Still no updated FORSAKER?!
- Thread starter Razz
- Start date
It's like having a Beholder for a friend! 
geosapient
Explorer
Crothian said:
The 1e Barbarian could use magic at later levels.
Yep, those are the two options. This sounds absolutely fair to me.Razz said:
The first type would be equivalent to a character in a modern setting who hates all technology and has sworn not to use it. He won't drive or ride in a car, so the party takes forever to get anywhere. He won't use a gun or any modern weapon, so he's no good in a gunfight. When he does get shot, he won't submit to any modern medicine, so the party twiddles their thumbs for a few weeks while his wounds heal. That does not sound like a very effective modern adventurer to me, and I don't think his fantasy equivalent would do any better.
I have no sympathy for that type. If you turn your back onto everything that makes life easy in your world, then you should not expect to have an easy life.
The other type would be a character who is willing to use technology to destroy technology. E.g., Bad Scientists are doing Bad Experiments, so he will turn a Bad Gun to a good purpose by killing scientists with it. This guy may be a hypocrite (and also a nutbar), but it seems like he'd be a lot more useful to an adventuring party.
EyeontheMountain
First Post
Hmm, Nostalgia.
The Forsaker never made the slightet bit of sense to me. Kind of like the Ur-Priest. How does someone who hates magic/dieties so much get all those cool magical abilities/divine spells? Just makes no sense at all.
The Forsaker never made the slightet bit of sense to me. Kind of like the Ur-Priest. How does someone who hates magic/dieties so much get all those cool magical abilities/divine spells? Just makes no sense at all.
frankthedm
First Post
Update? The Forsaker got his own ruleset!
IRON HEROES
IRON HEROES
Mouseferatu
Hero
AuraSeer said:
Exactly. Not all options, and not all character concepts, are created equal. If a character in a magic-rich world wishes to forego all magic, he should expect to be disadvantaged.
Nifft
Penguin Herder
Razz said:
As a class, it's worse than a Paladin in terms of enforcing one player's choice on the whole party.
If your idea of "good RP" is the same as my idea of "restrict the options of everyone else in the party", then I don't want your RP in my party.
A Foresaker could be made to work if the rest of the party also hated (and avoided) magic. But in a "cliche" (i.e. normal) party, you're doing your fellow players a disservice.
That's why I don't like it.
Cheers, -- N
PS: There's an Occult Slayer in the game I DM. It's working nicely. If that's the replacement Foresaker, more power to it.
Mouseferatu said:
Hence the reason the Forsaker prestige class was the way it was. It allowed someone to gain power to match with the rest of the party, despite their backwards ways. Only one ability relied on destroying a magic item to achieve, but even that drawback fit the thematic "all magic must be destroyed" of the prestige class.
So far, the only barely solid reasons I have been hearing from everyone is that the rest of the party can't be a cliched D&D group and feel the Forsaker is holding them back. From what? Healing him? Let him die or use a Heal check for once. For not teleporting or plane-shifting with everyone else? Let him find his own way, that could be an adventure in itself maybe.
And, of course, as someone else said maybe the PrC can be in an all magic-hating party. Point is, I don't see a reason for WOTC to not update the PrC, whereas I am only seeing reasons why picky DMs don't want it updated.
