Least favorite Prc

[TiQuinn]

Completely. Who says because they are published their use is compulsory? Lots of books also come out with new magic items and weapon types. That doesn't mean I allow a profusion of weapons and weird magic items in my game.

It really depends on the DM and the group he plays with, and is out of the hands of WotC, really. I think the problem is a lot of DMs get "suckered", and I use that term loosely, into using PrCs they don't necessarily want to because quite often it's the players who are buying the splatbooks and asking to have material incorporated. Nothing WotC can do about this, per se, though they end up getting blamed for putting out the material to begin with.

 

[RobNJ]

It really depends on the DM and the group he plays with, and is out of the hands of WotC, really. I think the problem is a lot of DMs get "suckered", and I use that term loosely, into using PrCs they don't necessarily want to because quite often it's the players who are buying the splatbooks and asking to have material incorporated. Nothing WotC can do about this, per se, though they end up getting blamed for putting out the material to begin with.

That's part of it, but people who are bothered by this can still say that Wizards puts too many PrCs in their books.

It doesn't matter if there are 2 new prestige classes published every day. If there are only 7 Knights of the Holy Whatzis in your campaign, then there are only 7 Knights of the Holy Whatzis, period.

It reminds me of the complaint about metaplots, or when stamp collectors get all bent out of shape because there're too many new stamps. No one is forcing you to consume or use the product. If you don't like it, don't us it.

 

[SSS-Druid]

Just because I make a turnip stew, does that mean you are forced to eat it?

Thank you.

I don't think I'll ever understand the logic whereby "a lot of options" equals a bad thing.

 

[Psion]

Re: Re: Re: Re: ugh.. wounded pride

They overshadow the core classes because there are so many of them and they are so easy to get into. If PrCs were fewer/harder to get into, they wouldn't overwhelm the core classes like they do now.

Easy to get into? Well, it depends on who writes it, but sometimes it can be very hard to get into a class at a reasonable level. In fact, this is Steve Miller's (ex-WotC author, not the singer) chief complaint.

So many? Let me join the chorus that more options is not bad. Use what you want, skip the rest.

Don't approach them with a collectors mentality. Approach them with a consumer's mentality.

 

[Nightfall]

Thank you.

I don't think I'll ever understand the logic whereby "a lot of options" equals a bad thing.

They just probably don't feel the love you get when you take on Incarnate huh Joe? Btw, I'm working on making my version of Nightfall, your antithesis. *is kidding about the antithesis*

 

[Malakye]

The more options the better. I want more prestige classes, more items, more spells, more monsters, and more feats.

I will probably only use a handful at a time in any given campaign but at least I have the options.

 

[bloodymage]

All of them.

 

[Wolfen Priest]

Thank you.

I don't think I'll ever understand the logic whereby "a lot of options" equals a bad thing.

The point I think he's trying to make is that as a DM he doesn't allow PrC's for the most part, because he doesn't like their execution, or concept or whatever. I feel the same way, personally.

Now, If we (that is, people who don't really like PrC's) are bombarded with them in most d20 products, "a lot of options" becomes "a lot of options we won't use, and are therefore just taking up space, space that we paid for. when we bought the product."

Sure, we have the option not to buy such products. Just like we all have the option not to vote if we don't like either political candidate. instead, we opt to complain about it until something is done to pacify us. I'm sick of all the PrC's, and would like to see "more options of other stuff."

 

[drnuncheon]

That's exactly the point, actually. You're assuming that a Rogue 10/Wizard 10 is an effective level 20 character; I'm thinking it's not. Your best spells are 5th level, you have a modest selection of skills (only a handful of them maxed out), and you are probably not a major threat in combat compared to any single class character.

Actually, I'm assuming that a Rog5/Wiz5/Trickster10 is a better rogue than a Rog20, and almost as good of a wizard as a Wiz20. And that's just not right.

Even if you compare it to a Rog5/Wiz15, the Trickster beats it around the block and back again, because it doesn't have to give anything up. It's got all the casting power of the Rog5/Wiz20 plus 4d6 more sneak attack plus 20 more skill ranks plus ranged legerdemain plus impromptu sneak attack...and it gave up, what, 2 metamagic feats for it? You don't even have to take useless skills or feats to get in.

And I think a Rog10/Wiz10 (or a Rog5/Wiz15 for that matter) is plenty effective as a 20th level character if the player is smart. He can't act like a 20th level evoker, which is what too many people try to do with multiclassed spellcasters. But if he uses stuff where the effectiveness is not so dependant on his caster level, he can be a nightmare.

J

 

[drquestion]

Originally posted by drnuncheon
Actually, I'm assuming that a Rog5/Wiz5/Trickster10 is a better rogue than a Rog20, and almost as good of a wizard as a Wiz20. And that's just not right.

I think that part of the problem here isn't really with prestige classes, though, but with the way D&D handles multiclass spellcasting. Unlike BAB (primary req. for fighting classes) and skill points (primary req. for rogues), caster level doesn't go up AT ALL when you level in a non-spellcasting class.

So, whereas a Ftr10/Rog10 is both better at fighting than a Ftr10 and more skilled than a Rog10, a Ftr(or Rog)10/Wiz10 isn't better at casting than a Wiz10. So, a Wizard loses more by multiclassing than a Fighter or a Rogue.

Arcane Trickster is meant to remedy this, and so is Spellsword. I actually don't think that it's too powerful compared to either a straight Rogue or a straight Wizard - an Arcane Trickster doesn't have the skill points, special abilities, or hit points of a straight Rogue, and he will also be about 2 spell levels behind the Wizard. Both of these are pretty major. He is pretty much unambiguously better than a Rog10/Wiz10, but in my view that's because spellcasting is an area in which the core multiclassing rules have problems.

drquestion