So my problem is this - in 2nd AD&D you could added special classes as variants of core ones and Greyhawk books were written as such. For example, I now looked through the Scarlet Brotherhood and they society is based on three classes - monks, assassins and thieves. From 3ed onward assassins are prestige class/paragon path, not something you got from start. So what to do with this like situations?
In Scarlet Brotherhood example I think just to swap assassins with wizards - in sourcebook it is mentioned they wanted they position from beginning - but there are many other examples in previous sources. How do you handle this?
Last edited by wyrdhamster on Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:23 am; edited 2 times in total
I have converted some of the old class kits into suitable class alternatives and kits for the 3.5 version of the game. Some of my conversions pull from the pathfinder rules as well. Maybe I'll make that my next project completing the complete rogue.
3e is a different system from the previous ones; multi-classing is very easy to do and often encouraged. Is a Rogue 10/Assassin 10 supposed to be a thief or an assassin? There's also new classes that fill similar roles to pre-existing ones - what if I wanted the "thug" variant of the fighter class from the PHB? Could I get away with saying I'm part of the thief/spy caste? Or the factotum from Dungeonscape (all skills are class skills)?
Two ways you can attack this:
(1) Re-organize the caste system (Argon's proposal). I actually like this, since I was never keen on wizards not being part of the hierarchy. (I'm not terribly keen on monks either, but I suppose that's neither here nor there.)
(2) Substitute another (comparable) class for assassins. For this, adapting the ninja class from Complete Adventurer would probably be your best bet. (Just call it "scarlet assassin" or something other than ninja.) There's also the scout and the spellthief from the same book, but those aren't exactly "assassin" type classes.
Of course, the easiest way is to make the brotherhood assassins - NPCs. Use the defunct classes as a house advantage so the later edition players get a nasty surprise.
Personally, I never liked the idea of assassin players as story-wise it didn't really make sense as a relatable character. Assassins seem more focused on a goal - assigned target, then simply wandering around looking for adventure.
The current Father of Obedience -- head of the Scarlet Brotherhood -- is Korenth Zan, 17th level Magic User. (The Scarlet Brotherhood, page 5.)
Of course, it could be someone else . . . "today." I play an older, "pre-Wars" game, myself.
In Scarlet Brotherhood he is 17th level Monk, of course. They needed to put the monks there to sold new seplement. And as I have mixed feelings with monks in general in fantasy, I let them be with a big "mostly NPC class".
Generally, for SB I just change Assassins with Wizards - and Assassins Prestige Class as "favorite" for Brotherhoods agents.
(1) Re-organize the caste system (Argon's proposal). I actually like this, since I was never keen on wizards not being part of the hierarchy. (I'm not terribly keen on monks either, but I suppose that's neither here nor there.).
-Actually, in Sean Reynold's Scarlet Brotherhood supplement, the titles for the tripartite system is not meant to be taken literally. Some monks are titled "thieves" and vice versa. There are examples of wizards, fighters, clerics, and everyone else in the hierarchy as either "Monks", "Assassins" or "Thieves", usually based on level.
Azoriel wrote:
(2) Substitute another (comparable) class for assassins. For this, adapting the ninja class from Complete Adventurer would probably be your best bet. (Just call it "scarlet assassin" or something other than ninja.) There's also the scout and the spellthief from the same book, but those aren't exactly "assassin" type classes.
-The easiest thing in D&D 3.5 (which Wyrdhamster specified as his system) is to just use rogues as SB assassins, using the appropriate skills and feats. If an SB assassin wants to "toughen up" with shields and heavy weapons, he can take a level of fighter when (if) he makes it to second level.
That way, I don't have to take to many liberties with the rules, and it's still very much like the old "Assassin" class.
Actually, in Sean Reynold's Scarlet Brotherhood supplement, the titles for the tripartite system is not meant to be taken literally. Some monks are titled "thieves" and vice versa. There are examples of wizards, fighters, clerics, and everyone else in the hierarchy as either "Monks", "Assassins" or "Thieves", usually based on level.
Ah! This is much more palatable to me! (Vice having a caste system that dictated what you did in meta-game terms - bleh.) I think I may stick to the whole thief(spy)/assassin/monk designation in my own campaigns then. No doubt the guys will be rather surprised when the "head monk" starts casting high-level wizard spells...
The current Father of Obedience -- head of the Scarlet Brotherhood -- is Korenth Zan, 17th level Magic User. (The Scarlet Brotherhood, page 5.)
Of course, it could be someone else . . . "today." I play an older, "pre-Wars" game, myself.
In Scarlet Brotherhood he is 17th level Monk, of course. They needed to put the monks there to sold new seplement. And as I have mixed feelings with monks in general in fantasy, I let them be with a big "mostly NPC class".
Generally, for SB I just change Assassins with Wizards - and Assassins Prestige Class as "favorite" for Brotherhoods agents.
Wyrdhamster,
I completely understand your hesitancy to include the monk class the way its proposed in the players handbook. The monk class does not have the western feel that many of the other classes have in the game. I created and submitted an article available here on CF listed Monastic Fighting Styles of the Flanaess. http://www.canonfire.com/cf/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=996
The very first style is listed for the Scarlet Brotherhood monk their fighting style is known as the Silent Sash. I hope this helps with including monks in your campaign.
First - Scarlet Brotherhood cast system demands that you from beginning be risen as "caste class" member. So even if later in you life you can multiclass, you begins your start as base class. The problem with Assassins in 3ed+ is they are earn. You can always made character that can easily become Assassin as soon as possible, but it's not the setting Scarlet Brotherhood caste system. Easier to me is replacing Assassins as cast with Mages, especially as I thought of SB from beginning as magocracy like Thay in Forgotten Realms ( only more serious ).
Second - I just get this feel of monk as "outsider from far Orient". Also, can't imagine not Oriental Adventure ones elves or dwarves in Greyhawk. But it is easily to accept in Forgotten Realms for me - maybe because I want Greyhawk to be more "pure" setting?
Argon, thanks for link, readied it and love it. If you ever would want help with Monastic Tradition foe D&D Next - write to me and will help.
First - Scarlet Brotherhood cast system demands that you from beginning be risen as "caste class" member. So even if later in you life you can multiclass, you begins your start as base class. The problem with Assassins in 3ed+ is they are earn. You can always made character that can easily become Assassin as soon as possible, but it's not the setting Scarlet Brotherhood caste system.
The only reason it says that is to make the background information fit the rules. When you are writing background information to fit the rules system, and the rules system changes, you either rewrite the background information to fit the the new rules, or write new rules to fit the background information.
Without rewriting anything, you can have members of the Assassin caste using the Assassin Prestige Class as usual. What you will see is that, at lower levels, Rogues who are a part of the Thieves Caste will focus on a different skill set than Rogues of the Assassin caste will. For example, a Thieves Cast Rogue would be the one focusing on Disable Device and similar skills, while the Assassin Caste Rogue will be focusing on skills like Disguise. Both will surely train in stealth skills.
As to Feats, you should see a difference there too. A Thieves Caste Rogue will often take Feats that improve their thieving skills, such as Nimble Fingers, Acrobatic, etc., while a Assassin Caste Rogue will be taking Feats like Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, Exotic Weapon Proficiency, etc., because they are all about *killing* stuff, not stealing stuff.
Members of both castes are still purely Rogues (at least until they take Prestige Class levels), but the difference between the two is in the focus of their training.
Once a Rogue of either caste is high enough level to take Prestige Class levels, then they go their separate ways completely- the members of the Thieves Caste not being allowed to take levels in the Assassin Prestige Class, and those of the the Assassins Caste being *required* to take levels in the Assassin Prestige Class. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
Cebrion's solution is also supported by the fact that the Assassin caste is generally considered to be of a higher authority and prestige than the Thief caste. That is well-represented by the fact that admittance to that caste requires that a person be qualified to take levels in the prestige class.
First - Scarlet Brotherhood cast system demands that you from beginning be risen as "caste class" member. So even if later in you life you can multiclass, you begins your start as base class. The problem with Assassins in 3ed+ is they are earn. You can always made character that can easily become Assassin as soon as possible, but it's not the setting Scarlet Brotherhood caste system...
-Actually, a full citizen of the SB can rise or fall in their caste. It also seems likely that almost everyone starts in the "thief" social caste, even 1st level Monks (although they quickly leave that behind).
It is also possible to fall out entirely, and be made a sub-citizen for awful behavior/performance, while sub-citizens occasionally are made citizens (presumably of the "thief" social class).
"Founded by Kevelli Mauk over a thousand years ago, the Brotherhood of the Scarlet Sign initially did no more than teach the doctrine of racial and cultural purity . . .
"The Scarlet Brotherhood takes great care in selecting suitable mates for breeding children . . . the Office of Purity -- the governmental group directing the breeding and training of citizens -- determines appropriate matches and informs the prospective parents of their obligation . . .
"Chosen mates are required to live together until the child is conceived . . . after the child is born and the baby declared viable, the father returns to his work . . .
"Sub-citizens are not involved in the breeding program. The Office of Purity realizes that exceptional traits sometimes arise by chance; the sub-citizens are the experimental group used for this purpose."
What? You thought the "breeding program" only "applied" to slaves and sub-citizens? Nope!
They breed their own people for "racial purity." There is no "falling in love, getting married and having kids" in the Scarlet Brotherhood.
Woe be unto the member of the Scarlet Brotherhood that allows him/herself to fall in love with a Rhennee.
And if you think that's bad, try falling in love with a Bakluni!
...They breed their own people for "racial purity." There is no "falling in love, getting married and having kids" in the Scarlet Brotherhood...[/color][/i][/b]
-IIRC (I don't have it on me), there is falling in love [with other citizens], and I think they can get married to other citizens (what would be the point of stopping them); it's the kids part that's controlled. I also think they mention cases where you can have kids with your spouse (if the ministry of whatever-Purity?-allows it), but they still end up in the program.
. . . I think they can get married to other citizens . . .
I shall delve deeper into the publication. Interesting information is to be found throughout, sometimes as single sentences where you least expect them. I haven't read anything in particular concerning marriage.
Everything about "you" is known and "you" will be informed that "you" will mate with this particular person. The "leaders" of the Brotherhood don't care what your "spouse" -- if any -- may think of it.
jamesdglick wrote:
I also think they mention cases where you can have kids with your spouse (if the ministry of whatever-Purity?-allows it), but they still end up in the program.
And therein lies the "point" -- if the Office of Purityallows it.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises
And as I have mixed feelings with monks in general in fantasy, I let them be with a big "mostly NPC class". 
(Vice having a caste system that dictated what you did in meta-game terms - bleh.) I think I may stick to the whole thief(spy)/assassin/monk designation in my own campaigns then. No doubt the guys will be rather surprised when the "head monk" starts casting high-level wizard spells... 
