D&D 5E With the reintroduction of PrCs which are on your 'must see' list?

[discosoc]

Pretty much like all previous editions, I won't use them. Same goes with "Advanced" books and other optional chunks of players options, each more specific than the last. This drove me from Pathfinder, and it will drive me from 5e as well.

 

[Andor]

In general all subclasses can work great for representing specializations, the only problem is their fixed starting level, even more in the case of domains since they have to be chosen at 1st level. So they are really not very good to represent an "elite/prestige" group... if the Mystra's Dweomerkeeper are supposed to be an elite group that only the best can enter, then using a domain to represent it means that you enter it at 1st level, so you must be a 'chosen' since the start, but it can't happen later on in the campaign, and it can't be based on story requirements...

I think class design, and PrCs are the wrong design space for this stuff. We already have factions and associations right from the starter box. If you join a secret order in game, then congratulations, you have earned whatever mechanical benefit is associated with it (if any), whether that is a social perk like the noble background, a skill or feat training, or a magic item. PCs are already the elite, most people don't even have classes. Super-extra-duper-special Wizard training +1 should not be a thing.

PrCs should represent new or different paths of development, not pure "Cleric, only better" power creep.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Pretty much like all previous editions, I won't use them. Same goes with "Advanced" books and other optional chunks of players options, each more specific than the last. This drove me Pathfinder, and it will drive me from 5e as well.

That drove you to Pathfinder? The 3.5 continuation with all the 'Ultimate ______' books?

I totally agree on this one. It's actually really hard to represent with the existing classes. Warlock is probably the closest match, and it's pretty far off.

I'm surprised anyone else liked the idea of the ur-Priest, at all. I could see a Warlock Pact that radically changed your spells list (which Pacts don't normally do) to mostly spells shared with divine casters as an ur-Priest. But PrC makes more sense - you don't go stealing magic from the gods lightly.

I can think of a couple that qualify. I'd like to see an alienist, a defiler, a green star adept, and a cavalier, for instance; I think all of those could be used across a wide swath of classes. The blighter is a tricky one, as it's totally druid-focused but anti-druidic. I'm not sure how to handle that one.

Defiler and blighter sound similar in that sense. I suppose the blighter could be open to Druids, Rangers, Clerics (Nature Domain) and Oath of Ancients Paladins?

 

[discosoc]

That drove you to Pathfinder? The 3.5 continuation with all the 'Ultimate ______' books?

From. I omitted the word, but I also didn't say "to."

 

[JackOfAllTirades]

WOTC turned away from Prestige Classes by changing the Eldritch Knight and the Arcane Trickster into Sub-classes, and that's exactly what they should keep doing.

 

[Andor]

I'm surprised anyone else liked the idea of the ur-Priest, at all. I could see a Warlock Pact that radically changed your spells list (which Pacts don't normally do) to mostly spells shared with divine casters as an ur-Priest. But PrC makes more sense - you don't go stealing magic from the gods lightly.

True, but then again, stealing magic from the gods is right there in the PHB Warlock goo fluff. "The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it."

 

[Tony Vargas]

True, but then again, stealing magic from the gods is right there in the PHB Warlock goo fluff. "The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it."

Not exactly a god, but fair enough.

 

[Pssthpok]

Off the cuff, I second the "none" response, mostly because PrCs are pretty much power creep by definition, prerequisites notwithstanding.

That said, if 5E can handle the PrCs as "deep cut" class concepts, it might work. I'm talking Warlord (Fighter PrC), Shaman (Cleric PrC), Warden (Druid PrC), Artificer (Wizard PrC), etc.
The trick is that you can MC into a PrC and, even though you lose your core class capstone, still get the capstone for the PrC.

So... capstones need to replace core class capstones AND PrCs need to reflect niche class concepts and not just the promise of power creep.
If that's the case, I'm all for it. Otherwise, "none".

 

[the Jester]

I'm surprised anyone else liked the idea of the ur-Priest, at all.

There was an awesome halfling ur-priest who looked like a wee lil Anton laVey in my game.

 

[GlassJaw]

d. None of the above.