The Bladesinger PRC

[metaquad4]

I disagree with this list of priorities. There are more than enough generic, open-to-everyone, classes on this server. Filling the PrC and class list with even more bland generic classes with little ties to the lore of the setting makes the server itself feel more bland. If anything, implementing classes like the bladesinger should take priority over classes like solar channeler. The bg list of classes covers most concepts well enough, except maybe a divine sneak. We should focus on adding classes and content which enrich the setting.

If we can release them in equal portions, then it would be fine. But, only if we can do that.

For example:
Create a series of classes, bound to races and prioritizing races that don't have classes bound to them yet. Then, release them all at once, so that each race has a class associated with it.

For example, we have:

Elves:
Arcane Archer

Gnomes:
Breach Gnome

Dwarf:
Battlerager
Dwarven Defender

Halfling:
Warsling Sniper

Human:
Red Wizard (Faction Specific, App Only)

Darkvision Races:
Cavestalker

For the race end, the situation isn't actually terrible right now. We just need something for:
Humans (all they have is a faction specific/app only class), Planetouched (Ideally, Elemental Archer could have been keyed towards Gensai with its Kaedrin bonuses, but BG nerfed that when it was implemented), and Orcs.

For specific deities, its a little more tricky. Ideally, we'd have each god's specialty priest, but that isn't feasible for nwn2 (If I am not mistaken, there is a maximum amount of classes you can have in the game at any point. Sigil was possibly speaking of this issue on their forums a while back. It was either classes or races, but I'm pretty sure it was classes.). Not to mention the amount of work that would be involved. Due to limited time and resources, it would be better to tie themed divine classes to domains, rather than specific deities. Even if we could divert resources to implementing each of these, it would be better to use those resources else-where (something always needs to be done).

(((Sorry for rambling offtopic. Will stop now. This take on the discussion can probably go to the general forums.)))

[kellendril]

I would have to say, if this PRC is approved, it really should be app only, simply because the lore supports that it would be a very rare PRC, requiring a great deal of training by a master of the art.

I'd even go so far as to say that I don't think it should be approved if it is opened up to whoever wants to take it. The lore just would not support the mad influx of bladesingers that would inevitably follow.

[metaquad4]

You could say the same for other classes: Paladin, Warlock, Druid, Cleric, Harper Agent, Daggerspell Mage, Monks (Each Monastery has its own way), Morninglord, Stormlord, Divine Champion, Spirit Shaman, Favored Soul. . .probably a couple that I missed too.

Each of their own lore knowledge that is required to play them "properly". Many of them are devoted to specific causes, knowingly or unknowingly. A few of them are required to take oaths and keep to those oaths against all else.

As far as "requiring a great deal of training". . .most classes require a great deal of training. Some of them by a master, some not (depending on the class, and if the class is driven by innate or taught ability). As far as IG effort to master the art goes, most classes have that too. For instance, Eldrich Knight notes that "They tend to be driven individuals, because simultaneously perfecting their spellcasting and combat prowess requires immense time and effort."

People don't just mass up and play the same class. If a new class is released, there will be that moment where a bunch of people may make bladesingers. Some will stick with it, some won't. That is the nature of releasing new and exciting classes.

You could use that argument for many classes. Take warlock. If there was a massive influx of warlocks, lore wouldn't support that. Same with favored souls. Same with druids. Same with wizards. Not every adventurer in any one region are all the same class. And, that is the case in game either. There may be an initial influx, or a post-initial influx if it becomes the flavor of the month for one reason or another. But, it'll die down.

You don't need to worry about everyone becoming a bladesinger. If you do, you need to evaluate the class. If everyone is going to play it, and it has something to do with power, you can tone it down (for example).

Your arguments make no sense, from my perspective. You won't suddenly find that every player is playing a bladesinger. Some will, some won't. Bladesinger is no more intensive than the myriad of other "intensive" classes we have on the server. If it is, then by all means, quote me something from source that says it is more intensive than say. . .paladin (as an example, since paladin is generally considered the most intensive of the traditional base classes). Show, with evidence, exactly how it is more intensive than the already intensive classes we have.

Side-Note:
(Personally, I don't think any of these classes are really intensive. They require a bit of background research, but most things IG do when you delve into it. Not just with classes, either. You do research on locations, countries, religions, etc. You do your background research so you can understand the rules and story in which you can make your character, and then you do so. Its not intensive, at-least form my view. Its part of the fun. And, its not very much research. D&D doesn't exactly have massive piles of lore you *need* to know. You just need to know the boundaries and from there, you can do what you like. Anything more than that is for your own fun. D&D is a creative game, after all. Its a game about customization, not creating carbon copies of one another.)

[kellendril]

I stated my opinion. I really didn't make an argument for your perspective, but for mine. It is what it is. It makes perfect sense to me. I'd rather not see bladesinger if it will be open to every single person that thinks the class is cool without a commitment to playing the class right.

[The Whistler]

If you state your opinions publicly, you should be prepared to debate them.

[Lockonnow]

the DnD was fun before 4E then it been bording couse if you look manything thing have change

[metaquad4]

If the player doesn't play the class right, there can be IC consequences to that. If a druid, for example, demolishes a section of nature, I would fully anticipate that the DMs not only strip them of their druidic abilities but send druid NPCs after them. If a paladin player breaks their code, I expect DMs to strip them of their powers. If a player with a class connecting them to an organization betrays that organization, consequences should follow. It is up to the DMs to make sure those consequences do follow. And, if the player is aiming to stay true to the class, they will do their research.

Additionally, tooltips are there for a reason. Tooltips can give advice on how to play the class, and give background information on the class. They let people know what the class is. Put text that should be there into the tooltip, so that players (at the very least) get interested and inform themselves (if the tooltip isn't informative in and of itself, which it should be).

If all is well, the class tooltip will inform players about what the class is, and the DMs will ensure that actions have consequences.

Also, before the argument that DMs can't be present all the time is stated - yes. DMs aren't present all the time. The onus is on the player to take a screenshot of a character blatantly violating an oath and sending it in. The DMs can follow up, and root out the truth of the matter then. Players have an onus to help the game out, too. And, DMs won't always have the time to do this, yes. Such is the price we play, by playing a D&D-based cRPG. DMs will, eventually, find time. And, if the player does their RP near a DM (which is very possible, most people stick to continuity), and is found to be in violation of any specific class code, the player can be booped.

Not to mention, players enforce consequences on each-other. A bladesinger betrays an oath they made to their elven people? Their elven people can deliver some swift elven justice. Same with paladins, druids, harper agent, etc.

There are a myriad of ways a player who chooses one of these classes and blatantly betrays their oath can (and will, in practical terms) be dealt with. It likely won't happen often (count the times that druidic players have betrayed their oaths, harper agents have betrayed the harpers, paladin players have betrayed their oaths, daggerspell mages have betrayed their mission, red wizard/thayan knight players have betrayed the red wizards, warlock/spirit shaman players have betrayed their pacts, sacred fist players have betrayed their oaths, etc) as we can see with all these other classes.

I wouldn't worry about that. And hey, if we implement it and the server suddenly collapses into pure chaos (people ERPing in the streets, random OOC PvP slaughter in the BG Palace District, Elves running everywhere), we can make it app only and give everyone who took it either the chance to make an app or a 100% RCR. No harm done.

Rather than instantly jumping to an undesirable extreme, we should take it easy. No need for an app. The game tends to take care of itself, and actions have IG consequences And if there becomes a need, you can always say "I told you so"

We shouldn't use the app system to substitute for punishing characters for doing something that their character sheet wouldn't allow. We should handle that in character. Its far more interesting, it generates RP, and it isn't an artificial barrier (or wall, if you will. That the players have to pay for! With apps!).

[BigJ]

Even at 5/10 progression still OP.

Make it lose the INT / AC bonus if it wears armour. I assume every other class (Monk/Duel/IB/FoF) which has a stat to AC bonus on it loses that bonus when wearing armour for balance reasons. (Hell the main reason monk was banned from druid because it turned their casting stat in to AC)

Make it lose the 0% ASF. Every NON-ELVEN gish build has to spend 3 EPIC feats to get that, how is getting it for free balanced? Also, will this make you immune to the 50% asf from stone / iron body?

In fact just compare this PrC with a non-elven gish or even a straight mage, for balancing. (+10 ac with armour on top???. +10 ac to polymorph and shapechange. Non-elven has to be lvl 23 at earliest and spend 3 epic feats to get 0ASF)

5 Wiz / 5 Dragonslayer / 10 Blade / 10 Ek sounds nice for AB (3 off a normal warrior class before spells), but 10 Wiz / 3 fighter / 9 blade / 8 Arch mage would make a pretty sweet CL30 wizard with + 16 ac compared to another wizard, especially if stone/iron body works without +50% ASF.

MAYBE as a home-brew class which was open to all races (Drow have their own version after all) you wouldn't have to make NON-ELVEN comparisons or worry about reasons for app-only.

But still OP.

BigJ

[Aspect of Sorrow]

Make it lose the 0% ASF. Every NON-ELVEN gish build has to spend 3 EPIC feats to get that, how is getting it for free balanced? Also, will this make you immune to the 50% asf from stone / iron body?

S/I B ASF would still apply, just as it does against autostill.

[Moltrazahn]

Orc only classes!

...

Actually each race should have at least one unique class avaliable. Would be special and actually non-snowflake.

[aaron22]

Orc only classes!

defiler.. that sounds amazing.

[metaquad4]

Even at 5/10 progression still OP.

Make it lose the INT / AC bonus if it wears armour. I assume every other class (Monk/Duel/IB/FoF) which has a stat to AC bonus on it loses that bonus when wearing armour for balance reasons. (Hell the main reason monk was banned from druid because it turned their casting stat in to AC)

Make it lose the 0% ASF. Every NON-ELVEN gish build has to spend 3 EPIC feats to get that, how is getting it for free balanced? Also, will this make you immune to the 50% asf from stone / iron body?

In fact just compare this PrC with a non-elven gish or even a straight mage, for balancing. (+10 ac with armour on top???. +10 ac to polymorph and shapechange. Non-elven has to be lvl 23 at earliest and spend 3 epic feats to get 0ASF)

5 Wiz / 5 Dragonslayer / 10 Blade / 10 Ek sounds nice for AB (3 off a normal warrior class before spells), but 10 Wiz / 3 fighter / 9 blade / 8 Arch mage would make a pretty sweet CL30 wizard with + 16 ac compared to another wizard, especially if stone/iron body works without +50% ASF.

MAYBE as a home-brew class which was open to all races (Drow have their own version after all) you wouldn't have to make NON-ELVEN comparisons or worry about reasons for app-only.

But still OP.

BigJ

5/10 is fine. For a gish, there is a fine line between OP and useless (due to the frequency of dispels here). I think ending at 26 CL (for a gish build) hits that sweet spot.

Most gishes spend those 3 feats to not have to put any points into dex (and to get access to mithril fullplate). This still needs to put points into dex (light armor!), at-least 16 points (for mithril breastplate). Also, if you read the feat, it wouldn't. That 50% arcane spell faliure is applied as per fullplate. To bypass that, you need auto-still 0-9 still.

The AC can be scripted to not apply while polymorphed, in a similar manner to Fist of the Forest.

None elven gishes do suck, but not for the reasons you stated. They suck because of the dispel fix, and they need another class to counter-act it. If indeed bladesinger is added, they should still add another part time casting, part time High BAB class none-the-less so that anyone can make a viable gish with (most) any race.

Again, stone body wouldn't work. 10 Wiz / 3 fighter / 9 blade / 8 Arch mage would indeed be a good build. It'd be a good tank-wizard. As a caster, however, it would fall short of other (more potent, for casting/nuking) class combos. Like Wizard/SD (with frost mage, ASoC, Blood Magus, etc). And due to Archmage, it'd have less sustainability than the former. Its AC would be comparable to a bard (or, even better: a divine bard), an iron sorcerer, a divine shield cleric/FvS, or a Spirit Shaman/Druid.

I would expect, just like Assassin became Assassin and Avenger (open to all alignments), Bladesinger would follow the same route (with Bladesinger's drow counterpart intergrated into the class). Not doing that would not be fairly silly.

[mrm3ntalist]

Some personal opinions

- No new PRCs should be application only. Its counter productive.
- With the "dispel fix" 10 lvlPRCs should have at least 6/10 spell progression.
- I dont think it is needed to prioritise in making a race specific PRC for every race. If someone feels that a race specific PRC is needed, a suggestion can be made. The argument that a race has X race specific PRCs is not something that can be used for/against a new prc.

[Tantive]

Evil Bladesingers. Just no. Its rather abominable to my tastes in every sensibility to me. In all examples for characters in Dnd lore books, neutral is the lowest I've seen them go. Evil going gish, let that happen under Duskblades that have their own Lore and interesting Abilities, and leave it there where it belongs. They also function differently in combat roles. Duskblades are Heavy combat spellblades, while the bladesingers acted as precision skirmishers.

A class more open to the rest. Duskblade, Spellblade and Swiftblade are far more fitting.

[The Whistler]

my tastes

to me.

Ok.

Now, you can get practical or you can keep lobbying for a sub-race AND alignment constrained prc which is never gonna happen. The easiest solution to this would be to add a clause within the class text which explains what Duskblades and Deathsingers are and that actual, evil Bladesingers are utter snowflakes.

S/I B ASF would still apply, just as it does against autostill.

I played an autostill sorcerer for 4 years and the above is not true, unless it was changed in the recent-ish megapatch.