Hey folks,
Just me with a small peeve about Cavaliers. While realizing that they do have some neato stuff to work with, I am a bit surprised that Knowledge: Nobility and Knowledge: History are not class skills.
Cavaliers are, by definition, nobility. And when nobility takes it's show on the road, they stay with other nobility, not at Hojo's. Moreover, the leaders of tomorrow are, at least historically, squired out to other nobles so that their own dear old dad doesn't go too soft on them.
To say that they are ignorant of their contemporaries is a stretch to say the least.
As for KN: History, if there is one thing historically that set the nobility apart from the masses (aside from money and power), it was education. Joe Schmuck, the tradesman's son, learned the trade of his father or one of his father's friends because frankly, apprenticing was the only option open to him other than perhaps the church. For the lower born, well let's hope they like farm implements. Nobility on the other hand, they had private tutors as a rule. Even pop culture recognizes this. How often have you seen in a movie or read in a book the scene where our young hero to be stares wistfully out the window at his older brothers/father going off to war while he is stuck at a table full of books watched over by an unsympatheic tutor?
They ain't reading Sears catologues folks.
Just my 2 cents.
HH
It doesn't have knowledge (nobility) by default because it doesn't fit every order, nor is every cavalier automatically a noble.
A cockatrice cavalier serves only himself, he doesn't much care what the trends of the nobility are.
A dragon cavalier is devoted to his small band or friends, and is more at home in a mercenary camp than a throne room.
The Order of the Lion & Order of the Sword seems to be what you are thinking of- the classic, noble knight serving either a king or a lord- and they GET knowledge (nobility). As for education, 4+ skill points is pretty good.
Alexander Kilcoyne wrote: It doesn't have knowledge (nobility) by default because it doesn't fit every order, nor is every cavalier automatically a noble.
A cockatrice cavalier serves only himself, he doesn't much care what the trends of the nobility are.
A dragon cavalier is devoted to his small band or friends, and is more at home in a mercenary camp than a throne room.
The Order of the Lion & Order of the Sword seems to be what you are thinking of- the classic, noble knight serving either a king or a lord- and they GET knowledge (nobility). As for education, 4+ skill points is pretty good.
This.
Alexander Kilcoyne wrote: It doesn't have knowledge (nobility) by default because it doesn't fit every order, nor is every cavalier automatically a noble.
A cockatrice cavalier serves only himself, he doesn't much care what the trends of the nobility are.
A dragon cavalier is devoted to his small band or friends, and is more at home in a mercenary camp than a throne room.
The Order of the Lion & Order of the Sword seems to be what you are thinking of- the classic, noble knight serving either a king or a lord- and they GET knowledge (nobility). As for education, 4+ skill points is pretty good.
+1
Alexander Kilcoyne wrote: It doesn't have knowledge (nobility) by default because it doesn't fit every order, nor is every cavalier automatically a noble.
A cockatrice cavalier serves only himself, he doesn't much care what the trends of the nobility are.
A dragon cavalier is devoted to his small band or friends, and is more at home in a mercenary camp than a throne room.
The Order of the Lion & Order of the Sword seems to be what you are thinking of- the classic, noble knight serving either a king or a lord- and they GET knowledge (nobility). As for education, 4+ skill points is pretty good.
I liked the playtest dragon and cockatrice a bit better, since the dragon is symbolically greedy and a guardian of treasure, as well as representing primal terror, whereas the cock (The Rooster) is considered a symbol of the sun, which in western culture represents life and warmth, as well as a bunch of other solar hero type deals. reversing them is a mystery to me.
Madcap Storm King wrote: Alexander Kilcoyne wrote: It doesn't have knowledge (nobility) by default because it doesn't fit every order, nor is every cavalier automatically a noble.
A cockatrice cavalier serves only himself, he doesn't much care what the trends of the nobility are.
A dragon cavalier is devoted to his small band or friends, and is more at home in a mercenary camp than a throne room.
The Order of the Lion & Order of the Sword seems to be what you are thinking of- the classic, noble knight serving either a king or a lord- and they GET knowledge (nobility). As for education, 4+ skill points is pretty good.
I liked the playtest dragon and cockatrice a bit better, since the dragon is symbolically greedy and a guardian of treasure, as well as representing primal terror, whereas the c&%~ (The Rooster) is considered a symbol of the sun, which in western culture represents life and warmth, as well as a bunch of other solar hero type deals. reversing them is a mystery to me. While dragons are traditionally depicted as hoarding treasure, in heraldry it is considered a valient defender, while the cocatrice is a terrible monster to all who see it. A cockatrice is not the same as a rooster, it is horrible corruption of it that turns people to stone.
Caineach wrote: Madcap Storm King wrote: Alexander Kilcoyne wrote: It doesn't have knowledge (nobility) by default because it doesn't fit every order, nor is every cavalier automatically a noble.
A cockatrice cavalier serves only himself, he doesn't much care what the trends of the nobility are.
A dragon cavalier is devoted to his small band or friends, and is more at home in a mercenary camp than a throne room.
The Order of the Lion & Order of the Sword seems to be what you are thinking of- the classic, noble knight serving either a king or a lord- and they GET knowledge (nobility). As for education, 4+ skill points is pretty good.
I liked the playtest dragon and cockatrice a bit better, since the dragon is symbolically greedy and a guardian of treasure, as well as representing primal terror, whereas the c&%~ (The Rooster) is considered a symbol of the sun, which in western culture represents life and warmth, as well as a bunch of other solar hero type deals. reversing them is a mystery to me. While dragons are traditionally depicted as hoarding treasure, in heraldry it is considered a valient defender, while the cocatrice is a terrible monster to all who see it. A cockatrice is not the same as a rooster, it is horrible corruption of it that turns people to stone. Well it's the closest I could find to the symbology. Unfortunately I couldn't find much on heraldic symbolism, so I'll take your word for it.
Also, remember that investing in non-class skills is a lot more worthwhile in PRPG vs 3.5
Hockey_Hippie wrote: Just me with a small peeve about Cavaliers. While realizing that they do have some neato stuff to work with, I am a bit surprised that Knowledge: Nobility and Knowledge: History are not class skills.
Cavaliers are, by definition, nobility. And when nobility takes it's show on the road, they stay with other nobility, not at Hojo's. Moreover, the leaders of tomorrow are, at least historically, squired out to other nobles so that their own dear old dad doesn't go too soft on them.
To say that they are ignorant of their contemporaries is a stretch to say the least.
Alexander Kilcoyne wrote: The Order of the Lion & Order of the Sword seems to be what you are thinking of- the classic, noble knight serving either a king or a lord- and they GET knowledge (nobility). As for education, 4+ skill points is pretty good. Not only that, but the Order of the Lion cavalier gets a bonus to all knowledge: nobility checks (concerning his own sovereign/kingdom) equal to half his class levels. Far from ignorant I'd say.
Alexander Kilcoyne wrote: It doesn't have knowledge (nobility) by default because it doesn't fit every order, nor is every cavalier automatically a noble.
A cockatrice cavalier serves only himself, he doesn't much care what the trends of the nobility are.
A dragon cavalier is devoted to his small band or friends, and is more at home in a mercenary camp than a throne room.
The Order of the Lion & Order of the Sword seems to be what you are thinking of- the classic, noble knight serving either a king or a lord- and they GET knowledge (nobility). As for education, 4+ skill points is pretty good.
I don't buy this argument at all, not for these two particular skills. This is not stuff, the cavalier decides he is going to learn. This is stuff his father decides he is going to learn or else.
I also do not agree that Cavs are not by definition nobles. This is taken from the class description:
Cavaliers are skilled at fighting from horseback, and are often found charging across a battlefield, with the symbol of their order trailing on a long, fluttering banner. The cavalier’s true power comes from the conviction of his ideals, the oaths that he swears, and the challenges he makes.
Cavaliers tend to marshal forces on the battlefield, using their mounted talents and challenges to control the flow of the fight. Outside of battle, cavaliers can be found advancing their cause through diplomacy and, if needed, subterfuge. The cavalier is no stranger to courtly intrigue and can hold his own in even the most delicate of social situations.
At first level, Cavs are expected to have a mount that functions like an animal companion, a lance, banner and all the other trappings (next time you see a Cav with leather armour, a spear and a wooden shield let me know). These things cost money, lots of money. More than your typical first level character would be expected to have. That in and of itself says that the PC comes from rich parents.
Never mind as a 1st level cavalier, an order of any sort has zero motivation to accept any Tom Dick or Harry who shows up and looks the part. Likely the reason behind a 1st level Cav being a member of any order is because Daddy put in a good word with someone he knows in the same order. That smells a lot like influence peddling. Which is not something Joe Candlestickmaker has a lot of in those circles. Ah, but the local lord sure does. Joes son won't make the grade, but Sir Houseonthehill's will.
Outside of battle a Cavalier "is no stranger to courtly intrigue and can hold his own in the most delicate social situations."
If that doesn't scream noble upbringing, I don't know what does.
Given that I again submit that as a person of noble birth, however minor, he would have been exposed and been expected to know a good number of nobles and their houses not to mention possibly major houses of foreign lands as well as general history. This would not have been a choice on his part as stated earlier. It would basically be a 'you learn this or you never get up from this table' diktat from the old man.
HH
Not all cavalier are noble. So no they should not auto gain that on the list. I could make all the same arguments about a fighter or well any class on some skill {Fighter and perception}
If he can live with perception as a class skill then the cavalier will be fine with his 4 skills per level.
seekerofshadowlight wrote: Not all cavalier are noble. So no they should not auto gain that on the list. I could make all the same arguments about a fighter or well any class on some skill {Fighter and perception}
If he can live with perception as a class skill then the cavalier will be fine with his 4 skills per level.
Please show me proof of that rather than just saying 'Not all Cavaliers are noble'. I realize, there is not a specific sentence in the Cav write up that says they are all noble or they don't have to be noble, but all of what is there points to them being from moneyed families with a lot of influence. That to me spells nobility.
And that is the premise of my argument.
HH
The proof is in the evolution of the classic knight Cavalier translates out to basicly horseman not nobility. Early French Norman Knights(chevalier) were little more than thugs on horseback. It was only in the late medieval period that an inherent chivalric class really came into its prime. The order of the sword and lion best epitomize this, and correspondingly have Knowlege Nobility. Also having one or 2 classes deemed societally superior to others presents a potential problem. Having a character in the party who, by rights, is automaticly in charge presents some huge friction possibilities. With a Noble/Ignoble option for cavaliers you are presented with a greater selection of character types. Essentially, If you want to be a noble go ahead. Sword and Lion best fit that desire anyway. If you don't want to play the stereotype real world knight in plate(they wore chain), lording it over peasants "noble" you still have options within the class.
rant concluded
Darth BlahBlah wrote: The proof is in the evolution of the classic knight Cavalier translates out to basicly horseman not nobility. Early French Norman Knights(chevalier) were little more than thugs on horseback. It was only in the late medieval period that an inherent chivalric class really came into its prime. The order of the sword and lion best epitomize this, and correspondingly have Knowlege Nobility. Also having one or 2 classes deemed societally superior to others presents a potential problem. Having a character in the party who, by rights, is automaticly in charge presents some huge friction possibilities. With a Noble/Ignoble option for cavaliers you are presented with a greater selection of character types. Essentially, If you want to be a noble go ahead. Sword and Lion best fit that desire anyway. If you don't want to play the stereotype real world knight in plate(they wore chain), lording it over peasants "noble" you still have options within the class.
rant concluded
If that is the case, then why the language that they use in the character identity. Why is it that every first level knight starts out with a great horse, armour, weapons and upper class social skills. If the designers truly meant that not all knights would be nobility, then those things would have been reserved for those orders that you point out. But they aren't. The insinuation both in the description and in abilities/possessions a Cavalier has at the beginning of his career clearly point to a life of privilege. I'm sure the designers of the class can research as well as you and are quite aware of the 'thugs on horseback'.
But if they meant that particular version to be the norm then why didn't they call the class 'Calvary', lose the references to high society, take the social skills out of the class skills section? Why didn't they bump back the joining of an order to 3rd or 4th level which by that time the Cavalier/Calvary would have gained himself enough of a reputation that an order would see him as a worthy member based on his accomplishments? As opposed to his family connections which would be the only reason an organization, even your 'thugs on horsebacks' would want someone unproven in battle who could well put anyone he rides with in jeopardy the first time he has to fight.
The fact is, they didn't. Just like they didn't give Druids the social/negotiating skills (Bluff, Dip, Sense Motive) even though there is tangible historical evidence that Druids were indeed called upon regularly to mediate disputes within and outside of their communities.
I like historical accuracy, I do. But the description of the Cavalier class as written points at those of that class being of noble birth, however minor (remember, landless Knights are considered nobles).
That said, I also don't believe all noble cavaliers lord it over the peasants. I believe, like any other demographic, you have nobles who are bastards and nobles who are decent people. Further, history shows that those of the first group tend not to last in power too long as the lose the support of their populace who rebel, Madame Defarge etc, etc.
Non-rant finished :)
HH
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
I'd like to point out that the name Cavalier is a nostalgia nod to a 1ed class, back in the merry days when skills weren't part of the game.
Gorbacz wrote: I'd like to point out that the name Cavalier is a nostalgia nod to a 1ed class, back in the merry days when skills weren't part of the game. That very well may be, but, as I have said countless times here already, why all the upper crust stuff in the description/role/abilities for *all* Cavaliers if not to reinforce the premise, that this particular version of this class, is of noble birth?
They could have easily took the name Cavalier but left all of that out. But they didn't.
HH
I lean towards HH's argument ... it would have been nice to have seen the KNO Nobility as a class skill. True, PFRPG isn't a historical medieval game ... it's pseudo-medieval. Even so, assuming PF has some historical roots, this is clearly someone that's coming from the upper strata of society: fighting on horseback, courtly intrigue, marshaling forces on the battlefield ... these all describe someone originating from the upper-class. And it's reasonable to expect that someone from the upper-class would be familiar with the heraldic signs and family names among the nobility.
On the other hand, a class skill in PF just gives you a +3 bonus, right? As Evil Lincoln pointed out, you still get a lot of bang for your buck by parking ranks in non-class skills.
Seems easy to houserule a fix, if you really need to, by just making the KNO skill part of the class. Or, maybe you as the GM simply give the Cavalier a +1 skill bonus or something.
ziltmilt wrote: I lean towards HH's argument ... it would have been nice to have seen the KNO Nobility as a class skill. True, PFRPG isn't a historical medieval game ... it's pseudo-medieval. Even so, assuming PF has some historical roots, this is clearly someone that's coming from the upper strata of society: fighting on horseback, courtly intrigue, marshaling forces on the battlefield ... these all describe someone originating from the upper-class. And it's reasonable to expect that someone from the upper-class would be familiar with the heraldic signs and family names among the nobility.
On the other hand, a class skill in PF just gives you a +3 bonus, right? As Evil Lincoln pointed out, you still get a lot of bang for your buck by parking ranks in non-class skills.
Seems easy to houserule a fix, if you really need to, by just making the KNO skill part of the class. Or, maybe you as the GM simply give the Cavalier a +1 skill bonus or something.
Endlich. Danke. Though, if Cavs had more than 4+INT for skill/level, I'd buy EL's arguement more. But that would be over-balancing methinks. Hence my suggestion to make KN:Nob and KN: His class skills.
HH
Gorbacz wrote: I'd like to point out that the name Cavalier is a nostalgia nod to a 1ed class, back in the merry days when skills weren't part of the game. OT
Please don't say merry days.
I'm about to switch back from a 3.5/PFRPG campaign (where I DM) to an AD&D 2ed FR campaign (where I'm a player, with a Mask cleric/thief), and just thinking of the lack of basic options/clunkyness of rules that awaits makes me cringe in anguish.
/OT
OP, it seems fairly clear you already had your mind made up when you created this thread, so you just go and house-rule that all cavaliers in your games are nobles and they all get knowledge (nobility) alright? And when a player wants to play a mounted combatant specialist mercenary type you can CRUSH HIS FOOLISH NON-NOBLE CONCEPT!!!
Darth BlahBlah wrote: The proof is in the evolution of the classic knight Cavalier translates out to basicly horseman not nobility. Early French Norman Knights(chevalier) were little more than thugs on horseback. Early Norman knights were thugs on horseback who owned land. They were the nobility of their time. So if someone wants to take a 'cavalry' concept and make 'nobles-only' out of it, not only is this perfectly reasonable it is also congruent with earth's history. Only the nobility could afford horses, for a long time.
Of course, in D&D-land, horses are cheap compared with magic items. So if somebody told me that in their games, craftsmen and middle-class folk can afford war horses and barding, I would actually be okay with that.
Alexander Kilcoyne wrote: OP, it seems fairly clear you already had your mind made up when you created this thread, so you just go and house-rule that all cavaliers in your games are nobles and they all get knowledge (nobility) alright? And when a player wants to play a mounted combatant specialist mercenary type you can CRUSH HIS FOOLISH NON-NOBLE CONCEPT!!! You mean did I believe in my own argument or did I float this idea without conviction? Sure, the former. I don't write things I don't believe in, as I assume you wouldn't either.
As for the mounted combat mercenary type, you are missing the point. On purpose I believe. I have nothing against someone playing 'mounted combatant specialist mercenary types', I have one myself. But he is a Ranger/Fighter/Rogue who uses bows from horseback and rides a light warhorse. He doesn't pretend to be a great battlefield commander or be able to hob-nob with the hoity toity and his equipment, while good, is (or was, he is 5th level) not in the same league as what is alluded to in the Cavalier write up.
I started this thread because I believed that with the way the Cavalier was written up, it made sense that he should have these skills. Not just to houserule it for one campaign, but to suggest it to everyone so they might look into it as well.
I find it incredible that in another thread I outline how different knowledge skills can be used, none of which is in the core or alluded to in the skill description, and I'm lauded for being innovative. But here, when I follow the logical flow of what is written and I'm branded a heretic.
Yeesh <shakes head>
HH
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules
|
