Here are two questions that bother me ...
a) Prestige classes : do they come into account when determining whether the character receives XP penalties for multiclassing? I used to believe it was self evident because classes that are outside the "normal" multiclassing process by demanding a stringent set of prerequisites just to enter them are bound to multiclass a character with wildly different class levels, and since those classes are "bonuses" of a sort (for going through the hoops), it would not be logical to penalize the character for taking them... Then again, I checked the DMG, and found no explicit provisions to that effect...
So, do you apply XP penalties for character whose prestige classing puts them in awkward multiclass positions, or do you regard Prestige classes as outside those restrictions, and if so, by house rule, or by interpretation of the rules as it being the intent of the game? (in the latter case, I'd like to know what you base yourself on).
b) Assassins. I have a high level character who was evil as may be, and took levels as an asassin (making him 4 classed as rogue/cleric/ranger/assassin) ... then, dreck happened, he was killed by a foe who he thought he was about to murder (and would have gotten away with it if he'd stuck with a poisoned bolt in the neck rather than insisting on doing it by sword) ... and was reincarnated, changing his race, and alignment to a non evil one in the process. Now... can he still advance as an assassin? and what happens tothe assassin level he has left?
If this is not the right place to ask... could you please direct me to a better one? I'm not at all used to doing my RPG stuff over the net, and have the most difficult time finding my way to the right FAQs and what not
a) Prestige classed do not count towards an XP penalty. I believe it actually says that somewhere in the DMG in the prestige class chapter.
b) your Assassin predicament is more up the the DM as there really aren't hard fast rules about it. However this is what I'd suggest. Until he switches back to evil you couldn't advance as an assassin anymore, though you wouldn't loose what you already know. The more frequently you use your current assassin abilities the more quickly you'll turn back to being evil.
Quote from: SvartalfHere are two questions that bother me ...
A) Multiclassing Rules: (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/prestigeClasses.htm) "Taking a prestige class does not incur the experience point penalties normally associated with multiclassing."
B) The
reincarnate (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/reincarnate.htm) spell has no effect on a character's alignment... Your character should still be evil, unless you've decided that he's had a profound change of heart. Also, the Assassin (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/assassin.htm) Prestige Class has no restrictions or penalties for alignment change, the way a Barbarian, Paladin or Monk does. Technically, an Assassin gone Good can still advance as an Assassin, but he'll have a very hard time staying Good, if he chooses to continue using his Assassin abilities (especially Poison Use and Death Attack).
Quote from: kryysta) Prestige classed do not count towards an XP penalty. I believe it actually says that somewhere in the DMG in the prestige class chapter.
It's in the FAQ and Errata I believe. I know it's still the case that PrCs are exempt from exp penalties.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/assassin.htm
Being Evil is a prereq.
I tought that is you suddenly don't meet the prereqs for a class you only keep BAB, HPs, Saves and Skills. You lose access to your class abilities until you mette the prereqs again.
Quote from: YigI tought that is you suddenly don't meet the prereqs for a class you only keep BAB, HPs, Saves and Skills. You lose access to your class abilities until you mette the prereqs again.
Not necessarily. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/prestigeClasses.htm)
"Unlike the basic classes, characters must meet Requirements before they can take their first level of a prestige class. The rules for level advancement apply to this system, meaning the first step of advancement is always choosing a class. If a character does not meet the Requirements for a prestige class before that first step, that character cannot take the first level of that prestige class."
The SRD, at least, says nothing else on the subject. The prerequisites are needed for the
first level of a prestige class, but not the subsequent levels.
I tought I saw that in another book, maybe from a Complete one.
Or I just extrapolated from feats.
I'll check tonight.
Quote from: CyclotronA) Multiclassing Rules: (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/prestigeClasses.htm) "Taking a prestige class does not incur the experience point penalties normally associated with multiclassing."
B) The reincarnate (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/reincarnate.htm) spell has no effect on a character's alignment... Your character should still be evil, unless you've decided that he's had a profound change of heart. Also, the Assassin (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/assassin.htm) Prestige Class has no restrictions or penalties for alignment change, the way a Barbarian, Paladin or Monk does. Technically, an Assassin gone Good can still advance as an Assassin, but he'll have a very hard time staying Good, if he chooses to continue using his Assassin abilities (especially Poison Use and Death Attack).
Thanks.
a) that was quite clear, and vindicated me... just why in heck couldn't they put that sentence in the DMG? I'm particularly inept at finding what I want through web search...
b) cogent reasoning. Actually, the whole dying and alignment change during the reincarnations were more abuses of DM power than anything else... But I noticed that I like my character as his new self, but being a deadly slayer was and still is a major part of his self view... even if Erevan Ilesere won't be too delighted with the deadly nature of my character's brand of mischief...
Quote from: SvartalfThanks.
a) that was quite clear, and vindicated me... just why in heck couldn't they put that sentence in the DMG? I'm particularly inept at finding what I want through web search...
It was stated in the 3.0 DMG but they forgot to put it in the 3.5 DMG.
And http://www.d20srd.org/ is your friend.
Quote from: YigI tought I saw that in another book, maybe from a Complete one.
Complete Warrior says that if you cease to meet the prerequisites for a PrC, you lose the abilities other than BAB, hp, saves, and skills.
Me, I say that that's stupid, especially if you draw the rule to its ultimate conclusion (such as the 10th level dragon disciple, who becomes a half-dragon, which means he becomes the dragon type, which means he's uneligible for the PrC...). I think a good general rule would be that if you can't meet the prereqs for the class, you can't advance any further in it but don't lose any of its abilities unless those abilities are somehow tied in with the prereq (e.g. a Radiant Servant of Pelor who loses his access to the Sun domain somehow would lose most of the class' special benefits).
Quote from: CyclotronTechnically, an Assassin gone Good can still advance as an Assassin, but he'll have a very hard time staying Good, if he chooses to continue using his Assassin abilities (especially Poison Use and Death Attack).
Is this RAW? Honest question - I'm just starting to get back into d20
I know that EGG had "issues" with the use of poison, but I didn't know that was still in 3rd Ed. And I don't see why Death Attack is any more evil than say Sneak Attack or Precise Strike
RAW? sorry, I'm a noob to d20 foruming, I don't know that one yet
Quote from: SvartalfRAW? sorry, I'm a noob to d20 foruming, I don't know that one yet
Rules As Written.
Quote from: Hastur T. FannonIs this RAW? Honest question - I'm just starting to get back into d20
I know that EGG had "issues" with the use of poison, but I didn't know that was still in 3rd Ed. And I don't see why Death Attack is any more evil than say Sneak Attack or Precise Strike
No... No exactly RAW. Just roleplaying common sense.
Personally, I don't see things like poison use or death attacks as specifically Evil in of themselves... But how you use them, just like any other weapon or ability, can be. In general, it's tough (especially for your typical D&D player), though not impossible, to find Good ways to use those two particular abilities.
I can think of a few... Sticking to non-lethal poisons, for example.
I think the inherent Evilness of Poison and Death Attacks originaly stems from their percieved honorlessness as a way of fighting... It's normally a very cold-blooded and teacherous way to harm someone.
Quote from: CyclotronI think the inherent Evilness of Poison and Death Attacks originaly stems from their percieved honorlessness as a way of fighting... It's normally a very cold-blooded and teacherous way to harm someone.
One ironic part of D&D is that in the real world, poison is considered an easy way to bring down big and tough things, and especially skilled combatants. However, in D&D those things tend to be nigh immune to poison, on account of high Fort saves.
Not to mention the fact that unless you use megapowerful stuff, any poison use by the PCs will likely be of minor importance in solving the encounter, while if they themselves are poisoned, and they don't have access to the proper restorative magic, they will be weakened for days, which may be a real bother if they are in the middle of something and can't afford to take time to rest.
Quote from: CyclotronI think the inherent Evilness of Poison and Death Attacks originaly stems from their percieved honorlessness as a way of fighting... It's normally a very cold-blooded and teacherous way to harm someone.
Surely "honour" is a matter of Law vs. Chaos, rather than Good vs. Evil (Ethics vs Morality if I've got that the right way round)
Death Attacks can be deeply moral - in the same way that using a scout-sniper to take out the commanding officer of the opposing force (thus destroying their moral and encouraging their surrender and
saving life) can be a Just act
Quote from: Hastur T. FannonDeath Attacks can be deeply moral - in the same way that using a scout-sniper to take out the commanding officer of the opposing force (thus destroying their moral and encouraging their surrender and saving life) can be a Just act
But in the absolute black and white morality of D&D that is an unjust act because it is a murder, rather than during an act of combat. Honor as D&D defines it is partially law, and partially goodness.
Quote from: DackeComplete Warrior says that if you cease to meet the prerequisites for a PrC, you lose the abilities other than BAB, hp, saves, and skills.
Me, I say that that's stupid, especially if you draw the rule to its ultimate conclusion (such as the 10th level dragon disciple, who becomes a half-dragon, which means he becomes the dragon type, which means he's uneligible for the PrC...). I think a good general rule would be that if you can't meet the prereqs for the class, you can't advance any further in it but don't lose any of its abilities unless those abilities are somehow tied in with the prereq (e.g. a Radiant Servant of Pelor who loses his access to the Sun domain somehow would lose most of the class' special benefits).
I agree with you. That situation never happened in a game so far so I don't know how we would handle it.
Quote from: Hastur T. FannonSurely "honour" is a matter of Law vs. Chaos, rather than Good vs. Evil (Ethics vs Morality if I've got that the right way round)
Yes, exactly. Which is why it is not a surprising stance coming from EGG... Remember that in the earliest versions of EGG's D&D alignment was a single Lawful-Neutral-Chaotic axis, with Law == Good and Chaos == Evil.
Quote from: Hastur T. FannonDeath Attacks can be deeply moral - in the same way that using a scout-sniper to take out the commanding officer of the opposing force (thus destroying their moral and encouraging their surrender and saving life) can be a Just act
Oh, I'm not necessarily arguing with you here...
In fact, I've long had a character concept for a Iajistu-style honorable knight, who studies his foe's fighting style intently for weaknesses, before drawing his sword and killing his enemy with a single well-placed blow.
He'd essentially be a very lawful, but non-evil version of an assassin. Unfortunately, I can't yet create him the way I want to without a DM house-rule, due to the Evil prerequisite of the Assassin PrC.
If we were playing Iron Heroes, the concept would be perfect for an Executioner.
Quote from: CyclotronIn fact, I've long had a character concept for a Iajistu-style honorable knight, who studies his foe's fighting style intently for weaknesses, before drawing his sword and killing his enemy with a single well-placed blow.
Do you have Oriental Adventures? I think that there is a class like that in there.