How important are prestige classes?

[milotha]

I think prestige classes are necessary to get multiclassing for spellcasters to work, especially wizards/sorcerers. Mystic Theurge, Arcane Trickster, Eldritch Knight etc. I find that a standard multiclassed 6/6 wizard/priest is extremely weak compared to a straight wizard or a straight priest, but a 12th level Mystic Theurge stands a chance.

 

[MacMathan]

Nope not very necessary. Sometimes the balance headaches they create are just not worth it.

In the right hands they can be great tools but all too often I see people bolting them on for purely crunch reasons when ideally I would like the reasons to be tied inot the character and storyline. I realize that is hard to provide in a world generic supplement but it onces agains goes back to being more effort than they are worth some of the time.

As far as multi-class spellcasters working I personally do not think they should necessarily work very well at all. The PRC's bolted on in 3.5 have always felt very artificial to me. I think it is somewhat of a holdover from previous editions that players expect to be able to make such a character work. Once again this is kind of worldview specific and gets into the amount of dedication you see different types of casters needing to master their arts.

my 2cp

 

[Deadguy]

Interesting. The view generally seems to be that 'No, they aren't necessary', but 'Yes, they are useful'. Appropriate enough for a tool listed in the DMG. I think that they need to be bedded into the campaign from early on to have the most value. Not merely because PCs need time to plan out advancement to meet prerequisites; but also because PrCs need to be seen to be part of the setting, and not merely 'an add-on for gearheads' (thanks Hong! )! Otherwise they tend to feel 'forced' in the setting.

I will add that I agree with milotha (and thus disagree with MacMathan) that PrCs have served as a handy, if incomplete, tool for getting multi-classing and magic to work together. We only have a problem with them because of the legacy way that spellcasting is constructed, and at least a PrC like Eldritch Knight offers a sort of work-around. I suspect that if a campaign offered no other PrCs, it would be as well to offer Eldritch Knight, Mystic Theurge, Arcane Trickster and similar PrCs*.


* unless, as MacMathan says, you specifically want to create a world where multi-classing and spellcasting is meant to be crap!

 

[pdkoning]

* unless, as MacMathan says, you specifically want to create a world where multi-classing and spellcasting is meant to be crap!

I think multiclassing and spellcasting IS meant to be crap, and I support it. When you are a divine spellcaster, you have to focus on your deity, and thus sacrifice some fighting experience warriors gain on the battlefield. And I must say that both the 'pure' Cleric and Druid are not 'weak', and do really not need to multiclass because they can also fight quite well.

When dealing with arcane magic, a fighter/wizard just does not fit well in my opinion. When studying the arcane you have to spend years and years of research in hidden dusty tomes located in isolated and dusty places. After your study you are the most powerful spellcaster of the party, and at high levels probably the most powerful character. You just can't fight well, but that is what wizards are about.

When considering the sorcerer, yes, he doesn't have to study, but he also relies mainly on magic, and thus has to sacrifice fighting skills, for the sake of game balance

Last but not least, the Bard is just fine: Jack of all trades, master of none.

As you can imagine, I do not really like 'mechanical' prcs designed for mage/fighter multiclassing. And like I have posted before, I think prcs are really optional.

 

[BryonD]

PrCs are not necessary - you can make most archetypes without them - but they sure add to the game.

This is absolutely true

 

[BryonD]

I don't think that's true. Most prcl we see in books cannot be made by multi classing.

This is absolutely true

 

[milotha]

I think multiclassing and spellcasting IS meant to be crap, and I support it. When you are a divine spellcaster, you have to focus on your deity, and thus sacrifice some fighting experience warriors gain on the battlefield. And I must say that both the 'pure' Cleric and Druid are not 'weak', and do really not need to multiclass because they can also fight quite well.

When dealing with arcane magic, a fighter/wizard just does not fit well in my opinion. When studying the arcane you have to spend years and years of research in hidden dusty tomes located in isolated and dusty places. After your study you are the most powerful spellcaster of the party, and at high levels probably the most powerful character. You just can't fight well, but that is what wizards are about.

When considering the sorcerer, yes, he doesn't have to study, but he also relies mainly on magic, and thus has to sacrifice fighting skills, for the sake of game balance

Last but not least, the Bard is just fine: Jack of all trades, master of none.

You are presenting a stereotyped view of wizards that not all spellcasters must obey. By imposing this arbitrary view of wizards, you are severely limiting the role-playing that your players can do. A game system should allow players to design out their character concepts. It should be flexible. I've seen numerous people post on these boards that the reason that they prefer 3.5 to 1/2ed is the flexibility in character creation. The prestige classes are an attempt to allow the players to do this, and are necessary to get the multiclassed spell casters to work.

The priest, paladin and ranger are divine spell casters that fight. Why for the sake of game balance can't you be an arcane caster that fights? I've played with numerous fighter/wizards in my time playing D&D. They never broke the game. Their armour selection and lower hitpoints really balance the concept to begin with.

Suppose that someone has a great character concept that involves being both a divine and arcane caster that doesn't fight? They can't exchange their fighting training for arcane training?

There's really nothing in the rulebooks that says that one can't learn to fight and cast arcane spells (the bard for example). There is nothing saying that one can't be a strong or healthy wizard. You can put good stats under str and con and dex as a wizard. I've seen great dwarven wizard fighter/sorcerer concepts.

As for everyone who wants to have both fighting and arcane casting abilites being forced into playing a bard. A bard is just one flavor or all the combinations of these two classes, and a narrow version at that. Must all arcane caster/fighter's play a musical instrument or sing?

As for game balance issues: Take a 6/6 fighter/sorcerer. They aren't in the same league as a 12th level fighter or a 12th level wizard. Is this the only option for your players? This isn't a balanced option either. The prestige classes are an attempt to fix this design problem with 3.X.

 

[Psion]

How important is it to Players to have the option to take a prestige class? Can not a Player make a fully satisfying character with only the core classes?

Considering that I have seen many PCs come and go that were great fun in the game, I hardly think that they are necessary.

I do think that they are nice for looking for something more distinct when you get jaded by the core classes, without going the route of creating a dizzying array of beginning options or "basic building blocks" for characters (which I think is a bad thing for the game.)

I think they are, most importantly, a tool for the DM to help define the game and to keep players guessing.

In my games, I particularly like arcane prestige classes. They create a feel of specialists in obscure areas of arcane lore, which I think adds immensely to the feel of arcane magic. Fighter types benefit less, I think, but in the right sort of campaign where individual styles are important, prestige classes like those in Masters of Arms or Swashbuckling Adventures can highlight the distinctions and make for more interesting options in combat.

 

[Evilhalfling]

I think that several are necessary for concepts - the playable multiclass charachter.
And others are necessary roles - the Assasin's Guild, The Knightly Order, the Archmage prC that are clearly recoginiazble and serve to warn others of your status.

I love the Wheel of Time Prestige Classes - If you join one people from around the world can make assumptions about your strength, abliltes and motivations - If a Ranger walks into a bar everyone shrugs. If a Warder walks in everyone knows how dangerous he is, and looks for his Aes Sedai.
Prestige classes should be about prestiege -

 

[D+1]

They are utterly unimportant because they are utterly unnecessary. However, that doesn't mean that they aren't useful or desireable, just that you shouldn't feel that you MUST provide them as options to the players. They are largely a tool for the DM to use to enhance certain aspects of a campaign. Their biggest downside is that players easily see them as more of a power enhancement than flavor for a campaign world. For that reason I suggest using them sparingly; be CHOOSY about which PrC's to let your players use.