I know I'm picky, but I feel really blegh when it comes to wizard choices in prestige classes. Did I miss something or is evil the new good?
Top of the hat, wizard friendly prestiges are:
Souleater (perfect with a paladin in your group)
Agent of the Grave (undeads are good, right?)
Demoniac (damned)
Diabolist (damned)
Blackfire Adept (basically damned)
Geenie Binder (non-good)
Bloodmage (Ogre Momma from you know where anyone?)
Now, there are some decent ones, if not super specific. A Grand Marshall or even Living Monolith can be somewhat easily refluffed for a different region and origin.
I don't really have a point. Just blowing off some steam.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the prcs in pathfinder are pretty meh in general. They require silly prereqs(iron will for half of them I swear). You missed the Magwambyin Arcanist or whatever its called btw. That ones a little bit better, and I do like the Diabolist myself. Free Imp Animal Companion to sit beside your familiar and that can fight for you like a slave. but to be fair I am MrSin...
If you really want something to complain about theres that one faqs about how leveling in a prc doesn't give wizard new spells. He has to somehow find and pay for scribing spells into his spellback instead of having his usual 2 per level progression.
Yeah, I noticed that. At first went 10 wizard levels, ooh, spells, yay. Then theorized a PrC in there, ooh, ooww, my wallet!
Maagwyabsomething is okay yeah. Bit too goody good for me, it increases good spells, and double spell slot cost of evil. How many good spells do we have besides the few Druid spells we get? Arcane mastery stuff is pretty swell though.
Cyphermage is a bit toooooo scroll maniac for my taste. It's a very expensive prc in the long run. Savant is good, but boring like hell. Oh look, bonus to this and that, even tho it's already darn high.
It's like, it's either evil, summoner, or obsessed with something.
Veiled illusionist seemed nice, till I realized my fey character can't change into a dwarf or gnome, only fey, making him stand out a lot.
Daivrat was kinda cool, kinda like Spell Mastery, but with a genie. Then I realized. How often will I get to use diplomacy vs genie-kin?
Wish there was a Mesmer(guild wars 2) themed prc. Making illusions seem more real and give them the shadow effect so they can do some hurting.
Too bad there aren't many good spells with the good descriptor the druid or the wizard gets. The aura and protection from evil can be useful, but I don't like being forced into an alignment for mechanics. Its hard to get some GMs to reflavor something or let you do something out of alignment.
I think the only way to really do that is to go illusionist and specialize in shadow evocation/conjuration and the like. Thats a crazy number of rolls and saves though. The vieled illusionist helps a bit, you can wear a hat of disguise over your vieled illusionist and you have have a disguise over a disguise over a disguise, which is pretty much Sivanhas gig. I don't think you can really be a mesmer outside of enchants and illusions though, they were mostly reactive and proactive, but not big on doing roleplaying things unless they were an npc.
Hmm. There's a feat, lets you end the duration of an illusion, but deal damage with it. Wish they would expand on it with a prestige, kinda like they did with Spell Mastery with the maaambyan and Eye of Something with the Arclord of Nex.
It'd be totally awesome. Mirror images that run around. Minor/major images that work as shadow description, disbelief or damage.
So far my fav spell is Shadow Weapon. Quasi real any weapon of your choice to stab people.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's not like you're not already the most powerful and flexible class in the game :)
Class features are fun though. Spells might be ultimate power, but having some class features on the side is great. Its not like your asking for some crazy preistige with the power of rainbow doomyness and shields. That would be silly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually in 3.5 most pristeges were untouchably awful, You'd find 2 or 3 you like in a splatbook, but most were just... no. They were great for being flavorful. and in pathfinder, it suffers from the same issue. Paths of pristege was mostly awful, most archetypes are bleh and made of flavor and people just pick the ones that are worth their time or what they want.
Its possible to make prestige classes fun, flavorful, and viable and still make the base classes fun, flexible, and viable. There was(and is) an excitement in reaching a prestige you really, really wanted. I don't like that its mostly gone.
|
I don't know about "untouchably awful" - Archmage and Radiant Servant of Pelor were both amazing. Holy Liberator and Templar were both good too, and that's just off the top of my head.
I think it's also that the base classes were made so much more even, I.E. there's no more front-loading to the point where a lot of base classes get their best stuff in the first few levels.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to admit that I'm not a big fan of the philosophy "it's okay if X is better than Y because only bad guys will take X". Ugh.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Exactly. Your picking out classes that didn't destroy your caster levels. In the same book as the radiant servant is blighter, black flame zealot, and entropomancer. How often did someone say "Oh hey, that looks awesome, imma jump on that!". Half caster level... ew.
Yeah... I'm with cheeseweasel. Good single classes is great! Putting the hate on multiclassing is not.
He had to eat up 3 levels of rogue and lose 3 caster levels if he didn't sink a feat (which is more valuable in 3.5) into practiced spellcaster if he didn't want to lose caster levels over it. Its actually not as powerful as a pure wizard at higher levels becuase of the number and power of their spells. I think assassin stance got you the prereqs without levels in rogue oddly enough.
Arcane trickster doesn't look much different now, but you can't make up one of the caster levels ever.
I like beguilers for my rogue/wizards myself. I've never been much for arcane trickster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, you can sort of see why there aren't many Prestige Classes available in Pathfinder; no body asked for them. After all, there were Prestige Classes in the Advanced Player's Guide, but everyone got so excited for the new archetype mechanic presented in the same book that the prestige class mechanic was ignored for two years; they were even absent from the "definitive guides on magic and combat," which makes very little sense in my opinion.
The best way to start seeing more Prestige Classes out of Paizo is to prove to them that there is still a market in Prestige Classes; you're not going to get them if Paizo thinks they won't sell. First, get any many people as you can convince to buy Paths of Prestige. This is Paizo's only real serious Prestige Class-focused product; you don't buy this book for any other reason that to have more Prestige Classes, after all. Second, make it clear to the 3PPs that new, quality Prestige Classes will sell. Because the 3PPs are much faster at producing new material that Paizo, your feedback will have an impact on a 3PP sooner than it would on Paizo itself, and you can bet that the Paizo teams watch the 3PPs for buying and selling trends in the industry.
Of course, if you don't want to influence the market, that's fine too. Just don't complain about the lack of Prestige Classes if you're not willing to do anything about it.
This thread is relevant to my interests. I'm playing a rogue in my friend's game and I recently decided to revisit my days playing Arcane Trickster. I remember in 3E and 3.5 D&D Arcane Trickster was very powerful, but I don't know where it will stand now.
The game I'm playing in is not supremely cheesey, so I'm ok if I end up a little on the less powerful end of the scale this time, but what are the community's thoughts on the class in general?
(Also, is there a place on the board where people are expected to put their initial introductory posts. I didn't see one, so I don't know if I'm committing a faux pas by not posting there first.)
Arcane Trickster is actually better than it was in 3.5. Then again, straight Rogue is a lot better than it was in 3.5, too.
There's also a whole slew of new archetypes for the Bard that might do what you're looking for, as well as the Alchemist base class that makes for a decent skillful 3/4 caster.
In short it's not that PrCs aren't as good in PF, most of the PrCs in the CRB actually got a boost, it's just that the base classes got more of a boost.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The best way to start seeing more Prestige Classes out of Paizo is to prove to them that there is still a market in Prestige Classes; you're not going to get them if Paizo thinks they won't sell. First, get any many people as you can convince to buy Paths of Prestige. This is Paizo's only real serious Prestige Class-focused product; you don't buy this book for any other reason that to have more Prestige Classes, after all.
If they wanted me to want more prestige classes why did they make the same mistakes 3.5 did and release partial caster progression classes and the like? I want quality. Its hard to want prestiges if they're lackluster! But... thats my opinion. Oh wells is also my opinion.
If they wanted me to want more prestige classes why did they make the same mistakes 3.5 did and release partial caster progression classes and the like? I want quality. Its hard to want prestiges if they're lackluster! But... thats my opinion. Oh wells is also my opinion.
Why didn't they make PrCs to make the most powerful classes even more powerful?
Full progression casting PrCs would be extremely limited since the only thing a character would be loosing is School/Bloodline/Domain abilities.
A full progression PrC with nine empty levels and one lackluster capstone wouldn't be very interesting, so PrCs loose progression so they can have interesting abilities.
The handful of full progression PrCs in 3,5 were all grossly unbalanced because 3.5 didn't have School/Bloodline/Domain abilities. Casters got a whole class worth of abilities and gave up next to nothing!
I don't think a bard archetype will quite cut it, especially since I already have levels in rogue. My character concept also really supports wizard into arcane trickster (He was a traps rogue with a, essentially, a very scientific mind. He's now in an area where science is low and magic is high, so he's adapting his thought process to learning magic, just as he did with clockwork devices in his homeland.).
However, I will look into Bard Archetypes as an alternative for the future. Thank you.
Arcane Trickster, IMO, is a really fun class.
The entry of Rog 3/Wiz 3 will cost your character a bit of combat prowess (which a Rogue is already short on), but the low-level spells will add a tremendous amount of utility.
For a combat focused Rogue, I would stay away unless you want to suffer through the lag in combat abilities.
For a skill focused Rogue, the benefits outweigh the losses.
It's not like you're not already the most powerful and flexible class in the game :)
Wait, so it's okay to gain more flexibility as an evil caster than as a less specific/locked prestige?
My beef personally is that half the PrC for wizard/sorcer/whatever, with caster levels, is either super specific and dull, or evil.
Yes, Cyphermage is decent, if you love using scrolls. And Loremaster is awesome, if you like flat bonuses to stuff and extra languages which I have loads of. And heck, Savant is pretty sweet, if you don't mind how dull it is, because as a level ten wizard, I really need that bonus to spellcraft and knowledge arcana.
I personally liked a few more of the 3.5 PrC that added to flavour without necesarrly obsessing with it. Top of the hat there's a class that makes your abjurations better, sure it focuses on abjuration, but it gives varied bonuses and new ways to do stuff than say, three ways to use a costly scroll.
I was disappointed to see that Magus was a normal class rather than Eldritch Knight. A prc that basically only gives you extra bab instead of weaving martial and magic together like it's fluff said. Arcane archer does all that and then some :/
@Sidenote
Using Inner Sea Magic rules, a guild member can gain +3 caster levels, that includes new spells known and spell slots when they hit 35 fame in such a guild, which is 35 skill checks and about 3500gp. Two of the guilds happen to be bard themed, requiring Perform(sing/any) check with DC of 15+your ranks in that skill.
The best way to start seeing more Prestige Classes out of Paizo is to prove to them that there is still a market in Prestige Classes; you're not going to get them if Paizo thinks they won't sell. First, get any many people as you can convince to buy Paths of Prestige. This is Paizo's only real serious Prestige Class-focused product; you don't buy this book for any other reason that to have more Prestige Classes, after all.If they wanted me to want more prestige classes why did they make the same mistakes 3.5 did and release partial caster progression classes and the like? I want quality. Its hard to want prestiges if they're lackluster! But... thats my opinion. Oh wells is also my opinion.
You can blame the wizard, because he loses very little from multiclassing. A wizard's class features amount to whatever school benefits he receives, and most of those are unlocked by 8th level. The cleric has the same problem, where after about 8th level the cleric has nothing to look forward to except new spells. If spellcasting prestige classes weren't somewhat partial, they would literally take away nothing for the bonuses they give you.
This reminds me of a conversation I had with one of my players when I explained that Paizo would never allow him to have a cleric archetype that boosted his base attack bonus to a full progression.
I was disappointed to see that Magus was a normal class rather than Eldritch Knight. A prc that basically only gives you extra bab instead of weaving martial and magic together like it's fluff said. Arcane archer does all that and then some :/
To be fair, the Eldritch Knight came first. It was a legacy Prestige Class from 3.5, and the Magus was created two years after the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game was released. So its not like someone sat down and said, "Okay, let's design these two ideas at the same time!"
And honestly, its all about what you're looking for in the class. A magus blends the spells together much better, sure, but the Eldritch Knight can get 8th level spells at the bare minimum; I think it might even get 9th level spells eventually, but I don't remember. So if you want the uber powerful spells, Eldritch Knight is better.
Arcane archer does all that and then some :/
Not really. Arcane archer requires a BAB of 6, costing you a fortune in caster levels right away, and only gives you 7 CLs out of 10 levels.
Eldritch knight gives you 9 CLs and requires that you can cast 3rd level spells.
AA is an archer that uses magic, EK is a mage that fights.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While we're talking about PrC's, anyone think being feat taxed to get into a PrC is wierd? It sometimes makes sense, but usually its something like Iron Will. As weak as some are I feel like need persuasian or similar feats just isn't very attractive.
While we're talking about PrC's, anyone think being feat taxed to get into a PrC is wierd? It sometimes makes sense, but usually its something like Iron Will. As weak as some are I feel like need persuasian or similar feats just isn't very attractive.
Yeah, I think it's just a holdover from 3.5 When PrCs were much more powerful relative to single classes.
I thought most from 3.5 were awful actually. Flavorful yes, but really only good for people who really really wanted it or npcs. Anything less than 9/10th casting already kills it for casters. There were silly things like the Blighter(has to be Fallen Druid) or Risen Martyr(Capstone: Dies no rez).
There were just a few that were really really nice. Casters just sort of dipped around the full casting or dropped out when it didn't give them anything. I don't see anything like that with Paizo for martials or casters, unless I'm really missing something. Its hard enough to get out of your class.
I thought most from 3.5 were awful actually. Flavorful yes, but really only good for people who really really wanted it or npcs. Anything less than 9/10th casting already kills it for casters. There were silly things like the Blighter(has to be Fallen Druid) or Risen Martyr(Capstone: Dies no rez).
There were just a few that were really really nice. Casters just sort of dipped around the full casting or dropped out when it didn't give them anything. I don't see anything like that with Paizo for martials or casters, unless I'm really missing something. Its hard enough to get out of your class.
I'm not talking about caster specific PrCs, Just PrCs in general. I'm a little rusty on 3rd ed splat-books but I distinctly recall being appalled by at least 2 or 3 PrCs per book in those days.
I personally liked a few more of the 3.5 PrC that added to flavour without necesarrly obsessing with it. Top of the hat there's a class that makes your abjurations better, sure it focuses on abjuration, but it gives varied bonuses and new ways to do stuff than say, three ways to use a costly scroll.
I'm gonna bite back my usual rants about PrCs and instead ask the question: What PrCs from 3.5 were you hoping to have?
There are a ton of converted PrCs in the Conversions section.
Also, please tell me you aren't talking about the Abjurant Champion. Lie to me if you need to.
I personally liked a few more of the 3.5 PrC that added to flavour without necesarrly obsessing with it. Top of the hat there's a class that makes your abjurations better, sure it focuses on abjuration, but it gives varied bonuses and new ways to do stuff than say, three ways to use a costly scroll.I'm gonna bite back my usual rants about PrCs and instead ask the question: What PrCs from 3.5 were you hoping to have?
There are a ton of converted PrCs in the Conversions section.
Also, please tell me you aren't talking about the Abjurant Champion. Lie to me if you need to.
Problem is the close-minded, paranoid DMs who say "Core only and anything you try to bring in will be killed with fire along with you, heretic" and seem to be dominating most of the known community. If not that, then they're really loud and obnoxious about their preferences while wanting to shove said preferences down the throats of everyone around. Those kind of people will slap you for even suggesting something as monstrous as "homebrew" or "3.5e converted material" etc.
Problem is the close-minded, paranoid DMs who say "Core only and anything you try to bring in will be killed with fire along with you, heretic" and seem to be dominating most of the known community. If not that, then they're really loud and obnoxious about their preferences while wanting to shove said preferences down the throats of everyone around. Those kind of people will slap you for even suggesting something as monstrous as "homebrew" or "3.5e converted material" etc.I personally liked a few more of the 3.5 PrC that added to flavour without necesarrly obsessing with it. Top of the hat there's a class that makes your abjurations better, sure it focuses on abjuration, but it gives varied bonuses and new ways to do stuff than say, three ways to use a costly scroll.I'm gonna bite back my usual rants about PrCs and instead ask the question: What PrCs from 3.5 were you hoping to have?
There are a ton of converted PrCs in the Conversions section.
Also, please tell me you aren't talking about the Abjurant Champion. Lie to me if you need to.
Heh. I'm like that but I'm a player. Heretic. ;p
Problem is the close-minded, paranoid DMs who say "Core only and anything you try to bring in will be killed with fire along with you, heretic" and seem to be dominating most of the known community. If not that, then they're really loud and obnoxious about their preferences while wanting to shove said preferences down the throats of everyone around. Those kind of people will slap you for even suggesting something as monstrous as "homebrew" or "3.5e converted material" etc.I personally liked a few more of the 3.5 PrC that added to flavour without necesarrly obsessing with it. Top of the hat there's a class that makes your abjurations better, sure it focuses on abjuration, but it gives varied bonuses and new ways to do stuff than say, three ways to use a costly scroll.I'm gonna bite back my usual rants about PrCs and instead ask the question: What PrCs from 3.5 were you hoping to have?
There are a ton of converted PrCs in the Conversions section.
Also, please tell me you aren't talking about the Abjurant Champion. Lie to me if you need to.
Half the problem. The other-side are power-gaming munchkins specifically looking to break the game, ME me me Center of attention players who have to do everything, and the odd jerk who gets off on deliberately ruining everyone else's fun. These are what feed into the paranoid/close minded GMs and when said GMs encounter one it only vindicates their paranoia. That and most of the GMs that I know who are of the Core only school are that way because Paizo is open with their playtests, which last for 8 months to a year or more, and most loopholes are filled by then. Third party publishers are not nearly as open or as rigorous (in general) as Paizo, and as a result, Game-breakers get through from time to time.
Sorry for the rant, but I get a bit Techy when people throw everything on the GM; RPGs are a co-operative medium.
Problem is the close-minded, paranoid DMs who say "Core only and anything you try to bring in will be killed with fire along with you, heretic" and seem to be dominating most of the known community. If not that, then they're really loud and obnoxious about their preferences while wanting to shove said preferences down the throats of everyone around. Those kind of people will slap you for even suggesting something as monstrous as "homebrew" or "3.5e converted material" etc.I personally liked a few more of the 3.5 PrC that added to flavour without necesarrly obsessing with it. Top of the hat there's a class that makes your abjurations better, sure it focuses on abjuration, but it gives varied bonuses and new ways to do stuff than say, three ways to use a costly scroll.I'm gonna bite back my usual rants about PrCs and instead ask the question: What PrCs from 3.5 were you hoping to have?
There are a ton of converted PrCs in the Conversions section.
Also, please tell me you aren't talking about the Abjurant Champion. Lie to me if you need to.
Half the problem. The other-side are power-gaming munchkins specifically looking to break the game, ME me me Center of attention players who have to do everything, and the odd jerk who gets off on deliberately ruining everyone else's fun. These are what feed into the paranoid/close minded GMs and when said GMs encounter one it only vindicates their paranoia. That and most of the GMs that I know who are of the Core only school are that way because Paizo is open with their playtests, which last for 8 months to a year or more, and most loopholes are filled by then. Third party publishers are not nearly as open or as rigorous (in general) as Paizo, and as a result, Game-breakers get through from time to time.
Sorry for the rant, but I get a bit Techy when people throw everything on the GM; RPGs are a co-operative medium.
I apologize for the bias. I am the kind of player who LOVES his own created homebrew races as well as any non-human options (Humanity is overrated!) that are also available in books like "Dragon Empires Gazetteer" that introduced races such as the Kitsune and Nagaji, yet I was hounded by a very close-minded DM* who shot down some of my favourite creations slowly and painfully. He didn't do it because they were overpowered or anything, but because he himself "just doesn't happen to like them". No room for compromise apparently, even though all the other players in the group were okay with what I wanted to play as.
* = I have mentioned this person numerous times. Apologies to those who have already heard all of this before and are tired of hearing about it.
The other problem that explains my bias is that I have NEVER run into these problematic players you speak of myself. I'm both lucky and unlucky like that.
Problem is the close-minded, paranoid DMs who say "Core only and anything you try to bring in will be killed with fire along with you, heretic" and seem to be dominating most of the known community. If not that, then they're really loud and obnoxious about their preferences while wanting to shove said preferences down the throats of everyone around. Those kind of people will slap you for even suggesting something as monstrous as "homebrew" or "3.5e converted material" etc.I personally liked a few more of the 3.5 PrC that added to flavour without necesarrly obsessing with it. Top of the hat there's a class that makes your abjurations better, sure it focuses on abjuration, but it gives varied bonuses and new ways to do stuff than say, three ways to use a costly scroll.I'm gonna bite back my usual rants about PrCs and instead ask the question: What PrCs from 3.5 were you hoping to have?
There are a ton of converted PrCs in the Conversions section.
Also, please tell me you aren't talking about the Abjurant Champion. Lie to me if you need to.
Luckily customization isn't a major issue in my case, we've already homebrewed Souldrinker into a norn/raven shaman type ferry man, bit inspired by Darksiders 2, and changed Arcane Archer into a throwing prestige.
Fyi, losing three caster levels is not so bad, using Inner Sea Magic allows joining a guild, and after 35 semesters, 35 skill checks, if you make everyone, you'd get +3 caster level in a single class, gaining spell slots and spells known as well.
Is there a reason why the archmage PRC was not updated to Pathfinder?
Is there a reason why the archmage PRC was not updated to Pathfinder?
My google fu told me they said they didn't need it. Wizards in 3.5 just got more spellcasting at the higher tiers(they actually just got spellcasting at all levels) and that they thought they might release them as alternate class features at a later point.
So its because in pathfinder wizards supposedly have class levels at their later levels, and they felt that was the purpose of archmage. I guess... Not that I agree,thats just what I read. You can search for it yourself, wasn't hard to find.
Thanks, Mr. Sin, I kinda liked the PRC myself.
Is there a reason why the archmage PRC was not updated to Pathfinder?
I believe they (designers) cited a few reasons.
First, they felt it was too good, and encouraged all wizards to break from the wizard class to go into it. Second, they felt that the capstone abilities in many cases replaced them. Third, they felt it was too generic. While that sort of ties in with point one, they felt that too many of the abilities were to broad and didn't really fit with what they wanted out of prestige classes. They felt high level sorcerers and wizards as a whole were archmages, not simply people with the prestige class.
I was also quite a fan of the PRC, but thankfully my GM worked with me to develop some feat alternatives that did many of the same things.
Ultimately I feel like the idea of replacing archmage abilities with feats and class features in the main rules was something of a failure. Since the vast majority of adventure paths never reach level 20, you end up with wizards who never get those replacement capstones they might have otherwise had at level 14-15. Similarly, the arcane fire and SLA feats are frankly terrible choices. Perhaps flavorful options, but outright bad in the vast majority of instances for what you invest in them.
Problem is the close-minded, paranoid DMs who say "Core only and anything you try to bring in will be killed with fire along with you, heretic" and seem to be dominating most of the known community. If not that, then they're really loud and obnoxious about their preferences while wanting to shove said preferences down the throats of everyone around. Those kind of people will slap you for even suggesting something as monstrous as "homebrew" or "3.5e converted material" etc.
As others observed, this goes both ways, and there are two sides to both stories. I would feel comfortable to say upwards of 80% of the homebrew material I've seen has been very seriously unbalanced in the worst ways (typically in the form of martial characters, rather than casters). As a GM I would be very wary of having to work such material into the game. Similarly, there were many 3.5 options that were just plain broken. Dragonsight is an excellent example of a spell that was probably outright too good (similarly, avascolate and its mass version). Many feats also fell into the category (shock trooper, rob's gambit). Having to sift through it is tiresome.
Lets also keep in mind that for a GM, it is much easier to say "core only" than it is to keep track of half a dozen other major rulebooks that add numerous and powerful options to the game. I know that even as a player sometimes I lament the simplicity lost by adding books beyond the CRB.
You forgot about Riftwarden and Magaambyan Arcanist, both of witch can't be evil.
We brought up magwambawhosits. Riftwarden doesn't look too good itself. Its a pure caster with 7/10 caster levels?
We brought up magwambawhosits. Riftwarden doesn't look too good itself. Its a pure caster with 7/10 caster levels?
Actually, personally, my beef with maagasomething is hard to remember and, while okay, a little dull depending on taste.
Riftwarden, for me, went under "Yay, another summoner. Because spending more actions per turn is exactly what I needed." We have a handful of pet prestiges, no transmuters, enchanters or abjurers, but three conjurerers.
With the munchkin player's, one of my friends is kinda one. Except he does it with one idea or feature. Then sucks at everything else. Worse he has the tendency to get bored with anything not keyed to his munchkinyness. He actually drives the rest of us nuts. Worse is most are none combat based, when we need his usual bard playing self the most.
To be honest with you, I don't think Wizards really need prestige classes. At all. Each one is different, because of the different spell selections, specialization, race, feats, etc. They have more variety available to them than any other class. Everything they are or do is a matter of player preference. Compare that to the Cleric's spell list, which is nearly identical to each other.
I think everyone deserves flavorful and viable prestige classes that don't punish you. Same with archetypes.
I don't see a lot that excites me with cleric either. I think I'd go diabolist myself if I had to pick. You lose some progression if I remember right.
|
We have a handful of pet prestiges, no transmuters, enchanters or abjurers, but three conjurerers.
[tangent]
The game in general could use some more flavorful options for Abjurers, not just PrCs.Enchantment and Illusion suffer from fairly large swathes of creatures that are entirely immune to them, making them 'all or nothing' options that are either doing their job like anyone else, or utterly useless.
Conjurors get crazy love, with an entire base class (the Summoner) that's basically just a conjuration love letter.
A Necromancy-themed 'Summoner' with an undead companion and a smaller Summoner-like list of mostly necromancy spells, or an Enchantment-themed 'Summoner' with a permanent mind-controlled flunky linked as deeply as a familiar or eidolon would be, and six levels of tighter focused Enchantment spells, would be one way of doing something for some of these classes, although it wouldn't really fit with an Abjurer or Diviner (neither one of which are as thematically suitable to have a companion critter).
[/tangent]
As for the PrC issue, it always seemed to me that there were many types of PrCs. PrCs for casters were almost never as good as taking levels in your base Cleric or Druid or Wizard, making them pretty much useful only for Sorcerers, which, in 3.X, were pretty dire by about 3rd level and eager to PrC out into *anything.* PrCs for Fighters and Rogues, on the other hand, were often a superior option to remaining a Fighter or Rogue.
And then there was the lack of Fractional BAB and Fractional Saves, making someone who PrC'd too much from (or into) a medium BAB class suffer from a constant rounding down of his Basic Attack Bonus, while his saving throws might shoot through the roof... Pathfinder has fixed the 'too high saves' issue, while leaving the 'too low BAB' issue in place, making PrC's even *less* attractive for a medium BAB class like the Monk or Rogue or Bard.
Given the implied (inferred?) dissatisfaction with the concept (or at least it's previous execution?), that may well be by design.
Well, if blackfire adept counts, i figured Riftwarden would too. Their two of a kind. Neither seems really worth it to me. Giving up spell progression on a pure caster build is just distasteful.
I missed that someone brought up the Arcanist, but i kind of like it.
Hemothurge isn't evil really.
I think what abjurers need is more spells in their school. And conjuration needs to give some back. Like all of the healing spells. Mae armor should be abjuration too. A new set of abjurations would be a good forum project.
It saddens me that nobody seems to think Evocation needs more love.
Seems like there's only one good blasty casty painful death spell every odd spell level and that's usually a Conjuration spell.