PDA

View Full Version : No base class PrC game? How Broken?



Starsinger
2008-12-06, 07:05 PM
Okay.. let's say you could take your first level of a PrC that was designed to be entered at 6th level (like most standard prcs) at level one? For clarification purposes, you don't start your career towards say, Shadow Dancer as a rogue 1. You start as a level 1 Shadow Dancer?

Obviously cheesey PrCs (Ur-Priest) would be disallowed, and PrCs that advance spellcasting (LoreMaster) would have to pick an appropriate class to model their casting after.

My question is, how broken would this be?

Zenos
2008-12-06, 07:07 PM
What about the required feats for the PrC? Would they come with the PrC?

Kurald Galain
2008-12-06, 07:08 PM
It would bias the balance towards casters, which are already strong, because they can use any PrC that fully advances spellcasting and get those abilities in addition to, you know, spells.

Starsinger
2008-12-06, 07:10 PM
What about the required feats for the PrC? Would they come with the PrC?

Unless they were necessary for class features? No. And if so, then depending on how many feats, it might eat up their feats in the future.

Emperor Tippy
2008-12-06, 07:14 PM
Incantatrix 10/Initiate of the Seven Fold Veil 7/ Archmage 2/ Mindbender 1 :smallbiggrin:

Yeah, I'm going to go with pretty broken.

kamikasei
2008-12-06, 07:16 PM
This doesn't strike me as "broken" as in "overpowered", but "broken" as in "doesn't work".

What would be the point of such a game?

Yukitsu
2008-12-06, 07:20 PM
This doesn't strike me as "broken" as in "overpowered", but "broken" as in "doesn't work".

What would be the point of such a game?

The lulz, probably.

Starsinger
2008-12-06, 07:20 PM
Well given that 99% of 3.5 characters take PrCs anyways, why not cut out those pesky five levels wherein you don't have one?

Keld Denar
2008-12-06, 07:21 PM
Dwarven
Fist of the Forest2
Deepwarden2
Frostrager5
BearWarrior10
Warshaper1

Con to AC twice as a large bear who is immune to crits and mauls people with his icy claws that strike as if they were those of a colossal bears. RAWR!

rayne_dragon
2008-12-06, 07:24 PM
I would be quite broken, however it should be possible to balance out by giving your monsters free templates or their own PrC. I have this bizzare image of a Gelatinous Cube with True Necromancer levels suddenly raising quite the undead horde much to the surprise of the PCs.

Starsinger
2008-12-06, 07:26 PM
I'd forgotten that nobody plays 3.5 without excessive powergaming anymore. :smallsigh:

Vortling
2008-12-06, 07:27 PM
Okay.. let's say you could take your first level of a PrC that was designed to be entered at 6th level (like most standard prcs) at level one? For clarification purposes, you don't start your career towards say, Shadow Dancer as a rogue 1. You start as a level 1 Shadow Dancer?

Obviously cheesey PrCs (Ur-Priest) would be disallowed, and PrCs that advance spellcasting (LoreMaster) would have to pick an appropriate class to model their casting after.

My question is, how broken would this be?

Very broken. However if you only allow PrCs that lose casting levels it can be more balanced. Watch out for the Chameleon. 2x Caster level per level gets horrific fast. It can be a lot of fun for people who want to play martial classes. Starting out with Master Thrower or Drunken Master would be oodles of fun.

AmberVael
2008-12-06, 07:28 PM
I'd forgotten that nobody plays 3.5 without excessive powergaming anymore. :smallsigh:

I wonder how you possibly could have forgotten that. I mean, it's such an integral part of the game. :smallyuk: Hint: Sarcasm!

Mando Knight
2008-12-06, 07:29 PM
It would make Theurges more useful... as you wouldn't have to burn caster levels before getting the class...

kamikasei
2008-12-06, 07:33 PM
I'd forgotten that nobody plays 3.5 without excessive powergaming anymore. :smallsigh:

I don't see the point of this comment, nor do I see what it's replying to.

PrCs provide abilities that are intended to show up no earlier than a particular level. For some of these, it would be a bad idea for them to be available earlier. For others, it wouldn't matter. Then on the other hand, some PrCs give you powerful abilities at the cost of having to invest otherwise worthless feats or skills as prerequisites. If you don't have to pay that prerequisite cost, the PrC's abilities become better value.

So, the game would basically require so much individual-case ruling that you might as well just homebrew up a set of new base classes to reflect the concept behind every given PrC and use those.

Starsinger
2008-12-06, 07:37 PM
I don't see the point of this comment, nor do I see what it's replying to. Vael said it so much better than I did.

PrCs provide abilities that are intended to show up no earlier than a particular level. For some of these, it would be a bad idea for them to be available earlier. For others, it wouldn't matter. Then on the other hand, some PrCs give you powerful abilities at the cost of having to invest otherwise worthless feats or skills as prerequisites. If you don't have to pay that prerequisite cost, the PrC's abilities become better value.

So, the game would basically require so much individual-case ruling that you might as well just homebrew up a set of new base classes to reflect the concept behind every given PrC and use those.

Ah.

AmberVael
2008-12-06, 07:37 PM
I don't see the point of this comment, nor do I see what it's replying to.

I would think...


Incantatrix 10/Initiate of the Seven Fold Veil 7/ Archmage 2/ Mindbender 1 :smallbiggrin:

Yeah, I'm going to go with pretty broken.
Dwarven/Fist of the Forest2/Deepwarden2/Frostrager5/BearWarrior10/Warshaper1

Con to AC twice as a large bear who is immune to crits and mauls people with his icy claws that strike as if they were those of a colossal bears. RAWR!
Watch out for the Chameleon. 2x Caster level per level gets horrific fast.

These kind of things are what are being referred to.
The point would be that, sure, you can break the system if you want to- but is everyone attempting to play the game just going to blatantly abuse it like that? Why put all the emphasis on those issues?

Fax Celestis
2008-12-06, 07:43 PM
With an intelligent, proactive DM who had a firm grip upon what is and isn't going to be allowable, it'd be very interesting and fun.

Eldariel
2008-12-06, 07:45 PM
The bigger problem is, what happens after level 10? Do you have to find another synergistic PrC to continue or can you go on in the same PrC homebrew? That said, the idea is of course intriguing. There just is such a large number of PrCs at different power levels that the power differences would probably be further pronunciated. If you can work with that though, and at least allow core classes after finishing your PrC, it'd be just fine. But the basic idea of being able to start PrC from level 1 for the less "prestigious" PrCs is fairly logical.

MeklorIlavator
2008-12-06, 07:50 PM
One problem would be that some concepts just lack PrC. From my experience, there are a lack of PrC's that fit any archery concepts or ones that fit stealth as well as the base classes. Still, it could be interesting.

kamikasei
2008-12-06, 07:52 PM
The point would be that, sure, you can break the system if you want to- but is everyone attempting to play the game just going to blatantly abuse it like that? Why put all the emphasis on those issues?

Of course not. But when the question is "would this change be broken, and how?" and the answers received include several examples of "it would make this brokenness possible", I don't see much cause for surprise or snark.

RPGuru1331
2008-12-06, 07:54 PM
Of course not. But when the question is "would this change be broken, and how?" and the answers received include several examples of "it would make this brokenness possible", I don't see much cause for surprise or snark.

"Obviously cheesy PrCs would be disallowed"

"Incantatrix/IotSV :D :D :D"

"Fantastic, guy, can you be less useful?"

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-06, 08:00 PM
"Obviously cheesy PrCs would be disallowed"

"Incantatrix/IotSV :D :D :D"

"Fantastic, guy, can you be less useful?"The problem is Ordinary builds that become insane due to getting powers way too early. Heck. Compare Eldritch Knight, one of the weakest PrCs out there for Gishes, to standard Wizards under this system.

kamikasei
2008-12-06, 08:01 PM
The line in the OP was "obviously cheesy PrCs (Ur-Priest)". Iot7V is just powerful. Or to put it another way: Ur-Priest is made cheesy by this change because it would let you get access to higher-level spells faster than a Wizard or Cleric. Iot7V is cheesy to start with and does not become significantly more so with this rule; Tippy and Keld Denar do point out that the change lets you fit entire progressions of multiple very powerful PrCs into your build instead of having to choose what you have room for after your base levels, though, and that's a useful point to make.

How does being told that, no, if you take this change, think of ways it can be broken, and discard them all because they're cheesy, then the result is that it's not broken, help?

Starbuck_II
2008-12-06, 08:03 PM
Master of Nine who knows none!

Would be hilariously funny.

The_Snark
2008-12-06, 08:04 PM
With an intelligent, proactive DM who had a firm grip upon what is and isn't going to be allowable, it'd be very interesting and fun.

I'd put more emphasis on having intelligent, reasonable players who understand the intent behind such a game, and are willing to work with the DM to get something that satisfies them and doesn't unbalance the game.

Personally, I'd want to weigh the disadvantages of such a system against what you're hoping to gain for it: earlier access of neat class features, versus having to modify/ban various classes and work to accommodate concepts that don't have a prestige class to fit them... It might be worth it, if you want to give players interesting capstone abilities without playing at the highest levels (notice I say interesting abilities, not necessarily powerful ones), but it might involve enough messing with the classes that it'd be better to delve into homebrew or modify the base classes.

Eldariel
2008-12-06, 08:04 PM
One problem would be that some concepts just lack PrC. From my experience, there are a lack of PrC's that fit any archery concepts or ones that fit stealth as well as the base classes. Still, it could be interesting.

Draw from 3.0 books. They have plenty of solid archery PrCs (Peerless Archer, Deepwood Sniper, Order of the Bow Initiate [3.0 version is actually decent] and heck, even Weapon Master).

Fax Celestis
2008-12-06, 08:11 PM
Draw from 3.0 books. They have plenty of solid archery PrCs (Peerless Archer, Deepwood Sniper, Order of the Bow Initiate [3.0 version is actually decent] and heck, even Weapon Master).

"Even", he says. Longbow Weapon Masters are terrifying. 18-20/x6 crits. Mmm.

Eldariel
2008-12-06, 08:23 PM
"Even", he says. Longbow Weapon Masters are terrifying. 18-20/x6 crits. Mmm.

My point was that the Weapon Master isn't precisely an Archery PrC, hence the "even" - the others are clearly Archery-specific PrCs, while Weapon Master goes for...well, anyone who's interested in specializing in a weapon.

EDIT: This reminds me, I'll have to build a Psionic Archer around Psionic Weapons Master and the damage-pumping powers.

Kish
2008-12-06, 08:37 PM
I'd forgotten that nobody plays 3.5 without excessive powergaming anymore. :smallsigh:
I know this isn't what you asked, but it really isn't meant to be snarky or unhelpful.

If your reasoning is "cut out the delay in getting to a prestige class because everyone goes for one anyway," and you want to avoid powergaming, I think disallowing prestige classes would work better than having people start with them.

RS14
2008-12-06, 09:06 PM
I don't think the power levels will be dramatically changed except at high levels. If this is just a way to make PrCs available in a low level game, go for it.

Stephen_E
2008-12-06, 09:15 PM
I don't think people have thought things through well enough.

It would totally change the balances of PCs. Not necessarily good or bad, but DIFFERENT.

People talk about the awsomness of Incantrix/Initiate of the Veil.

Try Mystic Theurge/Arcane Heirophant. I have the casting of a 20th level wizard, a 20th level Druid, animal comp 10 lev druid, and many of the Druid abilities. The double casting classes suddenly go from weak to powerhouses.

There are some melee semi-caster classes that rock. Wanted adds for Warchanters in the Advenyurers advertiser would be heavy.

Stephen E

Ascension
2008-12-06, 09:31 PM
One problem would be that some concepts just lack PrC. From my experience, there are a lack of PrC's that fit any archery concepts or ones that fit stealth as well as the base classes. Still, it could be interesting.

No stealth? In addition to the already mentioned Shadowdancer (not the best example, but does get HiPS) most of the Complete Adventurer classes can be pretty stealthy.

My biggest problem with the basic concept is pretty the counterpart of the "casters only gain class features, they don't lose anything" complaint... the non-casting classes do lose class features they can't get any other way. Even if you rule that any PrC that advances a class feature gives the basic version to you (for example, a Master of Many Forms would be assumed to have Wildshape), some low-level class features may become unobtainable. Trapfinding, evasion... Rogue prestige classes assume you have these things.

That being said, I'd love a chance to play one of the Daggerspell classes without losing more than one caster level.

MeklorIlavator
2008-12-06, 09:33 PM
Ascension, my point is pretty much what you said, though you said it much clearer/better.

Fax Celestis
2008-12-06, 09:36 PM
That being said, I'd love a chance to play one of the Daggerspell classes without losing more than one caster level.

You can do that already: Full-caster 5/Spellthief 1/Daggerspell Mage X, take the Master Spellthief feat. No CL lost, AND you get Armored Mage (Light).

Ascension
2008-12-06, 09:45 PM
You can do that already: Full-caster 5/Spellthief 1/Daggerspell Mage X, take the Master Spellthief feat. No CL lost, AND you get Armored Mage (Light).

Egad, you're right! Wouldn't work for the Daggerspell Shaper, but it works perfectly for the Mage. I always forget Spellthief. I generally ignore it because it doesn't have full Sneak Attack progression... but if I was building a Daggerspell Mage that'd be out the window already anyway. I'm going to have to play one of those sometime soon.

The Glyphstone
2008-12-06, 09:46 PM
I don't think people have thought things through well enough.

It would totally change the balances of PCs. Not necessarily good or bad, but DIFFERENT.

People talk about the awsomness of Incantrix/Initiate of the Veil.

Try Mystic Theurge/Arcane Heirophant. I have the casting of a 20th level wizard, a 20th level Druid, animal comp 10 lev druid, and many of the Druid abilities. The double casting classes suddenly go from weak to powerhouses.

There are some melee semi-caster classes that rock. Wanted adds for Warchanters in the Advenyurers advertiser would be heavy.

Stephen E


While you have a good point overall, I think you picked a bad example - Arcane Heirophant specifically says it doesn't give you Wildshape, only advancing your existing Wildshape ability. Same with the animal companion - it allows you to "retain one AC you already have", but says nothing at all about getting an AC, and doesn't have Animal Companion as a class feature. You would still be a Druid 20/Wizard 20 for casting with some neat channeling powers, but without the extra goodies that bust a druid in half. If that's houseruled, though, as it likely would be, your point stands in its entirety.


For the original idea, I can see it being quite cool, and allowing for some very wacky characters - it would definitely help out casters more than noncasters, but the power differential is already so great that it isn't gamebreaking on its own. You would most definitely have to ban the dual-caster progression classes though, similar to Gestalt.

CthulhuM
2008-12-06, 09:49 PM
I agree that it would be interesting, and has potential to work well, and a number of problems could be solved on a case-by-case basis by disallowing certain powerful PRCs. That said, there are several more systemic issues you would have to come up with solutions for.

1. Prestige classes that have feat prerequisites that directly play into some of their abilities (not a huge problem, though - players will simply have to take the feats to benefit from the abilities that enhance them) or that are simply bad feats you have to take in exchange for getting into a good PRC (will require case-by-case judgment, perhaps requiring the players to pick up the feats as they advance). As people have mentioned, this would be more problematic with PRCs that assume class features (evasion, uncanny dodge, etc.). In those cases, you'll need to come up with an individual solution.

2. Dual-casting and gish classes in general: Most of these classes are flat-out better than equivalent non-dual classes, but they are balanced by the fact that in order to get into them you have to split your focus between two different areas. The end result in a normal game is, in theory, a character who is balanced by being decent at two things rather than really good at one. Without those suboptimal starting levels, though, gishes and dual-casters will just be really good at both of their focuses. You could solve this by reducing some of the benefits these classes give (for example, say that mystic theurge gives 7/10 casting in both classes, rather than 10/10). This would also need to be handled on a case-by-case basis.

3. Prestige classes that cannot be obtained at 6th level normally (archmage, etc.): These classes are specifically designed to give more powerful abilities than more "standard" PRCs, and thus should not be obtainable at the same time as them. You could solve this problem by not allowing characters to take these classes until later levels, exactly how late would depend on the class in question and your own judgment.

4. Capstone abilities: Some PRCs, particularly in more recent splatbooks, have 10th level abilities that are significantly more powerful than anything else the class gains, and that represent a serious power break for anyone who obtains one (for example the initiate of the draconic mystery's ability to shapechange into a huge dragon, the thrallherd's second cohort or the eternal blade's ability to take an additional turn as an immediate action once per encounter). These abilities are generally fine at the levels one can normally gain them (i.e. 16th or 17th), where ridiculousness is par for the course. But gaining them at level 10 is likely to be... disruptive, particularly if some characters are taking a PRC with a serious capstone and some are not (or decided to multiclass). There's really no easy solution to this, but at least the problem won't arise until you actually get to level 10, so you've got plenty of time to worry about it.

rayne_dragon
2008-12-06, 10:21 PM
I actually seem to recall that BESM d20 has a point buy system for abilities that would allow you to revamp PrC to be balanced, or at least sort of balanced.

Starsinger
2008-12-06, 11:23 PM
and you want to avoid powergaming
Excessive powergaming. There's a difference between strong and ridiculously strong.

As for dual-class style PrCs I admit I wasn't thinking of ones like Mystic Theurge and Eldritch Knight when I asked, but rather ones like Arcane Trickster or Spellsword (Spellblade?) which are more half and half than full/full

FMArthur
2008-12-07, 12:23 AM
I think you can already do this with Survivor, if you really want to. :smallwink:

Ascension
2008-12-07, 12:40 AM
I think you can already do this with Survivor, if you really want to. :smallwink:

Don't you need a level of Commoner first?

Keld Denar
2008-12-07, 01:56 AM
Incantrix10/Dwomerkeeper10

-2 adjustment on all metamagic, and a few spells you can make into (SU), which means you can get free wishes!

Add Arcane Thesis and you have -3 adjustment on all MM.....god, zee abuses, zeh are everyvere!!!

Ever want to see what 16 metemagic feats all stacked onto one Enervation can do?

I call it Auto-Wight.

Riffington
2008-12-07, 02:04 AM
Compare Eldritch Knight, one of the weakest PrCs out there for Gishes,

Weakest?? It's well above average. You just aren't considering Green Star Adept or Suel Arcanamach as real choices...

Keld Denar
2008-12-07, 02:07 AM
Weakest?? It's well above average. You just aren't considering Green Star Adept or Suel Arcanamach as real choices...

Suel Arcanamach is actually pretty strong if you build him right. Sure, no 9th level spells, but creative application can make some pretty sick characters. Check out hte Suel Arcanamach handbook over on the CharOps forum. Theres some pretty neat stuff in there.

woodenbandman
2008-12-07, 10:27 AM
While you have a good point overall, I think you picked a bad example - Arcane Heirophant specifically says it doesn't give you Wildshape, only advancing your existing Wildshape ability. Same with the animal companion - it allows you to "retain one AC you already have", but says nothing at all about getting an AC, and doesn't have Animal Companion as a class feature. You would still be a Druid 20/Wizard 20 for casting with some neat channeling powers, but without the extra goodies that bust a druid in half. If that's houseruled, though, as it likely would be, your point stands in its entirety.


Prestige Wildshape ranger 10/Arcane Hierophant 10. 15th level druid casting, 10th level wizard casting, 20th level wildshape, 20th level animal companion, 15 BAB.

Unearthed Arcana: Qualifying you for prestige classes since 2005!

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-07, 11:36 AM
Weakest?? It's well above average. You just aren't considering Green Star Adept or Suel Arcanamach as real choices...What Green Space Addict? I've never heard of that. I was comparing it to the JPM, the Spell Sword, and the Abjurant Champion. You know, real choices. :smallwink:

FMArthur
2008-12-07, 01:38 PM
Don't you need a level of Commoner first?

A character with no levels would also have no save bonus, so you qualify instantly before taking any classes.

AmberVael
2008-12-07, 01:42 PM
A character with no levels would also have no save bonus, so you qualify instantly before taking any classes.

By that argument, a character that didn't exist would also qualify for the class.
I can see it now.

"Breaking news today: millions of people are spontaneously appearing across the world, claiming that they have lives granted to them through 'use of the survivor prestige class.' More on this after commercial break."

NEO|Phyte
2008-12-07, 01:42 PM
A character with no levels would also have no save bonus, so you qualify instantly before taking any classes.

Not quite. Your highest base save bonus need to be LOWER than your character level. Meaning you would need to have LESS than no save bonus to go with your no character level.

Mushroom Ninja
2008-12-07, 02:00 PM
What if only noncasters got to take PrCs at 1st level? It could be something of a balancing factor...

jcsw
2008-12-07, 02:06 PM
What if only noncasters got to take PrCs at 1st level? It could be something of a balancing factor...

Would be arbitrarily limiting to those players who haven't even heard of Batman... You know, the kind of players who wanna play an evoker and can do it without an echo of a forum community telling them not to in their heads.