Gray Guard is, indeed, awesome. I had a paladin that I was playing in the Sunless Citadel adventure path that would have been perfect for it- he was a paladin of Heironeous, but he was raised by Hextorian parents. Shame that game died.
Actually pretty much everything in Complete Scoundrel is great, particularly the skill tricks.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Gray Guard is, indeed, awesome. I had a paladin that I was playing in the Sunless Citadel adventure path that would have been perfect for it- he was a paladin of Heironeous, but he was raised by Hextorian parents. Shame that game died.
Now you're going to make me go out and look at a copy of this book just so I can see what you're talking about....
|
The jist of it is...a Grey Guard is the "Dirty Harry" of paladins. They have a lot more leeway w.r.t. what they can do in the name of the church than a regular paladin.
And if a Grey Guard bends the rules a bit, as long as he's not being a total scuzzball, whosoever casts the atonement spell on him doesn't lose exp's.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
The jist of it is...a Grey Guard is the "Dirty Harry" of paladins. They have a lot more leeway w.r.t. what they can do in the name of the church than a regular paladin.
And if a Grey Guard bends the rules a bit, as long as he's not being a total scuzzball, whosoever casts the atonement spell on him doesn't lose exp's.
That's a really unique idea... I'm not sure how I feel about it, but I can see where it might be especially appropriate in 'grittier' settings like Ravenloft or Dark Sun.
|
|
It's hard to explain, but I felt the same way you are describing feeling about it until I read the prestige class.
It's almost like there are hypnotic Stepford Dad runes in the body of the work. I like it a lot.
For instance, he can coup de grace the leader of an evil cult in his sleep; a paladin maybe couldn't do that.
Oooh...now I want to check this book out.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I'm...not dismayed, exactly, but unimpessed.
I have no problem with the Grey Guard being considered a "good-aligned" character.
But everything about the class tells me that the character is no longer "lawful".
The way i see it, and *of course* your mileage varies, killing sleeping people, even if they aura-identify as evil, is not a lawful act.
Deliberately fouling someone in basketball isn't "lawful." And choosing a class that can "foul" (fall in need of atonement) without it being such a big deal may still be good, but is not lawful.
|
|
I like the gray guardian, but for a sort of "opposite" reason.
Ever since Warriors of Heaven I have been increasingly distressed by the portrayal of the Good alignment in the game. More and more it seems it the only thing considered "good" in the books is a very narrow, very modern, very wimpy, interpretation. Warriors of Heaven went so far as to completely neuter any sense of opposition between Chaos and Law in Good. They not merely wouldn't, they couldn't fight. And next to that, Lawful Good of different varieties having any differences was certainly out.
Coming from the Greyhawk campaign where Trithereon think ANY Lawful Good deity is as bad as Hextor without even being honest about wanting to oppress everyone, and Cuthbert and Pholtus have a major rivalry, that always sat poorly with me.
With the gray guardian, I see a chance for paladins to get down and dirty in ways hardcore Lawful Good should get some times. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and Mr. Evil Mastermind needs to die here and now, not 6 months, 1,000 miles, and a trial away. He surrendered? *shrug* So it is also an informal execution. We'll log it and let the confessors sort it out.
Now what I'm really interested in is the Malconvoker. That's where the real power is at. >:)
I personally never really liked the whole idea that someone would get as worked up over their Law/Chaos axis as they do their Good/Evil axis. I understand that beings that are ONLY interested in Law/Chaos would, but not someone like a paladin or a cleric that are interested in really doing some good.
This is not to say that I think all forms of good should get along just fine, but it reminds me of the whole Superman/Batman thing. They both want the same thing, but use different tactics, and don't always get along well because of it. Are there going to be disagreements between good people? Yeah, and likely some that refuse to work with one another, but fighting one another actively really starts to blur the line between them being good or not, in my mind.
Of course, I don't like the "Good is just like Evil, but the opposite" theory either. Good and evil would have different tactics, which the Malconvocer actually shows. I can easily see an evil being allowing itself or its minions to be summoned to fight another evil to screw over another beings plans, or to potentially corrupt a good caster, but I couldn't picture a good being allowing itself to be conjured to aid an evil being, even if it was actively fighting an evil creature when summoned, becuase in the long term, they would be aiding evil.
Also, I do think that you can come up with situations where good is pited against good. I thought that the saddest, but one of the best, examples of this was the Dwarfgate Wars in DragonLance, where the dwarves of Thorbardin didn't have enough food to take in their cousins, the Hill dwarves didn' beleive them, and the Mountain Dwarves figured that the war would at least let them die with honor rather than from starvation.
Of course, I don't like the "Good is just like Evil, but the opposite" theory either. Also, I do think that you can come up with situations where good is pited against good. I thought that the saddest, but one of the best, examples of this was the Dwarfgate Wars in DragonLance, where the dwarves of Thorbardin didn't have enough food to take in their cousins, the Hill dwarves didn' beleive them, and the Mountain Dwarves figured that the war would at least let them die with honor rather than from starvation.
Threadjack! A lot of people bag on DragonLance, but one of the things I liked best about it was its serious treatment of good and evil, and the differences between them.
|
|
Threadjack! A lot of people bag on DragonLance, but one of the things I liked best about it was its serious treatment of good and evil, and the differences between them.
What serious treatment?
Anyone who was Evil had to betray everyone around them, and had to be betrayed in turn?Anyone who was Good got a "Get out of acting foolish free!" card because they were on the "right" side?
In an attempt to have thieves in the game without "morally sanctioning" theft an entire race of pseudo-innocent kleptomaniacs was created?
When the Priest-King transgresses, thousands of innocents are condemned to die.
Thousands more are left bereft by the powers of Good until Evil threatens to win forever, and then they come back, blatantly trading power for service.
The elves won't fight, the dwarves won't fight, the knights would rather fight each other for who gets to lead the fight.
And the whole thing is a foretold result.
Serious treatment?
Differences?
In Dragonlance?!?!?
Okay, I read that malconvoker; that's a guy who's definitely playing with fire. Infernal powers are old, they've seen it all, they've done it all, and no little mortal with a few tricks is gonna get drop on them.
Or maybe I've read too much Frankenstein and too many Michael Crichton novels...
Yeah, but something about the PrC strikes me as a fun RP hook though. I'd love to have a player take that PrC for his character, since it would give me TONS of hooks to work with.
Serious treatment?
Differences?
In Dragonlance?!?!?
I respect your opinion, but honestly, do we have to spent this much time on this board jumping on other people because they don't like our favorite setting, whatever one that might be? Nothing negative was said toward another setting before this comment, you just had a couple of posters mentioning examples that they thought supported their opinions on something.
I can see saying that you don't feel that DragonLance is as morally deep as other might see it, but your comments were a bit dismissive and kind of out of proportion to what was said in the first place.
At any rate, as far as Complete Scoundrel goes, I think its kind of fun that instead of just doing a "rogue splatbook" that some of the things introduced play around the edges of the grey areas of the alignment system, not so much to work against it as to make people really think about the motivation of their characters.
|
|
Yeah, but something about the PrC strikes me as a fun RP hook though. I'd love to have a player take that PrC for his character, since it would give me TONS of hooks to work with.Okay, I read that malconvoker; that's a guy who's definitely playing with fire. Infernal powers are old, they've seen it all, they've done it all, and no little mortal with a few tricks is gonna get drop on them.
Or maybe I've read too much Frankenstein and too many Michael Crichton novels...
Oh, yeah. I definitely agree. It's those guys who are brave or stupid enough to play with fire that do the most interesting stuff...
Threadjack! A lot of people bag on DragonLance, but one of the things I liked best about it was its serious treatment of good and evil, and the differences between them.What serious treatment?
Anyone who was Evil had to betray everyone around them, and had to be betrayed in turn?
Anyone who was Good got a "Get out of acting foolish free!" card because they were on the "right" side?
In an attempt to have thieves in the game without "morally sanctioning" theft an entire race of pseudo-innocent kleptomaniacs was created?
When the Priest-King transgresses, thousands of innocents are condemned to die.
Thousands more are left bereft by the powers of Good until Evil threatens to win forever, and then they come back, blatantly trading power for service.
The elves won't fight, the dwarves won't fight, the knights would rather fight each other for who gets to lead the fight.
And the whole thing is a foretold result.Serious treatment?
Differences?
In Dragonlance?!?!?
Not gonna bite.
KEJR has got my back.
You know, reading through the Grey Guard again, this seems like a really good PrC for paladins of LN deities. Their god and the higher up clerics might not have a problem with their actions, but their fellow paladins are uncomfortable around them, in part because the remind them that their deity isn't as interested in valor and goodness as they are.
Since I mainly run Forgotten Realms campaigns, this seems like a really good choice for a paladin of Helm. From my old days as a player in a Greyhawk campaigns though, I can definately see Pholtus or Saint Cuthbert having some of them around in their paladin orders as well.
|
|
So this Complete Scoundrel sounds like a good book.
I don't own any of the "Complete" series at the moment - my impression has always been that they're pretty much variant core classes, which may be cool but I don't feel I need them; "variation on a theme" prestige classes, and new feats - and from my collection of Dragon magazines I've got more prestige classes and feats than I could probably ever use...
So my questions are:
Does Complete Scoundrel go beyond this?
Do I need Complete Adventurer (or anything else "Complete") to get complete satisfaction from Complete Scoundrel?
Well, from what I understand, this second go round in the "Complete" series won't have any new classes in them, which has been true of Complete Mage and Complete Scoundrel. Complete Mage has a lot of supplemental information on the core classes introduced in Complete Arcane (spells for Wu Jen, invocations for Warlocks, PrCs for Warlocks), but most of the "support" material in Complete Scoundrel that I have seen so far is essentially feats to work with certain aspects of the "Complete Adventurer" classes.
Much of Complete Soundrel really is stuff that can be used in and of itself (skill tricks, interesting PrCs that kind of challenge alignment perceptions, luck feats, etc.)
I liked Complete Mage because it expanded on the new ideas in Complete Arcane rather than throwing out a bunch of new ideas and classes, but as far as a general utility thing, Complete Scoundrel should be useful without any of the older "complete" books in your collection, but it all depends on what you are interested in adding to your collection.
|
What I like about it--it's obviously going to have utility for rogues/bards/etc, but it seems to not leave out the other classes entirely either.
It has a prestige class for paladins, for Crom's sake.
I just read the "Healing Hands" skill trick. Handy for a celestial like me. Not so much for a rogue. I like the variety of this book.
And mine is autographed by the authors!
|
|
Seems like one of the things they did in the new series of complete books is put in feats and PrCs that make combining classes possible that might not have been feasable(or at least very advisable) before.
Having a more 'roguish' paladin is quite an off the wall concept before, and you would take serious penalties for trying to play the(possibly cliche) character who was on the wrong side of the law but through some event has reversed his stance and changed his ways.
This is just a single example of course since its the one the OP was talking about, but there any many feats and PrCs in this book that allow for combinations that make sense but would have failings otherwise. For instance, Swift Tracker makes a Ranger/Scout combo work quite amazingly by allowing the other class's levels to add for some of the abilities. There are similar feats for other class combos too like swashbuckler/fighter, ninja/monk, ect.
This trend seems to have been carried over in the complete mage too, taking some of the many classes we already have and making them useful in different ways together. I've never been big on multiclassing, but I have to admit that a lot of these seem to have possibility.
|
|
I respect your opinion, but honestly, do we have to spent this much time on this board jumping on other people because they don't like our favorite setting, whatever one that might be?
No jumping on another person. If he wants to like DL he is free to, and for whatever reason. I just completely disagree that the reason he cites is present in DL.
I can see saying that you don't feel that DragonLance is as morally deep as other might see it, but your comments were a bit dismissive and kind of out of proportion to what was said in the first place.
Not "as morally deep."
I see it as not moral at all.More, I see it as defining the lack of morality that led to the BoED, and the general degradement of what is a "grey area of the alignment system," as well any attempts to deal with it.
I like hard edged issues of good and evil, and law and chaos, and neutrality in my game. The Complete Scoundrel does present some interesting takes on that, although I expect I take them a lot further than might be intended, particularly with a class like the Gray Guard.