No Prestige classes allowed

[Plane Sailing]

I'm playing in a campaign where the DM decided at the outset that there would be no prestige classes.

I'm quite disappointed, because there are several character concepts that I'd love to play which involve prestige classes, but hey... you go where the game is, right?

 

[Plane Sailing]

I'm pretty happy with the way I use PrCs in my games...

1. 95% of the PrCs are tied to an organization (whether it says so in the book or not) and there is some roleplaying heavy stuff that has to take place to join one.

2. Entry requirements and powers of the PrC are flexible insofar as getting the right "flavor" is concerned. Not to make the class beefier or simpler to get into.

3. Players are limited to one 10 level PrC and one PrC that allows up to 5 levels. So at most someone could have 2 PrCs.

With those strictures in place, I think it works great for me.

This is pretty much the same strictures as I use in my own D&D campaigns, and I've been very happy with how it has worked out.

< soapbox >
Although many people legitimately disagree, I personally think that WotC made a major foulup when they started disassociating prestige classes from organisations in their first round of splat books, and moved them from the DMG (something to build character into a world) into the PH style stuff (cool things to do with your character).

I think the former is inspired, the latter is insipid
</ soapbox>

 

[Cor Azer]

I'm sorry, but, in this day of technology, that's an incredibly poor excuse. If the player wants to play a PrC, and you don't have the book, hie him to the nearest 7/11 and a photocopier. 50 cents later and you have the PrC in hand and you don't have to worry about buying a new book.

1. That's copyright infringement, in all likelihood, and hence illegal.

2. Very often (not always, but often enough) prestige classes in supplements deal with other rules also in those supplements (Imagine trying to pull in a PrC related to a new magic system without the rest of those rules). That requires a lot more rules to be copied (see 1).

That notwithstanding, very often the rest of the supplement will have other tidbits that balance that PrC that may not be directly mentioned in the PrC (ie, opposing classes), or flavour details that speak to how the class relates to the campaign world at large. Sure, you could copy these as well (See 1), but as a DM who doesn't own the book, how do I know you got all of the relevant pieces? This isn't just a "I don't trust my players to not cheat" - I've played a plot of games with my friends, and sometimes we just accidentally overlook things - having the actual book in front of me (not just borrowing it) gives me time to read it thoroughly so I understand all of the implications.

 

[Cor Azer]

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.

To be fair, I was moreso asking about people who feel that a character can only be unique if and only if (to use a mathematical proof term) the character has a prestige class. I agree that a PrC can make a character unique, but it is not the only way to do so.

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.

As I (at least tried to) have implied, I do permit prestige classes to some degree (generally, they need to be tied to organizations and tailored to the campaign), so I'm really acting as the devil's advocate to learn about other perspectives here. Specifically, I'd like to know why other people would prefer to take a prestige class, rather than your aforementioned magic item or a specific feat, or even just a particular high level ability in a core class as the mechanical reward they seek? Is there some thing specific about the prestige class in question, or just having a prestige class in general?

~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.

My bad... I used some jargon from another message board I frequent - we use a ~ in front of a statement to idicate irony, sarcasm, or wry comments. Stuff not to be taken completely literally.

 

[Psion]

My only beef with PrCs (and I've had them in my games to some extent) is the pre-planning required to get there. I think it makes characters less organic and contributes to some of the munchkiny crap that annoys me (the 'I'll take 1 level of this and 1 level of that and this feat from this splatbook and I can qualify for Ubermage a level early' stuff).

IME, cherry picking happens more often with the requirement-less base classes.

Another reason PrCs are a better choice than the base-class-mill.

 

[Sir Brennen]

I once suggested that Feats should have level-dependent improvements. As you'd go up in level, each Feat you have would add functionality according to a pre-determined progression...possibly different for each feat. "Low-power" feats might improve every level. "High-power" feats might only improve every 3 or 4 levels.

And those level-dependent improvements would essentially be other feats.

Example: Power Attack would have improvements such as Cleave, Great Cleave, Sunder, etc. Power Attack, a fairly useful Feat, would improve every 4 levels.

Iron Heroes does this with levels of "Feat Mastery." Basically the core "feat chains" are just added levels of the same initial feat.

 

[GlassJaw]

My favorite system for creating characters is Grim Tales. Just 6 generic base classes, no multiclassing penalties, pick the core skills and abilities you want, and voila, no need for overly-specific and limited-focus classes or prestige classes.

Overall, I don't like the class = job mentality that 3.x has, both with core classes and prestige classes.

It's not so bad with the core classes (but it's still there - what if you want a rogue without sneak attack or a unarmed non-monk brawler? Those archetypes are tough to do with core classes alone) but with every book that comes out, the new classes and prestige classes get more and more specific. Whatever happened to the idea that core classes were supposed to be generic?

The more generic the system, the better IMO. Actually require the player to have a character concept and choose the abilities they want rather than thumbing through a ton of splat books to find the uberest prestige class they can.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

< soapbox >
Although many people legitimately disagree, I personally think that WotC made a major foulup when they started disassociating prestige classes from organisations in their first round of splat books, and moved them from the DMG (something to build character into a world) into the PH style stuff (cool things to do with your character).

I think the former is inspired, the latter is insipid
</ soapbox>

I empathize greatly with your sentiment.

The PrCs I tend to like are ones that strike me as personal path of becoming something else, rather than a means to become X per cent better at some combat related task. Organizations are a big help in creating the right kind of context, although the only way.

I agree, cignus_pfaccari, that we probably would need more feats to handle this as an elegant substitution for PrCs. In principle, it is a doable change, although it might add to the bookkeeping.

 

[Felon]

< soapbox >
Although many people legitimately disagree, I personally think that WotC made a major foulup when they started disassociating prestige classes from organisations in their first round of splat books, and moved them from the DMG (something to build character into a world) into the PH style stuff (cool things to do with your character).

I think the former is inspired, the latter is insipid
</ soapbox>

I've often wondered what organization obsession is. Does there really need to be a cabal of whipmasters or acrobats out there in order for me to take the lasher or thief-acrobat PrC? If you needed an organization to become a specialist, how did the first specialists ever come into existence?

 

[Gryffyn]

In my case, it's not an obsession with organizations. I disagree that PrCs should be used to create specialist characters at all. Where PrCs are used to give characters bonuses instead of flavor, they become as bad as 2e kits. Tying PrCs to organizations forces you to consider the campaign flavor first, and put any of the min/maxing on the back burner, or forget it entirely.

I would be very happy in a campaign with no prestige classes, but I have no problems with them as long as the DM is on the ball and makes things fun for everyone.