Reinventing the Adepts

hong · Apr 20, 2002

Cyronax said:
I felt the same way you about clerics. Of all the PC classes, I think the cleric is fairly obnoxious. There supposed to be generic divine spellcasters, but I still think they have a way overblown spell list.

Anyway, the real point I was going to make here Aaron, was to recommend you look at the Ecclesiastic class from the Netbook of classes found here. That class focuses more on casting divine magic than combate, while having similar combat abilities to the wizard. That seems similar to what you were describing.

I use the ecclesiastic class in conjunction with clerics. Some religions have members of both classes in their divine spellcaster hierarchy, while others have only one or the other.

The shaman from OA also makes a dandy generic priest. Just change the bonus feats (and maybe the spell list) to match your setting. In fact, I ripped off the shaman to make a "priest", which you can find here:

http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/dnd/priest.htm

I'm still not quite happy with it, though. Any suggestions would be welcome.

[edit: Crothian has started a thread on the House Rules forum on priestly classes: http://www.enworld.org/messageboards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10926 ]

Cyronax · Apr 20, 2002

hong said:
The shaman from OA also makes a dandy generic priest. Just change the bonus feats (and maybe the spell list) to match your setting. In fact, I ripped off the shaman to make a "priest", which you can find here:

http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/dnd/priest.htm

I'm still not quite happy with it, though. Any suggestions would be welcome.

[edit: Crothian has started a thread on the House Rules forum on priestly classes: http://www.enworld.org/messageboards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10926 ]

I like the idea of the OA shaman as the generic priest class, but in a campaign that has druids I think a shama would be inappropriate. I don't think a generic priest should get automatic animal companions. The OA shaman has that feature because it mirrors myths about buddhist and daoist priests. A "priest" of an evil deity, say Hextor or Vecna, however doesn't really need automatic animal companions.

C.I.D.

hong · Apr 20, 2002

Cyronax said:
I like the idea of the OA shaman as the generic priest class, but in a campaign that has druids I think a shama would be inappropriate. I don't think a generic priest should get automatic animal companions. The OA shaman has that feature because it mirrors myths about buddhist and daoist priests. A "priest" of an evil deity, say Hextor or Vecna, however doesn't really need automatic animal companions.

That's why I said you should maybe change the spell list, if you want to use it as a generic class. The shaman, as it's written, is meant for a game where regular D&D clerics and druids don't exist. If you want to insert the class into a game where either of these classes do exist, then you're going to have to do some tweaking.

It really comes down to what all of these classes are meant to represent in your game. The shaman's niche overlaps to a considerable extent with that of the druid, so if you don't want to change the shaman that much, then perhaps the druid should go. On the other hand, if you see the shaman as being more of a cleric replacement, then it should get the cleric spell list (with some changes, maybe).

Of course, this begs the question of why there even exist separate cleric and druid classes in the first place, but that's an issue for another thread....

Aaron L · Apr 20, 2002

I am reading the thread, downloading the NBoC and opening hongs webpage as I type this, thanks for the suggestions.

Horacio · Apr 21, 2002

Aaron L said:
I am reading the thread, downloading the NBoC and opening hongs webpage as I type this, thanks for the suggestions.

Exactly like me

Thanks!

Someguy · Apr 21, 2002

I have almost played one once... I was bored, I wanted to try something different... But instead i went Psion... GNOMISH PYROKINETICIST!!!!!!

hong · Apr 21, 2002

Just a note that I've modified the priest class on my D&D page. The main changes are removing the smite ability, and adding item creation feats, Martial WP and Weapon Focus to the list of bonus feats.

Comments are still welcome.

Cyronax · Apr 21, 2002

hong said:
Just a note that I've modified the priest class on my D&D page. The main changes are removing the smite ability, and adding item creation feats, Martial WP and Weapon Focus to the list of bonus feats.

Comments are still welcome.

hong, much praise for the changes you've made to the priest class! Very streamlined and customizable, I like it.

In terms of balance though, couldn't you give the priest the turn fiend (or celestial for evil priests) ability earlier than 14th level?
I'm not so sure about what an appropriate level would be, but I might be tempted to grant even a 5th-8th level priest that ability.
That lowered level however, still presumes +5 turn resistance fiends (a good idea I must say).

Good work,
C.I.D.

hong · Apr 21, 2002

Cyronax said:
In terms of balance though, couldn't you give the priest the turn fiend (or celestial for evil priests) ability earlier than 14th level?
I'm not so sure about what an appropriate level would be, but I might be tempted to grant even a 5th-8th level priest that ability.
That lowered level however, still presumes +5 turn resistance fiends (a good idea I must say).

Thanks!

The turn resistance is almost mandated by the pathetic HD a lot of fiends have. A CR 17 marilith has 9 HD, for instance (it has lots of special abilities to make up for it, but they don't count when it comes to turning). Having a six-armed harbinger of destruction running away from a mid-level priest tends to do bad things for their mystique, not to mention game balance. In fact, the turn resistance could possibly be even higher than +5; the number isn't settled yet.

I made the turn fiends ability high level partly so that mid-level priests couldn't turn mariliths, and also so that there would be a significant tradeoff when it comes to taking a prestige class. Someone who takes a PrC is (usually) giving up the top 10 levels of advancement, and there should be something in there that balances out what the PrC gives.

Cyronax · Apr 21, 2002

hong said:
I made the turn fiends ability high level partly so that mid-level priests couldn't turn mariliths, and also so that there would be a significant tradeoff when it comes to taking a prestige class. Someone who takes a PrC is (usually) giving up the top 10 levels of advancement, and there should be something in there that balances out what the PrC gives.

Good point. That is a good incentive for advancement I suppose. Maybe my problem stemmed from the fact that all clerics can turn undead as a matter of class ability, and those with an elemental domain can turn one type of elemental outsiders. Are fiends and celestials that much different? In that sense they are I guess.

C.I.D.

Reinventing the Adepts

How do you use Adepts in your game?

I use them as is

I assume that they are there, but never really use them

I prefer use other 3e classes for tribal spellcasters (like cleric, druid, or sorcerer)

I am using a d20 class (like Green Ronin's Shaman) in their place

None of the above describes me (describe)

hong

WotC's bitch

Cyronax

Explorer

hong

WotC's bitch

Aaron L

Hero

Horacio

LostInBrittany

Someguy

First Post

hong

WotC's bitch

Cyronax

Explorer

hong

WotC's bitch

Cyronax

Explorer

Similar Threads