One of the founders of our hobby and one of the most unsung contributors to Dungeons & Dragons, Len Lakofka has passed away at the age of 76.
Along with the many adventures, classes, spells, and rules he created, Len was also father of the Suel in Greyhawk, designer of their gods, and namesake of the Lendore Isles.
The value of his work goes without saying, but his presence will be sorely missed. The adventures of Leomund go on.
Congrats Cebrion on a hard worked, hard fought article. My only question on first read is one on background. Did they liberate Admundfort Island in canon? I thought it was still the homebase for Vayne (I have no idea just going from memory).
Yes, Admundfort was very recently liberated. This is the reason why Vayne is running amok in Expedition to Greyhawk Ruins(I consider this canon) and not running things in Admundfort. I almost missed this bit, but I edited it in very recently. The heraldry for the Knights of Holy Shielding will be added to the article very soon, plus a very minor revision.
It is of note that it wasn't the Knights of Holy Shielding who valiantly stormed the shores and took Admundfort- it fell from within. Never underestimate the power of a dedicated Shield Lander underground! I would assume that some members of "The Resistance" continue their service as counter-intelligence/counter-insurgency forces. The Knights of Holy Shielding have made a point of fortifying the island itself as well as the city, plus rebuilding what needs to be rebuilt.
Perhaps this played out in LG, but if it didn't they surely missed a perfect opportunity for an adventure. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
Great article, skillfully combining background history and stats.
I did see that Ceb, in the author's notes, is making the distinction between merely devoted members of the knighthood and those who have been chosen to express divine power (in 1.5E terms, perhaps, cavaliers vs. paladins). He constrasts someone like Count Jaktarai with a hypothetical "holy paramour", a phrase that caught my attention since paramour means a lover or mistriss...perhaps the CHR requirement for the class should be higher...or perhaps he meant paragon? _________________ My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
Paramour was the word I meant to use, and not Paragon. While paramour does mean "illicit lover", it was also used as a term for Christ(if used by a woman) or for the Virgin Mary(if used by a man). When used in a religious context the word has an entirely different meaning. The word comes from par amour or "by way of love, passionately" and it is in this context that I use it as it relates to the religious background of the Knights of Holy Shielding. That really is the only meaning I had ever ascribed to the word(until now that is). And so, such a person that bears the title "Paramour" in the Shield Lands is one who is passionately dedicated to the holy cause of the Shield Lands. A "holy paramour" is one who is passionately dedicated to their religion, as it implies the religious association/meaning of the word.
Also, there is no Charisma requirement for the class, though it would certainly make for a better commander to have a high Charisma score. Some leaders just don't have Chasrisma, but they are tactical geniuses. It is such leaders who place high Charisma lower-level commanders directly among their troops to inspire them. This is one of the things about there not being any stat requirements for prestige classes that I like. The stats may not always line up to be the most effective for a prestige class but, to me, that just adds more range to the possible characters that take a specific prestige class. A high Charisma leader might speak well, inspire the toops, and due to that be loved by them. Another leader might have a lower Charisma but actually be a highly intelligent military genius and yet still be loved by the troops(the veterans at least)- "He's a hard man, and a real bastard too, but he's never led us wrong." There is room for all types. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
Last edited by Cebrion on Sat Jan 12, 2008 2:42 am; edited 1 time in total
Very interesting take on the subject. I like it, especially the religious touch.
Now I have to reconsider using this PrC or the original from the LGJ.
What do you think when comparing these two PrCs ?
As a side note, I´m DMing a GH Shield Lands campaign, currently in late 576 CY. My PCs will enter Alhaster in a few days, and I intend to have them around when Zeech secedes from the Shield Lands. On of my PCs is a Knight (from D&D3.5 PH 2), and at 6th level has fulfilled the prerequisites for the original PrC just now.
I just noticed this post. Glad you liked the article. I had forgotten about the write-up in Dungeon for LG on the Knights of Holy Shielding, so this one truly was written independently of it. Having reviewed that article I can say that I like it. The article contains quite a bit of background information that mine does not, but it really wasn’t my intent to write up an all inclusive history of the order but just an overview with a presentation of a PrC that I think is representative of the order. I did the same thing with the Knight Protectors of the Great Kingdom and the Knights of the Hart articles.
One point that I specifically make at the end of the Knights of Holy Shielding article is that there can be a wide variety of members within the order(or any knightly order for that matter) even though they have not taken levels in the PrC that I present. My PrC is split into two groupings mainly as a way to separate the “regular” knights from the knight commanders, or "Inner Circle" knights. This command structure is a feature you will find in all of the knightly order articles I have written so far, and membership in what is really the second half of a single PrC gives some leadership benefits in addition to the other training benefits. I just like how that works, and it is noticeably absent in other knight PrCs. I am also of the mind that a knightly order doesn’t go into battle with just a bunch of mounted and armored knights, but also with the squires of the order who usually outnumber the knights of the order by 2-1 or even more. In the case of the Shield Knights, they not only form an elite core within the Shield Lander army, but also command the elements of that army, so I think the upper echelon members of the order should have training in how to lead troops.
Anyways, because of the diversity of knightly order that I imply(and really personally like), I think it is perfectly fine to have Knights of Holy Shielding that use both the LGJ Knight of Holy Shielding PrC and my own PrC. I would hope that characters that take the LGJ PrC and who seek a position of command in the order would at least take the Leadership feat, but it is not required. It just depends how deep into the role-playing aspect of things you want to get, plus it also matters if a campaign will feature opportunities for characters to lead troops in battle or not. I have made a point of including such opportunities in my campaign, but I understand that not every DM will do so, so a variety of PrC choices(or not) for members of the order is a good thing in my opinion. I’d recommend not setting a limit on it, such that only one PrC is used, and if a character doesn’t take levels in that PrC then they cannot be a knight of whatever order. I do however give a noticeable political benefit within the order to those who follow the “old traditions”(i.e. the pc takes levels in a PrC I have defined as definitive of the order in question), and also apply bonuses to the knight’s Affiliation score too if the knight has a certain type of PrC levels.
As to the Knight Class in PHB 2, I don’t like the idea of a Knight class at all. A knight is to me more than anything a 1st level character just starting out could be. Becoming a knight is a process. A PC should aspire to become a knight. A PC should have to prove themself worthy of becoming a knight. But a PC does not start out as a knight. I think the PrC system represents knightly orders much better than the Knight class does. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
Saracenus is working on something a bit more complex than this as well. I''ll post it here in addition to seeing about getting the images ammended to the original article itself. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
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