Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dandu" data-source="post: 5688343" data-attributes="member: 85158">Really this whole thread underscores the inherent <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />tery of the Munchkin, who wants the BROADEST definition when it serves their purposes and the NARROWEST definition when it does not.&nbsp;The Assassin cannot be good. It's written, plain as day.&nbsp; Nothing about them changing alignments, it states as written in stone by&nbsp; God above &quot;No Assassin can have a good alignment&quot;. Not &quot;Assassins can have a change of heart&quot;. Not &quot;Assassins can have a good alignment if they put on an alignment&nbsp; changing item&quot;. Not &quot;Special exceptions can change allow my assassin to be Good and still practice his craft&quot;. Not &quot;Magic makes me a&nbsp; rather polite and prim and generous and kind Assassin&quot;.&nbsp;This is why there are no ex-Assassins. Because there cannot BE&nbsp; an ex-Assassin. If the answer to the question &quot;Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Assassin's Guild?&quot; is &quot;Yes&quot; then you cannot have a good alignment. Even&nbsp; if by some bizarre chance you did get your alignment changed, the fact&nbsp; remains that it is impossible to be a good Assassin as stated by RAW.The game allows for paladins to turn evil, for monks to turn chaotic,&nbsp; for any number of alignment variations. But unlike paladins, monks, bards, barbarians, what have you, there's&nbsp; nothing in RAW for ex-Assassins. Consequently you cannot assume there can be ex-Assassins simply because it suits your powergaming needs. It states&nbsp; clearly there can be no good Assassins. Game over.Now, <a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/prc/20070401a" target="_blank">Avengers</a> on the other hand...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dandu, post: 5688343, member: 85158"] Really this whole thread underscores the inherent :):):):):):):):)tery of the Munchkin, who wants the BROADEST definition when it serves their purposes and the NARROWEST definition when it does not. The Assassin cannot be good. It's written, plain as day. Nothing about them changing alignments, it states as written in stone by God above "No Assassin can have a good alignment". Not "Assassins can have a change of heart". Not "Assassins can have a good alignment if they put on an alignment changing item". Not "Special exceptions can change allow my assassin to be Good and still practice his craft". Not "Magic makes me a rather polite and prim and generous and kind Assassin". This is why there are no ex-Assassins. Because there cannot BE an ex-Assassin. If the answer to the question "Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Assassin's Guild?" is "Yes" then you cannot have a good alignment. Even if by some bizarre chance you did get your alignment changed, the fact remains that it is [U]impossible[/U] to be a good Assassin as stated by RAW. The game allows for paladins to turn evil, for monks to turn chaotic, for any number of alignment variations. But unlike paladins, monks, bards, barbarians, what have you, there's nothing in RAW for ex-Assassins. Consequently you cannot assume there can be ex-Assassins simply because it suits your powergaming needs. It states clearly there can be no good Assassins. Game over. Now, [URL="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/prc/20070401a"]Avengers[/URL] on the other hand... [/QUOTE]

Verification