The Knight of the Rose gets the same +1 to caster level as the Knight of the Sword, and also several more abilities. You have to have at least 3 levels in KoS to become KoR, so you basically get all the good stuff of the KoS anyways before the KoR. Also, a KoR gets +1 BAB and a d10 HD, which KoS only goes up like a cleric.
I wish they would have put more abilities in this prestige class so that there would be a reason to stay a Knight of the Sword.
Does anyone see much of a reason to stay in Knight of the Sword?
Originally posted by True_Blue
Does anyone see much of a reason to stay in Knight of the Sword?
Sure. The same reason you'd stay a Knight of the Crown - because your character's a member of that Order and wants to attain status in that Order, rather than take a whole new series of trials and change Orders.
Cheers,
Cam
Originally posted by True_Blue
Does anyone see much of a reason to stay in Knight of the Sword?
For roleplaying´s sake maybe?
When I choose a class and a PrC I do so because I like the roleplaying aspect of the class...not it´s abilities and +´s to all kinds of things...
If I were to choose a KoS I´d do so because I thought it would be interesting playing a very spiritual person in a knightly order...but then we´re all different :D
Stat wise, I would stay till 10th in Sword before going to 10th in Rose, because that would stack with your clerical levels and put you at a pretty high caster level.
Roleplaying circumstances are, as always, a consideration. But in my opinion, it is typically the responsibility of the rules and mechanics to at least adequately reflect the flavor of the setting. In other words, the most "spiritual" order of the Solamnic Knights should have this status reflected by their abilities or their abilities in relation to the other Knighthoods.
However, as things stand, there is nothing about the Knights of the Sword that make them any better at casting than the Knights of the Rose. Sure, Rose is the supreme, top order, and thus it can be justified that they're as good in battle and Knights of the Crown and as good at casting as Knights of the Sword. However, Knights of the Crown are still different and unique from Knights of the Rose in their class abilities, while Knights of the Sword get nothing.
I'm not saying that they need to be more powerful. I'm not even saying they need to be given anything at all. I would be perfectly happy with the Knight of the Rose getting a slower caster progression (even if only slightly), or the Knights of the Sword getting more skill points to reflect their more scholarly nature. Or something that tells players 'Look, these knights are more about spirituality than the others', rather than them simply being a consolation prize for not reaching Rose or something to pick because of flavor only. Picking a PrC for flavor is fine, but I can make flavor out of nothing - I don't need a PrC for that. I could go straight Cleric with the Knight of the Sword as is and lose very little.
So what, again, is the motivation? That's all I don't understand. I'm not a munchkin or something only interested in more abilities. It's just that it doesn't make any logical sense.
Originally posted by Kalanth
Then there is the possibility that you stay in the Sword order because you fail the test to get to Rose, or the Knightly Council declairs that you do not qualify.
You beat me to the punch on this one. lol
It could be that you make a great Sword Knight, but that your leadership skills are not the best. Or maybe the knighthood feels that you would better serve the knighthood where you're at.
Believe it or not, yours truly has never played a Rose Knight. The reason behind that is that my characters did not fit the mold of a Rose Knight. One was a Crown Knight, the other a Sword Knight.
I guess the only reason to even go in it at all from a stat respect is that you have to to reach KoR.
Originally posted by Brimstone
I will say, Trampas, you definately seem the Sword Knight, type. In fact, were you a DL character, I'd say that's what you'd be.
Well thank you, good sir! That means a lot to me, my man.
Sword Knights are, in fact, my favorite branch of the Knights of Solamnia. I can't quite place my finger on why, although I have to say that I like their sense of spiritualism.
I would daresay that you would be suited to the Legion of Steel. Arek Brimstone, Steel Legionnaire.
Originally posted by Dragonhelm
Sword Knights are, in fact, my favorite branch of the Knights of Solamnia. I can't quite place my finger on why, although I have to say that I like their sense of spiritualism.
Well...either a sword knight or a wookie Jedi.....
;)
Originally posted by Dragonhelm
I would daresay that you would be suited to the Legion of Steel. Arek Brimstone, Steel Legionnaire.
Now the real question is...is that a good thing, or a bad thing? Personally, I think it's a good thing. But it's highly probable that there are people on Ansalon that see the Legion of Steel as a blight (the Knights of Solamnia for instance). They've got kind of a vigilante attitude, I think. And that can rub people the wrong way sometimes...
Hey...that does sound like me.
Originally posted by Brimstone
Hey...that does sound like me.
No comment!
If I wasn't a sword knight, I'd be a paladin since they're "non-standard". ;)
Originally posted by Magus_Extreme
dunno, the wookie jedi seems pretty good too, DH.
Ah, good ole Kurrelgyrre.
I know that a few people have done a wookiee Jedi, but I really dig my setup.
Basically, he was rescued from enslavement to the Empire by one of the last Jedi Masters prior to the Rebellion era. During the escape attempt, things got a bit confusing, and the Jedi Master was slain.
Now, how can a wookiee pay a life debt to a dead man?
My answer was that he would fill his shoes. Problem is, this was during the Jedi Purge. He spent most of the Rebellion era trying to find some hint of the Jedi, but with little luck.
Long story short, he finally found a teacher and got some initial training, which he finished at the Jedi Academy. It takes him years (decades) to become a Jedi.
In the process, he had to balance wookiee rage with Jedi control.
When I first played Kurrelgyrre, or KG for short, it was in a homebrewed White Wolf system. Then I played him in the WEG d6 system. Since those days, I've been playing him with the d20 system (both original and revised). Brimstone and I play a PBeM Star Wars game with my first DM, and we're having loads of fun.
If you want to read further adventures of Kurrelgyrre, check this out:
Life Debt
That's chapters 1-9 of his story. I haven't had time to write any more of his story of late, but I hope to get back someday.
In 3e as it stands now, there isn't really anything to distinguish the Knights of the Sword, or Knights of the Rose. They are both spiritual wings of the Knights of Solamnia now. Heck, they are clerics before they even qualify for those prestige classes.
I especially take issue with Dragonhelm's attempt to explain why someone would stay in the Knights of the Sword... because they are being held back, or because they are not "up to snuff". IMO, the knights of each order should be as competant as any other, but simply differ in function.
That is why I also disagree with the requirement of having Knights of the Crown or Knights of the Sword levels before becoming a Knight of the Rose. Do Knights of the Crown swear an oath of loyalty to an order, knowing full well they will break it later to advance to the higher two? Do all the best and brightest go the Knights of the Rose, leaving the dregs for the previous two orders?
Does the church of Kiri-Jolith have such a grip on power that they only allow one of their members to advance to the highest positions of power, disregarding claims of birthright?
That is the last excuse I am using for my own campaign, and what will ultimately lead to the class' revision. Raye Oakensheild is from one of Solamnia's oldest families, but cannot enter into the Knights of the Rose because he refuses to enter into the service of Kiri-Jolith. He has other responsibilities and duties that preclude service to a diety. However, since he is of noble blood, he has a claim to be a Rose Knight.
The end result (if Raye is successsful) is that the Knights of the Sword will be the only clerics to serve the gods of good as a whole. The Kiri-Jolithan knights will join with the Order of the Sword, splinter off to look after the church of Kiri-Jolith in Kalaman, or follow the King to Sancrist, and form a new knighthood. (Taking the symbol of the victorious eagle rather than the self-sacrificing Kingfisher of course).
Originally posted by ferratus
I especially take issue with Dragonhelm's attempt to explain why someone would stay in the Knights of the Sword... because they are being held back, or because they are not "up to snuff". IMO, the knights of each order should be as competant as any other, but simply differ in function.
Understood, but I must say this. If they all were as competant as any other, then why does the Knightly Counsil have to discuse and determine if the petitioner is worthy? And why would they reject so many? After all, Sturm was not a knight until he died at the Clerist Tower, he was just a high level squire.
Originally posted by Kalanth
Understood, but I must say this. If they all were as competant as any other, then why does the Knightly Counsil have to discuse and determine if the petitioner is worthy? And why would they reject so many? After all, Sturm was not a knight until he died at the Clerist Tower, he was just a high level squire.
Well, that can be answered through flavour text. For example, I'm going to take the Sword Knights and pump up their "preistly" flavour. That means I'm going to make a feat in which a sword knight can fast for one day in every seven which grants a sacred bonus similar to the "divine favour" spell 1/day. I'm going to demand celibacy and being tied to a fortress-abbey (such as the High Clerist's Tower). So if you come across a young candidate, maybe he just won't be up to snuff for it. Raye Oakensheild, for example, married young. Perhaps one desires to join the Order of the Sword, but while an excellent soldier, he lacks the spiritual faith necessary to do the spiritual work that the Knights of the Sword require. However, since he is competant he might be asked to consider becoming a Knight of the Rose, or seek promotion in the Knights of the Crown.
Originally posted by ferratus
I have to agree with the Udjat here. I've always veiwed the Knights of the Crown as the career soldiers of the Knighthood, the Knights of the Sword as their spiritual and defense branch, and the Knights of the Rose as their noble and aristocratic branch.
Very good summary, overall.
In 3e as it stands now, there isn't really anything to distinguish the Knights of the Sword, or Knights of the Rose. They are both spiritual wings of the Knights of Solamnia now. Heck, they are clerics before they even qualify for those prestige classes.
The divine spellcaster requirement is due to having two different forms of divine magic. Had there just been one type of divine magic, then I would probably lean towards Sword Knights having their own spell chart.
I especially take issue with Dragonhelm's attempt to explain why someone would stay in the Knights of the Sword... because they are being held back, or because they are not "up to snuff". IMO, the knights of each order should be as competant as any other, but simply differ in function.
Then why have the trials going from order to order? They're designed to test competency for the order. Why would the trials have a chance of failure?
That is why I also disagree with the requirement of having Knights of the Crown or Knights of the Sword levels before becoming a Knight of the Rose.
Sounds like you're more upset at how the knighthood is structured.
Do Knights of the Crown swear an oath of loyalty to an order, knowing full well they will break it later to advance to the higher two? Do all the best and brightest go the Knights of the Rose, leaving the dregs for the previous two orders?
The knights swear an oath of loyalty to the knighthood. They swear to perform to the best of their ability within their order. It would be like being in the military. You swear an oath to your nation, not to the 1st division infantry.
Originally posted by Dragonhelm
The divine spellcaster requirement is due to having two different forms of divine magic. Had there just been one type of divine magic, then I would probably lean towards Sword Knights having their own spell chart.
I'm going to borrow a mechanic from Testament's prophet prestige class. They have +1 per caster level if they have previous divine classes, and they have a cleric's spell progression if they do not.
Then why have the trials going from order to order? They're designed to test competency for the order. Why would the trials have a chance of failure?
Like I said, to find which fit is best for them, not which is the better knight. So Rose Knights are of noble blood because they have been "born into the purple" as it were, and thus trained from birth as a natural leader in society and in the study of law.
However, someone could work his way up through the Knights of the Crown through merit, and thus be military leaders and high ranking officers. However, if you just say "Rose Knights are the best" then most players won't want to play anything else. The true dragonlance purists and fanatics might want to play a Knight of the Sword or Crown for "flavour" but we both know they are usually the DM.
Sounds like you're more upset at how the knighthood is structured.
Well, the modern interpretation of D&D rules anyway. In DLA you weren't knighted until a couple levels into the prestige class. You could switch over before you got a title with "Knight" in it. For example, it wasn't until Level 6 that you became a "Knight Clerist" so thus you could move over to the Knights of the Rose before picking up spellcasting levels and becoming a "Knight of the Sword".
The knights swear an oath of loyalty to the knighthood. They swear to perform to the best of their ability within their order. It would be like being in the military. You swear an oath to your nation, not to the 1st division infantry.
It depends on the tradition of the division or branch of the armed forces. Oath-taking is a means of assuming duty and being inducted to the culture of that military unit. So thus, I would expect different oaths from the different orders, to uphold their differing responsibilities and duties.
Originally posted by ferratus
Well, that can be answered through flavour text. For example, I'm going to take the Sword Knights and pump up their "preistly" flavour. That means I'm going to make a feat in which a sword knight can fast for one day in every seven which grants a sacred bonus similar to the "divine favour" spell 1/day. I'm going to demand celibacy and being tied to a fortress-abbey (such as the High Clerist's Tower). So if you come across a young candidate, maybe he just won't be up to snuff for it. Raye Oakensheild, for example, married young. Perhaps one desires to join the Order of the Sword, but while an excellent soldier, he lacks the spiritual faith necessary to do the spiritual work that the Knights of the Sword require. However, since he is competant he might be asked to consider becoming a Knight of the Rose, or seek promotion in the Knights of the Crown.
I love you. Your posts are always so thoughtful and informed, they actually help out a ton. This was a very intreging point of view. Corse, I can't see a KoS demanding Celibacy, but that is just because I never thought that it would be a part of that branch of the Knighthood.
Originally posted by ferratus
I'm going to borrow a mechanic from Testament's prophet prestige class. They have +1 per caster level if they have previous divine classes, and they have a cleric's spell progression if they do not.
*nods* I've seen that mechanic before myself (can't remember where). That works just fine, actually. You could even say that they progress as a paladin spellcasting-wise, which would be appropriate. Or you could use something like the Bard progression chart.
However, someone could work his way up through the Knights of the Crown through merit, and thus be military leaders and high ranking officers. However, if you just say "Rose Knights are the best" then most players won't want to play anything else. The true dragonlance purists and fanatics might want to play a Knight of the Sword or Crown for "flavour" but we both know they are usually the DM.
Yeah, I will admit that the average DL fan will probably work his way up to Rose Knight. That's always been the case, though, due to the structure of the Knighthood.
Well, the modern interpretation of D&D rules anyway. In DLA you weren't knighted until a couple levels into the prestige class. You could switch over before you got a title with "Knight" in it. For example, it wasn't until Level 6 that you became a "Knight Clerist" so thus you could move over to the Knights of the Rose before picking up spellcasting levels and becoming a "Knight of the Sword".
At the same time, DLA also says that you have to progress from Crown to Sword to Rose.
Hey, it wouldn't be DL without contradictions. ;)
It depends on the tradition of the division or branch of the armed forces. Oath-taking is a means of assuming duty and being inducted to the culture of that military unit. So thus, I would expect different oaths from the different orders, to uphold their differing responsibilities and duties.
I would think that, as you progress from order to order, you still uphold the oaths of your previous orders. Either that, or you're released from your previous oath and swear a new one that is appropriate to your order.
Either way, the ideals of the three orders mesh well together. They don't conflict.
Ah, well. I guess It's a matter of interpretation.
Originally posted by Kalanth
I love you.
That'll change. I'm a very hard person to love on these lists. I'm right far too often, very blunt, and when you start arguing with me you grab a tiger by the tail. ;) I'd like to think though that I've left dragonlance a richer place than I found it, and I'm not just a self-important critic who is bringing everyone down.
If that is the case, I shouldn't be here. Why spoil everyone else's fun?
This was a very intreging point of view. Corse, I can't see a KoS demanding Celibacy, but that is just because I never thought that it would be a part of that branch of the Knighthood.
I know celibacy is relatively controversial to associate with anything, since most of liberal society thinks that it is largely a deviant and unhealthy lifestyle choice. It however, seemed to fit for these guys, based on the role I see them fulfilling.
See the Knights of the Rose fulfill two roles. That of adventuring Knight Errant, and that of leader to various manorial estates. Thus, they are born with heriditary rights to land and title. This needs to be replaced as noble lines die out, taken from families that have a long history in the Knights of the Crown.
The Knights of the Crown are career soldiers, and fight as Solamnia's elite troops, and loyal to Solamnia's authorities.
So what is left for the Knights of the Sword? I didn't want to make them glorified chaplains. I wanted them to have a subculture as unique and as special as the aristocratic Knights of the Rose, and the militaristic and dutiful Knights of the Crown.
So with the Knights of the Rose being the leaders and wandering adventurers, and the Knights of the Crown being the career soldiers that serve on the front, what role should they play?
So I decided to make them the guardians of Solamnia, devoted heart and soul to the knighthood, their nation, and the gods. What better way to express that devotion, than to have no other priorities than the Knighthood? Plus, since they are the last line of defense (as the fortress-abbey the High Clerist's Tower is the last line of defense into Palanthas) what better people to have as your guardians than those who will not fear for their lives knowing that they have no children to support? Plus, it allows for garrisoning soldiers almost indefinately, since they have no need to make time for their families or children. Nor are you burdened with feeding and housing them during a seige.
It just seemed to fit to me.
Originally posted by Dragonhelm
Yeah, I will admit that the average DL fan will probably work his way up to Rose Knight. That's always been the case, though, due to the structure of the Knighthood.
Yeah, I'd like to encourage more diversity by moving away from a pyramid model, to the model of a tripod. That way the High Warrior and the High Clerist will actually have a decent voice in how things are said, rather than just the High Justice or Grand Master deciding everything. I would like to make the High Clerist the authority on spiritual matters, the High Warrior the authority on Military matters, and the High Justice on political and legal matters.
By stressing different roles, rather than ascending power, you will encourage more people to make use of those nifty new Crown Knight abilities which I love. Otherwise, I'll have to see endless progression of Rose Knights at the table, which I'd rather avoid. Heck, Rose Knights are even over represented in the novels, with each of the authors wanting to make a "heroic" character. What is more impressive, a Knight of the Crown or a Knight of the Rose?
I'd like to change conventional wisdom a bit, so that equally impressive and temporally powerful characters can come from all three orders.
Originally posted by ferratus
Yeah, I'd like to encourage more diversity by moving away from a pyramid model, to the model of a tripod. That way the High Warrior and the High Clerist will actually have a decent voice in how things are said, rather than just the High Justice or Grand Master deciding everything. I would like to make the High Clerist the authority on spiritual matters, the High Warrior the authority on Military matters, and the High Justice on political and legal matters.
The High Warrior, High Clerist, and High Justice form the knight's council, IIRC. Or at least the uber-council. I don't believe the Grand Master has to be the High Justice, although that usually is the case.
By stressing different roles, rather than ascending power, you will encourage more people to make use of those nifty new Crown Knight abilities which I love. Otherwise, I'll have to see endless progression of Rose Knights at the table, which I'd rather avoid. Heck, Rose Knights are even over represented in the novels, with each of the authors wanting to make a "heroic" character. What is more impressive, a Knight of the Crown or a Knight of the Rose?
I'd like to change conventional wisdom a bit, so that equally impressive and temporally powerful characters can come from all three orders.
Definitely, there needs to be more focus on the Crown and Sword Knights.
Originally posted by ferratus
That'll change. I'm a very hard person to love on these lists. I'm right far too often, very blunt, and when you start arguing with me you grab a tiger by the tail. ;) I'd like to think though that I've left dragonlance a richer place than I found it, and I'm not just a self-important critic who is bringing everyone down.
If that is the case, I shouldn't be here. Why spoil everyone else's fun?
No, no it won't change. I like the blunt and straight forward people. Its the ones that don't listen to others opinions that are the problems.
So what is left for the Knights of the Sword? I didn't want to make them glorified chaplains. I wanted them to have a subculture as unique and as special as the aristocratic Knights of the Rose, and the militaristic and dutiful Knights of the Crown.
So with the Knights of the Rose being the leaders and wandering adventurers, and the Knights of the Crown being the career soldiers that serve on the front, what role should they play?
I am not sure if you know much military jargin or not, but I always viewed the Knights of the Sword as the NCO of the Knights of Solamnia. In case you are not familiar with the acronim, NCO is a Non-commisioned Officer, or an elisted person that has reached the level of troop management. They can give a form of order, but it is not the Direct order that an Officer could give. They deal more on a personal level with the junior enlisted.
With that said, I always thought of the Knights of the Sword to take this role in the Knighthood. Of course, they also gain more of the religious aspect as well.
Originally posted by Dragonhelm
The High Warrior, High Clerist, and High Justice form the knight's council, IIRC. Or at least the uber-council. I don't believe the Grand Master has to be the High Justice, although that usually is the case.
Yep, I know about the council. But see, when I envision the council meeting, I don't think a pyramid structure will really work. The High Warrior and High Clerist just seem to filling the seats. If the High Warrior is outranked by the High Clerist, and the High Justice outranks the High Clerist, and the Grandmaster outranks the High Justice... it doesn't seem like much of a council.
Instead, I'd rather the uber-council convene, and have the three knighthoods breif the grandmaster on various subjects.
The High Warrior breifs the grandmaster on what is militarily feasible. Supplies, troop strength, which forces are marshalled where, how strong the enemy is etc.
The High Clerist serves as the spiritual and moral authority. Is this war just? How do the gods support these actions? What can we do to improve education, health, and literacy among the population? Etc. etc.
The High Justice serves as the grand master's legal and political counsel. What conditions are bound to by this treaty? What are our ambassadors telling us? Do we have a legal precedent in the measure to proceed in this course of action?
A much more productive meeting, IMO, all things considered.
Originally posted by Kalanth
I am not sure if you know much military jargin or not, but I always viewed the Knights of the Sword as the NCO of the Knights of Solamnia. In case you are not familiar with the acronim, NCO is a Non-commisioned Officer, or an elisted person that has reached the level of troop management. They can give a form of order, but it is not the Direct order that an Officer could give. They deal more on a personal level with the junior enlisted.
Yeah, I myself have always veiwed people like Lord Amothus, senators, non-knighted heriditary nobles to fulfill that function.
Of course, I see the Knightly orders as being largely distinct institutions within the knighthood, much like the Navy, Airforce, and Army are distinct in our armed forces. Each fulfills a specific role, and each has its own officers and staff.
Originally posted by True_Blue
To me, it doesn't seem like hte Knight of the Sword prestiege class has enough abilities for people to want to remain in it. The Knight of the Crown class is good for straight warrior types.
The Knight of the Rose gets the same +1 to caster level as the Knight of the Sword, and also several more abilities. You have to have at least 3 levels in KoS to become KoR, so you basically get all the good stuff of the KoS anyways before the KoR. Also, a KoR gets +1 BAB and a d10 HD, which KoS only goes up like a cleric.
I wish they would have put more abilities in this prestige class so that there would be a reason to stay a Knight of the Sword.
Does anyone see much of a reason to stay in Knight of the Sword?
1) Sword Knights gain Concentration as a class skill, Rose Knights do not. If you were to remain in Sword you could still advance your Concentration ranks (good for casting spells in battle) without paying 2 skill points per rank.
2) Sword Knights turn undead at their Sword level -1. Rose knights don't even get turn undead until 4th level Rose.
3) More Sword Knight levels = more smiting and more damage when you do.
4) Advancing to Rose Knight means you've got to spend two more feats (Leadership, Mounted Combat) that could be used for something else ... such as spell penetration, or heroic surge, or improved turning, etc.
Knowing all this, is it still worth staying in Sword? I dunno.
Compared to the Knight of the Sword, they have better hit dice, and a better base attack bonus. They get numerous abilities, one at each level, many of which are aimed at their actual role in the Knighthood (leadership, inspiration, and command). If you dropped the spellcaster progression class feature, it'd still be a very valuable class.
Knights of the Rose who did want to continue with their spellcasting and clerical power would still be free to take additional cleric levels (which they have due to the requirements of Knight of the Sword). I wouldn't abandon the Sword Knight requirements, though. I think it's still in keeping with the current view of the Orders that Rose Knights attain at least some experience as a Sword Knight. However, rather than require 3 levels of Sword, I'd drop it to 1 level as with the Crown to Sword requirement.
Consider this an optional and unofficial rules change for the Knight of the Rose. I'd be interested to hear from anybody who finds this diminishes the class - personally, they're pretty good even without the spellcasting.
Cheers,
Cam
Originally posted by ferratus
That'll change. I'm a very hard person to love on these lists. I'm right far too often, very blunt, and when you start arguing with me you grab a tiger by the tail. ;) I'd like to think though that I've left dragonlance a richer place than I found it, and I'm not just a self-important critic who is bringing everyone down.
Modest....you forgot "modest."
I would love to see either the Knight of the Sword get a d10 or its base attack bonus go up by +1. I think either change would be good, but not both so that it doesnt overshadow the other knights. It would be nice also if the Knight of the Sword had just one more ability, nothing powerfull, just something to make it stand out a little more.
Knights of the Sword have always been my favorite, and I would still play one all the way through, but I would like to see just a little more difference in the class. It looks like they just took the cleric class and renamed it Knight of the Sword, and added Smite and Soul of the Knighthood. Again I say, it would just be nice for the class to have something different in its abilities. There isn't much difference in going up a Knight of the Sword level and a cleric level.
I noticed this trend when I asked my one aspiring Squire of the Crown what his objective in life was. He said that in RP terms he wanted to be knight of the rose and be a confident leader of the people. But shortly after looking at the Stats of the knighthood, he came back and stated that he changed his mind, and that his main idea had changed. He still wanted to be in the knighthood, but now he wanted nothing more than the levels in Crown (he wanted to take all 10) and then he would begin to take levels in the Legendary Tactician. I found that dissapointing, because he was so adament about being a Knight of the Rose, but the whole need of clerical levels, and the fact that Sword knights statistically are not worth it are his down sides to the Knighthood.
This brought light to my eyes, and I am going to pour over the old 1st and 2nd ed versions to determine just what could be changed to make the sword more interesting.
However, the DLCS requirements mean that you can't become a Knight Of The Rose without being able to cast 2nd level divine spells, so there could be NO Rose Knights until after the return of faith in the star gods, and thus there should have been nothing but Knights of the Crown at the High Clerist's tower.
Hopefully, the WOL sourcebook will deal with this when it comes out (in about a year's time), but that's not much use in my campaign starting next month!
As it is, I'm fudging it so that (1) Rose Knights do not gain caster levels or turn undead (2) Knights of the Sword do not need divine spellcasting, but don't gain spells or their turning ability (and can't advance beyond 3rd level) until they have taken at least one level of Cleric.
It's not an ideal solution, but it does mean that my PCs can get to Rose Knight if they want. And if any of them play a knight who does discover true faith, then it's going to be a lot of fun for them convincing the Knights Council of that...
I dunno, game mechanics are second in my games.
Originally posted by Cam Banks
It wouldn't be an entirely bad thing to drop the Knight of the Rose's +1 spellcaster level progression.
I was looking over the Knights of the Rose prestige class as well. It has both the Fighter's BAB bonus, 2 good saves like the cleric, a cleric's spell progression, and enough special abilities to cover the loss of the fighter's feats. The end result being, of course, that a Knight of the Rose could beat the snot out of any cleric or fighter of equivelant level that it went up against. So I'm just going to drop the +1 caster level too, and keep the saves, special abilities and BAB bonus. I do love the Knight of the Rose abilities.
I think it's still in keeping with the current view of the Orders that Rose Knights attain at least some experience as a Sword Knight. However, rather than require 3 levels of Sword, I'd drop it to 1 level as with the Crown to Sword requirement.
Okay, but if you're going to simply drop them both down to one level each, you're going to have this effect on the flavour of the game. A knight stops in at each of the bottom two orders for a bit to study with them, and then leaves to pursue a higher calling. I mean, a level is only lasts anywhere from a few months to a year in a campaign world.
You can maintain that flavour, but without needing to saddle the character with a level or two that he doesn't want (and frankly, doesn't find much use for once he starts progressing as a non-spellcasting Rose Knight in earnest).
It would be better to use the three feats I suggested. Squire of the Crown, Acolyte of the Sword, and Novice of the Rose.
Then you get a nifty ability at each level, that is always useful, and it maintains the flavour that you've spent certain months or years training with the lower orders before joining your current one.
Originally posted by ferratus
It would be better to use the three feats I suggested. Squire of the Crown, Acolyte of the Sword, and Novice of the Rose.
Then you get a nifty ability at each level, that is always useful, and it maintains the flavour that you've spent certain months or years training with the lower orders before joining your current one.
It's an idea I've suggested in the past, but I don't favor it now simply because those are valuable feat slots already needed for the hefty requirements of the PrCs. In fact, I'd rather take a level in a class with all of the benefits and features than use up a feat slot on what amounts to flavor.
Cheers,
Cam
Main non-roleplaying reason to take Sword Knight thought is the 10th level ability... having an Always Holy weapon is pretty cool...
But personally, I would go either Crown Knight 10 or Rose Knight 10...
Originally posted by Cam Banks
It's an idea I've suggested in the past, but I don't favor it now simply because those are valuable feat slots already needed for the hefty requirements of the PrCs.
A Knight of the Rose requires Endurance, Honor Bound, Leadership, and Mounted Combat. All of those are combat related feats except for honour bound. That number of feats, plus the three I require, could be picked up by a fighter by 6th level. Only one less than the official requirement. Plus, I'd be in a perfect position to claim that +6 BAB bonus requirement. ;) Of course, I would only have +2 Base Will Save. However, honour-bound takes care of the whole "I'm strong willed because of my integrity" flavour anyway.
In fact, I'd rather take a level in a class with all of the benefits and features than use up a feat slot on what amounts to flavor.
I think your logic is a little twisted here. First off, feats are all about flavour, that's what they are there for. That's why not all fighters and heroes of a specific class look the same. These are the grab-bag of special abilities.
Secondly, you commit to a lot more when you are saddled with a level or two. For example, take the Crown Knight level, and the Sword Knight level. You gain a +1 bonus to on initiative checks for Knightly Courage... but so what. I can get improved initative for +4. I also get a charisma bonus to fear effects. which only comes into play when I get a fear spell cast on me, since I control when my character is scared otherwise. Both of them put together are worth less than a single feat. They are great when you are allowed to progress in your prestige class (and thus increase the bonuses), but not if you are going to drop it after one level.
Take the Knight of the Sword as well. He takes one level, and he gets a smite evil ability that will give him +1-+4 to attack, and +1 to damage, only once per day! because he only has one Knight of the Sword Level. Frankly, I'd rather take an "Acolyte of the Sword" feat which I gain a sacred bonus to my attack and damage rolls equal to my charisma modifier for 1 minute. (1 fight). I should mention now that this a second tier feat, available only after one takes the Squire of the Crown feat, like the more powerful feats like Cleave or Improved Disarm. It also is dependant on an ability score, so if you have a high charisma, you've probably sacrificed another ability.
This feat is always useful, and I don't lose my +1 BAB. Of course, this is all assuming that Rose Knights do not gain a +1 caster level for spells, nor need a divine spellcaster level to gain the prestige class.
Even with the current requirements in place though, I'd rather take a pass at the puny smiting ability, and get right to the leadership bonuses. After all, I can always cast Divine Favour if I really need a good smite... or take the War Domain.
That's the thing about multiclassing in D&D, and it is D&D's dirty little secret. The more you multi-class, the more you trade power for versatility, and the weaker you are. A 10th level fighter/10th level sorcerer is not CR 20. A 5th level sorcerer/5th level fighter/5th level cleric is not challenge rating 15. Heck, you're lucky if its 10. A 5th level sorcerer/5th level fighter/5th level rogue/5th level cleric has a hell of a lot of hitpoints.... but it ain't no challenge rating 20 either.
That's the big problem I have with the extensive multi-classing requirements in the Knights of Solamnia class. I can take a single-class character of equivelant level to Linsha Majere and beat her like a red headed stepchild.
Oh, and one final note, I'd have to spend a feat slot to get "Diehard" anyway, due to my requirement of a Knight of the Sword level. So I'm pretty much only asking for 2 feats more. ;)
Originally posted by ferratus
It would be better to use the three feats I suggested. Squire of the Crown, Acolyte of the Sword, and Novice of the Rose.
What exactly do these feats do, other than act as requirements for the Knight prestige classes?
Originally posted by The White Sorcerer
What exactly do these feats do, other than act as requirements for the Knight prestige classes?
I believe Terry is postulating them as having benefits outside of being indicators of membership in the various Orders.
Cheers,
Cam
Originally posted by ferratus
That's the thing about multiclassing in D&D, and it is D&D's dirty little secret. The more you multi-class, the more you trade power for versatility, and the weaker you are. A 10th level fighter/10th level sorcerer is not CR 20. A 5th level sorcerer/5th level fighter/5th level cleric is not challenge rating 15. Heck, you're lucky if its 10. A 5th level sorcerer/5th level fighter/5th level rogue/5th level cleric has a hell of a lot of hitpoints.... but it ain't no challenge rating 20 either.
I don't agree with you, and in many cases neither do the designers. The only major shortfalls evident in multiclassing arise when you have two spellcasting classes, which has always been a problem (and is the reason why the mystic theurge exists). Multiclassing carries with it the trade-off of giving up certain level-dependent qualities of class features for a broader spread of abilities, flexibility, and of course the improved saves. Your 5/5/5/5 character is CR 20, have no doubt about it - especially if they're equipped appropriately for a 20th level character.
That's the big problem I have with the extensive multi-classing requirements in the Knights of Solamnia class. I can take a single-class character of equivelant level to Linsha Majere and beat her like a red headed stepchild.
Write up a character with the same stat array of Linsha Majere and the same character level, and prove it.
Oh, and one final note, I'd have to spend a feat slot to get "Diehard" anyway, due to my requirement of a Knight of the Sword level. So I'm pretty much only asking for 2 feats more. ;)
Or you could get Diehard for free at Crown 3!
Cheers,
Cam
Originally posted by Cam Banks
I don't agree with you, and in many cases neither do the designers. The only major shortfalls evident in multiclassing arise when you have two spellcasting classes, which has always been a problem (and is the reason why the mystic theurge exists). Multiclassing carries with it the trade-off of giving up certain level-dependent qualities of class features for a broader spread of abilities, flexibility, and of course the improved saves. Your 5/5/5/5 character is CR 20, have no doubt about it - especially if they're equipped appropriately for a 20th level character.
Think of it this way Cam. You can either cast a spell or make an attack with a weapon right? A 10th level sorcerer/10th level fighter is half as good at doing both. Therefore, a 20th level sorcerer can outblast him, a 20th level fighter can out-fight. With enough strategy you might get a chance to even the score through your versatility, but most of the time you will get beaten in a knock-down fight with either class.
The more you multi-class sure you've got more versatility, but you are still hampered by only being able to do a limited number of actions. So taking my 5/5/5/5 character... I can do a healing spell s a 5th level cleric, or a blasting spell as a 5th level sorcerer, or attack as an 8th or 9th level fighter, or sing as a 5th level bard. The DC's for spells and special abilities, the BAB and multiple attacks are all far, far lower than an equivelant single classed character. What that translates into are attacks that cannot penetrate and spells that are simply ignored because everyone easily makes the saving throw.
Write up a character with the same stat array of Linsha Majere and the same character level, and prove it.
*shrugs* It's right there. She has a lower BAB because of her rogue and cleric levels, yet doesn't have a very powerful spellcasting talent. She is a very versatile character, but she isn't a powerful one.
Add the smites into the mix, my strength boon for being a cleric of Kiri-Jolith with the strength domain, +2 heroic initiative, and armored mobility and wow wee I'm rocking without min/maxing.
I think what I like most about the new PrC's (including the Knights of Solamnia) is that I don't feel the need to min/max. They are strong right out of the box. I looked at the War mage PrC and it really seems uber to me. I mean +3 damage/damage die and charisma bonus to 3 allies Ac, plus wearing leather armor, sweet.
As to why you would stay with the Sword Knights...at one time, wernt the Rose Knights spells granted to them by Paladine? So changing from the Kiri-Jolith oriented Sword Knights, to join the Rose Knights would require you to change allegience to Paladine and thus lose all benefits of worshipping Kiri-Jolith such as access to his domains (You would have to choose 2 of Paladines domains instead). Now even though Paladine has stepped down as a God. I could definatly see the Order of the Rose dedicating themselves to his ideas still (and thus worshipping good in general, selecting from Paladines old Domains of Good, Law, Protection and Sun)
Changing the Rose Knights class by altering spell progression is an injustice, the reason being, look at all that you have to do to get there. There are 3(4) classes as a pre-requisite to join them (Cleric, Knight of the Crown, Knght of the Sword; or if you want to join faster, Fighter, Cleric, Knight of the Crown, Knight of the Sword). They have to undertake 3 Knightly Quests. They must be accepted by the current Rose Knights as worthy. They are the best of the best. Not every PC that applies should get in to the Rose Knights. In my game im definatly going to be looking at the characters actions since day one and see if i think hes worthy before i left my players join. There is no shame in staying in the Crown or Sword orders.
Lastly (I apologize for the length) I view the Solamnic Knights as, like i said earlier, an Elite fighting force. the Knights of the Crown should outnumber the Knights of the Rose atleast 5 to 1. There are probably 3 Crown Knights for every 1 Sword Knight. If you figure a Small Army of 10'000= 2000 Crown Knights, 667 Sword Knights and 400 Rose Knights, 6933 Enlisted Men or Squires. The Rose Knights ditributed across the army in order to make best use of their leadership abilities, The Knights of the Sword formed into 200 Man Squads to take advantage of weakness in the Enemy lines and the Sword Knights, evenly distributed as both Non-Coms, Medics and battle field support (ie: Dispel Magic, or Mass bulls strength anyone??) It would be easy to see why these guys would kick arse.
So to re-iterate. Love the Solamnic Knights. The only change im going to make is that Rose Knights get their spells from Paladine (or after he steps down as a god, from the Good pantheon as a whole, selecting from Paladines domains still) Thanks and have a good day!!!
-Khirak Vil, Minotaur Gladiator
"Khirak strong like Ox, Thick like door"