Scythe-wielding PrCs

[Cheesy74]

I'm creating a melee character that focuses around wielding a scythe. I've been poring over a few books and haven't managed to find any PrCs that focus on this, so I figure that it'd be easier to ask for the community's assistance. Are there any PrCs like this outside of dragon magazine or the like?

EDIT: I'd prefer one that isn't barbarian-focused, because my initial intent was to make a battle cleric around this.

[The Glyphstone]

Not a scythe-specific one, but if you got a Kaorti Resin scythe, you might be able to take Exotic Weapon Master.

[Wabbajack]

Take Disciple of Dispater? Or if not evil a re-fluffed version?
Tripled threat range that stacks with Imp Crit is rather nice with x4 crit damage.

[Cheesy74]

Damn. Would that tripled rating stack additively or multiplicatively? That is, would it go from 18-20 to 15-20 or just to 17-20?

[Curmudgeon]

Take Disciple of Dispater? Or if not evil a re-fluffed version?
Tripled threat range that stacks with Imp Crit

That's only in a 3.0 game, of course. Stacking of threat range expansion was done away with in 3.5 rules.

[Wabbajack]

Disciple of Dispater explicitly says that it stacks with Imp Crit, so unless there is an errata it stacks by RAW.

[tyckspoon]

Damn. Would that tripled rating stack additively or multiplicatively? That is, would it go from 18-20 to 15-20 or just to 17-20?

Threat range multiplication is done by counting the threatening numbers and then increasing that count by the multiplier. If you've got a 20/x weapon, you have 1 threatening number. Double your threat range means you now should get 2 threatening numbers, so 19-20. If you started with 18-20, you have 3 threatening numbers. Double that, you should have six, so 15-20.

[Wabbajack]

I think he's asking how the doubling would stack with the tripling.

[Cheesy74]

I think he's asking how the doubling would stack with the tripling.

Yeah. I'm well aware of how threat range is multiplied, I just don't know how this would stack.

[Beelzebub1111]

You would have 6 (2x3) threatening numbers so: 15-20

Though if you had a Falchion, it would be 18 (3x2x3) threatening numbers, so you would crit on a 3!

[gbprime]

No, you don't multiply the multiplier, you only add it. Start with a 20, doubling it makes it 19-20, tripling it makes it 18-20, and adding improved critical doubles the ORIGINAL, adding 1 more to make it 17-20.

It's Falchions that are lethal like this. 18-20 becomes 9-20 in the end.

[Beelzebub1111]

No, you don't multiply the multiplier, you only add it. Start with a 20, doubling it makes it 19-20, tripling it makes it 18-20, and adding improved critical doubles the ORIGINAL, adding 1 more to make it 17-20.

It's Falchions that are lethal like this. 18-20 becomes 9-20 in the end.

Ugh...this is confusing. STILL 55% chance to crit is pretty awesome.

[Curmudgeon]

Disciple of Dispater explicitly says that it stacks with Imp Crit, so unless there is an errata it stacks by RAW.

That's wrong for a couple of reasons. From the 3.5 Dungeon Master's Guide on page 4:

This is an upgrade of the d20 System, not a new edition of the game. This revision is compatible with all existing products, and those products can be used with the revision with only minor adjustments.

D&D 3.5 removed threat range stacking; that's one of the minor adjustments involved with the upgrade from 3.0 rules.

Here's the official rule regarding rule disagreements.

Errata Rule: Primary Sources

When you find a disagreement between two D&D® rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees.

Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves book and topic precedence. The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for playing PC races, and for using base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics from the Dungeon Master's Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player's Handbook, you should assume the Player's Handbook is the primary source. The Dungeon Master's Guide is the primary source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities.

Disciple of Dispater says their Iron Power ability stacks with Improved Critical, but the 3.5 Improved Critical feat disagrees:

This effect doesn’t stack with any other effect that expands the threat range of a weapon.

Following the Primary Sources resolution procedure for rules disagreements, the Player's Handbook is correct, and the Book of Vile Darkness isn't.

[Urpriest]

Here's the official rule regarding rule disagreements. Disciple of Dispater says their Iron Power ability stacks with Improved Critical, but the 3.5 Improved Critical feat disagrees: Following the Primary Sources resolution procedure for rules disagreements, the Player's Handbook is correct, and the Book of Vile Darkness isn't.

Not from the text you quoted. The Book of Vile Darkness is the primary source for Disciple of Dispater. That means it takes precedent on the effects of Disciple of Dispater's abilities. The fact that it contradicts the primary source on Improved Critical means that the contradiction is unresolvable by use of the quoted rule, as the quoted rule does not say anything that would imply that the Player's Handbook's status as primary source on Improved Critical overrides the Book of Vile Darkness's status as primary source on Disciple of Dispater.

You would need another principle to distinguish the two contradictory statements. While 3.5's design principle of eliminating stacking critical ranges would help with this, applying it is an exercise in extrapolation, much like Magebred Fleshraker animal companions. Extrapolation, even suggested extrapolation, as long as there are no explicit guidelines for it, is not RAW. Very clear RAI, but not RAW, and as such outside your purview.

[true_shinken]

That's wrong for a couple of reasons.

Mythic Exemplar also increases threat range and explicitly stacks with Improved Critical. You think this ability, from a class in Complete Champion, doesn't work as well?
Specific overrides general, after all.

[Curmudgeon]

Not from the text you quoted. The Book of Vile Darkness is the primary source for Disciple of Dispater.

That's not right. There are only three primary sources in D&D 3.5:

• Player's Handbook
• Dungeon Master's Guide
• Monster Manual

Everything else is a supplement.

[Urpriest]

That's not right. There are only three primary sources in D&D 3.5:

• Player's Handbook
• Dungeon Master's Guide
• Monster Manual

Everything else is a supplement.

The text you quoted contradicts this.

One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees.

This is two explicit examples of classes of primary sources. Each class is not restricted to the Core books. Ergo every book is a primary source for at least any text referred to in tables and any spell descriptions summarized at the beginning of chapters. The Disciple of Dispater's abilities are referred to in a table.

[Curmudgeon]

As far as books go, my statement was correct. But the important issue is this:

The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game

If there's a rule for playing the game that disagrees with the PH, the Player's Handbook is correct. That's the case here with the rules for critical threat ranges.

[Wabbajack]

The Player Handbook says you can't sneak attack undead or constructs, so anything that would normally give you these abilities doesn't work because the PH is the primary source for base classes?

[Curmudgeon]

Rules supplements can supplement the Player's Handbook rules if they say so. They can't disagree with those rules without making a point that they're creating a new rule. Here's an example (from Complete Arcane on page 86:

Some of the feats, spells, and items in Complete Arcane and other DUNGEONS & DRAGONS supplements use two new action types: the swift action and the immediate action.
...
Casting feather fall is an immediate action (instead of a free action, as stated in the spell description in the Player’s Handbook), since the spell can be cast at any time.

It's impossible for any 3.0 book to create an exception to 3.5 rules, because those rules weren't in place yet to be excepted.

[ericgrau]

As the scythe is already one of the best two handed weapon options, it would make more sense for there to be a PrC for greatsword wielders. I mean the scythe gives more damage on average thanks to crits and you can trip with it. If you can find any tripping and/or crit PrCs, feats or builds then that'd work.

[woodenbandman]

3.5 player's handbook overrules 3.0 BoVD, end of story. You can't possibly consider a 3.0 sourcebook that refers to 3.0 version improved critical to overrule the revised version of improved critical printed in 3.5 player's handbook. "oh but there's not been any errata." Get real. 3.5 player's handbook erratas 3.0 improved critical. Nothing stacks with 3.5 improved critical. QED. you are PERFECTLY welcome to argue that the 3.5 version of improved critical is stupid and that the designers are meanyheads, but BoVD rules on critical threat range stacking was revised IN THE 3.5 PHB. this is no different than 3.0 haste being revised in the PHB, or whatever feats were in tome and blood being revised in complete arcane or whatever. just because the revision was printed in a different book rather than an official BoVD errata doesn't make it less valid.

[2xMachina]

3.5 player's handbook overrules 3.0 BoVD, end of story. You can't possibly consider a 3.0 sourcebook that refers to 3.0 version improved critical to overrule the revised version of improved critical printed in 3.5 player's handbook. "oh but there's not been any errata." Get real. 3.5 player's handbook erratas 3.0 improved critical. Nothing stacks with 3.5 improved critical. QED. you are PERFECTLY welcome to argue that the 3.5 version of improved critical is stupid and that the designers are meanyheads, but BoVD rules on critical threat range stacking was revised IN THE 3.5 PHB. this is no different than 3.0 haste being revised in the PHB, or whatever feats were in tome and blood being revised in complete arcane or whatever. just because the revision was printed in a different book rather than an official BoVD errata doesn't make it less valid.

Mythic Exemplar also increases threat range and explicitly stacks with Improved Critical. You think this ability, from a class in Complete Champion, doesn't work as well?
Specific overrides general, after all.

Boldfor emphasis

[Curmudgeon]

Mythic Exemplar also increases threat range and explicitly stacks with Improved Critical. You think this ability, from a class in Complete Champion, doesn't work as well?

That's the case when you follow the dispute resolution steps provided by WotC. Since they didn't bother to describe this as an exception, the PH rule wins the disagreement.

This effect doesn’t stack with any other effect that expands the threat range of a weapon.

[Hazzardevil]

Kensai anyone? I do reccomend something like that since you can upgrade your weapon with xp.

[ericgrau]

I'm gonna have to agree that if a 3.5 source explicitly stacks with improved critical it's golden, but if a 3.0 source does that's highly questionable.

[Popertop]

was that sarcasm, or are you serious?

[Mushroom Ninja]

While not specifically scythe-related, a scythe-wielding Kensai could be pretty sweet in a Scythian way.

[MeeposFire]

Hard to tell.

[faceroll]

I'm gonna have to agree that if a 3.5 source explicitly stacks with improved critical it's golden, but if a 3.0 source does that's highly questionable.

Ditto. The former is clearly an example of specific trumping general. A feat that states "NOTHING stacks", and an ability that states "in this case it DOES stack" would use the specificity trumps general rule.