Awnshegh Build to use for the BRCS

[the Falcon]

I voted for Option 1, because I really like its system much more than that of Option 2. I think the system of Option 2 is needlessly complicated without its added complexity really enhancing gameplay in any way. However, I also think a lot of the Traits (as Option 1 calls them) and Disadvantages of Option 2 could perhaps be incorporated into Option 1 to make it more versatile and interesting.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by the Falcon@Jul 23 2004, 07:10 AM
I voted for Option 1, because I really like its system much more than that of Option 2. I think the system of Option 2 is needlessly complicated without its added complexity really enhancing gameplay in any way. However, I also think a lot of the Traits (as Option 1 calls them) and Disadvantages of Option 2 could perhaps be incorporated into Option 1 to make it more versatile and interesting.

I agree that many things of option 2 could be incorporated into option 1 (some already were before I put them out).

Likewise I think that some things from option 1 could be incorporated into option 2.


If option 2 is the one to be used IMO several things would need to be tweaked (BAB progression and hit dice for instance). I'm not entirely sold on the fact that all awnsheghlien get a good BAB, d10 hit dice and good Ref and fort saves. Some seem to me to be not warrior oriented (see magian, hag, etc.) But this could be worked out in the final version.

I'm also not too keen on forcing all awnsheghien to take disadvantages. There are some of the published 2nd ed ones that clearly have them and some that don't. Again this could probably be tweaked in the final work up.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by geeman@Jul 22 2004, 06:40 PM
Some of his fighter levels might translate into awnshegh class levels

pretty well. In fact, several of the awnsheghlien that are portrayed as

fighters in the original materials would appear to _really_ have levels in

an awnshegh character class IMO. The Gorgon should, of course, still have

several levels as a fighter in order to portray him as one of (the) premier

warriors of Cerilia, but at F25 (per BE) in the "low-level" BR setting that

still leaves a lot of wiggle room.



Gary

I'm not too certain on this, by losing fighter levels he loses fighter bonuse feats (very important IMO). Also didn't he have several wizard levels (per the monster cards from the box set) and sources that he controlled?

Regardless, not everything can be exactly as it was in 2nd ed. We just have to resolve ourselves to the fact that some things have to change to match the 3.5 mechanics and just try to capture the flavor/feel of the characters in question, IMO.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by RaspK_FOG@Jul 22 2004, 02:57 PM

Basically, I think the Ua system is clean, transparent, and mostly smooth, but seems to me that it is a little towards making things work backwards: instead of making the thing work for the core rules, it tries to bend the core rules to work for it; while I realise why that is, I still don't feel comfortable with it.

It doesn't really bend things all that much more than does option 2.

The major change in option 1 from the UA bloodlines is the transformations occuring at the levels where a character would take the 'empty' bloodline class levels (per the UA). The optional disadvantages work similar to the system in UA (not bloodlines but in another part of the book) so it is combining optional variations in an 'official' WotC book and then tweaking (as mentioned already).

The 2nd option (class level based) invokes several changes from core system it is paralleling. Making a saving throw to 'avoid' taking awnshegh levels and mandatory disadvantages for example.

I think it just comes down to what people are more comfortable with, since they both can be made to work.

[RaspK_FOG]

The concept of making a saving throws to avoid taking levels was connected with taintedness even from 3e days - see both Oriental Adventures and Unearthed Arcana; this makes for the fact that you have to resist going on such a path!

On the other hand, the UA bloodline mechanics make me feel uncomfortable due to their inheritance: while they resemble monster and template levels, they work so differently that they make me uncomfortable with how the provided mechanic bends the core mechanic. It is true, class features are nothing more than a consistent way of bending the rules, but in this case I feel as if the rules are bent a little to much.

[geeman]

At 04:33 PM 7/23/2004 +0200, irdeggman wrote:



>I`m not entirely sold on the fact that all awnsheghlien get a good BAB,

>d10 hit dice and good Ref and fort saves. Some seem to me to be not

>warrior oriented (see magian, hag, etc.)



I did the White Witch (not the most warrior-like character) using awnshegh

class levels and that seemed to work out pretty well. In the long run,

nobody "sees" things like BAB, hit points or saving throw bonuses, and

while it might seem counterintuitive that individual character would have

access to something like the BAB progression normally reserved for

"warrior" classes really doesn`t redefine the character as warrior oriented

per se.



Gary

[RaspK_FOG]

I will agree with Gary; nobody wants a warrior when he can get a fighter. The reason are the bonus feats the fighter gets which really make him good; otherwise he is nothing!

[fiftyone]

I just voted option 1, but if option 2 is selected, for BAB and save progression just say that attaining the 1st awnshegh level the character/npc gets 3 good selections. BAB to average is 1, BAB to good is a 2nd and 1 left for one good save. etc, poor BAB & 3 good saves, average BAB and 2 good saves.

Selecting the will save as good could describe the uber awnshegh that havnt necessarily gone completely insane yet.

edit: I suppose hit dice could be incorporated into that aswell, but i'd still rather determine hit die by creature type. Even if it is sketchy.

[the Falcon]

Originally posted by RaspK_FOG@Jul 24 2004, 01:15 AM
The concept of making a saving throws to avoid taking levels was connected with taintedness even from 3e days - see both Oriental Adventures and Unearthed Arcana; this makes for the fact that you have to resist going on such a path!

I do not own a copy of OA, but the Taint in UA works a bit different from what you suggest.
In the Taint system you have to make saves to avoid increasing your taint score, not to avoid gaining any tainted class levels.
The character can then later use his taint score to qualify for a tainted prestige class, which can alleviate the drawbacks of the Taint.
In one example of those prestige classes, the tainted sorcerer, the character's Taint score effectively functions as a new ability score.

mmm... If bloodline scores are implemented as ability scores, I wonder if we could use the Taint system as a basis for their game mechanical workings? Especially if carrying the taint of Azrai causes drawbacks which can then be alleviated by taking on awnshegh levels, thus creating a game mechanic for being unable to resist the lure of Azrai?

[geeman]

I`m trying to stay out of rooting for one method over another here--aside

from being the yahoo who wrote option #2, I`ve already pretty much

described my opinion, but I am curious if I could get a little more

explanation on what is complicated about that option so I can either

improve it or clarify the text. What is confusing those who find the

character class method difficult? Is it something in the character class

itself? The extensive system of transformations and/or disadvantages? The

saving throw leading up to taking levels in that class or the "template"

associated with "instant awnsheghlien"?



Thanks,

Gary