General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
I could see the Assassin being almost a Leader/Striker then anything. The Assassin can influence/trick enemies using his appearance altering, if he himself can move through walls then perhaps he can move enemies and or allies as well, the ability to manipulate shadows could cover allies and give them combat advantage and such, or blind enemies.
I could see the fluff/concept of the Assassin moving around the idea that he shoves aside/manipulates enemies to force them aside so he can focus on his primary assassination target.
__________________ Secret Member of... *blink, blink* Damn you amnesia!
Diablo2 also had the assassin class, so I wouldn't be too worried about parental backlash. Apparently, we can get away with a fair amount of gore and violence so long as there is no RA'rated stuff. A hundred and one different ways of killing someone? No problem. A little extra cleavage and everyone is up in arms.
"Assassin" conjures up the image of the gentleman-mercenary, the dapper intellectual, the brilliant infiltrator well-dressed in black clothes who charges a high premium for his services in eliminating the wealthy and powerful. No lock can keep him out, and no guards will hear him coming. He slays kings.
"Ninja" conjures up the image of the illusionist-murderer, a creature of the night and magic, whose athletic prowess defines her skill, speed, and stealth, and whose supernatural powers render her a fearsome bogey, a night-terror for all who hear of those she slays in their sleep.
I suppose. But that's not how I imagine either. I suppose it's in part because I've never thought of ninjas as magical or assassins as particularly gentlemanly. When I think of assassins I think of black-robed killers who kill others for a profit, a cause, or out of loyalty to a lord.
When I think of ninjas... I think of basically the same thing. Except they're using a katana instead of a dagger or short sword.
Again, it comes off to me more like a matter of flavor than mechanics. I guess I can see why others might see it differently. But a "ninja" or "samurai" class just rings wrong to me somehow.
PHB had dudes who get their power from devils. The game revolves around killing things. C'mon now.
I don't know. Adventurers generally need an excuse to kill things.
A fighter can fight for a noble cause and even an infernalock can be "a devil-touched hunter using infernal spells to eliminate evil" (phb1).
An assassin commits murders. I guess he could do that to fight evil too but the word has a strong real-world negative connotation. I think this is why thieves were renamed too.
Say a kid asks "Mum, can I have this book? I want to play a warlock". Unless she's some religious nutcase, the mother's reaction will probably be "...a what? is it like some kind of wizard? sigh..."
I think "I want to play an assassin" will arouse more concrete concerns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Runestar
Diablo2 also had the assassin class, so I wouldn't be too worried about parental backlash. Apparently, we can get away with a fair amount of gore and violence so long as there is no RA'rated stuff. A hundred and one different ways of killing someone? No problem. A little extra cleavage and everyone is up in arms.
Diablo2 was rated 16+ in France, but no one sues over wardrobe malfunctions here
__________________
_ Ceterum censeo the encounter/daily power system is an unholy blight upon D&Ddom
5e can't come soon enough
Last edited by lutecius; 2nd June 2009 at 03:05 PM..
An assassin player class may also be a bit too controversial for a book aimed in part at young gamers. I don't know the ddi terms of agreement but I assume the average subscriber is somewhat older.
At any rate, the books' default assumption so far is that PCs are the good guys.
Well, it requires a credit card - do underagers get credit cards in the US and thus can use them in a contract with WotC, or is it technically their parents that would be the subscribers?
On second thought:
Besides the Warlock, the Avenger also has some "morally questionable" fluff behind it. The Avenger basically is already an Assassin - but one that murders in the name of his god. The Avenger seems to be one of the classes that is using his powers with the explicit purpose of killing someone, not to achieve any other goals. (A Rogue might be killing because he's doing illegal things and people will try to stop him. A Paladin kills because he protects the weak and so on).
Thoughts of the Arch Chancellor - My weblog on EN World - containing game related material, like: house rules, design theories, reviews, play reports, adventure ideas
Secret Member of <Think we would just hide our secret with a spoiler tag, eh?>
Last edited by Mustrum_Ridcully; 2nd June 2009 at 11:06 AM..
I think the issue with assassin is that, as others have said, assassins go out and murder people. It's much different from all the other classes which go out and smite evil monsters. In a game that's very centered on GOOOOOOOD VS EEEEEEEEEVIL! I'm wondering where the assassin lies. Especially since there's no alignment restrictions.
__________________ Psionics are too sci-fi, not like the traditional method of spell casting that has existed only in D&D, involves research, laboratory work, and formulas, and was cribbed directly from a series of science fiction novels. I mean, come on, calling forth the power to alter the world from your own center of will? That's not magical in the slightest! Not at all like my wizard's spell "Telepathy!"
I think the issue with assassin is that, as others have said, assassins go out and murder people. It's much different from all the other classes which go out and smite evil monsters. In a game that's very centered on GOOOOOOOD VS EEEEEEEEEVIL! I'm wondering where the assassin lies. Especially since there's no alignment restrictions.
It lies whereever the player wishes it to lie. As you said there are no alignment restrictions so it is up to the player to come up with his background and motivations.
I dont see this being a big issue as 3e had the assassin PRC and there was no trouble.
__________________ Pablo El Vagabundo
"Mercy!? You want MERCY? I'M CHAOTIC NEUTRAL!!!"
Yeah remember that the killing of humans and other intelligent life forms for the purpose of profit is held to be the antithesis of weal....
...some time in the last 30 odd years I figured out what that meant.
And to me that says 'adventurer'...
I'll stick with the Dragon article that interpreted Robin Hood as an Assassin.
It lies whereever the player wishes it to lie. As you said there are no alignment restrictions so it is up to the player to come up with his background and motivations.
I dont see this being a big issue as 3e had the assassin PRC and there was no trouble.
3e assassin was evil only ;p
__________________ Psionics are too sci-fi, not like the traditional method of spell casting that has existed only in D&D, involves research, laboratory work, and formulas, and was cribbed directly from a series of science fiction novels. I mean, come on, calling forth the power to alter the world from your own center of will? That's not magical in the slightest! Not at all like my wizard's spell "Telepathy!"
I suppose. But that's not how I imagine either. I suppose it's in part because I've never thought of ninjas as magical or assassins as particularly gentlemanly. When I think of assassins I think of black-robed killers who kill others for a profit, a cause, or out of loyalty to a lord.
When I think of ninjas... I think of basically the same thing. Except they're using a katana instead of a dagger or short sword.
Thanks to a steady supply of anime, the media depiction of ninja, and what various people call to mind when the term is brought up, has drifted a bit from the old depiction from bad 80's ninja movies. When people think ninja, they tend to think about people leaping from tree to tree, feet a blur when they run, smoke bombs, mystical powers, and shuriken/kunai everywhere. They're more like wuxia style fighters focusing on ranged, throwing weapons in the common depictions, these days.
You say assassin, and people tend to think about more...mundane powers and feats. Ninja doesnt seem to have the same stigma attached to it as assassin does either.
Ever since I saw the cover for PH3 with the minotaur as a player race I was guessing Dragonlance. I am stoked by this (do kind of wish for Dark Sun still but we can't have everything. Loved playing Dragonlance as a child)
I do sometimes wonder how under the radar we were apparently flying despite the dozens of sourcebooks and adventures we published under the official license.
That said, I don't think 2010 is Dragonlance. But, hey, player-character minotaurs. Yet another gift of Krynn to the broader D&D universe.
It wouldn't make the race or class underpowered. Not to put words into his mouth, but what he's probably talking about is this: some race/class combinations are better suited for one another than others. Some people believe that WotC tries to ameliorate this by making extra strong feats to accomodate the unsuitable combinations. For example, tiefling and fighter is a weak combination, and WotC has made feats specifically for tieflings who are fighters. These are unlikely to exist in the original article (and if they do they definitely won't cover unpublished classes), which means that over time we'll have more and more combinations for these races and classes that just don't quite work.
Yup, that's pretty much what I mean.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lutecius
An assassin player class may also be a bit too controversial for a book aimed in part at young gamers. I don't know the ddi terms of agreement but I assume the average subscriber is somewhat older.
At any rate, the books' default assumption so far is that PCs are the good guys.
Assassins can be the good guys too - James Bond, Jason Bourne
I dont see this being a big issue as 3e had the assassin PRC and there was no trouble.
I don't have any issue with the assassin or its being ddi exclusive. I just think the classe's negative connotation is one of the reasons why it won't appear in print.
The 3e assassin was an evil-only PRC in the DMG. In 3e, you needed classes for bad guys. In 4e you need a "human assmurderer" in MMx.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CelticMutt
Assassins can be the good guys too - James Bond, Jason Bourne
Good guys aren't called assassins even when that's technically what they do. James Bond is generally described as a spy/secret agent.
"Jason Bourne" or even David Webb before amnesia isn't what I'd call a good guy.
__________________
_ Ceterum censeo the encounter/daily power system is an unholy blight upon D&Ddom
5e can't come soon enough
FWIW, I feel the same way about the "exclusive" content, and would feel exactly the same way if the *books* had "exclusive" stuff not available in other formats. I just do not get the idea of limiting access to material based on the distribution medium.
Your note about making books less useful is correct-- but I really hope that is *not* "the idea." Some of us still prefer print. I would think the Dungeon/Dragon outcry last year would have driven that point home...
I'm not happy about it either.
It's desperation. They need DDI to have subscribers, they're banking on it. They weren't able to deliver on their promises so they're trying to find other ways to gain subscribers.
It's annoying as hell and it's playing fast and loose with their original claim that you wouldn't "need" DDI. When core races and classes are DDI exclusives you're missing part of the game if you don't subscribe. I'm fine with DDI when it is supplemental, but they are clearly trying to make it the core of the game. Screw that.
None of my players subscribe. I'm the only one and I'm canceling. It's not worth it to me anymore. It's much more convenient for me to have a book with classes/races etc in it that I can lend to players that don't subscribe than to log in and have them wade through DDI to find something.
Anything DDI is banned from my table at this point, so I suppose that means no Revenant and no Assassin.
I liked 4E, it has it's faults but it's a decent game. The way it's being managed as a whole, however, leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It may be time to start looking to switch.
It's annoying as hell and it's playing fast and loose with their original claim that you wouldn't "need" DDI. When core races and classes are DDI exclusives you're missing part of the game if you don't subscribe. I'm fine with DDI when it is supplemental, but they are clearly trying to make it the core of the game. Screw that.
Do you also ban books that you do not personally own?
Because I mean... imagine a world without the DDI. In this world the Avenger is "exclusive" to the PHB II and I don't own the PHB II.
Is there any meaningful difference between my relationship to the Avenger in that world and your relationship to the Assassin in this one?
Do you also ban books that you do not personally own?
Because I mean... imagine a world without the DDI. In this world the Avenger is "exclusive" to the PHB II and I don't own the PHB II.
Is there any meaningful difference between my relationship to the Avenger in that world and your relationship to the Assassin in this one?
Maybe you didn't see the part where I explained that. Books are convenient, I can lend them out, they are easy to access at the table. If a player sees something in a book I have and they want it, it's a simple matter to go buy the book for themselves. I find DDI unwieldy and inconvenient. It cannot be shared and I'll not have my game held hostage for a monthly ransom.
In any event it depends on the book. At my table any WotC published book is legal, I own them all anyways (though I'm seriously considering dumping the whole system at this point). Third party supplements are not, nor are the power cards found in the minis packs, and now nor is DDI content.
Last edited by guivre; 3rd June 2009 at 05:48 AM..
Reason: softened tone
It's annoying as hell and it's playing fast and loose with their original claim that you wouldn't "need" DDI. When core races and classes are DDI exclusives you're missing part of the game if you don't subscribe. I'm fine with DDI when it is supplemental, but they are clearly trying to make it the core of the game. Screw that.
Er, to play and enjoy D&D you do not need D&DI. And you never will. If you want the assassin class and revenant race, well, then you need D&DI. But it's within the realms of possibility to play without the exclusives.
__________________ Brian Zuber
Proud Member of ENWorld since 2000 (under several lost screen names). Gaming since the mid-80s!
Favorite Settings: Love all of the official settings, Mystara is my nostalgia fave! Trying to create a homebrew that blends the best elements of the various settings. Favorite Edition: Can't decide between 3rd Edition and 4th Edition, like them both!
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
