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.

 

[Li Shenron]

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?

It's first and foremost a matter of access rights, in the sense of the question: "should this archetype be accessible to only one class or more?".

In the case of this Runecaster, it's more than clear that they wanted it to be not a specialized Wizard, but instead something separate from each class' own source of spellcasting power. Actually, they wanted it to be even separate from having spellcasting powers in the first place! They just decided that everybody should be able to learn how to use runes, and that's why it is not a subclass.

It could have of course been a feats chain too.

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...

I totally agree with your fear that Prestige Classes are very hard to design, in fact I was about to post the same here yesterday, then decided to just give it more thoughts...

Let's compare the design challenges of feat chains VS subclasses VS prestige classes, assuming you want to implement basically the same thing (i.e. a few consecutive special abilities):

1) Feat chains: you can always choose to specify a minimum character level requirement for a feat if you want, so you can design those abilities freely as you wish, and then just ask yourself "what should be the minimum level of ability X and Y", then slap such level to the feat as a requirement.

The only downside is that some classes might get feats at a significantly higher level than required: e.g. you design a feat with 5th-level requirement, then maybe some classes get a feat at 4th level (too early) and the next at 9th, so they have to wait 4 more levels. But it's not a huge downside.

2) Subclasses: the levels are fixed, so you rather first take a look at what those levels are, and then design/tweak the special abilities to match the level.

No downside other the fact that you are not completely free, and some classes have remarkably few subclass levels with a huge gap.

3) Prestige classes: you can set a requirement for the first level, then the following levels are consecutive. So you have to design all special abilities to be appropriate for the level range. You can shift everything up or down in level, but that's it. If you decide that 6th level is where the Prestige Class starts, and you have 5 levels worth of special abilities, all of them must be appropriate for levels 6th-10th.

The downside is that you are even more restricted in terms of design, and furthermore the whole class might even end up significantly less attractive if you take it later than as-soon-as-possible, if the special abilities don't scale up well. [One unprecedented design possibility would be to have each level of the prestige class to have its own requirement, also in terms of minimum level].

Furthermore, you are at least required to decide the HD of this class (tho at least compared to 3e you don't have to decide BAB, ST, skill points etc.) which is extra work beyond the point of those special abilities, which are really the purpose of the prestige class. The Runecaster is already an example of this small additional problem, with its d8 HD being clearly a compromise value which tries not to let non-Wizards lose too much. If the Runecaster was a feat chain or a subclass, there would be no such problem.

 

[Li Shenron]

By the way, [MENTION=3586]MerricB[/MENTION] excellent article as usual

It made me think that really there is ONE simple idea that can help against multiple problems at once... just design only HIGH-LEVEL prestige classes.

Just think of it, if we only had 5-levels prestige classes requiring minimum character level 15th, then:

- you could design very high-level special abilities associated to each prestige class (instead of low-level abilities which cost you giving up higher-level abilities later)
- you would know a lot more exactly at which character level a PC would enter the prestige class and earn those special abilities
- it would be much less likely to see players build crazy combos, because there just isn't level space for too many prestige classes per PC
- prestige classes would actually feel 'prestigious'

This Runecaster archetype probably is not a good example of something that should be a prestige class, because its features aren't particularly high-level after all. They aren't even much of a progression if you look closely, they mostly just develop 'horizontally', granting you more runes. It would be so much better to implement this Runecaster as a feat that can be taken multiple times.

 

[Minigiant]

By the way, @MerricB excellent article as usual

It made me think that really there is ONE simple idea that can help against multiple problems at once... just design only HIGH-LEVEL prestige classes.

Just think of it, if we only had 5-levels prestige classes requiring minimum character level 15th, then:

- you could design very high-level special abilities associated to each prestige class (instead of low-level abilities which cost you giving up higher-level abilities later)
- you would know a lot more exactly at which character level a PC would enter the prestige class and earn those special abilities
- it would be much less likely to see players build crazy combos, because there just isn't level space for too many prestige classes per PC
- prestige classes would actually feel 'prestigious'

This Runecaster archetype probably is not a good example of something that should be a prestige class, because its features aren't particularly high-level after all. They aren't even much of a progression if you look closely, they mostly just develop 'horizontally', granting you more runes. It would be so much better to implement this Runecaster as a feat that can be taken multiple times.

Or even better.

Prestige Class: Levels 6-10. Gives you so-so power features with the assumption of the PC having Extra attack or access to 3rd level spells.

Rune Scribe uses Flame Stoker rune to reroll fire damage.

Paragon Path: Levels: 11-16. Gives warriors a multi attack or attack buff. Gives mages an ability equal to 6th level spells.

Feytouched uses Will of the Fey to cast eyebite once per short rest.

Epic Destiny: Levels 17-20. Gives warriors a multi attack or attack buff. Gives mages an ability equal to 8th level spells.

Archmage can use Epic Arcana to cast any 8th level spell in their spellbook using a 9th level spell slot.

 

[MerricB]

By the way, [MENTION=3586]MerricB[/MENTION] excellent article as usual

Thank you very much. Always amazes me that people occasionally like my writing.

It made me think that really there is ONE simple idea that can help against multiple problems at once... just design only HIGH-LEVEL prestige classes.

I was very fond of the Fochluchan Lyrist, which required ten levels of other classes before you could enter it. We actually had one in one of my long-running 3.5E games; reached about 15th-16th level by the end. Great character, although paled a lot to some of the other PCs. Thankfully, was run by a role-player who got a lot of face time.

I like the idea of capstone classes. I wonder if you'd consider the old Thief-Acrobat one as well... once you entered, you never left!

Cheers!

 

[delericho]

Nice for Runes, bleh to prestige classes.

This.

If there's one thing 5e doesn't need from the 3e days, it's Prestige Classes. Especially if WotC are going to stick with their release-light schedule, and so don't need a handy way to fill up page count with lots of options nobody will use.

 

[Evenglare]

Whats that I hear? I ... I think it's coming from the SCAG and prestige classes... Shhh.... listen... hear that small scampering? I think it's the sound of power creep beginning...

disclaimer that I do not necessarily think these things being shown off are ACTUALLY more powerful than current 5e stuff.... but it certainly has heralded in the creep.

 

[MerricB]

I've just added a couple of paragraphs to my article, pointing out reasons for using Prestige Classes as a tool:

"However, there are reasons to use Prestige Classes. The primary one is because they can be entered by (potentially) any class. You could play a fighter/rune scribe. You could play a wizard/rune scribe. You could play a sorcerer/rune scribe. Paths are unique to individual classes; to open up these concepts, the prestige class is one way of doing it.

"Why not implement the Rune Scribe using feats? That's a very good question; indeed, with the greater power of feats in 5E, it would be a consideration, especially if you put a level restriction on taking the feat. The answer is probably down to the complexity of what the class wants to do. Feats can be powerful, but there is a limit to the complexity they can handle. Note that this implementation of the Rune Scribe uses spell slots to power its rune magic. How do you design a fighter/rune scribe using feats? It may not be so easy."

Cheers!

 

[dwayne]

As long as the saves and skills are not in the Prestige Classes and the abilities gained are slightly less than those from the primary classes I think they will be a good addition. I like the idea that any class can take them which is something I converted in a home brew for 3.5 for my players. The thing I did was take away everything but the requirements and the prerequisites and substituted the abilities for feats in 3.5, but in 5th that's not an option. Might be able to make them in to a path of some type and stretch it over the class, looks like it would be workable but would take a while to get the higher runes.

 

[Shasarak]

And the roots go back to AD&D training rules, if not even earlier.

That is probably the worst aspect of the new Prestige Classes. Still, just as easy to ignore as the training rules in ADnD were.

 

[Minigiant]

I've just added a couple of paragraphs to my article, pointing out reasons for using Prestige Classes as a tool:

"However, there are reasons to use Prestige Classes. The primary one is because they can be entered by (potentially) any class. You could play a fighter/rune scribe. You could play a wizard/rune scribe. You could play a sorcerer/rune scribe. Paths are unique to individual classes; to open up these concepts, the prestige class is one way of doing it.

"Why not implement the Rune Scribe using feats? That's a very good question; indeed, with the greater power of feats in 5E, it would be a consideration, especially if you put a level restriction on taking the feat. The answer is probably down to the complexity of what the class wants to do. Feats can be powerful, but there is a limit to the complexity they can handle. Note that this implementation of the Rune Scribe uses spell slots to power its rune magic. How do you design a fighter/rune scribe using feats? It may not be so easy."

Cheers!

You'd do a runic magic feat the same way you'd do any other.

Half or more of the feat uses spell slots. The remainder works for any class. And some runes (weapon runes) work better in the hands of fighters. Basically handing it like rituals and cantrips.

That's how runic magic and true naming works in my game. Casters use it better but warriors and experts can learn the runes and names that work on them better. I have a dwarven rune warrior NPC who isn't a caster but held off two giants alone due to his runes on his weapon and armor. And the paladin in my game uses true names to crit fiends and fortify his shield.

I could now make PrCs for the other subsystems in my game.

The only issue is the designer making use the feat works for all classes and using the correct level of power associated. This is no different from Prestige Classes as they cause delays in a character's entry into the tiers of play and can be problematic in high powered tables and campaigns.