The emancipation of feats and death of PrC's?(long)

[Celtavian]

re

I completely disagree with you. I am really tired of the use of feats. A character receives 7 feats with some bonuses for class and possibly race, yet their are hundreds of feats to choose from. Feats are far too limiting, and given many people's desire to model characters off storybook characters they have read feats should be more plentiful as should skill points.

I think feats should move to a level based system. You take a feat and it improves as you level. For example, if you choose the Power Attack feat, you will gain other abilities as you level showing a specialized fighting style that you are working on. If you take the Empower Spell Feat, it will become more powerful as you level granting other options to use with it like Maximize Spell or Widen Spell. If you take the Spell Focus Feat, it eventually becomes Greater Spell Focus as you level.

I'm hoping they start tightenig up the feat system in the future with level based feats. This will allow characters with limited feat selection to have more options for their character. The Cleric in my campaigns is one of the least played classes because of their limited feat selection. If there weren't interesting Prcs for clerics, it would be like pulling teeth to get someone to play one. The feat system definitley needs to be reworked to tie together feat chains allowing players to select a few feat paths that eventually allow them to become as they wish rather than having to painstakingly choose feats with a limited number of choices.

 

[the Jester]

I'm starting to lean more and more towards Crothian's "feat every level" paradigm.

 

[Land Outcast]

I'm starting to lean more and more towards Crothian's "feat every level" paradigm.

the previous post had me thinking about it...

 

[Baron Opal]

I disagree with the OP, but my point of view is that the PrC that I make for my game are almost always based on guilds or organizations. I design practically all of the PrCs for my game, and the requirements are usually a BAB or spell level minimum and a single feat. The feat gives a token related ability, a +2 to appropriate social skills, and unlocks the PrC for the character.

Not every person in the organization is a member of the PrC, but the higher ranking ones are. Most of my PrC are five levels. those that are ten are mostly caster classes, interestingly enough. I suppose that I could make the abilities of the PrCs feat chains, but I specifically want to have the players choose between the abilities of the base classes and the abilities offered by the PrC. I run an Aracan Evolved game, so there are generally more abilities gained over the course of a character's class. There are no classes like the sorceror, where the last five levels are the same as the first save for spell power.

And, as was mentioned above, there just aren't enough feat slots to begin with.

 

[Bront]

Baron Opal brought up a good point when he mentioned the sorcerer.

There are a few classes that do very little for a player other than some base abilities and skills, particularly at higher levels (Cleric and Sorcerer in particular, but Wizard and Fighter are guilty of this to an extent as well).

This is where PrCs come in. What's so special about making a sorcerer level, when I could make a Loremaster level and get some expanded abilities? Or fighter when I could be... well... all sorts of options? Greater Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Specialization aren't that enticing as a fighter, though some of the newere PHBII stuff sounds like it could be.

Everyone gets that feat, which makes it seem less special. And that's every 3 levels at that, which is too sparce at times. I have a vision of Character X, but I don't have enough feats to make it work, but with a PrC, it does work.

That being said, I do agree that some PrCs are poorly put togeather, either in how they are built, what they require, or in simply being a class + (Though not all that are class + only look like it at first glance).

 

[Gold Roger]

Ok, so most of you have stated various facts about the current edition that create a need for PrC's in addition to feats.

Most notably these are that there are few featslots and that many classes don't give much in the way of interesting abilities in their later levels.

Lets go for a moment to thoughts of a new edition of D&D, which will eventually come. Say in that edition there where more feat slots and classes where designed in such a way that the higher levels give new abilities. Would you still see a need for prestige classes?

Some stated that some players don't want to build theyr characters piecemeal. But they have to choose feats one way or another, don't they? In if a player wants a clear linage for his abilities, why not just tell the DM what his character concept is and have him present a clear feat progression.

Just as a aside, some people have spoken of classes and PrC's. I don't want to do away with classes, I love them. But I want them to shine over PrC's.

 

[Nellisir]

See, that's why I am giving out feats at every odd level.

I'm starting to lean more and more towards Crothian's "feat every level" paradigm.

I give out a feat every level except 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 20th, when they get ability bonuses. No one complains.

 

[Psion]

Lets go for a moment to thoughts of a new edition of D&D, which will eventually come. Say in that edition there where more feat slots and classes where designed in such a way that the higher levels give new abilities. Would you still see a need for prestige classes?

I think that one of the prinncipal failings of the current edition is not all classes provide a concrete benefit at every level (feat or class ability), though in d20 variants like d20 modern, such is the norm. I expect that to propagate back to D&D.

But still, I see perstige or advanced classes as useful for reasons I have already explained. The package and focus the abilities with a related concept, and make it easy for a player who would rather "subscribe" to a character design than "kitbash" one.

But I sense if Wulf still hung around, he'd agree with you. (Me, one of the greatest things about Grim Tales is you can use d20 modern advanced classes with it...)

 

[Psion]

I give out a feat every level except 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 20th, when they get ability bonuses. No one complains.

In Green Ronin's Advanced GM's Manual, one variant provided is a feat OR ability increase at every level.

I actually think I like your variant better. Seems less likely to get out of hand.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

Lets go for a moment to thoughts of a new edition of D&D, which will eventually come. Say in that edition there where more feat slots and classes where designed in such a way that the higher levels give new abilities. Would you still see a need for prestige classes?

Yes.
For the niche character types, who specilize in one type of ability to the exclusion of others, and for the "guild/organization" member types - I prefer that over the orginzation style that was presented in recent books.