Your thoughts on the power of prestige classes

[Storm Raven]

It's 1/2 of his caster level. The repayment is trivial, at best, since it can be paid in any combination of levels the player chooses. The ability to pluck any spell out of a hat when needed is an nice ability. Having a player with a Wiz10/MotAO8 in my game, I think I can speak with some experience at it's relative balance levels. If you don't think the ability to pull a 9th level spell out of thin air is a powerful ability, I don't know what you think one is.

Sure, it is a nice ability, but he has to plan ahead by leaving that slot open, and that is the only spell he can call from the spellpool that day. Or he can leave a 6th and 3rd level slot open and pull those, or any number of other combinations, but he still has to plan ahead what level of spell he wants to pull.

That said, it is not awesomely unbalancing, and I'll thank you not to put words in my mouth. You read meaning where there was none, apparently based on a bad experience with other forum members. I said this:

You said the MotAO class was unbalanced and cited the spellpool abilities as why. I pointed out that the spellpool was not that powerful when you use all of its limitations. I didn't put words in your mouth, I dealt with exactly what you wrote.

I do not complain about the balance/relative power of the class. If I thought it so radically unbalanced, I would have disallowed it. It is, however, something for virtually nothing, and that's my problem with it. Why wouldn't a wizard take the class?

Because he wants to be a Loremaster, or an Elemental Savant, or any number of other PrCs that offer various perks and specializations to a wizard that are entirely different from the MotAO class. Because he doesn't want to blow a feat on the pretty useless Cooperative Spell metamagic feat and wants a different one, balancing the power of the spellpool against the cost of that feat. I have a player playing in my weekly game who considers spending a feat on Cooperative Spell to be too costly to be acceptable, so he has no interest in being a MotAO. Another player (since departed from the campaign) played a wizard throughout and had no interest in becoming a MotAO, the cost of the feat being a significant roadblock for her, the loss of familiar advancement also concerned her.

For the trivial cost of one metamagic feat you might not normally take, he gets a class that gives him a fairly powerful talent. If you were planning on being a pure wizard, at 10th level, you'd have to be a fool NOT to take the class, really.

Unless you wanted access to the Loremaster's wide array of powers for example. Or you wanted another metamagic feat as part of a feat chain. There are many "non-fool" reasons not to be a MotAO. Your personal assessment of the value of the class notwithstanding, in my experience many people have examined the issue and come to a different conclusion about the "no brainer" status of becoming a MotAO.

If the class required some real sacrifice on the player's part, I might feel better about it...but Knowledge(Arcana): 8 ranks? A palty monthly g.p. dues fee? Hardly the stuff of sacrifice. And if a players stays with the class, that Coop feat can come in handy when recruiting other members.

The Cooperative Spell feat is useless, it increases the power of the spell by a tiny amount if each wizard involved has the feat and casts the spell. Yippee.

The 750 gp up front cost is quite significant at the time most PCs are going to want to enter the PrC. Giving up a metamagic or item creation feat in exchange for a completely useless feat is a cost. The monthly dues are small, but the requirement that the PC return to campus on a regular basis ties the PC to a particular geographic area, at least until he can Teleport, and even then it is a pain in the butt. I think you are trivializing the costs and emphasizing the benefits in your mind. Sure, the benefits are nice, but the burdens are significant as well.

 

[Oni]

Here are some random thoughts I have regarding PrC's


If it could be done through multiclassing, or through multiclassing with the addition of a couple of new feats then it probably shouldn't have been made into a PrC. Prime example: Arcane Trickster.


The way prereqs are handled sucks, period. The unwritten rule is the earliest you can take a PrC is 6th level. But the one of the design rules for PrC's is that you shouldn't use level as a requirement. This leads to some truly terrible sets of prereqs that often have little to do with the PrC. This practise of making terrible convoluted prereqs also forces the player to plan out everything in advance if they have any hope of actually taking the class. They ought to drop this silly can't use level as a prereq rule.


A character should not become more powerful than another character of equal character level by virtue of taking a PrC. In my opinion versatility equals power. So a PrC focused on a specific can be more powerful at that particular task than say a straight base class character. By focused I mean something like the Foe Hunter, and not the Weapon Master. So what I refer to is situational focus not focus in method of attack. If what a PrC is focused on is almost always applicable, that doesn't fly with me.


PrC's that grant abilities equal to that of a base class + more (like most of the PrC's with +1 caster level at ever level) should have some sort of penalty or hinderance to balance things out. For instance losing access to additional schools of magic, or having limitations on when and how you can use the powers of the class. Hinderences are also a good substitute for nonsensical prereqs. For instance in a homebrew PrC I created the prereqs are almost nonexistant, but the powers of the class are only usable at night and the character suffers penalties to dice rolls made during the daytime.


Powerwise a PrC should be equal to about the 5th-15th level of a single classed base class character. PrC's usually are not a completely new field of study, but rather an alternate path of advancement.


Many PrC's just wouldn't make good core classes simply because the concept doesnt go far enough to stretch over 20 levels or shouldn't be immediately available to PC's.


I'll probably come back to this and add other thoughts or clarifications as they come to me.

 

[WizarDru]

You said the MotAO class was unbalanced and cited the spellpool abilities as why. I pointed out that the spellpool was not that powerful when you use all of its limitations. I didn't put words in your mouth, I dealt with exactly what you wrote.

Exactly what I wrote was: "fundamentally flawed". You filled in "unbalanced" all on your own. Twice, now, because you apparently can't separate my arguments from some others you've apparently had this argument with. I specifically was talking about requirements, you're focusing on a single ability that I think is strong, but not unbalanced (as I already stated). Nowhere in either post did I say that I thought the spell pool was unbalanced, and specifically said so in the second post.

With regards to taking other PrCs, you are correct. That was not my point. My point was the if a person was planning on staying a pure wizard, he looses virtually nothing for becoming a MotAO after a certain level, specifically 10th. I will concede that the g.p. cost is much more significant for a 6th level character. But after 9th level, a pure wizard gains more by becoming a MotAO than by remaining a pure wizard. To me, that is fundementally flawed. You obviously feel otherwise, so we'll just agree to disagree.

 

[Psion]

Originally posted by Oni
The unwritten rule is the earliest you can take a PrC is 6th level. But the one of the design rules for PrC's is that you shouldn't use level as a requirement.

I fail to see why that is a problem. In fact, it is part of what makes a well designed prestige class work. If I say you need to be "fighter level 5" or whatever, then I am placing a very fine point on what members of the class will look like AND I am limiting the adaptability of the class to other d20 games that may not use that class. Further, by requiring an usual set of skill rank prerequisite, I can allow a character who is willing to go through a convoluted path get it earlier than a character who does not have to make such a big sacrifice but wait until later to get an equivalent benefit. These are good things AFAIAC.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Are all of the complaints about PrC's here originating from DMs? I'm not making any implication, I am genuinely curious.

Why are there so many prestige classes out there? My own prolific but relatively insubstanstial contribution notwithstanding, it's because they are FUN. People like them. People buy them. No need to be snooty about it.

I have the luxury of being both a player and a DM in pretty much equal parts, and I allow pretty much anything that's fun, because when I play, I want to have fun, too. Of course I also happen to be a publisher, and although I don't necessarily take the opinion that ALL players share the same opinions as I do-- I know a lot who do. I consider myself a fairly typical gamer. I know what I like, so I publish that, and I'm doing ok.

Clearly there's a market for PrCs-- though I will not disagree that it would be nice to see other innovations as well. (I include at least one, maybe two completely new game mechanics in each book, aside from feats and PrCs).

It is obvious from postings and articles by Monte Cook that the original intent was that PrC = organization.

Is a departure from "original intent" by definition a bad thing? That would seem to contradict the very nature of the OGL.

Would you be more content if the vast offering of PrC's were simply called by a different name?

I guess my point is that the original intent of the designers as to what a Prestige Class is, offers, or should be called is pretty much irrelevant. If the class is fun (and yes, balanced) I really don't care. If I am running a dungeon crawl, sign up for whatever PrC floats your boat. If I am running a more serious campaign, it's my responsibility as a DM to integrate the PrC into the campaign by way of an "organization" or some test of the PC's worthiness.

Moving on:

Would the "feat chain" proponents recommend deconstructing the paladin and monk into variants of the fighter class that can be just as easily defined with "feat chains"? Same for the druid, bard, sorcerer, etc.

Since the original designers saw fit to group BAB, saves, skill points, and those "feat chains" together, and to then define them as core classes, I see no reason why a PrC can't do the same-- grouping feat-like abilities, skills, BAB, etc. and simply definining itself as a new class. It's a matter of convenience. There's a lot of respect being paid to the original designers' intent (and rightly so) so you must recognize that it is their own design that favors "class definitions" over piecemeal "feat chains."

For what it's worth, I would personally prefer a classless game with feat chains; d20 Modern is a step in the right direction.

I've been blathering, haven't I?


Wulf

 

[Davelozzi]

I went for "other". At their best, a PrC should be balanced as more powerful within their field of expertise, but weaker otherwise. It should be a balance based in give and take...

I voted more powerful, but only in a focused area, exactly as Umbran describes.

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

Are all of the complaints about PrC's here originating from DMs? I'm not making any implication, I am genuinely curious.

Why are there so many prestige classes out there? My own prolific but relatively insubstanstial contribution notwithstanding, it's because they are FUN. People like them. People buy them. No need to be snooty about it.

I have the luxury of being both a player and a DM in pretty much equal parts, and I allow pretty much anything that's fun, because when I play, I want to have fun, too.

I'm a player 25% of the time. A wizard player, no less. And being single classed so far haven't hurt me, but it's definitely been hurting the single class rogue. I don't object to my players buying PrC packed books. They can buy 'em, and I can ban 'em. At this point, they've learnt not to buy anything from Mongoose, since those get banned without me even bothering to read them. If there are other publishers of egregiously bad PrCs, beware!

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

If there are other publishers of egregiously bad PrCs, beware!

If mine end up on your list for any reason, let me know. Feedback's important to me.


Wulf

 

[Psion]

Wulf, after the bang up job you did on your first two books, I can't wait to see what you do with the elf book. No complaints here.

I don't think Mongoose is universally bad... but I think they have gotten something of a reputation based on a few egregious prestige classes that they do have. I think about 75% of their ultimate prestige classes book is useful, so I don't see banning them all.

 

[jmucchiello]

I don't object to my players buying PrC packed books. They can buy 'em, and I can ban 'em. At this point, they've learnt not to buy anything from Mongoose, since those get banned without me even bothering to read them. If there are other publishers of egregiously bad PrCs, beware!

Is this some kind of gauntlet being thrown down?

Joe Mucchiello
Throwing Dice Games
http://www.throwingdice.com