D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 Forsaker

[Three_Haligonians]

Hey all,

Anyone out there have leads on a 3.5 version of the Forsaker PrC? New game is starting up soon and I think I'm gonna try one out. If it's possible, ones that -don't- change the DR of the class to DR/magic work best since imho, a PrC that's all about being magic hating (and more importantly, magic resistant) shouldn't have magic be a weakness.

Thanks

J from Three Haligonians

 

[Droid101]

Hey all,

Anyone out there have leads on a 3.5 version of the Forsaker PrC? New game is starting up soon and I think I'm gonna try one out. If it's possible, ones that -don't- change the DR of the class to DR/magic work best since imho, a PrC that's all about being magic hating (and more importantly, magic resistant) shouldn't have magic be a weakness.

Thanks

J from Three Haligonians

And harbingers of evil (demons/devils) shouldn't have "good" as a weakness. And the haters of evil and the upholders of good (Angels) shouldn't have "evil" as a weakness. But guess what, they both do. That's how this system works, and I can guarantee that Forsakers, when made into 3.5, will have DR/magic. That's almost a given.

 

[Three_Haligonians]

True...

Ok, that's a good point.. so I'll concede it, in which case any 3.5 versions of the
class would be very much appreciated, since searching the boards is out and the internet is a very big place.


Thanks

J from Three Haligonians

 

[Crothian]

MAgic is their weakness though. They can't use it, they hate it...sure thewy have some defense against it but DR/Magic really makes the most sense for them. If its good enough for the Dragons its good enough for a Forsaker.

 

[Droid101]

Ok, that's a good point.. so I'll concede it, in which case any 3.5 versions of the
class would be very much appreciated, since searching the boards is out and the internet is a very big place.


Thanks

J from Three Haligonians

And I apologize if I sounded hostile. Sometimes it comes out wrong.

 

[Liquidsabre]

I thought the Complete Warrior's Occult Slayer PrC was the 3.5'd watered down and clipped version of the Forsaker?

 

[Saeviomagy]

For the sake of your fellow players - don't play a forsaker.

I know it sounds like a cool idea, but in practice you will just hamper the party almost constantly.

I know for a fact that were I playing the wizard or cleric in a campaign, I'd be against letting a forsaker join the group, and if he did anyway, I'd be making no special accomodations for his ways.

DM says we're travelling across the world? Teleport. See you in 3 months buddy. We need to do stuff underwater? Sorry about that - guess you either wait here or drown. Infiltration mission? Well, you stay here, we'll tell you what we find out. Fight going badly? Guess which guy doesn't get the escape spell?

And of course I'd be passing on worthless pieces of junk to you as 'magical items' out of treasure hoards, on the basis that you can't tell whether they're magic or not, and you'd just smash them if they were anyway...

None of this is being mean, and none of this is taking into account the standard "me forsaker, me kill magic user" attitude that the forsaker seems to come packaged with. It's just being pragmatic and not allowing another player to ruin my fun.

I'd suggest that if you want an interesting anti-magic character, you either take occult slayer, or you just take fighter levels and spend all your non-fighter feats on spelltouched feats from unearthed arcana. Now you'll have a character that bounces lightning bolts, turns 'being set on fire' into a bonus, rebounds power word spells, rebounds any spell if he crits his save, and a bunch of other stuff - good, effective, entertaining stuff that doesn't screw with the party spellcasters ability to help you.

 

[Three_Haligonians]

Funny..

DM says we're travelling across the world? Teleport. See you in 3 months buddy. We need to do stuff underwater? Sorry about that - guess you either wait here or drown. Infiltration mission? Well, you stay here, we'll tell you what we find out. Fight going badly? Guess which guy doesn't get the escape spell?

I'd suggest that if you want an interesting anti-magic character, you either take occult slayer, or you just take fighter levels and spend all your non-fighter feats on spelltouched feats from unearthed arcana. Now you'll have a character that bounces lightning bolts, turns 'being set on fire' into a bonus, rebounds power word spells, rebounds any spell if he crits his save, and a bunch of other stuff - good, effective, entertaining stuff that doesn't screw with the party spellcasters ability to help you.

Just because the character has no forsaker levels doesn't mean they are going to accept magic aid. If the concept here is "anti-magic," then even an occult slayer with spelltouched feats is going to refuse help from the party caster.

And of course I'd be passing on worthless pieces of junk to you as 'magical items' out of treasure hoards, on the basis that you can't tell whether they're magic or not, and you'd just smash them if they were anyway...

I must have missed where it said an INT of 6 or less was required for the Forsaker PrC.

None of this is being mean, and none of this is taking into account the standard "me forsaker, me kill magic user" attitude that the forsaker seems to come packaged with. It's just being pragmatic and not allowing another player to ruin my fun.

By ruining the fun of the other player? The problem here I believe is that this "standard 'me forsaker, me kill magic user' attitude." If I were to play one, (which I still am, incedently) I would do so with the full knowledge that other players are most certainly going to use magic in some way, whether it be casting their own spells, using magic weapons, or just drinking a potion and roleplay the character accordingly, probably in a manner such as"thanks but no thanks, let's just agree to disagree and be on our way.."

I wouldn't expect "special accomidations" but there is a point where players have to come half-way when the concept for their characters are at odds.

J from Three Haligonians

 

[ThirdWizard]

I must have missed where it said an INT of 6 or less was required for the Forsaker PrC.

Actually he is correct. Forsakers have no way of finding out if an item is magical on their own. They must have someone cast detect magic to find out if it is. I never thought about the irony inherent in that before, actually... Also, they destroy magical items to gain their abilities. So, they would smash them if they were magical.

Now, I'm sure you can't throw him a stick off the ground and say its magical, but you might, for example, hand him the masterwork sword and tell him that its magical, while keeping the brooch that actually does detect as magic to yourself as the party wizard. Many PCs would be aghast at giving a fellow adventurer their share of the dragon's hoard only to see them smash them up the next day.

 

[Storyteller01]

MAgic is their weakness though. They can't use it, they hate it...sure thewy have some defense against it but DR/Magic really makes the most sense for them. If its good enough for the Dragons its good enough for a Forsaker.

Wouldn't that be unbalancing though?

I can't use it, and I have to make a save just to heal. Sure I'm a burly fighter, but (compared to a fighter) my life expectancy is nil, since i'm the bigger target? A fighter, standard barbarian, and dragon still gain a full benefit from healing spells.