Should prestige classes be better than base classes?

[Felix]

Ding, ding! TANSTAAFL.

TANSTAAFL?

But they won't because about half the player base really like them (in the same way drug addicts like heroine)

You had an argument until this ad hominem. Too bad. I'll just go off and enjoy my heroin because I'm an addict and don't know what's good for me, shall I?

Most prestige classes are laughably overpowered

Nonsense.

Spellcasting PrCs that give up more than 3 casting levels will miss those 9th level spells when they tangle with their base-class opponent.

Archer PrC's still have to deal with this.

Melee PrCs still have similar weaknesses to base-class meleers: relatively weaker ranged attacks and Will saves.

Gish PrCs attempt to combine low-HP and low-BAB classes with melee, with more and less success.

But to say, "Most PrCs are laughably overpowered" is either ignoring weaknesses that specialization presents or defining "overpowered" as "slightly more effective in his ballywick".

If you sincerely believe that PrCs are overpowered to the extent they ruin games (which is how I would define "overpowered"), then please define overpowered to your satisfaction or support your claim.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Nonsense.

No, it isn't. But if you wish to believe that it is, well. . . fair enough.

Spellcasting PrCs that give up more than 3 casting levels will miss those 9th level spells when they tangle with their base-class opponent.

Hm, and how many spellcasting (as in, that's their FOCUS) give up "more than 3 casting levels"? Hm. . .

Archer PrC's still have to deal with this.

Right, and archerycentric base class builds are so much better at dealing with that or any other associated risk, how exactly?

Melee PrCs still have similar weaknesses to base-class meleers: relatively weaker ranged attacks and Will saves.

But, for the most part, they gain *a lot more* in terms of power than the (roughly) equivalent base class(es) configuration. Frequently, in terms of power in all meaningful ways. Yes, all.

Gish PrCs attempt to combine low-HP and low-BAB classes with melee, with more and less success.

Whereas gish base class builds, not so much? *snort*

But to say, "Most PrCs are laughably overpowered" is either ignoring weaknesses that specialization presents or defining "overpowered" as "slightly more effective in his ballywick".

No, it really isn't.

If you sincerely believe that PrCs are overpowered to the extent they ruin games (which is how I would define "overpowered"), then please define overpowered to your satisfaction or support your claim.

That is not how I define overpowered. As I have *already very clearly implied*, my definition is: "If prestige classes, on the whole, result in more overall power than do any of the (approximately) corresponding base builds, then they are in fact, on the whole, overpowered." By my definition, whereby base classes should continue to be truly viable options (i.e., not totally redundant) right through level 20, or even beyond, they are - on the whole - noticably overpowered.

So, despite the fact that you only requested a detailed definition from me on the condition that my definition matched your own, I thought I'd clear this one up (I hope), regardless.

It's quite deliberate, the design decision involved. If you like that decision, more power to you. No pun intended.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

TANSTAAFL?

There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

As I recall, that's from Robert Heinlein.

 

[Nightfall]

Unfair! No one is allowed to post my ideas whilst I am away! I protest! They came forward in time and stole my idea!

I'd feel bad about it if I hadn't been away for a year or so.

Oh, and you're both fluffy bunnies.

I prefer the term "Light weight herbivore with buck teeth" myself.

 

[IamTheTest]

I think PrCs should be better than base classes but more specialized. That is to say, I view PrCs as PhDs and base classes as holders of Bachelors (still smart just more broad).

 

[DragonLancer]

Funny how things can change.

Quite, but as I see it, the only reason that things changed was because WotC saw that they had a major player mechanic on their hands. If they filled every splat book with several new PrC's, they would make more money. Not that thats a bad thing on their part, a company has to make money after all, but it has added a new dimension to PrC's that they weren't designed to be.

 

[Psion]

There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

As I recall, that's from Robert Heinlein.

I don't know if it originated there, but Larry Niven used to quip it.

 

[Psion]

Hm, and how many spellcasting (as in, that's their FOCUS) give up "more than 3 casting levels"?

Many, especially older ones. It finally occurred to some designers that, once you had progressed through 10 levels of a PrC, what you were getting over the course of those levels wasn't worth the tradeoff of your most powerful spells.

I often find that I have to tweak the spellcasting advancement of spellcasting PrCs to make them even close to playable.

Of course, may older and 3rd party PrCs had the opposite problem, of not really giving anything up at all. But overall, AS, I think you are tarring with a big brush.

 

[Felix]

No, it isn't.

I remember this argument for elementary school. I believe my response should be "Yes it is."

Hm, and how many spellcasting (as in, that's their FOCUS) give up "more than 3 casting levels"? Hm. . .

Arcane Trickster
Archmage
Eldrich Knight
Heirophant
Loremaster
Mystic Theurge
Thaumaturgist

Gee, in the DMG, about half. Whaddya know. And the Eldrich Knight isn't going to be any kind of effective in melee without taking more than one Fighter level, so that would be another.

Or perhaps you meant, "Of all the spellcasting PrCs that don't give up any spellcasting levels, how many of them give up more than three spellcasting levels?" Then I'd have to say you are quite right. Or is that what you meant by "(that's their FOCUS)"? So suddenly any spellcasting class that gives up spellcasting levels doesn't have spellcasting as their FOCUS? Good circular logic, that would be.

Right, and archerycentric base class builds are so much better at dealing with that or any other associated risk, how exactly?

Terribly sorry, I thought you would have been interested in knowing how a PrCs still have weaknesses.

in terms of power in all meaningful ways. Yes, all.

[Meta]This response is a broad generalization that I cannot possibly support to counter your own.[/Meta]

Whereas gish base class builds, not so much? *snort*

Wheras gish base classes are signifigantly underpowered. The PrC attempts to bring them back into line with a single-classed build. Snort yourself.

No, it really isn't.

Ah, back to this. "Yes, it really is".

"If prestige classes, on the whole, result in more overall power than do any of the (approximately) corresponding base builds, then they are in fact, on the whole, overpowered."

So if PrCs are better at their speciality than base class builds, which are more generalized, then they're overpowered. No wonder you have the opinion you do.

So, despite the fact that you only requested a detailed definition from me on the condition that my definition matched your own, I thought I'd clear this one up (I hope), regardless.

My apologies, there should have been a negative in that statement: "If you don't believe X, then define or defend your opinion" or something along those lines. But since you decided to provide the definition, I'll suggest that if someone is determined to find something, they'll find it: you don't like PrCs, and you've contrived a way to "prove" that it's the case.

It's quite deliberate, the design decision involved. If you like that decision, more power to you. No pun intended.

This is similar to the, "Heroin addicts like heroin, more power to them for shooting up." I suppose since I'm such a powergamer and don't have any idea about proper game balance I should just be on my merry and not discuss things like this when the grown-ups are in the forum.

 

[Psion]

Gee, in the DMG, about half. Whaddya know. And the Eldrich Knight isn't going to be any kind of effective in melee without taking more than one Fighter level, so that would be another.

I would NEVER take more than 1 fighter level in an EK build.