Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Poodle 11-07-05, 01:05 AM	Hi I am looking for a good assassin class and prestige class maybe slightly over powered I don’t really like rogues I was thinking of ninja but I wanted to see if anyone has made a better assassin class and for prestige I was just looking for something slightly stronger then the current one. thanks
Wyrd Bearer 11-07-05, 01:16 AM	Do you mean good as in "excellent in quality" or do you mean good as in moral opposite of evil? I ask because, unlike the superstition that all words have one, and only one, true meaning in every situation, without more context to give the word "good" a particular edified meaning in this situation, a reader would not know the exact usage of the word that you wish to convey. (Thank you I. A. Richards for ruining my life.)
Poodle 11-07-05, 01:22 AM	sorry I meant good as in strong but not overpowered I need a sightly more powerful assassin then normal for what I am planing so I needed a stronger type assassin class and prestige class but I was just wondering if any one has made one because I am not really that found of ninjas and I needed something a bit stronger anyway sorry for the mix up of contexts. Thanks
BlaineTog 11-07-05, 01:26 AM	sorry I meant good as in strong but not overpowered I need a sightly more powerful assassin then normal for what I am planing so I needed a stronger type assassin class and prestige class but I was just wondering if any one has made one because I am not really that found of ninjas and I needed something a bit stronger anyway sorry for the mix up of contexts.Why would you need it to be more powerful?
heretic888 11-07-05, 07:15 AM	Going with what Wyrd Bearer said, I would also extend this contextualism into the word "assassin" itself. What exactly are you looking for?? A paid killer-for-hire class akin to the Assassin prestige class?? Or, is this just a catchall term for Any Deadly Sneak class?? Laterz.
573v3 11-07-05, 07:29 AM	Maybe more specifically you want an optimised assasin. That would include taking full advantage of their primary ability, Death Attack. Use poisons, and get your death attack dc up and you have a very strong char.
CzarGarrett 11-07-05, 09:49 AM	Before everyone goes too nuts, lets lay out what we have and see if the OP can't use any of it. To play a "killer for hire" characters, any character can do. Its more of a personality rather than actual class. You can have a rogue, fighter, cleric, mage, anyone except a Paladin be a killer for hire. As per a specific assassin, there's the Assassin PrC (in the DMG), and Slayer of Domiel (BoED). Also, a more specific assassin doesn't need to be either of the PrC's, as it could just require RPing it out to join an assassins guild.
heretic888 11-07-05, 12:09 PM	Before everyone goes too nuts, lets lay out what we have and see if the OP can't use any of it. Well, there's my Shinobi No Bushi class (see signature) for players looking for a combatic sneak with some Oriental flavor --- but I'm not entirely sure this is what the OP is looking for. To play a "killer for hire" characters, any character can do. Its more of a personality rather than actual class. I would argue that its more of a roleplaying background or flavor than a personality, actually. You could have several different characters with the same 'killer-for-hire' background, but with a myriad of diverging personalities and characteristics. You can have a rogue, fighter, cleric, mage, anyone except a Paladin be a killer for hire. Yup. There might even be a way to play a Paladin assassin, provided you only take hits on evil beings and your primary motivation is not personal profit (in this example, the Paladin may represent a larger organization dedicated to wiping out evil). As per a specific assassin, there's the Assassin PrC (in the DMG), and Slayer of Domiel (BoED). There are also a few assassin-type prestige classes in Oriental Adventures, such as the Ninja Spy, Shadow Scout, or Yakuza. There is also the Ninja of the Crescent Moon in Sword and Fist. Mind you, these are 3.0 products but the classes in question need very little in the way of conversion or updating to make them playable. Also, a more specific assassin doesn't need to be either of the PrC's, as it could just require RPing it out to join an assassins guild. Yup, again. Laterz.
Nekr00 11-07-05, 12:22 PM	For an assassin-like prestige class you could also use a Ghost-faced killer from the Complete adventurer.
Vaalingrade Ashland 11-07-05, 02:17 PM	Darkstar Assasin PrC (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=530855) -- an Assassin that won't shame the game world like the one in the DMG.
gorfnad the shiznit 11-08-05, 02:30 AM	otherwise you try my shadowmage core class. the link is in my sig.
Evernon 11-08-05, 02:42 AM	The assassin from the DMG is overpowered as it is, I prestiged at level three, and by level six I was nigh unstoppable. Improved invisibility, silence, and the assassins death attack are enough for most single kill. If you want to add flavor build him up from a two weapon ranger, remember that the rangers class feats stack with any feats he takes, so you can take two weapon fighting and improved two weapon fighting twice, plus the rangers two weapon mastery, two weapon defence, etc.. when your done holding two weapons actually gives you a + to your attack bonus for those weapons. Mix that up with an assassins silence and invisibility, darkness, etc.. and you have one hell of a combination.
Satori 11-08-05, 10:21 AM	The assassin from the DMG is overpowered as it is, I prestiged at level three, and by level six I was nigh unstoppable Skills Disguise 4 ranks, Hide 8 ranks, Move Silently 8 ranks. "Ranks" in a skill are garnered PURELY from class levels, and are calculated before ability and racial/feat mods. Therefore, you'd have to be at least level 5 before you'd meet the prereqs, and your first level in Assassin would be taken at level 6. So how exactly did you get in at level 3? Even with a race with a LA, you are STILL considered your class level in regards to maximum skill ranks allowed. If you want to add flavor build him up from a two weapon ranger, remember that the rangers class feats stack with any feats he takes, so you can take two weapon fighting and improved two weapon fighting twice, plus the rangers two weapon mastery, two weapon defence, etc.. when your done holding two weapons actually gives you a + to your attack bonus for those weapons Combat Style (Ex) At 2nd level, a ranger must select one of two combat styles to pursue: archery or two-weapon combat. This choice affects the character’s class features but does not restrict his selection of feats or special abilities in any way. If the ranger selects archery, he is treated as having the Rapid Shot feat, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites for that feat. If the ranger selects two-weapon combat, he is treated as having the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites for that feat. The benefits of the ranger’s chosen style apply only when he wears light or no armor. He loses all benefits of his combat style when wearing medium or heavy armor. Two-Weapon Fighting [General] You can fight with a weapon in each hand. You can make one extra attack each round with the second weapon. Prerequisite Dex 15. Benefit Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary hand lessens by 2 and the one for your off hand lessens by 6. See the Two-Weapon Fighting special attack. Normal If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. When fighting in this way you suffer a -6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a -10 penalty to the attack with your off hand. If your off-hand weapon is light the penalties are reduced by 2 each. (An unarmed strike is always considered light.) Special A 2nd-level ranger who has chosen the two-weapon combat style is treated as having Two-Weapon Fighting, even if he does not have the prerequisite for it, but only when he is wearing light or no armor. A fighter may select Two-Weapon Fighting as one of his fighter bonus feats. Nowhere does it say that a Ranger's fighting style is stackable with the feat of the same name. The ranger is treated as having the feat in question...which means taking the feat again would only allow the Ranger to TWF in Medium or Heavy Armor. THEY DO NOT STACK. Such would be silly and ultimately game breaking, as who would want to use any other fighting style if you actually got bonuses for getting more attacks? Just remember that you can actually be a "Killer for Hire" without taking a PrClass with the correct name. The best "Assassin" are probably multi-classed spellcasters, with liberal application of alter self, hold person/sleep, and charm. One of my favorite "Assassins" was a Rokugan Ninja/Samurai/Iaijutsu Master from OA. Sure, we fudged the alignment mechanics for realism, but that little Japanese Goju-Spawn was a hell of a quick hitter. If he managed to draw on you flat-footed...well, it was curtains for any non-epic NPC out there.
Evernon 11-08-05, 11:04 PM	#1 We always treated ranks in a skill after modifiers were calculated, which is how I prestiged at the third level, which worked well into the campaign we were playing. #2 The rangers combat style and stacks are game breaking, I agree, but nowhere does it say that the effects of his two weapon fighting style and the feat two weapon fighting do not stack, nor does the rangers combat style restrict his choice of feats, so that is legal, the question is whether or not a DM, who has the last say, will allow it. You may not, but I don't see any reason not to, and I reward my players for hard work, like the time he took to make sure that this build was legal.
GypsyComet 11-08-05, 11:27 PM	You start using unstated rules variants (like counting "total modifiers" as "ranks") and yes, the PH and DMG class balance can get whacked in a hurry. Let's argue from the Rules as Written. It's MUCH safer that way... If a PrC's ability (like, for example, Two Weapon Fighting (TWF) as a class bonus feat) doesn't state that it stacks with previous occurences, then it doesn't. In a number of cases, it WILL say so specifically. In the case of TWF taken as a feat on top of the Ranger's ability, it doesn't stack to become Improved TWF. It DOES remove the Ranger's Armor limitation for TWF, however.
Satori 11-08-05, 11:30 PM	I've already quoted the SRD, so I'm hoping someone else will come in and back me up. Feats don't stack unless they explicitly state that they do. Otherwise, you could get Dodge 10 times, Weapon Spec 10 times, and have +10 to AC and +20 to Damage. I'm afraid that stacking the feat TWF with the Ranger Combat Style that "grants the equivalent of the TWF feat" is not only illegal, but rather illogical as well. In addition, it is a well known DnD 3.5 fact that a "rank" is what you add to a skill manually, while a "modifier" is stuff that gets added automatically from stats/race/feats, etc... As such, using a modified skill as a prereq for a Rank requirement is not legal, and thereby negates your reasoning that the Assassin PrClass is overpowered. It most certainly could be overpowered by allowing entrance at 3rd level (early level Save or Die abilities are generally overpowered), but the class is hardly overpowered when it is played IN A MANNER THAT IT WAS CREATED FOR. By saying "I broke the rules and illegally used the class, so now I'll say that its overpowered" is about as valid as saying "I'm a better boxer than you because I'm going to bring a gun into the ring and shoot you for the win". Come on, you know better. I'm beginning to think you guys aren't even playing DnD anymore.
Vaalingrade Ashland 11-09-05, 12:03 AM	I didn't think you needed backing up because the other way is mind numbingly stupid.
Wyrd Bearer 11-09-05, 12:11 AM	Satori is correct on this, the assassin PrC is fine if you play the game the way it was meant to be. I mean, yes, I do make the occasional exception to the RAW, but letting modifiers like racial bonuses to skills count as ranks and letting the ranger who is only "treated" as having the TWF feat as opposed to actually having the feat use (i.e. wizards actually "gain" scribe scroll as a bonus feat and monks actually "gain" improved unarmed strike, feats that require those as prereqs can be taken) is just silly. You might as well just put away the dice and say "I take the BBEG's head in my hands, rip is off and then shove it down the throat of the headless body" in combat as you're not even playing by the rules anymore.
BlaineTog 11-09-05, 01:35 AM	I didn't think you needed backing up because the other way is mind numbingly stupid.QFNBTT. (Quoted For Nose-Bleedingly Truthful Truthery)
Evernon 11-09-05, 02:12 AM	I wasn't talking about using racial modifiers for maximum ranks, only modifiers from attributes, str, dex etc.. and the prc also states when feats DO NOT stack with each other, leaving the possibility open, it also states that it does not in any way limit the rangers feat selection, meaning that a ranger CAN take the two weapon fighting feat on top of his combat style, which if let stack would increase his modifiers to 0 if he was using a light weapon in his off hand, and the additional feats give him a few extra attacks per turn, not nearly as big a deal as you are all making it out to be, but at lower levels gives your ranger some more umph
Satori 11-09-05, 10:24 AM	Read This Evernon (http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php?date=2002-10-11&res=l) You are seriously beginning to scare me, Evernon. I really don't know what to say, except that I'm sorry for your DM and the other players. I'll weep for their hardship. :weep: However, doesn't it boggle your mind that even when many other forum members poke in to bluntly tell you how silly your reasoning is, you still refuse to listen? Does it not make you wonder if, quite possibly, YOU MIGHT BE WRONG? Has it ever occurred to you that other people may have been gaming for a lot longer than you? Did you ever consider that many of us MIGHT EVEN KNOW THE CREATORS OF THE GAME YOU PRETEND TO KNOW ABOUT? :shocked: :banghead: :help:
heretic888 11-09-05, 12:56 PM	I didn't think you needed backing up because the other way is mind numbingly stupid. To quote the great Snoop Dog: "F'shizzle."
SwiftFox 11-09-05, 01:09 PM	Theres nothing wrong with the core rogue, ninja or assassin classes as they are... the only problem is with players who have unrealisitic expectations of these classes, ie : "ninja asssssasssssins are teh aw3som3 and tey shood be teh bets mostest powurful chars like in anime omg lol!!!111one". Ive seen this fact reinforced over and over by DBZ fans who think monks are underpowered and LOTR fans who think magic is too powerful and flashy... the game is the way it is and wishing your favorite class or character concept was an exception to the rule is just immature.
heretic888 11-09-05, 01:21 PM	Theres nothing wrong with the core rogue, ninja or assassin classes as they are... I only partially agree with you here, with a few qualifications in regards to the Ninja base class and Assassin prestige class. Now, my problem here has nothing at all to do with class mechanics or abilities. As is, I think both classes are mechanically appropriate in pretty much any well-rounded D&D campaign. Rather, my problem concerns the descriptive text and flavor background of these respective classes. The Ninja has an interesting set of abilities, but (like the CW Samurai) it doesn't make a very good ninja in D&D. I feel the class would be much more interesting if given a completely unique flavor text (with a name like, let's say, Shadowblade or something) and divorced from the rather awkward association with ninjutsu. Because, honestly, the Scout does a much better job at this than the Ninja. Likewise, the description of the Assassin gives the impression that it is the prestige class for professional killers and hitmen (whether freelance or employed by an organization). As this discussion and others have clearly demonstrated, this is evidently not the case. As such, I would argue more descriptive flavor and a new name is needed, possibly something along the lines Dark Assassin or Assassin of the Black Hand. Just my perspective, mind you. Laterz.
LiamDeclan 11-09-05, 01:59 PM	If you want some really deadly assassins or PrC's for them check out Green Ronin's -- Assassin's Handbook. This book has a BASE class Assassin that doesn't even have to be of Evil alignment. The assassin in this book has a Killing Blow class feature around 2nd or 3rd level that allows you to make a Coup De Grace attack against a flatfooted or flanked opponent. You do a Critical hit (if you make your attack roll) and your opponent makes a fortitude save versus damage done or dies. This class also gains bonus feats and sneak attack dice (about half that as a rogue does) and some spell casting too.
heretic888 11-09-05, 02:08 PM	LiamDeclan, By "CORE class Assassin", I assume you are referring to an Assassin base class here. Correct?? If so, I'm gonna have to give it the good ol' roll of the eyes here. I really don't see the Assassin (which, from what you've described, sounds like it is a direct extrapolation of the DMG prestige class of the same name) as being appropriate for base class material. If you want something to that end, I see no reason why the Rogue does not work (with you taking levels in the DMG Assassin once your qualify) just as well. Laterz.
LiamDeclan 11-09-05, 02:19 PM	I was saying by CORE class that it is a Assassin class with levels 1st-20th level. This class doesn't have Trapfinding, Uncanny Dodge or Evasion though. And the max sneak attack dice is 3d6 and that is gained when you are 75% through the entire class. Killing Blow at a max of 5 times a day when you are also 90% through the class.
Wyrd Bearer 11-09-05, 02:27 PM	I was saying by CORE class that it is a Assassin class with levels 1st-20th level. This class doesn't have Trapfinding, Uncanny Dodge or Evasion though. And the max sneak attack dice is 3d6 and that is gained when you are 75% through the entire class. Killing Blow at a max of 5 times a day when you are also 90% through the class.1-20 level progression classes are called base classes. Core class are the player classes found only in the players handbook. Anything that doesn't come from the PhB, DMG, and MM is not core.
heretic888 11-09-05, 02:36 PM	I was saying by CORE class that it is a Assassin class with levels 1st-20th level. This class doesn't have Trapfinding, Uncanny Dodge or Evasion though. And the max sneak attack dice is 3d6 and that is gained when you are 75% through the entire class. Killing Blow at a max of 5 times a day when you are also 90% through the class. LiamDeclan, Wyrd Bearer is right. The correct term for a 20 level class is a base class. A core class refers to any class (whether base or prestige) published in the three aforementioned sources. Based on your description, this class still sounds like a 20 level extrapolation of the DMG Assassin, albeit a very clumsy one. Again, I personally don't see the need for such a base class. The Rogue fills the archetype just as well (if you want some spells, just take a few levels in Wizard or Sorcerer), if not better. It just goes to show that not everything that gets published is necessarily well-designed. Laterz.
LiamDeclan 11-09-05, 02:37 PM	I Edited my post that said CORE class and changed it to say BASE class. Sorry for any confusion, my bad.
heretic888 11-09-05, 02:39 PM	I Edited my post that said CORE class and changed it to say BASE class. Sorry for any confusion, my bad. No worries. :P
Satori 11-09-05, 03:38 PM	I agree with Heretic on his previous point about the silliness of popular names. Remove "Ninja" from every class/PrClass, and NEVER use Assassin without some other type of descriptor. Otherwise, players find themselves pidgeon-holed into these narrow classes SIMPLY because of the name...which is beyond ridiculous. I've found that the majority of "Assassin" obsessed players don't even want to play a real Assassin. They don't want to play a self-serving, ultimately evil killer for hire...they just want to play someone who is good at being sneaky and hitting hard while hiding. Monk does this well. Single classed Rogue does this well. Ranger does this REALLY well. Multi-Classed Rogue/Wizard can unleash a rocket launcher from hiding...which means they do it well too. We need to remove our fixation on monikers.
Vaalingrade Ashland 11-09-05, 03:47 PM	I've found that the majority of "Assassin" obsessed players don't even want to play a real Assassin. They don't want to play a self-serving, ultimately evil killer for hire...they just want to play someone who is good at being sneaky and hitting hard while hiding. Erm... Dude... The former isn't and assassin and the latter is. Just because the prestige class in the DMG is called assassin doesn't make it so. To be frank, the Assassin organization in the DMG are morons not fit to were the daggers.
Satori 11-09-05, 04:26 PM	assassin n 1: a murderer (especially one who kills a prominent political figure) who kills by a treacherous surprise attack and often is hired to do the deed I've always been taught that an ASSASSIN is someone who sneakily kills for money...a mercenary sneaky person. A person that kills quickly while hidden isn't an assassin unless they were hired to do it. Otherwise, they are just sneaky people that strike hard from the shadows. As such, my point was that most players seem to think that to be an ASSASSIN means to simply be able to hit hard from the shadows...without the requisite hiring involved. This is silly, since actually playing an ASSASSIN isn't very much fun. Always being tied to a guild, or always having to watch out for the guild assassins (for freelancers), and always in danger of execution from the law isn't very much fun. It really is MUCH easier to simply play a sneaky, hard hitting ADVENTURER that hits hard from the shadows, but isn't bound by a guild (or other organization) or monetary reward...since money and treasure seem to follow anyway. Some players just obsess over the names used, when anyone can refer to themselves as an "Assassin" for one reason or another, regardless of what race/class/PrClass they have.
heretic888 11-09-05, 04:31 PM	Remove "Ninja" from every class/PrClass, and NEVER use Assassin without some other type of descriptor. I can agree with you on the Assassin point, but I'm somewhat more ambivalent when it comes to "Ninja". In my mind, there is more than enough room for a good "Ninja" class in D&D --- provided it is done with a modicum of authenticity and faithfulness to the Japanese archetypes (both historical and mythological). Otherwise, "ninja" just becomes a cliched label to tack onto your newest Rogue variant class, having very little to do with Japanese ninjutsu. I tried to do something like this with my Shinobi No Bushi class (see sig), but wisely refrained from calling it a "ninja". :P Otherwise, players find themselves pidgeon-holed into these narrow classes SIMPLY because of the name...which is beyond ridiculous. Agreed. ;) Laterz.
heretic888 11-09-05, 04:37 PM	I've always been taught that an ASSASSIN is someone who sneakily kills for money...a mercenary sneaky person. I've always thought of an assassin as a synonym for a professional killer or hitman (as opposed to, say, a serial murderer or violent sociopath). This doesn't necessarily make the assassin a mercenary, mind you. In fact, the DMG Assassins are not even mercenaries. Their loyalty and allegiance is explicitly connected to a particular guild or organization. Ideally, they only kill when instructed to by the guild or when forced to due to circumstances. The DMG Assassin Guild is for hire, but the DMG Assassin is not. Its a subtle distinction, but an important one to make. Laterz.
Evernon 11-09-05, 11:25 PM	look satori, <snip> your freaking out over what is a minor variation in the rules your used to, very minor. <snip> I understand the rules and how they are written. This is a matter of point of view, myself and the eight people that play with me agree that the rules read you can select two weapon fighting on top of the two weapon style, that you can do the same with improved two weapon and the style of that name, and again with mastery, the effects don't stack on a +2 basis every time, perhaps I should have been clearer, they first remove the rangers must wear light armor restriction, and then add extra attacks if that is appropriate, such as improved and improved, as a one time bonus. If you ask me that is more than fair compensation for the use of the feat slot. <snip>. I do understand how you might be shocked if every stacking feat were to add a bonus to your base attack or increase your number of attacks per turn. but when your talking about a one time bonus, meaning of course it doesnt increase by level, I just don't see what the big deal is. The whole thing comes out like this, instead of a +2 to your attack bonus, the stacking feats, when all two weapon fighting feats were taken, would add 4, meaning the total modifier for using two weapons would be 0, and it would add an additional three attacks per turn, and 2 AC, by this time you'd be getting close to lvl 20, where a penalty or bonus of 2 really wouldnt matter, and those three attacks per turn wouldnt make a whole lot of difference either. <snip>.
Vaalingrade Ashland 11-10-05, 12:56 AM	No, you're wrong, very... epicly wrong. Two-Weapon style is what is called a 'virtual' feat. Apperently this wasn't put in the wretched 3.5 edition, but it was clarified in Sword and Fist. Virtual Feats, IE, class abilities that have the name and function of existing feats Are virtual feats and count as those feats for the purpose of prerequisites AND counts as those feats, meaning you can't take that feat 'again' unless it says so in the special line.
BlaineTog 11-10-05, 01:30 AM	*agrees with VA*
MageCat 11-10-05, 02:25 AM	Hey, guys! I got a great idea! I think instead of taking fighter level 3, etc, i will just take fighter level 1 over and over. I cannot find anywhere in the rules that forbids it! why would i want to take fighter level 3 and get no feat when i could take level one over and over! you get max hit points for your first hit die, +2 to your fort save, and a bonus feat everytime you are level 1! at level 5 i will be a fighter1/fighter1/fighter1/fighter1/fighter1! sound good? On a more serious note... I read the description of 2-weapon fighting feat in the 3.5PHB. it includes a line about a ranger being treated as though he has the feat already. It does not mention anything about the ranger taking the feat and getting additional benefits. Therefore, the only benefit of a ranger taking the feat is that he will be able to use it while wearing med and hvy armor. also, if you refer to page 160, you find the penalties for fighting with 2 weapons. this chart explicitly states that if your off-hand weapon is light and you have 2-weap fighting feat, you have a -2 penalty to each hand. One could claim that if you have 2-weap. fighting twice, you take a -2 penalty to each hand that stacks for a total penalty of -4 to each hand :pbbbtt: One can bend the rules any way they wish. if you are talking about house rules, please say so AT THE BEGINNING! A little comedy here, noone take it too seriously, please?
Dioxin 11-10-05, 04:25 AM	One could claim that if you have 2-weap. fighting twice, you take a -2 penalty to each hand that stacks for a total penalty of -4 to each hand :pbbbtt: Good catch. I :bow: to your :pbbbtt:. Evernon's assertion that the DM is always right even when discussing the rules with other DMs comes a close second as the funniest bit of comedy on this thread. EDIT: I just realized since using two weapons is -6/-10 and with (Two Weapon Fighting) and light weapons it becomes -6(+2)+2/-10(+6)+2, if the bonuses from the same feat taken twice stacked it would become -6(+2+2)+2/-10(+6+6)+2 for a total of +0/+4. This means you actually end up better with your "off" hand than your main hand. If that bit of silliness doesn't crush the idea righ there, I don't think the combined reasoning skills of the entire board would be able to do it.
LiamDeclan 11-10-05, 04:39 AM	wow just simply wow
Verdaloth 11-10-05, 11:15 AM	QFNBTT. (Quoted For Nose-Bleedingly Truthful Truthery) :heehee :rofl:
Satori 11-10-05, 02:39 PM	Yay! <snip> :cheer: <snip> :cheer: <snip> Oh, Mr. Ashland and, well, everyone else who has responded to this thread is correct. By RAW, you are not, Evernon. Oh, heck, how about another cheer! :cheer: