Prestige Class woes

[Desdichado]

OK, I know a lot of people complain about the glut of PrCs in the market in various imprints all over the d20 landscape. Psion said something in another thread, which I'm going to paraphrase, that struck me as particularly insightful though; good prestige classes are much more than simply mechanics, they are character concepts, and that's something that's worthwhile.

My first reaction was to type up some variety of "Hear, hear!" in reply to that, but it was a bit off-topic for that thread, and the more I thought about it, the more I thought that I'm still dissatisfied with the implementation of the concept anyway.

The theory of prestige classes allows, I think, for two specific meta-game concepts to be realized:

• Belonging to an organization that grants special class-related benefits (i.e., the Harpers, Red Wizards of Thay, etc.); or,
• Narrowing in on a concept that is too specific to really be a core class

The problem is, the more I've thought about it, the more I think PrCs are suboptimal at both of those tasks, for the most part. For the first task, I think it stretches credibility to envision too many organizations to which membership opens up all these "secret techniques." Granted, there's still room for some of that, but I think that there are better mechanics to invoke membership in some of these organizations for which PrCs is a bit much. The Iron Kingdoms book for example, has a number of membership feats which grant you a few minor, often roleplaying related benefits. Want to join the Iron Workers Union (or whatever the exact name of that organization was?) You take the feat, not a PrC.

And the problem with narrowing in on a concept that is not served by the core classes is, that you want to play that concept from the moment you envison the character; you don't want to "graduate" finally into the concept after levels and levels of play. Granted, you can still roleplay the concept, but if the mechanics don't support you, then that's an unsatisfying experience. If you want to play, for example, a swashbuckler (and we'll assume that you don't have Complete Warrior) you can multiclass fighter and rogue, getting a generally crappy character build that isn't really fighter, rogue or swashbuckler, until you finally qualify for the duelist prestige class, or you can work with your DM to modify either the fighter or the rogue class to make it work for the concept right from the get-go. To me, the latter option is so vastly superior that I'd never consider the former; if the DM wouldn't work with me, I'd either look for another DM, or look for another character concept.

Granted, I guess I'm not disagreeing with Psion too much; really good PrCs still fill a valuable niche in the marketplace, IMO, but that niche is smaller and smaller every time I look at it, and much of what PrCs do, I'd rather have some other mechanic do instead.

 

[takyris]

Honestly, kinda, yeah.

But I think that an important thing to note is that that's just for our playing styles. I don't get a big geeky thrill out of unlocking a previously un-takeable class, but a lot of people do -- and that's not a bad thing. One of my players will play Final Fantasy for hours upon end in order to get the full Hawaiian outfit, even though there's no point to doing so (uh, I think -- please note that I don't play FF). It's a mark of pride for him, much like qualifying for a PrC. That's not a bad thing -- it's a completely valid playing style.

Unfortunately, though, this brings up the choice of a) making PrC's clearly superior to core classes, so the folks who try really hard to qualify for them will get something for their trouble, or b) making them not better, so that people don't have to take a PrC if they don't want to do so.

 

[Psion]

For the first task, I think it stretches credibility to envision too many organizations to which membership opens up all these "secret techniques."

Perhaps related to my discipline IRL, but I don't think it needs be secret techinques at all, and you need not think of all the organizations as secret cabals or assassin's guilds. It merely need be a specialized area of knowledge.

To highlight what I mean, I particularly LURVE spellcasting PrCs. They make sense to me. Spellcasting is widely equated to an academic discipline, a realm that IRL has MANY specialties. I am an engineer and graduated with an engineering degree, but when I was going for my masters, it became obvious by the course selection that "electrical engineering" in and of itself, was not a course option. I had to choose something specific. I could have went into making chips, control systems, networks, analog circuits, etc.

So it appears to me magic is. The idea that advanced wizards would get into specific disciplines as they advance resonates with me. Wizards need not have some secret cabal... it could be a public academic discourse. The esotericness of their topic matter alone creates a barrier to entry.

Of course, this need not apply only to academic disciplines. I'm sure there are dozens of workers from all kinds of fields out there who can talk about their trades which they have, over the years, become uniquely qualified for.

The Iron Kingdoms book for example, has a number of membership feats which grant you a few minor, often roleplaying related benefits.

Nobody says all organizations need PrCs. Book of the Planes has membership feats as well. Spycraft and various other supplements have featured feats and PrC that have your organization as a prereq, but the PrC or feat is not universal. When I Translated my world to 3e, many organizations that were translated proved perfectly workable as is, using core classes.

And the problem with narrowing in on a concept that is not served by the core classes is, that you want to play that concept from the moment you envison the character; you don't want to "graduate" finally into the concept after levels and levels of play. Granted, you can still roleplay the concept, but if the mechanics don't support you, then that's an unsatisfying experience.

To this end, FWIW, I really dig the idea of substitution levels. Sometimes a full blown PrC is inappropraite, and a concept is so broad that many core classes arguably should have access to certain capabilities as is. Substitution levels fit the bill nicely.

If you want to play, for example, a swashbuckler (and we'll assume that you don't have Complete Warrior) you can multiclass fighter and rogue, getting a generally crappy character build that isn't really fighter, rogue or swashbuckler,

Too bad the swashbuckler is crappy too (I recommend the SA duelist or AU unfettered.)

I am all for new base classes, with a pretty strict caveat: that a first level starting character would be a member of the class must make sense. I also go mostly for broad, archtypal base classes, and those archetypes are chosen with the feel of the game I want to run in mind. Monk is hanging on by a thread, and the old Paladin is out. I allow Priests (the cleric is too martial to fit the role of all priests AFAIAC), Martial Artist, Shaman, Unholy Warrior (paladin is too narrow), Psion, PsyWar, Wilder, and I am really trying hard to justify Hexblade.

 

[SSquirrel]

OK, I know a lot of people complain about the glut of PrCs in the market in various imprints all over the d20 landscape. Psion said something in another thread, which I'm going to paraphrase, that struck me as particularly insightful though; good prestige classes are much more than simply mechanics, they are character concepts, and that's something that's worthwhile.

The theory of prestige classes allows, I think, for two specific meta-game concepts to be realized:

• Belonging to an organization that grants special class-related benefits (i.e., the Harpers, Red Wizards of Thay, etc.); or,
• Narrowing in on a concept that is too specific to really be a core class

The problem is, the more I've thought about it, the more I think PrCs are suboptimal at both of those tasks, for the most part. For the first task, I think it stretches credibility to envision too many organizations to which membership opens up all these "secret techniques." Granted, there's still room for some of that, but I think that there are better mechanics to invoke membership in some of these organizations for which PrCs is a bit much. The Iron Kingdoms book for example, has a number of membership feats which grant you a few minor, often roleplaying related benefits. Want to join the Iron Workers Union (or whatever the exact name of that organization was?) You take the feat, not a PrC.

And the problem with narrowing in on a concept that is not served by the core classes is, that you want to play that concept from the moment you envison the character; you don't want to "graduate" finally into the concept after levels and levels of play. Granted, you can still roleplay the concept, but if the mechanics don't support you, then that's an unsatisfying experience. If you want to play, for example, a swashbuckler (and we'll assume that you don't have Complete Warrior) you can multiclass fighter and rogue, getting a generally crappy character build that isn't really fighter, rogue or swashbuckler, until you finally qualify for the duelist prestige class, or you can work with your DM to modify either the fighter or the rogue class to make it work for the concept right from the get-go. To me, the latter option is so vastly superior that I'd never consider the former; if the DM wouldn't work with me, I'd either look for another DM, or look for another character concept.

Granted, I guess I'm not disagreeing with Psion too much; really good PrCs still fill a valuable niche in the marketplace, IMO, but that niche is smaller and smaller every time I look at it, and much of what PrCs do, I'd rather have some other mechanic do instead.

Ya know this is the 2nd or 3rd "Psion said..." thread I've seen in the last day or so *grin* Psion is obviously just, THE MAN! heh.


I think that there are definite pluses to both system really. Altering core classes to fit your world is always a good idea. Make the game work for you. Don't like a class? Kill it. Bring a class in from Arcana Unearthed or Midnight. As I said over here, there's many good PrCs out there that serve the purpose of injecting flavor or showing how to play a fringe style character like an Alienist. An Alienist is one example fo a class I don't think you would ever really wanna alter the core class to become. I mean, why on earth would that be the standard in a world? Its possible, but it would be a freaky ass world heh.


I think Psion is right about the whole narrowing your field of study aspect in Engineering and Magic both. Look at how EQ2 is doing things. First 20 levels you are one of 4 core classes. After that you gain levels as one of several specialty classes. After 10 or 20 levels of that you gain ANOTHER, more specific class and gain levels as that. I'm not familiar with how the tree runs so I can't post examples, but the EQ2 site has them.


As usual, it's your game, do what you feel is best. I personally would probably do a mix of PrCs, class alterations etc. Heck, next game I wrun will probly be a heavily altered AU w/the Weapons as SpecialFX rules, Revised GNG, and DrSpunj's Class Balance heh. I love the cool stuff I read about on ENWorld to steal for my own game.


Hagen

 

[DaveMage]

I wish that, like substitution levels, prestige classes were not "classes" but rather templates.

For example, you'd add this "prestige template" onto whatever character class you are already pursuing, and the template would work similarly to substitution levels (or in addition to normal abilities) based on the appropriate prerequisites.

That way, you could add multiple templates to customize your character even more. You could have, for example, Loremaster and Archmage templates added on to your sorcerer or wizard, which would provide benefits at certain levels. The "cost" for these templates would vary based on the power of the template. For wizards, it might mean a specific skill set requirement, or giving up metamagic bonus feats at particular times. You would still officially be a wizard or sorcerer, but would have added benefits that other wizards and sorcerers would not have.

It certainly would be preferable to me rather than the 100s of full-blown prestige classes out there which I probably will never use.

 

[DragonLancer]

Personally I think PrC's should be kept to a minimum. The core classes have 20 levels for a reason after all. But not just that, they should be there to represent specific campaign setting roles.

I mean, Scythe Warrior (made up name, not a real PrC) might be a great addition to a fighter who weilds a scythe, but does it fit your setting or is it just a there to please the player who has that concept?

Obviously YMMV but the concept of prestige classes has changed since their first appearence in the 3.0 DMG. Now they have become a player resource and are expected rather than being a reward or specific order.

Just my view.

 

[Klaus]

Take a peek at this page at the Eberron Journal. It takes Complete Warrior PrClasses and give them the "prestige" part, meshing them with the setting and making membership mean that you're a special part of the world:
http://www.coveworld.net/eberron/conversions-cw.html

There are pages for Complete Divine, XPsiHB and MiniHB as well.

This sort of creative thought brings PrClasses to life.

 

[Psion]

I mean, Scythe Warrior (made up name, not a real PrC) might be a great addition to a fighter who weilds a scythe, but does it fit your setting or is it just a there to please the player who has that concept?

Because we wouldn't want to please the players?

I personally have no problem having the players drive things. Of course, the DM retains exucitive veto power.

(Still no kender in my game...)

 

[Desdichado]

This has absolutely paralleled what I'm doing in my campaign -- I had a player who really wanted to do something with his character that wasn't allowed by the rules I had already established, but after some discussion, I agreed that it was perfectly within the scope of the vision of my campaign setting. Rather than introduce some wonky multiclass or prestige class option, I merely worked with him to work up the first half dozen or so levels of a new base class, which takes care of us for quite a while yet when we'll have to see how the class would continue to develop, assuming that character survives and continues his same direction.

To me, being a good GM (not that I really am) is largely about pleasing your players, and to me (and my players) playing the concept of their character, assuming it's in the vision of the GM's setting, is a large part of being pleased. I'm totally about modding base classes to get the desired effect, and then staying in that base class unless an in-game reason comes up to change it.

So, what do I do with prestige classes as a GM? Often, I just mine them for concepts and class abilities, which I can cannibalize on my modded classes.

Now as to Psion's interpretation of magic prestige classes being equilvalent to specialist fields, I can understand that. It doesn't really work in my current campaign setting, but I've actually tossed around that same idea for a d20 Modern based game where all the magic using classes would be advanced classes, and they'd all represent specific schools of magical thought. So I'm with you there.

 

[Turjan]

(Still no kender in my game...)

Players find workarounds. IMC, it's called "gnome" .