No base class PrC game? How Broken?

[Starsinger]

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]

What about the required feats for the PrC? Would they come with the PrC?

[Kurald Galain]

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]

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]

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

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

[kamikasei]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

I'd forgotten that nobody plays 3.5 without excessive powergaming anymore.

[Vortling]

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]

I'd forgotten that nobody plays 3.5 without excessive powergaming anymore.

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

[Mando Knight]

It would make Theurges more useful... as you wouldn't have to burn caster levels before getting the class...

[kamikasei]

I'd forgotten that nobody plays 3.5 without excessive powergaming anymore.

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]

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]

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

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

"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]

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]

Master of Nine who knows none!

Would be hilariously funny.

[The_Snark]

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]

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]

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]

"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]

I'd forgotten that nobody plays 3.5 without excessive powergaming anymore.

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.