One of my players wants to play a ghost/undead hunter type character with good fighting abilities and some magical tricks to help them in their field, like in the show Supernatural. She wants the PC to be clever and tricky rather than faithful.
I was thinking of allowing them to play a Ranger/Cleric only instead of her spells being wisdom-based they will be intelligence based and she knows and prepares them as a wizard. But seeing as all the good undead-bashing/warding spells are on the Cleric list she'll still use that list.
I feel odd about this. Would any of you have a problem with it? We used to do "counts as" stuff like this in warhammer all the time, eg your rough riders are exactly the same game-wise only instead of being guys on horses with lances they are guys with jetpacks and grenade throwers. But it seems wierd in D&D to say OK, this character is mechanically a cleric but in the game world she doesn't worship a god and her spells, though they are the same as divine spells, are gotten from old books and memorized. Her Turn Undead power represents ancient rituals she's learned to repel or destroy undead. Odd huh? But I can see the character and it's a cool idea. After all, why should pious people have all the vampire slaying fun?
Also, should I give her something else to make up for restricting the Cleric's spell list? Or is it not that big a deal? And should she suffer arcane spell failure if the spells are arcane spells that just mimic divine spells (thereby unfairly nerfing the cleric's armour)? Or are they Divine spells that don't come from a god? Is that even possible?
Or should I just let her do it and not worry about the logical incnsistencies? :)
It's a great big mess...
Well if all the fluff that goes along with this fits your campaign world, there's nothing wrong with switching mechanics around to suit. I would recommend using the wizard spells/day progression if you're using Int as the casting stat. I'd also recommend that you label the character's spells as divine (thereby negating spell failure), unless you're really going for the wizardly book-learning thing. I wouldn't worry about the cleric spell list being restrictive, especially if you have any of the many splat books with extra spells, or if you allow the creation of new cleric spells.
|
Kahoolin, have you considered an Archivist (from Heroes of Horror)? IMO, that class is a good "monster hunter" in the less martial tradition of Van Helsing (or Van Ritchen).
They use divine spells, drawn from the cleric and druid lists, but need a prayer-book, and prepare their spells like a wizard (intelligence based). They have d6 HD, can wear medium armour (no arcane spell failure chance), and have a wizard's attack bonus progression. They also have a "dark knowledge" class feature which gives them and allies bonuses to hit certain types of monsters (undead, outsiders, aberrations etc.)
The only problem is they don't turn undead! But I can see a multi-classed ranger/archivist being a good undead slayer. Maybe its just me, but while I certainly see the useful aspect in having an undead slayer be able to turn undead, it doesn't quite fit the image for me. I like my monster slayers to do all the research into their enemies weaknesses, find the right weapons etc, then go duke it out with the baddies themselves, rather than the somewhat anti-climactic game mechanic of turning undead.
I also see an undead slayer generally going after the BBUG's like ghosts, vampires etc, not wading through hordes of skeletons and zombies ... and with a multiclass cleric, turning anything much beyond a zombie or ghoul might be a big ask...
Just say that the character "worships" the principles of "good" and you can let her stay a cleric, without messing with the game mechanics. I´m not sure about 3e, but in 2e it was possible for clerics to worship philosophical principles instead of gods. Now, this character does not need to actively worship, but instead adhere to her ideas and goals, and this may suffice to accomplish what you are looking for. Consider giving her access to the trickery domain for the rogueish part, and perhaps the sun domain for fighting undead, and you are done. (Urban) Ranger for the weapon variety may be an idea, so you don´t need to spend a lot of feats for them. Wisdom will be important anyway, as some sneaky skills require it. Knowledge (Religion) is indispensable (knowledge about undead is included therein), so why not take a class that has it as class skill anyway?
You might want to take a look at the Favored Soul class (was it PHB2 ?), it might be closer to what you are looking for.
Stefan
The turning is going to suck with a multiclassed ranger/cleric unless the undead are kept weak just so that the character can actually effect them.
I don't have the book, but sounds like that Archivist thingy is really good. Otherwise... how about just having her take wizard levels? Not even pretend to be cleric, just a ranger/wizard with Practiced Spellcaster.
Considering the specialized nature, possibly allow the research of "new" spells, with the end result of adding cleric spells to the wizard spell list. Thus, you have a wizard casting searing light as an arcane spell. Perhaps raise the spell levels by one for all such spells to reflect the difficult nature of producing such magics through arcane means rather than divine (as a perk, all save DCs go up by one on such spells).
To tell the truth, a cleric with just a single level of ranger for Favored Enemy and the weapon proficiencies sounds more practical. Just continue wearing light armor and acting "rangery." Have faith be a quiet, personal affair that the character just doesn't talk about much.
There is a precedent of having a cleric not worship any kind of god yet still get most of the nifties of being a cleric. It was introduced in the Kalamar world setting. I think they were limited to about 3rd level in the RAW but hey the whole idea here is to come up with a good logical way to override the RAW. I do agree with Tequila about you using the wizard spell per day since you are going to use INT as the prime stat. The only other thing I can see potentially doing is run it more like a sorcerer for spells per day and how many she knows if you want it more of a intuitive thing allowing her to come with whatever as she goes.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
End of the day, it sounds like your player is trying to get the system to fit their character concept, not bend the rules to get the most degenerate combat monster they can create. With that caveat in mind, I would say go ahead and swap out Wis for Int, keep the spells as divine (including the lack of armor check penalty), and not make the character worship a being or force unless that fits with the concept.
None of the above is going to break the game based on the facts as given. The synergy of high Int and the ranger class will help offset the loss of caster levels for multi-classing.
Hmmm...though now that I say all that, you may want to take care with the ranger aspect of this class. Out of the box, the ranger needs a lot of decent stats to be effective (Wis for spellcasting, Str for combat, Dex for stealth/ranged, Cha for empathic abilities, Int for skills) and you are basically making room for Wis to be a dump stat. That definitely bears watching.
But, still, the concept sounds cool and I think you can roll with it. I'd be more concerned if multi-classing was not part of the character concept because the dilution in casting ability and combat style is going to outweigh the benefits of not having to worry about having a good Wis.
Or are they Divine spells that don't come from a god? Is that even possible?
It indeed is. Clerics are the only class that, by the book, have to choose a god. Yes, paladins normally follow a god, but nothing in their text explicitly says they have to choose one.
I think your idea is fine, though of course some spells will have to have different names (Holy Smite?). But I think you can handle that. :-)
Suggested the archivist...
That actually sounds really cool, unfortunately none of us have Heroes of Horror. I've been meaning to take a look at it though.
Suggested the Favoured Soul
Another great idea, but unfortunately, Complete Divine is the only Complete book none of us have! That would actually be perfect because as I understand it they are divine spontaneous casters who don't even have to know which deity they are favoured by. Is that right? How do they compare with a Cleric? (without breaching copyright of course...)
To tell the truth, a cleric with just a single level of ranger for Favored Enemy and the weapon proficiencies sounds more practical. Just continue wearing light armor and acting "rangery." Have faith be a quiet, personal affair that the character just doesn't talk about much.
That's actually what she's going for, Ranger 1/Cleric 3 is the idea so far (the PC is replacing a dead 4th level Monk).
End of the day, it sounds like your player is trying to get the system to fit their character concept, not bend the rules to get the most degenerate combat monster they can create.
Yeah my players are good like that. Well... most of the time ;)
Oh well, without buying a couple more books I think I'm just going to go simple, change the names of tsome spells and powers and just let her play as a Cleric with no god (Saern's gonna kick my ass...)
Favored Soul is to Cleric as Sorcerer with the Draconic Heritage feat tree is to Wizard. Sort of.
You mean a spontaneous caster with glowing eyes and a spooky voice?
Or are they Divine spells that don't come from a god? Is that even possible?It indeed is. Clerics are the only class that, by the book, have to choose a god. Yes, paladins normally follow a god, but nothing in their text explicitly says they have to choose one.
I think your idea is fine, though of course some spells will have to have different names (Holy Smite?). But I think you can handle that. :-)
Actually, you can be a cleric of a "philosophy" instead of a god. I encourage these, especially w/ creative players like the one Kahoolin appears to have.
(Saern's gonna kick my ass...)
Blagh, blagh, makes no sense, blagh, blagh, in my homebrew, blagh, blagh, carefully consider alignments, blagh, blagh, degenerating logical argument, blagh, blagh, typical rant.
:)