Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Anything wrong with allowing a PrC at lower levels?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Spatzimaus" data-source="post: 3352890" data-attributes="member: 3051"><p>Right, what he said.</p><p></p><p>Many PrCs are "overpowered" during their 5 or 10 levels, being absolutely better than the class they build off of, but this is compensated for by increased requirements (which usually end up requiring 5 or 6 levels to acquire). <strong>I hate these classes.</strong> For one thing, you can often acquire several of them, since prerequisites often overlap. (Once, I made an NPC opponent who mixed ShadowDancer, Blackguard, and Assassin.) But also, it means that you're making a weak character for several levels in exchange for big power later on, while I prefer a more smooth progression.</p><p></p><p>But the other type of PrC, the one I vastly prefer, is one which has some sort of ongoing cost. Usually, this is by dropping or reducing some progressive part of the core class (spellcasting, familiar/companion/mount progression, skill points, hit points) in exchange for something of comparable value.</p><p>The Horizon Walker is one of my favorites of these; yes, it requires 8 ranks of a Knowledge skill, but that could be reduced easily without breaking the class; it really only serves to limit the class to Rangers and Bards. Its benefits are pretty much equal to what a Ranger would give up to take the class; the -2 skill points per level are balanced by the skill boosts most terrains give, the loss of Favored Enemy is balanced by the attack bonuses some terrains give, and the loss of spellcasting is nicely balanced by the innate abilities some terrains give. It all works nicely.</p><p>These PrCs are not <em>better</em> than the core class, just <em>different</em>. For this sort of class, having very weak requirements is just fine; you're effectively creating an alternate core subclass that's well-balanced with the existing material.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Spatzimaus, post: 3352890, member: 3051"] Right, what he said. Many PrCs are "overpowered" during their 5 or 10 levels, being absolutely better than the class they build off of, but this is compensated for by increased requirements (which usually end up requiring 5 or 6 levels to acquire). [b]I hate these classes.[/b] For one thing, you can often acquire several of them, since prerequisites often overlap. (Once, I made an NPC opponent who mixed ShadowDancer, Blackguard, and Assassin.) But also, it means that you're making a weak character for several levels in exchange for big power later on, while I prefer a more smooth progression. But the other type of PrC, the one I vastly prefer, is one which has some sort of ongoing cost. Usually, this is by dropping or reducing some progressive part of the core class (spellcasting, familiar/companion/mount progression, skill points, hit points) in exchange for something of comparable value. The Horizon Walker is one of my favorites of these; yes, it requires 8 ranks of a Knowledge skill, but that could be reduced easily without breaking the class; it really only serves to limit the class to Rangers and Bards. Its benefits are pretty much equal to what a Ranger would give up to take the class; the -2 skill points per level are balanced by the skill boosts most terrains give, the loss of Favored Enemy is balanced by the attack bonuses some terrains give, and the loss of spellcasting is nicely balanced by the innate abilities some terrains give. It all works nicely. These PrCs are not [i]better[/i] than the core class, just [i]different[/i]. For this sort of class, having very weak requirements is just fine; you're effectively creating an alternate core subclass that's well-balanced with the existing material. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Anything wrong with allowing a PrC at lower levels?
Top