| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 23 May 2006 : 12:27:59
Where do you think the Knight class (from PHB II)would appear in the FR?
For those havent bought the PHBII the Knight class can be found on the WOTC website
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060501a&page=2
Knights are abit misrepresented in the Realms as there are many groups who use Knight in the their name but are either not Knights in the traditional sense (ie Knights of Myth Drannor *Im looking at you Torm!*) or are tied to specfic religious orders that use Paladins (Such as the Knight of the Eternal order etc)
So far I can think of the following places where Knights would fit in the realms
Knights of Thay (LE): The Knight class would probably be a good base class for a Thayan Knight character or NPC
Knights of the Black Gauntlet (LE): This group could quite easily use the Knight class as its core class
Knights of Cormyr (LG): The Knight class would make a good class for a character aspiring to be a Purple Dragon Knight.
Everwatch Knights: An Order devoted to Helm who hire themselves out as Body guard.
Order of the Silver Chalice: (See Champions of Valor)
Warriors of the Star: (See Champions of Valor)
I have a soft spot for the old Cavalier class and the Knight class is worthy successor to it, so any FR personality who was orgionally stated as a Cavalier in the Old Grey box set could be a Knight in 3ed. I can think of 3 off the top of my head
Azoun IV
Caladorn Cassalanter
Mourngrym Amcathra
Any of my fellow scribes think of any other groups or Realms personalities who might use the Knight class? |
| 23 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 26 May 2006 : 14:41:29
To toss in my 2 coppers...
the knight looks very much like the original cavalier of 1st edition. A knight could very well be attached to a faith... he isn't like a 2nd ed. crusader, but coul be compared to any type of historical knightly order, teutonic knights, knights templar, maltese...
The intresting question for me, however, is this:
Could a lawful organization be part of a chaotic faith/order? Would the Church of Cyric, for example, sponsor a knightly order? |
| Archwizard |
Posted - 25 May 2006 : 23:55:28
Perhaps take a step even further back. Weren't 1e Monks of the kungfu variety as well. And take a look at the earlier edition Cavaliers, perhaps that is a better analogy for the Knight, as stated before.
The 2e spellcasting cloister Monks were of an entirely different archetype than the martial Oriental monk of 3e. Just as the 2e Crusader was more of the warrior cleric who would bless troops before joining in the battle themselves (Turpin from The Song of Roland) as opposed to the knights or cavaliers who received the blessings and then kicked butt (Roland from The Song of Roland). |
| nb_nmare |
Posted - 25 May 2006 : 22:27:19
I'll end it with "but you're ignoring precisely the same thing in regards to monks". |
| Kuje |
Posted - 25 May 2006 : 18:33:15
nb_nmare and Wooly,
Could you take it to private tells or whatever? Your small debate is highjacking the thread..... |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 25 May 2006 : 18:15:04
quote:
Originally posted by nb_nmare
Nope, I'm saying soldiers can replace soldiers. I think I'll let Faiths & Avatars speak for me here:
"In the adventuring party, crusaders are natural leaders whose place is in the front lines of any battle."
"Crusaders excel in personal combat, and are nearly as skilled as a warrior of the same level."
But you're ignoring the fact that crusaders were clerics. They may have been handier with weapons than most clerics, but they remained clerics. They the hit dice of clerics, the saving throws of clerics, and, most importantly, the spellcasting ability of clerics. Crusaders were not fighters, they were clerics with a small mix of fighter abilities added in.
Crusaders, as clerics, had a place in the church heirarchy. Fighters do not. Thus, the two cannot be freely swapped.
Crusaders are not soldiers. Therefore they cannot be replaced by soldiers. |
| nb_nmare |
Posted - 25 May 2006 : 17:54:00
Nope, I'm saying soldiers can replace soldiers. I think I'll let Faiths & Avatars speak for me here:
"In the adventuring party, crusaders are natural leaders whose place is in the front lines of any battle."
"Crusaders excel in personal combat, and are nearly as skilled as a warrior of the same level." |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 25 May 2006 : 11:26:51
Okay, we'll make this real simple. Class changes from 2E to 3E are not a factor. You're saying that a variant fighter is an excellent replacement for a variant cleric, in both flavor and crunch. Explain to me how replacing members of a church's clergy -- which has always meant spellcasters -- with non-spellcasters fits either the crunch or the lore.
That's why I'm disagreeing with you. You're saying that soldiers can replace doctors. I'm saying they can't. |
| nb_nmare |
Posted - 25 May 2006 : 07:56:21
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly RupertI disagree. Since demihumans could multiclass and humans couldn't, demihumans didn't need to be paladins -- they could do the fighter/cleric routine.
In 2E, a fighter/cleric and a crusader were still distinctly different things (for example, a 2E fighter/cleric couldn't wield any weapon, whereas a crusader could, and they had access to a different set of spells).
A 3E fighter/cleric and a straight conversion of the crusader would be virtually identical (as I mentioned before, 3E fighter/cleric can wield any weapon, and the lack of spheres of divine magic in 3E greatly confuses the spell selections). You would have to radically alter the crusader for there to be appreciable difference, and since the knight is already there...
quote:
And the class was intro'ed in a book about human deities -- not one about demihuman deities. It's hard to say that something intended for demihumans has a place in a book for humans.
I assume you mean "something primarily intended...", since if it weren't intended for demihuman, it'd be human-only  . Anyway, note that I wrote "one of the main reasons", rather than "the reason", or "the main reason". In other words, I'd already acknowledged there were other reasons for the class' existence, equally or possibly even more important, before your post.
Besides, F&A wasn't purely for humans, it was an equally valid resource for half-elves, too.
quote:
Besides, only a couple of the demihuman races -- at least one of which did have the F/C option -- were capable of being crusaders.
And? It still allowed more than half of them the option (only gnomes and halflings were excluded), which is more than they had before. I feel the fact that a few of the demihuman crusader groups I listed above, such as the Berronar's Valkyries and the Hammers of Moradin, are presented as paladins in Champions of Valor somewhat backs me up on this...
quote:
I still disagree. The crusader was a souped-up cleric (more fighting ability, less spell options, no undead turning). A souped-up fighter does not match that in either crunch or fluff.
And I still say the differences in abilities don't matter, given how different the 3E monk is from its 2E counterpart; , the differences between the two monks are so great, they're almost the equal of the differences between the crusader and the knight.
In fact, the "it doesn't really seem like the original" isn't really a particularly good argument to use when it comes to 2E/3(.5)E comparisons, considering that even some of the standard classes were radically altered between editions, e.g. the druid. |
| Kuje |
Posted - 25 May 2006 : 06:55:23
Magic of Faerun mentions a knight that was knighted by Alustriel. :) So I'm assuming she has knighted others who aren't members of the Knights of Silver. |
| warlockco |
Posted - 25 May 2006 : 02:59:19
quote:
Originally posted by Dargoth
I think several of those groups would fail the Code of conduct section of the Knight class. Chivalry (Even a corrupted LE version) wouldnt be something the Company of the Ebon spur would follow
The Code of Conduct as given, yeah, but one can modify the Code of Conduct to suit different Knighthoods.
Just like how in 1E Cavaliers, had a Code of Conduct, but it wasn't Exactly the same for LN, LE, or LG ones. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 25 May 2006 : 00:40:32
quote:
Originally posted by nb_nmare
Anyway, there won't be much point in a straight conversion of the crusader to 3E. One of the main reasons for the crusader's existence was to allow certain demi-human races access to a paladin-like class, and since any of the standard races can become paladins in 3E, that reason is rather redundant
I disagree. Since demihumans could multiclass and humans couldn't, demihumans didn't need to be paladins -- they could do the fighter/cleric routine. And the class was intro'ed in a book about human deities -- not one about demihuman deities. It's hard to say that something intended for demihumans has a place in a book for humans. Besides, only a couple of the demihuman races -- at least one of which did have the F/C option -- were capable of being crusaders.
quote:
Originally posted by nb_nmare
So, given that a 3E lawful or chaotic aligned cleric (especially one with a few fighter levels, for the extra feats) who worshipped a god of war, combat or conflict would be extremely similar to a straight conversion of the crusader, the knight does indeed make for a good replacement of the class. Maybe not strictly in terms of crunch, but certainly in terms of fluff.
I still disagree. The crusader was a souped-up cleric (more fighting ability, less spell options, no undead turning). A souped-up fighter does not match that in either crunch or fluff. |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 24 May 2006 : 22:58:57
Something else I wouldnt mind seeing is substitute levels for the Knight for different FR Knights ie what Champions of Valor |
| nb_nmare |
Posted - 24 May 2006 : 19:25:11
quote:
Originally posted by Dargoth
I think several of those groups would fail the Code of conduct section of the Knight class. Chivalry (Even a corrupted LE version) wouldnt be something the Company of the Ebon spur would follow
Like honor, chivalry is not a constant, universal set of ideals; the qualities it embodies depends entirely on personal beliefs. Of course, in the real world, all those we'd label as "knights" were either christians, or (in the case of f.ex the knights of the round table) made to appeal to christians, so RL concepts of chivalry tended to be extremely similar. However, in a world where multiple and extremely different religions have knighthoods, concepts of chivalry will most definitely vary greatly.
From what little we know of it, the company of the Ebon Spur is certainly not a chaotic aligned group. Their main reason for being is to promote the glory of Cyric, especially through combat; that sounds rather like the knight's purpose to "demonstrate your fighting ability, and win renown across the land".
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert... Except for the fact that crusaders were more of a cross between fighters and clerics, and had spellcasting ability...
... though this fact can be safely ignored, given that 2E monks also had spellcasting ability .
Anyway, there won't be much point in a straight conversion of the crusader to 3E. One of the main reasons for the crusader's existence was to allow certain demi-human races access to a paladin-like class, and since any of the standard races can become paladins in 3E, that reason is rather redundant 
Another problem is that the differences between the crusader and cleric are irrelevant in 3E. Can wield any weapon? So can the 3E cleric. Nonweapon proficiency crossover with and same THAC0 progression as the fighter? No such things in 3E, and there are no longer even any restrictions on how proficient a certain class can become with weapons. Different selection of spells? The 3E cleric can cast the majority of those available to the 2E crusader (those that survived the edition change, anyway), and domains should cover the rest.
So, given that a 3E lawful or chaotic aligned cleric (especially one with a few fighter levels, for the extra feats) who worshipped a god of war, combat or conflict would be extremely similar to a straight conversion of the crusader, the knight does indeed make for a good replacement of the class. Maybe not strictly in terms of crunch, but certainly in terms of fluff. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 24 May 2006 : 03:33:40
quote:
Originally posted by nb_nmare
The knight makes for a pretty good a replacement for the 2E crusader class featured in Faiths & Avatars, Powers & Pantheons and Demi-human Deities.
... Except for the fact that crusaders were more of a cross between fighters and clerics, and had spellcasting ability... |
| scererar |
Posted - 24 May 2006 : 03:23:47
I think that the Knight as a PRC is great, but to stereo-type it in an Aurthuran tpye manner, or any manner at all, reverts back to 2E, in a bad way. My opinion is a "knight" can be portrayed in any manner of sorts. An example would be the two knights in silver, in the novel Ghostwalker. My second would be your reference to Torm, my favorite "knight" to walk Faerun.
Once again, I do think the Knight class or a PRC of this sort, is great, but I think it needs to be kept within a certain aspect of what knight would typically be and not all encompassing. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 23 May 2006 : 23:46:00
I noticed that Peirgeron's bodyguards in City of Splendors are mentioned as being "knights," though they don't specifically say that they belong to this or that order. I was wondering if perhaps the bodyguards of the Open Lord of Waterdeep would constitute a knightly order? Or perhaps Peirgeron's bodyguards are more "knightly" due to the curren Open Lord?
Also, since several members of Waterdhavian noble families had the Cavalier class, could it be that some of the Waterdhavian nobles have, in essense, familiar knighthoods? |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 23 May 2006 : 23:38:05
I think several of those groups would fail the Code of conduct section of the Knight class. Chivalry (Even a corrupted LE version) wouldnt be something the Company of the Ebon spur would follow |
| nb_nmare |
Posted - 23 May 2006 : 21:55:18
The knight makes for a pretty good a replacement for the 2E crusader class featured in Faiths & Avatars, Powers & Pantheons and Demi-human Deities.
The one problem in doing a straight substitution of the knight for the crusader is that the crusader class allowed both lawful and chaotic alignments, meaning there are groups of crusaders dedicated to chaotic gods. However, seeing as the knight class is not reliant on a deity for its abilities, this shouldn't matter too much.
Anyway, one of the groups already mentioned in this thread originally consisted of crusaders, namely the Knights of the Black Gauntlet. There are plenty of others (note that not all of these soley consist of crusaders), for example:
- Brothers of the Black Fist (Iyachtu Xvim, presumably now converted to Bane)
- Brothers of the Blood (Garagos)
- Cavaliers of the Seven Seas (Istishia)
- Cavaliers of the Ever-Changing Truth (Istishia)
- Companions of the One True Vision (Helm)
- Company of the Ebon Spur (Cyric)
- Fellowship of Poetic Justices (Hoar and Tyr)
- Knights of the Fire Drake (Kossuth)
- Knights of the Four Winds Quarters (Akadi)
- Knights of the Shadow Sword (Shaundakul)
- Knights of the Undying Dragon (Myrkul, even after his death)
- Order of the Aster (Lathander)
- Order of the Red Falcon (the Red Knight)
- Sardonyx Knights (Grumbar)
- Swords of the Lady (Selune)
There are numerous demihuman orders of crusaders too, though with paladins no longer being 3E only, many have been retconned into paladins. Again, not all are crusader-only.
- Darksong Knights (Eilistraee)
- Fanatics of the Overflowing Pit (Ghaundaur)
- Handmaidens of the Spider Queen (Lolth)
- Legion of Vengeful Banshees (Kiaransalee)
- Militant Myrlochar (Lolth)
- Selvetargtlin (Selvetarm)
- Axe Dwarf cults (Clangeddin Silverberard)
- Berronar's Valkyries (Berronar Truesilver)
- Gray Lances of the Snarling Steeder (Laduguer)
- Haela's Host (Haela Brightaxe)
- Hammers of Moradin (Moradin)
- Knights of the Mithral Shield (Dumathoin)
- Legion of Silver (Berronar Truesilver)
- Numerous groups on Evereska (Corellon)
- Knights of the Killer Whale (Deep Sashelas)
- Knights of the Seven Sacred Mysteries (Sehanine Moonbow)
- Fellowship of the Forgotten Flower (Corellon)
- Swords of Evereska (Corellon)
- Wing of Plumed Kingfishers (Aerdrie Fenya) |
| scererar |
Posted - 23 May 2006 : 15:21:51
Knights of Silver in Silverymoon |
| Jindael |
Posted - 23 May 2006 : 12:59:49
Olbould Many-Arrows could easily have a level or two in the knight class. |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 23 May 2006 : 12:56:38
quote:
Originally posted by Kajehase
I can imagine Tethyr having quite a few. Unless the queen's Horselord decides that the country's topography is better suited to light cavalry I'd even say it could become a very common class.
The order of the Silver Chalice and the Warriors of the Star are both based in Tethyr |
| Kajehase |
Posted - 23 May 2006 : 12:50:51
I can imagine Tethyr having quite a few. Unless the queen's Horselord decides that the country's topography is better suited to light cavalry I'd even say it could become a very common class. |
| Arivia |
Posted - 23 May 2006 : 12:42:54
The Knights of Athalantar, for one. |
|
|
