3rd edition D&D campaign idea...just looking for some feedback

[Luvian]

Originally posted by Rikard_OHF: First of all i must personally say i really dont like the concepts of good evil law and chaos at all in DnD having said that i do think it's possible to build a campaign with these forces instead of gods. Clerics instead of gaining power from worshipping gods, could gain power directly from the positive or negative energy plane. Normal humans would follow clerics they think are powerfull or because they agree with the cleric's stand in the battle of good and evil. That would be your religion The classes wouldnt have to be changed much, but i do agree that you should restrict access to positive and negative energy based on allignment

I agree with you about the aligments. They are really unrealistic and restricting for the average players.

Those should be only a broad guideline on how to play your character. It represent the way your character most comonly act. But most players just think if they are chaotic good, they always have to act chaotic good, for example.

In thruth, people are a lot more likely to act a certain way based on their morals and vices. A greedy but honest judge might have trouble turning down bribes. A noble Paladin whose family was butchered by a band or rogue halflings might really hate halflings and have a very hard time helping them.

A cruel assasin might have been raised as an orphan by a priest of Lathander and for that reason, he just can't bring himself to let any known Follower of Lathander suffer...

[ 07-28-2003, 06:30 AM: Message edited by: Luvian ]

[Nerull]

Originally posted by Rikard_OHF: I think you should turn the Blackguard into a whole new class (take the paladin class and the blackguard prestige class as reverance) and make it possible to switch between those (like a fallan paladin who can become a blackguard with extra bonusses)

Yes the idea is to make the 4 alignments into their own full classes (it was tempting to make them all prestige classes (easier to design , but decided to go with all four being full classes).

The biggest problem I see is that I want the four to be comparable. I mean that I don't want one of them having supernatural abilites, then the opposite having skill oriented. Prime example: Paladin gets resistance to disease and cure disease, while the blackguard gets poison use and backstab as it stands now. One gets a supernatural ability that involves channeling positive energy to cure diseases (much less it only has so many uses a week), while the other one gets backstabbing, which has nothing to do with negative energy (and he can use it whenever he gets the opportunity, with no limit). If I am looking at a system in balance (kind of what I have been thinking of), then the opposites would have similar, if reversed abilities. I would think Lay on Hands from the Paladin would be Inflict Wounds from the Blackguard. Maybe the Blackguard would get Contagion instead of Backstab. Or even better, maybe the Paladin loses the Remove Disease, but gains the Rogue's uncanny dodge (called Defensive Awareness like it is called with the Dwarven Defender prestige class).

That brings me to the lawful and chaotic warrior types. I am purposely trying to avoid them using positive and negative energy like the good and evil clerics (respectively) use. Of course, that strips away many of the Paladin and Blackguard abilities, thus the reason I am asking the questions I am asking.

Of course, I could just leave the cleric class alone, forcing the neutrals to choose between positive and negative energy, thus making them "lean" in one direction or the other (can't you tell that I don't like the way they handle neutral clerics?). Thus, I could add those other "paladin" classes, but make them have to choose between positive and negative energy usage (which would cause them to greatly lean in one direction or the other, which is unattractive in my mind). At least with the Chaotic holy warrior, I can tap into the Holy Liberator prestige class for some ideas (i.e. make them eventually immune to charms and compulsions, etc.).

I agree with Luvian that the straight alignments can be too restrictive, but in this system only one axis of the alignment would be restricted (for example, Paladins would have to maintain a good alignment, but could be Lawful, Neutral, or Chaotic in their approach).

I guess I'll just keep plugging away at it and see what I come up with.

[Deejax]

Hi, I'm happily thinking along with your ideas about the four philosophies but I'm missing some details. Presumably because I've never played (or even seen) the third edition D&D (I'm still stuck in AD&D ).
What is a "Prestige class"?
What is "dodge" or "defense awareness"?

I agree that it is not a really nice idea to let the chaotic and lawful priests/paladins use the same energy as their good and evil counterparts. Perhaps the easiest solution is to introduce chaotic and lawful energy.
I don't know where the positive and negative energy comes from (the positive and negative planes?) but you could create the same type of source for the chaotic/lawful spells.

Contagion/cure disease is a nice opposition combo for the paladin/blackguard. I don't think you should try to create four way combo's. i.e. four different aspects of a single phenomenon, like diseases. Just stick to the oppositions. I think some mind control would be interesting for the chaotic/lawful innate abilities. Something like "mob mentality" vs "disperse". The first is the chaotic spell to enrage a group of people, the second the reverse, a lawful spell.
In connection to the lay on hands/inflict wounds a confuse/concentrate combo could be the chaos/lawful alternative.

Maybe there could even be shared special abilities. If two philosophies agree on a particular action. For example turn undead for lawful/good and command undead for chaos/evil. (I know, not the best example, but you know what I mean [img]smile.gif[/img] ) Or paralyze (lawful/evil) vs "free action" (chaos/good).

Tell me what you think!

[Nerull]

Originally posted by Deejax: Hi, I'm happily thinking along with your ideas about the four philosophies but I'm missing some details. Presumably because I've never played (or even seen) the third edition D&D (I'm still stuck in AD&D ). What is a "Prestige class"? What is "dodge" or "defense awareness"?

In 3rd edition, they do not have kits like in 2nd edition. Instead, they have prestige classes, which are classes you can multiclass into once you meet the prerequisites to take levels in that class. Many require you to have certain skill levels, feats (special enhancements that you select as you go up in level, like better dodging ability or the ability to fire a bow into melee without penalty), abilites, etc. before you take the class. In 3rd edition, the Blackguard is a prestige class. You need to have certain prerequisites to enter the class, and there are only 10 levels in the class (unless you own the Epic Level Handbook, which gives rules for higher levels). You take a class or classes, gather the prerequisites, and eventually qualify to enter that class. That is why it is called a prestige class; it is something your character works towards, and eventually defines himself as that class (for example, someone who eventually takes levels as a Loremaster will regard himself as a Loremaster, regardless of what classes he took before). There is no multiclassing restrictions for any race or class combination for taking a prestige class.

Uncanny Dodge is a special ability that is most commonly associated with the Rogue (i.e. thief). You get bonuses as you go up in level (level you get them at depends on the class; it would probably be different between the Rogue and the Paladin). The first bonus gained is to never lose your dexterity bonus to AC, even if caught flat footed (i.e. surprised). The second is to not be able to be flanked (preventing flanking to-hit bonuses and sneak attacks (i.e. backstabbing), unless the opposing character is 4 or more levels higher). Finally, you start getting bonuses to saves to avoid traps. The Dwarven Defender prestige class has this ability, but calls it "Defensive Awareness" rather than Uncanny Dodge. I would probably call it that for the Paladin. The reason I would give this to them if I kept the Blackguard with the sneak attack is that it counters their sneak attack quite nicely.

Originally posted by Deejax: I agree that it is not a really nice idea to let the chaotic and lawful priests/paladins use the same energy as their good and evil counterparts. Perhaps the easiest solution is to introduce chaotic and lawful energy. I don't know where the positive and negative energy comes from (the positive and negative planes?) but you could create the same type of source for the chaotic/lawful spells.

The positive and negative planes are the source for positive and negative energy in both 2nd and 3rd edition. In 3rd edition, clerics are even more adept at using these two energy sources. All of them can use both, but good clerics are good at using positive energy and evil clerics are good at using negative energy. The neutral clerics have to choose one or the other, something I think is ridiculous. I guess the suggestion that lawful clerics can reduce Will saves and spontaneously cast controlling spells, while chaotic clerics raise Will saves and spontaneously cast "liberating" spells, is a step in the direction of using "lawful" and "chaotic" energy.

Originally posted by Deejax: Contagion/cure disease is a nice opposition combo for the paladin/blackguard. I don't think you should try to create four way combo's. i.e. four different aspects of a single phenomenon, like diseases. Just stick to the oppositions. I think some mind control would be interesting for the chaotic/lawful innate abilities. Something like "mob mentality" vs "disperse". The first is the chaotic spell to enrage a group of people, the second the reverse, a lawful spell. In connection to the lay on hands/inflict wounds a confuse/concentrate combo could be the chaos/lawful alternative.

The Holy Liberator prestige class (i.e. effectively a Chaotic Good Paladin) gains both immunity to charms and compulsions and the ability to give someone else another saving throw (with a bonus) if they are being controlled. This seems like a good place to start with the chaotic side. For the lawfuls, it does seem like some controlling abilities would fit the bill (radiate Calm Emotions, cast Hold spells, etc.). It is obviously going to need some more work; I'll probably play around some more with it this weekend.

Originally posted by Deejax: Maybe there could even be shared special abilities. If two philosophies agree on a particular action. For example turn undead for lawful/good and command undead for chaos/evil. (I know, not the best example, but you know what I mean [img]smile.gif[/img] ) Or paralyze (lawful/evil) vs "free action" (chaos/good).

Actually, I'm trying to avoid shared abilities as much as possible. This is due to the fact that most of the abilities are based on usage of positive and negative energy, thus forcing the clerics to divide into 2 camps (i.e. "good" versus "evil", with the neutrals having to pick sides). I see this as short-minded. Why not have two oppositions instead of just one? That is really the whole point of this. Why not have two lawful good clerics have two different set of abilities, because one emphasizes the lawful path (he just believes that order is the best way to help others), while the other emphasizes the good path (he wants the greater good, and takes an orderly approach to promoting good)?

Thank you for all of the great suggestions! It is helping me narrow down in my mind exactly what I want this to look like. This is really the big sticking point for me; the rest is smooth sailing (well, smoother sailing, at least).

[Deejax]

Originally posted by Nerull: The positive and negative planes are the source for positive and negative energy in both 2nd and 3rd edition. In 3rd edition, clerics are even more adept at using these two energy sources. All of them can use both, but good clerics are good at using positive energy and evil clerics are good at using negative energy. The neutral clerics have to choose one or the other, something I think is ridiculous.

You mean a good cleric uses negative energy? Never knew that one. But how do you want to construct your clerics. Can they all use all four different energies (if you go for a Chaotic and Lawful energy)? Are you going to allow true neutral clerics? Are clerics free to specialize in a certain (or more then one) energies?

The Holy Liberator prestige class (i.e. effectively a Chaotic Good Paladin) gains both immunity to charms and compulsions and the ability to give someone else another saving throw (with a bonus) if they are being controlled. This seems like a good place to start with the chaotic side. For the lawfuls, it does seem like some controlling abilities would fit the bill (radiate Calm Emotions, cast Hold spells, etc.).

Yep, lawful wants to repress free choice and enforce the law and chaos wants to let be and let every individual do whatever he/she wants. Nice opposition

Actually, I'm trying to avoid shared abilities as much as possible.

Maybe you could use dual specialized clerics. ie clerics specialized in two (non opposing) philosophies. Then you could chose not shared but exclusive spells. For example a spell purely for clerics specialized in both the chaotic and good philosophy. Or you could create prestige classes for all four alignment combo's (le/lg/ce/cg).

[Nerull]

Originally posted by Deejax: You mean a good cleric uses negative energy? Never knew that one. But how do you want to construct your clerics. Can they all use all four different energies (if you go for a Chaotic and Lawful energy)? Are you going to allow true neutral clerics? Are clerics free to specialize in a certain (or more then one) energies?

In the previous 2 editions, clerics could not use cause wounds or other "Reversed" spells. In 3rd edition, they can use both cure and inflict wound spells; it is just how you use them that matters. It is perfectly acceptable for a good cleric to use inflict wounds to destroy an evil foe, just as it is acceptable for an evil cleric to use cure wounds to heal an evil ally.

However, the true specialization comes in the turn/rebuke undead and spontaneous casting. A good cleric (or a neutral cleric worshipping a good deity) must choose to turn undead and be able to spontaneously cast cure spells (can use up a prepared spell to cast a cure spell of the same level). An evil cleric (or a neutral cleric worshipping an evil deity) must choose to rebuke undead (cause the undead to cower in awe helpless, or to command them) and spontaneously cast inflict spells (just like the good cleric with the cure spells). That is what causes that specialization in positive or negative energy, but they can always prepare and cast a spell of the opposite energy (they just can't spontaneously cast it).

Where the system breaks down for me is for neutral clerics worshipping neutral dieties. Then they have to choose one specialization or the other, effectively choosing a side between good and evil. Why should they have to choose? But that is the way it is in the rules. Oh, and a cleric can only be true neutral if their deity is true neutral. Also in the rules, and a rule that fits well with this situation. You are talking about a set of beliefs that help to polarize thought and belief, thus generating enough energy to bestow spells to those that espouse that belief. They (rightfully) redefined neutrality to not only include those that actively seek neutrality, but also those that could care less. This is not to be confused with evil's "me" attitude; a neutral cares for others close to them but doesn't go out of their way to choose sides, similar to many people walking around today. That is the reason most animals are true neutral; they are worried about themselves and the welfare of any companions, but could care less about other things. How could "I don't care" generate enough strong opinion/belief to power spells?

That is why the force of nature will be out there, with druids as their priests. They will be pretty much as they are now (might change their weapons around a bit, but otherwise no change). They will be the neutral priests.

The main way to create "lawful" and "chaotic" spells would be to group the spells together that control others (i.e. Charm and Compulsion spells) for lawful and group those that free from enchantments (i.e. the various "remove" and "free" spells) for chaos. This is similar to grouping all of the spells that use positive and negative energy in the cleric's arsenal. Round it out with some newly created spells and/or spells from the wizard list at different levels, and you would be all set. Will take some work, but will work quite well. I was already planning to shake up the planar cosmology, placing positive and negative energy in the celestial and infernal (respectively) regions. It would only make sense then to have lawful and chaotic energy (need better names than that) placed in those respective realms. Good suggestion! [img]smile.gif[/img]

Maybe you could use dual specialized clerics. ie clerics specialized in two (non opposing) philosophies. Then you could chose not shared but exclusive spells. For example a spell purely for clerics specialized in both the chaotic and good philosophy. Or you could create prestige classes for all four alignment combo's (le/lg/ce/cg).

Well, the thing is the cleric spell lists include most all of the spells that any of them could cast (i.e. good clerics can cast remove paralysis, hold person, inflict wounds, etc., so literally any cleric can cast any spell except spells of opposite alignment like protection from good for a good cleric). Thus, the only change would be in the two abilities of turn undead/rebuke undead/lower will saves/raise will saves and spontaneously casting. With only these two things changing, those would be the things that would set each specialization apart. So, why try to blend them together? They need to have some differences.

[Deejax]

A spontaneous spell is trading a memorized spell for a different effect? So a cleric who can cast a spontaneous cure light wounds doesn't need to memorize it? Nice.

Originally posted by Nerull: It would only make sense then to have lawful and chaotic energy (need better names than that) placed in those respective realms.

Yep. Positive and negative for good and evil sounds a lot better than chaotic and lawful for chaos and law. But what are good adjectives for chaos and law? Things like "ordered" or "balance" just don't cut it. In some settings the term "entropy" is used. But I really do not like the term. I studied chemistry and entropy was part of a course I failed too often. Maybe some "scientific" phrases could be nice. I don't have very specific ideas yet, but maybe some "endo-" and "exo-" type words (as used in endothermic and exothermic reactions). I'll think about it.


Druids are true neutral? Or should druids have (at least) one neutral alignment? I think true neutral would be better because then they are really independent of the four philosophies. Do you have an energy plane that goes with the neutral magic?

[Nerull]

Originally posted by Deejax: Yep. Positive and negative for good and evil sounds a lot better than chaotic and lawful for chaos and law. But what are good adjectives for chaos and law? Things like "ordered" or "balance" just don't cut it. In some settings the term "entropy" is used. But I really do not like the term. I studied chemistry and entropy was part of a course I failed too often. Maybe some "scientific" phrases could be nice. I don't have very specific ideas yet, but maybe some "endo-" and "exo-" type words (as used in endothermic and exothermic reactions). I'll think about it.

They use the term "axiomatic" to describe lawful creatures in 3rd edition, and "anarchistic" to describe chaotic creatures. Also, playing with the thesaurus got me the term ataxia to describe disorder/confusion. Entropy is usually associated with negative energy (positive = creative, negative = destructive).

Originally posted by Deejax: Druids are true neutral? Or should druids have (at least) one neutral alignment? I think true neutral would be better because then they are really independent of the four philosophies. Do you have an energy plane that goes with the neutral magic?

Actually, in 3rd edition, druids have to be within one step of true neutral (either true neutral, or chaotic neutral, lawful neutral, neutral good, or neutral evil). This is the same one step rule that applies to clerics (clerics have to be within one step of their deity's alignment), so this fits. Clerics in this system would have to hold the alignment of their philosophy (ex. Clerics of Good would have to be good), but could be anywhere on the map as far as the other part of their alignment.

[Nerull]

Alright, I went to Barnes & Noble, read up on the 3.5 Paladin class, and have some ideas.

However, first things first, on the lawful and chaotic replacement to turn undead for the cleric, I am going to make it -4 to will saves and +4 to will save, respectively. I realized that the -2 and +2 I stated earlier were a bit low for the ability. Also, the mass cure/inflict spells and now 4 levels higher than its single counterpart (Cure/Inflict Light is 1st level, Mass Cure/Inflict Light is 5th level, etc.). Thus, there are cleric choices for spontaneous casting for levels 0 - 8, so I need to revise the list previously done (do that later).

Anyway, here's how the special abilities for the Paladin break down (from Player's Handbook 3.5; just making sure to quote my source):

Level Abilities gained that level

1. Aura of good, detect evil, smite evil 1/day
2. divine grace, lay on hands
3. aura of courage (immune to fear, +4 to allies' saves v.s. fear), divine health
4. turn undead
5. smite evil 2/day, special mount
6. remove disease 1/week
7. -
8. -
9. remove disease 2/week
10. smite evil 3/day

The remove disease would continue to get one more use each 3 levels, while the smite evil would get one more use every 5 levels. The aura of good means that the show up strongly on detect good spells.

Now, I already decided to get rid of special mount in return for no multiclass restriction and only restricted to good alignment (instead of lawful good). The rest looks good as is.

With that, the revised/expanded/changed/etc. Blackguard would look like this:

Level Abilities gained that level

1. Aura of evil, detect good, smite good 1/day
2. dark blessing (i.e. divine grace), wounding touch (inflict version of lay on hands)
3. aura of despair (-2 to all saves of enemies), poison use (can use poison without risk)
4. rebuke undead
5. smite good 2/day
6. contagion 1/week
7. -
8. -
9. contagion 2/week
10. smite good 3/day

The contagion would go up one use per 3 levels, and the smite good would go up one use per 5 levels.

Now, the Justicar and Anarch (tentative names) would be different.

This is what I came up with for the Justicar (lawful):

Level Abilities gained that level

1. Aura of law, detect chaos, smite chaos 1/day
2. righteousness (i.e. divine grace), hold person (see below)
3. aura of command (-4 to will saves)
4. control the masses (see below)
5. smite chaos 2/day
6. hold monster 1/week
7. -
8. -
9. hold monster 2/week
10. smite chaos 3/day

The hold monster would go up one use per 3 levels, and the smite chaos would go up one use per 5 levels. The hold person and hold monster are just like the spells of the same name, but the hold person is usable a number of times a day equal to the Justicar's charisma modifier. Control the masses allows the Justicar to use up 2 uses of their hold person or hold monster ability to cast a mass version of the same spell (mass hold person or mass hold monster).

Now the Anarch (chaotic):

Level Abilities gained that level

1. Aura of chaos, detect law, smite law 1/day
2. good fortune (i.e. divine grace), remove paralysis (see below)
3. aura of freedom (+4 to will saves)
4. free will (see below)
5. smite law 2/day
6. break enchantment 1/week
7. -
8. -
9. break enchantment 2/week
10. smite law 3/day

The break enchantment would go up one use per 3 levels, and the smite law would go up one use per 5 levels. Remove paralysis is usable a number of times per day equal to their charisma modifier (both remove paralysis and break enchantment as per the spells of the same name). Free will is a complete immunity to all charms and compulsions.

Does this look good, or does this need improvement? Please let me know.

[ 08-03-2003, 05:19 PM: Message edited by: Nerull ]

[Nerull]

A great resource came out this month, one that helps immensely (Dragon #310). It details variants for fighters, rogues, barbarians, rangers, monks, and paladins. The paladin one is for "holy warriors" of the other 5 non-evil alignments (Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, Lawful Neutral, True Neutral, and Chaotic Neutral). Mixing and matching those, here is what I come up with for my four holy warrior classes:

The Sentinel(good)

Level___Abilities gained that level

1. Aura of good, detect evil, smite evil 1/day
2. Divine grace, lay on hands
3. Resist fiendish lure, celestial fortitude
4. Turn outsider
5. Smite evil 2/day
6. -
7. -
8. Dispel evil 1/week
9. -
10. Smite evil 3/day
11. -
12. Dispel evil 2/week
13. -
14. -
15. Smite evil 4/day
16. Dispel evil 3/week
17. -
18. -
19. -
20. Dispel evil 4/week, smite evil 5/day

• Resist fiendish lure is a +4 bonus to mind affecting attacks from evil outsiders.
• Celestial fortitude is a +2 to Fortitude saves against effects from evil outsiders and evil spells. If the spell/effect has a partial effect on a successful save, then there is no effect if the save is successful.
• Turn outsider works like turn undead, except against outsiders of neutral or evil alignments.
• Dispel evil is just like the spell of the same name.

The others would be called the Reaver (evil), Enforcer (lawful) and Anarch (chaotic). They would have similar abilities (with the alignments changed, of course). For Enforcers, they would replace lay on hands with Dominate Person (usable once a day per 5 levels). For Anarchs, they would replace the lay on hands with Break Enchantment (also usable once a day per 5 levels).

I am thinking of having the clerics turn outsiders, too. Justification: without the gods present, there is little holding back outsiders from trying to stake a claim in the Prime Material plane.

What do you think?