Why LEVEL is never a prerequisite for PrCls

[Li Shenron]

(inspired from a thread in House Rules)

Isn't it there actually an explicit rule or at least guideline since the 3.0 DMG that suggested the DM not to use character level as a requirement for a PrCl?
I think there is, but I am not 100% sure if in some supplements there have been any PrCl with such a requirement.

I'd like to know from you what is the real reason for this. I seem to remember that the original idea behind this was that all characters should be open to qualify for PrCls, and a certain level could make it easier, but should not be required. A supporting idea was that "level" isn't an in-character concept and therefore it's always better not to have to explain why a certain level is required.

Now after all these years I've seen hundreds of PrCl, ALL OF WHICH were designed exactly to put a MINIMUM level to qualify, either by requiring a certain BAB or a certain skill rank.

Gamers are quite used to this way of design, and I think that most are ready to support it's "goodness", but somehow it bothers me.

BAB actually works pretty fine as a requirement, as it is used (normally) only for combat-oriented PrCl. It is also better for in-character explanation, since it represents a general experience in fighting, and nothing else does.

Skill ranks are slightly more complicated.
First, they are used in nearly all PrCl to determine the minimum level.
Pay attention to the fact that a character that has that skill as class skill qualifies at level R-3 (R being rank required), but one that doesn't have it qualifies at level 2R-3, which is more than double.
Nothing wrong with a Shadowdancer requiring 10 Hide ranks, but while a Rogue can become one at level 8, a Fighter or Wizard could only at level 18. It's a very large difference, maybe too large.

If the PrCl seems like it really should be open to any character equally (not there are many examples, but imagine a PrCl about being admitted to a noble or knightly order), why not using character level and forget about those tricks that put a minimum level anyway? What would you use instead?

I don't understand why character level has become a taboo in PrCl requirement... no reason to be a sacred cow because it isn't older than 3ed. I'd like to know what problems I could encounter in a PrCl designed with such a requisite.

edit: used smaller fonts on parts which are not related to the main question

 

[Psion]

There was a guideline to that effect in an old Dragon article.

In a way it makes sense, because level is sort of a nebulous concept. I view many prestige classes as continuation of existing ability, so in that case, it does make more sense to key it off actual capability. That said, since a design principle is that prestige classes should get capabilities in line with the character level not class level, it makes it an important balancing criteria to practically enforce a given level. Some PrC design would be easier if you call out level explicitly.

 

[philreed]

There was a guideline to that effect in an old Dragon article.

According to the DMG II:

Character Class or Level: This requirement discourages creativity among players. Base attack bonus effectively sets a minimum character level, but not every prestige class requires a minimum base attack bonus.

 

[WayneLigon]

Nothing wrong with a Shadowdancer requiring 10 Hide ranks, but while a Rogue can become one at level 8, a Fighter or Wizard could only at level 18. It's a very large difference, maybe too large.

That right there is the reason not to use character level. Most PrC's are based around a concentration on certain skills and abilities. People who are very good at those skills and abilities go on to take the PrC so they can continue to refine those certain aspects. Thus, Rogues can become Shadowdancers early on because that's part of what they do normally. ShadowDancers are based around being stealthy and sneaky. Fighters, while they are capable of such things, are really pretty bad at it.

Using skills/abilities/BAB requirements also stiffles the 'but why can't my character be an X?' arguement right away.

 

[Dingleberry]

That right there is the reason not to use character level. Most PrC's are based around a concentration on certain skills and abilities. People who are very good at those skills and abilities go on to take the PrC so they can continue to refine those certain aspects. Thus, Rogues can become Shadowdancers early on because that's part of what they do normally. ShadowDancers are based around being stealthy and sneaky. Fighters, while they are capable of such things, are really pretty bad at it.

Using skills/abilities/BAB requirements also stiffles the 'but why can't my character be an X?' arguement right away.

More specifically, rogues who put skill points into the appropriate skills can become ShadowDancers early on. An 8th level rogue who has NO ranks in Hide shouldn't qualify to be a ShadowDancer simply by virtue of his rogue level.

 

[Old Fart]

I have always assumed it was to allow "monsters," i.e. creatures that start with a base number of hit dice, such as gnolls, trolls, giants, lizardmen, etc., to qualify for Prestige classes. The "base creature" might qualify (or partially qualify) for a PrC with it's BAB and/or skills, before it would have enough "levels" to do so.

 

[Flyspeck23]

Now after all these years I've seen hundreds of PrCl, ALL OF WHICH were designed exactly to put a MINIMUM level to qualify, either by requiring a certain BAB or a certain skill rank.

There's a difference in telling the players that they have to be real sneaky in order to take the Shadowdancer prestige class, and telling them to take 5 levels of rogue.

The taboo has nothing to do with allowing only characters of a certain level to take a prestige class (that's what BAB and skill ranks do, as you've already said), but rather not to tell players to take a certain class.

 

[Li Shenron]

Before the thread goes the wrong way: I didn't mean "X levels in class Y" as a requisite, but rather "character level X", regardless of the class, in a way similar to the Leadership feat.

And the example of Shadowdancer was for a class where indeed the requirements as skill ranks are just fine (even if I pointed out one possible problem).

 

[billd91]

Before the thread goes the wrong way: I didn't mean "X levels in class Y" as a requisite, but rather "character level X", regardless of the class, in a way similar to the Leadership feat.

And the example of Shadowdancer was for a class where indeed the requirements as skill ranks are just fine (even if I pointed out one possible problem).

I think characterizing a prestige class by listing its requirements in abilities and powers (BAB, Skill ranks, etc) feels less metagamey. You're focusing on the actual abilities needed to enter the class. Caracter level, by comparison, is one level abstracted from the character's actual abilities. Character level actually implies very little about what the PC can and cannot do since it has nothing to do with any particular class chosen. And I think for prestige classes, we're more concerned with what the character can actually do.

 

[Estlor]

IMHO, I think it has to do with 3e's mantra: "Choices, not restrictions."

The idea is to make a prestige class something independent from the base classes, focusing on the talents and abilities you need to enter it without zeroing in on the nuances of character level. As a player, you can CHOOSE to persue a prestige class or not, and in doing so, it forces you to CHOOSE how early you can access it. If I said you have to be character level X to enter a prestige class, it takes away some of the choice. You know that, no matter what you do, you have to be at least level X to enter. If the prestige class is tied to feats and skills instead, you might be able to reach it by level Q if you sacrifice some other developments to push for the prestige class, or you might take your time and not qualify until level Z. But the idea is the choice belongs to you, not the game designer.

Another way to look at it is a good 3.xE/d20 designer is telling you things you CAN do, not things you CAN'T. You CAN get into the prestige class once you have at least 10 ranks in Hide, not you CAN'T get into it until you're at least 8th level.