|
I like it when stories move on the edge of the conventional. Stories like Terry Pratchetts "Discworld", where an assassin wouldn't dream of hurting another person without getting paid, or an otherwise nice kid would become a demonologist because he hates being told what to to. I also like stories where the monsters become the good guys, and I love the suggestion from the chapter on Asmodeus in AP #30 about lawful good paladins of Asmodeus. I would love to see more of this in my Pathfinder game, but as it is, a lot of these opportunities are blocked by prerequisites. Some prerequisites are fine, when they are designed to keep the power levels of certain combos in line, but I feel that prerequisites that are only thematical (Assassins being evil) are more of a hindrance. I know, in my own game, the sollution is simple; Change the rule. But that doesn't apply to Organized Play, or other instances where RAW applies.
So, fellow Paizonians, help me with a thought experiment: If a new feat was to appear, say, in the Advanced Players Guide, or Misfits Redeemed, that allowed you to disregard certain prerequisites, how would that effect the power balance? What prerequisites could be ignored without opening up holes for mischievous players to exploit?
|
For the Assassin, there's really no way around the evil part.... killing for money is unquestionably evil. Although, that is pretty much what every adventuring group from the dawn of the game has been doing... But that's beside the point.
Of course, there's nothing stopping an Assassin working for a good organization (except maybe paladins and their pesky Detect Evil). Lawful Evil Assassins I could see as definitely being ones that might not kill unless their getting paid, whereas CE ones might just kill for the fun of it.
|
|
But a good (or neutral) guy infiltrating the Assasins Guild would never be able to learn the trade, because he doesn't fit the prerequisite. He might be able to train his sneak attack for several levels, but not killing blow because it's... evil?
But that's besides the point. My question was that, if you for some reason or other, want to play a character who doesn't fit the stereotype, would an official feat that allows you to bypass prerequisites break the game balance?
But a good (or neutral) guy infiltrating the Assasins Guild would never be able to learn the trade, because he doesn't fit the prerequisite. He might be able to train his sneak attack for several levels, but not killing blow because it's... evil?
But that's besides the point. My question was that, if you for some reason or other, want to play a character who doesn't fit the stereotype, would an official feat that allows you to bypass prerequisites break the game balance?
i don't beleive it would break game balance at all. it would mostly be a fluff thing. but think of all the doors opened. though it would be an underpowered feat. unless it let you blatantly ignore both racial and alignment based requirements of any class.
New Feat
I am What I am!
Benefit; if any particular class requires you to be a member of a specific race or follow a specific alignment. you may blatantly ignore those requirements as if they weren't there. you are not bound by tropes. you must still meet all other requirements not based off of alignment or race.
Special; A cleric who takes this feat may choose to channel the type of energy opposed to his alignment instead, even if it would be normally illegal. meaning that an evil cleric with this feat can channel positive energy with this feat and vice versa. this particular swap can only be done once in a character's career.
|
|
New Feat
I am What I am!
Benefit; if any particular class requires you to be a member of a specific race or follow a specific alignment. you may blatantly ignore those requirements as if they weren't there. you are not bound by tropes. you must still meet all other requirements not based off of alignment or race.
Special; A cleric who takes this feat may choose to channel the type of energy opposed to his alignment instead, even if it would be normally illegal. meaning that an evil cleric with this feat can channel positive energy with this feat and vice versa. this particular swap can only be done once in a character's career.
I like it, but I would edit it to say "any particular class or feat", that way you might get a little more value. Would be good for VoP.
Here is an edited repost of the feat
I am What I am!
Benefit; if any particular "Class" or "Feat" requires you to be a member of a specific race and/or follow a specific alignment. you may blatantly ignore those requirements as if they weren't there. you are not bound by tropes. you must still meet all other requirements not based off of alignment and/or race.
Special; A cleric who takes this feat may choose to channel the type of energy normally opposed to his alignment instead, even if it would normally be considered illegal. meaning that an evil cleric with this feat can channel positive energy with this feat and vice versa. this particular swap can only be done once in a character's career.
|
|
I can definitely see other alignment variations of the Assassin, just not good assassins that work on commission. the Slayer of Domiel failed something epic in regards to making a good (aligned) assassin. Death Touch? Really? So, at the 10th level of the class I MIGHT be able to kill someone that is somewhere between 0-60 HP? But if I roll low, nothing happens.... Why not sneak attack him?
I'm not so sure on how there can be a neutral assassin, though... You can either kill for profit/pleasure, or to rid the world of evil people in the quickest and most painless way possible... Maybe true neutral people that assassinate anyone that screws up the cosmic balance, or someone like the Inevitables.
Variant alignment paladins definitely need some tweaks to their class features, though (which I hear is coming up in the APG).
Buuuuuuut to get on-topic: No, I don't think it would be game-breaking in any sense, but it does water down some of the flavor. If my group dashed the alignment requirements, no one would play a LG paladin, every monk would be Chaotic, Lawful Barbarians would be everywhere... But that may be just because my group is a bit contrary. It seems like some of the better class features generally require you to act a certain way to continue to enjoy them, and it might devalue them to take away said requirements.
|
|
Who says you get where you are in life because of who you are? Take the Assassin: Couldn't someone be sent off to Assassin school because that was what his father was? Or just grow up in a certain Red Mantis city? Or a good Andoran soldier be ordered to train as an Assassin, so he could take out evil tyrants?
I like the "I am what I am"-feat, and would like to add the option that a follower of a god could be more than one alignment step awayfrom that god. But is it possibly broken? Is there any combo I can't think of, like Monk/Barbarian, or Gnome Arcane Archer, that would become too unbalanced?
here is another repost
I am What I am!
Benefit; if any particular "Class" or "Feat" requires you to be a member of a specific race and/or follow a specific alignment. you may blatantly ignore those requirements as if they weren't there. you are not bound by tropes. you must still meet all other requirements not based off of alignment and/or race.
Special; A cleric who takes this feat may choose to channel the type of energy normally opposed to his alignment instead, even if it would normally be considered illegal. meaning that an evil cleric with this feat can channel positive energy with this feat and vice versa. this particular swap can only be done once in a character's career.
Special; a cleric with this feat is no longer limited to being 1 step behind thier god's alignment. their aligment may be as removed from that of thier god as they wish.
i clarified something that was intended from the first part. none of said combos would be any bit unbalanced at all. they'd just be exotic.
And requiring the use of a feat to accomplish such a character is so worth it. :) i wonder if my dm well allow this feat, i've been wanting to play a barbarian/monk forever!
|
|
Well, some of it would start to break the suspension of disbelief (for me, at least). Why is the CG god giving spells to this CE guy? How can this assassin claim that he is a good person when he kills for money? Why is that paladin slaughtering children...?
Taking the Assassin example and running with it- I would be all for removing the "evil" prerequisite for the class. It really depends on the organization you join to teach you though, because many would require you to practice this death attack technique on living people to make sure you have it down... Where other organizations just use wooden dummies because they value life. Of course, the Assassin isn't quite the best example because he doesn't lose his class features if he deviates from his alignment. Clerics and paladins, on the other hand...
I think the feat should be renamed "Overlooked" when taken by clerics that deviate from the normal tenants of their faith by being an forbidden alignment.
|
|
Well, some of it would start to break the suspension of disbelief (for me, at least). Why is the CG god giving spells to this CE guy? How can this assassin claim that he is a good person when he kills for money? Why is that paladin slaughtering children...?
That is something quite different, in the last two examples. An assassin who kills for money is not good, and neither is a paladin who slaughters children. But I'm not looking for a way to play a good character who can act evil without repercussions, I'm looking for a way to play a stereotype in a different way. For instance, an assassins who doesn't kill for money, a paladin who does good in the service of Asmodeus, or a law-abiding, disciplined barbarian. If it breaks suspension of disbelief, to the point that the character does not feel like a real person and disturbs roleplaying, then the GM should reject the concept.
|
|
Paladins of Asmodeus are actually somewhat common in our faction. People confuse us for evil just because we ultimately seek total domination of the world; this is just predjudice. While infiltrating the various continent we do plenty of good, and have acted as some of the most loyal allies the Pathfinder society has found. As to our paladins, they are legitimaelu out to help the populace, and for their sake we don't talk with them much about some of their power sources... may violate a code or two, and why would we want to do that to our Paladins?
-Thallin, PR department of Asmodeus
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I could totally see a good assassin - even a lawful good one.
This character would be a skilled "mercenary" agreeing to exterminate only purely evil beings like evil dragons and demons. His payment isn't in gold but in magical oaths of good - if a mighty king is threatened by an evil dragon, he agrees to kill the dragon - but only if the king swears to be good to his people and help the weak.
|
|
Naruto has plenty. I've always thought of the evil requirement for assassin to be a bit silly; there are plenty of political assassins, even in good factions. If you sneak in with the operative of taking out an Orc chief causing issues in the area, it doesn't really matter the methods.
Pallys are obviously tailor-made for good, though strictly speaking I could see them going down the other axis (most Pallys tend to play up the "good" aspect far more than the Lawful... Really I see most Pallys played as Neutral Good).
Personally, I would make this a trait and not a feat, if you even really need it. Its not really that powerful, and I know lots of GMs who have been ignoring alignment restrictions for years.
But a good (or neutral) guy infiltrating the Assasins Guild would never be able to learn the trade, because he doesn't fit the prerequisite. He might be able to train his sneak attack for several levels, but not killing blow because it's... evil?
Well, like undercover agents all over the verse, he'll have to decide whether he will fake some stuff or become the very thing he is fighting, to fight it from within.
In this case, the guy infiltrating an assassins' guild will have to decide: will he just fake being an assassin by never really killing anyone, or will he turn evil to show them his commitment.
There are no Get Out of Jail cards for this. You could have chosen an easy occupation, like greengrocer, but you chose a hard one - so live with the consequences, like being faced with hard choices.
But that's besides the point. My question was that, if you for some reason or other, want to play a character who doesn't fit the stereotype, would an official feat that allows you to bypass prerequisites break the game balance?
I think it would break the game. Once you have the official foot in the door, you can do all sorts of crazy stuff. Let that box remain closed, Pandora. Leave decisions like this in the hands of the GM (and in the case of formalised environments like organised play, you're out of luck.)
And really, if you make a "ignore rules" feat to allow exotic choices in organised play, the organised play world will turn into a freak-show. It will become The League Of A Thousand Drizzts in no time.
And, since we're talking about assassins, I'll use my at will "sound like a broken record" spell-like ability and repeat myself for the killionth time:
You don't need the assassin class to play an assassin character. You don't even need the rogue class.
The PrC is a special case of a guild assassin training in an evil guild of evil assassins. It's not more general because every class is the generic assassin*. It's all about attitude.
*Except paladin maybe.
There are alot of people in my group that love the Assassin's Creed games, and have wanted a way to play good or neutral assassins for a while. This is what they have been looking for.
Pardon me for pointing out the obvious, but why do you require a rule when all you need to do is go up the the GM and say "Hey, I've got this great character concept, but there's this one little hitch I need to you houserule for me . . ."?
Pardon me for pointing out the obvious, but why do you require a rule when all you need to do is go up the the GM and say "Hey, I've got this great character concept, but there's this one little hitch I need to you houserule for me . . ."?
Because:
I know, in my own game, the sollution is simple; Change the rule. But that doesn't apply to Organized Play, or other instances where RAW applies.
One of the players in my game played a Barb/Monk and it was atrocious. He was a wrecking ball.
Because:
I know, in my own game, the sollution is simple; Change the rule. But that doesn't apply to Organized Play, or other instances where RAW applies.Okay, I missed that . . . in which case shouldn't that question go under the Organized Play forum?
*Except paladin maybe."Moradin has decreed you must die by my blade."
That's not an assassin. Unless Moradin is the name of the guy who paid you to kill your target, preferably in an underhanded way.
Okay, I missed that . . . in which case shouldn't that question go under the Organized Play forum?
Because:
I know, in my own game, the sollution is simple; Change the rule. But that doesn't apply to Organized Play, or other instances where RAW applies.
I still think the solution is the right one: Ask your GM to change the rule in your game. You're the sole heroes in your home game.
In organised play, you're one among hundreds, thousands, killions. If you add an easy backdoor to break the rules of the world, you'll have hundreds, thousands, killions of "exceptional" characters running around. There will be no more simple dwarf fighters or elf wizards around since everyone plays CG drow rangers living on the surface or stuff like this.
The only thing I could see is it going out as a sort of reward: Have some sort of OP contests or lotteries. The winners get to break the world's rules and play Drizzls or guys that are actually from earth but have been transported to Golarion by some freak interversal phenomenon and now walk around with a Glock as their preferred weapon. (The latter character concept is freeware, by the way - you are officially allowed to use it in your home campaigns ;-))
Is a place in the afterlife not a form of payment?
Dog heaven is squirrel hell . . . .