Notices


Gaming Discussion

For all things gaming related.


Pathfinder: [3.P] PrCs as gestalt

   
Quote:
You're the one trying to claim "more benefit to noncasters". I've given numerous examples proving considerable advantage to various casters by various means and methods.
What advantage? Casters are more powerful even without this houserule. All this do is give casters a few more options, but it's not like they need it.

Quote:
You've yet to even describe *any* noncaster option that actually makes things decent for them.
They get free class features. Base class + PrC is better than just base class. And it's even better if you choose smart.

Quote:
T4/5 to T1. Which classes? HOW?
Err... Paladin/Bard/Ranger... with the Prestige houserule that you yourself brought into the discussion.

Quote:
Your goal is "clearly as good or better than a sorcerer".
Err... No it isn't. Where did you get that idea?

Well, yes, prestige make everyone better. But the question is a matter of "by what amount". What noncaster class offers the same increase in power as the PrCs possessed by casters? Especially the ones that cost spellcasting levels?


Also, no, by your rules, that would NOT work that way.

If you turned a fighter into a prestige paladin/bard/ranger... it would still only gain half progression. After all, it isn't a caster on the primary side of the gestalt. So that's a failure. And technically it wouldn't even get THAT, since they only add "+1 to existing spellcasting class". If you have no existing casting. You get no increase in casting. So taking it as a noncaster just gives you various noncasting features (most of which you could probably have gotten anyway with your base class).

So it gives a caster all the powers of a ranger or paladin or bard. While allowing them to still keep all the powers of a druid or cleric or sorcerer (the three classes that most easily "fit" those PrC variants). It gives a noncaster almost nothing more than a couple free feats and maybe some skill points. Maybe.


And I "got that idea" by you claiming a T1 class from a T4/5. Sorcerer is T2. So if it's T1, it must, by definition, be better than sorcerer. Actually, since sorc isn't even top of the T2 chain, it was a low bar.

Quote:
But the question is a matter of "by what amount".
By significant amount for mundanes/T3-6s and non-significant amount for casters/T1-2s.

Quote:
What noncaster class offers the same increase in power as the PrCs possessed by casters?
With this houserule any PrC actually gives more to mundanes/low tiers than it would give a caster.

Quote:
Especially the ones that cost spellcasting levels?
Most caster PrCs that cost caster levels are kinda weak. Especially the 5/10 for some reason.

Quote:
If you turned a fighter into a prestige paladin/bard/ranger... it would still only gain half progression. After all, it isn't a caster on the primary side of the gestalt. So that's a failure. And technically it wouldn't even get THAT, since they only add "+1 to existing spellcasting class". If you have no existing casting. You get no increase in casting. So taking it as a noncaster just gives you various noncasting features (most of which you could probably have gotten anyway with your base class).
Good God... Either I suck major balls at explaining or you're not even trying.
I'm NOT using the Prestige Paladin/Bard/Ranger to bring mundanes to T1! I said that if you use this houserule AND the Prestige classes then Paladins will be T1 (because they'll be Clerics with Paladin class features), Bards will be T1 (because they'll be Wizards or Sorcerers) and Rangers will be T1 (because they'll be Clerics or Druids). Now do you understand?

Quote:
And I "got that idea" by you claiming a T1 class from a T4/5.
Except I didn't.

Basically you're arguing against a strawman.

BTW, just so we are clear, I'm saying "mundanes", but actually I'm talking about weaker classes (T3 and below), and by casters I mean the strong classes (T1-2). But I think you knew that, because you didn't ask about T3 and below casters.

Eh, I understand you just fine. I am explaining to you that you're *wrong*. Empirically. With examples. You just keep throwing "but it makes mundanes more stronger" at me like that makes it true, without once giving an example or logic behind your claim.

And, again, if it's a cleric with paladin prestige levels. Then it is STILL A CLERIC. With a prestige class that gives it all the powers of yet another class (as if it needed the help). Nothing more. Nothing less.

Just like a Sevenfold Veil is still a wizard. With a prestige class. Granted, that's not one that gets especially stronger- couple bonus feats, nothing more.

But look at half-caster PrCs. Some of them are downright insane. They take your CoDzilla from being a god. To being a god that *eats other gods*. They'd have to create a Tier Zero for them. They'd be powerful enough to beat certain "theoretical" builds. Not all of them. But some of them. And without any particular minmaxing involved.

Quote:
Eh, I understand you just fine. I am explaining to you that you're *wrong*. Empirically. With examples.
Nah, I'm not wrong. You give examples of a few exceptionally good PrCs, but totally ignore that the rest of them is weak and their class features at best give T1-2s some flavorful, but not very powerful abilities.

Quote:
You just keep throwing "but it makes mundanes more stronger" at me like that makes it true, without once giving an example or logic behind your claim.
Sorry, I'm lazy like that. I'll give you one example and if it won't satisfy you, I'll try again with more.
A TWFing concept. Normally suboptimal unless you're optimizing the hell out of it. Now you simply go Ranger 6 / (Ranger 10 // Dervish 10) / (Ranger 4 // Tempest 4). You have good skills, you gain TWF feats for free, you become a great TWFer, you can move and full attack, and you have all Rangers wilderness skills. Replace Ranger with Scout and it's even better.

Quote:
And, again, if it's a cleric with paladin prestige levels. Then it is STILL A CLERIC. With a prestige class that gives it all the powers of yet another class (as if it needed the help). Nothing more. Nothing less.
No, it's the other way around. It's a Paladin that gained the Clerics T1 power.

Quote:
But look at half-caster PrCs. Some of them are downright insane. They take your CoDzilla from being a god. To being a god that *eats other gods*. They'd have to create a Tier Zero for them. They'd be powerful enough to beat certain "theoretical" builds. Not all of them. But some of them. And without any particular minmaxing involved.
Depending on your groups preferred power level, you could either ban the offending PrCs, nerf them or not care.

It doesn't matter if it's all of them. You asked which group benefits more. That means you're *suppose* to cherry-pick the best. On both sides. If you're deliberately avoiding the good stuff... well, of COURSE you'll limit the power. That'd be another house rule.

Ok... so you got a powerful enough TWFer. Does it do anything else cool? At all? Because at level 20, hitting things with swords has long since stopped being all that interesting, useful, or effective. I'll grant you, it keeps the ranger combat effective. But it isn't as good a boost, linearly, as... let's see... sandstorm has Walker in the Waste (at level 10 you become a superior breed of liche- complete with phylactery). Worth two caster levels. Beastly if you keep the CL.

SandShaper (another sandstorm) costs 3 levels. But adds a huge list of new spells. STRONG new spells at that. Easily takes your sorcerer into the T1 range and possibly beyond if you don't pay that caster level cost.

Scion of Tem-Et-Nu (more sandstorm)- 1/2 casting. Full BAB. Fast Healing. Total Gish wet dream. The lost CLs are what makes it not worth it. Suddenly, godlike.


Your TWFer is still, at best, a T3 character. Still gonna get its ass kicked by a sorc. Given how weak TWF is, even perfectly optimized, and the price tags associated with double weapons... I bet you it's still not as good as an optimized barbarian with a two hander. So you didn't even increase its tier a full step.


... How do you count a CLERIC that multiclasses to a cleric oriented PrC to suddenly be counted as a paladin? It's still a cleric. Just an even more ungodly one. Cleric casting, cleric features, cleric starting class. If you find a way to have a character start as an ordinary paladin and gain T1 casting... THEN you have an argument. But this just takes a cleric and gives it Full BAB, better HD, and some great class features.


... It doesn't matter the "group's preferred power level"- that's a house rule. You have to leave all (legal) rules in the game in order to legitimately compare effective changes to power levels with your house rule.


At best you can argue a "comparatively speaking" point. A thousand dollars means a lot more to someone on the poverty line than half a million dollars means to Donald Trump. That's what your rule does, metaphorically.

Quote:
sandstorm has Walker in the Waste (at level 10 you become a superior breed of liche- complete with phylactery). Worth two caster levels. Beastly if you keep the CL.

SandShaper (another sandstorm) costs 3 levels. But adds a huge list of new spells. STRONG new spells at that. Easily takes your sorcerer into the T1 range and possibly beyond if you don't pay that caster level cost.

Scion of Tem-Et-Nu (more sandstorm)- 1/2 casting. Full BAB. Fast Healing. Total Gish wet dream. The lost CLs are what makes it not worth it. Suddenly, godlike.
A T1 is still T1. A T2 might become T1. I don't see a problem here.

Quote:
Your TWFer is still, at best, a T3 character.
That means the houserule works.

Quote:
I bet you it's still not as good as an optimized barbarian with a two hander.
The Dervish is T3. A Barbarian is T4. Yeah, the Dervish is better.

Quote:
... How do you count a CLERIC that multiclasses to a cleric oriented PrC to suddenly be counted as a paladin?
It has Paladin class features. It has better BaB, d10s. It's effectively a Paladin.

Quote:
At best you can argue a "comparatively speaking" point. A thousand dollars means a lot more to someone on the poverty line than half a million dollars means to Donald Trump. That's what your rule does, metaphorically.
But... that's the point, dude. Don't you understand? It's not supposed to make mundanes equal to casters. That is apparently your assumption, which is wrong. The point was to make PrCs more fair and advantageous to lower tiers. A Wizard can take a strong PrC like Incatatrix. He still progresses his most important feature, spells, and gets new cool abilities on top. I want to give lower tiers the same. And that's why they gain more from it. A Wizard, Cleric or Druid will still be T1. A T2 might be bumped to T1, but that's not a problem. A low tier caster might even be bumped to T2 or T1, which is great. Mundanes/half-mundanes can be bumped to T3, which is all they really need, otherwise I'd just use Tome.

It's exactly like I said in my last post. You're arguing against a strawman.

No. The wizard, cleric or druid would now be in a brand spankin' new "Tier Zero". They'd start breaking other T1 casters. Like I said- gods that eat other gods.

I'm not saying the weak classes need to be made on par with the powerful ones. I'm saying you're giving MORE to the T1s than to anyone else. You're making the power gap worse, not better.

Clearly I disagree. There's no Tier Zero. T1s are the most powerful, and they stay the most powerful. I don't care if they get a little more powerful. Meanwhile lower tiers can be bumped up 1 or more tiers. That's a more significant benefit in my book.

Fine. They can stay T1. But then all the T1 classes that DON'T take advantage of the newly godlike prestige advantages are cleanly and neatly demoted to T2. And everyone else gets knocked down a peg as well. So your T4 classes are now T5- unless they use your setup to bring them back up to T4.




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Myth-Weavers Status