A Big Hole In The Rules?

[Christian]

My apologies for the tone of the above post. I'd edit it, but since you already quoted it, that would make your post look strange.

Sorry.

 

[Magic Rub]

No problem Christian all is good. I'm a bit of a tit for even starting this post. I should have look at my books a little closer before I delved in to this. Though in my defence I am at work so my mind is technically suppose to be on other things, or so my employer would like to believe.

 

[Tzarevitch]

If you play with the "Psionics are Different" variant then a Forsaker could use Psionics, though any remotely reasonable DM would step in and say no- its not the Forsaker can tell the difference, heck alot of mages can't.

Ultimately its the DMs call, but in the spirit of the rules it should be disallowed. Using the non-variant rules they can't use psionics since they are in every way magical and spell-like abilities.

Personally I fail to see why people keep complaining about this class in particular. It does have some mechanical problems and a moderate upside but is has a huge downside. In my opinion that downside makes it suicidal to use this class as a PC.

Three words: "Permanent" "Ability" "Drain".

Without magic you cannot fix this. Level drainers are also a big problem but at least you get a save (assuming you survive the day). Undead drainers of all types (especially incorporeal ones) are the bane of your existance. Unless you've broken magic items recently (I think that part of the class is stupid beyone words), you don't have any way to strike a non-corporeal undead and you'll have a devil of a time even with corporeal ones because you can't crit them to help you breach DR.

Also without magic you are going to be easy to hit. Against incorporeal undead your AC is basically your Dex, Dodge and Expertise if you have it. They will hit you early and often.

I think the Foresaker was poorly thought with regard to the part of constantly needing to break magic items but it is not that bad a class. The problem comes when the DM lets the PCs do something whacky like half-dragon/were-tiger or whatever it was. The problem isn't with the Forsaker class, the problem is with the DM allowing the player to play a half-dragon lycanthrope. (Honestly I would've said that you cannot have both templates. If the character contracts lycanthropy it overrides his dragon blood, it doesn't stack with it.)

In my Dark Sun campaign psionics are different and foresakers do exist who foresake arcane magic but not divine magic or psionics. I ruled that they only get their SR against the effects that they foresake. Problem solved.

For the Grand Prize Winners for stupid prestige classes try: Ghostwalker, Warmaster and Fang of Lolth. With some minor fixes Foresaker is not that bad (not that I'd ever play one).

Tzarevitch

 

[kreynolds]

That's twice now that I've heard people complain about the Ghostwalker, but no explanations have been offered. What are the problems that some of you have with it?

 

[Xarlen]

[


I think the Foresaker was poorly thought with regard to the part of constantly needing to break magic items but it is not that bad a class. The problem comes when the DM lets the PCs do something whacky like half-dragon/were-tiger or whatever it was. The problem isn't with the Forsaker class, the problem is with the DM allowing the player to play a half-dragon lycanthrope. (Honestly I would've said that you cannot have both templates. If the character contracts lycanthropy it overrides his dragon blood, it doesn't stack with it.)

For the record, it was as follows: Me, the 8th level Half fiend Priest of Nurell, our 8th level werewolf Barbarian, 8th level Elf fighter (who felt he got the shortest end of the stick), and then the, here we go: Half-dragon/Were-bear Barbarian 6/Frenzied Berzerker 2.

When all else went down, he had a strenght mod of +22. First of all, yes, you can't have a dragon lycanthrope. Second, his ECL would've been off the chart. Third, he had to be Large to have that str. Last, the player's 'way of balancing' was all he had was a pair of adamantite chains, and an axe. 'But I have no magic!' But he didn't *need* it. His STR took care of any Damage Reduction we encountered.

 

[hong]

For the Grand Prize Winners for stupid prestige classes try: Ghostwalker, Warmaster and Fang of Lolth. With some minor fixes Foresaker is not that bad (not that I'd ever play one).

[pimp]

If you don't like the warmaster, consider my knight commander, which fills much the same role but isn't a contender for Silliest Class Ability Name Evar:

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

[/pimp]

And since this is the Goofiest Rules Thread Evar, I'm sure noone will mind the hijack

 

[Henry]

I hereby declare that this is the goofiest rules thread I've ever seen.

Nope - I've got you beat - the thread about spells without a line of effect working in an anti-magic field was by far the goofiest. I should know - I agreed for a while. (!)

And if that one doesn't paint your little red wagon (to coin a phrase), how about the thread that faced off a common housecat and a halfling commoner to see if the housecat was given stats too high for its CR?

It gets a lot goofier around here than you may at first realize!

 

[hong]

Nope - I've got you beat - the thread about spells without a line of effect working in an anti-magic field was by far the goofiest. I should know - I agreed for a while. (!)

And if that one doesn't paint your little red wagon (to coin a phrase), how about the thread that faced off a common housecat and a halfling commoner to see if the housecat was given stats too high for its CR?

It gets a lot goofier around here than you may at first realize!

I'm sure Christian knows about those; he's a long time lurker/poster to this forum.

Any thread that goes for more than ~3-4 pages (60-80 followups) is almost certainly going to be goofy. If it wasn't goofy, there would be no potential for disagreement and thus no need for extended discussion. Conversely, the longer a thread gets, the more likely it is to delve into increasingly esoteric matters, the parts that are easy to grasp having been settled right at the start.

This is a fact of online discussions; I think I will call it Hong's Fourth Law.

 

[Xarlen]

Like adamantite stuff requiring all or bits to be used as adamantite?

 

[hong]

Like adamantite stuff requiring all or bits to be used as adamantite?

Naturally.

Oh, forgot one more reason for the goofiness of long threads: the longer a thread gets, the more likely it is that the people continuing it will be those who are just TOO FRIGGIN' STUBBORN to let the matter rest. This is simply a matter of natural selection, since the less hardy souls would have dropped out long ago.

And if you think that thread is goofy, you haven't seen some of those on UNsenet. 1,500+ posts on why you can/can't see through an invisible door. The impact of items of create food/water on a medieval economy. The off-and-on alignment war which has been continuing, in various forms, since AD&D first appeared. And so on. This place is refreshingly non-goofy by comparison. Why, it's almost... dull.