(Discussion) General Part IV

[Creamsteak]

Trader PrC and the name conventions for judges should also be commented on, if you've got a chance.

 

[Macbeth]

Trader PrC and the name conventions for judges should also be commented on, if you've got a chance.

Right, I just finished updating the character thread (another approved PC and one that just needs a couple of touch-ups), let me give my opinions on these issues:

Naming Conventions: I don't really care one way or another which naming convention we use, we just need to settle on one.

Trader PrC: (also posted in the submission thread) The original was a little troublesome, I think thta the original Connection mechanic was a bit complex, but with the revision in Creamsteak's post, I give it a big YES. Really nice job, Velmont, its a non-combat PrC that I can actually see being very useful, but not overly powerful. Very nice.

 

[Jack Haggerty]

• Little Sneak- Great! I like the latest revision, and I think we should approve this. I vote tp approve it.

I've got a second (Third? I don't remember.) post-approval suggestion for a change to the Traceless ability... The judges should double-check it, when they get time. If no one has a problem with the change, I'll fix a few minor editorial errata mistakes and post the finalized version of the PrC.

And thanks to everyone who helped with the Little Sneak. Your suggestions and critiques were invaluable.

 

[dpdx]

For what it's worth, early 3.0 Defenders of the Faith had "knights" of various alignments (Knight of the Horn, and whatnot) that played a lot like Paladins. I have that book, still, and could give examples.

I'm wondering, though, since Thels brought it up - do we need a new deity in the pantheon so that people who want to play the 'classic' paladin, can?

 

[Thels]

Paladins are not so much related to a deity as more related to a set of mind and picking a deity that relates to it. There are no deity related powers as with the Cleric domains, so there's no need to make a specific paladindeity, and even if, I think Hyrag kinda fits that niche already.

 

[dpdx]

Cool, then.

On a semi-related note, my first contribution, Chennet', God of the Forge, is ready for review/comment. Once the God is approved, I can get to work on PrC, flavor, some minor house rules, and more flavor.

 

[Uriel]

Fellow Judges, how do you all feel about folks advancing a Level during an adventure, providing it is something natural, like a fighter or rogue going from L1 to L2.

Obviously, nobody is going to suddenly go from a Wiz1 to a Wiz1/Fighter2, having 'suddenly' picked up a feat and a bunch of weaons proficiencies.

This is an important question that we have not addressed as of yet.

-Uriel

 

[Uriel]

Fellow Judges, how do you all feel about folks advancing a Level during an adventure, providing it is something natural, like a fighter or rogue going from L1 to L2.

Obviously, nobody is going to suddenly go from a Wiz1 to a Wiz1/Fighter2, having 'suddenly' picked up a feat and a bunch of weaons proficiencies.

This is an important question that we have not addressed as of yet.

-Uriel

Edit:Others in LEW, please feel free to add your thoughts, making it Judge only on ths thread was rude, forgive me.

 

[Macbeth]

Hmmm, I would say that you have to wait until time between adventures. I know that, logically, a Fighter or Rogue could level up, but it seems to discriminate between classes, therefore being unfair to Wizards, Bards, etc. This is a tough decision, I can definately see benfits to looking at it either way, but my feeling is that you should have to wait.

 

[Velmont]

As Macbeth said, for fairness, let everyone raise in level between adventure.