No prereqs for PrCs. A crazy idea?

I am playing with the thought of removing all prereq for Prestige classes. Would this be totally unbalancing?
I don't think so. With the exception of classes that get a 9th level spell at 10th lvl and the like, would it really mess things up?

Everything else would stay the same, so to get +1 caster lvl, you would need to have a spell casting class already etc.

Besides the mystic theurge, is there something I'm overlooking that makes this a particulary bad idea?
Thanks

:)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Why would any spellcaster stay for more than the first level in their class then ?

With even halfclever players they will find some combination that will lead to characters that are much more powerful than characters made by standard rules. Thats certain for both spellcasting and melee characters.

Without going in to details and using only the 3.5 DM I think you would see loads of Assasins (for rogue types), Characters with one level of shadowdancer (again for rogue types), Arcane tricksters (straight out better for any arcane spellcaster than the base classes, especially for a sorcerer), Loremasters (agueably better than any base arcane class), Thaumaturgist (better than any arcane base class), Arcane archer (most fighter types would love to spend 1 level for always having +1 arrows), Eldritch knight (for a caster/fighter type, take one level as wizard /sorcerer and then you are set to go).

IMO its a terrible idea, but that could be because I do not understand what you are trying to accomplish.
 

Sorcica said:
I am playing with the thought of removing all prereq for Prestige classes. Would this be totally unbalancing?
I don't think so. With the exception of classes that get a 9th level spell at 10th lvl and the like, would it really mess things up?

Everything else would stay the same, so to get +1 caster lvl, you would need to have a spell casting class already etc.

Besides the mystic theurge, is there something I'm overlooking that makes this a particulary bad idea?
Thanks

:)
Most people who remove mechanical prereqs for prestige classes replace them with roleplaying prereqs. So you still have to find the organisation involved, do what they want you to do, get trained with them, etc. There's also more of an onus on everyone not to abuse the system, so make sure you don't have any players who are likely to take undue advantage of this.
 

monboesen said:
Without going in to details and using only the 3.5 DM I think you would see loads of Assasins (for rogue types), Characters with one level of shadowdancer (again for rogue types), Arcane tricksters (straight out better for any arcane spellcaster than the base classes, especially for a sorcerer), Loremasters (agueably better than any base arcane class), Thaumaturgist (better than any arcane base class), Arcane archer (most fighter types would love to spend 1 level for always having +1 arrows), Eldritch knight (for a caster/fighter type, take one level as wizard /sorcerer and then you are set to go).

But is this terrible? They would give up the core class' abilities. Arcane archer means a bonus feat less for fighters, and that will affect weapon spec. etc.
Eldritch Knights would give up a spellcasting lvl, rogues give up skil points and special abilities, arcane trickster gives up bonus feats and special abilities etc.

After they have taken the PrC, they would have to find another class again. I do see a problem if they just switch to yet another PrC.

But I do agree that this idea is less good regarding sorcerers. IMO, that because they stink from the start. There has never been any reason to stay in the sorcerer class from the beginning, IMO. I don't think the familiar is worth it.
 

I think it would have quite a dramatic effect on the types of characters that you see.

Humans, i suspect, would become less common. One of the major advantages of humans is that the exra skill points and extra feat often allow entry into a PC a level or three earlier than a demi-human could.

I would definatly include a minimum entry level, as many class features (especialy spell-like powers) might be far too powerful for low level play. This is even more evident when you look at level 10 class features being available at 11th level.

Also I would suggest enforcing that characters have to stay in a PC until its complete, or you will end up with some of the worst cherry picking possible.

Overall I would instead say to your players that your prerared to be more lenient on PC Preq and see what they ask for.
 

As I tried to strain, but such things are difficult in posts, it depends on your intentions, the campaign and the players.

The reasons prestige classes have prequisites is off course to limit the entry level and pay valuable skill points and feats on suboptimal builds. As mentioned by Hong prestige classes should ideally also be tied in with organistions, cults, special heritage and the likes. I would strongly suggest that you keep it that way.

If you have mature players and carefully review the possible prestige classes then no, it does not have to be terrible. But it will require work to keep players on approximately the same powerlevel.

If your aim is to allow players more options (as in getting acces to prestige class abilities) you could instead dole out more feats and let such abilities be valid choices for feats.
 

It seems to me that this would encourage pcs to 'cherry pick' prcs. There are also a number of prcs that seem balanced to me only because they require you to spend a bunch of otherwise less-than-ideal feats to get in; then you get tons of good stuff to make up for the prereqs that you had to take.
 


Too overpowered

The prereqs are there to make it difficult to multiclass into drastically different classes, that have differet fosusses.

Imagine an Fighter/Dervish/Dwarven Defender/Horizon Walker; with the actual prereqs this would very difficult to attain becuase they don't overlap, but without prereqs, who's to stop you?
 


Remove ads

Top