Feats OR Prestige Classes, Not Both

[Lago PARANOIA]

Regardless, what a great idea.

I'm dead serious. Prestige classes was one of the best ideas that 3rd Edition had.

Now it had a bunch of stupid shit that came with it like the unstated rule that 95% of the time you shouldn't enter a prestige class until at least level 5. Or bullshit prerequisites that made it impossible for someone to acquire organically if they didn't know about it ahead of time. Or the fact that prestige classes were the prime target for filler in a book. Or everything that game out of Song and Silence.

Or the thing I hated the most, the warping of the original intent of prestige classes. Rather (this is just off of the top of my head), in the 3.0E DMG prestige classes weren't supposed to exist. The examples in the books were--get this--examples. You weren't actually supposed to take levels in assassin, they were just ideas for your DM to create. See, the DM was supposed to work with the player and individually tailor prestige classes to fit what the player wanted to do.

But then someone got the idea that prestige classes were a great way to sell books, so WotC immediately backpedalled on the idea and started releasing them like Pokemon cards. And then we ended up with the stupid shit that I just complained about.

Regardless, they were an awesome idea and it makes me very, very butthurt (from both unwanted anal sex and hemerrhoids) how badly mangled prestige classes are in 4E.

[Fuchs]

All of the prestige classes I saw in use in my pen and paper campaigns were custom-made.

[TheDarkFuzz]

In my group, we never had a custom PrC. Just the ones from the books. Mostly just the good ones from the books.

I always thought the design intent of PrCs was to give characters a schtick that was unique to them. It gave designers space to do crazy shit like "you can turn into Green Diamond Man!" or "you're batshit insane which makes you powerful for some reason!" which encompassed a variety of abilities rather than one or two feats' worth. I don't see how releasing them like Pokemon cards is a bad thing, because I am objectively in favor of game designers continuing to design and release content for the game they designed. I'm also a little wary of the idea that all PrCs should be worked out between player and DM, because it seems like mileage using that method will vary wildly.

[violence in the media]

You say that like the mileage doesn't vary widely between prestige classes already.

[TheDarkFuzz]

Good point.

Still, at least when Wizards releases them you can go between different DMs or games and always have that resource to go back to when you need to justify why your character has laser-vision.

[Judging__Eagle]

It should be noted that most PrCs that Wizards released were once a custom bullshit class designed for a single character.

Like a druid, whose player has a hardon for daggers, and picked up a level of rogue, b/c they liek daggers.

PrCs that a player will take usuallt tend to be custom written classes for a specific character.

[Username17]

I actually think the idea of tiering classes for 4e was a pretty good one. Yeah, you're paragon you get to be an Astral Blade or Storm Warden. That makes sense on a lot of levels. I think it's fucked on a couple of levels:

• Concepts like Pit Fighter and Daggermaster are not high tier concepts. There's no reason conceptually that a first level character couldn't be a cat burglar or feytouched. If you're going to restrict concepts to higher levels, they should be ones that actually don't work at lower levels.
• If you're going to have classes that people unlock later on, those classes should be less restricted and more complete than the crap 4e is dishing up. Storm Warden and Knight Commander should be things to be, not selectable abilities for characters in fixed and established classes.
• Class trade-ins should be optional. Weather Wizard is a concept that only works at higher level when droughting a kingdom is something the players could plausibly do without making the rest of the adventure feel small in the pants. But Conjurer is a concept that scales all the way from summoning badgers to summoning demon lords.

But the number one complaint I have is still feats. If you give players a small number of ability omni-slots, those need to be spent on actual abilities. The ability to spend them on +1 to something you already do makes players less interesting and breaks the RNG. It's bad coming and going.

-Username17

[ggroy]

[CatharzGodfoot]

It should be noted that most PrCs that Wizards released were once a custom bullshit class designed for a single character.

Like a druid, whose player has a hardon for daggers, and picked up a level of rogue, b/c they liek daggers.

And then the druid died and the player wanted to try being a wizard. And then she decided to play exactly the same character again.

[Roy]

It should be noted that most PrCs that Wizards released were once a custom bullshit class designed for a single character.

Like a druid, whose player has a hardon for daggers, and picked up a level of rogue, b/c they liek daggers.

And then the druid died and the player wanted to try being a wizard. And then she decided to play exactly the same character again.

THUNDER GUIDES, HO!

[Wulf]

I think tier-seperation is a good idea. And it should work fine for 3.5 as well.

Basic classes like...I dont know, the Fighter, can be a Tier 1 class, also known as the "realistic tier" which ranges from level 1 to 5. After level 5, you can take a supernatural class (or prestige class), that you use for levels 6 to 10. At level 11, you go for the ownage tier and finally at level 16 you take an epic prestige class. (Figher -> Beast Warrior -> God of War -> God Slayer)

Fighter is ok for levels 1 to 5 which are the realistic tier, but the class Fighter has absolutely not a single class ability that says "I am going beyond a normal human limits now and become level 6+!" while other classes get super spells or funky supernatural abilities (like the monk, although the monk doesnt get much power and is generally crap, his theme and class is full with supernatual abilities which actually all physical-themed classes should get for free).

So your characters ends up with 4 "mini" prestige classes. Ofcourse, some prestige classes are simply the evolution form of the previous tier if you want to continue the same theme, which is fine and might even offer several unique bonusses cause you stay in-theme.

[mean_liar]

Yes, let's remake v3.5 again. That sounds like time well-spent.

[Lago PARANOIA]

mean_liar, when I think of the three biggest innovations I liked about 3E, I think of prestige classes, monster creation, and open multiclassing.

When I think of the three biggest innovations I liked about 4E, I think of... summoning mechanics, dynamic traps, and fixed hit points.

So you'll forgive me if I seem a bit biased on that front.

[Blicero]

How did 4E do summoning? I'm assuming it wasn't a loads-o-minionz type thing. And which classes got it? I would have though that it would have required a "summoner" class.

As for prestige classes, I also like the idea that Wulf presented. I guess EQ2 does this as well or something.

So, at first level, you're a Summoner. You create things, and maybe do some sort-term summons.

At level 6 (or whatever), you choose to become a Binder. Now, in addition to your general conjurer powers, you start learning how to do a wide variety of long-term bindings in addition to short-term summons.

Then, at level 11, you become a Fiend-Binder. You might start growing horns and gain some fiend-esque abilities. Primarily, though, you'll have a lot of binding powers that let you do crazy shit with fiendish servants.

Finally, at level 16, you become a Soul Binder. You use your mastery of binding to bind the souls of anyone, not just outsiders. You essentially get this massive army of controlled servants whose souls you store in shiny crystals in your blood palace.

An important part of this is that you don't leave your old classes. So, at when you get to level 20, you could choose to learn a level 20 Summoner Power, a level 20 Binder Power, a level 20 Fiend Binder Power, or a level 20 Soul Binder Power. Each would (obviously) be equal in power, but they would have different levels of specialization.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Summoning in 4E works in one of two ways:

A) Like Pokemon, where you trade out your actions so your Pokemon can do something.

or

B) Like, SimFarm where you plop down tokens on the field and get benefits for them during combat, such as using them to spy, letting allies unlock healing surges, being a meat shield, etc..

None of this crap where a cleric makes a Gentleman's agreement with the DM not to permanently spam the field with Hound Archons. Seriously, it's a big improvement and I like it.

[Psychic Robot]

The former is inherently more interesting than the latter. I don't really want to plop down a totem that lets everyone within five squares use a healing surge. That's...that's very bland. However, one of the benefits of summoned creatures is that you are getting more actions (and something to do your dirty work for you), which is why I find things like the ranger's beast companion (or whatever it is) stupid. Standard action for standard action? Give me a fucking break. I have all sorts of magical equipment, but my tiger can attack for 1[.B.] + its Strength modifier + my Wisdom modifier? Weaksauce. It also breaks the fuck out of verisimilitude.

"Old Yeller, get him!" Old Yeller charges the monster and bites. The next round, he stands there and stares at you like someone with Down's Syndrome. Because you have to command Old Yeller to bite each time you want him to bite (until he gets rabies).

The 3e summoning problem could have been solved with better summoning lists and a tighter leash on what summons could and could not do.

[Lago PARANOIA]

The former is inherently more interesting than the latter. I don't really want to plop down a totem that lets everyone within five squares use a healing surge. That's...that's very bland.

"Old Yeller, get him!" Old Yeller charges the monster and bites. The next round, he stands there and stares at you like someone with Down's Syndrome. Because you have to command Old Yeller to bite each time you want him to bite (until he gets rabies).

Psychic Robot, you're confusing what they did with the base mechanic with what the base mechanic actually is again.

[violence in the media]

The former is inherently more interesting than the latter. I don't really want to plop down a totem that lets everyone within five squares use a healing surge. That's...that's very bland.

Yeah, but if you can plop down three mana totems first, then you can totally frost shock your enemies.

[Psychic Robot]

I remember that spell. It was awesome, but you'd need to drink for 30s to get your mana back.

[Roy]

I remember that spell. It was awesome, but you'd need to drink for 30s to get your mana back.

LOL NEWB FARM MANA REGEN GEARZ KKTHXBAI.

[Wulf]

Yes, let's remake v3.5 again. That sounds like time well-spent.

I wouldnt mind that , although you might have meant it sarcastically as TGD has several "systems" in-house in the works.

Frank (and K) did a lot of work with Tomes and TNE. But both are no longer "real" 3.5. Tome is really D&D on hardcore space dope and TNE has a lot of modules, but not a single permanent system yet (as far as I can tell, but I am pretty new around here). Rather then the Tome-way, I would want to make casters lower in power (atleast, remove the cheese) ,but more tactical interesting (divide spells into various sizes, minor, major and greater spells, give certain spells channeling that needs to be active for several rounds to reach the full effect,etc).

But both of them has sure a lot of potential and plenty of ideas, like level/rank-based feats, hitpoint variants, CAN, etc.

We really should take all the good house-rules that are still compatible with most 3.5 supplements (classes, feats, etc, but not underlying systems perse) and create a smooth working 3.5 from it. Then hack the WWW and replace all paizo's pathfinder manuals with our own pdf manual. Ofcourse, all in the name of justice and saving the world

[Grek]

Summoning up an Attack Tiger and still getting to do whatever else it is you can do is not balanced unless everyone else in your party is just as powerful as you plus your most powerful combination of summons combined. This means that either your summons suck or your character personally isn't very powerful and requires his summons to be level appropriate.

[zeruslord]

The current plan for TNE is that it is set in the world of the Culture Focus series and is based on CAN. Culture determines what you can pull starting powers from, but after that it's point buy or something. That's all anyone but maybe Frank knows right now.

[ubernoob]

Summoning up an Attack Tiger and still getting to do whatever else it is you can do is not balanced unless everyone else in your party is just as powerful as you plus your most powerful combination of summons combined. This means that either your summons suck or your character personally isn't very powerful and requires his summons to be level appropriate.

Alternatively, you spent actions to summon that tiger and the SUM of all actions you and the tiger take in the combat are equal in power to the actions your allies got to take.

I'm in favor of having a summoner not have as powerful actions by himself though. You summon because you aren't strong yourself and that's cool.

[CatharzGodfoot]

Summoning up an Attack Tiger and still getting to do whatever else it is you can do is not balanced unless everyone else in your party is just as powerful as you plus your most powerful combination of summons combined. This means that either your summons suck or your character personally isn't very powerful and requires his summons to be level appropriate.

It's balanced mechanically, but you're still getting twice the screen time of everyone else.