Prestige Classes - A Crutch?

[Pants]

I believe PrCs, and the current multiclass concept, are the worst things that have happened to AD&D!

What's AD&D?

Yup, in "the old days", you could be a F/MU/T (that's Fighter/Magic User/Thief, or Fighter/Wizard/Rogue, today), but you started at level one, in each, and advanced in each class one level at a time...

OD&D is the only true version...

Now, you have to go F1, F1/W1, F1/W1/R1, F2/W1/R1, etc. Further, you have the brand-spanking-new ability to STOP taking levels in a class (even with the 20% XP Penalty - IF it's enforced!). So now, PCs can "cherry-pick" a level (or more) of Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger, and Monk, even despite the alignment restrictions, and be an Ex-Barbarian with nearly all the powers, abilities, and skills of their classes... Of course, if the 20% XP Penalty were strictly enforced, then there would be less of this.

God forbid I be allowed to make a character I want!
Cherry picking classes will make you suck, unless of course the class you're cherry picking is the 3.0 Ranger

The fact that "Prestige Classes are more powerful than regular classes", of course, makes an even bigger joke out of "most characters have only a single class". This is a laugh, in most games that I have seen.

A well designed PrC shouldn't be, it should make you give up something in order to be good at something else. And what you give up should be equal to what you gain.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of poorly designed PrC's out there

The simple fact that a F/Ex-Barbarian/Paldin/Ranger has an 8+CON Fortitude save, and more HP, and the same BAB as a fourth level F/Pal/Rgr, plus some other great abilities, is pretty bad. Add some Rogue levels to the mix, and/or some Monk levels, and the PC can have Improved Uncanny Dodge before a straight Rogue can, AND some added AC Bonus when unarmored... It becomes pretty silly to play just one class.

Don't forget that you'll be incredibly weak. You may have a lot of abilities, but they are going to suck. Rampant multiclassing is not the path to power.

 

[BryonD]

So PRC's are not a crutch, got it. What do you mean by the Feat example?

I mean that the two primary complaints about PClasses being expressed:
A) They redundantly do things that the system can already do; and
B) They can easily become destructive to character power equity

can also be applied to feats.

As I stated, there is a difference in degree.

If these two things establish that PClasses are bad, then feats are also, to some lesser extent, also bad.

Again, I disagree with the point. I am simply rhetorically claiming that once you start in with a flawed logic point, it is easy to reach other flawed conclusions.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I believe PrCs, and the current multiclass concept, are the worst things that have happened to AD&D!

Yup, in "the old days", you could be a F/MU/T (that's Fighter/Magic User/Thief, or Fighter/Wizard/Rogue, today), but you started at level one, in each, and advanced in each class one level at a time...

Now, you have to go F1, F1/W1, F1/W1/R1, F2/W1/R1, etc. Further, you have the brand-spanking-new ability to STOP taking levels in a class (even with the 20% XP Penalty - IF it's enforced!). So now, PCs can "cherry-pick" a level (or more) of Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger, and Monk, even despite the alignment restrictions, and be an Ex-Barbarian with nearly all the powers, abilities, and skills of their classes... Of course, if the 20% XP Penalty were strictly enforced, then there would be less of this.

The fact that "Prestige Classes are more powerful than regular classes", of course, makes an even bigger joke out of "most characters have only a single class". This is a laugh, in most games that I have seen.

The simple fact that a F/Ex-Barbarian/Paldin/Ranger has an 8+CON Fortitude save, and more HP, and the same BAB as a fourth level F/Pal/Rgr, plus some other great abilities, is pretty bad. Add some Rogue levels to the mix, and/or some Monk levels, and the PC can have Improved Uncanny Dodge before a straight Rogue can, AND some added AC Bonus when unarmored... It becomes pretty silly to play just one class.

And don't even get me started on the LN Druid/Monk!

I'm not entirely sure I understand your complaint. Is it just that you think some of these combos and PrC's are overpowering in some way, or that you disilke that people like to have choices when they play? This is a game we're discussing, after all, a leisure pursuit, as Psion said, not a job or religion or whatnot that requires adhering to a strict dogmatic paradigm. People want choices. You can limit them in your campaign if you'd like. It's easier to take out than put back in - you can eliminate multiclassing from your game, but if it wasn't available, you'd have a heckuva time putting it in (assuming the game had been designed not to accomodate it).

Some of your reasoning seems to come from the assumption that being able to survive combat is the overriding ability in the game. It's not, at least for a lot of us. Yeah, in a hack 'n' slash campaign like those I played in back in 1979, when I was 13, the ability to either deal out or avoid damage was paramount. That was fun - then. And, yes, I know that many decry the current game's focus on combat. But I can tell you, from experience with the new game, most of the other abilities and skills that work outside of combat are pretty dadgum important, at least in the games I've played in. In essence, these class combos and PrC's you are deriding are eggs with hammers - really good at one thing, but easily taken out when removed from their element. And that's what makes (well-designed) PrC's and multiclassing viable - the fact that, for the most part, they take away something in return for something else. I guarantee that as a DM, if I see a player loading up on classes just to be unkillable in combat, I'm gonna recognize that the PC in question is gonna overshadow other party members in combat, and I'm going to design scenarios that allow for the use of abilities other than combat survival. Even if a DM doesn't recognize this, eventually it will be seen in play, and even the newest newbie DM will know enough to adjust. Either that, or the campaign is gonna fall apart. It's not the game's fault if it's abused. An analogy I used to use was that of a car - just because you can drive 120 miles an hour doesn't mean you should. And if you wreck, whose fault is it? Yours or the car's? After all, a car can be used for a lot of other things besides driving fast.

 

[BSF]

I believe PrCs, and the current multiclass concept, are the worst things that have happened to AD&D!

I would disagree. Though, I liked my 1st Ed 7th Ranger/7th Druid. There were many times when he was the last person standing in some vicious combats. I cannot make him anywhere near as effectively in current versions of the game. However, I wouldn't change that.

The simple fact that a F/Ex-Barbarian/Paldin/Ranger has an 8+CON Fortitude save, and more HP, and the same BAB as a fourth level F/Pal/Rgr, plus some other great abilities, is pretty bad. Add some Rogue levels to the mix, and/or some Monk levels, and the PC can have Improved Uncanny Dodge before a straight Rogue can, AND some added AC Bonus when unarmored... It becomes pretty silly to play just one class.

Except for that 0 + Wis Will save. That periodic hold person is going to be a real pain.

I think the disparity in a multi-class build and a dedicated build are emphasized the higher level you get. Your sample build would have had spells as a dedicated Ranger or Paladin. Or, it would have had more feats, including Weapon Specialization as a Fighter. Or, an additional Rage per day as a Barbarian. Early on, missing those features might not be as apparent. But, later, you might start missing some of the advanced class features. Maybe the build is worth it? I don't know. I've never had a player try to build a real character that way.

In fact, I would seriously question why somebody was playing in my game if they couldn't justify a class choice such as that. On the other hand, if they were able to weave a wonderful story, I would be happy to let them play it. I would even point out some of the flaws I will eventually try to exploit so they can consider that before making the choice.

 

[frankthedm]

I alway found them to be an optional part of the game that was made a mandatory waste of space in nearly EVERY $uppliment produced.

 

[LightPhoenix]

I'm of the opinion that they're only a crutch if you let them be a crutch.

I also strongly believe in this wacky concept called free will. If you don't like them, don't use them. There are no D&D SS soldiers that come to your house and force you to like them, or to use them.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

http://www.3rdedition.org/articles/viewer.asp?ID=57

Now that I've gotten that link out there...

I agree. I see too many PrCs with bad pre-reqs ("hey, let's punish the player who dares take this PrC by making them take ranks in Knowledge (the planes)) to make up for the raw unadulterated increase in power.

Anyone remember the Zerth Cenobite PrC? You get all the monk abilities, and all you pay for it is taking 4 ranks in Knowledge (the planes), some other stuff every monk too anyway, and some fluffy requirement (go visit a monastery in Limbo).

And you get bonuses to attack rolls, saving throws, etc...

So, if you want to be a better monk, take that PrC. You'd be a fool not to!

I think they would be better off designing a PrC that is no more and no less powerful than a monk - just different - and not include any punishing pre-requisites in it, only those that make sense.

Even worse are PrCs like the archmage - what is it doing with that name? Why not call it "Finder of the Art's Secrets" or a better name that took more than a few seconds to come up with (both names)?

To top it all off, I rarely find PrCs that do what I want them to do. Sometimes (new) feats will do the job, other times there's something just ... wrong ... with them.

A friend of mine bought the WarCraft RPG, and I took a look at their variant of the "cavalier" PrC. It didn't look like a power trip, which was a plus IMO.

Unfortunately, it led you command mounts ... when you weren't even riding them! So, by riding mounts you can mind control them? That's not what I was looking for in a knight. I might as well make my own ... which I did. (Of course, I made it a base class so my mount won't be a dead end for the last 5 levels. But that's another story.)

 

[Hardhead]

But I mean come on..."Archmage"? the concept here seems to be "Better Wizard" unless I've missed something.

I don't think you've missed anything, which is a reason I dislike that class too. There are just too many PrCs that have no flavor, and are all Power. You know, for all the errata that Sword and Fist required, when you go back and look through it, it's just the kind of thing that PrCs should be - that they started out being. Most are tied to some organization or some secret society. All have a role, campaign-wise. And even if Fist of Hextor doesn't fit your campaign, it's easy to chang the name to another appropriate god. Compare it to later splatbooks like Defenders of the Faith, which for being a religious splatbook, had less god-themed PrCs than Sword and Fist! And none of them were memorable, except for power-tripping munchkins.

PrCs should be flavorful, balanced, and not just an "improvement" on a core class. So few live up to this, however.



- Z a c h

 

[Steverooo]

I'm not entirely sure I understand your complaint. Is it just that you think some of these combos and PrC's are overpowering in some way, or that you disilke that people like to have choices when they play?

Oh, I'm quite certain you didn't understand (and pretty sure you didn't really try, either). Let me elucidate.

1) Most classes offer a +2 on the "Good" save at first level. This is bad, because it allows a Fighter-type to take Brb/F/Pal/Rgr for a +8 Fortitude "Base" Save Bonus; the same as a 12th level Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, or Paladin! His trade-off? He loses only +1 on a Will save!

Problem 1 - Save Bonuses for multiclassed characters are too high, at least on the "Good" saves.

Fix 1 - Lower save DCs by one, and lower first level class save bonuses to +1, maximum, instead of +2. Another fix would be to make multiclassing work the same way as it did in AD&D (an older edition, for anyone who homestly didn't know), where once you multiclass, you continue to take that class, for life.

As for choices, I'm all for them, but the class system isn't, so much... and there are better ways to fix that than multiclassing to an (IMHO) absurd level.

2) I also have a problem with the apparent-WotC-doctrine that "Prestige Classes are more powerful than PC (Core) classes". Why? Why not make Core PC classes as powerful, and then allow PCs to chose whether or not to take Prestige Classes and forego the later levels of PC classes?

I fail to see how either limits player choice. Maybe I'm just blind.

I also believe that, if you really want player choice, that most abilities should be "featable", allowing PCs to modify their characters to suit what they want... This is the antithesis of the class system, however. I rather doubt that 4.0 will be a classless system!

There are other ways to do this, as well, besides rampant multiclassing. There are many ways, IMHO, which are better. A Ranger who wants to set deadfalls and snares shouldn't be forced to take Rogue levels, nor to join a specially-made "Trapper" PrC. He should be able to do it as a Ranger. IMHO, of course... YMMV. (And no, Profession/Craft Trapmakering won't do it - see the time & cost sections in the DMG, for why!)

In essence, these class combos and PrC's you are deriding are eggs with hammers - really good at one thing, but easily taken out when removed from their element.

This is a very odd statement, Colonel, especially since I didn't mention a single PrC in my example... If you're referring to the F/Brb/Rgr/Pal example, then by the same standard, a Fighter is also a Hemmer-wielding-Egg, and with a MUCH lower Fortitude save!

As for your contention that the example was "Hack & slash", take a Druid/Ranger/Rogue/Monk, and look at the Reflex saves... Not so combat-oriented, but, again, the Reflex save is higher than a fourth level PC of any of the named classes...

...A problem that needs fixing, even if you find the class combinations "silly". They ARE (and that was part of my point, eh?)!

[Edit]: Ah well, enough out of me... This will be my last post to the thread. Carry on!

 

[ciaran00]

I'm not trying to be a Troll here but, Does anyone else feel that prestige classes are a crutch for the less than creative?

No, you're totally correct. PrCs are the "video game" aspect of 3e... no real personal development, just official quantifications of benefits traditionally garnered only from roleplaying (now a part of "rollplaying").

Also, most and all PrC's are a class that's slightly handicapped (heh, some PrCs don't bother with this) with some spell-like-ability equivalent. Note the absolute similarity to Rifts C.C.'s and R.C.C.'s ... no real balance, but lots of arbitrary creativity as far as number-crunching goes.

ciaran