Best straight 20 classes?

[Ozzie831]

Hey everyone,

I was just curious on what you guys think are the best classes as is.

I havnt been playing long so I dont know all the classes out there and I thought it was an interesting question since everyone seems to muliclasses or prestige classes into something.

So no multiclassing. Any book or dragon magazine.

Thanks!

[Falontani]

This is a complex question. Some classes play great 1-20 just fine. Others do great, but are better with prestige classes (sorcerer, cleric are the big two). Other classes are just trash that should never be played pure.

I personally say that death master from Dragon compendium is an amazing class that you can play 1-20 without wishing you had done one prestige class or another.

Cleric/sorcerer only have their class features at level 1, and taking prestige classes that do not lose spellcasting is a straight up improvement, vs wizard at least grants bonus feats, meaning any prestige class taken instead of wizard requires you to not lose spellcasting, and give something more powerful than the bonus feats your losing.

Druid is the core class that does not need prestige classes, and frequently is worse off with prestige classes then a pure druid.

[Mike Miller]

The initiators are good 1-20. (Tome of Battle)

[Buufreak]

The old adage of more barbarian comes to mind here. But realistically, barb, druid, bard, and wizard are all straight out of core and do just fine without classing out.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

The initiators are good 1-20. (Tome of Battle)I vastly prefer to multiclass multiple initiator classes, as the absolutely massive increase in versatility far eclipses the fairly minor boost in power that a couple of additional levels grant. For instance, a couple of levels in swordsage is practically always better than two more levels in either of the other initiator classes.

Artificer has enough fantastic class features throughout its levels that more levels in artificer is almost always better than alternatives, and few (if any) PrCs grant equivalent or better abilities. Legacy champion and uncanny trickster are the only PrCs that boost artificer, and even they lose out on at least one level's worth of abilities.

Psychic warrior is feat-hungry enough that getting more levels of psywar (with attendant bonus feats) is worth it over most PrCs, especially since few PrCs are both gish-friendly and powerful enough to overcome the need for more feats.

Psions as well, though far less so, given that they get both fewer bonus feats and far more efficacious PrCs.

Ardents, meanwhile, need more mantles to be effective, but they get so little otherwise compared to PrCs that it's kind of a damned-if-you-do scenario. They're almost the perfect poster child for "is improved by legacy champion," actually. More benefits from levels in ardent while gaining additional class features? This is compounded by not being hit nearly as hard by the loss in MLs if you're aware of the problem and seek to overcome it via Practiced Manifester and similar.

Erudites, of course, are in the same vein as ardent, since they are punished for taking non-erudite levels, but they're also punished for taking more erudite levels at the same time. Legacy champion is even better for them, due to not being screwed by the extra loss in XP for learning powers, though they still get fubar'd by taking more levels in a class that isn't erudite.

Wilders are somewhat similar to erudites in this way, but less so. They are punished via enervation for taking more levels in wilder, but they need more levels in wilder to boost their main schtick. Variant wilder ACFs make this far more tolerable, but even then, legacy champion is a godsend, here.

[ezekielraiden]

The old adage of more barbarian comes to mind here. But realistically, barb, druid, bard, and wizard are all straight out of core and do just fine without classing out.

It's a little hard to argue that doing 10 levels of Sublime Chord (maybe with some Virtuoso and/or Lyric Thaumaturge thrown in) is not better than standard Bard, at least for casting purposes. And since Song of the White Raven makes Crusader/Warblade levels sufficiently stack-useful, a mono-class combat-focused Bard isn't that great either.

This is not to say that the standard Bard is bad--if anything, it SHOULD have been where "Tier 2" actually ended up for 3.x's overall balance--just that there are several prestige classes that give you "Bard, and also the toys other classes have too." (I'm still tinkering with a Crusader/Bard/Sublime Chord/Jade Phoenix Mage build, actually, which is part of why I say this.)

Druid is good, and I definitely agree it's the gold standard for "don't bother taking other classes/PrCs, they're either less powerful or cheesy." In Pathfinder, even without the benefit of PF's much stronger favored class bonuses, Wizard (especially if you have the Exploiter archetype) is also good, and Summoner should basically never ever take levels of anything else, because evolution pool is literally worth every feat you're allowed to spend on it.*

Initiators and invocation-users got (much) less in the way of PrC support for a variety of reasons, so while there may be options that are straight-up improvements, they don't quite reach the level of, "Would you like to be a Bard, and still have nearly all your Bard stuff...and also cast full 9th level spells like a Sorcerer/Wizard?"

Barbarian is kind of an interesting case. Unlike most, where the reason to keep going is almost entirely "make the thing you do better" (e.g. Druids do beastmastering, shapeshifting, and full-magic, so a further level of Druid is almost always way more benefit than a level in anything else), Barbarian kinda...doesn't play nice with other classes. It might be worth a dip in the odd build, but in general if you want to play Barbarian you probably don't want to go just a handful of levels.

*Unless--and this is borderline cheese--you can convince your DM to let you get your half-elf alternate favored class bonus from Evangelist by taking Favored Prestige Class(Evangelist), in which case losing 1 evo point for the benefits of the Evangelist may be worth it. You're trading the equivalent of three feats--an evo point = Extra Evolution, Deific Devotion, and Favored Prestige Class--to accelerate the devotion progress and get at least a couple of other feats' worth of effects, e.g. dodge bonuses to AC, and at Evangelist 10, a fun transformation ability. It's not a screaming good deal, but if you really want those Deific Devotion benefits or find yourself with a spare evo point or two, it's good enough to consider...again, IF you can persuade your DM to let you keep the half-elf FCB.

[liquidformat]

Barbarian is kind of an interesting case. Unlike most, where the reason to keep going is almost entirely "make the thing you do better" (e.g. Druids do beastmastering, shapeshifting, and full-magic, so a further level of Druid is almost always way more benefit than a level in anything else), Barbarian kinda...doesn't play nice with other classes. It might be worth a dip in the odd build, but in general if you want to play Barbarian you probably don't want to go just a handful of levels.


I really can't agree with this, I have never seen anyone play straight barbarian 20 and there are plenty of prcs and other classes you would want to mix with it. Heck just dipping two levels of barbarian then going for dungeoncrasher fighter is pretty common or going initiator. But beyond that you have prcs like frenzied berzerker, totemist/totem rager, frost rager +blazing berserker feat, black blood cultist, Runescarred Berserker, Champion of gwynharwyf, and bear warrior which are all straight bumps with different focus to barb.

Besides druid I would say totemist is a great single class choice, dragonfire adept, and then there are some odd ones like hexblade, it isn't a great class but it arguably becomes worse if you multiclass/prc with it.

[Icarium]

I'll just mention Sha'ir here.. That is a "cover-all-bases"-spellcasting class if I ever saw one.

[noob]

Straight cleric up to 20 is rather great: you have awesome casting,good saves, high hit points and your rebuking as well as your domain powers progress over the levels(for example at level 20 the travel domain effect lasts so long(20 turns but you spend them in the way you want) it is almost as good as having permanent freedom of movement(better because it can not be dispelled and worse because if you fight a whole lot of encounters you can run out of it))

[ericgrau]

For fun just out of the PHB I would do cleric 20, fighter 20, sorcerer 20 or wizard 20. You have spells or feats to pick to keep things interesting, and they are fairly straightforward to play. Barbarian 20 I actually find incredibly boring, with few options, which is why I think most don't do it. With much more experience you can make druid 20 or bard 20 pretty fun. Perhaps even ranger 20 with heavy skill usage to complement your fighting, if in the right setting.

I don't have much experience with ToB but I imagine maneuvers provide some similar appeal to those who like the book. I've avoided it because it tends to be too strong for casual play and for style reasons. One player in my group uses it at times. Even though he's not trying crazy combos just a single maneuver can be too much. Even alongside casual casters. But for a little bit higher level of optimization, which is not uncommon among experienced forum goers, and if you like the style, I can see how warblade 20 might be lots of fun. Probably others in ToB too.

Ninja 20 seems like it would be fun though I haven't tried it. Especially as a ranged character. You have a built in sudden strike trigger and skills, so it's a straightforward sneaky fighter who can make skill checks.

Similar to cleric and sorcerer, favored soul 20 is fun. IIRC I did one briefly, and I've had a lot of fun with a Pathfinder Oracle which I played a bit longer.

So basically I think any class that gives lots of options by itself and isn't too hard to use could be lots of fun for 20 levels. And lots of fun is my biggest definition of "best". My 5E group is going back to 3.5e for a bit. While we like 5E and it's straightforward enough to play, we all miss the many options 3.5e has. Even though no one goes crazy complicated with their builds and often does X PHB class 20 no ACF by choice, 3.5e has a lot of cool options to pick from. So I think it's all about finding the right balance of fun vs over-complication for your personal interests. Many people have more fun building their characters than playing them, and go all out. As long as everyone else in the group is doing the same, that's great too. Others hate doing so much work, and prefer simpler characters that still give them something to do. That's also great.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Straight cleric up to 20 is rather great: you have awesome casting,good saves, high hit points and your rebuking as well as your domain powers progress over the levels(for example at level 20 the travel domain effect lasts so long(20 turns but you spend them in the way you want) it is almost as good as having permanent freedom of movement(better because it can not be dispelled and worse because if you fight a whole lot of encounters you can run out of it))Literally any full-casting divine PrC is better than cleric 20, because cleric 20 gives you absolutely nothing that a full-casting divine PrC doesn't also give you -- because it doesn't give you anything extra at all.

[Lapak]

I vastly prefer to multiclass multiple initiator classes, as the absolutely massive increase in versatility far eclipses the fairly minor boost in power that a couple of additional levels grant. For instance, a couple of levels in swordsage is practically always better than two more levels in either of the other initiator classes.The only one I'd stop to consider the tradeoff is Warblade, as always-on double stances is no small thing.

All three work perfectly fine at 20-level classes, though; multi- or prestige-classing can make them better but they will absolutely function and contribute without it.

[ericgrau]

Literally any full-casting divine PrC is better than cleric 20, because cleric 20 gives you absolutely nothing that a full-casting divine PrC doesn't also give you -- because it doesn't give you anything extra at all.
Most PrCs are better than anything 20, but you can still both do well and have a lot of fun with cleric 20. And the difficulty isn't too high, except for some rookies. Yeah caster PrCs make it more obvious, but most PrCs are both stronger across the board, and most PrCs are also unnecessary to play well across the board. Is cleric 20 unplayable without a PrC? Very far from it. It's extremely playable.

[noob]

Literally any full-casting divine PrC is better than cleric 20, because cleric 20 gives you absolutely nothing that a full-casting divine PrC doesn't also give you -- because it doesn't give you anything extra at all.

That is false: some domain powers scale on cleric level such as the effect of the travel domain which is of getting one turn of supernatural freedom of movement per day per Cleric level.
Also turning is not progressed by prcs unless the prc mentions it explicitely.
And there is no full divine progressing prc in core(the thaumathurge does not progress all the aspects of casting(read the text: the caster level is not increased but the slots are progressed so maybe you increase the most important part of casting but you will feel the cl loss) so it is a trade(that is rather good but still it is a trade)) .
Out of core many of the divine casting progressing prcs either have worse hd or worse saves and none of them progress domain powers.
So overall I think cleric gains the less from prcs among the core classes(if you exclude the druid which is so op that only one prc is worth it: planar shepherd and that prc in particular is so much op it is meaningless)

[ericgrau]

That is false: some domain powers scale on cleric level such as the effect of the travel domain which is of getting one turn of supernatural freedom of movement per day per Cleric level.
Also turning is not progressed by prcs unless the prc mentions it explicitely.
And there is no full divine progressing prc in core(the thaumathurge does not progress all the aspects of casting(read the text: the caster level is not increased but the slots are progressed so maybe you increase the most important part of casting buy you will feel the cl loss) so it is a trade(that is rather good but still it is a trade)) .
Out of core many of the divine casting progressing prcs either have worse hd or worse saves and none of them progress domain powers.
So overall I think cleric gains the less from prcs among the core classes(if you exclude the druid which is so op that only one prc is worth it: planar shepherd and that prc in particular is so much op it is meaningless)


When a new thaumaturgist level is gained, the character gains new spells per day as if he had also gained a level in whatever spellcasting class he belonged to before he added the prestige class. He does not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained. This essentially means that he adds the level of thaumaturgist to the level of whatever other spellcasting class the character has, then determines spells per day and caster level accordingly.
Thaumaturgist does advance caster level. Otherwise kinda true. Besides what you mentioned, the thaumaturgist for example hurts your BAB and HP, and costs a nearly useless feat for a cleric. And no, divine power isn't an answer to BAB until you quicken it. Even then it's partial, because you could quicken something else or prepare another level 8 spell. In exchange for thaumaturgist's drawbacks you boost an ability that is either pretty minor or if abused severely game breaking even without the PrC. It's pretty meh, but many splatbook divine PrCs are much better.

So true it's not quite lose nothing for divine PrCs, but I think it's still lose little and gain a lot like most PrCs.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

While some full-casting PrCs don't boost turning or domain abilities, those are rather piss-poor examples of class abilities, even for the domains that scale. You have to take very specific domain abilities and focus on using them heavily to be worthwhile; else, 95% of all domain abilities are completely static. Meanwhile, advancing turn undead is pretty pointless, since the number of uses per day is not based on your class level at all, and even on undead-heavy campaigns, it's better to use them to fuel divine metamagic and other abilities.

Basically, unless your build focuses a huge amount on either mechanic, you lose practically nothing for PrC'ing and gain a HUGE amount via class abilities.

So what I'm saying is, 99% of builds are 100% better off PrC'ing with general full-casting PrCs, and those that aren't are still better off choosing PrCs that do advance the abilities in question.

[Maat Mons]

If you like skill points, Cloistered Cleric 20 is a valid choice. The Lore ability is another perk of staying in.

Dragon magazine has the Arcane Disciple variant for Cleric, which adds a spell from the Sorcerer/Wizard spell list to your Cleric list every level. Prestige classes don't advance that feature, so if you're going to be an Arcane Disciple, sticking out the full 20 levels is probably the way to go.

The Deity's Favor ACF for Favored Soul make going to 12th level in the class a pretty strong choice. There's nothing in particular wrong with taking the remaining 8 levels either.

Archivist 20 at least continues to gain improvements to Dark Knowledge, which is something.

At lower tiers, Beguiler and Psychic Rogue both seem like fine choices for a single-classed build.

[CactusAir]

fighter 20,


Straight fighter is a NPC class. It's underpowered, requires a lot of system mastery to get good value out of, and is generally horribly frustrating to play when stacked up next to spellcasters.

Now if you use the PF version and stack on some Archetypes that give you actual power progression, maybe.

Fighter (Runesinger, Impossible Warrior) 20 is actually functional, though not up to par with a fullcaster.

Mostly fighter is a dip class.

[Eldariel]

Druid 20 out of the PHB is one of the best straight 20 classes. While Planar Shepherd is an upgrade, straight Druid is competitive with almost any other build and easily top tier for its whole career.

[zfs]

In the realm of "weaker classes that should probably be taken to 20," you've got Truenamer. Level 20 gets you Conjunctive Gate and Say My Name And I Am There.

Knight also has a strong capstone but I think it's still usually better to multiclass. But Loyal Beyond Death is a fantastic and flavorful capstone.

[HouseRules]

Straight fighter is a NPC class. It's underpowered, requires a lot of system mastery to get good value out of, and is generally horribly frustrating to play when stacked up next to spellcasters.

Now if you use the PF version and stack on some Archetypes that give you actual power progression, maybe.

Fighter (Runesinger, Impossible Warrior) 20 is actually functional, though not up to par with a fullcaster.

Mostly fighter is a dip class.

Fighter is a combat rocket tag class. Pretty much most combat classes could 2 round kill another, so the rocket tag is on.

[Troacctid]

Dragonfire adept and dread necromancer come to mind for me.

[Efrate]

I want to chime on dragonfire adept. Its a great class and going 20 is perfectly reasonable. Also totemist works great 1 to 20. Essentia and binds are hard to progress better than with it.

[CactusAir]

Fighter is a combat rocket tag class. Pretty much most combat classes could 2 round kill another, so the rocket tag is on.

Literally every class can 1 round murder most things at level 20 if you go hog wild on optimization.

Handle Animal cheesing + WBL + Use Magic Device can cover a lot.

What is the point of posting non sequitur?

[Psyren]

My vote is Druid, it's strong all the way up and there is a ton of support for it.


I'll just mention Sha'ir here.. That is a "cover-all-bases"-spellcasting class if I ever saw one.

Sha'ir is awful at low levels (1-6ish) though - your spells don't stay in your head very long, so you have to be very careful when you send your gen out to bargain for them so that you're not stuck on crossbow duty or twiddling your thumbs at a pivotal moment. Once you can keep your spells for the entire adventuring day (and can afford some wands/scrolls) it's much better.


I want to chime on dragonfire adept. Its a great class and going 20 is perfectly reasonable. Also totemist works great 1 to 20. Essentia and binds are hard to progress better than with it.

Totemist 1 is actually a pain unless you're using a race with a free natural attack. The other 19 levels are fine though.

[Particle_Man]

Beguiller is pretty solid. Does what it says on the tin from one to twenty. No particular reason to change classes once you are one. Nice skills and skill points and ninth level casting.

[tiercel]

Beguiller is pretty solid. Does what it says on the tin from one to twenty. No particular reason to change classes once you are one. Nice skills and skill points and ninth level casting.

I mostly agree, the biggest exception being a possible Mindbender 1 dip because (1) telepathy is awesome generally, much less for being The Face and The Scout and language-dependent magic, (2) the Mindsight feat is potentially just sick (if allowed), and (3) slipping in a Mindbender dip delays Advanced Learning while still advancing spellcasting progression, so a higher level spell can be learned.

That’s not to say that Beguiler 20 isn’t solid if you like what Beguiler does, just that a single dip can be almost a little too good — as long as you don’t mind playing a nongood character and you won’t reach or get to use the capstone (which is actually not shabby).


It's a little hard to argue that doing 10 levels of Sublime Chord (maybe with some Virtuoso and/or Lyric Thaumaturge thrown in) is not better than standard Bard, at least for casting purposes. And since Song of the White Raven makes Crusader/Warblade levels sufficiently stack-useful, a mono-class combat-focused Bard isn't that great either.

This is not to say that the standard Bard is bad--if anything, it SHOULD have been where "Tier 2" actually ended up for 3.x's overall balance--just that there are several prestige classes that give you "Bard, and also the toys other classes have too."

Bard is an interesting case in that Bard 20 is really not shabby, especially if you have variant classes, ACFs, SpC and MIC in play, but that there are multiclass and/or PrCs that really make sense for a given direction you want with a bard.

I have a knee-jerk negative reaction to Sublime Chord builds, not because they are bad (obviously, they really do juice up spellcasting), but because I find them more niche than other people do:

It takes a while to even get into Sublime Chord, so it’s a little silly to start locking down skill points and going through whatever Lyric Thaumaturge/Virtuoso contortions if the character is going to spend much or most of an adventuring career below 11th level or so (which is common in campaigns of my experience)
Saying “Sublime Chord is better than Bard because better spellcasting” is fine if better spellcasting is the priority, but also begins to beg the question “Isn’t straight Sorcerer, much less with whatever full-advancement PrCs, better than Sublime Chord because better spellcasting?” I mean, yeah I get that a Bard/Lyric Thaumaturge/Virtuoso/Sublime Chord/Virtuoso build is basically a bard/sorcerer theurge, but if you’re actually playing at level 20 and spellcasting is your priority, then is bardsong worth the sorcerer’s +3 7th level spells/day, +3 8th level spells/day, +4 9th level spells/day, and whatever sorcerer PrC abilities?


What makes Bard interesting to me is that you have on the one hand, classes you take pretty much 20 (or at least 19) levels in, for the most part (Druid being the most obvious, but as above, Beguiler pretty much and some others), on the other hand, classes that you probably hardly ever take to 20 (because there pretty much are basically “strictly better” options for basically any kind of build, whether it be Fighter or Sorcerer or even most Clerics), and Bard is kind of in the middle — Bard 20 is viable, depending on what you want, but for a given specialization, a bard multiclass/PrC progression is also viable.

[TalonOfAnathrax]

Beguiler is definitely the best. You get something new at pretty much every level, it does what it wants to do, and it's easy to play for beginners.
What more could you want?

I'm also a fan of Warlock. Not very powerful, but it works well enough. Without PrCs it has low damage but does rather well as a scout/face type of character! A decent and relatively simple class (that can be built as a DPS machine in combat, but that requires odd splats or PrCs).

[Mordaedil]

I feel like it'd be easier to make a list of classes that 20 levels doesn't work, since all classes are designed to run from 1-20 at the outset, even if they don't always do a stellar job of it.

For such, I'd say rogue lacking some sort of Hide in Plain Sight ability ruins their stealth also no special ability to bypass blindsense or blindsight. Fighters feats just aren't enough to make it entertaining to me.

Knights maybe? Wu Jen? Never played those, so not sure. I know one of the samurai classes is decent and the other is hot garbage.

[liquidformat]

Dragonfire adept and dread necromancer come to mind for me.

I thought you wanted to leave dread necromancer after like 8 levels for the most part?

[Malphegor]

With the right feats, Dread Necromancer's one you could easily take to level 20. The main thing is that after level 8, a lot of people multiclass out because the class itself just starts giving you enhancements to what you already have at that point.

That said, there's enough going on with a necromancer build that it will be a fun ride. You're busy upgrading your army of the dead, and if you have mother cyst trying to figure out how to sneakily give your teammates cancer so you can mindcontrol them in a few years time.

Really, looking at DN to 20 is about the only time I've ever felt like multiclassing is unecessary. (I say this as someone who plays a wizard who by the time I'm done with him will have 5 classes going. I am a rampant multiclasser)

[liquidformat]

With the right feats, Dread Necromancer's one you could easily take to level 20. The main thing is that after level 8, a lot of people multiclass out because the class itself just starts giving you enhancements to what you already have at that point.

That said, there's enough going on with a necromancer build that it will be a fun ride. You're busy upgrading your army of the dead, and if you have mother cyst trying to figure out how to sneakily give your teammates cancer so you can mindcontrol them in a few years time.

Really, looking at DN to 20 is about the only time I've ever felt like multiclassing is unecessary. (I say this as someone who plays a wizard who by the time I'm done with him will have 5 classes going. I am a rampant multiclasser)

Do you ever play druid? That is really the only class I ever feel that way about?

[Aniikinis]

For such, I'd say rogue lacking some sort of Hide in Plain Sight ability ruins their stealth also no special ability to bypass blindsense or blindsight. Fighters feats just aren't enough to make it entertaining to me.

Darkstalker from LoM really helps this, though I agree that it and HiPS should have been in the class itself instead of a feat later on.

[Troacctid]

I thought you wanted to leave dread necromancer after like 8 levels for the most part?
The class strongly disincentivizes you from leaving by basing the size of your undead army on your class level instead of your caster level.

In addition, when a dread necromancer uses the animate dead spell to create undead, she can control 4 + her Charisma bonus HD worth of undead creatures per class level (rather than the 4 HD per level normally granted by the spell).
It also has several other features that scale based on class level, but Undead Mastery is the main one that you'd care about.

[Feantar]

I don't know why someone hasn't mentioned this (or, if you have, my reading comprehension betrays me) but, Factotum. Well, technically 19 is the capstone, but 20th gives you two extra inspiration point and spell, so if you've gone that far it feels wrong to skip it.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I don't know why someone hasn't mentioned this (or, if you have, my reading comprehension betrays me) but, Factotum. Well, technically 19 is the capstone, but 20th gives you two extra inspiration point and spell, so if you've gone that far it feels wrong to skip it.Because most people only really care about levels 3, 8, and MAYBE 11 (if they're gestalting). More than that is disinsentivised by chameleon or sublime chord (if you want casting) or martial and skillmonkey dips. Higher levels don't grant that much.

[Cosi]

I thought you wanted to leave dread necromancer after like 8 levels for the most part?

The issue is, unsurprisingly, more complicated than Troacctid's superficial analysis makes it out to be.

Capping by class level is a problem, but it's not really that big of a deal because it also scales by CHA mod. If you have at least +6 CHA (and, as a single-stat CHA caster you do), you get as large a control pool as anyone else. You lose out relative to more Dread Necromancer levels, but you're still ahead of any other class. And, IMHO, you've probably already hit the point of dimishing returns for zombies at 80 HD, which is what +6 CHA and 8 levels of Dread Necromancer gets you.

Having the ability at all is actually a disadvantage at really high levels of optimization, because it prevents you from using CL cheese to expand your control pool.

Overall, I would say something like Dread Necromancer/Rainbow Servant is superior to Dread Necromancer, but it is close enough that I would say the class fits the question posed by the thread.

[Feantar]

Because most people only really care about levels 3, 8, and MAYBE 11 (if they're gestalting). More than that is disinsentivised by chameleon or sublime chord (if you want casting) or martial and skillmonkey dips. Higher levels don't grant that much.

Blasphemy!

Okay, I get the chameleon appeal, but I have a weak spot for cunning brilliance. I don't really get why you'd go sublime chord - if you wanted a full caster, there's better ways to get one. I see your point though.

[Troacctid]

The issue is, unsurprisingly, more complicated than Troacctid's superficial analysis makes it out to be.
Yeah, I didn't want to go into a super detailed analysis or anything, but ultimately, I think it's difficult for most prestige classes to compete with an extra 10 HD undead minion every level. It's a very real opportunity cost.

[Cosi]

Yeah, I didn't want to go into a super detailed analysis or anything, but ultimately, I think it's difficult for most prestige classes to compete with an extra 10 HD undead minion every level. It's a very real opportunity cost.

An extra 10 HD zombie or skeleton. Which is CR 3 or CR 5. That's not really a huge deal, particularly since you already have 80 HD worth of zombies and skeletons. Also, you get planar binding, so you're plenty good at minionmancy anyway. Spending those levels shoring up your weaknesses by expanding your spell list seems likely to be more effective than growing your already prodigious horde of undead. Though if you could figure out how to buff your undead's WIS scores for cheap, you could do pretty well making a bunch of 1 HD Spell-Stitched skeletons.

[Fuzzy McCoy]

On a different note, druid has already been mentioned, but I think spirit shaman qualifies as well.