I am currently working on a new version of an assassin class, the Honed Blade, because I think the one in the DMG and the psionic version used in DS is...well...silly.
Here are my issues with the current assassin class.
Why can they use magic/psonics? IMO I do not see how the art of stealth and killing lends itself to kowing how to cast spells or manifest powers. I think that adding spells and powers was a cop-out on the designers part because they did not have good enough alternitives.
My second gripe with the current class it the fact that you have to be evil. How does killing someone make you evil? Soldiers train to kill, and kings order criminals killed, but it does not make them evil.
IMO, assassins are not all evil- a good king or lord may have an assassin on hand to do things a large number of troops cannot do. Also, what is more evil: sending one man in to kill another, or sending in whole armies that will end up killing hundreds or thousands, which could lead to famine, disease, and many other things to those who had no part in the battle or reason for the war.
This is all my two cents and I was wanting to know what others thought of this idea.
I am unsure if I will post the Honed Blade PrC ecause I would like for you all to see new material, but if I do not post it, I will still send it around to the Athas.org people and have them check it out and get it cleaned up and the kinks worked out.
Overall, I just want to know what you all think- do you like the current version of the assassin class or would you like to see a viable alternative?
Post your thoughts and let me know.
With that said, I still feel there's plenty room for another hired killer PrC
So, IMO, I'd say strip out all the magic/psionics and make give them a list of abilities to choose from similar to how Rogues and Bards work, as well as poison use, death attack, and anything else appropriate. Using a Rogue/Bard ability tie-in might be nice as you could even state that "the Honed Blade may substitude an ability from the Bard or Rogue class in place of one of these."
I think it's a good idea - something that's not quite bard, not quite rogue, and fills that gap between the two as far as "go for the kill" is concerned. I sent some assassins after my group and ended up using the regular assassin class simply because there wasn't anything better - I didn't want to build Athasian bards all decked out for poison use, and straight rogues didn't do the trick either...it was about the only way (in my situation, at least) to get the poison use in a way that made sense.
So, IMO, I'd say strip out all the magic/psionics and make give them a list of abilities to choose from similar to how Rogues and Bards work, as well as poison use, death attack, and anything else appropriate. Using a Rogue/Bard ability tie-in might be nice as you could even state that "the Honed Blade may substitude an ability from the Bard or Rogue class in place of one of these."
It is funny that you say that, because that is almost exactly what I am doing!
Well, I may have to post it but it is still in the works, so...
I'll check that later.
So yeah, I like the idea of taking that part out. I mean they gain millions of skill points, special abilities and bla bla bla, so IMO spells are pure overkill.
I do not mean to tease, but I think the abilities are pretty cool.
I jusr sent my V2 of the PrC to Pennarin and Nytcrawlr for them to have a look at the abilities- there is still a lot needed fluff wise but, well I like it - and while is does have some high skill requirements, I could see any class being able to take this PrC, but IMO rogues, rangers, and bards would get the most and have the easiest time getting it.
Cool
I do not mean to tease, but I think the abilities are pretty cool.
ROAR!!! TEASER, TEASER!!! :P
Here are my issues with the current assassin class.
My second gripe with the current class it the fact that you have to be evil. How does killing someone make you evil? Soldiers train to kill, and kings order criminals killed, but it does not make them evil.
IMO, assassins are not all evil- a good king or lord may have an assassin on hand to do things a large number of troops cannot do. Also, what is more evil: sending one man in to kill another, or sending in whole armies that will end up killing hundreds or thousands, which could lead to famine, disease, and many other things to those who had no part in the battle or reason for the war.
Overall, I just want to know what you all think- do you like the current version of the assassin class or would you like to see a viable alternative?
Post your thoughts and let me know.
From a idealogical point of view (ie, my own opinion here), there is a difference between soldiers killing people on the field of battle, and one person sneaking in and slitting someone's throat. A lot of soldiers who have gone to war being adverse to killing see it mainly as a "them or me" type of thing. You either defend yourself, kill the enemy, or the enemy is going to kill you. When it comes to assassination, there is a different mentality. Now, it can be argued that taking out the head of an opposing force will kill the morale of the army and help to end the conflict sooner, but it can also be argued that killing enough of the troops in "honorable" battle will have the same effect.
Think of how the Brittish thought of the Americans in the Revolution. Here, Brittish troops had spent centuries following their rules of warfare. Before firearms they would line up in units, each take a turn with the archers, then send in the infantry, then the cavalry. After the advent of firearms, they would line up and each take turns firing at each other until one side couldn't fight anymore. Along come the Americans who start using guerella tactics. Hit and run, ambush, assassinations. Now, Neither side was evil, I would say, but both sides were looking out for their own best interests. The Americans were just willing to get their hands dirty in the defense of their country.
So, while I could be convinced that an Assassin does not have to be evil to do his job, I would go so far as to restrict the alignment to any non-good. The "good" ones are going to be the ones looking to challenge a champion (effectively the same results as assassination, just more "honorable"), fighting one on one, refraining from sneaky ambushes and whatnot.
But I do like the idea of an Assassin. Right now my group has something of an assassin. Halfling Ranger/Fighter/Scout/Sniper. Basically he is a master of hiding, shooting and fading back into hiding. He has an awesome attack bonus with his bow, and there has been some frustration from another player because the halfling can always hit his target, but he does 1d6+3 per shot, I have no problem with the Halfling sniping out the enemy from a safe hiding spot. While he is not technically an assassin, he has sat back and tried to identify and target commanders.
In any case, I'm willing to check it out when it is done, offer feedback. Make an NPC in my game and try it out, stuff like that.