People's Champion PrC analysis

[APorg]

So having actually built a People's Champion and been asked about the class, I thought I would share some of my observations.

First let me quote the entire wiki for reference.

Spoiler: show

- Base Attack Bonus: +1 / Level.
- Hit Die: d8.
- Primary Saving Throws: Fortitude, Will.
- Proficiencies: Simple and Martial Weapons, Light, Medium and Heavy Armor Proficiency, Shields.
- Skill Points: 4 + Int Modifier.

Class Skills: Antagonize, Appraise, Concentration, Discipline, Heal, Influence, Listen, Lore, Parry, Search, Spellcraft, Spot.
Unavailable Skills: Animal Empathy, Use Magic Device.

REQUIREMENTS:

Alignment: Non-chaotic and non-evil
Base Attack Bonus: +4
Spellcasting: One level of cleric or paladin.
Skills: Influence 5 ranks, Lore 3 ranks, Search 3 ranks, Spot 3 ranks.

ABILITIES:

Level
1: Eye for Detail - +2 bonus to Appraise, Listen, Search and Spot checks.
2: Righteous Anger - Once per day add Wisdom modifier to attack and damage (minimum +1); this lasts for one turn, plus one round per level of People's Champion.
4: Aura of Confidence - +4 bonus on saving throws vs. fear. At will, grant nearby allies a +1 bonus on attack and saving throws vs. fear.
5: Unyielding Devotion - +4 bonus on saving throws vs. mind-affecting.

BONUS SPELLS

Upon reaching level 1 and 4 the character gains new spells per day as if he had also gained a level in his highest divine caster class (cleric or paladin) and his caster level in that class increases accordingly.

People's Champions receive a bonus feat at level 3.

The People's Champion is an interesting hybrid PrC that brings a bit of everything, with some strong pros but heavy cons as well. What are pros and cons depends on whether you're coming into People's Champion from a Cleric or a Paladin. Let's go through each item line by line.

- BAB: +1/level. PRO for Clerics, this lets a 20th level Cleric/PC reach +16 BAB for the fourth attack; however, no advantage for Paladins.
- HD: d8. Wash for Clerics, CON for Paladins who'll lose 10 HP by level 20.
- Saving Throws: small boost of +1 Fort/+1 Will for a Cleric/PC. More significant boost of +1 Fort/+3 Will for Paladins.
- Proficiencies: Clerics gain Martial Proficiency. Paladins gain nothing.
- Skill Points: 4 per level. This is 10 extra Skill Points by level 20.
Class Skills are very good, offering Antagonize, detection, Discipline to Clerics, Spellcraft to Paladins. However -- you probably won't have spare Skill points to spend on much, see below.

Requirements:
- Non-Chaotic, non-Evil; for Ezrite Clerics, this prevents them from being 4th Sect, while Lawgiver Clerics are forced to be the icky liberal LN type. Mild CON for Clerics. A non-issue for Paladins, who have to be LG anyway.
+4 BAB; not much of a speedbump, you'll need levels to get the Skills anyway.
- 1 level of Cleric or Paladin. It might be feasible to become a Rogue/Cleric/People's Champion, but that's too complicated a build to cover here. Paladins can only be Paladin/PC. Or maybe combine it with a second PrC, I dunno, good luck getting that past the CC.
- Skills: This is is the first major CON of People's Champion. On paper, the pre-requisites cost you 14 Skill Points. However, 6 of those are cross-class, meaning you effectively have to invest 20 Skill points. Meaning that by level 20, even with 4+Int skill points per level, you are still down about 10 Skill points. This pretty much forces a People's Champion to have INT 14 to make any use of their class Skills -- and this is on top of requirements for being a Cleric or Paladin.

Abilities:
(1) Eye for Detail, +2 to Appraise, Listen, Search, Spot. This is a very nice Feat, but it has the same problem as the rest of the People's Champion class: it's very diffuse. A People's Champion is never going to have the spare Skill points for Appraise; and while a Lawgiver Cleric with the Scrutiny domain could make a great Listen build, that poor sucker still has to drop 6 Skill points into Spot. In other words: it doesn't really refund the sunk cost of the Skill pre-requisites because it is too spread out. A soft PRO, but not really enough.
(2) Righteous Anger: an extremely strong ability that is unfortunately a bit of a one trick pony. In PvE it's good for a boss fight. In PvP, it might let you win a fight against people who don't know how to counter it. (Hint: it only lasts a maximum of a minute and a half per rest.) Again, a PRO, but one that won't quite make up for the loss of 3 caster levels...
(3) Bonus feat. No complaints here, a nice PRO.
(4) Aura of Confidence: +4 save vs fear, at will aura that grants allies +1 AB and +1 against fear. Probably the best of these abilities simply for the +1 AB aura. Good PRO.
(5) Unyielding Devotion: +4 vs mind-affecting. Nothing to sniff at, Will saves aren't exactly the People's Champion's weak spot. Mild PRO.


And finally we come to the largest CON point of the class: bonus spellcaster levels are 2 out of 5 levels, meaning level 20 Cleric or Paladin with People's Champion ends up being a level 17 caster. For Clerics, this is a loss of one level 7 spell, two level 8 spells, and three level 9 spells. For a Paladin, the loss of a level 1, a level 2, a level 3, and two level 4 spells. This is a huge CON point.

* * *

Personal Analysis:

The biggest problem with the People's Champion is that it doesn't really do one thing well. Instead it turns the Cleric into a fairly flexible fighter/caster with maybe a dash of Skills, and a one-shot power that makes you very impressive for 66 to 90 seconds, but is probably not worth three level 9 spells for a Cleric or two level 4 spells for a Paladin.

Which leads us to the next problem: Flexibility  is obviously meant to be the People's Champion's strength, and such flexibility should come at a cost -- but a People's Champion is probably not as flexible, build-wise, as you might expect. The pre-requisites are so high and the pay-off is so diffuse, that it really railroads the character build. You're pretty much forced to take INT 14 to make any use whatsoever of the Prestige Class's prestigious skills. And while in theory you can make use of the class to build a Listener, you've already sunk 6 Skill points into Spot.

Overall, I feel the class just falls a bit short of pure class Clerics or Paladins. Yes, it gets some nice things, but not enough to make up for what it costs, in my opinion. Like the Monster Hunter, I feel the class suffers from the fact that it was designed based of 3.0 source material: where Skill points were overall lower. Yet in 3.5, we saw Rangers and Bards get their Skills boosted. People's Champion is a Prestige class, but it feels left behind.

So here are what I would hope to suggest to the Dev team to make this class a little less diffuse versus base classes.
- Raise Skill points to 6+Int to parallel the changes to Rangers and Bards; this is mostly a Skill-based Prestige Class, it shouldn't be starved of Skill points.

If that's too strong, then please consider:
- Drop some of the pre-requisites to make the class more accessible. Especially Spot, this would mean that a Scrutiny Lawgiver People's Champion wouldn't need to waste 6 precious Skill points in Spot.

Or finally:
- Improve Eye for a Detail to do a bit more to cover the sunk cost from Skill Points; improving the Spot and Search bonus to +3 would repay the Cleric/Paladin for the cross-class expenditures.

[Phantasia]

I was going to make a far more long-winded reply in response to your various points, but I will keep it short for the sake of readability.

People's Champion in my opinion is in a very good spot right now. I don't really see the issue with the prerequisites. If you want to be a Cleric/PC, then you have to shill out a few more points in a few cross-classed skills. You have to burn an additional 12 skill points to qualify as a Cleric or Paladin (which is honestly, nothing). This is easily mitigated by taking 14 Intelligence and especially so by being a Human due to their roots in the Lawgiver and Ezrite church (which is what most People's Champions will be). Or God forbid, you triple class into Rogue which is actually a very viable and potent build with many, many skills and strategies at your disposal, and having to burn little to no skill points.

Clerics taking the People's Champion class are opting into a more combat and skill-focused style of game play, and as thus, pure clerics or caster clerics should not be looking at this class unless they are comfortable with losing a few slots. You should be comfortable with the trade offs.

For Paladins, you trade up your spell slots for detection skills which I would take in a heartbeat over a few more casts of Holy Sword or whatever other 4th level spell you fancy.

It comes down to player choice with People's Champion, in the end, and I'm completely fine with that. I don't see how adding more skill points, dropping the prerequisites, and also improving Eye for Detail solves anything but giving them an overabundance of skill points when it's not really needed.

[Pav]

I think a Cleric or Paladin that gets Spot as a class skill and an immense combat upgrade in the form of Righteous Anger should be comfortable with the tradeoffs. I think that what's being suggested here, is to make the class have less of those, but that is not the point of a PrC. You trade something off (be it caster levels, BAB, or skill points in the examples of other classes) to receive enhancements to your roleplay and to specific mechanics and powers.

Honestly, I'll stick to the current version of the People's Champion that can easily detect high level sneaks with the availability of related Cleric spells, and have mid-high 40's AB with partial buffing.

Spoiler: PEAK PERFORMANCE • show

[APorg]

I've addressed all those points already. In the context where Bards or Rangers had 4+ Skill points, yes, People's Champion is fine. But we're not in that context anymore. We have a completely overpowered base class that get boosted to 6 Skills per level and you say a Prestige Class that's stretched thin is in a good place?

Come on, guys, be real. Or is everyone supposed to start playing Bards if they want a flexible build with few compromises?

[Pav]

The skillpoint issue should be reserved for another thread. There's more than one PrC that should get a bump with that logic in tow.

[APorg]

The skillpoint issue should be reserved for another thread. There's more than one PrC that should get a bump with that logic in tow.

No, the Skill points issue goes to the heart of the PrC. It's not a separate issue, and it's against the yardstick of the new Bards and Rangers that People's Champion should be compared.

[Phantasia]

Why are you comparing a Cleric/Paladin that goes People's Champion with two completely different classes? Base classes at that. The People's Champion is meant to provide the Cleric or Paladin with a viable melee alternative that hampers their spell casting in a minimal to moderate manner, while also providing skills that the class had no access to prior.

As far as I see it, you're getting a damn good package.

[APorg]

Because that's the point of these forums? It's perfectly valid to compare a Skill-based Prestige Class with strong magical abilities to a Skill-based base class with strong magical abilities.

Every time we have one of these arguments where people say, "If you don't like it, just don't play it", I get a bit more depressed about game balance on this server until one day I'll resign myself to playing only Bards, or Wizards, or whatever character class is the flavour du jour. But until then, I think it's legitimate to say some things need a nudge in the context of other things.

[Pav]

I don't think anyone said "if you don't like it, don't play it". What was instead said that the PrC needs to be looked at objectively with how it works within the possible avenues, and thus far, it works fine. You get more skills than the base classes' that open up to it and you can easily save up the skills from those levels to invest in new skills within the 5 levels of PC.

If you scroll up and look at the screenshot I put up, that's an example of how strong they are in practice. I don't think there's any Bard out there that could reach that.

The only thing out of your analysis that I agree with is indeed, a skill bump; it would make the class more appealing and easier to play for those who for some reason choose to play below 14 intelligence. But, at the same time, I think that point could also be raised against bumping the amount of skills you get.

In earnest, the classes' you pose as debilitating to the balance are very strong, though I would not say it's because of the amount of skills they have available. The case is the same with People's Champion.

[APorg]

I don't think anyone said "if you don't like it, don't play it".

It is kind of where the line of thinking is going when people are told they should be comfortable with the trade-offs.

If you scroll up and look at the screenshot I put up, that's an example of how strong they are in practice. I don't think there's any Bard out there that could reach that.

Righteous Anger is fun, but don't over-rate it. It lasts for one short boss fight and then you're done until the next rest. In PvP it might win you a fight -- but then again it's also fairly easily countered.

The only thing out of your analysis that I agree with is indeed, a skill bump; it would make the class more appealing and easier to play for those who for some reason choose to play below 14 intelligence. But, at the same time, I think that point could also be raised against bumping the amount of skills you get.

A skill bump was actually the high point of my proposal... my three suggestions were separate, not all together.

In earnest, the classes' you pose as debilitating to the balance are very strong, though I would not say it's because of the amount of skills they have available. The case is the same with People's Champion.

I don't really see a disconnect between Skill points and class strength. Balance is holistic. Everything is part of the big picture.

[Pav]

I don't think anyone said "if you don't like it, don't play it".

It is kind of where the line of thinking is going when people are told they should be comfortable with the trade-offs.

Alright. That's the way you see things, and I disagree with it.

If you scroll up and look at the screenshot I put up, that's an example of how strong they are in practice. I don't think there's any Bard out there that could reach that.

Righteous Anger is fun, but don't over-rate it. It lasts for one short boss fight and then you're done until the next rest. In PvP it might win you a fight -- but then again it's also fairly easily countered.

How?

I don't really see a disconnect between Skill points and class strength. Balance is holistic. Everything is part of the big picture.

So you want to make a class that's already really good just be better?

I forgot to mention it also gives Clerics Discipline as a class skill, regardless of others already mentioned. It is not only good, it is almost pointless not to take if you can.

[APorg]

Alright. That's the way you see things, and I disagree with it.

It is literally a logical implication. "You should be comfortable with the trade-offs"; implies, if you're not comfortable, don't trade-off.

This is also a very common counter-argument deployed in the defence of the status quo. We saw it raised in the thread about ECL races. It's not a particularly fair argument because it fails to address whether the status quo is good or not; or whether the status quo could be improved.

How?

Last dude said he would simply use a Haste potion to outrun the PC until the effect is done. And after that, the PC is kinda short of options compared to a full Cleric or Paladin. Using Improved Expertise might also do the trick.

It's a strong one-shot ability but it's not an I-Win button.

So you want to make a class that's already really good just be better?

You're putting words in my mouth there.

I want a class that was designed in 3.0 looked at through the lens of 3.5; through the same lens as everything.

I forgot to mention it also gives Clerics Discipline as a class skill, regardless of others already mentioned. It is not only good, it is almost pointless not to take if you can.

Please do remember, I actually play the class.

[Pav]

Alright. That's the way you see things, and I disagree with it.

It is literally a logical implication. You should be comfortable with the trade-offs; if you're not comfortable, don't trade-off.

This is also a very common counter-argument deployed in the defence of the status quo. We saw it raised in the thread about ECL races. It's not a particularly fair argument because it fails to address whether the status quo is good or not; or whether the status quo could be improved.

What I meant was you taking it as an insult.

Equaling ECL races to PrCs is a false equivalency.

How?

Last dude said he would simply use a Haste potion to outrun the PC until the effect is done. And after that, the PC is kinda short of options compared to a full Cleric or Paladin. Using Improved Expertise might also do the trick.

It's a strong one-shot ability but it's not an I-Win button.

Use a ranged weapon, and Improved Expertise won't do anything. It is actually to your long term benefit.

So you want to make a class that's already really good just be better?

You're putting words in my mouth there.

I want a class that was designed in 3.0 looked at through the lens of 3.5; through the same lens as everything.

I fail to see how I put words in your mouth when that (in my eyes, since I see the class as very good) seems to be the point of the thread. Also, ironically, the server is not necessarily balanced only with 3.5 in mind. There's a lot of dissonance between the two versions going on in many aspects of the server, not just the influx of new PrCs.

I forgot to mention it also gives Clerics Discipline as a class skill, regardless of others already mentioned. It is not only good, it is almost pointless not to take if you can.

Please do remember, I actually play the class.

I fail to see how this negates empirical evidence.

A 14 Intelligence Human 15 Cleric OR Paladin, 5 People's Champion, gets 130 skill points. 14 Points are used to acquire the class. Otherwise, another 86 points could be used to max out the following (considering you take a PC level at 20): Concentration, Discipline, Spot, Spellcraft. That leaves you another 30 skill points to do with as you please, which is plenty in the context of what the class requires. If you're not a human, or, for some unfathomable reason, took less than 14 intelligence, you can still do those four skills and have a few points remaining.

Moreover, the class has exceptionally high AB that lasts for a minute and a half and still has high AB without that specific ability. With it now being open to other deities except Ezra and the Lawgiver (a deity with really good domains anyway), there's a myriad ways to optimize the specific Cleric path.

The Paladin path loses a lot but it also gains utility and overkill survivability in the form of Spot and Spellcraft, which are nothing to scoff at in the hands of one of the best melee classes' in the game. Detection is actually their number one issue.

I wish I was playing this class because of how good it is.

[APorg]

What I meant was you taking it as an insult.

I didn't take it as an insult; it is just an attitude, that I find depressing, that does nothing to improve the quality of server balance, and you, of all people, who I know has always been keen on the subject balance, shouldn't be defending it. If someone in the Monster Hunters thread told you the class shouldn't be changed because those players knew what they were signing up to, you would rightly counter it, hard. Here, though, you're wasting your time defending it. I'm non-plussed.

Equaling ECL races to PrCs is a false equivalency.

Pointing out that the same counter-argument is misused in different contexts is not drawing an equivalency, it's a caution against using bad counterarguments.

Use a ranged weapon, and Improved Expertise won't do anything. It is actually to your long term benefit.

Do you genuinely think it's an I-Win button then? Because that's definitely some empirical evidence I'd like to see.

I fail to see how I put words in your mouth when that (in my eyes, since I see the class as very good) seems to be the point of the thread.

I think the class is overall inferior to a pure class Cleric 20 or Bard 20. (And I mean this in a holistic, overall sense; not any particular dimension.) Not terribly far down, but not on the same tier. I'd like to see it nudged to their tier.

I fail to see how this negates empirical evidence.

What empirical evidence? You've posted one screenshot and think that's conclusive, I've played it in game and genuinely think you are overstating the ability of one boost that lasts a maximum of 90 seconds.  I know some experienced Cleric players, whom I spoke to before taking the PrC, who wouldn't make the trade-off.

[Pav]

What I meant was you taking it as an insult.

I didn't take it as an insult; it is just a depressing attitude that does nothing to improve the quality of server balance, and you, of all people, who I know has always been keen on the subject balance, shouldn't be defending it. If someone in the Monster Hunters thread told you the class shouldn't be changed because those players knew what they were signing up to, you would rightly counter it, hard. Here, though, you're wasting your time defending it. I'm non-plussed.

Counterpoint, and probably the last contribution I will make to this thread.

The People's Champion class is in an extremely good place and has nothing wrong about it. It is not meant to be better than a Cleric, which, in my earnest opinion, it isn't - but it is also not worse, by any stretch of the imagination. Clerics are not better off taking any other Prestige class or base class.

Monster Hunter is not. It has no features. It has no benefit. It doesn't even have its basic pen and paper mechanics. It has no tradeoff, simply a downgrade from just playing whatever class you played before. Fighters are better off picking Rogue levels. Others are better off playing pure.

I am here to defend balance and to stop an already great class from becoming exceptionally overwhelming. Not to preserve status quo, but to make sure it does not tip toward the wrong end. It is your right to disagree, and I am fine with that - but please, do not imply that I am being a hypocrite when my interests remain where they always were.

I have nothing else to add to the argument other than what I already have, because I believe it proves my point.

[APorg]

You chose to defend an argument that defends the status quo instead of balance,  I never forced you to defend it. I don't think that makes you a hypocrite,  but I don't think you've considered what the import of this argument was. Anyway I'm happy to drop it. As I said, a sad consequence of the status quo being too entrenched is that it encourages people to simply bow to the prevailing balance winds and play strong classes. That's why I find the "You knew the rules" argument, no matter how politely expressed (and Sword did word it very politely),  depressing.

It's unnecessary to defend your Monster Hunter argument. My point was not to attack it, but to illustrate that the status quo argument can be applied in either context. I was illustrating why it's ultimately meaningless because it can be said of any balance argument, regardless of the particulars of the situation.

As to the point: you said that Clerics are not better off taking any classes or Prestige classes. This is the nub of the issue. I don't think the current incarnation offers much flexibility at all. But I will come back tomorrow and post another character  build example as it's getting late

[Silas Rotleaf]

Oh wow.
I was really wondering what some of the newer PRCs like People's champ and crypt raider actually did. This has been... Rather enlightening, thanks.

[APorg]

I'm going to go ahead and post some numbers, as Pav's are incorrect. (Ironically his numbers are more generous than some of my suggestions in the first post so I wish his numbers were right.)

Let's start first with a bit of a joke scenario: an INT 10 non-human Cleric or Paladin, going into People's Champion. At level 20, that character will have a total of 56 Skill points. 20 of those (not 14) have to go into the pre-reqs, leaving 36... which is not even enough to max up the original class Skills. You'd have access to all those Prestige Class skills and be unable to have a respectable score in any. The class is in a similar situation to where Bards were before the Hak update boosted them... except Bards were boosted, of course, and Bards didn't have to pay 20 Skill points up front for access to their abilities.

I'll let you run the numbers yourself on INT 14 non-Human; it's better but still very tight.

INT 14 Human is the optimal scenario. This bears emphasis. Anything else is a suboptimal scenario. Yes, it's easy to play a Human cleric. But when people point out how easy it is to justify bring a Human cleric/Paladin getting onto this Prestige Class, it's also worth being aware that this is the best case. All other permutations are weak.

INT 14 Humans in this scenario have 125 Skill points (not 130), and the pre-reqs set them back 20 (not 14); for a final total of 105 free to spend (not 116). This let's you a least buy up two of your Class Skills to 23, two Prestige Class Skills to 22, and have about 15 left other skills that might be nice for RP, like a bit more Influence or Heal or Lore. But there's very little to spare, especially if you need to hit Skill levels for Feat requirements. And again, this is literally the best case scenario.

It would be nice to lower some of the pre-reqs and offer some capability for non-INT 14 or non-Human from being able to take this Prestige Class effectively.

Personally I think dropping the Search/Spot requirement and replacing it by the Sharp Eyes feat would do a lot to making this class more accessible and a bit more flexible, without making any radical changes.

And note that the above proposal (saving 6 Skill points in the long run) is still more modest than the 11 extra points in the earlier numbers being thrown around.

[Always_a_hero]

Reading the description of the People's Champion (PsC), it seems to me like the search and spot prerequisites are related to the character perceiving the injusting/corruption within a social/religious hierarchy. So these stats are technically part of the class' flavor, a thing often discussed over this sort of changes.

PsC has only 5 lvls for a PrC and has some amazing features. Making those features more accessible to divine classes early on is the suggestion. For a wisdom focused cleric who could have access to an empowered owl's wisdom and reach a +8 bonus to AB and damage for nearly two minutes (unless it counts as in-fight rounds) and that at lvl 8 (with a 12 int human or 14 int non-human pure cleric), plus all other cleric basic buffs to defense and offence. If you can't sacrifice skill points for such amazing stuff, well it just becomes unfair and unbalanced to enhance the class.

[APorg]

I think the Spot/Search pre-reqs ought to be replaced by Feats. E.g. Skill Focus: Search, Alertness, Sharp Eyes, and so on. An INT 10 non-Human essentially can buy a single class Skill to full strength after meeting the pre-reqs; that's one single skill out of Concentration, Discipline, Spellcraft, Spot, Listen, and so on. Each bump in INT, or being Human, essentially gives you one more. It's still very lopsided.

And don't forget that the PrC also sacrifices 3 spellcasting levels. That's huge.

All this in the context where Bards get 6 Skills per level and can combo Bard Song/Curse Song to get an effective +7 AB (+2 from Song, -5 AC on opponent from Curse) and +7 AC (+5 from Song, -2 opponent AB from Curse) and Clerics get three more level 9 spells, two more level 8, and one more level 7. Righteous Anger is a nice emergency button but it lasts 90 seconds at most and if you build your character around it, you will lose.

I don't think it's unreasonable to point out the paradox of a Skill-based class that loses out on Skills, and this Prestige Class still has some way to go to be as powerful as some stuff that requires no application.

[Always_a_hero]

One thing we'd need to define though: what is a skill-based class? Because in my books, it comes down to saying a class highly depends on the skills they invest into.

Is cleric a skill-based class under this definition? Not really. The only skills I consider usefull are Concentration (for casting in fighting) and maybe Spellcraft for saves. Cleric is a class relying mostly on its spells. PsC is, on the other hand, a fighting class based on the wisdom stat and saves vs mind spells/fear, so more wisdom. The skillnI fight necessary for it is Discipline, even if the theme is based around perception. The same would go for Paladin.

As for comparing Righeous Anger to Bard's Song, the +7 AB from the song (2 AB+ -5AC) is achievable at lvl 16 of bard with 30 perform, which would require a great boost in the skill from items. Righeous Anger can provide, let say with empowered owl's wisdom and 18 wisdom as based stat, the same +7 to AB and damage, but at lvl 8 so half of what a bard requires. I'm not saying Bard's song is worse, in fact it's an AOE so way better... But I hope you get the point.

Lastly, for the loss of late circle cleric spells, it almost sounds like because you lose three 9th circle spells, the prestige class should offer something of the same weight. This is partially true, but let me put it that way: you still get 9th to cast even if you don't have the max which can be offered (2 instead of 5). Furthermore, most of those 9th lvl spells are AOE damage spells. So while you cast those spells in the back, you're not using another thing PsC is giving you: a 4th attack per round. That 4th attack along with that +7 AB and dmg I mentioned (+9 or a bit more at lvl 20) will apply to that attack, plus flame weapon, plus GMW, plus whatever other effects you get from the mage hasting you or the bard singing at your side, giving you another +7 AB. The point is, in my opinion, both comes to the same value, thus no change is required despite the skill cost.

[BahamutZ3RO]

I think People's Champion is in a pretty good spot. They're pretty stronk combat-wise, they've got good mechanics, and they get better skill points than Clerics or Paladins (4 vs 2). I'm also not entirely sure but I think a Paladin taking People's Champion would be able to get access to spells much sooner than a full Paladin would, which is a really big deal.

As far as the requirements go, I can see how that might be a pain but I think it's decently reasonable. Far less painful than other classes requiring you to take useless feats. (Looking at you Pale Master and Shifter).

[APorg]

One thing we'd need to define though: what is a skill-based class? Because in my books, it comes down to saying a class highly depends on the skills they invest into.

Is cleric a skill-based class under this definition? Not really. The only skills I consider usefull are Concentration (for casting in fighting) and maybe Spellcraft for saves. Cleric is a class relying mostly on its spells. PsC is, on the other hand, a fighting class based on the wisdom stat and saves vs mind spells/fear, so more wisdom. The skillnI fight necessary for it is Discipline, even if the theme is based around perception. The same would go for Paladin.

People's Champion is basically a Skill class in the sense that it has access to a lot of good Skills and 4+Int Skill points. The thing is, because it costs 20 Skill points in pre-reqs, your 4 Skills per level of People's Champion effectively just go back into repaying that pre-req. It's why it's horrible to try and enter the class if you're a non-human or don't have INT14.

Bards and Rangers used to be in a similar spot before the HAK pack. They had good Skills, but only 4+Int per level; so they were kind of forced to take INT 14. I mean, you could play a Bard or Ranger with INT 10, but you felt the squeeze. (Heck, you felt the squeeze as a human Bard with INT 14 back when they had 4+Int skills per level, but I digress.)

Then 3.5 came along and redesigned Bards and Rangers so as to have 6+Int Skills per level; after we applied that in the last Hak pack here, suddenly, playing an INT 10 Bard or Ranger isn't so bad. (I mean, I'd still play an INT 14 Bard because their Skills are excellent. But INT10 Bards and Rangers are IMO much more viable than they were before.

IMO this is kind of where I feel People's Champion is at now. They have great Skills in theory, but because of the high pre-requisites and that IMO they were probably designed more with a 3.0 philosophy than a 3.5 one, they feel the Skill squeeze.

I'm not saying Bard's song is worse, in fact it's an AOE so way better... But I hope you get the point.

Still, Bard Song can be used many times; Righteous Anger can be used once per rest... it's a one-shot trick. I think people who see the class and see only that ability are overrating it. IMO, most of the time, the +1 AB aura of confidence is actually going to do more for a party.

I'm also not entirely sure but I think a Paladin taking People's Champion would be able to get access to spells much sooner than a full Paladin would, which is a really big deal.

Nah, People's Champ offers bonus caster levels (two out of five levels). Don't think that aids progression....

As far as the requirements go, I can see how that might be a pain but I think it's decently reasonable. Far less painful than other classes requiring you to take useless feats. (Looking at you Pale Master and Shifter).

IMO taking two useless Feats and saving those 12 Skill points spent cross-class would be an improvement. 12 Skill points is close to four Feats if you look at each Feat as a +3 Focus. Just sayin'....

I'm not saying People's Champion is in a terrible place and are unplayable. But I think that when you compare them to a lot of pure classes that have access to the same -- or better -- Skills, I wouldn't rank People's Champion as on the same tier. Now maybe my problem is that I'm comparing them against the high bar of Bards,  Wizards, well-equipped Monks, or even their pure parent class; but AFAIK I'm the only person playing a People's Champion and my main take-away from playing the class is that it suffers from the same Skill squeeze as Bards and Rangers did back in 3.0.

[ASymphony]

When a PRC states that it received caster progression at certain levels it means it only receives progression at those levels. In other words, an 11 paladin 5 peoples champion would only be equivalent to a 13 level paladin in terms of casting progression.
It might be helpful to look at the level progression table to understand the situation better: http://nwn.wikia.com/wiki/Paladin

[EO]

Legacy of the Blood, the book the PrC is from is 3.5. In a similar vein since you’ve been repeating that argument multiple times, the 3.5 version of Monster Hunter also kept its 4 ranks/level.

That rangers and bards got more skills doesn’t justify anything.