NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mike Sullivan" data-source="post: 992293" data-attributes="member: 9824">I don't know the Spellsword well, so I won't comment on its power level.  If it's over-weak, it should obviously be brought up-to-par.I will speak to the role of PrC's in general:  They are supposed to add a flavourful, interesting role to the game (ideally one which is codified in the game world), which can not be trivially reproduced through standard multiclassing.  If a PrC happens to overlap slightly with a multiclassing niche, that's supposed to be coincidence, and the PrC should occupy a narrower role.Thus, no, the Spellsword is not supposed to prop up a poor multiclass option.The EK is not a good PrC, because it is not designed to do the things that a PrC does.  Instead, it is supposed to serve as a systems patch for a failed multiclassing role.As such, the EK fails in its duty, the less generic and more flavourful that it gets.No, what I want is an effective Fighter/Wizard.  Not an "effective member of a particular order of martial magic users from the Southwest corner of D'ran who use the philosophical beliefs about their ancestor spirits as the cornerstone to their fighting style," a frikkin' effective Fighter/Wizard.  Period.  End of story.  Why is that so difficult for you to grasp?I acknowledge that some GM's, of course, feel that Fighter/Wizard shouldn't be an effective multiclass, but I'm not playing with them.  I'm playing in a game that sees no reason why it shouldn't be just as reasonable a choice, with tradeoffs and ups and downs, for a Fighter level 7 to take his next level as a Fighter, as a Rogue, or as a Wizard, or for a Rogue 2/Sorcerer 2 to take his next level as Fighter, Rogue, or Sorcerer."Normal" Prestige classes, with idiosyncratic style and flavor, may or may not have a place in my game, but they do NOT fill the role of patching multiclassing.  Multiclassing patches should be as generic as multiclassing, because that's what they're trying to replace.Now.  I actually would go with a different clunky, lame patch (a variant of the one that Will mentioned), rather than the Eldritch Knight/Mystic Theurge/Arcane Trickster patch that 3.5 presents, because for all that the "virtual spellcasting levels" are a clunky, lame patch, they're a more versatile one than the "generic PrC's patch."But none of that means that the generic PrC's "ought" to be regular PrC's.</blockquote>

Verification