# Rank the 3.5e DMG Prestige Classes



## Dark Jezter (Sep 3, 2003)

As the title says, this thread is to discuss the various prestige classes in the 3.5e DMG terms of power and overall usefulness.  I'll start by listing the classes and how I useful I feel that each one is.

*Arcane Archer:* An Average-powered class.  This class isn't as powerful as it used to be since enchanted arrows and enchanted bows no longer stack.  Still, it can be a nice archer class.

*Arcane Trickster:*  An average-powered class.  Great for dungon-exploration, since he can open doors and chests from a safe distance away, which will enable him to avoid many types of traps.

*Archmage:*  A highly-powerful class (some people claim it's overpowered).  You lose familiar progression, but in exchange you get very powerful arcane abilites.  Makes high-level wizards and sorcerers even deadlier than normal.

*Assassin:*  Moderate-to-high powerful class.  Rogues can take this class to become good at, well, assassination.  This is your class if you like to quickly and efficently kill your enemies.

*Blackguard:*  About as useful as a paladin (which could either be worthless or very useful, depending on who you talk to), but evil.

*Dragon Desciple:*  Limited usefulness.  I can't really imagine why you'd want to take this class.  I guess it could be useful if you were a fighter or barbarian, then took ranks in this to increase your physical toughness (at the expense of a lower BAB).

*Duelist:*  Limited usefulness.  The only thing this class has going for it is high inititive and reflex saves.

*Dwarven Defender:*  Highly useful.  The best melee PrC in the book.  I've personally seen the dwarven defender used to great effect in P&P D&D, and he gets even better in 3.5e!

*Eldritch Knight:*  Moderately useful.  It's now possible to make a fighter/mage who is decent, but not overpowered.  This class would be great for picking off wounded enemies.

*Hierophant:*  Highly Useful.  All a cleric needs to do is take 1 or 2 levels in this class after gaining the ability to cast 9th-level spells so that they can gain the Divine Reach ability.  Casting Harm on enemies from 30 (or 60) feet away is a neat trick, even if Harm was nerfed in 3.5e.

*Horizon Walker:*  Has anybody actually used this class yet?  It's a really cool concept, but I can't think of a way to make him really useful in regular play.  Limited usefulness.

*Loremaster:*  Limited usefulness.  Steep requirements for class features that aren't too good.

*Mystic Theurge:*  Moderate usefulness.  Remember when this PrC was first announced and everyone was screaming over how overpowered it supposedly was?  After testing it out myself and reading other player accounts, it's become apparant that this class isn't the superclass is first appeared to be.

*Red Wizard:*  Highly useful.  A Red Wizard evoker with Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration will soon be able to bypass the spell resistance of almost any monster.  Give him some levels in archmage, and he becomes even more potent.

*Shadowdancer:*  Moderately useful.  Quick and stealthy, this character makes a great scout/spy.

*Thaumaturgist:*  This is a class I haven't really tested out yet, but from what I've seen it could potentially very powerful; having a few powerful outsiders ready to fight for your cause could be a very nice benefit. 

Well, those are my thoughts that have been formulated by my own playtesting and study.  Anyone else have thoughts they'd like to share about the new PrCs?


----------



## Plane Sailing (Sep 3, 2003)

I've not seen many of these in use yet, obviously, but some comments:

_based on played classes_ 
Duellist: Bags of style, and helps make the rapier armed, well, duellist, a viable melee combatant. I really like this class as it supports a classical niche.

_based on raw opinion, take or leave it as you will_ 

Archmage... I wonder about the power of this one - the fact that you have to give up high level spell slots seems like a steep price to pay for most of the potential benefits. I don't know whether or not I'll see one of these played in my game.

Dragon Disciple - I agree that it seems rather strange that a class with arcane requirements proves best for melee fighters. Most peculiar.

Dwarven Defender - widely regarded as useless amongst my group, since enemies can just move away if you get into a defensive stance. Ironically it might suit highly mobile high dex dwarves best! Clearly a great class for defenders of dwarven citadels but not so good for adventuring IMO.

Nothing much else to say yet, other than that I really like the Horizon Walker, and it would be a tough decision for me whether to take a ranger on in his own class or pick up some horizon walking levels. Who'd have thought someone would ever say *that* about the ranger 

Cheers


----------



## Rashak Mani (Sep 3, 2003)

Horizon Walker looks like a supermarket for out of the ordinary abilities... want some spot ? Get the Plains terrain. Want some Move Silent ? Get Marsh. Higher levels have things like Resist 20 Fire !! Or tremorsense 30'feet. (You keep these abilities even outside that environment)  I wouldnt say its overpowered... but it certainly might be taken for a shopping list.

   Duelist could be a bit better too... nice concept... weak execution.


----------



## Will (Sep 3, 2003)

I personally think Duelist is really nifty, though you have to be very careful building it.

A rogue/fighter with a decent Int and Weapon finesse would do very well.

I've also considered a monk, but it isn't an effective design.

I agree with the initial poster about most of the others. Archmage I think is a reasonable trade-off.

Red Wizards require a careful control of 'circle initiates' a PC can have access to. In addition, the class is strongly dependant on how the DM runs things. Still, requiring, say, Leadership to have followers could work. The price of another school of magic is pretty hefty... you're talking about a mage with only 2/3 the selection of spells after a certain level, and that can be tough.


----------



## nute (Sep 3, 2003)

Here's my thoughts on how to rank the classes:

*Arcane Archer:* Reduced in effectiveness from 3.0. Only really accessible at high levels, unless you only take the minimum required arcane spellcasting levels, in which case it becomes merely a glorified archer. By the time a character would qualify for the class, magic items that surpass the class abilities should be available. The exceptionally useful abilities (Hail of Arrows, Arrow of Slaying) do have their benefits, though.

Rank: C

*Arcane Trickster:*  Very focused towards a utility character. Goes back to the aphorism of "Do many things, but none of them very well". Useful in stealthy situations, not so much in direct conflict. Skill choices remain viable, though. 

Rank: C

*Archmage:*  Once you're able to qualify for this class, there's no reason NOT to start taking levels in it. If your campaign requires so many uses of top level spells on a daily basis, make scrolls. The special abilities conferred by this class are insanely useful. The loss of spell progression makes it less than ideal, but the tradeoff's well worth it.

Rank: A-

*Assassin:*  By its nature, it's campaign-oriented (requires an assassin's guild or similar organization) which limits it somewhat. A good addition to a rogue's abilities, but not so much as a class unto itself. I consider it one of those that doesn't merit pursuing all ten levels of. 

Rank: B-

*Blackguard:*  Again, a very useful class, more so than the assassin. It's not campaign-oriented, and provides the best benefit of that class (poison use) with better BAB and HP. 

Rank: B+

*Dragon Disciple:*  Very limited. Requires spellcaster prereqs, then offers no spellcaster bonuses. DUD.

Rank: D

*Duelist:*  For those high-INT rogues or especially rangers, this is a beautiful PrC. The attack progression is amazing, and the abilities just keep getting better and better. 

Rank: B+

*Dwarven Defender:*  Suffers from the race-limited drawback of the arcane archer, but if you're a melee-oriented dwarf and you're not taking this PrC, Moradin frowns upon you! The benefits more than make up for the limitations. Second only to the Devoted Defender PrC for the role of "shield the wizard", it fits beautifully into a party dynamic. 

Rank: B.

*Eldritch Knight:*  The build for an EK is better suited for a DEX-based fighter, due to armor-related arcane spellcasting problems, and the need to keep one hand free for somatic spell requirements. An interesting combination could possibly be a Ftr/Wiz/Duel/EK build. But overall, it doesn't offer much more than a straight fighter/wizard multiclass.

Rank: C+

*Hierophant:*  Like the archmage, immensely useful for dedicated divine spellcasters. Curing at a distance is one of the most useful abilities, and the ability to bump your effective caster level makes up for the lack of spell progression. At high levels, having things like Widened Flame Strike as a spell-like ability become horribly awesome.

Rank: A.

*Horizon Walker:*  An expanded ranger class, really. If you're building the hunter/tracker role, it fits beautifully. If not, there's not much of a need for it. 

Rank: C.

*Loremaster:*  Most people neglect the fact that bards are technically arcane spellcasters. Working a bard build to Loremaster maximizes its usefulness. And takes forever to do, sadly. High requirements don't meet the payoffs. 

Rank: D.

*Mystic Theurge:*  Two spell progressions are useless without the skills to use them well. Only good with a lot of levels of it. I've never seen a good divine/arcane build for any character, and this PrC continues that tradition.

Rank: D.

*Red Wizard:*  Super-specialist. If you like that build, and don't mind the specific prereqs, this is the class for you. The campaign-specific nature of the class limits it GREATLY, though. As it's written, not as useful given the other stuff in the FRCS.

Rank: Compared to other FRCS, C.  Compared to core: B+

*Shadowdancer:*  At low levels, it's just repeating rogue abilities. Only in the higher levels does it become useful. Like the Arcane Trickster, a good utility character but less useful than a rogue until the good shadow abilities kick in. 

Rank: C.

*Thaumaturgist:*  Prereqs are high, and it's a 5-level class with the big build to a planar cohort. Good if you take it at high levels, an inefficient side path otherwise.

Rank: C-.

So, in order from awesomest to least awesomest:
Hierophant
Archmage
Duelist
Dwarven Defender
Blackguard
Assassin
Red Wizard
Eldritch Knight
Shadowdancer
Arcane Archer
Horizon Walker
Arcane Trickster
Thaumaturgist
Dragon Disciple
Loremaster.


----------



## Dark Jezter (Sep 3, 2003)

The duelist earning a B+?  I'm curious as to how you came up with that score.  I've run simulation combats involving two different duelists; one that used a high-INT rogue as a base class, and the other that used a dex-based fighter as a base class and had feats like Spring Attack and Weapon Specialization (Rapier).

The only really good Duelist ability I found was Elaborate Parry, which could increase the duelist's AC by at least 9 (at the expense of -4 on all attack rolls) if he started fighting defensively.  Canny defense didn't grant a real high AC because you had to give up shields and armor.  Precise strike, by the time you are high-enough level to get it, is only moderately useful (even with precise strike, you won't be inflicting as much damage as a sneak attacking rogue or a pure fighter).  Overall, I found the duelist not as useful as a pure rogue or pure fighter.

The Duelist may be a cool concept if you are a fan of movies like The Princess Bride or The Mask of Zorro, but in actual gameplay his usefulness is limited.


----------



## Norfleet (Sep 4, 2003)

My rating system here is very self explanatory, but I'll explain anyway: It's the noises I made when I was considering these as characters: "Ooh", "Hmm", "Eh", and "Bleah", roughly corresponding to Good, Okay, Bad, and Terrible.

Arcane Trickster: Seems to have been nerfed. I recall the version from S&S was an initial +3d6 SA at L2, which helped nicely to cover for the SA levels lost from having to take 5-6 levels of arcane casting. This new one doesn't do that, so it sharply curtails your sneak attack progression. Kinda "eh" now, as it sorta shoots the rogue/mage idea in the foot nicely. An at least 3 level delay in spellcasting ability, or a 5 level delay in sneak attacks, depending on which you value more, and no catchup in SA. I give it an "Eh".

Archmage: Okay, I think everything anyone's cared to say about it has been said. I give it an "Ooh".

Blackguard: A cool concept in practice, but the execution falls a bit short. For one, the amount of cross-class Hide involved for a skill which is really rather useless to Fighter/ex-Pals tends to put it out of reach, or makes becoming one a very premeditated move. That means, despite its intended appeal towards being a fighter or ex-Pal class, it's actually a rogue PrC. Emphasis also on the fact that it grants sneak attack progression, but in such low doses that it wouldn't mean anything unless you already HAD sneak attack. For a Rogue, it's an option to consider. I give it a rating of "Hmm". For everyone else, I rate it an "Eh".

Dragon Disciple....what exactly is this class trying to do? Give sorcerors or bards a way to shoot themselves in the foot, spellcastingwise? I give it a "Bleah."

Duellist: The original v1.0 Duellist with Precise Strike starting at +1d6 at L2, +1d6/4 lvls was good. The new 3.5E Duellist with only +1 and +2d6 at 5 and 10 is kinda "eh". The price of entry remains Dodge and Mobility: Unless you're planning to go all the way with the Spring Attack + Whirlwind branch, these feats are essentially useless, particularly since the class also demands tumble, which means you *HAVE* tumble.

Dwarven Defender: It's like barbarian, but for dwarves. I give it a "Hmm".

Eldritch Knight: For mages who like swords? I give it an "Eh".

Hierophant: Cherrypick class. I give it a "Hmm" simply for that alone. As an actual full-progression, I give it an "Bleah".

Horizon Walker: I think it's for rangers or fighters. Nobody else would have a feat spare for...Endurance, is it? I don't even know what that does off the top of my head. Must not be terribly useful, because if it did, I'd remember it. Seems kinda like a cherrypick. I give it an "Eh".

Loremaster: Skill focus(Knowledge)? I'm supposed to burn a feat for this? I'll pass, thanks. I give it a "Bleah".

Mystic Theurge: This is much better for NPCs or created high-level PCs. It could be really cool, if you shoehorned it with some of the 3.0 splatbook PrCs. I give it an "Eh" for that, or if you're an NPC. Otherwise, "Bleah".

Shadowdancer: It's a rogue without sneak attack. It has special magicalish powers. That's usually called a "bard". Aside from those special powers, everything else it gains is just an overlap of the rogue, and it demands two useless feats as price of entry: Dodge, Mobility. Once again, without Spring/Whirl, Dodge and Mobility are crappy wastes of two feats. And this class demands hide and and move silently ranks. Lots of them! Which means fighters need not apply, since they get neither of these. So that reduces the Shadowdancer to a cherrypick for HIPS, at the cost of 2 feats and a level. I rate this a "Bleah", overall. But you can cherrypick anyway. It's still available for you in 3.5.

Red Wizard, read literally, requires "Human from Thay", which means that outside of FR, it's impossible to actually meet that prerequisite, which means it doesn't exist. Assuming your DM ignores that, and has a Red Wizardoid group in the campaign, then it becomes a decent choice. I give it a "Hmm". Otherwise, as it stands, it's FR-only still(makes you wonder why it's now in core), and evaluated from an FR-only standpoint, against other FR stuff, it's kinda "eh".

Thaumaturgist: Oh, look, a summoning PrC. Maybe it's just me, but I have a strongly negative opinion of summoned help. I see them as crutches of the weak, which, admittedly, mages are, but still, they do tend to suck, being as they summon monsters you've probably killed before, or would certainly be able to kill at the level you summoned them. Besides, summoners are too much like telemarketers for my taste, particularly if you're a summonable critter. I'm probably overly biased on this, so I'm not going to rate it.


----------



## Will (Sep 4, 2003)

I found that a duelist is best if you are already not going to have a lot of armor and just enough to fit any Int bonus you have. I think it's primarily useful at levels 15-20, where bracers of armor are reasonably cheap compared to regular armor, and where tomes of stat buff start appearing.

I also find you really want to do something like Ultra dex/int, two weapon tree.

A monk build would be cool, but really requires a GM to waive the multiclass restriction, and possibly waive Weapon Finesse requirement for monks. At which point a duelist could be a very handy for extra AC and a few useful abilities.


----------



## MerricB (Sep 4, 2003)

Norfleet said:
			
		

> Dragon Disciple....what exactly is this class trying to do? Give sorcerors or bards a way to shoot themselves in the foot, spellcastingwise? I give it a "Bleah."



You know how the Eldritch knight has requirements of Wiz5/Ftr1? Well, the Dragon Disciple has the requirements of Ftr4/Brd1. 

Consider the following build:
Str 15, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 14, Wis 8, Cha 13

By the time you've reached 15th level, you are a Ftr4/Brd1/DD10:
Str 26, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 16, Wis 8, Cha 15.
HD 4d10+1d6+10d12+30
BAB +11
AC +4 natural armour
SA: darkvision 60', low-light vision, flight, blindsense 60'.

The Dragon Disciple is a martial class, but requires a slight touch of arcane ability. I've seen a Pal2/Sor4/DD6 in my campaign, and that was a _scary_ build. 

Cheers!


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Sep 4, 2003)

Norfleet said:
			
		

> Loremaster: Skill focus(Knowledge)? I'm supposed to burn a feat for this? I'll pass, thanks. I give it a "Bleah".




You wouldn't give up a feat for a bonus feat every other level?  Um, okay.


----------



## Norfleet (Sep 4, 2003)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> You wouldn't give up a feat for a bonus feat every other level?  Um, okay.



Ooh. I didn't see that angle, buried under two crossreferenced tables as it were. That changes things a lot. Incidentally, that's also a revised rating.


----------



## MerricB (Sep 4, 2003)

Dark Jezter said:
			
		

> *Dragon Desciple:* Limited usefulness. I can't really imagine why you'd want to take this class. I guess it could be useful if you were a fighter or barbarian, then took ranks in this to increase your physical toughness (at the expense of a lower BAB).




It's a melee fighter's dream.
+8 Str, +2 Con, +2 Int, +2 Cha, +4 natural armour and a d12 Hit Die.

You lose 4 to your BAB (assuming a Ftr4/Bard1/DD10 build), but you gain that +4 back through strength. Wield a two-handed weapon to get an additional +6 damage...

It's nasty. 

Cheers!


----------



## Norfleet (Sep 4, 2003)

MerricB said:
			
		

> It's a melee fighter's dream.
> +8 Str, +2 Con, +2 Int, +2 Cha, +4 natural armour and a d12 Hit Die.
> 
> You lose 4 to your BAB (assuming a Ftr4/Bard1/DD10 build), but you gain that +4 back through strength. Wield a two-handed weapon to get an additional +6 damage...
> ...



It might also make it difficult to find equipment that fits. Not to mention really cramping the entire ale and wenches thing.


----------



## Amrynn Moonshadow (Sep 4, 2003)

red wiz is not in srd d/l iirc.... but, its in the 3.5e phb/dmg?


----------



## Dark Jezter (Sep 4, 2003)

Yes, the Red Wizard is in the 3.5e DMG as an example of a campaign-specific prestige class.


----------



## Thanee (Sep 4, 2003)

*Arcane Archer:* Extremely weak.

*Arcane Trickster:* Very good class. You only lose 3 caster levels to gain almost all benefits of a rogue (altho now you don't get uncanny dodge anymore, unless you get another rogue level, losing a total of 4 caster levels). This is the only way to play a rogue/wizard multiclass effectively.

*Archmage:* It's a powerful class still, altho it's a lot weaker now. Still pretty much a must-have for high level wizards and sorcerers.

*Assassin:* dunno.

*Blackguard:* dunno.

*Dragon Desciple:* Very powerful, once you enter epic levels! Otherwise only moderately useful, except as a fighter class.

*Duelist:* Nice fighting class, but mostly for style. All in all an average class.

*Dwarven Defender:* Seems to be a nice class, altho I've never seen one in action. The reduced mobility reduces its effectiveness, tho.

*Eldritch Knight:* dunno. Seems like a nice fighter/wizard, tho, as you only lose one caster level.

*Hierophant:* Moderately useful, nothing more. Some nice abilities, but you sacrifice too much to get them.

*Horizon Walker:* dunno.

*Loremaster:* A highly underrated class, which is very good actually!

*Mystic Theurge:* Havn't seen one in action, but you lose 3 caster levels to double your spellcasting, which sounds like a fair deal and would make for a great support spellcaster. Not as good as the similar (also losing 3 caster levels to gain the benefits of another class) Arcane Trickster, tho. Also not as good as a pure wizard or cleric, since higher level spells are generally better than more lower level spells.

*Red Wizard:* Even tho, this one was nerfed a lot, it's still a very powerful class.

*Shadowdancer:* Adds some great abilities (evasion, darkvision, etc), but also has steep requirements. All in all an average class.

*Thaumaturgist:* dunno.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## hoyerhan reborn (Sep 4, 2003)

MeepoTheMighty said:
			
		

> You wouldn't give up a feat for a bonus feat every other level? Um, okay.



From DMG:
You can't choose the same secret twice.


----------



## Klaus (Sep 4, 2003)

Arcane Archer: Has lost usefulness with the revision. The "arrow +x" everodd level should be replaced with different abilities. Maybe keep "automatic magic arrows" at 1st level and add +1 to arcane spellcasting class at levels 3, 5, 7 and 9. Rate: C-

Arcane Trickster: Ranged Legerdemain is just awful. Far better would be to allow an AT to use Disable Device, Open Locks and Sleight of Hand through a "mage hand" spell, with a decreasing penalty. That way, an AT can load up on "mage hand" if he wants to. And Impromptu Sneak Attack doesn't quite float for a class that is supposed to focus less on combat than a straight rogue. Rate: D

Archmage: Good class, with nice flavor and abilities. It's a fine 5-level class. Rate: B+

Assassin: Good class, has flavor and losing the spellbook helped. Rate A-

Blackguard: Good class, with lots of flavor. Rate: A-

Dragon Disciple: Moderate class, with lots of flavor. Rate: C+

Duelist: More flavor than anything else, but precludes the rapier+main gauche fighter. Excelent for a city rogue. Rate: B-

Dwarven Defender: Incorporated some of the 3.0 epic DD to make this class a wonderful choice for dwarven fighters. Deadly in the right situation, and just as effective as a regular fighter in other situations. rate: A-

Eldritch Knight: Bland. If you take 5 levels of fighter and 5 of wizard, you get, over 10 levels, average BAB, almost-good Fort and Ref saves, +5 spellcasting levels, one metamagic feat, increased familiar powers and 3 bonus fighter feats. The EK doesn't add anything interesting to this mix. Might as well stick to Ftr/Wiz. Rate: E

Hierophant: Nice abilities, but wouldn't float as a 10-level PrC. Good thing it's 5-levels. Rate: B-

Horizon Walker: It should be clarified if the HW needs to visit the prospective terrain at least once before chosing it. Otherwise, it's just silly. But if it enforces the "walking" part, it's a fine class. Rate: B+

Loremaster: Very good class in 3.0, and still is. Rate: A

Mystic Theurge: There's only so many spells you can cast in one round. The MT has ultimate versatility, but in the end isn't overpowered. It just lacks flavor. Works best for clerics of Boccob or similar magic gods. Rate: C

Red Wizard: Looks like a good class, but I'd rather have a Greyhawk example of a setting-specific class. Rate: B

Shadowdancer: Very good class, with tons of flavor. Wonderful for rogues, monks and rangers. Rate: A

Thaumaturgist: Seems too limited in benefits, but has to be tested yet. Rate: C- (pending).


----------



## green slime (Sep 4, 2003)

Thanee said:
			
		

> [*Eldritch Knight:* dunno. Seems like a nice fighter/wizard, tho, as you only lose one caster level.




Actually, I get that you lose two: as you loose one to gain martial weapon proficiencies (A fighter/ranger/barbarian/paladin level), and then another one upon entry into the class.


----------



## Amrynn Moonshadow (Sep 4, 2003)

no Red Wizard in the srd isn't much of a problem, it was nerfed for 3.5e right? big changes or little ones? (not that it matter much to me, red wizards are but npc's in my campaign . . . and anyway, in a few days i'll finally get to go back to 'home' and visit all my D&D books again, and make the changes myself as i see fit)

mystic thuege (sp?) reeks (in that good way) or the FR 2nd edition specialty priests of Azuth, the "Magistrati" . . . 

along with the previous rant i had weeks (months?) ago about the inherent dumbness of speciality wizards (what? +1 spell / day basically? so an evoker has no special ability to cast better fireballs than a diviner? an necromancer is JUST AS GOOD at Illusions as an illusionist?), i think that in big arse campaigns like the FR they should flesh out things a bit more. at least include a 'priest' class for the gods (i'm not really seeing that a priestess of eldath would be a better fighter than a street rogue or anything, but they are . . .), and other specialities. a paladin of Torm is going to be alot different than a paladin of Sharess (goddess of male and female sluts in some ways). yet they are not mechanics wise.

i guess i'm saying diversity is a strength, and sorry for hijacking this thread.

arcane archer isn't that special of a class, not compared to the Dwarven Defender, at least it's better than the halfling pony rider, or the half-orc goat banger or whatever . . .

archmage is solid.

horriz. walker is a well themed out prestige class. works well with this one npc i have (ranger 3 / psion (nomad) 10) who lives in the harsh deserts of Calimshaan and also knows a thing or two about hills and the plane of fire. (went there a few times to kick some efreeti buttocks) it's not really a great class for a PC, but hey, not all PrC's are for PC's.

or at least I think so.

dualist is nice in theory, but i think got a bit weaker (duh) with the revision; but it was already weak to begin with IMO.


----------



## Li Shenron (Sep 4, 2003)

I haven't seen them played yet, therefore I am only speculating...

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's start with the most unique PrCl:

Arcane Archer - The concept is very nice, but the implementation is a little boring. For a straightforward archer (Fighter + 1 level of arcane spellcaster) it is very good: it costs the loss of bonus fighter feats for better saves and skills, plus the special abilities and free magic arrows. But I think the special abilities should have been more valuable, with more use per day and maybe allowing Imbue Arrow with Touch spells as well. Possible also for Rangers. 8

Assassin - It was already very well done in 3.0, with spontaneous casting (but still based on Int) the design is even improved. 10

Blackguard - Easily the evil counterpart of Paladin, so I was not expecting much except opposite abilities, and it's fine. Ex-Paladin rules have always been a nice addition IMHO. The only thing that always bugged me is that the requirements do not fit at all with the concept. Why every BG are good in hiding and sundering remains a mystery to me. 9

Dragon Disciple - An insteresting attempt to convert a template into a PrCl. I'll tell you what I think about it the day I figure out what it is all about. N/A

Duelist - Just a series of bonuses rather than new abilities, for high-dex/int Figthers. 6

Dwarven Defender - Slightly too powerful, but overall ok. It doesn't strike me much with flavor for some reason, but it's better than I once thought. Trap Sense doesn't fit completely IMHO. 8

Loremaster - It is good overall, but incomplete. There are at least 3 kinds of knowledge: scholar (e.g. Knowledge skills), practical (e.g. metamagic, item creation...) and instant (Divination spells). There are requisites for all of them, which is good design, but the benefits of the class don't improve those ability, and instead just give stray pseudo-knowledge with the "secrets". In any case, better than straight core classes. 7

Shadowdancer - An example on how to design a PrCl. Right requisites, good balance, works well with several core classes, great flavor, unique abilities. 10

Thaumaturgist - The idea is very good, but stopping at 5th levels is IMHO a mistake, it should have been easy to come up with other abilities at higher levels, or improve the base ones, maybe at the cost of a couple more prerequisites. 6

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Then the PrCl which are basically just improved multiclassing (my general opinion is that they are boring but generally effective):

Arcane Trickster - It's just Wizard with Sneak Attack and better skills. RL and ISA abilities wouldn't have hurt if they were usable more times per day! 7

Eldritch Knight - Obviously only for Wiz/Ftr or similar combos. To straight Wiz it costs 2 spellcasting levels, to straight Ftr it costs 3 points of BAB. It is probably a very playable class, but it is also the most uninspired of all. 6

Mystic Theurge - In a party without Wiz and Cle, it can become a must, and it would be welcome if there are only 3 PCs at all. Still good if either one is missing, but if there are both already, it's just frustrating. I think it is probably balanced anyway. 6

---------------------------------------------------------------------

At last, the PrCls which IMHO must be considered just as special abilities in exchange for 1 normal level progression (there is no real progression of specific features over the PrCl levels, every level gives 1 new ability completely by choice). These classes are just "cherrypicking", but I don't dislike this if it happens only at high levels:

Archmage - Well, it's a must, therefore it's too cheesy IMHO: except Arcane Fire, all the abilities are worth the cost, and spellcasting progression is not hindered. Trivial requirements, powerful class. 8

Hierophant - It's essentially a variant of the previous one, just to make it work differently for divine casters and justify a different class. 8

Horizon Walker - If it's 10-levels it's only because the planar mastery bonuses could be too good at low-mid levels. The class idea is nice, but they could have come up with something more interesting than skill bonuses. 6


----------



## MeepoTheMighty (Sep 5, 2003)

hoyerhan reborn said:
			
		

> From DMG:
> You can't choose the same secret twice.




True, but they're all at least as good as a feat.


----------



## Thanee (Sep 5, 2003)

green slime said:
			
		

> Actually, I get that you lose two: as you loose one to gain martial weapon proficiencies (A fighter/ranger/barbarian/paladin level), and then another one upon entry into the class.




You're - of course - right. Forgot the missing +1 caster level on the first class level of Eldritch Knight! 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Norfleet (Sep 6, 2003)

Li Shenron said:
			
		

> Shadowdancer - An example on how to design a PrCl. Right requisites, good balance, works well with several core classes, great flavor, unique abilities. 10



I wouldn't give it that much. SD is clearly a cherrypick for the L1 HiPS. For a fighter, it chews away at BAB and feats. For a rogue, there's zero sneak attack progression. It's certainly not for casters, because there's no progression there either. As far as I can tell, the full class isn't really for anyone.


----------



## Psiblade (Sep 6, 2003)

The shadowdancer works wonders for Bards, Monks, and Rangers. Anybody who can sneak gets either uncanny dodge or evasion or both.



-Psiblade


----------

