Nope. They just can't take further levels until they become evil again.
|
Also would it be game breaking to waive the alignment restriction on Assasin's. It seems like its not unthinkable to have a non-evil assassin, like on assassin's creed.
Sure, why not? I think that the statement on the Assassin sums up alignment intention well though: "the nature of their duties inevitably pushes them toward an evil alignment." Why would this class be any different from a Ninja who can be any alignment? I certainly can't give a convincing answer. So, why not?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They start carrying a sword with a reversed blade?
Seriously though, I can't imagine anyone good would continue to assassinate on a contract basis, and about the only potential good use of such abilities I could gorse would be the "kill one to save thousands" approach, so while there's nothing implicit about an assassin turning good losing powers, any real turn to good might make them reluctant to employ them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Plus the 'assassins' in Assassin's Creed are not a band of noble do gooders either. Ezio and Altair may very well 'ping' evil, just because they don't kill 'civilians' They still killed guards who just happen to be doing thier duty, kill people for pay, kill for revenge, etc. They are just a 'lesser' evil then the templars, and even still there isn't much from the Templars POV on the matter. Also Ezio was a thief, careless womanizer, and before his family's execution, was a silver spooned brat/gangster.
Hate to break the hopefuls hearts here, but that's the way I see it.
Easy fix if you feel the player is just up to shenanigans by trying to take advantage of the class features and play the good guy at the same time. (Not saying that's the case here buuuut):
Tell them they can shift alignment, but any use of assassin class abilities to kill sentient beings would be considered an evil act. I mean, if they REALLY want to forsake that evil life, they should want to cast those ill-gotten assassination skills to, eh?
That way they can't have their cake and eat it too.
the assassin PrC is portraying a secret knowledge that only this group of people know. It's not something you can just learn by killing. It's taught by the assassins guild, who test their members, by making them kill someone, a random target, or you dont get taught the skills.
If you want to 'assassinate' people that can be done differently with the ninja trick be either a normal rogue or a ninja, taking that trick.
as far as a member of that society going good?
I suppose that could happen.
There has been a TON of 'good vampire' movies/shows in the last 15 years.
Why not good assassins.
I don't think there should be any hand waving however, this can only happen to someone who was once evil and is not anymore.
Can they use their death attack on the goblin king? Sure.
Are they going to do it for money anymore with no good reason to kill someone? no.
Are they going to increase their craft? No. they are going to follow a new path, and maybe use former skills of their occasionally.
I've always liked the idea that Assassin wasn't a class per se, but more of an occupation. Anyone could be paid to kill another regardless of class. I understand that doesn't fit the idea of the stealthy killer that is the flavor of the word nowadays. That's moot, anyway. So...I feel the class as presented pertains to more of a "contract killer". I would definitely treat the abilities gained from the class as trained instead of naturally learned and therefore unavailable once the character changes alignment or ceases to work for the organization that trained him/her. If this was truly a story of redemption wouldn't the character be trying to leave that life behind? Perhaps take up rogue again,(assuming that was part of his/her pre-assassin days. Or another class, what-have-ya) with a specific set of skills learned from the time spent as an assassin. I actually like the idea of characters growing and changing through alignment as the levels are gained and classes change. The story of the re-deemed assassin is a classic. Not to mention the lengths their former affiliation might go to silence a member who turned their back on them. Just my 2 cents. Your feelings on the subject might differ. To each their own ;)
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They become Shepherds. :-)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am offended by the idea that any member of any class based around killing could possibly be nonevil. Now let me tell you about my barbarian
Also would it be game breaking to waive the alignment restriction
The answer to any question that begins with these eleven words is always "no".
Easy fix if you feel the player is just up to shenanigans by trying to take advantage of the class features and play the good guy at the same time.
I know that when I want to create a cheesy overpowered build in Pathfinder, the first thing that comes to my mind is the Assassin class.
There is always the option that an Evil character is truly on the side of good. He may see himself as an necessary evil. He does the things that the Paladins can't. He is a true believer that knows he is a monster, but knows that without him, good will fail. Now, that doesn't mean he is right. Paladins would not appreciate his help. Many would try to hunt him down as an abomination to their beliefs. True clerics would offer him no absolution, nor understanding. He would see himself as a martyr that is sacrificing his soul so that others don't have too.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is always the option that an Evil character is truly on the side of good. He may see himself as an necessary evil. He does the things that the Paladins can't. He is a true believer that knows he is a monster, but knows that without him, good will fail. Now, that doesn't mean he is right. Paladins would not appreciate his help. Many would try to hunt him down as an abomination to their beliefs. True clerics would offer him no absolution, nor understanding. He would see himself as a martyr that is sacrificing his soul so that others don't have too.
Paladin: "I find evil villains who need to die and hit them in the face with a sword, killing them. I also slaughter their minions. What do you do?"
Assassin: "I find evil villains who need to die and hit them in the back with a sword, killing them. I don't kill all their minions, though."
Paladin: "You monster."
e: Bonus round:
Ninja: "I find evil villains who need to die, study them for six seconds, and hit them in the back with a sword, killing them instantly."
Assassin: "I find evil villains who need to die, study them for eighteen seconds, and hit them in the back with a sword, killing them instantly."
Ninja: "You monster."
I personally hate the alignment restrictions and how certain acts are automatically evil. Killing someone for money? Evil, but killing someone for phat lootz because he terrorized a town or two, not evil and totally justified.
I personally hate the alignment restrictions and how certain acts are automatically evil. Killing someone for money? Evil, but killing someone for phat lootz because he terrorized a town or two, not evil and totally justified.
BSABSVR much?
I mean honestly if you can't see the difference between "Kill someone for money, no other reason" and "Kill someone for terrorizing a town or two" you might need a bit of adjustment... that or some drugs.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
IIRC one of the 'qualifications' for the prestige class is killing someone just gain access to the prestige class. There's no heroic "Save the girl, kill the creature." Just "Hey, I don't know you from Adam, but I've got to kill you." That is supposed to be a moral event horizon I guess.*
*shrug* It's one of the reasons I like the Red Mantis better anyway.
The hero of Without Remorse, for example, engages in some clearly evil activity in his roaring rampage of revenge. He also engages in similar actions to save some GIs. He's clearly an 'assassin' but isn't killing anyone just to kill someone.
At one point he tracks down the guy who got his (now dead) GF hooked on speed. When the guy asks him why he's going to kill him. Clark doesn't see any point in hiding the truth from the guy. "Practice."
*
I personally hate the alignment restrictions and how certain acts are automatically evil. Killing someone for money? Evil, but killing someone for phat lootz because he terrorized a town or two, not evil and totally justified.BSABSVR much?
I mean honestly if you can't see the difference between "Kill someone for money, no other reason" and "Kill someone for terrorizing a town or two" you might need a bit of adjustment... that or some drugs.
I never said no other reason, just that some killing of people is not evil while some is. I'm saying that to kill people for money, in pathfinder, is evil, but it's perfectly fine to go and murder someone who terrorized a town(maybe he scared them with pranks. Terrorizing doesn't automatically mean he was killing people in the town or forcing them to do stuff).
|
To join the PrC you need to kill someone just to gain entry into the PrC. Is this certainly evil?
James bond had to kill someone in order to gain his '00' designation, as did al the other '00' agents. There may be debates about his alignment, but it's not hard to postulate the organisation to which the prospective assassin desires entry to be good or neutral, and the 'required kill' to be a 'legitimate' target.
I'm going to go with no, you meant exactly what you posted, also your argument still amounts to "killing is killing regardless of motive except in this game" which still doesn't hold.
Again if you can't tell the difference between murder for profit and 'murder' to stop someone from terrorizing people you might need to reexamine how you view the world.
Incidentally it doesn't matter what you are doing to terrorize someone, that word has some very specific meanings and if that's what you are up to then it isn't simply some prank.
I'm going to go with no, you meant exactly what you posted, also your argument still amounts to "killing is killing regardless of motive except in this game" which still doesn't hold.
Again if you can't tell the difference between murder for profit and 'murder' to stop someone from terrorizing people you might need to reexamine how you view the world.
Incidentally it doesn't matter what you are doing to terrorize someone, that word has some very specific meanings and if that's what you are up to then it isn't simply some prank.
Then you have no idea what I meant when I posted and can't see the difference that the GAME puts in killing for profit, regardless of reason or motive, and killing something because of what it did or is.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I tend to think Assassin would be best broken down into a series of rogue talents/advanced talents.
There's a difference, between say, a fighter who kills people for money, or a barbarian who kills people for money, and the "Assassin" class.
If you want to be an assassin, but not an "Assassin" that's fine, you're not restricted.
If you want the "Assassin" class and all the bells and whistles, you play by the rules. One of the rules is to get said bells and whistles, you gotta be an evil dude or dudette.
If your "Assassin" Turns good. That's great. Find a new Class and carry on.
To join the PrC you need to kill someone just to gain entry into the PrC. Is this certainly evil?James bond had to kill someone in order to gain his '00' designation, as did al the other '00' agents. There may be debates about his alignment, but it's not hard to postulate the organisation to which the prospective assassin desires entry to be good or neutral, and the 'required kill' to be a 'legitimate' target.
No. He was given the "00" designation so he could kill, if necessary, without permission. He didn't have to kill to get it, it was given so he could kill in the course of his assignments. That is, his assignments might require him to kill. Big difference. Also, different setting / universe / assumptions :)
|
|
No. He was given the "00" designation so he could kill, if necessary, without permission. He didn't have to kill to get it, it was given so he could kill in the course of his assignments. That is, his assignments might require him to kill. Big difference. Also, different setting / universe / assumptions :)
To join the PrC you need to kill someone just to gain entry into the PrC. Is this certainly evil?James bond had to kill someone in order to gain his '00' designation, as did al the other '00' agents. There may be debates about his alignment, but it's not hard to postulate the organisation to which the prospective assassin desires entry to be good or neutral, and the 'required kill' to be a 'legitimate' target.
'Casino Royale' was chronologically the first James Bond 007 'adventure'; the pre-title sequence shows his assignment to kill a rogue MI5 agent. The 007 designation hinges on the success of this mission; if he failed he wouldn't get it.
Also would it be game breaking to waive the alignment restriction on Assasin's. It seems like its not unthinkable to have a non-evil assassin, like on assassin's creed.To be an assassin, you have to be willing to kill people for no other reason than to join. That really does preclude anyone from anything but an evil alignment. I have a real problem with the idea that anyone was willing to take the road that leads to assasin hood turning "good".
Yeah, in PF the assassin as written is more of this type of assassin. An individual who kills anyone for purely the point of profit and personal gain baring the innocent nature of their victims.
Lets have a bit more of an honest rewrite shall we?
Assasin: "I kill monsters that I'm paid to fight, Paladin and Ninja,and since someone was willing to pay me, you'll both be dead from the poison I put in your drink long before we finish this little chat."
Did you not see the post I quoted and was responding to?
|
|
IIRC one of the 'qualifications' for the prestige class is killing someone just gain access to the prestige class. There's no heroic "Save the girl, kill the creature." Just "Hey, I don't know you from Adam, but I've got to kill you." That is supposed to be a moral event horizon I guess.*
*shrug* It's one of the reasons I like the Red Mantis better anyway.
The hero of Without Remorse, for example, engages in some clearly evil activity in his roaring rampage of revenge. He also engages in similar actions to save some GIs. He's clearly an 'assassin' but isn't killing anyone just to kill someone.
At one point he tracks down the guy who got his (now dead) GF hooked on speed. When the guy asks him why he's going to kill him. Clark doesn't see any point in hiding the truth from the guy. "Practice."
*** spoiler omitted **
That is one of the best books i have ever read, lol, John Clark is the man.
Paladin: "I find evil villains who need to die and hit them in the face with a sword, killing them. I also slaughter their minions. What do you do?"Assassin: "I find evil villains who need to die and hit them in the back with a sword, killing them. I don't kill all their minions, though."
Paladin: "You monster."
e: Bonus round:
Ninja: "I find evil villains who need to die, study them for six seconds, and hit them in the back with a sword, killing them instantly."
Assassin: "I find evil villains who need to die, study them for eighteen seconds, and hit them in the back with a sword, killing them instantly."
Ninja: "You monster."
Lets have a bit more of an honest rewrite shall we?
Assasin: "I kill monsters that I'm paid to fight, Paladin and Ninja,and since someone was willing to pay me, you'll both be dead from the poison I put in your drink long before we finish this little chat."
You never warn the paladin it's quite possible one of his mercies cures poison! :P
Assassins never become good. they just go to hell and regroup.
By RAW, a character has to be evil to enter the assassin prestige class. There's nothing in the rules that prevents them from turning non-evil (or very rarely even good) afterward; they don't loose their class abilities and can even advance in levels.
However, certain aspects of the assassin prestige class need to be kept in mind. Using poison is (for the most part) an evil act; drow poison and oil of taggit might be OK (GM's call), since they only cause unconsciousness without damaging the victim, but that's about it. As mentioned, a non-evil assassin is going to be very discriminating about who they kill; they will no longer consider it "just a job" or a way to make money. I could see a neutral assassin who works as a bounty hunter or adventurer, but killing would no longer the character's main/only goal. The last consideration is that in most worlds, assassins are usually members of some organization (either a church, guild, society, etc.); by becoming non-evil, an assassin puts themself at odds (i.e., refusing an assignment) with an organization full of hired killers. They can expect to be targets of their former organization, who will likely not stop until the former member is dead/destroyed without possibility of being brought back to life.
Anyway I'm a little surprised no one has brought up Vlad Taltos, yet. A very relevant example, since the character and novels by Steven Brust are based on an old AD&D campaign.
Plus the 'assassins' in Assassin's Creed are not a band of noble do gooders either. Ezio and Altair may very well 'ping' evil, just because they don't kill 'civilians' They still killed guards who just happen to be doing thier duty, kill people for pay, kill for revenge, etc. They are just a 'lesser' evil then the templars, and even still there isn't much from the Templars POV on the matter. Also Ezio was a thief, careless womanizer, and before his family's execution, was a silver spooned brat/gangster.
Hate to break the hopefuls hearts here, but that's the way I see it.
Yep Ezio was a bad boy before he took on the robes.. but once be becomes an assassin.. I can not think of one instance where he killed for hire. Everyone he took down was a member of the organization or the guards who worked for those people.
if killing guards makes you evil.. please change the alignment of every single player in 90% of the games I have played or run.
seriously how often to do you hear "we don't kill them?"
heck our special forces units in the real world would all "ping" evil.. every signal one
He killed for hire. Paid off by the Medici. Those people Ezio killed wern't even Templars, just people the Medici wanted removed. And you got paid well for it.
I agree with the fact that to become an assassin you need to be evil...I mean you have to murder someone for NO OTHER REASON than to become one. Think about whether you would do that for something else. "I want to see the new 'Hobbit' movie", Attendant: "OK, kill the father of four behind you and you're in." If you did that...you are DEFINITELY EVIL. now there are 3 types of evil based on the alignment chart so you don't have to be the guy in the room laughing maniacally at the top of your lungs evil. Lawful evil for one is a good choice to go with and there are good ways for a GM to throw in why that character is in the group.
For instance...
Right now I happen to be playing an Assassin in my group. None of the others are evil and I play Lawful Evil. Being this alignment has been the most fun and challenging experience for me...for one you cant just murder the blacksmith at the bar talking $hit about you half-orc fighting buddy (poor guys wife and daughter were murdered by orcs) because you respect the laws and don't want to cause issues with the guards and trouble the rest of your party. I instead sneaky sneaky'd out of the bar to his smith and proceeded to rob him of any coin I could find and threw all his tools and anything that had to do with his family into the still burning forge. Now we have yet to return to that town but im pretty sure the guy committed suicide.
Also to explain me being in the party...our "leader" an oracle of heavens was in need of protection and needing money at the time I was willing to put forth my skills and sign a contract to help her. I am bound to this being Lawful and therefore before I make any EVIL decisions I have to think if it will cause any harm to her or the others that are helping to protect her (which means I can't kill the archer fighter in my group even if he does constantly annoy my character lol), this becomes an issue at points but again is very fun...
sorry for rambling but those are some of my thoughts on playing one