Useless classes

[Hazzardevil]

We've all talked about useless classes which don't work, providing worse class features than the base class (looking at you hospitaller), or pulling a character in a different direction to what the base classes leading to did.

Any classes people like for that? Hospitaller is the first to come to mind, but there's plenty of other divine warrior classes, which aren't all that different mechanically or thematically. To make a better game, we might want one divine warrior prestige class with options to reflect different classes. There's the Temple Raider of Olidammara, which is kinda the equivalent, but it's a Divine Rogue.

I reckon it's basically because writers wanted content and divine warrior prestige class is easy to write. And this is far from the only easy idea. Anti-base class is another idea they like, see Blackguard, Blighter and Ur-Priest for Anti-Paladin, Druid and Cleric.

Now let's complain discuss various examples of it.

[Mordaedil]

Our DM's girlfriend brought a Battledancer to the table where we had a Warblade and thought it was a good idea to enter a battle royale tournament with him. Even with all odds stacked against him (no time to prepare with new weapon, no stances or strikes left), he wiped the floor with her. What an awful class.

(The rest of the party were a favored soul, a sorcerer and a custom class gunslinger, but with sneak attack extreme range benefits.)

[Malphegor]

Fiendbinder's a weird one. You get decent benefits (a permanent demon/devil that you can command and make wear armor and whatnot...) but by the time you're likely to get them you can probably do better.

It has a feat tax to make the skill it uses affordable, and it's easy enough to waste gold on one of the summons if you bugger the skill check, so the easiest way for a wizard to deal with it is to stop levelling one of their main skills for a few levels to dump it into something that really imo should be folded into Knowledge (Arcana)

It's... costly. But, you can get a decent devil/demon out of it. A hellhorse, a succubus... and they're permanent, and if they die they die for good, which is great if you're the sort who isn't fond of the hellish denizens... but why have you invested so much effort getting to know them?

You're better off being a full wizard... But it's like Acolyte of the Skin: it's a fun thing to do roleplaying wise, but wow is it kind of unimpressive considering what you're losing should you just be a regular ol' wizard.

[Silly Name]

I think you mentioned one such class: the Blighter.

First, you need to be an ex-Druid. That's isn't too bad in itself, but Blighter levels never really let you recover what you lost. Undead Wild Shape makes you vulnerable to Turning and other undead-destroying tricks. You gain back spell levels relatively quickly, but there is the issue of how to advance those spell slots if you take another PrC, and the fact that you're stuck with the Blighter spell list.
Oh, and those (minimum 5) levels of druid? Still sitting there, not giving you anything apart from BaB and saves.

At least Blackguard is A) accessible even by non ex-Paladins, B) actually gives you something in exchange of your feature-less Paladin levels, so it doesn't completely suck.

Oh, and by the way, Blighters need to use their Deforestation feature in order to prepare spell, and the text explicitely calls out the fact that using Deforestation in any environment with sparse vegetation doesn't let you prepare spells for the day. So, you know, Blighters are rendered powerless if they have to spend more than one day in a desert, at sea or other environments with little plants.

Also, this isn't explicitely the class' fault, but I am miffed that this is the only Evil Druid PrC in the whole game.

[Menzath]

Green star adept.

It's supposed to be for a Gish that makes you into a tough golem with Dr.

What it actually does is gimp your spells known, average BaB so you aren't really better at meele, and overall reduction to hp for people with 14con or more. The Dr is eeh, and the fast healing isn't enough, some of the other bonuses are neat, but don't add enough to make up for the other shortcomings.

Just about every specialist magic crafting prc, they are often worse then just playing an artificer.

[Troacctid]

One that comes to mind is Incarnum Blade. It lets you form a blademeld, which does...nothing.


Also, this isn't explicitely the class' fault, but I am miffed that this is the only Evil Druid PrC in the whole game.
That's not true, there's Talontar Blightlord.

[Zaq]

I mean, I feel like this applies to half the ingredients in our Iron Chef competitions and spin-offs.

Shout-out to Thunder Guide and Flux Adept as ingredients that stand out in my memory as being exceptionally worthless. Though that’s probably biased by the fact that I judged those rounds.

[Nifft]

Our DM's girlfriend brought a Battledancer to the table where we had a Warblade and thought it was a good idea to enter a battle royale tournament with him. Even with all odds stacked against him (no time to prepare with new weapon, no stances or strikes left), he wiped the floor with her. What an awful class. The Warblade should have been able to recover Strikes with a swift action, and Stances never run out.


I think you mentioned one such class: the Blighter.
(...)
Also, this isn't explicitely the class' fault, but I am miffed that this is the only Evil Druid PrC in the whole game.

Druids can be evil as-is, so the standard "Evil Druid" class is just Druid.

[RaiKirah]

I mean, I feel like this applies to half the ingredients in our Iron Chef competitions and spin-offs.

Shout-out to Thunder Guide and Flux Adept as ingredients that stand out in my memory as being exceptionally worthless. Though that’s probably biased by the fact that I judged those rounds.

I thought I remembered there being a protest build for Thunder Guide that used single levels of previous components to emulate it, but I just checked and it's not there. There was a build based around lying about the deeds that make the Thunder Guide fluff, which was highly entertaining.

[Cosi]

You can make an evil Druid, but I think there's an obvious niche for some kind of evil bog Druid with undead and/or rot powers. Like the Golgari in MtG. Or some kind of High Evolutionary type that goes all in on survival of the fittest. Or an evil Fae type that picks up some illusion or mind magic (yes, there's the Wild Soul, but it's an Arcane PrC). In a game where Spinemeld Warrior gets five pages (there's even a "Spinemeld Warriors in the world" section for you to never read or care about), it is not unreasonable to wish that there was some more variety in the Evil Druid archetype.

[Willie the Duck]

Divine Crusader is an interesting case. Straight off the bat, let's just say that it is truly suboptimal--requires 7 levels of martial classes or 10 or a 3/4 class, only to give you 3/4 BAB, some do-dads, and 1-9 casting from a single cleric domain. That said, if you started play with a high-cha martial, such as paladin1-4, figher 1 or 1-2, add on Templar for a small dip, all for the purpose of cherry picking the early dip abilities each of those classes bring, then suddenly find yourself at level 7 or 8 with no real idea of what to do next... (presumably there are story reasons or the like not to just get rid of the character at that point).. it's not a baaad thing to take next, especially if the domains available based on your god are fairly good. That said, you would never deliberately take it as an end step.

[Troacctid]

You can make an evil Druid, but I think there's an obvious niche for some kind of evil bog Druid with undead and/or rot powers. Like the Golgari in MtG.
Right, or like Talontar Blightlord. :smalltongue:

[mabriss lethe]

Shadowdancer: admittedly, it's a useful dip, but the class as a whole is a ripe one. Your two main entry classes in core are bard and rogue, yet the class does nothing to advance the useful characteristics of either. No SA, bardic music, or spell progression. It duplicates some of a rogue's better passive abilities to no benefit to the rogue, its SLAs are extremely limited, your shadow buddy uses the worst mechanic to operate under (modified familiar rules) and is an XP bomb waiting to go off and take you down as well.

Edit to add: oddly enough, the other core base class that can natively enter it is Monk... and it does sort of give monks a boost. Which isn't saying much

[RoboEmperor]

Virtually every single PrC that is not full casting, near-full casting, or is a useful dip. Too many to list. They just can't compete with a full casting class so they are never, ever picked therefore they are worthless.

The only PrCs that don't give full casting or near-full casting that aren't completely worthless are PrCs that synergize someway with something. Like Dragon Disciple giving extra 8th level spell slots to Nar Demonbinder.

[Nifft]

You can make an evil Druid, but I think there's an obvious niche for some kind of evil bog Druid with undead and/or rot powers.

Evil isn't synonymous with Undead, and the basic Druid already has rot powers.

You could certainly make a rotten bog-mummy Druid variant thing, but it's no more necessary than a desiccated desert dry-lich variant Druid thing... and neither of them needs to actually become Undead. Both could become Elemental instead.

[Segev]

Virtually every single PrC that is not full casting, near-full casting, or is a useful dip. Too many to list. They just can't compete with a full casting class so they are never, ever picked therefore they are worthless.

The only PrCs that don't give full casting or near-full casting that aren't completely worthless are PrCs that synergize someway with something. Like Dragon Disciple giving extra 8th level spell slots to Nar Demonbinder.

War Hulk is not good for a dip, but is pretty solid for particular designs. Bear Warrior is certainly not weaker than straight Barbarian. There are useful PrCs that are not for full casters. The trouble is the number of PrCs that are meant to hybridize full casters (or worse, focus them on something other than casting) that gimp the casting and don't give nearly enough of the other focus to make up for it.

[RoboEmperor]

War Hulk is not good for a dip, but is pretty solid for particular designs. Bear Warrior is certainly not weaker than straight Barbarian. There are useful PrCs that are not for full casters. The trouble is the number of PrCs that are meant to hybridize full casters (or worse, focus them on something other than casting) that gimp the casting and don't give nearly enough of the other focus to make up for it.

I didn't include non-casting PrCs because I don't know what is useful or useless to mundanes.

[Cosi]

Right, or like Talontar Blightlord. :smalltongue:

No, because that class has almost nothing to do with the undead, has a winter theme rather than a swamp one, and "blight" is not quite the same as "decay" -- the theme suggested is one that focuses on decay as a part of nature, not the destruction of nature that the Blighter and Blightlord seem to.


Evil isn't synonymous with Undead, and the basic Druid already has rot powers.

animate dead is pretty explicitly evil. You're free to think that's stupid, and I do, but the game associates evil with undead pretty strongly. And the Minbender exists despite the basic Wizard having mind powers.


You could certainly make a rotten bog-mummy Druid variant thing, but it's no more necessary than a desiccated desert dry-lich variant Druid thing... and neither of them needs to actually become Undead. Both could become Elemental instead.

No prestige class is necessary. There's no reason there needs to be a Pact Bound Adept, or Shadow Sun Ninja. or a Thrallherd, or a Shadowcraft Mage, or a Green Star Adept, or a Ghost Faced Killer, or a Necrocarnate, or a Prestige Paladin, or a Master Spy, or a War Weaver, or a Scion of Dantalion, Yet those PrCs all exist, because someone thought adding some abilities that emphasized or enhanced a particular concept was worthwhile. My intention by emphasizing the existence of the Spinemeld Warrior was to point out that there are way stupider concepts being supported. If you're going to have that in the game, there's no reason not to have a couple of obvious evil Druid concepts in there.

[Nifft]

animate dead is pretty explicitly evil. You're free to think that's stupid, and I do, but the game associates evil with undead pretty strongly. And the Minbender exists despite the basic Wizard having mind powers. No, I'm saying that "evil" and "undead" are distinct things, which may overlap in places, but that being "evil" does not necessarily imply any association with the undead.


My intention by emphasizing the existence of the Spinemeld Warrior was to point out that there are way stupider concepts being supported. If you're going to have that in the game, there's no reason not to have a couple of obvious evil Druid concepts in there. Evil Druid is a solid concept which deserves support.

It's just that undead are a particularly bad way to support the Evil Druid concept, and Blighter is a particularly dumb way to implement Evil Druid.

It's like how the Anti-Magic Barbarian concept has both Forsaker and Runescarred Berserker as implementations. Both of them are aiming at the same design space -- only one of them is hitting.

Personally before they bothered with Undead Druid stuff, I'd want to see plant-monster Druids ("Feed me, Tsey'mour!") / evil Fey Druids ("Blood for the Horned Hunter!") / evil Aberration Druids ("Ia! Ia!") / evil magical beast Druids or even evil Dragon-themed Druids, in spite of how overplayed dragons tend to be. There's so much potential for evil concepts without needing to go out of the class theme space.

[ATHATH]

Re: Evil Druids: I'd like to remind you guys that the Wild Reaper variant exists. Use Bone Knight to turn your Turn Undead ability into Rebuke Undead.

[ATHATH]

Fiendbinder's a weird one. You get decent benefits (a permanent demon/devil that you can command and make wear armor and whatnot...) but by the time you're likely to get them you can probably do better.

It has a feat tax to make the skill it uses affordable, and it's easy enough to waste gold on one of the summons if you bugger the skill check, so the easiest way for a wizard to deal with it is to stop levelling one of their main skills for a few levels to dump it into something that really imo should be folded into Knowledge (Arcana)

It's... costly. But, you can get a decent devil/demon out of it. A hellhorse, a succubus... and they're permanent, and if they die they die for good, which is great if you're the sort who isn't fond of the hellish denizens... but why have you invested so much effort getting to know them?

You're better off being a full wizard... But it's like Acolyte of the Skin: it's a fun thing to do roleplaying wise, but wow is it kind of unimpressive considering what you're losing should you just be a regular ol' wizard.
There's some cheese that you can pull with Fiendbinder- namely, binding advanced fiends (with a harder skill check) and binding fiends that can possess stuff.

[ExLibrisMortis]

No, because that class has almost nothing to do with the undead [...]
It spreads a plague that first converts afflicted creatures to plants, which then wither and die and become undead. It's pretty undead-themed. Also:


Corrupt priests who revel in decay, the blightlords of Talona are feared and reviled throughout the Unapproachable East. Their plagues have transformed the western reaches of the Rawlinswood into a foul green hell of diseased monsters and deadly poisons. Worse yet, the blightlords seek to infect the healthy forests and lands nearby with the same sickness. Under the tutelage of the horrible Rotting Man, the Talontar blightlords marshal the Rawlinswood’s black horde, leading their infected minions forth to scourge the nearby lands.

[Silly Name]

Another one comes to mind - the Inquisitor PrC from the Dragonlance Campaign Setting.

It's a really weird class. The concept is clear - Inquisitors aren't the "Spanish Inquisition" kinda guys (they can be, of course, but torture isn't their focus), but rather investigators and detectives, cracking mysteries and solving unsolvable cases a la Sherlock Holmes or Hercules Poirot, or tracking down people, criminals and felons and bring them to justice. However, the class' features, while supporting this concept, are rather underwhelming in a game of D&D. Apart from a various list of buffs to your skill checks, the Inquisitor class grants you Trapfinding, Uncanny Dodge & Improved Uncanny Dodge.

The capstone ability, at level 10, is... getting to replicate Divination once per day. Wee.

If you are really dedicated to playing a detective, this class might help - the skill list definitely supports that, and your various buffs to skills based on Int or Wis help with finding clues or gathering information -, but it doesn't seem to really flow naturally from any base class. Bard and Rogue are the two bases classes that could easily satisfy the entry requirements, but the former would sacrifice bardic music and spellcasting, while Rogues would earn a bunch of redundant features. Oh, and Inquisitors must be non-Chaotic, which is quite unusual for Bards and Rogues.

I really can't imagine anyone using this class, and the concept can be simulated via other means. It honestly feels out of place in D&D, and strikes me as something more fitting for an NPC class. It could work in a different game, something with less spell-slinging and sword-fighting involved than D&D, and the Inquisitor ends up feeling like a fish out of water.

[weckar]

animate dead is pretty explicitly evil. You're free to think that's stupid, and I do, but the game associates evil with undead pretty strongly. And the Minbender exists despite the basic Wizard having mind powers.Just because Undead -> Evil does not mean Evil -> Undead.

[Segev]

Just because Undead -> Evil does not mean Evil -> Undead.

However, evil that doesn't involve undead is rarely worth performing.

[weckar]

Eh, after filing the edges off gold pieces for about a century my favorite dwarf would disagree :smallbiggrin:

[Segev]

Eh, after filing the edges off gold pieces for about a century my favorite dwarf would disagree :smallbiggrin:

That's chaotic, more than evil. He's almost certainly not hurting anybody with that level of theft. While not good, it probably isn't evil.

Also, he's taking a century to do what a single undead could manage in days. Certainly less than a year. Even mindless undead doing labor for a while will earn more money than those shavings represent.

[Cosi]

Evil Druid is a solid concept which deserves support.

I disagree, sort of. "Evil Druid" is a bad concept because anything that touches the alignment system is stupid. What's interesting are Druids that do some kind of Druid-y evil. Like an anti-civilization Druid that goes around running villages over with wild plants and feral animals. Or maybe some kind of Druidic servant of the Elder Elemental Evils. But "Evil Druid" in and of itself is stupid. You need an evil theme.


It's just that undead are a particularly bad way to support the Evil Druid concept, and Blighter is a particularly dumb way to implement Evil Druid.

Personally, I think Golgari-style necro-Druids are way more interesting than generic evil plant stuff, and way more on message for Druid than Aberration Druids. Blurring the lines between life and death is very much on theme for a nature caster. Consorting with creatures that are explicitly non-natural is very much not.


It spreads a plague that first converts afflicted creatures to plants, which then wither and die and become undead. It's pretty undead-themed. Also:

Not really. It's plague themed. Yes, it's an undead plague, but that's not really the natural place for an undead-themed Druid.


Just because Undead -> Evil does not mean Evil -> Undead.

Uh, sure? I did list a bunch of other examples you could do for evil Druid. I'm not really sure why the objection "you could totally do some other kind of evil Druid" is supposed to be relevant.

[ExLibrisMortis]

No, because that class has almost nothing to do with the undead, has a winter theme rather than a swamp one, and "blight" is not quite the same as "decay" -- the theme suggested is one that focuses on decay as a part of nature, not the destruction of nature that the Blighter and Blightlord seem to.

Corrupt priests who revel in decay, the blightlords of Talona are feared and reviled throughout the Unapproachable East. Their plagues have transformed the western reaches of the Rawlinswood into a foul green hell of diseased monsters and deadly poisons. Worse yet, the blightlords seek to infect the healthy forests and lands nearby with the same sickness. Under the tutelage of the horrible Rotting Man, the Talontar blightlords marshal the Rawlinswood’s black horde, leading their infected minions forth to scourge the nearby lands.

Not really. It's plague themed. Yes, it's an undead plague
So you say it's "winter-themed" and not "decay-themed", and "has nothing to do with undead". It turns out you're wrong on all counts, it's pointed out to you, and you can't just say "fair enough, I didn't read the description"? I'm not even disagreeing on the broader point, I'm just providing some information on a favourite class of mine. No need to downplay the class just because it doesn't suit your argument.

[Nifft]

I disagree, sort of. "Evil Druid" is a bad concept because anything that touches the alignment system is stupid. What's interesting are Druids that do some kind of Druid-y evil. ... but Druid-y evil touches the alignment system, because you used the word "evil", and now you are doomed to be everything you hate until you can get someone to cast an atonement on your screen name.



Personally, I think Golgari-style necro-Druids are way more interesting than generic evil plant stuff, and way more on message for Druid than Aberration Druids. Blurring the lines between life and death is very much on theme for a nature caster. Consorting with creatures that are explicitly non-natural is very much not. Unnatural unlife is 180° off-theme for a nature caster.

Death could be on-theme. Death is certainly part of nature. But not undeath.

Finding strange alien beauty within life that's natural to an alien world, that could be on-theme. It's still nature, just from a different world / plane / universe. That would be the Aberration Druid. Probably also favors succulents and marsupials.

Other evil-y Druid-y themes might be: fungus, rot, predators which kill more than they eat, feeding people to fey, feeding people to plant monsters, setting humans on fire in a giant wicker man (and using the hilariously bad BoVD human sacrifice rules to get cheap magic items from the ashes), turning intelligent beings into unintelligent plants & animals (balefully), hunting humans as prey (stag horn helm optional), drowning the year-king in the bog, extorting money from peasants (or you'll diminish their plants), and so forth -- all things which are both natural and evil at the same time, rather than being unnatural evil.

[Luccan]

Ronin. No wait, that's better than CW samurai.

[SLOTHRPG95]

Eh, after filing the edges off gold pieces for about a century my favorite dwarf would disagree :smallbiggrin:


That's chaotic, more than evil. He's almost certainly not hurting anybody with that level of theft. While not good, it probably isn't evil.

Also, he's taking a century to do what a single undead could manage in days. Certainly less than a year. Even mindless undead doing labor for a while will earn more money than those shavings represent.

Assuming normal PHB/DMG cost of unskilled labor, your skeleton minions will only draw in 1 sp per day each, so most of the first year (250 days, in fact) will be replacing the cost of producing said 1 HD skeleton (the cheapest option). Sure, after that it's pure profit, but it's not a huge profit margin, and you're capped on how many HD of undead you can control. There are much better uses for the undead under that cap. Meanwhile, one pound of gold has a PHB-listed worth of 50 gp. So to make more money from filing the edges off gold pieces for a century than said skeleton can make in a year (waiving creation costs to be generous), that dwarf would have to be averaging no more than about 3.3 grams of gold shaved off per year to make less money. That's a dwarf who is either really bad at filing, or overly-cautious about margins of error. I'm pretty sure a basic merchant's scale couldn't detect a sub-percentage-point mass difference on a gold coin.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

You know a really bad PrC? The 3.5 metamind. The entire point of the class is to gain far more power points in your pp pool, but the class loses so many manifester levels (and thus, pp gained from manifester levels), that you actually lose power points from taking the class. And you lose out on powers known, psicrystal granted abilities, and feats and/or class features the class you were taking would've been giving you in the meantime.

The capstone is both amazing and abusable, but taking the class is too painful to make it worthwhile. Just take three levels in illithid savant and eat a shadow clone no jutsu an ice assassin of a metamind, instead.

[SLOTHRPG95]

You know a really bad PrC? The 3.5 metamind. The entire point of the class is to gain far more power points in your pp pool, but the class loses so many manifester levels (and thus, pp gained from manifester levels), that you actually lose power points from taking the class. And you lose out on powers known, psicrystal granted abilities, and feats and/or class features the class you were taking would've been giving you in the meantime.

The capstone is both amazing and abusable, but taking the class is too painful to make it worthwhile. Just take three levels in illithid savant and eat a shadow clone no jutsu ice assassin of a metamind, instead.

No kidding. A Psion 10/Metamind 10 will effectively be behind nearly 150 PPs compared to a straight Psion 20 before taking into account that the extra 5 MLs also give you more bonus PPs for high ability score. Abuse of Font of Power is the only thing that makes it vaguely worthwhile, and as noted, there are better ways to get that. If you're just using it to manifest 15 PPs's worth of power for 10 rounds, you're only breaking even if you and the straight Psion have at most 13 Int, and getting ahead on PPs/day is supposed to be this class's whole shtick.

EDIT: Did my arithmetic way too quickly, it's actually not quite as ridiculous as that. If you have a really high Int though (and why wouldn't you?) it still doesn't break in the Metamind's favor.

[Calthropstu]

All classes gain bab, saving throws, and abilities. By default, no class is "useless." I could run a campaign with plain old commoners and make it fun. A group of 4th level commoners with low level gear could easily take on standard threats such as a pack of wolves going after their livestock.

So useless classes do not exist. Under powered classes require a comparison to a higher powered class, and so yes there are plenty of classes who under perform.

But even under performers have their uses. They are an additional target at the very least, and they DO output at least SOME damage to foes however small. I have seen people disparage the soulknife for how "bad" it is, but I've seen plenty of soulknives make decent contributions.

So a character can only be useless by a player and party who do not know how to utilize them.

[Cosi]

So you say it's "winter-themed" and not "decay-themed", and "has nothing to do with undead". It turns out you're wrong on all counts, it's pointed out to you, and you can't just say "fair enough, I didn't read the description"? I'm not even disagreeing on the broader point, I'm just providing some information on a favourite class of mine. No need to downplay the class just because it doesn't suit your argument.

The "Winterheart" ability and the cold damage look like a winter theme to me. You're free to disagree with that, but it hardly seems reasonable of you to accuse me of not reading the class when I'm making a judgment based on one of the abilities the class actually has. I'll admit this isn't the strongest of connections, but it's not like there's nothing there.

And yes, the class really has very little to do with the undead (I note you omitted the word "almost", which turns out to be an important word). Yes, the plague it spreads eventually turns people undead. But the class abilities? Nothing to do with undead directly. It gives you a domain, but that domain doesn't get so much as command undead. Is the class completely divorced from undeath as a concept? No. But it's pretty far from being an undead-focused class. Compare it to something like Pale Master or Master of Shrouds -- that's what an undead-focused PrC looks like. Not "it spreads a plague that eventually turns you into undead".

And yes, the class's "blight" theme may seem similar to "decay", but I would argue that there's a subtle but important distinction there. The best articulation of the theme I'm aiming for is basically "exactly the Golgari from MtG's Ravnica". But broadly the theme I would expect the class to have would be about how death and decomposition are a necessary part of the natural cycle to promote new growth, with undeath as an extension of that. Conversely, "blight" to me is more about something that is disrupting the natural order, often (in fantasy) some kind of corruption driven by something outside nature. That's obviously related to what Druids do, but more in an anti-Druid sense than as a particularly nasty variation of the Druid.

I also don't understand why you keep dropping that block quote like I'm supposed to care. It doesn't mention undeath or decay, so it seems like a strange argument to keep bringing it up when I say the class doesn't do those things. It's about spreading a blight that consumes and destroys nature. That's very different from a class focused on the natural processes of death and decay.


Unnatural unlife is 180° off-theme for a nature caster.

Who said "unnatural unlife"? It's easy to come up with versions or understandings of undeath that are compatible with nature as a value. Peat bog zombies, mushrooms growing on corpses, vampires as an apex predator metaphor, you name it. There's no reason that "animate it as a zombie" can't be how nature recycles a corpse. Seriously, go look at the Golgari stuff from any of the three Ravnica blocks and tell me that necro-Druid is a contraction in terms. Or the Myconids in D&D with their fungus zombies.


Finding strange alien beauty within life that's natural to an alien world, that could be on-theme. It's still nature, just from a different world / plane / universe. That would be the Aberration Druid. Probably also favors succulents and marsupials.

The modal abberation isn't a creature from an alien world, it's an evil genius that wants to take over our world. Mind Flayers, Aboleths, Beholders, Ethergaunts, those weird flesh warper dudes from the MMIV. You could look at things the way you're suggesting, but it's a way bigger reach than "bog zombies" for a Druid.


extorting money from peasants (or you'll diminish their plants)

"extortion" doesn't really strike me as on-theme for a nature caster. That's a totally reasonable evil plan, but it strikes me as bizarre for a nature warrior type.

[gorfnab]

Divine Crusader is an interesting case. Straight off the bat, let's just say that it is truly suboptimal--requires 7 levels of martial classes or 10 or a 3/4 class, only to give you 3/4 BAB, some do-dads, and 1-9 casting from a single cleric domain. That said, if you started play with a high-cha martial, such as paladin1-4, figher 1 or 1-2, add on Templar for a small dip, all for the purpose of cherry picking the early dip abilities each of those classes bring, then suddenly find yourself at level 7 or 8 with no real idea of what to do next... (presumably there are story reasons or the like not to just get rid of the character at that point).. it's not a baaad thing to take next, especially if the domains available based on your god are fairly good. That said, you would never deliberately take it as an end step.
There is another prestige class that can greatly increase the power of Divine Crusader, Sovereign Speaker (FoE). This could lead to a build like Crusader 7/ Divine Crusader 1/ Sovereign Speaker 9/ Crusader 3 or Something Full BAB Cha based 7/ Divine Crusader 1/ Sovereign Speaker 9/ Contemplative 1/ Sacred Exorcist 1/ Warpriest 1.

[J-H]

Metamind becomes much more attractive in Epic levels, where Psionicists do not continue gaining additional power points. Practiced Manifester eliminates the ML loss, and free power points for 10 rounds when you can burn at least 84pp per round (ML 30 + schism ML 24 + Quickened power 30) becomes very handy.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Metamind becomes much more attractive in Epic levels, where Psionicists do not continue gaining additional power points. Practiced Manifester eliminates the ML loss, and free power points for 10 rounds when you can burn at least 84pp per round (ML 30 + schism ML 24 + Quickened power 30) becomes very handy.It gives you power points, but not really anything else of note. Thrallherd is vastly better, inside or outside of epic, and a lot of other PrCs grant much nicer abilities. If you want power points, maybe go ardent with Practiced Manifester, instead? Its pp go right into your pool, and if you focus on boosting your Wis with some of your WBL, you can get a sizeable upgrade to how much you get right off the bat. (Bonus points if you use the Magic Mantle and Supernatural Transformation [Psionics] to boost your ML up to your HD. Literal bonus points. Plus it removes your powers fizzling due to damage and removes PR and dispellability, too.)

...It's too bad the 3.5 constructor doesn't have any uses in epic. Astral constructs are really nice, and it's sad that they're just speedbumps by then.

[Calthropstu]

It gives you power points, but not really anything else of note. Thrallherd is vastly better, inside or outside of epic, and a lot of other PrCs grant much nicer abilities. If you want power points, maybe go ardent with Practiced Manifester, instead? Its pp go right into your pool, and if you focus on boosting your Wis with some of your WBL, you can get a sizeable upgrade to how much you get right off the bat. (Bonus points if you use the Magic Mantle and Supernatural Transformation [Psionics] to boost your ML up to your HD. Literal bonus points. Plus it removes your powers fizzling due to damage and removes PR and dispellability, too.)

...It's too bad the 3.5 constructor doesn't have any uses in epic. Astral constructs are really nice, and it's sad that they're just speedbumps by then.

If you play psionics as different Astral constructs still have plenty of use even deep into epic levels as the energy bolt option works on most epic monsters. Spam astral construct and have them spam energy bolts and you get some serious firepower on the board that only psionic creatures resist.

Otherwise, yeah speed bumps.

[Mordaedil]

The Warblade should have been able to recover Strikes with a swift action, and Stances never run out.

Standard action, by making a normal attack action. Which he did, but the fight was over by then. Using just his fist. Also you are right, he just opted to not bother with the stance. He as a warblade just outclassed her that much without even using his advantages.

[Nifft]

You know a really bad PrC? The 3.5 metamind. The Metamind, ugh.

I'd say you're firmly in the lead for winning this thread.



Standard action, by making a normal attack action. Which he did, but the fight was over by then. Using just his fist. Also you are right, he just opted to not bother with the stance. He as a warblade just outclassed her that much without even using his advantages.

Ah, so that PC was a sportsman -- wanted to give the underdog a fighting chance.

Pity she had started from so far under the dog, which was already buried.

[RoboEmperor]

I usually find someone talking about the Alienist PrC in these types of threads. So I'll mention it. Alienist. Summoning specialized spellcaster that's inferior to normal summoning spellcasters in every way imaginable.

[Mordaedil]

Ah, so that PC was a sportsman -- wanted to give the underdog a fighting chance.

Pity she had started from so far under the dog, which was already buried.
Yes, he was very sporting, to the point of throwing away the club he had been using as a weapon to engage her in fisticuffs. And even while taking attacks of opportunities and dealing 1d3 + str nonlethal damage, he still won.

It was entertaining to watch at least, in a "stop, stop, she's already dead" sense.

[SLOTHRPG95]

I usually find someone talking about the Alienist PrC in these types of threads. So I'll mention it. Alienist. Summoning specialized spellcaster that's inferior to normal summoning spellcasters in every way imaginable.

Alienist doesn't really fit here, especially if you're comparing it to another 10 straight levels of Wizard (which I think is in the proper vein for this post). You're definitely giving up a lot of flexibility as to what you can summon, but it's not like you're getting nothing in return. Except in high-op settings, you're better off as (for example) Conjurer 3/Master Specialist 10/Alienist 7 than you are as Conjurer 3/Master Specialist 10/+7 Conjurer, and that's not because of some super-powerful synergy between the two PrCs.

[Segev]

Ah, the Metamind.

I'll see that, and raise you the Divine Mind.

I mean, it's not much of a raise, but it is worse than the Metamind...slightly. Its only cool feature comes online fairly late (5th level, IIRC) for something that should be setting it apart from other classes in its own book, let alone the game, and it never quite feels like it's getting powers for its level.

[zfs]

I tend to agree with Calthropstu that no class is really "useless." The closest I could see to being useless would be a class that makes a character mechanically worse, adds no useful fluff, and doesn't help actualize a specific character concept.

So a class that's about as close to useless as possible would be like the Shining Blade of Heironeous. If you enter as a straight classed Paladin, you're worse in almost every way. In exchange for a good Will save, Spellcraft as a class skill and the ability to give your weapon a minor enhancement a few times per day as a standard action, you're gimping your already gimped spellcasting progression, plus weakening your Smite damage and Lay on Hands. You're not really adding any fluff because "super devoted to my deity" is a concept you can already do as a Paladin or Cleric from Day One.

Compare that to something brought up in this topic already like Thunder Guide. It's certainly not adding many strong mechanical options, but it does give you codified class abilities to be a pulp hero. Sure, you could just try to convince your DM that you should have those anyway - "You know, I'm basically Allan Quartermain so people should be paying me to write of my epic deeds." But it's nice to just get that ability with no DM adjudication needed.

[HouseRules]

True, No Class is Useless. All of those Commoners are stronger than your Wizards.

[Sto]

No class is useless. As we all know, the truenamer isn't a class, it's a nice idea.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Planar shepherd. A class that no DM I have access to would allow me to take hardly inspires its use, after all.

[RoboEmperor]

Planar shepherd. A class that no DM I have access to would allow me to take hardly inspires its use, after all.

Dweomerkeeper and Incantatrix.

[ExLibrisMortis]

I also don't understand why you keep dropping that block quote like I'm supposed to care. It doesn't mention undeath or decay [...]
I "keep dropping" the block quote to show that you haven't read the class description. Decay is literally the sixth word, dude. I can't take you seriously if you keep trying to weasel out of this: you were wrong about the Blightlord, because you hadn't read the class description. Yes, you weren't totally wrong when you read "Winterheart" in the level table, but it gives you the plant subtype, nothing else (the name refers to the chilling of a Blightlord's body as they stop being endothermic and start being plants).

The Talontar Blightlord is all about taking natural creatures and infecting them with plague, turning them into blighted creatures, then blighted plant creatures, then rotting blighted undead plant creatures. It's a druid- and plague-mediated way to decay, and it fits your "some kind of evil bog Druid with undead and/or rot powers" to a tee: all about death and decay, as well was wasting, blight, rot, and all of the other words picked out of the thesaurus.

[Grim Reader]

I think you mentioned one such class: the Blighter.

First, you need to be an ex-Druid. That's isn't too bad in itself, but Blighter levels never really let you recover what you lost. Undead Wild Shape makes you vulnerable to Turning and other undead-destroying tricks. You gain back spell levels relatively quickly, but there is the issue of how to advance those spell slots if you take another PrC, and the fact that you're stuck with the Blighter spell list.
Oh, and those (minimum 5) levels of druid? Still sitting there, not giving you anything apart from BaB and saves.

I don't know about that. You get the ability to turn Undead and back to alive again with standard actions. That is fairly unique and at least feels like it should open up some unusual build concepts.

Theres ways around the Druid levels requirement.

And the class gives you ninth level spells in nine levels, a version of wild shape (that opens doors) and some other minor stuff. Granted the spell list is pretty poor, but there are many ways to expand a spell list. And you do get Harm as a 5th level spell.

It does at least give unique options.

Yes, spending five levels of Druid on the entry is clearly RAI, but its such a stupid requirement that a lot of DMs will look kindly on other entries that are RAW.

[Calthropstu]

Planar shepherd. A class that no DM I have access to would allow me to take hardly inspires its use, after all.

Actually, that raises a valid point.

Any class that has your gm refuse to let you use it is truly useless.

[Luccan]

I don't know about that. You get the ability to turn Undead and back to alive again with standard actions. That is fairly unique and at least feels like it should open up some unusual build concepts.

Theres ways around the Druid levels requirement.

And the class gives you ninth level spells in nine levels, a version of wild shape (that opens doors) and some other minor stuff. Granted the spell list is pretty poor, but there are many ways to expand a spell list. And you do get Harm as a 5th level spell.

It does at least give unique options.

Yes, spending five levels of Druid on the entry is clearly RAI, but its such a stupid requirement that a lot of DMs will look kindly on other entries that are RAW.

How do you avoid the Druid requirement when Druid is literally a requirement? I mean, I guess with the wording you could become an ex-druid at level 1 then take 5 levels in like, Wizard, but that seems like an even bigger waste.

[Cosi]

I disagree with the notion that "useless" has to mean "can't do anything". "Useless" just means "worse at achieving your goals than other options in a sufficiently general way that a reasonable person wouldn't use it". Could you make a Commoner that was notionally able to achieve tasks that were notionally useful for some adventure? Sure. But such a character would be worse at every goal he might choose to pursue than he would be if he had opted to take levels in any other class.

And, yes, you can have fun playing any particular class. But "have fun" is actually a very low bar for a TTRPG. Fundamentally, playing a TTRPG involves hanging around with friends talking about a mutual interest. That's fun. That's fun even if the story you're telling involves characters who are fairly inept, even if those characters could have been built far more effectively. But "the class has to be explicitly and effectively anti-fun" is obviously to high a bar to call something useless.

The idea that classes that are too powerful are the useless ones is just naive contrarinism. "It's not really the Fighter that's bad, the Wizard is bad because it's too good!" Yes, Planar Shepherd, Incantatrix, and Dweomerkeeper are very powerful. But even powerful character classes can be used non-abusively, and there are of course games where those classes are permissible. Conversely, the only game where the Commoner is an effective choice is one where there are no other choices (or, if you wish to argue about infinite chickens, substitute whichever class you personally consider worst).


I "keep dropping" the block quote to show that you haven't read the class description. Decay is literally the sixth word, dude.

Yes, I missed that, and it was a mistake on my part, and I should have been less aggressive in my call out. But it's a minor mistake, because while it uses the literal word "decay", it's very clearly not using it in the way I'm talking about. I should have better explicated that the absence I was objecting to was a concept I was gesturing at with the word "decay", not the word itself. The class is another iteration on "corrupt nature with a horrible blight", not "explore death and decay as a part of nature". And the quote (or the class) still doesn't mention undeath at all. Well, technically it does, but only to say that it progresses your turning or rebuking. None of the abilities do. So yes, I made a mistake in missing the literal language used. But you made a much larger mistake in assuming that the literal language was more important than the semantics that language implied. Which, ultimately, is why your strategy of block quoting without analysis of either my position or yours is flawed.


The Talontar Blightlord is all about taking natural creatures and infecting them with plague, turning them into blighted creatures, then blighted plant creatures, then rotting blighted undead plant creatures. It's a druid- and plague-mediated way to decay, and it fits your "some kind of evil bog Druid with undead and/or rot powers" to a tee: all about death and decay, as well was wasting, blight, rot, and all of the other words picked out of the thesaurus.

No, it does not. The class grants you exactly zero undead powers. You get a domain that offers no undead-related spells, you get immunity to disease, you get a couple of things that spread a plague which eventually turns people undead in a way that is essentially flavor text, you get to control blight monsters, you get buffs to fighting with a glaive, and you turn into a plant. By that standard, Archmage is a class for Necromancy mages because you could use Arcane Fire to kill creatures you eventually reanimated or get Necromancy SLAs. Pale Master is a necromancy PrC. The first ability it gives you (after a completely dead level one) is a necromancy ability. The class gives you multiple abilities that either make you more undead, enhance your necromantic capabilities, or allow you to command more or better undead.

[Goaty14]

In the vein of Metamind being useful at epic because it grants abilities outside of the class progression, the Enlightened Spirit (Warlock PrC) is also useful in epic for the same reason.


No class is useless. As we all know, the truenamer isn't a class, it's a nice idea.

Nah, the Truenamer is actually a pretty decent class. It's poorly designed, yes, but it's passable if you know what you're doing. The whole "but Truenamer is T6 ("T7" if you refer to StackExchange (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/38201/what-are-tiers-and-what-tier-is-each-class))" argument doesn't take into the account the fine text showing that it's T4 if built right (which generally strikes me as weird -- no other class switches tiers like that).

The Truenamer's effectiveness more or less comes down to:
T7: People who haven't played the class and don't know what it's about
T6: People who are trying it for the first time/don't know what they're doing
T5: People who recognize the importance of pumping Truespeak, but aren't savvy enough to push it high
T4: People who recognize the importance of pumping Truespeak, and are savvy enough to push it high

[Grim Reader]

How do you avoid the Druid requirement when Druid is literally a requirement? I mean, I guess with the wording you could become an ex-druid at level 1 then take 5 levels in like, Wizard, but that seems like an even bigger waste.

Wouldn't work, since you need to have been able to cast 3rd level Druid spells previously. Druid 1/Spirit Shaman 6 would work in that fashion though.

However, Druids are not immune to the desire to not die. Stepping outside the natural cycle of life and death, living forever. Its one of the oldest motivations for spellcasters after all. So you become an Aberration to live forever. And in doing so, you fall. Becoming an Elan. Entirely coincidentally, you also lost all your Druid/ex Druid levels when doing that.

Or... you know, Blighters seem pretty fond of the Undead. I mean the Lichloved feat has to come from somewhere. That sort of thing can be hard on your levels though. You could lose them all.

Or being raised so many times you go mad. And just get into the whole die and become alive again.

The requirement is that at some point you were a Druid, and that you were capable of casting third level Druid spells. Anything thats lost you those levels still leaves you qualified, because you only need to have had them in the past.


The character must be an ex-druid previously capable of casting 3rd-level druid spells.

Then you can enter after level 4 as a full-BaB class. Barbarian, Fighter, Ranger, Duskblade. Swordfull of channeled Harm at level 9. Ex-Paladin for that double fall. Hexblade. Samurai. Well, Ronin. You know, mashing up Blighter and Samurai sounds like it'd be terrible, but 9th level spells at level 13.

[ExLibrisMortis]

I disagree with the notion that "useless" has to mean "can't do anything".
I strongly agree with this. When we call a class "useless", it's not literal; we're judging its relative merit, not saying it has literally zero utility towards every single goal.


Yes, I missed that, and it was a mistake on my part, and I should have been less aggressive in my call out.
Thanks.


The class grants you exactly zero undead powers.
It's somewhat hidden, and not exactly powerful compared to a straight cleric's necromancy (but then, none of the class is strong), but it grants some new Necromancy spells (fear, energy drain, horrid wilting, finger of death as 6th instead of 8th) and undead minionmancy: the ability to create blightspawned creatures and juju zombies (through your animal companion), and a (second) pool of rebuking that works on evil plants/animals and blightspawned creatures; by extension, juju zombies formed from blightspawned creatures are affected, too (though they have turn resistance 4). Juju zombies are really nice (free Power Attack, climb speed, electricity immunty, retains Intelligence) and normally require CL 16 on create greater undead to make, so for a Blightlord, they are available six levels early (ECL 9 instead of 15). The undead part of the class is exactly two levels long (maybe four if you count Blightmind), and it doesn't exactly rank as a powerful undead-focused class, but it has that ability to cause a plague of a unique kind of undead, so that's something :smalltongue:. Which is also why I like the class: it's not strong, but it's a change from wights and wraiths. You can do cool things with the Dragon magazine plant companion and the template at level two, too.

[Troacctid]

In the vein of Metamind being useful at epic because it grants abilities outside of the class progression, the Enlightened Spirit (Warlock PrC) is also useful in epic for the same reason.
Given that the epic levels of warlock give you bonus epic invocation feats without having to meet the prerequisites, if I were an epic warlock, I'm not sure I'd want to be taking levels in anything outside my base class.

[Mordaedil]

Well and truely useless to the point that noone would ever want to play any of it?

Everything from Complete Psionic.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Well and truely useless to the point that noone would ever want to play any of it?

Everything from Complete Psionic.You mean aside from the anarchic initiate, right? And soulbow?

And were you talking about the non-PrC stuff, too? Because lots of people play ardents and erudite psions, use various feats (such as Linked Power), and take quite a few of the introduced powers (like synchronicity and anticipatory strike).

Either way, that statement is pretty much wrong. Yeah, there's a ton of dross in there, but there're some pretty great things, too.

[Luccan]

Well and truely useless to the point that noone would ever want to play any of it?

Everything from Complete Psionic.

People seem to like Ardents and Erudites. Ok, Erudites might be because they don't understand how Erudites actually work, but the love I've seen for Ardent seems genuine. The Synad is a cool player race.

[Mordaedil]

Fair enough. I guess no entire supplement is unplayable then.

It does come closest from what I've seen though.

[OgresAreCute]

Magic of Incarnum has some stinkers like Soulborn and Incarnum Blade.

[ATHATH]

https://youtu.be/Qp-7Bp3W9f0?t=23

[razorback]

I may have missed it but Reaping Mauler.
Great concept, terrible execution.

[Cosi]

Magic of Incarnum has some stinkers like Soulborn and Incarnum Blade.

Incarnate's no prize either. The only thing in the book I would really consider good is the Totemist, and even that is just a fairly generic melee blender build in a can. Also, the mechanics have way more epicycles than is in any way justifiable.

[Nifft]

Fair enough. I guess no entire supplement is unplayable then.

It does come closest from what I've seen though.

Tome of Magic might be closest to unplayable.

Even the 1/3 which I do use is often subject to houserule improvements.

[Cosi]

I think Savage Species and Serpent Kingdoms could be good picks for useless books. Both of those books contain options that are either complete garbage, or completely game destroying, neither of which is useful.

The content levels of some later-period setting books are also pretty low. I don't think they ever hit zero rules, but there's probably some stuff out there that comes close.

You might make a technical case against the Spell Compendium, as most of the content there is plunder from other sources. Though I think it still has some original material.

Personally, I think the Rules Compendium is a good contender. It changes lots of things purely for the sake of changing them, and I can't think of anything it did that made me think "wow, that's way better than the ways the rules used to be." You're better off not putting the effort into learning the new rules.

[Troacctid]

I'd nominate Weapons of Legacy for the biggest flop of a sourcebook. Book of Challenges has to be up there too.

[weckar]

Tome of Magic might be closest to unplayable.

Even the 1/3 which I do use is often subject to houserule improvements.I'd say that book is about 4/5ths playable.

[Cosi]

I'd say that book is about 4/5ths playable.

The Binder is a marginal class, given just what's in the book. The Shadowcaster is worse, and the Truenamer is bad on almost every level a class can be bad. Yes, there are things that hit in the Shadow Magic or Name Magic sections, but there are misses in the Pact Magic section as well -- or do you see a lot of Scions of Dantalion and Witch Slayers in your games? Honestly, even 1/3 playable is generous.

[weckar]

Just because it is not the best option, doesn't make it unplayable. Are they functional with a unique flavor? Yeah. So, playable.

[Cosi]

Just because it is not the best option, doesn't make it unplayable. Are they functional with a unique flavor? Yeah. So, playable.

Truenamer isn't functional. Shadowcaster doesn't have a unique flavor. Those classes are bad. Are they completely useless? No. But there's no reasonable circumstance where they actualize a character concept more effectively than alternatives.

[ExLibrisMortis]

Personally, I think the Rules Compendium is a good contender. It changes lots of things purely for the sake of changing them, and I can't think of anything it did that made me think "wow, that's way better than the ways the rules used to be." You're better off not putting the effort into learning the new rules.


I'd nominate Weapons of Legacy for the biggest flop of a sourcebook. Book of Challenges has to be up there too.
Yeah, these are definitely up there, and probably my top 3. I like Weapons of Legacy, but from a safe distance, all drawbacks invisible, fluff narrated by Morgan Freeman.

[Nifft]

The Binder is a marginal class, given just what's in the book. The Shadowcaster is worse, and the Truenamer is bad on almost every level a class can be bad. Yes, there are things that hit in the Shadow Magic or Name Magic sections, but there are misses in the Pact Magic section as well -- or do you see a lot of Scions of Dantalion and Witch Slayers in your games? Honestly, even 1/3 playable is generous.

Witch Slayer is a tool for the DM's antagonist NPCs.

Scion of Dantallion seems usable by PCs -- what do you think is the problem?

In the 2/3 that I usually don't prefer, some stuff like Child of Night (in the Shadow Magic section) seems usable.

[Silly Name]

You might make a technical case against the Spell Compendium, as most of the content there is plunder from other sources. Though I think it still has some original material.

Personally, I think the Rules Compendium is a good contender. It changes lots of things purely for the sake of changing them, and I can't think of anything it did that made me think "wow, that's way better than the ways the rules used to be." You're better off not putting the effort into learning the new rules.

I'd argue that at least they serve the purpose of having a bunch of info all in one place, rather than spread across multiple books.

[Cosi]

Yeah, these are definitely up there, and probably my top 3. I like Weapons of Legacy, but from a safe distance, all drawbacks invisible, fluff narrated by Morgan Freeman.

Weapons of Legacy is a good idea, but the designers were entirely to cautious in their implementation.


Witch Slayer is a tool for the DM's antagonist NPCs.

It's kinda crap for that too though, because it doesn't really do anything interesting. What ability does it have that makes a Witch Slayer antagonist unique or memorable? It's got some passive anti-mind control defenses, some Paladin-y abilities that screw over Binders (incidentally, I think the "you can stay a Paladin" thing undercuts the "for antagonists" idea), and the capstone is a short-range disable. If the point of the class is to make an effective antagonist, I don't really see how it's doing that.


Scion of Dantallion seems usable by PCs -- what do you think is the problem?

It's not that bad mechanically because it progresses binding, but it's also not particularly good. It's not a concept anyone was crying out for before Tome of Magic dropped. It's not even a concept that flows obviously from what's presented in Tome of Magic. It's a shovelware PrC that doesn't serve any particular need, even if it's mechanically passable. Who, without knowing the Scion of Dantallion PrC existed, would create a character concept best served by that PrC?


I'd argue that at least they serve the purpose of having a bunch of info all in one place, rather than spread across multiple books.

I could agree for the Spell Compendium, but the Rules Compendium changes are new. There's no reason for that book to exist in the form it does. It removes some obscure TO tricks like the Difference Engine and letting Wizards learn arbitrary spells, but those issues come up in close to zero games.

[Troacctid]

I'd argue that at least they serve the purpose of having a bunch of info all in one place, rather than spread across multiple books.
Also incorporating errata, patching a host of dysfunctions (including such hits as: you can't see a torch in a dark room because the darkness blocks line of sight; fire resistance doesn't apply against lava; and wizards can scribe spells from other lists into their spellbooks), and updating rules to account for stuff that didn't exist when the core rules were written (e.g. not all spontaneous casters are arcane, and not all spellbook-users are wizards).

[Nifft]

It's kinda crap for that too though, because it doesn't really do anything interesting. What ability does it have that makes a Witch Slayer antagonist unique or memorable? It's got some passive anti-mind control defenses, some Paladin-y abilities that screw over Binders (incidentally, I think the "you can stay a Paladin" thing undercuts the "for antagonists" idea), and the capstone is a short-range disable. If the point of the class is to make an effective antagonist, I don't really see how it's doing that. Momentary Disjunction is memorable -- it's an OFF button to most of the things that keep your PC alive.

Various churches are (for vague and dumb reasons) supposed to hate Binders, so making special allowance for a Paladin to be your adversary nemesis NPC is consistent with the rest of the chapter.



It's not that bad mechanically because it progresses binding, but it's also not particularly good. It's not a concept anyone was crying out for before Tome of Magic dropped. It's not even a concept that flows obviously from what's presented in Tome of Magic. It's a shovelware PrC that doesn't serve any particular need, even if it's mechanically passable. Who, without knowing the Scion of Dantallion PrC existed, would create a character concept best served by that PrC?

Dantalion is similar to the Akashic Record, but with a collective-imperial HUMANITY F*** YEAH paint job.

Lots of character concepts are possible in that space.

[weckar]

All of this still makes me wish there was a 1st party Binder/Incarnum theurge.

[zfs]

Momentary Disjunction is memorable -- it's an OFF button to most of the things that keep your PC alive.

Various churches are (for vague and dumb reasons) supposed to hate Binders, so making special allowance for a Paladin to be your adversary nemesis NPC is consistent with the rest of the chapter.


What's vague about it? Binders channel a power source that even the Gods can't understand or control. A power that according to them probably shouldn't even exist. I think the Gods have a pretty clear reason to fear and hate vestiges and therefore those who let them re-enter existence.

Edit: Admittedly sometimes the fluff is confusing - Andromalius's entry certainly seems to be claiming that Olidammara purposely made him a vestige, whereas other fluff entries imply that no one quite knows how vestiges are made. It seems to usually be a "natural" process of some sort - after all, what jerk would want to keep Acererak, Karsus and Tenebrous around?

[Arbane]

My favorite along these lines is the Risen Martyr - your capstone ability is 'you die'.
(The Mountebank's a fun one, too. At level 20, you get dragged off to hell.)

[Nifft]

What's vague about it? The complete and utter lack of specificity.

If you can't see it, then answer me this: which religions dislike Binders? Which don't mind them so much? Which few actively like them?



Binders channel a power source that even the Gods can't understand or control. A power that according to them probably shouldn't even exist. I think the Gods have a pretty clear reason to fear and hate vestiges and therefore those who let them re-enter existence. Everything you just said applies equally to Wizard and Druids and Paladins, and the book even notes those as versions of Lesser Pact Magic.

Therefore gods must all hate those guys, too, right?



Edit: Admittedly sometimes the fluff is confusing - Andromalius's entry certainly seems to be claiming that Olidammara purposely made him a vestige, whereas other fluff entries imply that no one quite knows how vestiges are made. It seems to usually be a "natural" process of some sort - after all, what jerk would want to keep Acererak, Karsus and Tenebrous around? It's not confusing, it's just inconsistent, vague, and in some places kinda dumb.

Overall I like the Binder, which is why I notice warts like this -- because I actually use the damn thing in my games.

Compared to Wizardry which allows you to summon fiends and talk to them, or compared to Druidcraft which has you associating with heathen Fey and spirits, or compared to Bardic tomfoolery which has you memorizing choral verses we'd prefer went forgotten -- even compared to Paladins of a cause which gives people a bright and shining example of why the Church isn't necessary -- compared to any and all of those mainstream choices, the Binder is a small potato who isn't worth the time to ecclesiastically censure.

[zfs]

My favorite along these lines is the Risen Martyr - your capstone ability is 'you die'.
(The Mountebank's a fun one, too. At level 20, you get dragged off to hell.)

To be fair though, Risen Martyr does fill a need - "how do I keep playing my character when I die and I'm too low level and too poor to get brought back to life." It's basically the world's cheapest and worst auto mechanic - I can get your car up and running again, but it's going to run into a brick wall in 10 levels. It's up to you whether it's better to just buy a new car. I used to think its 10th level ability was utterly useless because of ascension, but re-reading it I see that you don't ascend until you would have hit Level 11.

Mountebank does have a non-lose your character class feature it gains at Level 20, and it does give your DM the ability to let you earn your soul back with an epic quest. Which is actually a nice plot hook for a high level character. Of course, the real meta move is to get 19 levels in Mountebank the base class and then take the Mountebank prestige class at Level 20. Take that, evil masters!

[zfs]

The complete and utter lack of specificity.

If you can't see it, then answer me this: which religions dislike Binders? Which don't mind them so much? Which few actively like them?


To my understanding, all of them. I mean I get what you're saying, they never go into "well here's why Wee Jas doesn't like vestiges, and here's why Kord doesn't," but the general fluff vibe is that Gods don't like vestiges because they exist entirely outside of their control. No one even knows where they are, or if they are. They exist and don't exist. I'd love if they gave us more "Near Realm" fluff, but they don't.



Everything you just said applies equally to Wizard and Druids and Paladins, and the book even notes those as versions of Lesser Pact Magic.

Therefore gods must all hate those guys, too, right?


I don't see this as being apples to apples. There are Gods of arcane magic. There are Gods of divine magic. There are Gods with Cleric and Wizard and Paladin class levels. I don't think the Gods are at a loss to explain the mechanisms of those abilities. Whereas there's no God of vestiges. (Well, afroakuma has a cool theory about Vecna being a Binder, but that's clearly afrocanon)

Your point about Paladins below makes sense - some churches may dislike that their existence potentially makes the church supererogatory. The same might be true especially of Favored Souls. But you can't really argue that the Favored Soul of Pelor would be disliked by Pelor.




Overall I like the Binder, which is why I notice warts like this -- because I actually use the damn thing in my games.

Compared to Wizardry which allows you to summon fiends and talk to them, or compared to Druidcraft which has you associating with heathen Fey and spirits, or compared to Bardic tomfoolery which has you memorizing choral verses we'd prefer went forgotten -- even compared to Paladins of a cause which gives people a bright and shining example of why the Church isn't necessary -- compared to any and all of those mainstream choices, the Binder is a small potato who isn't worth the time to ecclesiastically censure.

I like them too - I played one up to Level 14 once. But I think I see our disconnect here - you're asking for why the church doesn't like them, and my answer is about the Gods not liking them. I'll agree, outside of churches being an extension of the deity, there's no real explanation for why individual church hierarchies hate them and hunt them. And yes, their powers are no more evil than summoning or binding fiends. But some churches do hunt down those who consort with fiends.

In general I'd only say that souls are the currency of the Gods, and vestiges are Confederate money. I understand why they want them taken out of circulation.

The place where I notice the inconsistency is in the creation of vestiges in the first place, Andromalius being a perfect example. Of course one could argue that vestiges are supposed to be odd and mysterious and that some amount of inconsistency is not only appropriate but beneficial. I'd disagree, but it's not an unreasonable point of view.

[Nifft]

To my understanding, all of them. I mean I get what you're saying, they never go into "well here's why Wee Jas doesn't like vestiges, and here's why Kord doesn't," but the general fluff vibe is that Gods don't like vestiges because they exist entirely outside of their control. No one even knows where they are, or if they are. They exist and don't exist. I'd love if they gave us more "Near Realm" fluff, but they don't. Doesn't say all of them.

It was vague to the point that you've been operating under misinformation.


Check ToM, p.9 -- there are two separate places on that page which mention religion vs. Binders. It's either "many" or "most", but not much wording about which is which. Elves and Dwarves apparently are more religious than other races, and Gnomes might be okay with Binders because their religion is comedy, but otherwise -- nothing.

And again, there are plenty of non-Binders who use powers that the gods don't control -- and most of them provide stronger powers than what the Binder gets.

Hell, apparently gods don't mind godless Clerics (in contradiction to that one Elder Evil).


I like them too - I played one up to Level 14 once. But I think I see our disconnect here - you're asking for why the church doesn't like them, and my answer is about the Gods not liking them. I'll agree, outside of churches being an extension of the deity, there's no real explanation for why individual church hierarchies hate them and hunt them. And yes, their powers are no more evil than summoning or binding fiends. But some churches do hunt down those who consort with fiends.

In general I'd only say that souls are the currency of the Gods, and vestiges are Confederate money. I understand why they want them taken out of circulation. I mean, the disconnect here is that nothing about the Binder would ever interfere with a god taking whatever souls the god would normally take. It's not a competing product.


Hmm, maybe that's what is missing -- maybe Binders should get abilities that directly compete with Clerics. Maybe just slap Healer spellcasting directly on top of the Binder.

[zfs]

I mean, the disconnect here is that nothing about the Binder would ever interfere with a god taking whatever souls the god would normally take. It's not a competing product.


Hmm, maybe that's what is missing -- maybe Binders should get abilities that directly compete with Clerics. Maybe just slap Healer spellcasting directly on top of the Binder.

It's sort of a competing product, in the sense that multiple places in ToM point to many Binders being ex-clergy. But I'd agree that's no more true of Binders than any other alternate magic system - Incarnum is certainly a different path to power that could entice someone of faith to stray. My only argument would be that Binders still have...I suppose I'd say an "echo" of religion in their practices. They traffic and commune with beings that are esoteric, abstruse and beyond rational explanation. Gods give clerics power in exchange for veneration. Vestiges give Binders power in exchange for access to the world.

But yeah, they're not stealing souls from the Gods. If they were, most Binders would be chunky salsa.

Anyway I think I'll let that be my last word on the subject because I don't want to clutter the topic. Whatever you think of certain parts of their fluff, I think we'd both agree Binder is far from useless, since it's a strong class mechanically that fills an obvious fluff space and in general has pretty good fluff to boot (individual vestiges have pretty strong fluff IMHO even if parts of the class are contradictory or confusing).

[Quertus]

You know a really bad PrC? The 3.5 metamind. The entire point of the class is to gain far more power points in your pp pool, but the class loses so many manifester levels (and thus, pp gained from manifester levels), that you actually lose power points from taking the class. And you lose out on powers known, psicrystal granted abilities, and feats and/or class features the class you were taking would've been giving you in the meantime.

The capstone is both amazing and abusable, but taking the class is too painful to make it worthwhile. Just take three levels in illithid savant and eat a shadow clone no jutsu an ice assassin of a metamind, instead.


Metamind becomes much more attractive in Epic levels, where Psionicists do not continue gaining additional power points. Practiced Manifester eliminates the ML loss, and free power points for 10 rounds when you can burn at least 84pp per round (ML 30 + schism ML 24 + Quickened power 30) becomes very handy.


The Metamind, ugh.

I'd say you're firmly in the lead for winning this thread.

Yeah, not counting epic, Metamind strikes me as a class that completely failed at its intended niche. Assuming an optimized intelligence, just how many times do you have to take the pp-increasing feat in order to actually come out ahead from the class at level 20?


I'd nominate Weapons of Legacy for the biggest flop of a sourcebook. Book of Challenges has to be up there too.

Ouch. I have had a player actually enjoy a custom Weapon of Legacy; otherwise, it's generally handled like toxic waste.

[zfs]

Ouch. I have had a player actually enjoy a custom Weapon of Legacy; otherwise, it's generally handled like toxic waste.

Weapons of Legacy is a painful one because it's such an obviously good idea and it has a lot of strong fluff but goodness, they're just not powerful enough to be worth what you sacrifice for them. Fortunately it does at least give an easy framework to homebrew from, and I've seen lots of great custom Legacy Weapons.

[Cosi]

Momentary Disjunction is memorable -- it's an OFF button to most of the things that keep your PC alive.

It's closer to a partial stun, I think. My reading of the ability is that it stops you from casting, not that it turns anything in particular off. The "as if in an antimagic field" thing seems to be an explanation of "cannot use spells, spell-like abilities, or supernatural abilities", not rules for the effect itself.


Dantalion is similar to the Akashic Record, but with a collective-imperial HUMANITY F*** YEAH paint job.

Lots of character concepts are possible in that space.

Sure, you could create a character with that theme. But you could create a character with any theme. I'm sure you could come up with a bunch of character concepts for "Dragons + Shovels" or "Aberrations + Platonic Realism". But how likely is someone to come up with those concepts on their own?


My only argument would be that Binders still have...I suppose I'd say an "echo" of religion in their practices. They traffic and commune with beings that are esoteric, abstruse and beyond rational explanation. Gods give clerics power in exchange for veneration. Vestiges give Binders power in exchange for access to the world.

I don't understand how you'd be able to tell the difference between what Binders do and a kind of Cleric that simply happened to have a weird theology. The particular religious rituals of D&D gods don't get a lot of play, but I don't see how even Clerics would be able to figure out that the guy doing a binding ritual for Amon wasn't just doing a religious sacrifice. It's like trying to explain the difference between Spiderman and Wolverine to a man on the street in Marvel. Yes, from our point of view there are obvious differences in underlying mechanics, but from the point of view of the average person in-setting they seem pretty damn similar.


Weapons of Legacy is a painful one because it's such an obviously good idea and it has a lot of strong fluff but goodness, they're just not powerful enough to be worth what you sacrifice for them. Fortunately it does at least give an easy framework to homebrew from, and I've seen lots of great custom Legacy Weapons.

Weapons of Legacy just needed to ditch the penalties. The concept of the book was a chance to help provide meaningful guidelines for the kind of DM pity artifacts that are inevitable (and, frankly, good if done well) in D&D. But they screwed the pooch on execution by making costs way too high (which is to say, not trivial).

[Lans]

The Binder is a marginal class, given just what's in the book. The Shadowcaster is worse, and the Truenamer is bad on almost every level a class can be bad. Yes, there are things that hit in the Shadow Magic or Name Magic sections, but there are misses in the Pact Magic section as well -- or do you see a lot of Scions of Dantalion and Witch Slayers in your games? Honestly, even 1/3 playable is generous.

A friend of mine was actually pretty big on those two, and I never understood why


Truenamer isn't functional. Shadowcaster doesn't have a unique flavor. Those classes are bad. Are they completely useless? No. But there's no reasonable circumstance where they actualize a character concept more effectively than alternatives.

A shadowcaster has a couple of interesting abilities, but considering it gets an ability from a decent sized list every level thats kind of sad. I've always wound up using the theurge class when ever I thought about using it.3

[Bucky]

Per the forum's dysfunctional RAW collection:
* Truespeak prestige classes don't advance truenaming.
* Black Flame Zealot is useless because it's impossible to enter - it requires the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat in a non-exotic weapon.
* Knight of the Thorn is useless because it's almost impossible to enter - it requires proficiency in all martial weapons... as feats. Taken individually.
* Sacred Fist is useless because it isn't allowed to use weapons but its unarmed strike counts as a weapon.
* Shade Hunter is useless because shades don't exist in 3.5.

[Crow_Nightfeath]

The two classes that come to mind, though I really like the idea of them are shadow caster and factotum.
The shadow caster from Tome if Magic, has awesome class abilities and some really cool fluff stiff, but overall their mysteries are really weak. And you only get so many of them, with no bonus for high stats.
The factotum from dungeonscape in idea is probably the best class, but it falls rediculously short of being that. It prides itself on being a dabbler of everything but master of nothing. It gets an average attack bonus and average HD, it gets every skill as a class skill though, even those off the wall skills like inijiatsu(sp?) focus. It gets an interesting healing/turn undead ability. And it gets a kind of arcane spell casting, it gets a couple spells it can cast in a day, but can't take the same spell more than once.

I love the ideas, but they ultimately fall short of being useful classes.

[Nifft]

Sure, you could create a character with that theme. What I did was list several discrete themes, none of which are confined to the Tome of Magic, and all of which are somewhat popular. Here they are again:
- Akashic Record
- HUMANITY F*** YEAH
- Collectivism
- Imperial legacy / lost empire remnant

If a character has one or more of those themes, the Scion of Dantalion can be a useful class.



A friend of mine was actually pretty big on those two, and I never understood why

A shadowcaster has a couple of interesting abilities, but considering it gets an ability from a decent sized list every level thats kind of sad. I've always wound up using the theurge class when ever I thought about using it.3 Child of Night (PrC from the Shadowcaster section) gives a real spellcaster a lot of the benefits of Shadowcaster, plus 9/10 advancement for the real spellcasting. It's nothing game-breaking but it's decent and covers a lot of the spooky darkness ow my soul flavor.

[ATHATH]

A Weapon of Legacy can be decent if you make a custom one and use the Truebond (Ritual of Faith) feat in combination with the Theurgic Spellcasting feat to set the CL of all of your custom WoL's abilities to be equal to your own CL. Making your WoL intelligent (using one of the abilities that lets you make it intelligent) may or may not let it use its abilities on its own, which can turn it into a mini-spellcaster if you select the right abilities.

[Manyasone]

Incarnate's no prize either. The only thing in the book I would really consider good is the Totemist, and even that is just a fairly generic melee blender build in a can. Also, the mechanics have way more epicycles than is in any way justifiable.

Magic of Incarnum did open the door to something far better...Pity (arguably, Paizo did make a big turd of things) it took a, admittedly brilliant, 3rd party PF publisher to do it.

[Arbane]

I don't understand how you'd be able to tell the difference between what Binders do and a kind of Cleric that simply happened to have a weird theology.

Everyone hates Binders because they're theurgical hipsters. "Oh, you're still praying to Pelor? That's cute. I'm invoking Andromalius today. He's really obscure, you probably haven't heard of him."

[Nifft]

Everyone hates Binders because they're theurgical hipsters. "Oh, you're still praying to Pelor? That's cute. I'm invoking Andromalius today. He's really obscure, you probably haven't heard of him."

"I was binding Haagcenti, Bride of the Ice Giant Jarl, before she was cool."

[zfs]

Everyone hates Binders because they're theurgical hipsters. "Oh, you're still praying to Pelor? That's cute. I'm invoking Andromalius today. He's really obscure, you probably haven't heard of him."

This is amazing and I totally want to play a Binder again just to be that guy. "Vestiges are just so much more sophisticated than deities. Gods are so commercial - I learned about Buer from this Githzerai shaman at a hole in the wall tavern where they do an Illumian Bard poetry slam. Just so much culture."

[jdizzlean]

I think you mentioned one such class: the Blighter.

First, you need to be an ex-Druid. That's isn't too bad in itself, but Blighter levels never really let you recover what you lost. Undead Wild Shape makes you vulnerable to Turning and other undead-destroying tricks. You gain back spell levels relatively quickly, but there is the issue of how to advance those spell slots if you take another PrC, and the fact that you're stuck with the Blighter spell list.
Oh, and those (minimum 5) levels of druid? Still sitting there, not giving you anything apart from BaB and saves.



Oh, and by the way, Blighters need to use their Deforestation feature in order to prepare spell, and the text explicitely calls out the fact that using Deforestation in any environment with sparse vegetation doesn't let you prepare spells for the day. So, you know, Blighters are rendered powerless if they have to spend more than one day in a desert, at sea or other environments with little plants.
.

you can spend 3 levels in druid as an illumian w/ the improved sigil (krau) feat, there are even more cheesy ways to do it w/ only 1 class level in druid.

I would think if you're at sea, you can become a skeletal dire baracuda, swim to the sea floor, and destroy all that vegetation to get your spells back for the day.

[Silly Name]

you can spend 3 levels in druid as an illumian w/ the improved sigil (krau) feat, there are even more cheesy ways to do it w/ only 1 class level in druid.

Ok, this cheese makes the class' entry slightly less terrible. Still, I once more point to Blackguard as an example of what a "fallen X" class should do with those ex-paladin/druid/whatever levels: use them to fuel extra class features, not have them sit there doing nothing.


I would think if you're at sea, you can become a skeletal dire baracuda, swim to the sea floor, and destroy all that vegetation to get your spells back for the day.

I think that would only work only if you managed to find a really large field of seaweed on the seafloor. "Sparse vegetation" isn't enough to fuel the Blighter's spells, which means they also get punched hard if they have to spend more than 24 hours in a city (unless the city has a nice park, but that's only a one-day extender).
And remember, you always have to find new swathes of land to plunge into decay, so a Blighter has to always keep travelling: they can't set up a base of operations.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Some species of bamboo grow at phenomenal rates. It would be in a blighter's best interest to plant fields of bamboo in areas of otherwise sparse vegetation and when they grow enough in a couple of days, kill those off.

Also, monk 3+ without ACFs. Practically everything they get past that point can be gotten via inexpensive magic items, and even some of their initial abilities are obviated by others (such as the monk's belt). The only reason the first two levels are tolerable is because they grant good saves, quite a lot of feats, said feats bypass prereqs, and they gain the ability to treat their (improved) unarmed strikes like both natural and manufactured weapons, which opens a lot of room for op-fu.

[Thurbane]

Well, the cheesiest Blighter entry I've seen is with Elan or Hellbred, and say that in your previous life you you were an "ex-druid previously capable of casting 3rd-level druid spells".

Good luck getting that to fly at most tables.

[Hazzardevil]

Interesting binder musings


Part of the issue is Tome of Magic is one of the books which adds lots of interesting ideas which are never touched upon in another book. I think they're trying to leave leeway so DMs can expand on things in their own games.

It's like Psionics. Do you want psionics to be an important part of the setting or is it just another power source to let players play something different? Because Binders getting problems from the various churches can be interesting, but it can also be something that derails the party's errands. But the books are allergic to giving Out of Character advice like "The DM can play up or play down the discrimination they face as the game demands." So it stays very vague and doesn't give specifics.


Per the forum's dysfunctional RAW collection:
* Truespeak prestige classes don't advance truenaming.
* Black Flame Zealot is useless because it's impossible to enter - it requires the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat in a non-exotic weapon.
* Knight of the Thorn is useless because it's almost impossible to enter - it requires proficiency in all martial weapons... as feats. Taken individually.
* Sacred Fist is useless because it isn't allowed to use weapons but its unarmed strike counts as a weapon.
* Shade Hunter is useless because shades don't exist in 3.5.

A lot of these are stupid oversights which should have been picked up on when being proof-read, but these aren't disastrous. I can imagine a lot of these are ones that a player wouldn't notice and would play as I think are intended. Knights of the Thorn seem intended to have made you enter a martial base class in order to slow down casting before you join for example.

It's like a Monk isn't proficient with his fists by RAW, but nobody is going to actually make a monk have a -4 attack when using their fists.


Well, the cheesiest Blighter entry I've seen is with Elan or Hellbred, and say that in your previous life you you were an "ex-druid previously capable of casting 3rd-level druid spells".

Good luck getting that to fly at most tables.

At that point I'd ask why you wanted to be a Blighter and try and find another way to get what you want. I think I'm a lot happier using homebrew than most people, so I'm okay looking into finding something like a Blighter, but the way the game is set up, it's not easy to have sudden direction changes in character without having them planned, which in turn makes Roleplaying falling Paladins, or other classes feel cheap, because they were telegraphed through feat choices to keep your character functional.

[Mordaedil]

I've never found many of the sourcebooks being very specific on the subject of worship because it tends to assume some adaption to personal campaigns and various other settings.

Regardless, I think it is safe to assume that the deities mad at Binders are ones that have portfolios they inherited or took from dead gods that are on the Binder's list.

Messing with dead gods might be on the gods big list of super taboos as well, however your DM sees fit. It probably is being vague to assist playability.

[Efrate]

tome of magic and magic of incarnum classes in general need love. there are a lot of great ideas but with next to interaction between those books and nearly anything outside of core.

totemist and binder would be great to theurge.

give shadowcaster some love and mix it heavily with warlock, add on mystery effects as riders on eldritch blast.

dsp did everything better in pf, wish they did more in 3.5.

On topic ninja of the creasent moon was pretty junk, not sure if it got updated into 3.5 or just folded into the ninja class. most of the 3.0 splats had pretty bad prcs.

I enjoyed the book of challenges, as a new dm it got me thinking about things in New ways. and rotating mirror globe rooms with beholder doing on the fly trig to use all eye rays every round from weird angles is how they should be used, I don't care what anyone says. especially if they bank around their amf cone to keep casters occupied.