Special Restriction classes

[Luccan]

Certain base classes in 3.5 come with greater than normal restrictions. These range from the Wu Jen's Taboos to the Paladin's somewhat vague more-lawful-good-than-lawful-good to the Druid's metal prohibition. I'm looking for all the base classes in the game that have restrictions beyond simply alignment requirements. Here's what I have so far:

Druid (armor and weapons)
Paladin (be the goodliest or badliest depending on your variant. Lawful and Chaotic also apply.)
Wu Jen (taboos)
Knight (honorable* combat)
Healer (metal armor, not helping Good injured creatures)
Samurai, CW (dishonor, violating Bushido which isn't actually described in CW)
Samurai, OA (violating Bushido, which is actually described in OA)
Cleric (violating tenants of their god)

I'm certain there are at least a couple more, so please feel free to let me know what I missed!

[daremetoidareyo]

Monks & multiclassing, not being lawful

[torrasque666]

Monks & multiclassing, not being lawful

I mean kinda? OP's lose their abilities, either temporarily or permanently, for violating their rules. Monks just can't take more levels in Monk. They don't lose anything for becoming nonlawful.

To OP: Clerics and violating their tenents.

[OgresAreCute]

Oriental Adventures Samurai:

A samurai who becomes nonlawful or violates the tenets of
bushido cannot gain new levels as a samurai. He retains all his
bonus feats, but his ancestral weapons lose any “awakened” magical abilities.

Complete Warrior Samurai:

A samurai who ceases to be lawful or who commits an act of
grave dishonor loses all samurai class features that depend on
Charisma or Charisma-based checks. Minor embarrassments
don’t count, but major breaks with the code of bushido do.

Not sure if you count straight-up alignment requirements without other codes/restrictions, but if you do, Hexblade:

A hexblade who becomes good-aligned loses all hexblade
spells and all supernatural class abilities. His familiar
becomes a normal animal and leaves the hexblade’s service
as soon as possible.

Sohei:

A sohei who becomes nonlawful loses all spells and her ki
frenzy ability.

[Khedrac]

Healer (MH) also has to wear non-metal armor or lose their spells. (It's weird, they fluff link them to animals, give them animal handling as a skill and the druid armor restriction, but absolutely nothing makes sense for Healers to have this restriction.)

[Goaty14]

Paladin also has the multiclass restriction of the Monk. If your DM likes to stick to the rules, then I'd suggest "accidentally" slipping the short "The Unwavering Path (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060825a)"* module into his or her book pile, conveniently placed at the top when you announce your multiclass decision.

*The link is broken, but I'm sure that you can find it archived somewhere on the interwebs.

[Luccan]

Monks & multiclassing, not being lawful


I mean kinda? OP's lose their abilities, either temporarily or permanently, for violating their rules. Monks just can't take more levels in Monk. They don't lose anything for becoming nonlawful.

To OP: Clerics and violating their tenents.

See, this is why I need help. I hardly ever see the actual tentents of a cleric's faith come up in games. Monk isn't quite what I'm looking for, but I did also forget they have that rule (because that rule is stupid).


Oriental Adventures Samurai:


Complete Warrior Samurai:


Not sure if you count straight-up alignment requirements without other codes/restrictions, but if you do, Hexblade:


Sohei:

Ah yes, the Samurai. Somehow I remembered Knight but not them. I wasn't quite looking for Hexblade/Sohei type restrictions (otherwise I would've included Barbarian and Bard, among others) but that reminds me I need to remove the Hexblade alignment restriction in the next game I run. It never made any sense to me, given their powers are inherent.


Healer (MH) also has to wear non-metal armor or lose their spells. (It's weird, they fluff link them to animals, give them animal handling as a skill and the druid armor restriction, but absolutely nothing makes sense for Healers to have this restriction.)

Yeah. Healers also have a code too, now that I've looked into them again (also, they kinda just suck for full casters). But you'd think you would want a medic as protected as possible. Of course, the reason I'm collecting these, which I reveal below, works for my purposes.


Paladin also has the multiclass restriction of the Monk. If your DM likes to stick to the rules, then I'd suggest "accidentally" slipping the short "The Unwavering Path (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060825a)"* module into his or her book pile, conveniently placed at the top when you announce your multiclass decision.

*The link is broken, but I'm sure that you can find it archived somewhere on the interwebs.

Luckily, this has nothing to do with a rules stickler DM that doesn't want me to have fun. However, I will absolutely take a look at that module if it lifts restrictions from Paladin multiclassing. Could be useful in the future.

Thanks for the responses so far, I'm updating the OP with those classes. I'm conceiving of a setting where magic power is derived from oaths undertaken by the individuals who would have that power. The classes here seem to be providing a good base of classes, with some warriors, an arcanist, and three divine casters. The Knight is the odd man out in this case, but I'm thinking of providing their Challenge with additional uses of a more mystic nature.

Edit: Normally the CW Samurai would also have non-magical abilities, but I've taken to gestalting them with the OA Samurai (and letting them choose an ancestral weapon from a short list rather than being stuck with the bastard sword).

[torrasque666]

Luckily, this has nothing to do with a rules stickler DM that doesn't want me to have fun. However, I will absolutely take a look at that module if it lifts restrictions from Paladin multiclassing. Could be useful in the future.

Its a short adventure that lets a former monk or former paladin multiclass back into the original class. Have to do it twice if you want that for both classes.

[Zaq]

The Binder class itself technically carries no specific restrictions, but every single vestige you bind to has a chance (depending on the result of your pact) of making mechanically-enforced demands on your behavior, so that kinda counts, I guess?

[Luccan]

The Binder class itself technically carries no specific restrictions, but every single vestige you bind to has a chance (depending on the result of your pact) of making mechanically-enforced demands on your behavior, so that kinda counts, I guess?

Oh yeah. I keep forgetting classes I've been working on other stuff with recently. Hmm, they also work really well for my setting in their default fluff. Power comes from the oaths people take that restricts their behavior, but (some, sometimes) Binders can circumvent that. The gods aren't happy someone is breaking the rules and it freaks everyone else out (or at least everyone who knows the difference). But Binders aren't always immune to the rules, which is actually what the vestiges are counting on.