How many PrC is okay?

[Corlon]

[SIZE=4]here's my two cents[/SIZE]

The only thing I hate is when people take level 1 of everything, whether it is PrC or basic class.

I usually don't allow stuff like "ranger 1" unless it's the first level, or the character intends to keep increasing, the first being the character was born where he picked up some skills, and decided he didn't like that way of life, and the latter being they want to proceed in a new class.

An example, is my friend was making a character (lv 5)that would use his fists, but he wanted to be a barbarian. So he wanted to make a monk 1/ranger 1/barbarian 3. I asked him about the monk, he said because their was a master in his slave camp that taught him how to fight. Then his character escaped and I asked him about why the character became a ranger, and then changed to barbarian. He said the character had always wanted to be a barbarian, but he just wanted the three extra feets granted by 1st level ranger . But he really wanted the ranger, so I made him take another level of ranger (which in my oppinion, provides nothing of value besides a couple skills and a base attack). He was pissed about this ruling, but he took the two levels of ranger, showing that he had gone a little into that, and realized his true talent was in anger and brute strength, and then becoming a barbarian.

PrCs are my friend, I love buying books so I can just read through the bagillions of new prestige classes (masters of arms really has the many )that have come out, and I see nothing wrong with dm or character custom made prestige classes, as long as it goes with the character concept, because it shows him going into refining certain skills that he is already proficient in.

well, that's my two cents.

note: If this is off topic, I'm sorry, my senses may be dulled by the fact that it is 1:37 in the moring

 

[Mordane76]

When I sit and think about everything that has been said here, I have to wonder...

If PrC are the collective devil, and modifying PC classes is our salvation, how do we change player perception? When I look at the PC classes, I think of them as sanctified, unchanging... holy, and woe betide those who should mess with such core pieces of the system.

If PrC are not the collective devil, and they can be used to save us from the potentially flawed upper levels of the PC classes, then how to do we fix the issues of front-loading without lossing the initial investments that normally come along with a PrC.

Or is it a mix of the two -- are the main classes flawed just as badly as some of the PrC? Where does the true implications of the cry, "Powergamer!" lie? Players can overpower their characters just as easily with a few choice PC classes selections. Can PrC really shoulder the blame for potentially tipping the balance of character-power?


What is drawing players to PrC? And isn't that statement flawed? Shouldn't it be what is drawing characters to PrC? Which one are we seeing more -- Players drawn to PrC, or characters drawn to PrC?

 

[seasong]

Editted for clarity. The below is an example of me tempting some hypothetical player with a PrC.

"All right, you continue as a Wizard who specializes in Necromancy, or you can be a Necromancer. As a Wizard specialist, you'll gain more spell variety, more spells per day, and more metamagic. As a Necromancer you won't have any of that (spell levels will rise more slowly as well), but you'll get some really cool flavor text, a few neat powers that no one else can do, and you'll open up the possibility of becoming a lich or immortal."

I think I can see what attracts non-powergamers to PrCs.

 

[Mordane76]

Seasong: Now -- is the Necromancer you describe a variant PC class, or a PrC? From what I've heard said, the two are nearly synonomous in many people's minds (not mine, though).

If it's a variant PC class, then why not take Necromancy enhancing PrC classes later like True Necromancer, Pale Master, and Master of Shrouds?

 

[seasong]

Meant for it to be a PrC, sorry if that wasn't obvious .

I will edit for clarity.

 

[Mordane76]

Okay...

This provides a good basis, though -- I can now put forth two examples.

The first is as so -- we have a wizard, who decides to specialize as a Necromancer (so we'll use the abbreviation Nec hence). Now, Mr. Nec advances to a certain point, let's say Nec4, then becomes a Clr of a deity with the Death Domain, and advances to Nec5/Clr5. Now, he takes several levels in True Necromancer, Pale Master, and Master of Shrouds, so he ends up as a Nec5/Clr5/TN4/PM3/MoS3 at 20th level. Is this a power combination? Does this strike fear into the hearts of DMs everywhere?

The second is as so -- this is a character I played in a Forgotten Realms campaign. The character was Thayan, whose parents hide his great intellect from the elders so that he would become a soldier instead of a necromancer, but the elders discover the treachery after a fairly lengthy assignment to the army and pulled him into tutelege in the black arts (and also executed his parents for their duplicity). After completing his tutelege, he continued in advancing his knowledge of the black arts (out of a desire to become powerful enough to destroy the great zulkir Szam Tam, who he believes is primarily responsible for the execution of his parents and his present situation). Once allowed to leave the holdings of Thay, he learned of Kelemvor... and dedicated his life to the advancement of the teachings of the church of Kelemvor. He will soon become a Hunter of the Dead, but right now he is a Ftr4/Clr4/Nec5. Is this a power combination? Does this strike feat into the hearts of DMs everywhere? What if this character continued to advance, and ended up as a Ftr4/Clr4/Nec5/HotD7?

 

[seasong]

In the first example, I really think that the player and I should have sat down and decided what it was about those three PrCs that he liked, and worked out a new PrC that combined those elements. I don't mind the power aspect of it (he really misses the coolest parts of each of those), but he really needs a stronger concept!

Other than that, neither of those strikes fear in my cold, black heart. And I don't really see why they should.

 

[MerakSpielman]

Are people applying the xp penalty for multiclassing? You do remember it hurts more and more the more classes you add, right?

I require my players to present me with a character concept up-front, before the campaign even starts. This concept represents the end-goal of the characters development. They can take any PrCs that fit well with this end goal, though I also make them tell me up front which PrCs they plan on taking in the future.

My next campaign is going to be half-and-half combat and role-playing. A min-maxed combat machine will not be able to hold his own in this game.

I think the hypocracy of the anti-lots-of-PrC argument is that DMs create a deadly world full of tough monsters and then whine when a player makes a character designed to excel in that environment. If you don't want uber-powerful min-maxers in your campaign, don't make it such a beneficial option.

Or phrased another way, if you want players to pick PrCs for role-playing reasons, then offer rewards for such behavior (in-game, non-numeric rewards are best). If you want them to min-max for combat, just throw hordes of monsters at them and it will happen all by itself. Don't expect role-playing reasons if ROLL playing is all that goes on - or all that the players are interested in.

Oh, and I don't believe role playing is superior to roll playing, in case I gave that impression. It's just a different style.

If you're a player complaining about other players min-maxing, have a talk with them or the DM. In the end, though, they can build their character however they want, and so can you, as long as the DM says it's ok. Find a niche for your character and become valuable to the party in your own way.

 

[Mordane76]

Unless I'm mistaken, doesn't the DMG state that PrC are not considered normal classes for the purposes of multiclassing, and hence do not impose an XP penalty? So, therein lies another benefit of PrC -- no XP penalty for multiclassing.

 

[incognito]

I'm back to defend my postion.

First: Happy New Year Y'all.

P-Cat: No apologies necessary. The things I say, can be pretty heavy handed sometimes (yet another real-life failed charima check, I guess), and it was very heavy handed to mention them in a thread you started asking for help! Any vehement coutner - post is deserved.

Small counter comment to the "frothing"
I did not say you are doing it wrong, just raised my eyebrows. I have been a positive contributor to your campaign in the past, and am happy to do so again in the future. I love readig the DoD story hour. I do reserve the right to disagree with things that you post (quoting included) - I thought the message boards were about the exchange of ideas in this manner, even if we don't agree. I will DEFINITELY us more tact in the future, and do not want to infer you are a bad DM (because it clear to the whole of ENWorld, incl me, that you are not!).

And onto defending my position:

PROBLEM: Some classes are front loaded, and have little at the end of the level speectrum (15-20)
DM/WotC Solution(?): Create PrCs with nifty abilites which will enable a character to climb a different ability tree, and at the same time add a specific flavor to the game world. Add pre-requisites as a nod twds balance.

The solution has an inherent flaw. PrCs can easily suffer from the same Front loading problems that Character classes suffer from. Also, players beginning at levels higher than 1 can design class/race/feat combinations to quilify for a presitige class in a way to minimize the restrictions, and take full advantage of of strengths.

That's not (IMO) the intent of PrCs. It is also my belive that WotC did not expect characters to take on multiple PrCs.

I'll make a bold statement here, feel free to shoot it down. mult-classing with core classes is NOT the same a multiclassing PrC. Especially with regard to the 4 basic classes (ftr, clr, rge, wiz).

PrCs are meant to have LOTS of flavor, while I belive the core classes were meant to be basic, with feat selection and skill selection adding the flavor. I am a big fan of multi-classing. My favorite character so far was a Monk2/Druid6 (NPC). While he didn't do a ton of damage, casting greater magic fang on his natural weapons was neat! A cool character concept. The in-game justification is that the character attined "monk-dom" seeking sptitual enlightenment away from mainkind in the wilderness, and eventually reverted to a more wild state.

An unusual class combo to be sure, but not a pwoer-games one, simply one that "worked" (unlike, say,: Wiz2/Sorc2/Bard1/Druid1 a sixth level ccacster with no second level spells and a +2 BAB is...let's just say, "unfortunate."

Someone asked how havign a death ray gun (8d8 as a ranged touch attack was the same as having a muchy PrC).

Well if I made a PrC (or series of PrCs) which everyone could have access to, that granted strong, front loaded powers, then everyone would want/take it, and have a lot of added "power" for relatively little "cost."

In the same way we see characters creating front loaded mutli-class combos that are awfully annoying. Like Ranger1/Paladin2/Rouge3/FighterX. Good saves, great abilites, great skills esp. if the character begins as a rogue. And the character has taken levels in a series of front loaded classes.

In both the the Monk/Druid, and the Ranger/Paladin fiasco approached me for a PrC that fit thier feat selection AND had abilites that complimented thier existing skills (like +1 caster level for the Monl/Druid) I'd have to laugh right in the players faces. Regardless of thier intentions it would be a mechanism for them to gain abilities they wanted to achive, rather than the remaining default abilites for the class.

I think the reason P-Cats post struck such a cord within me, is that the players are looking to do this for their next level which they are about to gain - and apologies tp P-Cat for bringin up his game. So, let's not look a P-Cats campaign. Consider a generic gaming world. The players ask the DM to find a PrC for them that fits an existing feat, sklills, alignment, and class chain: oh yeah, and I'm going to gain a level of it next week (or in a few weeks). As a counte proposal: Why not make the PrC at the beginning of THIS level, and have the players role-play their next whole level, tryng to role-play qualify for it. Not that aren't/weren' role-playing before, but now they are seeking something nique, and perhaps unique qualifications are called for: BAB, FEAT, and skills pre-reqs don't seem to be enough. Especially if the PrC in question has font loaded abilities.

As a better/alternate solution, why not simply swap out some of the paladin class feature, and grant soem "neat" paladin features. Nothing grand, mind you - again Paladins gain BAB, more healing, and are working twds more spells. But an extra smite, or a minor divine feat might be called for instead of more "cure disease."

Final note: I think the DM should be the one to come up with ALL the PrCs in his/her world. Ideally, all created at the beginning of the campaign, but genrally created NOT with an existing character in mind. I would require at least 1 or 2 levels of a player chracter prusuing the PrC befoure I would allow him/her to level in the PrC, and finally, I'd require them to finish the PrC unless extreme role-play circumstance prevented it.

Whew, a mouthful -bring on the bashing, I did ask for it this time...