What's Wrong With Prestige Classes?

[SHARK]

Greetings!

You know, I'm boggled by what I have seen. Lately, I have seen many people whine and bitch about how "Prestige Classes SUCK!" blah, blah, blah.

Why?

I remember when Prestige Classes were hailed as the greatest thing since peanut butter, and that they allowed you to customize your character concept to a fine point, and play anything you wanted, rawr, rawr, rawr!!!

So, what the fuck happened?

NB: Yes, it is true that some prestige classes are lame, and stupid.
However, many are also very cool, and at the end of the day--there is the wonderful ability, and the tools, to create and tailor your own prestige classes to your own campaign, and that is outstanding.

Thoughts?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[Martin]

I couldn't tell you, SHARK. I've spent more time poring over d20 Modern than D&D lately, so my experiences are geared that way. Personally, I like the d20 Modern approach where you have Basic and Advanced classes, each class indicating a deeper specialization in concept. Prestige classes (in fact any class change/progression), in my experience, work best when you've got to do things within the roleplaying aspect of the game rather than just pick a few feats.

The best I can tell is that there has been an overkill in Prestige classes over the years and as a result that's turned people off of the concept.

[Northcott]

The best I can tell is that there has been an overkill in Prestige classes over the years and as a result that's turned people off of the concept.


That's pretty much been my take on it. That, and may of the PrCs that have come along have given the impression of being power wanks, or worse, being utterly useless. A good PrC should have, above all, a solid flavour to it.

3e seemed like a great idea at the time, but for me it quickly turned into a boring exercise in watching people wank the game to death with lame-ass cardboard cut-out power builds. The guy who thought "spiked chain" would be a good idea? I want somebody to punch him in the balls. The shmuck who thought it would be funny to not give Paladins mounted combat feats automatically, and then give them a special ability/mount that they need to spend a feat to use properly? That guy, too.


I think PrCs are just kind of the penultimate logical progression of the silly, crippling focus on minutae that D&D evolved into.

[Enk]

I think PrC hate comes from two basic sources: backlash against poorly designed PrCs, and volume. There's just too damn many of them, and no one seems to remember that PrCs are a DM's tool instead of a player carrot. Add in the massive crop of poorly designed PrCs - ones meant for NPCs (Frenzied Berserker), ones that are simply PC classes turned up to 11 (Radiant Servant of Pelor), or ones that can be duplicated completely via feats (Tempest) - and it gets silly.

PrCs were a neat little idea for DMs that Wizards quickly realized were another way to sell books.

[Harry]

No one I know personally uses them. Characters evolve and grow. I've never had a character end up going in quite the direction I originally imagined. PrCs are substitutes for good, strong characters concepts in the first place. And honestly, you can already do pretty much everything in any of the base classes.

I don't remember where I saw the thread, ENWorld, NTL or elsewhere, but a good PrC should be something along three levels and out. Cut the power creep, and slash the prerequisites, and make them more flavorful. More folks I know would use them then.

[Pigs in Space]

The only thing wrong with it is the same sort of shit that is wrong with all the WOTC products and that the 80 billion splat books, with bazillions of prestige classes/feats/etc.

Not to mention there are a whole pile of prestige classes that just plain suck, compared to other ones, so they never get used.

I mean every second cleric is contemplative. :)

[Lisa Nadazdy]

What I don't like about PrCs is that they are either a kludgey way to build a character that you want in the first place, or tool to abuse the system. If you want a specific type of character, then go with a point-build system, for fuck's sake. Also, people who use PrCs to "game" the system need to beaten about the ears until they stop twitching.

[ColonelHardisson]

As Martin says above, a great concept buried under a pile of shit that has accumulated over the years. I blame WotC for it, really. Instead of really pushing the flexibility of the basic system by showing how most, if not all, character concepts can be achieved via judicious skill and feat choice and multiclassing, they basically dropped promoting that aspect of the game after some really good articles in Dragon by James Wyatt. They did this in favor of leading the Prestige Class charge. Sure, many of them were good at the outset, and seemed to illustrate the concept well, but then every would-be game "designer" just had to come along and make a Prestige Class that could easily be covered with the base classes. It was a deluge of Biblical proportions, and really rubbed people the wrong way. I'm guessing they'll retain the concept for 4e, but I also imagine they'll try to address the proliferation of them, as well. Not that it'll do them any good.

[shabois]

I agree with my fellows above. i think it was a neat idea that can still be useful, but as with all things TSR/Wotc, it has been over exposed to try to make a buck. Too many Complete retired adventure/bartender handbooks out there for me. hey are trying to take advantage of the younger games who don't know better and will buy anything.