Prestige classes in 5e

[Spacehamster]

Hello playground!

Do you think that DMG will have any prestige classes and how would you want said classes to work? I would say they should have 4 or max 8 levels(due to how ability boosts work in 5e) and also have their most powerful abilities far in to prevent the crazy dipping that were 3e, was so weird reading about optimal builds that contained like 7 classes. :p

So what's your take on prc'a and how they should be implemented?

Spacehamster over and out!

[MadBear]

Well if the list that Obyrn put out is any indication of what we'll see, then no, there won't be any prestige classes.

I'm ok with it. The fact that there's a section on modifying classes might well be interesting though.

[silveralen]

It's a little interesting to consider, in that most of the restrictions typically used to determine if you qualified for a prestige class hardly exist in this version. They would most likely the'll have stat requirements, maybe proficiency in a skill or saving throw, and a level requirement. I wouldn't be upset if prestige classes couldn't even be entered until level ten, and you could only enter one or two at most.

All that being said, I feel like they aren't really needed for this edition. I'd rather they added more archetypes, alternate features, or even base classes, similar to the direction pathfinder went. It seems to be a better fit, at least to me. A lot of existing prestige classes have already been built into the classes. The few that don't fit at all would probably be best as base classes.

[Person_Man]

I would say that including prestige classes would be a terrible design.

First, they lead to codex bloat, because its too easy to publish books full of a dozen or so prestige classes for every conceivable niche. This is bad, because having 100,000+ of supplemental material makes the game unmanagable and unknowable unless the DM fiat excludes stuff, which means that a player who purchases a supplement runs a high chance of it being useless if its not allowed, or that player have a mechanical advantage over players who don't own or read or take the time to read through that or other supplements.

Second, it leads to terrible, terrible game imbalanced. More specifically, 90%ish of all prestige classes (and roughly 50% of the base classes) printed were essentially garbage, and a small number were absolutely game breaking.

The current subclass structure mostly resolves these issues, though I would say that full casters are still more powerful and flexible then non-full casters at mid-high levels. Breaking subclasses into a variant prestige class system would be a terrible mistake.

[Gurka]

I'm in agreement with the folks above. I don't think PrCs are a very good idea. A wider variety of archetypes combined with a good list of alternate base class features (different types of Barbarian Rage or Druid Wild Shape, for instance) should offer a much more balanced and functional way to achieve even very specialized character concepts.

[MadGrady]

I would prefer to see more subclasses than I would prestige classes. It is my opinion that subclasses might be the replacement for PrCs in this edition.

It might be cool to see expanded subclass paths though, like at level 12, a sublcass gets an alternate path that they can take that provides a little more focus.

[Spacehamster]

I would prefer to see more subclasses than I would prestige classes. It is my opinion that subclasses might be the replacement for PrCs in this edition.

It might be cool to see expanded subclass paths though, like at level 12, a sublcass gets an alternate path that they can take that provides a little more focus.

Upon reading replies and thinking it over I must agree that more or expanded subclasses and few more base classes would be better then prc's yes. :) and paths within paths sounds fun. :)

[Doomchild]

paths within paths sounds fun. :)

I'll third that notion, sounds very, dare I say it?, sphere-grid-esque. In a good way.

[Spacehamster]

Black guard could make for a interesting base class paths: undead leader type, necromancy and enhancement spell progression at half progression and third one could be a dirty fighting nasty fighter type. At core would be like a paladin without the spell progression with per day spell like abilities that destroy, fear and divide your enemies. ^^

[MadGrady]

Upon reading replies and thinking it over I must agree that more or expanded subclasses and few more base classes would be better then prc's yes. :) and paths within paths sounds fun. :)

The initial thought I had was for a Wizard - Starts off base wizard. At 2nd level takes their arcane school of Evocation. Then perhaps at 12th level Evocation school allows a brand that focuses on specific elemental damage (ie. fire mage, ice mage, etc etc)

Edit: I too would love to see new base classes. I'm a huge fan of variety, and I think the subclass mechanic would play well into expanded base classes as well.

[Ellington]

I'd like to see Prestige classes handled as feats with certain ingame prerequisites.

[obryn]

I doubt they will be in the DMG, but as I always point out, classes in 5e work almost identically to classes in 3e. Since we have buffet-style multiclassing, I predict prestige classes (and/or similar alternatives - like racial classes) will happen eventually.

[MadGrady]

I doubt they will be in the DMG, but as I always point out, classes in 5e work almost identically to classes in 3e. Since we have buffet-style multiclassing, I predict prestige classes (and/or similar alternatives - like racial classes) will happen eventually.

I don't disagree here in that I think eventually we will have at least something added later on (how can they not?), I just always disliked racial classes. I hated limiting a class choice to a particular race. I get the concept, I just never agreed with it's implementation :smallsmile:

[Geoff]

A lot of Prestige Classes, those that actually are about joining some exclusive organization or gaining some level of actual fame or prestige or whatever, might work very well as some sort of, I don't know "Earned Background."

You start off with a background that's a social class or position or societal role of some kind - Soldier, Local Hero, Hermit, Sage, even Noble. They're all things you could be born into or could happen to you right off the turnip cart, pre-1st level, by definition.

But, what if you join an exclusive Wizard's Guild, or get Knighted by the King or something? Earned Background. You get another background benefit, learn a new proficiency, gain access to a little secret knowledge (that you better keep secret) or whatever... and maybe some obligations come with it, too.

Some of the others, like Mystic Theurge, just addressed MCing difficulties that 5e has fixed upfront.

[Morty]

I think it's safe to say prestige classes did not do the job they were intended for in 3e. Introducing them in 5e would be a bad idea. Which, obviously, is no guarantee WotC won't do it. But it doesn't look like it's on the agenda in the near future.

[MadGrady]

A lot of Prestige Classes, those that actually are about joining some exclusive organization or gaining some level of actual fame or prestige or whatever, might work very well as some sort of, I don't know "Earned Background."

You start off with a background that's a social class or position or societal role of some kind - Soldier, Local Hero, Hermit, Sage, even Noble. They're all things you could be born into or could happen to you right off the turnip cart, pre-1st level, by definition.

But, what if you join an exclusive Wizard's Guild, or get Knighted by the King or something? Earned Background. You get another background benefit, learn a new proficiency, gain access to a little secret knowledge (that you better keep secret) or whatever... and maybe some obligations come with it, too.

Some of the others, like Mystic Theurge, just addressed MCing difficulties that 5e has fixed upfront.

I really really like this concept. Instead of a full fledged (sort of) class that I have to dip into (which means staving off primary class features), I can get additional boons that are story based (+1), add value to my character (i.e. skills, proficicienies etc) (+1), and perhaps provide a more combat oriented feature (since backgrounds are primarily providing social/RP features).

[obryn]

I think it's safe to say prestige classes did not do the job they were intended for in 3e. Introducing them in 5e would be a bad idea. Which, obviously, is no guarantee WotC won't do it. But it doesn't look like it's on the agenda in the near future.
Oh, I agree! But I thought 3e-style multiclassing was the core part of the "bad idea" rather than the prestige classes themselves, and we got it anyway! :smallbiggrin:

I give it a year, tops.

[MadGrady]

Oh, I agree! But I thought 3e-style multiclassing was the core part of the "bad idea" rather than the prestige classes themselves, and we got it anyway! :smallbiggrin:

I give it a year, tops.

This will depend on how truthful they were about their release strategy for this system.

Really, what I want to see, is just ways that a single class can be different compared to another character with same class and level. I really like that someone who is a 5th level fighter can look so different from another 5th level fighter (based upon race, background, and subclass choice). I know this has always been the case in previous additions, but it just seems more evident in 5e (imho). So anything that would allow a single class to branch out and remain unique in a party is something I will likely support.

[obryn]

This will depend on how truthful they were about their release strategy for this system.
Well, we don't even have the core books at this point, so it's impossible to tell or predict.

Right now the strategy is really weird, with them contracting basically every supplement out to third parties.

[MadGrady]

Well, we don't even have the core books at this point, so it's impossible to tell or predict.

Right now the strategy is really weird, with them contracting basically every supplement out to third parties.

Agreed. I really can't wait for the DMG for December. I know it's not that far away, BUT IT'S A REALLY LONG TIME TO WAIT :smallbiggrin:

[Geoff]

I thought 3e-style multiclassing was the core part of the "bad idea" rather than the prestige classes themselves, and we got it anyway! 3e multiclassing was a great idea, it just required that each level of each class be an equally-weighted 'building block' that you could use to put your character together - failing that, it required lots of system mastery, and consistently failed to do things that, intuitively, it should have.

5e MCing fixed some of the specific issues it had in 3e. Proficiency and caster level being based on character level, for instance. It also broke some of the things 3e had right, like feats & stat bumps being determined by character level instead of class level, or save DCs being based on slot level.

[EugeneVoid]

Prestige Classes I'd be okay with. Sturgeon's Law though. They need to be fluffy, have trade-offs, and not be front-loaded like so many 3.5s weren't.

[squashmaster]

I'm against prestige classes. Multiclass if you must.

Unless they were to make a module/book that explicitly covers mythic/21+ level play. Then do prestige classing there. But even then, don't do it. Unless you've got an absolutely 100% badass setting that demands it. And I mean the greatest thing since Planescape.

Maybe add a prestige feats system, that, based on a certain level of renown, you have access to extra special feats you can get a few of. Feats like 3.5/PF style.

[Galen]

It's pretty obvious from looking at Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster, that they don't intend 5E to have prestige classes - they will all be handled as class variants.

[Yorrin]

Yeah, looking at the design so far it looks to me that PrCs will be handled in subclasses. I can foresee, for example, the Harper Agent being a Rogue or Fighter subtype, or Red Wizard as a variant Necromancer, and such like that. Actually variant features like "take this feature instead of your third level rogue feature" type stuff could be very interesting.

[MadGrady]

Yeah, looking at the design so far it looks to me that PrCs will be handled in subclasses. I can foresee, for example, the Harper Agent being a Rogue or Fighter subtype, or Red Wizard as a variant Necromancer, and such like that. Actually variant features like "take this feature instead of your third level rogue feature" type stuff could be very interesting.

Agreed. I always did like the "archetype" system of Pathfinder, which is similar in nature to the subclass. Being able to customize the progression would be a nice touch for a bit more advanced players, or those with a solid concept that might not wish to multiclass

[Geoff]

There are some issues with sub-classes substituting for PrCs (just as there were with Paragon Paths trying to do the same).

For instance, you have to 'pull the trigger' at a specific level.

It'd also restrict the PrC to a class, and crowd out other sub-classes. For instance, if 'Harper Agent' is a Rogue Archetype, you can't have a Fighter, Bard, or Illusionist working for the Harpers, unless, maybe, he was multiclassed Rogue - and, you couldn't have Thief or Arcane Trickster Harper Agent, at all.

An advantage of PrCs was that there wasn't always only one path to each one. Of course, you could just have a PrC sub-class for each appropriate class - Bardic Harper, Harper Spy (Rogue), Arcane Harper (Wizard), Harper Knight (Fighter), Sacred Harper (Cleric), etc...

Probably some PrCs naturally work as sub-classes, like those that clearly can only be of one class, like a Red Wizard. Others might be reduced to a feat (which isn't reducing a lot), or a membership perquisite gained via RP or downtime investment, or as I first suggested, a sort of 'Earned' Background chosen after 1st level if you meet the prerequisites...

[rlc]

Earned Background

This is exactly what I talk about in every single one of these threads, so I pretty much don't have to now. they'd be more like epic destinies than prestige classes, but who cares what it technically is?

edit:

There are some issues with sub-classes substituting for PrCs (just as there were with Paragon Paths trying to do the same).
For instance, if 'Harper Agent' is a Rogue Archetype, you can't have a Fighter, Bard, or Illusionist working for the Harpers, unless, maybe, he was multiclassed Rogue - and, you couldn't have Thief or Arcane Trickster Harper Agent, at all.


They've already taken care of this. Anybody can join the Harpers, even in the starter set.
I realize that you're only using the Harpers as an example, but the point is that there are already ways around things that were handled by only prestige classes don't have to be.

[MadGrady]

There are some issues with sub-classes substituting for PrCs (just as there were with Paragon Paths trying to do the same).

For instance, you have to 'pull the trigger' at a specific level.

It'd also restrict the PrC to a class, and crowd out other sub-classes. For instance, if 'Harper Agent' is a Rogue Archetype, you can't have a Fighter, Bard, or Illusionist working for the Harpers, unless, maybe, he was multiclassed Rogue - and, you couldn't have Thief or Arcane Trickster Harper Agent, at all.

An advantage of PrCs was that there wasn't always only one path to each one. Of course, you could just have a PrC sub-class for each appropriate class - Bardic Harper, Harper Spy (Rogue), Arcane Harper (Wizard), Harper Knight (Fighter), Sacred Harper (Cleric), etc...

Probably some PrCs naturally work as sub-classes, like those that clearly can only be of one class, like a Red Wizard. Others might be reduced to a feat (which isn't reducing a lot), or a membership perquisite gained via RP or downtime investment, or as I first suggested, a sort of 'Earned' Background chosen after 1st level if you meet the prerequisites...

This is a solid point, I had not considered that relegating PrCs to subclasses eliminates all players from taking that route. This would be a benefit of the earned background feature - available to all, but not granting a full class/subclass worth of features (imho)

[Oscredwin]

There seems to be design space that can be filled with PrC's. Given how save DC's work, how multiclassing as a spellcaster works, and ability boosts/feats and extra attacks are tied to class level, I see possibilities of classes that you take after level 3 or so that can increase your spell slots (without giving you higher level spells by default) or giving you awesome features without giving you more statboots/feats, or a fighter type class that doesn't give extra attacks. In fact, if I was designing PrCs for 5th, I would not give any of them "learn spells as if you gained a level in X class" or an ability boost or an extra attack.

[Freelance GM]

I'd like to see Prestige classes handled as feats with certain ingame prerequisites.

In the last playtest, "Arcane Archer" was actually a feat you could take.

"Arcane Archer
Prerequisite: The ability to cast at least one spell of 1st level or higher, proficiency with the long bow or short bow
As an action, you can imbue a spell of 1st level or higher into an arrow you are holding. You cast the spell as normal, but the spell effect does not occur until after the arrow is used in an attack. You can only imbue a spell that affects one creature or a spell that has an area such as a sphere, cloud, or cylinder. The arrow holds the spell effect until the end of your next long rest or until it is used in an attack that hits.
If you cast a spell that affects one creature, the next time the imbued arrow hits a creature with an attack, the attack deals damage as normal, and then you resolve the spell’s effect against the target.
If you imbued a spell that has an area, the creature does not need to be hit for the spell to take effect. Instead, you resolve the spell’s effect from the space or creature you targeted. If the arrow hits a creature, damage is dealt as normal.
Once you resolve the spell’s effect, the spell vanishes from the arrow."
- Feats, 9/19/2013 Playtest Packet

I think this got cut over some ambiguity over how it worked, and whether "then you resolve the spell’s effect against the target." meant it bypassed any Saving Throw.

But hey, if there's more feats in the DMG, maybe this (and other PrC-inspired ones) will be in there? Perhaps a "Defensive Stance" feat mimicking the Dwarven Defender, or a Horizon Walker feat that allows you to acclimate to one type of extraplanar terrain.

[rlc]

i could also see horizon walker as a ranger subclass.

[Cambrian]

Yeah, looking at the design so far it looks to me that PrCs will be handled in subclasses. I can foresee, for example, the Harper Agent being a Rogue or Fighter subtype, or Red Wizard as a variant Necromancer, and such like that. Actually variant features like "take this feature instead of your third level rogue feature" type stuff could be very interesting.Not even sure "Harper Agent" should be a subclass. Why are Harper Agents universally similar? Can't one be a sneaky rogue and the next a wizard or warrior? Subclasses should remain common character concepts-- if they are used irresponsibly to try and reinforce the setting they can actually make the setting come off more homogeneous unintentionally.

[Starsinger]

Harper Agent seems more like a Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting background than a PrC

[rlc]

harpers are a faction that can be joined by any class. it has absolutely nothing to do with class, actually, though i guess a rogue or somebody with the criminal background would make more sense as a member.
as was said earlier, you can even join the harpers in the starter set, though it, like the other factions that are mentioned, has nothing to do with the adventure.

[Lortharian Duin]

I believe I saw Archmage as NPC in Monsters Manual. It led me to believe that they will put prestige classes. Dunno what you thought 'bout it...
...
Anyhow, IF prestige classes would be implemented shouldn't they be, well, prestigious?
...
By "prestigious" I don't think they should be in any way similar to those v3.5 had, with sheer amount of splat books, we got a huge amount of non-prestigious, unoriginal, weak-in-fluff, unbalanced-in-power prestige classes.
Notice I said a huge amount, some were indeed prestigious...Archmage for example.

5e could place most 3.5 classes/prestige classes as archetypes but I really don't think they should even use 3.5 version as reference, yet alone as source material. Only as source for names :smallbiggrin:
They should give depth to your character, make him/her stronger in certain aspect of his/her class by adding interesting new mechanics/proficiencies and obviously would be acknowledged by society otherwise there would be no prestige.
...
Imagine a prestige class as acquired template for which you have to have certain amount of prerequisites.
Cover a wide-area of abilities for least 3 base classes and they should improve a character in his progression to the top of the food chain by not replacing their core abilities that make them unique.
Examples: Archmage, Archdruid, Artisan Scholar, Inquisitor, Hierophant, Grand Master, Virtuoso, ect. (I don't know, I'm just throwing stuff out. I see them all as some kind of titles that you earned. Perhaps even: Imperial, Arcane, Dark, Divine,... Imperial Assassin, Arcane Champion, Dark Hunter, Divine Berserker,...:smallbiggrin:)
...
Oathbreaker will probably be a paladin class variant, won't he?

[BRKNdevil]

In the last playtest, "Arcane Archer" was actually a feat you could take.

"Arcane Archer
Prerequisite: The ability to cast at least one spell of 1st level or higher, proficiency with the long bow or short bow
As an action, you can imbue a spell of 1st level or higher into an arrow you are holding. You cast the spell as normal, but the spell effect does not occur until after the arrow is used in an attack. You can only imbue a spell that affects one creature or a spell that has an area such as a sphere, cloud, or cylinder. The arrow holds the spell effect until the end of your next long rest or until it is used in an attack that hits.
If you cast a spell that affects one creature, the next time the imbued arrow hits a creature with an attack, the attack deals damage as normal, and then you resolve the spell’s effect against the target.
If you imbued a spell that has an area, the creature does not need to be hit for the spell to take effect. Instead, you resolve the spell’s effect from the space or creature you targeted. If the arrow hits a creature, damage is dealt as normal.
Once you resolve the spell’s effect, the spell vanishes from the arrow."
- Feats, 9/19/2013 Playtest Packet

I think this got cut over some ambiguity over how it worked, and whether "then you resolve the spell’s effect against the target." meant it bypassed any Saving Throw.

But hey, if there's more feats in the DMG, maybe this (and other PrC-inspired ones) will be in there? Perhaps a "Defensive Stance" feat mimicking the Dwarven Defender, or a Horizon Walker feat that allows you to acclimate to one type of extraplanar terrain.

That sounds cool and i might use that as a optional feat for an NPC first and then an option for my PC's if they decide to research how that "Mysterious Stranger" did that. Though I'd expand it to any weapon with the Ammunition Property. I'd also make it so that if it has a Saving throw, it would only bypass the First One that would normally be made. Sleeping Arrow!!!

That said, I started a thread discussing( even though nobody has yet to put their own input in) what Prestige Classes Shouldn't be converted to a Subclass. I originally put down, Shou Disciple from Unapproachable East, as unadaptable since its main schtick was full BAB, so more attacks and the ability to flurry with any weapon. But as a Feat with a Level Restriction, It may not be as OP. Something Like Level 12 and a Ki Pool.

[Person_Man]

RE: Multi-classing

My current take on it is that most multi-class combos suck horribly, especially at mid-levels. And even in the best case scenarios there are tradeoffs that tend to be worthwhile in the short term but suck in the long term. They included it for the sake of tradition, but its often a trap option.