PDA

View Full Version : Aasimar with Saint Template:



Os1ris09
2010-06-05, 01:06 PM
Does any one think this combonation is broken and cheesy in any good campaign with the class being taken is cleric and its good PrC's.

The following build I am proposing to my DM if he allows LA buy off is:

Aasimar Saint

Cleric of Heironous 4/Ordained Champion 1/Bone Knight 10/Ordained champion 4/Cleric 1

Or the following class's

Warlock 1/Cloistered Cleric 4/Eldritch Discpile 15

The latter build already ok'ed with DM due to house rule that if a PrC has a full 10 lvls already then you can continue to advance in that PrC and gain the repeating benefits such as gift of the divine patron.

Greenish
2010-06-05, 01:11 PM
Does any one think this combonation is broken and cheesy in any good campaign with the class being taken is cleric and its good PrC's.The race + template combo isn't broken. The class is easy to break, though.

Saint is pretty powerful template, perhaps even worth the 2 LA.

Aasimar doesn't offer much, other than the Outsider type.

Frog Dragon
2010-06-05, 01:17 PM
Go lesser aasimar (Player's guide to faerun) for the extra level of cleric casting.

Optimystik
2010-06-05, 01:18 PM
Go lesser aasimar (Player's guide to faerun) for the extra level of cleric casting.

This, especially since the Saint Template makes you an Outsider anyway, so you can afford to trade it in and avoid the Aasimar LA.

Os1ris09
2010-06-05, 01:21 PM
Go lesser aasimar (Player's guide to faerun) for the extra level of cleric casting.

Wish I could but I can't have campaign setting specific anything..... only reason bone knight may pass is because there isn't a region requirement or anything like that in the class itself bar the raise dead thing at lvl 5 but DM ruled that for regular zombies/skeletons

Optimystik
2010-06-05, 01:27 PM
Then you're better off as a human since Saint makes you an Outsider anyway. Aasimar will give you next to nothing here.

If you really want to be an Outsider at first level, go Neraphim (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20040613a&page=2) instead.

Os1ris09
2010-06-05, 01:33 PM
Then you're better off as a human since Saint makes you an Outsider anyway. Aasimar will give you next to nothing here.

If you really want to be an Outsider at first level, go Neraphim (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20040613a&page=2) instead.

Are they printed in a book? If not I can't do it..... :smallfrown:

Claudius Maximus
2010-06-05, 01:37 PM
Neraphim can be found in the Planar Handbook.

2xMachina
2010-06-05, 03:17 PM
Lesser isn't campaign specific. It is stated in a campaign book, but it does not require any setting.

Also, Aasimars CAN'T be Saints if they're not the lesser variety. Saints require humanoid, which Aasimars aren't. Lesser fixes that, and removes 1LA. Good all around.

Os1ris09
2010-06-05, 04:28 PM
It is located in the planar handbook? I will check it out.

Edit: Still DM has trouble letting bone knight work because it is listed in an Eberron book and the mere fact that lesser Aasimar is in Player's Guide to Faerun hurts the chances of it being accepted. SO........... I may have to go human since Aasimar can't become a saint. Oh well I get a bonus Feat and extra skill points. :smallbiggrin:

Gnorman
2010-06-05, 06:34 PM
I want to see the in-character justification for being a sainted commander of the undead.

Should be an interesting cognitive dance.

Optimystik
2010-06-05, 09:02 PM
Also, Aasimars CAN'T be Saints if they're not the lesser variety. Saints require humanoid, which Aasimars aren't. Lesser fixes that, and removes 1LA. Good all around.

Nitpick - The only race restriction on Saints is that they cannot be Outsiders or Elementals, not that they have to be humanoid. So you can be an Elan Saint, a Dragon Saint, and even a Necropolitan Saint.

arguskos
2010-06-05, 09:08 PM
I want to see the in-character justification for being a sainted commander of the undead.

Should be an interesting cognitive dance.
I was gonna mention that. How are you a Saint who has levels in Bone Knight? That just doesn't seem to flow together super well. Are undead not auto-evil in your DMs world or somesuch (not a bad thing)? :smallconfused:

ShadowsGrnEyes
2010-06-05, 09:51 PM
i belive the basic answer here is that the dm's setting must allow for good aligned death gods. . .

Os1ris09
2010-06-05, 10:09 PM
None of the above. The DM says that messing with necromantic effects for a good purpose is a "good" act. However to use those powers to fulfill your own ends is evil. So if I raise a corpse from the dead to have it aid in a good act such as slaying a black dragon harassing a town or slaying a devil or demon then the purpose of the spell is for good. Therefore leading to the saint template which dm states as thus "you must always strive for good deeds, no matter how you must attain them."

SO....... Behold the undead good aligned character. Therefore leading to undead are not inherently evil. HOWEVER, already animated undead not under control of a good character are evil, just the ones I raise are evil just can't do evil things while under my influence. :smallwink:

Tanuki Tales
2010-06-05, 10:19 PM
Could always try to see if you could make the Undead raised Deathless instead of undead.

Os1ris09
2010-06-05, 10:21 PM
Could always try to see if you could make the Undead raised Deathless instead of undead.

This is true. That template is in the BoED correct?

balistafreak
2010-06-05, 10:29 PM
So you can be an Elan Saint, a Dragon Saint, and even a Necropolitan Saint.

I once attempted to run a Tainted Scholar (progressing Sorcerer) Necropolitan Saint in a game.

... yeah, it didn't fly with the DM at all. :smalltongue:

"So your character is an undead glowing with holy energies who fuels his casting off of all that is evil in this world."

"Yes?"

"NO."

There were probably alignment restrictions I was overlooking too, but it was at least a silly concept. And good, to boot!

Optimystik
2010-06-05, 11:04 PM
This is true. That template is in the BoED correct?

Yes, and ECS too.

@ "Sainted Scholar": that is deeply disturbing.

balistafreak
2010-06-05, 11:22 PM
@ "Sainted Scholar": that is deeply disturbing.

As a Sorcerer, I had him take Divine Sorcerer (I think that's what it's called, from Dragon Magazine, eeeeew :smallwink:) to pick the Spell Domain. Divine Sorcerer lets you learn one domain spell, freely switchable after a rest. Guess what the Spell Domain has? Anyspell.

So I could prepare a small portfolio of combat-specific tricks just like a Wizard, while spontaneously casting essentially at-will. If I really wanted to be evil, I could just say that "I've Anyspelled every spell possible in existence" but... yeah. I don't use Polymorph for that reason - it might let you solve any problem, but then the game's boring and why are you playing again?

In retrospect, this was definitely not a character for the normal player. Even all my plans of holding back (good lord, I took the most unoptimal Sorcerer spells-known list ever) probably wouldn't have been enough.

"Sainted Scholar" does have a nice ring to it though. :smallbiggrin: Holy Power is such a nice add-on when you can't advance your spell DCs through any other means. (Necropolitan Tainted Scholars can get infinite spells via infinite Depravity, which undead can gain, but without a way to gain Corruption, their spell DCs are frozen. Admittedly at a relatively high number at first, but if the game progressed I would actually fall behind.)

If it helps the character was also a Silverbrow Human for Disguise as a class skill and the dragonblooded subtype to power up Wings of Cover. :smallcool:

Dracons
2010-06-06, 12:23 AM
Saint. Ha. I laughed at my player who suggested he be allowed to have that. It's only a plus two template! I should be allowed to have it!

Um. No.

sonofzeal
2010-06-06, 01:55 AM
There were probably alignment restrictions I was overlooking too, but it was at least a silly concept. And good, to boot!
Nope, it's totally RAW-legal. Sorta.

Necropolitan makes you Undead, but doesn't require an alignment or behaviour change. Tainted Scholar only requires taint, and again there's no alignment or behaviour piece to that. All the alignment and behaviour restrictions are from Saint.

And actually, it's not nearly as abusive as it might seem. The normal trick is to go Tainted Scholar + Necropolitan, then pump your Taint score up arbitrarily high. However, the best and easiest ways to pump your Taint score are by casting Evil spells, which the Saint can't do. He then has a very hard time abusing the Tainted Scholar mechanic. Really, his best option to build Taint is to fight a heck of a lot of the vilest evils out there, and gain Taint by exposure that way. I'd think of it like a Malconvoker, turning the dark energies against themselves.

"Early in my career I was captured and forced through this process to turn me undead. But now I am immune to much of their darkest weapons, and can turn their own energies against them to strike them down in the glorious name of Heironeous himself! All hail the gods of light!"

true_shinken
2010-06-06, 02:39 AM
Lesser isn't campaign specific. It is stated in a campaign book, but it does not require any setting.

I wonder if people actually bothered to READ the lesser races.
There being lesser races is a DM choice. You can't have a single lesser aasimar; either all aasimars are lesser or there are no lesser aasimar. Sure, you could get it past a DM, but it's not RAW - it's a house rule.
You can't any more campaign specific than this; it's a choise of race that defines how that entire race functions in the world.

Sliver
2010-06-06, 02:52 AM
I wonder if people actually bothered to READ the lesser races.
There being lesser races is a DM choice. You can't have a single lesser aasimar; either all aasimars are lesser or there are no lesser aasimar. Sure, you could get it past a DM, but it's not RAW - it's a house rule.
You can't any more campaign specific than this; it's a choise of race that defines how that entire race functions in the world.

The entire thing is a variant and it says that the DM should use it across the board... And it's a variant to the campaign your playing, not the Faerun setting.

2xMachina
2010-06-06, 05:09 AM
Variants are still RAW. Not always used, but still RAW.

Sliver
2010-06-06, 05:17 AM
Doesn't make it campaign specific. Like anything, it's up to the DM, but just because it's a variant in a campaign setting book, doesn't mean it is specific to that setting.

2xMachina
2010-06-06, 06:01 AM
Doesn't make it campaign specific. Like anything, it's up to the DM, but just because it's a variant in a campaign setting book, doesn't mean it is specific to that setting.

I know. I was replying to True_Shinken, who thinks variants are house-rules.

EDIT: Or did you get delete ninja'ed?

Gorbash
2010-06-06, 07:29 AM
Does any one think this combonation is broken and cheesy in any good campaign with the class being taken is cleric and its good PrC's.

The following build I am proposing to my DM if he allows LA buy off is:

Aasimar Saint

Cleric of Heironous 4/Ordained Champion 1/Bone Knight 10/Ordained champion 4/Cleric 1

Or the following class's

Warlock 1/Cloistered Cleric 4/Eldritch Discpile 15

The latter build already ok'ed with DM due to house rule that if a PrC has a full 10 lvls already then you can continue to advance in that PrC and gain the repeating benefits such as gift of the divine patron.

Are you sure that being Saint and Bone Knight is such a good idea? Yes, I know that Ordained Champion/Bone Knight is a good combo, but you have to remember that, as a Saint, you have to be epytome of good and I'm not sure that undead-raising, skeletal mount-riding, bone armor-wearing cleric qualifies.

I mean, just look at the picutre:

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/5n_gallery/90017.jpg

You might wanna check that with the DM first, since Saint template SPECIFICALLY states that you have to be paragon of Exalted, which I'm not sure you can, given the fluff of the Bone Knight prestige class.

Tanuki Tales
2010-06-06, 11:26 AM
Are you sure that being Saint and Bone Knight is such a good idea? Yes, I know that Ordained Champion/Bone Knight is a good combo, but you have to remember that, as a Saint, you have to be epytome of good and I'm not sure that undead-raising, skeletal mount-riding, bone armor-wearing cleric qualifies.

I mean, just look at the picutre:

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/5n_gallery/90017.jpg

You might wanna check that with the DM first, since Saint template SPECIFICALLY states that you have to be paragon of Exalted, which I'm not sure you can, given the fluff of the Bone Knight prestige class.

Just get the DM to make what you raise Deathless instead of Undead.

Ravens_cry
2010-06-06, 11:42 AM
Just get the DM to make what you raise Deathless instead of Undead.
I always found deathless more evil then undead. Negative energy is merely an alternate élan vital, alien, but no more evil then antimatter. Deathless,. being fuelled by a surge of positive energy, are a perversion of the life force of the world, living past their span appointed span using the energy that should be returned to the world with their demise.

hamishspence
2010-06-06, 12:10 PM
The fluff for Bone Knight says "you can never gain paladin levels again, since your association with the undead forever taints you"- however, you do retain some of your paladin powers. (Or regain them, if you were an ex-paladin).

You lose Smite Evil and Detect Evil, among others, though.

As written, you can be any alignment- including Good- but depending on the DM, you might not be able to gain exalted feats or PRCs (or templates).

Tanuki Tales
2010-06-06, 12:19 PM
I always found deathless more evil than undead. Negative energy is merely an alternate élan vital, alien, but no more evil then antimatter. Deathless,. being fuelled by a surge of positive energy, are a perversion of the life force of the world, living past their span appointed span using the energy that should be returned to the world with their demise.

Unfortunately, Negative Energy is skewed as being Evil by most fluff and settings.

Besides, Deathless are supposed to be like Baelorns, living on for the good of the people.

Greenish
2010-06-06, 12:30 PM
Besides, Deathless are supposed to be like Baelorns, living on for the good of the people.Great many evils have been committed "for the good of the people".

Ravens_cry
2010-06-07, 02:36 AM
Unfortunately, Negative Energy is skewed as being Evil by most fluff and settings.

I know, I just disagree. It also seems odd to me in light of the fact the creation golems enslave a spirit to provide the motive force, yet the creation of most golems is not considered evil in most settings and fluff.



Besides, Deathless are supposed to be like Baelorns, living on for the good of the people.
What Greenish said. What are Baelorns, by the way?

Runestar
2010-06-07, 06:25 AM
What Greenish said. What are Baelorns, by the way?

I think he meant baelnorms, which are good liches (typically elves) in the forgotten realms.

Os1ris09
2010-06-07, 07:11 AM
@ Gorbash: please read the posts following the original to see why I am attempting such a thing. Because like in real life many things are skewed and can be percieved on both ends of good and evil. it is all relevant to its purpose IMO. So if you apply that concept to D&D you obtain this argument that I am proposing to my DM.

"None of the above. The DM says that messing with necromantic effects for a good purpose is a "good" act. However to use those powers to fulfill your own ends is evil. So if I raise a corpse from the dead to have it aid in a good act such as slaying a black dragon harassing a town or slaying a devil or demon then the purpose of the spell is for good. Therefore leading to the saint template which dm states as thus "you must always strive for good deeds, no matter how you must attain them."

SO....... Behold the undead good aligned character. Therefore leading to undead are not inherently evil. HOWEVER, already animated undead not under control of a good character are evil, just the ones I raise are evil just can't do evil things while under my influence. "

In turn I wanted to play a Lich in a previous campaign that was a good campaign, which I succeeded in :smallbiggrin:, and he asked are liches evil? Is the mere fact of being a lich evil? To which I replied, "No because evil and good refer to acts and morale standards. Raising undead shouldn't be inherently evil if it is for a good cause such as saving a town or slaying a demon. Flip side of that though it is evil if used to selfish ends and forwarding your own power and not contributing to anything else."

Optimystik
2010-06-07, 08:33 AM
In turn I wanted to play a Lich in a previous campaign that was a good campaign, which I succeeded in :smallbiggrin:, and he asked are liches evil? Is the mere fact of being a lich evil? To which I replied, "No because evil and good refer to acts and morale standards. Raising undead shouldn't be inherently evil if it is for a good cause such as saving a town or slaying a demon. Flip side of that though it is evil if used to selfish ends and forwarding your own power and not contributing to anything else."

I just wanted to point out that by RAW, becoming a Lich is "unspeakably evil." I'm not saying that you can't rise above that to become good, but it wouldn't be easy unless your DM houserules it to be so.

There is a Good Lich variant in Libris Mortis (in addition to FR's Baelnorns) but that one has a slightly higher LA.

Tanuki Tales
2010-06-07, 10:24 AM
I think he meant baelnorms, which are good liches (typically elves) in the forgotten realms.

Damn. Had a feeling I was mispelling it. :smallsigh:

It ends with an N, not a M by the by.

@Greenish: Yeah yeah yeah, lovely cliche.

Undead are generally created for selfish reasons to be selfish means to reach selfish ends. Deathless on the other hand serve their communities, giving up eternal rest to continue protecting or guiding their people.

Ravens_cry
2010-06-07, 10:34 AM
Damn. Had a feeling I was mispelling it. :smallsigh:

It ends with an N, not a M by the by.

@Greenish: Yeah yeah yeah, lovely cliche.

Undead are generally created for selfish reasons to be selfish means to reach selfish ends. Deathless on the other hand serve their communities, giving up eternal rest to continue protecting or guiding their people.
Power is power. It's morality depends on its use, rarely in itself.
Imagine a nation that raises its dead as skeletons to do menial, repetitive, drudge work, raising water in wells, simple tasks on farms, and generally providing a better quality of life for all.
How is that evil? How is that even selfish?

Tanuki Tales
2010-06-07, 11:31 AM
Power is power. It's morality depends on its use, rarely in itself.
Imagine a nation that raises its dead as skeletons to do menial, repetitive, drudge work, raising water in wells, simple tasks on farms, and generally providing a better quality of life for all.
How is that evil? How is that even selfish?

Don't look at me, that's how Wizards likes to paint things.

I'm in the camp that negative energy is no more inherently evil than Positive is inherently good, they're both types of energy.

But the "as written by them" truth is that 9 times out of 10:

Undead = Evil
Deathless = Good.

Ravens_cry
2010-06-07, 11:39 AM
Don't look at me, that's how Wizards likes to paint things.

I'm in the camp that negative energy is no more inherently evil than Positive is inherently good, they're both types of energy.

But the "as written by them" truth is that 9 times out of 10:

Undead = Evil
Deathless = Good.
Yes, but this is D&D. We can change things, rules, fluff, setting, anything really.

Tanuki Tales
2010-06-07, 11:46 AM
Yes, but this is D&D. We can change things, rules, fluff, setting, anything really.

Except we're not talking about that.

We're talking about backing up a choice of class and template based on what is as written. The OP had said that he barely got things by his DM because the DM felt they were "campaign setting specific". So its apparent that refluffing wouldn't have been an option based on that. Deathless are written as good and are essentially the same thing as Undead, making an easy change to the Bone Knight.

Though this is not there or here since the DM also said that Necromancy in itself is not an evil act.

Ravens_cry
2010-06-07, 11:49 AM
Except we're not talking about that.

We're talking about backing up a choice of class and template based on what is as written. The OP had said that he barely got things by his DM because the DM felt they were "campaign setting specific". So its apparent that refluffing wouldn't have been an option based on that. Deathless are written as good and are essentially the same thing as Undead, making an easy change to the Bone Knight.

Though this is not there or here since the DM also said that Necromancy in itself is not an evil act.
Ok then. . .
Argument complete.
Commensing Cool Down Proceadures in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . .
Mark
*sound of liquid nitrogen been poured*

Greenish
2010-06-07, 11:57 AM
@Greenish: Yeah yeah yeah, lovely cliche.It being a cliché doesn't mean it's not true, or not relevant.

Deathless on the other hand serve their communities, giving up eternal rest to continue protecting or guiding their people.They "give up" being dead for ruling over the living. Oh, such a sacrifice!

Tanuki Tales
2010-06-07, 12:10 PM
It being a cliché doesn't mean it's not true, or not relevant.
They "give up" being dead for ruling over the living. Oh, such a sacrifice!

They don't rule, they generally fill an advisory position and act as sort of unliving Wikipedias.

*cue "All Viziers and Advisers to the throne are evil, evil men with Goatees"*

Greenish
2010-06-07, 12:14 PM
They don't rule, they generally fill an advisory position and act as sort of unliving Wikipedias.

*cue "All Viziers and Advisers to the throne are evil, evil men with Goatees"*http://decclic.qc.ca/usagers/060895/iznogoud.jpg
I rest my case.

Optimystik
2010-06-07, 12:17 PM
They "give up" being dead for ruling over the living. Oh, such a sacrifice!

If you mean Baelnorns, they don't rule anything... they generally have to hang out in pretty sparse areas like the ruins of Myth Drannor, eternally defending some forgotten Macguffin from people that don't even remember it exists.

Os1ris09
2010-06-07, 12:35 PM
I just wanted to point out that by RAW, becoming a Lich is "unspeakably evil." I'm not saying that you can't rise above that to become good, but it wouldn't be easy unless your DM houserules it to be so.

There is a Good Lich variant in Libris Mortis (in addition to FR's Baelnorns) but that one has a slightly higher LA.

Ya. I read that too but the DM ruled it as such that necromancy isn't inherently evil so why should becoming a lich be as well if it is using necromantic powers. To explain how I got it to work we had alot of down time (about a month in game) and we were fighting off these things that had fail or die effects. Well me being who I was RPing at the time couldn't find anyway to help against this evil foe. Until I found out about becoming undead. In turn I talked to the party and they said they wouldn't become undead for one reason or another so I transformed myself to help the cause and save spell slots, I was always running out of spells to help out. So becoming undead meant immune to death effects, etc.... Hence I sacrificed myself to help the cause. In turn though in the end I ended up dying because of a timely disintegrate spell that I had barely missed by 1. :smallfurious: But the damage and everything I did eventually led to a successful slaying of such a person. So the DM did his "divine intervention" and let me be ressurected as my original race due to sacrifice and heroic acts. :smallbiggrin:

I didn't get my money back though for the ritual........ :smallfrown:

Greenish
2010-06-07, 12:44 PM
If you mean Baelnorns, they don't rule anything... they generally have to hang out in pretty sparse areas like the ruins of Myth Drannor, eternally defending some forgotten Macguffin from people that don't even remember it exists.Well, I was thinking of Eberron's Deathless, I'll admit.

Tanuki Tales
2010-06-07, 12:50 PM
Well, I was thinking of Eberron's Deathless, I'll admit.

The Undying Court are elves though who are weird to even other elves and dragons.

So it's not a case of Deathless are evil but a case of Elves are Elves.