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.

 

[Mistwell]

the problem is that it can't take that into account... or else the only answer is nothing ever gets added unless it is 100% agreed to...

Only if we live in a bizzaro world where only absolutes can happen. What part of "some meaning" or "take that into account" read as "the only meaning" or "the only thing you count" to you? It's just one factor of many. None of them are absolute. That's what it's called WEIGHING the costs and benefits.

 

[Saeviomagy]

For me this is a major reason to not like this implementation of PrCs. I've struggled with PrCs. I personally think legendary boons (magic item equivalent benefits without the physical item), in story benefits, feats and subclasses are preferable to anything I would want to model with a PrC which really leaves me scratching my head as to what they're good for.

There's a niche where you want to have a character progress along an optional story-related path that isn't covered by feats or subclasses, since subclasses are a one-off thing and feats are only every 4 levels. If a character finds a powerful item, there's a dearth of resources that I can charge them in order to give them a choice whether to master it or not.

My thoughts are things like reducing their highest stat by 2 (to effectively pre-purchase a feat), draining a spell slot (ie - it's always used) or some similar penalty that they can buy off.

I don't think that charging levels is the right way to go, after close thought. Mainly because the original classes have features that are relatively sparse, so a 5 level super-dense class like this is either too good or not good enough depending on whether you're a caster or not.

 

[Psikerlord#]

The ability score requirements cannot be in for balance. Those requirements dictate that your score must be higher than X. That means the requirement dictates that you must have a bonus, often at least a +1 bonus, and often in the primary stat the class uses. Meeting or exceeding the requirements makes you more effective at your second class than you would be if you didn't meet those requirements. Honestly, how much more powerful would be if you could take wizard levels with an 8 Int as compared to requiring a 13 Int?

Balance as in making them rarer, because not everyone can meet the requirements, as well as imposing an opportunity cost : maybe you could have put that 13 in cha, for a bit more social oomph, or into Con, for more HP. But if you want that prestige class, you have to pump Int to 13. That sort of balance.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

I've decided I like the idea... the flavor... and the mechanics.

But ultimately I would like to see something like this as a subclass of an Artificer/Alchemist class. Although as a test run for how prestige classes might work.... it isn't bad, but this looks a better fit for where I think they may end up with their Artificer/Alchemist why not simply make it part of that?

 

[JohnLynch]

feats are only every 4 levels.

Feats are at most 4 levels away. So if they got this at level 4, then sure, they have to wait four levels. But with a PrC they have to wait (however long it takes to find the person to train them) + (however long it takes to get the required mechanics). This could be 4 or 8 levels anyway. Because the chances of anyone except a wizard or rogue having the requirements isn't exactly high. This is where things like retraining rules can be a boon in which case this is better represented through a feat (if you want to minimise the amount of time between "I want this" and "I now have this").

 

[Arnwolf]

Nooooo. This could have easily been redone as an archetype. Oh well, to each his own. Enjoy those of you who like this stuff.

 

[MerricB]

I've been thinking about a few of the problems with Prestige classes - Runes and Things - and I'm really, really dubious about the concept in 5E. I'm not utterly opposed to it, because I don't like shutting down avenues of design. There are wonderful things that can appear if you allow them to...

...but also a lot of horrid, unbalanced drek. Hmm...

 

[Guest 6801328]

The Adventurer's League has this handled nicely. Each PC has a story origin that unlocks certain books for use. So there's less room for overlap. If they take a prestige class from Book A they can't take options from Book B or C.

This confused me. Are you extrapolating what WotC might do regarding prestige classes based on previous evidence? If not, what did I miss from official publications?

For all the people saying, "If you don't like it in your game don't use it. End of story." why can't we just turn that around and say that if you want it in your game, use a homebrew? You don't need anything to be official to use it in your own game. It's your table, right?

I only make that argument rhetorically because I acknowledge that there is something compelling and satisfying about using official rules, but for those of us who prefer fewer options subtracting from the rules (by telling players they can't use certain options) feels just as jerry-rigged as adding to them. So can we please stop making the "it's your table" argument, in either direction?

That said, it's definitely easier to both exclude and include "semi"-official material, like UA articles, or content that's tied explicitly tied to official settings. So I hope that all new options are presented in a way that makes it easy for DMs to say (for example) "We're not playing in the Eberron setting, so no those options aren't available."

 

[Xavian Starsider]

Sure ::roll-eyes:: 3.X era with thousands of feats and hundreds of PrC form official and unofficial source never happened...

Just because the buffet is all you can eat doesn't mean you have to try every dish.

When I DM'd 3.x, I had a list of allowed sources for my players to draw feats, equipment and prestige classes from. Anything not on the list, they had to clear with me. I never had a problem with my players.

Were you a DM? Yes, the thousands of feats and prestige classes were there, but most of us didn't choose to run a 'Anything goes! Your every character concept is pre-approved!' game.

If you understand that DMs are capable of talking to their players about what their game allows, then you should have no problem with people enjoying feats and prestige classes.

If on the other hand you ever chose to run one of these "Anything goes!" campaigns, then clearly you love prestige classes too much to complain about them.

In any case, you have no reason to roll eyes at someone for enjoying the mechanics.

 

[Chimpy]

I really like the idea of Prestige Classes or Paragon Paths. It gives the player something to aim for and gives variety at higher levels.