Was there ever a 2ED Assassin?

[thorr-kan]

I had so much fun with my 1ED half-orc assassin/cleric, I was wondering if anything similar extisted in 2ED.

[JadedDM]

Technically, yes. In the Complete Thief's Handbook, there is an assassin kit. It's not much, though. They're basically non-good thieves who can identify poisons but have much less thief skill points and suffer a -4 reaction penalty to anyone who knows they are assassins.

[Delvin Darkwood]

There is also an assassin class in a greyhawk supplement or something like that (some sort of red brotherhood monastery... thing. The exact name eludes me). The class was mostly the same as 1st edition, the only change being to the 2nd editions thief skills. They received 20 points at first, second, and third level, and then 30 points there after.

[LibraryOgre]

The Scarlett Brotherhood supplement had the 2e version of the assassin.

[Rhynn]

The Complete Book of Humanoids has the Shadow kit for thieves, which basically makes them a 1E assassin: all weapons, shields, disguises, death attack, worse thief skills.

Porting assassins over is dead easy. They're just variant thieves. The only thing you really need to do is figure out how to handle their thief skills in 2E.

I give them a free Disguise proficiency, and this...


To determine the initial value of each skill, start with the base scores listed on Table 26½ below. To these base scores, add (or subtract) any appropriate modifiers for race, Dexterity, and armor worn (given on Tables 27, 28 and 29, respectively). All assassins at 1st level receive 30 discretionary percentage points that they can add to their base scores. No more than 15 points can be assigned to any single skill. Other than this, the points can be distributed in any way.

Each time an assassin rises a level in experience, he receives another 30 points to distribute. No more than 15 points per level can be assigned to a single skill, and no skill can be raised above 95 percent, including all adjustments for Dexterity, race, and armor.


Table 26½: Assassin Thieving Skill Base Scores
PP OP F/RT MS HS DN CW RL
5% 5% 0% 10% 5% 15% 50% 0%

[thorr-kan]

I remember the Shadow kit. I'd fogotten the assassin kit.

I'll have to see if I can scare up a copy of the Scarlett Brotherhood supplement.

[ken-do-nim]

The Scarlett Brotherhood supplement had the 2e version of the assassin.

As well as the monk. Good supplement!

[Hawriel]

Sadly I can't remember, but doesn't the Complete thieves book have an assassin kit?

[Rhynn]

Sadly I can't remember, but doesn't the Complete thieves book have an assassin kit?

Yes. Also, the first reply in this thread:


Technically, yes. In the Complete Thief's Handbook, there is an assassin kit. It's not much, though. They're basically non-good thieves who can identify poisons but have much less thief skill points and suffer a -4 reaction penalty to anyone who knows they are assassins.

[Hawriel]

Yes. Also, the first reply in this thread:

Good thing you pointed that out. Other wise the interewebs would have been mad at you.

[Rhynn]

Good thing you pointed that out. Other wise the interewebs would have been mad at you.

:smallcool: Now you've read 4 posts in this thread.

[Xuc Xac]

I think the AD&D2ed DMG mentioned the lack of an assassin class because it wasn't really a "class". They said something like being a wizard, thief, or cleric requires a particular set of abilities. Killing people for money only requires a certain morally reprehensible outlook. A character of any class can kill for money. Not all assassins are stealthy, wall-climbing, backstabbers, but if you want to be that kind of assassin, then just be a thief who kills for money.

[MeeposFire]

I think the AD&D2ed DMG mentioned the lack of an assassin class because it wasn't really a "class". They said something like being a wizard, thief, or cleric requires a particular set of abilities. Killing people for money only requires a certain morally reprehensible outlook. A character of any class can kill for money. Not all assassins are stealthy, wall-climbing, backstabbers, but if you want to be that kind of assassin, then just be a thief who kills for money.

The "real" reason was trying to get away from things that outsiders might think were bad or evil. 2e took out Demons+Devils (by name change of course), assassins, and half orcs as a player race (among other things). Granted that is a fair rationalization for it and I don't think you need an assassin class as I think the thief handles it just fine especially if you allow kits.

[Rhynn]

The "real" reason was trying to get away from things that outsiders might think were bad or evil. 2e took out Demons+Devils (by name change of course), assassins, and half orcs as a player race (among other things). Granted that is a fair rationalization for it and I don't think you need an assassin class as I think the thief handles it just fine especially if you allow kits.

Yup. 2E AD&D sort of fell victim to the early moral panics and everything had to be "cleaned up." Granted, this had already begun internally, mostly in the Dragonlance modules; Weis and Hickman wanted to write grand epic adventures for heroes, not for a bunch of guys mostly out for gold and glory (a primary or partial motivator in most other 1E modules).

It is a fair enough rationalization. Especially given how 2E streamlined/unified classes, the assassin would have looked pretty redundant. "So it's a thief who's worse at being a thief but can use halberds. Okay..."

[ken-do-nim]

Yet, in supplements 2E brought back everything 1E had: monks, assassins, demons, devils, you name it. There's even a Complete Book of Necromancers, if you can find it.

[Rhynn]

Yet, in supplements 2E brought back everything 1E had: monks, assassins, demons, devils, you name it. There's even a Complete Book of Necromancers, if you can find it.

I think that actually makes sense: the public perception was almost certainly formed from the core books (PHB, DMG, MM), since those are the ones everyone had. (Well, not that I'm saying e.g. Patricia Pulling ever even read those books, but you know...) So the supplements can have pretty much anything.

Not sure about demons and devils, though - that was a name-change (tanar'ri and baatezu) that wasn't reversed until 3.X, AFAIK? I mean, they used the words "demon" and "devil" (shadow demons, etc.) that's about it. I think the main thing was to have the more "innocuous" entries "Baatezu" and "Tanar'ri" (and "Yugoloth") in the Monstrous Compendiums / Monstrous Manual.

I also doubt anyone objected much to monks. :smallbiggrin:

[MeeposFire]

Yet, in supplements 2E brought back everything 1E had: monks, assassins, demons, devils, you name it. There's even a Complete Book of Necromancers, if you can find it.

Of course. After a while the need for new content combined with older 1e gamers wanting the older stuff brought back would lead them to eventually bring back most if not everything (sometimes under a different name though).

[thorr-kan]

So I've had a chance to look over CompThief and CompHum. The Assassin and Shadow kits vary just enough to be interesting. Of the two, I think the Shadow's closer to how I played my half-orc.

I've also looked at a friend's copy of Scarlett Brotherhood. Assassin class is interesting, but Suel human only.

So, I think the half-orc would be cleric/thief, Shadow kit.

Any Greyhawk speciality priests ever detailed? Like for Wee Jas?