| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| aelryinth09-15-06, 06:34 PM | :O There's a big ol' thread on the optimizers Board talking about it. Two PrC's...Sovereign Speaker, and more tellingly, the Planar Shepherd. Speaker: NINE domains. That's, um, 81 extra spells. Can be combined with classes with 'all spells on spell list castable' and Domain Spontaneity, and some really sick stuff dealing with Turning...ouch! That's also NINE FEATS or equivalents, in addition to all the new spells. Planar Shepherd - Utterly destroyed the balance they were trying to bring back to the SHapechange/Polymorph family. YOu get to transform into native outsiders of your Chosen Plane, getting all their Supernatural, Extraordinary, and Spell like abilities. Fernia - Well, Efreets get 3 Wishes a day. No xp. Since you aren't a genie, you can grant them to yourself. For two uses of Wildshape a day, that's pretty cheap. Fernian Shepherds FTW. Balor - Ahem, their SWORD is a SU ability. How much money are those worth? Templates - Sigh. Any creature of certain types smacked with a template becomes a magical beast. Among other things, this includes vermin. So not only do you get the spell effects of a celestial/fiendish/elemental/other templated creature of your Hit Dice, you can also access creatures that you never could before. Basically slap the plane's template on it and boom! now you can become it. They've been trying like heck to balance out shapechanging stuff, and then they introduce this? The only restriction is that it takes 2 Wildshape uses per (ohhh, big cost), and you can't be a Shepherd to a plane with an opposed alignment (i.e. Fernia is mildly Evil, so no Good Planar shepherds of Fernia who can turn into Efreet!). I admit that there's a lot of flavor to the book...but once again they drop the balls on a PrC or two in balance areas. Just think...a Planar Shepherd of Shavarath can become any kind of devil, demon or archon...with all their innate abilities intact. (sighs) ====Aelryinth |
| OneWinged4ngel09-15-06, 06:48 PM | Pretty much, Aerlynith. Druid 20 is definitely no longer the minmaxxer's best choice. The Shepherd is obscene... it's kinda hard to miss. It leaps out at you like an angry level 4 kobold with a viper familiar and access to Serpent Kingdoms. |
| DarkPawn09-15-06, 07:05 PM | So don't allow anyone to play either PrC. Whew, saved the game again. I deserve a medal.:D |
| (Psi)SeveredHead09-15-06, 11:28 PM | So don't allow anyone to play either PrC. Whew, saved the game again. I deserve a medal.:D For your next trick, can you replace the trees murdered to have that rubbish printed on them? And give a partial refund for the useless material? I don't think it's going to break a campaign unless the DM is missing a spine... but it's annoying that something that obvious slipped through. For the Sovereign Speaker, do you still only get the one bonus domain spell per level? Please say yes. Please. What else does it give? Does the PrC even need to exist? |
| DarkPawn09-15-06, 11:31 PM | For your next trick, can you replace the trees murdered to have that rubbish printed on them? And give a partial refund for the useless material? *waves his hands and chants* There!! ;) |
| Salla09-16-06, 12:04 AM | For the Sovereign Speaker, do you still only get the one bonus domain spell per level? Please say yes. Please. What else does it give? Does the PrC even need to exist? According to CO Board gossip (haven't gotten it yet), you get an extra 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level domain slots over the course of the class's 9 levels. |
| Mouseferatu09-16-06, 12:12 AM | According to CO Board gossip (haven't gotten it yet), you get an extra 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level domain slots over the course of the class's 9 levels. 3rd or lower, 5th or lower, and 7th or lower, over the course of the class. But let's not forget that you lose two levels of casting over the course of the class. And it's not as gross with Domain Spontanaity as it sounds, when you consider that you have to take that feat separately for each domain you want to use it with. ;) (Disclaimer: I wrote the Sovereign Host chapter. The sovereign speaker is not as I originally designed it--development made a lot of changes--but I'm happy with the way it stands.) |
| aelryinth09-16-06, 01:09 AM | The power of the Speaker is how it dovetails with other PrC's and classes. They've even got builds for this class already on the board, and OW, you should see the Turning build that came up with it. Then there's the 'cast any spell on your spell list' power that having nine domains REALLY helps out...domain spells are on your spell list. Caster level isn't a problem...there's other means to take care of that. And don't forget each and every domain grants at least a feat equivalent...in addition to an extra 9 known spells. I think they were pairing it with cloistered cleric and Sacred Exorcist for something like 14 domains...:P You should to the Optimizer boards and read it. It's very entertaining. And yeah, the Planar Shepherd should never have seen the light of day. Who mucked that one up? It's like every extra Eberron book has seen a PrC that needs a nerf bat applied hard to it. ===Aelryinth |
| itraylor09-16-06, 05:50 AM | Well hopefully the Dragonmarked book set to come out in November will have a nice PrC for a Cannith artificer that increases the XP reserve :P. |
| Salla09-16-06, 08:56 AM | And don't forget each and every domain grants at least a feat equivalent...in addition to an extra 9 known spells. To nitpick, there's a lot of overlap between the main cleric list and most Domain lists, so you're probably not getting 81 more spells. :) You still only have a limited number of slots in any given day, so past a certain point all adding more spells does is force tough decisions, or make you split your focus between too many different tasks that you can't really do any of them more than once or twice. (Blah blah wands scrolls :)) |
| Zuj09-16-06, 09:19 AM | So..... How many people who are calling these classes broken have actually seen them in action at the mid to higher levels? *cue cricket noises* Personally, I don't have a problem with either of these PrC's. The Sovereign Speaker is an excellent idea, and I don't think there are as many balance issues with it as people think. All the special domain powers would be quite a thing to contend with, but there are plenty other Prestige Classes that get other abilities that exceed the scope of domain powers. Plus, it loses two caster levels anyway. I do think the Planar Shepherd is an extremely powerful (but not broken) Prestige Class. The fact that you could turn into an Efreet and get 3 wishes a day doesn't really bother me, because you can't use them for yourself (it says in the Monster Manual text). The potential to turn into powerful outsiders is an incredible ability, but I'm not goibng to call it broken until I hear some first hand accounts of real gaming sessions. I don't expect these will be rolling in anytime too soon. |
| strange_person09-16-06, 10:06 AM | The fact that you could turn into an Efreet and get 3 wishes a day doesn't really bother, because you can't use them for yourself (it says in the Monster Manual text). One of the baisic assumptions of the D&D game is that PCs operate in groups, and that (at any given time) at least one member of the group is not transformed into some kind of genie, and thus capable of requesting wishes. If all the other PCs are unconsious or absent, think hirelings. Even if you're playing a solo game, granting 3 wishes/day has the potential for all kinds of plot damage outside of combat. Failing anything else, you could sell them to NPCs for several hundred GP each. They also work as a world-beating untraceable bribe. Guards won't let you in to the villain's stronghold? Grant them their heart's desire, talk them into an early retirement, and waltz in past all the traps they told you how to disarm. As far animal-intelligence or nonintelligent opponents, you can probably just outrun them and come back with someone you can grant wishes to. One spell, usable 3/day, that can defeat any foe of human-level inteligence. Even if their wish is "kill that Planar Shepherd and collect the bounty" you could just duplicate a Clone spell and teleport away. They get a satisfactory corpse, which they can turn in for the bounty; you successfully resolve the encounter (And earn XP!) without having to roll a single die. Can you think of any real-game situation where that WOULDN'T work? Sounds pretty unbalanced to me. |
| Zuj09-16-06, 11:03 AM | One of the baisic assumptions of the D&D game is that PCs operate in groups, and that (at any given time) at least one member of the group is not transformed into some kind of genie, and thus capable of requesting wishes. If all the other PCs are unconsious or absent, think hirelings. Even if you're playing a solo game, granting 3 wishes/day has the potential for all kinds of plot damage outside of combat. Failing anything else, you could sell them to NPCs for several hundred GP each. They also work as a world-beating untraceable bribe. Guards won't let you in to the villain's stronghold? Grant them their heart's desire, talk them into an early retirement, and waltz in past all the traps they told you how to disarm. As far animal-intelligence or nonintelligent opponents, you can probably just outrun them and come back with someone you can grant wishes to. One spell, usable 3/day, that can defeat any foe of human-level inteligence. Even if their wish is "kill that Planar Shepherd and collect the bounty" you could just duplicate a Clone spell and teleport away. They get a satisfactory corpse, which they can turn in for the bounty; you successfully resolve the encounter (And earn XP!) without having to roll a single die. Can you think of any real-game situation where that WOULDN'T work? Sounds pretty unbalanced to me. I think your argument operates on the premise that there isn't a DM present to administrate the limits and inherent dangers of the wish spell. Arguably, it is one of the best abilities to have in the game, no doubt, but granting this to other people, friend or foe, can potentially endager the caster. I think if the game you play in has a DM with half of a brain, it won't become an issue. Furthermore, the text under the efreet entry doesn't say how much control the genie has over the wishes. It seems to be left open ended enough where a DM could fairly easily monitor and control the abuse of that kind of power. From what I recall, doesn't the genie have to be somehow in your service to be able to grant these wishes? There is no rule that specifically states this, but there has got to be a good reason why a CR 8 monster can grant wishes 3 times a day. |
| Just another user09-16-06, 11:25 AM | Any GM worth his salts could easily fix that from saying that you can't pick levels in that Prc to house ruling some reasonable limits like ignore the "no xp cost for supernatural abilities (you use wish, you pay the XPs) or that to use a supernatural/spell-like abiliity you must have a caster level high enough to cast the equvalent or nearest spell so you must have a 18 caster level as druid before to use Wish when polymorphed into an efretti. |
| Azazyll09-16-06, 12:47 PM | Anyone who tries to power game on me gets what they deserve, within the rules. I've met the power gamers. I don't like them, they should be off playing computer games where they belong. That's not what D&D is about, that's what being five is about. And I would play the five year old right back. Everybody's got a weakness, ever power combo is specialized, just don't let them use the ability that often. There are no broken rules, only broken DMs. |
| Kreistor109-16-06, 01:53 PM | I've said it before (though maybe not here) and I'll say it again. So long as WotC continues to hire artists and not mathematicians knowledgable in statistics, you will have artists performing the statistical analysis. *cough* What a joke. There are certain individuals (I'm told with significant sway) inside WotC who continue to believe that you can't balance a game like DnD. Things like this are evidence that they don't even let anyone try. Cripes, if you want to stop this kind of thing, hire a powergamer! |
| Orion Polaris09-16-06, 02:17 PM | I just don't get why wizards goes about putting in so much effort hitting the Druid with the hose stick and then goes and makes something that is a great deal more unbalanced then the Druid ever was. Yes you can just ignore the new PRC, but it's still disturbing nonetheless. I hope this doesn't turn into a trend. |
| aelryinth09-16-06, 03:17 PM | The assumption that because you can house rule away the broken parts of the game, the game isn't broken, is popularly called Oberoni's Fallacy over on the Opt boards. It's a cop out, in more literal terms. It basically says that WoTC can put anything into the game, no matter how unbalanced, because the players and DM's can just House Rule it away. That's a pretty sad way to administer a game, especially when they've gone thru so much trouble recently to realize the bad points of the game and try to mend them. In other words, because you CAN ban it doesn't mean that it should never have been made. Clearly, they utterly dropped the ball on the Planar Shepherd. =================== And as for the granting of Wishes, the wording is that they can grant them to nongenies only. Even Wildshaped and duplicating one, you aren't a genie, so you can certainly grant them to yourself. ===Aelryinth |
| DarkPawn09-16-06, 03:29 PM | The assumption that because you can house rule away the broken parts of the game, the game isn't broken, is popularly called Oberoni's Fallacy over on the Opt boards. It's a cop out, in more literal terms. It basically says that WoTC can put anything into the game, no matter how unbalanced, because the players and DM's can just House Rule it away. That's a pretty sad way to administer a game, especially when they've gone thru so much trouble recently to realize the bad points of the game and try to mend them. In other words, because you CAN ban it doesn't mean that it should never have been made. Clearly, they utterly dropped the ball on the Planar Shepherd. =================== And as for the granting of Wishes, the wording is that they can grant them to nongenies only. Even Wildshaped and duplicating one, you aren't a genie, so you can certainly grant them to yourself. ===Aelryinth Honestly the longer a game lasts, the greater the chance that you'll find something that you *absolutely* disagree with. It is going to happen for everyone. Whether they have an NPC die, they have a city explode, they have a new PrC show up, they add new (broken) spells, they add a new (broken) magical items. It is just going to happen sooner or later. Everyone isn't going to like everything. Everyone isn't going to agree. Look at the debates about the Duskblade. Look at the debates over clerics and druids being over-powered. Look at the debates over sorcerors and bards being underpowered. Everyone can't agree on anything. So why even care if something shows up in a book that you feel is broken or wrong? You don't have to buy the book. Not everything is for everyone. I personally think you are kind of expecting an awful lot. Basically what you're saying is every new material released, has to be pass your level of expectations. Meaning the rules and balance has to be up to your standards. Some people will argue that the balance is there, others won't. It is all your personal opinion. So how do you expect someone making a new sourcebook to make everyone happy? So is it really that wrong to say, "If you don't agree with something they just released, just don't use it?" I guess it is... |
| Solarious09-16-06, 04:07 PM | While the Soverign Speaker "Has the power!" *cue lightning and disturbing leather/lioncloth getup*, it does loose 2 caster levels, setting you back a spell level, and domains are inheritly limited by the slots and overlap. The Planar Shepard is disturbing however. It explicitly allows you to template up your Wildshape, which is unprecidented. Who likes an uber-templated monster as an alternate form? :shifty: |
| ArcTan09-16-06, 04:48 PM | And as for the granting of Wishes, the wording is that they can grant them to nongenies only. Even Wildshaped and duplicating one, you aren't a genie, so you can certainly grant them to yourself. ===Aelryinth Is that really the rule? That you get all the (Ex), (Su) and (Sp) abilities but you *don't* change Type, Subtype or Race? That sounds like the opposite of what they were trying to do with the Polymorph subschool spells. IIRC in PHB2 when you turn into a Red Dragon you *literally* turn into a Red Dragon -- you lose all spellcasting, all class abilities, and so on and in return get *all* the abilities of a Red Dragon. None of this putting-different-things-together stuff that broke the old Polymorph. Now, sure, becoming an efreeti and granting three Wishes to your fellow party members is broken. But, then again, this is the kind of thing where the DM steps in and says that these Wishes' power will be limited by his own interpretation (this isn't the Wish *spell*, and genie wishes in legend have a way of going wrong on you) and/or that even if the efreeti wants to give away wishes they still have to be "earned" because of the law of efreet magic or something. |
| ArcTan09-16-06, 04:49 PM | Honestly the longer a game lasts, the greater the chance that you'll find something that you *absolutely* disagree with. It is going to happen for everyone. Whether they have an NPC die, they have a city explode, they have a new PrC show up, they add new (broken) spells, they add a new (broken) magical items. It is just going to happen sooner or later. Everyone isn't going to like everything. Everyone isn't going to agree. Look at the debates about the Duskblade. Look at the debates over clerics and druids being over-powered. Look at the debates over sorcerors and bards being underpowered. Everyone can't agree on anything. So why even care if something shows up in a book that you feel is broken or wrong? You don't have to buy the book. Not everything is for everyone. I personally think you are kind of expecting an awful lot. Basically what you're saying is every new material released, has to be pass your level of expectations. Meaning the rules and balance has to be up to your standards. Some people will argue that the balance is there, others won't. It is all your personal opinion. So how do you expect someone making a new sourcebook to make everyone happy? So is it really that wrong to say, "If you don't agree with something they just released, just don't use it?" I guess it is... Just because it's not possible to meet everyone's standards doesn't mean they shouldn't *have* standards, or at least try to meet most people's standards (or, rather, the standards of most people who think about the game intelligently). |
| DarkPawn09-16-06, 04:54 PM | Just because it's not possible to meet everyone's standards doesn't mean they shouldn't *have* standards, or at least try to meet most people's standards (or, rather, the standards of most people who think about the game intelligently). So basically if someone doesn't agree with your view of the book, they are not intelligent? You're also speaking for most people's standards? How do you honestly have the ability to speak for *most people*? The people that post on these forums maybe make up 1/10 of the people that roleplay. We have no clue what 9/10 of the other people do or think. I'm not disagreeing with you on your view of the books. I'm not disagreeing that the PrC's seem a bit broken. I'm just stating my opinion is exactly that, only my opinion. If this stuff didn't sell, they wouldn't be making more of it. For all we know, every 12 year old from California to Rhode Island is cheering about how great and balanced that book was. |
| Arcane Guyver09-16-06, 06:34 PM | I'm not concerned with the Sovereign Speaker in the least - lots of possible new options, but a very limited ability to use those new options (domain spell slots). The Planar Shepperd looks insane, and looks tough to handle the class without being a prick DM (which is what you are if you make every Wish backfire). The only way I can think of is that the base wild shape ability explicitly says that the druid must be familiar with the new form. "Familiar" is not solidly defined - meaning it's under the DM's purview. As DM, I'd make sure the PCs don't ever get too chummy with genies or the more ludicrously powerful outsiders. |
| operations09-16-06, 06:46 PM | No game is broken. Only the DM. |
| The Dreaming Duck09-16-06, 07:32 PM | I don't think it's going to break a campaign unless the DM is missing a spine... but it's annoying that something that obvious slipped through. That's the key to me. A good DM can ALWAYS say "No, you can't use that" or "This works differently in my game." But especially given the previous concerns with shapechanging, why did this ability come into play at all? What's the point of wasting pages in a book that we'll never use - when from the art gallery, we can see that there was other material that didn't make it into the book? With that said, on the issue of efreeti and wishes, if I were to allow the ability in the game, I'd personally do the following. Treat the shapechanged PC as a genie for this purpose. He can grant wishes for his friends, but if an efreet can't normally grant wishes to himself, neither can the shapechanged PC. In my mind, this is a simple issue of precise wording versus obvious intent. The ability is supposed to grant the character all the abilities of the creature. Those abilities include granting wishes... to other creatures. I assume that the specific choice of "nongenie" was so two efreets couldn't wish for each other. But in my mind the intent is absolutely clear... and ties into my next point. Next, I'd take a step beyond the rules and delve into flavor. Why CAN'T efreeti grant wishes to other genies? What is the source of their power - where do these wishes come from? These are things we mortals know nothing about... the genie shows up, grants a wish, goes away. But if they have such power, why don't they use it themselves? On the one hand, you could say "Um, it's a bizarre ability they evolved that just doesn't work on themselves, like a poisonous creature being immune to its own venom." On the other hand, you could say that a wish is a wish is a wish... and that the restriction on efreeti is a SOCIAL restriction imposed by the powers that be of Fernia; if you were part of a *race* of beings each of which has the power to alter reality, I could see wanting some form of order being established to prevent abuse of that power. If the power of the wish is drawn from a central source or otherwise monitored by a council of genies, a planar shepherd who becomes an efreet may fall under the dominion of that force. Given that the planar shepherd gains his powers through a deep bond with a specific plane, I could certainly see the powers of that plane deciding that their laws now apply to him. On the same note, a planar shepherd of Shavarath can become an archon, devil, or demon. But if that shepherd is a PC in my game, I'd have forces of all three sides approaching him and damanding that he pick a side and join the battle. He's not a superhero - "Captain Devil-Archon-Demon-Man". He's a being who draws power from a deep connection with a specific plane... and as the saying goes, when you gaze into Shavarath, Shavarath also gazes into you. Another fun approach: the body wardrobe. What if the planar shepherd isn't physically shapechanging into the new form... but rather swapping minds and bodies with an inhabitant of the plane? In other words, when the Fernia shepherd becomes an efreet, he becomes a SPECIFIC efreet - and that genie may be held responsible for the actions committed by the druid using his form (and for a wacky twist, the druid's body might transpose to Fernia under the control of the efreet)! Taking this approach, it would behoove the druid to develop a good relationship with the denizens of the plane whose bodies he may use, and to learn their customs and laws... which is entirely in keeping with the described role of the planar shepherd as "emissary and negotiator" of the plane in question. I am not in any way suggesting that this is implied by the ability as it stands - but it would be an interesting way to limit it. So. I think the PrC is a woeful kettle of fish and the ability is horribly imbalanced. But I think that the idea of a druid as a planar emissary and negotiator is NOT a terrible thing. If you set aside the "How badly can I break the game with this ability" and instead say "From a story perspective, what does it mean to be a character who has worked his way up to possessing this ability? What is my relationship with the plane? What social limits might there be on this power?" I think it is possible to use the PrC in the game and for it to create intriguing characters. A high-level planar shepherd of Fernia would make a great messiah for the sulatar drow, if you wanted to have a drow-invasion-of-Khorvaire plotline. And again, I think the planar shepherd of Shavarath could be a fascinating character, constantly pulled in different directions by the opposing forces. The ability is potentially game-wrecking, but the basic idea has a lot of potential. While I agree that it's very disappointing to get material from WotC with this level of imbalance, I think that there are ways a DM can use the PrC and actually make the ability interesting from a story perspective, without simply banning it outright. |
| Just another user09-16-06, 08:04 PM | The assumption that because you can house rule away the broken parts of the game, the game isn't broken, is popularly called Oberoni's Fallacy over on the Opt boards. It's a cop out, in more literal terms. It basically says that WoTC can put anything into the game, no matter how unbalanced, because the players and DM's can just House Rule it away. The problem is if that if you have 50 bases classes and 2000 Prestige classes (random number but close enough to reality) is inevitable that some combination of them end to break the game, the solution? either go back to AD&D (1 class for 20 level and then you can add all the classes that you want, or limit someway the combination of classes and prestige classes. If the WotC don''t do it then the GMs must do it. It is impossible think that WotC verify all the possible combination of classes and Prc for every new of then, just look at the mess every time they try to add some other piece of rules (i.e living constructs). |
| The Dreaming Duck09-16-06, 08:14 PM | It is impossible think that WotC verify all the possible combination of classes and Prc for every new of then... Sure, and that may be valid with the issues people have with the Sovereign Speaker. But the Planar Shepherd is entirely self-contained. If you used only the three core books and then dropped the Planar Shepherd in, you'd still end up with a character who can turn into an efreet and throw wishs around... and that's not even a sly rules-lawyering twisting of things, it's just the stated nature of the ability. The PS's wild shape clearly states that you can be any inhabitant of the plane and get all of the abilities of that creature. If you choose Fernia, efreeti are on the list, and efreeti are right there in the SRD and ECS. I'm playing both sides of this argument, because I've suggested what I'd do to limit the ability. But while I agree with you that WotC shouldn't have to track every possible combination of every effect from every possible sourcebook that a DM might decide to use... the planar shepherd's ability is simply unbalanced in and of itself. |
| ArcTan09-16-06, 08:44 PM | So basically if someone doesn't agree with your view of the book, they are not intelligent? You're also speaking for most people's standards? How do you honestly have the ability to speak for *most people*? The people that post on these forums maybe make up 1/10 of the people that roleplay. We have no clue what 9/10 of the other people do or think. I'm not disagreeing with you on your view of the books. I'm not disagreeing that the PrC's seem a bit broken. I'm just stating my opinion is exactly that, only my opinion. If this stuff didn't sell, they wouldn't be making more of it. For all we know, every 12 year old from California to Rhode Island is cheering about how great and balanced that book was. All I'm saying is that, whether or not the book is balanced, it's a *valid argument to have* whether the book is balanced. If I took you at your word then criticizing any book at all from a game balance perspective would be a waste of time and we should all shut up about it, no matter what insane things WotC might in the future choose to do. There *are* objective standards by which we can argue whether a class is balanced according to the mathematics of the game, and it *is* reasonable to try to figure out what material works and what doesn't, so that we can give positive or negative feedback and help WotC see what makes a better or worse game. Just because everything we say is our opinion and therefore to some degree subjective doesn't mean it's *totally* subjective and therefore completely disregardable. |
| DarkPawn09-17-06, 01:54 AM | All I'm saying is that, whether or not the book is balanced, it's a *valid argument to have* whether the book is balanced. If I took you at your word then criticizing any book at all from a game balance perspective would be a waste of time and we should all shut up about it, no matter what insane things WotC might in the future choose to do. There *are* objective standards by which we can argue whether a class is balanced according to the mathematics of the game, and it *is* reasonable to try to figure out what material works and what doesn't, so that we can give positive or negative feedback and help WotC see what makes a better or worse game. Just because everything we say is our opinion and therefore to some degree subjective doesn't mean it's *totally* subjective and therefore completely disregardable. I respect your opinion and agree with it considering this book. I am not buying this book. My point is merely you have an opinion, talk about it all you want. Just keep in mind, there are thousands upon thousands of people that don't frequent this forum. We have no idea how the rest of the roleplaying population feels. There are many players that look forward to new books, simply to find the newest, toughest, most broken PrC. I've gone to numerous game stores where people play half dragon/half celestial vampire monks that are sainted. It happens and they love this stuff. I just wonder if WotC knows exactly what they are doing. Their target audience is probably not the 25+ *old school* gamer. Especially ones that work mathematical equations on every new thing they release. Again...I agree with you. I'm just trying point something out. I've decided to ignore this book. If someone else buys it, I'll read it but I don't plan on allowing the PrC's. |
| igotsmeakabob!!09-17-06, 02:04 AM | Sovereign Speaker? Hell no, its not overpowered. You get 3 extra domain slots over the whole thing. You get domains, yes, but guess what? You give up 2 caster levels. Thats a whole spell level. Not insane, not crazy powerful. Its a cleric. Look at the other cleric PrCs. Yeah. Planar Shepherd is, as its currently written, insane. Yes, you have a DM to regulate it all, but seriously... they need to think about what they're putting out before they print these things. For me at least, Planar Shepherd isn't allowed until Errata pops out dropping its power level. |
| 645789009-17-06, 10:24 AM | --I think that the Sovereign Speaker is broken; just not as broken as the Planar Shepperd. But i would need to know more about the Speaker (like requirements, how many levels in advancement, etc) to actually give my final saying on it. The shepperd is horribly broken as it is, i think most can agree at that point. Some of you may say the Dm can House Rule it, but he shouldnt need to. The supplement books are suppose to make things easier for a Dm, not the other way around. (Situations) -Can we do the play session today with the new book? (Joe) -Wait, i need to house rule all the feats, half of the prestige classes, 1 of the regular classes, ten of the spells and 5 specific magic items. (Dm) -Oh i see... :X (Joe) -Hey can i take the Planar Shepperd? (Joe) -No you cant, i have finished fixing its unbalancing features. (Dm) -But look, the book is written by the WoTC; look the credits, so many experts... they cant all be wrong... I want to use it. (Joe) (It has happened to me... some players...uhh) --I think people should feel free to bash books on the boards, because it is the only way (or maybe the best way) to get them fixed; no sane WoTC worker will place an errata because of a single person filling a complaint (even though that`s maybe the ideal thing to do, its not gonna happen; too much work). --I am one of those Dms that cant buy one book each month, and need to buy all the books i want for the year (maybe more time). I shouldnt need to work on the books that are supposed to improve my gamming experience. |
| Kid SixXx09-17-06, 11:29 AM | The Sovereign Speaker doesn't look remarkably broken to me, but it is the most backload rewarding PrC I've ever seen. I'm not sure if the loss of two caster levels would really dissuade me from taking the SS PrC as opposed to going another path (ie. staying a pure cleric or taking another PrC). Other alternatives don't look nearly as attractive, & that's the litmus test that tends to make me believe that the SS might be unbalanced. The Planar Shepherd prima facea is really troubling, but I look at it this way. At 16th level (Druid 6/ Planar Shepherd 10 of Fernia) could qualify for the insane shapechange ability, but any DM that allows a player to wild shape from a 16th level PC into a CR20 Balor simply because list of inhabitants of Fernia includes "demons" probably shoudn't be DMing a game. I don't see the powerful binding authority that says that I as a DM should give that scenario a pass. If he wildshapes into a demon, he'll wildshape into something close to his own level of personal power IMC, not into some game-killing behemoth. And yes, I concur with the notion that if the PrC had been balanced in the first place, I wouldn't have to be making all of these rulings. |
| ArcTan09-17-06, 11:39 AM | Balor - Ahem, their SWORD is a SU ability. How much money are those worth? This, by the way, is a really stupid way to list the Balor's flaming sword that harks back to older editions and really should've been changed for this one. Either just say in the monster desc "Most Balors have a +1 Vorpal Longsword on them at all times" or else *describe* the way this ability is (Su) in a sensible way ("Any longsword the Balor wields counts as a +1 Vorpal Longsword as long as he's using it"). But no, I don't think Balors have the ability to generate an endless supply of +1 Vorpal Longswords at will as a (Su) ability. |
| The Dreaming Duck09-17-06, 01:34 PM | Ahem, their SWORD is a SU ability. How much money are those worth? If the sword IS a supernatural ability, I assume that it's worthless - just like a warforged's armor. It's not an independent item, it's an aspect of the creature. As such, I'd assume that if it was given away it would in some way decay or fade away. A balor always has its sword; that's part of its identity and function. That doesn't mean it can keep throwing them out the window and create a huge pile of them. Even if you decide that it COULD sell it, that's where I'd turn to the body wardrobe option I suggested earlier. Sure, you become a balor and sell your sword. And when you swap back to your normal form, there's a balor in Shavarath who says "Hey! That @#$%@ sold my sword! He's going to pay for that!" I still feel that I'd allow the PrC in the game by imposing social limitations. The character is supposed to gain his powers by becoming an emissary and envoy of the plane, not by being some shapechanging superhero. I think this is a fine opportunity for DMs to explore the customs of those planes, and for the shepherd to have to match his actions to the expectations of two worlds. The Planar Shepherd is supposed to be a person who loves Fernia and tries to represent it in Eberron; therefore, if there are laws governing the actions of balors and efreeti, I'd expect him to have to hold to them. To my mind, this is a more positive solution than simply outlawing the PrC, and could actually create some very interesting solutions. Yes, you can become an efreet, and yes, you can grant wishes for your friends... but by the laws of Fernia, the power of the wish is granted in order to sow chaos among mortals. Does your use of the wish follow those restrictions? If not, you may be called to account; genie or human, you are acting as an agent of Fernia. I'd also emphasize that earlier point that you have to be familiar with the creature before you can wild shape into it. In this isutation, I'd rule that this doesn't mean "has seen a picture"; you have to actually have spent time with the creatures. If you use the body wardrobbe option, you could rule that you have to actually obtain permission from the creature whose form you want to assume. Which allows you to keep the ability while leaving the selection of forms in the DM's hands, and encouraging the PC to adventure on his plane of choice and to get to know its inhabitants. ...any DM that allows a player to wild shape from a 16th level PC into a CR20 Balor simply because list of inhabitants of Fernia includes "demons" probably shoudn't be DMing a game.... Well, yes, because he hasn't read the rules for Wild Shape. WS states that the hit dice of the new form can't exceed the character's druid (and planar shepherd) level - so for a 16th level character, balors are out. |
| iurbina09-17-06, 01:52 PM | The Sovereign Speaker is not particularly broken. The extra domains you get access to are quite limited: 1) They are explicitly chosen from among those offered by the Host, 2) You cannot have more than 2 domains offered by a specific deity (The example given is not being able to take Good if you have Strength and War, as Dol Dorn offers all three). The primary source of brokenness I can see stems from use of the Spell Compendium domains (specifically the Spell domain), which bears with it the plague of formerly FR-specific anyspell foolishness. Edit: The domains from the Spell Compendium that the Host provides are Celerity, Competition, Creation, Family, Force, Glory, Liberation, Metal, Mind, Oracle, Pact, Retribution, Spell, Trade, and Wealth, for the curious. |
| PoeticJustice09-17-06, 09:53 PM | When does a PC get the ability to take levels in Planar Shepard? At best, you can't get to be an efreet until tenth level, and I think that precludes the material from roughly half of all current Eberron games. Even then, it's not something I think 90% of players would even consider, much less burn a feat and take a prestige class to do. |
| Thramzorean09-18-06, 12:13 AM | Still you can't be happy with this planar shepard PrC. That's a can of worms that didn't need opening. I am definitely annoyed about this. Considering the limited number of and high page count of the new PrCs you would really think we would only get 110% certified, playtested and polished product. This clearly isn't it, let alone WotC authorizing some leap into the quagmire of shapechanging... :nonono: |
| aelryinth09-18-06, 01:38 AM | Keep in mind that most people view PrC's as something that should be usable between settings. ERgo, you shouldn't have any problem making Red Wizards and Purple Dragon KNights fit into Eberron, likewise Sovereign Speakers should be able to fit into other settings. And in those other settings, we can get a wee bit ugly. Not as broken as Planar Shepherd, however. As for the whole body wardrobe thing...that's not how Wildshape works. Intro it, and you have a house rule to somehow put a partial fix on a broken ability. As for the Balor's sword thing...I completely agree it should be summon/dismiss a sword...but it doesn't actually say that's what happens. ==Aelryinth |
| ArcTan09-18-06, 02:45 AM | Keep in mind that most people view PrC's as something that should be usable between settings. ERgo, you shouldn't have any problem making Red Wizards and Purple Dragon KNights fit into Eberron, likewise Sovereign Speakers should be able to fit into other settings. And in those other settings, we can get a wee bit ugly. Well, in an ideal world this would be true, I suppose, but in reality WotC has come out and said things like we should assume Forgotten Realms simply has a higher level of power than core D&D, etc. And it is pretty clear that when things are written with a particular setting in mind, it usually requires *some* adaptation -- mostly of flavor, but of some mechanics too -- to make it usable anywhere. In order to try to combat option-glut I do think people should err on the side of PrC's being setting-linked. Remember that the whole PrC concept was originally created as a DM worldbuilding tool. As for the whole body wardrobe thing...that's not how Wildshape works. Intro it, and you have a house rule to somehow put a partial fix on a broken ability. Yeah, but which is better, a houserule to make a PrC playable or simply telling your hopeful player it's banned? I can see the argument for either one, but if you personally think you can make the former work I think it is a superior solution. As for the Balor's sword thing...I completely agree it should be summon/dismiss a sword...but it doesn't actually say that's what happens. ==Aelryinth It's a confusing and badly written entry to begin with. In what way can we say having a piece of equipment is a (Su) ability? Sure, having a sword cannot be countered by Dispel Magic and you don't need to make a Concentration check to... have a sword. And sure, +1 Vorpal is affected by antimagic. But then again, does the *whole sword* disappear if the balor goes into an Antimagic Field, if *having the sword* is the (Su) ability? If I turn into a Balor with Shapechange, do I just get the sword in my hand? Since it's a (Su) ability that's an inherent part of me, do I somehow lose this ability from my stat block and become no longer a standard balor if I drop the sword? Or, if I drop the sword, does another one magically appear in my hand? Can I *never* drop the sword, not even, say, to eat a sandwich? The list of questions goes on. And the fact that simply *having a weapon* is listed as a (Su) ability doesn't become any less asinine or impossible to interpret literally. |
| PoeticJustice09-18-06, 10:56 AM | Still you can't be happy with this planar shepard PrC. That's a can of worms that didn't need opening. I am definitely annoyed about this. Considering the limited number of and high page count of the new PrCs you would really think we would only get 110% certified, playtested and polished product. This clearly isn't it, let alone WotC authorizing some leap into the quagmire of shapechanging... :nonono: I've participated in freak-out sessions when Magic of Eberron and 5 Nations came out. Both left me feeling a bit unfulfilled. Knowing that I will, in all likelihood, never have a player who wants to use either class, I am simply not worried about it. Additionally, 9 New Domains isn't that powerful, assuming that the Prestige Class doesn't increase effective cleric level for using their abilities and you don't play with optimizers. Again, I'm just not worried. |
| Reinforcements09-18-06, 11:18 AM | I would just like to point out that, possibly broken prestige classes aside, if you're into Eberron you should probably get Faiths. It's full of setting coolness, even if it's also full of balance issues. (On the subject, I think the Planar Sheperd is ill-conceived and the Sovereign Speaker is not broken. You CAN break the Speaker, but you have to really try at it.) |
| The Dreaming Duck09-18-06, 01:23 PM | As for the whole body wardrobe thing...that's not how Wildshape works. Intro it, and you have a house rule to somehow put a partial fix on a broken ability. Um... did anyone ever say otherwise? I am not in any way suggesting that this is implied by the ability as it stands - but it would be an interesting way to limit it. I'm well aware that it's not how wild shape works. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I thought this was a DISCUSSION board... you know, where we might do zany things like suggest house rules as a way of solving problems, instead of just pointing that problems exist. ;) The thing to me is that of the two PrCs, I think the Sovereign Speaker is less problematic... but I'm a thousand times less likely to use it. It simply doesn't interest me at all. You're a cleric with 11 or more domains. Honestly, who cares? The planar shepherd is a PrC with balance problems, but it has a great deal of story potential. Looking at each plane, a story for an NPC already leaps out at me. The sulatar messiah leading a drow army out of the Burning Jungle, with the power of Fernia at her beck and call. A priest of the Dragon Below who can draw the essence of the plane of madness to our world... and who at high levels can temporarily BECOME a daelkyr (see below for more on this). An agent of Shavarath who has embraced the concept of the eternal conflict itself - who, rather than choosing a side, seeks to encourage war in all forms. I'd like to use these ideas, so I'd rather find a way to balance the problems within the PrC instead of throwing it out or abandoning its abilities. Taking the body wardrobe a step further, I like the idea of saying that the druid has to actually obtain permission from the outsider whose form he wishes to assume. So in the case of the 20th level Shepherd of Xoriat being able to become a daelkyr, sure he can do it... if he's negotiated it with the daelkyr in question. He is essentially becoming a conduit for that being to reach our world. From a PC perspective, this keeps the ability intact but actually requires the PC to travel the planes and negotiate with the inhabitants, encouraging the exploration and experience which is what the class is supposed to be about. Again, you're an emissary or an envoy. If you can convince an efreet to let you use his form, and if you understand the laws of Fernia regarding the use of wishes, great - but both of those are things that will be challenging, and both are places where the DM could limit the ability without removing it. You're absolutely right. What I'm suggesting is a house rule to partially fix what is unquestionably a serious broken ability. But I like the flavor of the PrC and the potential I can see in it for story and adventure - so I'd rather work on patching the ability than abandoning the idea. (Oh, and before someone brings it up, I'm aware that the PrC requires the Greensinger Initiate feat. However, in his Druid dragonshards, Hellcow said that parallel traditions beyond the Eldeen Reaches could use the Eldeen feats even without having a connection to the Reaches... so if I did my Sulatar shaman, fine, she'd get the feat. Having Hide and Bluff as class skills would be good for either a Sulatar druid or a druid aligned with the Dragon Below... so I'm happy to abide by the restriction.) |
| makeshiftwings09-19-06, 07:56 PM | Or, if I drop the sword, does another one magically appear in my hand? Can I *never* drop the sword, not even, say, to eat a sandwich? And now you see why balors are so angry all the time. |
| Raven Dark09-19-06, 08:41 PM | What truly makes the Planar Shephard broken? Forget the new wildshape. Planar bubble is easily the most broken ability the class gets. Pick Dal Quoar as your domain for example. Now, you and everyone within your 40-foot diameter planar bubble gets 10 rounds of actions for every single round of actions those outside the bubble get. Although you need to keep concentration on the effect, the rest of your party doesn't. :D Time Stop eat your heart out. :P Don't believe me? The class ability clearly states you get all of the physical qualities of the plane. If you look up the physical qualities in the DMG, it clearly specifies that this includes gravity and time traits as well. That's RAW. You can have that and tons more by level 10. Teehee. |
| The Dreaming Duck09-19-06, 10:14 PM | Pick Dal Quoar as your domain for example. Now, you and everyone within your 40-foot diameter planar bubble gets 10 rounds of actions for every single round of actions those outside the bubble get. Although you need to keep concentration on the effect, the rest of your party doesn't. Sure, but the realm that gives you this specific time effect is Dal Quor. Which raises two points. The first ties to everything I've said so far. By the time you gain this ability, you have spent five levels trying to become an "envoy and emissary" of Dal Quor. What is Dal Quor? In essence, il-Lashtavar... the Dreaming Dark. You're not going to get this deep into the class without building up some sort of personal relationship with the Quori and il-Lashtavar (at least, you sure won't in my game), and that's going to be a hard relationship to maintain if you aren't serving their agenda. And bringing little pieces of Dal Quor to Eberron? Not something the kalashtar will be too keen on! Second, taking Dal Quor in particular, you run into the issue of it being off its axis. Note that the plane shift ability of the planar shepherd works just like the spell... which means that it DOESN'T work with Dal Quor, unless you make a DC 35 Spellcraft check. Personally, I'd apply that same difficulty to bringing a chunk of Dal Quor here... or, in fact, any remote plane. The whole point of Dal Quor is that it's virtually impossible to form a connection, and I think that should be as true for the planar shepherd as anyone else. It's not stated anywhere, so again, that's a house rule (unlike having the druid have to deal with il-Lashtavar, which is a simple consequence of choice of plane)... but it's a logical one given the nature of the plane. With that said, I *like* the idea of a planar shepherd tied to Dal Quor - a servant of nightmare, who can pull dreams into reality and shapeshift into quori forms. I'd just make him a villain, because if he wasn't a villain, the Dreaming Dark would eat his brain. And as a villain, the time distortion you describe becomes a challenge players must deal with - close quick before he can draw on Dal Quor! |
| Raven Dark09-20-06, 09:29 AM | Sure, but the realm that gives you this specific time effect is Dal Quor. Which raises two points. The first ties to everything I've said so far. By the time you gain this ability, you have spent five levels trying to become an "envoy and emissary" of Dal Quor. What is Dal Quor? In essence, il-Lashtavar... the Dreaming Dark. You're not going to get this deep into the class without building up some sort of personal relationship with the Quori and il-Lashtavar (at least, you sure won't in my game), and that's going to be a hard relationship to maintain if you aren't serving their agenda. And bringing little pieces of Dal Quor to Eberron? Not something the kalashtar will be too keen on! Second, taking Dal Quor in particular, you run into the issue of it being off its axis. Note that the plane shift ability of the planar shepherd works just like the spell... which means that it DOESN'T work with Dal Quor, unless you make a DC 35 Spellcraft check. Personally, I'd apply that same difficulty to bringing a chunk of Dal Quor here... or, in fact, any remote plane. The whole point of Dal Quor is that it's virtually impossible to form a connection, and I think that should be as true for the planar shepherd as anyone else. It's not stated anywhere, so again, that's a house rule (unlike having the druid have to deal with il-Lashtavar, which is a simple consequence of choice of plane)... but it's a logical one given the nature of the plane. With that said, I *like* the idea of a planar shepherd tied to Dal Quor - a servant of nightmare, who can pull dreams into reality and shapeshift into quori forms. I'd just make him a villain, because if he wasn't a villain, the Dreaming Dark would eat his brain. And as a villain, the time distortion you describe becomes a challenge players must deal with - close quick before he can draw on Dal Quor! Most of the limitations you listed are merely house rules stemming from flavor as you see it. It doesn't change the fact that the rules as written allow a 10 to 1 action ratio with the ENTIRE party. |
| cosmikube09-20-06, 10:40 AM | Man, is this supposed to be a roleplaying game or what? The whole origin of prestige classes is supposed to reflect a very special thing that is attainable through *roleplaying* objectives. That is, until it became a sorry substitute for 2nd edition class kits. So far Dreaming Duck as done nothing but point that out. If you ROLEPLAY the prestige class properly, it becomes much less unbalanced, and please don't tell me that ROLEPLAYING is a house rule! Of course the class has the potencial to become highly disruptive in a campaign, but only if your DM doesn't make you ROLEPLAY it as it's supposed to be. |
| aelryinth09-20-06, 11:46 AM | Man, is this supposed to be a roleplaying game or what? The whole origin of prestige classes is supposed to reflect a very special thing that is attainable through *roleplaying* objectives. That is, until it became a sorry substitute for 2nd edition class kits. So far Dreaming Duck as done nothing but point that out. If you ROLEPLAY the prestige class properly, it becomes much less unbalanced, and please don't tell me that ROLEPLAYING is a house rule! Of course the class has the potencial to become highly disruptive in a campaign, but only if your DM doesn't make you ROLEPLAY it as it's supposed to be. A class is never, ever supposed to be balanced by roleplaying restrictions, because 100% of people do not ALWAYS 'role play'. There's power gamers, number tacticians, hack and slashers, social mavens, thinkers, puzzle players, and role players. What you are saying is 'no PrC's unless this is your play style!' Simply put, that does not and will never work. The thing binding all these together is the rules, not the play style. A Class has to be mechanically balanced on its face. If you take the flavor text, throw it out the window, and boil it down to numbers, it still has to reasonably match up with other PrC's and classes to create a balanced and appropriate class for pretty much every setting. (Gasp) You mean, they might use Eberron PrC's in non-Eberron, homebrew worlds too?!?!?!?!? YES. And the Planar Shepherd violates a huge number of balance rules; it violates WoTC's own attempts to address the imbalances with shapechange and polymorph spells not just a little, but FLAGRANTLY; and as the Optimizer Boards succintly put it, there's finally a Druid PrC that is worth going into over Pure Druid. This is not and never should have been a class. Forcing a DM to Rule O the class is the Oberoni Fallacy...when it falls 100% of the time for the DM to correct a problem, then the problem should have been addressed without having to force the DM into making a change. DM's generally don't like having to Rule 0 something...many players feel it's a cop out and discriminatory. Rule 0 is not a solution to an embedded problem...it's a warning that a problem exists and should be solved. ===Aelryinth |
| Kreistor109-20-06, 11:57 AM | There's power gamers, number tacticians, hack and slashers, social mavens, thinkers, puzzle players, and role players. What you are saying is 'no PrC's unless this is your play style!' I call "role players" actors. That gets rid of the favoritism they give themselves by claiming the gerenal term for all players. |
| cosmikube09-20-06, 12:27 PM | Oh, ok, i'm sorry, my mistake, i thought these message boards were for the discussion of a roleplaying game calle Dungeons and Dr... wait a minute... This IS for the discussion of a roleplaying game! A class is never, ever supposed to be balanced by roleplaying restrictions, because 100% of people do not ALWAYS 'role play'. I get it, so you're saying you don't have to roleplay in order to play a..hum..roleplaying game. That's like saying you don't really have to play tennis in order to play tennis. But whatever, I get your point. There's power gamers, number tacticians, hack and slashers, social mavens, thinkers, puzzle players, and role players. What you are saying is 'no PrC's unless this is your play style!' Sure. Now isn't it wonderful that with such a myriad of player styles you also get a number of PrC options that fit different player styles? Isn't it wonderful that individual DM's have the freedom to chose between these options according to their players' playing style? I mean, Dreaming Duck turned a rather uninteresting PrC (in my humble opinion), mechanichally broken though it may be, into something that I would want to play, or something i would want to be challenged by, in pure roleplaying terms. You say that if you strip away the flavour, if you disregard the fluff, the class is broken. Well, don't disregard it then. The fluff IS there for a reason. And what's even more important, as with everything that gets published, if your don't like it, don't use it! As simple as that! God knows how many official Dark Sun absurdities I had to ignore back in the day, for the sake of my campaign... |
| The Dreaming Duck09-20-06, 01:49 PM | Most of the limitations you listed are merely house rules stemming from flavor as you see it. Wrong. My suggestions on wild shape are indeed house rules, as is my suggestion that there be limitations on using the powers of the shepherd in conjunction with remote planes... though I would maintain that it's one strongly in line with the ECS ruling that summoning and plane shift spells are limted when tied to remote planes. Note that the Plane Shift ability of the shepherd WILL be affected by this rule, since it functions as the spell. However, my statements about the consequences of being a planar shepherd of Dal Quor are clearly a consequence of choosing Dal Quor as your plane. From the class description: "As you advance in level, you become more and more attuned to your chosen plane, until you are indistinguishable from its natives." "You have a natural affinity with extraplanar creatures native to the plane." "Given your attunement to a plane outside your native one, you spend at least as much time there as on your home plane. Your outlook perfectly mirrors the characteristics of that realm of existence." If you say that a PC can be tied to Dal Quor with no psychological impact or dealings with the quori - that he can do it just to gain the superspeed - you are intentionally ignoring the clear intent of the class. The class says that your powers are a result of your growing bond to the plane, which should be reflected by both your psychological outlook and your social connections. I'm sorry that you can't accept this as a limitation, but it's perfectly common in other systems; for example, in the Hero System, characters can get points for powers from Psychological Limitations and from being Watched by greater powers, both of which are implied here. You and others are saying that these things can't possibly be considered balancing factors for the class, and if you refuse to consider them, the class is unbalanced. But the designer obviously DID consider them to be balancing factors, and *I* think it's perfectly reasonable to do so. You're saying "These restrictions don't apply to me, so the class doesn't work" - while if you accepted those restrictions, you'd see why Dal Quor and Xoriat would be almost impossible for heroic PCs to attune themselves to. Needless to say, I still don't think the class is ideally balanced. But I think the blatant refusal to accept the implied psychological and social limitations of the PrC in the name of "Well, not everyone roleplays" is unjustified. These are inherent restrictions of this class, and if you can't handle that, you can't BE a planar shepherd. Just like in the Hero System, you don't have to play a character with psychological limitations - if you don't want to roleplaying, take other disadvantages. The planar shepherd clearly requires traffic with the denizens of the plane in question and expects your outlook to mirror your plane, and if you aren't doing those two things, you're not playing the PrC as it's designed. As for "Some people won't use it in Eberron", that's fine... and page 109 of the book states "If your campaign is not set in Eberron, you can easily adapt the planar shepherd to suit your own needs." Adapt, IE change. If you're running a campaign with lots of cheerful happy planes with flowing time that could thus give a cheerful happy hero that 10-1 time ration, adapt the class to take out the time aspect. In Eberron, that particular issue is tied to Dal Quor, and if you're using the plane correctly, it's not going to be a viable choice for PCs. And as for people who say "I'm playing D&D, not the Hero System" - you utterly miss my point. Whatever system you're playing, it is possible to have psychological factors play a balancing factor. If you use a style of play that doesn't support that, then it falls to you not to use the material that depends on it. As has already been said, there are thousands of PrCs out there. For those who DO care about the personality and denizens of the planes, this can work in an interesting manner. As a side note, this is exactly the sort of PrC I would see as being banned from RPGA play, precisely because RPGA character design can't presume any sort of roleplaying or long-term impact of a class choice... which is one of the reasons the RPGA does restrict PrCs and feats from play. This is a PrC that relies on those roleplaying aspects as a limiting factor. It's not suited to a hardcore number tacticians game, hence the RPGA would need to ban it. But like I said, I'm looking forward to introducing planar shepherds from Dal Quor and Xoriat into my campaign... and if a player wanted to try to be a shepherd of Dal Quor? I'd love to run that story. Even without the house rules, the class DOES work for me, because I'm willing to use the implied restrictions; if you aren't, that's a choice you're making and you'll need to decide what to change accordingly. |
| Hellcow09-20-06, 02:08 PM | What you are saying is 'no PrC's unless this is your play style!' Not at all. What is being said is that there are FEWER PrCs if this is your play style. I think Dreaming Duck's analogy with the Hero System (or GURPs) is a good one. If you like to roleplay, saddle your character up with psychological limitations. If you don't, do something else. That doesn't make the PsychLim character broken; it means that in two different campaigns, you'll see two different things. There are many different playstyles, and ALL of them are valid. But not every PrC needs to work for every playstyle. The planar shepherd is clearly supposed to be impacted by the relationship with the plane, both with the natives and the impact the plane itself has on the personality of the shepherd. If you are using a style of play in which these things would be ignored, then you are changing the intent of the PrC... at which point it would be appropriate to either not use the PrC, or to apply house rules to bring it back into balance, just as a Hero character who won't play with psychological limitations needs to get other disadvantages to pay for his powers. It's arrogant and unfair to state that all people must "act", as Kreistor1 would call it. But this shouldn't prevent designers from creating PrCs designed to appeal to those who do - just as other PrCs will be better suited to power gamers, number tacticians, and hack and slashers. I absolutely expect the RPGA to ban this PrC from Mark of Heroes and Xen'drik expeditions for just this reason. But it won't be the first PrC they've banned, and it leaves lots of others still available. If there are SOME people whose play style can incorporate the Planar Shepherd - which it seems that there are - then it's not a total failure. Of course, it's possible that with better balance, one could keep the idea intact and make it usable by all players. So that's my challenge. What I'm seeing time and again is "The class is broken. It sucks. It's so broken it's unbelievable"... and when someone actually suggests ways to modify to make it useful, the response is "Those are stupid house rules. It's broken. Broken, broken, broken." OK. I hear you (not that I had anything to do with the class, or work for WotC). But can you do better? Taking the core idea - a druid who forms an affinity with a plane - what would YOU do? Rather than just saying "WotC screwed up. Losers."... can you show them how to do things better? It's been said that they should hire a power gamer to get their balance right... so power gamers, show me your stuff! Essentially, I feel as if 90% of what I'm hearing is just complaints; I'd like to see someone show me how things could be done RIGHT. In my opinion, Dreaming Duck has done a good job of suggesting ways to balance the PrC for the "actor." I'd love to hear from the power-gamer, numbers tactician, and the rest, saying how they'd make this core idea - druid bound to a plane - work. Perhaps it's impossible. If so, it means WotC choose to offer a PrC aimed to a certain style of play. This is, perhaps, unfair to all other players... but I can see why a PrC offered in a book called "Faiths of Eberron" might be slanted towards people who enjoy exploring the flavor and psychological aspects of the world. |
| Emeramber09-20-06, 03:04 PM | Not that this has any real impact on the discussion, but the idea of a character based on Planar Shepher(Dal Quor) sparked an idea that could be potentially flavorful. The Dreaming Dark has not always ruled Dal Quor, nor will it always rule (probably). Imagine a Kalashtar who is trying to reconnect to the plane, to find pockets of resistance untainted by the nightmare, to also spread the ideas and philosophies to return the Dream and banish the Dark. For those of you who have read Neil Gaiman's Sandman series, add in a little "dream of a million cats" to the concept. |
| The Dreaming Duck09-20-06, 03:39 PM | The Dreaming Dark has not always ruled Dal Quor, nor will it always rule (probably). True, but at the moment, the Dreaming Dark is the embodiment of the age. It's not that the DD conquered the plane: the cycle turned and became il-Lashtavar. Changing it to il-Yannah is the goal of the Kalashtar, and essentially IS like Dream of a Thousand Cats... but that's completely changing the nature of the reality, not just finding a spot the DD hasn't come to yet. Right now, Dal Quor is defined by the Dreaming Dark, and the rebellious quori not only fled but completely severed their psychic connections to the plane. So I'd argue that if "your outlook perfectly mirrors the characteristics of the plane", the intention is that it's the plane as is, not as it might someday be... and that the kalashtar would likely be very disturbed by someone bringing the planes closer together (which is, after all, a primary goal of the Dreaming Dark!). With that said, the idea is a flavorful one and hey, do what's fun! I just feel that the limitation of being influenced by the plane is an intentional part of the class, and Dal Quor is one of the dark planes. |
| Siran Dunmorgan09-20-06, 04:03 PM | It's also worth noting that Eberron (as a campaign setting) has always had a strong element of the setting in its Prestige Classes: the same kind of balancing, i.e., something that has to be portrayed as part of a campaign, is also true of the Cataclysm Mage: the extreme abilities of that Prestige Class must be paid for with globe-trotting quests, and the ultimate class ability results in the Chamber and the Lords of Dust taking personal interest in the character: again, the balance is in role-playing. On the other side of that same coin, many of the class features of the Thunder Guide simply do not function outside the context of role-playing: what difference does it make to a "number cruncher" that the Thunder Guide can communicate with all of the major cultures of the Thunder Sea basin, or that their exploits are described in penny dreadful novels all over the Five Nations? Are we going to go the other way from "Planar Shepherd is Broken!" and say "Thunder Guide is underpowered?" I suppose that from a so-called character optimization perspective, it is underpowered: the class abilities of the Thunder Guide would not much improve its performance as—for example—a figure in Dungeons & Dragons Miniatures. But it's a beautifully crafted thing for the role-playing campaign setting. Similarly, Planar Shepherd. Is it broken? Eh. Maybe. Does it work well in the context of the setting? Pretty much, yes. The point is that Eberron has a pattern of Prestige Classes that explore role-playing opportunities more than so-called character optimization. —Siran Dunmorgan P. S. And if you thought a planar bubble of Dal Quor was annoying... does a planar bubble of Dolurrh get the entrapping effect? |
| makeshiftwings09-20-06, 05:51 PM | OK. I hear you (not that I had anything to do with the class, or work for WotC). But can you do better? Taking the core idea - a druid who forms an affinity with a plane - what would YOU do? Rather than just saying "WotC screwed up. Losers."... can you show them how to do things better? It's been said that they should hire a power gamer to get their balance right... so power gamers, show me your stuff! Essentially, I feel as if 90% of what I'm hearing is just complaints; I'd like to see someone show me how things could be done RIGHT. In my opinion, Dreaming Duck has done a good job of suggesting ways to balance the PrC for the "actor." I'd love to hear from the power-gamer, numbers tactician, and the rest, saying how they'd make this core idea - druid bound to a plane - work. Perhaps it's impossible. If so, it means WotC choose to offer a PrC aimed to a certain style of play. This is, perhaps, unfair to all other players... but I can see why a PrC offered in a book called "Faiths of Eberron" might be slanted towards people who enjoy exploring the flavor and psychological aspects of the world. I see your point, but I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that yes, I (and many of us) could do better. I don't even play that much and I'm not that much of an optimizer, but even I am aware of the problems with Polymorph. Not only have they come up in my own games, but WotC then did several articles on this site about how they themselves think Polymorph is broken, to the point of blatantly suggesting getting rid of it, and then included various nerfs and variant options in recent books to get around the problem. Whoever wrote the Planar Shepherd obviously never read any of those articles or books. Furthermore, the class screams "never been playtested or even looked at too closely" to me. If I worked at the richest, highest-staffed RPG company in the world, I would hope that I could at least get someone to give my new PrC a once-over to check for any obvious balance issues. I really don't believe that happened with this class. It seems to me that one person wrote the class, a person who has possibly never played a high level game and has probably never used the Shapechange or even Polymorph spells before, and then no one else ever reviewed the class. Anyway, enough complaining, how would I make a class like the Planar Shepherd but more balanced? First, I'd replace the "you get all the effects of the plane" bubble with a list of combat-balanced bubbles instead. The problem with the planes is the same problem as Polymorph: planes were never balanced to be "used" by a character, the same way monsters are not balanced to be "used" by a character. Some suggestions might be: Dal Quor: "Zone of Nightmares" - You summon and control a bubble of dreamscape from the plane of Dal Quor. Creatures entering this bubble are confronted with their own worst nightmares. Each round that someone besides you remains in the bubble, he is affected by a Phantasmal Killer spell, DC 15 + your Charisma modifier. Xoriat: "Zone of Madness" - You summon and control a bubble of madness from the plane of Xoriat. Creatures within this bubble are assaulted by images and creatures so horrifying that their minds rebel against the scene. Each round that someone besides you remains in the bubble, he must make a Will save vs DC 16 + your Cha modifier, or be affected as if by Word of Chaos, at your druid caster level. As for the shapeshifting, I don't think that is really necessary to promote the idea of a planar emissary. I would let them summon things from the planes, much like the Thaumaturgist does (which, by the way, has some similar flavor). Or, I would give them single, specific abilities related to creatures of their plane, the way that Beast Totems work in the ECS. Fernia could get a salamander's Heat or a fire elemental's Burn, but certainly not an Efreet's Wish. |
| Hellcow09-20-06, 06:07 PM | I see your point, but I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that yes, I (and many of us) could do better. And don't take my comment the wrong way, MSW - I'm not saying otherwise. My point was that now that the problem had been pointed out, I'd rather see people providing answers so people COULD use the PrC as opposed to endless reiterations of how it's broken. And frankly, I don't even care about people continue to complain about it being broken, but it seems rude to dismiss people who are suggesting house rules and alternatives... when that does provide a positive alternative instead of one more complaint for the pile. I'll also point out that I'm not proposing a solution to this problem. Frankly, I don't have the time. And yes, that IS something worth complaining about. The fact that the class may REQUIRE you to create house rules to use it in your campaign IS a problem, and it's absolutely valid to complain about it and to expect better of something you spend your money on. But what's done is done - which is why I'm saying that now the problem HAS been pointed out, I'd like to see people's solutions to the problem. I think Dreaming Duck has proposed a solution that can work for people who follow one particular style of play. MSW has taken the first step towards revising it for a different playstyle. Personally, I'd like to see other people's solutions... not because I'm saying "you couldn't do better", but because you MIGHT be able to do better - and if so, you're providing a valuable service to everyone who has the book. Should you have to do this? No. But if you CAN do it, I'd like to see it. |
| Kaleanae en'i Mori09-20-06, 10:52 PM | Just don't have the book as part of your game! We took at look at MoE and promptly put it back on the bookshelf. Neither are in play because we simply don't like the content. easy fix |
| Always-Late09-20-06, 11:18 PM | Verdict: Planar Shepher is utterly broken for anyone who supports Dal Quor. There are also other brokez0rs things in it. However, intelligent DMing and consequences should keep this in check, with house rules or whatever. (Before anyone brings up the Oberoni Fallacy, it is broken. But why do you care?) For example, the two uberb0rked planes to choose from shouldn't be a problem for most DMs, or given the DM tremendous leeway in dealing with them. The thing about roleplaying restrictions is like, "Yes, uberpowerful, but must be a zealot of the Silver Flame." Fantastic! My character's already a zealot of the Silver Flame, so he didn't have to pay anything for those restrictions! "Yeah, he gets awesome abilities, but he must devote himself to the Path of Light." Well, it seems this one psion, at least, follows the Path of Light. Lucky him, he didn't have to give up anything. "Corruption ablities abound, but must be a worshipper of the Mockery." What a coincidence... Now, madness, insanity, and being watched by higher powers are actually "balancing" factors because they make a mechanical in-game difference; namely, enemies who actually come after you offset it. For example, consider this ability: Ninja Slayer: This character has made an enemy of all ninjas, and is suffused with an irrational hatred for ninjas. This character gets +10 to spot and listen checks, take half-damage from precision-based damage, and gets +4 to initiative. However, every day, there is a one in ten chance the Ninja High Command dispatches a team of ninjas with CR equal to that of the party plus one to track, kill, or capture the character. Powerful? Sure. But it has drawbacks. |
| AesophDarkfable09-20-06, 11:47 PM | Planar Shepard will be errated, no worries. Its a near lock |
| aelryinth09-21-06, 12:17 AM | First of all, let's look at the flavor of the Planar Shepherd. The sentence "your viewpoint comes to mirror that of an inhabitant of that plane" is killer here. To a Druid what you are doing is simply...you are betraying the nature of the world of your birth and being subverted by the nature of another world. Among other things, you should lose the Druidic language since you essentially giving up your tie to Eberron. I'm not sure what the Druidic equivalent is on Dal Quor, but have fun with it. Second, this whole 'serving an alien plane' actually dovetails much more sharply with a cleric then a Druid. It then becomes less of a betrayal of your world and simply service to an ideal that eventually turns you into a direct servant of the plane. So, I have problems with the very flavor text and nature of the class. Planar Shepherd suggests that this is a class that watches over interactions with the planes, with an eye towards controlling denizens of that plane and regulating/controlling them and their interactions with Eberron, not being subverted by them. The way the class is written is more a Planar Devotee, not a Shepherd. The whole class should be scrapped and revised to something that has special abilities giving it terrible power against denizens of a specific Plane...or Outsiders in general, instead of Aberrations, basically an Uber Gatekeeper specifically trained to withstand or control outsiders who dare to intervene in the affairs of Eberron...a true Shepherd of the Planes, not some silly tree lover transferring his druidic allegiance from the world of his birth to another. Interaction with the Planes is a given, a neccessity, and only the Planar Shepherd can truly understand those relationships, control them, and intervene as needed to make sure that the forces outside Eberron do not endanger the world from which they draw their ultimate power. They should be the true protectors of Eberron as no puny cleric or wizard, who seeks to serve or to dominate the planes, can be, more in harmony with the song of the planes then any other. That's a Planar Shepherd. That's my 2p. ====Aelryinth |
| makeshiftwings09-21-06, 02:26 AM | First of all, let's look at the flavor of the Planar Shepherd. The sentence "your viewpoint comes to mirror that of an inhabitant of that plane" is killer here. To a Druid what you are doing is simply...you are betraying the nature of the world of your birth and being subverted by the nature of another world. I also agree with you here. I think druid is the least likely base class flavorwise to become something like a devoted follower of a plane. Cleric seems the most likely, or wiz/sorc. Most of the druid sects would be completely against the idea of the Planar Shepherd. The Gatekeepers actively strive to stop extraplanar involvement, the Ashbound would probably consider it arcane and evil, and the rest of them would at best be confused about it, since most druid spells, abilities, and beliefs have nothing to do with the other planes except for Thelanis and maybe the elementals. Verdict: Planar Shepher is utterly broken for anyone who supports Dal Quor. No, the fake Time Stop is just one example. The bigger problem is the ability to Shapeshift into outsiders and gain all their Su, Sp, and Ex abilities, and this happens no matter what plane you choose. See the Char Op boards for all the ways this can be abused. |
| (Psi)SeveredHead09-21-06, 09:43 AM | Ninja Slayer: This character has made an enemy of all ninjas, and is suffused with an irrational hatred for ninjas. This character gets +10 to spot and listen checks, take half-damage from precision-based damage, and gets +4 to initiative. However, every day, there is a one in ten chance the Ninja High Command dispatches a team of ninjas with CR equal to that of the party plus one to track, kill, or capture the character. Powerful? Sure. But it has drawbacks. That's a joke. Oh look, an easy encounter every once in a while. Thanks for the XP! It's actually nice for the DM; if they run out of material, throw ninjas! I wouldn't treat it seriously unless I didn't get XP for it. It would have to be a life-threatening encounter too, not a cakewalk. Any PC group which ticked off the ninja command might pick up that drawback anyway without mechanical benefit; making enemies is part of RPing. The PCs would be well within their rights to boot the PC with this feat unless they also were enemies of these ninja for some reason (in which case, it's not a penalty; the ninja would have attacked anyway). And finally, +10 Listen, +10 Spot and +4 Init is way too powerful for the drawbacks. It's as if we ticked off the Boromar Clan in a successful adventure, but now they want us dead. So we get ambushed by Boromar hitmen every once in a while. I think I deserve +5 Listen/Spot and +2 Initiative. No DM is going to allow that. If you're going to try to balance mechanical benefits with RP (a losing battle, IMO) you should at least put some effort into it. |
| Euangelion09-21-06, 10:22 AM | My main problem with the PrC actually stems from my dislike of the direction they've taken the Greensingers. Nothing, I repeat nothing, we've seen so far makes mention of the Greensingers being interested in any plane other than Thelanis. The Greensingers were fine they way they were, wild, unpredictable druids and rangers with a strong tie to fey. Cool. On the other hand, a druidic sect with strong interest in the planes is not necessarily a non-druidic thing. Magic is magic, and it could very well be that divine magic and arcane magic are artificial (get it?) designations. The nature of the planes is still nature, it could be said. Thus they really missed a neat opportunity to introduce another of those dozen or more druidic sects that the ECS mentions are active in the Eldeen Reaches, a sect that is sort of the polar opposite of the Gatekeepers, that has a strong relationship with the Greensingers (stronger than most, at least) but is distinct and not so tied to one alignment (chaotic). In fact, Planar Shepherds would be a decent name for the sect itself. Their initiate feat could give them access to the summon monster x spells (perhaps even as another option for the spontaneous spellcasting ability), or other planar-related spells. This sect would have been the perfect home for the advanced horizon walkers, and the planar ranger substitution levels could be a source of ideas for their version of the Eldeen Ranger PrC. This sect might also be the one that makes the most sense to explain the presence in the setting of any aasimars, tieflings, mephlings, or any other planetouched races a player might be interested in. This would have increased the options for players and DMs alike, but instead they modified considerably an already reasonably established part of the setting. Overall, I'm still impressed with FoE, but this has been bugging me the last few days. Edit: oh, and another thing. The section on the Greensingers makes no mention of bards that I could see. This just doesn't make sense to me. Also, where are the gnomes? They're basically fey themselves, with their bardic talents and spell-like abilities, and there's over 50,000 gnomes in the Eldeen Reaches, but the elves and half-elves have cornered the market on the Greensingers? Yet another missed opportunity to expand another aspect of the setting, considering that the majority of gnomes in Eberron don't live in Zilargo, yet we never see anything about other gnome cultures apart from the Zil. Then again, I know what to do about it; after all, it's my Eberron! |
| Hellcow09-21-06, 01:31 PM | The sentence "your viewpoint comes to mirror that of an inhabitant of that plane" is killer here. To a Druid what you are doing is simply...you are betraying the nature of the world of your birth and being subverted by the nature of another world. Wow, Aelryinth, I couldn't disagree with you more. In my opinion, what the planar shepherd is doing is embracing the idea that the planes are PART of nature. Many people like to think of the planes as if they are entirely alien worlds. But another viewpoint is that they are all aspects of reality - and that Eberron embodies them all, blended together. Let's look at the PrC itself: Some druids... reject narrow interpretations of what constitutes the "natural" world. They see the great dance of the planes as a full expression of existence... The planar shepherd is embracing a particular bond between Eberron and one of the other planes, and becoming the embodiment of how that plane IS a part of nature. So he must do both things - respect the balance of nature AND respect the nature of his chosen plane. But wait! How is it possible to do this with a plane that is itself about death or corruption? How can you embody both nature and Xoriat, a plane that is the antithesis of nature? A druid can't. But a blighter can, and that's EXACTLY what the PrC says. Sometimes a blighter (Complete Divine 23) enters this class to further his exploration of the planes of death, madness, or destruction There's a REASON they suggest that most members of this class are Greensingers bound to Thelanis... because it's not easy to be a planar shepherd tied to Fernia and still be a druid! The key here is that I believe that you're half-right, Aelryinth. A druid who follows this path is still a druid and must follow a code of behavior. In the case of the planar shepherd, that code of behavior must now embrace the nature of the plane that is his second home. In some cases, it will make it absolutely impossible for him to maintain his druidic nature... and only a blighter could follow this path. And even for the blighter, in my opinion it's clear that he still needs to embody the plane; as such, a shepherd who abuses his powers in a manner entirely inconsistent with the nature of the plane should lose them, just like the druid who abuses his powers. As the Dreaming Duck said earlier, the character isn't just a superhero; he's a holy man who derives supernatural abilities from a bond developed over time. I believe this is the intent of the designer, and I believe that's clearly stated; again, the text of the class itself states that you've got to be a blighter to work with madness. As one of the designers of the world, I think that it is entirely appropriate to see the planes as a part of nature, and to explore that bond... though obviously you (and anyone else) are entitled to your contrary opinion. With that said, I realize that this implied limitation won't work in a campaign that is purely about the numbers, and which sets aside the flavor of the planes... a campaign that wouldn't worry about restricting the behavior of a normal druid, for example. Which is why I'd still like to see a version of the class that would work in such a campaign. |
| Hellcow09-21-06, 01:34 PM | Nothing, I repeat nothing, we've seen so far makes mention of the Greensingers being interested in any plane other than Thelanis. Personally, I don't think this PrC should be tied to the Greensingers. I like the idea of a druidic class tied to exploring the planes and the balance between the planes and Eberron, because, in my mind, that is a part of nature in the world. But I agree, there's no particular reason to tie this to the Greensingers; I think each plane would inspire its own traditions. The Greensingers, as initially defined were strongly tied to Thelanis. I think a sulatar planar shepherd of Fernia makes sense, but I wouldn't see a Greensinger following this path. |
| Euangelion09-21-06, 01:54 PM | Personally, I don't think this PrC should be tied to the Greensingers. I like the idea of a druidic class tied to exploring the planes and the balance between the planes and Eberron, because, in my mind, that is a part of nature in the world. But I agree, there's no particular reason to tie this to the Greensingers; I think each plane would inspire its own traditions. The Greensingers, as initially defined were strongly tied to Thelanis. I think a sulatar planar shepherd of Fernia makes sense, but I wouldn't see a Greensinger following this path. But the issue goes beyond this PrC; it lies with the material offered regarding the Greensinger sect itself. Based on what was written about the Greensingers in FoE, the PrC does fit; what doesn't fit is the material in this sourcebook in comparison to the material in all the others, including PGtE (which otherwise seems to be in agreement with FoE). I could almost imagine that the Planar Shepherds were supposed to be a new sect entirely, but space constraints forced them to meld it with an established sect, and they simply picked the Greensingers because they do have such a strong tie to a plane. But I certainly wasn't involved in any part of writing FoE, so it's all conjecture on my part. Again, it's not that I think FoE stinks, even this issue. I just have a strong sense that an opportunity to do something extra cool with the setting was missed. Edit: I realize the PrC can also be available to the CoW offshoot, but why not also the Wardens, who have their headquarters smack dab in the middle of another powerdul manifest zone of yet another plane (the most druidic one of all, Lammania)? Again, missed opportunity. |
| The Dreaming Duck09-21-06, 02:08 PM | [EDIT] On second thought, never mind. I have no desire to prolong this discussion. |
| Hellcow09-21-06, 02:15 PM | But the issue goes beyond this PrC; it lies with the material offered regarding the Greensinger sect itself... I certainly wasn't involved in any part of writing FoE, so it's all conjecture on my part. And I didn't work directly on it either, so I can't tell you (though I DID write the Greensinger section in PGtE). But I do understand that your concern is broader than just this PrC, and I think it's a valid concern. Obviously this isn't the first time that sourcebooks have presented contradictory views of something, and I'm sure it won't be the last. I think you just need to pick the view that works best for you. I realize the PrC can also be available to the CoW offshoot, but why not also the Wardens, who have their headquarters smack dab in the middle of another powerdul manifest zone of yet another plane (the most druidic one of all, Lammania)? Again, missed opportunity. Personally, I'd pull the Greensinger restriction. I think the planar connection is something interesting to explore, and again, I'd love to see other people's approaches to the basic concept if they don't like this one. But in my campaign, I'd allow planar shepherds that had nothing to do with the Greensingers... though I'd certainly challenge them to live up to it, just as I'd challenge a player who comes up with his own unique two-domain religion. |
| ArcTan09-21-06, 02:22 PM | The whole class should be scrapped and revised to something that has special abilities giving it terrible power against denizens of a specific Plane...or Outsiders in general, instead of Aberrations, basically an Uber Gatekeeper specifically trained to withstand or control outsiders who dare to intervene in the affairs of Eberron...a true Shepherd of the Planes, not some silly tree lover transferring his druidic allegiance from the world of his birth to another. That's more like a Gatekeeper -- a Guardian *Against* the Planes, not a peaceful Shepherd of the Planes. (Here's a hint -- shepherds do their best to keep their herds peaceful and fruitful as a whole. They don't pick a favorite set of sheep and then brutally kill all the others for the first's protection.) The point of "Planar Shepherd" is that he sees *all* the planes as his sheep, not that he sees Eberron as his sheep and the other planes as wolves -- which would just make him a standard Gatekeeper druid or other aberration-hunting or demon-hunting class, which would be rather boring. Aelryinth, why do you continue to insist that when you read a bit of flavor text, and it turns out that the overall idea doesn't fit the idea *you* initially had when you read the flavor text, you decide the whole idea must be scrapped and rewritten to be something you would like more? It's one thing to say that Planar Shepherd is unbalanced. It's another to hear the phrase "Planar Shepherd", come up with a *whole huge set of assumptions* and then demand that the existing PrC be completely rewritten to fit those. That's lame, especially since it'd turn the Planar Shepherd into yet another version of the Sacred Purifier or Exorcist of the Silver Flame or other PrC that smites "unnatural" things. |
| Euangelion09-21-06, 02:23 PM | Is the game Dungeons & Duck? So, tell me more about this Dungeons and Duck game of yours.:plotting: |
| ArcTan09-21-06, 02:24 PM | Planar Shepard will be errated, no worries. Its a near lock The shapechanging ability may be toned down, but I sincerely doubt they will errata *out* Planar Shepherd or rewrite it from the ground up. That's far too sweeping a change for an errata to make -- they'd basically be telling you "Hey, this part of the book you paid for, just ignore it", and they have a policy of avoiding that. Hell, Frenzied Berserker still canonically exists, despite the fact that they've *acknowledged* it was a very poor balance decision. They errataed out Polymorph, and yet they haven't gotten rid of the Master of Many Forms class. That sort of thing. |
| allenchan09-21-06, 06:08 PM | Hell, Frenzied Berserker still canonically exists, despite the fact that they've *acknowledged* it was a very poor balance decision. They errataed out Polymorph, and yet they haven't gotten rid of the Master of Many Forms class. That sort of thing. Just a side note, they've never once touched polymorph, they merely disassociated everything else with polymorph, and offered a new polymorph school alternative. Except in RPGA, Polymorph is still alive and healthy as a spell. |
| Siran Dunmorgan09-21-06, 06:27 PM | Aelryinth, why do you continue to insist that when you read a bit of flavor text, and it turns out that the overall idea doesn't fit the idea *you* initially had when you read the flavor text, you decide the whole idea must be scrapped and rewritten to be something you would like more?I don't know why he does it, but I'm often glad that he does. Having Aelryinth post something controversial is one of the best ways we've discovered yet to get Hellcow posting on a topic. :D I am mostly in agreement with Euangelion that this doesn't quite mesh with what we've seen previously of the Greensingers, particularly since the "singers" part of their name was given such short shrift in Faiths of Eberron. On the other hand, the idea of a Planar Shepard is... intriguing, especially if uprooted from the Greensingers. One of the discussions that I have ongoing with Hellcow revolved around the role of the Prophecy on other planes: I had, as part of the expression of this in-game, postulated an Order that had explored the planes to see how the Prophecy manifested there: while I had assumed that they were simply druids, Planar Shepherd makes an excellent Prestige Class for that Order. In point of fact, the Planar Shepherd seems a thing that might have gained currency among the dragon-druids preceding the Gatekeepers: such knowledge as the Planar Sheperds gain could be seen as the foundation of the dimensional seals. —Siran Dunmorgan |
| Euangelion09-21-06, 09:01 PM | In point of fact, the Planar Shepherd seems a thing that might have gained currency among the dragon-druids preceding the Gatekeepers: such knowledge as the Planar Sheperds gain could be seen as the foundation of the dimensional seals. It could even be that the philosophy of the planar shepherds towards the planes is the dominant one espoused by most dragons, which necessitated Vvaraak seeking out the lesser races to receive his (her?) wisdom. |
| ArcTan09-21-06, 11:09 PM | Just a side note, they've never once touched polymorph, they merely disassociated everything else with polymorph, and offered a new polymorph school alternative. Except in RPGA, Polymorph is still alive and healthy as a spell. If you read between the lines even a little bit you'll see that they really want you to stop using Polymorph and start using Polymorph Subschool spells. (By "read between the lines" I mean "read the text of the open letter associated with the Polymorph errata"). But this is *exactly what I mean* -- Polymorph is as close as they've come to actually cutting something completely out of the core rules, and they still can't bring themselves to actually do it. They will *never* write an errata that says "This spell doesn't exist" or "This PrC doesn't exist" -- the most they'll do is untie everything else from it, give you an alternative to it and carefully never mention it again. (This is the sort of status PrCs like Frenzied Berserker or Master of Many Forms enjoy.) The same can be said for Epic levels, which Wizards has actually said they don't support anymore but still hasn't been errataed out. |
| igotsmeakabob!!09-22-06, 12:03 AM | Vvaraak was a her as I recall. |
| aelryinth09-22-06, 04:38 AM | AND ArcTan is looking for a flaming reply again. I'll Address Hellcow first. Your viewpoint and mine are not in conflict as to the neccessity of the planes even from a druidic standpoint. The druids don't seek to bar all the planes or seal them away...clearly planar interaction is, from their expanded viewpoint, a neccessary part of Eberron as a whole. The betrayal comes from adopting the view of the outsider of another plane, a plane where 'all the planes blend together to form Eberron' is not part of the philosophy. They are, in fact, extending out to become a philosophical ideal...NOT defenders of nature, they are now defenders of one aspect of Nature and have given up being defenders of Eberron itself. After all, there's nothing that says Eberron is of importance to denizens of other planes, who have other things to worry about. You've set aside your primacy of caring for Eberron and how the other planes contribute to it for enhancing the well-being of the other plane. ERgo, you've betrayed your druidic oaths and the very viewpoint you are espousing, Hellcow...your wide vision just became a tunnel, again. ========= As for Arc Tan, Shepherds are Ferocious defenders of their flocks...but over their flock, they use a gentle hand. By keeping the relationships between Eberron and its planes under control, they would keep everything in natural harmony. It's when outsiders seek to abuse the planar links and Do THings that the Shepherd would be stirred to action. Yes, this is very much like the Gatekeepers, but the focus is less on keeping gate seals then keeping everything moving in harmony. Specializiation in a plane then becomes being a master of that plane and how it interacts with Eberron...and being able to take the form of a native makes it easier to interact with them, oversee how the plane is interfacting with Eberron...and if neccessary, learn their weaknesses, infiltrate and destroy them if neccessary...all to protect the flock. But if they do the job right, everything continues along in harmony, because the outsiders know the Shepherd is watching... And if that's not enough for you, use your own imagination. ====Aelryinth |
| Hellcow09-22-06, 01:24 PM | As for Arc Tan, Shepherds are Ferocious defenders of their flocks...but over their flock, they use a gentle hand. By keeping the relationships between Eberron and its planes under control, they would keep everything in natural harmony. It's when outsiders seek to abuse the planar links and Do THings that the Shepherd would be stirred to action. Shepherds do many things. A shepherd must guide and nuture his charges. He must protect his flock, but looking to the traditional shepherd, how often does a shepherd employ raw brute force, and how often does his sheer presence scare off cowardly predators? How often does he make other decisions that are equally important for the health of his flock - finding safe pasture, tending the injured, and so on? What ArcTan has pointed out is that the planar shepherd considers the inhabitants of BOTH planes to be his flock: that his goal is to assist BOTH of them and to preserve the balance between them. Ideally, this isn't about combat; it is about wisdom and interaction. In my mind, this is a parallel to the Wardens of the Wood, who seek to preserve the balance between nature and civilization, respecting each and protecting each from the other. The planar shepherd of Thelanais is not supposed to protect Eberron from Thelanis, but rather to serve as an intermediary of BOTH worlds - as the class says, an "envoy, emissary, and translator." Essentially, I feel that this class does the first part of what you suggest, Aelryinth - "keeping the relationships between Eberron and its planes under control" - though it focuses on a specific plane. The emissary of Thelanis protect Thelanis from Eberron and Eberron from Thelanis. Protecting Eberron from broad planar intrusion is the role of the Gatekeeper, who is not supposed to have any interest in the virtues of the planes or Eberron's relationship with them; the Gatekeeper protects Eberron. So if Thelanis invades Eberron, the Gatekeeper would fight; but if the planar shepherd is doing his job, that invasion would never occur. The key is that the planar shepherd would ALSO seek to prevent humanity from in some way invading or abusing Thelanis. The PS believes in balance, and balance can be tipped by either side. The PS sees the fey as his flock just as much as the humans: both are equally blind to the delicate balance between the worlds, and that's why both need his help. The betrayal comes from adopting the view of the outsider of another plane, a plane where 'all the planes blend together to form Eberron' is not part of the philosophy. Come on. In saying this, you're completely contradicting all of the flavor text of the class. The shepherd takes another plane as his SECOND home. He has a "hollistic" philosophy. The denizens of that plane may not see the link between the two planes, but neither do the inhabitants of Eberron. The SHEPHERD embodies that link, and while his outlook is influenced by his second home, it is also influenced by his first home. The class doesn't say "you abandon all loyalty to Eberron and are subsumed by the new plane"; it clearly states that the PS is about forming a bond between the planes and serving as an intermediary between the two. As I see it, Aelryinth, the problem is you're trying to make things too one-sided. You're seeing the shepherd as a syncophantic devotee of a particular plane, and you want to turn him around to a champion defending us against that plane. In fact, he's not supposed to be either of those things. He's an emissary and a guide to people of BOTH planes. If you need to negotiate with a prince of Thelanis, find a Greensinger to help you with it... and if an archon needs to deal with mortals, he may find a shepherd of Shavarath to help him make his case. Balance has always been a key point of druids, and in this case it's balance between two planes. You want a warrior who is prepared to control and defeat people of another plane. There's nothing wrong with that as a class idea. But it's not what this class was ever meant to be, nor would its existence invalidate the purpose of this class. Again, I see this as a planar parallel to the Wardens of the Wood. The Wardens seek to preserve the balance between nature and civilization. This doesn't mean infiltrating civilization and being prepared to destroy it from within, or even learning special tricks to destroy civilized people. It means that they patrol the boundaries, that they work with people and creatures on both sides of the line, peacefully when possible and resorting to violence when it is absolutely necessary. The planar shepherd takes things a step farther, because he actually lives in both worlds... but again, he does so in order to understand and strengthen the bond between the two, not because he is placing the plane above Eberron. This isn't a question of loyalty to an alien force; it's the belief that the force ISN'T alien, and that through his actions, the PS can make that clear to people on both sides of the planar divide. I don't have the time to personally continue the discussion, and personally I feel that the flavor of the class is quite clear, so I'll let my point rest here. So lack of further response doesn't mean a lack of interest on my part - but rather, I feel that if I haven't made my point by now, further discussion on my part isn't going to help. |
| aelryinth09-22-06, 03:27 PM | Well, I'll happily posit the fact that I focus on certain elements of the flavor text, and that flavor text is working out to be self-contradictory. He gradually takes on the perspective and attitudes of a native of another plane. That doesn't make him balanced between the planes...that makes him an immigrant to another plane's ethos. Furthermore, his ability to transform into outsiders...living embodiments of philosophies that are, to a great deal utterly unconcerned with 'balance' and 'nature', and something Druids are traditionally opposed to. COuld I take Planar Shepherd (Eberron) and suddenly become Rakshasas, couatls, native outsiders and all the magical beasts of Eberron? Why not? The logic escapes me. It'd be particularly funny if I could wildshape into a particular monk/20 because he's a native outsider... A prescence warding away interference is effectively a protective and defensive stand...which is what the Shepherd is. This class doesn't say Planar Ambassador, Trade Attache', Agent Plenipotentiary, or anything of the sort. Becoming a master of relationships between your home plane and another does NOT neccessitate you transforming your mindset into that of a native of the other plane, most of which have strong philosophical stances opposed to the Nature of your own plane. In the words of the Silver Flame, you are voluntarily corrupting your own soul to do something like this. I consider the flavor text contradictory, the purpose of the class muddled and subject to too much interpretation, the abilities broken, and the intentions of whoever made this disaster unsupported by game mechanics that reinforce and exemplify what this thing is supposed to do. For an ambassador to the Fey, the idea presented of a Druid trained in the Fey style works far, far better without all these crazy balance problems. (Can't remember if it was online or in one of the books). Being trained by Fey doesn't mean transferring planar mindset of any sort...just a set of potentially strange obligations on both sides of the coil. The class also dovetails far, far better with a Clerical mindset, since the adoption of a Planar mindset is heavily involved with ethical alignments and beliefs, and dealings with Outsiders is far more a province of the clerical orders then the Druidic. ==Aelryinth |
| The Dreaming Duck09-22-06, 05:31 PM | That doesn't make him balanced between the planes...that makes him an immigrant to another plane's ethos. The class clearly states its intention. It states that a member of the PrC seeks to bridge the worlds, treats the chosen plane as a "second" home, that they seek to "open the minds of others to the reality of nature." It makes clear that to a planar shepherd, the existence of the planes IS part of the balance of nature. It doesn't matter what the inhabitants of those planes think, because as Hellcow said, it's not as if the inhabitants of Eberron share the druid's ethos; the shepherd is taking a stance unique on both planes. His behavior changes because he is embracing something new; but he still has all of the influences of the old shaping him as well. Again, second home, not replacement home. As far as I can tell, you're essentially saying "I don't care that the vast majority of the class defines itself as being about balance, if I take this one statement and interpret it in a particular way it contradicts everything else that's said, and as a result the class should be entirely scrapped and replaced with a different class I like better." Honestly, I don't even know what the point of this argument is. I can't imagine it's "WotC ought to replace this PrC in errata with an entirely new PrC". The case for the other PrC seems largely to be based on pure semantics, "what would be an ideal match for the title shepherd", as opposed to "what would best tie to the ethos of the Greensingers" - which aren't at all suited to the defender-against-outsiders role. Alternately, it's "I don't believe that the PrC clearly states its intention as being about the balance between the planes, despite all the statements about the balance between the planes." You say the purpose is unclear and subject to interpretation. If this is so, I wish they'd make this sort of mistake more often. Reading it as I do, I have gained the foundation for four new storylines I want to run in my campaign... far more than I've gotten from most PrCs in this or any other book. I find most PrCs to be boring collections of rules: frankly, balance aside, I find the Sovereign Speaker to be the waste of space in this book, because I see nothing I can do with it that I couldn't have done before with a standard cleric of the Host, unless the adventure somehow turns on the guy having five different granted domain powers at once. The planar shepherd provides me with interesting ways to create stories around each plane, creating distinctive characters for each. You may not be able to grasp the purpose of the class. You may choose to focus on what you see as contradictions. But the potential is there, if you choose to look for it. This may not be the Platonic ideal of the PrC, and as I've said from the start, it has balance issues on its mechanics. But for my campaign? It's one of the best PrCs I've seen in a long time. |
| The Dreaming Duck09-22-06, 06:18 PM | On a side note, don't take my last message to mean that I think the Planar Shepherd IS the best PrC WotC's come out with in years. I recognize the problems it presents for many types of gamer. And that's exactly my point. It's a class that works GREAT for my campaign, and I'm glad to have it. I'm guessing that if everyone who contributed to this thread listed what they considered to be the five best and worst PrCs, we'd see far more than ten PrCs named... and it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of people's favorites were other people's least favorites. D&D has its power-gamers, tacticians, dramatists, etc, and they all like different things... and a PrC that may ruin a "numbers tactician's" game may be ideal for another. For me, it's easily the best PrC in this book, despite the balance issues... which I've already resolved for my campaign as I described earlier in this thread. Aelryinth, you may consider your uber-defender PrC to be more balanced, less contradictory, and a better match for your campaign. But personally, I have no interest in such a class in mine. That's all I'm saying. The balance issues are quantifiable and are something a DM will have to address. Flavor issues? Not so much, as shown by the fact that you can't grasp the purpose while it makes perfect sense to me. To each their own. |
| Just another user09-22-06, 06:23 PM | you know what? never mind. I made here a comment about D&D and rolepalying but those kind of discussions never goes well, so I just delete it. Sorry. |
| The Dreaming Duck09-22-06, 07:16 PM | Essentially, that's my point though, JAU. I'm not saying this is the perfect PrC. The fact that it can be balanced by roleplaying is great - if you're running a campaign in which roleplaying is a significant factor. Otherwise, it won't work and you shouldn't use it as it stands, just like you shouldn't play Champions with psychological limitations. This PrC is well-suited to my play-style and I'm glad to have it. I recognize that it's flawed for other DMs and I'm sorry to hear that - but again, there's MANY PrCs that are flawed for my purposes and which I'll never use. It's easy for the numbers tactician to complain about a class that is mechanically imbalanced. As someone who cares about story potential, there are many classes that I counsider to be mechanically balanced, but which offer absolutely nothing to me in flavor (and personally, flavor is what I'm looking for when I use a pre-existing campaign setting!). Aelryinth, you listed all the different types of gamers... but how many PrCs are useful for absolutely every one of them? I recognize this one doesn't work for many people: I'm simply saying that it DOES work for some people, and I'm one of them. For the numbers tactician, Rule Zero may be a last resort, and a class with ambiguous elements may be irretreivably flawed. Being primarily concerned with storytelling, I consider Rule Zero to be the core of the game, and am more concerned with the inspiration I get from an idea than the numbers. I *can* iron out the rules, once the seed has been planted. But if I'd never think of the idea on my own, I can't fix it, can I? So when I buy books, I'm looking for that inspirational idea... that thing I wouldn't think of on my own. In the case of the Planar Shepherd, it's not even the Thelanis/Greensinger as it stands; rather, it's the thought of taking the PrC and applying it to all the other planes, to get the shepherd of Shavarath, of Fernia, or of Dal Quor. Each of these has a story - and personally, I hadn't considered the idea of a druid linked to Shavarath who could pull the plane of fire into the world before. Faiths of Eberron gave me that spark, and that's what made the book worthwhile for me. By comparison, I think I'm very unlikely to ever use an argent fist in my game. Yet again, that's me. I'm not a number cruncher, power-gamer, or what have you, and I respect that ALL of those are valid and popular styles of play. But my style of play is ALSO valid; and it happens this is a PrC that's, apparently, aimed at me. Does this mean you shouldn't criticize it? Not at all. Criticize away. Hey, as much as I like it, I would have liked it even more with those balance issues worked out. I'm just saying that this isn't simply black and white. There is more to a class than just numbers, and the perfectly mechanically balanced class - ideal for the tactician - can still suck for other types of players and DMs. And just as you criticize it - letting WotC (if anyone's listening) know that it's material that doesn't work for your playstyle - I'll continue to explain why it DOES work for my playstyle, and hope that more material is created that is useful to ME in the future. Because I'm a selfish :censored:. |
| aelryinth09-22-06, 09:12 PM | For an NPC, this is a great class. You have total control over him and get to WOW the PC's with his unique abilities and power and whatnot. But this is 3E. No more of this 'NPc's can do things I can't conceivably do' stuff that characterized all the stuff in 2E. And so you can't balance a PrC in a GAME environment via roleplaying restrictions. The flavor text is STILL contradictory, JAU. You don't need to take on the mindset of another plane/ethos to treat it as a second home and understand it. This 'enlightened view of the planes' is something you are actually chucking out the window, BECAUSE you are replacing your mortal?ish viewpoints with that of an outsider of another realm. Contradictory flavor text. Sure, the intentions are there...but they are NOT backed up. And that's why this is a wreck of a class. As for the Uber Defender...good fences make for good neighbors. someone has to watch the fences, not just holes in the ground, and not just for xoriat and its aberrations. ===Aelryinth |
| The Dreaming Duck09-22-06, 10:53 PM | For an NPC, this is a great class. You have total control over him and get to WOW the PC's with his unique abilities and power and whatnot... But this is 3E. No more of this 'NPc's can do things I can't conceivably do' stuff that characterized all the stuff in 2E. And so you can't balance a PrC in a GAME environment via roleplaying restrictions. OK, all sorts of things to address here. But this is 3E. No more of this 'NPc's can do things I can't conceivably do' stuff... Please show me the text in a 3E that actually states that this is the case. I've heard this from you before, Aelryinth... that designers said somewhere on a message board sometime that there were no "sacred cows" in 3E. But where is it IN PRINT? Where is the rule telling me, as someone who picks up the game and has never read a message board, that this is the case? Meanwhile, I CAN show you something in black and white. Namely, an 11-year old cleric who gains 14 levels in Flamekeep, something no PC can do. A dusk hag whose abilties are described as a plot device for the DM. An eldritch machine, which can only be created if the DM decides it can be created, and the effects of which are entirely up to the DM. It may be that the designers of 3E intended there to be no sacred cows. But they didn't SAY it anywhere in the book... and meanwhile, the designers of Eberron clearly believe that it IS possible to have NPCs who can do things PCs cannot. And I don't know about you, but I'm playing in Eberron. If I'm wrong - if there is a rule that DOES say that no NPC should be able to do something a PC can't - please give me a page reference. I'd like to know. Otherwise, you are certainly entitled not to use any NPC-exclusive things in your campaign, but I'll still be using Jaela Daran and Sora Teraza in mine. But that's only the begining. Page 13 of the DMG is all about the trust between player and DM - how it is ultimately up to the DM to balance the game whenever things get unbalanced... noting among other things that it's better for a DM to counter an unbalanced PC/item by changing the challenges and circumstances of the game than by taking the item or ability away. In other words, instead of just saying "you can't grant wishes", say "You can grant wishes, but there are consequences; you're called to the City of Brass to learn about the laws governing the mastery of reality." Meanwhile, page 14 talks about the right of the DM to change the rules, stating "Given the creativity of gamers, almost every campaign will, in time, develop its own house rules." It continues to say "The ability to use the mechanics as you wish is paramount to the way roleplaying games work." It continues to discuss the balance involved, to encourage DMs to think carefully before changing a rule. But it doesn't say "YOU CAN NEVER CHANGE THE RULES! YOU MUST DO EXACTLY AS WE SAY!" Rather, it says that the rules are a starting point - and that most games WILL change the rules to suit play style. Now, as long as we ARE playing strictly by the rules, let's jump to page 176 of the DMG: "Prestige classes are purely optional and always under the purview of the DM. We encourage you, as the DM, to tightly limit the prestige classes available in your campaign." In other words, strictly by the rules, a DM is not required to allow ANY prestige class into the game. Which brings us back to the fact that some prestige classes work better for some play styles than others. The planar shepherd works great for my campaign, so as a DM I will use it. The Sovereign speaker? Nah. I just don't like it and don't feel it has flavor. I see no reason to add it, and I won't, just like I don't allow samurai or ninja. No big loss... in fact, I'm following the suggestion of the designers by choosing to limit the number of PrCs. Finally, we come to the statement that by what I've described, the PrC would work great for NPCs but couldn't work for a PC. Nothing could be further from the truth. You are correct, the stories I said I wanted to run revolve around NPCs... because *I* have the power to create NPCs. But personally, I would LOVE to have a player in my group decide to play a planar shepherd of Dal Quor or Fernia. I'd even allow the wishes and the time synch on Dal Quor. First the character has to work up to that level, and that means interacting with the planes and their inhabitants. He has to learn the customs of the plane - I've told you how I'd handle the efreet's wish, and I was thinking about how I'd handle it for a PC when I said it. And in the case of Dal Quor, he's going to have to deal with how the kalashtar feel about a person who is trying to form bonds between Eberron and il-Lashtavar. This isn't a "Any player who tries it will get beaten up by kalashtar atavists! Ha! Stupid player thinks he can pull one over on me!" - rather, I think that it would be a fascinating developing story, as the character tries to walk that line between darkness and light, as he tries to embrace the plane he has chosen as part of nature and reality. And so you can't balance a PrC in a GAME environment via roleplaying restrictions. A game? Maybe not. A campaign? Of course you can. At least, I can... and page 13 of the DMG even talks about how to do it, so I shouldn't be the only one. Nonetheless, is entirely possible that YOU can't, and there's nothing wrong with you if that's the case - it simply means you and I have different play styles. And that's why the DMG clearly states that it's up to you as DM to decide what prestige classes to allow in your game... and why I would expect the RPGA to restrict this PrC. I can handle this PrC in my campaign, even with no errata whatsoever. I'd be happy to do so, and as I've said, it's the one PrC in this book I AM likely to use. If you can't, that's fine - and as the DMG says, no one says you have to. The flavor text is STILL contradictory... Huh. I didn't have any trouble with it, certainly not on the level of "this is so strange and confusing that I can't figure out how to use it!" But perhaps it's just me. someone has to watch the fences, not just holes in the ground, and not just for xoriat and its aberrations. Right, but that "somebody" is still the Gatekeepers. Page 241 of the ECS: "(Gatekeepers) spend their lives... guarding against extraplanar invasion." Yes, the majority of stuff for the Gatekeepers so far has focused on aberrations and Xoriat, but technically they're supposed to be policing against all planes. So the uber-defender is fine, but it's more Gatekeeper stuff, and I'm happy to see a druid who's NOT a Gatekeeper. And as a DM, I'm simply more interested in a class that is about exploring and understanding the planes than fighting them. Again, two different DMs, two different play styles, two different PrCs. The uber-defender is what you want in your game, and you can choose not to use the planar shepherd; the DMG even advises you to pick and choose. Meanwhile, I will use the shepherd, both for NPCs, and if anyone wants to play one, PCs. |
| Salla09-23-06, 01:04 AM | Y'know, I just noticed something. The Noble Djinn says it can grant three wishes to any being who captures it. Which means you can't just give them away, your party mates have to capture you ... which means it has to be involuntary, because it's not capturing otherwise, and you obviously can't capture yourself ... so either you have to fight them as hard as you can to avoid being captured, or you can't grant wishes because you weren't captured, and you have this incredibly 'overpowered' Prestige Class and one of the two most powerful Core classes backing you up ... Sounds fair. :D "Sorry, Tom ... use the Empowered Flame Strike, and get them all, or no wishes for the party." "Man, this SUCKS!" |
| HarmonysRage09-23-06, 03:32 AM | Furthermore, his ability to transform into outsiders...living embodiments of philosophies that are, to a great deal utterly unconcerned with 'balance' and 'nature', and something Druids are traditionally opposed to. ==Aelryinth I love this: "Most Druids are moderate in their belief of the proper balance between nature, magic and civilization." ECSB p.36 So where in this is the pathos of the planar shepard wrong to the setting? Note it says "Most" and not all. Don't like it? Don't play it. |
| DarkWarriorKarg09-23-06, 08:28 AM | You can't please everyone. I'm glad they put in this class... I was getting tired of "mechanical balance". If I want a mechanical balance, I'd play fantasy hero or gurps fantasy. Things can be balanced through RP, just not in a rules-lawyer heavy game (RPGA). Among mature players, most don't even care, as long as each gets his own spotlight. Why, some are even able to handle not being on an even footing with the other players, as long as they get a chance to shine! |
| The Dreaming Duck09-23-06, 01:46 PM | Why, some are even able to handle not being on an even footing with the other players, as long as they get a chance to shine! This is in essence my point in saying I'd allow the character to be a planar shepherd of Dal Quor, even with the time differential. Because what does that do again? It allows him to speed up time for himself and his allies, by drawing Dal Quor to the plane. Yes, it's a very powerful effect that could allow him to defeat many opponents. Looking at this: First, I'm the one who decides what encounters they will face. If they have to deal with the assassin who jumps them with no warning, time warping is useless; the opponent is within the sphere of influence when combat begins. They can choose to use it to set up attacks against known opponents... but I can establish threatening situations where it doesn't come into play. It's a 20-foot radius, which will fill most rooms in the average building, for example. On the open battlefield, it's incredibly powerful; in the cramped dungeon, it's more limited. And as DM, I do have some choice as to which situation will be more common. Next, I'll adjust CR and EL accordingly. If they DEMOLISH their opposition because of the time shift, and are not in fact placed in danger, then the EL drops. The reward is supposed to be based on the challenge. As such, in the open battlefield scene, I'd hit them with tougher foes because I know they can now handle it - but the experience rewards they are receiving wouldn't change dramatically. Also, note that it can only be used once a day - so the shepherd will have to pick and choose. Is this situation worth using it? What about this one? This is one reason this abilty is easier to address than the Efreet wishes - though as I said, I'd be perfectly happy to handle that one in my game as well. Again, I think it would provide an interesting opportunity to explore the culture of a race of beings with the power to alter reality. It would be a very unusual game, but I can run unusual. Finally, I'll focus on the fact that they are bringing Dal Quor to Eberron. It's not just about speed - it is the realm of nightmares. If you use it in a civilized area - perhaps you want a few extra rounds to plan or do something - you'll draw a vast amount of attention to yourself, as dreams manifest around you. And these are dreams, so they could be ANYTHING. It could just be an unusual environment. But perhaps that twenty-foot radius is a battlefield itself, the nightmare of a veteran who served in the Last War; spectral soldiers are clashing all around you, potentially posing a distraction and certainly drawing attention. Perhaps it's someone's dream of having an audience with King Boranel and discovering he has no pants... look, it's Boranel! In any case,it's an aspect of the power that is unpredictable and could cause a significant reaction. And the final part of this is the question of what it means to draw Dal Quor closer to Eberron - which is, after all, exactly what the quori are trying to do. When you create a planar bubble, is it possible for a quori to plane shift to it? Or does it at least give them a strong point where it's easier for them to mentally influence people (perhaps it was a Sarlonan planar shepherd who helped the quori make contact with their first hosts back before the age of Riedra!)? This may not threaten the player who uses it, but may have serious long term consequences... and the kalashtar will be concerned. Eseentially, it's a nuclear weapon - it is very powerful, but the character may be causing terrible fallout when he uses that power. He may NOT care - but the consequences of his actions will come back to haunt him. Again, page 13 of the DMG... it's up to the DM to balance things when a game gets out of hand, and it's possible to do this without being heavy handed. The DM controls the world, sets the challenges people face, and controls every aspect of story. If a character's power increases, it's simply a question of adjusting the challenges to match - both overall and in a way that addresses the specific issue. I can come up with ways to handle the dream-speed and efreet wish - and as I've said, I think it both would actually make interesting campaigns. Now, to address a general point... But this is 3E. No more of this 'NPc's can do things I can't conceivably do' stuff that characterized all the stuff in 2E. And so you can't balance a PrC in a GAME environment via roleplaying restrictions. I just want to touch on this again. I responded by quoting the DMG and asking Aelryinth to do the same. But my intention isn't to say "I'm right and Aelryinth is wrong." It's quite possible a designer did intend to remove the sacred cows from 3E, and that this is how, say, Monte Cook would play D&D. My point? I'm not Monte Cook, and the rule book doesn't say that I have to be. What the rules clearly state is that they are a framework for creating your own story. They say that house rules are fine, and even provide guidelines for creating house rules... though they reinforce that the rules were made for a reason and shouldn't be discarded carelessly. Nonetheless, the game is defined by DM and players, and as per page 14, "The ability to use the mechanics as you wish is paramount to the way roleplaying games work." If I choose to create a new NPC like Jaela Daran who possesses abilities a player cannot have, I'm not doing anything WRONG. I'm just doing something the no-sacred-cows designer wouldn't do in HIS campaign. But D&D is a framework... a framework designed to be equally useful to wargamers, roleplayers (or "actors", if you prefer), number-crunchers, puzzle-solvers, power-gamers, and on and on and on. We'll all do things differently. And I'm sure some of the Eberron designers (I don't know which one is responsible for things like Jaela and Teraza) run their games very differently than whoever said "no sacred cows". In other words, the rules DO tell me that I have the right to exclude prestige classes that I don't like, and that I can change the rules themselves if, on careful consideration, I feel it's necessary to do so. They tell me that it's my duty as DM to find ways to balance unbalanced situations. So Aelryinth, in YOUR campaign PCs may be able to do everything NPCs can, and that's fine; it may even be how the designers of 3E run their own games. But that doesn't make my style of play wrong. You can't tell me "No more of this unique NPCs thing" because, aside from the fact that the ECS has such NPCs, the DMG tells me that first and foremost I am in charge of my game... not the designer and certainly not you. If I'm running a game for the RPGA, then I must follow the strict guidelines they have established, and that's why they ESTABLISH those guidelines - because every DM has their own style. But when I'm playing at home, it's about the trust between my players and myself, and it's up to me to balance situations and if necessary adjust the rules as I see fit. This isn't a war between roleplaying/acting and powergaming/tacticians. It doesn't matter how you play. All that matters is that the game is a framework that gives players of ALL types a place to start. Where they go from there is up to the DM. |
| aelryinth09-23-06, 02:36 PM | First of all, Jaela does not have a power that the PC's cannot attain. There is nothing forbidding a PC becoming the Speaker of the Flame...it's just that there is only one at a time. They did the same thing with the CHosen of Mystra. The reason there is a template is because it now IS possible to become a Chosen of Mystra. YOur RP balance ideas are falling flat, because now, because of this one overpowered PrC, the rest of the characters now need to face threats beyond their normal power that they simply couldn't handle because of this character. In other words, your class balance just went out the window. You have one superhero who is setting the tone for everyone else, because he has powers that break the rules. ========== Kindly tell me how altering your mindset to that of an outsider of Another World, instead of maintaining a balanced viewpoint of all of them, is moderation? Especially when a large number of those worlds have philosophies/purposes rather antithetical and dangerous to the existence of Eberron? Even the Children of Winter love their world. Fernians want to see it all burn, and have a definite evil mindset...you can't even be a Good Druid and be a Fernian adherent...no moderation for you! In short, deviation from Neutrality is being almost enforced upon you. ====Aelryinth |
| The Dreaming Duck09-23-06, 03:47 PM | First of all, Jaela does not have a power that the PC's cannot attain. She has a power for which no game mechanics exist, and one which is intentionally restricted to a single individual, with no path a PC can intentionally choose to follow to ascend to that position. Could a PC become Keeper of the Flame? Sure. But a DM would have to be the one both to make it happen and decide what it meant. To say "PCs can do anything NPCs can do because a DM could decide to create rules to explain the thing the NPC does and choose to provide the PC to do it" seems like a very weak argument. Jaela is a unique individual in the world. The only way a player could duplicate her abilities is if the DM chooses to allow it; there's no "Keeper of the Flame" PrC. What about Sora Teraza? Could we create a "Dusk Hag Daughter of Sora Kell" PrC? Sure. Do you think the creators ever intended it, or did they just give an NPC an ability they don't expect the PCs to have, because it makes a good game? YOur RP balance ideas are falling flat. Um... no, they're not. Me and my players have a great time playing D&D. I would LOVE to run the game I've just described, if a player chose to follow it. YOU may not like them. You might not be able to balance a game for your players in such a way and have it feel satisfying. But you don't know what I'm capable of or what I enjoy. And as such, please don't tell me that you do. My ideas are quite inspiring... TO ME. If you want to say "Your ideas would never work in my campaign", that's fine. I don't expect them to, and I've said that from the very begining. But no, Aelryinth, they are not "falling flat." And yes, the other players will now be facing greater challenges - because THEY will be able to handle them (remember, the shepherd of DQ provides greater speed for his ALLIES to use!). Again, *I* know my players, and I know if they will enjoy those greater challenges. And that's what the DMG says: that as DM, it is my job to inspire trust in my players and to balance the game through the challenges I present. The key to RP balance is that you CAN'T put it in a rulebook. It requires the DM to understand his players, what they enjoy and hate, and all sorts of other factors. When things are based purely on numbers, DMs and players are completely interchangable; when story is a major factor, they are not. That's why, IMO, you COULDN'T use this class in the RPGA - because in the RPGA, you need to be able to have any combination of players and DMs come together, and you need things to be balanced by the numbers. You can't rely on an experienced DM and the relationship he has built with his players. But I have that relationship, I know what I can handle, and I know that this is something both my players and I would enjoy. And I'd rather play a session with my players than a session of RPGA play, because I get an experience I could never have it that completely-by-the-numbers play. Furthermore, you haven't addressed my point that while there are 2,000 PrCs out there, the rules clearly encourage the DM to carefully pick and choose. This class doesn't work for you. It does work for me. I pick it, you don't. Again, I'm not likely to use any of the OTHER PrCs in this book; I'm glad they did include one for my playstyle. Kindly tell me how altering your mindset to that of an outsider of Another World, instead of maintaining a balanced viewpoint of all of them, is moderation? Kindly tell me what you read that says "Your viewpoint completely alters to be alien and have nothing to do with your previous world"? I see the following statements: "Dubbed 'planar shepherds' for prostelytizing on planar tolerance, they work to open the minds of others to the reality of nature" "Your concept of the natural world extends to all the planes of existence... your work centers on the balance of nature." "Your hollistic view of existence.." "You have a natural affinity with extraplanar creatures native to that plane but are generally unprejudiced toward other planar inhabitants - other than those whose aims directly oppose your own, or who threaten the existence of your native or chosen plane. Hollistic. Second home. Unprejudiced. Working to defend BOTH planes. The one statement that stands out in connection to what you're saying is this. "Given your attunement to a plane outside your own, you spend at least as much time there as on your own plane. Your outlook perforce mirrors the characteristics of that realm of existence." I don't find this contradictory at all. You are trying to emphasize the connection between these two planes. You are working to become a creature of BOTH planes. Your outlook is ALREADY influenced by Eberron; the more time you spend in your new home, the more you grow attuned to it. You can't seek to be a emissary between Eberron and Kythri, a living embodiment of the bond between those planes, and maintain a lawful alignment; you are trying to show with your actions how Kythri IS a part of the balance of nature, and Kythri is chaotic. Beyond this, nothing ever says you put the interests of that plane first or lose loyalty to your home plane - quite the opposite, it clearly states just a few sentences later that you defend the interests of "your native or chosen plane". You spend equal times on both planes, you defend both planes, and your outlook - which, originally, is only influenced by ONE plane - becomes balanced by both. You're making an enormous mountain out of a molehill, and unless you have some stronger case to make, I won't argue this point any further. You can CHOOSE to take this statement out of context and be baffled by it - but the overall purpose of the class is clearly stated, and I feel that the statement I quoted isn't even contradictory if you choose to read it in context. This isn't some bizarre cobbled together morass of conflicting ideas; the purpose of the PrC is perfectly clear. Fernians want to see it all burn, and have a definite evil mindset...you can't even be a Good Druid and be a Fernian adherent... no moderation for you! In short, deviation from Neutrality is being almost enforced upon you. Now, once again, you are being careless on many levels, ignoring both the description of the class, the description of the druid, and even the words of Hellcow on this thread. "Deviation from neutrality is enforced"... so? In 3E, druids don't have to be TRUE neutral; they can be any neutral alignment. So your Fernian shepherd is Neutral Evil. Where's the problem? "You can't even be a good druid and be a Fernian adherent"... you're right. Planar Attunement clearly states that your chosen plane can't have an alignment trait opposed to you. You CAN'T be a good druid and be a Fernian adherent. Where's the problem? "Fernians want to see it all burn..." Sure. And sure, this doesn't work well for the druid. But as the PrC itself says on page 105, and Hellcow pointed out specifically in response to you, "Sometimes a blighter enters this class..." and a blighter would LOVE to see it all burn. Where's the problem? I feel that this class is clear in its intent, and while its mechanics are unbalanced enough that they could never be allowed in RPGA play, I have no concerns about using it myself and plan to do so. The ONE place where I feel there is serious contradiction is the attachment of the Greensingers to the PrC... mainly because on page 106 under "Playing a Planar Shepherd", it says "You might attach yourself to an existing druid sect or form a subsect devoted to your chosen plane." It sounds to me like this was, as someone suggested earlier, an independent thing that got shoehorned onto the Greensingers - and I find it far more interesting to build unique subsects around the planes. So sure, I'll have Greensinger planar shepherds of Thelanis... but my blighters of Fernia will be something entirely different. I certainly get that this PrC isn't for everyone. No PrC is. But I'm sorry, Aelryinth, while you may be perfectly justified in concerns about its balance in general play, the flavor is really quite clear - and most of your complaints are dealt with in the text of the class itself. You don't like it, and that's fine. You'd rather they'd replaced it with your uber-defender, something you'd use. But if they had, I'd be saying "Did we NEED more Gatekeeper material? &%*$ it, there's not a single PrC in this book I'm going to use." It's Dungeons & Dragons, not Dungeons & Duck or Aelryinth & Dragons. Everything that comes out won't appeal to both of us. Like the DMG says, it's a framework for us to build our game from, and each of us can pick and choose what to use. Personally, I'm glad to have something that works well in MY game for a change. |
| Indigo09-23-06, 06:07 PM | "Given your attunement to a plane outside your own, you spend at least as much time there as on your own plane. Your outlook perforce mirrors the characteristics of that realm of existence." To make an imperfect (and hypothetical) real-world analogy: I'm a US citizen. However, I think that all nations are equally important. I decide to act as a personal cultural ambassador between the US and another nation, picking Japan. I do this in part because I'm fascinated with Japan. I travel between the two, learning the customs of Japan and trying to share those with my friends back in the US, and also sharing my US customs with the friends I make in Japan. Because I'm spending half my time there and because I am actively trying to forge a bridge between the two, I adopt Japanese mannerisms and customs myself. My friends may say "You've got a sort of Japanese thing going on." But this doesn't change the fact that I remain loyal to the US and still have many American traits. I'm trying to embody both cultures. Just because I embrace the second culture doesn't mean I've abandoned the first. I'm not an expatriate, who only lives in Japan and has abandoned the US entirely. I am an active citizen of both worlds, and I am trying to broaden my mind to encompass the customs of both. I act, as far as I can, in the best interests of both. It is problematic that at 10th level you become an outsider "native to your chosen plane", because now you are no longer native to Eberron; you are no longer a bridge and have instead flipped to one side. However, I see this as a poor mechanical decision. The class doesn't say "At tenth level your mind is subsumed by your devotion to your chosen plane and you abandon your loyalty to your former home"; instead it says that you should spend an equal time on both planes and defend them both. The flavor seems clear to me; IMO, it's the mechanics of Planar Self that are the concern, and it's not a concern that I have a problem with. I started as an US citizen trying to help Americans understand Japanese culture; by 10th level, I've become a Japanese citizen trying to help the Japanese understand US culture. Whatever my citizenship, I remain an ambassador between both nations. The connection to the Greensingers seems marginal at best; the class doesn't have Bluff, Hide, or Perform, the three skills that define the Greensinger by the ECS. Personally, I suspect it was written for some other book and slid in - or that it was a stand-alone thing that got forced onto the Greensingers in editing. |
| Indigo09-23-06, 06:08 PM | First of all, Jaela does not have a power that the PC's cannot attain. There is nothing forbidding a PC becoming the Speaker of the Flame...it's just that there is only one at a time. It's Keeper, not Speaker (that would be Tira Miron). I don't see how this helps your argument, though: * Jaela possesses a position that gives her an extra pile of levels. * There is no defined way for a PC to get this power. * If a PC did get this power, it would as far as we can tell be a pure gift from the DM; Jaela doesn't have levels in a PrC or anything like that. IIRC, we got her stats in Five Nations, and she didn't even have a feat. * The only balancing factor on that power would be the character's new social obligations to the church and Thrane - roleplaying restrictions. I don't see how you can incorporate Jaela into the world of equal balance and NPC-PCs-all-holding-hands. If a PC could get the power, it would be a travesty of balance, and since we've seen Jaela's character sheet there's no indication that there's any sort of mechanical balancing factor attached to it. Forgotten Realms may have made it possible to become a Chosen of Mystra. Some day, Eberron may make it possible to be Keeper of the Flame. But they haven't done ityet, and the fact that there can be only one is a fairly strong indication that they won't; Jaela is a plot device, not an intended path for a character. At least with Mystra, she's a goddess you can work for and chat with; with Eberron, the gods are so distant, who knows what's going on. In any case, it seems to me that if you can accept Jaela and Sora Teraza on the premise that "A player character could under the right circumstances gain these abilities", there's not a lot of things that you couldn't accept - because WotC could always come out with the "Complete Dusk Hag" down the line, with feats giving PCs the Dusk Hag abilities. They could, but they haven't done it yet, and somehow I don't expect them to. |
| Hellcow09-23-06, 06:38 PM | (I said I wasn't going to post again about the shepherd - not that I'd never post again!) WotC could always come out with the "Complete Dusk Hag" down the line, with feats giving PCs the Dusk Hag abilities. They could, but they haven't done it yet, and somehow I don't expect them to. You know, I think someone - James Wyatt or myself, I honestly can't remember - did make a PrC back in the day that gave the player an ability much like that of the dusk hag (prophetic dreams - it wasn't actually a "dusk hag" PrC). I wonder what happened to that. Of course, it was much like a typical dusk hag, not Sora Teraza. With that said, as one of the designers of the ECS, I personally have no problems with giving an NPC abilities that cannot be replicated by a player if it serves the needs of the story. Jaela is a good example. She's not supposed to be a PC, and I think it would be almost impossible for a PC to serve as Keeper of the Flame while continuing a career as an adventurer. It is certainly possible to quantify the abilities she gains from being Keeper, and if a DM wanted to make one of his players Keeper, he certainly could; but as Indigo points out, there's no balance here, because there's not supposed to be. Jaela isn't supposed to be in any way balanced, and if a PC did become Keeper, the real balancing factor would be the duties imposed on them by the position. I can imagine a DM doing this if she wanted to run a campaign in which all of the PCs became global power players - a sort of Birthright scenario - but no, I can't imagine you ever seeing a "Keeper of the Flame" template in an official sourcebook. It's possible to say that a PC could become Keeper of the Flame... but when James Wyatt, Bill Slaviscek, Chris Perkins, myself, and others were sitting down hammering out the ECS, no one said "Well, we have to make sure that a PC could become Keeper of the Flame if they wanted, because that's a core value of third edition." It's possible that this was a design goal for Third Edition, and it's certainly possible many of the designers play that way - but no one at WotC told me I had to change my style when I was working on the ECS. I think Dreaming Duck has hit on the key point. Everyone has their own preferences. The only thing that's wrong is telling someone else that what they're doing is wrong. The DMG puts things in the hands of the DM. It may advise people to think carefully before changing rules, but it actually discusses the things you should bear in mind if you DO change the rules, which is far more than most RPG systems do. The RPGA requires hard and fast rules, because a single player may have 15 different DMs over the course of 15 games; both player and DM need to be on exactly the same page. But when you're playing at home, the only things that matter are that both player and DM understand the rules that are being used (standard and house) and that both enjoy what they are doing. Some people say "If you're going to change the rules, why bother having them at all? One you start changing one, the whole thing collapses!" To me, this is a foolish statement that blows the argument completely out of proportion. The DMG itself says that house rules will generally evolve because of the creativity of gamers. It is not a weakness or a flaw to make a change to improve the way things work for your personal style. Someone can decide they don't want to use attacks of opportunity without wanting to design an entirely new combat system, and without thinking the combat system is inherently flawed; it may be the case that the group of gamers they run don't enjoy combat and want things to be simpler. The DM could choose to run a different, simpler system. Or they could take D&D, which has a thousand things they love - the character system, skills, magic - and simplify combat. Another DM could love combat, but hate the Diplomacy rules, because he finds them to be unrealistic and to repeatedly ruin his stories, which ends up spoiling the game for everyone. He doesn't want a new game - he just wants something different for Diplomacy, and so he makes house rules. When these DMs go to Winter Fantasy, they'll have to play things by the book. But at home, what matters is that they are consistent and that their players understand how they are going to run things - and that everyone has a good time. At least, that's how I see it. |
| makeshiftwings09-23-06, 07:18 PM | I don't know; most of these posts sound like apologist defendings of what is obviously a broken class. Can NPC's have abilities no PC can have? Sure. But nothing in the PrC says it's for NPC's only. In fact, it's pretty clearly supposed to be a player option. Can a DM use DM fiat aka "roleplaying balance" to completely neutralize and/or kill any PC he wants whenever he feels like it? Sure. But nothing in the PrC says that this particular PrC is a special case that needs to be neutralized/roleplay-hindered any more than any other class. Its description certainly does not imply to me that becoming one is going to bring legions of hellspawn assassins out of the woodwork to target you. Dreaming Duck, you have a point, I guess, in that anything can be "roleplay balanced" by the DM if he wants to. I could let one PC play a 40th level deity and the other PC play a 1st level kobold bard, and somehow still figure out a way to make a tolerable game out of it. But that doesn't change the fact that the players are horribly out of balance. I could let a PC take an ability like "You get 7 wishes a day for free" and then immediately have the gods surround him and curse him with an ability that says "You get 7 less wishes per day". It doesn't change the fact that a class that grants 7 wishes is unbalanced compared to the other classes. As a DM, I can easily ban or completely rewrite any class I feel like. But it doesn't change the fact that you've just paid for a book where you need to basically rip out and shred a large section of what you paid for because of the ineptness of the playtesting and editing teams. Edit: I wanted to add to this to make it more clear. I'd be ok with it if the PrC had come with an explanation, like "Sidebar: The Planar Shepherd in Play. As you may have noticed, the Planar Shepherd is far more powerful than almost any other prestige class for its level. It will allow the player to perform otherwise unthinkable feats like granting wishes for free, changing the flow of time, shapeshifting into powerful monsters that break all the current balance rules surrounding polymorph, and more, without giving up any of his spellcasting or combat abilities. This class should only be used for NPCs, or in a highly controlled environment where the PC in question is supposed to be supernatrally powerful for plot purposes. DM's be warned; do not allow this prestige class without serious consideration!" The FR books did this for Spellfire, and I believe for "Chosen of Mystra" and other things as well. Plus, they had a strong reason to be in the books, since Spellfire and the Chosen of Mystra were in the novels, and players wanted to see actual stats for them even though they were by necessity too powerful. Just like players wanting to know the stats for gods. But the Planar Shepherd does not have any warning, and does not have a history or plot-necessitating reason to be so ridiculously powerful. In fact, it strains the believability of the metaplot of Eberron ("there are no uber heroes anymore, that's the player's job") to think that there are Planar Shepherds NPC's walking around out there. It is pretty obvious to me that the Planar Shepherd was not, in fact, purposely created to be so broken as a DM tool, but was in fact just a case of someone who had never really played a high level game or used polymorph or shapechange much designing this class, and then absolutely no one at WotC bothering to playtest it even briefly before sending it off to press. |
| ArcTan09-23-06, 08:05 PM | For an NPC, this is a great class. You have total control over him and get to WOW the PC's with his unique abilities and power and whatnot. But this is 3E. No more of this 'NPc's can do things I can't conceivably do' stuff that characterized all the stuff in 2E. And so you can't balance a PrC in a GAME environment via roleplaying restrictions. *shrug* I don't like the class that much, but I'm going to disagree with you on this. Something that has to be balanced via RP restrictions should not make it into a sourcebook where the hoi polloi will abuse it or pressure their DM into letting them abuse it. But for a home gaming group, yes, it makes perfect sense for a player to say "I promise to only use these class abilities in a non-broken way that fits the story" and the DM to grant it to him on this basis, because *good* groups do not play D&D in a "game environment", in the sense of players trying to exploit every conceivable advantage to "beat" the DM. I think Polymorph is horribly overpowered, but I'd be perfectly willing to let a player use it with RP restrictions on it. That's how it worked in our last campaign, and it was fine. The flavor text is STILL contradictory, JAU. You don't need to take on the mindset of another plane/ethos to treat it as a second home and understand it. This 'enlightened view of the planes' is something you are actually chucking out the window, BECAUSE you are replacing your mortal?ish viewpoints with that of an outsider of another realm. You become more like an Outsider relative to an ordinary Eberronian, sure, but how do you know that the actual Outsiders from that plane still don't view you as alien, odd, distorted because of your native Eberron heritage? In order to treat a plane as a second home you must have *more of* the mindset of an inhabitant of the plane than an ordinary person from Eberron, who has none of that mindset at all. That's the point. As for the Uber Defender...good fences make for good neighbors. someone has to watch the fences, not just holes in the ground, and not just for xoriat and its aberrations. ===Aelryinth "Good fences make good neighbors" is *one* possible interpretation of how the planes ought to work. The PS is written with the assumption that some people follow a different path -- the path of trying to bring two planes into closer contact with each other, making people on both planes understand each other, bring the planes into balance through natural intercourse. I know you've stated before that you think "natural" means zero connection between different planes at all, but I do think it's pretty clear this isn't how it works in Eberron. In Eberron, interaction between the planes is an *entirely natural phenomenon*, and trying to push the planes too far apart breaks down the bounds of nature just as much as trying to pull them too close together. |
| ArcTan09-23-06, 08:06 PM | Especially when a large number of those worlds have philosophies/purposes rather antithetical and dangerous to the existence of Eberron? Even the Children of Winter love their world. Fernians want to see it all burn, and have a definite evil mindset...you can't even be a Good Druid and be a Fernian adherent...no moderation for you! In short, deviation from Neutrality is being almost enforced upon you. Not all Fernians do. The Chaotic Good Phoelarchs come from Fernia, after all. Again, you're assuming all kinds of crap about the planes that you have no basis for assuming. (The efreet in Core D&D have no desire in seeing the whole world burn -- they're just greedy and selfish and live in their well-defended City of Brass. Why should Fernian efreet be different?) |
| The Dreaming Duck09-23-06, 08:07 PM | I don't know; most of these posts sound like apologist defendings of what is obviously a broken class. Can NPC's have abilities no PC can have? I'm not apologizing for anything, and I don't see what the "Can NPCs have abilities PCs can't" has to do with the planar shepherd, since I've already said I'd let a PC use the class with full abilities in my game. So far, I've seen two major mechanical flaws pointed out with this class. The wild shape ability fails to take into account the full range of abilities available to outsiders. The specific example that keeps being drawn up is Fernia; and, of course, Fernia is unavailable to a good character, and in all liklihood, unavailable to a druid, as the psychology involved would require you to be a blighter. If you take Dal Quor, planar bubble will allow you to, once per day, create a 40-foot bubble inside of which people can act more swiftly. I'm not "apologizing" for either of these things. And I wouldn't restrict either to NPCs. I'm saying that I am perfectly capable of handling a PC with these abilties in a game that I run, and that the story potential of the PrC makes it far, far more appealing to me than more balanced classes that offer nothing from a flavor perspective. The Sovereign Speaker is an example of a class that I personally don't see as being either balanced OR interesting. The key point, MSW, is that I'm NOT saying the Planar Shepherd is a perfect class. I'm not encouraging you or Aelryinth to use it in YOUR games, and I'll point out again that the DMG suggests that a DM should carefully pick and choose what prestige classes to allow. I'm saying that while YOU may not want to use it, I do - that there is more to a class than pure numbers, and that I'm glad this class was created. Personally, I do wish they'd placed clearer restrictions on the wild shape ability. That seems to be the greatest flaw of the class (as I said, I'm just not as concerned with planar bubble for all the reasons I've given above), and it would have been nice to have a class that had the story AND ideal balance. But I'm very glad for the idea and basic concept - and I'd rather have to deal with wild shape issues than not have been given this idea to begin. And again, I only have to deal with those issues if I use the class... which is MY CHOICE. But nothing in the PrC says that this particular PrC is a special case that needs to be neutralized/roleplay-hindered any more than any other class. Sure, but the class DOES imply roleplaying elements and actions that should be taken by the character. According to the text of the class, you're supposed to spend approximately half your time on your chosen plane, and seek to understand the outlook of the plane. The class is described as "emissary, translator, and negotiator", not "shapechanging wish-monger with no interest in Fernia other than gaining the ability to hand out wishes." The intent of the class is clear. The problem is that it never occured to the DESIGNER that someone might try to take the class just to get wishes out of Fernia, and that's where this RP-balance comes up. The point is that *I* want to use the class as it is intended - someone who wants to embrace two planes - and if you do that, it works well. If you don't - if you just use it to become a Efreet-shaping superhero - then it doesn't work. Which is why a DM shouldn't use it if that's the kind of game he's running. Again, the DMG says from the start that not every PrC will work for everyone. This one works for me and not you. I'm not apologizing for it. I like it, wishes and all. You don't. If you like the Argent Fist, then you got a PrC that I will get no use from, so we're even. I could let one PC play a 40th level deity and the other PC play a 1st level kobold bard, and somehow still figure out a way to make a tolerable game out of it. Again, I think the issue is style of play. I know how I'd handle that character with the wish ability so that he WASN'T able to use wishes all the time, without just saying "you can't use wishes" or making him feel gypped out of his power; I know how I could make it feel like a natural part of the world. Again, with the Dal Quor character, the last thing I'd want is for kalashtar characters to just pop out and kill him; that's boring, and punishing the player for something I let him do - if that was going to happen, I should have just told him from the start "I'm not going to let you use this PrC." My point is that I'd have the kalashtar show up and say "You can use this ability all you want... but be aware that every time you use it you are playing Russian Roulette with the fate of the world." The player will need to decide... is this particular situation worth that small chance of opening a portal to Dal Quor and starting a new planar incursion? Meaningwhile, the Dreaming Dark will be urging him TO do it, telling him of the wonders of the world, how the two worlds DO belong together, and how it's his destiny to bring them together. The efreet wish ability is what makes the character too powerful. Therefore, if I place roleplaying restrictions on the use of wish, I haven't ruined the character. I haven't killed him. I haven't made him less powerful than the people around him; if anything, I've brought him to the level he should be at. And as I said, I wouldn't simply say "You can't use wishes"; I'd say "You can use wishes... but now you need to learn the culture of the efreeti, and discover why THEY aren't constantly using wishes." Since after all, it wouldn't be hard for an efreet who wants to get a wish to find a mortal and say "Hey, I'll grant you a wish if you'll ask a second wish for me." The power of the wish - when and how it can be used - is clearly part of the genie culture, and that's what I'm saying I'd like to explore. That would be a whole SERIES of adventures for the character in question... and he won't get the ability to do it until he hits 9th level in the planar shepherd class, by which point he SHOULD know all about the culture of Fernia if he's been doing his job. Again, I know my style and what my players enjoy. It might not work for you. It doesn't make this a perfect class. But as I've said, what PrC is perfect for all play styles? I recognize and acknowledge that this one is bad for the pure numbers player. But it's great for my style. But it doesn't change the fact that you've just paid for a book where you need to basically rip out and shred a large section of what you paid for because of the ineptness of the playtesting and editing teams. But again, I can look at the Argent Fist and say "It's perfectly balanced, and yet I could rip these pages out, because I'll never use them." Very few books are going to be 100% useful. When I bought Complete Warrior, I paid for a samurai class I will absolutely never use. In Faiths of Eberron, you paid for the argent fist; I paid for the planar shepherd. My question is if you WOULD use the planar shepherd if the mechanics were slightly different - IE, do you like the idea and simply feel that you can't use it because of the mechanics? If so, then yes, that IS something you have every right to be angry about and I sympathize with you. If, like Aelryinth, you simply don't like the core idea and wouldn't use it whatever the design was, then we're never going to find middle ground. |
| ArcTan09-23-06, 08:08 PM | First of all, Jaela does not have a power that the PC's cannot attain. There is nothing forbidding a PC becoming the Speaker of the Flame...it's just that there is only one at a time. And if a player *did* become the Keeper, it would be horribly unbalanced and have to be very carefully watched and surrounded by RP restrictions to not break the game. (Seriously, bumping someone from level 4 to level 18 all at once, as long as they stay in Flamekeep? That'd make the other players happy.) I don't see how that's not parallel to the Planar Shepherd. |
| The Dreaming Duck09-23-06, 08:14 PM | I know you've stated before that you think "natural" means zero connection between different planes at all, but I do think it's pretty clear this isn't how it works in Eberron. Two words: Manifest zones. Manifest zones are PART of nature. Quoting Planar Shepherds in the Game, "In a world where manifest zones and planar gates are disturbingly common, a character class with the abilty to safely travel and explore in these places becomes very useful." From Sharn to the Greenheart, the planes DO touch life on Eberron and have since the dawn of time. In fact, the giants BREAKING the connection between Eberron and Dal Quor was the unnatural act - one so serious that the dragons destroyed the giant culture rather than let that power be used again. The Gatekeepers may have stopped the incursion from Xoriat, but they didn't eliminate manifest zones of Xoriat: the issue is balance, and the incursion shattered that balance. Planar TRAVEL may not be common, but the planes do affect life on Eberron... as any citizen of Sharn should know. |
| Euangelion09-23-06, 08:37 PM | Not all Fernians do. The Chaotic Good Phoelarchs come from Fernia, after all. Phoelarchs are monstrous humanoids by type, and therefore in Eberron can be (should be?) off any alignment, though chaotic good does fit with their general personality as described in MMIII. However, while phoelarchs are not outsiders, firre eladrin are (and chaotic good to boot, how about that?) and are themselves native to Fernia, according to the ECS. |
| aelryinth09-23-06, 08:44 PM | TDD is also putting words in my mouth, when I've stated my position much more bluntly and openly. Hopefully this will clarify things so he understands it better. I have problems with the NAME of the class. A Planar Shepherd? A shepherd is not an ambassador, negotiator or other tongue wagger. He's a guardian and defender of a flock. Look at the context of the name. He is not a go between. Furthermore, there's implicit superiority implied in the title...the Shepherd is more powerful then his flock, and thus tells them where to go, what to do, and coddles them. And he's going to be Shepherd to a Solar or Balor? It strains all credulity. So we automatically have a problem in that the flavor text simply doesn't fit the class description. Now we get into the whole 'becomes an outsider, first in mind and then in body, and then translates himself to a different plane.' He ends up being no longer even native to Eberron...fine, he's a Japanese citizen now, he's basically renounced his Eberron nativity on a very fundamental level. And none of that implies a shift in loyalties to you? He's an outsider...he can't even relate to us anymore, his perspectives are those of an extraplanar being! A representative of a living ethos! And then they blow the mechanics out of the water. Yeah, sure, you could balance out all the extra wishes...but again, you now have to bend the rules of the entire game for the one character, by adding things to the class that aren't a part of it. ============== As for the whole Speaker of the Flame, he's now the supreme leader of the Church and speaks for the Flame...as long as he goes nowhere and sits in the Cathedral. I assume the other PC's will want to adventure and actually gain levels. It may be swell they have an uber cleric for a friend...but becoming a Speaker basically means a transformation of the campaign from adventuring to Kings and Queens and the like. The qualifying critieria alone (like, being Exalted, for starters) are going to doom attempts to abuse the power with the position. Rules can be made up pretty easy for that sort of thing...the fact that there aren't none at present doesn't mean they couldn't be whipped up. I expect that they are extremely limited, after all. As for the Daughters of Sora Kell...sure you could give the PC's extra powers. Feat, Blood of Sora Kell, prime requisite you are descended from the Uberhag Sora Kell and manifest odd magical ability...and there you go. Great for a Warlock or something. We have half fiends...there's absolutely nothing that says a PC can't be descended from hags. The prophetic PrC could be called Living Plot Device, because that's pretty much what it will amount to...you can't abuse something based on prophecy if the DM doesn't feed you stuff to abuse. And where's my Planar Shepherd of Eberron, eh? That's the plane I chose...I want to make my little flock of Couatl's and Rakshasa's all live in joy and peace with Dragons and mortals. Feh. ===Aelryinth |
| The Dreaming Duck09-23-06, 09:34 PM | I have problems with the NAME of the class. Which personally I find to be a trivial concern. I wouldn't throw out the duskblade just because it doesn't have anything to do with dusk (or for that matter, say, Hide or Move Silently). You didn't say "I wish they'd changed the name", you said "They should have scrapped the class and replaced it with an uber-defender." A shepherd is not an ambassador, negotiator or other tongue wagger. He's a guardian and defender of a flock. But a guardian in MORE than a physical sense. A shepherd is expected to GUIDE his flock. In the present day, "shepherd" is a term often implied to a priest. This "shepherd" isn't supposed to physically protect his flock from actual wolves, he is supposed to guide them and keep them from straying. Even looking to the literal occupation, the duties of a shepherd involve far more than physical defense. He has to find suitable pasture and water. He has to tend the sick and injured. He has to keep them from straying. And again, his presence is likely to be as great a deterrent as his actual physical prowess. The average shepherd with his crook might have troubled fighting a pack of wolves that were are determined to attack - but he may be able to scare them away. The planar shepherd is a shepherd in the same sense as the priest: metaphorical. And as has been pointed out, the inhabitants of BOTH planes are his flock. He is providing guidance, and keeping them from straying. Look at the context of the name. He is not a go between. A priest - a "shepherd" - is a go-between between his "flock" and a higher power. He possesses an understanding they do not and is thus expected to guide them. Likewise, the planar shepherd guides the inhabitants of the planes. Of course, you say he should therefore BE a cleric. But the planar shepherd DOESN'T serve a personified force; like the druid, he respects the concept of nature, specifically as it is embodied in these two planes. He understands the nature of these planes better than the inhabitants, and thus is capable of guiding them. Furthermore, there's implicit superiority implied in the title...the Shepherd is more powerful then his flock, and thus tells them where to go, what to do, and coddles them. And he's going to be Shepherd to a Solar or Balor? Is the pastor more "powerful" than the Delta Force commando in his congregation? No. Could he fight the commando? Of course not. Even taking the literal shepherd, sheep are pretty tough bastards; I wouldn't pick a fight with one. A priest/shepherd isn't "superior"; again, he is a guide. The balor or solar is far more powerful than the (low-level) planar shepherd, but neither balor or solar understands Eberron - and that's where THEY need the planar shepherd. Again, they are ALL his flock, because he needs to show them how they ALL are part of nature. So we automatically have a problem in that the flavor text simply doesn't fit the class description. Assuming by "class description" you mean "class title" and by "the flavor text simply doesn't fit" you mean "my interpretation of the flavor text doesn't fit." And none of that implies a shift in loyalties to you? Given that it's immediately followed by the statement that he will act to defend inhabitants of both planes? No, it doesn't. YOU are reading into things, saying "well, his type changed, so his loyalties must change too." The class description is extremely clear: the character is loyal to BOTH planes, and there's absolutely NOTHING implying that the character in any way turns on his original plane. Indigo is correct. He may be a dual citizen, but he's not an expatriate: it is clearly and specifically stated that he should spend equal time on both planes, that he should be loyal to the inhabitants of both planes, that the chosen plane is a second home. by adding things to the class that aren't a part of it. And my point is that these things ARE a part of it. As a person who likes the class and intends to use it, I see those things as being innate to the purpose of the class: come to understand the plane; work with the inhabitants of the plane; establish the balance of the planes. Again, let's go back to the DMG. The DMG encourages the DM to carefully choose what PrCs to allow in the game. The clear point of this PrC is to allow a PC to explore the planes, develop a relationship with inhabitants of a plane, and make them part of the world. If that's not something you want in your campaign... and if your player, frankly, should be playing a wizard because he just wants some wishes... you shouldn't use the PrC in the first place. The flavor of the class is clear. If you're not going to follow it, you aren't using the class as intended, in which case you shouldn't be using it. Rules can be made up pretty easy for that sort of thing...the fact that there aren't none at present doesn't mean they couldn't be whipped up. Wow, I don't understand where you're going with this at all, or especially how it relates to this discussion. Originally you said "The Planar Shepherd would be great for NPCs, but doesn't work for PCs, and so shouldn't be allowed." But there ARE clear rules for the planar shepherd; all people are arguing about is if they are balanced. If you're willing to allow NPCs to have completely unbalanced abilities as long as they are in some way defined... in other words you don't mind that Jaela has 14 extra levels with no drawbacks as long as she hangs around Flamekeep, as long as it's a feat a PC could take... what's your problem wth the clearly-defined rules of the Planar Shepherd? Besides which, we HAVE stats for Jaela Daran, on page 138 of Five Nations. She's not exalted. She has no special feats or templates. She's simply special. You could MAKE special rules to let a PC do what she does... but at that point you're just making house rules, not "playing 3E as it is meant to be played" (aside from the fact that making house rules IS playing 3E as it is meant to be played!) And where's my Planar Shepherd of Eberron, eh? That's the plane I chose...I want to make my little flock of Couatl's and Rakshasa's all live in joy and peace with Dragons and mortals. All druids are planar shepherds of Eberron. Besides which, Eberron has been described as the place where the planes merge together. As you've said, the planes taken in isolation ARE unbalanced, and Eberron is where they find balance. All planar shepherds are of Eberron AND of one other plane. As such, frankly, it would make sense to allow a planar shepherd to wildshape into a native outsider of Eberron, and yes, it's a flaw of the class that it doesn't suggest that. But you can't choose Eberron as your plane because you are inherently tied to Eberron - the point of this is to be a bridge between Eberron and ANOTHER world. You SHOULD be trying to get the coautls and rakshasas to live in harmony with dragons and mortals, because they are ALL part of Eberron, your home plane; but you also want all four of them to live in harmony with the inhabitants of ANOTHER plane. So "feh" right back atcha. I'm not apologizing for liking the class. The shapechanging ability is as unbalanced as polymorph in general. But I think the intent of the class is perfectly clear, it's the one PrC i find compelling enough to use in my game, and I'll stand by that until Khyber rises from the depths. |
| Euangelion09-23-06, 10:24 PM | All druids are planar shepherds of Eberron. Besides which, Eberron has been described as the place where the planes merge together. As you've said, the planes taken in isolation ARE unbalanced, and Eberron is where they find balance. All planar shepherds are of Eberron AND of one other plane. As such, frankly, it would make sense to allow a planar shepherd to wildshape into a native outsider of Eberron, and yes, it's a flaw of the class that it doesn't suggest that. But you can't choose Eberron as your plane because you are inherently tied to Eberron - the point of this is to be a bridge between Eberron and ANOTHER world. You SHOULD be trying to get the coautls and rakshasas to live in harmony with dragons and mortals, because they are ALL part of Eberron, your home plane; but you also want all four of them to live in harmony with the inhabitants of ANOTHER plane. Which of course was Eberron's role, whether metaphorically or literally, in the cosmic battle between Khyber and Siberys, between fiend and celestial. Right on, DD!! |
| The Dreaming Duck09-23-06, 11:40 PM | Just to make a few things clear: I do not believe that the fact that a DM can choose whether or not to use a PrC excuses poor design. Given that WotC has been reviewing polymorph and is aware of the problems with shapechanging abilities, the wild shape ability of the planar shepherd is very problematic. I like the idea that the planar shepherd can assume the forms of creatures of his chosen plane. However, this ability could have been better balanced, and people are perfectly justified in complaining about it. I am not saying that every DM should be able to handle the difficulties presented by the planar shepherd through story means. Quite the opposite: I'm saying that I can't imaging the class being used in the RPGA because of the complexity of the balance. However, I'm saying that I would have no trouble balancing it and using it in my campaign. I am not saying that YOU should like the planar shepherd... ... I'm telling you why I do. My solutions may not work for you. Then again, they may, and that's why I'm sharing them... this is, after all, a discussion thread. Most posts have focused purely on the negative elements: the difficulty of balancing it. I have never in this thread claimed that the class is well-balanced; I've said that I will use it anyway, and that the idea behind the class is what makes it so compelling to me. By comparison, I find the Sovereign Speaker to be utterly tedious, and would never use it for that reason. If at each level the Sovereign Speaker chose a specific Sovereign and gained both a domain and a specific duty and role in the religion as a result - so there was a clear story significance to being a Sovereign Speaker of Dol Dorn and Aureon, distinctly different from simply being a cleric of the Host (bearing in mind that by the ECS, most clerics of the Host worship the pantheon instead of a single deity) maybe I'd like it. And I can fill in that material myself. But now I'm the one with the wasted pages in the book. And as I said, I don't find the Argent Fist compelling on any level. That's my problem... and that's my point. I don't like the Argent Fist. I DO like the Planar Shepherd. It's not perfectly balanced. It's sloppy design, and people are right to complain about that. But when people complain that this slip-up in design makes the class utterly unusable or say that it shouldn't have been included in the book at all, that's where I need to speak up - because I believe the class IS usable and am glad it was included. I wish it was perfectly balanced, but I'd rather deal with those problems than not have been given the idea in the first place. So, I'm not saying that people are wrong to complain - and I'm certainly not saying that the planar shepherd is suited to every campaign. I think it would be ideal if WotC created prestige classes that were ideally suited to ALL playstyles - perfectly balanced and full of story potential. However, the vast majority are not. My point is that it's very easy to draw attention to those where the mechanics have slipped, but for MY game it's just as serious to have a class like the Sovereign Speaker which is utterly uninspiring from a story perspective. But I recognize that SOME people will love the Sovereign Speaker purely because of the mechanics. Again, I'm just pointing out that the planar shepherd is flawed - but it is the best PrC in the book for my playstyle, so while it's not perfect, neither is it a complete waste of space. You might want to tear those pages out - but I could trade you for my torn out Sovereign Speaker pages, ninja, samurai, and on and on and on. It's a rare book that will be 100% applicable to every campaign. And while the DMG doesn't excuse poor design, it DOES warn you that not everything will be right for your playstyle, and that you should consider that - and NOT simply cram everything in because it exists. If you KNOW the planar wants to be a planar shepherd not because he has any interest in the ethos of the class, but simply because he wants to introducing an unbalanced element that slipped through the radar of the design team into your game, it's your right to simply say "No", and the DMG not only backs you up, but encourages you to do so. Prestige classes are ALL entirely optional, not something any player has a right to use. And as for throwing out a class just because of its name, again, I think the planar shepherd makes far more sense than the duskblade. For that matter, should the swordsage be required to use a sword, because that's the name of the class? I just think that in the grand scheme of things, this is astonishingly trivial. Suggesting a new name for the class - "In my campaign, I'll call it the planar emissary" - is one thing. Suggesting that the entire class should be thrown out and replaced in order to fit one possible interpretation of the name is another thing entirely. |
| ArcTan09-24-06, 02:43 AM | TDD is also putting words in my mouth, when I've stated my position much more bluntly and openly. Hopefully this will clarify things so he understands it better. I have problems with the NAME of the class. A Planar Shepherd? A shepherd is not an ambassador, negotiator or other tongue wagger. He's a guardian and defender of a flock. Look at the context of the name. He is not a go between. Furthermore, there's implicit superiority implied in the title...the Shepherd is more powerful then his flock, and thus tells them where to go, what to do, and coddles them. And he's going to be Shepherd to a Solar or Balor? It strains all credulity. *shrug* "Shepherd" is a synonym for, after all, "pastor", which in the context of Protestant churches means someone who tries to balance the conflicting personalities in his flock and make them all get along more than he's actively defending them from external threats. Shepherds guide and protect their flocks, but they're hardly archetypes of great martial strength and power. The image associated with the word "shepherd" is one of peace, gentleness, nurture, etc. It's not like D&D PrC names make all that much sense anyway, or real-life religious titles are all that perfectly congruous -- linguistic evolution is a funny thing. I still think "Planar Shepherd" is a better name than "Warblade". So we automatically have a problem in that the flavor text simply doesn't fit the class description. So call it a "Planar Ambassador" in your game. That's easier than writing a whole new class. Now we get into the whole 'becomes an outsider, first in mind and then in body, and then translates himself to a different plane.' He ends up being no longer even native to Eberron...fine, he's a Japanese citizen now, he's basically renounced his Eberron nativity on a very fundamental level. And none of that implies a shift in loyalties to you? He's an outsider...he can't even relate to us anymore, his perspectives are those of an extraplanar being! A representative of a living ethos! *sigh* That's because D&D rules don't let you have two Types at once, and D&D has a habit of making capstone abilities involve Type changes. That's *it*. The flavor here trumps your assumptions about what it means to change Type -- if we go by the idea that Eberron is the confluence of all planes, the Material world in that all elemental archetypes and such exist in mixture here (that Eberron is the "real world" and therefore has a Shadow and Ethereal Plane while the Outer Planes do not), then an Extraplanar being is still more "native" to Eberron than an Eberron native is native to the other plane. Beings from other planes can be summoned to Eberron, while we have no evidence that these summoning and calling relationships are natural to other planes at all. That kind of thing. And I would think that the idea he has to retain pro-Eberron values is implicit in the fact that he must retain his Druid base class, and that if he loses his Druidic values he loses his Druid class abilities. It's like why you don't question the goodness of a class that has to be built off of a Paladin. And then they blow the mechanics out of the water. Yeah, sure, you could balance out all the extra wishes...but again, you now have to bend the rules of the entire game for the one character, by adding things to the class that aren't a part of it. Enh. I bend the rules of the game for one character all the time -- after all, in an average campaign he's one person out of, say, five or six, and that gives hiim a very important vote. I don't feel I *have to* bend the rules if I don't want to, but I certainly can, and I probably should if it'll make the game more fun. That's the great thing about D&D -- that we're all making rules for our small groups of friends to have fun rather than trying to create consistent rules that would work on the scale of an MMORPG. As for the whole Speaker of the Flame, he's now the supreme leader of the Church and speaks for the Flame...as long as he goes nowhere and sits in the Cathedral. I assume the other PC's will want to adventure and actually gain levels. It may be swell they have an uber cleric for a friend...but becoming a Speaker basically means a transformation of the campaign from adventuring to Kings and Queens and the like. The qualifying critieria alone (like, being Exalted, for starters) are going to doom attempts to abuse the power with the position. Rules can be made up pretty easy for that sort of thing...the fact that there aren't none at present doesn't mean they couldn't be whipped up. I expect that they are extremely limited, after all. First of all, it's Keeper. The "Speaker of the Flame" is Tira Miron's spirit. Second of all, you're basically saying that in an ordinary D&D game that doesn't use the rules from a book like Dynasties and Demagogues, becoming Keeper of the Flame involves becoming an NPC. This *is* how the DMG and DMG2 say to handle such situations -- if you want to be a successful merchant, a political leader, a wealthy patron of the arts, or whatever, you've just ended the campaign, because the campaign is about adventuring. Face it -- D&D doesn't *prevent* you from doing things like running a campaign about being an administrative bureaucrat, but it does discourage them. It comes out and says things like a PC who becomes a Vampire should become an NPC, probably, or else it'll mess with the campaign; same deal with a PC becoming possessed by a quori spirit full-time, or becoming the Keeper of the Flame. D&D still does, in fact, have the idea that some jobs and some abilities and some templates are for NPCs and some are for PCs. That's why you can't choose to play a Gelatinous Cube. As for the Daughters of Sora Kell...sure you could give the PC's extra powers. Feat, Blood of Sora Kell, prime requisite you are descended from the Uberhag Sora Kell and manifest odd magical ability...and there you go. Great for a Warlock or something. We have half fiends...there's absolutely nothing that says a PC can't be descended from hags. The prophetic PrC could be called Living Plot Device, because that's pretty much what it will amount to...you can't abuse something based on prophecy if the DM doesn't feed you stuff to abuse. In other words, you're talking about DM-fiatted handwavy abilities you can plug into something to make it work -- you make up a feat called "Prophetic Visions" and now he can have prophetic visions that are *all made up by* and *all strictly controlled by* the DM. How is this different from creating the RP-based behavioral restrictions for a Planar Shepherd? It honestly doesn't seem that different to me from any other behavioral restriction, like Paladins' potential to Fall. And where's my Planar Shepherd of Eberron, eh? That's the plane I chose...I want to make my little flock of Couatl's and Rakshasa's all live in joy and peace with Dragons and mortals. You wouldn't be a *Planar* Shepherd, then, because you're not crossing the planes. |
| ArcTan09-24-06, 02:46 AM | And as for throwing out a class just because of its name, again, I think the planar shepherd makes far more sense than the duskblade. For that matter, should the swordsage be required to use a sword, because that's the name of the class? I just think that in the grand scheme of things, this is astonishingly trivial. Suggesting a new name for the class - "In my campaign, I'll call it the planar emissary" - is one thing. Suggesting that the entire class should be thrown out and replaced in order to fit one possible interpretation of the name is another thing entirely. Especially since the "Planar Guardian" class Ael wants to create has already been *done to death a thousand times*. If I had a nickel for every class that was based around the idea of hunting, killing, resisting or warding the "unnatural"... the fact that there's actually a class that *attacks* this idea and subverts it, embracing a balance between natural and "unnatural" or alien, is a good step forward and something I'd like to see more of. Ael can easily *have* his Planar Guardian by simply adapting and reflavoring the Aberration Hunter, Illithid Slayer, Sacred Purifier, Exorcist of the Silver Flame, or *any number* of other things that are about killing things that don't belong. |
| Siran Dunmorgan09-24-06, 01:50 PM | ...if we go by the idea that Eberron is the confluence of all planes, the Material world in that all elemental archetypes and such exist in mixture here (that Eberron is the "real world" and therefore has a Shadow and Ethereal Plane while the Outer Planes do not), then an Extraplanar being is still more "native" to Eberron than an Eberron native is native to the other plane. Beings from other planes can be summoned to Eberron, while we have no evidence that these summoning and calling relationships are natural to other planes at all. That kind of thing.Planes other than Eberron don't have shadow and ethereal planes associated with them? So... shadowdancers or shadowsmiths lose their class abilities while on Thelanis? Etherealness doesn't work on Dal Quor? Look... each of the planes embodies an idea, an aspect of all-that-is. Eberron isn't any different from any of the other planes in the cosmology. The drawing that we have of the other planes "orbiting," with Eberron at the center is as flawed a model of what's actually happening as Medieval maps of the universe that portrayed Earth as the center of all things, and Jerusalem as the center of Earth—and that drawing is the only thing that cues the belief that Eberron occupies a central position in the cosmology. Hellcow himself has stated that from the perspective of any given plane (his example was Syrannia), their plane is the center of the cosmology, and the other planes trace orbits around them. It is certainly never stated that the other planes don't have their own ethereal and shadow counterparts, which is the easiest way to resolve the use of—for instance—shadowdancer abilities on planes other than Eberron, or a quori's ability to possess someone already on Dal Quor. Each of the planes is, in effect, a state of mind given physical existence, an embodiment of some perspective on the universe as a whole. Eberon without the other planes would be incomplete—as would the other planes without Eberron, or each other. The existence of Fernia does not imply that there is no fire on Lamannia. The existence of Risia does not imply that there is no ice on Mabar. And, certainly, the existence of Lamannia does not imply that there are no animals on any of the other planes! Only where the planes stand somewhat in opposition can we speak of exclusivity: there is no peace on Shavarath, just as there is no war on Syrannia. There is no reality on Dal Quor, just as there are no dreams on Eberron [1] With respect to the Planar Shepherd, the text of the class specifies that the Shepherd cannot elect Eberron as their plane of choice: this seems a bit shortsighted, since it's relatively easy to suggest that druids originating elsewhere (Lamannia, for example) would consider Eberron the foreign plane for this purpose, and would indeed be able the assume the form and abilities of—for instance—a rakshasa. There are a few combinations that might be tricky to accomodate, such as a druid native of Fernia becoming a Planar Shepherd of Risia... but of such things are epic tales made. —Siran Dunmorgan [1] No. Really. We have to project to Dal Quor to dream, yes? Colophon: Yes, the class is broken—from the point of view of someone looking at Dungeons & Dragons as a miniatures battle game like HeroScape. And it's possible to abuse it. It's also possible to not abuse it, in much the same way that there are legitimate medical uses for dangerously addictive drugs such as morphine. |
| aelryinth09-24-06, 04:03 PM | A class that watches over interactions between the planes and steps in to prevent abuses of the same is the kind of Planar Shepherd I envision...not some martial hackmaster waiting on a dimensional portal for some intervening outsider to set foot in Eberron to be hacked on. He who keeps the fences up can open the gate or close it, and neighbors can certainly talk to one another. Controllign and moderating the interactions between the planes does not mean go hackwild on every Outsider setting foot in Eberron...that's a Straw Man argument, and quite a misinterpretation of how I envision the duties of the class. My Planar Shepherd knows what side of the fence he's on...but he also knows the land beyond that fence, and the people and the creatures there. he can be a great foe or a great aide, but he's certainly not going to give up the essence of what he is and become something that dwells on the other side. ===Aelryinth |
| AkumaDaimyo09-24-06, 05:25 PM | I notice most people whinning and crying about how powerfull the new PrCs are completely ignore the RP requirements and go straight to the mechanics of the class. They ignore and miss the fact that some of them take MONTHS to achieve and require tests and other such things and lots of responsibilities. In fact I think some of these classes don't even work for adventuring at all due to the responsibilities of the PrC. But people need something to whine about. :rolleyes: |
| Always-Late09-24-06, 05:25 PM | Just for the record, Aelryinth, do you hate the concept of Eldritch Machines?I notice most people whinning and crying about how powerfull the new PrCs are completely ignore the RP requirements and go straight to the mechanics of the class. They ignore and miss the fact that some of them take MONTHS to achieve and require tests and other such things and lots of responsibilities. In fact I think some of these classes don't even work for adventuring at all due to the responsibilities of the PrC. But people need something to whine about. :rolleyes: I love how some people decide that because there are strict RP requirements, incredibly overpowered prestige classes don't matter.. |
| makeshiftwings09-24-06, 05:47 PM | Just for the record, Aelryinth, do you hate the concept of Eldritch Machines? I know this wasn't directed at me, but it sort of bothers me that Eldritch Machine even needed to be printed. I think the mere fact that it was printed is proof that Aerlyinth has a strong point that WotC does expect players to be able to mimic or pick apart anything in the word, ie, the "Everything Must Be Statted" rule. The description of the Eldritch Machine is basically "If you're the DM and you want to do something cool, and some player starts whining that it's not possible for an X level Y to do Z without A, B, and C, then point at this part of the book." The Eldrtich Machine is basically the old "a wizard did it" excuse for things that don't fit into the rules. All DM's should of course know they're free to do whatever they want if they think it will be cool, and don't need to stat everything or follow the mechanics if they don't want to. The fact that we needed to have this re-explained to us in the ECS and given a name so that we can fling it at players who complain that they can't do the same thing is a sign of the average D&D mindset. |
| AkumaDaimyo09-24-06, 06:01 PM | I love how some people decide that because there are strict RP requirements, incredibly overpowered prestige classes don't matter.. I love how some people decide that because they don't understand how strict RP requirments work that they don't stop idiots from getting overpowered prestiege classes...:rolleyes: I also love how they miss that perhaps such PrC really aren't meant for most PCs? You think your companions are gonna wait around for months while you take these really hard tests you might not even pass? you think they aren't going to mind that they waited around to get some uber powerfull PrC on their side only to find out their old friend has new, "more important" priorities than adventuring? Do some more RP and you'll find out just how much strict RP requirements DO matter as far as "overpowered prestige classes." If they aren't used the DM isn't using the prestiege class correctly. |
| (Psi)SeveredHead09-24-06, 08:08 PM | I love how some people decide that because they don't understand how strict RP requirments work that they don't stop idiots from getting overpowered prestiege classes... What is the point of making a PrC available to players if the GM is going to use that method to ban them? Why not just ban the PrC? I also love how they miss that perhaps such PrC really aren't meant for most PCs? Planar Shepherd is broken in the hands of an NPC as well. |
| yrogerg09-24-06, 08:53 PM | Planes other than Eberron don't have shadow and ethereal planes associated with them? So... shadowdancers or shadowsmiths lose their class abilities while on Thelanis? Etherealness doesn't work on Dal Quor? Look... each of the planes embodies an idea, an aspect of all-that-is. Eberron isn't any different from any of the other planes in the cosmology. The drawing that we have of the other planes "orbiting," with Eberron at the center is as flawed a model of what's actually happening as Medieval maps of the universe that portrayed Earth as the center of all things, and Jerusalem as the center of Earth—and that drawing is the only thing that cues the belief that Eberron occupies a central position in the cosmology. Hellcow himself has stated that from the perspective of any given plane (his example was Syrannia), their plane is the center of the cosmology, and the other planes trace orbits around them. It is certainly never stated that the other planes don't have their own ethereal and shadow counterparts, which is the easiest way to resolve the use of—for instance—shadowdancer abilities on planes other than Eberron, or a quori's ability to possess someone already on Dal Quor. Each of the planes is, in effect, a state of mind given physical existence, an embodiment of some perspective on the universe as a whole. Eberon without the other planes would be incomplete—as would the other planes without Eberron, or each other. The existence of Fernia does not imply that there is no fire on Lamannia. The existence of Risia does not imply that there is no ice on Mabar. And, certainly, the existence of Lamannia does not imply that there are no animals on any of the other planes! Only where the planes stand somewhat in opposition can we speak of exclusivity: there is no peace on Shavarath, just as there is no war on Syrannia. There is no reality on Dal Quor, just as there are no dreams on Eberron [1] <snip> —Siran Dunmorgan [1] No. Really. We have to project to Dal Quor to dream, yes? Erm, but re-read the text of that part of the chapter. Projection to Dal Quor (and vice versa) occurs through the Astral plane, which is the only transitive plane that connects Eberron to the planes. ECS page 92 explicitly states that Eberron is the only plane that is coexistant with the Shadow and Ethereal, and that spells like Ethereal Jaunt and Shadow Walk will fail to function on other planes. Honestly, though, Eberron's planes are quite a bit less hazardous than some of the nastier planes in the Great Wheel, so the lack of non-Astral transitive planes is just a bit of an added challenge for planewalkers. Colophon: Yes, the class is broken—from the point of view of someone looking at Dungeons & Dragons as a miniatures battle game like HeroScape. And it's possible to abuse it. It's also possible to not abuse it, in much the same way that there are legitimate medical uses for dangerously addictive drugs such as morphine. I think this is exactly what people who are defending the flavor of the class are arguing. Personally, I'd allow people to use it, but make sure they didn't abuse it, just as I'd allow old-school Polymorph, provided my players didn't use it to turn into Firbolgs and War Trolls. Saying 'no Efreet cheese, and no Dal Quor cheese', and maybe adding some pithy flavor explaining why nobody else does these things, is a lot easier than completely re-writing it as an entirely different class, and it leaves a lot more room for fun than than banning it. |
| AkumaDaimyo09-24-06, 09:15 PM | I don't recall saying to ban the PrC. And it doesn't matter as much if it's broken in the hands of a NPC because the DM gets to roleplay Dragons, Monsters and Gods. The DM can fairly much do what he or she wants. But apparently he can't roleplay this PrC? :rolleyes: |
| The Dreaming Duck09-24-06, 09:45 PM | Planes other than Eberron don't have shadow and ethereal planes associated with them? Whatever Hellcow thinks, this is clearly stated on page 92 of the ECS. However, I'll point out that it's not Eberron that gets the shadow and ethereal plane, it's "the material plane". Essentially, the implication of both the text and the planar map is that both the ethereal plane and plane of shadow are aspects of the material plane, while the other thirteen are located in the astral. So this doesn't invalidate the idea that an archon of Shavarath may believe that the multiverse revolves around Shavarath... but those revolving planes include that wacky three-in-one material/shadow/ethereal plane. Colophon: Yes, the class is broken—from the point of view of someone looking at Dungeons & Dragons as a miniatures battle game like HeroScape. And it's possible to abuse it. It's also possible to not abuse it, in much the same way that there are legitimate medical uses for dangerously addictive drugs such as morphine. Essentially all I've been trying to say. I respect the fact that this class will be terrible for many campaigns; but it's great for mine. |
| The Dreaming Duck09-24-06, 10:24 PM | A representative of a living ethos! Just out of curiousity, has any official source actually described outsiders as "incarnate representatives of a living ethos"? The Monster Manual simply says that an outsider is partially composed of the matter of another plane. The one (semi)official source that comes to mind is Keith Baker's "Eternal Evil" article, which introduces the idea of immortal outsiders and says: In the Eberron Campaign Setting, powerful outsiders stand outside the grip of death. Such an outsider is a manifestation of an idea or a plane. These immortals do not reproduce naturally, but their numbers remain constant. This obviously applies to creatures like solars, eladrins, balors, etc... "powerful" outsiders. But it doesn't apply to ALL outsiders... for example, aasimars or half-fiends, both weak outsiders who are specifically created BY reproduction. Hellcow appears to be positing a sort of conservation of planar energy - you can never kill all the solars, but despite the fact that there have been solars since the dawn of time, there's the same number of solars today as there was then. There aren't little solars, solar families, and so on. Solars aren't simply an alien race, each solar embodies a specific concept, and always will. But aasimars, half-celestials, etc are the result of traffic between the planes. They aren't immortal, and their numbers aren't constant. Sora Kell might conceivably be an immortal being who's existed since the dawn of time, but her half-fiend daughters aren't, and it's not like three other fiends were wiped out of existence when the daughters were born. I'd see the player-character-becoming-an-outsider (whatever the class) as being the equivalent of a half-celestial or half-fiend... a being who becomes infused with the energies of a plane, but not a incarnate representative of the plane like a solar. Among other things, this expressly violates the statement that "their numbers remain constant", and furthermore, if becoming an outsider means becoming IMMORTAL, then that's both something that would be really unbalanced and more importantly, something you'd really need to expressly describe (since the only source I'm aware of is an unclear statement in a magazine). Anyhow, this is actually a question, not a criticism. I like the idea of outsiders as embodiments of the plane. But aside from this magazine article, is there any official source that says this is the case? |
| makeshiftwings09-24-06, 11:07 PM | But for those of you who like the "flavor" of the class, wouldn't you much prefer that it had the same flavor but wasn't broken? All that it would have taken for the class to not be broken was a half hour of playtesting, or a quick proofreading by someone passingly familiar with character optimization or polymorph spells. That's my whole problem. The "flavor" doesn't necessitate to me that an "intermediary to the planes" somehow has to be able to both polymorph while conserving Sp and Su abilities, or be able to inflict planar time and space rules as a spell-like effect. They could have easily made a short list of effects, one for each plane, instead of just saying "You can use the plane's physics", and they could have just let the class be more about summoning/dominating/befriending outsiders rather than polymorphing into them, or at LEAST they could have left out the "plus you get all their Su and Sp abilities" part of the polymorph. None of that is necessary for the flavor of the class. The only reason the mechanics would be necessary as part of the flavor is if the intention of the class was that Planar Shepherds were the most powerful beings in Eberron, weilding godlike power at will. And I'm certain that was not the intention. Combining the fact that this class is the most powerful Eberron class by far with the fluff also damages my view of Eberron. Part of what I like about it is that there aren't supposed to be uber-powerful epic-style NPC's running around saving the world. But now apparently the Greensingers and other druids have a bunch of these ridiculously overpowered shapeshifters running around having tea with angels, pit fiends, daelkyr, and quori. I realize this is a problem with PrC's in general; they need to have ones that work for high-level PC's, so they need to make up some fluff to pretend that there are other groups of high level NPC's in each PrC they come up with, but it strains the credibility of the world to drop a PrC group as powerful as the Planar Shepherds into the game and pretend they're no big deal. And just so people are aware, it's NOT just one or two loopholes. The Efreet Wishes example or the Dal Quor time stop are just two examples. Nearly every outsider has some overwhelmingly powerful ability. Look at the at-will Sp abilities of a Solar. Depending on rule interperetations, you also get their Spell list, making you basically a fully refreshed cleric each time you wild shape. Being able to turn into a Balor is STILL powerful even if your DM doesn't let you sell your free Vorpal Swords. You still get to gate in another Balor each time you shift, as well as getting to Greater Teleport at will all day. It bothers me that apparently no one even thought to glance at the most iconic and common outsiders before putting that ability in there. |
| Siran Dunmorgan09-24-06, 11:24 PM | Erm, but re-read the text of that part of the chapter. Projection to Dal Quor (and vice versa) occurs through the Astral plane, which is the only transitive plane that connects Eberron to the planes. ECS page 92 explicitly states that Eberron is the only plane that is coexistant with the Shadow and Ethereal, and that spells like Ethereal Jaunt and Shadow Walk will fail to function on other planes. Honestly, though, Eberron's planes are quite a bit less hazardous than some of the nastier planes in the Great Wheel, so the lack of non-Astral transitive planes is just a bit of an added challenge for planewalkers. Wow… I guess it's a bad idea to include any of the Shadow Magic classes from Tome of Magic in your plane-walking group, then, since they'll pretty much be experts rather than shadowcasters: their powers derive pretty much entirely from their interaction with the Plane of Shadow. I'd always played it that each of the named planes of Eberron had its own shadow and ethereal planes, separate from the shadow and ethereal planes of the others, so as not to break any class features. Yikes. Much thanks for the correction. —Siran Dunmorgan |
| Always-Late09-24-06, 11:34 PM | I don't recall saying to ban the PrC. And it doesn't matter as much if it's broken in the hands of a NPC because the DM gets to roleplay Dragons, Monsters and Gods. The DM can fairly much do what he or she wants. But apparently he can't roleplay this PrC? :rolleyes:So, it's broken, but it's okay, because it doesn't matter if NPCs are broken? |
| The Dreaming Duck09-24-06, 11:42 PM | But for those of you who like the "flavor" of the class, wouldn't you much prefer that it had the same flavor but wasn't broken? Absolutely, makeshiftwings. In fact, I think I've said exactly that in about half the posts I've made. As I've said before and will say again, the mechanics of the class are flawed and I would prefer it if the class was perfect in ALL aspects. However, a class that has perfect mechanics but crappy flavor is just as worthless to me as a class with broken mechanics and excellent flavor is to you. This class has problems. All I've said from the start is that I'm glad it exists at all. I'd be far happier if it existed and was ALSO balanced. Part of what I like about it is that there aren't supposed to be uber-powerful epic-style NPC's running around saving the world. But now apparently the Greensingers and other druids have a bunch of these ridiculously overpowered shapeshifters running around having tea with angels, pit fiends, daelkyr, and quori. Where is this stated? I just skimmed over the class again - specifically, "planar shepherds in the world" and "organization", and I don't actually see anything implying that ANY planar shepherds with this level of power exist in the world. It's been established that 12th level characters are a BIG deal in Eberron. But in order to have access to the outsider wild shape ability, you have to be at least a 14th-level character. Aside from the sample NPC (who I admit, I think is unnecessarily powerful for Eberron - though even HE doesn't have the outsider wild shape power!), where is there a single planar shepherd who is identified by level? It's implied that there are planar shepherds in the world. It's even stated that some of the most powerful members of the Greensinger sect are planar shepherds. But what does that mean? What do we know of the power level of the Greensingers? The notable Greensingers mentioned in the PGtE include a 12th-level character, a 10th level character, an 8th level character, and a 5th level character... a 5th level character is apparently worth mentioning! Skimming page 102-105 of Faiths of Eberron, I don't see anything implying the existence of higher level characters. So a 13th-level druid/planar shepherd would be the MOST powerful member of the sect (that we know of), not just "among the most powerful." So again, is there anything that clearly states that there are any living characters that actually HAVE the ability to assume the form of an outsider using wildshape? |
| The Dreaming Duck09-24-06, 11:53 PM | So, it's broken, but it's okay, because it doesn't matter if NPCs are broken? While as I've said, *I*'d be willing to allow it as a PC class, I believe the point here is that it doesn't matter if NPCs are broken because a good DM will avoid exploiting the broken ability. If a player has free wishes, a DM needs to come up with a clear solution to prevent this from destroying the game. If an NPC technically SHOULD have the ability to get free wishes but mysteriously chooses not to exploit this poor piece of design, the game is unaffected. The players don't know why the NPC isn't getting lots of wishes - are genie laws at work? Did you change the mechanics of the class? It doesn't matter: the NPC simply isn't using the game-breaking ability, and they don't even know if he possesses it or not. The class isn't called "Fernian Wishmonger". The designer clearly didn't INTEND it to be used as a way for people to get free daily wishes. If the DM chooses to play an NPC without exploiting the loopholes, he's doing what the designer intended - even if the designer failed to live up to our expectations. If it's in the hands of the PCs, the DM needs to be able to solve this problem, explaining the nature and purpose of any restrictions. If it's solely in the hands of NPCs, the DM can choose not to MAKE it a problem in the first place. As the DMG clearly states on page 13, balance is in the hands of the DM - A DM choosing not to use an unbalanced ability possessed by an NPC is doing what is needed to make the game work. It's not a competition between player and DM, it's a cooperative effort, and the players rely on the DM to make balance work. It's an imperfect solution and not the path I'd take, but certainly a valid point. |
| Siran Dunmorgan09-25-06, 12:31 AM | But for those of you who like the "flavor" of the class, wouldn't you much prefer that it had the same flavor but wasn't broken? All that it would have taken for the class to not be broken was a half hour of playtesting, or a quick proofreading by someone passingly familiar with character optimization or polymorph spells. That's my whole problem. The "flavor" doesn't necessitate to me that an "intermediary to the planes" somehow has to be able to both polymorph while conserving Sp and Su abilities, or be able to inflict planar time and space rules as a spell-like effect. They could have easily made a short list of effects, one for each plane, instead of just saying "You can use the plane's physics", and they could have just let the class be more about summoning/dominating/befriending outsiders rather than polymorphing into them, or at LEAST they could have left out the "plus you get all their Su and Sp abilities" part of the polymorph. None of that is necessary for the flavor of the class. The only reason the mechanics would be necessary as part of the flavor is if the intention of the class was that Planar Shepherds were the most powerful beings in Eberron, weilding godlike power at will. And I'm certain that was not the intention. Combining the fact that this class is the most powerful Eberron class by far with the fluff also damages my view of Eberron. Part of what I like about it is that there aren't supposed to be uber-powerful epic-style NPC's running around saving the world. But now apparently the Greensingers and other druids have a bunch of these ridiculously overpowered shapeshifters running around having tea with angels, pit fiends, daelkyr, and quori. I realize this is a problem with PrC's in general; they need to have ones that work for high-level PC's, so they need to make up some fluff to pretend that there are other groups of high level NPC's in each PrC they come up with, but it strains the credibility of the world to drop a PrC group as powerful as the Planar Shepherds into the game and pretend they're no big deal. And just so people are aware, it's NOT just one or two loopholes. The Efreet Wishes example or the Dal Quor time stop are just two examples. Nearly every outsider has some overwhelmingly powerful ability. Look at the at-will Sp abilities of a Solar. Depending on rule interperetations, you also get their Spell list, making you basically a fully refreshed cleric each time you wild shape. Being able to turn into a Balor is STILL powerful even if your DM doesn't let you sell your free Vorpal Swords. You still get to gate in another Balor each time you shift, as well as getting to Greater Teleport at will all day. It bothers me that apparently no one even thought to glance at the most iconic and common outsiders before putting that ability in there.Sure. Those are the primary examples—there's also the ability of a Planar Sheperd of Dolurrh to transform everyone in a 20' radius into a memory-free shell of their former selves, Outsider natives of Dolurrh if they fail a save. Yes, we'd all have been happier with different, more balanced mechanics. [1] I'd personally have been happier with a prestige class for the Greensingers that placed emphasis on their relationship to music and to the fey: the characteristics implied by the name "Greensingers", and by all of the flavor text we've seen up to this point. But it's been a while since we've looked at the credits page of an Eberron book from Wizards of the Coast and seen a "Playtesters" section. It also seems as if every new Eberron book has something about it that seems as if the author of the chapter is simply ignoring some significant history of the setting. [2] I'm tempted to say that it's useless to complain, but it's not: we do need to complain about this sort of thing, and complain some more until it stops happening. Unfortunately, we do also have the Planar Shepherd class as written as an official part of the setting, and it's up to us to make what use of it we will, if any. —Siran Dunmorgan [1] I'd personally have been happier with Faiths of Eberron if the author of the chapter on the Dark Six—and whoever did continuity editing—had remembered that Dol Arrah is a goddess. [2] Five Nations had the Aundair chapter, with the romance between dragonmarked Heirs. Magic of Eberron had the legend of Aeren, where she's suddenly male, the original leader of the rebellion against the giants, and the first of the Deathless. As opposed to female, a leader at the end of the rebellion, and dying thousands of years before the elves figured out how to use the Shae Mordai manifest zone. I'm looking forward to the chapter on Darguun (in a hypothetical Frontiers of Khorvaire), where the "Legend of Jhazaal Dhakaan" speaks of her as male, and as a warrior Emperor leading the struggle against the daelkyr. |
| The Dreaming Duck09-25-06, 01:09 AM | I'd personally have been happier with a prestige class for the Greensingers that placed emphasis on their relationship to music and to the fey: the characteristics implied by the name "Greensingers", and by all of the flavor text we've seen up to this point. For what it's worth, for the Greensingers, I'd have prefered the same thing. I think the planar shepherd is actually a fairly bland PrC for the Greensingers. I think it contradicts what we've been told of the Greensingers in the PGtE and fails to live up to the name "Greensinger" (as long as we're talking about names...) - it doesn't even have Perform as a class skill! To me, this REALLY feels like a class that was supposed to be sect-neutral (especially given the line that says "You may choose to align yourself with an existing sect or create your own") which was screwed onto the Greensingers as an afterthought... or potentially, the Greensinger section of FoE was written in an attempt to justify the planar shepherd. As a Greensinger-only PrC? It utterly fails to capture the mystique that's been built around the sect. But I would rather be given the planar shepherd than PrC with far stronger bonds to the Greensingers. Because frankly, I've never used a Greensinger in my campaign... but as long as I unscrew the "Greensinger only" prerequisite* (I'll come back to this), the planar shepherd gives me a different story for each plane. Again, I want the sulatar messiah, the Cult of the Dragon Below Blighter, the Dal Quor shepherd who walks a crooked line between human and quori (yes, even with the crazy consequences of planar bubble). A class purely devoted to the Greensingers would be interesting, and I have to say, this is not a successful job of creating that class. But the whole reason I DO like this class is because of the range of ideas in can encompass. I'm tempted to say that it's useless to complain, but it's not: we do need to complain about this sort of thing, and complain some more until it stops happening. Again, I agree. This is a flawed class. It would be nice if WotC actually gave us classes that worked on all levels. My continual posting on this subject is because I want WotC to hear MY voice as well - and my issue is that I want classes with versatility and depth as well as solid mechanics. All three things are important to me, and as consumers we deserve all three. It's just that #1 is the one that is the most obvious, so when I feel a class has done a good job in the other categories, I feel obliged to point it out. I'd personally have been happier with Faiths of Eberron if the author of the chapter on the Dark Six—and whoever did continuity editing—had remembered that Dol Arrah is a goddess. Yes, that is pretty appalling. ...as long as I unscrew the "Greensinger only" prerequisite Hey! I thought I was defending this class! What's with this "changing the rules" thing? From the start I've said the class was flawed. I've also pointed out that the DMG advises you to make changes if it suits the needs of your campaign, and to choose what PrCs to add to the game. I find that this class inspires many stories for me... but not stories having to do with the Greensingers. So yes, I DO advocate removing this restriction. I think it's a weak restriction that feels like it was added on at the end of the design and which is not justified by the design... and which is, in fact, at odds with some of the flavor. The Greensingers have always been defined as having strong ties to Thelanis. Even these Nightbringers are linked to Mabar. As a class, the planar shepherd can be applied to any plane, so yes, I will make this change. It's not a perfect class. The balance is off, and the Greensinger link is contrived. If you're listening, WotC, please do a better job next time. However, even with these flaws the class has given me ideas for adventures, and I'm far happier to have it than, say, the Sovereign Speaker. |
| ArcTan09-25-06, 03:03 AM | Planes other than Eberron don't have shadow and ethereal planes associated with them? Nope. Not if you look at the little map of the planes in the ECS. And if you follow the default rules of the Manual of the Planes, which says that the non-Material (Inner and Outer) Planes are not directly connected to the Ethereal Plane or the Plane of Shadow. Partly it helps reinforce the idea of the Astral as the only "ultimate" Transitive Plane through which you can go anywhere. Partly it helps reinforce the idea that the Material Plane is special. And you can mess with it if you want -- MotP provides rules for using the Deep Ethereal and such to make it possible to cross the Ethereal to other planes. So... shadowdancers or shadowsmiths lose their class abilities while on Thelanis? It depends on how you think those classes' abilities work. Not all of them directly reference the Plane of Shadow, but the ones that do, yeah, would stop working. Etherealness doesn't work on Dal Quor? By default, yes. Look... each of the planes embodies an idea, an aspect of all-that-is. Eberron isn't any different from any of the other planes in the cosmology. The drawing that we have of the other planes "orbiting," with Eberron at the center is as flawed a model of what's actually happening as Medieval maps of the universe that portrayed Earth as the center of all things, and Jerusalem as the center of Earth—and that drawing is the only thing that cues the belief that Eberron occupies a central position in the cosmology. Hellcow himself has stated that from the perspective of any given plane (his example was Syrannia), their plane is the center of the cosmology, and the other planes trace orbits around them. Enh. Hellcow has also said that the Material Plane of Eberron is still defined as the plane where all things are mixed. Syranians don't consider themselves superior to Eberronians because they think Syrania is "normal" and Eberron unnusually evil -- they consider themselves superior because Syrania is pure and perfect good, while Eberron is an imperfect mix of good with corruption. The Outer Planes think of Eberron as less important than themselves, and they may be right, but that doesn't mean that Eberron still isn't a Prime world and the Outer Planes Outer Planes by the rules of MotP. It is certainly never stated that the other planes don't have their own ethereal and shadow counterparts, which is the easiest way to resolve the use of—for instance—shadowdancer abilities on planes other than Eberron, or a quori's ability to possess someone already on Dal Quor. It's more or less implied, in that this is a rule grandfathered in from MotP, and the ECS never contradicts it, and even gives us a little picture showing it to be the case. Each of the planes is, in effect, a state of mind given physical existence, an embodiment of some perspective on the universe as a whole. Eberon without the other planes would be incomplete—as would the other planes without Eberron, or each other. The existence of Fernia does not imply that there is no fire on Lamannia. The existence of Risia does not imply that there is no ice on Mabar. And, certainly, the existence of Lamannia does not imply that there are no animals on any of the other planes! Well, we don't know for sure what exists where and what doesn't. It's a fair bet that stuff that's strongly implied doesn't exist on a plane probably doesn't -- i.e. no animals on Syrania, for instance. Only where the planes stand somewhat in opposition can we speak of exclusivity: there is no peace on Shavarath, just as there is no war on Syrannia. There is no reality on Dal Quor, just as there are no dreams on Eberron [1] With respect to the Planar Shepherd, the text of the class specifies that the Shepherd cannot elect Eberron as their plane of choice: this seems a bit shortsighted, since it's relatively easy to suggest that druids originating elsewhere (Lamannia, for example) would consider Eberron the foreign plane for this purpose, and would indeed be able the assume the form and abilities of—for instance—a rakshasa. But the whole idea of a Druid seems tied to the one plane that exists to be a balance between other planes. At the very least, I find it quite hard to imagine how a Syranian angel could be a Druid in the parameters we've been given for Druids in D&D. Even a Druid of Lamannia is hard to imagine, since it seems that the religious teachings one practices to become a Druid are innate to inhabitants of Lamannia and not something wielded as a form of magic. (You have lycanthropes who just *are* lycanthropes rather than learning Wild Shape, you have djinn, you have animals of various kinds -- where do you have the ordinary sentient races that are the source of Druids in Eberron?) |
| AkumaDaimyo09-25-06, 03:30 AM | Dreaming Duck? LOL. Thats cute. Its the Quackori? ;-) |
| Violatrix09-25-06, 03:43 AM | We're currently running an Eldeen campaign, and when Faiths was released, one of my players jumped on Planar Sheperd. She had been considering eventually moving into Horizon Walker, but this PrC fit her concept better, so I allowed it. Our game hasn't imploded, broken down or otherwise become unworkable, and our druid isn't walking around as some uber-outsider 24/7. Though I'm blessed with players who are good concept roleplayers, mechanically in practice the PrC isn't as doom and gloom as I'm reading in people's theories. We have a Planar Sheperd, she's rather advanced (we've played often lately), and everything is peachy from a mechanical standpoint. There is one specific thing which bears mentioning with regard to the PrC as it fits in with Eberron druid culture though, and it was a guideline I provided to my player. Of all the sects in Eberron, only two have what could be called a reasonable connection to an outer plane: the Greensingers and the (recently introduced) Nightbringers. Greensingers are fluffed to have connections to Thelanis, while Nightbringers are all about Mabar. It would be a ridiculous stretch for a player to argue otherwise and select a different plane, since it should be assumed that if they're playing a sect druid, they hold to the values and interests of that sect beyond the lay members. Some people might feel that the sect requirement was tacked on to the PrC, but honestly, what other sects currently detailed in the setting does it even passably fit with? Greensingers and Nightbringers are also comparitively tiny sects, and very geographically localized. If a PC wants to have a planar sheperd who's out adventuring far from home on the Material Plane, they'd better have an absolutely immaculate reason to back it up. On uber druids wandering the Material Plane, our reasoning is rather simple: if they don't have to, they don't. A druid so deeply connected to an alternate plane that they become a planar sheperd is likely going to be spending as much time on that plane as they can. Nothing states that epic sheperds aren't currently living happy lives on any of the many outer planes. It's yet another control which allows for the presence of high-level NPCs in Eberron without having them be a recognizable or known presence. |
| Shady31409-25-06, 04:42 AM | Personally I felt the Druid Section of FoE was by far the weakest chapter in the entire book. It will be undergoing massive editing for use by me in my campaign so I am not surprised the PE is such an awkward, uninspiring, mechanically flawed class. |
| makeshiftwings09-25-06, 05:24 AM | Absolutely, makeshiftwings. In fact, I think I've said exactly that in about half the posts I've made. As I've said before and will say again, the mechanics of the class are flawed and I would prefer it if the class was perfect in ALL aspects. However, a class that has perfect mechanics but crappy flavor is just as worthless to me as a class with broken mechanics and excellent flavor is to you. This class has problems. All I've said from the start is that I'm glad it exists at all. I'd be far happier if it existed and was ALSO balanced. Ok, I see what you're saying. Personally, I think the fluff of the class isn't particularly original, but I can accept that it's a cool idea for a sect of druids. But you seem to be excusing the broken mechanics because you think the fluff is good. It doesn't have to be a tradeoff; it could be fixed by just having one intern do a playtesting run or a brief proofread for balance issues. But, as Siran said, there are no playtesters at all listed in the credits. I'm fairly certain that they had each chapter done completely by a different author, and then not a single person looked over the book for balance issues before sending it to press, and this is pretty poor treatment by the richest and most succesful RPG company in the world. The more people defend mistakes by claiming "it's not such a big deal", the more WotC will think it's ok to pump out books without anyone proofreading them. Faiths of Eberron even had typos and grammatical mistakes on the full page art spreads where there are like one or two sentences. That's really shoddy work; I think we deserve better. |
| Euangelion09-25-06, 08:38 AM | Only where the planes stand somewhat in opposition can we speak of exclusivity: there is no peace on Shavarath, just as there is no war on Syrannia. This is a bit off-topic, but while Syrania may be a plane of peace, by their description in the MM and FF, angels are all consumate warriors. |
| ArcTan09-25-06, 12:27 PM | This is a bit off-topic, but while Syrania may be a plane of peace, by their description in the MM and FF, angels are all consumate warriors. OTOH, since Syrania's description says it has no population other than Angels, and since Angels are all good-aligned and strictly barred from fighting each other and exist in a peaceful, utopian hierarchy, it's hard to see what the Angels fight. We can assume they must at times leave Syrania to fight something. And that there is a natural process of exposure to ideas from other planes that leads some of them to become Radiant Idols (who are, in their own twisted and evil way, a kind of Syranian "Planar Shepherd" for Eberron). We just don't know how yet. |
| Euangelion09-25-06, 12:41 PM | It's a chicken and egg thing, except that we know which came first (let's say the egg, which represents the MM), but if the chicken (the ECS) had come first, angels would probably look a lot different than they do. There's a similar thing between S:CoT and FoE. If FoE had been written first, then we'd see a lot more temples to the SH as a whole in Sharn than we do in S:CoT. But the (paraphrasing and using hyperbole) "vast majority of the Vassals worship the SH as a whole and only the freeks concentrate on one of the sovereigns" thing in FoE and PGtE is definately an evolution in the concept of the SH. Again, the Planar Shepherd and the Greensingers are yet another one of those evolutions. I'm not saying that concepts shouldn't evolve as the Eberron setting is developed. I just don't think that in this particular instance that the changes to the Greensingers were organic and/or necessary. The concept of the Planar Shepherds should have been either included in the ECS from the beginning (as a seperate druidic sect) or in an Eberron Planar Handbook-type sourcebook, where the relationship of the class to all of the planes would probably have been more thought out than it was in this case. Oh well. Coulda, woulda, shoulda. |
| ccerose09-25-06, 04:13 PM | I just wanted to say thank you for such a lively and entertaining discussion. |
| AkumaDaimyo09-25-06, 05:58 PM | So, it's broken, but it's okay, because it doesn't matter if NPCs are broken? Pretty much considering the DM can play what he wants, when he wants, how he wants. A DM can take a Kolbold and give it "ungoldy powerz of phat pwnage" if he wants. You think he needs a PrC to do broken stuff? lol |
| The White Sorcerer09-25-06, 06:18 PM | wacky three-in-one material/shadow/ethereal plane. Just a random thought: Material=Eberron, Ethereal=Siberys, Shadow=Khyber? EDIT: Another random thought: Random Thought would make an awesome American Indian name. |
| Hellcow09-25-06, 06:18 PM | But the (paraphrasing and using hyperbole) "vast majority of the Vassals worship the SH as a whole and only the freeks concentrate on one of the sovereigns" thing in FoE and PGtE is definately an evolution in the concept of the SH. Actually, Euangelion, it's always been my view of the SH. If you look on page 68 of the ECS, it says "Most people revere the Host as a whole pantheon, offering prayers to different deities in different situations. Even clerics are often devoted to the entire Host rather than to a specific patron." Page 24 of Sharn notes that the four temple districts "all contain great houses of worship dedicated to the Sovereign Host (as a pantheon)", and High Priest Pthaso Mogan leads services to the Host as a whole. There are many shrines to individual Sovereigns - including, for example, Daca's Watch* - but these aren't intended to primarily cater to disciples. Rather, when you are seeking the blessing of a specific god for an endeavor that falls under his dominion - for example, asking Kol Korran for aid in a business transaction - you may go to his shrine. But you may attend a service at a shrine of Olladra the next day, when you want to celebrate your good fortune. If it's not clear in the early books, it's because the Host itself isn't covered in great detail. But the idea of most people worshipping the Host as a whole - and even weaving the Dark Six into their prayers when appropriate - was certainly there from the start. --------------- *As a side note, Daca embodies the "accident" method described in "Coming to the Faith" (page 14 of FoE) - she doesn't claim to be a priestess of Boldrei, but others consider her to be blessed by the goddess. |
| aelryinth09-25-06, 07:36 PM | Just out of curiousity, has any official source actually described outsiders as "incarnate representatives of a living ethos"? The Monster Manual simply says that an outsider is partially composed of the matter of another plane. The one (semi)official source that comes to mind is Keith Baker's "Eternal Evil" article, which introduces the idea of immortal outsiders and says: This obviously applies to creatures like solars, eladrins, balors, etc... "powerful" outsiders. But it doesn't apply to ALL outsiders... for example, aasimars or half-fiends, both weak outsiders who are specifically created BY reproduction. Hellcow appears to be positing a sort of conservation of planar energy - you can never kill all the solars, but despite the fact that there have been solars since the dawn of time, there's the same number of solars today as there was then. There aren't little solars, solar families, and so on. Solars aren't simply an alien race, each solar embodies a specific concept, and always will. But aasimars, half-celestials, etc are the result of traffic between the planes. They aren't immortal, and their numbers aren't constant. Sora Kell might conceivably be an immortal being who's existed since the dawn of time, but her half-fiend daughters aren't, and it's not like three other fiends were wiped out of existence when the daughters were born. I'd see the player-character-becoming-an-outsider (whatever the class) as being the equivalent of a half-celestial or half-fiend... a being who becomes infused with the energies of a plane, but not a incarnate representative of the plane like a solar. Among other things, this expressly violates the statement that "their numbers remain constant", and furthermore, if becoming an outsider means becoming IMMORTAL, then that's both something that would be really unbalanced and more importantly, something you'd really need to expressly describe (since the only source I'm aware of is an unclear statement in a magazine). Anyhow, this is actually a question, not a criticism. I like the idea of outsiders as embodiments of the plane. But aside from this magazine article, is there any official source that says this is the case? The whole view on Eberronian Outsiders are that they are living incarnations of a specific ethos. The succubi on Hellcow's site is a Spirit of Murder. There's spirits of law, hope, joy, duty yada yada yada. Outsiders exist in a set number...powerful and weak. If a weak one dies (like, say, a rebellious quori) they are simply reincarnated from the plane itself as a new member of the species (and the Dreaming Dark makes sure they are properly brainwas- er, brought into the fold). If they are powerful enough, they might remember who they were and their 'old' name. If they are really powerful, they just come back. -------------------- Eldritch Machines are simply a wondrous device with Wish as the empowering magic. You can even calculate the cost for them. They exist because you can't always easily shoe horn powerful magical effects into any given spell...a device that animates all the dead for miles around and draws them to the caster? Well, a mere Animate Dead isn't going to do the job. What about a device that grants you utter control over all Warforged nearby? That turns a coterminous zone into a rip/merger of the planes? Since there's no spell that does these powerful effects, you substitute the infinitely adaptable wish spell, pay the required gold and xp, and you can build it. Since they are largely an NPC tool, you handwave away the cost and xp during construction. Due to costs and time, PC's generally won't have the resources to build one until they are EPic, anyways...at which time you have Epic magic, which does the same thing, only is more abuseable. ===Aelryinth |
| Hellcow09-25-06, 08:03 PM | The whole view on Eberronian Outsiders are that they are living incarnations of a specific ethos. The succubi on Hellcow's site is a Spirit of Murder. Yes, but my website isn't an official source. Yes, it is my opinion that powerful outsiders are living symbols and representations of the planes, but what Dreaming Duck has asked is whether that idea is stated in an official source. To the best of my knowledge, I'm the only Eberron designer that has clearly stated this, and then only in the Dragon article. If I have a chance, I'll certainly put it in a sourcebook. But until that happens, there's the chance another designer will say something completely different. Aelryinth is correct that even weak outsiders - in terms of hit dice - can be part of the immortal energy of the plane. Tsucora and tsoreva quori are part of il-Lashtavar just as the kalaraq are, and there are a set number of tsoreva... but yes, the weaker tsoreva will have none of the memories of its predecessor when it is reborn. However, I do see a difference between outsiders that are created by the planes and outsiders that are created through some form of intercourse between creatures. Outsiders noted as being affected by age or experience are likely to fall into this category - for example, barghests, which "whelp". So I'd personally throw aasimars, tieflings, half-fiends, half-celestials, barghests, salamanders (salamander reproduction is described in the MM), and similar spirits as creatures with the outsider type yet which are not immortal embodiments of ideas. Another factor I would add in as a DM is whether the creature can gain experience. The solar who is the Keeper of Hope has existed since the dawn of Syrania. If he is killed, a new Keeper of Hope will soon emerge, of similar power to the last. His abilities are the abilities of the Keeper of Hope, not gained through personal experience. By comparison, the aasimar is far more like a human; his knowledge and abilities are developed over time. He starts weak, but may have potential the solar will never reach. Likewise, with the quori, an Inspired HOST may gain experience... but the kalaraq quori may go through ten hosts with no change in the spirit. The Daughters of Sora Kell are another good example. As half-fiends, they have the outsider type. But they were born in this age, and if they are killed, they will not reincarnate. Sora Kell may be truly eternal. Her daughters may be immune to the ravages of time... but they are not actually immortal. And in my opinion, they ARE her daughters; at one point they were actually children, and they have grown into their power. The truly immortal spirits come into existence which knowledge and power intact. The soldiers of Shavarath don't need training camps; they are embodiments of war, and are born ready for the battle. In any case, I would say that player characters who become outsiders are much like half-celestials or aasimars. They gain the type, but they don't suddenly gain the innate attachment to the plane that creates an immortal outsider. The immortal outsiders are truly set in number; PC outsiders can temporarily shift things, but will not permanently alter the energy of the planes. But of course, that's just MY opinion, and even I may change my mind if I am ever in a position to write something like "Planes of Eberron." |
| yrogerg09-25-06, 08:53 PM | Yes, but my website isn't an official source. Yes, it is my opinion that powerful outsiders are living symbols and representations of the planes, but what Dreaming Duck has asked is whether that idea is stated in an official source. To the best of my knowledge, I'm the only Eberron designer that has clearly stated this, and then only in the Dragon article. If I have a chance, I'll certainly put it in a sourcebook. But until that happens, there's the chance another designer will say something completely different. Aelryinth is correct that even weak outsiders - in terms of hit dice - can be part of the immortal energy of the plane. Tsucora and tsoreva quori are part of il-Lashtavar just as the kalaraq are, and there are a set number of tsoreva... but yes, the weaker tsoreva will have none of the memories of its predecessor when it is reborn. However, I do see a difference between outsiders that are created by the planes and outsiders that are created through some form of intercourse between creatures. Outsiders noted as being affected by age or experience are likely to fall into this category - for example, barghests, which "whelp". So I'd personally throw aasimars, tieflings, half-fiends, half-celestials, barghests, salamanders (salamander reproduction is described in the MM), and similar spirits as creatures with the outsider type yet which are not immortal embodiments of ideas. Another factor I would add in as a DM is whether the creature can gain experience. The solar who is the Keeper of Hope has existed since the dawn of Syrania. If he is killed, a new Keeper of Hope will soon emerge, of similar power to the last. His abilities are the abilities of the Keeper of Hope, not gained through personal experience. By comparison, the aasimar is far more like a human; his knowledge and abilities are developed over time. He starts weak, but may have potential the solar will never reach. Likewise, with the quori, an Inspired HOST may gain experience... but the kalaraq quori may go through ten hosts with no change in the spirit. The Daughters of Sora Kell are another good example. As half-fiends, they have the outsider type. But they were born in this age, and if they are killed, they will not reincarnate. Sora Kell may be truly eternal. Her daughters may be immune to the ravages of time... but they are not actually immortal. And in my opinion, they ARE her daughters; at one point they were actually children, and they have grown into their power. The truly immortal spirits come into existence which knowledge and power intact. The soldiers of Shavarath don't need training camps; they are embodiments of war, and are born ready for the battle. In any case, I would say that player characters who become outsiders are much like half-celestials or aasimars. They gain the type, but they don't suddenly gain the innate attachment to the plane that creates an immortal outsider. The immortal outsiders are truly set in number; PC outsiders can temporarily shift things, but will not permanently alter the energy of the planes. But of course, that's just MY opinion, and even I may change my mind if I am ever in a position to write something like "Planes of Eberron." I like this idea a lot, and reading this just inspired me to modify it a bit, borrowing from Neil Gaiman's Sandman series in the process. I would say, when a pure outsider is destroyed, and is reborn, he is the same, and he isn't. The idea he represents is preserved, his form and powers are preserved, but on some fundamental level, he *is* different. When Dream is reborn at the end of the series, he's no longer Morpheus, but he's still Dream. And he's changed, but in many ways, he *is* the same. He is able to restore his realm, almost-fully, IIRC. I think I'll incorporate that into my conception of Eberron outsiders, and I think it might also explain why the Quori *might* not be completely sure that killing a Quori and allowing it to re-form would wholly change its personality, but at the same time, it also provides outsiders a reason to still fear death, and seek to avoid it. On the other hand, a PS's outsider abilities would pretty much be born out of the plane's influence, more like the planetouched in my world, and divorced from this cycle of rebirth. I dunno, it's not a fully formed idea yet, because it just occurred to me. But the Endless are a good starting-point, I think. |
| ArcTan09-25-06, 11:25 PM | I like this idea a lot, and reading this just inspired me to modify it a bit, borrowing from Neil Gaiman's Sandman series in the process. I would say, when a pure outsider is destroyed, and is reborn, he is the same, and he isn't. The idea he represents is preserved, his form and powers are preserved, but on some fundamental level, he *is* different. When Dream is reborn at the end of the series, he's no longer Morpheus, but he's still Dream. And he's changed, but in many ways, he *is* the same. He is able to restore his realm, almost-fully, IIRC. I think I'll incorporate that into my conception of Eberron outsiders, and I think it might also explain why the Quori *might* not be completely sure that killing a Quori and allowing it to re-form would wholly change its personality, but at the same time, it also provides outsiders a reason to still fear death, and seek to avoid it. On the other hand, a PS's outsider abilities would pretty much be born out of the plane's influence, more like the planetouched in my world, and divorced from this cycle of rebirth. I dunno, it's not a fully formed idea yet, because it just occurred to me. But the Endless are a good starting-point, I think. An analogy others might be familiar with would be Time Lords and their regenerations from Dr. Who. Of course, they have to worry about being able to regenerate only a limited number of times, but even with that aside dying and regenerating is hardly pleasant for the Doctor, and it really is one person dying and another taking his place. |
| Hellcow09-25-06, 11:37 PM | An analogy others might be familiar with would be Time Lords and their regenerations from Dr. Who. Both the Endless and the Doctor are excellent examples. The article in Dragon #337 says "Powerful spirits... can draw on the memories of their predecessors. More often than not, they maintain the same name as their predecessor, although their may be noticable changes in personality or mannerisms." Even if there will always be a symbol of Hope, that doesn't mean that death is a trivial thing to the solar that holds that position - at the same time, he knows that he will always exist in some form, and has a very different outlook on death than a mortal. |
| Euangelion09-27-06, 12:59 AM | Actually, Euangelion, it's always been my view of the SH. Okay, fair enough, but I still think that there's a difference between simply stating that some SH clerics are devoted to the whole pantheon while others are devoted to a single patron on one hand, while on the other hand asserting that those clerics who are devoted to a single patron are often (usually?) seen as weird and suspect by the majority of the followers of the SH. I'm sure there's a number of PC clerics of Dol Arrah who would be startled to discover that (contrary to their experiences in Eberron before FoE) most followers of the SH are uncomfortable with their focused devotion to the Lady of the Sun! (But let it be known that I think this layer of tension within the Vassals of the SH is a good and healthy thing for the setting.) |
| Euangelion10-02-06, 09:34 AM | When I make a mistake, I admit it. Regarding my earlier assertions that there was no indication that the Greensingers had any interest in any other plane besides Thelanis, I'll share this quote I noticed this morning while looking over the Greensingers section of PGtE: "The lords of Thelanis draw courtiers and entertainers from Eberron, and many Greensingers spend time in the halls of the Faerie Court before returning to Eberron to act as ambassadors, servants, and spies for the fey lords. These individuals can serve as guides to Thelanis (and perhaps other planes), but they cannot always be trusted; their motives are as mysterious as the fey themselves." (italics added) Sorry Ari, Jennifer, and C.A.! :embarrass |