# Most Unbalanced Prestige Classes?



## Wonger (Jun 2, 2004)

I'm launching a new campaign soon, and I'd like to avoid having PCs choose a prestige class that I only figure out is horribly unbalanced months after they take it.

So please, if you know of a poorly balanced prestige class, list it here with a as brief as possible blurb why it is bad!  Then I can look it up and make a choice if I'm going to ban it or modify it or what have you.

I'm only including WotC published PrC's at this point: DMG, splatbooks, Complete Books, Dragon, etc...

Chime in!!


----------



## der_kluge (Jun 2, 2004)

The one I see mentioned a lot is the Order of the Bow Initiate, from the FRCS (I believe).  Really, really powerful.  

In fact, I find most stuff (feats, spells, everything) from the Forgotten Realms books to be just over the top in terms of power.  At first glance, they seem balancing, but then I always regret allowing it later on.  The "spell prodigy" feat comes to mind.  There are others.

I've seen some "weak" prestige classes, but I've not personally come across any really powerful ones in my own campaign.


----------



## der_kluge (Jun 2, 2004)

I should add that I believe there is a revised Order of the Bow Initiate in the Complete Warrior.  And, I can only hope that it is fixed.  Most of the Prestige Classes in the Complete Warrior are very solid.


----------



## Goddess FallenAngel (Jun 2, 2004)

The Order of the Bow Initiate in the Complete Warrior (not a FR class) is actually balanced - it is the older printing of it in Sword and Fist that is way over the top, in my opinion.

The Dervish from the Complete Warrior is a bit unbalanced, from what I've seen of it in play.

Also, if you do allow FR books, stay away from anything having to do with Shadow Magic & Spellfire. Both feats and PRCs. Unless you are having a campaign that is including those elements (and thus the ways to exploit their weaknesses) they are far too powerful for your campaign (from my personal experience).

Really, because the Forgotten Realms is a high-magic, high-power campaign setting, the items published for FR are a bit powerful for a 'normal' campaign. If you are not running a FR campaign, I would suggest looking over anything from a FR book carefully before allowing it.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 2, 2004)

Without a doubt, Radiant Servant of Pelor. That one just is undead slaughter fiend. Short of something with a lot HD or a Death Knight, few undead can withstand the assault of a RSoP.


----------



## Impeesa (Jun 2, 2004)

Nobody's mentioned anything utterly broken yet... though the Radiant Servant is powerful. Things to watch out for: Hulking Hurler (CW). Easy to do hundreds of thousands of damage with that thing. The revised Dweomerkeeper from the CD Web Enhancement. How does Wish or Miracle 4/day with no xp cost sound to you?

--Impeesa--


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 2, 2004)

Mm forgot about DK. Course since it was a web enhancement I didn't count it...


----------



## MrFilthyIke (Jun 2, 2004)

Geomancer seemed VERY powerful at high levels, and a lot of people say the Ur-Priest is "broken".  I don't know, I've not played in a campaign high level enough to even BOTHER with PrC's.


----------



## jarlaxlecq (Jun 2, 2004)

Frienzied Berserker, unless you consider it balanced because hes as likely to kill the other PCs as he is the enemy


----------



## Psion (Jun 2, 2004)

I don't think Geomancer is that potent -- it has to split its entry casting levels and only benefits from advancing in one class at a time.

Ur-Priest (and for that matter, any class geared to get spells at a level sooner than avaialble to a normal class -- there are several, so watch out for apostle of peace, divine champion, and so forth) and Radiant Servant would get the nix in my game. Hulking Hurler is only broken by virture of an ill-spoken mechanic, but you could easily nix the whole class to avoid the problem.


----------



## MarauderX (Jun 2, 2004)

About half of the PrCs from Warcraft are a bit out of touch with balance, IMO, as are many of the spells.  I was hoping to incorporate a lot of it into my homebrew, but after reading some of them and thinking of them combined with maxed core classes it would be more than overpowering, but absurd.


----------



## GreenMonster (Jun 2, 2004)

*Dervish/archmage*

what can I say - Dervish gets around half the combat rules and is limited only by "uses ber day" of the dervish dance....Ask yourself...how many great halls need to be cleared by a single character in a given day?

As for archmage it is overpowered simply in the fact that what mage wouldn't take it?

oh yeah...Be careful with Verdant Lord...good saves...spells advancement every level...2 good saves...and throw in some special abilities to boot!


----------



## Wonger (Jun 2, 2004)

Good stuff so far - keep 'em coming!  A few players have expressed interest in a couple of the ones mentioned.

Maybe you could give me a little more analysis on these:

Radiant Servent of Pelor - from Complete Divine.

Archmage.


----------



## Sejs (Jun 2, 2004)

MrFilthyIke said:
			
		

> and a lot of people say the Ur-Priest is "broken".



Allow me.  

Ur-Priest?  Broken.


----------



## Savage Wombat (Jun 2, 2004)

What's the deal with the Hulking Hurler anyway?  It doesn't seem unbalanced at first glance...


----------



## epochrpg (Jun 2, 2004)

*This should be obvious!*

*MYSTIC THEURGE IS BROKEN BEYOND BELIEF!*

I can hear the M-T loving babies crying now: "But they don't get wizard feats!  And they don't improve at turning undead!  That makes it balanced!"

Balanced my @$$.  Sorcerers gain none of those things.  Basically, all a mystic theurge is is a sorcerer who also gets to cast cleric spells ON TOP of his arcane spells.  BROKEN!!!!!!


----------



## Ferret (Jun 2, 2004)

Any one that focus on raising crit ranges and multipliers, should be off limits. Trust us.


----------



## Psionicist (Jun 2, 2004)

epochrpg said:
			
		

> [SIZ...E=7][B...][COL....OR=Orange]MYSTIC THEURGE IS BROKEN BEYOND BELIEF![/COLOR][/B][/SIZE]
> 
> I can hear the M-T loving babies crying now: "But they don't get wizard feats!  And they don't improve at turning undead!  That makes it balanced!"
> 
> Balanced my @$$.  Sorcerers gain none of those things.  Basically, all a mystic theurge is is a sorcerer who also gets to cast cleric spells ON TOP of his arcane spells.  BROKEN!!!!!!




Please don't shout.


----------



## Gnimish88 (Jun 2, 2004)

Shadowdancer - Not unbalanced or overpowered per se, but you definately want to make sure that you and the player agree on what Hide in Plain Sight and Shadowjump allow the character to do.


----------



## Psion (Jun 2, 2004)

Wonger said:
			
		

> Good stuff so far - keep 'em coming!  A few players have expressed interest in a couple of the ones mentioned.
> 
> Maybe you could give me a little more analysis on these:
> 
> Radiant Servent of Pelor - from Complete Divine.




This one is really pretty straightforward. It gets a bevy of class abilities AND has everything the already powerful cleric has and even does some of them better -- including the two things the cleric does best: heal and spellcast.

Drawback - a slightly smaller hit dice. Doesn't pay for it IMO



> Archmage.




Nothing wrong with the 3.5 version, IMO. Spell power WAS broken in 3.0/FRCS, but the 3.5 DMG version works. Some find the entry requirements a bit straightforward, but I really don't think if you express the costs in other ways (like spell slots) that its a big deal.


----------



## epochrpg (Jun 2, 2004)

*Okay*

okay.  *whispers* "mystic theurge is broken beyond belief.  they are the same thing as a sorcerer who also gets to cast cleric spells on top of sorcerer spells.  there is zero justification for this.  sure they cannot turn, but neither can a sorcerer for crying out loud.  it is broken."


----------



## silentspace (Jun 2, 2004)

die_kluge said:
			
		

> The one I see mentioned a lot is the Order of the Bow Initiate, from the FRCS (I believe).  Really, really powerful.
> 
> In fact, I find most stuff (feats, spells, everything) from the Forgotten Realms books to be just over the top in terms of power.  At first glance, they seem balancing, but then I always regret allowing it later on.  The "spell prodigy" feat comes to mind.  There are others.
> 
> I've seen some "weak" prestige classes, but I've not personally come across any really powerful ones in my own campaign.




A lot of that stuff has been revised in the Player's Guide to Faerun.  Spell Prodigy now affects bonus spells only, not DC


----------



## Psion (Jun 2, 2004)

epochrpg said:
			
		

> *MYSTIC THEURGE IS BROKEN BEYOND BELIEF!*
> 
> I can hear the M-T loving babies crying now: "But they don't get wizard feats!  And they don't improve at turning undead!  That makes it balanced!"
> 
> Balanced my @$$.  Sorcerers gain none of those things.  Basically, all a mystic theurge is is a sorcerer who also gets to cast cleric spells ON TOP of his arcane spells.  BROKEN!!!!!!




Note: Caps, exclamation points, and size doesn't make your point more correct. Really.

The mystic theurge debate is old, but here's my take:
It's unbalanced at its highest levels, but not at low levels.
At low levels, the entry requirements of having to have 3levels in two different spellcasting classes, and ergo be 3 casting levels behind a single class spellcaster, puts it at a disadvantage despite the larger spell list.

However, adding two caster levels per spellcasting level after that tends to work of that initial disadvantage pretty quickly, and by 8th-10th level or so, the class has extremely broad utility, great endurance, and strong internal synergies that make it a bit of a scene stealer.

(The typical argument that it is not unbalanced presumes some sort of mage duel arrangement. If this was a game of arena combat, that would be a valid measure. But it's not, so it isn't. It's a game where a team of characters are expect to face a variety of obstacles.)


----------



## Piratecat (Jun 2, 2004)

epochrpg said:
			
		

> *whispers* "mystic theurge is broken beyond belief."




Despite initial assumptions, we haven't found mystic theurge to be broken at all. The loss of those high level spells is excrutiating. 

I agree, however, about Divine Servant of Pelor -- give up diddly, get lots in return. The same could be said for the archmage, which I would allow nevertheless.


----------



## Someone (Jun 2, 2004)

I don´t agree with the mystic theurge being broken. I´m playing one right now, in a (large) party that also has clerics and wizards. I found that a) he´s real, very good as support and utility and b) pathetic in combat.


----------



## Sejs (Jun 2, 2004)

> What's the deal with the Hulking Hurler anyway? It doesn't seem unbalanced at first glance...



Give it a second glance.  

The damage a Hulking Hurler does with a thrown object is based on the object's weight.  The heaviest object an HH can throw is something up to their light load capacity, or their medium load capacity with the Overburdened Heave trick.  And remember carrying capacity scales not only with the strength of a creature, but also with its _size_.  And additionally, a sharp or pointy object deals damage as if were an object of twice its actual weight.

So as a very modest example, say we have a Str 25 ogre with 2 levels of Hulking Hurler, and Overburdened Heave.  Medium load is 533 lbs, doubled due to being Large, clocks in at 1,066 lbs.  Okay, so our ogre purchases a 1000 lb ball of spiked iron.  Imagine it looking like the head of a really large, really mean flail.  Enchant it to be +1 and Returning, just for convienance sake.  Each attack, our very, very modest example can chuck his weapon for 13d6 dmg, plus relavent modifiers.


----------



## Piratecat (Jun 2, 2004)

EpochRPG, shouting with a large font size is rude; please don't do so. I have edited your post accordingly.


----------



## Wonger (Jun 2, 2004)

epochrpg said:
			
		

> okay.  *whispers* "mystic theurge is broken beyond belief.  they are the same thing as a sorcerer who also gets to cast cleric spells on top of sorcerer spells.  there is zero justification for this.  sure they cannot turn, but neither can a sorcerer for crying out loud.  it is broken."




I've already made up my mind about the MT, so lets not let this thread turn into that thread (one that has been done a dozen times already).  I am going to steer clear of that one.

Keep them coming!


----------



## Longbow (Jun 2, 2004)

Frenzied Berserker, Improved Power Attack and Deathless Frenzy are insane.


----------



## silentspace (Jun 2, 2004)

GreenMonster said:
			
		

> As for archmage it is overpowered simply in the fact that what mage wouldn't take it?




Archmage in 3.5 is not nearly as good.  Spell Power is +1, for level-dependent variables and caster level checks only.  Spell-like ability hasn't changed, but it's not such a great ability.  Arcane Fire is alright, but 3.5 has Scorching Ray, which is very good (Empower it, Maximize it).  The good arcana are Arcane Reach (not so many touch attack spells though), Mastery of Elements and Mastery of Shaping.  

Still, Mastery of Elements and Mastery of Shaping are pretty attractive, especially if you like evocation spells, so yes, a lot of wizards will take it.


----------



## Aaron L (Jun 2, 2004)

ruleslawyer said:
			
		

> When is a druid with the ability to wild shape ever NOT in wild shaped form in a combat situation? Unless the player is inexperienced, druids are wild shaped all the time.






Really?   I have played and seen played many druids who weren't wild shaped every combat.   I wouldn't consider myself inexperienced by a long shot.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jun 2, 2004)

Windwalker (of Shaundakul) from FR's _Faiths & Pantheons_. Ugh.

Full spellcasting progression every level, plus special abilities (some _very_ good) every level, plus another domain. As written, this thing is ridiculous (and was discovered to be so through play).


----------



## Psion (Jun 2, 2004)

Pkitty and someone,

I'm curious: what levels of MTs have you run, and are they as PCs or NPCs? That could make all the difference IMO/E.


----------



## BobROE (Jun 2, 2004)

arnwyn said:
			
		

> Windwalker (of Shaundakul) from FR's _Faiths & Pantheons_. Ugh.
> 
> Full spellcasting progression every level, plus special abilities (some _very_ good) every level, plus another domain. As written, this thing is ridiculous (and was discovered to be so through play).




I think it was based on the theory that you'd be a ranger taking it, and if that's true it's not that bad.  But from a cleric it's definitely broken.


----------



## 3catcircus (Jun 2, 2004)

Sejs said:
			
		

> Give it a second glance.
> 
> The damage a Hulking Hurler does with a thrown object is based on the object's weight.  The heaviest object an HH can throw is something up to their light load capacity, or their medium load capacity with the Overburdened Heave trick.  And remember carrying capacity scales not only with the strength of a creature, but also with its _size_.  And additionally, a sharp or pointy object deals damage as if were an object of twice its actual weight.
> 
> So as a very modest example, say we have a Str 25 ogre with 2 levels of Hulking Hurler, and Overburdened Heave.  Medium load is 533 lbs, doubled due to being Large, clocks in at 1,066 lbs.  Okay, so our ogre purchases a 1000 lb ball of spiked iron.  Imagine it looking like the head of a really large, really mean flail.  Enchant it to be +1 and Returning, just for convienance sake.  Each attack, our very, very modest example can chuck his weapon for 13d6 dmg, plus relavent modifiers.




But *if* you allow a Str 25 Ogre w/ 2 levels of HH in your campaign - is it as PC or NPC?  If your campaign is high-powered enough for this example to be a PC, and *assuming* the DM *allowed* him to enchant the thing, then wouldn't *everything else* in the campaign be of equal power?  If it is for NPCs only - then obviously, the answer is not to throw that at a party that couldn't handle a spellcaster launching a 13D6 fireball...


----------



## ForceUser (Jun 2, 2004)

I'll join the chorus on the Radiant Servant of Pelor. Thumbs down. 

The revised Sacred Fist is worrisome, though I have yet to see it in play to decide for myself.

To whomever claimed that the Archmage is something every single wizard would strive for, I disagree. The entry requirements are less than optimal. You are forced to sacrifice three potential metamagic feats for Skill Focus and Spell Focus (X2). That is a hard sell.


----------



## epochrpg (Jun 2, 2004)

Someone said:
			
		

> I don´t agree with the mystic theurge being broken. I´m playing one right now




oh, i see.


----------



## Pants (Jun 2, 2004)

ForceUser said:
			
		

> To whomever claimed that the Archmage is something every single wizard would strive for, I disagree. The entry requirements are less than optimal. You are forced to sacrifice three potential metamagic feats for Skill Focus and Spell Focus (X2). That is a hard sell.



Plus, you have to give up actual spell slots in order to use all those fancy-schamncy powers.  A very hard thing to give up indeed.

My list of unbalanced PrC's:

Overpowered:
Vigilante (Relics and Rituals)
Thrall of Dispater (Book of Vile Darkness)
Frenzied Berserker (Complete Warrior)
Skylord (Book of Exalted Deeds)
Illithid Savant (Savage Species)

Underpowered:
Tempest (Masters of the Wild) (it was bad in 3.0 and now its really bad in 3.5)
Most of the Disciple and Thrall PrC's from the BoVD
Vermin Lord (BoVD)
Forsaker (MotW)


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 2, 2004)

3.5 archmage isn't broken. 3.0 was. (That's only because they've nerfed Spell focus, and thus they did so with 3.5 archmage.) 

I already gave my vote for RSoP. 

I side with Psion on what's broken for the most part. (I like Divine champion but doubtful I'll use it outside of the Realms.) 

MT isn't broken but it's just a crock IMHO.


----------



## MDSnowman (Jun 2, 2004)

Pants said:
			
		

> Overpowered:
> Vigilante (Relics and Rituals)




This I can see... The Vigilant was always a powerhouse uber-ranger



			
				Pants said:
			
		

> Underpowered:
> Tempest (Masters of the Wild) (it was bad in 3.0 and now its really bad in 3.5)




This makes no sense to me, the Tempest was the cornerstone in the worst bit of powergaming I'd ever concieved of... it was called the human blender and got 10+ attacks on a full attack action.

..also where has it been updated to 3.5?


----------



## Pants (Jun 2, 2004)

MDSnowman said:
			
		

> This makes no sense to me, the Tempest was the cornerstone in the worst bit of powergaming I'd ever concieved of... it was called the human blender and got 10+ attacks on a full attack action.



10+ attacks!?  How the hell can you get 10+ attacks!?


----------



## Ottergame (Jun 2, 2004)

Sejs said:
			
		

> Give it a second glance.
> 
> The damage a Hulking Hurler does with a thrown object is based on the object's weight.  The heaviest object an HH can throw is something up to their light load capacity, or their medium load capacity with the Overburdened Heave trick.  And remember carrying capacity scales not only with the strength of a creature, but also with its _size_.  And additionally, a sharp or pointy object deals damage as if were an object of twice its actual weight.
> 
> So as a very modest example, say we have a Str 25 ogre with 2 levels of Hulking Hurler, and Overburdened Heave.  Medium load is 533 lbs, doubled due to being Large, clocks in at 1,066 lbs.  Okay, so our ogre purchases a 1000 lb ball of spiked iron.  Imagine it looking like the head of a really large, really mean flail.  Enchant it to be +1 and Returning, just for convienance sake.  Each attack, our very, very modest example can chuck his weapon for 13d6 dmg, plus relavent modifiers.





13d6 damage, and you get to attack once per round with it.  An archer can do more damage than this with magic arrows at this level.


----------



## MDSnowman (Jun 2, 2004)

Pants said:
			
		

> 10+ attacks!?  How the hell can you get 10+ attacks!?




Well I maxed out his Two weapon Fighting skills with the tempest PrC, and gave him a pair of bracers of blinding strike (making any weapons he wields speed weapons... and with one in each hand that's an extra 2 attacks)

hell by level 20 if you've maxed out your tempest levels you get

4 Attacks due to BAB
4 Attacks with your Off Handed Weapon (Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Two Weapon Fighting, Greater Two-Weapon Fighting, and the Class Ability Supreme Two-Weapon Fighting)
2 Attacks from the Bracers of Blinding Strike

All this being said this was a purely intellectual exercise and I do not advocate doing this as either a PC or NPC, if I were DMing and someone approached me with this idea I would throw it in their face and declare them mentally unfit to play in my game... it is that broken.


----------



## Kannik (Jun 2, 2004)

arnwyn said:
			
		

> Windwalker (of Shaundakul) from FR's _Faiths & Pantheons_. Ugh.
> 
> Full spellcasting progression every level, plus special abilities (some _very_ good) every level, plus another domain. As written, this thing is ridiculous (and was discovered to be so through play).




Agreement on this one.  Give up nearly nothing, gain lots.  Definitively one of those ones that makes one go Agah!, even in FR.  And it wasn't changed/updaged in PGtF.  

Kannik


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jun 3, 2004)

*RE: Hulking Hurler*

1. The hulking hurler's damage scales with his carry capacity
2. Carry capacity scales with strength. Every +10 strength = 4 x carry capacity = 4 x damage
3. Carry capacity scales with size. Each size increase doubles your damage
4. Carry capacity increases if you've got more legs - quadrupeds carry 50% more. Being a quadruped increases your damage by 50%.

Centaur + hulking hurler + strength boosts

Strength 36 (not unreasonable). Carry capacity 7200 pounds. Damage? 39d6. If it's a spiky ball, that's 78d6.

Each round - because he enchants his huge ball of lead with returning.

Beyond that, try some war hulk levels. +20 strength (10 levels of warhulk) is x16 damage.

Or start with something that's still humanoid (like a half-ogre) and use enlarge person on it?

For full details, see
here where some others work on the same thing. I think the planet gets destroyed on about page 3.

My suggestion on vetting PrC's?

DON'T!

All you have to do is this:

When someone takes a PrC, or shows you a character build, ask them why they are doing things how they're doing them. Ask them what the character is intended to do.

Chances are if they are a powergamer, they know exactly where they're going and exactly what the build can do. If you're an honest and good DM, then they'll tell you. Then if you find it to be off-planet, you can discuss what to do about it.

If they're not a powergamer, then the chances of them stumbling upon something truely game-breaking are slim, and when they do, they're likely to see reason.


----------



## Devall2000 (Jun 3, 2004)

The 'Fist of Razial' out of the "Book of Exalted Deeds" strikes me as being broken.  I've played one.  If you're a paladin, your smite continues to stack once you take this class(not a big deal by itself).  If you make sure to get one level of cleric before taking this PrC, you continue to add spell levels to your existing spellcasting class for every level of this PrC you take.

With this PrC your smite gets to be pretty good.  You end up with a chain lightening effect and your weapon acts as a holy weapon.

Where has the tempest been updated for 3.5?  

Has the 'Master of Chains' been updated for 3.5?

-Jamie


----------



## Sejs (Jun 3, 2004)

Thanks for saving me the trouble, Saeviomagy.



> An archer can do more damage than this with magic arrows at this level.



 Really? At 9th level using a +1 weapon with a single enhancement?  The devil you say.

(Ogre: 4 giant HD, +2 Lvl Adj, Fighter 1, Hulking Hurler 2. Str 25 for the ogre is equal to a human with str 15.  Or 14 starting with +1 from advancement if you prefer.)


----------



## Psion (Jun 3, 2004)

> I side with Psion on what's broken for the most part. (I like Divine champion but doubtful I'll use it outside of the Realms.)




Actually, I meant divine crusader, but looking at it again, it doesn't seem all that gamable. Or worthwhile, really. ("Aura" is supposed to be a class ability? Weak.) On the outside, it can get 1 9th level domain spell 1 level early.


----------



## Abraxas (Jun 3, 2004)

Where is the Divine Crusader Written up?


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 3, 2004)

I was about to ask Psion the same thing...

In any case little or no doubt DSoP deserves my "Watch it Break your game" seal of disproval.


----------



## Count Arioch the 28t (Jun 3, 2004)

Devall2000 said:
			
		

> The 'Fist of Razial' out of the "Book of Exalted Deeds" strikes me as being broken.  I've played one.  If you're a paladin, your smite continues to stack once you take this class(not a big deal by itself).  If you make sure to get one level of cleric before taking this PrC, you continue to add spell levels to your existing spellcasting class for every level of this PrC you take.
> 
> With this PrC your smite gets to be pretty good.  You end up with a chain lightening effect and your weapon acts as a holy weapon.




If by "Chain lightening effect" you mean "Deals a piddly amount of damage to creatures that, by the time you get the ability, will barely even notice", then YES, it DOES have a chain lightening effect.  

2d6 (2d8 if evil outsider) damage isn't a big deal at 16th level.

And if you take one level of cleric, WOW, you cast as a 10th level cleric when you hit 16th level, then you can get 4 more.

14th level cleric casting is meaningless at 20th level.  Better than paladin casting, but not that great.

The only case where this class is really good is when you take it as straight cleric, and even then, I don't think it's that bad, I have a cleric 8/fist of Raziel 4 in my group, and he is not really overshadowing the rest of the party.  

I don't think that many PrCs are overpowered, but the one that sticks out is Dweomerkeeper from the Complete Divine update on wizards.com.  

However, I am of the beleif that weak classes are just as unbalancing as the strong ones, so I will list a few I find unbalanced in that regard:

Mystic Theurge  (Except when mixed with Urpriest, then it's too good.)

Vermin Lord (Except when using the 3.5 swarm rules, then it becomes ungodly powerful to the point that the game reality breaks down.)

Meta-mind  (Can't do anything a straight psion can't do better, it does nothing, and charges you out the ass to do nothing.)

Spellsword  (The channel spell is nice, but poorly written.  It's overpowered when liberally interpreted, and too weak otherwise.)

Actually, add to spellword pretty much every PrC in complete warrior.  (Haven't looked at most of them too deeply, but I think I might check hulking hurler a bit closer as it seems to be really munchable.)

Also, there's a lot of turkeys in CD, but I still need to study the book a bit more, as I don't make too many judgements until I've done a bit of testing.


----------



## FireLance (Jun 3, 2004)

Devall2000 said:
			
		

> The 'Fist of Razial' out of the "Book of Exalted Deeds" strikes me as being broken.  I've played one.  If you're a paladin, your smite continues to stack once you take this class(not a big deal by itself).  If you make sure to get one level of cleric before taking this PrC, you continue to add spell levels to your existing spellcasting class for every level of this PrC you take.
> 
> With this PrC your smite gets to be pretty good.  You end up with a chain lightening effect and your weapon acts as a holy weapon.
> 
> -Jamie



It is, in fact, possible to go Fist of Raziel with 8 levels of cleric.  Over 10 levels, you get +10 BAB and +9 spellcasting levels.  Mix it with another PrC that gives fighter BAB and half spellcaster progression, like Warpriest or Sword of Hieroneous (both from Complete Divine) and you get a character with BAB +18 with the spellcasting ability of an 18th level cleric.

The most abusive combination I can think of requires the use of the Human Paragon and the Presitige Paladin from Unearthed Arcana.  A Cleric 4/Human Paragon 3/Prestige Paladin 3/Fist of Raziel 10 has BAB +18, casts spells as a 17th level cleric, and gets Detect Evil, Divine Grace, Aura of Courage and Divine Health in addition to all Fist of Raziel abilities.


----------



## Psion (Jun 3, 2004)

Abraxas said:
			
		

> Where is the Divine Crusader Written up?




Complete Divine.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 3, 2004)

Should have guessed...

Btw I will defend Viligant. If only say in the Scarred Lands, when you're facing down a pack of Asaatthi, you'd want a Ranger/Rogue/Viligant in your party. And they don't outshine the party paladin either. Well usually not...


----------



## Psion (Jun 3, 2004)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Btw I will defend Viligant. If only say in the Scarred Lands, when you're facing down a pack of Asaatthi, you'd want a Ranger/Rogue/Viligant in your party.




You'd want the overpowered class in the party? No shock there. We had a DM that let clerics spontaneously cast without reducing their spell list. We wanted her in the party too. 

C'mon, I love R&R and defend it against all comers, but I think you gotta own that one.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 3, 2004)

Okay fine. So it's not the best of the bunch. But hey take the good with the bad...


----------



## Pants (Jun 3, 2004)

What I find humorous is that 95% of the listed PrC's are from WotC sources   
Does that just mean that WotC books simply get more circulation or that WotC makes crappier PrC's?


----------



## Psion (Jun 3, 2004)

Pants said:
			
		

> What I find humorous is that 95% of the listed PrC's are from WotC sources




I thought the original poster asked about official sources.

If you want unofficial sources... oh the tales I could tell...

You know, there are would be designers out there who still beleive in the "role playing disad" principle...


----------



## Pants (Jun 3, 2004)

Psion said:
			
		

> I thought the original poster asked about official sources.



You know... you're absolutely right.  I never even noticed that.  *slaps forehead*


----------



## Celtavian (Jun 3, 2004)

*re*

I haven't found too many broken Cleric prestige classes because of the role the cleric fills in the group. A cleric is usually so busy healing and buffing that he often doesn't get a chance to use all the special abilities to which he has access. 

I've played a Windwalker. They get great special abilities that should stand out, but they don't. Special abilities for a cleric are just neat little blurbs of text on the character sheet more often than not. About the only thing I was able to do was reach the battle quicker and attack flying creatures. I didn't have the feats, hit points, or power to outshine the melee classes unless I let the melee classes die and completely ignored healing them. I've noticed reading some story hours that there are some groups clerics that completely ignore their groups health during the battle in favor of casting offensive spells. A surefire way to die alot. 

I just know clerics with or without prestige classes rarely outshine the melee or arcane classes in our group because they are too busy keeping everyone alive to use their spells for combat. If your group doesn't run that way, then the following Prestige classes can be quite powerful:

1. Windwalker
2. Fist of Raziel
3. Radiant Servant of Pelor
4. Eye of Horus-Re (Radiant Servant of Pelor's older and more powerful brother...whoever designed this prestige class was mad)


Arcane Classes

1. Elemental Savant: This class is pretty damn powerful once it is maxed out at 10th level. You lose only one casting level to gain full elemental traits and abilities. It will probably be updated in the _Complete Arcane_. Mostly the Air and Earth Elemental Savant is overpowered because of their modes of movement, which you receive at 10th level.

They updated most of the arcane classes and changed _Haste_, so the arcane classes aren't particularly overpowered now.

Fighter Classes

1. Dervish: On paper it looks real nasty. There are a few players working towards this class, so I'll know just how nasty later. 

2. Power Attack, Great Cleave, and a 2 handed weapon: Not a Prestige class, but a powerful feat combination. You thought Wizards were good at taking out alot of people at the same time, the fighter wielding a Great Axe or Greatsword with Power Attack and Great Cleave is right up there with them. 

Fighters with Great Cleave, Power Attack, and a 2 handed weapon mow through the small fry like a wheat thresher. Power Attack only becomes nastier at higher levels with so many ways to gain stackable attack bonuses from _Bless_, _Prayer_, _Heroism_, _Greater Heroism_ and similar spells. If you have a Bard in the group, expect your 2 handed fighter to be power attacking for upwards of 10 to 12 or more damage per attack per round depending on the AC of the current enemies. It can get even worse if your main tank is a Paladin.


----------



## Olive (Jun 3, 2004)

Count Arioch the 28t said:
			
		

> I don't think that many PrCs are overpowered, but the one that sticks out is Dweomerkeeper from the Complete Divine update on wizards.com.




People have mentioned this one. What's the deal?


----------



## Wonger (Jun 3, 2004)

Psion said:
			
		

> I thought the original poster asked about official sources.
> 
> If you want unofficial sources... oh the tales I could tell...




Yeah, I didn't want to wade through 100 pages of posts about broken prestige classes.  WotC provides plenty!  If I find one from a d20 publisher that I like, I give it a good look through, and if a player introduces me to one, I give it a meticulous look through!

But, many of the players are picking up books that I don't even own yet, like Complete Warrior and Divine, so this thread is to help me get a leg up on those crafty players!

Still good stuff!  Keep it coming!!!


----------



## vtaltos (Jun 3, 2004)

I can't believe it, 3 pages in and no Hammer of Moradin? Easily the most overpowered Prc I have seen in a WOTC product! The Warshaper is pretty bad as well.


----------



## silentspace (Jun 3, 2004)

vtaltos said:
			
		

> I can't believe it, 3 pages in and no Hammer of Moradin? Easily the most overpowered Prc I have seen in a WOTC product! The Warshaper is pretty bad as well.




The Hammer of Moradin is good if you have a really good set of stats.  If you have a 'standard' array, its not so great.  If you're a druid, Warshaper is not worth it, you're better going straight druid, I think.  But if you're a savage species shapechanging race, it's probably a pretty nice class.


----------



## vtaltos (Jun 3, 2004)

silentspace said:
			
		

> The Hammer of Moradin is good if you have a really good set of stats.  If you have a 'standard' array, its not so great.  If you're a druid, Warshaper is not worth it, you're better going straight druid, I think.  But if you're a savage species shapechanging race, it's probably a pretty nice class.




Gotta disagree on both counts. The Hammer of Moradin gets 15 different special abilities over 10 levels and between level based att points, magic items and spells, you WILL have good enough stats. 

 As for the Warshaper, EVERY 6th level druid qualifies and in the first 3 levels gets immunity to crits/stunning, +4 str and con, and reach!


----------



## silentspace (Jun 3, 2004)

vtaltos said:
			
		

> Gotta disagree on both counts. The Hammer of Moradin gets 15 different special abilities over 10 levels and between level based att points, magic items and spells, you WILL have good enough stats.
> 
> As for the Warshaper, EVERY 6th level druid qualifies and in the first 3 levels gets immunity to crits/stunning, +4 str and con, and reach!




Well, all I can say is the Hammer of Moradin didn't work for me.  At minimum you need good Str, Con, Wis and Cha.  Dex helps make the hammer throw abilities useful.  Sure, by 18th level you will have good items for stats, but getting there is tough.  But I was using 25 point buy, so take that for what it's worth.

Druid 6/Warshaper 3 vs. Druid 9?  I'll take Druid 9, which gives you 5th level spells (vs 3rd level) and Wild shape 3/day - Large (vs 2/day - Medium).  Venom immunity is a nice perk too.


----------



## Someone (Jun 3, 2004)

epochrpg said:
			
		

> oh, i see.




If you suggest that I´m biased because I´m playing one, well, you´re wrong. 

Psion, It´s "only" level wiz3/cle3/MT4. I agree that the prestige class becomes increasigly better at higher levels, but I doubt that living that sweet spot at level 16 compensates the levels you have to build the class requisites.


----------



## Dark Jezter (Jun 3, 2004)

Pre-errata Ninja of the Crescent Moon.  Yikes!


----------



## Taren Seeker (Jun 3, 2004)

Windwalker: If you want to qualify for this class with any sort of skills or useful feats then you are best off taking a level or 2 of Ranger which of course puts you behind in spellcasting. It's a strong class but not broken. Most of the abilities that you gain also become superceded by the later levels. (air walk, feather fall, etc)

Hammer of Moradin: this class becomes MUCH stronger if you take the Axe Thrower feat (in PGtF) which allows you to use your str to hit with thrown weapons. Strongest fighting class I have seen except maybe for the Frenzied Beserker. Hammer is tough to really judge because many of the powers are not complementary. My gut says b0rken tho, and FB is definitely that.

Warshaper: People often overlook that all of those nifty abilities only work when you are shaped. Rules for a Doppleganger, not so much for a Druid.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jun 3, 2004)

Wonger said:
			
		

> Yeah, I didn't want to wade through 100 pages of posts about broken prestige classes.  WotC provides plenty!  If I find one from a d20 publisher that I like, I give it a good look through, and if a player introduces me to one, I give it a meticulous look through!
> 
> But, many of the players are picking up books that I don't even own yet, like Complete Warrior and Divine, so this thread is to help me get a leg up on those crafty players!



You are not playing against the players.

When your player shows you a character, ask what it can do. Ask them to tell you the best they expect to get out of it. Ask them WHY they want such a character. THEN decide whether the PrC/feat/whatever is right for your campaign. And if it's not, tone the abilities down or pick out something comparable that they can go into which keeps the style of the character.

Trying to preemtively vet every prc and feat combination is the road to madness.


----------



## passengerpigeon (Jun 3, 2004)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> You are not playing against the players.
> 
> When your player shows you a character, ask what it can do. Ask them to tell you the best they expect to get out of it. Ask them WHY they want such a character. THEN decide whether the PrC/feat/whatever is right for your campaign. And if it's not, tone the abilities down or pick out something comparable that they can go into which keeps the style of the character.




This is the best advice ever.  Of course, it requires a very noncompetitive relationship with your players.  Which is worth cultivating anyway.

It's also worth noting that it's much, MUCH safer to say "everything is banned unless I say otherwise" than it is to say "nothing is banned unless I say it is."  That way, in the worst possible case, hey, you banned everything.  As Hong can tell you, that's not so bad.

--p


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 3, 2004)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> Trying to preemtively vet every prc and feat combination is the road to madness.



Who said any of us DMs were sane...?


----------



## Balrog (Jun 3, 2004)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> You are not playing against the players.
> 
> When your player shows you a character, ask what it can do. Ask them to tell you the best they expect to get out of it. Ask them WHY they want such a character. THEN decide whether the PrC/feat/whatever is right for your campaign. And if it's not, tone the abilities down or pick out something comparable that they can go into which keeps the style of the character.
> 
> Trying to preemtively vet every prc and feat combination is the road to madness.





Yes, I agree that as a GM you ARE NOT playing against the players.  But in my game, in the role as judge and jury of game balance, I find that relying on the average player to consider the big picture is often futile and overly optimistic.  I find I have to take the initiative on these matters and try to keep my game balanced.  It has been a chore, as early on in my campaign, I loosened the reins a bit and gave the green light to many things I regret now.  If I had it to do over again, I would be doing what Wonger is doing right now: getting knowledgeable testimony on this board before allowing an unbalanced PrC in my campaign.  

I am not sure of his intent, but I think this may be close to what he is trying to achieve here.  Not narrow his players options, just make his game as balanced and enjoyable for ALL of his players as he possibly can.  And avoid that ONE can of worms from being opened......


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jun 3, 2004)

This thread is going to quickly get too long for much usability, but I'll chip in anyway. First off, I will say that with the possible exceptions of the Hammer of Moradin and the Windwalker, most of the worst offenders do NOT come from FR sources, at least in 3.5. I will assume that you're as 3.5-comp as possible, and thus ignore "old versions" or superseded versions of PrCs. My take (OK PrCs excluded, all WotC sources except for non-FR campaign-specific stuff like KoK):

*MULTICLASSING PRCs*
Arcane trickster/eldritch knight: Weird. If a player is a multiclassed rog/wiz or ftr/wiz, respectively, these classes become no-brainers and make for a more powerful character of that type. However, IMHO, they do NOT make for a more powerful character than a straight wiz/arcane caster PrC. So this one's up to you. If you don't want every single rog/wiz (ftr/wiz) in your game taking arcane trickster (eldritch knight), you may want to change these classes a bit. 

Mystic theurge: Underpowered. REALLY underpowered. Even at Wiz3/Clr3/MT 10, this class is inferior. Keep in mind that an odd-level MT is a corner case anyway; the MT 10 will drop back to two spell levels behind the straight wizard or cleric given one more level. 

Spellsword: Generally underpowered (see Arioch28's post), EXCEPT that you do not want to allow players to do a one-level dip into this, or they will do it all the time when building fighter-mages and go Eldritch Knight the rest of the way.

*ARCANE CASTER*
Archmage: OK, except that you really should put reasonable limits on mastery of shaping and mastery of elements, as they are probably a bit too powerful and/or prone to abuse (shapeable anti-magic fields and never having to worry about energy resistance come to mind). 

Celestial mystic (BoED): Overpowered. No class should grant all the abilities it does _and_ full caster progression; the loremaster is nearly as bad, but the extra goodies it gets aren't so combat-oriented. I'd say that this class should maybe be reduced to 7/10 caster progression or have some of the abilities stripped out.

Maho-tsukai (OA): Broken, as, for that matter, are the OA taint rules in general. Simply do not allow these characters as PCs in your game. Even if you use them as NPCs, make sure you control the spell DCs with absolute precision, or your PCs will drop like flies.

Nar demonbinder (Unapproachable East): Messy. I'd disallow this PrC if I were you, because it allows characters to start their spell progression at 4th level, which creates weird breaking points. 

Red wizard: The circle magic ability is a bit ooky; a serious powergamer can manipulate the rules in this to boost his caster level and stack on free metamagic feats like crazy. However, it is, IMHO, a less likely abuse than any of the other ones I'll mention here.

Spelldancer (Magic of Faerun): Brokity-broke-broken. There's a reason why this one failed to make it into Players' Guide to Faerun. Do not allow.

I know this list seems short, but the fact is that the real abuse with arcane casters is in the spells, not the PrCs...

*DIVINE CASTERS*
Radiant servant of Pelor (CD): Yup, overpowered. You lose an average of 10 hp over 10 levels for much better turning and healing plus martial weapon profs? Err... I'd just rule this out and use a modified version of the substantially better Morninglord of Lathander (PGtF) instead.

Eye of Horus (PGtF): This class has the same problems as the RSoP, with the additional insult to injury that it accumulates 1/2 epic bonus feat progression and full epic caster progression!

Dweomerkeeper (CD web enhancement): Oy. To answer Olive, the "deal" with DK is that it grants the ability to cast any of the PC's known spells as a supernatural ability. IOW, no SR, no dispelling, AND no components, including XP. Welcome to the world of free _wish_. Fortunately, there's an easy way to modify this class: Throw out supernatural spell entirely. The mantle ability is still nice, as is improved metamagic at 10th level.

Fist of Raziel (BoED)/Hospitaler (CD): Balanced high or overpowered; it's a matter of opinion and experience. A straight cleric with one of these PrCs IS a better paladin than the paladin, so to speak; I happen to think that paladins are a bit weak, so I'd probably allow one or both of these classes in my game and just dispense with the core paladin entirely.

Holy Liberator (CD): Closer to overpowered than either of the above, IMHO, because it's a paladin in 10 levels (and REALLY a paladin; you get all the goodies) with an alignment that's compatible with nice things like the bard and barbarian (frenzied berserker with good Will save?). I'd probably disallow.

Apostle of peace (BoED)/ur-priest (CD): Seriously consider just getting rid of these classes entirely, or granting them +1 caster progression; IMHO, it will NOT hurt your game. The Vow feats already grant a caster enough flavor without imparting access to a PrC, and ur-priest can be done better anyway with something like the Athar prestige class in Dragon 287. In the alternative, +1 caster progression is better; classes really shouldn't grant 9 levels of spellcasting over 10 class levels, due to the abuse potential when combined with something like mystic theurge.

Risen Martyr (BoED): Weak. This class simply will never be taken willingly by a sane player. Skip it.

Verdant Lord (MotW): Overpowered when combined with cleric. A cleric loses NOTHING by taking this class except turning ability (eh), and gains good BAB (!) plus the ability to wildshape into a crit-immune plant while wielding his mighty array of weapons and armor. Not good.

Warshaper (CW): This is a bit too good for a druid to take a level dip into. I'd move the morphic body ability up to at least 3rd level.

Windwalker (F&P): _Might_ be balanced, actually. The requirements are pretty murderous, and the only big benefit is good BAB. Is good BAB really worth the loss of a caster level plus a serious skill and feat investment? Dunno.

*COMBAT CLASSES*
Champion of Gwynharwyf: It's a barbarian with improved DR, spells (which he can cast while raging!), divine grace, and smite evil. Overpowered, IMHO.

Frenzied Berserker (CW): It's just not a good class to allow as a PC, IMHO. Either this guy will be overshadowing all the other folks in the party, or he'll be killing them. Additionally, Deathless Frenzy is just not a very good mechanic; the FB can take ANY amount of damage without dying? Barbarians are rager enough for me.

Hammer of Moradin (PGtF): Just too darn many abilities. I'd consider paring down the abilities (aura of courage, DR, the free Far Shot feat, and stalwart could all go without making the class weaker, IMHO) but otherwise leaving it as is; I don't think anything about the class is intrinsically game-breaking.

Hulking Hurler (CW): Requires the DM to fix the throwing mechanics. It's really too easy (without using the Munchkin... er, Miniatures Handbook) to get a character that deals umpteen d6 damage with a thrown object. 

Knight of the Chalice (CW): SOOO much weaker against fiends than a ranger with favored enemy (evil outsider) that it just hurts. Either give 'em some decent abilities or skip the PrC.

Peerless Archer (Silver Marches): The ranged power attack ability of this class (Power Shot, gained at PrC level 3) is really too powerful. If you were to simply remove it, or allow the PA to take a limited, arbitrary attack penalty for bonus damage (say, -1 or -2 for +1 or +2, respectively), it might be OK. Otherwise, the class is balanced high but fine, especially in 3.5 where losing out on bonus archery feats is a tough blow.

Runescarred Berserker (Unapproachable East): Barbarians with _greater invisibility_, _heal_, _righteous might_, and _spell resistance_ are just wrong. A mite overpowered.

Singh Rager (OA): From the man who brought you the champion of Gwynharwyf: A lawful "barbarian" (think paladin/samurai synergies here) that gains rage-like abilities (including greater and tireless rages), two good saves, free haste as an (Ex) ability, and the famous full-attack-after-a-charge rush! Plus, you can combine this with the iaijutsu master PrC! This is the reason you do NOT allow OA classes into D&D campaigns...

*ROGUE CLASSES*
Shadow Thief of Amn (PGtF): I think bonus feats plus sneak attack progression are too much. I also don't think this class is necessary. A straight rogue is just fine to represent its abilities, IMHO.

Telflammar Shadowlord (Unappropachable East): The shadow pounce ability of this class has lent itself to rather wild interpretation. You either need to rework it so that it simply allows _dimension door_ as a swift action or MEA without creating any new actions, or decide that you're dealing with the class differently.


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jun 3, 2004)

Taren Seeker said:
			
		

> Warshaper: People often overlook that all of those nifty abilities only work when you are shaped. Rules for a Doppleganger, not so much for a Druid.



When is a druid with the ability to wild shape ever NOT in wild shaped form in a combat situation? Unless the player is inexperienced, druids are wild shaped all the time.


----------



## Balrog (Jun 3, 2004)

I should also note that in a previous campaign, as a player, I ran a Cleric/ Radiant Servant of Pelor through the RttTOEE and he ended up being possibly the most powerful character in the party.  I dont know if I intended that or not when I was lower level and making decisions on his feats, skills, etc.  But I did intend to make him the best I could possibly make him within the rules that were presented.  And the DM for that campaign approved that.  Of course, it helps that the PC is also a Contemplative with the Mysticism Prestige Domain (A 3.0 campaign)  

My point is that as a player, I had my blinders on, not really caring about game balance.  I am not saying I am representative of a majority of players.  I am merely trying to point out the contrast in my own mindset between running a PC and trying to make him the best I can, and then trying to run a game and have every player at my table involved and having fun.


----------



## Psion (Jun 3, 2004)

silentspace said:
			
		

> Druid 6/Warshaper 3 vs. Druid 9?  I'll take Druid 9, which gives you 5th level spells (vs 3rd level) and Wild shape 3/day - Large (vs 2/day - Medium).  Venom immunity is a nice perk too.




Think I gotta agree with that.


----------



## Psion (Jun 3, 2004)

> Mystic theurge: Underpowered. REALLY underpowered. Even at Wiz3/Clr3/MT 10, this class is inferior. Keep in mind that an odd-level MT is a corner case anyway; the MT 10 will drop back to two spell levels behind the straight wizard or cleric given one more level.




I disagree.

Underpowered at first, but by the time you have the added utility of 20 caster levels in 10 levels, the sheer utility of the class makes it a real show-stealer and ultimate swiss utility knife.


----------



## Celtavian (Jun 3, 2004)

*re*

Easiest way to fix the Dweomerkeeper is to make them pay the xp cost for Supernatural Spell. It is a cool ability that makes the Dweomerkeeper unique. Being able to bypass SR a few times per day and avoiding a concentration check isn't all that bad.


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jun 3, 2004)

Most 10-level spellcasting PrCs. Most give out good abilities at most levels, and even if the abilities aren't earth-shattering they more than pay for the requirements and the turn undead/familiar stuff you gave up.

Pretty much any PrC with unnamed save DC bonuses, especially if the bonus exceeds +1, and it gets worse if you allow multiple PrCs.

Note IMC you can't take more than one prestige class. That clears up some issues for me.



			
				Ruleslawyer said:
			
		

> Arcane trickster/eldritch knight: Weird. If a player is a multiclassed rog/wiz or ftr/wiz, respectively, these classes become no-brainers and make for a more powerful character of that type. However, IMHO, they do NOT make for a more powerful character than a straight wiz/arcane caster PrC. So this one's up to you. If you don't want every single rog/wiz (ftr/wiz) in your game taking arcane trickster (eldritch knight), you may want to change these classes a bit.




I'm fine with these, and I'm usually an opponent of PrCs. I think I tweaked the arcane trickster IMC (and didn't allow sneak attack with ranged touch attacks).



> Maho-tsukai (OA): Broken, as, for that matter, are the OA taint rules in general. Simply do not allow these characters as PCs in your game. Even if you use them as NPCs, make sure you control the spell DCs with absolute precision, or your PCs will drop like flies.



The first thing I did, upon seeing this PrC, was to look at the _cloud of taint_ spell. Absolutely broken, and it's a shame because this was a pretty fresh character concept.



> Dweomerkeeper (CD web enhancement):




Please tell me there's a limit to how often it can do so.



> Peerless Archer (Silver Marches): The ranged power attack ability of this class (Power Shot, gained at PrC level 3) is really too powerful. If you were to simply remove it, or allow the PA to take a limited, arbitrary attack penalty for bonus damage (say, -1 or -2 for +1 or +2, respectively), it might be OK. Otherwise, the class is balanced high but fine, especially in 3.5 where losing out on bonus archery feats is a tough blow.




Manyshot breaks it in 3.5 - in it's defense, it's actually a 3.0 class when Manyshot and the Bow of True Strike were non-core stuff.

The entropomancer, from Complete Divine.

Pathetic! You give up 5 caster levels for one cool ability and the ability to control an artifact. That ability isn't broken, it's the artifact that is, and virtually no DM will ever put that artifact in their campaign, for several reasons:

1) It has no cost. How much magic gear does a character or NPC have to give up to have a _sphere of annihilation_?

2) What is the save DC... right, it doesn't have any. Whoever has it, either PC or NPC, can far too easily set up a deadly trap with it.


----------



## billd91 (Jun 3, 2004)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> The first thing I did, upon seeing this PrC, was to look at the _cloud of taint_ spell. Absolutely broken, and it's a shame because this was a pretty fresh character concept.
> 
> .




I think that spell could work a bit better with the Rokugan sourcebook which extends the taint score out quite farther with specific points where you can get minor, moderate, and major corruptions. Check out that scale of taint and I think you'll find that the class adapts to it pretty well and not heavily unbalanced.


----------



## Rugger (Jun 3, 2004)

RE: MT and Ur-Priest... Do folks really allow one PrC to increase spellcasting in another?  Seems kinda silly to me... maybe to the letter of the rules its allowed, but...

-Rugger


----------



## Wonger (Jun 3, 2004)

Saeviomagy said:
			
		

> You are not playing against the players.
> 
> When your player shows you a character, ask what it can do. Ask them to tell you the best they expect to get out of it. Ask them WHY they want such a character. THEN decide whether the PrC/feat/whatever is right for your campaign. And if it's not, tone the abilities down or pick out something comparable that they can go into which keeps the style of the character.
> 
> Trying to preemtively vet every prc and feat combination is the road to madness.




I have a great relationship with my players.  They are great role-players and they are also highly skilled roll-players.  I think we have a rare balance of the two that keeps everyone happy.  But, even if they want to take a class for good in-game story and character reasons, they will use the mechanics of the class (no matter what class) to be as effective as possible in the game.  If that class happens to be a broken one, whether they intend it or not, it's gonna be bad for the game.  That's what I'm trying to head off as obviously these boards have enough people that the broken classes have been "playtested" by.  Maybe I can't preemptively stop every broken class from getting into my game before it's too late, but I certainly know several to avoid that have come up multiple times in this thread.

Personally, in previous campaigns, I can attest to the broken-ness of the Frenzied Berserker's deathless frenzy.  Other than that, all the classes mentioned are untried in my campaigns - so thanks for all the input!  If there are more out there, keep them coming!


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jun 3, 2004)

Psion said:
			
		

> I disagree.
> 
> Underpowered at first, but by the time you have the added utility of 20 caster levels in 10 levels, the sheer utility of the class makes it a real show-stealer and ultimate swiss utility knife.



I'd really, really like an empirical example of how the MT comes out overpowered, Psion. I've run scenarios with a Wiz3/Clr3/MT 10 subbed in for a Wiz16 in a party, and the MT has not done quite so well. I used to think it was a bit overpowered; now I'm with Grog on the theory that, at least in the context of the MT, "[v]ersatility just means more ways to suck." The best use (and the closest to "overpowered") I can see for the MT is as a cohort. I find the MT weak at even high levels for the following reasons:

1) If you're casting attack spells, you lose out on SR penetration. 15% is a pretty big add-on to your chances of having a precious spell fizzle.

2) Fewer high-level spells. At the dizzying heights of 16th level, most casters will be forced to unload _only_ their highest-level spells in combat. The MT has either fewer of these, or simply doesn't have 'em (no 8th-level spells, in the case of the Clr3/Wiz3/MT 10).

3) Utility spells? Well, why not just play a straight cleric, then? With the right domain selection, many more hit points, better saves, better domain abilities, almost the same versatility as the MT, and you have more and better high-level spells. I just don't see what the MT has that makes it better than a straight cleric 3 levels higher in this regard.

But, please do prove me wrong!


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jun 3, 2004)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> I'm fine with these, and I'm usually an opponent of PrCs. I think I tweaked the arcane trickster IMC (and didn't allow sneak attack with ranged touch attacks).



Note that I didn't say overpowered, I said weird, in that you practically have to take these classes if you're a multiclassed ftr/wiz or rog/wiz, which sits ill with some DMs (not me, but some) who think that prestige classes should be, well, _prestigious_ rather than a necessity. 

BTW, if you did "tweak" the AT that way, you nerfed it as thoroughly as it is possible to do. I'd just steer clear of playing a rog/wiz in your campaign.


> _Please tell me there's a limit to how often [the Dweomerkeeper] can [use Supernatural Spell]._



Well, yeah, there is, but how does that really matter? One or two _wishes_ a day for no XP cost is still 5-10k XP saved per day, which is just too much. A Clr1/Wiz9/Dkr10 can cast three or four _wishes_ per day; welcome to free +4 inherent stat boosts for the whole party! 


> _Manyshot breaks it in 3.5_



Manyshot breaks Power Shot how? The attack penalties you take for using that feat make it as bad or worse to use in conjunction with Power Attack than do a standard full attack. In fact, I'd rather a full attack + Rapid Shot + Power Shot. 







> _in it's defense, it's actually a 3.0 class when Manyshot and the Bow of True Strike were non-core stuff._



AND, of course, when the things that really  boost the "power" of Power Shot were still in effect: All-day GMW and stacking enhancement bonuses on bows and arrows. That -10 to attack doesn't seem so bad when you're stacking on a +5 from your bow AND a +5 on your arrows (GMW).  


> _The entropomancer, from Complete Divine.
> 
> Pathetic! You give up 5 caster levels for one cool ability and the ability to control an artifact. That ability isn't broken, it's the artifact that is, and virtually no DM will ever put that artifact in their campaign, for several reasons:
> 
> ...



Which is why the entropomancer is purely an NPC class. I actually DON't think this class is broken because only a DM will ever use it, and any DM who gives an NPC a _sphere of annihilation_ is unlikely to use it purposely to screw the players. It's more likely, in fact, that adventures featuring an entropomancer will be centered around the PCs trying to stop one from actually obtaining a _sphere_.


----------



## Psion (Jun 3, 2004)

ruleslawyer said:
			
		

> I'd really, really like an empirical example of how the MT comes out overpowered, Psion. I've run scenarios with a Wiz3/Clr3/MT 10 subbed in for a Wiz16 in a party, and the MT has not done quite so well. I used to think it was a bit overpowered; now I'm with Grog on the theory that, at least in the context of the MT, "[v]ersatility just means more ways to suck." The best use (and the closest to "overpowered")[/b]




Snarky sayings do not an argument make.



> I find the MT weak at even high levels for the following reasons:
> 
> 1) If you're casting attack spells, you lose out on SR penetration. 15% is a pretty big add-on to your chances of having a precious spell fizzle.
> 
> ...




We already know that 3 levels "off the top" is the cost of the class; fixating on SR doesn't prove anything further. Further, it undermines your argument by relying on a very specific condition. You are really only proving they don't make good blast mages, which I can only agree with.

The 3 level cost is telling at low levels. But when you have 10 extra levels of spells, even if lower, that begins to make up for it.



> At the dizzying heights of 16th level, most casters will be forced to unload _only_ their highest-level spells in combat.




Not IME. My PC sorcerers and clerics of this level frequently ran through their higher level spells at this level and did have to rely on their lower level spells. My high level party relied extensively on mass haste... but that's only what, a 6th level spell? Likewise, harm is a very viable spell at high levels, as is disintigrate. That's worthless, right? I don't think so.



> 3) Utility spells? Well, why not just play a straight cleric, then? With the right domain selection, many more hit points, better saves, better domain abilities, almost the same versatility as the MT,




 There are many spells that are exclusively arcane and/or exclusively divine; that the cleric is "nearly as good" seems somewhat off. Clerics can't cast teleport, or mass haste, or a variety of other potent spells. Since clerics can access their whole spell list, you can focus your attention on spells that clerics don't have, making those wizard levels even more effective, making the class's very broad indeed. This makes them very versatile in overcoming challenges set forth by the GM. Which can make the MT a spotlight hog or DM spoiler of the fist degree.

In short, at high levels, the class enjoys broad utility, good synergy between its spell lists, and high endurance. Pretending that every challenge you face is a demon with high SR or is a mage duel is far from telling the whole story about the MT.


----------



## Remathilis (Jun 3, 2004)

RE: Radiant Servant of Pelor

I'm failing to see how this class is any more broken than most Cleric-based PrCs. 
Compare it to some of its cousins (esp Sacred Exorcist) and you'll see its not that damaging a PrC (with one exception, I'll note below)

1.) To be utterly useful, you must have two domains, Healing and Sun. Any other combination loses out on some of its major powers.

2.) d6 HD does make it abit weaker, and in a game where hp is rolled, the RSoP does have less hp than a standard cleric.

3.) Extra Greater Turning: This IS the power of this class, and though the number is a bit high (I'd have made it just Cha mod), its not terribly useful unless you are fighting alot of undead creatures. Besides, Disciple of the Sun blows this power away.
4.) Radiance: Nice, not needed, but good flavor.
5.) Turn Undead: Sacred Exorcists get full turning also. Nothing unique here.
6.) Divine Health Another flavorful power, but not game-breaking. Paladins have had it alot longer by the time this PrC grants it, and Contemplatives gain it as well.
7.) Empower/Maximize/Supreme Healing: These only apply to Cure spells CAST FROM THE HEALING DOMAIN AS DOMAIN SPELLS. That means that only one cure per level tops will be juiced up, and only if he is using all his domain slots for healing spells. (see below).
8.) Aura of Warding: +2 will for characters 2 spaces away? Useful if everyone huddles around the cleric, but I rarely see that happen. 
9.) Bonus Domain: If you've been playing smart, your choices are Strength, Good, Glory or Purification. Many PrCs in CD grant bonus domains, so this is nothing new, but now, you have three choices, juiced up healing spells, sun spells, or a third domain. If your stretching your miliage for your healing, your choice is already picked.
10.) Positive Energy Burst. Hmmm... 10d6 max to every undead in 20 squares (reflex 20 for 1/2) for two turn attempts? Thats nice, but I'd rather just Greater Turn them. or Empower Flamestrike a bunch. 

All that adds up to a class that is high powered, but not overly broken unless your game revolves around fighting vampires. Against other types of monster (giants, for example), your actually doing worse than a standard cleric, thanks to less hp. However, against undead, you rock the hizzouse. 

MY BEEFS: and yes, I do have them...

Why Martial Weapon Prof? Pelors Favored Weapon is a Mace (simple). I'd remove this. 
As stated, I'd make Greater Turning equal to your cha, not 3+cha.
I'd also knock the radius of PEB to maybe 50 feet 

However, I don't see the problems with this class that others have pointed out.

(BTW: Historical note, the original version of this class had no sun domain necessity (but still required for EGT) and required 3 ranks of knowledge: Undead (now obsolete, but still a SP expenditure).


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jun 4, 2004)

Psion said:
			
		

> Snarky sayings do not an argument make.



No, but they make a good summation.


> We already know that 3 levels "off the top" is the cost of the class; fixating on SR doesn't prove anything further. Further, it undermines your argument by relying on a very specific condition



Er, no. I just put the SR thing on the board because, at these levels, when practically _everything_ you face has the ability or access to it, SR is an important factor.


> Not IME. My PC sorcerers and clerics of this level frequently ran through their higher level spells at this level and did have to rely on their lower level spells.



Yes, but the fact remains that they HAD the high-level spells _to begin with_, which the MT does not. 


> My high level party relied extensively on mass haste... but that's only what, a 6th level spell? Likewise, harm is a very viable spell at high levels, as is disintigrate. That's worthless, right? I don't think so.



Keep in mind that those spells represent the top of the list for MTs. And harm and disintegrate use SR as their principal defense; again, the MT can't beat it. Moreover, I wouldn't trust an MT to deliver a _harm_ spell, since he's unlikely to have the melee survivability of the cleric; that survivability (and/or the divine reach ability of the hierophant class, which the straight cleric gets much earlier) are essential to delivering _harm_ without getting smushed like a bedbug.


> There are many spells that are exclusively arcane and/or exclusively divine; that the cleric is "nearly as good" seems somewhat off. Clerics can't cast teleport, or mass haste, or a variety of other potent spells.



The ever-popular Travel domain does have teleport, you know. And does mass haste even _exist_ in a 3.5 campaign? The MT is a 3.5 PrC, after all. You have to keep that in mind.  


> Since clerics can access their whole spell list, you can focus your attention on spells that clerics don't have, making those wizard levels even more effective, making the class's very broad indeed. This makes them very versatile in overcoming challenges set forth by the GM. Which can make the MT a spotlight hog or DM spoiler of the fist degree.



I repeat. _Give me an example of why._ Concrete examples of this happening in your campaign would be a really good idea, since I don't see the evidence for this at all. Moreover, the above contention really damages your argument. If anything, the MT's ability to cast lots of lower-level spells that aren't good in direct offensive capacity make them excellent _support_ characters, not spotlight hogs. 


> In short, at high levels, the class enjoys broad utility, good synergy between its spell lists, and high endurance. Pretending that every challenge you face is a demon with high SR or is a mage duel is far from telling the whole story about the MT.



Strawman. I didn't at all suggest that, which is why I wanted to see if you had actual experience from which to report. Moreover, "high endurance" is irrelevant when you're at levels at which people have full access to _greater teleport_. NO one runs through all their spells at a rate which would give the MT an advantage simply because he had a few extra low-level spell slots. Casters in danger of this teleport home and rest.

If you have a party of three characters, one of whom is a fighter-type, one a skill monkey, and one an MT, then yes, the MT will look good. But that is because he is _the only spellcaster_. A party of a fighter, cleric (or wizard), rogue, and MT, for example, will find the MT used as a glorified healing/buffing item, possibly doling out some buff spells like haste and the ability boosters, but being able to cast a few extra 3rd-level spells at 16th level hardly gives a PC the spotlight. If your argument is that the MT makes the PARTY too powerful by providing overly cheap curing and buffing, I can _sorta_ accept that, although I'd argue that the changes to the ability buffs and (greater) invisibility make the MT either a _necessary_ adjunct to a party that equips according to 3.0 rather than 3.5 principles, or just sorta weak.

But now I've taken this thread off-topic, for which I apologize to all posters, including yourself, Psion.


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jun 4, 2004)

Remathilis said:
			
		

> RE: Radiant Servant of Pelor
> 
> I'm failing to see how this class is any more broken than most Cleric-based PrCs.




Maybe you should be looking at how balanced those other cleric PrCs are.



> Compare it to some of its cousins (esp Sacred Exorcist) and you'll see its not that damaging a PrC (with one exception, I'll note below)
> 
> 1.) To be utterly useful, you must have two domains, Healing and Sun. Any other combination loses out on some of its major powers.




That's only one weak domain. Sun is great - _sunburst_ is really great.



> 2.) d6 HD does make it abit weaker, and in a game where hp is rolled, the RSoP does have less hp than a standard cleric.




Yes.



> 3.) Extra Greater Turning: This IS the power of this class, and though the number is a bit high (I'd have made it just Cha mod), its not terribly useful unless you are fighting alot of undead creatures. Besides, Disciple of the Sun blows this power away.




Let's go on with this.



> 4.) Radiance: Nice, not needed, but good flavor.
> 5.) Turn Undead: Sacred Exorcists get full turning also. Nothing unique here.
> 6.) Divine Health Another flavorful power, but not game-breaking. Paladins have had it alot longer by the time this PrC grants it, and Contemplatives gain it as well.
> 7.) Empower/Maximize/Supreme Healing: These only apply to Cure spells CAST FROM THE HEALING DOMAIN AS DOMAIN SPELLS. That means that only one cure per level tops will be juiced up, and only if he is using all his domain slots for healing spells. (see below).
> ...




Well, that's a lot of abilities. How many caster levels do you give up for that?

What does Positive Energy Burst have to do with Empower Flamestrike? (Unless you're talking about a certain busted Divine Metamagic feat...)



> All that adds up to a class that is high powered, but not overly broken unless your game revolves around fighting vampires. Against other types of monster (giants, for example), your actually doing worse than a standard cleric, thanks to less hp. However, against undead, you rock the hizzouse.




The problem is that you give up almost nothing and you get a slew of abilities. With all those abilities it's probably worth two caster levels lost - and that's taking the pre-requisites and hp loss into account.

(PS taking away hit points and giving it better weapons was just weird. Is he supposed to be better at combat or worse?)


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jun 4, 2004)

Remathilis said:
			
		

> RE: Radiant Servant of Pelor
> 
> I'm failing to see how this class is any more broken than most Cleric-based PrCs.




Maybe you should be looking at how balanced those other cleric PrCs are.



> Compare it to some of its cousins (esp Sacred Exorcist) and you'll see its not that damaging a PrC (with one exception, I'll note below)
> 
> 1.) To be utterly useful, you must have two domains, Healing and Sun. Any other combination loses out on some of its major powers.




That's only one weak domain. Sun is great - _sunburst_ is really great.



> 2.) d6 HD does make it abit weaker, and in a game where hp is rolled, the RSoP does have less hp than a standard cleric.




Yes.



> 3.) Extra Greater Turning: This IS the power of this class, and though the number is a bit high (I'd have made it just Cha mod), its not terribly useful unless you are fighting alot of undead creatures. Besides, Disciple of the Sun blows this power away.




Let's go on with this.



> 4.) Radiance: Nice, not needed, but good flavor.
> 5.) Turn Undead: Sacred Exorcists get full turning also. Nothing unique here.
> 6.) Divine Health Another flavorful power, but not game-breaking. Paladins have had it alot longer by the time this PrC grants it, and Contemplatives gain it as well.
> 7.) Empower/Maximize/Supreme Healing: These only apply to Cure spells CAST FROM THE HEALING DOMAIN AS DOMAIN SPELLS. That means that only one cure per level tops will be juiced up, and only if he is using all his domain slots for healing spells. (see below).
> ...




Well, that's a lot of abilities. How many caster levels do you give up for that?

What does Positive Energy Burst have to do with Empower Flamestrike? (Unless you're talking about a certain busted Divine Metamagic feat...)



> All that adds up to a class that is high powered, but not overly broken unless your game revolves around fighting vampires. Against other types of monster (giants, for example), your actually doing worse than a standard cleric, thanks to less hp. However, against undead, you rock the hizzouse.




The problem is that you give up almost nothing and you get a slew of abilities. With all those abilities it's probably worth two caster levels lost - and that's taking the pre-requisites and hp loss into account.

(PS taking away hit points and giving it better weapons was just weird. Is he supposed to be better at combat or worse?)


----------



## General Dorsey (Jun 4, 2004)

I've noticed that the Hammer of Moradin combined with the Master Thrower makes for a dangerous combo.


Also, the Frenzied Berzerker/Warhulk combo is rather nasty.  If you do allow the warhulk, do not, at all, ever, under any circumstances, allow it as an epic prestige class.  We had one in our campaign (we tried level 32 for fun), and he managed to deal over 1500 points of damage in one hit.  After that single attack, his character was "retired" from the game.  BTW, his Strength when raged was 90.


----------



## Psion (Jun 4, 2004)

Edit: Let me sum up instead of dragging this out. I doubt I will get you to cede any of these point, but here goes:
1) I disagree that SR is as pivotal as you claim, it only forces the MT to choose other equally valid options for spell selection.
2) I disagree that spells 1 or 2 levels off the highest are useless in a high level game.
3) Domains are not equivalent to a wizard's whole spell list.
4) I disagree that spell endurance is irrelevant in high level games, based on both typical published adventure scenarios and adventures in my own campaign.
5) Finally, you seem to be hinging your entire case around combat against high SR creatures, which is far from the only obstacle that characters face in a well rounded campaign and far from the only determinant in what makes a character whose utility other players will resent.


----------



## Psiblade (Jun 4, 2004)

Having played a MT, I can definitely tell you some of the weakness in 28 point 3.5 game at medium to high level with both a cleric and a wizard also in the party (currently 15th).

1st DCs for MT are going to be low. Creation points are split between Int, Wis, Dex, and Con. A pair of 16's cost you 20 of your 28 points.  :\ 

2nd High level firepower is determined by the ability to deliver 2 spells per round. A MT has a lot of low level slots that are hard to use in combat. A lesser metamagic rod of quicken (expensive) is almost a necessity. Wizards and Clerics have a lot more high level slots that can be quicken.

3rd Delivering cleric attack spells is hard. Most of the better cleric attack spells are by touch. With Wizard like hp and ac, delivering attack spells by touch = death by 3.5 power attack. You have to either reach spell them (no harm for me) or spectral hand them (costs 1 rd of 5 for combat).

4th Buffing spells become less useful at higher levels. Most characters want to have Con, Str, buffed all the time. At 1 min. per level, the 2nd level cleric spells do not cut it for a high level game.

The MT ends up being a ranged damage dealer (low ac & low hp) that is weaker than a wizard in penetrating SR, lower DCs, fewer quickens, lower level spells (no horrid wilting), but with significant healing ability and flexibility (for that remove fear) in a 28 or 32 point game.

If however you let them go wild (40+ points or high rolls), then the limitations play less of a roll. The power of a MT would increase dramatically. Better DCs, better hit points, better ac, better init, etc. The same principle applies if you allow access to twilight/halfweight armor. The MT would be extremely weak in a 25 or 22 point game.

The MT works best when the party has neither a cleric or wizard, or the party already has one of each. The specialist is a lot better at filling their role than a MT. The MT is an interesting PrC because it is really balanced only in a certain range of stats.

-Psiblade


----------



## Davelozzi (Jun 4, 2004)

*Church Inquisitor*

I like Church Inquisitor because it's one of the prestige classes that would fit best in my game, but I'm a little iffy on whether or not it's balanced.

Same hit dice (d8), BAB, and spell progression as a regular cleric, and more skill points.  Essentially, you're trading turn undead and a good Fort save for a whole bunch of cool special ablities, plus twice as many skill points.

Opinions?


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 4, 2004)

*sides with Head*

Anyway with Iron Might now coming out, I figure more stuff for good/balanced Pr-classes in 3.5 is a given. At least if you like Malhavoc stuff, which I do.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Jun 4, 2004)

Wonger said:
			
		

> I have a great relationship with my players.  They are great role-players and they are also highly skilled roll-players.  I think we have a rare balance of the two that keeps everyone happy.  But, even if they want to take a class for good in-game story and character reasons, they will use the mechanics of the class (no matter what class) to be as effective as possible in the game.  If that class happens to be a broken one, whether they intend it or not, it's gonna be bad for the game.  That's what I'm trying to head off as obviously these boards have enough people that the broken classes have been "playtested" by.  Maybe I can't preemptively stop every broken class from getting into my game before it's too late, but I certainly know several to avoid that have come up multiple times in this thread.




That's why you ask them "what is the class going to do for you?" and "whats the best you'll get out of it?". After you know the answers to these, you've got a really neat option when a class turns out to be far better than expected: You can limit it to doing what the player expected and wanted it to do in the first place. The player won't be disappointed (they got what they wanted in the first place) and you won't be too surprised (because most players CAN spot the power of the class they're taking).


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 4, 2004)

Or alternatively he could just require them to go find someone to train them...and if they can't too bad.


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jun 4, 2004)

Psion said:
			
		

> Edit: Let me sum up instead of dragging this out. I doubt I will get you to cede any of these point, but here goes:
> 1) I disagree that SR is as pivotal as you claim, it only forces the MT to choose other equally valid options for spell selection.



Didn't say this, Psion.


> 2) I disagree that spells 1 or 2 levels off the highest are useless in a high level game.



Didn't say this either.


> 3) Domains are not equivalent to a wizard's whole spell list.



Certainly didn't say this. If I thought this, then I'd have made a statement to the effect that neither an MT nor a straight wizard can ever be as good as a cleric.


> 4) I disagree that spell endurance is irrelevant in high level games, based on both typical published adventure scenarios and adventures in my own campaign.



This I did say, and I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. However, I will point out that EVEN if endurance is a factor, then we're talking a scenario under which the MyTh is more like the non-casters than the casters; he's not as potent an instant nuke, but he lasts longer. He certainly doesn't have more "endurance" than the fighter.


> 5) Finally, you seem to be hinging your entire case around combat against high SR creatures, which is far from the only obstacle that characters face in a well rounded campaign and far from the only determinant in what makes a character whose utility other players will resent.



And NO, I am NOT doing this! I had no intention of continuing this particular discussion in the first place, but I do _not_ appreciate this sort of strawmanning. Either face my arguments head-on, or just drop it.


----------



## Al'Kelhar (Jun 4, 2004)

OK, thrown into the ring for debate:

Prestige Paladin from _Unearthed Arcana_ is unbalanced.  Not in a "oh my [deity], that's SOOOO BROKEN" way, but unbalanced nevertheless.  It is balanced on the assumption that the character which takes the PrC has at least one level of fighter or ranger in order to get the necessary Ride ranks and the Mounted Combat feat, AND continues with the PrC for its whole 15-level progression.

However, a straight cleric can qualify for the class by 6th level, and since there's no multi-classing penalty for this PrC, can dump the PrC when he's got all the abilities he needs out of it (i.e. by 3rd level).  The cleric takes 3 levels of paladin and only loses 1 spell casting level while gaining all the meaningful abilities of a paladin, better BAB, better saves (over those three levels, of course).  The character then goes back to being a cleric.  If you "do the math", a Clr/Pal3 is better than a Clr(n+3).  A prestige class should never make a character a better generalist than a core class; the selection of a prestige class for "goodies" should never be a "no-brainer".

Cheers, Al'Kelhar


----------



## passengerpigeon (Jun 4, 2004)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> Most 10-level spellcasting PrCs. Most give out good abilities at most levels, and even if the abilities aren't earth-shattering they more than pay for the requirements and the turn undead/familiar stuff you gave up.




The real problem here is that the basic spellcasting classes suck and all they offer is additional spellcasting progression.  What they SHOULD do is either a) give them a bunch of varied abilities and have the PrCs explore them or b) make some of the spells you get per level a class ability, so that you give up some spell progression by taking a PrC.  In my opinion.

--p


----------



## hong (Jun 4, 2004)

passengerpigeon said:
			
		

> The real problem here is that the basic spellcasting classes suck and all they offer is additional spellcasting progression. What they SHOULD do is either a) give them a bunch of varied abilities and have the PrCs explore them or b) make some of the spells you get per level a class ability, so that you give up some spell progression by taking a PrC. In my opinion.




Which is pretty much what I did with the druid (OA shaman) and mage (sorcerer) IMC.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jun 4, 2004)

Well, i also want to beat the dead horse, ahem the Mystic Theurge. 
I think the best equivalent to the MT would be a prestige class for fighters that gave 2d10 each level (possibly also double constitution modifier), but maybe has medium BAB. (so, the max BAB is +17 instead of +20 - you see, he doesn`t lose his 4th attack))
He doesn`t hit as often as a straight fighter, but he will survive nearly twice as long. 
The Mystic Theurge is the same - his spells don`t have the full punch of a straight caster, but it takes nearly twice as long till his spells are up. 

And there are some very nice tactics a Mystic Theurge can pull of that don`t require him to cast offensive spells - example: 
The invisible healer. Use his arcana invisibility and his divine healing, he can steadily pump up the group fighters, while the enemies have no clue why their target continues fighting. Unlike a Cleric that happens to have invisiblity as a domain spell (and can only cast it once per day), he can do this trick multiple times. 


Spoiler



(I believe there is a scenario similar to this in Banewarrens. An evil Ex-Cleric is aided by an invisible caster that constantly heals him. That was really a difficult encounter for us.


Using the Healer Class from (Complete Warrior? Miniature`s Handbook?), we used the same trick with a potion of invisibility - not bad, but it doesn`t work that often...


----------



## Celtavian (Jun 4, 2004)

*re*



			
				Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> Well, i also want to beat the dead horse, ahem the Mystic Theurge.
> I think the best equivalent to the MT would be a prestige class for fighters that gave 2d10 each level (possibly also double constitution modifier), but maybe has medium BAB. (so, the max BAB is +17 instead of +20 - you see, he doesn`t lose his 4th attack))
> He doesn`t hit as often as a straight fighter, but he will survive nearly twice as long.
> The Mystic Theurge is the same - his spells don`t have the full punch of a straight caster, but it takes nearly twice as long till his spells are up.
> ...




_Invisibility_, _Spectral Hand_ and healing is one awsome Mystic Theurge combination. Wounding is also great once you obtain _Greater Invisibility_.


----------



## Celtavian (Jun 4, 2004)

passengerpigeon said:
			
		

> The real problem here is that the basic spellcasting classes suck and all they offer is additional spellcasting progression.  What they SHOULD do is either a) give them a bunch of varied abilities and have the PrCs explore them or b) make some of the spells you get per level a class ability, so that you give up some spell progression by taking a PrC.  In my opinion.
> 
> --p




We added bonus feats to the Sorcerer to improve that class. They receive Eschew Materials at first level and access to Metamagic and a few Sorcerer specific bonus feats every 5 levels like the wizard. 

The big problem with clerics is that they spend too much time healing the party to really enjoy their Prc. I think this may be campaign specific, but the encounters we face are often so powerful that all the cleric manages to do is keep the melees alive. They usually spend all their offensive spell power on spontaneous cures and buffing spells like _Bless_, _Death Ward_, _Energy Resistance_, _Spell Immunity_ and _Prayer_. Not to mention, they are almost always making scrolls or wands to supplement their healing and buffing power during downtime.

Maybe we play a tougher game than most, but the times when the cleric actually gets to throw down are few and far between. Cleric Prc's are usually nice window dressing. They look like fun. They look like they should be overpowered, but they aren't. Clerics (I should qualify this by saying well-played clerics that want to see their party survive) spend too much spellpower keeping the party alive to be able to throw down as well as a melee.

The real class that usually overshadows everyone is the Wizard/Sorcerer. Once they are able to throw down big blasts of magic like _Horrid Wilting_, nasty death spells like _Power Word, Kill_, or summon sickeningly powerful monsters like Elder Elementals, they really steal the show. They are like the clean up hitter in a high powered batting order. Once the other guys manage to wear down the enemy, they come in strong and deal the killing blow.


----------



## Bulldogc (Jun 4, 2004)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Despite initial assumptions, we haven't found mystic theurge to be broken at all. The loss of those high level spells is excrutiating.
> 
> I agree, however, about Divine Servant of Pelor -- give up diddly, get lots in return. The same could be said for the archmage, which I would allow nevertheless.



archmage 3.5 dmg looks fine to me u gota be like a 15th level caster to even start on it(dont have it in fromt of me) and even then u gota give up your high level slots to get their abilities so its a nice trade off.


----------



## Bulldogc (Jun 4, 2004)

Pants said:
			
		

> Plus, you have to give up actual spell slots in order to use all those fancy-schamncy powers.  A very hard thing to give up indeed.
> 
> My list of unbalanced PrC's:
> 
> ...




thrallherd and psionuncarnent are pretty broken to if u usein psionics especialy at higher levels


----------



## Psiblade (Jun 4, 2004)

There is a major problem with the MT as an invisible healer. If the spell is brought down or they can detect invisible for any reason, enemy fighters five foot step and splatter you all over the walls. The low ac and low hit points are deadly on the front lines. Clerics/Healers with armor/shield/hp and a ring of invis are much better at the invisible healer routine.

Spectral hand is a much better option, but does not last that long. You either have to quicken it (using a 6th level slot) than burns off a chain lightning or spend the first round of combat casting it.

The MT looks awesome on paper, but in reality does not measure up.

-Psiblade


----------



## Psion (Jun 4, 2004)

ruleslawyer said:
			
		

> I had no intention of continuing this particular discussion in the first place, but I do _not_ appreciate this sort of strawmanning. Either face my arguments head-on, or just drop it.




Each and every one of those points was drawn from an original much longer response directly to your previous post. I merely simmered it down because I felt that a drawn out argument was pointless.

If you wish to clarify your position, then by all means do. But please do not insinuate that I have deliberately misconstrued what you have had to say.

From my perspective, it is you, if anyone, who is guilty of constructing strawmen and not meeting my arguments head on because you have continued to harp on the point of blast mages when I explicitly said several posts that is not the venue in which I have concerns with the MT, yet you continue to beat on it. Either address my concerns or admit I am right, don't continue to tell me I shouldn't be concerned about the MT in combat because I already know that.

I do not see either one of is going to convince the other, and further, I think your insinuations that I am deliberately misconstrued your arguments are getting just a tech personal. I think it is time to leave well enough alone, because I don't see any more light being shed on this issue. Just heat.


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jun 4, 2004)

Psion said:
			
		

> From my perspective, it is you, if anyone, who is guilty of constructing strawmen and not meeting my arguments head on because you have continued to harp on the point of blast mages when I explicitly said several posts that is not the venue in which I have concerns with the MT, yet you continue to beat on it.



Er, no, Psion. Let's go back and review my "harp[ing] on blast mages, shall we?

Arguments in my first post:

1) MTs are weaker because they can't beat SR. This is the blast mage point. Note: _One_ argument among the others. Alone

2) No access to high-level spells. This is not a blast mage point, but an overall power point. The fact is that whether you are a blast or utility caster, you work from the top on down, because the high-level spells really are that much better. Lacking access to one, often two entire levels of spells compared with a straight caster even at the top of the PrC is a real problem for the MT.

3) Less additional versatility than you might think (my cleric w/domains vs. MT point). Again, not a "blast mage" point, but an "MT counts for less in the versatility domain than you might think" point.

And the wrap-around argument: SHOW me how the MT becomes a "spotlight hog" when experience in my campaigns and testing on the WotC Char Optimization boards shows the MT to be an excellent (and not overpowered!) cohort and support character, but lacking in the raw power to be a spotlight hog. 

Arguments in YOUR first post:


> We already know that 3 levels "off the top" is the cost of the class; fixating on SR doesn't prove anything further. Further, it undermines your argument by relying on a very specific condition. You are really only proving they don't make good blast mages, which I can only agree with.



"Fixating on SR" is a strawman argument, Psion. 


> Not IME. My PC sorcerers and clerics of this level frequently ran through their higher level spells at this level and did have to rely on their lower level spells. My high level party relied extensively on mass haste... but that's only what, a 6th level spell? Likewise, harm is a very viable spell at high levels, as is disintigrate. That's worthless, right? I don't think so.



Fair, and I responded to these arguments individually in the following post. _Directly_ responded, as follows:


> ...does mass haste even exist in a 3.5 campaign? The MT is a 3.5 PrC, after all. You have to keep that in mind.
> 
> ...I wouldn't trust an MT to deliver a harm spell, since he's unlikely to have the melee survivability of the cleric; that survivability (and/or the divine reach ability of the hierophant class, which the straight cleric gets much earlier) are essential to delivering harm without getting smushed like a bedbug.





> here are many spells that are exclusively arcane and/or exclusively divine; that the cleric is "nearly as good" seems somewhat off. Clerics can't cast teleport, or mass haste, or a variety of other potent spells. Since clerics can access their whole spell list, you can focus your attention on spells that clerics don't have, making those wizard levels even more effective, making the class's very broad indeed.



My response: The Travel domain does have teleport. And:


> I repeat. Give me an example of why. Concrete examples of this happening in your campaign would be a really good idea, since I don't see the evidence for this at all. Moreover, the above contention really damages your argument. If anything, the MT's ability to cast lots of lower-level spells that aren't good in direct offensive capacity make them excellent support characters, not spotlight hogs.



Then you come at me with:


> Pretending that every challenge you face is a demon with high SR or is a mage duel is far from telling the whole story about the MT.



So you're telling me that this _isn't_ a strawman argument? And that I didn't respond to your arguments directly?
Then, of course, your next post says the following:


> 1) I disagree that SR is as pivotal as you claim, it only forces the MT to choose other equally valid options for spell selection.
> 2) I disagree that spells 1 or 2 levels off the highest are useless in a high level game.
> 3) Domains are not equivalent to a wizard's whole spell list.
> 4) I disagree that spell endurance is irrelevant in high level games, based on both typical published adventure scenarios and adventures in my own campaign.
> 5) Finally, you seem to be hinging your entire case around combat against high SR creatures, which is far from the only obstacle that characters face in a well rounded campaign and far from the only determinant in what makes a character whose utility other players will resent.



These arguments seem to not even acknowledge the counter-arguments that I (and, subsequently, Psiblade) raised regarding your posts. Moreover, you play up the SR thing again, which was ONE (count it) of my arguments and represents approximately 20% of my post(s) on the issue. That is what I meant by "strawman," and there's no need to assume that I was being personal; this is an issue of what I feel is an insufficient response to my arguments, not a personal attack. If you felt that I was turning up the heat, I apologize.


----------



## Psion (Jun 4, 2004)

ruleslawyer said:
			
		

> Er, no, Psion. Let's go back and review my "harp[ing] on blast mages, shall we?




Let's not.



> These arguments seem to not even acknowledge the counter-arguments that I (and, subsequently, Psiblade) raised regarding your posts.




Psiblade said nothing about my posts.

That said, they weren't meant to address the minutia of everthing you posted. They were a very abbreviated editing of a long winded reply of the sort that I do not have the patience to be drawn into. But I thought better of it.

I've come a long way since usenet. I know nothing is going to be proven, and if we continue to go down this path, it will just go on until a mod comes to shut us down and nothing will come of it except I will have wasted my afternoon.

So I was just trying to say my peace and bow out. Which I am now doing. You either beleive or you will not. Either you share my values on what makes for a disruptive elements of a game, or you do not. If someone has seen the sorts of problems I have seen and my posts forewarns them of the potential, then great. If someone sees them and says that is not a problem the way they play, that's great too. But I see nothing to be gained by disputing any longer. 

Good day sir.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 4, 2004)

Rulesy/Psion,

Just agree to disagree. 

Besides I still think Viligant isn't broken.

*shoe from Psion* Ouch! Okay fine.


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jun 4, 2004)

Happy to! 

Psion: My bone of contention was that I felt you _mischaracterized_ my counter-arguments to your own contention (which you made first) that the MT was overpowered. That is the point of this thread, isn't it? To figure out which PrCs might pose problems and why. You seem to agree with that, no? Like it or not, your edit came off as ignoring the points I made, not addressing them. I'd have been perfectly happy to agree to disagree initially had that not been the case.

Anyway, I've apologized three times previously: First for making OT posts, then for wasting your time, so to speak. I'd appreciate a less exasperated tone from you, in any case; I'm hardly interested in wasting my time either.


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jun 4, 2004)

PS: Psion (or mods!), if you think it'll help the starting poster, I'd be happy to go back through this thread and delete all my posts to shorten it to on-topic posts.

Back onto topic:

A nice quick way of spotting scary PrC issues is to check out the Character Optimization board on the WotC boards. All the broken PrCs seem to enjoy a tour of duty on that site.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jun 4, 2004)

BobROE said:
			
		

> I think it was based on the theory that you'd be a ranger taking it, and if that's true it's not that bad.  But from a cleric it's definitely broken.



You're absolutely right. I pretty much figured that out a couple of sessions after the Windwalker entered play.

The quick, easy, and immediate fix to make the Windwalker balanced is to simply change the "+1 caster level" benefit to "+1 Ranger caster level".

With that, it is balanced and fits the spirit (and my guess, the original intention) of the class.


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jun 4, 2004)

However, WW does still involve a substantial skill and feat investment for a cleric, and the only major benefit the class confers is BAB (the energy resistances are nice, but less good for a cleric, who can provide these easily with spells, than for the spell-lighter ranger). So it may come out at least a little more even than it seems at first. I dunno.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jun 4, 2004)

I don't buy the "feat and skill" investment argument, and never will. Experience has proven (to me) that it's irrelevant - and in many cases, beneficial.

For me, there is no "seems" - experience with the WW prestige class has already shown me that my personal impressions are correct.


----------



## Celtavian (Jun 4, 2004)

arnwyn said:
			
		

> I don't buy the "feat and skill" investment argument, and never will. Experience has proven (to me) that it's irrelevant - and in many cases, beneficial.
> 
> For me, there is no "seems" - experience with the WW prestige class has already shown me that my personal impressions are correct.




I've played a Windwalker to 13th level. They didn't seem particularly overpowered compared to the other characters. They certainly weren't stealing the show and besides being able to engage flying enemies, they really didn't have an edge on the fighters in melee. 

I think a Ranger/Fighter/Windwalker would be much more powerful in team play than a Cleric/Ranger/Windwalker. Being able to fly at will for a fighter type is a huge boon. A cleric with the Travel domain, which most Shaundakul priests have, can already fly at relatively low level. 

I listed the Windwalker as overpowered only because you receive alot of neat abilities while giving up only the good Fort save and turning, for some really nifty special abilities. It certainly isn't a show stealer Prc, but the ability to fly is certainly nice. Full BAB is nice as well, but hardly a game breaker. More often than not you are still going to cast _Divine Power_ and _Righteous Might_ if you are going to enter melee, which are going to supercede the good BAB of  the Windwalker anyhow.

In play, the Windwalker is no show stealer. Overpowered only because you might receive a little too much for giving up too little.


----------



## Prism (Jun 4, 2004)

There are three WotC cleric PrC's that I am aware of that advance full caster progression and full turn undead progression. Doomguide (F&P), Radiant Servant of Pelor (CD) and Sacred Exorcist (CD). 

Out of all of these the Radiant Servant is probably the weakest and most restrictive to qualify for when it comes to choosing domains. The additional healing powers barely do enough to tempt you to take the poor healing domain (Preparing cure spells as a cleric - tut tut). There are better choices in the sun domain, but this isn't the strongest domain out there either. I'd say that this PrC makes worshiping Pelor a bit stronger.

The Doomguide is fairly strong although is a bit tricky to qualify for. The extra abilities are pretty decent and you get 3 bonus feats too

The strongest and easiest to qualify for is the sacred exorcist. No feat requirements at all, 2 skills which you would probably take anyway, no domain reqs or god reqs. You get a favoured enemy bonus's vs undead or evil outsiders, plus permanent consecrate and a few other nice spell like abilities

All in all these are stronger than a straight cleric, especially the sacred exorcist which requires no planning at all.


----------



## Taren Seeker (Jun 4, 2004)

arnwyn said:
			
		

> I don't buy the "feat and skill" investment argument, and never will. Experience has proven (to me) that it's irrelevant - and in many cases, beneficial.
> 
> For me, there is no "seems" - experience with the WW prestige class has already shown me that my personal impressions are correct.



 And my experience with an 18th level ranger/cleric/WW is that it is powerful, but most benefits are not that relevant. Also, if you want to be able to have any amount of decent skills or useful feats you really do need to take that Ranger level, otherwise you are paying a lot of cross class, need martial weapon: GS, tracking and lightning reflexes. Without Ranger at mid levels you can't even have ranks in concentration.

So the upside is that the PrC pretty much forces you to give up at least 1 caster level, maybe 2 depending on how important skills are to you. As for the requirements giving you more benefits, I would not have bothered with ranks in hide or move silent, nor lightning reflexes, nor even WF: GS if they were not required by the class.

As others have stated, many of the side benefits of the class are simply either overshadowed by later abilities (the flying) or by your own spellcasting abilities.


----------



## Arbiter of Wyrms (Jun 4, 2004)

*Sangehirn*

Without a doubt, the most unbalanced class I have ever had the joy of playing is the Sangehirn, from the WotC site (Mind's Eye, I think) for 3.0 psionics.  

This Psionic healer would soak up everybody's damage as soon as combat was done, wait five minutes for his fast healing to make the damage go away, and the party was ready to go again.  

Hit points and healing were never an issue that got that party to rest.  We only worried about power points and spells per day.  With rings of sustenance all around, we took only four hours turnaround and we hit the ground running again.  I believe that, in game time, we spent about a week or less cleaning out the entire crater ridge mines in RtToEE.


----------



## Celtavian (Jun 5, 2004)

*re*



			
				Prism said:
			
		

> There are three WotC cleric PrC's that I am aware of that advance full caster progression and full turn undead progression. Doomguide (F&P), Radiant Servant of Pelor (CD) and Sacred Exorcist (CD).
> 
> Out of all of these the Radiant Servant is probably the weakest and most restrictive to qualify for when it comes to choosing domains. The additional healing powers barely do enough to tempt you to take the poor healing domain (Preparing cure spells as a cleric - tut tut). There are better choices in the sun domain, but this isn't the strongest domain out there either. I'd say that this PrC makes worshiping Pelor a bit stronger.
> 
> ...




The only overpowered ability of the Radiant Servant is the Greater Turning. They gave too many uses to both the Radiant Servant and the Eye of Horus-re rendering undead adventures just about obsolete. Otherwise, the Radiant Servant is just fine. The martial weapon proficiency doesn't fit from a flavor standpoint, but that is easily fixable.

The Morninglord of Lathander and the Eye of Horus-re also grant turning levels. The Eye is way overpowered, the Morninglord is a bit underpowered.


----------



## Marshall (Jun 5, 2004)

Celtavian said:
			
		

> The only overpowered ability of the Radiant Servant is the Greater Turning. They gave too many uses to both the Radiant Servant and the Eye of Horus-re rendering undead adventures just about obsolete. .





Why? Whether the undead runs away or is destroyed the encounter is a win for the PCs.


----------



## FireLance (Jun 5, 2004)

Marshall said:
			
		

> Why? Whether the undead runs away or is destroyed the encounter is a win for the PCs.



I guess some people take the perspective that if the undead are not destroyed, they can always come back to haunt the party at an inconvenient time.

Careful though, this might turn into a "depends on how the DM runs undead" argument.


----------



## hong (Jun 5, 2004)

FireLance said:
			
		

> I guess some people take the perspective that if the undead are not destroyed, they can always come back to haunt the party at an inconvenient time.




As in, ten rounds later.


----------



## Prism (Jun 5, 2004)

Celtavian said:
			
		

> The Morninglord of Lathander and the Eye of Horus-re also grant turning levels. The Eye is way overpowered, the Morninglord is a bit underpowered.




Not sure how I forgot the Morninglord as I play a cleric of Lathander soon to take that PrC. The reason I didn't worry too much about the Eye is that it loses a caster level at first and has an annoying feat requirement and some cross class skill prereqs.


----------



## FireLance (Jun 5, 2004)

hong said:
			
		

> As in, ten rounds later.



Twenty, actually - ten rounds of fleeing, and ten rounds of running back  . Unless they have access to teleport magic, of course.

This also assumes that the undead want to or are forced to go back and the party hasn't gone somewhere else during those twenty rounds.  Either that, or the undead have access to some kind of advanced party-dar (tm), party-tracker (tm) or incredible coincidence (tm) capability which enables them to show up where the party happens to be.


----------



## Celtavian (Jun 5, 2004)

*re*



			
				Marshall said:
			
		

> Why? Whether the undead runs away or is destroyed the encounter is a win for the PCs.





Incorporeal undead have a good chance of coming back as do vampires and liches who  have other means to escape. Just turning the undead is not a win, they still have to track them down and kill them.

Not to mention that Greater Turning will often work against very powerful undead. If the cleric uses Greater Turning against the bad guys main guards, he can destroy one or two of them per attempt no saving throw. With cerain magic items and a very good roll, he can probably destroy the main undead enemy with no saving throw.

Just imagine it this way: A PC receives a death spell capable of killing an equal level foe with no saving throw irregardless of hit points or protections. That is what greater turning is like to undead. How happy would you be if some class received the ability to kill a living PC or enemy of equal to 4 levels higher than your level with no saving throw or warding spells? One time a day is very good, 2 to 4 times a day is nigh on godlike power, and 3 plus Charisma times per day makes many encounters a joke. Greater Turning can absolutely dismantle and destroy an undead encounter making it much easier than it should be.


----------



## DClingman (Jun 5, 2004)

I'll be honest as a game designer. When it comes to high level chars and PrCs, I think in general the balance needs to shift to the player. In an electronic game, I don't have the ability as the GM to sit there and correct imbalances. However in D&D, I can always add another monster out of the blue to overcorrect and make an encounter interesting even for a class that people would consider "unbalanced". I can add 10 hp to the monster to keep him up one more round, etc. Whether its the Theurge or whatever you got, everyone has a limit of spells/day and hit points. With enough crap thrown at them, something is going to give. 

As a quick side note, I don't want to sound like balance is irrelevant cause it totally is. What I am saying is that those things can be corrected in real time when playing RPGs.

Dustin


----------



## HighlandsBear (Jun 5, 2004)

Mystic Theurge is weak! Can't believe this argument keeps popping back up. Everyone knows some super secret spell combo that would just make it roxor but I'm never around to see it.

Also, can't believe someone argued Holy Liberator was overpowered now. It was nerfed to the point no one will ever use it again. First off, unlike a paladin it does not get turn undead anymore. That means no divine might or other divine feats. Also, you get half the number and power of smites, and no lay hands - not much payoff for having high charisma for your character's first 10 levels and getting absolutely nothing out of it. Celestial companion is vastly weaker than a pal horse until like 19th level. You basically need to split your stats like a paladin, but are even weaker.


----------



## Taneel BrightBlade (Jun 5, 2004)

I was thinking that Frenzied Berzeker was brocken myself the Deathless Frenzy is too low level (at least thats the problem I see).  But at high levels mages and sorcerers are just as broken so it evens out


----------



## Taren Seeker (Jun 5, 2004)

(edit: re: Holy Liberator) Well, I'd say that immune to all compulsions/charms is worth a fair bit. The class is not underpowered now, but is less powerful then before (I don't think it needed nerfing though). Losing the Turn Undead did hurt my high level Ranger tho...no more Divine Might/Divine "the one that does temp HP's and Movement" (I always forget the name)

I'd rank it as good or a little better than base paladin, also cuz you can multi it freely and use Barbarian levels. They get spells and caster level faster as well.

Why it got nerfed while others didn't...*shrug* Divine Oracle with Full Plate evasion always bugged me, and it still does


----------

