Should Some Prestige Classes have Attribute Requirements?

[Crothian]

In Dragon 274 Monte Cook wrote and article on designing prestige classes and one of the suggestions in there is attributes should not be used as prerequistes to prestige classes. Now in the past two and a half years we have seen a mixture of prestige classes and some have had attributes as prequites and some have not. So, what do people think about using them?

 

[Eternalknight]

No they shouldn't as ability scores are not character choices.

 

[Dungannon]

I voted for option 3. As per our previous discussion, I think it depends on the specific PrC being created, and the idea behind it.

 

[Carnifex]

As per our previous discussion, I voted for option 3, for the same reasons as Dungannon.

I would like to point out, I do not think your poll is really worded quite right, as it is currently strongly weighted towards getting number 2 as a response. This is because answer 1, the 'yes they should', sounds like you're saying that the option 1 is for people who think that ability score prereq's should be a widescale, almost compulsory part of a PrC. I think few people believe that...

As I argued earlier, I merely see that there are some cases in which ability score prereqs are perfectly justified, no matter what Monte Cook might say.

 

[boothbey]

As the creator of the prestige class that sparked the discussion, thought I would add my two coppers worth.

The skald class that I created is essentially a barbarian/bard hybrid. They tap into their inner rage (barbarian) and combine that with thier motiviational bard type abilities. I prefer to use attribute requirements as it makes a qualifying for the class less restrictive. You are free to build the character more how you wish rather than having to jump through a number of hoops.

I did add a few skill requirements as well as requiring ability to rage and use bardic music to the class. The attribute requirements were added as the character taking the class must have the strength to prove his ability in battle, and the charisma to bring those properties out in others.

The class is meant for people with the talent needed to be able to take the class and less on the idea of proper training. They are after all, part of a barbarian culture.

 

[LrdApoc]

Boothbey, I fail to see how adding attribute requirements makes a class less restrictive.. since Feats also have minimum requirements, would it not be better to use feats as the limiters.. then the character not only has the statistical prowess, they also receive the bonus of the feats abilities?

Personally I think making classes based on attributes is a design esthetic that dates back to 1e, and in a game built on random die rolls for statistics you are potentially penalizing the player for creating a concept before the numbers are in place.. shouldn't you reward the player by allowing them to work their way into the concept through planning and choice?

As far as the strength requirement.. why not make this a special requirement and allow the GM to decide if they feel the character is worthy of the class..

Feats also do not necessarily mean training.. they are often natural or raw talents.. especially the fighting feats.

 

[Wormwood]

Many PrC's require Feats with stat prereqs. Some require that you "can cast X level spells" which assumes a minumum Int, Wis or Cha.

So no, I don't have a problem with a simple stat requirement for PrCs.

 

[Carnifex]

Ah yes, I managed to completely forget two points in the debate yesterday.

Firstly, as I had said, if you use points buy then your characters stats *are* choices. Even if you didn't, though, you get an extra ability point at every 4 levels - and where you put that point is your choice, therefore again making stats something of a choice.

Also, as Wormwood said, there is basically no support for an argument saying that ability scores as prereqs are a bad mechanic when many, many prc's already use them as prereqs, albeit in a veiled way. A PrC that requries power attack means that it has a prerequisite of 13 strength. The same with several other feat prereq's, like expertise or dodge - they are limiting the PrC to only individuals with high enough ability scores in the relevant areas.

The same with minimum spellcasting levels. A PrC that requires a minimum of an ability to cast 3rd level divine spells is demanding characters with a minimum Wisdom of 13, since you can't ast 3rd level divine spells if you have a Wisdom of any lower.

As such, on the basis of the myriad of PrC's already provided for us, saying that ability scores should not be used as PrC prereq's because they are no character choices is not necessarily a very valid argument.

 

[Thresher]

Depends what you want to flavour your PRC with, I dont really have a problem with it being imposed if its to add character.

Say you where building a PRC for something related to feats of strength where a character could lift or carry more than normal, sort of a Hercules type thing (sure, maybe you wouldnt make that class but it might still have some appeal for some people), youre hardly going to have Joe Smoe with his Strength of 12 and Con of 10 pushing over brick walls, lifting a cart with one arm and hiking 30miles with a tree trunk on each shoulder.
Theres a limit to what should be reasonable to most people's imagination without some numbers to back it up.

 

[WattsHumphrey]

I said 'other.'

This is mostly because the flavor of the PrC is far more important than the requirements. If the requirements meet the flavor then I don't mind. If they appear tacked on to keep normal people out of the class, then perhaps the whole class needs some rethinking.

The only requirements I've seen that I really don't like are equipment requirements. A good example of this is the Lasher's (S&F) need to own a whip. Now, IIRC, if a character loses the rereqs, they lose the class abilities. Destroying or losing the only whip you own removes the Lasher's abilities. Now I'd consider that a silly ruling, and I'd just let the abilities stand... but by the rules...