prestige class tiers 3.5

[lunar2]

I'm working on a campaign setting, and am trying to figure out what prestige classes to use. i want to keep everything within a middle power range, so all the base classes i'm using are T3-4, and the prestige classes should be +0 or +1. i've narrowed down the list somewhat, but sonofzeal's list doesn't have dragon magic or complete champion. so, could anyone rate these prestige classes, please?

Forest Reeve (CC), Holt Warden (CC), Paragnostic Apostle (CC), Paragnostic Initiate (CC), Dragon Lord (Dragon Magic), Wyrm Wizard (Drag).

also, prestige bard and prestige ranger. no prestige paladin, because none of the base classes i'm using give turn undead.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Depends on what other source material is handy.

For example, with Prestige Bard, you open up DFI optimization on a Wizard chassis... assuming you have all the resources to optimize DFI.

I think one of the paragnostic PrC's gets you access to Turn Undead. Not sure, though.

Wyrm Wizard can be broken, although I don't recall how offhand, except that it was featured in a Known Cheese build.

As for the others... they don't stick out in my mind one way or the other.

[lunar2]

i'm not using prestige classes that you need other prestige classes to get into, so nothing that requires bardic music, favored enemy, or turn undead.

my available base classes are

beguiler, dread necromancer, healer, warmage, homebrew adept (can get animal companion or 2 domains or a spellbook and bonus feats. casts from druid, cleric, or wizard spell lists, respectively. either bard or duskblade casting, haven't decided which), barbarian, rogue, fighter.

note that the fighter, healer, rogue and warmage are all somewhat upgraded to make them competitive with the other classes.

[Gavinfoxx]

Have you seen this?

www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=1573.0l

[nedz]

Or this ?

pad the short message

[lunar2]

yeah, i'd seen one of them. i mentioned that. but even the one i haven't seen still doesn't cover dragon magic, complete champion, or the prestigious classes from unearthed arcana, which is where the 8 prestige classes i named come from.

[theUnearther]

Prestige Ranger is a half casting class, so it pretty much can't be called broken. It seems to be the general consensus that favored enemy bonuses, other than Favored Enemy: Arcanists, are worthless.

For comparison, a Druid/Prestige Ranger will inevitably be better than a Ranger of that level, and worse than a single classed Druid.


Prestige Bard gets a similar deal, but it's more like 75% casting. So, still worse than a straight caster, but slightly less so. And fun.

[Gavinfoxx]

Hey, both Favored Enemy Arcanists and Favored Enemy Evil are solid favored enemies!

Most the others suck, though, unless you know a LOT about the campaign in question ahead of time...

[ThiagoMartell]

Hey, both Favored Enemy Arcanists and Favored Enemy Evil are solid favored enemies!

Most the others suck, though, unless you know a LOT about the campaign in question ahead of time...

This, so much this.
Once you add Nemesis, Favored Enemy (evil) gets quite ridiculous. Not only do you know they are evil (and I'm pretty sure it does not count as a divination effect, so there should be no way around that), you get a bunch of plusses against them. Mystic Ranger/Harper Paragon kicks major ass due to this.

[nedz]

Favoured Enemy: Human is also usually solid, but can be useless in some campaigns.
Favoured Enemy: Undead can also be reasonable.

FE is generally poor though.

[eggs]

The PrC tier system is a joke.

I'd recommend finding what the players what to use, get some actual context for the class/PrC combos involved and making an informed decision, rather than basing the permitted/banned list off whether classes are "much better than more samurai levels," "slightly worse than more conjurer" or "ambiguously worded and circumstantial, so used once in the most broken way by the writer's group."

[hex0]

The PrC tier system is a joke.

I generally agree. It is just too situational because of the vast amount of combos of base and prestige classes.

Prestige base classes are hard to judge. I do like them and suggest them quite a bit. In SRD only, Cleric 6/Prestige Paladin 3 is pretty good.

[lunar2]

it's amazing how i can ask a question, get half a dozen replies, and not a single reply actually answers my question. i get things like

"druid/prestige ranger is better than straight ranger, but worse than straight druid"

or

"cleric 6/prestige paladin 3 is good in srd only"

or

"prestige classes are hard to judge based on the huge combinations of base and prestige classes out there."


even though i listed the base classes available, and neither cleric nor druid were on that list, so why would they even be mentioned. i listed the exact prestige classes i needed an answer for, and specifically said prestige paladin was not available, because none of my base classes give turn undead, and i don't have prestige classes that require other prestige classes to enter, so again, why mention it. i'm looking for tiering for classes from dragon magic and complete champion, so it's obviously not SRD only.

sorry for the rant, but if you are going to reply, could you at least pretend to answer the question i actually asked? are any of these prestige classes +2, -1, or -2?. that's all i need to know. once i know the general power level, then i can decide which ones are actually going to be used.

if it helps, outsiders do play a large role in the setting, and players would know that ahead of time. so favored enemy does have viable outlets.

[Kelb_Panthera]

SInce sonofzeal actually made the PrC tier system, have you considered PM'ing him for his opinion?

Though honestly, I tend to think that PrC's vary in benefit too widely by entry method to acurately rate that way, too. Unlike base classes, there are just too many variables.

[Endelehia]

Apart from the prestige ranger which seems to be at -1,and wyrm wizard who could be considered borderline +2,the rest are indeed within your desired boundaries (mostly +0).

[lunar2]

Apart from the prestige ranger which seems to be at -1,and wyrm wizard who could be considered borderline +2,the rest are indeed within your desired boundaries (mostly +0).

thank you.

@Kelb_Panthera well, i figured if he'd ever gotten around to looking at those books, it would have been on the list.

while the classes may vary quite a bit based on entry method, i'm working with limited base and prestige classes, so there would be less clutter to sort through in that regard. the prestige tiers should work well enough for my purposes, which is to sort out the truly broken (+2) and underpowered (-1,-2) classes, and then i can manually sort through what's left to decide what i'll actually use.

[eggs]

sorry for the rant, but if you are going to reply, could you at least pretend to answer the question i actually asked?

Sure.

Paragnostic Apostle just gives small numeric bonuses and CL boosts to things. If the intuitive entry is Cleric, it's a bit of an improvement over base class levels, because it actually gives something for its levels, while continuing to advance the Cleric's one class feature. That would put it in the appropriate level. But looking at how the base classes allowed (Dread Necro, Beguiler, Bard) would use it, it probably carries fewer of its own class features than they do, and would probably weaken a character fiddling with it, which sounds like something you don't want.

Holt Warden's easiest entry is Druid, which can't help but satisfy its prerequisites and which gains the most from the bonus domain. In that case, it misses out on its Wild Shape and companion features and gets a few more spells that it already had and some minor divinations/hit point recovery in exchange. So HW is probably a step down, and out by your criterion. But if a Healer went into the class, it would gain some added flexibility to make it fit the power level you're gunning for better.

The Dragonlord does nothing but fiddle with +1 and +3 bonuses. It sucks, but if you're using the PrC tier system, it could fit your "accept it" parameters, because entry through a weak class like Samurai or Fighter is probably more intuitive than entry through Warblade or Bard.

The Wyrm Wizard loses casting, but accesses other spell lists. There is no way to give you informative feedback. A player could use this to pick up Fireball on his beguiler or Suggestion on his Warmage, or to grab Shapechange on his Dread Necromancer.

Forest Reeve doesn't get spells and doesn't stack with weapon enhancements, but it gets a couple SLAs and Ranger features at an accelerated rate. Compared to ranger levels, it's an overall respectable exchange at ECL6-10, but a horrible losing deal at ECLs 16-20. Where it is on the Tier system depends on which point you're assessing it. It probably falls into the negative rankings by the PrC tier system's standards. But those assumptions are silly, because the characters who are going to take levels in it in the first place are the ones who have something to gain from it - and on something like a Ranger/Barbarian/Deepwarden, it would add some versatility at little to no power decrease.

On Paragnostic Initiate, what's the most straightforward entry... probably Monk, Ranger, Rogue or Fighter? It probably falls into your "acceptable" range then, but you can expect any character who uses it to suck.

Dragon Lord mostly just gives small weak number boosts to its allies. This is a fun one that's party-dependent, entry-dependent AND Leadership-dependent: depending on whether you think the most intuitive entry is Marshal, Fighter or Dragon Shaman, it goes from an improvement to optimization-dependent to a step down. If you don't have party members to benefit from the auras or to set up flanks, it just becomes a compete waste of time. If the Dragon Lord doesn't have leadership, its class features don't work well. It probably fits into your "accept it" range, but if you're pushing people to use classes like DFA and Warblade, I'd be surprised if Dragon Lord levels didn't weaken a build.

tl;dr The PrC tier system is a joke. Responding to your question directly is either misleading or uninformative. Look at the specific builds your players want to use.