Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 482833" data-attributes="member: 151">No, I didn't.  One of the classes I quoted was underpowered, the bondblade.  Mind you, since there were only three classes reviewed, I only missed one.You're drawing conclusions from the article that simply aren't there.  When Monte critiques the Disciple of the Four Winds, he says: "Unfortunately, the class' abilities don't measure up to its harsh requirements."  And he's right.  That class makes you give up all of a monk's best abilities for the power to jump all over the battlefield.  It's not a fair swap for a PrC that you can't even qualify for until 8th level, or 15th level for small characters.That does not equal the same thing as saying PrCs should be more powerful than core classes.  He's saying that if a character makes a sacrifice to take a prestige class, he should be compensated with abilities that make the sacrifice worthwhile.How about the Internal Alchemist, the next Prc?  "When balancing prestige class abilities, the number one way to look at it is to ask yourself: If a character didn't take this class, where would he be and what could he do? Then compare your answer to the things your prestige class can do. I like the internal alchemist a lot, but coupled with his normal spell progression, a couple of his abilities make him so much better than a normal wizard or sorcerer, the class is probably not properly balanced.   Looks like a "too powerful" recommendation to me.In my previous post, I quoted him about the bondblade.  Let's quote him again:  "For non-spellcasting classes, match up the abilities gained with the abilities lost. Does a fighter-style prestige class give abilities at least as good as a fighter would get (but not way better) if he or she just stayed with the basic class and got normal bonus feats? What about a paladin's special abilities -- do the prestige class abilities stack up against the additional laying on hands, smiting evil, and other benefits the paladin gives up?"  There it is again: as good as, not better than.  He's not trying to invalidate the core classes as a choice, but give players alternate, campaign-specific choices.For those who'd like to draw their own conclusions, I encourage you to read Monte's original articles.  The original first article is <a href="http://www.montecook.com/arch_dmonly9.html" target="_blank">HERE</a> and the second article can be found <a href="http://www.montecook.com/arch_dmonly10.html" target="_blank">HERE</a>.  Given that the PrCs from Monte's own supplements, BoEM I and II, are both fairly low in power, I don't see much support for your argument, here.  The poll is not terribly well worded, IMHO.  How about a specific quote or page reference from the DMG that makes this plain?  It seems to me that Monte was saying, several times, that Prestige Classes should be rewarding to take, but roughly equal in power to a core class combination.</blockquote>

Verification