Are Prestige Classes Really Necessary?

[kenjib]

RangerWickett, those are some excellent points. I'm in agreement that there should only be a small set of core classes. However, I think that there only needs to be three, not four. Why do you think that both rogue and expert are necessary? I think that they could both be handled by an expert class just fine. What is the difference between the rogue and expert as you see it, and how does each fulfill an important role?

 

[jollyninja]

i personally am a fan of the prestige class concept. i just do not think that it has been refined to the point of being sane. many of them have prerequisites that make no sense or are missing really obvious ones. warmaster needs weapon specialization, weapon master does not, wtf!. I think it is a world builders dream and can instantly define a character into a nice little niche. i will grant you the point that most currently available prestige classes could either be created through multiclassing or should be full classes but i also would not like the dnd game to turn into palladium with it's 50 million unbalanced classes (hmm mega jiucer or regular jiucer, which is more powerful?).

i would like to see more organization prestige classes be really short. 3-5 levels, most prestige classes kind of quit being particularly cool after a few levels.

 

[Tonguez]

Organizations are fairly self-explanatory, and I think they're the best thing to use prestige classes for in general.

Have to disagree with you here Rangerwickett - membership of organisations should be a roleplaying device and not an excuse for a prestige class. Yes the specialist training they provide is something but does what might essentially be a 'bonus feat' from the Order of Ting really justify an ENTIRE class?
The real ROLEPLAYING value of organizations is the obligations they place on the PC (and the benefit of a Patron) rather than the bonuses it might grant to PC joe who gains 'Bonus Feat X" and then never mentions the organisation again

Really the ONLY PrCs with any redeeming qualities are the 'Exotics' but even these become redundant if you follow the concept of stripped down 'core classes

Fighters = characters with good Attack skills. Use of Armour type should remain a feat option which can be swapped out for 'dex feats

Mage = characters who use magic - spontaneous casting or prepared spells selected as a feat (mutually exclusive)

Experts = Rogue, Bard (Expert/Mage) characters with high skill points

I'm personally reluctant to make clerics just another kind of mage, but thats a personal thing. IMHO Clerics, Druids, etc should be reworked more along the lines of the Monk thus making their 'powers' less spelllike and more intrinsic and linked to their beleif/faith.

 

[omedon]

RangerWickett

While I don't share the same enthusiasm for prestige classes as you do, I far from hate them. I just do not feel they are a necessary part of the game. The 3 core rulebooks only contained six prestige classes and I could easily imagine PC's having little desire to become one of these 6, especially since two of them are evil.

Now my main beef with Prestige Classes is that there are so darned many of them. There must be at least 500 published Prestige classes by now. Many of these are no good at all, either because they are completely uninspired or are broken in some way either riddled with rules problems or overpowered. Some are mediocre, others are good, and some are great.

I agree that prestige classes linked to organizations are generally the best as it encompasses the original vision of what prestige classes should be.

My problem that out of these 500 plus prestige classes, even if I were to find 50 that were of outstanding quality, ones that I dearly wanted to add to my game, perhaps 10 or so might actually make it in. Most of the ones that do make it in will likely be used for interesting villains rather than players. For example, I can't wait to send the bloodhound from MotW after a group of PC's however, this illustrates one of my dislikes about prestige classes; I don't know if or when I will ever get to use the blood hound. If my PC's don't make an enemy of the right guy it may never happen. This makes their value in dollar terms very low for me.

I don't hate prestige classes, but the overwhelming flood of them is begining to exhaust me. So far there has been a great demand for more prestige classes, and this is good because if you can find a prestige class to suit your players or fit in your game it can be a wonderful addition. However, I believe there is too much of an emphasis placed on them, too many books featuring them.

I would like to pass this off as a problem of the D20 system and the OGL glut, and conclude that the market will sort it out, by the offending companies either being forced to change or going under. However, WOTC own poor track record with prestige classes makes me wonder. Hopefully Masters of the Wild is the begining of good things to come.

I am very skeptical of prestige classes, they are pretty close to the last thing I am looking for in a D20 product. If I run across a good one I may a try, but I do not buy products looking for them. This is to do with their very limited value as I mentioned earlier.

Originally posted by RangerWickett
Prestige classes give you an easy way to introduce less typical character roles in a package that is easy to dole out.

This is what I like about prestige classes.

Originally posted by RangerWickett
It's also a good marketing ploy from WotC, because prestige classes are one of the most interesting aspects of game design. Look at some of Monte Cook's work for excellent usages of the concept. You'll always get people making more Prestige Classes, which will mean that you'll always have a source of new books to produce. Having more options for things people can create makes the industry more vibrant, and helps us all as a whole, even if we never find a use for most of what we buy.

This is what I don't like about them.

I guess if other people are happy forking over there well, or not so well, earned money for them and that keeps D&D alive then thats fine by me, but I would like to see some new ideas wedge there way into the market, things along the lines of city books and FDP's DM Guides.

 

[Psion]

In response to the sentiment "prestige classes aren't really nescessary."

Seasoning isn't necessary in my dinner, either. But I damn sure prefer it.

In response to the sentiment "you can do everything with regular classes you can do with prestige classes"

Not normally, no. Oft times prestige classes are the continuation or pinacle of a given concept, but if you could do the concept justice with the base classes and feats, then you really had no business making it a prestige class in the first place. Part of the point of a prestige class is to do things with them you could not otherwise do.

 

[WizarDru]

Not normally, no. Oft times prestige classes are the continuation or pinacle of a given concept, but if you could do the concept justice with the base classes and feats, then you really had no business making it a prestige class in the first place. Part of the point of a prestige class is to do things with them you could not otherwise do.

My sentiments, exactly.

Part of the problem is the assumption that Prestige Classes are only for PCs, and the tunnel-vision that results from this. Further, prestige classes have often been used incorrectly, IMHO, as a way to get uber-powers, and not to serve a concept. Sometimes the designers fall in love with a concept so much, they forget good design rules, and this is what results in so many broken PrCs.

For example, an excellent NPC prestige class is the Doomdreamer, from Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil. No sane PC would ever even dream of qualifying for the class, but it makes a great class for the big bad guys in them module.

Another great example is the Dharkaguard, from Living Greyhawk. It is an excellent example of both an organizational prestige class, and a well-designed one. The class, for those unfamiliar with it, is basically a Rheenee male who defends their barges on the Nyr Dyv, using the Dharka, a handheld harpoon-like weapon. They gain special uses for it (such as the ranged trip attack) which are only available to the class, but sacrifice much of the standard fighters flexibility to do so.

The problem I have with many prestige classes is that the designers often fail to consider the ultimate question: "If I qualified for this....is there ANY reason I WOULDN'T take it?" If the answer is no, then you probably should review either the requirements, the abilities, or both.

The second question to ask is: "Would the average player take more than ONE LEVEL of this class?" If the answer is no, then you need to redesign the class (most likely removing the rampant front-loading that is, IMHO, the cardinal sin of most poorly designed prestige-classes).

The third question should be: "Have you considered the effects that multi-classing might have on this class?" Again, if the answer is no, it's time to review. Many times, prestige classes are designed assuming the PC will only take that class, and ignores the possibility that they might take another class that would radically alter the character's viability. No one can consider all the possibilities, but you should have at least considered what will happen with the core classes. Even if your PrC is a clerical-based one, you should be know what will happen if they get a rage ability, for example. A Mighty Servant of Kord, for example, has the ability to increase his Strength...how is that effected if he can rage AND cast Bull's Strength? You'd better figure that out ahead of time.

I think Prestige Classes are one of the best things about D&D 3E...I just think many folks (including WOTC) don't use them terribly well.

A side note: the assumption is also being made that for organizations, all members join a Prestige class, which is, to me, the worst kind of metagame thinking. It's like assuming that every cleric who is a member of church has levels as a cleric, or that every member of a thieves guild has a level in Rogue. A fighter can be a Dharkaguard, for example, but only the elite members would have the Dharkaguard prestige class.

 

[Tsyr]

Is DnD really needed? Nope. Likewise, neither are prestige classes. But are they really a problem? Nope.

And like Psion said... I've never understood how people can say "You can do anything a prestige class can do without prestige classes".

Riiiight.

Show me how to make a Geomancer, or a Shifter, or a Void Deciple, or a Spellsword, or a Bladesinger, or a Dragon Mage, or an Elemental Savant, or a Drunken Master, or a Ninja Spy, or a...

The abilities just don't exist.

Sure, if you wanted to add ALL the new abilities as feats/feat chains, MAYBE... but then, what have you actualy changed? You've given players even more chance to min/max, for one...

 

[tenelo]

I seem to remember that the DMG section that introduced prestige classes had several points in it where it was emphasised that PrC's were very campaign specific, and a tool for the DM to use as part of fleshing out the world. They were not intended primarily as PC options, hence their placement in the DMG rather than Player's Handbook. They were also intended as a means of focus and specalization, rather than a general increase of power. These are both concepts that have rather gotten lost along the way, in the huge flood of official WotC, unofficial published and homebrew PrC's.

 

[Desdichado]

As some have pointed out, there's a big difference in complaining about the concept of prestige classes and complaining about the implementation of prestige classes. I think the implementation, as has been said many times here, is somewhat poor, for the most part. However, the concept of prestige classes is great. As a player, it gives me some neat concept I can develop towards. As a DM it does the same, and also gives me themed NPCs, and a great way to customize my campaign with little work.

However, making prestige classes as a proliferation of core classes is a mistake, in my book. For one thing, as has been mentioned here many times, the relatively simple method of prestige classes has been implemented poorly: making these classes core would likely be even worse. Also, I like the idea that these specialist organizations or concepts aren't ones that you jump right into. How can you be a lasher (as an example) without first mastering more basic fighting methods? How can you be a Fatespinner without first understanding the basics of magic?

Frankly, I've always agreed with RangerWickett's idea that we need fewer core classes, not more, although I'd prefer to see Rogue, Fighter, Mage, Cleric as the basic archetypes. Make them all as flexible as the fighter and you'd be good to go, assuming you had good prestige classes you could later join to develop into a more focused concept.

And in the best of all worlds, as someone else pointed out too, I'd like to see an option for d20 without classes at all. Then, of course, there wouldn't be a need for prestige classes, and you could get maximum flexibility out of the system.

 

[Wolfshead]

However, making prestige classes as a proliferation of core classes is a mistake, in my book. For one thing, as has been mentioned here many times, the relatively simple method of prestige classes has been implemented poorly: making these classes core would likely be even worse. Also, I like the idea that these specialist organizations or concepts aren't ones that you jump right into. How can you be a lasher (as an example) without first mastering more basic fighting methods? How can you be a Fatespinner without first understanding the basics of magic?

Frankly, I've always agreed with RangerWickett's idea that we need fewer core classes, not more, although I'd prefer to see Rogue, Fighter, Mage, Cleric as the basic archetypes. Make them all as flexible as the fighter and you'd be good to go, assuming you had good prestige classes you could later join to develop into a more focused concept.

And in the best of all worlds, as someone else pointed out too, I'd like to see an option for d20 without classes at all. Then, of course, there wouldn't be a need for prestige classes, and you could get maximum flexibility out of the system.

I also agree that making prestige classes into core classes could be a mistake. So many prestige classes have such an incredibly narrow focus that they just don't work in a standard 'adventuring party' campaign. If the campaign were tailor-made for certain types of narrowly-focused classes, it could probably work.

The idea of fewer, broader core classes is appealing. I thought Alternity did a good job of handling classes within a skill-based system. There were only four- Combat Spec (Fighter?), Free Agent (Rogue?), Diplomat (Cleric?), and Tech Op (Wizard?).

Randy