| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Apex |
Posted - 08 Feb 2010 : 17:11:31
I run a second edition (with some first ed parts) campaign and have been rethinking the use of the specialty priests from Faiths and Avatars. Do you think they are too powerful as designed and that using the specialty priests from FR Adventures provides better balance? |
| 11 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Thauramarth |
Posted - 14 Feb 2010 : 23:06:18
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
As for XP, you have to be careful with it. The default XP table for specialty priests is the druid table, which means they can go up incredibly quickly in the mid levels. I never thought that made a whole lot of sense because eventually you get to the Grand Druid/hierophant part, which specialty priests obviously wouldn't be doing. Still, it's a minor annoyance and most campaigns likely won't even get that far.
For me, the specialty priest table only made sense for druids (and, lest we forget, once a druid hits 11th level, the only way to progress in levels, up until 15th, is to challenge an incumbent druid). I used the paladin/ranger XP tables for the F&A speciality priests. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 14 Feb 2010 : 22:53:24
Yeah, but even for a lore-geek like myself, that's just too much work. Spheres are enough for me; they give the ability to mix and match, take away or give, quickly and easily without having to create unique lists for every single priest that my party encounters. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 14 Feb 2010 : 22:12:26
As I've mentioned, giving clerics spells by sphere or domain is a crude approximation to the real spell rosters, which vary even by country, faction and temple. I'd be inclined to create a distinct list spell by spell for PC priests, as they gained new spell levels. Given the detail both Realmslore and 3E rules-customization went into in other areas it's a strange omission from print that can be understood in light of the general neglect of priesthood detail. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 14 Feb 2010 : 20:51:36
I agree with Zanan. All the granted abilities look nice, until you realize the sphere access you're giving up. Cleric may not be flashy, but they can cast darn near any spell in the game, which often evens things out. I haven't had any problems with specialty priests in my games.
As for XP, you have to be careful with it. The default XP table for specialty priests is the druid table, which means they can go up incredibly quickly in the mid levels. I never thought that made a whole lot of sense because eventually you get to the Grand Druid/hierophant part, which specialty priests obviously wouldn't be doing. Still, it's a minor annoyance and most campaigns likely won't even get that far. |
| Zanan |
Posted - 14 Feb 2010 : 18:54:49
While quite a number of specialty priest were pretty powerful, a vast number was extremely hampered by the limited access to major and minor spheres. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 14 Feb 2010 : 11:52:07
One thing I would do though, is that if I were using the classes from the Forgotten Realms Adventures book, then I would add the extra spheres found in the Tome of Magic. Many of the more useful priest spells are to be found in these and are included in the Deity books versions of the priests. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 13 Feb 2010 : 16:16:28
How rules play out varies so much between campaigns that there really is no too powerful or balanced or unbalanced in the abstract. Anything but the most extreme class imbalance will only be experienced, in practice, in very rules-heavy campaigns where dice-rolling is given more prominence than in the native mode of the Realms. It also depends on the prominence of fighting and other activities in terms of time, story advancement, etc., and, as Jorkens says, which particular class you're talking about.
In my own experience I haven't had trouble with the F&A classes, though I haven't used them as extensively as some. As well as not doubling them up with kits (one of my least favourite 2E mechanics), remember to use the slower level advancement table, or impose a flat XP cost as in the case of the World of Greyhawk cleric modifications the 'specialty priest' idea came out of, and remember too that priest 'spells' are prayers to the god that aren't always answered exactly as the cleric had in mind, especially if his or her devotion is questionable. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 13 Feb 2010 : 11:34:36
I think some of the versions in the Deity books are a bit on the powerful side, but I would take that one a case-by case basis. My main gripe with the deity books is the crusader class which I really, really dislike. On the other hand it has the mystic (or witch if you like) which I have used on several occasions. |
| ZeshinX |
Posted - 08 Feb 2010 : 20:48:30
I had a similar (if not the same) approach as Halidan. I treated specialty priests from F&A as clerics that came with a built-in kit, so they were not able to take a kit (since they already had one). |
| Halidan |
Posted - 08 Feb 2010 : 19:29:00
I ran a 2E campaign for at least six years using the speciality priests from F&A (and its two companion books) and never had any problems with them being too powerful - either as PC's or NPC's. The only house rule I had was that you couldn't combine a class or racial kit from the 2E splatbooks with a specialty priest. I'd encourage you to give the specialty prioests a try - if they don't work for your campaign you can always modify your rulings down the road. |
| Thauramarth |
Posted - 08 Feb 2010 : 18:41:37
Faiths and Avatars took on board some of the changes proposed in the Players' Options books, so yes, overall, the priest classes in Faiths and Avatars tend to have some additional powers compared to the classes in Forgotten Realms Adventurers. In my view, those changes do not make the SPs excessively powerful, enither with regard to FRA, nor with regard to other classes. I've used the Faiths & Avatars SPs as soon as the tome was published, and never had additional headaches because of it. |
