No Prestige classes allowed

[KB9JMQ]

Never played in a game where Prcs weren't allowed.
But since 3E came out we have had only one (Hunter of Dead) ever tried.
My group just doesn't pick to go the Prc route.

In the Eberron game we just started my wife is going towards Arcane Archer. We will see if she sticks to the plan

 

[Felon]

I've played in a PHB-only campaign which, among other things, nixed prestige classes. I found it pretty stifling, but nobody else cared. To each their own.

Prestige classes are just an option, but they're a pretty darn good one. They give players something to keep driving towards, and a means to establish themselves as unique. DM's who put the kibosh on PrC's wholesale are often of the "my world first, my players second" school of thought. Allowing players to explore options can just muddy up the DM's beloved world. Best to keep the players enclosed in a neat little pen.

 

[Mighty Veil]

I stop using them in the games I run. I don't get too much complaints. I do allow in their place more core classes and feats.

 

[Cor Azer]

I've played in a PHB-only campaign which, among other things, nixed prestige classes. I found it pretty stifling, but nobody else cared. To each their own.

Prestige classes are just an option, but they're a pretty darn good one. They give players something to keep driving towards, and a means to establish themselves as unique.

Do you really need a prestige class to be unique? Personality and concept don't factor in?

And what level of "uniqueness" are you seeking? In the party? In the campaign world? In the whole realm of D&D? In the small scope, almost everything will be unqiue since there won't be enough characters to have much overlapping; in the larger scopes... someone else has probably had the exact same idea while your character concept may be rare, it's likely not completely unique.

DM's who put the kibosh on PrC's wholesale are often of the "my world first, my players second" school of thought. Allowing players to explore options can just muddy up the DM's beloved world. Best to keep the players enclosed in a neat little pen.

~All generalizations are false...

Some DMs just don't want to deal with more rules than necessary. For them, it's not a DM vs players, or campaign world vs players issue - it's a "I'd like to keep my sanity/have time for non-gaming things instead of buying and reading scores of extra rulebooks"

 

[Presto2112]

Personally I like prestige classes, but I have had games without them. But no they are not needed and it is entirely possible to have a great and varied game without them.

I've been playing in my current campaign for 4+ years, and to my knowledge, I'm the first person to take a PrC (Argent Savant, Complete Arcane). I'm really enjoying the character, but the difference between this character and a straight Evoker who focused on Force Spells is probably minimal.

 

[Fishbone]

I like prestige classes, mostly because of one group I was in was totally gung ho for them. You weren't jack until you prestiged. Me? I like them because they're mechanically stronger than the bases, as they ought to be, and they help me fill out concepts better.

 

[Bardsandsages]

I only allow prestige classes when they make sense for the character, not because someone suddenly decides they just got the latest edition of Dragon and it has this cool prestige class in it with some special power they want at 3rd level. If someone wants a prestige class, they have to clear it with me in advance (a level or two before they actually meet the conditions) so I can work it into the game.

If it seems a natural progression for the character, I normally allow it and work it into the story. If not, I just say no.

As far as my own characters go, I rarely use prestige classes in my builds. There isn't that much in prestige classes that I can't do myself with the right combination of skills and feats.

 

[Mallus]

DM's who put the kibosh on PrC's wholesale are often of the "my world first, my players second" school of thought.

Let me offer another point of view. Some DM's, namely me, feel that their distinctive "world" is the best thing they have to offer their players. The locus of fun. I'm far from the best combat DM (some might argue I'm far from good). I'm not a natural plotter. But I can make entertaining game worlds for people to muck around in. And part of making those worlds depends on being able to remove game elements as much as to add them.

If I nix something its not because I'm putting the players second. It's because I understand my strengths and I want to keep playing to them.

My current beloved homebrew of CITY (see Story Hour, really, its good) can accomodate just about anything; "Iaijutsu Master? Sure. Deepwood Sniper? Fine. Mad Alchemist with a clockwork cat for a familiar. Sounds lovely".

But not everything. And that's a key difference. I know what won't work, or at least, what will get in the way of me presenting the best part of my game, such as it is.

Allowing players to explore options can just muddy up the DM's beloved world.

Doesn't that more rightly apply to what PC's are allowed to do in play? Not the particulars of how they're constructed.

Best to keep the players enclosed in a neat little pen.

I've seen PC's penned in by plot, not so much by the parameters of character generation.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Do you really need a prestige class to be unique? Personality and concept don't factor in?

I have to disagree with this part. No, you don't need a PrC to feel unique ... but that's no reason to not allow them. Prestige classes can do more than make you an uber character. They give unique abilities that the CORE rules don't speak about. They can be used appropriately to obtain a unique vision for your character.

I don't like DMing for people who "must have PrC or this characters sucks." Why? Because a wizard 20 is a pretty darn powerful character, a fighter 20 is a sight to fear on the battlefield, a cleric 20 can do just about anything it has 15 minutes of notice about, and a rogue 20 can do just about any skill it feels necessary to learn. Core classes can get you there. But PrCs can be another tool to help envision the character.

Some DMs just don't want to deal with more rules than necessary. For them, it's not a DM vs players, or campaign world vs players issue - it's a "I'd like to keep my sanity/have time for non-gaming things instead of buying and reading scores of extra rulebooks"

I'll agree with this part. Keeping up with all the new rules can be daunting. Keeping up with all the class abilities can be daunting, too. I can respect someone who says to their players up front, "I'll DM, but I need limits on what I can keep track of." But that's also no reason to judge someone else who allows them. [Not saying Cor Azer is judging. That last statement is general, not personal, please!]

 

[Felon]

Do you really need a prestige class to be unique? Personality and concept don't factor in? And what level of "uniqueness" are you seeking? In the party? In the campaign world? In the whole realm of D&D? In the small scope, almost everything will be unqiue since there won't be enough characters to have much overlapping; in the larger scopes... someone else has probably had the exact same idea while your character concept may be rare, it's likely not completely unique.

Personality and concept are great things, but they're intangible qualities intrinsic to the character. I'm speaking of rewards the character has to earn within mechanical parameters, not unlike questing for a coveted magic item.

~All generalizations are false...

No, all generalization are general, which means they're not commited to 100% accuracy. But many are pretty valid nonetheless. I, of course, can only speak to my experiences.

Let me offer another point of view. Some DM's, namely me, feel that their distinctive "world" is the best thing they have to offer their players. The locus of fun. I'm far from the best combat DM (some might argue I'm far from good). I'm not a natural plotter. But I can make entertaining game worlds for people to muck around in. And part of making those worlds depends on being able to remove game elements as much as to add them.

That's a point of view I can accept, although I've never experienced it personally.