Were PrC's done all wrong?

[Numion]

I was just here thinking about the good 'ol Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. A great game, though bad mechanics. Or not necessarily bad, but it's an old system, and it shows. Anyhow, it had an experience system where you started with a simple career, such as Fisherman, Watchman or even a lowly Rat-Catcher. Quite mundane classes.

Once you had completed the class you could perhaps move on to an Advanced Career. (If you met the prerequisites) Those were the stuff that real adventurers made of. Freelances. Explorers. Scouts. Lawyers

So first, basic career. Then other basic career or an advanced career.

Got it? Good.

Quite like D&D. First a core class, then perhaps a prestige class when you have met all the prerequisites. But you could continue as a vanilla fighter.

Now this is where I think 3e goes wrong. The vanilla fighter is still supposed to be the best in fighting. Wizard should be the best spellcaster. And so on.

Shouldn't the weaponmaster be better fighter? Or archmage the better spellcaster? But it's against the normal policy. (Which wotc has broken themselves.) The vanilla classes should always be the best in their field. That's what's maybe wrong IMHO.

What if the core classes only went to level 10, and by then you would have to go to an 'advanced' or 'prestige' class. Those classes would be varied in focus, but not necessarily benchmarked against the core classes in power / level ratio. I think that would be seriously cool, or it's just the Warhammerer in me speaking

So what do you think of my idea? Standard classes would only be stepping stones to the more focused prestige classes, that shouldn't be compared to the core classes. And you couldn't continue past level 10 in a standard class.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Salutations,

No, because prestige classes are an option in the DMG.

Plus, I don't find much prestige when every one of your basic class will become one as well.

Finally, the current system allows a lot of flexibility: low & high level prestige classes, dm tool for organization construction, allowing for great variance in characters instead of a rigid one.

FD

 

[Desdichado]

Prestige classes aren't anything like advanced classes, though, which really are advanced and "better." They're simply more focused, and if done right, more flavorful, not better.

Then again, the fighter shouldn't necessarily be the "best" at fighting; he should be the most flexible good fighter though. Another "fighting" prestige class might actually be better, but much more limited: can only fight with a certain weapon, for example.

 

[LostSoul]

Then again, the fighter shouldn't necessarily be the "best" at fighting; he should be the most flexible good fighter though. Another "fighting" prestige class might actually be better, but much more limited: can only fight with a certain weapon, for example.

The problem I've got is that a Fighter20 who has focused on his longsword technique for all those levels isn't as good with his longsword as the Fighter10/Prestige Class10.

The way to get around this would be to use Prestige Classes as story elements: the Fighter20 would have heard (at level 10) of the great teacher of the longsword, and he could have searched him out for new secrets. (Although we have to ask: if our Fighter couldn't develop new techniques on his own, how could the great teacher?)

I've got some kind of problem with prestige classes... but I'm not exactly sure what it is, yet.

 

[Andor]

One of the problems with them is that prestige classes represent more than one thing.

Some of them represent Secret societies/Special guilds who teach secret techniques (Ninja of the Raped Rulebook, Knight of the Old Kingdom)

Some of them represent deals with otherworldly powers, or progressive growth away from humanity (Acolyte of the skin, alienist, ooze master, elemental adept)

Some of them represent natural specializations of existing classes and may or may not require any special training (Duelist, Weapon Master, Lore master)

Some of them are variations of classes adapted to specific places or situations (planar champion, Lord of the desert, city watchman)

Too many people try to cram these different things into the same conceptual space, and then get a headache.

-Andor

 

[Celebrim]

If you ask me, prestige classes shouldn't have been done at all.

Without exception, all the prestige classes seem to be minor variations on some basic class (in fact, in most classes it is clear what class you should be in order to take the class) except that you get more 'feats' than the basic class. Granted those feats are often more specialized and you aren't allowed to select them (less flexible), but the special abilities of any given prestige class always seem to add up to 1 or more new feat (equivalent abilities) per level, or at least more 'feats' more often than you would otherwise get.

That bothers the heck out of me. For one thing, I detest the fact that the prestige classes so limit character development. They give the impression that any one with X prestige class is pretty much the same as anyone else with X prestige class. If anything, the prestige classes seem vanilla to me compared to the regular classes. Secondly, it bothers me that if you don't take a prestige class you are slightly limited compared to those that don't. In my opinion, one new feat equivalent ability every OTHER level ought to be pretty close to the limit on a class.

I'd much much rather see the more interesting prestige class abilities become feats with the prequisites such a feat suggests. That way, if you wanted to become say, a 'master of chains' or a 'master samurii' (to name some of the more popular choices), then you could be a fighter and take feats which would suggest that sort of skill.

I don't see how they add to the game at all. There sole purpose seems to be to allow a character of Y level to do Z a couple levels before he or she could otherwise achieve those things if they had to buy those abilities as feats. They are player driven, power driven, ego driven classes rather than devices to aid role play. And the way they are handled in the various class supplements suggests this.

And 95% of the published PrC's I've seen are cheesy any way.

Ok, I'll go one further. The sole reason to include PrC's in the game was to give WoTC something to publish so they could make more money. More print is wasted on PrC's than almost any aspect of the game, and it seems you can't publish a new product without a prestige class in it.

 

[Tonguez]

If you ask me, prestige classes shouldn't have been done at all.


I'd much much rather see the more interesting prestige class abilities become feats with the prequisites such a feat suggests. That way, if you wanted to become say, a 'master of chains' or a 'master samurii' (to name some of the more popular choices), then you could be a fighter and take feats which would suggest that sort of skill.

And 95% of the published PrC's I've seen are cheesy any way.

I agree with most of Celebrims comments in as much as the D20 publishing community has gone overboard and created PrCs just as page fillers to sell more books.

Prestige classes have lost their Prestige. They should have been Setting specific creations and not just a long list of 'new class features X+Y!

I also agree that a Feat-tree system (maybe like Modern D20s 'Talents' would have been a much better way to create your PrCs and provide a easily usable system for DM sto create their own setting specific creations

eg "okay if your PC is a member of Barnabies Flying Circus you get access to the Feats - Hire-wire walker (prereq balance +4), Spiderclimb (Climb +6) and Slowfall (tumble +6)" sort of thing

 

[Harlock]

I'll say I agree with Celebrim on most counts. I DO see a roleplaying advantage with PrCs, though. I see them more for NPCs rather than PCs. As a DM it's kinda cool to be able to call an NPC an "Oozemaster" or some such. It just helps define the character in a nutshell. Name recognition really. Instead of the evil cleric your party runs into the Pale Master, Hetticus. As far as PCs go, it can help a player get a better "vision" of there character, but I think it's a bit too narrow. I like PCs with more options, but that's only my opinion and honestly SOME of the PrCs I have seen give options. Otherwise I just find PrCs too overdone. Everybody and their Grandma (no offense Morrus) has a dozen or more PrCs it seems. How many Ninjas does the world really need?

 

[hong]

That way, if you wanted to become say, a 'master of chains' or a 'master samurii' (to name some of the more popular choices), then you could be a fighter and take feats which would suggest that sort of skill.

But nothing compares with seeing "master samurai" or "master of chains" written up there on the top of your character sheet, baby.


Hong "and yes, I'm serious" Ooi

 

[Marion Poliquin]

Like others I believe that prestige classes are a good idea that went wildly out of control. originally, Prestige classes were supposed to represent setting specific affiliations and/or represent a sacrifice of flexibility in order to focus on a very specific specialization.

What we ended up with is a deluge of prestige classes thrown pêle-mêle at the consumer. And sometimes it seems that every new concept in third party D3D products require an accompanying prestige class.

And third party publishers aren't the only culprits. We get 7-10 new prestige classes in every issue of Dragon these days. Sheesh.