.
I'm not a big fan of restricting PRCs to a certain number or whatever as I've found my players just like to experiment and play something that sounds cool but it's never game breaking. It's a good house rule though for some players though.