What awesome PRC's would you allow to have full casting?

[CyberThread]

What awesome prc's that you think got messed up with bad casting progression, would you allow ((AS A DM)) to have 9/10 casting?

[Nightgaun7]

Bladesinger

[tbok1992]

Cancer Mage. Because, darn it, a class with a sentient tumor buddy should be viable in SOME way!

[Emperor Ing]

True Necromancer

Someone had to say it :smalltongue:

[NeoPhoenix0]

arcane archer

[Coidzor]

The vast majority of gish PrCs.

[Juntao112]

What awesome prc's that you think got messed up with bad casting progression, would you allow ((AS A DM)) to have 9/10 casting?

Elemental Savant

[avr]

Dragonmarked heir. Well, 4/5.

[Quietus]

Arcane Archer.

[TypoNinja]

Arcane Archer.

I gotta go with this, it always seemed silly to me that it had none at all. Not even full casting, just give it any casting progression at all.

[Failed Phantasm]

Hierophant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/hierophant.htm). And Dragon Disciple. :smallannoyed:

Also, I would change Hierophant's skill requirement to "Know (religion) 15 or Know (nature) 15", because otherwise a single-classed Druid can't qualify for this PrC until epic levels... or just by using a few simple tricks, like 1 level of Factotum and Able Learner but still.

[Juntao112]

Cancer Mage. Because, darn it, a class with a sentient tumor buddy should be viable in SOME way!

How is arbitrarily high strengh and natural armor nonviable?

[Skysaber]

The vast majority of gish PrCs.

Got to +1 this.

[Feytalist]

Green Star Adept.

No matter that it's got a silly capstone, I still like class.

[Mephibosheth]

Master of the Unseen Hand. They were clearly thinking of casters when they wrote it. But no spellcasting progression whatsoever? Really?

[Eldan]

I always had the opposite idea. I think no class should have full progression. You trade your progresion for actual class features. The DMG even spells that out. There should be a trade-off in PrCs.

[Karnith]

I would love to be able to actually play a Yathrinshee in a game at some point without shenanigans. Or a True Necromancer, for that matter. So let's go with those.

[Psyren]

I always had the opposite idea. I think no class should have full progression. You trade your progresion for actual class features. The DMG even spells that out. There should be a trade-off in PrCs.

Well, the OP actually said 9/10, which is a tradeoff (though I would personally be fine with 8/10 for non-gish PrCs. Gishes usually lose an extra CL from needing a martial class dip so I'd be fine with 9/10 there, and 10/10 is okay for theurges since they typically need more than one level from a second casting class. But I digress.)

Anyway, I would say Rage Mage is one that needs a better caster progression, as is Void Disciple. Metamind should be 9/10, Psion Uncarnate should be 7/10. True Necromancer should be reworked entirely.

Above all, every PrC needs class features of some kind. Eldritch Knight and MT were failures of design in my opinion.

[Shining Wrath]

Master of Nine. Nothing says awesome-sauce with supersized awesome fries like a weapons master who can also cast.

[NikitaDarkstar]

Dirge Singer. The fact that it has no caster progression at all (and by RAW doesn't stack with Bard levels for amount of performances) seems strange.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Well, the OP actually said 9/10, which is a tradeoff (though I would personally be fine with 8/10 for non-gish PrCs. Gishes usually lose an extra CL from needing a martial class dip so I'd be fine with 9/10 there, and 10/10 is okay for theurges since they typically need more than one level from a second casting class. But I digress.)

Anyway, I would say Rage Mage is one that needs a better caster progression, as is Void Disciple. Metamind should be 9/10, Psion Uncarnate should be 7/10. True Necromancer should be reworked entirely.

Above all, every PrC needs class features of some kind. Eldritch Knight and MT were failures of design in my opinion.

Agreed on the Theurges count. Hence my love for Noctumancers and Eldritch Disciples.

I see no reason to deny Dragonheart Mages (RotD) or Pact-bound Adepts (DrM) full casting.

[Psyren]

Master of Nine. Nothing says awesome-sauce with supersized awesome fries like a weapons master who can also cast.

I'm not seeing this one at all. A Master of Nine should be so focused on the Sublime Way that they don't have time for anything else - not magic, not psionics, not incarnum etc. Or did you mean full maneuver progression?

[Talderas]

Spellsword.

It has a number of issues but half caster level progression doesn't do it any favors. Assuming a level of fighter for the armor proficiencies you look at Wizard 9/Fighter 1/Spellsword 10 for a caster level of 14 at 20. The mechanics of the class (move action to channel) don't really justify that 5/10 progression.

Faster entry requires more full BAB classes. Wizard 3/Fighter 3 if you want to have useful spells for Channel Spell (Wizard 7/Fighter 3/Spellsword 10 for 12th caster level @ 20). Bard 4/Fighter 1 gets you in a level earlier but the Channel Spell candidates are lack luster.

[Amphetryon]

Lords of Madness' Abolisher. Also, +1 Rage Mage.

[Mishkov]

Seriously, rage mage. Also needs more spell rages, but that's a different story.

[Scow2]

I think a lot of people miss the point of not having full progression (Except in the case of classes where no spellcasting progression seems to be an oversight, such as Heirophant and Arcane Archer).

The class features are supposed to turn your focus AWAY from trying to get maximized spellcasting, for the same reason Fighters, Barbarians, Warblades, Monks, Rogues, and the like don't get any spellcasting progression.

[Silva Stormrage]

Horned Harbinger.... WHY did they make that one non casting progression... just why....

[gorfnab]

Mindbender
Dragon Disciple
Acolyte of the Skin
Master Transmogrifist
Prestige Bard
Seeker of the Song
War Chanter
Hammer of Moradin

[Karnith]

I think a lot of people miss the point of not having full progression (Except in the case of classes where no spellcasting progression seems to be an oversight, such as Heirophant and Arcane Archer). The class features are supposed to turn your focus AWAY from trying to get maximized spellcasting, for the same reason Fighters, Barbarians, Warblades, Monks, Rogues, and the like don't get any spellcasting progression.
We get it (or, at least, I do), it's just that most PrCs that offer class features instead of full-casting have terrible class features that in no way make up for the loss of spellcasting. And I don't know many people who are cool with going through a bunch of loopholes to make themselves worse at what they want to do.

Also it's not really similar to Fighters (etc.) not having spellcasting progression, because spellcasting PrCs are meant for characters who can cast spells. Requiring a character to be a dedicated caster to get into the PrC only to make the character's spellcasting worse than they would be if they hadn't taken levels in the class is silly, for the same reason that a fighter-type PrC that gives out 1/2 BAB is silly.

Losing out on one or two levels of spellcasting in a caster PrC I can understand for power-level reasons. More than that, though, and you're intentionally making yourself worse by taking the class.

[nobodez]

I think a lot of people miss the point of not having full progression (Except in the case of classes where no spellcasting progression seems to be an oversight, such as Heirophant and Arcane Archer).

The class features are supposed to turn your focus AWAY from trying to get maximized spellcasting, for the same reason Fighters, Barbarians, Warblades, Monks, Rogues, and the like don't get any spellcasting progression.

Yeah, but (disregardings the tiers that the designers did not intend to produce), those classes (though in some cases arguably) advance the core feature/role of the base/core class (almost every rogue-based PrC brings some sort of SA or stealth or trap finding or something around the rogue, similarly fighter PrCs advance BAB, combat maneuvers/special attacks, defensive abilities, or even battlefield mobility). The core feature/role of a magic (wizard/cleric/etc) based PrC should always be spells.

[Darius Kane]

All of them should have full casting.

[Darth_Versity]

Mindbender. Fun concept, but wasted because of the awful 5/10 casting.

[CyberThread]

Reaver needs it to

[Shining Wrath]

I'm not seeing this one at all. A Master of Nine should be so focused on the Sublime Way that they don't have time for anything else - not magic, not psionics, not incarnum etc. Or did you mean full maneuver progression?

Sorry, should have used Sarcasm Font. A Mo9 with full casting would devourer Druids for breakfast.

[Skysaber]

All of them should have full casting.

I'm strongly tempted to go +1 to this one instead, as I always felt robbed that so many 'prestige' classes were significantly less powerful than the base class. Doesn't sound very 'prestigious' to me when you're better off without it.

I've also felt robbed that you could barely find a rogue prestige class that had 8 skill points per level, or full Sneak Attack progression, to say nothing of both.

In my opinion, if you're going to call it a 'prestige' class then it should have advantages over and above the base class, not limiting factors that make it questionable, if not inferior. And if that wasn't your intention you should have called it something else.

[Divayth Fyr]

In my opinion, if you're going to call it a 'prestige' class then it should have advantages over and above the base class, not limiting factors that make it questionable, if not inferior. And if that wasn't your intention you should have called it something else.
So, every PRC should be like the Planar Shephard (broken planes aside)? Also, this makes base classes even less viable than they are now...

[Coidzor]

So, every PRC should be like the Planar Shephard (broken planes aside)? Also, this makes base classes even less viable than they are now...

Most of the base classes aren't viable due to their own design flaws and would similarly need to be revamped in order to have a reason not to PrC out anyway.

Aside from a handful of classes such as Druid, Warblade, and meldshapers, the vast majority of base classes end at or before level 10. A prominent example in the case of Fighter, which lasts only 2 levels without ACFs. And then there's Sorcerer where you have less reason than a Fighter to stay in the class as soon as PrCs open up.

[Kuulvheysoon]

I'm strongly tempted to go +1 to this one instead, as I always felt robbed that so many 'prestige' classes were significantly less powerful than the base class. Doesn't sound very 'prestigious' to me when you're better off without it.

I've also felt robbed that you could barely find a rogue prestige class that had 8 skill points per level, or full Sneak Attack progression, to say nothing of both.

In my opinion, if you're going to call it a 'prestige' class then it should have advantages over and above the base class, not limiting factors that make it questionable, if not inferior. And if that wasn't your intention you should have called it something else.

Scorpion Heritor, from Sandstorm.

I actually feel as if nearly every PrC should lose at least a single level of spellcasting - my reasoning being, of course, that you should lose something for the abilities that the PrC grant you. It should be a choice to take levels in something, not the automatic assumption (eg. Anarchic Initiate; there's very little reason to not take levels in it (assuming you qualify).

[Coidzor]

Scorpion Heritor, from Sandstorm.

I actually feel as if nearly every PrC should lose at least a single level of spellcasting - my reasoning being, of course, that you should lose something for the abilities that the PrC grant you. It should be a choice to take levels in something, not the automatic assumption (eg. Anarchic Initiate; there's very little reason to not take levels in it (assuming you qualify).

In an ideal world where the class features and abilities the PrCs grant are actually worth that loss of casting, agreed. With the hypothetical situation of the currently flawed PrCs on the table? There's some where they don't offer enough to be worth the loss of caster levels.

[Darius Kane]

So, every PRC should be like the Planar Shephard (broken planes aside)?
Yes. nfnghxhh

[Clistenes]

The Touched prestige class from Encyclopaedia Divinae - Shamans should have full (shaman) casting. They are basically characters from any class that are chosen by the spirits and forced to take levels of shaman against their will, but for some reason they don't have full casting.

The Touched PR is a nice way to introduce spirits and shamanic magic in a campaign, but without full casting it effectively cripples the character.

[Coidzor]

The Touched prestige class from Encyclopaedia Divinae - Shamans should have full (shaman) casting. They are basically characters from any class that are chosen by the spirits and forced to take levels of shaman against their will, but for some reason they don't have full casting.

The Touched PR is a nice way to introduce spirits and shamanic magic in a campaign, but without full casting it effectively cripples the character.

Forcing your players to take levels in classes is also a pretty bad idea in general. :smalleek:

[TypoNinja]

In my opinion, if you're going to call it a 'prestige' class then it should have advantages over and above the base class, not limiting factors that make it questionable, if not inferior. And if that wasn't your intention you should have called it something else.

PrC's aren't about being better in all ways, its about specializing in certain aspects or adding new ones. Master Thrower is a great PrC if you want to throw weapons. A straight Fighter still beats it out if that's not what you are doing though.

"The best" isn't the goal, "Better at the chosen task" is what you are aiming for.

[Karnith]

PrC's aren't about being better in all ways, its about specializing in certain aspects or adding new ones. Master Thrower is a great PrC if you want to throw weapons. A straight Fighter still beats it out if that's not what you are doing though.

"The best" isn't the goal, "Better at the chosen task" is what you are aiming for.
And when a PrC makes you worse at the chosen task, that's a problem. And it's a problem that virtually all half-casting PrCs have.

[TypoNinja]

And when a PrC makes you worse at the chosen task, that's a problem. And it's a problem that virtually all half-casting PrCs have.

If your chosen task is casting then obviously go for a full casting PrC, its not rocket science. I don't PrC into Deepwood Sniper if I'm not playing an archer, so I'm also not going to PrC into a non-casting class if I want to be a caster.

[Karnith]

If your chosen task is casting then obviously go for a full casting PrC, its not rocket science. I don't PrC into Deepwood Sniper if I'm not playing an archer, so I'm also not going to PrC into a non-casting class if I want to be a caster.
If you want to be a necromancer, there are prestige classes for that. Lots of them, in fact! And some of them, True Necromancer and Yathrinshee particularly, make you actively worse at fulfilling that character goal than taking a non-focused class (barring some extreme shenanigans, I would take Mystic Theurge over either of them any day of the week, and I hate that class. And that's not even counting the fact that, absent significant cheese and/or optimization, theurging is a trap anyway).

Don't want to be a necromancer, hm? Well, how about an enchanter? Mindbender is all about dominating people to your will! Too bad it makes you way worse at using your enchantment spells to lead people around, because it slows down your spellcasting progression in exchange for replicating low-level spells that you could already cast with spell-like abilities until the very end.

Maybe you don't want to be a necromancer or an enchanter. Say, doesn't being a shapechanger sound cool? Master Transmogrifist is all about that! Unfortunately, it weakens your ability to change shapes because you lose caster levels (pretty relevant for Polymorph), which is not even counting the other problems with losing 4 spellcasting levels (which, importantly, means that you will never get Shapechange, the best shapeshifting spell).

That not working for you either? Well, do you like flinging things around with spells? Master of the Unseen Hand is all about the telekinesis spell. It's a shame that it gives up the ability to get more castings of telekinesis (and everything else) in exchange for making the telekinesis spell do useless things.

Don't know what you want to do? How about Acolyte of the Skin (what even is this class?)? Too bad it makes you give up casting for some tiny numbers and crappy abilities that replicate spells that you'd be able to cast if you weren't in AotS (seriously, what even is this class?).

There are a lot of classes like this. The designers didn't seem to understand just how much of a loss half-progression is, and a lot of classes that could be usable/interesting are just terrible compared to staying in a base class because they offer so little casting. They offer abilities that are better replicated with higher caster levels, more spells per day, or, with spell bloat, other spells, all of which you can get through (you guessed it!) full casting. The class descriptions tell you that they will make you better at whatever the PrC is focused on, but those are often blatant lies. The classes can be useful in extremely niche builds or as dips, but they make you much worse at being a spellcaster in general, while also making you worse at your focus or only giving extremely minor bonuses that can be better replaced by actual casting.

Giving up regular spellcasting power to become a master in a niche is fine if it's actually worth doing so (hi there, Malconvoker!), but in 3.5 spells are so strong and scale so much in power that losing spellcasting levels to focus on one thing virtually makes you worse off than just getting full casting, even when it comes to that focus.

[NeoPhoenix0]

why does this feel like something that was probably discussed when pathfinder was made?

[Venger]

How is arbitrarily high strengh and natural armor nonviable?

because without spells, you can't cast scintillating scales to make that NA actually, y'know, matter


I'm strongly tempted to go +1 to this one instead, as I always felt robbed that so many 'prestige' classes were significantly less powerful than the base class. Doesn't sound very 'prestigious' to me when you're better off without it.

I've also felt robbed that you could barely find a rogue prestige class that had 8 skill points per level, or full Sneak Attack progression, to say nothing of both.

In my opinion, if you're going to call it a 'prestige' class then it should have advantages over and above the base class, not limiting factors that make it questionable, if not inferior. And if that wasn't your intention you should have called it something else.

likewise. all prcs should be full casting. if not, then there's no reason to enter them instead of sticking in your boring base class.

literally the only one I can think of is scorpion heritor, as mentioned.


So, every PRC should be like the Planar Shephard (broken planes aside)? Also, this makes base classes even less viable than they are now...

yep. base classes aren't viable at all now, they can't get lower than that. the game's about customization, and prcs are how you do that.


Scorpion Heritor, from Sandstorm.

I actually feel as if nearly every PrC should lose at least a single level of spellcasting - my reasoning being, of course, that you should lose something for the abilities that the PrC grant you. It should be a choice to take levels in something, not the automatic assumption (eg. Anarchic Initiate; there's very little reason to not take levels in it (assuming you qualify).

I disagree. let's not just use spellcasting as an example, let's go with rogue.

all the rogue prcs (besides scorpion heritor) require you to lose skills, SA, or both. what's the point of that? especially when your class is already struggling as rogue is, you don't need the system making things harder on you.

[Scow2]

because without spells, you can't cast scintillating scales to make that NA actually, y'know, matter



likewise. all prcs should be full casting. if not, then there's no reason to enter them instead of sticking in your boring base class. Actually, there is - Greater power in the focused field, when it works. Those that forget this aren't.


yep. base classes aren't viable at all now, they can't get lower than that. the game's about customization, and prcs are how you do that. You've completely missed the point of PrCs. They're about focusing on one aspect of a class and empowering it at the cost of flexibility. For example, the Radiant Servant of Pelor requires specific domains, and emphasizes a cleric's Healing and Turn Undead, while reducing it Battle capability.


I disagree. let's not just use spellcasting as an example, let's go with rogue.

all the rogue prcs (besides scorpion heritor) require you to lose skills, SA, or both. what's the point of that? especially when your class is already struggling as rogue is, you don't need the system making things harder on you.That's because the rogue is supposed to be the most flexible and versatile in its role. Prestige Classes are supposed to increase your stealth and assassination capabilities at the cost of general skillmonkeyness, or improve the form and function of certain skillsets at the cost of combat lethality, general utility, and secondary skillsets.

[Venger]

Actually, there is - Greater power in the focused field, when it works. Those that forget this aren't.
okay, I can agree with that. that's the problem we're talking about in this thread though, those that forget this.


You've completely missed the point of PrCs. They're about focusing on one aspect of a class and empowering it at the cost of flexibility. For example, the Radiant Servant of Pelor requires specific domains, and emphasizes a cleric's Healing and Turn Undead, while reducing it Battle capability.
all right, let's look at that. radiant servant can be a pretty cool class if you're playing in an undead-heavy game. radiant servant does indeed make you better at healing and turning, and part of the reason people take it is that it's full casting. it gives spells in addition to actual class features, something that clerics do not have at all. it's a perfect example of the kinds of prcs we think are good: ones that let you continue doing what you were doing and give you additional toys.


That's because the rogue is supposed to be the most flexible and versatile in its role. Prestige Classes are supposed to increase your stealth and assassination capabilities at the cost of general skillmonkeyness, or improve the form and function of certain skillsets at the cost of combat lethality, general utility, and secondary skillsets.

Okay, well, I like rogues too, but there is a certain discrepancy between their fluff saying that they are flexible and versatile and actually trying to make that work in the game. even curmudgeon acknowledges rogues are among the most difficult classes to play.

let's say that rogue prcs increase stealth/assassination and lose skills or vica versa. there aren't any prcs that give you more SA than your base class. the best you can hope for is full. (assassin, ronin, avenging executioner, ghost faced killer, etc)

but let's go the other way and assume you don't care about SA (you're playing one of the fabled "politics" games instead) and just want skills.

well, again, all you can hope for is to equal the amount of points you formerly received. there are very few classes that give 8 skill points (aside from the previously mentioned scorpion heritor, the only other ones I can think of are spymaster and exemplar, the former giving 2 dice of SA, the latter giving none at all)

so, even if you did feel that rogues were just too powerful with their ability to SA and do some skills (since you're probably played one, you know this isn't the case) and just wanted to pick one of those to be good at for your prc, there kind of arent' any options for you. this is the problem we're talking about, that even for characters who can't cast spells, there seems to be this attitude from designers that even the weaker classes should give up some of their most important class features for what amounts to no reason

[Karnith]

You've completely missed the point of PrCs. They're about focusing on one aspect of a class and empowering it at the cost of flexibility. For example, the Radiant Servant of Pelor requires specific domains, and emphasizes a cleric's Healing and Turn Undead, while reducing it Battle capability.Not the best example to make your point with, given that Radiant Servant of Pelor is a full-casting PrC and you lose basically nothing but the pre-reqs by going into it. Moving down from d8 HD to d6 is not a big deal at all, and you still get full casting, 3/4 BAB, two good saves, in addition to a bunch of other stuff on top of that. It's actually one of those "base class plus" PrCs that you don't seem to like.

well, again, all you can hope for is to equal the amount of points you formerly received. there are very few classes that give 8 skill points (aside from the previously mentioned scorpion heritor, the only other ones I can think of are spymaster and exemplar, the former giving 2 dice of SA, the latter giving none at all)
Uncanny Trickster also gives you 8 + Int skill points per level.

[Talderas]

There are a lot of classes like this. The designers didn't seem to understand just how much of a loss half-progression is, and a lot of classes that could be usable/interesting are just terrible compared to staying in a base class because they offer so little casting. They offer abilities that are better replicated with higher caster levels, more spells per day, or, with spell bloat, other spells, all of which you can get through (you guessed it!) full casting. The class descriptions tell you that they will make you better at whatever the PrC is focused on, but those are often blatant lies. The classes can be useful in extremely niche builds or as dips, but they make you much worse at being a spellcaster in general, while also making you worse at your focus or only giving extremely minor bonuses that can be better replaced by actual casting.

Identity crisis is a huge problem. But identity crisis also extends into the viability of prestige classes. There's druid prestige classes, but who would bother taking them when they're clearly inferior than base druid? Most often this is going to be because it doesn't advance wild shape or doesn't provide full advancement for spellcasting. Rarely do these prestige classes provide any compelling benefit.

[Karnith]

Rarely do these prestige classes provide any compelling benefit.
Uh, wasn't that my point?

[Sgt. Cookie]

Prestige Paladin and Ranger, brought up to Prestige Bard casting.

[Talderas]

Uh, wasn't that my point?

Yes it is. I was elaborating that the problem is an identity problem. Whoever designed the class didn't really know what they wanted to do (less likely) or if they did they did a poor job of expressing that identity with the mechanics of the prestige class (more likely).

That failure of identity is what creates the problem with prestige classes being outright worse than the base class they're designed to be prestigious.

However, even in a case of accurate identity and a class that makes that follows that identity successfully the class still may not be a compelling choice. Some prestige classes are just simply identified around too short a time frame. A 1/day ability that functions for one round that is potent but not groundshaking isn't bad for an NPC. It's utterly horrid for a PC that can reasonably be expected to engage in multiple encounters in a given day. In other words, prestige classes are often designed with NPCs in mind.

[Amphetryon]

One can't help but wonder - indeed, the point has even been brought up before - how many complaints about Prestige Classes could have been averted if they'd chosen a term like "Second Classes" instead of "Prestige Classes," with the baggage of connotation that carries with it.

[StreamOfTheSky]

None, save for those that FORCED those entering to lose at least one CL in order to enter as part of the requirements.

The game is already far too saturated with full casting PrC's that just make casters even more broken already, why in gods' names would I seek to make the problem worse?!

[WhatBigTeeth]

None, save for those that FORCED those entering to lose at least one CL in order to enter as part of the requirements.

The game is already far too saturated with full casting PrC's that just make casters even more broken already, why in gods' names would I seek to make the problem worse?!
Is this a response to the thread title or the OP?

I agree that full 10/10 casting is a problem in almost every case - giving freebies to the most powerful classes and making the decision of "PrC or Singleclass?" even less interesting. But making 9/10 or 8/10 casting the default for most cases would make the game work much closer to what I'd personally prefer (discouraging level-dips while still allowing them, making otherwise crappy classes more viable, adding a drawback to many of the classes that are already overly powerful).

[Eslin]

I beg to counter with the swiftblade - 6/10, and it has strong enough class features to justify it.

Pretty much every other prestige class should be 9/10, 10/10 or have really strong class features to justify lower progression.

[Talya]

I beg to counter with the swiftblade - 6/10, and it has strong enough class features to justify it.

Pretty much every other prestige class should be 9/10, 10/10 or have really strong class features to justify lower progression.

Notice how swiftblade builds never take all ten levels?

I rather like the mini-puzzle-game of character planning and design. Building your character to be effective at all levels of play and simultaneously making the fewest sacrifices is all part of the game. One of the issues with partial casting progression on PrCs is the sheer power of spellcasting in D&D... anything that costs you caster levels almost always makes your class worse at what it does (at least if you're a bard or full caster. Rangers/Paladins can get away with losing casting).

[Eslin]

That's just because the capstone is bad, people frequently take nine levels.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Is this a response to the thread title or the OP?

I agree that full 10/10 casting is a problem in almost every case - giving freebies to the most powerful classes and making the decision of "PrC or Singleclass?" even less interesting. But making 9/10 or 8/10 casting the default for most cases would make the game work much closer to what I'd personally prefer (discouraging level-dips while still allowing them, making otherwise crappy classes more viable, adding a drawback to many of the classes that are already overly powerful).

Thread title. Didn't really read the thread much. The idea of expanding the list of full casting PrC's at all is just patently ridiculous to me. That's like putting out a house fire with dynamite, if you care at all about game balance. I agree with you. Casting PrC's by default should all cost 1 level up front or the like. The class features gained making up for it, at least partly. Ones that force you to multiclass can be full progression since they already effectively cost you a CL or more.

[DarkSonic1337]

That's just because the capstone is bad, people frequently take nine levels.

Thus making swiftblade much more like a 6/9 casting class than a 6/10 casting class. Almost nobody takes the last level because the capstone ISN'T WORTH the last caster level loss.

I personally think swiftblade would be a very nice 7/10 prestige class, basically allowing the last level to increase caster level. There would be less Wizard 6/Swiftblade9/AbjurantChampion5, as elegantly as that works out.

[TypoNinja]

The class features gained making up for it, at least partly. Ones that force you to multiclass can be full progression since they already effectively cost you a CL or more.

That's kind of the point.

The power of spellcasting is such that almost nothing is worth losing casting levels for.

[Eslin]

Thus making swiftblade much more like a 7/9 casting class than a 6/10 casting class. Almost nobody takes the last level because the capstone ISN'T WORTH the last caster level loss.

I personally think swiftblade would be a very nice 7/10 prestige class, basically allowing the last level to increase caster level. There would be less Wizard 6/Swiftblade9/AbjurantChampion5, as elegantly as that works out.

I guess that is a pretty good example of how good spellcasting is - the capstone has to be really good to justify things.

Still, my example stands - they stuffed up by making the capstone bad, but swiftblade is an example of a class strong enough to be worth the loss of several caster levels.

[Talya]

Thread title. Didn't really read the thread much. The idea of expanding the list of full casting PrC's at all is just patently ridiculous to me. That's like putting out a house fire with dynamite, if you care at all about game balance. I agree with you. Casting PrC's by default should all cost 1 level up front or the like. The class features gained making up for it, at least partly. Ones that force you to multiclass can be full progression since they already effectively cost you a CL or more.

That would make it so boring to design a caster. There would be no optimization for spellcasting at all...everyone would play single-classed wizard, druid, or cleric. Bard PrCs would be out of the question. Sorcerer would never be played. Taking a PRC would always be a bad idea, if you cast spells.

I like the elegance of a single classed character fine (even if you only ever see it for Warblades, Bards and Druids). But I also like seeing builds with 4 different PrCs. The latter would be gone, except for non-spellcasters.

[StreamOfTheSky]

That's kind of the point.

The power of spellcasting is such that almost nothing is worth losing casting levels for.



That would make it so boring to design a caster. There would be no optimization for spellcasting at all...everyone would play single-classed wizard, druid, or cleric. Bard PrCs would be out of the question. Sorcerer would never be played. Taking a PRC would always be a bad idea, if you cast spells.

Oh, boo hoo. "If I want to be the absolute most powerful character I can be, my options are limited and boring!" Cry me a river...

Sorry if I don't like casters having their cake and eating it, too.

It's a non-competitive game. You don't NEED the most outright broken build possible to contribute and "win." Plenty of people lose a CL for their builds and do just fine.

[Talya]

It's a non-competitive game. You don't NEED the most outright broken build possible to contribute and "win." Plenty of people lose a CL for their builds and do just fine.


No you don't NEED to. But most people WANT to build as effective as they can, without resorting to outright "cheese." It's part of the fun of the system.

I tend to play melee types already as a preference. I'd almost never play a spellcaster if there were no fun, unique builds for me to make up. Personally, I tend to come up with a concept, then build it as differently and effectively as possible, while staying within that concept. I will sacrifice power for the concept, but I still try to minimize that where possible. Losing caster levels? I can stomach losing one or two sure. But when your concept has 2 base classes and 3 PrCs...if every PrC loses at least 1 caster level up front, you're WAY behind on spellcasting all of a sudden, and will never get your top level spells. I wouldn't do it.

[Talderas]

Oh, boo hoo. "If I want to be the absolute most powerful character I can be, my options are limited and boring!" Cry me a river...

Sorry if I don't like casters having their cake and eating it, too.

It's a non-competitive game. You don't NEED the most outright broken build possible to contribute and "win." Plenty of people lose a CL for their builds and do just fine.

It has nothing to do with a PrC being broken or powerful. There's a systemic problem with PrC design in general throughout all the published books. This isn't limited to casters. There are a significant number of PrCs that make you worse at what the PrC is alleging you're great at than if you stuck in the standard class. That is a huge functional deficiency. You should never become a worse character because you are taking a prestige class.

Loss of casting level is just one example that applies to Clerics/Druids/Sorcers/Wizards.

Rogues too often have prestige classes that make them worse at sneak attacking and worse at skill monkeying at the same time without providing anything significant in return.

Most druid PrCs are worse than a plain old druid.

All published 3.5 archer PrCs are bad (IIRC).

I'd hazard to guess that about 20-33% of PrCs do not make you worse.

[StreamOfTheSky]

You should never become a worse character because you are taking a prestige class.

Then ban all caster prestige classes completely and be done with it. Casters are the most powerful characters in the game, and PrC that make them even better for little to no cost is one of the biggest problems of 3E (right after the spells themselves). This entire thread's goal is to break D&D even more than it already is.

I've had plenty of casters that "became worse characters" from losing CL to a PrC. A Tier 1 Wizard who loses 1 CL is....*drum roll* still tier 1! Shocking, I know.


No you don't NEED to. But most people WANT to build as effective as they can, without resorting to outright "cheese." It's part of the fun of the system.

I tend to play melee types already as a preference. I'd almost never play a spellcaster if there were no fun, unique builds for me to make up. Personally, I tend to come up with a concept, then build it as differently and effectively as possible, while staying within that concept. I will sacrifice power for the concept, but I still try to minimize that where possible. Losing caster levels? I can stomach losing one or two sure. But when your concept has 2 base classes and 3 PrCs...if every PrC loses at least 1 caster level up front, you're WAY behind on spellcasting all of a sudden, and will never get your top level spells. I wouldn't do it.

Even if there were no caster PrC's at all and you were forced to stay in your base class to level 20, the sheer variety of options from your spell list alone gives you more versatility than pretty much any conceivable 20 level combination of multiclassed noncasting classes/PrC's.

[Talderas]

Then ban all caster prestige classes completely and be done with it. Casters are the most powerful characters in the game, and PrC that make them even better for little to no cost is one of the biggest problems of 3E (right after the spells themselves). This entire thread's goal is to break D&D even more than it already is.

I've had plenty of casters that "became worse characters" from losing CL to a PrC. A Tier 1 Wizard who loses 1 CL is....*drum roll* still tier 1! Shocking, I know.

This topic may be directly about caster PrCs but it is a problem not just limited to caster PrCs. It is a game design problem. A prestige class, due to the nature of having to meet specific requirements just to enter it, should at worse provide lateral growth and in most cases provide some vertical growth over the standard class as well. There are far too many prestige classes which provide horizontal growth that is not at all in proportion to the vertical growth they sacrifice for it.

[WhatBigTeeth]

There are far too many prestige classes which provide horizontal growth that is not at all in proportion to the vertical growth they sacrifice for it.
There are also far too many prestige classes that already provide inordinate amount of growth for their investment - a list that is already problematic because it describes power-gains for the most problematically powerful classes in the game, and a list that would greatly increase if 10/10 casting became the norm.

Though I suppose that because I'm of the school of thought that Tayla's 2 base class/3 PrC character shouldn't be as good at doing what one of its base classes does as an equal-leveled character with only levels in that one class, there's a very good chance we won't meet eye to eye.

[Icewraith]

A lot of PRCs forget that they force you to take levels in a class that already doesn't advance your key abilities, as well as force you to waste up to half of your feats on crap like dodge and spell focus: abjuration.

The prestige clases that generally get pointed to as "op" are outliers. A ten level gish class that forces you to take two levels of fighter should give 10/10 or 9/10 casting because you're already two levels behind a straight wizard and have several BAB less than a straight fighter. "OP" classes that give full progression and improved class features should not get full casting.

Initiate of the Sevenfold veil, for example, should be 7/10 casting at most.
Incantatrix at least costs you an entire school, you can blow half your feats to get the school back (and the other half qualifying for the class). It's ridiculously good though, so probably could stand to be 8 or 7/10.

Bladesinger requires levels in fighter and bard/rogue iirc to get in quickly, it should probably advance 10/10 casting since you already lost a lot of ground just qualifying for the class. It should also give casting in armor earlier.

Basically, classes that don't force you to lose ground in your primary abilities just to enter should be 7ish/10 casting. Classes that do force you to lose ground should provide normal class benefits as well as interesting class abilities. Classes that focus on two-weapon fighting should offer a bonus feat every level just to make up for how bad that style is and how many bad feats there are out there for it.

Also, I'm of the opinion that most class features should advance at half the rate for non-class levels, like initiator level does or like how wizards et.al have a 1/2 BAB progression. Things like sneak attack, skirmish, bardic knowledge, bardic music, caster level... all of it should advance at class level + 1/2 nonclass levels rounded down or similar. The caveat here is that the rest of the class should be worth taking, and while your inspire courage bonus should go up at half the rate you shouldn't get more music uses or new abilities.

Edit: This would be a good reason to actually have some sort of multiclassing penatly, although not in its current incarnation.

[Darius Kane]

Then ban all caster prestige classes completely and be done with it.
Eh, I'd rather add than remove.