The World of Layonara
The Layonara Community => Ask A Gamemaster => Topic started by: thekevmon on January 06, 2013, 11:51:56 am
-
The requirements for Unholy Champion of Pyrtechon include weapon focus (greatsword), but that doesn't make much sense to me given the statement in the Pyrtechon Clergy Attire LORE page:
"Clerics of Pyrtechon show no particular favor toward one weapon type, seeing all as tools to achieve the ends of their dark god. Weapons are made to kill and are all considered to be worthy of use. Indeed, many Clerics of Pyrtechon are skilled in the use of a range of weapons, far beyond the followers of most other deities."
I can understand requiring weapon focus for deities with a chosen weapon, but for Pyrtechon it almost seems as though focusing on one weapon would be frowned upon if anything. I'm just curious as to why weapon focus in a greatsword is required to be a champion of a deity who shows no particular favor toward a greatsword. If there has to be an additional feat (compared to the standard NWN Blackguard), why not something like Great Cleave?
thanks
-
The honest answer is that the people who originally designed and balanced this PrC are no longer associated with the world. Completing the honesty, the write-up for Pyrtechon has almost assuredly changed since then as well, which could have had an effect on their favored weapons (or lack thereof in this case).
Since all Champion PrCs here are based off the Champion of Torm PrC built into NWN, one of the requirements are having Weapon Focus in some specific melee weapon. For Layonara, this requirement typicallyfollows the deity's favored weapon, and so I would guess that it either followed the favored weapon for Pyrtechon at the time or it was just chosen to have something specific there.
Since the Great Sword is probably the most damaging melee weapon that exists (base stats, of course), it makes a certain amount of sense to make this one the requirement of the Unholy Champion of Pyrtechon.
-
My follow-up question: can it be changed? I know for a while these classes were only available to CE characters, but because that was not coded into the class NE was later allowed. Is the weapon focus (greatsword) coded, or can it be changed? Can exceptions be made? Or can it be changed to some other feat (again, great cleave stands out to me as a good choice)?
-
Well... this seems a bit odd... never noticed before myself... then again I've never really thought much of making a champion character.
From LORE: Unholy Champion (http://lore.layonara.com/Champions:%20Unholy%20Champion%20of%20Pyrtechon), Holy Champion (http://lore.layonara.com/Champions:%20Champion%20of%20Toran)
From Wiki: Blackguard (http://nwn.wikia.com/wiki/Blackguard), Champion of Thorm (http://nwn.wikia.com/wiki/Champion_of_Torm)
As it seems, unholy champion are made from Blackguard and Holy Champions from Champion of Thorm though what I find odd... is the difference in requirements.
Holy Champion:
BAB: +7
Feats: Weapon Focus
Alignment: Lawful Good
Unholy Champion:
BAB: +6
Skills: Hide 5 ranks
Feats: Cleave, Weapon Focus
Alignment: Neutral Evil
By what it seems... unholy Champion has more requirements then Holy Champion... plus the added weapon focus that blackguard does not originally have.
Now as for the weapon of choice (as it were) being a greatsword... mmmm... debatable in my opinion... in terms of chaos and destruction... I've always thought of greataxes as a better symbol.
-
Naturally, it can be changed since it's custom content to start. The questions are should it be changed and if so, how?
Given the present state of Pyrtechon with regards to the apparent lack of a favored weapon, I would say there's a fair argument to be made to loosen the requirement to any Weapon Focus feat (like in the original Champion of Torm), but I have a more difficult time seeing justification for changing it to something else completely. My reasoning there is that Weapon Focus gives an attack bonus on every attempt, and clearly one needs to be able to hit a target before it can be destroyed. However, I do come back around to the notion that a Greatsword will deliver the most amount of melee damage per strike out of all the other choices, and as such, it is the most "destructive" weapon available. So there's the simplified decision tree for you.
Administrative exceptions cannot be made for things that are mechanically enforced. If the game prevents someone from even getting the choice to take Unholy Champion of Pyrtechon, there's nothing we can really do. Such a change would have to come from an update, not a stroke of the proverbial pen. Beyond that, we have historically not been very flexible on deviations for divinely-linked character classes. While the Unholy Champion of Pyrtechon does not have the requirement of having a divine class first, by taking on such a mantle, one is still operating in Pyrtechon's name.
-
Blackguard is not the basis for Unholy Champion of Pyrtechon. Any assumptions or analysis based on this idea are simply wrong.
All "Champion" classes in Layonara are based on the Champion of Torm PrC (as I said in my first response) and modified to suit each deity appropriately.
-
Blackguard is not the basis for Unholy Champion of Pyrtechon. Any assumptions or analysis based on this idea are simply wrong.
All "Champion" classes in Layonara are based on the Champion of Torm PrC (as I said in my first response) and modified to suit each deity appropriately.
Ummmm... think you might want to look at the links in my last post. Note the unholy Champion is linked to Pyrtechons. All the things the Unholy Champion requires and has are exactly the same as the Blackguard.
Same for Hole Champion and Champion of Thorm.
At least whats stated in LORE are the same with the slight addition of weapon focus to Unholy Champion (blackguard). If that's wrong then LORE needs to be changed.
-
Ummmm... think you might want to look at the links in my last post. Note the unholy Champion is linked to Pyrtechons. All the things the Unholy Champion requires and has are exactly the same as the Blackguard.
Same for Hole Champion and Champion of Thorm.
At least whats stated in LORE are the same with the slight addition of weapon focus to Unholy Champion (blackguard). If that's wrong then LORE needs to be changed.
You are confusing similarity with origin. I am simply trying to correct your assumption so that your further analysis can proceed on the right path.
You can show me all the links you want, but your core assumption is still wrong. I won't deny the fact that there are similarities, but I am telling you that the origin of the Unholy Champion PrCs is, in fact, the Champion of Torm PrC, and each was adapted to fit the specific deity in question. At best, it's a melding of the two, but the intent is to reflect the flavor of the Champion class, not the Blackguard.
Carry on...
-
Ummmm... think you might want to look at the links in my last post. Note the unholy Champion is linked to Pyrtechons. All the things the Unholy Champion requires and has are exactly the same as the Blackguard.
Same for Hole Champion and Champion of Thorm.
At least whats stated in LORE are the same with the slight addition of weapon focus to Unholy Champion (blackguard). If that's wrong then LORE needs to be changed.
Regardless of the similarities between Champions and Blackguard mechanically speaking, All Champions are based on the original Champions PrC concept. Dorganath is not incorrect. The class's other details besides mechanical are also derived from the Champion base PrC, such as deity devotions, required favoured weapons matching the deities in question, etc. The process to obtain them, via WLDQs or CDQ series etc. It's all similar. Most of the differences come from Deity specific needs and the darker gods require different things than the more main stream gods. It's a hugely lore heavy PrC.
To be abundantly clear Unholy Champion does not in any way equal Blackguard. It's pretty blind to attribute the classes origins to mechanical requirements alone and try to call out one of the class's main contributors on a falsehood/confusion. What makes a Champion of any faith has way more to do with their devotion and sacrifice than a very few mechanical details.
~row
-
*sighs* stubborn ignorance... Look I understand you and frankly about everyone don't like being called wrong, confused/falsehooded or w/e and I apologize. Even if the origins were based on Champion of Thorm, why then does the Unholy Champion have EXACTLY everything the Blackguard have? Even PnP Blackguard (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/blackguard.htm)
Now, quite frankly I was talking more about the mechanical similarities. Deity requirements, descriptions and all that other role play stuff is simply just that... role play. Take all your classes and that of the base game and put them into another world with different LORE and there the role play requirements will likely be different. Are they the same class? Well, yeah... in a way yet they are also different. My saying that the Unholy Champions are the same as Blackguards in that they are the same (mechanically) yet different (role play wise) and frankly there are no blackguards in layo (at least none I know of) nor Champions of Thorm (let alone a god/deity or w/e named Thorm) So role play wise... what am I really comparing them to? :p
Anyways, enough with this somewhat slight derailing and lets get back to the original question which was:
The requirements for Unholy Champion of Pyrtechon include weapon focus (greatsword), but that doesn't make much sense to me given the statement in the Pyrtechon Clergy Attire LORE page:
"Clerics of Pyrtechon show no particular favor toward one weapon type, seeing all as tools to achieve the ends of their dark god. Weapons are made to kill and are all considered to be worthy of use. Indeed, many Clerics of Pyrtechon are skilled in the use of a range of weapons, far beyond the followers of most other deities."
I can understand requiring weapon focus for deities with a chosen weapon, but for Pyrtechon it almost seems as though focusing on one weapon would be frowned upon if anything. I'm just curious as to why weapon focus in a greatsword is required to be a champion of a deity who shows no particular favor toward a greatsword. If there has to be an additional feat (compared to the standard NWN Blackguard), why not something like Great Cleave?
thanks
I suppose to sum that up... A deity that favors no one weapon at all... why then does he force his champions into using one particular weapon rather then letting choose there own?
Ok may have adlibed a bit there... suppose a bit of my own question in that as well then.
If weapon focus has to be required where the champion uses there deities Favorited weapon. Why not for Champions of Pyrtechon be allowed to focus in what ever weapon they choose themselves? After all Pyrtechon favors no one weapon.
Also, as for the greatsword being most destructive is as I said debatable.
Greatsword: 2d6 (2-12) 19-20x2
Greataxe: 1d12 (1-12) x3
Roughly the same damage though the axe does have a higher crit multiplier. Though if you could add the Falchion in there (DDO players claim to be the greatest 2-hander) you would have a higher crit range with 2x crit. So... debatable.
-
*sighs* stubborn ignorance
Oh really? How interesting.
I am being neither stubborn nor ignorant. The seven years I have spent developing for Layonara and the close contact I have had with the people who shaped this world before that point gives me a particular insight that frankly you do not possess. I find your accusation ironic at best and insulting at worst. Take your pick.
So, you can either choose to believe me and show some respect for the time, knowledge and insight I possess, or you can choose to continue on the path of continuing to insult someone who is trying to share his knowledge with you. It's your choice, but I, for one, am done with trying to educate you.
Carry on.
-
Oh really? How interesting.
I am being neither stubborn nor ignorant. The seven years I have spent developing for Layonara and the close contact I have had with the people who shaped this world before that point gives me a particular insight that frankly you do not possess. I find your accusation ironic at best and insulting at worst. Take your pick.
So, you can either choose to believe me and show some respect for the time, knowledge and insight I possess, or you can choose to continue on the path of continuing to insult someone who is trying to share his knowledge with you. It's your choice, but I, for one, am done with trying to educate you.
Carry on.
Ok, I'm sorry I said something I shouldn't have and I apologize. I didn't really mean it. This argument over these classes is just seeming a bit well... confusing to say the least I guess. I guess really I'm being the stubborn and ignorant one.
Just finding it a bit odd though how a class can be based off or have origins from one class yet have little in common with that class and have alot in common with another.
-
Okay, this has gotten a little out of hand, but I would like to bring it back to a constructive level.
The character in question leveled up just now and is completely capable (mechanically, at least) of taking levels as an Unholy Champion. He does not have weapon focus. The class is selectable, and no weapon focus feat is listed as a requirement. Purely mechanically speaking, there is currently nothing stopping my character from taking levels in Unholy Champion (I did not actually level up as a champion, but I do not foresee any mechanical issues).
From a roleplay standpoint, I understand that the class is based on the Champion of Torm and that requires weapon focus (in the deity's favored weapon on Layonara). My interpretation of the lore on Pyrtechon is not that his followers focus on a greatsword, or even any weapon in particular. There is no favored weapon, and that being the case it doesn't make sense to me to have weapon focus as a requirement. Having said that, I don't think there is anything wrong with a champion having a weapon he is more skilled with than others, but there is no weapon that is favored by the divinity, and therefore it should not be required to take champion levels.
A Champion of Toran trains with a longsword, learns the combat style and fighting techniques associated with it. This makes sense, as the organization of the Toran religion suggests that you would likely be trained by superiors, all of whom would use longswords and would encourage the use of longswords. Champions of Vorax would use a battleaxe for a similar reason. Champions of Corath, a shortsword for a similar reason.
There is no favored weapon for Pyrtechon, and that being the case it does not make sense for weapon focus to be a requirement for the class. My interpretation is that a Pyrtechonite is the type to, at any given time, be carrying no less than three weapons. This is the principle I have stuck to with my character. The type who always has another weapon to use if he feels the situation favors it. Someone who is armed to the teeth, always. I feel that a more general combat feat is preferable to any weapon focus. Again, I'm gonna plug Great Cleave because I think it makes the most sense: Pyrtechonites want people to die, and die quickly. If a champion is surrounded by some valiant (but stupid) group of commoners trying to save their land from certain destruction, he should be able to strike them all down almost instantaneously without a moment's hesitation. Great Cleave is a feat dedicated to slaughtering hordes of weaklings quickly; personally, I think it's a better fit than weapon focus.
In summary, there does not appear to be any mechanical backing to the weapon focus requirement. Other churches have organization, and that helps the senior members mentor the younger members in the use of their chosen weapons. Pyrtechon has no such organization, and from my perspective and interpretation it does not make sense to have weapon focus as a requirement for the Unholy Champion class.
Thank you.
-
Hm, well... since the class is based/origined from CoT in that every champion regardless of deity has to have a weapon focus. Allowing Pyrtechon champions to be without a WF might seem a bit to far of an exception... even if replacing the feat... or so I'm assuming.
My suggestion... don't have it be restricted to just one weapon. Pyrtechon favors no weapon and as Kevmon said, his character is always armed to the teeth which would mean he has many fun and exciting ways to slaughter people. Pyrtechon may not favor a single weapon though his champions might have there own favorite weapon of destruction
*Pyrtechon champion talks about his own favorite weapon* Heheh, yes I have my trusty old heavy mace. *pets heavy mace like it was a kitten* Isn't she perty? Her name is... Helga... After my wife... well... after she smashed my wife... over... and over... and over again. Yeah sure I have axes and maybe a few daggers... a crossbow or two... Oh, but Helga here... *laughs maniacally, swinging his heavy mace around, destroying the interviewing room and smashing everyone like pinatas* Bash! Wack! Smash! yeahahahahaha!!!
Ok... might have when a little uh... crazy there... just a little... but you get the idea right... or uh... do you need Helga here to help you?
-
Quoting myself and adding emphasis...
Given the present state of Pyrtechon with regards to the apparent lack of a favored weapon, I would say there's a fair argument to be made to loosen the requirement to any Weapon Focus feat (like in the original Champion of Torm), but I have a more difficult time seeing justification for changing it to something else completely. My reasoning there is that Weapon Focus gives an attack bonus on every attempt, and clearly one needs to be able to hit a target before it can be destroyed. However, I do come back around to the notion that a Greatsword will deliver the most amount of melee damage per strike out of all the other choices, and as such, it is the most "destructive" weapon available. So there's the simplified decision tree for you.
It is exactly for the reason of consistency with the other Champion variants that I believe that there should be some Weapon Focus requirement. Ditching it completely goes against the intent and flavor of the class, in my opinion. Opening it up to any Weapon Focus is a reasonable thing, but I can also argue the justification for keeping it as Weapon Focus: Greatsword.
Simply because Pyrtechon doesn't indicate a weapon preference doesn't mean that his followers, clergy and champions cannot focus upon one or more weapons particularly. It means rather they are free to do so without restriction...or not. Regardless of deity and regardless of weapon, a Champion should be something more than just proficient in any given weapon, and that's where Weapon Focus comes in, both in a mechanical sense and an RP sense.
-
A champion is more than a sword or an axe; a champion is not simply the weapon of his god, he is the harbinger, the earthly messenger, the mortal embodiment of his God's very dogma. To be a champion, of any god, is not about being a soldier in their service; that's what paladins and fighters are for. To be a champion is something else entirely.
A Champion should be something more than just proficient in any given weapon, and that's where Weapon Focus comes in, both in a mechanical sense and an RP sense.
Yes and no. Weapon focus is exactly what the name suggests: the focused training in a single weapon, favoring it above all the others. But a Champion of Pyrtechon does not focus; he destroys. He takes whatever is at hand, whether he has trained with it or not, and destroys. He kills, he maims, he burns, he bludgeons, he slashes, he pierces, he decapitates, and he does it all indiscriminately, whether with a greatsword taken from the dying hands of his enemy or a broken piece of chain some fool thought could restrain his fury.
Weapon Focus gives an attack bonus on every attempt, and clearly one needs to be able to hit a target before it can be destroyed. However, I do come back around to the notion that a Greatsword will deliver the most amount of melee damage per strike out of all the other choices, and as such, it is the most "destructive" weapon available.
True. [LORE]Point Blank Shot[/LORE] also yields an attack (and damage) bonus, undoubtedly raising the destructive potential of any archer, yet it's not required for Champion. Also, while a greatsword has a more consistent damage output, when the critical range is factored in greataxe almost certainly overtakes it in terms of damage output, but that's neither here nor there.
I believe that there should be some Weapon Focus requirement. Ditching it completely goes against the intent and flavor of the class, in my opinion.
As stated previously, the Champion will use whatever is around to destroy. To support this, a quote from the [LORE]Champions: Unholy Champion of Pyrtechon[/LORE] page: "[it was] not so much a sword in its hand than a misshapen lump of sharpened steel." The weapon used for said destruction simply doesn't matter to a Champion, as long as they are carrying forth the Destroyer's will anything will do, as is evident from this passage. A proper Champion should be able to destroy anyone with anything.
Simply because Pyrtechon doesn't indicate a weapon preference doesn't mean that his followers, clergy and champions cannot focus upon one or more weapons particularly. It means rather they are free to do so without restriction...or not.
Or not. Versatility is valued by church and Champion alike, and as such they should not feel any need to focus on one weapon over any other. Focusing on a weapon is a liberty that a Champion should be allowed to take, but that should not be expected and certainly not required.
It is exactly for the reason of consistency with the other Champion variants that I believe that there should be some Weapon Focus requirement. Ditching it completely goes against the intent and flavor of the class, in my opinion. Opening it up to any Weapon Focus is a reasonable thing, but I can also argue the justification for keeping it as Weapon Focus: Greatsword.
Look, I understand what you are trying to say, but the fact is that the lore surrounding Pyrtechon and his Champions does not match the requirements for the class. Maybe Great Cleave isn't the right feat either, I'm open to suggestions, but at its core it seems obvious that weapon focus is not correct. Weapon focus makes sense for Toran. Weapon focus makes sense for Vorax. Weapon focus makes sense for Corath. In my opinion, there is no roleplay-related reason to keep weapon focus as a requirement for the Unholy Champion of Pyrtechon, and to require it would go against the intent and flavor of the class.
On a related note, correct me if I am wrong, but to my knowledge I currently have the only active character dedicated to Pyrtechon. Pyrtechon has not been given much love over the years, as I think I also owned one of maybe three clerics of him I have ever seen in my tenure at Layonara, none of whom have amounted to anything worthy of note. I have also been involved in the Corath church a little bit over the years and have seen how much that has changed and improved due to input from players much like myself. I would love the opportunity to finally give Pyrtechon a fighting chance among players in this world, both as a player and a character.
-
Bugger that...a champion of destruction should carry a weapon that makes the most mess. Go for a spikey splattering weapon like a morning star, Flail or war mace!!
-
What still seems to be separated in your mind is that being a Pyrtechonite trumps being a Champion. It does not. This is an inclusive situation. There are requirements for being a Pyrtechonite, and there are requirements for being a Champion.
Take two characters with identical builds except one has Weapon Focus in some weapon and the other does not. Which is going to be more effective? with that weapon? The answer is simple. I'm conceding here that the choice of weapon for an Unholy Champion of Pyrtechon is probably irrelevant. However, if such an individual is going to be a Champion of Pyrtechon, it behooves them to be as destructive as possible. Again, this can be expressed by choosing the weapon with the highest average damage per strike, but setting that aside and keeping the idea that Pyrtechonites have no specific favored weapon, the most effective Champion is going to be one that focuses on the nuances and particulars of one specific weapon rather than splattering his training over many.
For a Chaotic Pyrtechonite it's not about "focusing" so much as favoring and becoming very effective with a particular weapon.
A Jack-of-all-Trades is a master of none.
This idea is not in conflict with the lore surrounding Pyrtechon, nor is it in conflict with the lore surrounding champions. Pyrtechon would want his Champions to be the best destroyers possible, and a mechanical manifestation of that would be requiring a Weapon Focus feat.
Point Blank Shot is not a valid comparison here, because it does not apply to melee weapons. Champions are primarily a melee-focused class.
I really do understand your arguments, and I find value in them. I also suspect this one little feat may be upsetting a planned progression for a character of yours toward UCoP. If this is true, that's fine. I get it. But I also have to wonder why not also debate the merits of 5 ranks in Hide. Why would the Destroyer's Champion need or want to hide? Is he only to destroy in stealth? I doubt it. Lore-wise, that makes less sense than the original complaint, don't you think?
Bugger that...a champion of destruction should carry a weapon that makes the most mess. Go for a spikey splattering weapon like a morning star, Flail or war mace!!
Sure! And in doing so, you would also want to figure out how to make the biggest mess possible with that weapon, so Weapon Focus fits well.
So again, keeping a Weapon Focus requirement for all Champions (regardless of deity) seems to make a lot of sense, because it's consistent for Champions. If we're going to take that away, we shouldn't call them Champions, but that seems kind of a big and unnecessary shift for such a minor matter, when most or all of the lore matters related to UCoP can be solved simply by opening up the requirement to any Weapon Focus, not a specific one.
Though I would say...I would laugh a lot if someone tried to make an UCoP with Weapon Focus: Dagger...unless that someone was an over-caffeinated dual-wielding jackrabbit with a meth habit. ;)
-
Just for the record, my comment was meant to be light hearted but thanks for your insight. :)
But I totally agree with you Dorg and definately don't have a problem with weapon focus. You can make a case for any class out there but where would the buck stop? I can make a case for Champions of Corath or even clerics of Corath having a favoured weapon as a short sword. I've always prefered a dagger personally, it's more easily concealed than a short sword, easily poisoned and certainly represents the sacrificial aspect of the diety. Moreso it saves me a feat when I make a cleric. ;) But this is about Pyrtechon so I won't go off on a tangent.
All this talk makes me want to write up my pyrtechon cleric I've been thinking about for a while.
cheers,
Polak.
-
Though I would say...I would laugh a lot if someone tried to make an UCoP with Weapon Focus: Dagger...unless that someone was an over-caffeinated dual-wielding jackrabbit with a meth habit. ;)
Not necessarily. *Stands by a large crane at the docks, draws dagger and cuts the rope, large crate falls and a well setuped chain reaction ensues resulting in a series of explosions, things falling over and many people dying* Heheh, I love this dagger.
And I love over exaggerating things. :p
-
Mechanically, what class does the Unholy Champions pick when leveling?
-
What still seems to be separated in your mind is that being a Pyrtechonite trumps being a Champion. It does not. This is an inclusive situation. There are requirements for being a Pyrtechonite, and there are requirements for being a Champion.
I agree, this is an inclusive situation. The Champions are the cream of the crop, the very best Pyrtechonites out there; they take the dogma more seriously than anyone else. Surely the requirements for being a Champion can only be taken into consideration when one has met the requirements for following Pyrtechon. I am simply saying that a Champion embodies the dogma of a religion, and if there is no favored weapon there, then it should not be a requirement.
Take two characters with identical builds except one has Weapon Focus in some weapon and the other does not. Which is going to be more effective? with that weapon? The answer is simple. I'm conceding here that the choice of weapon for an Unholy Champion of Pyrtechon is probably irrelevant. However, if such an individual is going to be a Champion of Pyrtechon, it behooves them to be as destructive as possible. Again, this can be expressed by choosing the weapon with the highest average damage per strike, but setting that aside and keeping the idea that Pyrtechonites have no specific favored weapon, the most effective Champion is going to be one that focuses on the nuances and particulars of one specific weapon rather than splattering his training over many.
If the character without weapon focus has a different feat, for example knockdown, I wouldn't be so quick to favor the one with weapon focus. I think at this point we can both agree that the choice of weapon doesn't matter. While I agree that it would make sense to take weapon focus at some time during the career of the champion (in all honesty who in their right mind wouldn't?), I don't feel it should be required.
For a Chaotic Pyrtechonite it's not about "focusing" so much as favoring and becoming very effective with a particular weapon.
Again, I understand the appeal of weapon focus, but still feel it should not be required.
A Jack-of-all-Trades is a master of none.
Something a Bard understands all too well, I'm afraid. O.o
This idea is not in conflict with the lore surrounding Pyrtechon, nor is it in conflict with the lore surrounding champions. Pyrtechon would want his Champions to be the best destroyers possible, and a mechanical manifestation of that would be requiring a Weapon Focus feat.
Or really any combat feat. Cleave is already required, why not throw in whirlwind attack as well? Epic prowess? I'm just trying to say that in the context, weapon focus makes at most as much sense as any other combat-based feat, and in most cases not as much.
Point Blank Shot is not a valid comparison here, because it does not apply to melee weapons. Champions are primarily a melee-focused class.
The only melee-only feat they get is smite, which is useful, but not the sole reason to take the class. Sneak attacks from range are still useful, especially when you have a nice meaty fiend to absorb the blows while you take pot shots from just under 15 feet away. Seeing as they are based on the Champion of Torm, which requires weapon focus in a melee weapon, I can understand where you're coming from, but if the greatsword focus is to be opened to any weapon (or dropped altogether), a ranged Champion does not seem that unreasonable to me.
I really do understand your arguments, and I find value in them. I also suspect this one little feat may be upsetting a planned progression for a character of yours toward UCoP. If this is true, that's fine. I get it. But I also have to wonder why not also debate the merits of 5 ranks in Hide. Why would the Destroyer's Champion need or want to hide? Is he only to destroy in stealth? I doubt it. Lore-wise, that makes less sense than the original complaint, don't you think?
Good point. Why not debate the five ranks in hide? I'd assumed it was because any Unholy Champion worth his salt would know better than to practice their religion out in the open for all to see. Surely a Champion without some measure of stealth would be a short lived Champion indeed. Not to mention, the 5 ranks in hide are mechanically relevant (as even though the class is based conceptually on CoT, its pretty obvious that it is mechanically based on the Blackguard), where the weapon focus is not. Neither the hide nor the weapon focus seems relevant to me, but only one of those two is easily changeable and that's the one I'm after. But hey, why not re-work the entire class if none of it seems to make sense?
Sure! And in doing so, you would also want to figure out how to make the biggest mess possible with that weapon, so Weapon Focus fits well.
Or you would want to figure out how to kill the most things with it, where again, almost any combat feat applies. Pyrtechon is the God of Fury and Destruction, not the bane of janitors all across Layonara.
So again, keeping a Weapon Focus requirement for all Champions (regardless of deity) seems to make a lot of sense, because it's consistent for Champions. If we're going to take that away, we shouldn't call them Champions, but that seems kind of a big and unnecessary shift for such a minor matter, when most or all of the lore matters related to UCoP can be solved simply by opening up the requirement to any Weapon Focus, not a specific one.
All other Champions have a favored weapon, so yes, weapon focus should be kept consistent for them. Pyrtechon does not; he is decidedly inconsistent in that regard, and his Champion requirements should reflect that.
Though I would say...I would laugh a lot if someone tried to make an UCoP with Weapon Focus: Dagger...unless that someone was an over-caffeinated dual-wielding jackrabbit with a meth habit. ;)
Disciples of Pyrtechon are to be feared, not made sport of. But yeah, that would be kinda funny.;)
-
What still seems to be separated in your mind is that being a Pyrtechonite trumps being a Champion. It does not. This is an inclusive situation. There are requirements for being a Pyrtechonite, and there are requirements for being a Champion.
Umm... what does that actually mean? Is there a universal idea of a champion that is somehow equally applicable to Toran, Corath, and Pyrtechon, three incredibly different gods? Sure, if there was an order of "Champions" that took certain vows and somehow viewed equally across the board as filling the same function, but just serving different gods, that would make sense. But that really doesn't seem to be how the flavor of the classes are written (or maybe it is and I've just really missed the mark on understanding that one). If that's the case, then why not just have "Divine Champion" as a class, make the requirements static, and let people who follow any god become one? That would be actually be sort of nifty. I know back in my heyday Jet would have loved to become a Champion of Ilsare. But again, unless I've really missed the mark on understanding this, being a Pyrtechonite should trump being this ambiguous "champion." That's what the flavor of the class is, its what makes it different, and I have a very hard time believing that someone would be selected as a champion of any faith that didn't at the very least strive to be the very embodiment of that faith.
For a Chaotic Pyrtechonite it's not about "focusing" so much as favoring and becoming very effective with a particular weapon.
But why become focused on a particular weapon when that leaves you at risk of being a one-trick pony? Maybe tomorrow his free-spirited whims would lead him to want to set someone on fire and pound them into submission with his bare hands? Which brings me to the next point...
A Jack-of-all-Trades is a master of none.
Very true, but the mistake here is thinking that weapon skill is the only skill. Pyrtechon doesn't deal in mastery in swordsmanship or stealth; Pyrtechon is the master of unbridled fury and destruction. When I think of the man (or woman) who will carry that flag holding a burning home (likely tattered and burned from some horrible campaign) so I imagine the man who meticulously honed his swordsmanship, or axesmanship, or maulsmanship to best his opponents? No! I imagine a terrifying berserker who may have some tried and tested skill at arms, but more likely than not draws his strength from two sources: his own hate and anger and the divine wrath of a god who is basically just wrath and no cunning. The Champion I imagine is specialized, but its in destruction and fury, not honed skill at arms.
This idea is not in conflict with the lore surrounding Pyrtechon, nor is it in conflict with the lore surrounding champions. Pyrtechon would want his Champions to be the best destroyers possible, and a mechanical manifestation of that would be requiring a Weapon Focus feat.
This seems like an arguable point at best. The other best way to mechanical be as destructive as possible is to take Weapon Specialization. Or Improved Critical. But that's enough about mechanics... I thought Layonara was about roleplay first, and game mechanics third or fourth? And the fact is that Weapon Focus may be the defacto feat for most fighters because, yes it is a good feat for someone who wants to lock themselves into a weapon, and it frankly fits the backstory of most characters who are usually trained with one weapon. But roleplay wise, what is it? It is long-term training and experience with one weapon, focus on it over all others. There's really no escaping that unless we really want to downplay the roleplaying value of feat selection. I honestly don't think it makes sense as a necessity. Yes it makes sense for Champions of other gods, I grant you that, but I again ask: what does that actually mean in regards to being a champion of this god?
Point Blank Shot is not a valid comparison here, because it does not apply to melee weapons. Champions are primarily a melee-focused class.
Once again, what is this based on thematically? The Champions of Corath, Toran, and the default NWN Torm? As far as I see it, this comparison is perfectly valid - a theoretical champion of Folian S'pae would probably largely disagree that Champions must be melee based. Of course, he could always just take Weapon Focus (longbow), but he'd be a fool to pass up Point Blank Shot because mechanically, that's the one that makes sense.
Now its heart of the matter time, and the real reason I was interested in this debate:
But I also have to wonder why not also debate the merits of 5 ranks in Hide. Why would the Destroyer's Champion need or want to hide? Is he only to destroy in stealth? I doubt it. Lore-wise, that makes less sense than the original complaint, don't you think?
You are 100% correct on this, and the Hide skill makes no sense whatsoever, for a Pyrtechonite or this theoretical "Champion" that you've alluded to and sort of describe in the next paragraph:
So again, keeping a Weapon Focus requirement for all Champions (regardless of deity) seems to make a lot of sense, because it's consistent for Champions. If we're going to take that away, we shouldn't call them Champions, but that seems kind of a big and unnecessary shift for such a minor matter, when most or all of the lore matters related to UCoP can be solved simply by opening up the requirement to any Weapon Focus, not a specific one.
The Champion of Toran doesn't have that Hide requirement, am I wrong? Neither does the Champion of Vorax. Why not? Are they not all Champions first, and followers of their gods second? Yes, there is an alignment difference - Toran and Vorax are good, Corath and Pyrtechon are evil. This much is clear as day. But this is at its heart a mechanical difference. Evil is not the same as evil, and good is not the same as good. Honestly, the differences between Pyrtechon and Corath are arguable as different as the differences between Toran and Pyrtechon. Sure, in one case the two gods share alignments, but they otherwise have hugely different tenets and hugely different beliefs. To Pyrtechon, the Corathite is more fuel for the fire, but to the Corathite, the Pyrtechonite is a tool to be aimed and unleashed, but always kept on one of the things a Pyrtechonite hates most: a leash. Obviously these gods are different in many, many ways, other than alignment. But mechanical, the champion classes are divided in this way. That honestly seems highly contradictory: if they are all Champions in some universal sense, then how come they are still treated differently?
Which to me means there are really two options here: either champions are tailored to their god, or they are some other more universal concept. Restricting it based solely on alignment is honestly just bad roleplaying.
So here are my two propositions: accept that champions are unique to specific gods and tailor the PrCs to reflect that. That likely means whole new abilities, whole new requirements, although I think the write-ups wouldn't need to be redone. Sadly, this means that other gods will be left championless unless someone really wants to take the time to construct new classes for all of them, but maybe that's ok. Maybe the only gods who have need of specific champions are the ones that already have the classes.
The other option is to toss out specific champions of Toran, Corath, etc. and house them all under the "Divine Champion" PrC. This seems to me what you've been alluding to the desired case. If this singular class existed, the restriction could just be Weapon Focus, BAB +7, and no alignment restriction. Sure, people would need to be the same alignment as the god they wanted to champion, but that's what character approvals are for. This is the less sticky option that, in a weird way, gives characters of other gods something fun to work towards if they so desire. It also I think reconciles some of the inconsistencies that exist in the current understandings of "Champions" in Layonara.
Truth be told I don't think either solution will actually happen, but it is fun to think about.
TL;DR - Champions should either be specific to gods or wholly generic; the current system is strikingly inconsistent.
-
Some good and thoughtful responses, and far too much to respond to all of them, so I'm going to cherry-pick them and potentially take things out of context. *winks* Kidding about that last part....maybe...
I agree, this is an inclusive situation. The Champions are the cream of the crop, the very best Pyrtechonites out there; they take the dogma more seriously than anyone else. Surely the requirements for being a Champion can only be taken into consideration when one has met the requirements for following Pyrtechon. I am simply saying that a Champion embodies the dogma of a religion, and if there is no favored weapon there, then it should not be a requirement.
I have already, several times, put forth the idea that having a specific Weapon Focus requirement for UCoP is no longer consistent with lore given the lack of a preferred weapon. I think we can agree on this point at least fully. At the same time, I see no disparity or inconsistency with continuing to require some melee Weapon Focus feat. Champion is a melee-oriented class, afterall.
Answer me this: Why is this not a reasonable compromise?
Seeing as they are based on the Champion of Torm, which requires weapon focus in a melee weapon, I can understand where you're coming from, but if the greatsword focus is to be opened to any weapon (or dropped altogether), a ranged Champion does not seem that unreasonable to me.
I should have been more specific. I said "any" Weapon Focus feat when I meant "any melee" Weapon Focus feat. I did not mean for such an oversight to suggest the possibility of ranged-weapon Champions.
(as even though the class is based conceptually on CoT, its pretty obvious that it is mechanically based on the Blackguard)
As I have said in a previous post, it's possible (even likely) that UCoP, UCoBC and UCoC are a mixture of Champion of Torm and Blackguard. If one remains focused on the Blackguard similarities then it will seem that way, but if one considers them as a blend, then the presence of Weapon Focus makes more sense.
All other Champions have a favored, weapon, so yes, weapon focus should be kept consistent for them. Pyrtechon does not; he is decidedly inconsistent in that regard, and it is my belief that his Champion requirements should reflect that.
So why not have his Champions with an inconsistent smattering of preferred melee weaponry?
Umm... what does that actually mean? Is there a universal idea of a champion that is somehow equally applicable to Toran, Corath, and Pyrtechon, three incredibly different gods? Sure, if there was an order of "Champions" that took certain vows and somehow viewed equally across the board as filling the same function, but just serving different gods, that would make sense. But that really doesn't seem to be how the flavor of the classes are written (or maybe it is and I've just really missed the mark on understanding that one). If that's the case, then why not just have "Divine Champion" as a class, make the requirements static, and let people who follow any god become one? That would be actually be sort of nifty. I know back in my heyday Jet would have loved to become a Champion of Ilsare. But again, unless I've really missed the mark on understanding this, being a Pyrtechonite should trump being this ambiguous "champion." That's what the flavor of the class is, its what makes it different, and I have a very hard time believing that someone would be selected as a champion of any faith that didn't at the very least strive to be the very embodiment of that faith.
Good questions.
First, there is an overall concept of Champions. Taking the specific deities out of it for a moment, there is a common thread running through them all, and that is...well, they're the Champion of their deities. At their core, they're a physical embodiment of their deities, if not in form then in execution of...not dogma so much as being the arm of the deity itself. I know this concept was covered at great length with respect to Toran a while ago, and while it would be interesting to flip the coin around, I'm not going to start down that path here tonight. That's not to say it couldn't be discussed...just that I'm not going to start it.
On the question of making it just a general "Divine Champion" class...the answer is it's simply not appropriate for all deities to have Champions. For most, in fact, it makes no sense whatsoever. I could make a list and make some cheeky comments about the absurdity of some combinations (i.e. Champion of Az'atta -> Weapon Focus: Hugs), but that would be a big waste of time.
So...and again, this is speculative on my part, since the classes existed before I had anything to do with development, but I have a fair good idea how the minds of the people who did design them work...the Champion classes were picked by some criteria, and I would guess that criteria to have something to do with the aggressiveness of the dogma and deity alike. Toran is aggressive in protecting the weak and so on. Vorax is aggressive in battle and in strength of arms. Pyrtechon is just plain aggressive. Ca'Duz and Corath are also aggressive in their own particular ways. These all, as a collection, make sense to have Champions. That is not to say that there is any great similarity, in terms of RP, between Champions except in the very highest level of comparison.
And yes, there are marked differences between the Good-aligned Champions and the Evil-aligned ones. And yes, there are similarities to both Blackguard and Champion of Torm for both. As stated above, they are a blend of concepts, but please do not confuse the Unholy Champions with Blackguards in an RP sense, because that is definitely not universally accurate.
But why become focused on a particular weapon when that leaves you at risk of being a one-trick pony? Maybe tomorrow his free-spirited whims would lead him to want to set someone on fire and pound them into submission with his bare hands?
Weapon Focus can be taken multiple times for multiple weapons. This PrC is just asking for one at a minimum. This in itself does not enforce any sort of "one-trick pony" development.
But that's enough about mechanics... I thought Layonara was about roleplay first, and game mechanics third or fourth? And the fact is that Weapon Focus may be the defacto feat for most fighters because, yes it is a good feat for someone who wants to lock themselves into a weapon, and it frankly fits the backstory of most characters who are usually trained with one weapon. But roleplay wise, what is it? It is long-term training and experience with one weapon, focus on it over all others. There's really no escaping that unless we really want to downplay the roleplaying value of feat selection. I honestly don't think it makes sense as a necessity. Yes it makes sense for Champions of other gods, I grant you that, but I again ask: what does that actually mean in regards to being a champion of this god?
Yes, it is about RP first, and the NWN system is a lacking framework for the diversity of our lore. The mechanics we have are simply an approximation to reflect the RP and development of a character...or conversely they can be a framework for the RP and development of a character. But they're kind of clunky, tied to discreet concepts of class and on/off abilities with little to no spectrum.
Your questions here and arguments are good, but the real fact is that whether it's Weapon Focus (any melee) or some other combat-oriented feat, there'd still be a forced "backstory" for the character imposed by the feat requirement. That's pretty much true for any class, so the idea of eliminating it for this one makes no sense to me given the system we have. Maybe he's not focusing on a weapon...instead he focuses on knocking people down (assuming Knockdown would become a requirement for UCoP), for example. But why should he have to do that just to be Pyrtechon's Champion? It's just as restrictive, but it may only have the advantage of better aligning with someone's own personal build preferences while others won't agree with that and wish it to be something else.
So why not take it out all together? Well, then it becomes unbalanced in comparison to the other Unholy Champion classes. In particular, the bar is lowered for entry, so where's the trade-off? Should we take something away from the UCoP to balance it out and effectively make that PrC weaker than the others? Or should we take it away from all of them and kind of have to rebalance the whole mess?
Personally, it think that's far too much effort for this one little issue.
The Champion of Toran doesn't have that Hide requirement, am I wrong? Neither does the Champion of Vorax. Why not? Are they not all Champions first, and followers of their gods second? Yes, there is an alignment difference - Toran and Vorax are good, Corath and Pyrtechon are evil. This much is clear as day. But this is at its heart a mechanical difference.
There is a difference between Toran/Vorax Champions and Ca'Duz/Corath/Pyrtechon Champions. The latter set has Hide requirements, which makes sense since they're technically illegal in most places...arguably anyway. They also have a lower BAB requirement, so the difference in requirements between the Good set and the Evil set finds some kind of balance in the give-and-take.
Which to me means there are really two options here: either champions are tailored to their god, or they are some other more universal concept. Restricting it based solely on alignment is honestly just bad roleplaying.
So here are my two propositions: accept that champions are unique to specific gods and tailor the PrCs to reflect that. That likely means whole new abilities, whole new requirements, although I think the write-ups wouldn't need to be redone. Sadly, this means that other gods will be left championless unless someone really wants to take the time to construct new classes for all of them, but maybe that's ok. Maybe the only gods who have need of specific champions are the ones that already have the classes.
The other option is to toss out specific champions of Toran, Corath, etc. and house them all under the "Divine Champion" PrC. This seems to me what you've been alluding to the desired case. If this singular class existed, the restriction could just be Weapon Focus, BAB +7, and no alignment restriction. Sure, people would need to be the same alignment as the god they wanted to champion, but that's what character approvals are for. This is the less sticky option that, in a weird way, gives characters of other gods something fun to work towards if they so desire. It also I think reconciles some of the inconsistencies that exist in the current understandings of "Champions" in Layonara.
The second won't work for reasons I've stated already. It makes no sense for some deities to have Champions. Beyond that, custom crafting 28 Champion classes is no small feat...no pun intended. *grins*
There's a third option, because really, most of the Champions we have are already tailored to each deity by virtue of the preferred weapon and the corresponding Weapon Focus feat. That third option? Keep Weapon Focus as a requirement for UCoP but make it a non-specific melee Weapon Focus. This is the best of both worlds, and it gives freedom and keeps consistency across the line. It's also the easiest and quickest to do.
Really, and I don't mean any offense to anyone when I say this...but this whole discussion and the passion of the responses is kind of disproportionate to the root of things...and that root is this:
Pyrtechon's lore evolved. The class did not. It was a pure and simple oversight and it can be pretty easily remedied if people are willing to meet in the middle and understand the intent and limitations we have here.
-
All right, we have established that the requirement should at least be expanded to Weapon Focus (any melee weapon).
Before I make my next point, some facts:
[INDENT]In Layonara, all Champion classes, Holy or Unholy, regardless of Deity, are to be viewed through the lens of the Champion of Torm when considered from a conceptual and roleplay standpoint.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]In Layonara, both the Holy Champion of Toran and the Holy Champion of Vorax are mechanically identical to the Champion of Torm PrC from the original Neverwinter Nights, benefits and requirements all, with the exception that their weapon focuses have been specified for them.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]In Layonara, the Unholy Champion classes are mechanically identical to the Blackguard PrC from the original Neverwinter Nights, benefits and requirements all, with the exception that they must also take weapon focus in a melee weapon (specifically shortsword for Corath).[/INDENT]
The issue of balance was mentioned in the last post. Dungeons and Dragons has been around for decades. From these decades of play and experimentation spawned two prestige classes, the Champion of Torm and the Blackguard. These classes have no doubt been modified countless times over the years to bring them into balance with each other. There should be no clear favorite as to which is the superior class.
To remove the weapon focus requirement from unholy champions would not throw the Champion classes out of balance, it would throw them into balance. Think about it. The only additional requirement of a good Champion (as mechanically compared to the Champion of Torm) is that they have their weapon chosen for them from the start. The Unholy Champions (as compared to the Blackguard) are now required to take a whole new feat. Assuming the classes started in balance, as I have and I think many others would too, this throws them mechanically out of balance.
I don't think I'm being too bold in stating that there is more justification for a Champion of Corath having weapon focus than a champion of Pyrtechon, as Corath has a favored weapon and Pyrtechon does not. However, I fail to see the problem in removing the requirement altogether from both classes, since it is not mechanically enforced and it only serves to unbalance the classes.
As for the responses being disproportionate, I know I don't have to explain to anyone here how seriously Layonara takes its lore. The character submission process is proof enough of that. We are simply making this an issue because we feel something is wrong and that it would better the world for it to be fixed.
On a side note, and just out of curiosity, why is there no Blackguard class on Layonara? We have paladins, it seems perfectly reasonable that we would have anti-paladins.
-
Well I've certainly done my quota of reading for the week.
-
Answer me this: Why is this not a reasonable compromise?
@thekevmon
I'm totally following that you feel that there's something wrong with requiring any kind of weapon focus, and I think you were sort of getting to the why of it with the balance/unbalance segment there. I'm not seeing the answer to this pretty important question which I think will better explain why you feel the presence of the required weapon focus is so horribly offensive. Really, it's not about being stuck in the mud about it or unmovable, it's about really not understanding what it is you are trying to say with "this is completely wrong," because when we ask why we're getting "why don't you see this is wrong!" in reply rather than an enumerated example.
It's pretty obvious to me that the fixation is completely about the mechanics here, but I don't see how the mechanics isn't pretty ideally matched to the lore, with the exception of Dorganath's conceded point on weapon type. Is it too difficult somehow? Is it too limiting some how? Is it strictly a numbers thing ("We only have this number of things for the good guys, why do the bad guys have this extra junk??")? Is coming off contrary to lore in some way to you? What's going on here that makes you feel like the requirement of Weapon Focus feat (any) is so problematic that it feels unbalanced (and unfair) to you? Is Weapon Focus feat somehow barring someone out there from making the WLDQ application for Champion of P-tech (or massive CDQ series)?
As to why we don't have the Blackguard PrC, I don't know if there's been actual discussion about this or not but I would guess that the implementation and lore of the class hasn't been worked on due to a lack of interest by either Team members or community. We recently revamped an old PrC (scout) and added one of the 'newer' PrCs (knight), fitted to our lore etc. It's not that we don't add them, there ... just really hasn't been an interest expressed by anyone by my perception. I think this is the first time I've seen much said about Blackguard at all here. We don't really have all that many paladins, usually don't have that many active at any point in time that I can remember. It may just not be poplar enough to bother with (given the limited man hours available).
I could be totally wrong on this, and I'm sure someone will come around and brutally smack me down for the audacity of being wrong but, that's my current best educated guess.
~row
-
I'm going to *gasp* try to be succinct...
The issue of balance was mentioned in the last post. Dungeons and Dragons has been around for decades. From these decades of play and experimentation spawned two prestige classes, the Champion of Torm and the Blackguard. These classes have no doubt been modified countless times over the years to bring them into balance with each other. There should be no clear favorite as to which is the superior class.
D&D is not without its imbalances, and such a thing could be its own separate topic all together. NWN, while based on D&D, is not D&D. It's a computer-based approximation with its own sets of compromises necessary for an electronic, programmed format. Layonara is not D&D or NWN, though presently NWN it is the platform upon which Layonara is implemented, imperfect as it may be.
So ultimately, this isn't about what is preferred or favorite in terms of This Class or That. Also, it is quite pointless to continue to debate the basis of our Champion classes. Mechanical similarities are just that. The intent, design and lore of the classes trumps whatever arguments one may want to make about the stock NWN classes from which they are derived.
To remove the weapon focus requirement from unholy champions would not throw the Champion classes out of balance, it would throw them into balance. Think about it. The only additional requirement of a good Champion (as mechanically compared to the Champion of Torm) is that they have their weapon chosen for them from the start. The Unholy Champions (as compared to the Blackguard) are now required to take a whole new feat. Assuming the classes started in balance, as I have and I think many others would too, this throws them mechanically out of balance.
Only if one continues to treat them as Champion of Torm and Blackguard. If one narrows the focus to those examples, which do not fit Layonara's lore in one way or the other, then yes....the addition of additional requirements could be considered as unbalancing. However, if one considers the entire Champion line in Layonara, then one would see the consistency of the way they're designed. Even if one only limits oneself to the Evil-aligned Champion PrCs, there is presently a consistency among them, and as such it was my comment that removing a requirement from one of them skews things and removes that consistency.
I don't think I'm being too bold in stating that there is more justification for a Champion of Corath having weapon focus than a champion of Pyrtechon, as Corath has a favored weapon and Pyrtechon does not. However, I fail to see the problem in removing the requirement altogether from both classes, since it is not mechanically enforced and it only serves to unbalance the classes.
I think we can agree that Weapon Focus or not, the mechanical balance at play-time is negligible. The +1 AB isn't really going to amount to a heck of a lot. It's presence is, and always has been, symbolic for these PrCs. Removing a requirement, and a minor one at that, does effectively lower the bar for entry to the UCoP in comparison to the other Unholy Champion classes. That is the balance I spoke of before.
As for the responses being disproportionate, I know I don't have to explain to anyone here how seriously Layonara takes its lore. The character submission process is proof enough of that. We are simply making this an issue because we feel something is wrong and that it would better the world for it to be fixed.
No need to explain. I completely understand your intent and your opinions on this matter. I say this because I get the impression you're still trying to explain them to me. It's really not necessary. I simply have a different opinion and perspective.
However, whether or not something is "fixed", and how it is "fixed", will depend on how "wrong" it really is, and it is in this measure of "wrongness" where we seem to disagree. That's fine, and historically we have addressed matters like this where lore moves on but mechanics (or in some cases administration) do not. My opinion of what would best address the issue differs from yours. There's nothing wrong with that, but obviously we may not both get what we want out of it ultimately.
Understand that I completely understand and respect the opinions and analysis offered here. My disagreement with the offered conclusions should not be mistaken for a lack of understanding as to what is being conveyed here. Truly...I get it.
On a side note, and just out of curiosity, why is there no Blackguard class on Layonara? We have paladins, it seems perfectly reasonable that we would have anti-paladins.
In fact, the Unholy Champion of Corath re-uses the Blackguard class ID, thus replacing it in the list, mechanically speaking, and thereby excluding someone from taking Blackguard as a class. Once more, the "why" on this is going to be speculative, since I was not involved in things when these classes were created, but I would conclude that since we re-used the Blackguard class ID for Unholy Champion of Corath, we simply did not want the Blackguard class at all, or at least not by name. The reason for this is most likely that the lore of the standard Blackguard class is not compatible with the lore of Layonara. As has been observed now many times in this thread alone, there are strong mechanical similarities between Unholy Champions and Blackguards, but in terms of lore and RP, we want them to be different. Again, this is just a guess, albeit an educated one.
The last thing I want to say here is this:
I originally posted in this thread to convey information and background, because the question was asked as to why things are as they are. Isn't that the purpose of "Ask a Gamemaster"? However, it seems the information I offered, as background only, somehow became fodder for a debate. This happens a lot, actually, and it's tiring. It takes up a lot more time than I want to spend on it and in this case, I got called "ignorant" in the process. Always a good time.
I'm kind of thinking this thread has run its course, but I don't like shutting down a conversation that can be and has been productive on some level, so please continue if you want. That said, I think I will no longer contribute to this one. I have answered the questions asked and even agreed with the core assertion that lore and class design have a mismatch in this case and offered a reasonable compromise that seems to satisfy the core issue. However, I do not believe that hammering on this topic any further from either side is going to be productive in any way, at least not on my part. I understand what is being said, and hopefully I have made myself understood as well.
If you want to ensure proper visibility for some potential change in this matter, I strongly suggest posting there. This particular forum is not usually scanned for material when preparing updates.
Thank you all for offering your opinions and analysis, and thanks to thekevmon for bringing this up in the first place. It is indeed inconsistent, and probably should be addressed in some way.
*waves*
-
As suggested: http://forums.layonara.com/nwn-ideas-suggestions-requests/286522-unholy-champion-pyrtechon.html#post1748886