Why Prestige Classes?

WotC does publish a lot of feats. CW, XPH, and all the 3e splatbooks are feat rich. PrCs take so much space because they are more complicated.

It's posible I'm hulicinating, but I think WotC is slowly starting to publish fewer PrCs. Wait, I just took a look at the Player's Guide to Faerun, I think I was hulicinating. (My players must be putting some strong drugs in the pizza...)
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Snoweel said:
You also weaken humans as a race.

*blink*
For a moment I thought you were spouting Darwinian/Nietzschian philosophy.

You are correct, human would lose an advantage. So give it something else like "skill focus".

But I stand by my opinion that many PrCs are chosen to avoid the XP hit as much as the search for non-base/non-core classes.
 

kigmatzomat said:
*blink*
For a moment I thought you were spouting Darwinian/Nietzschian philosophy.

You are correct, human would lose an advantage. So give it something else like "skill focus".

But I stand by my opinion that many PrCs are chosen to avoid the XP hit as much as the search for non-base/non-core classes.

Actually, I disagree. Most PrCs I have seen played are more for the cool powers or benefits than a lack of multiclassing. I have seen people with three base classes and three PrCs all in one package and that is only because of the powers or benfits gained from the PrCs.
 

fanboy2000 said:
WotC does publish a lot of feats. CW, XPH, and all the 3e splatbooks are feat rich. PrCs take so much space because they are more complicated.

It's posible I'm hulicinating, but I think WotC is slowly starting to publish fewer PrCs. Wait, I just took a look at the Player's Guide to Faerun, I think I was hulicinating. (My players must be putting some strong drugs in the pizza...)
Personally, I think they're trying to revise everything including prestige class so it is balanced with the rest of the revised 3.5e rules. Probably the only new prestige classes for D&D are the ones from ... Eberron?
 

Remove ads

Top