Prestige Classes and Multiclassing

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

The more I look at prestige classes, the more I find I dislike them.
I'm going to prune them way back in my next campaign, but while I'd
like to dump them entirely they're still needed to shore up certain
weak multiclass combos.

Which brings me to the question I'd like to put to the group: What
multiclass combinations (assuming even levels, rather than 1-2 level
dips) are so much weaker than core single-class characters that they
need the boost of a prestige class or some equivalent?

Wizard/Anything Else, obviously, but what else?

--
Erol K. Bayburt
ErolB1@aol.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Erol K. Bayburt <ErolB1@comcast.net> wrote in
news:mrcrc1d6h26tdifk4lo17la7ucno1na01p@4ax.com:

> The more I look at prestige classes, the more I find I dislike
> them. I'm going to prune them way back in my next campaign, but
> while I'd like to dump them entirely they're still needed to
> shore up certain weak multiclass combos.

I'd suggest you're looking at the Prestige Classes the wrong way
around: you take a weaker combo early on to gain the later strength.

> Which brings me to the question I'd like to put to the group:
> What multiclass combinations (assuming even levels, rather than
> 1-2 level dips) are so much weaker than core single-class
> characters that they need the boost of a prestige class or some
> equivalent?
>
> Wizard/Anything Else, obviously, but what else?

Any spellcaster / Anything else for levels 6+

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Quentin Stephens" <stq@stq.gro.ku.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns968D2C7B6C1Dstqstqstq@130.133.1.4...
> Erol K. Bayburt <ErolB1@comcast.net> wrote:

>> Which brings me to the question I'd like to put to the group:
>> What multiclass combinations (assuming even levels, rather than
>> 1-2 level dips) are so much weaker than core single-class
>> characters that they need the boost of a prestige class or some
>> equivalent?
>>
>> Wizard/Anything Else, obviously, but what else?
>
> Any spellcaster / Anything else for levels 6+

I agree wholeheartedly with this statement.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> "Quentin Stephens" <stq@stq.gro.ku.invalid> wrote in message
> news:Xns968D2C7B6C1Dstqstqstq@130.133.1.4...
> > Erol K. Bayburt <ErolB1@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >> Which brings me to the question I'd like to put to the group:
> >> What multiclass combinations (assuming even levels, rather than
> >> 1-2 level dips) are so much weaker than core single-class
> >> characters that they need the boost of a prestige class or some
> >> equivalent?
> >>
> >> Wizard/Anything Else, obviously, but what else?
> >
> > Any spellcaster / Anything else for levels 6+
>
> I agree wholeheartedly with this statement.

Well, not wholeheartedly, but yeah. Though a Fighter 4/Cleric 4 is
still pretty nice; the loss of 1 BAB and two feats for four levels of
spellcasting and two domains is not a bad trade.

Laszlo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> Quentin Stephens wrote:
>> Erol K. Bayburt wrote:
>
>>> Which brings me to the question I'd like to put to the group:
>>> What multiclass combinations (assuming even levels, rather than
>>> 1-2 level dips) are so much weaker than core single-class
>>> characters that they need the boost of a prestige class or some
>>> equivalent?
>>>
>>> Wizard/Anything Else, obviously, but what else?
>>
>> Any spellcaster / Anything else for levels 6+
>
> I agree wholeheartedly with this statement.

/signed.

--
Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you
understand?
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigeclasslist.html
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatelist.html

Berawler: Is there any sanity or light left in this shrivelled husk of a world?
SingingDancingMoose: There was, but we had to trade it in for the internet.
Berawler: That is quite possibly the best response to any question ever.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Quentin Stephens wrote:
> Erol K. Bayburt <ErolB1@comcast.net> wrote in
>
> > Which brings me to the question I'd like to put to the group:
> > What multiclass combinations (assuming even levels, rather than
> > 1-2 level dips) are so much weaker than core single-class
> > characters that they need the boost of a prestige class or some
> > equivalent?
> >
> > Wizard/Anything Else, obviously, but what else?
>
> Any spellcaster / Anything else for levels 6+

Mmno. Clerics are buff enough to allow the creation of solid physical
builds.
I'd qualify that as "Any spellcaster/Anything else for levels 6+ IF
your focus is spellcasting."

Silveraxe

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Quentin Stephens wrote:
> laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote in
> news:1120812393.628532.132720@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
> >
> >
> > Malachias Invictus wrote:
> >> "Quentin Stephens" <stq@stq.gro.ku.invalid> wrote in message
> >> news:Xns968D2C7B6C1Dstqstqstq@130.133.1.4...
> >> > Erol K. Bayburt <ErolB1@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> Which brings me to the question I'd like to put to the
> >> >> group: What multiclass combinations (assuming even levels,
> >> >> rather than 1-2 level dips) are so much weaker than core
> >> >> single-class characters that they need the boost of a
> >> >> prestige class or some equivalent?
> >> >>
> >> >> Wizard/Anything Else, obviously, but what else?
> >> >
> >> > Any spellcaster / Anything else for levels 6+
> >>
> >> I agree wholeheartedly with this statement.
> >
> > Well, not wholeheartedly, but yeah. Though a Fighter 4/Cleric 4
> > is still pretty nice; the loss of 1 BAB and two feats for four
> > levels of spellcasting and two domains is not a bad trade.
>
> OTOH the loss of four levels of spellcasting is pretty severe for a
> character that's primarily a cleric.

Why is a Fighter 4/Cleric 4 primarily a cleric?

A Fighter 4/Cleric 4 is primarily a fighter, since he loses only 1 BAB,
but 4 spellcasting levels.

Laszlo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Quentin Stephens wrote:
> laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote in
> > Well, not wholeheartedly, but yeah. Though a Fighter 4/Cleric 4
> > is still pretty nice; the loss of 1 BAB and two feats for four
> > levels of spellcasting and two domains is not a bad trade.
>
> OTOH the loss of four levels of spellcasting is pretty severe for a
> character that's primarily a cleric.

Aye, there's the rub. It's all a matter of perception. If you think
of this character as a cleric with fighter levels, then of course it's
"severe". However, if you think of this character as a fighter with
cleric levels, then it's a whole different ballgame. The fighter is
trading in two bonus feats for the ability to cast a few 0th, 1st, and
2nd level spells and two Domain abilities (some are "better" than
others). Thanks to the Complete series, the character also has access
to Divine Feats. Divine Vigor is my personal favorite. In addition,
he trades in 1 BAB and delay in reflex improvement for a big boost to
fortitude and a nice boost in will. The net loss is an average of 4
hit points, but the spells can make up for that as well in my opinion.
Class skills are different but not useless. Healing is good for
binding wounds at least. Knowledge Religion and Knowledge Planes may
or may not be worthwhile depending on the campaign but Diplomacy is
very good.

At 20th level, 10 fighter/10 cleric is terrible from a cleric
perspective but not so bad from a fighter perspective. He loses a
significant number of bonus feats and BAB, but he's casting 5th level
cleric spells, which includes 4th and 3rd level. can't get past spell
resistance so don't bother. Concentrate on buff and divination spells
with emergency healing on the side. Divine Power fixes the BAB loss,
plus boost hit points and ST. Righteous Might is a nice boost as well.
When spell resistance is not a factor, saving throw DC's don't care
about caster level. Flame Strike from a distance while closing in,
Holy Smite perhaps. An occasional Slay Living from the "fighter" is a
nice surprise to the bad guy.

Gerald Katz


Gerald Katz

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote in
news:1120812393.628532.132720@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

>
>
> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>> "Quentin Stephens" <stq@stq.gro.ku.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:Xns968D2C7B6C1Dstqstqstq@130.133.1.4...
>> > Erol K. Bayburt <ErolB1@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> Which brings me to the question I'd like to put to the
>> >> group: What multiclass combinations (assuming even levels,
>> >> rather than 1-2 level dips) are so much weaker than core
>> >> single-class characters that they need the boost of a
>> >> prestige class or some equivalent?
>> >>
>> >> Wizard/Anything Else, obviously, but what else?
>> >
>> > Any spellcaster / Anything else for levels 6+
>>
>> I agree wholeheartedly with this statement.
>
> Well, not wholeheartedly, but yeah. Though a Fighter 4/Cleric 4
> is still pretty nice; the loss of 1 BAB and two feats for four
> levels of spellcasting and two domains is not a bad trade.

OTOH the loss of four levels of spellcasting is pretty severe for a
character that's primarily a cleric.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> "Quentin Stephens" <stq@stq.gro.ku.invalid> wrote in message
> news:Xns968D2C7B6C1Dstqstqstq@130.133.1.4...
>>Erol K. Bayburt <ErolB1@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>>Which brings me to the question I'd like to put to the group:
>>>What multiclass combinations (assuming even levels, rather than
>>>1-2 level dips) are so much weaker than core single-class
>>>characters that they need the boost of a prestige class or some
>>>equivalent?
>>>
>>>Wizard/Anything Else, obviously, but what else?
>>
>>Any spellcaster / Anything else for levels 6+
>
> I agree wholeheartedly with this statement.

A partial fix is setting casterlevel = HD for all classes. Then you
can play with taking the caps off low level spells (and redrawing the
spell slot tables at mid-high level as a result).

Or getting really keen and doing away with slots altogether.

--
tussock

Aspie at work, sorry in advance.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Behold! for "Silveraxe" <avidroleplayer@yahoo.com> spake unto the
multitude thus:

>Quentin Stephens wrote:

[bad builds...]

>> Any spellcaster / Anything else for levels 6+
>
>Mmno. Clerics are buff enough to allow the creation of solid physical
>builds.
>I'd qualify that as "Any spellcaster/Anything else for levels 6+ IF
>your focus is spellcasting."

That's essentially it. Rogues do well with a little bit of wizard or
sorcerer; any tank does well with a bit of cleric; rangers can do well
with a drop of cleric, druid or bard

--
Jim or Sarah Davies, but probably Jim

D&D and Star Fleet Battles stuff on http://www.aaargh.org

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Erol K. Bayburt wrote:
> The more I look at prestige classes, the more I find I dislike them.
> I'm going to prune them way back in my next campaign, but while I'd
> like to dump them entirely they're still needed to shore up certain
> weak multiclass combos.
[...]

You don't think it is legitimate for a character to wish to
specialize in a subset of his class abilities?

For instance, Clerics can both cast spells and turn undead.
Hence a subset of Clerics will wish to concentrate on one
ability, while neglecting the other.

Or a Rogue who wishes to focus on sneak attack and BAB,
while neglecting skills, Evasion and such.

That's one thing prestige classes are good for.

--
Peter Knutsen
sagatafl.org

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 07:58:13 +0200, "Peter Knutsen (usenet)"
<peter@sagatafl.invalid> wrote:

>
>Erol K. Bayburt wrote:
>> The more I look at prestige classes, the more I find I dislike them.
>> I'm going to prune them way back in my next campaign, but while I'd
>> like to dump them entirely they're still needed to shore up certain
>> weak multiclass combos.
>[...]
>
>You don't think it is legitimate for a character to wish to
>specialize in a subset of his class abilities?

I think it's legitimate for a character to wish to do so; I don't
think it's legitimate for him to get very far if he tries.

As a matter of worldbuilding, I look at the core classes as being
about as highly specialized as they can be, without running into
harshly diminishing returns. I dislike and disallow "school
specialization" for wizards IMC, for example.

Other people's mileage obviously varies.

>
>For instance, Clerics can both cast spells and turn undead.
>Hence a subset of Clerics will wish to concentrate on one
>ability, while neglecting the other.

I'd allow a feat that let a cleric "prepare" spells as turning
attempts, and another feat that let a cleric burn turning attempts to
prepare extra spells. Or feats that let a cleric use turning attempts
for other purposes, e.g. lay-on-hands style healing.

>
>Or a Rogue who wishes to focus on sneak attack and BAB,
>while neglecting skills, Evasion and such.

Multiclass into fighter, possibly a customized fighter with his
non-rogue weapon and armor proficiencies traded for switching his good
save to Reflex. Then allow the use of fighter feats to buy sneak
attack.

>
>That's one thing prestige classes are good for.

That's something prestige classes could be good for, if the DM designs
them all himself, or chooses them very carefully from the supply of
published classes.

Part of the problem is that different designers have different ideas
about what prestige classes are for. Worse, the prestige class
"template" doesn't include a space for describing the intended
character-design niche the class is intended to fulfil, or the
intended power level of the class ("deliberately a bit more powerful
than the standard classes," "about as powerful as a standard class,"
or "deliberately weaker than a standard PC class character"). Yes,
there's the "flavor text" but that doesn't really cut it when a DM is
trying to decide if a given prestige class is appropriate for his
game.


--
Erol K. Bayburt
ErolB1@aol.com