PDA

View Full Version : Prestige Mistakes



Krellen
2007-03-15, 06:42 PM
Radiant Servant of Pelor and Sacred Exorcist both fully advance cleric spellcasting with virtually no downside, so you might consider those.
I was looking through Complete Divine this week, and this comment in another thread made me want to bring up the subject I thought of when I first noticed it:

Is there any good reason for a Cleric to not adopt one of these two prestige classes?

He continues to gain his spellcasting and his turning abilities, gains a bonus to saving throws, and gathers a bunch of other class features on top of that. What's the downside? Why bother staying a Cleric?

For that matter, what about the Wizard/Sorcerer PrCs with full spellcasting progression? Oh no, they lost their familiar; I think the Giant's portrayal of Blackwing, V's familiar, reflects how much a sacrifice the familiar is for most PCs.

Any other ridiculously designed PrCs?

Khantalas
2007-03-15, 06:44 PM
Radiant Servant of Pelor has a d6 hit die. Slows down your tanking slightly.

The Gilded Duke
2007-03-15, 06:45 PM
Usually almost no reason not to go prestige, few classes have good features at higher levels. And Familiars... wonderful things for bards and rogues. When I play a bard I usually pick up a raven, they share your skills and can speak common.

Now you get double the social.

Jasdoif
2007-03-15, 06:50 PM
Hierophant has the opposite problem, with its lack of spellcasting progression. All these nifty abilities to modify spells, instead of getting better spells?

Krellen
2007-03-15, 06:52 PM
Bards don't get familiars.

Swordguy
2007-03-15, 06:54 PM
The answer to your question is no, there is in fact NOT a good reason to pick up PrCs. This is called "codex creep" (after the GW problem). Essentially, the newer material tends to have cooler and more powerful stuff so you'll buy it.

Illiterate Scribe
2007-03-15, 06:55 PM
Green Star Adept is fairly good; +15 caster level (though that really is a mistake).

Tellah
2007-03-15, 06:56 PM
@Krellen: They can take Obtain Familiar from Complete Arcane.

Bears With Lasers
2007-03-15, 06:59 PM
Green Star Adept is fairly good; +15 caster level (though that really is a mistake).

Yeah, that's only if you misread it.

The_Snark
2007-03-15, 07:05 PM
There's a feat that'll let any arcane caster get a famiiar. Which, incidentally, completely negates any disadvantage from those sorcerer/wizard prestige classes if you really want a familiar for some reason.

This is a problem for some of these classes. When it's the Alienist, it's not so bad; you boost saves at the expense of Wisdom, you get a few extra HP at the expense of the ability to interact normally, you can replace fiendish summoned creatures with pseudonatural ones, and you have to invest in a couple feats to get in. It's its own drawback.

When it's the Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil, where you get powerful extra abilities in exchange for a couple feats, then there's a problem.

Sacred Exorcist isn't even all that bad, since it doesn't give all that much (I think), but the free-ability PrCs are a problem. And Radiant Servant is powerful.

MeklorIlavator
2007-03-15, 07:18 PM
Really, the IotSV is completely insane, especially if you use the master specialist.

Krellen
2007-03-15, 07:19 PM
The answer to your question is no, there is in fact NOT a good reason to pick up PrCs. This is called "codex creep" (after the GW problem). Essentially, the newer material tends to have cooler and more powerful stuff so you'll buy it.
I've played Rifts - so at least I can say "at least D&D isn't as bad as Rifts". :smallbiggrin:

Proven_Paradox
2007-03-15, 07:20 PM
I'll plan to houserule tests for those kind of classes. And by "tests" I mean full blown quests in which PCs are going to have to invest time, money, and probably blood. Sometimes with zero XP for the person taking the quest, if they're taking a class I deem particularly powerful like Radiant Servant (though it wouldn't be fair to the rest of the party if they didn't get XP either). That usually evens things out a bit.

I've never tried that out though; I don't know if my players will object to that or not. They haven't tried to take any PrCs yet.

Merlin the Tuna
2007-03-15, 07:20 PM
Is there any good reason for a Cleric to not adopt one of these two prestige classes?The reason not to become a Radiant Servant of Pelor is not wanting to be the healbot or undead buster. To get anything out of the class, you need to take two domains that most people don't want; Sun and Healing. Some domains are great. Those two are not. Given the choice of Cleric/RSoP or Cleric with good domains (say, Luck and Travel), I would go for the Cleric with the good domains.

Swordguy
2007-03-15, 07:21 PM
I've played Rifts - so at least I can say "at least D&D isn't as bad as Rifts". :smallbiggrin:

Don't worry. It's getting there. :biggrin:

TheOOB
2007-03-15, 07:42 PM
The reason not to become a Radiant Servant of Pelor is not wanting to be the healbot or undead buster. To get anything out of the class, you need to take two domains that most people don't want; Sun and Healing. Some domains are great. Those two are not. Given the choice of Cleric/RSoP or Cleric with good domains (say, Luck and Travel), I would go for the Cleric with the good domains.

The sun and healing domains are both good domains that a cleric of pelor would likely take anyways.

As a DM, it's important not to just allow something just because WotC made it, over time they have proved time and time again that they care virtually nothing for game balance.

Currently I am working on varient casters that will replace other spellcasters in my campaigns. They will all be spontaneous, they will all use MAD casting (ala favored souls), and they will all have a lot to lose from prestige classing as a lot of their spells known/per day will come from class abilities rather then caster level, and thus while you do improve in power with PrCs, someone with the full base class will have a lot more spells.

Aquillion
2007-03-15, 08:54 PM
Dweomerkeeper. Full spell progression, yadda yadda. At 4th level you get the Supernatural Spell ability, which lets you cast one of your prepared spell once per day as a Supernatural Ability, which doesn't provoke an attack of opportunty and negates the need for compontents. Note that that's not just material components; like any normal SU ability, spells 'cast' with Supernatural Spell ability have no xp, gp, verbal and somantic components (though they do use up your prepared spell).

Unlimited money with True Creation. Unlimited free Resurrections. Unlimited everything with Limited Wish / Wish / Miracle. And the prestige class basically costs you nothing!

Jack_Simth
2007-03-15, 08:55 PM
Currently I am working on varient casters that will replace other spellcasters in my campaigns. They will all be spontaneous, they will all use MAD casting (ala favored souls), and they will all have a lot to lose from prestige classing as a lot of their spells known/per day will come from class abilities rather then caster level, and thus while you do improve in power with PrCs, someone with the full base class will have a lot more spells.

I've actually been toying with all spontaneous casters for games I run (well, except for Paladins, Rangers, and classes with similarly capped spells).

Clerics: Use the PHB Sorcerer spells known table (selected from the Cleric list) with Domain spells as bonus spells known (but no spontaneous Cure/Inflict, unless they are spells known), the Cleric spells per day (minus the domain slots). At odd levels, the highest level spells known will be domain spells only.
Wizards: Use the PHB Sorcerer spells known table (selected from the Sor/Wiz list). Specialist Wizards do not get extra spells per day; instead, they get extra spells known from their specialty school (one per spell level where they have spells per day) but cannot know spells from their forbidden schools. Note: I do not expect to see any generalist Wizards under this setup.
Druids: Use the PHB Sorcerer spells known table (selected from the Druid list), with the Summon Nature's Ally line as bonus spells known.
Sorcerers: Spells Known/Per day as in the PHB, bonus feats (as the Wizard) at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th, d6 HD, 4 + Int Skill points per level, use magic Device as a class skill, and can get their spells known off of any spell list (yes, a 10th level Sorcerer can take Heal from the Adept spell list from the DMG as a 5th level spell known - it's still an Arcane spell for the Sorcerer, though). The catch: a spell is not considered on the Sorcerer's class list unless it is also on the Sorcerer's known list (or it's faked with UMD). So if a Sorcerer wants to use wands, scrolls, and staves to suppliment their lack of spells known, they have to make a skill check for it (in addition to buying or getting it crafted - which, as I'm running a low wealth campaign, is kinda tricky).

Universally, metamagic takes no extra time.

Wizard's, Clerics, and Druids lose the benefits of having every spell available (so they can't dominate an encounter where they know what they'll be facing), but gain the benefits of spontaneous casting (which, as a DM, makes them a little more predictable). It also makes spellcasters of the same class farily different from each other - they have to pick and choose their spells carefully. Meanwhile, the Sorcerer gets a little bitty boost for not having as much mystic finess.

Dweomerkeeper. Full spell progression, yadda yadda. At 4th level you get the Supernatural Spell ability, which lets you cast one of your prepared spell once per day as a Supernatural Ability, which doesn't provoke an attack of opportunty and negates the need for compontents. Note that that's not just material components; like any normal SU ability, spells 'cast' with Supernatural Spell ability have no xp, gp, verbal and somantic components (though they do use up your prepared spell).

Unlimited money with True Creation[i]. Unlimited free [I]Resurrections. Unlimited everything with Limited Wish / Wish / Miracle. And the prestige class basically costs you nothing!
It has a hidden lost spellcasting level - you need both arcane and divine spells, and a particular domain, so you pretty much need to drop a level in Cleric (or, alternately, drop a level in Wizard) to meet the requirements. And it only advances one side. Makes a nifty class to end the career of the Wizard-3/Cleric-3/Mystic Theurge-10, though.

TheOOB
2007-03-15, 09:35 PM
Of course, after being a mystic theurge an overpowered PrC is needed.

Zincorium
2007-03-15, 09:40 PM
Of course, after being a mystic theurge an overpowered PrC is needed.

Fohlucan Lyricist is my personal favorite. Full double spell progression, full BAB, and I can wear metal armor as a druid? What's not to love?

The prerequisites aren't even that bad, really.

TheOOB
2007-03-15, 09:42 PM
Not that bad? You normally have to be triple classed, including one full spellcaster, one mid spellcaster, and one non-spellcaster. Your abilities in each will be pretty far behind by the time you take the class.

Jack_Simth
2007-03-15, 09:47 PM
Of course, after being a mystic theurge an overpowered PrC is needed.
No lo contendre. But for the Cleric-1/Wiz-4/Dweomerkeeper-10/Archmage-5, it's still a lost spellcasting level (cleric side basically useless, other than using wands of Cure Light and the like). Mind you, the infinite wealth loophole (Wish has 25k mundane items on the safe list... and uncapped cost magic items merely cost extra XP... which technically go away with Su abilities) is kinda gamebreaking if abused.

Aquillion
2007-03-15, 09:52 PM
It has a hidden lost spellcasting level - you need both arcane and divine spells, and a particular domain, so you pretty much need to drop a level in Cleric (or, alternately, drop a level in Wizard) to meet the requirements. And it only advances one side. Makes a nifty class to end the career of the Wizard-3/Cleric-3/Mystic Theurge-10, though.Sorta. As a Cleric, you could take the Magical Training feat to qualify, though. Or worship a diety with the Spell domain to get Anyspell... it, incidently, also grants Limited Wish, so it's a perfect fit. Mystra would work, since she can offer both it and the Magic domain you need for Dweomerkeeper.

Vaniel
2007-03-15, 09:54 PM
Shouldn't SpellCasting prestiges classes with a lot of features be reduced in their spell progression? How would, let's say, take away two levels of spell progression at the beginning and somewhere in the middle? Since you know, losing only one level, in the end, only makes you lose two spells per day, one of 8th and 9th level.

clarkcd
2007-03-15, 09:57 PM
For me it depends on the scope of the campaign. In my current campaign the characters just arrived at L17 and we should have enough plot related material to take us up to 25-30th level. If you're going that high you are sacrificing future bonus epic feats for PrC abilities. The NPC cleric I'm running for the group has stayed only with cleric for just such a reason. Epic feats are usually much better than PrC abilities and if you're going to be able to use them for a significant amount of levels can be worth it.

Of course that assumes you actually go past 20th level...

TheOOB
2007-03-15, 10:02 PM
Shouldn't SpellCasting prestiges classes with a lot of features be reduced in their spell progression? How would, let's say, take away two levels of spell progression at the beginning and somewhere in the middle? Since you know, losing only one level, in the end, only makes you lose two spells per day, one of 8th and 9th level.

Yes, but the number one rule of prestige classes is thou shall not give up caster levels. Virtually no ability is worth losing several spells per day/known (including 9th level spells) reducing your caster level, and slowing progression to higher level spells. If a PrC doesn't give full caster levels, it's 99/100 times not worth it.

Darrin
2007-03-15, 10:04 PM
Fohlucan Lyricist is my personal favorite. Full double spell progression, full BAB, and I can wear metal armor as a druid? What's not to love?

The prerequisites aren't even that bad, really.

The prereqs for Fochlucan are a bit bizarre. Ok, well, the evasion thing mostly. You have to waste two levels on Rogue, and I'm still trying to figure out why its part of the prereqs... it doesn't fit the background all that well.

Going Green Whisperer+Arcane Heirophant is a bit more optimal. With a dip into Sublime Chord, you can get 9th level arcane and divine spells... and you can still wildshape and do bardic music, so you're a bit more useful than a Mystic Theurge.

Jack_Simth
2007-03-15, 11:19 PM
Sorta. As a Cleric, you could take the Magical Training feat to qualify, though. Or worship a diety with the Spell domain to get Anyspell... it, incidently, also grants Limited Wish, so it's a perfect fit. Mystra would work, since she can offer both it and the Magic domain you need for Dweomerkeeper.
Crazyness.

Faerun Campaign setting, is it? Regional feat... still.. tasty... cheese! no bad! Must resist the cheese!


Shouldn't SpellCasting prestiges classes with a lot of features be reduced in their spell progression? How would, let's say, take away two levels of spell progression at the beginning and somewhere in the middle? Since you know, losing only one level, in the end, only makes you lose two spells per day, one of 8th and 9th level.
Should they? Yes. Do they? Not so much. See, being a level behind on the spellcasting curve is something a primary spellcaster really, really wants to avoid. To sell books, people tend to write PrC's that people will take... which almost always makes them better than the base classes (in many cases, strictly better). This causes power creep.

Then there's also the unintended interactions for things from different sources - the Magical Training feat and the spell domain's intereaction with the Dewoemerkeeper, as Aquillion pointed out, for example. Without such a thing, the Dewoemerkeeper isn't quite as strong (still a very strong class, mind) as it loses a caster level meeting the requirements.

Ramza00
2007-03-16, 12:04 AM
Really, the IotSV is completely insane, especially if you use the master specialist.
How is your campaign going?

Ramza00
2007-03-16, 12:09 AM
Dweomerkeeper. Full spell progression, yadda yadda. At 4th level you get the Supernatural Spell ability, which lets you cast one of your prepared spell once per day as a Supernatural Ability, which doesn't provoke an attack of opportunty and negates the need for compontents. Note that that's not just material components; like any normal SU ability, spells 'cast' with Supernatural Spell ability have no xp, gp, verbal and somantic components (though they do use up your prepared spell).

Unlimited money with True Creation. Unlimited free Resurrections. Unlimited everything with Limited Wish / Wish / Miracle. And the prestige class basically costs you nothing!
And if you have access to one supplement, godhood and the ability to assume infinite divine ranks :smallfrown:


It has a hidden lost spellcasting level - you need both arcane and divine spells, and a particular domain, so you pretty much need to drop a level in Cleric (or, alternately, drop a level in Wizard) to meet the requirements. And it only advances one side. Makes a nifty class to end the career of the Wizard-3/Cleric-3/Mystic Theurge-10, though.
In non setting yes there is a hidden level loss. In FR there is a 1st lvl feat magical training that allows you to cast arcane cantrips, thus fulfilling the requirements without caster level lost if you go the cleric focus route.

Regardless if you do lose a caster level, the abilities are just way too good.

Ramza00
2007-03-16, 12:15 AM
Fohlucan Lyricist is my personal favorite. Full double spell progression, full BAB, and I can wear metal armor as a druid? What's not to love?

The prerequisites aren't even that bad, really.

F lyrists requirements are horrible, unless you do something cheesy such as


Bard 1/Archivist 1/Wizard 1/Mystic Theurge 7/Fochlucan Lyrist 10

Bardic Music and Knowledge of 11th lvl Bard
Casts Archivist and Wizard at 18th lvl
15 BAB if using partials
Good Skillpoints (104+23*Int Skillpoints and since you have a high int due to casting=a lot of skillpoints)

Here is how you get into Fochlucan Lyrist easily
Race Illuminan
Bardic Tutealge (Region option for languages, you were raised in a bardic college/taught by a bard, allows you to get language druidic. Champions of Valor, preview of this option located here)
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20051104a
Get evasion by the Shadowalker template in Unapproachable East (+1LA buy it off if you can), or the shape soulmeld option
Take Able Learner at lvl 1 to keep your skills up
Take Improved Sigil (Krau) to get early entry (treat as many spells as you have sigils for as influenced by the heighten spell metamagic at no increase of casting time and it still occupies the old slot, thus 2nd lvl spells with the 1st lvl slot)

More ideas on early entry here.
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=377248http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11646310&postcount=17

The reason why the f lyrist requirements are so bizare is that it is emulating the old "bard" from past D&D which was a multiclassing nightmare back then. The evasion requirement is to sorta force you to have rogue lvls unless you use tricks and/or cheese.

Zincorium
2007-03-16, 03:55 AM
You want something cheesy?

Bard 5/Ur priest 1/rogue 2/ bard +2/sublime chord 1/Fohlucan lyricist 9. Use Fochlucan lyricist to advance ur priest and sublime chord spellcasting. The only real downside is that you have to stay nuetral evil, although that shouldn't be too complicated.

You get 9th level spells in both arcane and divine, bard music as a 17th level bard, and a BAB of 15, which is the same as a single classed bard or rogue. And because bard/rogue tends to be mediocre, most DMs will never see it coming until you take Fochlucan lyricist.

Edit: And if you use fractional BAB, it goes up to 17. Oh, and 19 of your HD are d6s, one is a d8, so you're significantly tougher than most characters with 9th level arcane spellcasting.

Morphius
2007-03-16, 04:45 AM
Well, this is why I as a DM have a "No, [screw] you" rule. You try to make a character that's within the rules as written, but is dramatically unbalanced, I respond with "No, [screw] you", and you don't get to break the game. For example... well, just look above.

Zincorium
2007-03-16, 05:13 AM
Well, this is why I as a DM have a "No, [screw] you" rule. You try to make a character that's within the rules as written, but is dramatically unbalanced, I respond with "No, [screw] you", and you don't get to break the game. For example... well, just look above.

Every DM should retain their right to check all things over before players use them and the responsibility to actually stop players from breaking the game. The only thing I suggest is that you add a bit of tact into it. There is no reason a player should try to optomize past a certain degree, unless it's a dysfunctional game where the DM's only goal is to kill the PCs, and that game is on death row anyway. Keeping your character in relative balance to the rest of the group makes it easier on the DM, and you don't feel like you're taking on a heavier load than the other characters.

I'm not an advocate of breaking the game, by Fochlucan lyricist being my 'favorite', I mean favorite example of an incredibly overpowered prestige class, not 'favorite thing to use in-game'. I really can't even think of a reason it needs to exist, since I've seen a complete dearth of druid/rogue/bards that the prestige class seems to embody.

Not only should Fochlucan lyricist be either beaten into a persistent vegetative state with the nerf bat or outright banned, but both sublime chord and ur priest should be disbarred from having their spellcasting advanced through another prestige class. They're almost balanced prestige classes within the niche they represent, ur priests being a spellcasting addition to non-caster characters, and the sublime chord being a prestige class that can only be taken late in a characters career, so that it's progression doesn't outstrip normal. They're still overpowered, but it's when they're combined with other things that they get truly game breaking. Kind of like kobolds.

Greendevilman
2007-03-16, 06:58 AM
Honestly I think a big part of the problem is that most of the core classes are incredibly poorly designed. Very few of them get much in the way of scaling class features as they level up and there is little reason not to PrC out if you can. The theory a lot of people operate under is that you give something up to get PrC class features (though I'm not sure this is true as even in core- the Assassin gives way better returns than what you sacrifice and the Loremaster is essentially a free lunch for any arcane caster) but most of the core casting classes (except the Druid) don't have much to give up. Look at the Sorcerer- he has one good save, the worst HD possible, the worst possible skills, and the only thing he gets as he levels up is full casting progression and a mostly useless familiar. The only things he has to give up are the familiar and the casting and most class features arn't worth a loss of more than one level of spell progression (especially due to the even level nature of sorcerer spell level advancement). Oh and his skills and feats. But frankly anything with remotely decent class features is strictly better than continuing on as Sorcerer, especially since any skill and feat requirements probably advance whatever concept the PrC was striving to emulate. Any PrC that does more than slightly flavor a Sorcerer is going to do a lot to add to its power (which is good because its quite weak compared to other core casters). The Druid is a much better designed class, overpowered compared to the other core classes as it may be, because it ACTUALLY GETS CLASS FEATURES THAT REWARD YOU FOR CONTINUING TO ADVANCE AS A DRUID. And if you want to PrC out? It ACTUALLY HAS CLASS FEATURES TO GIVE UP. Look at the Lion of Talsid PrC in the Book of Exalted deeds- it gives you pretty good features for the level investment but you do sacrifice two levels of Wildshape advancement, a feat, and several decent class features like A Thousand Faces and Timeless body for what it gives you. Still probably worth it and a good PrC overall, but you do need to weigh you options and its by no means obvious that every neutral good Druid should be gunning for it. Most of the newer classes show a tendency towards this kind of design and while it may be "power creep" I don't think that we should be so beholden to the poorly balanced core classes that we can't see this for the improvment that it is. If, for example, I'm playing a Beguiler I really have to weigh the sacrifices of not pursuing the class to completion. It may still be worth it, but I'm actually going to have to weigh the loss of class levels rather than just taking whatever PrC is available because I'm a sorcerer and absolutely ANYTHING that has full caster progression is better than continuing on as I am.

The objection to this is that you can set up PrCs that don't give full caster advancement as a reasonable sacrifice. This is somewhat true but:

a- Misses the fact that full caster PrCs have been in D&D 3.x since its inception (every DMG caster PrC, though not all of those that require spellcasting capability) so any claims that it was "always supposed to be this way" or was "intended to be such and such" are laughably false on their face.

b- Almost nothing is worth the loss of much casting advancement. Full casting is pretty much the best class feature in the game and anything that demands it as a sacrifice needs to walk a very fine line between being completely not worth it and being hideously overpowered. PrCs that lose a single (possibly two) caster level(s) are sometimes worth it for a Wizard or Cleric (though are usually much less so for a sorcerer) but only if the returns are high enough. I'm sure if I was less tired I could relate this somehow to the economic phenomena of the winner's curse, but suffice it to say that given the class-featurelessness of most core casters it is almost impossible to design a PrC that isn't either obviously inferior (rarely to never used) or obviously superior (almost always used if remotely flavor appropriate) to taking the base class, and the core casters have very little to give up beyond casting progression. Given this:

c- Why should the game be so beholden to the PHB's original largely class-featureless and poorly scaling character classes that it can never move beyond them? It was poor design then and its poor design now. Why not recognize the fact that the game, even at its inception, provided very little in the way of rational reason to stick to most of the core classes and most classes (excepting the Druid, Monk and maybe the Rogue) have very little reason not to automatically PrC out after snagging their low level class features? The post PHB base classes have largely been oriented towards providing more reasonably scaling class features from levels 1 to 20 (with greater and lesser success) and many actually have abilities that the loss of which on choosing to PrC represents real sacrifice on their part. In the meantime it'll be pretty hard to design any PrC with spellcasting and any class features whatsoever that'd not be taken over the next level of Sorcerer or Wizard.

So complain about PrCs all you like and there are some that never should have existed, but the real problem goes right back to the release of D&D 3.0 and all the whining about "power creep" true or not completely misses and obfuscates the real point. I've probably expressed myself poorly owing to tiredness, but I hope the main point I was trying to make got across clearly enough- Core was pretty poorly designed from a class features and balance perspective and notwithstanding problems with some particular of the billion and one PrCs out there the fact that there are free lunch PrCs inevitable from the basic design and those PrCs have been with us from the very beginning. So the problem isn't really with the Sacred Excorcist so much as it is with the Cleric. That said I'll be the first to admit that things like the Dweomerkeeper and Planar Shepard just straight up shouldn't exist*.

(P.S. I havn't talked as much about melee classes because they have their own set of issues and the point is easier to prove when talking about casters.)

*But I'll stand by the Shadowcraft Mage because the entire concept of a little gnome creating 120% real psuedo-miracles out of the essence of pure shadow using silent image is hilarious.

Ramza00
2007-03-16, 07:34 AM
I second what Greendevilman said about Druid being a well design class with scaling features, and how other classes lack these things and thus you just prc out.

I would like to add that monk is a horrible base class. On paper it looks like it scales just like a druid does. In actuality a lot of its abilities are useless, or the abilities counter intuitive to your focus (all that speed bonus makes you a good spring attacker, but you need a full round action to flurry)
. Monk's abilities are like the "dead level" series of web enhancement, useless abilities but it makes you feel like you are getting something at those levels.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20061013a
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20070227x

Greendevilman
2007-03-16, 07:41 AM
Oh sorry! God forbid if I gave the impression that I thought the Monk was a good class, I just meant that it actually gets abilities almost continually and if it wants to PrC out you have to weigh the sacrifice of those abilities. Mind you they're mostly bad abilities, but you still have to weigh them vs. the mostly useless features you get out of most Monk PrC classes. :smalltongue: I feel bad for the poor Monk as its basically the only class without a well defined role in a party and counterintuitively its probably more dependent on magical gear than any other class.

Fixer
2007-03-16, 08:43 AM
In order to prevent Fochlucan Lyrist from becoming a cheese machine in my games I very strictly restrict Druidic to JUST Druids. If a non-druid takes a normally druidic prestige class, they still don't get Druidic. If a druid becomes a non-druid and tries to teach Druidic to a non-druid, I have the druidic orders (Neutral Evil Druids if appropriate) hunt down and kill EVERYONE they taught the language too, and the ex-druid. If anyone gets ressurrected/raised, they are killed again until they no longer know the language.

Some might call it heavy-handed, but as it is a 'secret' language by a group that has evil members among its ranks, I can see the druids doing this.

Nevermore
2007-03-16, 11:18 AM
I agree that the druid is designed significantly better than most other phb classes; that is why I am yet to actually PrC out of Druid.

Krellen
2007-03-16, 11:31 AM
Core was pretty poorly designed from a class features and balance perspective[.]
Ironic there are so many classes that still have this problem - Sorcerer being one of the main ones, though Cleric and Wizard also have this issue - since the redesing of the Ranger in 3.5 was done because there was no reason to take more than 1 level of Ranger. It seems Wizards got the message - but forgot it after fixing one problem.

I'd be interested in seeing a "no PrCs" campaign. Anyone played one? If so, how'd it work out?

Swordguy
2007-03-16, 11:33 AM
Ironic there are so many classes that still have this problem - Sorcerer being one of the main ones, though Cleric and Wizard also have this issue - since the redesing of the Ranger in 3.5 was done because there was no reason to take more than 1 level of Ranger. It seems Wizards got the message - but forgot it after fixing one problem.

I'd be interested in seeing a "no PrCs" campaign. Anyone played one? If so, how'd it work out?

Druids, Clerics, and Wizards still make everyone else cry after about level 8-10. Lack of PrCs doesn't change that.

Aquillion
2007-03-16, 12:40 PM
It would still be possible to make balanced Wizard / Sorcerer PrCs; players always have things to give up, even if they don't know it. For instance:

* Giving up specific spell slots to enter the class / progress in its abilities (Archmage)

* Wizards can take another forbidden school (Wizard of High Sorcery)

* For wizards who don't want to give up an entire school, there could be classes that just give a disadvantage with a specific school (eg your CL with spells of school X is treated as having a -1 or whatever penalty for calculating spell effects only; this penalty could increase as you advance.)

There could be more general sacrifices, too:

* In order to join this PrC, you must be blind; you can wear a blindfold, but whenever you see using non-magical means, you lose all class features for a week. (They'll use magic to see, of course, but this leaves them super-vulnerable to dispel magic, antimagic areas, and so on. Good for a seer PrC, probably.)

* As you advance in this PrC, your body slowly becomes tainted, grotesque, and deformed, resulting in penalties to all interactions with others and slowly costing you certain equip locations.

* Members of this PrC are hated and feared throughout the civilized world, and possessing any of its abilities carries an automatic death sentence in almost any non-Evil community. There are organizations of skilled Paladins, Clerics, and good-aligned arcane spellcasters who devote themselves full-time to scrying out and destroying anyone who follows this path.

* Members of this PrC must swear loyalty to a specific organization / outsider, and must fufill regular tasks for it when requested or they lose their class features until they make up the failures. The difficulty, expense, and frequency of the tasks increases as you go up in class level.

* Anyone who joins this PrC takes an oath never to rely on the lesser hedge-magic abilities of wands, scrolls, and potions; if they ever use one personally, or willingly allow someone else to use one on them to their benefit, they lose the use of all class features for a week.

...and so on. Now, most players wouldn't take the worst of these, but that's because there are already so many good PrCs out there that cost nothing...

Tobrian
2007-03-16, 01:06 PM
(snip)Is there any good reason for a Cleric to not adopt one of these two prestige classes?

He continues to gain his spellcasting and his turning abilities, gains a bonus to saving throws, and gathers a bunch of other class features on top of that. What's the downside? Why bother staying a Cleric?

For that matter, what about the Wizard/Sorcerer PrCs with full spellcasting progression? Oh no, they lost their familiar; (snip)
Any other ridiculously designed PrCs?

A wizard or sorcerer with a familiar who then takes a PrC does NOT lose that familiar. Or am I missing something here?? :smallconfused:
You only lose access to the higher-level bonus wizard feats, but really you only get one every 5 (!!) levels and I never bothere with metamagic anyway, so really these days my wizards would take a PrC as soon as possible.

As for your question: With wizard PrCs like Urban Savant (from Cityscape) the normal core wizard class looks like an incompetent loser. Truth to tell the Urban Savant is what I always thought the wizard should be (more skill points for knowledge skills) and a lot more... if they adapted the Urban Savant as a 20-level class, you'd never have to take wizard again. Oh wait... with all the newarcane spellcaster classes like Beguiler, Archivist, Duskblade, Warmage etc you would be stupid to ever play a normal specialist wizard again. *sigh* Power creep indeed.

The only one who loses out when taking a PrC is the monk and the rogue )edit: and the druid), because their classes have some cool powers at higher levels (i.e. Slippery Mind for the rogue, and timeless body, quivering palm, perfect body etc for monk) UNLESS of course the PrC has even more awesome special feats. Really, I have nothing against PrCs in concept, I merely forbid certain PrCs (like the Dragon Disciple) when I'm the DM.

AtomicKitKat
2007-03-16, 02:31 PM
Really, I have nothing against PrCs in concept, I merely forbid certain PrCs (like the Dragon Disciple) when I'm the DM.

Really? The Dragon Disciple is one of the weaker PrCs out there. Mostly because it's not a full caster. It improves a Gish, and that's about it. You practically need to dip into Dragon Devotee just to make it worthwhile.

Innis Cabal
2007-03-16, 02:40 PM
my fav is arcane heriphant/mystic theurge

Krellen
2007-03-16, 03:30 PM
A wizard or sorcerer with a familiar who then takes a PrC does NOT lose that familiar. Or am I missing something here?? :smallconfused:
A 20th level wizard has a more powerful familiar than a 10th level wizard. Not a lot, but some. The wizard that's taken a non-familiar-granting PrC doesn't lose the familiar, no, but it ceases to advance. Assuming a "typical" 10/10 PrC multiclass, the wizard loses 5 AC, 5 Intelligence, a free scrying and a rather piddly SR of 25 versus the 20th level wizard. So there is a loss, but, really, who keeps track of their familiar like that?

Fax Celestis
2007-03-16, 03:33 PM
A 20th level wizard has a more powerful familiar than a 10th level wizard. Not a lot, but some. The wizard that's taken a non-familiar-granting PrC doesn't lose the familiar, no, but it ceases to advance. Assuming a "typical" 10/10 PrC multiclass, the wizard loses 5 AC, 5 Intelligence, a free scrying and a rather piddly SR of 25 versus the 20th level wizard. So there is a loss, but, really, who keeps track of their familiar like that?

Especially with spells like Augment Familiar around.

Tobrian
2007-03-16, 03:40 PM
A 20th level wizard has a more powerful familiar than a 10th level wizard. Not a lot, but some. The wizard that's taken a non-familiar-granting PrC doesn't lose the familiar, no, but it ceases to advance. Assuming a "typical" 10/10 PrC multiclass, the wizard loses 5 AC, 5 Intelligence, a free scrying and a rather piddly SR of 25 versus the 20th level wizard. So there is a loss, but, really, who keeps track of their familiar like that?

I think you meant "the wizard's familiar loses"... last I checked only the familiar gained SR, not the wizard himself.

Krellen
2007-03-16, 04:00 PM
I think you meant "the wizard's familiar loses"... last I checked only the familiar gained SR, not the wizard himself.
Yes, I assumed I had made it clear I was talking about the familiar itself. Sorry if I didn't.

Merlin the Tuna
2007-03-16, 10:29 PM
Oh wait... with all the newarcane spellcaster classes like Beguiler, Archivist, Duskblade, Warmage etc you would be stupid to ever play a normal specialist wizard again. *sigh* Power creep indeed.Except that any kind of Wizard is still better than... pretty much all of those.

Bears With Lasers
2007-03-16, 10:39 PM
Oh wait... with all the newarcane spellcaster classes like Beguiler, Archivist, Duskblade, Warmage etc you would be stupid to ever play a normal specialist wizard again. *sigh* Power creep indeed.

...are you kidding me? The Warmage is the worst arcane caster out there, only qualifying for the title because he actually gets 9th level spells; the Archivist is a divine caster who can get some wizard spells via domains but not most of them, the Duskblade is a gish, who gets a bunch of weak low-level spells and fills the melee role, and Beguilers replace rogues, not wizards.

With all the power creep, etc. in D&D... the Wizard, Cleric, and Druid remain the three most powerful classes in the game*.


*Except the Artificer, but that's campaign-setting-specific and justifies the campaign setting being the way it is.

Rigeld2
2007-03-16, 10:46 PM
Um.

Archivist can scribe all the important spells into his book. Name me one really really nice Wizard spell that isnt on a domain, somewhere.

Jack_Simth
2007-03-16, 10:51 PM
By a curious quirk of the item creation rules, it doesn't have to be on a domain list anywhere.

The Archivist just has to be able to convince a Wizard/Sorcerer/Bard with the spell to collaberate on a scroll, with the Archivist being the Creator. Because it's the Creator that determines the Arcane/Divine status, and the Archivist can learn any spell from a Divine scroll....

Rigeld2
2007-03-16, 10:56 PM
I knew there was a bug somewhere. So Archivist > Wizard and > Cleric, due to a larger spell base. Arguable on Cleric tho.

Bears With Lasers
2007-03-16, 11:01 PM
The Archivist is two-stat-dependant, and has fewer spells/day than specialist wizards or clerics.

Also, "divine scrolls of arcane spells"--also doable via Warlock or Artificer, I suppose--is one of those things that I don't think anyone would get away with in actual play. Archivists are still great, mind; they just don't replace wizards.
What makes archivist really powerful is other, shorter divine lists--for example, getting the paladin's Holy Sword at level 7 rather than whenever the Paladin gets fourth level spells, and same for the ranger's whatever-that-turn-self-into-Bulette spell in the SpC is called.

Jack_Simth
2007-03-16, 11:03 PM
Normally, it's nothing but an oddity; the Divine scroll of Fireball isn't useful to anyone, and the Wizard can't cast a Cure Light Wounds from an arcane scroll (not on his class list).

The Archivist has a quirk of wording...