Are prestige classes still viable?

[ruemere]

[...]

[on PFRPG prestige classes] Not intended to denigrate what is in the Pathfinder core rules now, just sharing my thoughts.[...]

My players are not very fond of prestige classes included in PFRPG. The classes either fail to excite (Theurge, Eldritch Knight), appear to be subpar (Duelist, Chronicler) or do not contain fixes to old problems (Shadowdancer's limited teleport/summon shadow).
I have used Assassin to scare beejesus the party, but that's the limit of my interest, though.

Disclaimer: To me, classes are building blocks, to be mixed and dipped instead of binding agreements, just like they are presented in d20 Modern. YMMV.

Regards,
Ruemere

 

[gamerprinter]

Disclaimer: To me, classes are building blocks, to be mixed and dipped instead of binding agreements, just like they are presented in d20 Modern. YMMV.

Regards,
Ruemere

Yeah, to me this is one of the big things wrong with D20/3e - I've always preferred base classes only, and rarely got involved with Prestige Classes, the few times I did, I usually ended up disappointed. Besides, class dipping is just wrong.

GP

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Well, maybe my gaming group is unusual, but most of my players don't have any books besides the PHB. So, what happens is that they're asking me to recommend (prestige) classes that might be interesting for their characters.

I'd say your group is very unusual indeed.

Only one of my players builds his character from level 1 to 20 before starting to play. And, as it happens, those characters tend to be the most problematic in play. Because, as often as not, his character concepts aren't really playable until the high levels.

You don't need to plain 1-20 though.

Archmage requires two skills you already have, and what, two feats? And of those two feats, you probably already grab one of them, on top of that. All you do is mention to your player to grab that second feat and they're golden.

If you're going to continue the "I am the ultimate source of all PrCs, ahahahaha!" thing, might I recommend you ask your players in advance what kind of character they want to build, and HELP guide them to their PrC? As it sounds, right now, you're letting them just wander aimlessly through their feats and skills, and then when they ask for help on a PrC, you just go "Hah hah too bad you screwed yourself!"

 

[sjmiller]

Well, maybe my gaming group is unusual, but most of my players don't have any books besides the PHB. So, what happens is that they're asking me to recommend (prestige) classes that might be interesting for their characters.

I'd say your group is very unusual indeed.

My group is very similar to Jhaelen's. I think the only player who has more then the PH is the one who runs another D&D game. Of course, a large portion of my group is also of the firm belief, that I cannot seem to change, that multi-classing at all is evil and wrong and should never be done. They say that you only get hosed when you multi-class.

 

[Runestar]

Besides, class dipping is just wrong.

In what sense?

I certainly don't see how being a barb2/fighter2/warblade2 (using fractional save rules if need be) makes me any less of a fighter than a fighter6.

In addition, if aggressive multiclassing would allow you to better represent your character's backstory, then shouldn't it be all the more encouraged, rather than condemned?

 

[gamerprinter]

Your example is wrong

The example you give "barb2/fighter2/warblade2" is multi-class and not class dipping. Class dipping is being primarily a spell-caster, but taking one level as fighter to gain access to fighter feats and better BAB, or taking one level as a Paladin to get access to Smite and Channel powers. Getting access to one or two unique feats and special powers then going back to your primary class or multi-class progression - that's class level dipping.

Multi-classing is perfectly fine, if that's the path you want to choose. I'm not against multi-classing. It just takes longer with Pathfinder by XP to get to high levels especially multiclassing to more than two classes. Still nothing wrong with that.

Don't confuse multi-classing with class dipping - two separate concepts altogether.

GP

 

[Scott DeWar]

Glad to hear that you are making changes in the next book. My request is that you do not just rehash a bunch of existing Monk PrC choices. I have never found any of them appealing and I am hoping for some new ideas.

I chip in my vote on this too! I love the monk, but sometimes a monk scorcer prc is kida what I am feeling

 

[Maidhc O Casain]

I chip in my vote on this too! I love the monk, but sometimes a monk scorcer prc is kida what I am feeling

I'm currently playing a Monk/Sorcerer (Aasimar Celestial Bloodline) - he's pretty dang cool, but only level three so he's got a ways to go (I hope).

 

[Scott DeWar]

I have a monk scorcerer that was staaarted before pathfinder beta and converted. he was started in the tradional 3.5 draconic line with an oriental element bend ( five elements of metel,fire, earth, water and wood) on the game. as he has become pathfinderized i kept hem as a draconic heritage. he is now level 7 and i have been searching for possible Prc for him. Enlightened soul came close, but still not the feel I am looking for.

 

[ruemere]

[...]class dipping is just wrong.

GP

My apologies for not being clear: in my opinion class dipping is fine.
I hail from the crowd of people who prefer to build characters around certain ideas, concepts, stories - dipping (not necessarily minmaxing) is about assembling building blocks of your character.

Of course, this comes from a guy who played an immortal wimp in GURPS and a paladin of similar alignment to Vlad Tepes in AD&D, so YMMV.

Regards,
Ruemere