FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1084943042[/unixtime]]Getting indignant about people who want to have character classes be fixed and numerous is, however, completely poitnless.
I'm not indignant, just annoyed. The existance of PrC's that are only good for one level is pointless. That's what I'm ranting about.
I agree w/ the class problem. There is a huge difference between having a lot of different character classes, and having a lot of different character abilities. The problem w/ having mucho PrC's is complexity. A feat or ability is just one mechanic. It lets you do one thing, like get an extra attack, or cast a spell, or move differently, or attack differently. That's relatively easy to analyze and balance.
Each PrC isn't just one mechanic, but several combined together. If you get sucky attacks, good skills, good skill list, odd feats, and an ability or two, plus spells in varying numbers and strengths . . . you've got to analyzie a lot of different aspects of the character to see how the gestalt works.
IMO, that's the reason so many PrC's are wacky. Usually, not because they're overpowered; very few are too powerful. Most
suck. The reason, IMO, is that it's too hard to tell if a combination of BAB + HD + Skills + Abilities + Magic is going to break, so you err on the side of weakness.
There already are modular classes in D&D, they're just called arcane casters. Their powers are "spells." It's relatively easy to balance arcane spells, because you have the same baseline to compare them to: how much does the spell increase an otherwise weak PC's power?