Shadow Dancer Question...

[Particle_Man]

ymmv

Well to each their own. If you want shadow-spawn to exist and have the same alignment as the SD, and stay loyal to the SD even if a shadow in the "chain of command" should die, then that is fine, and none giving an xp penalty on being destroyed to the SD (except for the 1-3 original shadow companions). It is an interpretation of the rules that is presently consistent, just as my interpetation is.

All that said, would you enforce an upper limit to how many shadows the SD can have? I mean by your interpretation the "primary" shadows can create spawn, and those spawn can create spawn, etc. Or could you actually end up with thousands, millions, billions, of shadows, all immune to being turned? (Raids on all the kobold warrens in the world could quickly beef up your army, and eventually you would reach a "critical mass" where they would overwhelm almost any humanoid army, adding to their ranks). Because even if they only have 19hp each, surely an SD with 20 trillion (quadrillion? quintillion?) loyal shadow followers would affect game balance in most game worlds. This may seem like a silly example, but the point is that by the rules interpretation you have put forward, how can this silly example be prevented? (Excepting rule 0, of course, since we are talking about interpretations of the rules, not house rules).

 

[Cyraneth]

Well, this is simply a house ruling in connection with the variant Shadowdancer presented in MotP. We created a new outsider version of the standard shadow, giving them a Con of 14 (to compensate for the reduced HD). We then removed their create spawn ability and adjusted skills, but otherwise let them remain unchanged. It has worked just fine, and that way our Shadowdancer wasn't as "undead-loving" as Shadowdancers normally might appear to be...

Just my 2 cents...

- Cyraneth

 

[The Proconsul]

From Storm Raven's Post:

Summon Shadow: At 3rd level, a shadowdancer can summon a shadow, an undead shade. Unlike a normal shadow, this shadow’s alignment matches that of the shadowdancer. The summoned shadow cannot be turned, rebuked, or commanded by any third party. This shadow serves as a companion to the shadowdancer and can communicate intelligibly with the shadowdancer. Every third level gained by the shadowdancer allows her to summon an additional shadow and adds +2 HD (and the requisite base attack and base save bonus increases) to all her shadow companions.

So, those Shadows don't remain at a pesky 3HD, but gain 2HD every three Shadowdancer levels ... meaning they have, for example, 7HD for a lvl 10 SD. Nothing grounbreaking, but still...

 

[Hypersmurf]

So, those Shadows don't remain at a pesky 3HD, but gain 2HD every three Shadowdancer levels ... meaning they have, for example, 7HD for a lvl 10 SD. Nothing grounbreaking, but still...

Note that that wouldn't include spawn, though.

-Hyp.

 

[chengarino]

Re: ymmv

Or could you actually end up with thousands, millions, billions, of shadows, all immune to being turned? (Raids on all the kobold warrens in the world could quickly beef up your army, and eventually you would reach a "critical mass" where they would overwhelm almost any humanoid army, adding to their ranks). Because even if they only have 19hp each, surely an SD with 20 trillion (quadrillion? quintillion?) loyal shadow followers would affect game balance in most game worlds. This may seem like a silly example, but the point is that by the rules interpretation you have put forward, how can this silly example be prevented? (Excepting rule 0, of course, since we are talking about interpretations of the rules, not house rules).

You're right there: perpetual unturnable shadows would imbalance the game. Our DM ruled that the SD Shadow (primary) would create spawns which are the std. MM CE ones. So, that when our cleric attempts to turn Undeads, the SD had better make sure that all the shadoows are more than 60' away or else the SD just sucked up the turning attempt.

In our campaign, there have been more than a few POWEREFUL vampires who seems to whoop our butts. And, having our shadow suck up the turning abilities seems to actually weaken the party's ability. So, there's balance in that sense.

Roleplaying wise ... the ability to create spawns may deter good PCs from doing so. I know our party's goodie-goodie LG cleric of Pelor doesn't like my SD trying to create a band of unwitting spawns milling about the group. But, the role playing opportunity it provides is fun.

And the other balancing factor is the importance of keeping the 'primary' shadow alive. Else, the spawned shadows could easily turn on the SD just as demon/devils love to turn on their summoners ;-)

Just trying to understand SD's place in the world and the value in those shadow companions. Who knows, all this may be 'updated' for v3.5.

chengarino

 

[chengarino]

variant Shadowdancer presented in MotP

Well, this is simply a house ruling in connection with the variant Shadowdancer presented in MotP.

Where? I couldn't find it in there ... and it wasn't in the appendix.

chengarino

 

[chengarino]

Re: Re: ymmv

You're right there: perpetual unturnable shadows would imbalance the game. Our DM ruled that the SD Shadow (primary) would create spawns which are the std. MM CE ones.

Having played a few sessions with the "Spawing" interpretation, I don't think that the rules are unbalanced.

Even with turing resistance +2, CE shadows are a hazard when you encounter evil clerics. At 3HD, they are easily 'rebuked' into attacking your own party.

chengarino