Here Come The PRESTIGE CLASSES! Plus Rune Magic!

Mike Mearls' latest Unearthed Arcana column presents the first ever 5E prestige class: the Rune Scribe! "Prestige classes build on the game’s broad range of basic options to represent specialized options and unique training. The first of those specialized options for fifth edition D&D is the rune scribe—a character who masters ancient sigils that embody the fundamental magic of creation."

It's a 5-level class, and also contains the basic information on how prestige classes work and how to join them - including ability, skill, level, and task-based prerequisites. Find it here.

 

[Greg K]

I was really hoping that prestige classes would take the form of feats in this edition.

As much as I am not fond of prestige classes, feats are optional. DMs that might not allow feats might choose to allow PrCs.

 

[CapnZapp]

You may want to read it more carefully, then. It specifically states that if you're adding it onto another spellcasting class, that you continue the spell progression. They give the example that a wizard 6/rune scribe 4 would have the spell slots of a 10th level wizard but the spellbook of a 6th level wizard. Now think about it. The highest spell you can cast is limited only by having an available spell slot and knowing the spell. That Wiz 6/Rune 4 has 5th level spell slots, and can still cast 5th level spells if he knows any. He can still scribe 5th level spells into his spellbook. He's just not getting the two free spells per level up that a wizard does. Similarly, a cleric can still pray for 5th level spells if she has 5th level slots. In 5th edition, it doesn't matter where your spellcasting slots came from. Even a Wiz 10/Cleric 1 can cast 5th level divine spells since there's nowhere in the class description limiting the level of spell you can know.

No, he gets the spell slots but he cannot learn the spells.

Except it doesn't. As I just explained in my previous post, your ability to learn a spell is limited only by the spell slots you have available to you. Not your class level.

Copying a Spell into the Book. When you find a wizard spell of 1st level or higher, you can add it to your spellbook if it is of a level for which you have spell slots and if you can spare the time to decipher and copy it.

Which means that you can cast a 5th level spell if you have 5th level slots and have it in your spellbook (or pray for it, etc.) But a wizard doesn't get 'free' spells when he gains rune scribe levels.

That would be quite broken. Your interpretation makes Wizards (and Wizards alone) immune to the cost of spellcaster multiclassing.

What you do at your home game is up to you, but I need your position to be contested before somebody thinks that is the way the game was intended to be played.

But more importantly here and now: [MENTION=56710]Zaran[/MENTION], you can drop the argument, since Xavian seems to insist on playing a different game than the rest of us.

 

[CapnZapp]

The problem with prestige classes, and the reason it isn't something that those of us who don't want to use can just ignore, is thus:

1) Prestige classes lock features into a new category. A feature placed into a prestige class is a feature unavailable to those who aren't using them.
2) Prestige classes lock concepts in a new category. Let's say some of us are looking forward to a sha'ir subclass. Except, they decide to make sha'ir a prestige class instead. Now we either have to use prestige class or miss out on the official sha'ir option.
3) Prestige classes confuse categories. Take the sha'ir example. Who knows where it will come out if prestige classes are in the game? And we get the joy of having to be concerned about where new stuff comes out for every subclass we may want (and this applies to people who like prestige classes too!) Can you imagine the tweets to Mike and Jeremy? "I'm looking forward to sha'ir, but PLEASE don't make it a prestige class!" or "I really want sha'ir to be a prestige class so my cleric can take it!" There isn't much argument about whether something should be a feat or a subclass--they are generally pretty obvious. Prestige class vs. subclass is a can of slime covered fiendish rune-worms waiting to happen.

Because of this, prestige classes alter the game for everyone, even those of use who choose not to use them in our games. Unlike multiclassing, they affect all of us, because they change the way future design happens. I don't like prestige classes, but more important than that, I don't like the way they change everyone's game, regardless of whether they choose to use them.

Congrats for that theoretical exercise.

But in reality, all of what you just said boils down to "I don't like options I don't like".

Newsflash: ALL additions to the game work this way. Thus, you may select one out of the following two options:

1) If WotC listens to me, I will never get anything at all.
2) My arguments are not specific to the changes I want to paint in a bad light, and are therefore irrelevant.

Have a nice day,
Zapp

 

[Guest 6801328]

Stein, kalt... So the ancient giants who named the runes spoke in German?

Or is it Old Norse?

My first reaction to "Stein" was "A drinking rune?"

 

[Mistwell]

Just because you choose to allow one prestige class does not mean you have to allow all prestige classes. You want a sha'ir and it's a prestige class and it fits your world? Allow it.

You don't want the Rune Master? Don't allow it.

You want a feat that is a simplistic mimic of the Rune Master? Make it. See Magic Initiate and Ritual whatever for a model.

An optional system does not change the options for those not using the optional system.

Congrats for that theoretical exercise.

But in reality, all of what you just said boils down to "I don't like options I don't like".

Newsflash: ALL additions to the game work this way. Thus, you may select one out of the following two options:

1) If WotC listens to me, I will never get anything at all.
2) My arguments are not specific to the changes I want to paint in a bad light, and are therefore irrelevant.

Have a nice day,
Zapp

I repeat, since you both ignored it earlier:

There are some reasonable objections to adding new types of options to the game (whatever those new options are) that I think challenge the notion of "A DM can always say no".

First, DMs have no choice in accepting new options for Adventurers League. A PC is either AL legal, or it is not. And then there are groups that are private but do round-table DMing (not that uncommon) such that one DM might be fine with an option but a later DM might not be fine with it and they can't really tell a player that the PC they've been playing in that same game can no longer be that PC.

Second, you never know how a new option will turn out in the long run. DMs are not game design experts. A new option might look fine for their campaign to begin with, but turn out to be terrible in practice after a while. It might interact fine with how things are at the beginning of a campaign, and then interact very poorly with future things that are published or developments in the campaign. And it's a lot harder to take an option back once someone's been using it. The more options there are, the greater the risk of this happening over time.

Third, some of the best arguments against a new option have repeatedly been made by Paizo for their new options. That being, when they release a new option, they feel compelled as game designers to support that new option in further material they are publishing. So even if it is optional, that means it because almost not-optional over time because it gets brought up in future publish materials such as adventures and splat books. The initial optional mechanic gets expanded in a future splat book, the optional ability gets put on a challenge to the party in an adventure, etc.. And the argument Paizo makes for doing this is pretty simple - they want to support what they've previously published and feel fans of those things deserve that support. Which means DMs who don't like that option either don't use that published material (which is decrease options for the DM) or has to remove that material from the new published material (which means a lot more work, and more unintended and unforeseen consequences from removing it).

In summary, any time a whole series of new types of new options are offered there are a lot of ramifications to it (sometimes unintended) that do in fact offer a significant challenge to the idea that "The DM can always say no to a new option". Sometimes they cannot (AL or round-table DM previously approved), sometimes they didn't realize they shouldn't have allowed it in (future unintended interactions), and sometimes not allowing it means eliminated future publications from their game (because those future publications expand on and use the option they denied) which reduces the choices the DM has.

You can add to that list the list of objections you guys were responding to that [MENTION=6677017]Sword of Spirit[/MENTION] mentioned, being that adding these options locks concepts and features into that new option, and confuses categories. These are all legitimate complaints about new options. Hand waiving these objections isn't really a good response in my opinion.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Try attacking someone with a sharpie pen drawing a particular pattern, you could only really pull that off in a fight through surprise or grappling. I personally think the laser pointer drawing pattern idea works better in execution and the concept.

It's not realistic, but it is Awesome, and that trumps realism most of the time in D&D.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The problem with prestige classes, and the reason it isn't something that those of us who don't want to use can just ignore, is thus:

1) Prestige classes lock features into a new category. A feature placed into a prestige class is a feature unavailable to those who aren't using them.

Lots of classes have similar or identical things going for them. Caster share tons of spells, for instance.

2) Prestige classes lock concepts in a new category. Let's say some of us are looking forward to a sha'ir subclass. Except, they decide to make sha'ir a prestige class instead. Now we either have to use prestige class or miss out on the official sha'ir option.

That is a very real danger, yes. A whole full class relegated to a PrC would be even deeper in the option ghetto than a merely optional one, and even if you could get at it, would allow for much less play of the concept, both because it'll narrower than the full class, and because you'd have to qualify before you even get to play it - the problem with a sub-class in lieu of a full class, only worse.

That would be a terrible abuse of the mechanic. It should be used for narrowly-defined concepts with a definite link to the world based on that 'deed' you must perform.

3) Prestige classes confuse categories.

5e has categories?

Because of this, prestige classes alter the game for everyone, even those of use who choose not to use them in our games. Unlike multiclassing, they affect all of us, because they change the way future design happens. I don't like prestige classes, but more important than that, I don't like the way they change everyone's game, regardless of whether they choose to use them.

But, if we're being reasonable: only if they're done badly or somehow abused (by 3pps or, very hypothetically, by a designer with an ax to grind). If they're used just to create very narrow campaign- or setting- specific mini-classes, they should only enhance the game, and have no impact on anyone not using them.

 

[Remathilis]

Personally, is not that I dislike the idea of prestige classes returning, but there are so many things I would rather they did first.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I'm not fond of the idea of Prestige Classes returning. I don't feel that the granularity provided is worth the added complexity of a new subsystem.

The Rune Master doesn't seem like a good candidate for a prestige class anyway. There's one core mechanic, the ability to use complex rune features, and four levels of cruft. The entire class would be better represented by a feat that grants a spellcaster the ability to use a rune's complex features, and a downtime activity for crafting new runes.

 

[77IM]

Sure currently there's no save to the fire one (which I assume is a mistake since all the other ones have saves), but I think the complex powers need to scale better for casters.

With a 1st-level slot, the fire one does the roughly the same expected damage as magic missile, which also has no save. The fire one scales a lot better than magic missile, possibly to balance against the fact that it is close-range.

(I agree with your sentiment, though, that the complex powers need to scale better in general.)