Before I get into D&D fighters/wizards/etclerica, let's talk about prestige classes, and let me preface this by saying I'm mostly worried about cRPGs, where such classes add a bit of replay value and another facet to your character's identity: a big choice to make. Though I don't play tabletop games, I doubt I'd see the point in a medium where the potential for divergence and customization is whatever the GM will allow. Nevertheless, as a cRPG player, let me admit from the start I fundamentally like them. As an idea. As a symbolic transcendence or apotheosis for your character. As a goal to work towards. As they're actually implemented... well... not so much.
Biggest problem: redundancy. In their earlier editions' incarnations, half tended toward hybrids of magical and nonmagical (arcane-this and eldritch-that) which merely end up watering down both of their core constituents instead of acquiring any specific flavor of gameplay, and ultimately would have you wondering "why didn't I just play a bard?" The rest were either bland and overspecialized (dwarf defender) or stupidly munchkin-ish (dragon disciple) that I couldn't see myself using them.
Fast-forwarding to last year, Wrath of the Righteous gives the impression that classes in Pathfinder have proliferated to truly absurd numbers, differentiated from each other only by a single overpowered ability (like my Witch of the Veil's combo teleport/invisibility) or gaining freebies like hexes while surrendering little to nothing compared to a base archetype of wizard or druid. That infinite redundancy is even more pronounced when comparing base to prestige classes, as base classes like Woljif's "eldritch scoundrel" duplicate prestige classes (e.g. arcane trickster) without the need for purposeful character development.
In fact, while I complain a lot about DnD 5e (and with due cause) I've liked both Solasta and BG3 replacing prestige classes with the old 2e BG2 "kits" differentiating each class at level 2. Oversimplified as everything is in 5e, subclasses nonetheless fit the basic idea of taking a major decision about your character's progress after creation and adding some replay value. Prestige classes also erred by splitting your level advancement, stalling the build-up (and frequently overcompensating in return) conflicting with progression rather than complementing it, watering down, disrupting the flow rather than building on it. That itself stemmed from their growing naturally out of multiclassing.
But all those hybridization options worked on the assumption there would be gaps to bridge between core fighter/wizard/cleric/thief options. With every druid, barbarian, bard, etc. added to the base roster, the justification for juggling your basic class later in the campaign asymptotes to "I just want to play a dire wolf with a pointy wizard hat" which desperate sartorial need can be served better by a single gear/spell proficiency feat. You can certainly have your prestige classes... if you're willing to keep the level 1 choice low and split off into higher specializations later. Conversely, offering fifty different base classes from character creation makes it hard enough to give them individual personalities without piling on duplicates at level five. Make up your damn minds. Either go back to the core handful with prestige specializations in a huge tree, or keep numerous core classes with less branching, and later customization coming from feats and skills.
For the rest of this series I'll ignore the issue altogether and assume subclasses are the better option, but keep the prestige class redundancy problem in mind, as it also applies to adding ANYTHING to the existing roster, from fighters to swashbucklers and druids to shamans.
No comments:
Post a Comment