Prestige Class woes

[Arnwyn]

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

Not sure what the problem is, here. Just don't have "too many" organizations with PrCs in your campaign and you're all set.

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.

I definitely agree with you.

It's certainly why I have long since ignored books in which PrCs are a focus.

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,

"Merely", huh? I think that term would have better fit the multiclass option...

 

[Desdichado]

"Merely", huh? I think that term would have better fit the multiclass option...

Well, there wasn't really a multiclass option that would've done what we wanted it to. What he's essentially going to be using is a fairly heavily modified hexblade.

 

[Greg K]

As I mentioned in the thead about what bugs me about 3e, I am of the opinion that Prcs should be a last resort and that customizing the class (3.0 PHB/p.94, PHB/p.110 and UA) should generally be the first resort or occassionally a new base class. Then again, I was arguing for more use of customization since shortly after the start of 3e and don't know how many times I would throw it out as a 3rd option whenever people would say the only choices for customzation in 3.x are multiclass or Prc.

Back in the day before Monte switched his server and opened Malhavoc, I had posted several fighter variants using the Thug example as a guideline. I also posted them on the WOTC board, but lots of people were telling me that I was creating new classes :\ . Others such as Sonofapreacherman, had posted an option about allowing wizard to get a form of bard lor. And I had been using the Wilderness Rogue and, a form of Barbarian hunter long before UA.

The nice thing I find with customzation, is that it allows a character to play a lot of character concepts from first level and at the same time take some of the sting and awkward of multiclassing just the straight core classes.

My own campaign uses a lot of customized classes and some non core classes while dropping some of the PHB classes.

Barbarian: Players can chosse the PHB bararian (berzerker) or the barbarian hunter from UA (although they get Favorite Terrain instead of Favorite enemy and may choose from Archery, Two weapon fighting, or Mounted Combat)

Bard: Bards fall into 3 categories all though I working on a non-spell casting version, the Skald.

Arcane Sage(UA): modified to receive no rogue skills and a modified bard list which includes loss of healing spells.

Divine Bard: modified to lose the rogue skills and has a modified bard list which loses some of the Arcane spells.

Troubador: Closer to the PHB bard, this variant loses healing spells and has a modified spell list.

I plan to add a skald class which gets no spells, but I am still debating how I want to do this.

Cleric: All Clerics are are variants. the type of variant depends upon the deity served which also determines the cleric's specialized spell list and domains. Variants include:
Cloistered Cleric (UA)
Divine Defender (UA)
Healer (Mi HB)
Specialty Priest (e.g. the female clerics of one deity are variants of the divine defender, but give up all Armor in exchange for a Monk's unarmed AC bonus, and are limited to very few weapons in exchange for flurry of blows and the OA Shaman's unarmed attack damage).

True Druid: A cloistered cleric variant posted both on Andy's board and here on Enworld (under house rules). It tires to get the druid closer to what I view a Celtic druid


Druid: The class is dropped and replaced by the True Druid cleric variant and Green Ronin's Shaman Class.

Monk: does not exist (replaced by the specialty priest example given above).

Paladin: do not exist (replaced by the divine defender from UA)

Psychic (Green Ronin)

Ranger: Is currently included and currently fills the role of the militant arm or the nature goddess . However, I might ditch it in the future. I dislike base classes that receive late spell casting. Furthermore, I already have the wilderness scout, the ex-hunter fighter variant, and the barbarian.

Rogues 3 Variants

phb Rogue:

Thug (UA): the list has a few fighter combat feat and a lot of Rogue Feats, This allows the character to focus on various rogue archetypes that might not be sneak attack types or combat types.

Wilderness rogue: This is used for standard hunters, scouts and the old 2e outlaw kit

Shaman (Green Ronin),

sorceror: (the class itself has some small tweaks)
battle sorceror is allowed

Swashbuckler (Complete warrior)

Witch (Green Ronin)

Wizard:
militant wizard is allowed
scholar wizard: may give up bonus feats for +2 skill points (to be spent on class skills) and Sage Lore

wizard, Specialists
All PHB specialists follow the specialist options for trading feats in UA (with slight modifications-- e.g., Illusionists have no ties to Shadow in my campaign)
All PHB specialists have their own spell lists
Variants specialists from PO: Spells and Magic can be used. Each gets their own unique spell list.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

While I think that prestige classes are perfectly useful in multiple ways, I'm not afraid of restricting their presence in my campaign setting. There are a lot of classes which simply don't fit - base and prestige alike, even in core.

On the other hand, I have no problem with the so-called "glut" of prestige classes in Wizards and third-party supplements, because I like new ideas. If the people you play with seem to assume they have a right to bring anything Wizards publishes to the game - which, for some reason, seems to be a common complaint among people objecting to the number of prestige classes out there - then the problem you have is your players, not Wizards.

 

[Desdichado]

My problem is players who play Wizards.

 

[Zoatebix]

Slightly off topic: what is the "SA duelist" mentioned by Psion above? I can't for the life of me think what "SA" stands for... I do love the unfettered, though.
-George

 

[Saeviomagy]

I like prestige classes. I think that at their core, they're a good mechanic for basically one thing - extra specialisation.

They're a way of packaging up positives and negatives so they're (more or less) balanced.

However, I think they need some changes:

I hate the "you must have x ranks in y skill and 5 useless feats to qualify for this prc"

Why? Because they require oddball metagame knowledge to function.

For instance - why should a PrC require skill RANKS as opposed to total skill mod? How on earth does that have an in-game effect on the PC? He personally has almost no way of finding out whether his ability with a skill is based on a good attribute, his skill focus feat, or the number of ranks, and which of those it comes from has absolutely no impact on the character whatsoever.

Or classes which require toughness. Take 3rd level characters PC A and PC B. PC A has a con of 13 and the toughness feat. PC B has a con of 14.

Assuming the same hit dice rolls, they've both got the exact same amount of hitpoints. But PC B wouldn't qualify for dwarven defender (for instance).

Or endurance. Or skill focus. Or whatever.

In short - in my next campaign, I'm going to let people qualify for PrC's in a much more organic manner.

As an example. Dwarven defender requires dodge, endurance and toughness, a base attack of +7, you must be a dwarf, and you must be lawful.

I don't see why only dwarves can get into the PrC. So I'll scrap that right off the bat.

I don't see why only lawful characters can get in - from now on if your character has a stubborn streak, he qualifies.

I don't see why those particular 3 feats are necessary to the class, so I'll replace that requirement with "you must have one agility-focussed feat and two toughness-focussed feats".

I don't see why it should have to be a particular base attack bonus. From now on you qualify if you've got a melee attack bonus of 10 or more before magical augmentation.

So someone with combat expertise, great fortitude and self sufficient could qualify.

Finally of course, I'll stick to the rule that a PrC requires GM approval before you enter it. If your PC seems, to me, to fit, you're in. If not - forget about it.

 

[SteelDraco]

It's Swashbuckling Adventures, AEG's d20 version of 7th Sea.

 

[Psion]

Slightly off topic: what is the "SA duelist" mentioned by Psion above?

Swashbuckling Adventures, by AEG. Has a trove of core and prestige classes, though I only use the courtier and may yet decide to use the duelist.

 

[philreed]

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.

This idea goes well with the "character development templates" I've wanted to do for over a year now. Mind if I catalog your idea away with my own? I may someday take some time to work on my own idea and could see including your idea in the same product.