a quite possibly stupid question. 3.5

[Mystic Muse]

certain PRCs will say things like "any nongood" or "any evil" does this mean that you have to only be that alignment initially or do you have to continue being that alignment lest you lose benefits? I'd imagine the former since from the classes I've seen there aren't any mechanics for "falling"

also, if a class says "any neutral" for an entry requirement does that mean I can be neutral good? (really don't expect that to be the case but I figured I should ask anyway)

[Crow]

If you no longer qualify for the PrC, you lose all benefits that you derived from it. Nope, no reformed assasins with all their abilities in tact.

If it says any(alignment), I believe it is generally referring to the second part. So Any neutral would be;

Lawful Neutral, True Neutral, Chaotic Neutral.

[Saintjebus]

Some PRCs say that yes, you will lose benefits if you change alignment. So if they don't specifically say you lose the benefits, you won't.

[taltamir]

If you no longer qualify for the PrC, you lose all benefits that you derived from it.

well... that depends on what you mean by "any benefit".
You retain your base BAB, HD, and Saves increases.
You lose spell casting
You lose a variety of specific abilities (such as the paladin's ability to add cha to saves, etc)...

[Crow]

well... that depends on what you mean by "any benefit".
You retain your base BAB, HD, and Saves increases.
You lose spell casting
You lose a variety of specific abilities (such as the paladin's ability to add cha to saves, etc)...

Yeah, you are correct. I over-simplified the issue.

[Mystic Muse]

So if I decided to take the sandshaper PRC and later wanted my character to be good I would lose all spellcasting capabilities?

[Ravens_cry]

So if I decided to take the sandshaper PRC and later wanted my character to be good I would lose all spellcasting capabilities?
All those you got from the Sandshaper class, yeah.

[Mystic Muse]

time to look for a new PRC for my backup Sorceror then.

[Ravens_cry]

time to look for a new PRC for my backup Sorceror then.

Or talk to your DM.
Make a good backstory, and play it, slowly working your way towards being good. Depending on your groups style of play, you may be able to pull it off.

[deuxhero]

Personally I think that alignment restrictions are stupid and you should ignore them like multiclass XP penalties.

[Mystic Muse]

I will in games I DM. however I'm a player in this campaign and just "forgetting" a class requirement isn't something I'd like to do. I'll try and convince my DM but I'll look for something else just in case

[KillianHawkeye]

People from the RAQ Q&A thread will tell you that the rule about losing your prestige class abilities if you no longer meet the qualifications is only limited to prestige classes from books in which that rule is presented (CWar & CAr I believe), as it is not a general rule at all. Indeed, there are several prestige classes in other sources which would cause you to lose your class abilities automatically if that rule were enforced on them.

The general rule is that prestige class requirements are for entry only unless otherwise noted.

[soir8]

I think "any neutral" means any alignment with the word "neutral". So that's neutral good, neutral evil, lawful neutral, chaotic neutral, and true neutral.

[Curmudgeon]

People from the RAQ Q&A thread will tell you that the rule about losing your prestige class abilities if you no longer meet the qualifications is only limited to prestige classes from books in which that rule is presented (CWar & CAr I believe), as it is not a general rule at all. Indeed, there are several prestige classes in other sources which would cause you to lose your class abilities automatically if that rule were enforced on them.
RAQ = "Rules As Quoted"? :smallsmile:

This is true. The primary source book for how prestige classes work is the DMG, in which the Dragon Disciple PrC auto-fails such a "continue to maintain entry requirements" rule. (By the way, the two rules -- Complete Warrior page 16 and Complete Arcane page 17 -- have different mechanics of what you lose when you fail to maintain entry requirements.)

Beyond that it's a matter of any specification in the class description, or DM judgment. You could "reform" (i.e., become non-Evil) as an Assassin, but no reasonable DM would let you take another level in the class unless you went out and killed someone new just to regain acceptable status for the class.

[Grumman]

As a houserule, I say that losing Good/Evil or organisation prerequisites only makes you lose class abilities that have to be continuously drawn from your patron or organisation. Sure, the Assassins Guild might try to hunt you down and murder you if you leave the organisation, but you aren't going to suddenly forget how to hit people where it hurts or forget how to cast arcane spells.

[Narmy]

Some PRCs say that yes, you will lose benefits if you change alignment. So if they don't specifically say you lose the benefits, you won't.Could take my Corrupted Slayer of Fiends PrC as example.

You have to be good in order to take the class. If you turn evil, you may no longer advance in the class, BUT you still keep all the benefits and abilities that you gained while in the class.

[olentu]

RAQ = "Rules As Quoted"? :smallsmile:

This is true. The primary source book for how prestige classes work is the DMG, in which the Dragon Disciple PrC auto-fails such a "continue to maintain entry requirements" rule. (By the way, the two rules -- Complete Warrior page 16 and Complete Arcane page 17 -- have different mechanics of what you lose when you fail to maintain entry requirements.)

Beyond that it's a matter of any specification in the class description, or DM judgment. You could "reform" (i.e., become non-Evil) as an Assassin, but no reasonable DM would let you take another level in the class unless you went out and killed someone new just to regain acceptable status for the class.

While the problem of the two books having differing text is somewhat legitimate the fact that the dragon disciple does not work properly given the rules in one or more of the other books requires derivation to create a contradiction and thus would be invalid unless I am forgetting some text from the prestige class section that says that all the prestige classes presented will never cause a problematic loop. Barring such a statement there would be only a strange interaction and not conflict with the primary source without extending the rules, and of course extending the rules is not proper.

If one can present a quotation that demonstrates an actual contradiction that I have forgotten that would be to me a reasonable counter argument but deciding that any specific intent derived from the rules is the way things are I would not find reasonable.

[DragoonWraith]

no reasonable DM would force you take another level in the class unless you went out and killed someone new just to regain acceptable status for the class.
Fixed that for you? Was that a typo, or do you seriously consider it "insane" to allow a person to take levels in the Assassin class while being Good?

[Curmudgeon]

Fixed that for you? Was that a typo, or do you seriously consider it "insane" to allow a person to take levels in the Assassin class while being Good?
"Insane" (your term)? No. But unreasonable (my term), yes. You've got to go out and kill someone for no other reason than to show that you're sufficiently Evil just to get started in the class.
PRESTIGE CLASSES

Prestige classes are purely optional and always under the purview of the DM. We encourage you, as the DM, to tightly limit the prestige classes available in your campaign. Since the rules stress this "tight limit" of PrC availability, a DM letting a Good character take a level of Assassin is way out of line.

[The Glyphstone]

If you're allowing a Good character to even consider the Assassin PrC, there is always the option of, you know, removing the arbitrary murder requirement.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

"Insane" (your term)? No. But unreasonable (my term), yes. You've got to go out and kill someone for no other reason than to show that you're sufficiently Evil just to get started in the class. Since the rules stress this "tight limit" of PrC availability, a DM letting a Good character take a level of Assassin is way out of line.Go out and stab an orc. He's evil, so your alignment is safe, but you wouldn't waste your time with some 1st level CE humanoid were it not for wanting to join the assassins. You can even have a diviner guarantee to you that this particular orc does indeed deserve death.

[Blackfang108]

Go out and stab an orc. He's evil, so your alignment is safe, but you wouldn't waste your time with some 1st level CE humanoid were it not for wanting to join the assassins. You can even have a diviner guarantee to you that this particular orc does indeed deserve death.

Hey, it works for NG and CG. Certain LG individuals might have issues with this, though. (Most probably wouldn't.)

[suryasm]

Unless the class rules specifically say "you lose all abilities if you stop being this alignment", try convincing your DM to treat it like the Monk - you keep your abilities, but cannot gain further levels. Of course, if you can convince your DM to let it slide entirely by saying "That's for entry requirements only", even better.

[Dixieboy]

If you no longer qualify for the PrC, you lose all benefits that you derived from it. Nope, no reformed assasins with all their abilities in tact.

That only applies to one book.

[KillianHawkeye]

RAQ = "Rules As Quoted"? :smallsmile:

Oops....

Well, I was basically quoting you guys. :smallamused:

[Optimystik]

The general rule is that prestige class requirements are for entry only unless otherwise noted.

The DMG says no such thing. You need to meet the requirements to enter, yes, but it never says that such requirements apply only to entry. The CW and CArc wordings are the first rules text on the subject of continuing to qualify for a PrC.


(By the way, the two rules -- Complete Warrior page 16 and Complete Arcane page 17 -- have different mechanics of what you lose when you fail to maintain entry requirements.)

What? No, they don't.

Complete Arcane wording: "Should a character find herself in a position (because of changed alignment, lost levels, or the like) where she no longer meets the requirements of a prestige class, she loses all special abilities (but not Hit Dice, base attack bonus, or base save bonus) gained from levels of the prestige class."

Complete Warrior wording: "If a character no longer meets the requirements for a prestige class, he or she loses any benefit of any class features or other special abilities granted by the class. The character retains Hit Dice gained from advancing in the class as well as any improvements to base attack bonus and base save bonus that the class provided."

Under both, you lose all special abilities granted by the PrC, and keep your saves, bab and hit dice, once you cease qualifying for the PrC. I fail to see any meaningful difference between the two.


Go out and stab an orc. He's evil, so your alignment is safe, but you wouldn't waste your time with some 1st level CE humanoid were it not for wanting to join the assassins. You can even have a diviner guarantee to you that this particular orc does indeed deserve death.

Last I checked, orcs are sentient too, so killing one just so you can enter a PrC is murder. Bye bye good alignment.

[Another_Poet]

Unless the class rules specifically say "you lose all abilities if you stop being this alignment", try convincing your DM to treat it like the Monk - you keep your abilities, but cannot gain further levels.


This (if your DM insists on using the alignment requirements).

[KillianHawkeye]

The DMG says no such thing. You need to meet the requirements to enter, yes, but it never says that such requirements apply only to entry.

Well the rules of basketball don't say that a dog isn't allowed to play, so I guess we should assume that they can play.

You say yourself that the DMG only mentions requirements for entry into the class. Therefore, by RAW, the requirements are only for entry into the class. Here is the actual quote from the DMG:

... the first step of advancement is always choosing a class. If a character does not meet the requirements for a prestige class before that first step, that character cannot take the first level of that prestige class.

You are, of course, free to houserule or apply the rules from CAr/CWar more broadly if you wish. I won't stop you.

[Optimystik]

Well the rules of basketball don't say that a dog isn't allowed to play, so I guess we should assume that they can play.

http://www.zeldalinkedgreen.com/AirBud1.jpg

Moving on from your fallacy...


You say yourself that the DMG only mentions requirements for entry into the class. Therefore, by RAW, the requirements are only for entry into the class. Here is the actual quote from the DMG:

Not being able to take the first level of a class does not automatically give you explicit permission to take levels 2, 3, 4, etc. Your rule has no bearing on this situation.


You are, of course, free to houserule or apply the rules from CAr/CWar more broadly if you wish. I won't stop you.

Funny, I thought it was the WotC logo on those books, not "Opti's Houserule Compendium."

[Zom B]

Well the rules of basketball don't say that a dog isn't allowed to play, so I guess we should assume that they can play.

You got somethin' 'gainst Air Bud?

[KillianHawkeye]

Moving on from your fallacy...

That was your own fallacy, bub. Or do you not remember saying this:

but it never says that such requirements apply only to entry

Anyways...


Not being able to take the first level of a class does not automatically give you explicit permission to take levels 2, 3, 4, etc. Your rule has no bearing on this situation.

Last I checked, this entire thread was about whether or not a prestige class' requirements were applicable at every level. I was simply showing you that the only rule in the DMG is, in fact, about qualifying for the first level of the class. Obviously, you have to take the first level before gaining levels 2, 3, 4, etc., so I don't know why you're changing the subject.

The point I'm trying to make is that, according to the DMG, taking the first level of a class does automatically give you explicit permission to take the following levels. Or rather, that there is no need for further qualification once you've gotten that first level. That's the meaning of the text I quoted.


You got somethin' 'gainst Air Bud?

No, I'm just not interested in playing Air Bud d20 when I have D&D right here. :smallwink:

[Optimystik]

That was your own fallacy, bub. Or do you not remember saying this:

You're the one strawmanning my argument. Never did I say "there's no rule about it, so it must be allowed!" There IS a rule, it just happens to be in CW and CArc. Remember?


I was simply showing you that the only rule in the DMG is, in fact, about qualifying for the first level of the class. Obviously, you have to take the first level before gaining levels 2, 3, 4, etc., so I don't know why you're changing the subject.

The point I'm trying to make is that, according to the DMG, taking the first level of a class does automatically give you explicit permission to take the following levels. Or rather, that there is no need for further qualification once you've gotten that first level. That's the meaning of the text I quoted.

If the DMG has nothing relevant to continuing to qualify for a prestige class, then why are you citing it?

Emphasis mine. That is your own interpretation. Houserule it that way if you want, but you are directly contradicting the actual ruling on the subject.

[KillianHawkeye]

Okay, I see where you're coming from now.

The problem here is that there's some inherent conflict between the rules presented in Complete Arcane and Complete Warrior and several prestige classes published in other sources (typically the transformative ones) in that according to those rules you would cease to qualify for the class at some point during the normal acquisition of class features.

The most common way that I've seen to resolve this is to follow the primary source rule and limit the rules from CAr and CWar to those books, thus alleviating the restriction and allowing other prestige classes to conform to a format consistent with the primary source (the DMG).

The alternative is what? Create an exception for every PrC that negates its own prerequisites? Is that what you're suggesting?

[Brendan]

If losing a necessary prereq makes you lose abilities, than how about this;

forgetfulness
wizard 4 /bard 3
one sentient subject, ranged
will negates
sr: yes
length: 1 min/level
upon a failed will save, subject is treated as if it has no ranks in any skills for 1 minute per level. If this makes them unqualified for a prc, they lose all class features from it and lose half the hit die they gained from the prc. This includes saves and BAB.

this is why I doubt it is valid that all abilities would be lost if even one prereq is lost. For a divine class, maybe, but no one forgets how to call their shadow companion because the person has a few lower bonus to hit.

[Optimystik]

Okay, I see where you're coming from now.

The problem here is that there's some inherent conflict between the rules presented in Complete Arcane and Complete Warrior and several prestige classes published in other sources (typically the transformative ones) in that according to those rules you would cease to qualify for the class at some point during the normal acquisition of class features.

The most common way that I've seen to resolve this is to follow the primary source rule and limit the rules from CAr and CWar to those books, thus alleviating the restriction and allowing other prestige classes to conform to a format consistent with the primary source (the DMG).

The primary source rule does not apply here because the DMG says nothing about continuing to qualify for a PrC, only entering one. In the same vein, for dead characters - the DMG says that a dead character's soul leaves its body, but it doesn't say when, whereas Complete Divine elaborates that a dead character's soul sticks around for a short while (making spells like Last Breath and Soul Bind possible.)

And if you want to get technical, CW and CArc were the first books in the "Completes" line. Their qualification may have been intended to be printed in every subsequent sourcebook with PrCs in it, but WotC just never saw the need.


The alternative is what? Create an exception for every PrC that negates its own prerequisites? Is that what you're suggesting?

Why not? The only class I know about that's like that is Dragon Disciple (which sucks anyway.)

[taltamir]

If losing a necessary prereq makes you lose abilities, than how about this;

forgetfulness
wizard 4 /bard 3
one sentient subject, ranged
will negates
sr: yes
length: 1 min/level
upon a failed will save, subject is treated as if it has no ranks in any skills for 1 minute per level. If this makes them unqualified for a prc, they lose all class features from it and lose half the hit die they gained from the prc. This includes saves and BAB.

this is why I doubt it is valid that all abilities would be lost if even one prereq is lost. For a divine class, maybe, but no one forgets how to call their shadow companion because the person has a few lower bonus to hit.

is that a real spell? you cannot make up a new spell on the spot to justify your argument...

[olentu]

The primary source rule does not apply here because the DMG says nothing about continuing to qualify for a PrC, only entering one. In the same vein, for dead characters - the DMG says that a dead character's soul leaves its body, but it doesn't say when, whereas Complete Divine elaborates that a dead character's soul sticks around for a short while (making spells like Last Breath and Soul Bind possible.)

And if you want to get technical, CW and CArc were the first books in the "Completes" line. Their qualification may have been intended to be printed in every subsequent sourcebook with PrCs in it, but WotC just never saw the need.



Why not? The only class I know about that's like that is Dragon Disciple (which sucks anyway.)

I would obviously agree, given previous statements, that since there is no conflict without extending the rules the primary source rule would not apply.

I think perhaps the ur-priest also fails to qualify for itself by the requirement that the character not be able to cast divine spells however there was a bit more to the requirement that I do not remember and so can not say for sure.

As for the spell if it was to be an example perhaps a more pertinent example would be loss of a magic item or effect that allows qualification for a prestige class.

[Optimystik]

I think perhaps the ur-priest also fails to qualify for itself by the requirement that the character not be able to cast divine spells however there was a bit more to the requirement that I do not remember and so can not say for sure.

Ur-Priest mentions "previously possessed" spellcasting, so that should cover it.

[olentu]

Ur-Priest mentions "previously possessed" spellcasting, so that should cover it.

Hmm, that would work depending on how it was used.

[Curmudgeon]

Complete Warrior wording: "If a character no longer meets the requirements for a prestige class, he or she loses any benefit of any class features or other special abilities granted by the class. The character retains Hit Dice gained from advancing in the class as well as any improvements to base attack bonus and base save bonus that the class provided."

Complete Arcane wording: "Should a character find herself in a position (because of changed alignment, lost levels, or the like) where she no longer meets the requirements of a prestige class, she loses all special abilities (but not Hit Dice, base attack bonus, or base save bonus) gained from levels of the prestige class."

Under both, you lose all special abilities granted by the PrC, and keep your saves, bab and hit dice, once you cease qualifying for the PrC. I fail to see any meaningful difference between the two.
Because you provided the quotes, I just changed the order and highlighted the important difference for you -- what they took out for Complete Arcane (which came after Complete Warrior). If you look at any of the prestige class main tables in Complete Arcane you should be able to step through the page 17 rule and see that they keep the BAB and three Saves columns, and lose the Special abilities column -- but also keep the Spells per Day/Spells Known column, because that's a class feature not specified as something they lose under the altered rule. So failing to meet the entry requirements means an Alienist loses "Familiar abilities, summon alien" but keeps "+1 level of existing spellcasting class". For a book of arcane PrCs, what they retain is at least as important as what they lose. Whereas Complete Warrior's page 16 rule just dumps all other prestige class features entirely.

The difference is huge.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Last I checked, orcs are sentient too, so killing one just so you can enter a PrC is murder. Bye bye good alignment.Except that he deserves death. You spied on his camp for days, listened to him talking about his rape and looting of an Elven town with his buddies, and watched him beat at least one slave. Then you break into camp, kill him, and free the slaves. He was evil, a self-admitted murderer, rapist, and torturer. So it's not an Evil act to kill him. But he's also level 2 or so, and you're level 5, and killing him actually requires more work than not killing him, you wouldn't bother with level 2 Orcs under most circumstances. The only reason you're going out of your way to execute him is to join the assassins.

[olentu]

Because you provided the quotes, I just changed the order and highlighted the important difference for you -- what they took out for Complete Arcane (which came after Complete Warrior). If you look at any of the prestige class main tables in Complete Arcane you should be able to step through the page 17 rule and see that they keep the BAB and three Saves columns, and lose the Special abilities column -- but also keep the Spells per Day/Spells Known column, because that's a class feature not specified as something they lose under the altered rule. So failing to meet the entry requirements means an Alienist loses "Familiar abilities, summon alien" but keeps "+1 level of existing spellcasting class". For a book of arcane PrCs, what they retain is at least as important as what they lose. Whereas Complete Warrior's page 16 rule just dumps all other prestige class features entirely.

The difference is huge.

Well since as I read it, it seems one is a subset of the other as to what is lost and neither changes what is explicitly kept there is no contradiction. So they can both apply.

[Optimystik]

Except that he deserves death. You spied on his camp for days, listened to him talking about his rape and looting of an Elven town with his buddies, and watched him beat at least one slave. Then you break into camp, kill him, and free the slaves. He was evil, a self-admitted murderer, rapist, and torturer. So it's not an Evil act to kill him. But he's also level 2 or so, and you're level 5, and killing him actually requires more work than not killing him, you wouldn't bother with level 2 Orcs under most circumstances. The only reason you're going out of your way to execute him is to join the assassins.

Who gave you the right to pass judgment on this guy? Especially since you're not doing it out of some sense of justice or to improve the lives of anyone he's hurt or might hurt - you're doing it so you can get access to some class features.


The difference is huge.

You and I could debate all day as to whether spellcasting counts as a "special ability" or not. I'd say it's pretty special, you obviously don't think so, ultimately it's a DM call.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Who gave you the right to pass judgment on this guy? Especially since you're not doing it out of some sense of justice or to improve the lives of anyone he's hurt or might hurt - you're doing it so you can get access to some class features.I'm the mutha**** adventurerer. [/Batman]
Really, he's a murdering rapist slaveowner. Any adventurer would kill him if they could get away with it, it's just that sneaking into his camp, stabbing him, and sneaking out, when you're more than twice his level, is more trouble than it's worth. He deserves death, and you'd be happy to kill him, but expending the extra effort is only worth it if you gain a PrC or something for it. If his death was contracted to me by the father of a girl in the village he burned, and I was promised a magic item if I killed him, would you still consider it murder? That's basically all adventurers do, after all. We track evil people down and kill them for money.

Worlds simplest dungeon: In a room there's a monster with a cookie. Kill the monster, take the cookie.

[tyckspoon]

And if you want to get technical, CW and CArc were the first books in the "Completes" line. Their qualification may have been intended to be printed in every subsequent sourcebook with PrCs in it, but WotC just never saw the need.


They reprint the rules for Swift and Immediate actions and the Polymorph Subschool in every book where they're relevant. I'm sure there are less-common examples, but to the best of my knowledge any rules addition or change that isn't part of the Core books gets reprinted any time it's used. If they wanted the CW/CArc prestige class rules to apply to everything forever after, they would have errata'd it into the DMG itself.

[Optimystik]

They reprint the rules for Swift and Immediate actions and the Polymorph Subschool in every book where they're relevant. I'm sure there are less-common examples, but to the best of my knowledge any rules addition or change that isn't part of the Core books gets reprinted any time it's used. If they wanted the CW/CArc prestige class rules to apply to everything forever after, they would have errata'd it into the DMG itself.

If you want to get into things WotC should have errata'd, I have a long list for you.

The fact is, there is a ruling on the subject. You obviously don't have to apply it to your games, but that's not the same as saying it isn't there.


I'm the mutha**** adventurerer. [/Batman]
Really, he's a murdering rapist slaveowner. Any adventurer would kill him if they could get away with it, it's just that sneaking into his camp, stabbing him, and sneaking out, when you're more than twice his level, is more trouble than it's worth. He deserves death, and you'd be happy to kill him, but expending the extra effort is only worth it if you gain a PrC or something for it. If his death was contracted to me by the father of a girl in the village he burned, and I was promised a magic item if I killed him, would you still consider it murder? That's basically all adventurers do, after all. We track evil people down and kill them for money.

Worlds simplest dungeon: In a room there's a monster with a cookie. Kill the monster, take the cookie.

I have no problem with you killing him. I have a problem with it being labelled a Good act.

[Grumman]

I have no problem with you killing him. I have a problem with it being labelled a Good act.
It doesn't have to be a Good act, it just has to not be an Evil act (or only a little bit Evil). Good characters do lots of things that aren't Good.

[Mystic Muse]

I'll ask my DM this Saturday what his ruling is. I have one or two other PRCs in mind in case it's a no. Now I have one other question. would a level 6 Sorceror deal 6d6 damage with fireball or 3d6?

[Optimystik]

I'll ask my DM this Saturday what his ruling is. I have one or two other PRCs in mind in case it's a no. Now I have one other question. would a level 6 Sorceror deal 6d6 damage with fireball or 3d6?

6d6 - it functions off caster level, not spell level.

[Curmudgeon]

You and I could debate all day as to whether spellcasting counts as a "special ability" or not. I'd say it's pretty special, you obviously don't think so
It's not what you or I think that matters here; it's what WotC put into the rules. The Special Abilities (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm) specification (Monster Manual, page 315) states that Spells are only special abilities when they simulate the abilities of spellcasting classes without requiring class levels. Spellcasting is a class feature, but it is not a "special ability" any more than an increase in BAB or saves is.

You can call spellcasting "pretty special", "really exceptional", or even "golly gee gosh spiffy" if you want. It still isn't in the RAW category of "special abilities".

[KillianHawkeye]

Except that he deserves death. You spied on his camp for days, listened to him talking about his rape and looting of an Elven town with his buddies, and watched him beat at least one slave. Then you break into camp, kill him, and free the slaves. He was evil, a self-admitted murderer, rapist, and torturer. So it's not an Evil act to kill him. But he's also level 2 or so, and you're level 5, and killing him actually requires more work than not killing him, you wouldn't bother with level 2 Orcs under most circumstances. The only reason you're going out of your way to execute him is to join the assassins.

It may not be an evil act to kill him, but it would be an evil act to murder him. They're not the same thing. Under the scenario I quoted, I wouldn't consider that to be murder any more than killing someone in a duel to the death is murder.

Regardless, the requirement to kill someone in order to become an Assassin is clearly a "join this organization"-type prerequisite. It's not really about Good or Evil, and you probably don't get to choose the target yourself anyway. As such, you shouldn't need to do it again unless there's an RP reason for it (maybe you haven't been meeting your quota of assassinations). If there isn't any organization of assassins in the setting, that requirement pretty much disappears.

So to sum up: You wanna become an Assassin. The Boss says "you gonna hafta kill someone, first." Maybe it's Rapey McMurderdeathkill, maybe not. It doesn't matter, you just gotta kill who they tell you to kill, then you're an Assassin. Depending on your DM, you might be able to ditch the organization after learning their secret techniques and still be able to gain levels in the prestige class or you might not.

[dsmiles]

It may not be an evil act to kill him, but it would be an evil act to murder him. They're not the same thing. Under the scenario I quoted, I wouldn't consider that to be murder any more than killing someone in a duel to the death is murder.

Regardless, the requirement to kill someone in order to become an Assassin is clearly a "join this organization"-type prerequisite. It's not really about Good or Evil, and you probably don't get to choose the target yourself anyway. As such, you shouldn't need to do it again unless there's an RP reason for it (maybe you haven't been meeting your quota of assassinations). If there isn't any organization of assassins in the setting, that requirement pretty much disappears.

So to sum up: You wanna become an Assassin. The Boss says "you gonna hafta kill someone, first." Maybe it's Rapey McMurderdeathkill, maybe not. It doesn't matter, you just gotta kill who they tell you to kill, then you're an Assassin. Depending on your DM, you might be able to ditch the organization after learning their secret techniques and still be able to gain levels in the prestige class or you might not.

Or your DM may allow a Lawful Neutral government sanctioned organization of assassins, who are used to take out terrorists, corrupt politicians, etc.

[Foryn Gilnith]

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/prc/20070401a

CN and CG people still can't be assassins, though. :(

[dsmiles]

That's exactly where I was going when I played the LN assassin.

[Curmudgeon]

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/prc/20070401a

CN and CG people still can't be assassins, though. :(
You do realize that's an April Fool's joke, right?

[Foryn Gilnith]

LN assassins are about as much of a joke as the WotC cover-up of My Little Pony RPG. First d20 modern 2e got cancelled for 4e, then MLP got shoved under the carpet? Damn Hasbro executives and their meddling....

But seriously, there's nothing conceptually wrong with the Avenger. And it's WotC material.

[Zaydos]

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/prc/20070401a

CN and CG people still can't be assassins, though. :(

but... but... but... Chaotic Fighters can become Avengers at name level instead of Paladins or Knights... You don't use the name for a non-chaotic only prestige class that's just... wrong. Bad WotC, bad!

[Grommen]

I think this is more of a judgment call than something that can be solved via strict rules.

If your dude acts one way in the beginning, and takes classes that he believes in (lets say he is evily inclined and joins the assassins guild, and thuss takes classes for that purpose). Now a few years down the line (and a few levels) he has a conversion in faith due to growing up, seeing the world, love, god or all those other things that make someone change what they believe in. If they are really and truly good or evil as the case might warrant...Would they willingly still use the tools of their former trade? You have to work that all out with your group and stuff.