| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| The Sage |
Posted - 26 Nov 2003 : 14:23:29
While I have not yet purchased this tome (and most likely won't until I have a free week when my hard-earned money is not needed to purchase something else), I was curious as to what the scribes here at Candlekeep thought about this tome, and it's possible uses for class expansion in FR?.
Let's hear from you...
|
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| The Sage |
Posted - 12 Mar 2004 : 23:23:10
Indeed...nasty little thing that it is.
Anyway, I've got my copy of Complete Warrior arriving early next week (finally), so I should be able to advance a few thoughts of my own. Although, looking over your comprehensive review Bookwyrm, maybe that won't be necessary...
Tell me a little more about these 'Tactical Feats' though. It's sounds as though WotC have lifted an idea from the Dragonstar game. From whagt you've described, they sound very similar...
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 12 Mar 2004 : 18:25:58
And that's my review. I hope it helped. Now I suppose I ought to try one for the Draconomicon. But I also have Jack Archer of Earth to work on . . . .
Oh . . . and that little thing called Real Life. I'm not sure what it is, but it keeps yelling at me.   |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 12 Mar 2004 : 18:23:54
I rather like Chapter 4: Fantasy Warfare. If nothing else, that painting on the third page is just nice. 
Historical and Modern-Inspired warfare styles are explained rather well, I think. Each type is rather tempting in its applicability; and I'm pretty sure which the particular author(s) of this chapter liked the most -- modern -- simply from the rich description of the possible uses of "modern" techniques. Personally, I'd move into the middle. I'm a big fan of guerrilla tactics, but most certainly not of huge monster-tanks and devistating spells that take the place of modern missile bombardment. Plus, I don't really like using dragons as air fighter-replacements. Rick Cook did a good job with them in his fantasy series, but that's an exception, and had to do with how dragons actually matured. I personally prefer the idea of griffins or giant eagles.
Moving on, it gives a rather good description of a war-mercenary campaign, which is rather close to the advice I'd given on another thread involving fantasy war.
Sporting events latter on don't really hold my interest, but I suppose they're okay.
New items: okay.
Warrior organizatons: okay. I think you'd be better off building your own, or at least fleshing out what's put here. I think they used up their roleplay quota on the start of the chapter.
There's a rather good deity section, but since it's not using a Torilian pantheon, I'll skip it.
There's an epic section, but nothing new.
There's a good section on chosing weapons that has a hint of roleplay to it. It then goes on to some new exotic weapons, some of which are good. The elven lightblade and thinblade don't seem worth it, though, unless one is an elf (in which case they have weapon familiarity). The first is just a slightly shorter rapier that weighs a third as much, while the second is a lighter longsword that can be used with Weapon Finesse. |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 12 Mar 2004 : 18:06:23
Chapter 3 continued
I'm skipping over the spells and domains.
Guardian familiars don't actually impress me that much, but them I'm not a fan of crushing, overwhelming attacks. I suppose the Spark guardian would work for my prefered style, but unless I'm ignoring roleplay (like if this were in a computer game), I'd go with a living familiar.
Skills:
Perform (weapon drill) seems useful. It opens up a pretty good way of modifying a Profession check for teaching. It also can help show how impressive your character's normal fighting is. The checks themselves I don't think would come up in roleplay, unless you're actually using it to earn money. I'd treat it as I would other "social" sort of checks, such as diplomacy: namely, take a look at the check modifier, take into account the way the player is roleplaying, and then make a decision.
It can also go into further detail; since it's a three-part skill check (1/2 BAB, total ranks, and Charisma modifier) one can say a character's style is impressive in three ways, whichever number is prominant. That is, it can be to the point (BAB), it can play to the audience (ranks), or the character is impressive himself (ability).
This section also points out four uses of the Knowledge skill category that can be used in a different, warrior-oriented way. There's also a Sleight of Hand use that, I'm sure, will be popular with rouges sense it would give another opportunity for a sneak attack. |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 12 Mar 2004 : 17:51:19
Chapter 3: Supplemental Rules.
Wherein one finds the abligatory new feats. Some are good. Some lack originality. I suppose any fighter-type class will find some good stuff here, especially a monk. I'm not really sure, since I've so far concentrated on arcane magic and a dexterous style of fighting (the former being for both characters, the latter for Jack specifically). For myself, Arcane Strike is the only useful general feat, and that's a reprint.
However, there are three other types listed here. One is for Divine Feats, which allow for some extra cleric/paladin might. I'm sure that most of this is intended for the paladin, but a militant cleric could use them easily.
Another is the Weapon Style feat list, which has ten selections for certain weapon combinations, or the same weapon in a different way. There are, in alphabetical order by feat title:
Hammer/axe
Axe/dagger
Sword/dagger
Hammer/sword
Sword/axe
Twin light maces
Net/trident (Roman gladiator, anyone?)
Quarterstaff (I rather like this one)
Halberd
Heavy mace, morning star, or greatclub
Finally (and out of order, because I like this the best), we have Tactical feats. These are feats that only apply in certain situations, but offer three special abilities with each feat. I like these because they offer a "fighting school" like you have in modern martial arts.
One seems useless in a standard D&D campaign -- it requires formation fighting. Most, however, seem pretty good, and I'd say they're worth planning for when you're drawing up your fighting character. They're like a halfway point between normal feats and PrCs in the sense of having to work to actually qualify for them. They also make for a rather "focused" character, as well. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 08 Mar 2004 : 07:04:18
Yes, I've seen it. I'll comment further when I have the time.
I only hope me latest PrC creation will be as good...I've never created a 'deity-influenced' PrC before...
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 08 Mar 2004 : 06:59:33
It's up, Sage. I just started a new scroll to keep Alaundo out of our hair...here. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 08 Mar 2004 : 06:50:59
That's great. As a plus, I've finally finished balancing the stats for my 'Talonite' PrC. It should be ready for posting soon...
All I can say at this point is that my take on a Talona PrC has been moderately influenced by my studies on the 'Death Guard Legion' of the (Warhammer world) Chaos God of Disease...Nurgle. However, I've managed to retain a great deal of Realms-flavor...
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 08 Mar 2004 : 03:49:49
Aurilite PrC is shaping up nicely... |
| The Sage |
Posted - 06 Mar 2004 : 08:36:38
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
I'm curious though Bookwyrm, did you have any more thoughts on the 'Swashbuckler' class in regards to Jack Archer...?
I sent you a list of my proposed first five levels for our Fencer core class. I'd looked carfully at the Swashbuckler before sending it. Perhaps you ought to check your ether-mail?
Ah yes...I'd only just looked into my account. As I stated previously, my OS upgrade has made it nearly impossible to access anything on the internet that is not already tied into my new system. My Hotmail account is one of those items not yet 'dealt' with.
Thanks Bookwyrm...
|
| The Sage |
Posted - 06 Mar 2004 : 08:32:13
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Hmmm...the Hexblade sounds interesting, although I wonder how many more 'spellcasters who can cast spells while in armor' will we actually need...
The only other one I know of is the Spellsword. The Hexblade (appearantly originally called the Warlock) is limited to light armor only (no shields), and this ability only effects spells cast as a hexblade, not a sorcerer, bard, or wizard (or arcane PrC). The Spellsword's primary use is to decrease the arcane spell failure penalty by a certain amount.
There's been a rather large number (at least 8 that I can count) of classes which have similar abilities to both the 'Hexblade' and the 'Spellsword' across a number of different settings. The Spellsinger from the Dawnforge setting (I think that's the one) is one of the typical examples.
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 06 Mar 2004 : 07:03:15
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Hmmm...the Hexblade sounds interesting, although I wonder how many more 'spellcasters who can cast spells while in armor' will we actually need...
The only other one I know of is the Spellsword. The Hexblade (appearantly originally called the Warlock) is limited to light armor only (no shields), and this ability only effects spells cast as a hexblade, not a sorcerer, bard, or wizard (or arcane PrC). The Spellsword's primary use is to decrease the arcane spell failure penalty by a certain amount.
quote:
I'm curious though Bookwyrm, did you have any more thoughts on the 'Swashbuckler' class in regards to Jack Archer...?
I sent you a list of my proposed first five levels for our Fencer core class. I'd looked carfully at the Swashbuckler before sending it. Perhaps you ought to check your ether-mail? |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 06 Mar 2004 : 06:57:35
Chapter 2: Prestige Classes
Most of these are overkill. That is, they’re just more than we need. I didn’t spot unbalanced PrCs (at least, not as obvious ones like the infamous Dragon Disciple), though there are some that would need DM judgement. Most of these are just useless as PCs, unless you can afford extreme specialization. The majority of these, if actually used, are best as NPC levels.
Some are excellent for PCs. The bear warrior has a potential for being misused, but is a good way to reward players with barbarian characters -- especially if you use the totem barbarians from Unearthed Arcana. Others, such as the bladesinger and the spellsword, are just converted from 3e, but are nice classes that people just starting out in D&D might miss, if they didn’t know that they could just convert from an older version themselves.
I can’t go through them all here, of course. However, of the ones I don’t recognize from elsewhere, useful PC PrCs that could be used in any campaign (and that I don’t believe would require DM approval) would be:
- Exotic Weapon Master: minor PrC that learns “tricks” with an exotic weapon.
- Hunter of the Dead: anti-undead specialist.
- Invisible Blade: minor PrC, a master of melee fighting with daggers and similar weapons.
- Knight Protector: a better “true” knight than the cavalier; paladins can multiclass into it freely.
- Master Thrower: minor PrC, with an ability list to match the name.
- Mindspy: minor PrC, better as an NPC but has potential, especially for roleplaying. (“I know exactly what you’re thinking. No, really -- I do.”)
- Nature’s Warrior: minor PrC, an aggressive druid-type class.
- Stonelord: Dwarven “druid”-like class. I’d extend it to deep gnomes as well.
Something I found highly annoying was the way they would put in the sample characters. I don’t really mind them actually being there, but I do mind the amount of space they put in. It is most certainly not necessary to explain things that the reader should already know; either class features that have just been presented (sometimes on the same page!), or features of either base class or race that are easily checked in the PHB. Considering the multitude of references to the later, a lot of space could have been given to other things, like (oh, here’s a novel concept) roleplaying information.  |
| The Sage |
Posted - 06 Mar 2004 : 00:51:59
Hmmm...the Hexblade sounds interesting, although I wonder how many more 'spellcasters who can cast spells while in armor' will we actually need...
As for the Samurai knockoff, I'd heard that it resembles the class presented in the Oriental Adventures tome.
I'm curious though Bookwyrm, did you have any more thoughts on the 'Swashbuckler' class in regards to Jack Archer...?
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 05 Mar 2004 : 21:15:37
This has reminded me to begin on those PrCs...oh, and Sage, there should be some very high powered items appearing in the shop soon... |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 05 Mar 2004 : 18:27:18
Okay, here's a review of The Complete Warrior. Please keep in mind that none of this was playtested by me, so it's all my own opinion without any experimentation.
Chapter 1: Classes
The hexblade seems like a ranger or paladin, in that it is the martial version of another class (in this case the sorcerer). Its ability to cast the class spells while in light armor without incuring a penalty makes it far more useful than it might seem. Other abilities make it more attractive than the first look might suggest. However, roleplaying personality is limited to a dark type (the character has to be non-good).
The samurai, I'm told, is a knockoff of another class of the same name. I can't comment on that, but it seems to me to be a class with a lot of roleplaying potential. Unfortunately, it's limited in origin; in the Realms, it would almost have to come from Kara-Tur. I suppose that there might be a few monestaries that would train them elsewhere, but it doesn't really fit the setting.
The swashbuckler has the most potential for the Realms, obviously. However, it's a bit limited at lower levels. It's limited to light armor, which gives a +2 bonus at the most without magic, and the only special thing it gains at first level is Weapon Finesse. At the very least, it should have an extra feat, such as Combat Expertise, simply to allow a low-level character a greater chance of surviving. As it is, I think that the class is high on roleplay, but low on gameplay until higher levels. (Surprising for a 3.5e product.)
To be continued. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 30 Dec 2003 : 11:00:20
Yes, and you've just reminded me about my own interpretation of the Elemental Summoner class which I finished, along with my Duelist (revised) PrC. I'll dig it out tomorrow, and see about posting it here.
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 30 Dec 2003 : 09:10:35
That sounds a lot like the Elemental Summoner I found some time ago. |
| Aman the Rejected |
Posted - 26 Dec 2003 : 22:47:01
Last week, when Aman, having cast Meld With Stone was bull rushed by a large Earth elemental, the gang started talking about ...
Elemental Masters as a PrC for clerics wherein you could summon the elemental and ride them as a sort of power armor ... |
| The Sage |
Posted - 02 Dec 2003 : 13:08:09
I will indeed post both of these classes (thanks for the reminder Bookwyrm ) next week. By now, you probably already know the reason for my lack of time this week.
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 01 Dec 2003 : 21:23:04
Yes, I would be. I was saying I probably wouldn't be able to contribute until after Christmas, when I hope my current project will be finished and released. |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 01 Dec 2003 : 15:31:51
Go ahead and start a PrC thread, like you did with skills and feats. I'm still curious about that Mistress of Daggers you mentioned. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 01 Dec 2003 : 10:12:22
Agreed.
Although, I do have a 'Talona' inspired PrC somewhere in my notebooks that is just itching to be finished, cleaned-up and posted for general comment and discussion...
Are you interested in at least looking it over?.
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 30 Nov 2003 : 20:46:30
Although we should probably put this on the back burner for a while, as both of us seem to be swarmed in... |
| The Sage |
Posted - 30 Nov 2003 : 12:31:09
Ah...Auril, one of my favorites.
Arivia if you have an idea or three for some PrC's for these deities and/or their church organisations, I'd be interested in seeing them. Maybe we should try working on some rough workups for the deities we think need PrC's, like the Bookwyrm said.
I think we should probably start another topic though...to keep the wise Alaundo happy...
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 29 Nov 2003 : 19:21:16
Hmm...Can I cover Eldath and Auril? |
| The Sage |
Posted - 29 Nov 2003 : 13:53:57
Well, BoED presented some very interesting deities/temple -based PrC's, one of my personal favorites being the Celestial Mystic. I could see a similar (Faerunian) interpretation of this type of class operating out of temples dedicated to Oghma, Deneir, or maybe even Azuth.
For those that don't have the BoED, the Celestial Mystic is a PrC dedicated to the understanding and comtemplation of the Illuminated Heaven and the upper planes, their denizens, and the fabric of the multiverse itself.
Aside from this, some PrC's based on some of the lesser or intermediate powers would also be interesting.
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 28 Nov 2003 : 21:59:01
Sounds like there's a market for religious and organizational PrCs here. Shall we start brainstorming? What voids need to be filled first? |
| The Sage |
Posted - 28 Nov 2003 : 12:55:05
I have to agree. Faction and organisation -oriented PrC are definitely more useful than some of the more generalised classes that have been offered up from time to time.
However, D&D is generalised for a reason, so that it can be applied to 'nearly' every d20/D&D setting published. Specific PrC's have always been left to the separate campaign settings...that is, except for Greyhawk.
|
| zemd |
Posted - 28 Nov 2003 : 10:13:29
Well, i think that the core rule books give plenty of combat rules. What the point of having dozens of pages of rules describing every single movement you can made in combat. And new feats?! New prestige classes?! Great there're ALWAYS new feats and new prestige class, when will that end? I'd prefer prestige class for the different priest by gods, for the different factions in the realms,... not just "Let see... what can i do today... ho great i'll create a new prestige class with a new feat as a prerequesite!"
Well i'll try to read it and maybe i'll buy it. But as i think it'll be, ... i doubt |
|
|
