Should Prestige Classes be more powerful than Base Classes?

[Psion]

I voted "as powerful", but should add the caveat that I am tolerant of PrCs that:

- Shore up weak concepts. A common complaint is that some classes would give a sorcerer no reason to stay single classed. That's okay, because the sorcerer is weak AFAIAC.
- Play into a campaign concept I am interested in. I am not above bribery to bolster the shared vision of the world.

Blatant over-powered-ness, I'll boot to the curb, though. I like to keep as many options as possible on the table, and overpowered classes diminish that.


I strongly prefer prestige classes as a method of realizing specialized concepts over creating new core class. AFAIAC, core classes should be flexible in nature. PrCs are all about the schtick.

 

[Simm]

Presige classes should be more powerful than basic classes. They are harder to get into and you can't start in one. I didn't sit in wizard for 13 levels to take archmage if it's no better than wizard.

 

[Glyfair]

Presige classes should be more powerful than basic classes.

I generally agree. I don't feel they should be much more powerful, just enough to compensate for requirements to get there.

One thing I'd change with them, though, is reducing the requirements to get into them. There should be requirements that the character fits the flavor of the class. However, right now there is too much planning required with most of them. Players often have to plan to go into a prestige class from 1st level in order to make it at a reasonable time.

 

[Nifft]

PrCs are inherently more powerful than base classes, and they must remain so. Why? Two reasons:

1/ PrCs are more specialized than base classes; and

2/ Specialization wins D&D.


Better specialization is more power, at the cost of flexibility.

But flexibility is defensive or ablative rather than offensive. For example, if your sword were sundered, it's great that you could use your mace proficiently -- but if you've put all your feats and class levels into being a swordsmaster, we should look at your damage output when you are wielding a sword. The mace-wielding condition is incidental, and you will do whatever you can to reduce its occurrence.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Crothian]

One thing I'd change with them, though, is reducing the requirements to get into them. There should be requirements that the character fits the flavor of the class. However, right now there is too much planning required with most of them.

Then they are too easy to get into and it becomes a no brainer. I like that there are costs. And as was learned in 2e people can not be trusted with anything but mechanical requirements.

 

[Glyfair]

Then they are too easy to get into and it becomes a no brainer. I like that there are costs. And as was learned in 2e people can not be trusted with anything but mechanical requirements.

I realize it would be a tough balance. I'm not sure of an exact solution, but the planning requirement is a major downside to prestige classes. I think one option would be to have more choices for entering a class with options given (either this feat, or that feat with this many ranks of this skill).

Another option would be to get rid of their steadfast avoidance of strict level requirements to get rid of some of the "hurdle" requirements. Just say that the Extreme Wizard class cannot be taken before level 7, instead of throwing in a semi-arbitrary requirement of 9 ranks in Spellcraft. Keep some of these that make sense, but get rid of the ones just there to keep a character level limit.

Of course, the "people cannot be trusted" is a completely different issue that an entire thread could be on. I can handle the options in my game. I really have no control over other games where these get out of hand, and really am not that concerned.

 

[Crothian]

I realize it would be a tough balance. I'm not sure of an exact solution, but the planning requirement is a major downside to prestige classes. I think one option would be to have more options for entering a class with options given.

Do you mean like to qualify for a class a character would need 4 of the following 7 options or something like that? So, requirements would still be there but a little more flexiable?

Of course, the "people cannot be trusted" is a completely different issue that an entire thread could be on. I can handle the options in my game. I really have no control over other games where these get out of hand, and really am not that concerned.

However, if we want the change to occur in the books we have to be concerned with how the D&D players in general will react and use them. As much as I wish it were so, Wizards just doesn't write books based on target audience me!!

 

[Glyfair]

Do you mean like to qualify for a class a character would need 4 of the following 7 options or something like that? So, requirements would still be there but a little more flexiable?

Yes (I edited my post to be more clear).

However, if we want the change to occur in the books we have to be concerned with how the D&D players in general will react and use them. As much as I wish it were so, Wizards just doesn't write books based on target audience me!!

That's true. At the same time, I think too many D&D players (especially on forums) are concerned with how other people play the game. If you want to use rules that would decimate my game, why should I care if I don't play with your group? The only time I'm concerned with that sort of thing is when it's done in public, reflecting on others opinion of my pasttime.

 

[Nellisir]

Prestige classes should just go away. It's a tremendous waste of game designer effort. A base class with a simple qualifier (i.e. a ROLE-PLAYING reason instead of a munchkin reason) would be so much more useful game content.

I disagree. I'd like to see D&D move towards a Warhammer/d20 Modern system, where the base classes cap at level 10 and naturally lead into a prestige class or classes.

 

[the Jester]

Prestige classes should just go away. It's a tremendous waste of game designer effort. A base class with a simple qualifier (i.e. a ROLE-PLAYING reason instead of a munchkin reason) would be so much more useful game content.

I look at the HUGE WASTE OF SPACE that is prestige classes that 99..999999% of the time are useless to most DM's, campaigns, and players.

Guess I'm a one-in-a-billion dm running a one-in-a-billion campaign with about a dozen one-in-a-billion players- wow, that really boosts my ego!

In all seriousness, imho the way to judge whether a prc is 'balanced' is to figure out what the optimal entry path is and then compare a character with ten levels of the prc against a character following the optimal entry path 10 levels longer than required to enter the prc (i.e. fighter 6/cavalier 10 vs. fighter 16).

The first level in a prc should give you something roughly equal to the 6th (or whatever) level of that base class.