[color=Red]here [/color]
I don't necessarily agree though.
How can Derek Crownguard be head of the Rose Knights if he has no Kinght Levels. He is a Noble 4\Fighter 4\Legendary Tactician 2. SO how is he the head of the Rose Knights.
Politics.
Cheers,
Cam
How can Derek Crownguard be head of the Rose Knights if he has no Kinght Levels. He is a Noble 4\Fighter 4\Legendary Tactician 2. SO how is he the head of the Rose Knights.
I have to say hearing these stat's are pretty arsinine. Before he went insane, Crowngaurd did come across as a competent Knight to the most part, and certainly deserved to have that recognized in his stat's.
I have to say hearing these stat's are pretty arsinine. Before he went insane, Crowngaurd did come across as a competent Knight to the most part, and certainly deserved to have that recognized in his stat's.
He was. If you look at his write-up in the War of the Lance sourcebook you'll see that he more than compensates for his lack of knight PrC levels. He's a perfect example of how not everybody in an organization, even one of the highest-ranking members, requires (or even meets the standards for) the organization's associated prestige class. This is very much the case in the Age of Despair.
Cheers,
Cam
He was. If you look at his write-up in the War of the Lance sourcebook you'll see that he more than compensates for his lack of knight PrC levels. He's a perfect example of how not everybody in an organization, even one of the highest-ranking members, requires (or even meets the standards for) the organization's associated prestige class. This is very much the case in the Age of Despair.
Cheers,
Cam
I accept that if you are talking about, since there were no GrandMaster, High Clerist, or Religious Orders anymore, that perhaps that would have prevented many Knights from attaining those abillities. That I can accept, yes.
Politics.
one easy word, one easy answer!
Not to mention Derek's alignment (LN) precludes him from taking the prestige class at all.
Whose to say that he didn't start his career in the KoS with good intentions (i.e. a good alignment) and later was corrupted or overwhelmed by the inner politics of the knighthood and lost sight of the Measure (changed to neutral) in his ambition for prestige and position?
Then you got the issue of the deadweight levels on him since he'll lose abilities from any KoS class levels with the alignment shift.
All I have to say to that is "oh well". Thats what you get for losing sight in the Measure. ;)
The knight levels would pretty much be the equivalent of straight fighter levels. Granted, he does have 4 levels of fighter which could be assumed were the "dead weight" levels of KoS. Maybe Derek should have been stated out that he still had levels of KoS but no longer had access to the PrC abilities due to his LN alignment.
Plus, worst case scenario it could be replaced with rogue knight levels, but I think that would an odd fit.
The knight levels would pretty much be the equivalent of straight fighter levels. Granted, he does have 4 levels of fighter which could be assumed were the "dead weight" levels of KoS. Maybe Derek should have been stated out that he still had levels of KoS but no longer had access to the PrC abilities due to his LN alignment.
There's rarely any reason we'd construct a stat block like that, except when we want to make a specific point. It's somewhat inefficient, to be honest, and I would rather accurately describe the character's current state than account for changes along the way. The version of Derek given in the WOTL is the only one you should need if you're including him in a WOTL campaign as an NPC. If he's used as a pregen, which he originally was (and was brought into the modules with DL6) he might be written a little differently.
Cheers,
Cam
I don't mind there being knights without the KoS prestige classes, but I think it should be an issue of where the Knight didn't want to take levels in the classes, not "well the knight doesnt have levels because he's LN". Even if I accepted the fact that derek is LN, I still believe that the KoS prestige classes should be open to any knights who want to take them. Sort of like the WoHS where wizards can take the prestige class, or they can just be a WoHS with only levels in wizard and such.
I personally believe the KoS PrC's requirement of Good basically create "true knights". It now brings forth knights who see other knights and notice they dont have the same "abilities" as the knights who are "true". And if you say they wouldnt know that stuff and call it metagaming or whatever, you are wrong. I think I would notice if I could turn undead and another knight couldnt. And actually start wondering why that was. Now you could say, yea well there would be good knights who wouldnt decide to take levels and wouldnt eventually have Turn Undead either. But remember, these knights have to train and I'm guessing subsequently this is how they unlock the powers they are given and such. What happens when a neutral character starts training to get those abilities... and it doesnt happen. I think no matter how the knighthood would keep it silent, word would leak out.
I'm just an advocate of the Knights of Solamnia PrC's being open to neutral and good people. I can see how evil can never be a requirement because they would be booted out in a second. But a neutral character who follows the Measure to a tee and does everything that needs to be done.. but doesnt have the "pious, good, holier than thou, etc" outlook should still be a viable option in the knighthood. Remember being LN isn't a "bad" thing.
Now if people don't like the idea of letting in LN people into the prestige classes, I think the only other option is the reworking of what is/isn't good. I think way too many people think that if a person has a bad quality or fault, they can't be good. Or if they arent the selfless, pious, holier than though, goody too shoes person than well.. thats not a true good person. I dunno this topic has always made a sore spot with me for some reason. Oh well.
There's rarely any reason we'd construct a stat block like that, except when we want to make a specific point. It's somewhat inefficient, to be honest
A line in Derek's write up that states "fighter levels represent the lost levels of Knight of (insert order here) due to Derek's alignment change later on in his career" doesn't seem to inefficient to me.
It seems pretty dead on and truer to the character IMO. But no need to split hairs over it now. Whats done is done.
Plus, worst case scenario it could be replaced with rogue knight levels, but I think that would an odd fit.
Definitely an odd fit as he was a member in good standing of the Knights of Solamnia.
Now, his cousin Charles Crownguard, is another case entirely. Charles was going mad over the death of his cousin and the hero worship of Sturm, when he thought it should have been Derek who had the hero worship. With the Dagger of Jealousy in corrupting him and his subsequent theft of the Brightblade, rogue knight fits Charles nicely.
Definitely an odd fit as he was a member in good standing of the Knights of Solamnia
Towards the end of his life that was questionable
What makes anyone believe that membership in an organization requires you to take the organization's prestige class?
Who ever said it did? What book ever claimed that? None. This is simply not trueIt's an assumption that seems very common. In fact, the opposite is true far more often than not:
Taking an organizational prestige class requires membership in the organization in question.
Most knights in the KoS probably don't have the PrC. Are they all going to be truly Lawful Good? Are they all going to have the same stats and feats? No. Of course not. That would make them all carbon copies and do a severe injustice to the individual character of each and every knight. They don't need knight levels when Fighter or Ranger will do just fine in most cases. I would suspect the number of knights with the PrC are the minority, or in a best case scenario, breaking even with or slightly higher than those without the PrC.
The same holds true for any other organization with a PrC to represent it. Do all WoHS have to take the PrC? What about all KoT? All Legion members? Even other settings don't adhere to this rule. Are all Harpers in the Harper PrC? Etc, etc.
Derek was well done and portrayed very accurately in his game statistics. Not giving him knight levels proves SP's commitment to producing accurate material over game stereotypes, for which I'm extremely happy and proud.
What makes anyone believe that membership in an organization requires you to take the organization's prestige class?
Nobody said that a person had to take PrC in order to have membership in an organization. However, there is a difference between being affiliated and having major political power within an organization. Tanis and Laurana are honorary Knights but didn't have nearly as much pull in the KoS. Granted they were well respected and their opinions mattered, but they weren't about to become head of any of the orders. It just seems odd for a man trying to become Grand Master of all the KoS didn't ever have a single level in any of the PrCs.
Thats like trying to be part of the Jedi High Council and not have a single level of Jedi. Just doesn't make sense, but maybe thats just me.
It just seems odd for a man trying to become Grand Master of all the KoS didn't ever have a single level in any of the PrCs.
Thats like trying to be part of the Jedi High Council and not have a single level of Jedi. Just doesn't make sense, but maybe thats just me.
His political pull is represented through his noble levels. Of all the classes, noble fits the role of a politician the best.
With the KoS prestige classes, you need to look at them as being the epitome of what a knight should be. The PrCs are there to represent the role of a hero knight, not to represent those who are either average or have fallen from grace.
His political pull is represented through his noble levels. Of all the classes, noble fits the role of a politician the best.
With the KoS prestige classes, you need to look at them as being the epitome of what a knight should be. The PrCs are there to represent the role of a hero knight, not to represent those who are either average or have fallen from grace.
Wasn't questioning the noble levels. I think those make total sense.
Even with falling from grace it would still would mean that he had levels in the PrC jut no access to its granted abilities.
So why bother giving him the levels then if they don't change his writeup at all except for rubbing out "Fighter" and adding "Rose Knight"?
Even with falling from grace it would still would mean that he had levels in the PrC jut no access to its granted abilities.
So why bother giving him the levels then if they don't change his writeup at all except for rubbing out "Fighter" and adding "Rose Knight"?
To reflect that he had them to begin with and to accurately depict the character. The levels don't convert to fighter their just levels of a class you can't access the abilities to anymore.
Remember, all through chronicals, we hear that Sturm is more knight that derek ever would be, and derek disparages him for it. I think this is represented by derek's lack of knightly levels.
well, you have to remember the context. There were 63 knights TOTAL during the war of the lance's beginning. With numbers like that, politics and bloodlines will play a huge role in who is in charge of what and classes will be secondary.
Remember, all through chronicals, we hear that Sturm is more knight that derek ever would be, and derek disparages him for it. I think this is represented by derek's lack of knightly levels.
Or that his fall from grace happened right there and then or a little prior to this incident.
Now, Derek Crownguard as a biggum tall leader in the KoS, despite a complete lack of prc levels . . . so what? With his stats and write-up he is more than sufficient to hold his place in the organization. Instead of seeing his write-up as indicative of the author's misinterpretation, you should be looking at it as an indication of Crownguard's own abilities: despite not having prc levels, he still managed to head up the rose knights. Sure there was some politicking going on, but still. Derek was not a stereotype, nor should he be re-made to be one.
If you saw some schmuck on the jedi council, with no levels in jedi, wouldn't you be thinking something along the lines of "wow, there's gotta be something about that guy, I wonder what it is . . ?" or would you be thinking "Nooooo . . . nooooo, there's no way that guy's really a council member. Noooo, this is a joke."
nic
If you saw some schmuck on the jedi council, with no levels in jedi, wouldn't you be thinking something along the lines of "wow, there's gotta be something about that guy, I wonder what it is . . ?" or would you be thinking "Nooooo . . . nooooo, there's no way that guy's really a council member. Noooo, this is a joke."
I would actually think that someone majorly misinterpreted his stats unless they gave a really good explanation in his write up why he was a council member without jedi levels. Maybe theres something wrong with me?
I would actually think that someone majorly misinterpreted his stats unless they gave a really good explanation in his write up why he was a council member without jedi levels. Maybe theres something wrong with me?
No, I can understand your confusion, but I think WOTL addressed all of the problems inherent in Derek Crownguard (who has always been a bastard... and has never been a good man, even when he was younger) with the stat block I wrote for him. Granted, I could have provided some kind of explanatory note to say why he doesn't have levels in the PrC, but there you go.
Cheers,
Cam
No, I can understand your confusion, but I think WOTL addressed all of the problems inherent in Derek Crownguard (who has always been a bastard... and has never been a good man, even when he was younger) with the stat block I wrote for him. Granted, I could have provided some kind of explanatory note to say why he doesn't have levels in the PrC, but there you go.
Cheers,
Cam
I wasn't aiming that last comment at you. That was just in the case of jedi example. I hope you didn't take that as such.
Also, near as I can tell, characters are not aware of what "classes" they posess. It's not as if Derek Crownguard ever said "You know, I've been mulling this over, and I think I'm going with Legendary Tactician rather than Sword Knight." Classes are purely an artifact of the game system which is not present in the slightest in the imaginary minds of the characters.
In other words, no character would know that Crownguard had no Knight levels, so it's really a moot point.
In other words, no character would know that Crownguard had no Knight levels, so it's really a moot point.
Plus, Derek gets almost all of the abilities he'd have earned from his Solamnic knight prestige class levels from his levels in noble and legendary tactician.
He's got the skills, but not the heart, of the knighthood.
Cheers,
Cam
I still think he should of had KoS levels that he could no longer use though :P
Remember, all through chronicals, we hear that Sturm is more knight that derek ever would be, and derek disparages him for it. I think this is represented by derek's lack of knightly levels.
Ooh, I like that Tal. That makes his stats even more realistic. Good call!
I still think he should of had KoS levels that he could no longer use though :P
Then write your own version and submit it to the Nexus. ;)
HUGE difference with the jedi: If you're not a force-user, you have no business being on the Jedi Council.
Right, this is a bad comparison.
Someone on the Jedi Council without any Jedi levels would be like someone on the Wizard's Conclave without any wizard levels.
Big difference.
Thats like trying to be part of the Jedi High Council and not have a single level of Jedi. Just doesn't make sense, but maybe thats just me.
To clarify my point: D&D classes have no bearing on who a character really is. In fact, especially for DL, there seems to an attitude geared very much towards giving a character personality and depth, and assigning D&D class levels as a later priority.
It has never been stated anywhere, for any organization that I'm aware of (or at least not for DL organizations) that being a member of an organization requires you to have the associated PrC.
You seem to be implying or under the belief that if someone is a high-ranking member of such-and-such an organization, then they should have levels in that organization's PrC. That is not the case. They can have levels of the proper PrC, but there is no real reason to take it if the character's archetype and personality don't fit it and Derek's certainly didn't come close to being a KoS. Cam made an excellent decision in designing that.
It might be your way of thinking and you might enforce that in your games, but that is not a cut and clear game design philosophy. Sorry if I was giving confused information; no offense meant.
Peace.
I just don't think Derek Crownguard was completely corrupt throughout his whole KoS career. Towards the end of it, yes. Undoubtedly. Granted, there are books that were later published that made him sound like a bastard from the start (which many question). I myself think it was a gradual thing. Thats just my opinion I guess.
Even granting you the benefit of the doubt - saying he was a pretty amicable chap at some point in his life - why does that necessarily mean he should KoS levels? Why aren't Fighter or Noble good enough? That's my point. I'm saying those other levels are good enough and that doesn't simply apply to Derek either.
Plus, Derek gets almost all of the abilities he'd have earned from his Solamnic knight prestige class levels from his levels in noble and legendary tactician.
He's got the skills, but not the heart, of the knighthood.
Cheers,
Cam
I think I can accept this.
Didn't think I would start suvch a heated debate, it was fun though.
Let's see if I can find a kender and get Kipper going at it. :D :D :D
Even granting you the benefit of the doubt - saying he was a pretty amicable chap at some point in his life - why does that necessarily mean he should KoS levels? Why aren't Fighter or Noble good enough? That's my point. I'm saying those other levels are good enough and that doesn't simply apply to Derek either.
Its because he was the head of an order and going for Grand Master. You can't become a general without first serving as a private and working yourself up the ranks.
The same goes for the WoHS. Yes you can be part of them without necessarily having levels in the WoHS PrC, but how many of the Orders' heads don't have levels of the PrC? Wouldn't you find it odd that Dalamar only had straight wizard levels and no levels of Black Robe and still be the head of that order?
Its because he was the head of an order and going for Grand Master. You can't become a general without first serving as a private and working yourself up the ranks.
You are correct. But none of those things have anything to do with prestige classes. I think you're confusing game mechanics and story. I'm sure there are many Knights of the Rose in the 5th Age who have no levels in any KoS.
The same goes for the WoHS. Yes you can be part of them without necessarily having levels in the WoHS PrC, but how many of the Orders' heads don't have levels of the PrC? Wouldn't you find it odd that Dalamar only had straight wizard levels and no levels of Black Robe and still be the head of that order?
No, I wouldn't find it odd. Prestige classes, at their core, are completely optional. They never have to be taken and there is a general consensus amongst many people that places way too much importance on them. They grant nifty abilities. Ok, I'll give you that. But what do they do for a character's personality? His depth of character? His goals, ambitions, dreams, and ideologies?
Does Dalamar need levels of WoHS? No. Is it cool to give them to him for the nifty abilities? Yes. Is it symbolic of his membership? Yes. But so are regular wizard levels. In the end, it boils down to trying to maintain an open mind frame about the mingling of game and story details.
Technically, you could ditch every PrC in DL and still have an awesome game. It would make the game a lot simpler, I'll say that, and probably put a heavier focus on individualizing a character through roleplaying versus through mechanics. But PrC's add cool game mechanics and effects to your game and are fun additions. However, the important thing to understand is that they are additions and thus never essential to a good (or logical) character build.
My apologies if I've offended or sounded harsh. Was just trying to be succinct. Peace.
If you say Derek isn't good, and never was.. then it makes sense that he never had any levels because he never had the requirement of being LG. I still find the definition of Good and such lacking in D&D, mainly because of stuff like this, but thats beside the point. It won't ever get changed. Too many people get downed because they have a quirk that isn't "holy" or "pious" or something else that isn't seen as "all the way good". Ambition doesnt ever bother me in a person, but whatever. We could all debate what exactly is good and isnt.. and never have a consensus.
But.. now if any of you admit that Derek might have been good in the beginning and eventually went downhill as he progressed, than I see it where he could have KoS PrC levels and eventually lost the abilities to change. Remember, Cam never said that Derek didn't take levels in the PrC because Derek didnt want to.. basically in the last huge thread it came down to "because he was LN". Now this could open up the.. well yea but if he *used* to be good, then I could *definately* see him wanting to attain those levels in the KoS prestige class because as you all put it "The KoS PrC's are the *true knights* (I hate that term =\)". Personally I just don't see how he *wouldnt* have aspired to that level. The guy lived for the knighthood and considered himself the pure epitomy of the knighthood. I doubt that becoming a "true knight" wasnt high on his priority list.
I guess its all how you look at it. If you say he was never good, which I dont agree with but can understand people's opinions, than yea he never did quite get there because of the alignment issue. But now if anyone believes that he *was* good and then started degenerating.. then its definately conceivable that he had levels before hand. "I don't want to make it messy" really isn't a good excuse when it comes down to not giving him the levels. "He never was LG and so couldnt ever get in the PrC" I guess is better, although still not a fan of it. "He never wanted to take levels in the PrC, he got all his abilities and training from being a noble and fighter" is even better, only problem I had was as I said before I dont see why he *wouldnt* want to be the "true knight". Wonder what happens when LN, CG, etc KoS seek to attain that "true knight" status in the knighthood and never quite make it. Thats where death knights could occur right there if they got mad enough and did something bad because of it. I think Lord Soth's main henchman(can't remember his name) was an example of a CG knight(*edit* actually not CG since the guy did some pretty evil stuff, more like CE I guess..I mentioned it mainly to show that there can be Chaotic characters in the knighthood).. he did everything by the book around people, but ended up backstabbing an Ogre or something when no one else was around.
Rook: No one has ever said that someone *has* to take levels in the PrC's for an organization. We all mostly understand its not a requirement, but I still believe, and you may think differently, that almost everytime you saw a real high ranking member of that organization, that it would have *some* levels in the PrC. I had this problem with Storm from FR when she was a founding member of the Harpers and high ranking offical, and yet had like 1-2 levels in the prestige class that went along with it. I understand it isnt a requirement, I just find it kind of funky. It should be a rarity at best I believe.
*ps* Where in the world does it say there are only 67 knights left at the beginning of the War of the Lance? Now granted I havent poured through the War of the Lance sourcebook, but that seems *awfully* low even for the time. Just remembering the different stories it seems theres more. Granted if you added up all the knights in the novels it probbaly wouldnt equal that, but that is very very low. I'd be interested how that number was came by.
*ps2* I still maintain derek isnt a bad guy :D The guy has ambition.. it happens. Not a big fan of that short story about him, but what can ya do... Even Good people have faults that don't always get "fixed". You could have a racist good person, someone who hated Ogres or something and still do lots of good in the world...
Rook: No one has ever said that someone *has* to take levels in the PrC's for an organization. We all mostly understand its not a requirement, but I still believe, and you may think differently, that almost everytime you saw a real high ranking member of that organization, that it would have *some* levels in the PrC. I had this problem with Storm from FR when she was a founding member of the Harpers and high ranking offical, and yet had like 1-2 levels in the prestige class that went along with it. I understand it isnt a requirement, I just find it kind of funky. It should be a rarity at best I believe.
I understand that point of view. I just think it's a fallacy to expect that. It isn't a realistic notion. The characters are striving to be something in the setting and game mechanics have nothing to do with it. The 'Derek was/could have been a good guy' argument aside (I agree with Cam in that he was always a real dirtbag), Being a powerful of high-ranking member of an organization has nothing - I repeat, nothing - to do with a prestige class by default.
A prestige class is just a way to tack on game mechanics to something and give it nifty power or abilities - hence, it satisfies the 'cool' factor. It has nothing to do with the character itself. And it also makes people feel like they've got their money's worth out of a book when there are the usual popular crunchy bits in there (PrC's, magic items, spells, monsters, etc).
Speaking from a personal standpoint, I love designing PrC's and using them in my game. But it never struck me as odd when I saw Derek's stats because I don't automatically put the two together. In fact, about the only time I put the two together is when my players get into them or when designing a particularly unique NPC. For the most part, if there were no prestige classes in DL, I wouldn't blink twice. But I love the ones that are there and wouldn't want to get rid of them.
One of the things I have always believed since I began designing for the d20 System is that, while a prestige class represents the IDEAL member of an organization, it usually isn't a requirement for the organization's membership. It's a game mechanism that should have no effect on roleplaying or the reactions of character in the game world. Though I believe it, most examples in the books are characters that take the PrC (often because in fiction the characters mentioned ARE the idealized members of their organization).
Derek Crownguard is a perfect example of a character who lives by the rules of an organization but not by its heart. His stats reflect that idea. I was actually arguiing the other side in the beginning, but have since come to believe it was the correct way to represent him in the game material.
Jamie Chambers
Sovereign Press, Inc.
Right, this is a bad comparison.
Someone on the Jedi Council without any Jedi levels would be like someone on the Wizard's Conclave without any wizard levels.
Big difference.
There are other force users beyond just jedi. If a force adept were on the Council with no jedi levels it would still raise some eyebrows.
*ps* Where in the world does it say there are only 67 knights left at the beginning of the War of the Lance? Now granted I havent poured through the War of the Lance sourcebook, but that seems *awfully* low even for the time. Just remembering the different stories it seems theres more. Granted if you added up all the knights in the novels it probbaly wouldnt equal that, but that is very very low. I'd be interested how that number was came by.
63 knights, actually.
By the time the War of the Lance rolls around, the Solamnic orders are a pale shadow of their former selves. They've been forced into hiding, adopting clandestine circles in cities and regions in which they once proudly waved the banner of the kingfisher and rose, chased out of their ancestral homes by the commonfolk, reviled as witches and sorcerers, blamed for the Cataclysm, and much worse. It isn't a good time to be a knight. Many of the knightly families have died out, their last male heirs falling to ogres or turning to the life of a mercenary knight, selling their services. Only on Sancrist and along the coast of Solamnia have lord knights held onto their estates, and when the Dragonarmies sweep over Solamnia and along the coast of the New Sea many of these castles fall.
It really should be said that there is a huge difference between the knights of Huma's time, as presented in the Legend of Huma and other books of that era, and the knights of the Gunthar's time. It is indeed fortunate that Sturm came along, for he lifted the spirits of the squires and soldiers and men-at-arms, and young knights of the Solamnic orders, showing them that Derek's path of political ambition and adherance to the Measure above all things was no path to righteousness. Derek's road ended violently in Chronicles, and had Sturm and Laurana not entered the picture, that would have been the fate of all of the Knights of Solamnia.
Derek is lawful neutral not because he's ambitious, but because he doesn't even try to be a good man. It takes work in Dragonlance to be good. There are many more neutral humans in Ansalon when the War of the Lance begins than good humans. This doesn't make them evil, or malicious, or want to cause harm. Derek didn't seek out to hurt people, although he was quick to punish those who acted against what he believed the Measure to dictate. But he was never a good man, and that was his failing.
Cheers,
Cam
If a force adept were on the Council with no jedi levels it would still raise some eyebrows.
Who'd know? If a person IS a Jedi, it doesn't matter if they have Jedi levels or not. Nobody in the game world knows.
Think about it this way. I certainly don't personally know how many levels of Expert I have with ranks in Craft Software. Is there a template for graduate degrees? To I have the Project Manager PrC? It doesn't matter.
Nobody goes around Krynn during War of the Lance with their eyebrows raised because Derek doesn't have the right class levels. He's a Rose Knight, he can swing a sword pretty well, the men respect him, good enough for most.
I don't know, I am just rambling.
Orignally posted by Rooks
But it never struck me as odd when I saw Derek's stats because I don't automatically put the two together.
See when I read his stats it didn't strike me as odd, until I read his history. Then it practically leaped out and slapped me. It just seemed odd to me that someone who is the high position in an order, High Justice, and is trying to attain the highest order in the organization, Grand Master, should (IMO) have at least some levels in the class.
Originally posted by Cam Banks
It really should be said that there is a huge difference between the knights of Huma's time, as presented in the Legend of Huma and other books of that era, and the knights of the Gunthar's time. It is indeed fortunate that Sturm came along, for he lifted the spirits of the squires and soldiers and men-at-arms, and young knights of the Solamnic orders, showing them that Derek's path of political ambition and adherance to the Measure above all things was no path to righteousness. Derek's road ended violently in Chronicles, and had Sturm and Laurana not entered the picture, that would have been the fate of all of the Knights of Solamnia.
I like this explanation because it shows how far the knighthood has fallen from it's glory days and how desperate they really were. Adn i can accept that as an explanation for Derek.
Note: It also appears that Derek could not have qualified for the Rose Knight PrC even if he was good (unless you drop the Legendary Tactician Levels in favor of rose knight)
Who'd know? If a person IS a Jedi, it doesn't matter if they have Jedi levels or not. Nobody in the game world knows.
Think about it this way. I certainly don't personally know how many levels of Expert I have with ranks in Craft Software. Is there a template for graduate degrees? To I have the Project Manager PrC? It doesn't matter.
Nobody goes around Krynn during War of the Lance with their eyebrows raised because Derek doesn't have the right class levels. He's a Rose Knight, he can swing a sword pretty well, the men respect him, good enough for most.
Well said. Very well put. That's exactly my point and you've put it very simply.
Derek is lawful neutral not because he's ambitious, but because he doesn't even try to be a good man. It takes work in Dragonlance to be good. There are many more neutral humans in Ansalon when the War of the Lance begins than good humans. This doesn't make them evil, or malicious, or want to cause harm. Derek didn't seek out to hurt people, although he was quick to punish those who acted against what he believed the Measure to dictate. But he was never a good man, and that was his failing.
To add to what Cam said here, the very nature of being Lawful Neutral in alignment is following the law above all things. Being raised in Solamnia, the law is the Measure. His full dedication to the letter of the Measure, rather than its heart, is what makes Derek LN.
This is also a good example of a Lawful Neutral character who isn't a two-dimensional soldier as well.
Game rules are a way to quantify characters. You use a set of rules to place down on paper all those things that make the character what they are. In the end, though, they're just rules and not the characters themselves.
The D&D rules are just one way of quantifying those characters. You can do it any number of ways, whether using SAGA, AD&D, the WEG d6 system, Castles and Crusades, and so on and so forth.
No matter how you quantify them on paper, they're still the same characters. I once played a wookiee Jedi Knight in Star Wars under several different systems (homebrew White Wolf, WEG d6, original and revised d20 systems). Yes, the mechanics changes throughout the process of converting him from one system to the next, but he was still good ol' Kurrelgyrre. How I roleplayed him didn't change, even when the rules did.
There are other force users beyond just jedi. If a force adept were on the Council with no jedi levels it would still raise some eyebrows.
Well then, that'd still be like a sorcerer being on the Wizard's Conclave. I still don't think it applies to this situation.
A more appropriate comparison would be a knight withouth the Knight of Solamnia PrC is like a Jedi on the Jedi Council without having any levels in the Council Jedi PrC (if such a thing existed).
Well then, that'd still be like a sorcerer being on the Wizard's Conclave. I still don't think it applies to this situation.
A more appropriate comparison would be a knight withouth the Knight of Solamnia PrC is like a Jedi on the Jedi Council without having any levels in the Council Jedi PrC (if such a thing existed).
Which was pretty much my point. :P
Which was pretty much my point. :P
Well then, I guess I disagree with your point. Because I don't have a problem with a Jedi on the Jedi Council without a Council Jedi PrC. Of course they'd have to be a Jedi (or an Adept...some kind of Force user).
All organizations are going to have pre-requisites or requirements in order to join. Like to join the knighthood...they're going to require that you at least have some competence with a sword. But that doesn't mean you have to be a fighter. Just like if you're going to join the Wizards of High Sorcery...they're going to require that you at least have working knowledge of how to prepare and cast spells. But this doesn't it mean that if you are accepted you have to use those same requirements and pre-requisites to take the PrC.
But I'm not really saying anything that hasn't already been said on this thread...so I'm not helping things. LOL!
Well then, I guess I disagree with your point. Because I don't have a problem with a Jedi on the Jedi Council without a Council Jedi PrC. Of course they'd have to be a Jedi (or an Adept...some kind of Force user).!
We differ in our way of thinking. (shrug)
All organizations are going to have pre-requisites or requirements in order to join. Like to join the knighthood...they're going to require that you at least have some competence with a sword. But that doesn't mean you have to be a fighter. Just like if you're going to join the Wizards of High Sorcery...they're going to require that you at least have working knowledge of how to prepare and cast spells. But this doesn't it mean that if you are accepted you have to use those same requirements and pre-requisites to take the PrC.
No, but I would expect those that are going to be Order Masters to have at least some levels of the WoHS PrC. Makes for a more credible leader build when the head of the Order actually knows the Orders secret's (provided by the PrC) that he is leading.
Now from this, it begs the question what happens when a "true knight" detects evil or something. Would they be able to go up to the Grand Council and say "behold, I did a Detect Evil and that knight shone like a beacon." What happens if a "true knight" does a detect good spell and some of his fellow knights dont come up as good. Dont argue about the semantics of "well he wouldnt do that".. I'm just saying if the situation came up. To me that would cause a little bit of a stir. Say the knights had their spells in the time of Derek. A couple of them had spells and cast detect good, for some reason or another. They notice that Derek comes up not as good. I guess that would cause a stir.. especially if enough people witnessed it. How does the knighthood address LN people? Or CN neutral? Is the requirement to be a KoS to be LG... or just Lawful.. or it doesnt matter? I would assume it would be Lawful, but then again I'd assume it would be LG also. Since spells are around now will the "true knights" make sure only LG people are in their knighthood?
I guess my problem is more with the things that the stats opened up then the stats themsevles. I've always known that u dont have to have the PrC to be in the organization. But now I guess I just see more of the faults with the knighthood and potential problems. Wouldnt you feel left out and less if all your knight buddies could Turn Undead or cast clerical spells, but you didnt have that ability. I guess that happens...
I dunno, its late.. or early.. and I'm rambling. Finals have me stressed, just figured I'd come on here and state more of my opinion. I'll try to be a little bit more cohesive next time heh.
I guess that would cause a stir.. especially if enough people witnessed it. How does the knighthood address LN people? Or CN neutral? Is the requirement to be a KoS to be LG... or just Lawful.. or it doesnt matter? I would assume it would be Lawful, but then again I'd assume it would be LG also. Since spells are around now will the "true knights" make sure only LG people are in their knighthood?
From what I've read in DLCS is that they are either cast out or have their throat slit by their own blade. I think the later is reserved for those who grossly transgress against the Measure
I guess my problem is more with the things that the stats opened up then the stats themsevles. I've always known that u dont have to have the PrC to be in the organization. But now I guess I just see more of the faults with the knighthood and potential problems. Wouldnt you feel left out and less if all your knight buddies could Turn Undead or cast clerical spells, but you didnt have that ability. I guess that happens...
It's much more likely that knights after the return of the Gods will have levels in the prestige class, simply because it's more noticeable after that point, and the traits which identify them are more supernatural in nature. Were Derek to be active later, such as the period leading up to the Chaos War, he'd not have advanced so highly without the support of his brothers in faith. As it was, the pre-War of the Lance Age of Despair was characterized by individuals like Derek who could advance by politics alone.
Alignment detection is also something to be concerned about in any campaign. It was trimmed back a lot in 3rd edition D&D - there's no know alignment spell now, for example. Your actions are much more reliable indicators than magic, especially in Dragonlance, and so if you act like a knight and look like a knight, you can probably remain a knight until you do something to prove that you're not.
Cheers,
Cam
See my problem never much was that there was a knight who didnt have KoS PrC levels. Its more of the fact that Derek didn't, I guess I always saw him as aspiring to be *the* knight and it would be natural he would go for that. But you all say he's LN, which may be so, everyone has their own opinion.
Derek was aspiring to be the knight, but in terms of how he viewed the knighthood. At the time of the War of the Lance, the knights were so wrapped up in following the letter of the Measure, they forgot the very heart of it. Derek represents this. He probably thought he was doing good.
Now from this, it begs the question what happens when a "true knight" detects evil or something. Would they be able to go up to the Grand Council and say "behold, I did a Detect Evil and that knight shone like a beacon."
I would think a knight would need a bit of proof beyond this. They would undoubtedly look at the knight's record and at how he behaved while on duty.
What happens if a "true knight" does a detect good spell and some of his fellow knights dont come up as good. Dont argue about the semantics of "well he wouldnt do that".. I'm just saying if the situation came up. To me that would cause a little bit of a stir.
I imagine the knights would look at such an individual as someone who may be losing faith. Perhaps they would be concerned that he was headed towards evil, or perhaps the knight in question just seems to lack all emotion. I'm guessing some "reform" might come into play too.
There's any number of possibilities.
How does the knighthood address LN people? Or CN neutral?
On a case by case basis.
Is the requirement to be a KoS to be LG... or just Lawful.. or it doesnt matter? I would assume it would be Lawful, but then again I'd assume it would be LG also. Since spells are around now will the "true knights" make sure only LG people are in their knighthood?
Within every organization, there's a variety of people. In D&D terms, you can say they are of all alignments. The Knights of Solamnia are no different. The knighthood aspires to have as many LG people as possible. At the same time, some members don't have as strong of a belief in law, or aren't quite as good, or maybe just wish to serve.
The KoS prestige classes are there to represent the epitome of the role of a hero knight. They do not represent every knight.
Really, I think this discussion boils down to a few things, namely how we interpret Derek Crownguard and some differences of opinion on design philosophy.
Really, I think this discussion boils down to a few things, namely how we interpret Derek Crownguard and some differences of opinion on design philosophy.
I view him as a dirtbag. A well written dirtbag, but a dirtbag nonetheless. He probably thought he was doing good - no doubt - but then he probably thought it was fine to talk to the mashed potato people during supper as well.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to chase down that leprechaun and get my gold back...
k, thats all...
Burger
High Justice - Alfred Markennin (Which is funny, Alfred being a sword knight and his descript saying no rose knights of his rank exist during WoTL, and yet Derek and Alfred are both 10th level Characters. Not the same class levels of course)
High Clerist - ?
High Warrior - ?
Gunthar is not the High Warrior, the High Clerist or teh High Justice. He is the Grand master. He may be thinking about retiring, but he is definately not the High warrior, he is a rose knight not a crown knight.
Actually, originally he was. He was the highest ranking Crown knight, Alfred was the highest ranking Sword knight, and Derek was the highest ranking Rose knight. All three held equal status, despite the fact that the Orders are scaled.
Eventually, however, the impression was made that Gunthar was a Rose knight also, so that's what we went with in WOTL. Check out his original module stats to see otherwise.
Cheers,
Cam
But i guess that the Gunthar thing is still without answer. I consulted the 2nd edition Tales of the Lance book, and in Gunthar stats says only Grand Master.
Any news?
k, thats all...
Burger
But i guess that the Gunthar thing is still without answer. I consulted the 2nd edition Tales of the Lance book, and in Gunthar stats says only Grand Master.
The answer is, he's a Knight of the Rose. We already established that.
Cheers,
Cam
My questions are.. has it been retconned now that there are three heads of the orders: High Justice, High Clerist, and High Warrior and from these three the Grand Master is determined? And if so, was there no High Warrior during the War of the Lance. If Gunther is supposed to be it, how can he if he is a Knight of the Rose? What of trials now if it is retconned.. does it require all three heads and the Grand Master? Or is it still the High Justice, High Clerist, and the Grand Master? I guess it just seems Weis and Hickman wrote the books one way and now we seem to have added another top person in there that doesnt seem to be mentioned in the novels. Just in case I run into trials in my campaign it would be nice to know.
Another thing, I've looked through the books and still don't agree with there only being like 67 knights(not sure where that exact number of 67 came from) at the start of the War of the Lance. The only real thing I saw to support it was at Sturm's trial they mentioned how hard it was to get 20 knights to bear witness. But man, 67 is low. Thats slightly more than the membership of my fraternity here at school. Just seems to be low for a *knighthood*. And yes I do realize that the have lots of other troops they pay and upkeep who make up their armies. But still, 67.. just seems more likely they would have died out. But who knows. With all the different missions knights were sent out on in this period, you would think they would be reluctant to do so considering there isnt many of them.
Also after the disastrous attack at the High Clerist's Tower, there would have been very little knights left. Might not even be enough to train more. When Derek was getting ready to go out and fight, he said that since when do goblins and such fight as well as Knights. This means he thought that him and his knights would wipe them up. To me, this means he didnt have say 20 knights and expect that the rest of his army would "be as good as knights" but that he actually had a fair number of knights, who were all expertly trained. I just can't see him being so optimistic with say.. 20 knights. Somehow expecting that they would annhiliate the other force because his 20 people were so expertly trained. Granted he had other forces with him, support troops, but he specifically mentions "the Knights".
I dunno, open to any thoughts. Just trying to clear this stuff up.
The only part that I thought even hinted or backed up the number of 67 was during Sturm's trial Gunther said there were 20 knights hastily gathered from parts of Sancrist. At first I thought this meant there werent many left, but I dont think so now. I think he just gathered higher up ones *in* Sancrist. Theres a lot more around in other parts and cities, castles and strongholds, on missions, etc.
Now I reread the part of the battle at the Tower of the High Clerist and many times "knights" are mentioned. When Derek goes off and gets slaughtered, Sturm says he has about 100 knights left to defend the Tower. To me, I take that as there being 100 knights, but I guess others could assume they are foot soldiers or something. But as Derek rode out, he specifically mentioned his knights and the foot soldiers that followed behind, so they werent just lumped together. Sturm constantly talks about "the knights" and I believe that most of what was left really were mainly all Knights of the Crown. I think roughly there were 300 knights at the Tower of High Clerist.. maybe between 200-300 and the rest were foot soldiers and support troops, maybe archers. If there were 100 Knights of the Crown, I think its reasonable to say there were at least 100 Knights of the Sword and Rose. So thats at least 200, if not a little bit more.
I just dont see it as even really possible that there were less than 100 knights at the start of the War of the Lance. I personally believe there were more than that *after* the War. I do believe that their numbers were really low at the end, but what that number would be I dont hazard a guess.
"The Knights of Solamnia, such as they are, are involved in a bitter struggle for leadership, although what of remains a questions. Apparently, of the 63 known knights still remaining at this time, all 63 want power."
Cheers,
Cam