Some of these I think are plenty reasonable, but a few I'm totally opposed to. A Prestige class should reflect a focus, a specialization, and be both flavorful and capable at their speciality. Unfortunately, a few things keep this from being the case.
The lack of scaling, (making them fit in with the trivial point you made) is something that keeps me from even considering a PrC nine times out of ten. And often I'll go to my DM, present my awesome character and flavor, and then show them how horrible they are in play.
Skill starvation, as well. While the minimal number of skills some PrCs offer make sense, there are quite a few that seem to quite desperately need more, not only for power, but also in terms of flavor.
I've been working on homebrew ways to make this better (on another thread recently) and you've brought up a number of points I had. But this isnt something paizo is willing to deal with; I get the distinct impression that if they could dispose of PrCs, they would. I also wish they would be an "equivalent" choice to single classing, so that it's not a choice between "vanilla & functionnal" or "interesting but uselss". Still, I've been working on making the best of PrCs for a little while. Some of them are optimisable, though none can really break the game. Still, it would be nice to have "examples" of what the original designers thought a PC in such a PrC would look like, since the NPCs they make are SOOO much weaker than the average PC.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Skill and feat taxes. I don't mind investing in a skill or feat that's a little unusual or suboptimal. That's part of the fun of PrCs. But please don't make me burn a feat slot on something that's irrelevant, worthless, or both.
Agreed, but the main point here is that there should not be completely irrelevant or worthless skills and feats. Circumstantial and suboptimal is fine, but a feat should give a noticable benefit by itself. All feats.
If something is bad enough to be considered worthless from a mechanical perspective, it should not be a mechanical option (profession skill, I'm looking at you).
Class attributes that don't scale with level. This one is really common, and typically takes the form "at X level of the PrC, you get to do Y as a spell or SLA". For instance, the Souleater PrC gives you the ability to Summon 1d3 cacodemons at 3rd level. This is roughly equivalent to a 3rd level spell, so it's not a terrible ability for an 8th level character. By 10th level, though, it'll be pretty pointless, and at higher levels it'll be almost completely worthless.
Not agreed. I like circumstantial and weird abilities. It's not an investment, so as long as it isn't considered a major part of the class' abilities it's no issue. The 1st level spell-like blasts of many spellcasters that deal 1d6+1 damage is a good example of this - by 5th level they're worthless, but you don't give much up for them so that's not an issue.
If you don't like them taking space on your sheet, just skip writing them down once you don't need them anymore.
Also, they last for one minute per level instead of one round per level, which is a huge difference for a creature with invisibility and six questions Commune.
I'd say it's more in line with a 5th level spell, especially since it gives access to what is a 5th level spell in Commune, with a CL of 6-18 depending on the roll. Since Commune is a powerful spell for its level, and the spell is much more versatile than just having Commune, I'd say the power of the ability is somewhere between a 5th and a 6th level spell slot. If the didn't have the Commune ability, I'd say it was a quite strong 4th or quite weak 5th level spell, due to them being very useful as scouts but kinda weak in combat.
So in that particular case, it's a very useful ability even up at quite high levels, especially if you don't have a cleric or oracle in the party.
Class attributes that are trivial. Do I really need to list these? There are a lot of them. I don't mean stuff that is useless but flavorful, like the Winter Witch's ability to freeze water into ice. No, I'm talking stuff like the Harrower's Spirit Deck, which looks cool at first glance but is really a Magic missile, except with much shorter range and less damage.
Agreed. Or, in general, I dislike abilities that are overly complicated ways of doing very simple things, like drawing a bunch of cards and doing a lot of math to just deal some damage.
Flavorful but extremely circumstantial abilities - YES! MORE OF THOSE!
Random ways to do stuff everyone can do with some tacked-on reason - No, please, no.
Class attributes that are redundant. PrCs should be interesting and unique and should give benefits that are difficult or impossible to get otherwise. They shouldn't duplicate racial benefits or stuff you can get from an archetype or bloodline. For instance, the Master of Storms is an interesting PrC -- but its abilities overlap considerably with the Stormborn bloodline.
Kind of agreed, but as there are more and more archetypes this will get harder to prevent. Don't agree with it when it comes to race though - I'm fine with a prestige class to show a prestigous group of, for example, humans that are so dedicated spelunkers they develop the underground senses and darkvision of a dwarf.
Class attributes that force you to be MAD.
Not agreed at all. The issue is with some classes being incredibly strong as SAD, not that classes are too MAD. Some classes are _weak_, and that weakness gets blamed on being MAD just because they would be stronger if they where SAD - but it's not an inherent flaw of utilizing different scores, it's an issue of the abilities being weak.
Compare a paladin and a monk. Both are about equally MAD - the paladin is great, the monk not so much.MADness should not go away as that leads to players being encouraged to min-max for every character they make or they are behind the curve - but MADness should be taken into account when designing class unique benefits.
An ability that adds Wis to Init in addition to Dex is a nice ability on a MAD class like a monk (or inquisitor, which gets that very ability and is another example of a well-designed MAD class), but is far too powerful on a SAD class like a cleric.
So: Have class attributes that depend on different ability scores. But recognize that inherently makes those abilities weaker, and compensate by making them stronger in other regards. A wizard PrC may let you add half your intelligence to reflex saves. A fighter PrC may let you add your full intelligence to reflex saves.
Skill starvation.
Yes. Agreed. But this is in general, not only with PrC's. Combine this with skills being vastly over-valued as a balancing component and you have an issue where most non-int casters will be boring skill-wise and just max perception, while rogues will have loads of skill points that can be spent on flavorful stuff but still gets them to end up as underpowered characters.
To be very clear: I don't mind that Paizo PrCs tend to be weakish compared to the core classes. That's a deliberate choice Paizo made as a response to the badly designed, overpowered PrCs of 3.5, and I'm fine with it. I don't mind weak or suboptimal. That's perfectly okay, especially if I'm trading power for fun and flavor. What I'm objecting to are poor design choices -- stuff that seems tax-y, redundant, or poorly thought out, and class attributes that are useless or otherwise non.
Doug M.
Well I would prefer that the Prestige classes atleast be DECENT, not the ridiculously poor and weak choices that a good majority of them are...
The Dragon Disciple PrC, which overlaps with the draconic bloodline, actually looks like a poorer choice when you consider the draconic bloodline doesn't give up any spellcasting levels...
-The fact that the only analog for bloodmages on Golarion grow immensely fat. This screws my concept for a character I had from 3.5 Oriental Adventures...
-The fact that antipaladins must be Chaotic Evil as opposed to Lawful, but hey- Hellknights!
-The way many of the prestige classes (like those listed above) are very Golarion-specific, making them difficult to transfer off-world
You forget another thing, you lose your favored class bonus when you level into a PrC.
This is a good discussion; but I think there is a problem of awareness of PrCs. I've been doing an exhaustive attempt at building ALL prcs into something usable. In certain cases it works, it others (most) it's a flavorful but limited build. But you know what the most common comment I hear is when I look for advice? "no idea what that PrC is". I think people dismiss a lot of PrCs out of hand because of the "PrCs suck" reputation.
As for "fluffiness" issues, it's really easy to convert from one context to another. One example: the living monolith, VERY osirion specific. Let's say I'm know the player of a dwarf that wants to use it, I can say ok, let's call it "stone guardian", switch the "ka stone" to a "sacred rune" marked on the character's forehead, and VOILA, a new order of soldiers to enrich your world.
The reason there are so many golarion specific PrCs is because of the schism between the "core" group (IE jason bulhman, SKR) & the "golarion" group (James Jacobs is the only one I know of). The core group is a LOT more cautious, tends to favor certain things (like no dex to damage & few prcs) and the "golarion" group favours other things. Or at least that is what I have gathered.
I like the prcs that do things other classes can't, or provide options that might be hard for straight classes to work in otherwise.
I like the prcs that do things other classes can't, or provide options that might be hard for straight classes to work in otherwise.
Something you might ask is if the other classes would be able to do that thing if the prc had never existed in the first place. In a world without witch or rogue for example, other classes might have their niche. That's not to say some things aren't best done with a PrC, but that sometimes the PrC or class is actually taking away from everyone else.
The Dragon Disciple PrC, which overlaps with the draconic bloodline, actually looks like a poorer choice when you consider the draconic bloodline doesn't give up any spellcasting levels...then you remember that the dragon diciple is a better paladin then a straight paladin.
An arcane caster who can't cast in armor and has 3/4 BAB and has multiclassed into at least one arcane caster is a better paladin than the paladin? Can I ask how so?
The Dragon Disciple PrC, which overlaps with the draconic bloodline, actually looks like a poorer choice when you consider the draconic bloodline doesn't give up any spellcasting levels...Actually, DD is one of the few good PrCs because it doesn't overlap with the bloodline. It stacks.
You use the sum or your sorcerer and DD levels for your bloodline abilities and all the other stuff is on top of that. The natural AC increase explicitly stacks. The breath weapon uses explicitly stack. The bite is added to the claws ability. The fly speed increases when he has wings from both sources. There is not a single redundant ability.
I wasn't citing it for any redundancies; I was citing it for what it lacked. Specifically, how it causes sorcerers that go all the way in that PrC to lose out on an entire spell level, which could prove to be a critical loss if the party has been relying upon them for magical power.
The Dragon Disciple PrC, which overlaps with the draconic bloodline, actually looks like a poorer choice when you consider the draconic bloodline doesn't give up any spellcasting levels...then you remember that the dragon diciple is a better paladin then a straight paladin.
Good point!
I like the prcs that do things other classes can't, or provide options that might be hard for straight classes to work in otherwise.Something you might ask is if the other classes would be able to do that thing if the prc had never existed in the first place. In a world without witch or rogue for example, other classes might have their niche. That's not to say some things aren't best done with a PrC, but that sometimes the PrC or class is actually taking away from everyone else.
The best example I can give is the Arcane Trickster's Ranged Legerdemain. I love that ability. I think that's wholly unique to the trickster. It doesn't take anything away from another class, and is a fun addition. PRCs built with something unique in mind I like.
As for "taking things away" from other classes, I think you're looking at it the wrong way. I look at it like, if this PRC is allowed in a game, would you ever play a normal class(that is close to the PRC)? If the answer is no, then something is wrong with the PRC. If you say, yeah, I'd play a normal class, but want to do the PRC because it allows me to do something neat, it's most likely ok. IMO.
The best example I can give is the Arcane Trickster's Ranged Legerdemain. I love that ability. I think that's wholly unique to the trickster. It doesn't take anything away from another class, and is a fun addition. PRCs built with something unique in mind I like.
Actually I think arcane trickster does do something the normal rogue/wizard can't, but I wouldn't say ranged legardmain is a good example because that might be something you could do with mage hand already. I'd say its because it mixes two classes and gives class features that give synergy. Its also full casting, and most classes with only partial caster progression are just awful for that reason.
As for "taking things away" from other classes, I think you're looking at it the wrong way. I look at it like, if this PRC is allowed in a game, would you ever play a normal class(that is close to the PRC)? If the answer is no, then something is wrong with the PRC. If you say, yeah, I'd play a normal class, but want to do the PRC because it allows me to do something neat, it's most likely ok. IMO.
Erm... What does that have to do with what I said?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd call all of these... features. Prestige classes are narrower than they were in 3.5, and NOT usually the "optimal" choice to develop a strong character. In fact, quite often they are not, and that is fine.
I disagree. If a PrC isn't good at something, its a trap option. Even if the Prestige Class's purpose is to make you strong in an out-of-combat situation, it needs to be good at SOMETHING.
There are plenty of examples of Prestige Classes that are simply too ... restrainted. Restrained is a good word for it. They have built in weaknesses and limitations that serve no purpose than to power down the Prestige Class.
There is still an anti-PrC reflex among the community and that's fine, but neglecting and otherwise gutting Prestige Classing and Multiclassing isn't the answer. Prestige Classes are a fundamental part of 3.5's heritage and when done well, they can be very cool. A great example is the Master Chemyst class.
I'd call all of these... features. Prestige classes are narrower than they were in 3.5, and NOT usually the "optimal" choice to develop a strong character. In fact, quite often they are not, and that is fine.I disagree. If a PrC isn't good at something, its a trap option. Even if the Prestige Class's purpose is to make you strong in an out-of-combat situation, it needs to be good at SOMETHING.
There are plenty of examples of Prestige Classes that are simply too ... restrainted. Restrained is a good word for it. They have built in weaknesses and limitations that serve no purpose than to power down the Prestige Class.
There is still an anti-PrC reflex among the community and that's fine, but neglecting and otherwise gutting Prestige Classing and Multiclassing isn't the answer. Prestige Classes are a fundamental part of 3.5's heritage and when done well, they can be very cool. A great example is the Master Chemyst class.
I'd be curious to know any examples you had of effects that specifically power down certain PrCs for no other reason than powering them down; while I have noticed their limited natures, I havent noticed any specifics limitations. I'm working on some houserules to make PrCs more potable, and I could use all the info I can get.
In terms of "powering down": for spellcasters, any class that wants you to give up a level of spellcasting (which about half of them do). For fighter types, anything that gives you benefits that are less valuable than feats, or anything that's not giving you full BAB and d10 HD. And of course, anything with feat or skill taxes, especially if the candidate character classes are already feat-thin or skill-starved.
Doug M.
I do not feel that powering down a PrC is necessarily a bad thing as long as it is a good trade-off for certain kinds of characters in the short term.
In casting classes that sacrifice spell progression I often allow them to keep the boost to CL if not the spells known and spells per day to smooth things over a bit if the class seems like it should be a dedicated caster at least.
Fighters often gain a lot by multi-classing even if the other class doesnt have full BAB, a level of rogue or in a PrC brings decen benefits even if it is just the addition of many class skills.
I don't think anyone's mentioned the big one: PrCs that are locked behind nigh unachievable "story prerequisites".
Stuff like the Agent of the Grave's (an otherwise pretty boss PrC in my opinion) "Must be part of the Whispering Way for a year" clause. How are you even supposed to...ugh.
But that one, at least, can be waived by saying you were in it somehow before game start.
One of the worst offenders is the Pain Taster. That's another cool PrC. It has some fairly unique abilities ("Intense Training" style stat raising, a Sneak Attack-esque ability that's always on if you use whips, etc.).
The catch? "Find a Drow priestess to torture you. Now make a Fort save or die".
Highly specific set of circumstances (which can be slightly fudged by having some other torturer do it, maybe, assuming they're world class at their job), which can result in death after they're achieved, and can't really be handwaved as happening before game start (barring reasonable houseruling), since it requires an actual roll.
My absolute least favorite part about PrCs are ones that as written are nearly impossible to get into.
|
then you remember that the dragon diciple is a better paladin then a straight paladin.An arcane caster who can't cast in armor and has 3/4 BAB and has multiclassed into at least one arcane caster is a better paladin than the paladin? Can I ask how so?
i can list everything but the cliff notes version is...
paladin 6/sorcerer 3/dragon diciple 10/ oracle (lore) 1
flight at will, 3 natural attacks + manufactured, high stats, high ac, and 5th levels sorcerer spells (at level 13), zero ASF with celestial armor, or mythril breast plate with a 5% chance for failure using arcane armor master.
*Sidestep Secret (Su) from the oracle class makes you a 2 stat character.
In terms of "powering down": for spellcasters, any class that wants you to give up a level of spellcasting (which about half of them do). For fighter types, anything that gives you benefits that are less valuable than feats, or anything that's not giving you full BAB and d10 HD. And of course, anything with feat or skill taxes, especially if the candidate character classes are already feat-thin or skill-starved.
If a PrC offers full casting progression and a boatload of class features, why would a wizard or cleric, both of which have almost no class features, ever stay in the base class?
In terms of "powering down": for spellcasters, any class that wants you to give up a level of spellcasting (which about half of them do). For fighter types, anything that gives you benefits that are less valuable than feats, or anything that's not giving you full BAB and d10 HD. And of course, anything with feat or skill taxes, especially if the candidate character classes are already feat-thin or skill-starved.If a PrC offers full casting progression and a boatload of class features, why would a wizard or cleric, both of which have almost no class features, ever stay in the base class?
This is one of the things I DONT see as a problem; casters are pretty powerful as it is, and losing a level or 2 of spells is a meaningful exchange. Plus, the actual caster level of spells can be compensated for(magical knack & items).
Feat & skills taxes can easily be compensated for as well (reduce OR remove them).
Fluff issues are the easiest to get around; refluff them to something that fits your world (though, for the pain taster, it would be complicated).
It's the power of the PrCs themselves, especially non-casty or low-casty ones, that is the issue (in my opinion). Loosing judgment/arcane pool/smite/flury of blows/challenge progression HURTS. And most dont give an equivalent exchange.
In terms of "powering down": for spellcasters, any class that wants you to give up a level of spellcasting (which about half of them do). For fighter types, anything that gives you benefits that are less valuable than feats, or anything that's not giving you full BAB and d10 HD. And of course, anything with feat or skill taxes, especially if the candidate character classes are already feat-thin or skill-starved.If a PrC offers full casting progression and a boatload of class features, why would a wizard or cleric, both of which have almost no class features, ever stay in the base class?
The class features they were given in pathfinder? Bloodlines, discoveries, revelation advancement, etc. Whatever they get pales is likely to pale in comparison to the spellcasting anyway unless it further augments the spellcasting. Even in 3.5 where they had no class features, you avoided things that didn't give you full progression unless they gave you something absolutely amazing because spellcasting is ultimate power.
Speaking of which, one of the big things that bothers me is wizards not getting new spells known.
I don't think anyone's mentioned the big one: PrCs that are locked behind nigh unachievable "story prerequisites".Well, this goes to part of why PrCs are tricky. Story prerequisites might seem an interesting way to balance PrCs and/or add flavor, but in practice they're very tricky to design. And of course, they're often avoided if the player builds a new character at a higher level. "Sure, Nick Necromancer has been an Agent of the Grave since seventh level. He joined the Whispering Way in eight grade, never looked back."
I once had a GM that required us to perform those RP tasks in-game or we couldn't enter the PrC with that character. If it was impossible to perform, we just couldn't use the PrC. Another one said we could use it in our backstory, the result was some really weird backstories... Flavor is awesome! but flexibility is paramount imo.
And I don't know why they got rid of the Archmage PrC. It actually had a "pay for abilities" mechanic that wasn't losing caster levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM i feel pretty ok with the prestige classes.
As a consumer I'm disappointed and somewhat disgruntled.
The class features they were given in pathfinder? Bloodlines, discoveries, revelation advancement, etc. Whatever they get pales is likely to pale in comparison to the spellcasting anyway unless it further augments the spellcasting. Even in 3.5 where they had no class features, you avoided things that didn't give you full progression unless they gave you something absolutely amazing because spellcasting is ultimate power.
Wizards and clerics have such minimal class features (with very little progression) that creating full caster level PrCs with plenty of class features means there's very little reason to stay in the base class, which was a major goal of Pathfinder in the first place.
What does a cleric give up by switching to a PrC with full casting progression? Channel Energy and Domain progression. By the time you're ready to take a PrC, Channel Energy is already more of a footnote ability than something important, and domain features are singularly unimpressive for the vast majority of domains (not to mention most stop progressing at 8th level). Domain spell progression is given up, but that's 1 extra spell per level compared to class features at every level (which is what almost everybody wants to see in a PrC).
What does a wizard give up? Arcane discoveries, a bonus feat or two, 2 spells known per level, and spell school progression. Again, very little compared to a PrC full of class features and caster level progression.
The thing with clerics and wizards is that full 9th level spells is such a dominant class feature that everything else is minor in comparison. There's relatively little for them to give up other than caster level in order to allow them to gain solid class features from a PrC.
What does a cleric give up by switching to a PrC with full casting progression? Channel Energy and Domain progression. By the time you're ready to take a PrC, Channel Energy is already more of a footnote ability than something important, and domain features are singularly unimpressive for the vast majority of domains (not to mention most stop progressing at 8th level). Domain spell progression is given up, but that's 1 extra spell per level compared to class features at every level (which is what almost everybody wants to see in a PrC).
And that's actually a ridiculously huge problem with the cleric.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And I don't know why they got rid of the Archmage PrC. It actually had a "pay for abilities" mechanic that wasn't losing caster levels.Here's an explanation and a promise by JJ.Ahh. Well that didn't end up happening, unless I missed something.
Funny thing about the Wizard. After 10 or so levels in PF, there's still not much of a reason to keep taking Wizard levels if there's a PrC out there.
And yet, it's not like we are seeing a ton of people playing loremasters & mages of the third eye either.
But wait; if your domain features are unimpressive, then you're taking the wrong domains.
As for the wizard: you give up school specialization power progression (which are great — again, if you pick the right ones); bonus feats are quite nice (item creation feats are excellent in most campaigns, metamagic is also quite good); and the free spells known are huge!
You'd have to have some pretty serious class features to warrant giving up all of that. Like, Incantatrix-level class features. Which, sure, if you have a class like that in PF, then everything is ruined forever.
I don't think paizo can do PrC's right, many people will only be satisfied if it offers a net result that is better than a core class option. When you get there you are back to 3.5 which according to many people was worse.
PrC's are generally not another tool for optimizers, I am actually fine with that. Still about half of my players went with PrC's in my latetst campaign, so I don't think they are all that terrible. They actually match up fine with paizo's assumed powerlevel in adventure paths imo.
And yet, it's not like we are seeing a ton of people playing loremasters & mages of the third eye either.
Mage of the third eye/arclord of Nex has a lot of obnoxious entry requirements and is really lackluster. Loremaster is pretty easy to enter; the only requirement you won't have just from being a wizard is Skill Focus (any knowledge skill). It's harder for sorcerers or witches to enter, though. Its abilities aren't terrible or useless, but they are really unexciting. I suppose if you picked up Skill Focus to qualify for Eldritch Heritage that it would be more appealing.
High level wizard abilities may not be great, but a handful of bonus feats and some minor bonuses are better than spending feats for mediocre abilities. It's worse for clerics who don't have the skill points to spare that wizards do. Especially since most of the full casting prestige classes only have 1/2 BAB.
On the other hand, I think veiled illusionist is a good casting prestige class. The only requirements are a few skill ranks and Spell Focus (Illusion), which fits the theme and mechanics of the prestige class. You also get an extra spell known every level, which makes up for not getting the two free spells as a wizard. Its abilities are interesting and flavorful, which makes it an actually appealing option.
And that's actually a ridiculously huge problem with the cleric.
I agree, actually. I just don't think PrCs that make the base class obsolete is the answer.
And yet, it's not like we are seeing a ton of people playing loremasters & mages of the third eye either.
Well, loremaster requires Skill Focus and 3 metamagic feats, which is a heavy entrance fee. Arclords of Nex are even worse, requiring Craft Construct (all but useless) and Eye of the Arclord (also lousy).
But wait; if your domain features are unimpressive, then you're taking the wrong domains.
How many of those domain features progress beyond 8th level, though? Two of the most sought after domains are Travel and Freedom. Once you hit 8th level, you get the main feature. Sure, you can use them a little bit more as you level, but you've already got a good amount of use just by hitting 8th.
As for the wizard: you give up school specialization power progression (which are great — again, if you pick the right ones); bonus feats are quite nice (item creation feats are excellent in most campaigns, metamagic is also quite good); and the free spells known are huge!
School specialization powers are nice, but not amazing. And like clerics, most of them kind of peak at 8th level (except for the capstone abilities, and how many games actually go to 20?). The bonus feats are good, but it's 2 feats over 10 levels (ie 4 levels of a fighter's class features). As for free spells known...it's dependent on the campaign. If you have difficulty finding ways to add spells to your spellbook (scrolls, captured spellbooks, paying a wizard to copy from him spellbook, etc.), then they're amazing. If that's not an issue, it's a footnote.
I don't think paizo can do PrC's right, many people will only be satisfied if it offers a net result that is better than a core class option. When you get there you are back to 3.5 which according to many people was worse.
PrC's are generally not another tool for optimizers, I am actually fine with that. Still about half of my players went with PrC's in my latetst campaign, so I don't think they are all that terrible. They actually match up fine with paizo's assumed powerlevel in adventure paths imo.
I wont deny that casty PrCs are pretty much equal in power to their equivalents, because they advance their greatest power: spellcasting. I really dont mind that full casting classes have less interesting PrCs, since they dont loose their main "feature". For them, it is a "relatively" equal choice between mono-class & PrC
The issue is more with 3/4 classes & martials, who rely on alternate abilties that dont scale as easily as spellcasting. BAB alone is not enough to keep a fighter/barbarian/ranger going. To them, it is NOT an equal choice between mono class & PrC.
As for optimization, EVERYTHING can be optimized; not everything can be "the most optimal". It's well established that mono-classed is "the most optimal". You're dealing with a corner case (most have PrCs) which might actually balance itself out. However, one PrC & a party of mono-classed characters might have a very different experience (assuming the PrC isnt a casty-type).
Edit: THey might have done better without PrCs/multiclassing at all rather than making a "gimped" version of it as it where. Then again, that might have taken them too far from their 3.5 roots.
I don't think anyone's mentioned the big one: PrCs that are locked behind nigh unachievable "story prerequisites".Well, this goes to part of why PrCs are tricky. Story prerequisites might seem an interesting way to balance PrCs and/or add flavor, but in practice they're very tricky to design. And of course, they're often avoided if the player builds a new character at a higher level. "Sure, Nick Necromancer has been an Agent of the Grave since seventh level. He joined the Whispering Way in eight grade, never looked back."
In a few cases -- the Pain Taster is one -- they're also a way of not-too-subtly signalling that this is really supposed to be a PrC for NPCs.
The catch? "Find a Drow priestess to torture you. Now make a Fort save or die"It's only a DC 15 Fort save. And Great Fortitude is a requirement for the PrC anyway. You'd be 6th level going in, right? So, be a class with a decent Fort save (+5), have a respectable Con (+3), add in Great Fortitude (+2) and a magic item that gives you just +1 to saves, and you're at +11 already. If the DM lets you use Bear's Endurance or similar magic, you should have little difficulty getting into "fail only on a 1" territory.
Alternately, blow one more feat on Improved Great Fortitude. Now you can have a relatively feeble Fort save -- let's say, +2 base, +2 from Con, +2 from Great Fortitude, and +1 from an item -- and you'll still have about a 90% chance of making that save. So while I agree with your general point, I don't think that's a great example.
Doug M.
The Fort save wasn't really the point, it was the "Find a Drow priestess who wants to torture you. But not just torture you, torture you in a very specific ritual that allows you to gain power from it if you're strong. So basically, find a Drow Priestess who likes you enough that she's willing to make you powerful, but also hates you enough to torture you mercilessly. Have fun with that." part.
So basically, find a Drow Priestess who likes you enough that she's willing to make you powerful, but also hates you enough to torture you mercilessly. Have fun with that.
To be fair, a drow torturing someone she likes because it makes them more powerful seems very believable.
I honestly think that's a more interesting way to run a culture who torture a lot than the standard lol CE approach.