Which prestige classes do you use?

[Friendless]

I'm a DM new to 3.5e, so prestige classes are sort of new to me. I first encountered them in Neverwinter Nights where my Arcane Archer rocked... but nevertheless I don't see the need for so many. It seems every source book has 3 or more prestige classes, most of which just seem totally unusable. Horizon Walker? Shadowdancer? Do people really use these things?

OMG I just looked at Wikipedia's list of prestige classes. There must be more prestige classes than PCs!

Anyway, what I should ask is (a) which ones do you actually use, (b) are there any you disallow, and (c) do you consider new prestige classes to be valuable content in a new source book?

 

[mhacdebhandia]

My last count of prestige classes, back in March, came to 524. I think the latest book included in that list was Complete Scoundrel.

I like prestige classes. I don't expect to like every one I encounter, or even the majority of them, though, because what I want from the game isn't what other DMs and players want from the game. They're like new monsters, in that regard.

I've only used a few in my career as a player - most notably, the Far Realms-connected, Lovecraftian alienist from Tome and Blood (originally) and Complete Arcane (after the revision).

I'll be encouraging the players in my Savage Tide game set in Eberron to consider prestige classes, though, because I think doing so could help them flesh out their interesting character concepts better than sticking to a single class, or multiclassing, could do.

I'm a strong proponent of the idea that the rules of the game should provide a meaningful way to represent your character concept, though, which is why I'm so fond of prestige classes - and base classes, feats, templates, et cetera.

 

[Blackrat]

My opinion is that the only ones worth using are the few in DMG. But as a DM I tend to allow allmost every PRC in the WotC-books. There are offcource few exceptions I have made to this rule when a player has found some obscure combination that makes them invinsible... Then again they have never really even intended playing such characters, just pointed out that it would be broken.

 

[Psion]

Anyway, what I should ask is (a) which ones do you actually use,

a) Whatever is convenient and interesting for the story at hand.

(b) are there any you disallow, and

b) Radiant Munchkin servant of Pelor is one that comes immediately to mind, but there are others, based on concept, balance, or suitability to the campaign many others. Thayan Knight, Mindbender, Dragon Disciple, Spirituel, Ur-priest, Exotic Weapon Master, Holy Liberator, Suel Arcanamach, Rage Mage, Ronin, Metamind, Kensai, Frenzied Berserker, and Forsaker are few I have specifically called out.

(c) do you consider new prestige classes to be valuable content in a new source book?

c) I did, but I'm sort of feeling "topped off" for the moment. Not so much interested in new PrCs unless it captures some new content... and there are few stones left unturned that I can see.

 

[Aus_Snow]

(a) which ones do you actually use

I've mostly used them as DM, and hardly at all as a player. Hm. . .

Anyway, the ones that leap out, of those that I can recall right this moment (some of which were house-ruled, btw):

Fleshwarper, Noctumancer, True Necromancer, Initiate of the Seven Veils, Divine Oracle, Dream Keeper, Mirror Master, Loremaster, Pious Templar.

(b) are there any you disallow

Yes. It's more a case of "which ones do I allow?", because it's a case-by-case kinda thing with me as DM, always. I do however have a list around somewhere, for the players' convenience. It's not a very long list. . .

(c) do you consider new prestige classes to be valuable content in a new source book?

Sometimes. If they are useful for a campaign, or if they even spark some interest, then yes. Otherwise, not really. Same as any other 'crunch', as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Firedancer]

There are a lot of prestige classes. Too many. Some are cool, unique or specific to a campaign setting.

Some I don't see the need for; like the need to pander to anyone interested in advancing as a monk-cleric having a prestige class rather than multiclassing. The need to incorporate the popular warlock with a warlock-wizard, warlock-cleric is annoying and a waste, IMO.

I do like prestige classes; as long as they add something (flavour, story elements, unique role). If a new sourcebook is covering a new aspect of a gaming world, then yes, prestige classes are valuable.

I don't have a banned list but I don't allow my players single level dips. In fact my players only select prestige classes that advance some aspect of their character rather than finding the most uber-PrC they can.

I have heard frenzied beserker is to be avoided as they don't die from HP loss, only massive damage or death effects (once frenzied). You could house rule something to alter this if you wanted.

The sensible approach is to discuss why a player wants a PrC, see if the reasons are fair and reasonable and of course reserve the right to tweak is it proves too good.

 

[robberbaron]

As DM - none.
I decided at the beginning of my 3.5 campaign that I was not going to allow them. I had basically moved the world from my 1e campaign forward in time and wanted to keep the same feel (as far as possible). PrCs didn't fit that.
Also, I knew that some of the players would hunt through twinkbooks for something they liked and would bitch and moan if I didn't let them play it. Nipped problem in bud.

As a player - I have used Dragon Disciple.
I like the look of several PrCs but most of them remind me of the 'new classes' we used to get in White Dwarf - every month there would be a class that had fewer weaknesses and more strengths than the last and they were mostly rubbish.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Anyway, what I should ask is (a) which ones do you actually use, (b) are there any you disallow, and (c) do you consider new prestige classes to be valuable content in a new source book?

The ones I have used as a player:
Bladesinger (The Tome and Blood Web Enhancement version)
Divine Champion
Hierophant
Divine Disciple
Dreadmaster of Bane
Deepwood Sniper
Assassin
Blackguard
Elocater
Spellsinger
Magelord
Arcane Trickster

Probably a few that I forgot.

The ones I used for NPCs when I was DM are probably too numerous to describe. I often use an NPC with a PrC I'd like to try out.


There are only very few PrC's I'd ban as a DM. The forsaker is something I'd definetly not allow, and things like Frenzied Berserker would only get green light if I thought the player could handle it (and the party could handle the player).


PrCs can be valuable content, but it is not a given. If the mechanics are sound and interesting (I have to see myself giving up the higher-level benefits of my base class for this PrC. Of course that's easier with some classes than with others), they offer something new, and/or flesh out the campaign world they're made for nicely, then I consider them valuable content.

But if it's just filler, like "this is basically the assassin, but usable for good characters", I'd rather have something else (the above example doesn't need a whole page. One sentence is enough)

 

[theemrys]

Personally I find it usually better to stick to the base classes from the PHB, but I've considered come. In my current game, a player is using the Master Specialist PrC from Complete Mage.

Personally I like the concept of PrCs, but figure they're best used to further a concept that you can't do with a base class. If you want to be a REALLy good summoner, the find a PrC that supports that... if you're wanting to become a druid specializing in your shape changing power.. then warshaper for you...

In the end, as a DM I entertain the idea of most, but rarely find players who go down that path.

 

[TwoSix]

My last count of prestige classes, back in March, came to 524. I think the latest book included in that list was Complete Scoundrel.

The Prestige Class Index on the WotC site lists 782 PrCs, although there's probably a fair amount of duplication between the 3.0 books and the 3.5.