How many PrC is okay?

[incognito]

A good reply!

one point:

The key to all of this is in the words "enough toys". Incognito clearly feels that a +1 to BAB and another Remove Disease per day is "enough toys".

There are other ways to reward those who level besides PrCs. The classes that have "enough toys" through the life of the character, may be weak to start with. Those players had to live with that (or multi-class). PrC are not really the solution ot the problem - or they are the over solution. They can make core calsses obsolete. That does not seem right.

Take the case of a character who has gone though 10 levels of a PrC after taking 5 levels of ranger. Now he's 15th level, going on 16th, and the rest of the ranger class does not look good enough to him, or any otehr class. What does that say about the player? NONE of the other core classes appeal to him! None! I'm having a hard time no one see the problem with this.

And I will say:

I can screen PrCs as easily (if not more easily) as I can screen subtly designed core class Smackdowns.

Seasong, you're a better man than I. I have missed holes in spells, feats, items, even skills. Moreover, it's simply another thing to wrangle out with my PCs, who are busy asking about buying items from shops, exploring the town, chasing politcal ties, hacking away at the local militia, etc, etc, etc. I have a lot to track.

With regard to your 1a, b, 2 points.

For me: PrCs exist. Custom ones can exist.

There are times when I BELIEVE in a PrC for a character. I'll bring it up when the time comes, if it comes. And I'll make sure the character knows about it enough in advance to make the Pre-req, or not make the pre-reqs if he does not want the PrC. I simply cannot accept having them available at the players bequest. and CERTIANLY not, all of a sudden, right at the time a character would level.

Point in case: The party stared at L3 with a halfling wizard. Over the course of 3 levels the halfling took fire-based spells, the Ignan Language, and ranks of Know (planes). No one asked him to. He did not own Tome and Blood. I suggeted the elementallist
PrC.

There is a Druid PrC that I created in my world, that casts Druid spells on the fly, like sorcerers. There are no druid PCs in my game currently, so I have not told anyone about the PrC.

If someone brings in a Druid, and shows a character background that fits the PrC, then if he keeps to the concept in game, I will speak with that player about it.

I think that answers where I fall WRT the existence of them in my world.

 

[nameless]

Take the case of a character who has gone though 10 levels of a PrC after taking 5 levels of ranger. Now he's 15th level, going on 16th, and the rest of the ranger class does not look good enough to him. What does that say about the player? NONE of the other core classes appeal to him! None! I'm having a hard time no one see the problem with this.

Of course he doesn't want to take another level in Ranger! He's a level 16 character, and he gains the same abilities that a level 6 character would. A high level prestige class allows him to keep progressing forward in abilities, regressing to a low level core class means that he completely stops his current progression. To put it in concrete terms, why would a level 15 PrC wizard want to take one level in sorceror? He'd gain a 2 level 1 spells and some level 0 spells he already has. In order to overcome the bigger threats he will inevitably face, another magic missile isn't gonna do the trick. But the extra level 8 spell per day will mean that he can memorize the Sunburst that saves his hide versus the vampire he fights.

The bottom line is that core classes are generalists and prestige classes are specialized. The character already spent plenty of time as a generalist, and slowly progressed into a specialty. It only makes sense that specialization will continue.

-nameless

 

[Henry]

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.

I think you are using the wrong assumption. First of all, "a nod towards balance" implies lip-service only - which is patently false toward most PrC's. Secondly, properly designed PrC's (of which there are more than a few) will sacrifice other abilities in favor of ones that better fit a character concept. "character concept" is not a code-word for "power-grabbing" it's a code word for "the concept of how a player wants their character to affect and be part of the campaign world. If I want a character that was born with the talent for magic, yet forsook it for life as a warrior, then my Sor1/Fighter3 is not meta-gaming, it's not powergaming, it's not even trying to get more power - it's perfectly balanced against a Sor4 or a Ftr4, and both would survive equally well in a party.

Next, WHERE IN THE WORLD did power-gaming and meta-gaming become naughty words? "Charges of powergaming" "so-and-so is clearly meta-gaming?" So what if he is? Let me get the record set straight, that, from my opinion, THERE AIN'T NOTHING INHERENTLY WRONG WITH META-GAMING. If fact, meta-gaming doesn't mean what many people USE it like.

Metagaming is using out-of-game knowledge about your DM or a certain item in-game, just because you know it's there. It's NOT picking your character's classes. Therein lies the trap of 1st and second edition; if a certain combination of race and class and abilities is SOOO bad, then Why was it even put into the freaking game in the first place? If an option is available in game, it's there to be used, not admired like the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden. "OOOOOO, shiny! But don't pick it, for that way lies munchkinism, and death."

If an option give a player an obvious advantage over others, DON'T even put it in the game. That is your right as DM, to know what your campaign can and cannot handle. But to assume that your campaign is the prototype for all campaigns (to assume that if your game can't handle it, it's not in there) is the height of a false step.

Lastly, powergaming is a totally different issue. Powergaming is using high levels and powerful magics in the game as the baseline, rather than low-powered ones. Powergaming is as inherently good and fun to play as games in which PC's fight snakes and dogs with sticks and mud-bombs.

So, in summary:

-It is unproven that all Prestige classes, or even most of them, are front-loaded and unbalanced;

-What doesn't work from your experience can work like a charm for someone else (this is why I don't criticize others' 'obviously munchkin' games);

-what is interesting is a matter of personal desire and experience.

And finally, no part of this is meant to be insulting, incognito - just very direct. Feel free to tell me if you feel i've crossed a line here - it's just a fiery topic closer to me than I thought.

 

[incognito]

Henry: Possibly your sig says it all?



Kidding. first let me quote myself - since eveyrone else is...

F) Being a Power Gamer (or munchkin) is fine if that is what all the players and the DM want. Otherwise it is annoying, at best.

That should answer your question as to my thoughts on power/munchkin gaming. It is only when there is a breakdown of the groups desires.

nameless, YOU say: Of course so-and so deos not want to be a 6th Level ranger!

And I say: Why did he take the #@^)*@$ class to begin with, then! And why should I feel obliged to create/co-create, or approve some concotion of his, just becasue he feels like +1 to all his saves, +1 to his BAB, and progression twds second level spells, another favored enemy, 4 skill points, a very respectable skills list, and yes, even another 1 HD of animal friends is not enough? but if that is his feeling fine: Then, like you, he can take a level of fighter, wizard, or whateve other calss he is inclined towards.

Your Level 3 ftr, lvl 1 Sorcerer is not inherently munchy, unless you started at L4, took your first level as a fighter, and took concentration as your level 1 feat, because that was you didn't want to take it at L3.

That's munchy, and won't find it's way into my game.

Also, don't EXPECT me to provide you with the spell sword PrC, just because you wear armor and use a sword and think it's "kewl." I can live with a player asking about a PrC, but he must live with my answer, and not feel free to start an open debate.


Finally:

-It is unproven that all Prestige classes, or even most of them, are front-loaded and unbalanced;

I bet even my nay sayers will admit that some PrCs out there are front loaded. Opinions may vary as to which. I won't try to prove it. You can start your own thread, of course.

-What doesn't work from your experience can work like a charm for someone else (this is why I don't criticize others' 'obviously munchkin' games);

Already granted.

And you do not insult me, and even if you did, I should be able to take a few insults!

 

[seasong]

There are other ways to reward those who level besides PrCs. The classes that have "enough toys" through the life of the character, may be weak to start with. Those players had to live with that (or multi-class). PrC are not really the solution ot the problem - or they are the over solution. They can make core calsses obsolete. That does not seem right.

Agreed. A well designed PrC should not make the Core Classes obsolete.

Indeed, if I were to make a custom PrC for a character to take their very next level in, I would most likely balance it with an eye towards the fact that they didn't have to sacrifice anything to get it (i.e., I would give it power in proportion to a core class). No sacrifice = no extra edge.

But PrCs fulfill something other than extra power - they provide different powers. Powers which, while no more effective, are more in tune with a particular non-core archetype.

Take the case of a character who has gone though 10 levels of a PrC after taking 5 levels of ranger. Now he's 15th level, going on 16th, and the rest of the ranger class does not look good enough to him, or any otehr class. What does that say about the player? NONE of the other core classes appeal to him! None! I'm having a hard time no one see the problem with this.

You mean if, for example, the Ranger 5/Arcane Archer 10 (I don't know if that's even possible, level wise ) wants to leverage his esoteric knowledge of the wilderness to take Lore Master, as his character becomes more contemplative?

To be clear: I do see the problem. But I also see many, many exceptions to the rule. The Lore Master above, is one of them, and I can see a character who, upon a life-changing event, decides to change paths from bad *** archer to lore master who can also kick butt. And if there was no Lore Master previously available, in the face of such roleplaying studliness, I'd be more than happy to build one for the player.

However, if the player has the motivations you ascribed to him, well then, that's not roleplaying studliness, is it?

With regard to your 1a, b, 2 points.

For me: PrCs exist. Custom ones can exist.

I mistated something here: I meant, "on the spot Custom PrCs, for a particular character". Since you were suggesting that a DM have all PrCs built before the campaign starts, I know you would allow them .

 

[nameless]

nameless, YOU say: Of course so-and so deos not want to be a 6th Level ranger!

And I say: Why did he take the #@^)*@$ class to begin with, then! And why should I feel obliged to create/co-create, or approve some concotion of his, just becasue he feels like +1 to all his saves, +1 to his BAB, and progression twds second level spells, another favored enemy, 4 skill points, a very respectable skills list, and yes, even another 1 HD of animal friends is not enough? but if that is his feeling fine: Then, like you, he can take a level of fighter, wizard, or whateve other calss he is inclined towards.

That's exactly my point. +1 to his saves and +1 to his BAB is something that every single character of every class gains at level 6, so it's pretty much a moot point there. I don't know about the rest of the character, but if he's anything like the other characters I've seen, he's probably not focusing on his animal friends and low level ranger spells; he's focusing on a fighting style, or possibly on some skills. Just because the word 'ranger' is on his character sheet doesn't mean he considers himself a Ranger, he is a unique individual, and a powerful one at that. He's not asking for you to give him a button to push for loot and xp, he's asking that he be allowed to continue developing his character along the lines he has been for 10 levels (and 2/3's of his character's lifetime). There are plenty of generic prestige classes out there that don't imply membership in some order. A lot of them simply represent someone with a particular interest continuing in natural pursuit of that interest.

 

[incognito]

There are plenty of generic prestige classes out there

See nameless, this is the core of out disgreement. To my mind, there are no "generic" PrCs.

Are you saying he cannot be an individual without them? Are you saying he cannot be an individual without taking some other core class? Pretyt small minded if you ask me. Needs a PrC to feel special.

And even your core argument does not hold water. This character may be gaining L6 in ranger, but other chracters are gaining level 16. And at L16, not all Pc are gaining increased BAB, all saves, etc etc.

A straight L16 character is not gaining in thier weak save.

L7/L8, who is gaining L9 in an wizard attack progression progression does not gain BAB

A L3/L12 PC who is level 12 in a clerical attack progression is gaining neither BAB nor ANY save.

Sure, some levels are weaker than others. What does a L7 barbarian gain besides a BAB? Does that make this a "bad class?" How about a L13 fighter? At L20 a barbarian is no longer winded by rage - but a rogue merely get's +4 vs traps...Unfair! Unbalanced!

You do not hear me say those things.

Most classes have slow levels. Those who have gone PrCs early should expect to have some slowness one the PrC is complete. Think of all the nifty stuff they got while leveling in the PrC!

 

[seasong]

nameless, YOU say: Of course so-and so deos not want to be a 6th Level ranger!

And I say: Why did he take the #@^)*@$ class to begin with, then! And why should I feel obliged to create/co-create, or approve some concotion of his, just becasue he feels like +1 to all his saves, +1 to his BAB, and progression twds second level spells, another favored enemy, 4 skill points, a very respectable skills list, and yes, even another 1 HD of animal friends is not enough? but if that is his feeling fine: Then, like you, he can take a level of fighter, wizard, or whateve other calss he is inclined towards.

I'm belaboring this point: They are not good enough because they are not the right abilities for the character, whereas the first 5 levels were. Heck, give the character a PrC that provides equivalent abilities, reduced slightly, but which are more in line with the character vision. If the player agrees to take less powerful stuff, how can you call that powergaming?

You seem to be automatically equating PrC with "more powerful abilities" (which, IMO, just needs a core class), whereas I tend to equate PrC with "different abilities".

I bet even my nay sayers will admit that some PrCs out there are front loaded. Opinions may vary as to which. I won't try to prove it. You can start your own thread, of course.

Oh, I would absolutely agree. I would, in fact, go so far as to state that most of the PrCs I've seen out there would not find there way into my campaigns... both for lack of flavor or roleplaying potential, or for broken design, or both. A lot of PrC designs seem to be built around maximum crunch & munch, and I'm not interested in allowing them.

But whether or not any particular PrC is broken has little to do with the overall idea of whether they should be allowed, and whether a PC might have roleplaying justification to take more than one.

 

[nameless]

See nameless, this is the core of out disgreement. To my mind, there are no "generic" PrCs.

Are you saying he cannot be an individual without them? Are you saying he cannot be an individual without taking some other core class? Pretyt small minded if you ask me. Needs a PrC to feel special.

Well, I'm not saying exactly that. I'm saying that at a certain point (IMO around level 10), most of the core classes, excepting spellcasters, look the same. Two single-classes Rangers simply don't have a lot of room to divulge. Even fighters, with all of their feats, eventually get all of the feats worth getting.

I'm of the opinion that there simply aren't enough options to make a character unique by the book. When you factor in the neceessary ramping of power at higher levels, you see that mid-to-upper level characters don't get any new tricks.

If you want to consider me saying that core classes are underpowered, fine. I think the 4 spellcasting classes are grossly more powerful than the rest, and prestige classes are the least kludgy way to fix that.

And when I say "generic" prestige class, I mean something that can fit into multiple settings. A Deepwood Sniper is something that wouldn't require a teacher or organization any more than a Ranger would. Logically, this means that any character who satisfies the prereqs for it, and has the desire to perfect those types of skills should "stumble" upon the class, for lack of a better word. I would imagine that many other prestige classes are perfectly fine as things that a character simply muddles through in the same way that they muddle through a core class. If you say prestige classes are very elite and personal, and completely inflexible, I think you're missing out on a lot of the potential of the d20 class system.

 

[incognito]

A Deepwood Sniper is something that wouldn't require a teacher or organization any more than a Ranger would.

Once could similarly argue that even the core classes needed a teacher to advance.

I'm not going to disagree that Magic/high level spells are strong. but even Wizards and Clerics (the Uber class) persue PrCs they are always the ones with +1 caster level. Why? becasue they don't want to give up what's really good. They just want a little something extra, know what I mean Vern? and that's why I have a problem with them

BTW, I am of the firm opinion, that a party of 4 clerics could do most everything a diversisfied party could do, and then steamroll the rest.

I also agree that at some point, the "relative power" of fighter types, as compared to other character types (and I also agree that this is around level 9) become imbalanced.

I do not agree that PrCs are the solution. DMs manaing spotlight time, or even creating a few custom feats to help these classes out works just fine. Have a abttle in an anti-magic zone and watch the fighter shine, have the party be utterly lost in the wilderness on another plane. Where will the wizard T-port to? Heh.

PrC should be more rare, not less. If everyone in a party has a PrC, and some PCs mor than one PrC, I don' think t says I have bunch of individuals. I think it says my players are a little power hungry. Cause I've gotta tell you, when our fighter turned 13th level, and found the +1 animated, large shield with SR, he was overjoyed! Never noticed the other PCs got 6th level spells - he had his toy.

My favorite item (ever) was the "witchwood sword" a wicked longsword that cast heightened (4th level) bestow curse on a possible critical. Regardless of the confimation roll Neat! My druid took improved crit at L12.