Advice Needed Dump Prestige classes IMC yay or nay

[Ace]

My two bits is that PrC's should be used to enhance the campaign world, not provide kewl powerz. PrCs should be organization-based, and thus provide adventure hooks for the GM. For example, a player can't just trade in his XP for a level of Blackheart. He must first seek the organization and become accepted, through quests for the organization and whatnot.

If your players want different sorts of fighting styles, there's always GURPS.


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^

I wish I cold get them to play GURPS actually I know the sytem inside, outside and upside down but the players (at least one of them anyway) are combat monkeys and are afriad of the GURPS combat systems lethality

 

[Ace]

the problem with eliminating PrCs and replacing their abilities with feats is 2 fold:

1) A character doesn't get enough feats to make things work that well (you've partially addressed this by giving more feats, but...)

2) Many PrC class abilities are much more powerful than feats.
Most feats are pretty underpowered and boring, actually.
If you were to spice up the feat selection to include PrC abilities, than you might get the danger of having the players select the interesting PrC ability-feats and leave the core feats fairly untouched.

So there's 2 potential dangers:
--Too powerful of PC's since they've got more feats, and they've selected the cream of the crop of PrC-ability-feats (and they didn't sacrifice anything to get those PrC abilities).
--Too weak of PC's because you may have to water down the powerful PrC abilities too much, leaving them with only a couple more feats than a normal character, but they'd have to spend a LOT of feats to make something interesting and effective.

Really, I'd just deal with the beast and allow PrC's, carefully checked by you.
They won't probably be asked about for QUITE a while, if you start low level, and the players are new to 3E.

Those are good points, the funny thing is the player have been playing 3e since it came out!

They just don't "get" the system on some fundammental level

 

[ced1106]

I wish I cold get them to play GURPS actually I know the sytem inside, outside and upside down but the players (at least one of them anyway) are combat monkeys and are afriad of the GURPS combat systems lethality

rotfl -- "I share your pain."

Feh! Stick to the core classes. If said monkey's complain, smack 'em with a Compendium I (and add five levels to their adversary)!


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^

 

[Destil]

I'd say go ahead and ditch them. They can allways be mined for feats or special ability swaps.

 

[Endur]

I ran a 3e D&D campaign that didn't allow Prestige classes and we didn't encounter any "problems."

I still alllowed multi-classing and feats, so those people who thought a single class wasn't the answer could multi-class and belong to more than one class. Or they could select feats so that their fighter was totally different from the NPC Captain of the Guard.

Power level wasn't a concern.

Tom

 

[haiiro]

Many PrC class abilities are much more powerful than feats.
Most feats are pretty underpowered and boring, actually.
If you were to spice up the feat selection to include PrC abilities, than you might get the danger of having the players select the interesting PrC ability-feats and leave the core feats fairly untouched.

I agree with this 100%. PrCs are balanced behind the scenes by including RP and system requirements to gain access to their (often more powerful) class abilities. Removing these checks sounds like it would be highly problematic - much more so than simply allowing PrCs under controlled conditions.

Make it clear to your players that any PrCs they want to take are going to have to be OK'd by you beforehand - that way, no one will build a character around tracking into a certain PrC only to find out that it's not something you want in your game.

Since you know you are running a low magic game/world, I'd use a limited number of low magic PrCs to emphasize that flavor. Just my 2 cp.

 

[DDK]

I think feat chains are more than adequate to represent power increases. A feat is a feat is a feat, is simply not the case. Whirlwind Attack is to Dodge, what the Alamo was to Custer.

Oh, and I'm a GURPS fan too. As far as character creation goes, I think it rocks. But as a system for playing... ugh.

If you like GURPS, then I reckon you'll like the Theralis system. It's also geared towards low magic.

 

[s/LaSH]

I'm personally a fan of no prestige classes. At first it seemed cool, but the more I consider the marketplace the more I feel that core classes can do just about the same stuff. A little inventiveness is all that's needed.

Well... I do improvise quite a lot, actually, but it's character-specific stuff. I don't really think of it as PRCs because it's more fundamental than just training a PC up. I'd say more but I can't because it's all part of the comic I do and hold so very secret.

Snarl.

 

[Larry Fitz]

There is not a problem with saying "NoPrC's" as such. Players do not have some sort of inalienable right to have PrC's, however, they do have a use, in fact it's stated on page 27 of the DMG:

Prestige classes allow DMs to create campaign specific, exclusive roles and positions as classes. These special roles offer abilities and powers otherwise inaccessible to PCs and focus them in specific, interesting directions.

PrC's are not supposed to make super characters nor excel a character beyond the core classes in the core class' own niche. That is my opinion, not D&D canon. The idea is to use PrC's to make your world come alive for the PC's, not to allow them as some sort of freakish experiment in munchkin mathematics. If a player asks if the can be a Deepwoods Sniper/Undead Stalker/Dwarf Hunter whatever, ask yourself if such a thing has a place in your game world, or if you want it to. I will not allow characters to have PrC's that don't fit in my world just because they give characters some cheatarrific new ability. Don't look to have a character who can do critical damage to constructs or undead in my campaign, or be able to hit everyone in a 60 foot radius with an arrow while not provoking AoO's from the eight guys who have you surrounded. Not because I'm against PC's doing "cool stuff" but I'm against abilities that manipulate the mechanics of the game without any consideration for realism. My most basic rule zero is, "If it seems patently absurd, then it is." In summation, PrC's are for you to enrich your game world, and share that enrichment with PC's, not to just add nifty number cruncjing abilities to characters. If a PrC fits your world and players want to play it, go for it. Just don't feel you need to use them. They are optional.