Dragonlance Dragonlance Reflected in D&D5

[Hussar]

[MENTION=78752]DMZ2112[/MENTION] - the only issue I might have with your KoS progression is that by making the switch at 4th level each time, the character never gains that second attack until 13th (total) character level. That's a pretty bit thing to delay for so long. I'm playing in Raunalyn's Dragonlance campaign using his Knight of Solamnia rules. I was thinking of switching into paladin with my fighter, but, then I realised that if I did that, I lose out on that second attack.

It might be better to keep KoS as a single fighter class.

Just my 2 cp

 

[DMZ2112]

[MENTION=78752]DMZ2112[/MENTION] - the only issue I might have with your KoS progression is that by making the switch at 4th level each time, the character never gains that second attack until 13th (total) character level. That's a pretty bit thing to delay for so long. I'm playing in Raunalyn's Dragonlance campaign using his Knight of Solamnia rules. I was thinking of switching into paladin with my fighter, but, then I realised that if I did that, I lose out on that second attack.

It might be better to keep KoS as a single fighter class.

Just my 2 cp

Hussar, thanks for the thoughts.

For now, I think I'm going to leave things as they are for three reasons:

One, not every class gets Extra Attack, and the Knight is not prevented from /eventually/ getting it,

Two, the free feat at 9th level helps mitigate the delay, and

Three, there's really nothing stopping a Knight of the Crown from taking a 5th level in Fighter before moving on to Knight of the Sword, if Extra Attack is important to them.

 

[PieAndDragon]

For the Knight of Solamnia, I'd be tempted to make this a Fighter and/or Paladin subclass, but template it on the Hunter subclass of the Ranger, with options for Crown, Sword and Rose at each level they would get a subclass ability (or later levels if Sword / Rose not to be taken early)
So for the fighter subclass, there would be an option for Knight of the Crown and Knight of the Sword (if they had advanced that far in the organisation), at 7th there would be options for Crown / Sword / Rose etc
For paladin the Sacred Oath abilities could also be gained at the Aura of Courage levels (replacing it) if you wanted to re-use the fighter subclass.

 

[Hussar]

Hussar, thanks for the thoughts.

For now, I think I'm going to leave things as they are for three reasons:

One, not every class gets Extra Attack, and the Knight is not prevented from /eventually/ getting it,

Two, the free feat at 9th level helps mitigate the delay, and

Three, there's really nothing stopping a Knight of the Crown from taking a 5th level in Fighter before moving on to Knight of the Sword, if Extra Attack is important to them.

If I'm understanding you correctly though, a character becomes a true Knight of the Rose at 12th level right? Or at 9th? Either way, it means that you're missing out on the second and third iterative attack until 13th level. It just doesn't say that this character is an elite warrior when he's attacking like a fourth level fighter at 12th level. Plus, he'd only have what, 6th level cleric casting abilities (if I'm understanding how casting stacking for MC'd characters work) and the abilities of a 4th level paladin.

That sounds like a very weak 12th level character. 1 attack/round, 3rd level cleric spells, and minor paladin abilities.

 

[DMZ2112]

For the Knight of Solamnia, I'd be tempted to make this a Fighter and/or Paladin subclass, but template it on the Hunter subclass of the Ranger, with options for Crown, Sword and Rose at each level they would get a subclass ability (or later levels if Sword / Rose not to be taken early)
So for the fighter subclass, there would be an option for Knight of the Crown and Knight of the Sword (if they had advanced that far in the organisation), at 7th there would be options for Crown / Sword / Rose etc
For paladin the Sacred Oath abilities could also be gained at the Aura of Courage levels (replacing it) if you wanted to re-use the fighter subclass.

A solid outline! I'd like to see this written up.

If I'm understanding you correctly though, a character becomes a true Knight of the Rose at 12th level right? Or at 9th? Either way, it means that you're missing out on the second and third iterative attack until 13th level. It just doesn't say that this character is an elite warrior when he's attacking like a fourth level fighter at 12th level. Plus, he'd only have what, 6th level cleric casting abilities (if I'm understanding how casting stacking for MC'd characters work) and the abilities of a 4th level paladin.
That sounds like a very weak 12th level character. 1 attack/round, 3rd level cleric spells, and minor paladin abilities.

Fast track: Knight of the Crown at 1st, Knight of the Sword at 5th, Knight of the Rose at 9th. Battlemaster Fighter 4/Cleric of War 4/Paladin of Devotion 1. But because of the faction rank requirements, that would be a very upwardly mobile Knight.

I think the most important thing to note is that the Fighter is the only class that gets more than two attacks ever. Even multiclassed Fighters don't get more than two attacks unless they've got two or more of the Fighter Extra Attack abilities. Other Extra Attacks don't stack.

So if the Knight takes Battlemaster Fighter 5 before multiclassing -- or at any time after that, for that matter -- he'll have the two attacks he's allotted. And let's be clear: I would recommend that be done. I am just not /requiring/ that it be done, because I think PCs should have the option of reaching Knight of the Rose before 11th level and I want the level requirements to be uniform.

As for your weighing of paladin abilities and clerical spells as less valuable than fighter abilities, I think that's a problem with multiclassing rules, not with this lore-based implementation. Is the Knight of the Rose optimized? No, absolutely not, not even with the free feat. But she's a flexible character with strong complementary abilities, which is no less valuable in my mind.

 

[Hussar]

True, no one gets more than two attacks, but all the fighter types do get a second attack at 5th level. That's a pretty big thing to give up for five levels (at a minimum - presuming that you do it in minimum levels).

Yup, more breadth, and certainly plausible, but, it does seem to be a lot to give up for a character that is meant to be a front line combatant. I wonder if dropping the fighter requirement and simply going with paladin/cleric might be better. Although, thinking about that, that's too many spells for the character. KoS aren't really casters are they? Not in my mind anyway.

Maybe dropping the cleric requirement and going fighter/paladin? What if you split it up? Say 5 fighter=Knight of Sword, 1 level of paladin qualifies you for Knight of the Crown, and you have to stick with paladin for the next four levels. After that, either fighter or paladin qualifies you for Knight of the Rose - depending on just how you want to interpret the individual knight, one being more concerned with divine stuff and the other more a "Leader of Men" archetype. Both are still Knights of the Rose, but, I don't think that allowing a little variation between individuals at that level is a bad thing. Lord Gunthar, forex, I would see as a more paladin'ey Knight of the Rose, while some of the more traditional ones might be straight fighters after their Paladin levels.

Just a thought.

Sorry if this is coming across as argument. Not my intention. Just thinking out loud and since I'm actually playing a Knight of the Sword right now, it's something of interest to me.

 

[DMZ2112]

True, no one gets more than two attacks, but all the fighter types do get a second attack at 5th level. That's a pretty big thing to give up for five levels (at a minimum - presuming that you do it in minimum levels).

I feel like we're on the same side of that particular argument. I swear, I'm not against military-minded Knights getting that second attack.

Yup, more breadth, and certainly plausible, but, it does seem to be a lot to give up for a character that is meant to be a front line combatant.

Well, that's an interesting question. Is she? That's not really how I see Gunthar Uth Wistan, and we all know how well that worked out for Derek Crownguard. Look at the titles of the Masters of the Orders -- the High Warrior is the leader of the Knights of the Crown. The leader of the Knights of the Sword is called the High Clerist, and the leader of the Knights of the Rose the High Justice. Those last two are unusual titles for front-line fighters, even commanders.

I see the Knights of the Rose as being strategic commanders and politicians more than battle-hardened veterans -- remember, there are very, very few of them -- and the Knights of the Sword as being a straight up holy order, sort of like what the Hospitalers might look like in a historical fantasy Crusader era. The "front line fighters" are Knights of the Crown, and they have all the benefits of a fully leveled fighter.

That said, I don't think a Knight of the Rose who is a Battlemaster Fighter 15/Cleric of War 4/Paladin of Devotion 1 is an impossibility, whether she takes those extra 11 levels of Fighter before he advances to Knight of the Sword or after. The idea is that a Knight of the Sword has to have spent four levels on the battlefield, and a Knight of the Rose has to have spent four levels under oath to Kiri-Jolith. But I don't see there being restrictions against taking additional levels of Fighter or Cleric, nor do I see any requirement that a Knight of the Rose continue to advance as a Paladin.

I wonder if dropping the fighter requirement and simply going with paladin/cleric might be better. Although, thinking about that, that's too many spells for the character. KoS aren't really casters are they? Not in my mind anyway.

They're not casters at all in the novels, but I tend to chalk that up to 350 years of devolution in the absence of Kiri-Jolith and Paladine. I think the original intention was for the casting to come back, but, well, the Chaos War.

Maybe dropping the cleric requirement and going fighter/paladin? What if you split it up? Say 5 fighter=Knight of Sword, 1 level of paladin qualifies you for Knight of the Crown, and you have to stick with paladin for the next four levels. After that, either fighter or paladin qualifies you for Knight of the Rose - depending on just how you want to interpret the individual knight, one being more concerned with divine stuff and the other more a "Leader of Men" archetype. Both are still Knights of the Rose, but, I don't think that allowing a little variation between individuals at that level is a bad thing. Lord Gunthar, forex, I would see as a more paladin'ey Knight of the Rose, while some of the more traditional ones might be straight fighters after their Paladin levels.

Well, mainly I don't want to lose the Cleric levels -- I think that's important. I actually really like the idea that Knights of the Sword, even during the 350 years following the Cataclysm, swore oaths to Kiri-Jolith and lived a more ascetic life than their Crown brethren. I like the idea that, in my Dragonlance timeline, there is eventually a Battlemaster Fighter 4/Cleric of War 16 High Clerist, who is an honest-to-gods clerist.

Just a thought.

It's a good one; it's just not my vision.

Sorry if this is coming across as argument. Not my intention. Just thinking out loud and since I'm actually playing a Knight of the Sword right now, it's something of interest to me.

Not at all! This kind of discussion is exactly why I'm here on ENWorld. I'm glad for the constructive criticism. I hope I'm not coming across as being unreasonably stubborn... but I am pretty unreasonably stubborn.

 

[Astromath]

I get what you are saying about not allowing specialization since 5e is all about freedom. However, OTOH, Dragonlance is very specific about what schools wizards can learn or not. It is extremely difficult to shoehorn that into the 5e freedoms. That is where I offer a compromise in that the wizards are not denied any school, but only denied the Arcane Tradition to certain schools.

Similarly, the Knights of Solamnia must also be LG (at least at the start of the War). I hate the restriction, but, again, that's how Dragonlance put it. However, those not of the three orders do not have that restriction other than being some form of Good alignment. Also, the Knights of Tarkisis must be of Evil alignment.

P.S. I am anxious to know how WotC will do this when they come out with the Dragonlance Supplement (that is, if they do). Especially, how they will work around the Moon Restrictions.

 

[DMZ2112]

I get what you are saying about not allowing specialization since 5e is all about freedom. However, OTOH, Dragonlance is very specific about what schools wizards can learn or not. It is extremely difficult to shoehorn that into the 5e freedoms. That is where I offer a compromise in that the wizards are not denied any school, but only denied the Arcane Tradition to certain schools.

A number of people have suggested this to me, and I think this is a good strategy. The only reason I'm not using it is personal desire.

Similarly, the Knights of Solamnia must also be LG (at least at the start of the War). I hate the restriction, but, again, that's how Dragonlance put it. However, those not of the three orders do not have that restriction other than being some form of Good alignment. Also, the Knights of Tarkisis must be of Evil alignment.

I have the same opinions, more or less, but I think it would be more accurate to say that Knights of Solamnia aren't not going to be Lawful Good and Knights of Takhisis aren't not going to be Lawful Evil. What I mean is that if a player came to me with a non-LG KoS concept the first question out of my mouth wouldn't be, "Why isn't he LG?" it would be "Why is he a Knight of Solamnia?"

Of course, this ignores the very clear implications of corruption and nepotism that the novels make toward the post-Cataclysm KoS. For my own purposes I'd accept a NG or LN KoS or a NE or LN KoT.

P.S. I am anxious to know how WotC will do this when they come out with the Dragonlance Supplement (that is, if they do). Especially, how they will work around the Moon Restrictions.

You and me both. If the promises about the kender are any judge we should not be waiting long.

 

[Eric Bienvenue]

Hi Raunalyn,

I would really like to see your note on the Knight of the Crown as I am working on a DL game where a Knight will be the main character. so if you can share you info, that would be great

Eric