There should be some significant disadvantages, and a definite diversion from normal progression. That is to say, when your new class which is derived from Barbarian comes up against a real Barbarian of the same (Barbarian +PrC) level, they should be markedly different, with the true Barbarian now in posession of abilities that your PrC does not have. Thieves should give up sneak attacks, mages should give up (at least) bonus feats and possibly even a level or two of spell progression, fighters should give up bonus feats etc. If it just ends up looking like a Barbarian with extra powers you've probably gone about it wrong.
There's a standard response to this which is 'If you've made your PCs too powerful, make the monsters harder'. This is true, but there are ways and means. If you make the PCs more powerful through the addition of magic items, they can be taken away again. The only way to remove powers from a prestige class is to kill the characters or rearrange the universe, neither of which is convenient. And if you simply make the monsters harder, you are making it harder for yourself too. The further you deviate from the original rules in the DMG, the harder it is to use it as a safety net when you're unclear on something or need a quick answer.
Anyway, by all means go with the Prestige classes, but make sure it's for purposes of defining their character through specialised abilities rather than simply supercharging an existing class.
Some people claim that all PrCs that have requirements should be organization-based, as otherwise it should be a core class, since you could just start your career as it. What do you say to this?
Some people say that, since the existing classes are not balanced against each other at all, but balanced based on the requirement it operates in a party, that invididual balance doesn't matter and overpowered PrCs are fine. And what do you think of that?
Some think that PrCs are just 'fill ins' for core classes which WoTC didn't want to make, or should simply be variant core classes, such as the Blackguard. That right?
You made a point here; many PrCs are overpowered. The most glaring examples are NPC PrCs, which shouldn't be a problem.. but then again, are, because it makes thier CR inappropriate.
While I allow all officially Published WOTC Prestige Classes I would as DM review 3rd party published material and see if it goes along with the campaign.
I dont for example allow Knight Protectors of the Great Kingdom because while it may be official it seems to be more GreyHawk in it's description, and since i play Forgotten Realms it would not be appropriate.
I do not however agree that Prestige classes should loose certain special abilities that the core class offered. All classes in my opinion have something that thier good at and a PrC that's been designed for them should not take away that ability or cease it's advancment.
Barbarian: he rages and should not loose that focus.
Bard: thier musical ability is key
Clerics: are more healers and should not loose thier ability to turn undead or thier spells that allow healing.
Druid: they are shapeshifter and should have that ability
Fighter: should retain a certain amount of bonus feats.
Monk: masters of unarmed combat, should retain thier flurry of blows, and Ac bonus even if it as a lower rate.
Paladin:He should also keep his healing and smite abilities.
Ranger: Favored enemy
Rogue: sneak attack and trap sensing
Sorcerer/Wizard: should keep thier spells.
While they should keep thier abilities, I would say that id give the PrC those abilities at a lessened rate.
However if you are to deny a PrC those abilities alternates should be made at a descent rate.
Firstly if you define prcs as "the same power level but different" then where does the "prestige" come in ? What is prestigious about being slightly different. The very name implies something better rather than different.
Secondly you are ignoring the drawback of suboptimal pre-requisites which can mitigate the prcs base power - a character with skill focus knowledge(whatever) is disadvantaged compared to one with empower.
Thirdly, if a single core-classed character should have abilities that the prc does not then this makes it impossible to design a prc for certain core classes. For example how can a single classed sorceror be "in posession(sic) of abilities that your PrC does not have. " ? The sorceror has nothing except his caster levels for the prc to trade in for prc abilities, the loss of a single one of those would require a raft of abilities to even vaguely compensate. The loss of more than one caster level will almost certainly make the 10/10 prc caster weaker than the 20th single classed caster. Back to my first reservation.
Excessive adherence to game balance is a shibboleth. You may believe the loremaster is overpowered, but would the presence of a loremaster in a party diminish anyone else's pleasure, even a single-classed wizard ? That is the only criteria that matters.
The 'Prestige' in PrC is something that must be earned, not just by filling out the minimum BAB and required feats, but by falling into a category. Harpers are recruited, Red Wizards choose their apprentices carefully. A character should not wake up one morning and decide to become a Drunken Master, a Harper, or a Loremaster. In my honest opinion, the player may tilt his character to fit into a prestige class that he aspires to, but it should be up to the DM to decide when (and if) the character ever attains the prestige needed to fit into the PrC. If Joe Bard wants to grow up to be a one day, he probably should begin angling his role-play towards that class long before he ever beings approaching the minimum requirements. Perhaps a local merchant that he helps mistakenly gives credit to those who Harp. This attracts their attention, and they begin scouting him out. If his behavior is appropriate, they may approach him before he ever becomes eligible for the PrC and begin training him in the ways. If his behavior isn't befitting of the class, no matter how often the player reminds you that he is qualified for it, he should not be allowed the opportunity.
Too often, Dungeon Masters cave to the will of the player over prestige classes (and half-this-race, but that's another story), forgetting that the rest of the world might have more than 100 Thieves better qualified for the Prestige class than the PC, but who are not members of that PrC for one reason or another.
Don't be a statsitic.
Imo, your class build says nothing about the flavor of your character. Because in game, classes and levels do not exist. Wether you're a straight fighter with all archery feats in existence and then some, or you are a Fighter4/Deepwoodsniper7/PeerlessArcher3/OrderOfTheBowInitiate4/Wizard1/ArcaneArcher1, in game you are an arche all the same. It's not what your levels are, it's what you do with them.
So yes, by all means, you should allow them.
What I mentioned about my own group was that 'I tend not to allow any prestige class that hasn't been generated through playtesting between the concerned player and myself'. This is true, although maybe 'generated' is the wrong word. Often my players are permitted to use an existing prestige class with nothing changed but the name or a class skill. The important thing is that as a DM you must be fairly well versed in the pros and cons of everything that comes into your game. If a player comes in with something from a supplement it's still your responsibility to make sure it matches what you would like your characters to be able to do in game. This is not to say characters need permission for every action, but they do need to realise that the DM has veto over their character creation. I'm just trying to help people exercise that right of veto intelligently.
Duloth:
Some people claim the requirements for PrCs balance them. What do you say to this?
If those requirements are correctly composed they may end up as balanced or unbalanced as any other character class. Usually the requirements are organized in such a way as to make the player resemble a member of that PrC before he/she can join it. I see that as their main purpose.
Some people claim that all PrCs that have requirements should be organization-based, as otherwise it should be a core class, since you could just start your career as it. What do you say to this?
I wouldn't say 'all PrCs that have requirements', but it does add a lot of flavour to be organization based, and explains why your thief now has abilities that Jimmy Fingers on the street doesn't have. Sometimes starting your career as a new and non canon class isn't such a bad idea. That's very similiar to a PrC without the high level. Since it's still called a 'Prestige' class I tend to assume you must be fairly prestigious (read: high level) before you can enter it. I've answered the question, and now I'm not quite sure why you asked it.
Some people say that, since the existing classes are not balanced against each other at all, but balanced based on the requirement it operates in a party, that invididual balance doesn't matter and overpowered PrCs are fine. And what do you think of that?
Whatever works in your game, basically. If you as an experienced DM want to have one player playing a Tarrasque and another one playing a level 2 Gnome, that's fine. Your table. But an inexperienced DM (who is the most likely to learn from these boards) probably shouldn't have that happen unless he means it and understands the repercussions. I would say on the whole that party balance against the encounter is more important than whether the Loremaster is more powerful than the thief. Hopefully they still get the same amount of tabletime.
Some think that PrCs are just 'fill ins' for core classes which Wizards didn't want to make, or should simply be variant core classes, such as the Blackguard. That right?
I don't think it's very important whether they fill in gaps in the game, which Wizards didn’t want to make, or whether these classes should be available in every campaign (that's how I read core class). They fill in the class that the character really wanted to play when he settled for a monk, that's what's important.
I suppose now I'll wait to see whether Duloth awards me a passing grade. Lord-Soto makes a point that I wholeheartedly agree with, that a PrC must also be earned by more than the mechanical addition of points to your skill tree or BAB. It should represent some extra training, maybe some new acquaintances, maybe a new practice regime. All these things make for enjoyable roleplaying. Unfortunately this also means that I disagree with Ertai. Class build does feature in game, because if I come from a class which has special abilities thanks to being trained with the ancient monks on top of a mountain before the adventure begins (or in the space between 4th and 5th level as so often happens) and then play my character to be afraid of heights, uninterested in mountains and totally unmonkish, I've created an inconsistent situation. And there goes the suspension of disbelief. In a similar way, if the 'Peerless Archer', 'Arcane Archer' and 'Deepwood Sniper' may all be held to take a certain degree of commitment in fulfulling your membership role with them, your character should certainly reflect that. If he doesn't even know who taught him that arrows could be enchanted simply by rubbing them a lot (or whatever he does) then he may be missing out on a few opportunities for some enjoyable roleplaying.
I have no wish to get into another 'This is how you should play' contest. If you like your classes to have no impact on the game that's fine. I can certainly see that the game could be built that way, and I agree with your point that there are (almost) no classes or levels within the game, merely unstratified power and abilities.
Out of game however, I must say that classes and levels absolutely exist. And their main purpose is to ensure that the party faces challenges that they will find enjoyable. If I bring in a Minotaur character, thanks to his great power I can expect to many levels lower than the rest of the party. If I make a character who is a monk with a sorcerer’s spell progression thrown in, you could expect this to have a similar effect. Thus, a Level 12 Prestige character should be about the same power as a Level 12 multi or single class character. I know that power is extremely variable, but I would like to think that the 'Prestige' of a Prestige class comes from being rare. Or unique, or admirable, or famous etc. Not just from being more powerful than other characters of 12th level. I think if you want to be more powerful than other characters of 12th level you should be 13th level.
That was a long response, and hopefully it will receive something constructive in return.
Prestige class have a dual character.
The first is to satisfy some cultural or epochal variant of the heroic archetypes (wizard-warrior-priest-rogue). You will hear people point to the "duelist" fighter, a renaissance-era musketeer, a quick rapier-armed fighter for instance.
The second is to introduce additional mechanics beyond the framework of the core rules of D&D.
Both can be in intent and execution, honorable and fair. The first I believe is true almost all the time, the second I believe false much more often than not for a variety of reasons.
The execution can be sullied by a romantic inclination with the variant class. To take the example of a "duelist", history wasn't very fair to people who fought in melee in light armor. The rules are pretty clear on that aspect as well. You're either quick or you're armored or preferably both if you want to fight another day in the front lines. But people want a lightly armored fighter that is "good". So then the romantic inclination takes over and where plausibility says it's cooked and additional game mechanics are added.
The problem with additional mechanics is just that. They are additional mechanics. With an enormously complicated game each new mechanic can exponentially increase the potential for some un-forseen combination being "abusable". As someone pointed out earlier the difficulty with class-related abilities from a DM perspective is that when they get out of hand you can't simply take them away like an item. It's a painful process and leaves everyone with a much more sour taste in their mouths.
The execution can also be horribly skewed by some arbitrary "weighting" of penalties which are often at best half-hearted attempts at "flavor" and more often than not a "slap on the wrist - here's your cake". In the end-analysis, people have a lot of difficulty agreeing on the voodoo that is "balance", romantic inclinations weighing heavily in the arena more than anything else.
I have never used PrC, I never will, and I advocate strongly against their use, particularly 3.5 PrC. The core classes in D&D have more than enough flexibility to fill almost any cultural or historical variant to the archetypes, particularly with a balanced, versatile and fair multiclassing system (3.0).
In the worst case, it's true, PrC divide the munchkins from the role-players. But at least we have in the game a framework to neatly divide the camps, and enough middle ground for the people in-between. Which is a good thing. Because the game should be popular and fun for all.
But I wanna cast high level arcane spells and swing a sword really well too!
TUT! Whatever made you think THAT was "fair"... fool of a took! Thwock!
This rule also allows me to introduce lots of specialists as villains...
Remember ... the PCs dont know anything about levels, BAB, class restrictions, ....
Prcs should generally have one of the following purposes
Making a weak multiclass viable(ARcane trickster, MT)
Making a character focus their ablilites onto one thing(Duelist,)
Giving a character new abilities at expense of the old ones(Acyolyte of the skin)
A more powerful class but the character has to take weaker skills or feats to get it (can't think of any right now)
It shouldn't be a better wizard(ARchmage, etc. ) It should be Different
I hate the "Its a prestige class, so it must be more powerful" ethos.
Two level 20 melee specialists with similar stats should be an even match unless the circumstances are specifically in favour of one of them.
Two level 20 arcane casters with similar stats should also be an even match unless the circumstances are specifically in favour of one of them
If a prestige class does everything a core class can do, but better, then the core class is rendered completely obselete.
A prestige class should be powerful, yes, but its power should be narrowly defined. In order to be better at one thing, it should lose out on another. Its prestige should come from its expertise in its specific field.
Otherwise, what on earth is the point of high level core classes?
But so many of the PRCs want to have their cake and eat it - they want to be better than their core predecesser in their specialsit area, without giving up anything.
And what you end up with isn't more choice, but less, since it becomes utterly pointless to choose something other than the PRC. Especially when so many PRCs cover concepts that could easily be covered by single or multi-classed core classes.
Originally posted by Furious George
Making a weak multiclass viable (Arcane trickster, MT)
I’d like to point out that this is one of the most heavily debated (and flamed) topics in recent board history. The mystic theurge engendered the largest discussion (often flame-war) ever on the D&D boards. Many people believe 3E multiclassing to be a fair trade of power for versatility, a perfect system. Too much versatility (a 10/10 split) and you're "washed up". The real strength of 3E multiclassing is any combination 17/3 or even 15/5 is both powerful and fun to play. Some will point towards bias in the creator's mindset (like 2E overpowered multi-classes) that has created the new batch of hyper-hybrids.
Either way, people will want them, and the strength of the prestige class system is to give purely optional purview to the DM if he wants to include such hyper-powerful characters, while retaining balanced archetypally correct classes and balanced flexible multiclassing as mandatory .
We're all happy in the end and that's what counts.
I allow almost all PrC in my games, mainly because my players never want to take them. The omly person ever to bother withthem is my wife, she played as a gnoll lasher and was looking to be a Master of Chains in another campaign. She decided upon character creation that she wanted to follow this path and started choosing skills and feats approprite to her characters path in life.
Ironically, I can't find the same clause in the 3.5 DMG.
I find that the problem created by Prestige Classes is in the players' assumptions that they can move into them at will, barring only the listed requirements. As Dalaek claimed indirectly, multiclassing works perfectly with the core classes; what it does not do well is handle PrCs. I don't have issues with individual PrCs (even the over-debated MT is allowed IMC); I have textbooks of issues with the combining of PrCs.
Here is where the description and game mechanics surrounding the PrC gets hazy. For those who follow the rules to the T--not necessarily "munchkins" at all--there is no stated limit to the number of PrCs you can take, as long as you have the prerequisites. However, if you mind the flavor text and descriptions of each PrC, you will find that each one requires some motivation and dedication on the part of the PC. Or at least some devoted time and training. Thus, the limit on PrCs isn't stated in the "crunchy" mechanics, but an understood element that is part of the roleplaying.
Personally, I've solved the issue by doing something similar to Shadowcat. Effectively, PrCs are banned...until introduced to the character. I guarantee there are some that the PCs will never see, but I like to mix things up. There will still be plenty of options left to my PCs, but it won't be a question of which will make them the greatest damage dealer; it will which group they got along with better, and more importantly whether or not those people could help them with the goals the character already had. So, the understood limitations on PrCs--the roleplaying of them--are enforced.
That was the idea behind them. On the other hand, in many cases the execution is truly lousy. First you get the archmage and virtuoso who give up almost nothing to take the class and simply gain (virtuoso is actually just badly written IMO, and was probably intended solely for Bards). Secondly you get overused or too generic PrCs (Mage of the Arcane Order (particularly for sorcerors)). Thirdly you get prestige classes that could better be represented by collections of feats (chain master, tempest, [other weapon specific PrC]) and fourthly you get Prestige Classes that don't play well with others (Nar Demonbinder springs to mind (perhaps plays too well with others would be a better description)).
In short, they are a very good idea that has turned into a giant Kudzu and become near unworkable. My solution is to restrict my players to Core PrCs unless I've run very carefuly through what they want first, tell them to use feats where possible instead of PrCs, to force them to RP getting the PRC and to disallow one or two level dips into a PrC (although I allow them to multiclass the basic classes freely)
Prestige classes serve several functions in 3E. They allow players to customize their characters beyond what is given in the PH. I mean, let's be honest here, if one 15th level fighter meets another 15th level fighter, the odds are that they will be pretty much the same, with slight variations, like different ability scores and maybe a couple of different feats. But with prestige classes, your 15th level Duelist can meet a 15th level Drunken Master and not look like carbon copies (not that I'm saying its not possible to have 2 15th level fighters be different from each other). What I'm saying is it offers a chance for characters to have the same class without being the same.
In fact its the other way around. The prestige class is a direct result of the Core Classes from which it comes. A Fighter/Blackguard for example is still a fighter, and that's his roll in the party. He will always be a fighter. He will never be anything else, even with the prestige class. Metagame thinking is what is driving the argument that Prestige Classes are too powerful. In fact you should try and picture yourself as the commoner watching the Character go at it with some monsters. Is he doing anything that someone else can't do? If so, why is he doing something someone else can't do?
The answer is simple. Its because he trained to be that way. The core class set him up to be able to do what he does best. Rangers in the new 3.5 are the epitomy of this argument, having their combat styles. Some are suited to Archery, some are suited to Melee.
The only thing to watch out for is the PrC that makes the impossible happen. The 5 Rouge/ 6 Godsmiter (whose power is the ability to smite all his enemies with divine power from his god whenever the heck he feels like it) is way too powerful a character. Besides, the character's initial class was rouge. The PrC classes he should have been using should have epitofied his ability to sneak.
Also:
The argument the DM has the final say is flawed. It isn't just up to the DM to be the one in charge. The players have a responsibility not to disrupt the gameplay too much. If it becomes hard on the DM, then he will make it hard on the characters often by becoming a jerk for the rest of campaign. This creates resentment.
Players: don't start the problem so the DM has to finish it.
Originally posted by snail shell
Personally, I've solved the issue by doing something similar to Shadowcat. Effectively, PrCs are banned...until introduced to the character. I guarantee there are some that the PCs will never see, but I like to mix things up. There will still be plenty of options left to my PCs, but it won't be a question of which will make them the greatest damage dealer; it will which group they got along with better, and more importantly whether or not those people could help them with the goals the character already had. So, the understood limitations on PrCs--the roleplaying of them--are enforced.
I assume that in that case, you've compensated by allowing players to be much more flexible in regards to the prerequisites to the prestige classes. Otherwise you end up with situations like:
"Okay, you've successfully roleplayed out meeting and seeking membership in the Watchful Order of Arcane Mages. Unfortunately, the Great Fortitude feat is one of the requirements for entrance into the prestige class, and you don't have it. Looks like you won't be taking a level in 'Watchful Order Mage' for another three levels. Yes, I sympathize that you didn't take the feat because you had no idea this prestige class would become available when developing your character, but rules are rules."
Or even worse.
"Sorry, but you failed in your quest to retrieve the rare volume of arcane lore. You're never going to be a loremaster now. Yes, I'm aware that your sorcerer took a level in wizard to get the necessary knowedge ranks, blew three of his precious spells known on Divination magic, and took a Knowledge skill focus feat that is going to be pretty useless. But what can we do if you fail the roleplaying requirement?"
The problem with DM-fiat is that by the book, most prestige classes have to be planned for from very early levels in your character build.
Originally posted by Wolfwood2
I assume that in that case, you've compensated by allowing players to be much more flexible in regards to the prerequisites to the prestige classes. Otherwise you end up with situations like:
"Okay, you've successfully roleplayed out meeting and seeking membership in the Watchful Order of Arcane Mages. Unfortunately, the Great Fortitude feat is one of the requirements for entrance into the prestige class, and you don't have it. Looks like you won't be taking a level in 'Watchful Order Mage' for another three levels. Yes, I sympathize that you didn't take the feat because you had no idea this prestige class would become available when developing your character, but rules are rules."
Actually, if I used 3rd edition, this similar to how I would handle it. However, it would run something more along the lines of:
You stand before the council of the Watchful Order of Arcane Mages. They eye you up and down, discussing your fate in hushed whispers. "You have potential," the head of the order finally announces. "However, you are not yet capable of enduring all of the hardships of the training. We will reconsider your membership after you have compensated for this weakness."
Out of character, this would translate to me telling the player what he must do to be considered for the order.
Or even worse.
"Sorry, but you failed in your quest to retrieve the rare volume of arcane lore. You're never going to be a loremaster now. Yes, I'm aware that your sorcerer took a level in wizard to get the necessary knowedge ranks, blew three of his precious spells known on Divination magic, and took a Knowledge skill focus feat that is going to be pretty useless. But what can we do if you fail the roleplaying requirement?"
Is that the only volume of rare volume of arcane lore in the realm? Perhaps if the DM were controlling the flow of prestige classes into the game, the player would have long ago discovered a book of ancient wisdom that he may or may not have sold because it wasn't a keen vorpal longsword. Maybe he could spend the next few levels seeking a new tome to make another attempt. He might not get in now, but he knows what needs to be done.
The problem with DM-fiat is that by the book, most prestige classes have to be planned for from very early levels in your character build.
This is the problem with a min-max type mindset. You are making the assumption that if the minimum requirements for the prestige class can be met by 5th level, the character should be built to fit into the prestige class as soon as he hits 5th level. However, just because the character CAN take the prestige class at that level does not mean that the player or the DM should begin manufacturing the character to meet that prestige class as soon as possible.
Seriously, though, not allowing prestige classes makes the game incredibly boring. "Hey, look, it's..." *sinks low in chair* "...just another fighter." Or, "Hey look! It's an Archmage!"
Every class is customizable beyond the original core classes. You can literally play anything you want. Watch midget mud wrestling or play mortal kombat with a friend in Vietnam. There’s no end to the pothibiliteeth.
Imagination and creativity are what stop a character being boring, not bolting on a PRC, overpowered or not.
The playable permutations available by mixing and matching core-classes are in the high-hundreds, more than you could really play in a lifetime. And even if you play a different character every few weeks, two characters of the same class can be enormously different.
If you know somebody who thinks you need PRCs to make characters interesting, I doubt very much whether any of their characters will ever be so.
a) Once you have the requirements you dont need to do anything further, i.e. you arent required to spend skill points and feats in the future ... (maybe some special skills should be counted against the feats which you get every 3 levels ...).
b) In the pursuit of great power it usually doesnt matter if you have a deficiency in another area, i.e. an arcane spellcaster specialized in "burning the opponents to ashes" will probably not need that much defense because he can kill the opposition fast or easily enough.
It is the second point which often makes PrCs "broken" by concentrating too much power in one area. If used "responsibly" there isnt a problem, but too often players are out to create the "most powerful character" instead of the "most interesting character". In my 20 years of (A)D&D experience I have determined for myself that players usually start with the "Tim Taylor phase" (MORE POWER !!!) which might be accompanied by a "Monty Haul phase" on behalf of the DM. Only after years of having a full sheet of "spare magic items and potions" will everyone start to get bored by it and try to explore the "underdog power phase" which is usually accompanied by an increased ROLEplaying to solve your problems instead of just hack 'n slash. With these different types of playing styles you cant have an easy solution to the problem of PrCs ...
It all boils down to yourself and mostly your players: Can they act responsibly enough to NOT create an imbalance even if you allow them a rather "specialized" PrC ? If the answer is NO you need to act with great caution or some other people might have less fun in the future if you allow the PrCs unchecked / unmodified by either having the one "SuperChar" solve all the problems and ruining the other players fun or by having "SuperGroup" ruin YOUR fun by beating the NPCs you spent a lot of time to create wayyyyy too easily. Keeping that "balance of fun" is the most important thing for a successful roleplaying group.
(P.S.: be honest to yourself when answering that question ...)
First off, I'd like to point out that a level in a prestige class usually IS more potent than a level in a core class, but that is why its a *prestige* class. Not just anyone can learn to do what you can do with a prestige class, but you have to go through a lot of special training and trouble before hand.
Second, I'd like to point out something that many gamers forget far too quickly: THIS IS A GAME, THE POINT IS TO HAVE FUN. If one character has somehow become more powerful than yours, don't lose sleep over it. I understand its no fun if that character is power gaming and has found the perfect combination of feats, classes, spells, and/or magic items to have an AC of 112 and +72 attack at level 3, but unless what he is doing is disruptive and/or completely overshadows all the other characters (such as the in the previous example), let him do what he enjoys. It can be argued (validly) that even the different races and classes from just the PHB are not entirely balanced, but if you are still going every thursday night and having fun and look forward to your gaming session, then I don't see a problem.
Third, the main benefit of prestige classes is that because they are specialists, they often have special abilities built in that cannot be attained with the core classes. This does not *neccesarily* mean that those abilities are more powerful, they are just different. Example: The Knights of the Chalice are demon slayers, and can "censure" demons just like clerics can turn undead. As far as I know, you cannot do that with any of the core classes.
Fourth - though you shouldn't have to and don't have to do it from level 1 - picking prestige classes should and does require some planning before hand, and there is nothing wrong with that. If I want to become a neuro-surgeon I'm going to have to train longer and at very specific skills before I can do the things that only neuro-surgeons can do, and it was probably easier if I was taking courses suited to my plans before I even started those final four years of study. I find it works best that if a player sees a prestige class he likes, he shows it to the DM and they discuss if it is feasable for him to train in that class.
Finally, I've noticed some discussion on the authority of the DM and how much say he should have. As a DM, let me say this to players: when you are in the middle of the session, the standard rule is that the DM is always right. This was set down because when George the player starts arguing with Tom the DM over whether or not that last attack should have hit or what-not, the argument takes up time and detracts from the fun. If you have a problem, bring it up with the DM after or before the game or write the DM a note or do something that will be less disruptive.
Now let me say something to DMs: YOU ARE NOT GOD. You should NOT be the only one involved in making decisions about your game. My entire last group basically just got up a left my last DM after having played with him for a few years because he thinks that being a good DM means not giving any le-way and being nitty gritty about the rules and what not. The rules are there to give the game structure so that it will be challenging so that it will be fun. The rules aren't the only part of the game and if you let them be it will not be fun, you will come off as a jerk, and you WILL lose your players, and DMing is no fun if you have no players.
Well, I've been ranting for too long, and it is late at night now, and I'm tired. So take those two coppers and pocket them.
- Mike the Delirious DM
Originally posted by Wolfwood2
I assume that in that case, you've compensated by allowing players to be much more flexible in regards to the prerequisites to the prestige classes.
Of course I relax the restrictions, but I think them over very carefully. As Gadren said, the DM isn't God, and sticking to the exact rules when it is disadvantageous to the players is done at the game's peril. On the other hand, some players will stretch the rules once they find out they can be stretched: keeping a tight hold on things at the beginning will make everyone's life easier by the end.
To address you directly, Gadren, I only disagree with you on your fourth point.
Fourth - though you shouldn't have to and don't have to do it from level 1 - picking prestige classes should and does require some planning before hand, and there is nothing wrong with that. If I want to become a neuro-surgeon I'm going to have to train longer and at very specific skills before I can do the things that only neuro-surgeons can do, and it was probably easier if I was taking courses suited to my plans before I even started those final four years of study. I find it works best that if a player sees a prestige class he likes, he shows it to the DM and they discuss if it is feasible for him to train in that class.
I don't disagree with your logic at all, but I think there is an application issue to consider. You want to be a neurosurgeon, but you can only want to be a neurosurgeon if you know what a neurosurgeon is. In the real world, we have the ability to research any career path that suits our whims, but not so in the campaign. While a first level PC will certainly have heard of a few PrCs, they can't have heard of them all. If there aren't any neurosurgeons in town, you don't really know what nuerosurgery is.
From here you can produce a thousand caveats and circumstances that change the argument; I'm not going to bore everyone. Let's just say from the PC's viewpoint, if they were interested in Medicine anyway, then when they do find out about neurosurgery, it will be easier to get into--as it should be. What won't happen is that a PC interested in swordsmithing finds out about the cool abilities that the neurosurgeon gets and changes direction. Or, if they do, it will be very hard for them. As it should be.
The key is roleplaying: first come up with a character. If, in that character concept, the PC loves his longsword and never uses any other weapon, it would be nice (even wise) for the PC to run into a Weapon Master. And if the PC can't quite get all of those feats because they didn't know about it in time, well, what is more important? The flavor of the class, or the crunchy bits?
This example is from the Reveler PrC from Fang and Fury, published by Green Ronin Publishing:
Race: Vampire
Special: The Reveler must kill a vampire having a Challenge Rating at least two greater than his own character level with his blood drain attack. He need not drain all of its hit points, but the killing stroke (reducing the vampire to 0 HP or below) must be made by blood drain only. This requirement must be met before attaining each new Reveler level.
The example they gave of this was a Human scion Fighter2/Reveler5 had to drain a vampire of 9+ HD before he could advance to 6th level.
I know you might not have that particular Green Ronin product (though if you like the thought of playing a Vampiric character without the +8 level adjustment, and minus most of the powers that REQUIRED that adjustment!) so I'll say that the Reveler PrC is designed to portray a Vampire that kills other Vampires to gain power. There are some drawbacks to this, like ANY Vampire within 30 feet could detect the PCs favorite "food"; which means it could get interesting trying to find a safe place to rest ANYWHERE near the other vamps (who know you regard them as delicacies beyond compare
)*looks back at post* damn, didn't think I was THAT talkative! I'll wrap up by noting that DMs concerned about having there not being any requirements to the various PrCs could do something similar to what Green Ronin did with the Reveler, tailored to each PrC in the world. This would make PrCs harder to advance in, and offer great openings for the DM to play with!!!
From my own personal experience I've noticed that many players, while imaginative and clever, aren't terribly creative. Many of the ideas they have for characters are usually based on something they saw in an action movie or read in a comic book and they just don't see how the core classes can translate into "claw-wielding mutant warrior" or "magical ninja". Prestige classes, non-standard races, and templates give them an easily identifiable way doing that. That frees them up from having to really THINK about how they are going to create the character.
Sometimes the PrCs bestow upon the player abilities that, while not unbalanced, can't "mocked up" very well by any combination of the core classes and are too powerful to be given in place of a feat. Sometimes these abilities are very cool and not outside the realm of a high-fantasy setting. Without any method of expressing that within the confines of "class abilities" and "feats", the players may feel daunted on how to integrate that into their character.
Anyway, in the end it is up to the DM to allow or ban this feature of the 3e rule set. If the DM and the players are fairly creative and willing to make a few minor tweaks to the standard rules, this poses no problem at all. If, however, the dm and players are unimaginative rules-saves, then the players may not have as much fun as they could.
One thing, while I'm thinking about it, someone mentioned that some PrCs don't play well with others. Those PrCs tend to make good villains. Remember that they are as much tools for the DM to make unusual or exotic adversaries as they are for the players to make unusual or exotic characters.
As a player, I tend to plan my characters from level 1-20 before I play them. This mainly results from my habit of sitting around and making characters whenever I'm bored, so I have to write out the whole progression, along with story, or I forget. This doesn't mean that the character won't change when I actually play them.
I think that the most important thing is for the DM and players to have a dialogue and figure out what kind of PRCs players might want prior to the beginning of a campaign so that they can be fit into a campaign. Finally, I feel it only fair that the players can take PRCs at the earliest possible level, as anything else can mess up potential characters. For example, their is a character I recently made after picking up the Eberron campaign setting and the Extended Psionics Handbook that had a 10 level prestige class (the war mind) and a 5 level racial prestige class (the warforged juggernaut). To be in either of these classes required being 6th level, meaning if I didn't take one of them at 6th level, I would be unable to take the full class for a 20th level character.
Sorry for the length, I just thought I would throw in my 2 cents. I agree that PRCs are a great addition to any game, but the most important thing is that everyone have fun, and that decisions are made on a joint basis.
PS Anyone who cherry picks a class in my campaigns will receive a beat down.
But so many of the PRCs want to have their cake and eat it - they want to be better than their core predecesser in their specialsit area, without giving up anything.
I agree with mister mayhem, and I will try to give an example of a prestige class that in my opinion is one of those "unbalanced" in term of "having their cake and eat it" - lots of benefits without giving up anything:
Let's take a look at the PrC Hammer of Moradin;
The overall typical figure is a fighter type with some divine spellcasting included - let us see; the fastest approach would be a fighter/cleric (min/maxers) but the paladin or even a ranger or druid might fit (not quite powerful though).
The paladin's aura - well since you get the paladin aura at 1st level, it might not be worth getting the reqs. from starting out as a paladin.
At 2nd level he gets an effect similar to the rangers favored enemy vs goblinoids (only better 2d6 instead of the rangers +2), 4th level he also gets benefits when fighting drows, and 8th level giants are also included.
At 3rd level he start to get damage reduction similar to that of the barbarian core class only better. (a fighter5/cleric3/moradin 9 has damage reduction 6/-, a barbarian 17 on the other hand only has damage reduction 4/-) At the same level he also gets an ability a pure fighter character only can dream of - the powerful grip! Twice the strength bonus for using a hammer in both hands! (and you get the 1+1/2 also when using it in one hand).
4th level Quake - let's have a better version of the wiz/sor/bard spell Balagarn's Iron Horn as a supernatural ability please.
5th level he can daze opponents 2/day
7th level he can bypass damage reduction as he had an axiomatic hammer. (I can see why monks get to bypass damage reduction in such ways, but they are going to need it since they are fighting with their bare hands, but a dwarven tank?) At the same level he gets Stalwart (su) - a bonus to AC equal to his base Will save modifier that last minimum 7 rounds (about the time of a combat)
8th level he also turns the opponents only chance for survival ARMOR into their bane, by making it a penalty to be wearing armor, adding the armor bonus to the damage roll(!)
9th level the hammer throw instead becomes a line attack - similar to lightning bolt, dealing damage to everything in its line if only the attack roll is good enough. (no penalty to the attack roll after successfully hitting a creature in its path)
10th level bones of the earth - shadowwalk as a spell like ability.
If you ask me, the person who created this prestige class is more a Warcraft III: the frozen throne player than a D&D player. Take a look at the url below and you will see what i mean.
http://www.battle.net/war3/human/units/mountainking.shtml
OK, so you have to be a dwarf, and yes, you have to write in that the character comes from the spine of the world, but other than that the only thing that prevents the player from choosing this PrC is the fact that you have to be a member of the "hammer club."
Well, that's quite a limitation some of you would say but unless WotC provides some Code of Conduct specially designed for the Hammers of Moradin, and puts in a requirement for Lawful in the prereqs I think the PrC is for munchkins and maxers/powerplayers only, and I don't want it in my campaign.
Other views?