Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Spatzimaus" data-source="post: 2787628" data-attributes="member: 3051">I hear this one come up a lot, and I'd never consider using it.  It's just the exact same rant against multiclassing that started this thread, with only a cosmetic change.If every PrC corresponded to a restrictive organization, then maybe I'd consider this sort of limit, but most don't.  There are many 3- or 5-level PrCs that are intended to flesh out some aspect of a class at the cost of others.  Druid classes that improve the wildshaping at the cost of spellcasting, or Barbarian PrCs that improve the Rage, or countless Wizard PrCs that force you to sacrifice the bonus feats.  In these cases, it makes perfect sense that you'd mix and match, in the same way you can mix most core classes.  Forcing someone to take all 10 levels of a PrC is just the same as forcing them to take 20 levels of a core class; sure, it solves some balance headaches, but it makes things far more boring.For instance, IMC my Psion took part of a 5-level PrC that improved his ability to make items with his magic (not just enchantment, I mean getting better effects out of spells like Fabricate) at the cost of raw spellcasting power.  Very specialized, and not something you'd even want to force someone to take all five levels of, since it's a net decrease in power.  Then, there's always the question of what do you do if you actually COMPLETE a PrC?  If I entered a PrC at level 7-8, and took 10 levels of it, what do you do for those last couple levels?  Go back to a core class?  A second PrC would make more sense in many cases, as long as it didn't drastically change the "theme" of the character.Now, the real complaint seems to be people who stack up one or two levels of front-loaded PrCs in the same way you can with core classes; since PrCs can't cause a multiclass XP penalty, it's not like there's much of a downside.  But as I've said in other threads, the real problems with PrCs boil down to two things:1> Many PrCs are front-loaded.  Keep things this way, and you'll end up with the same sort of situation you see with the non-caster core classes.  (The better PrCs give mostly level-scaling abilities, with the first "big" ability coming at level 5 or so.)2> Most just don't have any downside as you go along, instead opting for a hefty entrance requirement.  The fallacy here is that with tons of splatbooks available, you can ALWAYS find a PrC whose requirements include things you've already taken.  At that point, you're looking at a pure gain.  (For example, it's not too hard to be a Shadowdancer, Assassin, Horizon Walker, etc., since their requirements are things many people take anyway.)IMO, the simplest solution is that PrCs should never just be accepted as-is; the DM should evaluate each before the player can take it.  Does it give the character too much power?  Does it conflict with the politics/mythology/geography established for his world?  Would it force the campaign to follow a certain path, something the other players might not want?  And most importantly, does it fit the established theme of the character (or is he just taking it for a cool class ability)?  So, when a player IMC wants a PrC, he shows it to the DM at least a couple levels in advance, and between them, they tweak it into something both are happy with.  It's worked beautifully, and many characters end up mixing two or three PrCs into a distinct character concept.</blockquote>

Verification