Do you as a DM limit the number of PrC in your games

[jarlaxlecq]

I noticed that whenever people start rattling off character builds that they usually include a half dozen PrC per build. While I have only limited experience as a DM when I have done it I find it better to not allow any PrC unless I ok it first. And I wouldn't allow it unless its appropriate to the campaign, setting. I find that so many PrC are imbalanced and prone to abuse that its simply better to be very selective with what’s allowed into my game. What you DMs say? How do combat PrC abuse, or does pretty much anything go?

 

[shilsen]

It hasn't come up as a issue for me, but I would in all probability restrict PCs to one PrC, unless one had taken as many levels as possible in the given PrC.

 

[mikebr99]

It's really all about character concept for me... if it takes a few class and PrCs to get the guy's concept, then that's fine with me.

Mike

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Definitely. There are too many unbalanced PrCs out there (over and underpowered), too many with massive flavor errors, and some don't fit in a campaign world.

I don't let characters take more than one PrC either (and the same restriction goes for NPCs) since PrCs are almost never "cross-playtested" (it would increase the playtesting cycle length by several years to do that properly, and that's talking about a single product here).

 

[Darklone]

I guess I would make a difference if I see that a guy is trying to build his character towards a multitude of prestige classes instead of developing him properly... But it hasn't come up yet.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

It depends: If it's only for power reason, I tend to be harsher, especially if we talkt about Prestige classes with the capital P (those who gain prestige and specialize in something). After all, if your character concept incorporated becoming both a master of assassination and dungeoneering, you needn't to specialize twice - you just go rogue.

Either you limit it to only 1 or you force him to max out the PrC before he takes the next one.

On the other hand, some PrC's are made to flavour the character rather than define him. That's especially the case with 5-level PrC's. I don't mind allowing a priest-character go for both divine disciple and hierophant (or an arcanist arcane devotee and archmage)

 

[Thanee]

PrC should generally be DM's permission, tho most of them are permissable IMHO.

In a recent game I have limited total classes per character (core and prestige) to three (pre epic).

Bye
Thanee

 

[ruleslawyer]

I think that limiting the number of PrCs a character can take is a rather arbitrary restriction that doesn't really deal with balance issues head on. Probably better is to just eyeball abusive combos and make the player work to justify the choice to take various PrCs.

Thing is, multiple classes and PrCs can be part of a perfectly reasonable build.Ftr x/rog y/duelist z/wiz 1/bladesinger a/dervish 2 is actually a coherent "elven sword dancer" build. It lacks the raw power of, say, a fighter 4/ranger 6/ dervish 10, and pales beside a Clr20, but it's a fun build to play. The cracked-out ur-priest/yakuza/contemplative/shiba defender/nar demonbinder builds one sees on the WotC Character Optimization boards aren't made for actual play, and players who try this sort of setting-mixing, inchoate, milk-every-drop-of-power abuse should be clearly disabused of the notion that these are reasonable characters to play.

 

[pogre]

PRCs are purely for campaign flavor, an added extra to give the setting depth. The DM should come to the table with available PRCs, not vice-versa. Naturally, players are free to suggest possible PRCs that might fill campaign roles, but there is very little adventuring-wise that cannot be covered with core base classes and feats.

Naturally, this is a very campaign specific/ game specific ruling. What works for me is draconian and arbitrary to others - but for me this is not in its nature a balance issue.