Lame Prestige Classes

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Well, as long as we're staying off-topic a bit more...



I guess now we're just into a difference in how we view the class. I see the assassin class (as written in 3.0/3.5) as a scheming, methodical plotter. I like the idea that he very carefully selects his spells in advance as appropriate for the target and the mission--which he's already thoroughly researched and spied upon, of course. Drawing on both his innate cunning and his prior experience, he calculates which spells will best serve him on this particular job, and prepares accordingly.

To use a metaphor... I like the idea that James Bond is assigned gadgets that seem appropriate to the mission, and has to find ways to make them work if things don't go as planned. It would be much less fun if he had access to everything Q-Branch had ever designed, all at once, as needed.

Ditto to all of this. I always pictured assassins as having spellbooks concealed in other items, including a "traveling spellbook" rolled up inside the pommel of a dagger for a few emergency essentials.

If they're going to make them "cast spells like bards," at least let them cast in armor.

 

[Psion]

no more then people multi classing into Sorcerer or bard.

Multiclassing into sorcerer or bard is a personal character creation choice.

Assassin is a class; in the absence of another assassin class (as the case would be if you only use the DMG PrCs) assuming that all assassins would be naturally magically talented defies credulity if you assume it's not a trainable skill.

Like mouse said, make them a special mystical sect, all the sudden it makes sense. So really, to me, Assassin is not half as lame as Forsaker and Frenzied Berzerker (aka 1e Barbarian retread).

 

[Particle_Man]

Personally, I dislike how the Duelist loses out when wearing light armor, so has a choice between losing abilities or using no armor. To add insult to injury, the picture of the duelist shows her in light armor.

And no, the existence of bracers of armor don't soothe my rage. It is called the Duelist, not the "Seeker of Bracers of Armor".

 

[Dark Jezter]

As crass (and lame) as this statement may be, I can not help but find great humor in a guy going by the name "ForceUser" lamenting his inability to choke someone at a distance.

BryonD wins the internet!

 

[Wolv0rine]

Ok then!
Dungeon Delver The rogue is not a trapfinding specialist, it's a jack of all trades! The dungeon delver just focuses his skills to one avenue of adventuring. That's like saying a ranger is stupid because he's good at killing orcs when any fighter could do the same and take better feats while he's at it. While we're at it why don't you bash the Arcane Archer it's just a bow weilding fighter with spells!

Wait a second here. It was bad enough when I had to listen to the obnoxious twits who used to act like playing 1E instead of 2E was some sort of mark of obsolescence spouting off that the Bard was a "jack of all trades", which painfully under-represented the fact that a Bard is about music (or performing, if you want to be so broad). But now the ROGUE is a "Jack of all trades"?!? The Rogue is a Rogue. And the Rogue's roots stem directly from the Thief. The Rogue is not a friggin "Jack of all trades" any more than the Fighter is.

And in general I do distain the Arcane Archer for being a bow weilder with spells. Anything "...with spells" that is not by it's core concept a spellcaster is just kind of sad and pathetic. Which is probably why I re-build the Ranger without spells, and do my best to ignore and underplay the limited spells available to the Paladin.

PrC's that I actually loathe?

Anything that is race specific. I don't particulary see why dwarves should be the only ones capable of learning a defensive style, or why only elves can be bladesingers, or why only gnomes can be tricksters etc.

Well, this can depend a lot of how you present a race-specific PrC. The Dwarven Defender, for example, makes perfect sense as being a Dwarven-only PrC if you present it as being specifically tailored to utilizing the natural stature, build, and propensities of dwarves. Sure, any race should be able to have it's own Defender (although the Medium-size races don't have that same size-build difference between them), but if the Dwarven Defender's moves, tactics, and general training maximizes the utility of the Dwarf's physical attributes, it makes sense that only they'd benefit from it to the extent of Being a Dwarven Defender.

And in general, I just don't understand this whole "Stop complaining if it's messed up, just re-build it" trend. Sure I enjoy crafting mechanics and creating all sorts of things for D&D, but if I have to re-build something I found in a book (that I presumably bought to be able to use it's contents), then my opinion is that the book was badly written unless the book in question was tailored to be specifically intended for a particular campaign setting. In which case it only makes sense that if I'm not running/playing that setting that some re-tooling is going to be needed.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Assassin is a class; assuming that all assassins would be naturally magically talented defies credulity if you assume it's not a trainable skill.

Which is why, again, the Assassin PrC doesn't apply to all assassins. It applies to a particular subset: chiefly, those who are steeped in dark magic.

 

[Psion]

Which is why, again, the Assassin PrC doesn't apply to all assassins. It applies to a particular subset: chiefly, those who are steeped in dark magic.

See my edit. In essence, I agree. It's only lame if you stop at the DMG.

 

[Angel Tarragon]

Wow. I'm an anime fandboy and a Final Fantasy player.

Me too and proud of it.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

As they say in the Prequels, "Roger roger."

Although, personally, I never got the feeling from the DMG write-up that this class was meant to apply to all assassins, or that all assassins would be required to take this class. I read it, thought, "Yep, that's a Fire Knife / Hands of Bhaal class," and moved on.

 

[CyberSpyder]

See my edit. In essence, I agree. It's only lame if you stop at the DMG.

Or, if you do stop at the DMG, most assassins can be rogues, whose abilities are also rather well-suited to the task.