|#1true_blueJan 08, 2004 3:48:13||I just reread Lord Soth and I am still impressed with the book. I thought it was a pretty good book all around.|
What I was wondering was, according to the rules when he committed an evil act, he would have loss all his Supernatural abilities and any spells he had at that moment. I guess game mechanic-wise you could say that none of the other knights ever noticed him not using any of his abilities.
Was just wondering if a Knight of Solamnia was accussed of doing an evil crime, if they could just be like "Hey cast a heal spell and we'll believe you" since he wouldn't be able to do so if he had committed an evil act.
Hell, this is a bit extreme but a Knighthood could like keep a room full of skeletons that justs it there and whenever there is a trial just say "Turn one of them and we know your innocent". This is a bit far fetched, but still a valid point.
For some reason, knowing game mechanic-wise that if a character did something wrong or "not good" that they would lose most of their powers make the Knighthood a little bit more unreal I think. Something like Lord Soth wouldn't have even been a problem because like i said before...they could justs ay at his trial "Do an ability or cast a spell" and you would know if he had or not done.
Just was wondering your thoughts.
|#2talinthasJan 08, 2004 10:46:55||i think, on the whole, that authors try really hard to avoid putting overt game mechanics into their stories. it tends to kill the mood really quickly.|
|#3drachasorJan 08, 2004 12:37:20||If you want an ingame explanation...well, the gods probably aren't as quick and harsh the the rulebooks claim. Maybe they give the person some time to deal with what they did, and send them various warnings and messages....like hearing voices in your head whenever you cast a spell. Afterall, Soth was one of the most famous of Knights in his day, they might have been a bit lenient at first.|
|#4darthsylverJan 08, 2004 13:11:49||The Knights of Solamnia dedicate their lives to honor.|
If you demand that a Knight who is on trial for a break in that honor, it would be unhonorable to demand that he prove his innocence by any thing other than his word. If he had to resort to showing magical proof, then the knight who made the demand would have inpinged\insulted the honor of knight who is on trial (the knight on trial by the way is innocent).
No knight wants to be known as the knight who questions the honor of an honorable knight.
Besides there is probaly some rule in the measure kinda like the fourth (I think) amendment against self-incrimination.
|#5IllithidbixJan 08, 2004 17:50:56||Also bear in mind that not everyone in a Knightly Order would have ranks in the prestige class of that order. Many members would deal with more day to day issues, or simply lack the combat experience. Similarly not all members of a religious organisation would have levels in cleric, even if they possess the faith of their spell-casting companions. I would expect the Gods gift divine abilities to the people best disposed to use them|
Tanis for example was technically a Knight of the Rose (as well as theoretically belonging to the most elite/prestigious fighting unit of every other nation), however he never casts a spell, and I really doubt that his game stats would include a level of that prestige class.
I personally can’t recall any time in the novels when a Rose Knight character casts a spell (or a ranger or paladin in other d&d books for that matter…), in fact it is only the Knights of the Sword who have passing references to being the healers.
Remember that the game system is an abstraction, and is used for resolving actions where there is a chance of failure, and that cannot be (easily) determined just by role-play. It is there to fall back on when basic conceptualising and role-play fail (I can just about imagine a purely role-play system, but it would be rather tricky as the DM would have to decide whether each action failed or succeeded without the aid of any rules or chance factor). Its best not to think of the world actually existing in terms of the abstracted game mechanics, as you end up trying to work out why someone who is a very skiled blacksmith (and so must have a high Skill rank in Craft(Blacksmithing), and so a high level in expert) is also much tougher than a wyvern (due to having lots of hitpoints from his levels) despite the fact that he hasn't ever been trained as a soldier or been in a battle. It really doesn’t work.
|#6zombiegleemaxJan 08, 2004 20:30:53||also remember when the book was written..there was no 3e or 3.5. Prestige classes are new...this was written during the 1e/2e days...when knight of solmania was a class..not a prestige class...in 2e Soth is listed as a 9th level Knight of Solmania(atleast according to "when black roses bloom" module)|
|#7darthsylverJan 08, 2004 21:22:02||That was also a main thing about the Sword Knight. He did not have the capability to cast spells immediately upon achieving the Swrod Knight Class. He had to advance at least 4 levels in the Sword Knight Class before casting his first spell. This leaves plenty of time for the prosepective Rose Knight to decide if he wants to stay a Sword Knight or move on to become a Rose Knight.|
In 3E the petitioning Sword Knight must know how to cast spells before becoming a Sword Knight rather than after. Why this was important I do not know. The Assassin class gets spells after becoming an Assassin and does not need to know how to cast spells prior. The Paladin gets spells after advancing in the level. Blackguards gets spells after becoming blackguards.
Why the designers of Sovereign Press felt it was necessary to know how to cast spells prior to becoming a sword knight I will never know.
|#8cam_banksJan 08, 2004 23:00:23|
Originally posted by darthsylver
Flexibility, believe it or not.
Classes with built-in spellcasting, such as assassins, bards, and paladins, each use either spontaneous "wild" magic, or prepared "focused" magic. In Dragonlance, this is an important distinction. It's part of why the bard is limited to the 5th age as a spellcaster, since its spells are spontaneous and draw on wild magic, not prepared like a wizard's spells.
Because the Sword Knight PrC applies to knights in the early Age of Mortals, prior to the return of the gods, and to those who came after, it had to be able to draw on either mysticism or clerical magic. As a class that has bonus spell progression, the player can get the knight's spells from mystic levels or cleric levels.
|#9drachasorJan 09, 2004 3:51:25||darthsylver, good points.|
As far as Tanis goes, he was an honorary member of the Knights of the Rose...he didn't have to go through all the tests and trials to become one....and technically (just like someone with an honorary degree) isn't a Rose Knight in the truest sense (he doesn't have that class, nor even Sword or Crown Knight classes). And as far as 1st and 2nd edition Knights go, for all intents and purposes they *were* prestige classes...Crown require levels as a fighter, Knight require levels as a Crown, and Rose require levels as a Knight. A very odd mechanic in those games, but one that suddenly seems very natural in 3E.
|#10darthsylverJan 09, 2004 11:29:19||Well the easiest answer of course, is probably the one most don't like, the fact that you can be part of an organization without partaking in the actual Prc that goes along with the class. |
I would venture to say that only those who actually take the Prc would be the ones who are in charge of the organization, politicly as it were.
|#11ferratusJan 10, 2004 6:07:27|
Originally posted by Cam Banks
Yep, and without a cleric or mystic +1 divine spellcaster progression, it would actually be less attractive for clerics and mystics to take. After all, if the class has its own spell progression, then any cleric or mystic levels would simply double up the spells. So you'd have twice as many 1st level spells but be unable to cast 3rd level spells like a cleric of your level would. (for example). It is much the same situation when the wizard or sorcerer takes the assassin prestige class. You are not encouraged to because it would ultimately not be in your character's best interest.
However, if you don't like taking a level in cleric or mystic before becoming a Sword Knight, you can do what I do (since I don't like it either). Just assume that if you do have a mystic or cleric level you have a +1 spell progression. If you don't you simply start progressing as if you were a 1st level cleric. Simple and elegant.
As for the lie detecting itself, a lot of the knight's abilities can be duplicated (and evil aura masked) by magical items, the patronage of an evil god, or in this new age... mysticism. So that doesn't prove your innocence.
I imagine that it doesn't help your case any if you cannot do any knightly special abilities or show up as evil when detected as such, but just because you are evil it doesn't mean you have commited a crime. As well, you might have just lost your faith and while tragic, isn't a transgression worth getting your head chopped off with your sword over.
|#12drachasorJan 10, 2004 11:28:01|
Originally posted by darthsylver
Ahh, I just thought of something else that goes along with this. Not being able to use Knight special abilities doesn't mean a great deal at a trial. All it means is that you have failed Paladine in some way, but not that you commited something horribly evil. The way things are done, it seems like such failings are left between the Knight and Paladine, and Paladine does give chances to redeem oneself. As such, treating such a person as guilty or jailing them, would get in the way of Paladine letting the Knight prove himself. As such, Knights might talk a little about it, but they won't do anything against such a Knight, unless he seems to be doing something egregious.
|#13drachasorJan 10, 2004 11:30:33|
Originally posted by ferratus
Indeed! That's a great idea. Hopefully it would be used in whatever supplemental goes over the KoS.
|#14cam_banksJan 10, 2004 12:30:18|
Originally posted by Drachasor
It's used to some degree of success in Green Ronin's Mystic Vistas sourcebook, Testament for several of the prestige classes in there. There are a few bugs to iron out with it, of course, but it's something I've toyed with in the past.
|#15ferratusJan 10, 2004 13:18:16|
Originally posted by Cam Banks
What's the bug? There might be a couple bugs in the prestige classes themselves (though not obvious enough for me to notice) but that rule is too simple to mess up anything. Just give the class a clerical BAB bonus, saving throws, and spells. It is just like multi-classing, only with a few special abilities not found in the standard cleric.
|#16darthsylverJan 10, 2004 14:38:18||I still would wait at least three levels before letting Sword knights have spells.|
I would go along with something like this
1 - No spell casting
2 - No spell casting
3 - No spell casting
4 - Gains spellcasting
The Sword Knight gains the ability to cast a limited numbder of spells per week. The Sword knight has a spellcaster level equal to his Sword Knight level -3. The Knight uses either the Cleric spell progression chart as listed in the PHB unless the character already has a divine spell-casting class. When determining a Sword Knight's Spellcasting ability add any divine spellcasting levels to the Sword Knight's Class level and subtract 3 to determine the knight's spellcasting ability on the equivalent table.
|#17ferratusJan 10, 2004 14:41:11|
Originally posted by darthsylver
I wait two levels myself, so the vast majority of Sword Knights are non-spellcasting lay brothers. When they become "Knight Clerists" they are clerics who belong to the Knighthood. Not acolytes or favoured souls of the gods.
As well, by waiting a few levels I keep them down to approximately 14-16th level in terms of clerical spellcasting power. That leaves the church of Kiri-Jolith with much more relevance in the setting, where otherwise nobody would care about them at all.
I also have taken the clerical spellcasting ability away from the Knights of the Rose, because a fighter's BAB with a cleric's spellcasting ability and good saving throws is just wildly out of balance.