Most Unbalanced Prestige Classes?

[General Dorsey]

I've noticed that the Hammer of Moradin combined with the Master Thrower makes for a dangerous combo.


Also, the Frenzied Berzerker/Warhulk combo is rather nasty. If you do allow the warhulk, do not, at all, ever, under any circumstances, allow it as an epic prestige class. We had one in our campaign (we tried level 32 for fun), and he managed to deal over 1500 points of damage in one hit. After that single attack, his character was "retired" from the game. BTW, his Strength when raged was 90.

 

[Psion]

Edit: Let me sum up instead of dragging this out. I doubt I will get you to cede any of these point, but here goes:
1) I disagree that SR is as pivotal as you claim, it only forces the MT to choose other equally valid options for spell selection.
2) I disagree that spells 1 or 2 levels off the highest are useless in a high level game.
3) Domains are not equivalent to a wizard's whole spell list.
4) I disagree that spell endurance is irrelevant in high level games, based on both typical published adventure scenarios and adventures in my own campaign.
5) Finally, you seem to be hinging your entire case around combat against high SR creatures, which is far from the only obstacle that characters face in a well rounded campaign and far from the only determinant in what makes a character whose utility other players will resent.

 

[Psiblade]

Having played a MT, I can definitely tell you some of the weakness in 28 point 3.5 game at medium to high level with both a cleric and a wizard also in the party (currently 15th).

1st DCs for MT are going to be low. Creation points are split between Int, Wis, Dex, and Con. A pair of 16's cost you 20 of your 28 points. :\

2nd High level firepower is determined by the ability to deliver 2 spells per round. A MT has a lot of low level slots that are hard to use in combat. A lesser metamagic rod of quicken (expensive) is almost a necessity. Wizards and Clerics have a lot more high level slots that can be quicken.

3rd Delivering cleric attack spells is hard. Most of the better cleric attack spells are by touch. With Wizard like hp and ac, delivering attack spells by touch = death by 3.5 power attack. You have to either reach spell them (no harm for me) or spectral hand them (costs 1 rd of 5 for combat).

4th Buffing spells become less useful at higher levels. Most characters want to have Con, Str, buffed all the time. At 1 min. per level, the 2nd level cleric spells do not cut it for a high level game.

The MT ends up being a ranged damage dealer (low ac & low hp) that is weaker than a wizard in penetrating SR, lower DCs, fewer quickens, lower level spells (no horrid wilting), but with significant healing ability and flexibility (for that remove fear) in a 28 or 32 point game.

If however you let them go wild (40+ points or high rolls), then the limitations play less of a roll. The power of a MT would increase dramatically. Better DCs, better hit points, better ac, better init, etc. The same principle applies if you allow access to twilight/halfweight armor. The MT would be extremely weak in a 25 or 22 point game.

The MT works best when the party has neither a cleric or wizard, or the party already has one of each. The specialist is a lot better at filling their role than a MT. The MT is an interesting PrC because it is really balanced only in a certain range of stats.

-Psiblade

 

[Davelozzi]

Church Inquisitor

I like Church Inquisitor because it's one of the prestige classes that would fit best in my game, but I'm a little iffy on whether or not it's balanced.

Same hit dice (d8), BAB, and spell progression as a regular cleric, and more skill points. Essentially, you're trading turn undead and a good Fort save for a whole bunch of cool special ablities, plus twice as many skill points.

Opinions?

 

[Nightfall]

*sides with Head*

Anyway with Iron Might now coming out, I figure more stuff for good/balanced Pr-classes in 3.5 is a given. At least if you like Malhavoc stuff, which I do.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I have a great relationship with my players. They are great role-players and they are also highly skilled roll-players. I think we have a rare balance of the two that keeps everyone happy. But, even if they want to take a class for good in-game story and character reasons, they will use the mechanics of the class (no matter what class) to be as effective as possible in the game. If that class happens to be a broken one, whether they intend it or not, it's gonna be bad for the game. That's what I'm trying to head off as obviously these boards have enough people that the broken classes have been "playtested" by. Maybe I can't preemptively stop every broken class from getting into my game before it's too late, but I certainly know several to avoid that have come up multiple times in this thread.

That's why you ask them "what is the class going to do for you?" and "whats the best you'll get out of it?". After you know the answers to these, you've got a really neat option when a class turns out to be far better than expected: You can limit it to doing what the player expected and wanted it to do in the first place. The player won't be disappointed (they got what they wanted in the first place) and you won't be too surprised (because most players CAN spot the power of the class they're taking).

 

[Nightfall]

Or alternatively he could just require them to go find someone to train them...and if they can't too bad.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Edit: Let me sum up instead of dragging this out. I doubt I will get you to cede any of these point, but here goes:
1) I disagree that SR is as pivotal as you claim, it only forces the MT to choose other equally valid options for spell selection.

Didn't say this, Psion.

2) I disagree that spells 1 or 2 levels off the highest are useless in a high level game.

Didn't say this either.

3) Domains are not equivalent to a wizard's whole spell list.

Certainly didn't say this. If I thought this, then I'd have made a statement to the effect that neither an MT nor a straight wizard can ever be as good as a cleric.

4) I disagree that spell endurance is irrelevant in high level games, based on both typical published adventure scenarios and adventures in my own campaign.

This I did say, and I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. However, I will point out that EVEN if endurance is a factor, then we're talking a scenario under which the MyTh is more like the non-casters than the casters; he's not as potent an instant nuke, but he lasts longer. He certainly doesn't have more "endurance" than the fighter.

5) Finally, you seem to be hinging your entire case around combat against high SR creatures, which is far from the only obstacle that characters face in a well rounded campaign and far from the only determinant in what makes a character whose utility other players will resent.

And NO, I am NOT doing this! I had no intention of continuing this particular discussion in the first place, but I do not appreciate this sort of strawmanning. Either face my arguments head-on, or just drop it.

 

[Al'Kelhar]

OK, thrown into the ring for debate:

Prestige Paladin from Unearthed Arcana is unbalanced. Not in a "oh my [deity], that's SOOOO BROKEN" way, but unbalanced nevertheless. It is balanced on the assumption that the character which takes the PrC has at least one level of fighter or ranger in order to get the necessary Ride ranks and the Mounted Combat feat, AND continues with the PrC for its whole 15-level progression.

However, a straight cleric can qualify for the class by 6th level, and since there's no multi-classing penalty for this PrC, can dump the PrC when he's got all the abilities he needs out of it (i.e. by 3rd level). The cleric takes 3 levels of paladin and only loses 1 spell casting level while gaining all the meaningful abilities of a paladin, better BAB, better saves (over those three levels, of course). The character then goes back to being a cleric. If you "do the math", a Clr/Pal3 is better than a Clr(n+3). A prestige class should never make a character a better generalist than a core class; the selection of a prestige class for "goodies" should never be a "no-brainer".

Cheers, Al'Kelhar

 

[passengerpigeon]

Most 10-level spellcasting PrCs. Most give out good abilities at most levels, and even if the abilities aren't earth-shattering they more than pay for the requirements and the turn undead/familiar stuff you gave up.

The real problem here is that the basic spellcasting classes suck and all they offer is additional spellcasting progression. What they SHOULD do is either a) give them a bunch of varied abilities and have the PrCs explore them or b) make some of the spells you get per level a class ability, so that you give up some spell progression by taking a PrC. In my opinion.

--p