PRCs that dont offer full spellcasting progression

[Quartz]

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.

You could, of course, be playing in a game without stat boosters, or a low power campaign.

Or, of course, you could have started off with a high INT, and somehow during play got it reduced to 3 - add 5 for Inherent Bonus and 6 for your Headband of Intellect +6 and you're still only at INT 14.

 

[irdeggman]

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.

Aha I think we have come to the heart of the matter.

Prestige Classes are supposed to have a specific fit or role. They are suppposed to be more focused than the base classes. They should not, IMO, be simply a way to make a core class more powerful. DMG II pg 204+ give some pretty good backgorund and explanation for prestige classes, IMO, - more detail than is in the DMG.

 

[Keldryn]

Aha I think we have come to the heart of the matter.

Prestige Classes are supposed to have a specific fit or role. They are suppposed to be more focused than the base classes. They should not, IMO, be simply a way to make a core class more powerful. DMG II pg 204+ give some pretty good backgorund and explanation for prestige classes, IMO, - more detail than is in the DMG.

Precisely. The way I see it, the original intent behind prestige classes was that a character would sacrifice a bit of general power and versatility in favour of greater abilities within a narrow, more specialized area. A prestige class is an "advanced class" with specific requirements to qualify -- both in terms of game mechanics and in role-playing -- and thus it should be more powerful within its area of specialization than with a base class. But the character will lose out on something that she or he would have otherwise gained by staying in that base class.

It's pretty much a no-brainer for Sorcerers and Clerics to choose a prestige class, as they don't lose a whole lot. It's not really a difficult decision for many Wizards either. Interestingly enough, Druids have a full spellcasting progression, and they also get a number of unique abilities all the way through to 20th level.

I would definitely like to see the whole concept of prestige classes re-evaluated and re-designed. Every base class should have features that make them worth playing through to 20th level, and choosing a prestige class should be a difficult decision.

 

[Warmage-in-Onley]

There is a balance issue with some Prestige Classes that you simply have to give up something for what you get in return. There's also the question of when in the spellcasting progression you forego a casting level. For example, the Fiend-Blooded from Heroes of Horror does not gain a caster level at level 10, but he does gain the following: +1 to Dex, Con, Int, +2 to Str, immunity to poison, dr 10/magic, and an additional spell known (subject to a not overly stringent limitation). That's not too bad of a tradeoff...

 

[Corinth]

There is no PRC benefit that beats spell-casting progression. Far better to collapse the PRCs that have dead spell-casting levels down to the point where they become classes that offer full progression than to take them as-written.

 

[Cephid]

There is no PRC benefit that beats spell-casting progression.

Now I know it is not a PRC, but what about monk1 and asthetic mage?
At 12th level with Cha 27 (max + cloak of cha) you get:
+10 AC
- all day long
- while flat footed
- against touch attacks.
- +2 to all saves,
- imp. grapple
Now that seems as good or better than 1 level of spell progression.
What do you recon?

 

[IanB]

IMO, there should be no prestige classes that offer full caster progression (arcane OR divine) without either significant non-optimal costs for entry (example: loremaster's skill focus in a knowledge skill, archmage's skill focus in spellcraft) or significant costs to the non-casting abilities gained from the class (archmage's loss of spell slots.)

The loremaster is borderline, the archmage seems to be OK. The loremaster passes because it requires you to burn a feat on a bad choice and the abilities are weak; the archmage passes because you pay a double cost for the extra abilities. Almost all the other full progression classes I can think of are overpowered in my book.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Almost all the other full progression classes I can think of are overpowered in my book.

Of course they seem that way. That's because familiars suck and turning undead sucks. There's otherwise zero benefit to core classes (src, wiz, clr) (druids have some benefit, so I'll skip that) other than the spellcasting progression. Only the wiz has extra feats.

Thus, any PrC that offers full spellcasting progression would have to offer NOTHING to even be considered not overpowered when you compare it to core classes. But, is this a problem in PrC's or the core classes? There are numerous attempts at solutions, of course, but I have the opinion that many (full progression) PrCs are not overpowered, but that the core classes are underpowered and, quite frankly, suck. I would allow full progression on all but the most powerful of PrCs and only gimp a level on the main bonus acquisition level. As a player, I would not be able to stomach playing only a core class. If no full progression PrCs were allowed, I would simply not play a primary spellcaster.

 

[Corinth]

Now I know it is not a PRC, but what about monk1 and asthetic mage?
At 12th level with Cha 27 (max + cloak of cha) you get:
+10 AC
- all day long
- while flat footed
- against touch attacks.
- +2 to all saves,
- imp. grapple
Now that seems as good or better than 1 level of spell progression.
What do you recon?

I'd rather have another 9th level spell slot.

 

[Arkhandus]

The fact that full spellcasters (clerics, druids, sorcerers, wizards, etc.) are already more powerful than everyone else means that, really, a few levels worth of spellcasting progression sacrificed for an interesting prestige class is STILL leaving them at a similar or greater level of power than the rest of the party. By the time a full caster can enter a prestige class, he or she is already flinging around 3rd-level spells or better, so they're already contributing heftily to the party with Lightning Bolts, Hastes, Blinks, Flies, Dispel Magics, Magic Circles Against Evil, Protections From Elements, Displacements, Invisibility Spheres, Hold Persons, Suggestions, and whatnot. Not to mention the trusty Magic Missile, Ray of Enfeeblement, Rope Trick, Bull's Strength, Web, and Knock, for instance.

Really, what fighter can do anything similar in power to a wizard casting Horrid Wilting or Summon Monster IX? Isn't the wizard/elemental savant just as well off as the fighter when he's just casting Maximized Fireballs and Empowered Walls Of Fire with similar save DCs and such to those 8th and 9th-level spells? And he's got nifty abilities like being able to stride through the Elemental Plane of Fire unburnt. Sure, he's probably not quite as effective as the full wizard, but he's still plenty effective enough to be useful in the party and not disappointing or burdensome.

I've never had a problem with PrCs that give only partial spellcasting progression. Neither have the groups that I've gamed with the longest (I've gamed with many groups briefly, but only a few for any significant length, and thus only a few long enough for prestige classes to come into play). I'd love to play a Fatespinner, Elemental Savant, Spellsword, or Pale Master (one of my PCs is on his way towards Spellsword, but that campaign went on hiatus some months ago).