PRCs that dont offer full spellcasting progression

[Quartz]

Here's another side: prestige classes without full progression can be good for low-stat characters or characters in a campaign which isn't going to get that far. If there's no way you're going to get a 19 INT, you might well consider whether sacrificing the 9th level slot you'd get at 17th level is worth something else.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

In my opinion... The problem with spellcasting prestige classes that don't have full spellcaster progression is that there are spellcasting prestige classes that do have the full spellcaster progression. If *all* of the spellcasting prestige classes made you give up one (or more) spellcaster levels, then there would not be any problem with the spellcasting prestige classes that do not, now, give you a full spellcaster progression.

I mean... I can be a wizard or socerer and gain spellcasting... Or I can be this other prestige class and gain spellcasting AND extra powers? Sign me up.

Sure, if you're playing a wizard, you're giving up bonus feats... But how many bonus feats are you *really* giving up? Well... You're not going to get into your prestige class until level 6, so you're not giving up the one at level 5... And you're (unless you're in the minority of gamers) probably not actually going to make it to level 20, so you're not giving up that one. That leaves level 10 and level 15... Two bonus feats. For five to ten nifty class abilities... And if you're a sorcerer? Forget about it.

Later
silver

 

[Vraille Darkfang]

Here's another side: prestige classes without full progression can be good for low-stat characters or characters in a campaign which isn't going to get that far. If there's no way you're going to get a 19 INT, you might well consider whether sacrificing the 9th level slot you'd get at 17th level is worth something else.

This is about the only way I do it.

I'll also consider it if I know the Campaign's going to fizzle out by 11-12th level.

Of maybe if I'm playing a character concept just to, be, well, different.

But, If I'm making a character geared towards a long-term campaign & 20th+level, I'll never pick a Pure Spellcaster-Type Prestige class that doesn't give a Full Spell Progression.

Why?

If I have to give up 9th (and sometimes 8th) level spells, you gotta give me one heck of a PrC. By & large those classes features come no where near to the level of power those 8th & 9th level spells do. And if the DM lets in sources like the Spell Compendium, Dragon Magazine, & the various Sourcebooks the power balance shifts even further.

 

[Question]

Or is the problem simply that the standard wiz/sorc classes have no class abilities going for them except spellcasting progression, so it seems like the PRCs are even better versions of the normal classes with added bonuses?

 

[Tiberius]

Here's another side: prestige classes without full progression can be good for low-stat characters or characters in a campaign which isn't going to get that far. If there's no way you're going to get a 19 INT, you might well consider whether sacrificing the 9th level slot you'd get at 17th level is worth something else.

If there's no way that you'll hit 19 INT, then you have no business whatsoever being a wizard. Even starting with 10 Int, +4 from levels and +6 from a Headband of Intellect or similar magics gives you INT 20 at 16th level.

 

[Celtavian]

That's what Practiced Spellcaster is for (among other things). Yes, that is another feat, but there was a reason why you lost the caster levels in the first place... The feat is especially nice since it only helps those that still need help.

Practiced Spellcaster is 4 levels. It is not enough. I would assume that people who play Bladesingers and Spellswords would actually like to have their spells be effective at times and would also not want to have everything they cast easily dispelled.

I can understand limiting caster levels for everything except for spell resistance checks and caster level against dispels. When caster level is so limited that it makes a player ineffective against the common creatures with SR fought at a given level, you eliminate a fair portion of that player's power. And if a single dispel from a straight caster can elminate every effective spell you can cast, you have to wonder why they even gave you casting ability as it is useless at high level against your most potent enemies.

Just doesn't seem like good design. I'm pretty sure people who play Paladins, Rangers, Spell Swords, Bladesingers, and the other prcs and core classes with 10 caster levels or half-caster levels would like to be effective against powerful enemies with their already limited spellcasting power as they progress in level.

 

[Kafkonia]

Practiced Spellcaster is 4 levels. It is not enough.

I think that's an overstatement. If you select a 10 level PrC that only advances casting every other level, at level 10 you'd be down only one caster level. Unless the PrC is really crummily designed, that's not such a bad tradeoff for the extra goodies.

Especially since until that point you'd be neck-and-neck for caster level.

 

[boolean]

Argent Savant (at 1st level) gets Force Specialization. +2 competence bonus on attack rolls made with force spells and +1 per die to damage.

Sorry this is totally incomparable to gaining more spells and/or higher level spells known. Between getting, say, 8th level spells or this, i would gladly take 8th level spells. I am not saying it is not a nice class ability.......it makes orb of forces much more potent than they already are, but it cant be compared to spellcasting progression.

I agree, +1 damage per die isn't worth losing a caster level.

So I'd never take just a single level or Argent Savant.

That caster level isn't just paying for the first level abilities. It's also paying for the level 2-5 abilities. You have to look at the class design as a whole, not just a single level.

 

[Mistwell]

It really depends on the caster and the concept you have for that character.

For example, I think Elemental Savant could really be worth it with the right energy caster concept. Bonuses to a wide range of attack spells are much harder to come by in 3.5 than they were in 3.0.

 

[Sejs]

Or is the problem simply that the standard wiz/sorc classes have no class abilities going for them except spellcasting progression, so it seems like the PRCs are even better versions of the normal classes with added bonuses?

That is part of the problem, yes.

Particularly with the Sorcerer.