New Multi-Classing Rule.

[geeman]

Here`s a new version of the multi-classing rules I`ll be using. The new
version goes like this:

Provoking Multi-Class XP Penalties

Every character gets a Favored Class, a Preferred Class and an Advanced
Class. Character levels taken outside of those three categories provoke a
cumulative 10% XP penalty.

Favored Class works exactly how it does in the standard rules. Humans may
choose their Favored Class, while other races have one chosen for them, and
that class does not count towards multi-class XP penalties.

Preferred Class: Preferred Class works for characters of all races the same
way Favored Class works for humans. That is, any character can pick a
Preferred Class and levels of that class don`t count towards multi-class XP
penalties. A Preferred Class can not be a prestige class. (I`m kind of
debating this last restriction, since in the long run I don`t think it`ll
make that much of a difference if a Preferred Class is also a prestige
class, allowing the character to have a single core class and two prestige
classes.)

Advanced Class: In the current 3e rules, levels taken in any prestige
classes do not count towards multi-class XP penalties. A character of high
enough level (around 8th or so) can usually qualify for several prestige
classes, taking a few levels here and there in a way that would otherwise
provoke a multi-class penalty. When fiddling around with character
progressions using the core multi-class rules, I found that a character
could take 1 or 2 levels in just about any character class I wanted, and
after a while qualify for enough prestige classes similar enough to the
core class that it effectively destroys much point in having a favored
class or multi-class penalty system at all. A human barbarian 3/fighter
2/rogue 2 can take a level as a Gladiator, a few Ghostwalker levels, a
level or two as a Devoted Defender, etc. without incurring any penalties,
effectively giving them unlimited access to (arguably more powerful
versions) of the core classes without the kinds of restrictions in place on
lower powered character classes. So I`ve added the Advanced Class
category, which replaces the rule that excludes all prestige classes from
multi-classing penalties. Using this option a character can have a single
prestige class that does not count towards a multi-class XP penalty, but
any additional levels in a second (third, fourth, or more) prestige class
do earn a penalty.


Paying Multi-Class XP Penalties

These class qualifications fit into a change in the way the multi-classing
XP penalties work. Instead of a 20% penalty for taking levels in each
non-favored character class that is 2 or more steps away from one
another. An elf fighter 3/rogue 1, for example. Using these optional
rules any levels taken in a class that isn`t designated a Favored,
Preferred or Advanced Class provoke a 10% XP penalty per level. (At first
I went with a 5% penalty per level since it fits into the "base 20" nature
of 3e, but I found that a very slight penalty to pay and 10% works just as
well.) So a human character can still be a Fighter 6/Rogue 3/Ghostwalker 4
but if s/he takes on a fourth class then there`s a 10% penalty for each
level taken in that additional class.


Multi-Classing Feats

The other major addition is that one can take a feat which I`m calling (in
a startling burst of imagination) "Additional Preferred Class" which allows
a character to--you guessed it--take on an additional preferred class that
does not incur an multi-classing XP penalty. The class in question must be
chosen when the feat is taken. I thought this was a heady innovation until
I described it to a couple of players in my group who informed me that
something very similar appears in the Forgotten Realms D20 text. Oh, well.

This feat does force kind of a weird situation in which characters may wind
up paying an XP penalty for one or two levels before they get access to a
feat slot. A Ftr3/Rog3/Wiz3 who takes on a fourth class at level 10th and
11th level will wind up paying a 10% and then a 20% penalty for during
those two levels until s/he reaches 12th level and can take that feat,
while a Ftr3/Rog4/Wiz4 could just take that 12th level in a fourth class
and take the feat at the same time, avoiding any penalty. That`s a bit
inorganic. Of course, using the standard rules the same 10th level
character is going to either pay 20% for taking on a fourth class or 0% (if
it is a prestige class) until the character levels that fourth class up to
level 3 where the penalty goes away, but then the 20% penalty kicks in
again as soon as that class (or any of the others) go out of sync with any
of the others. It`s not perfect, but I like it better then the current
rules, so I`m going with this.

I`m also considering another feat that I`m "Jack of All Trades." (I know
that conflicts with the name of an existing feat, but I`ve never liked that
one, so this will replace it.) This feat would reduce XP multi-class
penalties by half (to 5% per level rather than 10%) so if someone wanted to
play a character who had character levels all over the place they could do
so while incurring a lower overall penalty without having to burn 2+
feats. Since the Favored, Preferred and Advanced Class options are
available I don`t think this feat would be used very often, but you never know.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

My players would no doubt favor such a system, I don`t give blooded humans
the choice of any Favored Class. Blooded humans have a favored class
determied by their bloodline (except Azrai, who still gets the choice).
This limitation and a skill bonus are the only impact bloodline has on
class.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 11:49 PM 8/22/2002 -0500, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

>My players would no doubt favor such a system, I don`t give blooded humans
>the choice of any Favored Class. Blooded humans have a favored class
>determied by their bloodline (except Azrai, who still gets the
>choice). This limitation and a skill bonus are the only impact bloodline
>has on class.

That`s an interesting option. I`ve been considering allowing the favored
class to have a couple of options. Cerilian elves, for instance, might
have wizard or sorcerer as a favored class, just as an example. Something
like that. Having three categories of classes that don`t provoke
multi-classing XP penalties is a lot, though, so I don`t want to add
another category. I`d rather have them fit into one of those three, but it
seems perfectly sensible that if one includes something like an
Awnsheghlien prestige class that those with Azrai`s bloodline and the
bloodform blood ability shouldn`t have to pay a penalty for leveling up in
that class.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Crumbiness]

I allow for my players to freely multiclass as long as it fits through role-playing and/or their background. This makes for greater role-playing with my players getting more involved in their characters. If something happens to a dwarf fighter (say Moradin comes to him) and he wants to become a paladin or a cleric, I would allow that without penalty.

I did come across one problem with one of players where it did not fit. He was a human barbarian and wanted a better will save so he wanted to take a level of cleric (which gives +2 will save and first level spells) instead of the feat that gives +2 will. I did not allow that since it wasn't within the spirit of his character (he was just trying to min-max)

Just my two cents

[Sir Justine]

Certainly it's a nice system, Gary. But are you really annoyed with multi-class characters? I find this one of the greatest improvements over 2º edition. Of course, sometimes the players abuse: one in my group had a fighter character and he wanted to fight with two-weapons; instead of taking the feats he wanted to take one level of ranger... (the first level of ranger is very strong, the others, however...). I said no, like the history on the post by Crumbiness. But this are exceptions. In overall I think the rules for multiclassing are good. At least with the core classes.
With prestige classes I agree with you. It's very strange (to not say ridiculous) not having a penalty. Most of the prestige, like the cavalier, have a roleplay that imply much devotion from the character. Changing from Knight of the Chalice to Thief-Acrobat to Animal Lord without any penalty? Of course the DM can prevent this with roleplaying, but I think that rules exist just to do this job. I guess I will use the "Advanced Class" rule.

[geeman]

At 11:48 PM 8/24/2002 +0200, Sir Justine wrote:

>Certainly it`s a nice system, Gary. But are you really annoyed with
>multi-class characters?

The thing I dislike most about the current multi-classing rule is the way
the penalty kicks in when class levels go out of sync with one another,
despite the actual number of extra classes, so a 2/3/2/3 character is fine
while a 2/3/3/1 character is not.

Actually, I`d probably get rid of multi-class penalties entirely if I
didn`t kind of like the favored class aspect of the system. It makes sense
that dwarves would favor fighter as a class. That depends pretty much on
the campaign, of course, and I`m starting to lean more towards just doing
away with the multi-class penalties entirely, but barring that I think this
kind of thing works a bit better.

>With prestige classes I agree with you. It`s very strange (to not say
>ridiculous) not having a penalty. Most of the prestige, like the cavalier,
>have a roleplay that imply much devotion from the character. Changing from
>Knight of the Chalice to Thief-Acrobat to Animal Lord without any penalty?
>Of course the DM can prevent this with roleplaying, but I think that rules
>exist just to do this job. I guess I will use the "Advanced Class" rule.

There are many problems IMO with prestige classes, and this multi-classing
option really only addresses one of them, but in general I like it as a
possible solution to some of the weirdnesses involved in that particular
aspect of 3e. Let me know how it works out for you.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Sir Justine]

This monday I started a new campaign and I will use your multi class rules. I showed then to my players and we think they are better.
So, just to confirm what you said, in your system, excluding the feats you mentioned, the maximum number of classes a character can have without penalty is two plus one prestige?
As an extra, here are the favored classes I use in my Birthright campaign:
Anuiren - Cleric
Brecht - Rogue
Khinasi - Wizard
Rjurik - Ranger
Vos - Barbarian
Elf - Sorcerer
Dwarf - Fighter
Halfling - Bard

PS: Today (08/27) is my birthday! Happy birthday to me! :)

[geeman]

At 12:25 PM 8/27/2002 +0200, Sir Justine wrote:

>This monday I started a new campaign and I will use your multi class
>rules. I showed then to my players and we think they are better. So, just
>to confirm what you said, in your system, excluding the feats you
>mentioned, the maximum number of classes a character can have without
>penalty is two plus one prestige?

Yes, that`s the gist of it. The preferred class might be a prestige class
too depending on whether or not you want to allow that, so its possible for
a character to have one class plus two prestige classes without provoking a
multi-class XP penalty.

>As an extra, here are the favored classes I use in my Birthright campaign:
>Anuiren - Cleric
>Brecht - Rogue
>Khinasi - Wizard
>Rjurik - Ranger
>Vos - Barbarian
>Elf - Sorcerer
>Dwarf - Fighter
>Halfling - Bard

I kind of like preferred classes for various cultures, but for humans I
think there should be more than one. Anuireans might have cleric or
fighter, Rjurik could have ranger or druid, Khinasi could have wizard or
paladin. Something like that.

You might also want to include:

Orog - Fighter
Goblin - Rogue

>PS: Today (08/27) is my birthday! Happy birthday to me! :)

Happy BD!

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ConjurerDragon]

Hello!

Gary wrote:
...

>> As an extra, here are the favored classes I use in my Birthright
>> campaign:
>> Anuiren - Cleric
>> Brecht - Rogue
>> Khinasi - Wizard
>> Rjurik - Ranger
>> Vos - Barbarian
>> Elf - Sorcerer
>> Dwarf - Fighter
>> Halfling - Bard
>
> I kind of like preferred classes for various cultures, but for humans I
> think there should be more than one. Anuireans might have cleric or
> fighter, Rjurik could have ranger or druid, Khinasi could have wizard or
> paladin. Something like that.
> You might also want to include:
> Orog - Fighter
> Goblin - Rogue
>
>> PS: Today (08/27) is my birthday! Happy birthday to me! :)
>
> Happy BD!
> Gary

Anuirean I would say Cleric (of Haelyn) or Paladin (of Haelyn) as Haelyn
is the Patron of Anuire.
Brecht would be rather Aristrocrat (Guilder) than rogue (or both)
Rjurik Ranger or Druid
Khinasi Wizard or Aristocrat (Lord)

Goblins should be divided into their subtypes. A goblin (goblin) is more
likely to be rogue, but a goblin (hobgoblin) or goblin (bugbear)
certainly could tend to warrior.

And happy Birthday!
bye
Michael

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

As I mentioned earlier, I use favored classes by bloodline, not culture.

Andurias-
Fighter favored class
Knowledge (Law) is a class skill, and bonus +1 to +4 based on bloodline
alignment must be non-chaotic

Reynir-
Ranger or Druid favored class
Wilderness Lore is a class skill, and bonus +1 to +4
any alignment

Brenna-
Rogue favored class
Appraise is a class skill, +1 to +4
any alignment

Basaïa-
Wizard favored class
Scry, Spellcraft, or any one Knowledge skill is a class skill, +1 to +4
any non-chaotic alignment

Masela-
Cleric is class skill
Intuit Direction is a class skill, +1 to +4
any alignment

Vorynn-
Wizard or Sorcerer favored class
Spellcraft is a class skill, +1 to +4
any alignment

Azrai-
favored class is determined by race, as PHB
Bluff is a class skill, +1 to +4
alignment is any non-good

I also include a backround class. Everyone can take a starting level as an
Aristocrat, Expert, or Rogue. I encourage wizards and clerics to consider
expert as their backround class. Characters have no penalty regarding their
backround class and may level up in them without penalty. When converting
most NPC`s from the books, I convert fighter over as 2/3`s aristocrat, and
1/3 fighter.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 09:12 PM 8/28/2002 -0500, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

>As I mentioned earlier, I use favored classes by bloodline, not culture.

What about doing this in addition to a favored class (or two) based on
culture? A Khinasi with a Reynir bloodline could have wizard, sorcerer or
ranger as a favored class.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 9:16 PM


> What about doing this in addition to a favored class (or two) based on
> culture? A Khinasi with a Reynir bloodline could have wizard, sorcerer or
> ranger as a favored class.

I`m still not exactly sure whether to work favored class into culture. Its
certainly a possibility. Part of what I would like to see is a
disproportionate number of Khinasi with Reynir bloodlines worshiping Ruornil
and combining the magic and wilderness that way. It may not be
systemizable, and I will just have to suggest how such a concept (Ruornil)
could unite culture (magic) and bloodline (nature) giving the character a
deep, integrated character concept.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 8:15 AM


> I kind of like preferred classes for various cultures, but for humans I
> think there should be more than one. Anuireans might have cleric or
> fighter, Rjurik could have ranger or druid, Khinasi could have wizard or
> paladin. Something like that.

As I mentioned last month when we were discussing Favored Class, I assign
favored class by bloodline derivation when present, and by race (according
to the PHB) when unblooded. Gary and others favored a more cultural
approach, and as mentioned above, also having a bit of a choice here. John
Machin has also suggested as much to me.

I think I`ve settled on a mechanic I like, and I`ll describe how it
satisfies both interests. Bloodline, where present, gives players the
following favored class.
Andurias - fighter
Reynir - druid
Brenna - rogue
Basaïa - wizard
Masela - cleric
Vorynn - wizard or sorcerer
Azrai - any

By culture, I`ll take a feat like Magical Training (from FR) which allows
some minor access to arcane magic as a Khinasi cultural feat. Khinasi
characters could later take a feat that makes Wizard a Favored class. So a
scion of Brenna who had become a fighter/rogue, might also be able to add
wizard as a favored class, becuase in the Khinasi lands, such an interest in
the

So, the two tiered system goes like this
Anuire - Martial Weapons Proficiency is the prerequisite for Martial
Training allowing Fighter or Mounted Warrior as a favored class.
Rjurik - Erik`s Piety (allowing 3 druidical orisons) is the prerequisite for
Circle Admission allowing Druid, Bard, or Cleric of Eric as a favored class.
Brecht - Merchantile Backround (+2 to Appraise and one Craft/Profession) is
the prerequisite to Guild Admission allowing Guilder as a favored class
Khinasi - Magical Training (allowing 3 cantrips) is a prerequisite to Arcane
Schooling allowing Wizard as a favored class
Vos - Weapon Focus in the prerequisite for Martial Training allowing Fighter
or Varsk Rider as a favored class.
Goblins - Martial Weapons Proficiency is the prerequisite for Martial
Training allowing Fighter or Mounted Warrior as a favored class.
Hobgoblins - Sneaky (makes Hide and Move Silently class skills) is a
prerequisite for Goblin Cunning allowing Rogue as a favored class.
Orog - Shaman Preperation (allowing 3 Adept 0-level spells) is the
prerequisite for Shaman Training making Adept a favored class.

Consider some examples, Omar, and unblooded Khinasi selects Rogue as his
backround class, and Fighter as his favored class. He picks Magical
Training as a feat at 1st level allowing him to cast Flare, Resistance, and
Arcane Mark once per day each. He advances to become a 3rd level Rogue/3rd
level Fighter. As a 6th level character he gains a bonus feat and takes
Arcane Schooling. When he levels up again, he can take Wizard levels
without an experience point penalty.

Hurthang Longshanks, has the blood of Reynir in his veins, and selected
Ranger as his favored class. His backround class is Aristocrat. He selects
Erik`s Piety as a feat. Once he`s a 6rd level Ranger/3rd level Aristocrat,
he finds himself a pretty formidable combatant. What he wants is to cast
more spells, and not neccesarily gain more ranger levels. So as a 9th level
character he take the bonus feat Circle Admission. He now advances as a
druid without experience point penalty.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 12:51 PM 9/18/2002 -0500, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

> > I kind of like preferred classes for various cultures, but for humans I
> > think there should be more than one. Anuireans might have cleric or
> > fighter, Rjurik could have ranger or druid, Khinasi could have wizard or
> > paladin. Something like that.
>
>As I mentioned last month when we were discussing Favored Class, I assign
>favored class by bloodline derivation when present, and by race (according
>to the PHB) when unblooded. Gary and others favored a more cultural
>approach, and as mentioned above, also having a bit of a choice here.

Actually, I kind of like doing both. That is, assigning favored classes to
both race (or culture) and bloodline. An Anuirean with a bloodline of
Brenna, for example, would have both fighter and rogue as a free favored class.

>Anuire - Martial Weapons Proficiency is the prerequisite for Martial
>Training allowing Fighter or Mounted Warrior as a favored class.
>Rjurik - Erik`s Piety (allowing 3 druidical orisons) is the prerequisite
>for Circle Admission allowing Druid, Bard, or Cleric of Eric as a favored
>class.
>Brecht - Merchantile Backround (+2 to Appraise and one Craft/Profession)
>is the prerequisite to Guild Admission allowing Guilder as a favored class
>Khinasi - Magical Training (allowing 3 cantrips) is a prerequisite to
>Arcane Schooling allowing Wizard as a favored class
>Vos - Weapon Focus in the prerequisite for Martial Training allowing
>Fighter or Varsk Rider as a favored class.
>Goblins - Martial Weapons Proficiency is the prerequisite for Martial
>Training allowing Fighter or Mounted Warrior as a favored class.

I don`t know what the Mounted Warrior class does, but it might be cool to
have something that differentiates Anuirean riders from goblin ones. Like
your Varsk rider for the Vos, you might want to go with an Anuirean
"Cavalier" and goblin "wolf rider" or something like that.

>Hobgoblins - Sneaky (makes Hide and Move Silently class skills) is a
>prerequisite for Goblin Cunning allowing Rogue as a favored class.
>Orog - Shaman Preperation (allowing 3 Adept 0-level spells) is the
>prerequisite for Shaman Training making Adept a favored class.

I`m a little leery of these prerequisites since most them are features of
the class they are taking on or of similar character classes, meaning one
of those classes could take the feat that grants them access to the free
favored class by virtue of their existing class abilities, or that
characters would have to take on a level of the particular class and pay an
XP penalty for a level or two until they could take on the feat that
removed the penalty. But then that might be exactly the point. Make
players take on some of the traits of a class (or at least pay an XP
penalty) before they actually can take on that class free and clear....

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Ariadne]

Orginally posted by kgauck

Andurias-
Fighter favored class
Knowledge (Law) is a class skill, and bonus +1 to +4
based on bloodline
alignment must be non-chaotic
Any non-chaotic? How do you want to mention this? Cuiraécen himself has a large (and sure) Andurias bloodline AND he is chaotic as well as for example Fhiele the Sword. Don't they get any bonus then?

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ariadne" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 5:44 AM


>> Andurias-
>> Fighter favored class
>> Knowledge (Law) is a class skill, and bonus +1 to +4
>> based on bloodline
>> alignment must be any non-chaotic
>
> Any non-chaotic? How do you want to mention this? Cuiraécen
> himself has a large (and sure) Andurias bloodline AND he is chaotic
> as well as for example Fhiele the Sword. Don`t they get any bonus
> then?

As a god, Cuiraécen could be said to not have a bloodline, but to be a
wholly new creation of Haelyn and Nesirie, focused on the personification of
battles and storms, which by their very nature are chaotic. It could also
be said that because of his portfolio he has trancended his blood
inheritance. More imoprtant, I think, is the impact on charatcers. Here,
an alignment restriction is more of a guideline, a firm suggestion. It can
be overlooked if the character concept makes sense. Fhiele may have a
lawful tendency in her blood and a chaotic tendency in her faith. So, I
would allow a priest of Cuiraécen to be chaotic. What is required to have a
chaotic scion of Andurias is a good rational for why the blood tendency has
been suppressed.

In converting characters to 3e, some chaotic characters with Andurias
bloodlines will be made neutral. Fhiele has not strong description to
preserve her chaotic alignment, so she might well become neutral. I won`t
decide for myself until I write up her backround.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Trithemius]

Aridane:
> Any non-chaotic? How do you want to mention this? Cuiraécen
> himself has a large (and sure) Andurias bloodline AND he is
> chaotic as well as for example Fhiele the Sword. Don`t they
> get any bonus then?

The god of leaderhsip and rulership and warfare (as opposed to personal
combat) sounds pretty lawful to me :)

Anyway, Cuiraecen doesn`t have a bloodline, he`s a god. I`d thought that
Kenneth and Gary and I had flogged this one to death already?

--
John Machin
(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)
-----------------------------------
"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."
Athanasius Kircher, Ars Magna Sciendi.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Ariadne]

O.K., O.K., the thing with a god is discussed enough. But why should Fhiely become neutral? Nobody MUST listen to his/her bloodline, I think...

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ariadne" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 8:16 AM


> Why should Fhiely become neutral? Nobody MUST listen to his/her
> bloodline, I think...

At the risk of repeating myself, I`ll repeat myself.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth Gauck" <kgauck@MCHSI.COM>
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 7:03 AM

> Here, an alignment restriction is more of a guideline, a firm suggestion.
> It can be overlooked if the character concept makes sense. Fhiele
> may have a lawful tendency in her blood and a chaotic tendency in
> her faith. So, I would allow a priest of Cuiraécen to be chaotic.
> What is required [in order] to have a chaotic scion of Andurias is a
> good rational for why the blood tendency has been suppressed.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Kenneth Gauck wrote:
> > Why should Fhiely become neutral? Nobody MUST listen to his/her
> > bloodline, I think...
>
> At the risk of repeating myself, I`ll repeat myself.

And that`s all very interesting back-rationalization, but there`s nothing
published anywhere to indicate that the bloodline of Anduiras gave people
a lawful tendancy. Quite the contrary- there are several counterexamples
floating around. Why make up a new rule, in this case?
--
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Trithemius]

Daniel McSorley:
> And that`s all very interesting back-rationalization, but
> there`s nothing published anywhere to indicate that the
> bloodline of Anduiras gave people a lawful tendancy. Quite
> the contrary- there are several counterexamples floating
> around. Why make up a new rule, in this case?

BoR suggests that Bloodline Derivation can be a modifier on personality.
Given that this is D&D and that in D&D personality comes down (in a
large way) to alignment it figures then that Bloodline Derivation can
affect alignment.

I don`t think Kenneth was engaging in back-rationalisation, apologism,
or even good-old-fashioned hoodwinking. I think he was just following
the line of reasoning suggested in BoR (and other places, although less
explicitly).

--
John Machin
(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)
-----------------------------------
"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."
Athanasius Kircher, Ars Magna Sciendi.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 09:13 AM 9/20/2002 +1200, John Machin wrote:

>I think he was just following the line of reasoning suggested in BoR (and
>other places, although less
>explicitly).

The BoR indicates and a few other sources indicate that characters will
lean towards traits having to do with their bloodline derivation, but
that`s a far cry from enshrining those tendencies into a rule. The
objection that Mr. McSorley raised was to taking that a step further by
making it a "rule" rather than a guideline/suggestion. Mr. Gauck`s
subsequent post would indicate that he would allow more variation than the
original post suggested, and includes a role-playing exception, which begs
the question why bother with it as a rule if it can be both rule excepted
and role-played away so easily? It is, in effect, a rule with no actual
effect other than the same suggestion/guideline presented in the BoR.

My own opinion on this kind of thing is that, in general, it`s a bad idea
to proscribe role-playing issues for players based on the rules, and
alignment is almost always a role-playing decision. (The only real
exception being certain spell effects.) I don`t even like the alignment
restrictions for certain character classes or races; paladins must be LG,
only non-good rangers can have their own species as a favored enemy,
etc. Non-LG paladins work perfectly well in BR, and what if someone wanted
a ranger who hunted only non-good members of his own species? That`d be a
perfectly good justification IMO and it`s not even based on
role-playing. Good rules aid role-playing by being pretty much invisible
to role-playing effects, bad rules force particular role-playing
choices. Bad role-playing, incidentally, violates the rules of whatever
game system is being employed by establishing some sort of exception to a
game mechanic based on a descriptive "role-playing effect" by a
player. Probably the most common example of this is players who write up a
background for their characters that gives them access to a family with
resources far beyond what their character would have alone, but
role-playing is often used to subvert actual game mechanics. (BR
characters are particularly vulnerable to this since there is no "noble"
character class that could be used to describe such valuable familial
ties.) I`ve gotten other background write ups that would indicate the
character has not had several adventures, but the successful nature of
those adventures is already assumed.

This particular rule that proscribes alignment based on derivation makes
both the "game mechanic that proscribes role-playing choices" and the
"role-playing exception to a game mechanic" mistakes by pushing players to
make alignment choices based on a random die roll (if one determines
derivation randomly per the Rulebook) and by giving them a role-playing out
to that self-same rule if they jump through enough role-playing hoops.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

> And that`s all very interesting back-rationalization, but there`s nothing
> published anywhere to indicate that the bloodline of Anduiras gave people
> a lawful tendancy. Quite the contrary- there are several counterexamples
> floating around. Why make up a new rule, in this case?

Because it`s fun.
Not everyone likes simple direct translations of the original canon
material; and I for one would really like alternative (or expanded) rules on
how different derivations of bloodline effect your character.

I think the rule is good, but I`d prefer the bloodline to grant some minor
reward to non-chaotic characters or grant some penalty to chaotic
characters, rather than saying they can`t be chaotic "without a good
reason".

Of course, part of the problem, is also that I don`t really like the system
of alignment as it currently stands in D&D. I`ve got some other ideas for
effecting personality with bloodline, but nothing I`m willing to post until
it`s a little better throught out.

As far as indicating that bloodline of Anduiras gave people a lawful
tendency... I believe this was first mentioned in the Book of Regency (a
free download for BR). If they didn`t actually introduce it there, they at
least elaborated on it quite a bit and made it sound really cool. In fact,
one of dissapointments, isn`t that there aren`t solid rules behind the
guidelines and ideas suggested in the Book of Regency.

Now, you could just dismiss the Book of Regency as a supplement and say it`s
not really core Birthright if you want to, but that book was really
well-written. I highly recommend downloading it if you haven`t already.
(It should be on Birthright.net somewhere.)

[And just as a side note: There are counter-examples to *EVERYTHING* in BR,
not just the influence of bloodlines. A certain Vos paladin comes to
mind...]

-Lord Rahvin

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "daniel mcsorley" <mcsorley@CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 3:53 PM


> And that`s all very interesting back-rationalization, but there`s nothing
> published anywhere to indicate that the bloodline of Anduiras gave people
> a lawful tendancy. Quite the contrary- there are several counterexamples
> floating around. Why make up a new rule, in this case?

Because I like it that way. It fits my conception of bloodlines.

Let`s not forget there are counter examples in the BR materials for every
occasion. Their inconsistancy doesn`t have to be my own. I`m happy to bend
the rules for a good charatcer concept, but in general, I see alignment and
other personality tendencies associated with bloodlines.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, John Machin wrote:
> > And that`s all very interesting back-rationalization, but
> > there`s nothing published anywhere to indicate that the
> > bloodline of Anduiras gave people a lawful tendancy. Quite
> > the contrary- there are several counterexamples floating
> > around. Why make up a new rule, in this case?
>
> BoR suggests that Bloodline Derivation can be a modifier on personality.
> Given that this is D&D and that in D&D personality comes down (in a
> large way) to alignment it figures then that Bloodline Derivation can
> affect alignment.
>
> I don`t think Kenneth was engaging in back-rationalisation, apologism,
> or even good-old-fashioned hoodwinking. I think he was just following
> the line of reasoning suggested in BoR (and other places, although less
> explicitly).

I didn`t mean back-rationalisation as a bad thing- it`s the term I came up
with to describe it. He`s retrofitting a new mechanic to the old setting
description, and it`s not an exact match.
--
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Lord Rahvin wrote:
> As far as indicating that bloodline of Anduiras gave people a lawful
> tendency... I believe this was first mentioned in the Book of Regency (a
> free download for BR). If they didn`t actually introduce it there, they at
> least elaborated on it quite a bit and made it sound really cool. In fact,
> one of dissapointments, isn`t that there aren`t solid rules behind the
> guidelines and ideas suggested in the Book of Regency.
>
> Now, you could just dismiss the Book of Regency as a supplement and say it`s
> not really core Birthright if you want to, but that book was really
> well-written. I highly recommend downloading it if you haven`t already.
> (It should be on Birthright.net somewhere.)
>
> [And just as a side note: There are counter-examples to *EVERYTHING* in BR,
> not just the influence of bloodlines. A certain Vos paladin comes to
> mind...]

That`s actually very 3e of them- fewer limitations ;). Fewer alignment
restrictions, more open multiclassing, stuff like that. Anyway,
restricting alignment by bloodline strikes me as a bad idea.
--
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Gary wrote:
> I don`t even like the alignment restrictions for certain character
> classes or races; paladins must be LG, only non-good rangers can have
> their own species as a favored enemy, etc. Non-LG paladins work
> perfectly well in BR, [snip]

Paladins are a bad fit to 3e any way you look at it- they should have been
scrapped, and replaced by multiclassing fighter/clerics and faith-specific
prestige classes. If blackguard is a prestige class, so is paladin. I
think they were mainly left in for backward compatability- people that
wanted to bring in their old paladins from 2nd edition would have bitched
and moaned. And as much as I leave prestige classes disused, this is an
instance where they are the proper mechanic.
--
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 5:29 PM

> This particular rule that proscribes alignment based on derivation
> makes both the "game mechanic that proscribes role-playing
> choices" and the "role-playing exception to a game mechanic"
> mistakes by pushing players to make alignment choices based on
> a random die roll (if one determines derivation randomly per the
> Rulebook) and by giving them a role-playing out to that self-same
> rule if they jump through enough role-playing hoops.

As I mentioned when I first posted the effects of Bloodline I`m using these
days, and on one or two other occasions, that picking your bloodline
derivation is the first step in constructing characters. You are right that
dicing for your alignment or other personality characteristic is silly
(except maybe for a pick-up game), but that`s not what I do. Since you pick
your derivation, you can do so with the alignment you have in mind.

> Bad role-playing, incidentally, violates the rules of whatever
> game system is being employed by establishing some sort of
> exception to a game mechanic based on a descriptive "role-
> playing effect" by a player. Probably the most common
> example of this is players who write up a background for their
> characters that gives them access to a family with resources far
> beyond what their character would have alone, but role-playing
> is often used to subvert actual game mechanics. (BR characters
> are particularly vulnerable to this since there is no "noble"
> character class that could be used to describe such valuable
> familial ties.)

I actually think that kind of invention is a good thing. The DM can rule
that certain character concepts are not fitting for his campaign. I like to
write up a game prospectus for that reason. It doesn`t eliminate character
concepts better suited to someone *else`s* campaign, but it does cut them
down pretty much. I also think that the DM is like a director and the
player is like an actor and both of them have to work together to create a
good fit between character and setting. Players will tend to come up with
the most awkward character concepts the less the DM provides setting
information and advice to the player. I`ve been able to spitball character
development with all my players my last several campaigns. It was a
reminder of how things good be when I was recruiting for additional players
for my Romulan Star Trek PBeM RPG and someone wanted to play a psionic
Romulan. I suggested a Vulcan defector, and the prospective player moved
along. Somewhere there is a setting happy to have his Romulan psionic.
Another player might have been happy to adjust his character concept to a
Vulcan defector.

I prefer not to leave character creation solely in the hands of the players.
I put on my beret, take up my bullhorn, and sit in my director`s chair and
take an active roll. The actor, er I mean player, might have a really good
idea for a character, but I`m the one who knows the setting.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 08:19 PM 9/19/2002 -0400, Daniel McSorley wrote:

>On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Gary wrote:
> > I don`t even like the alignment restrictions for certain character
> > classes or races; paladins must be LG, only non-good rangers can have
> > their own species as a favored enemy, etc. Non-LG paladins work
> > perfectly well in BR, [snip]
>
>Paladins are a bad fit to 3e any way you look at it- they should have been
>scrapped, and replaced by multiclassing fighter/clerics and faith-specific
>prestige classes. If blackguard is a prestige class, so is paladin.

Speak it, brother McSorley! Testify!

Actually, I wouldn`t mind a paladin-like set of "core" classes with much
more general class abilities.... more of a fighter with an emphasis than
the paladin/cleric crossbreed it is now. "Squire" or something to that
effect for the knightly version of the paladin of Anduiras described as a
prestige class, "Sailor" for Nesirie, "Jannisary" or something like it for
the paladins prestige class of Avani. All of those would be based on the
fighter, but with various tweaks, a different list of feats to chose from,
different skill lists, etc. The paladin-prestige classes, of course,
wouldn`t require someone to take on those particular "core" classes (nor
should any prestige class) but they would be the most apt "background"
classes for those paladins.

>I think they were mainly left in for backward compatability- people that
>wanted to bring in their old paladins from 2nd edition would have bitched
>and moaned. And as much as I leave prestige classes disused, this is an
>instance where they are the proper mechanic.

I agree 100%. There are several rules in 3e that seem to be the product of
the hue and cry before it was released. The "off the path" restriction on
paladins (and monks) is one. After playing 3e for a few months I realized
that that restriction is a really bad one and probably based on the amount
of complaints made regarding the multi-classing issues when those were
leaked before 3e`s release.

Even more problems with 3e come from what I`ve recently started calling the
"Forgotten Realms D20" aspect of 3e. That is, many of the things in the 3e
core rules that are taken as D&D cant come from things that are campaign
specific to FR and, to a lesser, extent D&D`s roots in the Greyhawk
campaign. The abilities of several core classes are the kinds of things
that might fit into FR/GH well, but when translated into another campaign
setting they often need to be altered away from their FR/GH aspects.

My point here is that in coming up with a 3e BR campaign one shouldn`t feel
particularly restricted to several aspects of the 3e core rules since they
are based on the FR "core setting." Birthright D20 would probably be a
better way of approaching the subject than by trying to force BR into the
3e mold.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 06:45 PM 9/19/2002 -0500, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

> > And that`s all very interesting back-rationalization, but there`s nothing
> > published anywhere to indicate that the bloodline of Anduiras gave people
> > a lawful tendancy. Quite the contrary- there are several counterexamples
> > floating around. Why make up a new rule, in this case?
>
>Because I like it that way. It fits my conception of bloodlines.
>
>Let`s not forget there are counter examples in the BR materials for every
>occasion. Their inconsistancy doesn`t have to be my own. I`m happy to bend
>the rules for a good charatcer concept, but in general, I see alignment and
>other personality tendencies associated with bloodlines.

Ah, OK. It looked from the original post as if you were saying that
characters got an additional favored class based on their bloodline
derivation and using alignment as an additional prereq. That read as if
characters could still take on another alignment despite their derivation,
but would then lose the additional favored class.

In regards to the inconsistencies in the BR materials, most are only
inconsistent using the 2e "rules". In a 3e conversion issues like
alignment restrictions by race and class, multi- or dual-classing
restrictions, ability score requirements, racial limitations on class level
no longer exist unless they are specifically kept. The Vos paladin NPC is
probably the most obvious one, but since he appears only once he can be
easily ignored. Others are less easily discounted because they are regents
or LTs, but since most of those issues go away in 3e the number of them is
very small.

In fact, while we`re at it, what BR contradictions would remain in a 3e
version of the setting? Restrictions I think should either remain or be
put in place for a 3e BR campaign are:

1. Chaotic alignment for elves.
2. Human/culture requirements for paladins (which should also be a
prestige class as Mr. McSorley recently pointed out, but that`s a whole
`nother issue.)
3. Elf, half-elf or bloodline requirements for wizard or sorcerers
classes using true magic.
4. Elves should still be barred from being priests or druids (but their
wizards should have access to some sort of Nature school of magic.)
5. I would go ahead and just restrict druids to the Rjurik and make up a
sort of specialty priesthood for everyone else who decided to worship Erik.
6. Similarly, I would bar the Vos from the bard class. If someone
really, really wanted some sort of class that operated in a similar manner
in Vos culture and made a good argument then I`d go for something similar,
but with different class abilities.
7. Barbarians should be restricted to the Vos or Rjurik. (Actually, the
barbarian is a goofy "Forgotten Realms D20" class IMO, and should be
rewritten for most campaigns.)

Any others?

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Trithemius]

Gary:
<snip!>

I am fine with having rules enshrined since I consider all rules to,
ultimately, be flexible. If it is a rule like this it justs means that
this is the normal average result. It is more of a guideline on
character creation - if you want a stock-standard PC then follow the
"rules" to the letter, if prefer something a bit (or a lot) different
then you break the rules (with your DMs consent of course).

I actually think "rules" are a bad term for character creation
guidelines personally, especially since I regularly ask my DMs
permission to break them myself.

Kenneth has a nice analogy for this subject featuring roadmaps and
bush-bashing and bears, but I`ll let him talk about that :)

--
John Machin
(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)
-----------------------------------
"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."
Athanasius Kircher, Ars Magna Sciendi.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Machin" <trithemius@PARADISE.NET.NZ>
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 10:44 PM

> Kenneth has a nice analogy for this subject featuring roadmaps and
> bush-bashing and bears, but I`ll let him talk about that :)

My analogy follows. It concerns what I was mentioning yesterday, that a
match between setting and character. Given our knowledge of the Khinasi
culture, its easy to imagine how to play a Khinasi wizard. Likewise a
Brecht rogue. Problems come along when when a character concept isn`t well
supported by setting knowledge. Hence, we need a map of the setting
(metaphorically). When I start talking about several of the Khinasi wizards
or Brecht rogues I have in my game, readers will easily begin to match that
to the game information. When I start talking about Khinasi druids and
barbarians living out among the wastes, readers will see the connections,
but walk away thinking that I`m going somewhere a little different than
most, but haven`t stretched things to the breaking point. When I start
talking about the many LG paladins of Haelyn in Vosgaard (Teodor Profiev)
with the Blood of Azrai, I`m now into the realm of what are generally
prohibited characters. The very notion of this character poses questions
which Anuirean priests of Sera and Khinasi wizards don`t. For such a
character to work, some additional character building hurdles have to be
crossed. So, bloodline, class, and culture should be considered as a
complex of linked identities.

Using my "road less traveled" analogy, the common character combination is
the road more travelled, and its a well marked road. Furthermore, you
probabaly know the way. Rare, means you need a map, and you should plan to
have enough provisions, there may not be a place to stop and buy rations on
the way. Prohibited means you need an atlas. You have mountains to cross,
and by the way, look out for bears.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Trithemius]

Gary:
> Actually, I wouldn`t mind a paladin-like set of "core"
> classes with much more general class abilities.... more of a
> fighter with an emphasis than the paladin/cleric crossbreed
> it is now. "Squire" or something to that effect for the
> knightly version of the paladin of Anduiras described as a
> prestige class, "Sailor" for Nesirie, "Jannisary" or
> something like it for the paladins prestige class of Avani.
> All of those would be based on the fighter, but with various
> tweaks, a different list of feats to chose from, different
> skill lists, etc. The paladin-prestige classes, of course,
> wouldn`t require someone to take on those particular "core"
> classes (nor should any prestige class) but they would be the
> most apt "background" classes for those paladins.

This is a pretty neat idea actually. However I would most certain be
against calling the pre-Paladins of Avani "Jannisary". This term is a
corruption of the Turkic "yeni cheri" meaning "new army" and
specifically refers to the slave-based infantry corps of the Ottoman
Sultanate.

Other than that though, it sounds cool. Any idea of the class features?

I also agree that we should not feel compelled by the assumptions of the
basic 3e Rules. The setting of BR needs to be preserved as unmolested as
possible and that could be hard if we are just to use what is in effect
the Greyhawk setting.

--
John Machin
(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)
-----------------------------------
"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."
Athanasius Kircher, Ars Magna Sciendi.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Ariadne]

Another Question: If you're a blooded elf or dwarf or what ever apart from human, what is your favourite class then? The racial or is this overwritten by his bloodline?

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ariadne" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 6:07 AM

> Another Question: If you`re a blooded elf or dwarf or what
> ever apart from human, what is your favourite class then? The
> racial or is this overwritten by his bloodline?

I`m rather inclined to embrace Gary`s solution for them, and say both. So a
Dwarf who is a scion of Brenna would have both Fighter and Rogue as a
Favored Class.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

If there were no such things as 1e and 2e, then Paladins could easily have
been left to a prestige class. Indeed, it would be simple. But since they
were present as mult-classing end runs in previous editions, they live on.

As it might better read:
Any character who undergoes the initiation into a religious order is allowed
to select from that order`s special list of feats. These feats can only be
learned from the religious institution in question. Lists will vary from
faith to faith. The list for Haelyn might look like this:
Detect Evil, Detect Chaos, Divine Grace, Lay on Hands, Divine Health, Aura
of Courage, Smite Evil, Smite Chaos, Remove Disease, Turn Undead, Special
Mount.
You can only take alignment based feats if you have the opposing alignment.
Only good characters can detect or smite evil, &c.

You would be recognized as a member of the Church as any normal paladin
would, and your behavior must be exempary, or they won`t teach you new
feats. Clerics are assumed to have taken the orders in question. There is
no game prerequisites, anyone of good faith can ask to join holy orders.
Holy order based feats are typically Charisma based (as written in the PHB)

Obviously only fighters with their many bonus feats could emulate the PHB
paladin, but why shouldn`t clerics of Haelyn go be able to take Aura of
Courage and Smite Evil as feats? Obviously they already have Turn Undead.
Consider rogues taking holy orders for Sera or Eloele and in effect being
paladins. Of course their list of feats would differ.

Is this not so elegant as to cause everyone to rip page 42 right out of the
PHB?

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Starfox]

Kenneth Gauck <kgauck@MCHSI.COM> wrote at 02-09-22 19.57:

> Any character who undergoes the initiation into a religious order is allowed
> to select from that order`s special list of feats. These feats can only be
> learned from the religious institution in question. Lists will vary from
> faith to faith. The list for Haelyn might look like this:
> Detect Evil, Detect Chaos, Divine Grace, Lay on Hands, Divine Health, Aura
> of Courage, Smite Evil, Smite Chaos, Remove Disease, Turn Undead, Special
> Mount.

This goes agains the normal limitations on feats - that they cannot get
better with levels. Lay on Hands and Smite Evil both do. But that is really
a minor point - call these feats Champion Feats and say that Champion Feats
can do these things, and it can work just fine.

A sixth level fighter gets 8 feats - almost enough to purchase the nine
class abilites of a sixth level paladin. Of course the paladin also gets
three feats to do whatever he pleases with. A higher-level fighter would
have to advance 12 levels to get the 9 class abilities of a sixth level
paladin, so it would not be the same. It is like building a monk out of a
collection of feats - It can be done, but not using existing classes.
Perhaps if you awarded extra feats for accepting limitations like the
paladin`s code of honor and inability to multiclass.

Feats are simply not intended for building new classes with. You can do it,
but then you have to meddle with the existing class system - and you`re
halfway to creating a new game already. Still, for a really wild game, I
suppose this could work.

/Carl

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 03:57 PM 9/21/2002 +1200, John Machin wrote:

>However I would most certain be against calling the pre-Paladins of Avani
>"Jannisary". This term is a corruption of the Turkic "yeni cheri"
>meaning "new army" and specifically refers to the slave-based infantry
>corps of the Ottoman Sultanate.

Right. "Jannisary" was just the first thing that popped into my head
regarding Mid East warriors. I don`t think I`d use it because of the
cultural-specific issues you note (though a fighter-like "slave warrior"
would be cool....) Other terms like "dervish" similarly call up religious
and/or cultural images, though that might not be bad for a pre-paladin
character class. I`d probably just go with something a bit more general
like "desert warrior" for simplicity, though.

>Other than that though, it sounds cool. Any idea of the class features?

I hadn`t really gotten as far as specific class abilities, but in general I
think this kind of thing could be interpreted as sort of the 3e version of
2e kits. They could be plugged in on top of a base fighter or ranger and
determine things like their class skills, bonus feat choices, and spell
lists if appropriate. For instance, a squire "kit" could look like this:

Class skills: Animal Handling, Knowledge (nobility), Ride, Swim, etc.
Bonus feats: Skill Focus (ride), Ride by Attack, etc.

In general, however, what I`d prefer is a whole system of designing
character classes so that if one wanted to make up a class there`d be some
rhyme and reason to it. That`s what I`ve been fiddling around with in some
of my tweaks to 3e, but I`ll need to put a lot more work into it before it
will make a lot of sense.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Trithemius]

> Right. "Jannisary" was just the first thing that popped into
> my head regarding Mid East warriors. I don`t think I`d use
> it because of the cultural-specific issues you note (though a
> fighter-like "slave warrior" would be cool....) Other terms
> like "dervish" similarly call up religious and/or cultural
> images, though that might not be bad for a pre-paladin
> character class. I`d probably just go with something a bit
> more general like "desert warrior" for simplicity, though.

I like the idea that there are a few kinds of "paladin of avani". There
are the near-estatic desert-dwelling faithful who believe that the Sea
of Grass is a testing place for the faithful, and then there are the
city-dwelling cultured and rational faithful who believe in Avani`s
message of virtue and mercy. They`d be quite different interpretations
of the goddess even within the same region. Perhaps there are "dervish"
followers of Avani and also "sipahi" followers of Avani.

I rather like the idea of slave-warriors myself. I always wanted to play
a `mameluke` (named for the Egyptian caste of slave-soldiers) in
Zakhara, particularly one who had been expelled and had his tattos
removed (ouch). I`m not sure exactly where to put them though - the
Khinasi didn`t do a lot of empire-building so I suspect that the `yeni
cheri` idea of forcibly conscripting non-Khinasi and then converting
them to the Avanite faith would not make a lot of sense. Perhaps the
Sultan of Djafra has previosuly invested a lot of responsibility in his
slave-class administrators and soldiers and so has been easy to
undermine since these "pillars of the community" are throroughly
corrupted by graft and special interests (like the yeni cheri class in
the later Sultanate was).

--
John Machin
(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)
-----------------------------------
"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."
Athanasius Kircher, Ars Magna Sciendi.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Trithemius]

Kenneth:
> If there were no such things as 1e and 2e, then Paladins
> could easily have been left to a prestige class. Indeed, it
> would be simple. But since they were present as
> mult-classing end runs in previous editions, they live on.

Wasn`t the Paladin of Basic D&D (the Cyclopedia edition or whatever, I
am afraid that I am not a D&D archaeologist) essentially a "prestige
class" for high level Lawful Fighters to progress into?

That is certainly a good argument to make Paladin a prestige class.

I think however that if the Paladin was to become a prestige class then
the Blackguard probably needs something a bit more as well, IMO.

--
John Machin
(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)
-----------------------------------
"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."
Athanasius Kircher, Ars Magna Sciendi.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, John Machin wrote:
> I think however that if the Paladin was to become a prestige class then
> the Blackguard probably needs something a bit more as well, IMO.

Why? Paladin would actually lose a good bit in the transition from class
to prestige class- it would only be ten levels, and would end up being
pretty comparable to blackguard. Spell progression should be comparable,
for instance. For abilities, I`d go something like:
1 Detect Evil, Divine Grace
2 Lay on hands, special mount
3 divine health
4 Aura of courage
5 Remove Disease, smite evil
6
7 Remove Disease 2/week
8
9
10 Remove disease 3/week

Something like that. BAB and saves would look like the blackguard`s.
Prerequisites should be equivalent, but I`d make the ability to turn
undead a requirement, and have paladin levels count as cleric levels for
increasing turning. So a fighter/cleric could hit it pretty early, a
cleric by 9th or 10th if they spent feats right.
--
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Starfox]

Gary <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET> wrote at 02-09-23 00.26:

> Right. "Jannisary" was just the first thing that popped into my head
> regarding Mid East warriors. I don`t think I`d use it because of the
> cultural-specific issues you note

Al-Qadim calls their holy warriors Faris (pl Farisan).

/Carl

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Peter Lubke]

On Mon, 2002-09-23 at 13:32, John Machin wrote:

Kenneth:
> If there were no such things as 1e and 2e, then Paladins
> could easily have been left to a prestige class. Indeed, it
> would be simple. But since they were present as
> mult-classing end runs in previous editions, they live on.

Wasn`t the Paladin of Basic D&D (the Cyclopedia edition or whatever, I
am afraid that I am not a D&D archaeologist) essentially a "prestige
class" for high level Lawful Fighters to progress into?

As a D&D archaeologist (ahem), paladins predate rangers and arrive
around the same time as thieves! This occurs in the first of the
supplements. Back then you could even send a stamped return envelope to
TSR Rules, P.O. Box 756, Lake Geneva, Wisconson 53147 to get an answer
on rules questions.

There was no alignment distinction of good and evil at that time.
However, it should be noted that a paladin had to do good as well as
remain totally lawful. I have left the emphasis and punctuation as it
originally appeared. Note that the original paladin had no spell ability
at all - but could dispel evil at will. Also note, the paladin cannot
lay on hands on himself. A paladin would have had 1d8 hit points per
level as did fighters. Check out the cool magic sword.


Fighting Men: Other character-types may engage in hand-to-hand
combat, but only true fighting men are able to use their strength
and dexterity to utmost advantage in melee. In addition, certain
lawful fighters may opt to become paladins. This is explained later
in the section entitled DETERMINATION OF ABILITIES.

.......

Charisma scores of 17 or greater by fighters indicate the
possibility of paladin status IF THEY ARE LAWFUL from the
commencement of play for that character. If such fighters elect to
they can then become paladins, always doing lawful deeds, for any
chaotic act will immediately revoke the status of paladin, and it
can never be regained. The paladin has a number of very powerful
aids in his continual seeking for good: He can "lay on his hands" to
cure wounds or diseases in others (two points of damage for every
level the paladin has attained, one disease per five levels, either
function performable but one per day). Paladins are not themselves
subject to disease. They have a 10% higher saving throw against all
forms of attack (excluding melee). Paladins of 8th level and above
dispel evil (spells, undead, evil enchanted monsters, and the like)
simply by ordering it hence, and they detect all evil at a range of
6".

Paladins with any form of "Holy Sword" are virtually immune to all
magics (see MONSTERS & TREASURE, MAGIC &TREASURE, Swords).

The paladin may at any time he chooses obtain a horse which is
likewise gifted, but he may never obtain a second within ten years
of the first, so if one is killed it is not automatically replaced.
The paladin`s horse is a Heavy, with Armor Class 5, Moves 18", has
5+1 Hit Dice, and high intelligence.

Paladins will never be allowed to possess more than four magical
items, excluding the armor, shield and up to four weapons they
normally use. They will give away all treasure that they win, save
that which is necessary to maintain themselves, their men, and a
modest castle. Gifts must be to the poor or to charitable or
religious institutions, i.e. not to some other character played in
the game. A paladins stronghold cannot be above 200,000 gold pieces
in total cost, and no more than 200 men can be retained to guard it.
Paladins normally prefer to dwell with lawful princes or patriarchs,
but circumstances may prevent this. They will associate only with
lawful characters.

...

Holy Sword +5: As a Holy Sword this weapon will display its true
worth only in the hands of a Paladin. Wielded by a Paladin it
negates all spells (including wands and staves and the like) in a
radius of 1", thus making the Paladin virtually magic-proof.

That is certainly a good argument to make Paladin a prestige class.

I think however that if the Paladin was to become a prestige class then
the Blackguard probably needs something a bit more as well, IMO.

--
John Machin
(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)
-----------------------------------
"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."
Athanasius Kircher, Ars Magna Sciendi.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by Birthright-L (Daniel McSorley)

Why? Paladin would actually lose a good bit in the transition from class to prestige class- it would only be ten levels, and would end up being pretty comparable to blackguard. Spell progression should be comparable, for instance. For abilities, I`d go something like:
1 Detect Evil, Divine Grace
2 Lay on hands, special mount
3 divine health
4 Aura of courage
5 Remove Disease, smite evil
6
7 Remove Disease 2/week
8
9
10 Remove disease 3/week
The good old paladin a PrC? What is this for a nonsense? And you start with? Fighter? Very funny...

If you follow the epic rules, you build an epic paladin PrC. Then you will have a normal paladin, but only a little bit later...

By the way, you forgot the spells...

[Trithemius]

Daniel McSorley:
> Why? Paladin would actually lose a good bit in the
> transition from class to prestige class.

Meh. I would be inclined to condense the Paladin`s abilities. I
personally can`t think of anything that a Paladin gets after they get
their Special Mount, apart from the spell progression. If it was a PrC
and not a Core Class then I`d be quite happy to have them developing
spell-casting from 1st level.

I`m quite happy to let these sorts of "signature" prestige classes be
quite powerful. If someone wants to embody absolute lawful goodness then
good luck to `em I say :)

--
John Machin
(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)
-----------------------------------
"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."
Athanasius Kircher, Ars Magna Sciendi.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Ariadne]

If you make the paladin a PrC, you will have problems to see a blackguard as a fallen paladin....

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ariadne" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:04 AM

> If you make the paladin a PrC, you will have problems to see a
> blackguard as a fallen paladin....

But all the easier to see him as a champion for the other side.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Ariadne wrote:
> The good old paladin a PrC? What is this for a nonsense? And you start
> with? Fighter? Very funny...

Thank you, I`m glad you liked it. We were having a serious discussion,
feel free to not participate if you aren`t interested in the topic.

I didn`t note specific prerequisites, but I suggested a BAB requirement
and a divine spellcasting requirement of some sort, making fighter/cleric
the optimal way to go into the class.

> By the way, you forgot the spells...

No, I didn`t. I noted that the paladin should have the same spell
progression as the blackguard.
--
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Trithemius]

Ariadne:
> If you make the paladin a PrC, you will have problems to see
> a blackguard as a fallen paladin....

I don`t see how. Just condense the list of special benefits.
Anyway, it never says that blackguards HAVE to be fallen paladins.
--
John Machin
(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)
-----------------------------------
"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."
Athanasius Kircher, Ars Magna Sciendi.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Ariadne wrote:
> If you make the paladin a PrC, you will have problems to see a
> blackguard as a fallen paladin....

A valid point, but fallen paladin was never the only way to get into that
class anyway. The prereqs are a couple of feats, BAB of 6, and knowledge,
religion I think. The change would make paladin->blackguard transitions
even more rare, but really that`s the kind of villainous character that a
major chunk of a campaign could be set around. Either his defeat or
redemption would be a large story arc, so it`s fine if he`s one-of-a-kind
in the world. They shouldn`t be on every street corner anyway.
--
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

Kenneth Gauck writes:

>> If you make the paladin a PrC, you will have problems to see a
>> blackguard as a fallen paladin....
>
> But all the easier to see him as a champion for the other side.

One way of looking at this particular issue is to just say one wants to
eliminate the paladin as a character class and come up with a sort of
anti-Blackguard prestige class to replace it.... Kind of an interesting
twist to the whole anti-paladin issue that led to the creation of the
Blackguard in the first place.

When it comes to "fallen paladins" I think they had to include that stuff in
the Blackguard prestige class in order to "compensate" paladins for their
lost abilities should they "fall". If one uses a prestige class in place of
the paladin, however, that sidebar for the Blackguard prestige class is
pretty easily ignored or incorporated into the standard class abiliites for
the prestige class.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

On Sun, 22 Sep 2002, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

> If there were no such things as 1e and 2e, then Paladins could easily
> have been left to a prestige class. Indeed, it would be simple. But
> since they were present as mult-classing end runs in previous
> editions, they live on.

I never liked the self-righteous buggers. Once free-for-all multiclassing
appeared in 3e, I figured they could just be replaced by now-standard
fighter/clerics. I have mixed feelings on PrCs in general (in particular,
there are waaay too many of them, and they are very badly balanced with
respect to each other), but if they are to be implemented at all in 3e, I
agree that a prestige class is the best approach.

> Any character who undergoes the initiation into a religious order is
> allowed to select from that order`s special list of feats. These
> feats can only be learned from the religious institution in question.
> Lists will vary from faith to faith.

This I like. I think it should also be true of spell lists and class
skills; for example, clerics of Neserie should not have access to fire
spells of any kind (and some should be known only to specific temples of
Avani or Laerme), and Intimidate should be a class skill for clerics of
Belinik and Kriesha (and Appraise for Sera, etc.).

> and your behavior must be exempary, or they won`t teach you new feats.

And I would add, "or new spells". Yes, the power comes from the deity,
but to access it, you must be taught the specific ritual that reliably
communicates to the deity precisely what you want and that you are
"authorized personnel", with no chance of accidentally blowing yourself
up through imperfect understanding of the divine mysteries.

> Obviously only fighters with their many bonus feats could emulate the
> PHB paladin, but why shouldn`t clerics of Haelyn go be able to take
> Aura of Courage and Smite Evil as feats? Obviously they already have
> Turn Undead. Consider rogues taking holy orders for Sera or Eloele and
> in effect being paladins. Of course their list of feats would differ.
>
> Is this not so elegant as to cause everyone to rip page 42 right out
> of the PHB?

I quite agree. I like these mix-and-match systems more and more as time
goes on, and would like to see them replace prestige classes (and perhaps
classes in general) entirely; IMO, it would in fact be much *simpler* to
have a complete list of feats and prereqs (which could be quite
complicated) all in one place, rather than endless proliferation of PrCs.


Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Azrai]

It makes absolutely no sense to change the paladin class into a prestige class.

- prestige classes are defined as a specialisation - the paladin on the other hand is a basic and traditional character class, which appears in all common roleplaying games. making a prestige class out of it elminates the possibility to choose it in the first levels. as a paladin fan I am strictly against it.

- @Daniel McSorley: it appears to me, you have a special feud with Ariadne; this was again a polemical comment. the gallant code of paladins seems to be not your special favour.

[Birthright-L]

On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Azrai wrote:
> Azrai wrote:
> It makes absolutely no sense to change the paladin class into a
> prestige class.
>
> - prestige classes are defined as a specialisation - the paladin on
> the other hand is a basic and traditional character class, which
> appears in all common roleplaying games. making a prestige class out
> of it elminates the possibility to choose it in the first levels. as a
> paladin fan I am strictly against it.

A presitige class is something you earn your way into by being excellent.
I think this defines paladins exactly. With the core class setup, earning
the favor of a militant order, and much arduous training, is subsumed into
character background. If it`s a prestige class, it`s equivalent to
gaining a knighthood in an Arthurian legend. You have to work your tail
off, be a moral paragon, and gain notice in high places, /without/ any
special powers. Then you get your spurs.

> - @Daniel McSorley: it appears to me, you have a special feud with
> Ariadne; this was again a polemical comment. the gallant code of
> paladins seems to be not your special favour.

Quite the contrary- I have no idea who Ariande is, since everyone on the
message boards posts behind pseudononymous handles. I have no special
opinion about him, but he made a snide comment, so I was snide back.
--
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Azrai]

Orginally posted by Birthright-L
I think this defines paladins exactly. With the core class setup, earning
the favor of a militant order, and much arduous training, is subsumed into
character background. If it`s a prestige class, it`s equivalent to
gaining a knighthood in an Arthurian legend. You have to work your tail
off, be a moral paragon, and gain notice in high places, /without/ any


you should not compare knights with paladins. the knight is complete different to a paladin. in my oppinion paladinhood is a dogma, and can not be gained with special training. it is an ethos, a way of viewing things in live. it is a common mistake to throw paladins and knights together.

what one could do is to invent a special knight-prestige class, which could be chosen by paladins. this should serve your needs.

In principal I am strictly against such a "game-changing" house-rule, they just don't make any sense at all.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "daniel mcsorley" <mcsorley@CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 4:01 PM

> If it`s a prestige class, it`s equivalent to
> gaining a knighthood in an Arthurian legend.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Azrai" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 5:12 PM


> you should not compare knights with paladins. the knight is
> complete different to a paladin. in my oppinion paladinhood
> is a dogma, and can not be gained with special training. it is
> an ethos, a way of viewing things in live. it is a common
> mistake to throw paladins and knights together.

By the time of the grail quest, so was Arthurian knighthood. I can grant
some of your criticism against knighthood as an institution that Arthur
found, but not as Arthur used it. Arthur imposed the ethos of the round
table, of the grail, and other noble and elevated principles on his knights.
Since Daniel specifically discussed Arthurian knights, I think he merits the
assumption that he`s got some of this ennobling ideology rolled into his
meaning.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[blitzmacher]

you should not compare knights with paladins. the knight is complete different to a paladin. in my oppinion paladinhood is a dogma, and can not be gained with special training. it is an ethos, a way of viewing things in live. it is a common mistake to throw paladins and knights together.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Throwing in my 2 pennies worth, I would definately disagree with this statement. Knights also have a set of virtues which they need to attain. The only difference would be the dedication of service that a paladin gives his god. Where a knight can have the same fervant believe in their god but not willing to give up their life style. A knight must spend a certain amount of time learning their fighting skills, and attaining their virtues as a squire before becoming a knight. I would think the same would be for a paladin, where they would have to prove themselves to their god and what their god stands for before their god bestoes them with supernatural powers. I think making it a PrC is a good idea, and allows for some cool roleplay in order to attain Paladinhood.

[Birthright-L]

On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Azrai wrote:
> you should not compare knights with paladins. the knight is complete
> different to a paladin. in my oppinion paladinhood is a dogma, and can
> not be gained with special training. it is an ethos, a way of viewing
> things in live. it is a common mistake to throw paladins and knights
> together.

Blackguard is just as much of an `ethos` or `dogma` as paladin. Why the
disparity?
--
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by Birthright-L(Daniel McSorley)
Quite the contrary- I have no idea who Ariande is, since everyone on the message boards posts behind pseudononymous handles. I have no special opinion about him, but he made a snide comment, so I was snide back.
May be some of my comments sound a little bit sharp, but as a non-native speaker it's sometimes difficult to find always the right words (it's like making a diplomacy check with a -4 penalty with every sentence).

Yes, we all hide behind pseudonyms, but one thing I'll tell you of me: I'm female!

To help you with my log-in-name: Ariadne is based on my favorite character (a Khinasi/ halfelf high priestess of Khirdai), but originally Ariadne is a famous person of the Greek mythology! She was the daughter of Minos and gave Theseus the wool ball, so he could find the path and kill the minotaur without getting lost.

[Birthright-L]

On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Azrai wrote:

> In principal I am strictly against such a "game-changing" house-rule,
> they just don`t make any sense ate all.

It seems pretty clear to me that every house rule is proposed by someone
who thinks it makes *more* sense than the existing rule.

That presently is my position on converting paladins to a (set of)
prestige class(es) -- yes, it changes the game, but in a way that I think
improves it and makes it more sensible.

You of course are free to disagree, but I think I should mention I suspect
people who object to all house rules as a matter of principle are going to
dislike an awfully large percentage of the traffic on this list.


Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Trithemius]

Daniel McSorley:
> Quite the contrary- I have no idea who Ariande is, since
> everyone on the message boards posts behind pseudononymous
> handles. I have no special opinion about him, but he made a
> snide comment, so I was snide back.

I`ll chime in here and say that I also find it quite confusing.
Nevermind that I am a little worried about people who would identify
themselves with Azrai or the Gorgon :)

--
John Machin
(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)
-----------------------------------
"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."
Athanasius Kircher, Ars Magna Sciendi.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Trithemius]

Azrai:
> you should not compare knights with paladins. the knight is
> complete different to a paladin. in my oppinion paladinhood
> is a dogma, and can not be gained with special training. it
> is an ethos, a way of viewing things in live. it is a common
> mistake to throw paladins and knights together.

I don`t believe this at all myself. While I am able to see paladins as
not neccesarily riding heavy horses and wearing full plate I see many
many thngs that link them with the romantic idea of what a knight is. If
I made a Khinasi sipahi paladin I would still consider him to be a
"knight". The same applies if I made Khinasi nomadic paladin, despite
their difference in culture and armaments there are many similarities
w/r/t ideology.

> what one could do is to invent a special knight-prestige
> class, which could be chosen by paladins. this should serve
> your needs.

Alterantively: What one could do is have a variety of slightly different
PrCs to replace the Paladin core class.

> In principal I am strictly against such a "game-changing"
> house-rule, they just don`t make any sense ate all.

...

--
John Machin
(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)
-----------------------------------
"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."
Athanasius Kircher, Ars Magna Sciendi.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Lee]

In a message dated 9/23/02 5:06:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
mcsorley@CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU writes:

<< A presitige class is something you earn your way into by being excellent.
I think this defines paladins exactly. With the core class setup, earning
the favor of a militant order, and much arduous training, is subsumed into
character background. If it`s a prestige class, it`s equivalent to
gaining a knighthood in an Arthurian legend. You have to work your tail
off, be a moral paragon, and gain notice in high places, /without/ any
special powers. Then you get your spurs. >>

I and my campaign had this idea way back in 2nd edition, I was real sorry
that paladins didn`t become a prestige class. They may yet, if my game
progresses that way.

Lee.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.