The Book of Exalted Deeds - It's Here! (merged - full ToC posted)

[Olive]

Thats true; I'll probably take Zaphkiel as a cohort.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Olive mate!

...well he is only a quasi-deity after all.

 

[gfunk]

Does that mean that the AoP gains caster levels at double pace?

Yes.

 

[Psion]

Interestingly enough, Monte Cook had made the exact same decision in the Book of Hallowed Might. First, you take Swear an Oath, which by itself is useless, and then you may take oath feats.

Huh? Swear and Oath certainly is not useless. It gives you a +1 luck bonus towards saves and checks in pursuit of fullfilling the oath.

 

[Gez]

Well, I read it as "in pursuit of fullfilling an oath taken with another oath feat".

 

[Psion]

Well, I read it as "in pursuit of fullfilling an oath taken with another oath feat".

They even include an example in the feat writeup which doesn't mention any other feats. It's just the oath you take.

 

[Voadam]

As for the book itself, I love it. My favorite quote so far:“A good character doesn’t just help others or fight evil when it’s convenient for him to do so. Even the most generous altruism, when it comes without sacrifice or even serves one’s own self-interest, is neutral at best. A character committed to the cause of good champions that cause in any circumstance, often at great personal risk or cost.”


I'd be thrilled if my players took that to heart.

Bah!

If you like doing good, you are not good, because only martyring is good. If you make your neighborhood a better place to live you are not good because you will benefit from it. Doing good acts without sacrifice is not good.

Bah! Rubbish!

 

[Joshua Randall]

Welcome to a philosophical debate that has been taking place for thousands of years. (And the D&D debate has been taking place for, what, 30 years?) I guess this is (partly) why BoED is a product for mature audiences.

 

[Psion]

If you like doing good, you are not good, because only martyring is good. If you make your neighborhood a better place to live you are not good because you will benefit from it. Doing good acts without sacrifice is not good.

Welcome to a philosophical debate that has been taking place for thousands of years.

Yup. Isn't "Voadam's" take above essentially Deontology?

Interesting ethical model, but not one I'd use to define the D&D alginments.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

It still seems a whole lot weaker than the assassain. You just don't get enough back for your investment of three feats plus putting a high score into CHA. Plus your pigeon-holed into having a bunch of rogue levels.

Divine Grace at 2nd level means there's a reason for the high Cha requirement. That's a minimum +2 bonus to saves across the board, unless you have Divine Grace already. Of course, I suspect that might have been put in towards the end of development to power the class up a bit.

True, the easiest way in is with Rogue-5, but, dernit, I *like* rogues. It's a pity that SoD doesn't advance Uncanny Dodge, but hey. Plus, with all the skill points at your disposal, you can have lots of nice social skills and be the nice erudite conversationalist who'll then take you down HARD if he has to, rather than the standard B&E guy.

And, yes, the feats do hurt; a non-human non-fighter can't get in until 6th level, and a human rogue-5 has to spend all three of his feats to get into the class. However, Weapon Focus gives you a +1 to attack, which is useful, and Sanctify Martial Strike is nifty as well. "Oh, look, I don't have to put Holy on my weapon any more. Being a bagman for Domiel is KEWL!!! Yay!"

Brad