Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Vocenoctum" data-source="post: 2385474" data-attributes="member: 2477">Fighters are mixed, given feats are still useful, but a lot of Fighter PrC's give feat equivalents, so it's fine. But really, sorcerer's get a free ride in a lot of PrC's, they have nothing but spell progression, so they lose less than anyone else. Though a lot of Cleric PrC's give full spells PLUS full turning, which is unbalancing.Rangers are a bad example, simply because they (and rogues & Monks) get stuff nearly every level now.Paladins and Barbarians are middle of the road, getting stuff, but it's more scattered. Bardic PrC's in general give spellcasting progression as well as bardic music progression of a sort, so they lose less.The worst offender for me, is the ones that give their own spellprogression. It's mostly a waste of time to have a spell progression worse than a paladin or ranger at your level. (And those two progressions aren't really that great either.)Characters with PrC's should be balanced against equal level PC's withough, but so often I don't take a PrC because of feat choices. Quite often, PrC's they think are "too good" are countered with Useless Feat prereq's that just send me elsewhere. A feat should be thematically linked at least, but how many CW PrC's had Combat Expertise? It's a defensive feat, not a "skillful" feat. (IMO ofc)</blockquote>