PrCs: Awesomesauce or Big Box o'Dumb

[wayfare]

Elsewhere on the playground, folks are discussing the mechanics of generic, customizable classes as a possible improvement on the PrC system. My question to the wise gamers here -- are PrCs a good idea. What were their merits and their flaws? Would you play another system that uses a similar mechanic?

[AttilaTheGeek]

I like PrCs because it lets you customize the class beyond ACFs and interchangable abilities, starting around the levels when you might be getting bored of the class.

That being said, I prefer Pathfinder's approach to PrCs to 3.5's because there aren't that many PrCs in Pathfinder and they can't always compete with a single class; in comparison, in 3.5, there's no reason to ever take a class to 20 (besides the Druid).

[awa]

prestige classes were intended to be a lot more rare and campaign specific then they ended up being.
They feel like a neat idea poorly implemented. I kinda like the idea of specific orders and secret societies with special techniques so you could say "look at this body see that wound clearly the killer was a member of the dreaded assassins guild." But they have so many prestige classes that anything really special is probably had by a dozen other groups and they are rarely well integrated into the setting.

it feel like many of the powers would be better off as alternate class features/ options for base classes

[Jeff the Green]

prestige classes were intended to be a lot more rare and campaign specific then they ended up being.
They feel like a neat idea poorly implemented. I kinda like the idea of specific orders and secret societies with special techniques so you could say "look at this body see that wound clearly the killer was a member of the dreaded assassins guild." But they have so many prestige classes that anything really special is probably had by a dozen other groups and they are rarely well integrated into the setting.

And, even worse, the first many PrCs they released were so generic that having an "assassin's guild" was almost nonsensical. Exactly why do you have to join the guild to learn how to kill somebody with a single stroke and cast a few spells? At least with things like Cannith Wand Adept, Mage of the Arcane Order, and Skypledged, we got some reason for there to be exclusivity in their ranks.

I think there are two ways PrCs can work well. The first is a gradual narrowing of focus. It makes some kind of sense that two 1st-level barbarians would fight in basically similar ways. It makes less sense that two 20th-level barbarians would. So the various PrCs help to flesh out the idea of different warriors perfecting their own styles, with one becoming nearly feral, another becoming closer to nature and tapping into nature spirits, and another drawing magical power from ritual scarification.

The other possibility is what seems to have been intended, that entering a PrC represented becoming a member of a specific organization. Personally, I don't like this one as well for a couple reasons. First, I think the affiliations system in Complete Champion, Cityscape, and elsewhere works better for this. Second, with relatively rare exceptions (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=242343), I prefer the idea of classes as metagame constructs. This is, for example, why I hate the requirement for Assassins to be Evil. There's nothing the class does that is inherently evil. Dishonorable, sure, but even Paladins don't fall for doing something dishonorable. In fact, in core, if you want to play a police officer who specializes in bringing people in for trial, the best way to do it (other than Wizard 20, obviously) is an assassin, since you can paralyze instead of kill on a death attack.

[WhatBigTeeth]

The emphasis 3e places on prerequisites is one of its most obnoxious elements, and it's an element that's deeply tied with the concept of prestige classes.

It's a large part of why building a character takes as long as it does - an element of the system that's kind of neat for dinking around internet discussion boards, but which is extremely onerous in play - and it leads to metagamey strangeness like Paladins needing hide ranks and a specific set of feats to fall into Blackguard status.

I believe the concept that prestige classes were presumably meant to represent - distinct powers for a character as a result of character achievement - would be better done with a combination of PF-style variance between characters within a class, supplemented with something akin to the affiliation system, where character achievement produces direct results, the benefits are largely tied to fluff, the powers are typically minor, they come at a cost, but are largely unrelated to the character's class and feat selection. This additionally supports the "classes are a part of the metagame" idea, which seems staggeringly more popular among internet gamers than it was with 3e's writers.

So a lot of what Jeff said^.

[Juntao112]

The problem with PrCs is that, often, you have to design your character from the ground up with them in mind.

[ArcturusV]

Well... to be contrary to the prevailing opinion so far, I actually like PrCs being limited based on IC actions. I mean this seems to have been the original intent. You don't just level into Blackguard, etc. PrCs, typically, are a direct increase in power over the classes they are supposed to be based on (At least ideally). The idea is that you weren't supposed to dip through a handful of PrCs to have a Cleric with 10 different Domains. Or similar acts.

Of course some PrCs just aren't really worth it compared to taking base classes. But mostly because they are really narrow in applicability or like most classes are Fluff Driven and the Fluff just doesn't support strong mechanics.

Just... I've seen PrCs get insanely out of control in the game when allowed unlimited access to them. If you limit a PrC to IC actions being required to enter it, you rarely see someone pick up more than 1 PrC and suddenly they get both a lot more manageable, and kinda fun because you don't see all the characters of a given archetype all jumping on the same PrCs.

[Morphie]

I think Prestige Classes are supposed to be seen as special, as a path your PC chooses to follow. Core classes are also ok, but in the end it depends on how you play it and how you imagine it to be.
In our gaming group we rarely choose to play them, but as a DM I would rule to a limit of 1/2 PrC per PC, in order to emphasize the importance of choosing such class, and not as a way to build the ultimate powerhouse without any regard to the personality of the PC.

[nyarlathotep]

Well... to be contrary to the prevailing opinion so far, I actually like PrCs being limited based on IC actions. I mean this seems to have been the original intent. You don't just level into Blackguard, etc. PrCs, typically, are a direct increase in power over the classes they are supposed to be based on (At least ideally). The idea is that you weren't supposed to dip through a handful of PrCs to have a Cleric with 10 different Domains. Or similar acts.

Of course some PrCs just aren't really worth it compared to taking base classes. But mostly because they are really narrow in applicability or like most classes are Fluff Driven and the Fluff just doesn't support strong mechanics.

Just... I've seen PrCs get insanely out of control in the game when allowed unlimited access to them. If you limit a PrC to IC actions being required to enter it, you rarely see someone pick up more than 1 PrC and suddenly they get both a lot more manageable, and kinda fun because you don't see all the characters of a given archetype all jumping on the same PrCs.

I would like a system with that in mind, but the 3.5 prestige classes published rarely actually had them as that. IE if you as a DM say "Well only people who are a part of the clown church can become shadow puppeteers and it is only tought to their inner circle" I'd be cool with starting a big old quest line to get into the clown church's good graces and learn shadow magic. Unfortunately that's not the system of dozens of prestige classes left to us by WotC

[ArcturusV]

Well... initially it was. However WotC caved to players who thought it was "Stupid". It's easier to note the difference in 3.0 material versus 3.5 material.

For example, if I look at my Oriental Adventures book, the PrCs in it are overwhelming a result of needing to seek out a particular mentor or be part of an organization or particular school. About 80%. The only ones that aren't are... Bear Warrior... Weapon Master... Ninja spy... very few.

Compare to a 3.5 book like, say Sandstorm. 4 PrCs that are basically just "things you can pick up" without significant IC needs, versus 2 that do require some more particular IC needs that not just anyone could necessarily become.

[WhatBigTeeth]

I don't think that was a consistent trend. As counterexamples, most of the Dragonmarked and Complete Champion PrCs have strong ties to affiliations with specific organizations and houses.

[Alienist]

Almost all caster prcs are bad.

Either they don't advance full casting, and so nobody takes them. Or they do, and thus are too powerful.

[Amphetryon]

The problem with PrCs is that, often, you have to design your character from the ground up with them in mind.

Why is it a problem to have an over-arching concept for a Character upon creation? To me, that complaint is like arguing that college majors are a bad idea, because the best way to approach them is to plan your college career from freshman year, rather than winging it as you take classes.

[Fouredged Sword]

I think a mix of 3.5 and 4 would work well. Lets strip out the strange prereqs. Prereqs should exist only as they relate to actual requirements for class features.

Lets make classes 4 levels long. You must take all of a class before you can multiclass. Classes have tiers. You must have taken a full tier one class before taking a tier two class. Tier three requires tier 2 or two tier 1 classes, ect, all the way up to five tiers.

A bog standard wizard should look something like
Wizard 4 / conjurer 4 / transmuter 4 / archmage 4/ High Wizard 4

Wizard grants a familiar and 1-4th level spellcasting. Conjurer grants cool conjuration stuff and grants 4 more levels of spellcasting.

Other options should be - Generalist, Evoker, Diviner, War Wizard, ECT.

Sorcerers should have their own options. There can be some cross pollination, but I am of the opinion that PRC's should be heavily class dependent with lots of PRC options and few base classes.

I even like the idea of all classes counting as 1/2 levels in your base class for advancing it's features. A wizard 4 / fighter 4 casts as a 6th level wizard, and should have cool PRC's like duskblade or abjurent champion (for the wizard 4 / abjurer 4 / fighter 4)

The idea is to make each 4 level packet powerful and character altering. Fighter levels should turn you into a fighter. Wizard levels should turn you into a real wizard.

Spellcasting should all be one pool determined by the first spellcasting class with limited spells known. Advancing cleric after wizard should advance the same spellcasting pool and allow cleric spells to be added to the wizard's spellbook.

But this all takes me down the road of altering the whole system to cap out at 6th level spells and giving melee cool stuff.

But yes,
Base classes

Fighter
Cleric
Wizard
Rogue
Sorcerer
Druid

Rangers are fighter 4 / druid 4 / ranger 4
Favored souls are Sorcerer 4 / cleric 4 / favored soul 4
factotums are rogue 4 / wizard 4

[Telonius]

The good: You can customize your character for practically any ability or theme that you want.

The bad: Munchkins have a tendency to take advantage of the good. Sturgeon's Law also applies; 90% of them are (mechanically) crud, and nobody takes them.

[Person_Man]

My general belief is that elegant base class design should include:

1) A clearly defined and worthwhile role.

2) A substantial list of abilities (spells, powers, maneuvers, vestiges, soulmelds, or whatever) which are generally built around that role.

3) A meaningful progression of those abilities, so that the class is interesting and useful at every level, and gains something meaningful each time you gain a level.

4) The ability to reasonably choose among those abilities. (Either because your entire list is spontaneous, or because you can change out your abilities at least once per day).

5) A clear weakness that can't be resolved solely with it's class abilities, which hopefully necessitates working with a team.

Prestige classes generally break elegant class design in a variety of different ways.

[navar100]

Prestige Classes are good for their original intent - to expand on a specialization of one or two aspects of a class or facilitate multiclassing to combine aspects of two classes into one class. That it would be a "patch" to multiclassing rules is a feature, not a bug.

The mistake that was made was not specifically and explicitly state you cannot multiclass prestige classes, at least until you complete a prestige class progression. That is when you get hypothetical shenanigans of taking one or two levels of several prestige classes to combine abilities to break the game.

A prestige class itself can be a problem due to a miscalculation of consequences. Planar Shepherd is a prime example of this. Incantatrix says hi. The idea of the prestige class looked good on paper but fails in practice. A few are just dumb; no one would take it. I see you Shining Blade Of Heironious.

Still, prestige classes are a neat idea and shouldn't be dismissively banned. They are another option in the cornucopia of variety the 3E system offers. They have an inherent roleplay hook the DM and player can use.

[nyarlathotep]

Well... initially it was. However WotC caved to players who thought it was "Stupid". It's easier to note the difference in 3.0 material versus 3.5 material.

For example, if I look at my Oriental Adventures book, the PrCs in it are overwhelming a result of needing to seek out a particular mentor or be part of an organization or particular school. About 80%. The only ones that aren't are... Bear Warrior... Weapon Master... Ninja spy... very few.

Compare to a 3.5 book like, say Sandstorm. 4 PrCs that are basically just "things you can pick up" without significant IC needs, versus 2 that do require some more particular IC needs that not just anyone could necessarily become.

The thing is that just about every one of the "things you can pick up" should have been a feat chain instead. Getting so angry you turn into a bear, that is literally something that spontaneously happened in viking lore. Unfortunately 3.5 also had a policy of moving big cornerstone mechanics solely to class features as opposed to feats.



The mistake that was made was not specifically and explicitly state you cannot multiclass prestige classes, at least until you complete a prestige class progression. That is when you get hypothetical shenanigans of taking one or two levels of several prestige classes to combine abilities to break the game.


I really don't think that is so much a problem when the system comes with so many front-loaded PrCs that only have good abilities in their first three levels then a whole bunch of deadspace. In particular the horrible "you get a spell-like ability once per day that is a few levels behind what a wizard could cast" classes.

[Deepbluediver]

My general belief is that elegant base class design should include:

1) A clearly defined and worthwhile role.

Thats interesting, because I think that base classes should be more general, able to fulfill different roles depending on what the player wants or how they build. And yes, I think that some base-classes are overly specific and should be scrapped or combined with others (or turned in 5/10 level PrCs).

But prestige classes, on the other hand, can absolutely focus on a single concept, because by the time you qualify for one you've likely already decided on what path you want to take, and you are free to pop in and out as desired.

That being said, if a PrC offers only 1 new trick or ability, then in most cases I think it should be limited to only 5 levels. If it can give a plarer 2-3 new toys, then it can get a full 10-level progression.

[nedz]

As Navar100 said there are different types of PrCs which means you cannot compare them directly.

The main problem with the hybrid ones is that not all character concepts are supported. A more generic approach would have been better rather than to use the PrC toolbox to fix multi-classing. Base classes almost all follow certain patterns so fixing this properly should not have been too hard.

The problems with the specialist PrCs is one of balance, though there only are a couple of dozen PrCs which are OP and these can be identified and banned. Again here, whilst there are a few class patterns, there are many exceptions. Writers were encouraged to be creative to the extent that the very idea balance was deprecated.

[awa]

The problem with having it be achievement based like that one that required you to kill a dragon is that A you need to build the character with the aim of taking the class right from the start and b there is no certainty you will ever run into one in game.

[strider24seven]

in comparison, in 3.5, there's no reason to ever take a class to 20 (besides the Druid).

Warblade says hi.
Wizard also says hi iff he obeys the golden rule (thou shalt not lose caster levels), and needs his feats for things that are not prerequisites for PrCs. And iff Incantatrix is not allowed.
Also Fighter 20 says hi iff his feats can be DCFS'd to Magical Training, Eldritch Corruption, Earth Sense, Earth Spell, Heighten Spell, and lots of Extra Slots.

[Deepbluediver]

The problem with having it be achievement based like that one that required you to kill a dragon is that A you need to build the character with the aim of taking the class right from the start and b there is no certainty you will ever run into one in game.

Yeah, a lot of the requirements for getting into a prestige class are so onerous or specific that by the time you accomplish them, it's negated any benefit you might have gained. Which, IMO, is what pushes many PrC's from "fun alternate option" to "teh suk".

Frankly, I think a lot of the requirement for PrCs should be more role-play related, but nope, we've got to have a mechanical "you must be this tall to ride" restriction on absolutely everything.

[Juntao112]

Why is it a problem to have an over-arching concept for a Character upon creation?

It means that you can't have a character who suddenly discovers the meaning of life and chooses to pursue it.


To me, that complaint is like arguing that college majors are a bad idea, because the best way to approach them is to plan your college career from freshman year, rather than winging it as you take classes.
Actually, the modern college system, including majors, is subject to a number of criticisms, so I'm not sure this is the best counterexample.

[Person_Man]

That interesting, because I think that base classes should be more general, able to fulfill different roles depending on what the player wants or how they build.

Well, if you have a game with just 10ish base classes, then yeah those classes should be more general and able to fill multiple roles. But if you have a game with 175 base classes (https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/class) (plus thousands of 3rd party and homebrew base classes), then my feeling is that each of those classes should have a more clearly defined and worthwhile role.

Or if your ideal game has a small number of more iconic classes with broader roles, then the game needs to do a better job of having classes with interchangeable parts. If you know that you're going to have hundreds of prestige classes or kits or alternate class features or racial substitution levels or whatever, just design base classes with abilities which can be swapped out or added to.

For example, give everyone a spell or power or maneuver or whatever progression, and then just add new spells/powers/etc, instead of adding new classes. Or create modular class abilities which can be more easily traded out, like Legend does.

[Deepbluediver]

Well, if you have a game with just 10ish base classes, then yeah those classes should be more general and able to fill multiple roles. But if you have a game with 175 base classes (https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/class) (plus thousands of 3rd party and homebrew base classes), then my feeling is that each of those classes should have a more clearly defined and worthwhile role.

Right off the bat that list starts with Adept and Aristocrat, which are explicitly NPC classes and not real options for 99.9% of games.

Plus, as you point out, the list includes quite a few racial classes, substituion level classes, variant classes, and even epic levels (5 points each for Cleric and Barbarian, and 4 for Bard plus Bardic Sage, etc). Some of the variants are things that I would classify as "too narrowly designed", and some of the different classes are mere tweaks on the same chassis.

I'm not sure exactly what the number is, but if you count the real, different classes, then it's probably significantly less. Do you reallt think you can come up with 175 distinct roles for use in game? And build an entire 20th level class off all of them?


Or if your ideal game has a small number of more iconic classes with broader roles, then the game needs to do a better job of having classes with interchangeable parts. If you know that you're going to have hundreds of prestige classes or kits or alternate class features or racial substitution levels or whatever, just design base classes with abilities which can be swapped out or added to.

That does actually sound like my ideal game, thanks. As for redesigning things, check my extended sig. :smallsmile:

Basically, within D&D you've got:

Skillmonkeys
Melee-specialists
Magic-users


And pretty much EVERYTHING fits one of those 3 roles, or some hybrid combination.

Most of the splat-book "base classes" are really just the same half-dozen Core-classes with different flavor or better numbers. And I don't mind that, but to often it seemed like WotC (not getting into homebrew/3rd-party stuff) took a single concept and tried to stretch it to cover 20 levels. Those are the things that I think should have been PrCs.

Oh, and I admit there are already plenty of PrCs that are also examples of bad design, having either no real benefit, unique talent, or overly-onerous entry requirements. Plenty of them should either be scrapped or combined into a smaller number of better classes.

To often I think that writers fell into the trap of "Buy our book! It's got 20 new Prestige Classes!" and 17 of them are [poop].

[Amphetryon]

It means that you can't have a character who suddenly discovers the meaning of life and chooses to pursue it.


Actually, the modern college system, including majors, is subject to a number of criticisms, so I'm not sure this is the best counterexample.
To the first: You can, because retraining rules exist, and because it is still possible - if somewhat harder - to find that you've suddenly qualified via serendipity for a PrC within 3.5's framework. This is how I had a Character become a Temple Raider of Olidammara, for example. If this complaint is intended as "because PrCs don't simultaneously support all playstyles with equal elegance" - which is how it appears from here - then that's a complaint that should be levied against every game and game system I've ever seen, from Tic-Tac-Toe to Chess to D&D to Baseball.

The modern college system's majors are MOST EASILY completed when one begins working toward their completion at the earliest opportunity, rather than waiting until (for example) the 2nd semester of one's Junior year and discovering one would need to take five or more years to complete a degree due to lack of focus to date. If you're reading anything else into the comparison, I apologize for confusing you.

[WhatBigTeeth]

The modern college system's majors are MOST EASILY completed when one begins working toward their completion at the earliest opportunity, rather than waiting until (for example) the 2nd semester of one's Junior year and discovering one would need to take five or more years to complete a degree due to lack of focus to date. If you're reading anything else into the comparison, I apologize for confusing you.
The students I've known hanging around college towns an extra year, just to pick up an obscure and irregularly-offered 3-credit course that will finish their major aren't too different than the problem with PrC planning and prereqs. There've been plenty of times that a player has thought they were ready to go into their big snazzy prestige class, realized that they don't have a way to cram enough ranks into Knowledge: Religion in time, or that they mistakenly grabbed Mobility instead of Combat Expertise, and then been stuck in a stupid limbo level while they wait for another chance to check that last box. Retraining rules help that to a certain extent, but it's problematic, and it adds nothing positive to the game.

Untangling the mess of prerequisites and corequisites needed to graduate from college takes time and dedicated planning to map out a sequence of courses that will mark off every prerequisite in time without missing classes offered on a yearly or bi-yearly schedule, but that's not unreasonable, because that's several years of real life and thousands of dollars of money invested. It's serious enough that it's not an unreasonable pain to take it seriously.

Doing the same with characters for a P&P RPG is just obnoxious. 3e character generation is overwhelmingly long, and the prereqs built into the system do nothing to improve that. I know my group has been using Dungeon World lately, in no small part because making each character doesn't require 20 levels' worth of bean counting before even starting play, in case the campaign and character both survive long enough to see it all through.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

The mistake that was made was not specifically and explicitly state you cannot multiclass prestige classes, at least until you complete a prestige class progression. That is when you get hypothetical shenanigans of taking one or two levels of several prestige classes to combine abilities to break the game.

99% of the time, being able to multiclass PrCs at will isn't a problem, and it's often necessary for martial types to dip 1-3 levels in multiple PrCs the way it's necessary for them to dip base classes if they want to get Nice Things; the cases where a PrC gets something amazing in the first few levels (like spelldancer) isn't a problem with the PrC system as a whole, it's a problem with the devs thinking that giving something that powerful out at so low a level was a good idea.


The thing is that just about every one of the "things you can pick up" should have been a feat chain instead. Getting so angry you turn into a bear, that is literally something that spontaneously happened in viking lore. Unfortunately 3.5 also had a policy of moving big cornerstone mechanics solely to class features as opposed to feats.

Agreed completely. The worst aspect of existing PrCs is that most of them are overly padded to stretch to 10 levels when they should be a 3-level PrC or a 1-3 feat chain at best. Most PrCs only have 1-2 unique features to offer and the rest are crap; I've actually experimented in the past with letting players take 3 levels of martial PrCs at once (+1 BAB, all good saves, features from the first/second/third set of 3 levels) and everything turned out fine.


Well, if you have a game with just 10ish base classes, then yeah those classes should be more general and able to fill multiple roles. But if you have a game with 175 base classes (https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/class) (plus thousands of 3rd party and homebrew base classes), then my feeling is that each of those classes should have a more clearly defined and worthwhile role.

I'd disagree, for two reasons. First of all, many classes are defined more by a theme than by a role. Is a hypothetical Pyromancer class able to throw fire, or summon fire elementals, or protect friends from fire, or make friends with fire creatures? Yes, it's fire, it's what he does. It's up to the player to decide whether he runs his pyromancer as a blaster, a buffer, a summoner, etc. "Pyromancer" doesn't necessarily imply a single role (aside from the fact that the -mancer suffix means diviner and so implies a utility caster :smallwink:) any more than "knight" (defender vs. cavalier vs. tactician vs. ...) or "swashbuckler" (skirmisher vs. social skills guy vs. combat trickster vs. ...) does.

Second, many people will end up playing classes they played before or wanting to play the same class as someone else in the party, and the same class should be able to support multiple roles for variety (in the former case) or to avoid toe-stepping (in the latter). Warmage, healer, samurai, and similar classes that are essentially one static progression with no selectable features shouldn't exist, and when you do give a class selectable features they shouldn't just be two dozen variations on the same thing.



As for my own thoughts on PrCs: They're a good idea in theory, ruined by three main things in practice: As mentioned above, most PrCs are bloated and could be 1/4 the length or a feat tree, caster multiclassing currently doesn't work so caster PrCs either have no tradeoffs or aren't really worth it with nothing in between, and many PrCs have too many or too complex prerequisites, usually because they arbitrarily decision that PrCs shouldn't come before 5th level despite the fact that more people play below 6th than above 10th.

So here's a solution I'm currently working on for those who care, spoilered for length: PrCs are split into "generic" PrCs (things you can just pick up) and "organization" PrCs (things specific to a certain flavor element). Generic PrCs have two trivial mechanical prerequisites and a level prerequisite ("trivial" meaning straightforward things that a character wanting to go into the PrC should already have and you shouldn't need to really plan for) and organization PrCs have a single flavor prerequisite, a single mechanical prerequisite, and a single level prerequisite.
All PrCs are condensed into at most 3 levels giving two "interesting" or "major" features at each level; any PrCs that don't have enough features for that become a feat chain. In either case, weak features are buffed as necessary to make them worth taking under this system.
Prerequisites are adjust to actual power levels--if something is better gained at 2nd than 6th, the prereqs will let you enter the PrC at 2nd.
All PrCs count as levels in the original class(es) for level-dependent stuff, and they all advance a class's "main feature" (spells/vestiges/powers/maneuvers/etc. for classes that have them, or things like sneak attack or bonus feats for those that don't) at all levels using a suitable caster multiclassing fix like this one (shameless plug; warning: old thread, don't necro) at all three levels.
It requires plenty of manual tweaking for each PrC, but it seems to work pretty well. Some examples:

Arcane Trickster becomes a single feat:

Arcane Trickster
Prerequisites: Ability to cast mage hand, Disable Device or Sleight of Hand 5 ranks
Benefit: You can make Disable Device, Open Lock, and Sleight of Hand checks using mage hand, but the DC is increased by +5 and you cannot take 10 or 20.
Nice and simple, and the dual-progression nature of the class is handled by a rogue/wizard using the multiclassing fix.

Arcane Archer becomes the following:

Arcane Archer
Prerequisites:
Spellcasting: Able to cast at least one damaging Area spell
Feats: Precise Shot
Character Level: 5th

Skills, Saves, HD: As core Arcane Archer

Advances: Arcane spellcasting, bonus feats

{table]Level|Special
1|Enhance Arrow, Imbue Arrow
2|Seeker Arrow, Phase Arrow
3|Hail of Arrows, Arrow of Death[/table]

Enhance Arrow: All arrows an arcane archer fires possess an enhancement bonus of +1/3 his character level, to a maximum of +5 at 15th level.

Imbue Arrow: As the core Arcane Archer feature.

Seeker Arrow: As the core Arcane Archer feature, except that the arcane archer may use it additional times per day by expending a spell slot of at least 2nd level as part of using the ability.

Phase Arrow: As the core Arcane Archer feature, except that the arcane archer may use it additional times per day by expending a spell slot of at least 3rd level as part of using the ability.

Hail of Arrows: As the core Arcane Archer feature, changing "arcane archer level" to "character level."

Arrow of Death: The arcane archer may use arrow of bone (CArc) once per day as a spell like ability.
It's now much more tempting to take, and doesn't screw with your existing casting or martial progression or even force a 50/50 split between them.

[Venusaur]

Almost all caster prcs are bad.

Either they don't advance full casting, and so nobody takes them. Or they do, and thus are too powerful.

Not necessarily. Several casting PrCs only lose 1 or 2 caster levels, which cam be a decent tradeoff (e.g malcanvoker or Walker in the Waste)

[Talionis]

Prestige Classes are good because they add an entirely more complex level to character creation. Without Prestige Classes creating characters would be too easy. People would neatly find the best builds and most would gravitate to them. Prestige classes allow for power ups, sometimes with drawbacks.

Not all Prestige Classes are well designed. Sometimes they interact poorly /too well when multiple classes are stacked. I actually think that there are too many full casting prestige classes that offer too much to casters. Casting is already so powerful granting any additional power seems like pay raises for the top 1%.

But Prestige Classes grant you so many options. Paths for optimization not focused on damage, but any number of weird unique things. Prestige Class system is far from perfect, but I wouldn't like DnD without something that adds at least that much complexity.

[RFLS]

So here's a solution I'm currently working on for those who care, spoilered for length: PrCs are split into "generic" PrCs (things you can just pick up) and "organization" PrCs (things specific to a certain flavor element). Generic PrCs have two trivial mechanical prerequisites and a level prerequisite ("trivial" meaning straightforward things that a character wanting to go into the PrC should already have and you shouldn't need to really plan for) and organization PrCs have a single flavor prerequisite, a single mechanical prerequisite, and a single level prerequisite.
All PrCs are condensed into at most 3 levels giving two "interesting" or "major" features at each level; any PrCs that don't have enough features for that become a feat chain. In either case, weak features are buffed as necessary to make them worth taking under this system.
Prerequisites are adjust to actual power levels--if something is better gained at 2nd than 6th, the prereqs will let you enter the PrC at 2nd.
All PrCs count as levels in the original class(es) for level-dependent stuff, and they all advance a class's "main feature" (spells/vestiges/powers/maneuvers/etc. for classes that have them, or things like sneak attack or bonus feats for those that don't) at all levels using a suitable caster multiclassing fix like this one (shameless plug; warning: old thread, don't necro) at all three levels.
It requires plenty of manual tweaking for each PrC, but it seems to work pretty well. Some examples:

Arcane Trickster becomes a single feat:

Arcane Trickster
Prerequisites: Ability to cast mage hand, Disable Device or Sleight of Hand 5 ranks
Benefit: You can make Disable Device, Open Lock, and Sleight of Hand checks using mage hand, but the DC is increased by +5 and you cannot take 10 or 20.
Nice and simple, and the dual-progression nature of the class is handled by a rogue/wizard using the multiclassing fix.

Arcane Archer becomes the following:

Arcane Archer
Prerequisites:
Spellcasting: Able to cast at least one damaging Area spell
Feats: Precise Shot
Character Level: 5th

Skills, Saves, HD: As core Arcane Archer

Advances: Arcane spellcasting, bonus feats

{table]Level|Special
1|Enhance Arrow, Imbue Arrow
2|Seeker Arrow, Phase Arrow
3|Hail of Arrows, Arrow of Death[/table]

Enhance Arrow: All arrows an arcane archer fires possess an enhancement bonus of +1/3 his character level, to a maximum of +5 at 15th level.

Imbue Arrow: As the core Arcane Archer feature.

Seeker Arrow: As the core Arcane Archer feature, except that the arcane archer may use it additional times per day by expending a spell slot of at least 2nd level as part of using the ability.

Phase Arrow: As the core Arcane Archer feature, except that the arcane archer may use it additional times per day by expending a spell slot of at least 3rd level as part of using the ability.

Hail of Arrows: As the core Arcane Archer feature, changing "arcane archer level" to "character level."

Arrow of Death: The arcane archer may use arrow of bone (CArc) once per day as a spell like ability.
It's now much more tempting to take, and doesn't screw with your existing casting or martial progression or even force a 50/50 split between them.

Huh. That looks really solid, but I'd be concerned that people would rapidly run out of things to do with new levels. I feel as though an E8 game would be really, really fun with this, though.

[Shining Wrath]

I'd divide PrC into 4 categories

Useless
Overpowered
Nice flavor but underpowered
Nice, logical progressions of a character build


#1 is probably the most common. If you look at a website which shall not be named but which is hosted in Europe, there are around 800 PrC. I'll bet that maybe 100 of them are worth knowing about. Maybe another 100 could be made useful with refluffing so they don't refer to specific deities or organizations that a DM may not be using. But there's just so many classes which I find useless, such as Drunken Master.

As an example of #2, consider Fist of Raziel. At level one, get a permanent 10' circle of protection. Instant total protection against all mind-affecting spells and powers for you and your nearby friends. At first PrC level.

For #3, consider Bloodstorm Blade. It would be the logical PrC for the wonderful Warblade class, except you don't gain any Warblade maneuvers as your PrC levels increase - and many of your BsB class features depend upon burning a Warblade maneuver of the Iron Heart school. The class is crippled without DM houserule.

[Talionis]

For #3, consider Bloodstorm Blade. It would be the logical PrC for the wonderful Warblade class, except you don't gain any Warblade maneuvers as your PrC levels increase - and many of your BsB class features depend upon burning a Warblade maneuver of the Iron Heart school. The class is crippled without DM houserule.

Even crippled/nerfed a bit. Bloodstorm Blade can do some very fun things. Not unfair on a compare it to spells unfair, but it can melee attack from a distance and if you get good weird things to do as a melee attack you can eventually melee attack each target within range.

I agree it should've progressed initiator levels, but Bloodstorm Blade can still be a useful Prestige Class.

[Shining Wrath]

Right off the bat that list starts with Adept and Aristocrat, which are explicitly NPC classes and not real options for 99.9% of games.

Plus, as you point out, the list includes quite a few racial classes, substituion level classes, variant classes, and even epic levels (5 points each for Cleric and Barbarian, and 4 for Bard plus Bardic Sage, etc). Some of the variants are things that I would classify as "too narrowly designed", and some of the different classes are mere tweaks on the same chassis.

I'm not sure exactly what the number is, but if you count the real, different classes, then it's probably significantly less. Do you reallt think you can come up with 175 distinct roles for use in game? And build an entire 20th level class off all of them?



That does actually sound like my ideal game, thanks. As for redesigning things, check my extended sig. :smallsmile:

Basically, within D&D you've got:

Skillmonkeys
Melee-specialists
Magic-users


And pretty much EVERYTHING fits one of those 3 roles, or some hybrid combination.

Most of the splat-book "base classes" are really just the same half-dozen Core-classes with different flavor or better numbers. And I don't mind that, but to often it seemed like WotC (not getting into homebrew/3rd-party stuff) took a single concept and tried to stretch it to cover 20 levels. Those are the things that I think should have been PrCs.

Oh, and I admit there are already plenty of PrCs that are also examples of bad design, having either no real benefit, unique talent, or overly-onerous entry requirements. Plenty of them should either be scrapped or combined into a smaller number of better classes.

To often I think that writers fell into the trap of "Buy our book! It's got 20 new Prestige Classes!" and 17 of them are [poop].

An exception might be (is) Tome of Battle, where melee characters gained an entire new mechanic for interacting with the game.

[Shining Wrath]

Even crippled/nerfed a bit. Bloodstorm Blade can do some very fun things. Not unfair on a compare it to spells unfair, but it can melee attack from a distance and if you get good weird things to do as a melee attack you can eventually melee attack each target within range.

I agree it should've progressed initiator levels, but Bloodstorm Blade can still be a useful Prestige Class.

I may dip it sometime - at level 4 you can make a full attack with thrown weapons.

The level 10 effect, RAW, lets you attack every enemy you can see; it doesn't mention anything about throwing range for your weapon :smalltongue: although I think most DM might impose a limit.

As written, though, it's hard to justify trading away 4 levels of Warblade for 4 levels of Bloodstorm Blade. Two maneuvers known, 80% of a stance, 80% of a maneuver readied, 80% of a bonus feat for the ability to throw your sword.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Huh. That looks really solid, but I'd be concerned that people would rapidly run out of things to do with new levels. I feel as though an E8 game would be really, really fun with this, though.

There's always continuing in a base class, you know. :smallwink: This is part of a general class condensation/revamp where poor classes get the same treatment as the PrCs, so they have their 1-2 worthwhile features turned into feats (e.g. Swashbuckler is a feat) or are compressed to a more useful level span (e.g. soulknife is 4-5 levels long) or are improved (e.g. martial classes get more goodies), so PrCing out isn't quite automatic. And the "good" PrCs are still 8-10 levels long, so there's always that.

You can always put exclusivity requirements on it when using it with standard 3e to discourage making builds that look like "base class 2/PrC 3/PrC 3/PrC 3/PrC 3/PrC 3/PrC 3," which I've sort of done: the majority of the revised PrCs have level requirements of 5, 11, and 17 by design, so if you say you can only have one PrC of each "tier" then builds end up looking like base class 11/PrC X 3/PrC Y 3/PrC Z 3 in varying orders, which is much more elegant.

Once it's all finished I might post the revised system here for review so people can see what it looks like in its final form.


As an example of #2, consider Fist of Raziel. At level one, get a permanent 10' circle of protection. Instant total protection against all mind-affecting spells and powers for you and your nearby friends. At first PrC level.

Nitpick: magic circle against evil only suppresses effects that grant ongoing control, so they're safe from dominate person and similar but vulnerable to phantasmal killer and similar. It's still pretty darn powerful, but not an AoE mind blank at low levels.

[awa]

the protection evil ability does not seem that overpowered compared to alternative access to protection from evil but that's just becuase protection from evil is so good for such a low level spell. I suppose it depends on what else you got to go with it.

[babus]

To be honest, I find the notion of taking any base class to 20 incredibly boring, even in cases that it's actually worth it. Diversifying the character's abilities via multi-classing or PrCs just adds a much needed dimension to things, both in terms of class complexity and fluff. I'm even fine with the notion of taking PrCs being strictly better than not taking them.

[Coidzor]

Well... initially it was. However WotC caved to players who thought it was "Stupid". It's easier to note the difference in 3.0 material versus 3.5 material.

Well, what else does one call demanding the entire campaign sit down and shut up so that they can go through an arc giving each player that's wanting a Prestige Class their shot at it?

Or having to decide via lottery or drawing straws who gets to have a prestige class due to time and story constraints?

[Jeff the Green]

To be honest, I find the notion of taking any base class to 20 incredibly boring, even in cases that it's actually worth it. Diversifying the character's abilities via multi-classing or PrCs just adds a much needed dimension to things, both in terms of class complexity and fluff. I'm even fine with the notion of taking PrCs being strictly better than not taking them.

For me, as I mentioned a little, it's not diversifying I want from my PrCs (at least for the most part; I like theurges), but focusing. Ideally you'd start as a wizard, and then maybe at 4th level you could take three levels of Enchanter, Diviner, Transmuter, etc. and give up spells above level 2 in another school, and then if you want you could further specialize on your school in a class like Red Wizard or go on to another specialty.

[Karnith]

Well, what else does one call demanding the entire campaign sit down and shut up so that they can go through an arc giving each player that's wanting a Prestige Class their shot at it?

Or having to decide via lottery or drawing straws who gets to have a prestige class due to time and story constraints?
Speaking to this:

Whenever I have a player who wants to take levels in Assassin, I waive the RP requirement (well, the Evil part and the "the character must kill someone for no other reason than to join the assassins" part, but I'm specifically talking about the latter), because it's a waste of everyone's time to actually play it out. It's not going to challenge the player, there's no reason for anyone else to be involved, and it's not going to be fun for anyone to actually play through.

Which is about how I feel about most roleplay pre-reqs, come to think of it.

[navar100]

For #3, consider Bloodstorm Blade. It would be the logical PrC for the wonderful Warblade class, except you don't gain any Warblade maneuvers as your PrC levels increase - and many of your BsB class features depend upon burning a Warblade maneuver of the Iron Heart school. The class is crippled without DM houserule.

But it's not really intended for warblades. It's intended for a non-adept class, really fighter, to partake of a taste of Tome of Battle without going fully into the maneuver system. The character had spent some feats on Martial Study Iron Heart maneuvers and those are what fuel Bloodstorm Blade abilities.

[Answerer]

Prestige classes are very good, and much better than Pathfinder's archetypes (both are better than one or the other but 3.5 doesn't have that many ACFs for most base classes and Pathfinder has few PrCs worth taking), because they can be added to multiple base classes. Archetypes only apply to the base class they come from.

Thus, different members of a prestige class can have different backgrounds, and that can cause different roles. This is a good thing.

Now, I won't argue that the particulars of 3.5 prestige classes are good all that often: cf. the spellcasting PrCs that are something for nothing, or complete self-nerfs. Pair O'Dice Lost is very right when he says that many PrCs are much, much too long (and frequently start too late; there are numerous concepts out there that are already inappropriate or obsolete by the time you get to 6th level and WotC shouldn't have been so scared of PrCs starting earlier).

But the concept of prestige classes is solid. A character in a prestige class should be approximately equi-powerful to a single-classed character in his base class, specifically because he's better at his specialty but not quite as good in general. The Malconvoker is an excellent example: the Malconvoker is much better with summon monster spells than a single-classed Archivist, Cleric, Sorcerer, or Wizard, but he's lost a spell-casting level, putting him considerably behind. That's a good thing.

Similar cases exist. Swiftblade gives up a ton of spellcasting, but becomes an awesome gish. Archmage has to use spell slots to power his abilities, but they're fairly potent effects (this would be better design if spellcasters were actually limited by spell slots at the levels that Archmage is available). If the Incantatrix weren't flat-out absurd, trading another school of magic for some kind of specialization seems appropriate (and again, this would work better if the schools were more equitable).

You'll notice I mention a lot of spellcasting classes. There's a reason for that: they have stuff to lose while still being generally capable. There's a very real risk that if you make a specializing PrC, you make characters who take it unable to act in a meaningful fashion when that specialty is not appropriate. That's not good.

You'll also notice I haven't mentioned classes that have steep prerequisites. This is also bad design: the "be underpowered now to be overpowered later" doesn't actually work when you could just start at that higher level, or when you spend large amounts of time at given levels (so you are underpowered or overpowered for significant amounts of time).

Which leads me to the idea that prestige classes are very difficult to get right because a Base X/Prestige Y should be equi-powerful with a Base (X+Y) at every level, from 1 (where Y is 0, but preparations, perhaps, must be made for the prestige class) to 20 (where Y is maxed out).

In this sense, I'd be tempted to try something similar to 4e's Paragon Paths. They make balancing much easier, because everyone gets a "prestige" and it's in addition to the base class (and that's OK because everyone gets one). Where 4e got this wrong, I think, was restricting paragon paths to a given base class, and its generally weak multiclassing to begin with. It would be interesting to try to make this work in 3.5, where one gets a 5-level prestige class starting at level 6, basically "in gestalt" with whatever they're doing with base classes, and then a different 10-level prestige class starting at 11th (or a 10-level at 6th and a 5-level starting at 16th, whatever). Has anyone tried something like that?

[Jerthanis]

PrCs, to me, are a patch on a Multiclass system that is absolutely nonfunctional. Other than a few dips for classes with frontloaded abilities, like Swashbuckler 3, Fighter 2, Lion Totem Barbarian, multiclassing WITHOUT the aid of a PrC is atrociously bad.

Personally, I generally hate PrCs, because I think the idea of being more powerful because of being part of an organization or having more training kind of undermines the idea of PC base classes representing more training with higher levels. Otherwise, it's a method of representing essentially trading one progression of abilities for another, and personally I'd prefer class structures that allow more customization within themselves, or a multiclass system that allows incorporating outside skillsets without sacrificing your entire ability to contribute within your own class' role over the idea of such a messy patch as PrCs wound up being.

A Paladin who expands his detective skillsets should be able to take a level of Rogue and not be an idiot rather than having to qualify for and invest in a new class that grants these skills starting at level 7 or whatever. A cleric who wants to specialize in exorcism should be able to make that choice within the structure of his own class through spell choice, feat choice, or class features rather than tracking down an obscure prestige class and taking random skill ranks or feats specifically to allow that skillset to emerge.

[Coidzor]

Which leads me to the idea that prestige classes are very difficult to get right because a Base X/Prestige Y should be equi-powerful with a Base (X+Y) at every level, from 1 (where Y is 0, but preparations, perhaps, must be made for the prestige class) to 20 (where Y is maxed out).

In this sense, I'd be tempted to try something similar to 4e's Paragon Paths. They make balancing much easier, because everyone gets a "prestige" and it's in addition to the base class (and that's OK because everyone gets one). Where 4e got this wrong, I think, was restricting paragon paths to a given base class, and its generally weak multiclassing to begin with. It would be interesting to try to make this work in 3.5, where one gets a 5-level prestige class starting at level 6, basically "in gestalt" with whatever they're doing with base classes, and then a different 10-level prestige class starting at 11th (or a 10-level at 6th and a 5-level starting at 16th, whatever). Has anyone tried something like that?

I like the general thrust of where the idea's going, though I'm not convinced of the particular execution despite seeing how it could work.

[Answerer]

I literally thought of it while writing that; I'd love to see refinement or alternatives.

[ArcturusV]

Well, what else does one call demanding the entire campaign sit down and shut up so that they can go through an arc giving each player that's wanting a Prestige Class their shot at it?

Or having to decide via lottery or drawing straws who gets to have a prestige class due to time and story constraints?

I dunno... is it any weirder than telling everyone "Okay... stop adventuring for a few months while the spellcasters make items"? Most of the RP requirements are things you don't really have to do in a single arc. It can be sprinkled in as subplots to what the main arcs are. You don't just go out on a quest for no purpose but the PrC... you're already building up skill/feat requirements as you level to get into it, why would you not also build up IC requirements at the same time?

Instead of hitting level 6 and saying something like, "Okay, I want to take Witch Hunter now, lets go on a quest so I can find a Witch Hunter to apprentice under and do a plot arc or two for the witch hunter so s/he will teach me."

Instead it's just something that's going on all the time anyway. You already have the contact. You're already proving yourself. When you take all those breaks for various things, clearing diseases, selling off loot, finding new gear, having spellcasters go craft/research new spells, etc, your character is off with your contact, picking up a trick or two.

Then when you finally hit the PrC level it's more a case of, "Next time you're in town resting and doing downtime stuff, your character hit up your contact and took an intensive training course in the secrets of the art as you became a full member".

It's... it seems that a lot of people rag the IC requirements based on usually interpreting it in the most unreasonable measure possible and presuming that's the only way you could do it. Usually the same people who twist RAW to get early entry tricks to other classes as is. So it just seems weird to me. I mean if you were going to take the most stubborn, hard to enact measure to the IC requirements, why not do it for other things? No early entry Mystic Theurge tricks, the "able to cast" means "Able to cast regularly" and you must have 3 levels in a dedicated Arcane cast, 3 levels in a dedicated Divine class at the very least.

Granted, there are some requirements I myself don't like. Usually really, really strigent Alignment based ones that don't make sense in the context of the class. Like the Assassins are Evil thing. The "kill someone just to get in" thing isn't such a huge problem with me. You're talking about maybe an hour of solo adventure with a would be Assassin, or one hour of group detour at most.

And of course, it CAN be interesting. An assassin contract like that (As seems to be the intention rather than just picking a random guy and killing him for no reason other than to get in), is a simple plot hook that can be a lot of fun to play out. Or could just say the last Villain you killed had a mark on him and killing him drew the attention and fulfilled the requirement. Which provides a retroactive plot hook and doesn't derail a session to do it, but still provides IC gristle.

[nedz]

My main gripe with the RP requirements is that they are clichéd and predictable. If they were more open ended then that would be better. Doing something just so you can take levels in a class is also metagaming.

That said: you can dispose of many of them in your backstory, even at level 1.

[awa]

except if all you do is bump into a mentor off screen it's not really a perquisite.

while some have specific things the character needs to have done such as surviving unaided or protected in a winter storm (likely to kill a caster) or single handily killing a red dragon of a certain age category (i forget how old but i recall it being extraordinarily difficult for a non-caster before level 11+)

also forcing a player to actual find a mentor/ changing the casting requirements to be more stringent is not really a comparable situation.

[Coidzor]

I dunno... is it any weirder than telling everyone "Okay... stop adventuring for a few months while the spellcasters make items"?

Yes, as you handwave the particular downtime requirements of crafting unless the party wants to go on a "social" adventure while split up or during the off-hours of crafting.

If you're being true to the spirit of RP-action requirements, you're not handwaving those prerequisites and organizations and the task of joining them. And then once the PC has gotten into the PrC, they've still got the shackles of the organization pulling at them, one has that much more to keep track of and while it can be an additional tool to get them forward it's an additional layer of complexity and we all know how much people hate that.


Most of the RP requirements are things you don't really have to do in a single arc. It can be sprinkled in as subplots to what the main arcs are.

Requiring the DM to break them up to dilute their overall effect, but you're confusing arc and arc when both can apply in this situation. Most of them aren't quite so easy to make into gradual things and require a time in the sun to get going.


You don't just go out on a quest for no purpose but the PrC... you're already building up skill/feat requirements as you level to get into it, why would you not also build up IC requirements at the same time?

So you're saying that stringent in character RP requirements are good despite also saying they can get handwaved away as part of the character's natural growth. Considering you have to join specific organizations rather than a kind of organization or equivalent organization, and deviating from this violates the spirit of stringent RP requirements by being too nice to the player and kowtowing to their sensibilities, you're severely understating the potential issues.


Instead of hitting level 6 and saying something like, "Okay, I want to take Witch Hunter now, lets go on a quest so I can find a Witch Hunter to apprentice under and do a plot arc or two for the witch hunter so s/he will teach me."

Instead it's just something that's going on all the time anyway. You already have the contact. You're already proving yourself. When you take all those breaks for various things, clearing diseases, selling off loot, finding new gear, having spellcasters go craft/research new spells, etc, your character is off with your contact, picking up a trick or two.

So instead of having a half session or session, it instead dominates the entirety of the character's time in the game itself, requiring the character to play second fiddle to the prestige class itself.


It's... it seems that a lot of people rag the IC requirements based on usually interpreting it in the most unreasonable measure possible and presuming that's the only way you could do it. Usually the same people who twist RAW to get early entry tricks to other classes as is. So it just seems weird to me. I mean if you were going to take the most stubborn, hard to enact measure to the IC requirements, why not do it for other things? No early entry Mystic Theurge tricks, the "able to cast" means "Able to cast regularly" and you must have 3 levels in a dedicated Arcane cast, 3 levels in a dedicated Divine class at the very least.

Because able to cast means one thing, able to cast regularly doesn't mean anything, and while you can deliberately set it up like that, it's a houserule rather than the RAW which is the assumption for discussions on the boards. The people advocating for RP requirements being held sacrosanct provoke others to illustrate how taking that position to its logical conclusion is not necessarily what people like you or I would want.


And of course, it CAN be interesting. An assassin contract like that (As seems to be the intention rather than just picking a random guy and killing him for no reason other than to get in), is a simple plot hook that can be a lot of fun to play out. Or could just say the last Villain you killed had a mark on him and killing him drew the attention and fulfilled the requirement. Which provides a retroactive plot hook and doesn't derail a session to do it, but still provides IC gristle.

And also a little shiny place in the sun adventure for the character dominating the group's concerns or splitting the party like how you were saying they actually shouldn't be done.

[russdm]

The main issue was really that most of the prestige classes in the DMG were crap or based on a small set of classes that they were made for. So wizards had to make more, but didn't realize that few prestige classes they made were worth going into. The ones that work best tend to be ones that gave interesting and constantly useful abilities rather than one-situation ponies/horses. A prestige class for fighters to slay vampires is worthless when you are barely ever encountering vamps. A prestige class allowing a rogue to become more sneaky is always going to be useful because you usually need to sneak around.

My DMG list, Corrections or advicements for them welcome:

Arcane Archer-Elf or Half-Elf Wizard(sorceror)/something that gets you bow skills/feats
Arcane Trickster-Bard/wiz(sorc) or rogue/wiz(sorc)
Archmage-Wizard or sorcerer only
Assassins-Mainly Rogues though anybody willing to spend skill points to work can get this, only available to evil characters really
Blackguards-ex paladins, requires interaction with evil stuff, so available to evil characters really
dragon disciple-only for sorcerers
duelist-better suited for rogues than anybody else
Dwarven defender-dwarves that are fighters, clerics, or paladins
eldritch knight-gish, fighter/wizard or fighter/sorcerer, barbarians not really efficient for this one
Heirophant- Clerics or rarely druids
horizon walkers-rangers or bards mainly
Loremasters-Wizards or Sorcerers or Bards or clerics
Mystic Theurge-Wizard(sorc)/Cleric(Druid) or even more rarely bard/cleric(druid)
Red Wizards-Wizards only
Shadowdancer-Mainly rogues or bards, with some other classes maybe
Thaumaturgist-cleric only

For most of them, you still need to multiclass unless if you start in teh class the prestige class is based for.