[3.5 Base Class]The Entity

[Quarian Rex]

Actually, once you convince a rich man that it's life-threatening, you could.

Not before he visited his local Cleric...

And remember, the more outlandish the Bluff, the greater the Sense Motive modifier is to detect it (up to +20).

I suppose gained levels could be converted into commoner.

I kinda think that it is a suitable penalty for an Oathbreaker. Nothing says Stripped-of-All-Power like levels in Commoner.

Also, what do you think about the temporary pact-thing I was mentioning earlier? I'm thinking conversion of 2-4 Channel Points per 1 Pact Point of the temporary pact, and temporary pacts last a day. This would do well for temporary minions, bodyguards, and also making sure that a mainly harmless NPC(like a commoner guiding the party through a labryinth) doesn't get offed and can be useful. Basically, a servitude contract.

I find it to be intriguing. Actually, that could be the solution to some of the reservations I've been having about the Power Pact. The one thing that I've been worried about is the option to add permanent HD to a character. That opens up waaay too many problems. Pun-Pun level problems.

If you only allow additional class levels to be added with a temporary Pact such insanity can be averted. I think. A conversion of 2 Channel Points per 1 Pact Point of the temporary pact should be more than sufficient considering the cost of the Pacts themselves. Also, I think that if you add spellcasting class levels that you should only gain spell slots, not spells known of the class. These spell slots could be used to cast same or lower level spells know (in the case of spontaneous casters) though spell slots of a higher level that the recipient could normally cast can only be used to cast lower lever spells (as when a Sorcerer uses a 4th level spell slot to cast a Fireball when he has run out of 3rd level spells) since no spells known of the new spell level would be granted by the temp class levels.

Prepared spellcasters could use the new spellslots to spontaneously cast spells as a Sorcerer using currently memorized spells as spells known (or spells known with the Spell Mastery Feat).

For example, a 3rd level Wizard [having memorized Magic Missile x2, Mage Armor, and Glitterdust, and having the feats Extend spell and Spell Mastery (Shield and Scorching Ray)], who has previously cast Mage Armor and one Magic Missile, receives a temporary Pact granting him two more Wizard levels. He now acts as a 5th level wizard in all ways (including selecting a Wizard bonus feat) but he gains three empty spell slots (one 1st level, one 2nd level, and one 3rd level as per a 5th level Wizard) which can in all ways be used as Sorcerer spell slots, using Magic Missile, Shield, Glitterdust, and Scorching Ray as spells known (as these are the remaining memorized/Mastered spells). He can use his 3rd level spell slot to cast Scorching Ray as per normal or he can use a Full-Round action to cast an Extended Glitterdust as per a Sorcerer casting metamagic, etc.

Just some precautions to make sure that early/extra spell access cannot be abused.

Thoughts?

[Pyromancer999]

Not before he visited his local Cleric...

And remember, the more outlandish the Bluff, the greater the Sense Motive modifier is to detect it (up to +20).

Homebrew can do crazy things. Plus there's a PrC in order to increase skill bonuses, forget which one it is though.

I find it to be intriguing. Actually, that could be the solution to some of the reservations I've been having about the Power Pact. The one thing that I've been worried about is the option to add permanent HD to a character. That opens up waaay too many problems. Pun-Pun level problems.

If you only allow additional class levels to be added with a temporary Pact such insanity can be averted. I think. A conversion of 2 Channel Points per 1 Pact Point of the temporary pact should be more than sufficient considering the cost of the Pacts themselves. Also, I think that if you add spellcasting class levels that you should only gain spell slots, not spells known of the class. These spell slots could be used to cast same or lower level spells know (in the case of spontaneous casters) though spell slots of a higher level that the recipient could normally cast can only be used to cast lower lever spells (as when a Sorcerer uses a 4th level spell slot to cast a Fireball when he has run out of 3rd level spells) since no spells known of the new spell level would be granted by the temp class levels.

The deal with Power Pact is that you can invest people with power in exchange for stuff. Like, you can have a spy in every key town, granting them power like base class levels in exchange for doing what you want. Still, I can see the need to limit the bestowing of permanent levels. Maybe have a limit of 3-5 permanent levels to start?

Prepared spellcasters could use the new spellslots to spontaneously cast spells as a Sorcerer using currently memorized spells as spells known (or spells known with the Spell Mastery Feat).

For example, a 3rd level Wizard [having memorized Magic Missile x2, Mage Armor, and Glitterdust, and having the feats Extend spell and Spell Mastery (Shield and Scorching Ray)], who has previously cast Mage Armor and one Magic Missile, receives a temporary Pact granting him two more Wizard levels. He now acts as a 5th level wizard in all ways (including selecting a Wizard bonus feat) but he gains three empty spell slots (one 1st level, one 2nd level, and one 3rd level as per a 5th level Wizard) which can in all ways be used as Sorcerer spell slots, using Magic Missile, Shield, Glitterdust, and Scorching Ray as spells known (as these are the remaining memorized/Mastered spells). He can use his 3rd level spell slot to cast Scorching Ray as per normal or he can use a Full-Round action to cast an Extended Glitterdust as per a Sorcerer casting metamagic, etc.

Just some precautions to make sure that early/extra spell access cannot be abused.

Thoughts?

I'd get behind this for a temporary Pact maybe, but overall I'd say it'd be a horrible idea for a permanent one. Part of why Wizards and the like make such pacts is in exchange for more power, not just spell slots, but spells.

[Quarian Rex]

The deal with Power Pact is that you can invest people with power in exchange for stuff. Like, you can have a spy in every key town, granting them power like base class levels in exchange for doing what you want. Still, I can see the need to limit the bestowing of permanent levels. Maybe have a limit of 3-5 permanent levels to start?

I implore you to scrap the idea of adding permanent levels altogether. Down that path lies naught but Madness. I am utterly serious here. It sounds harmless enough when you look at NPCs as the targets but when PCs are involved the game gets broken wide open.

If you want a better trained minion, make a commoner a 1st level adventuring class and then cast a low level summoning spell. Tell summon to kill the new adventurer. Have some curative magics nearby and you will have a capable minion with 3-5 honestly earned extra levels in a few days game time. Call it boot camp. Play a little montage music while you're doing it. You have your minions but you do not open the door for PC based lunacy at higher levels.

I'd get behind this for a temporary Pact maybe, but overall I'd say it'd be a horrible idea for a permanent one. Part of why Wizards and the like make such pacts is in exchange for more power, not just spell slots, but spells.

Sorry if I wasn't clear in the first post. This is an idea just for temporary Pacts. This is also a method to avoid infinite spell use (ie. empowering a commoner to a 10th level Cleric/Sorcerer/what-have-you ordering/having the Pact require him to cast all of his spells as you wish, kill him/have Pact expire due to Pact agreement, regain Pact Points, empower another commoner, rinse, repeat.

This would also show that Entities can provide excessive amounts of raw power but not necessarily the knowledge of how to best use such power.

[Pyromancer999]

I implore you to scrap the idea of adding permanent levels altogether. Down that path lies naught but Madness. I am utterly serious here. It sounds harmless enough when you look at NPCs as the targets but when PCs are involved the game gets broken wide open.

If you want a better trained minion, make a commoner a 1st level adventuring class and then cast a low level summoning spell. Tell summon to kill the new adventurer. Have some curative magics nearby and you will have a capable minion with 3-5 honestly earned extra levels in a few days game time. Call it boot camp. Play a little montage music while you're doing it. You have your minions but you do not open the door for PC based lunacy at higher levels.

I know what you're suggesting may make a bit more sense, NPC-wise, but I like the idea of investment of some kind of base class levels that results in a permanent power-up. Still, I'm seeing that you can't just go and pile on bunches of permanent class levels. How about a limit equal to 1/4-1/5 of your Entity level?

Sorry if I wasn't clear in the first post. This is an idea just for temporary Pacts. This is also a method to avoid infinite spell use (ie. empowering a commoner to a 10th level Cleric/Sorcerer/what-have-you ordering/having the Pact require him to cast all of his spells as you wish, kill him/have Pact expire due to Pact agreement, regain Pact Points, empower another commoner, rinse, repeat.

This would also show that Entities can provide excessive amounts of raw power but not necessarily the knowledge of how to best use such power.

Hmmmmm....... Actually, I was thinking about using this to handle it: Should you purposefully arrange for the death of a being you make a pact with, you lose the Pact Points involved in the pact.

[Quarian Rex]

I know what you're suggesting may make a bit more sense, NPC-wise, but I like the idea of investment of some kind of base class levels that results in a permanent power-up. Still, I'm seeing that you can't just go and pile on bunches of permanent class levels. How about a limit equal to 1/4-1/5 of your Entity level?

If you are completely stuck on the permanent power-up idea then lets try to minimize the potential horror. How about a max increase of one level per five full Entity levels, to a maximum of the Entities HD-2, with the additional condition that while HD/Level increases, experience points do not (and the recipient cannot spend xp, on spells or magic item creation, untill they have enough xp to qualify for their current character level).

This would allow you to grant limited power to give weak individuals a boost but does not put PCs ahead in the long-term. This would allow full spell progression because the boost is relatively minor for the levels at which you are capable of granting them.

Thoughts?

Hmmmmm....... Actually, I was thinking about using this to handle it: Should you purposefully arrange for the death of a being you make a pact with, you lose the Pact Points involved in the pact.

Hmmm. Truth be told, I don't like it. Perhaps a caveat so that and Entity cannot directly kill a minion to regain Pact Points but I think indirect should be still allowed. There are just too many roleplaying opportunities that it opens up.

If you are going to allow the recipient to try to cheat his end of the Pact (casting illusion spells on leaves to make it seem like money) then you should allow an entity to conspire against a former (or current) minion to regain spent Power. Tis only fair. And interesting.

[Pyromancer999]

If you are completely stuck on the permanent power-up idea then lets try to minimize the potential horror. How about a max increase of one level per five full Entity levels, to a maximum of the Entities HD-2, with the additional condition that while HD/Level increases, experience points do not (and the recipient cannot spend xp, on spells or magic item creation, untill they have enough xp to qualify for their current character level).

This would allow you to grant limited power to give weak individuals a boost but does not put PCs ahead in the long-term. This would allow full spell progression because the boost is relatively minor for the levels at which you are capable of granting them.

Thoughts?

I can get behind that. Just have to think of how to phrase it.

Hmmm. Truth be told, I don't like it. Perhaps a caveat so that and Entity cannot directly kill a minion to regain Pact Points but I think indirect should be still allowed. There are just too many roleplaying opportunities that it opens up.

If you are going to allow the recipient to try to cheat his end of the Pact (casting illusion spells on leaves to make it seem like money) then you should allow an entity to conspire against a former (or current) minion to regain spent Power. Tis only fair. And interesting.

I think indirect killing works. Sure.

Also, having a bit of a hard time coming up with the Celestial/Devilish/Demonic Aspects(especially the last two, since the crunch is pretty similar). May not be able to do those, but may come out with a couple feats for the Entity that give a similar feel. Also, not sure if I can do the rest of the Aspects previously mentioned, but here are some new ideas: Far Realm(slightly hard as all I can think of are tentacles, and may just do the same to that as the Celestial feats), and Elemental.

So, thoughts on this?

[Pyromancer999]

Yeah, so, at this point I think I'm going to replace the alignment Outsider ones(Far Realm, Devilish, Demonic, Celestial) with a Smite ability and a feat that lets you apply one template to a Servitor for what will probably be around 5 binding points/level, and also, just came up with an idea for a new one: Draconic.

Thoughts on this?

[Gideon Falcon]

Very well made class. I do think you need to figure out the effects of the construct and animal types for eidolons, though. I'm certainly looking forward to the other aspect feats.

[Pyromancer999]

Alright, added the Necrotic(Undead) Aspect feat, feel free to PEACH/comment on it. Would appreciate some feedback on my current ideas for other ones.

[Pyromancer999]

Again, would appreciate more comments and ideas for Aspect feats as I feel like I'm done with those, at least for now. May make a Draconic Aspect feat. Also, here are some ideas for more general feats for the Entity:

-Get some more Channel Points
-Templated Servitors
-Add subtypes to Servitors
-Smite ability(slightly enhanced)
-Something having to do with manipulating an aura of power, although I may just have finished that with the Aspect feats
-Get an additional Entity Power(as per the class feature)

Thoughts on this?

[Gideon Falcon]

I think you need to expound upon the types for your servitors; eidolons only have the outsider, ooze, elemental, magical beast, fey, and dragon types, but not constructs or any of those.

Also, I think that you might want to have an elemental themed Aspect feat.

Also, here might be an alternative for the given Tomorrow's Might options:

Spoiler

Show

Alter Size (Su): You may use the powers Expansion and Compression as Supernatural abilities (ML = HD) a number of times per day equal to your casting stat modifier.

Automatic Metamagic (Ex): You select a single metamagic feat with a static cost. You may apply this for free to spells and powers from your channeled might a number of times each day equal to your casting ability score (not the modifier) divided by the cost of the feat.

Call Creatures (Ex): You decrease the cost of all spells and powers with the summoning descriptor used through your channeled might by one.

Command Plants (Su): You may command plant servitors, and may use Command Plants at a caster level equal to your HD as a supernatural ability a number of times each day equal to your casting stat modifier. You may not have more creatures under this control than the same modifier.

Command Creatures (Su): You may use Dominate Person a number of times each day equal to your casting stat modifier, with caster level equal to your HD as a supernatural ability. You may only control a number of creatures equal to the same ability modifier at once through this ability.

Divine Air Mastery: No change

Divine Armor Mastery: No change

Divine Earth Mastery: No SLA's, otherwise no change.

Divine Fire Mastery: Changes as Divine Earth Mastery.

And so on, reducing the power of the abilities to non-epic levels.

[Pyromancer999]

I think you need to expound upon the types for your servitors; eidolons only have the outsider, ooze, elemental, magical beast, fey, and dragon types, but not constructs or any of those.

Well, Forge Aspect gives you Construct type Servitors. Basically, here's a basic rundown of skills you can choose for whatever types. I'd reccomend choosing about 5-10 for each:

Humanoid: Anything you want

Giant + Monstrous Humanoid: Str-based, Con-Based, and maybe some Wis-Based skills

Undead: Really subjective. Not sure what to put here

Aberration: Wis-Based, and Cha-Based skills, with a couple involving physical ability scores.

Plant: Just physically based skills. Maybe a mental ability score-based one or two.

Think of it as a build-your-own Skill list for each type.

Also, I think that you might want to have an elemental themed Aspect feat.

I agree, but it's more difficult than it sounds. What I'm thinking is that I may be forced to make a different one for each element.

Also, here might be an alternative for the given Tomorrow's Might options:

Spoiler

Show

Alter Size (Su): You may use the powers Expansion and Compression as Supernatural abilities (ML = HD) a number of times per day equal to your casting stat modifier.

Automatic Metamagic (Ex): You select a single metamagic feat with a static cost. You may apply this for free to spells and powers from your channeled might a number of times each day equal to your casting ability score (not the modifier) divided by the cost of the feat.

Call Creatures (Ex): You decrease the cost of all spells and powers with the summoning descriptor used through your channeled might by one.

Command Plants (Su): You may command plant servitors, and may use Command Plants at a caster level equal to your HD as a supernatural ability a number of times each day equal to your casting stat modifier. You may not have more creatures under this control than the same modifier.

Command Creatures (Su): You may use Dominate Person a number of times each day equal to your casting stat modifier, with caster level equal to your HD as a supernatural ability. You may only control a number of creatures equal to the same ability modifier at once through this ability.

Divine Air Mastery: No change

Divine Armor Mastery: No change

Divine Earth Mastery: No SLA's, otherwise no change.

Divine Fire Mastery: Changes as Divine Earth Mastery.

And so on, reducing the power of the abilities to non-epic levels.

Interesting, although I notice Water Mastery isn't in there, and even as-is, some might still be too powerful.

[Okuno]

I really like the idea behind this class: it's brilliance is in its obviousness, perhaps. Finally, a class I can use to build random FF-y bosses that don't seem to fit in. And what's more, something available to the fledgling Ansem.

I'm not so sure about the implementation. As a programmer, I love the complex system of feature inheritance for how it trims down the size of the source. As someone who wants to use the rules, I don't like flipping pages around to find out what a particular class feature does. Wherever possible, I'd say merge in pre-existing rules. Obviously, that doesn't work everywhere, and probably the best thing for usability is just add examples; they're well-used in the books, and rules like this could definitely benefit.

I'll probably get down to nuts and bolts later as I come up with a competing homebrew more aligned with my conceptions.


But, I want to say something concrete, so, f worrying about T3, go for T2. Sure, optimizers can break it easy, and even laymen can ruin a world sometimes, but there are two handy answers that can remove that high-tier fear. A) Optimizers can break anything. I saw a broken truenamer once. Don't worry about them, you can't beat them. B) Most people enjoy a reasonable game. Maybe that's just a lucky experience on my part, but consider the DM who says "use core plus this Entity homebrew I've linked". If he's letting wizards in, a T2 class isn't going to make the DM's life any harder. If a DMs really worried about banning sorcerers, let him ban the Entity too. Entity is a high-magic concept anyway.

Also, I see the main difference between T's 1&2 is T1 can have an arbitrarily long 'spellbook', but T2s are finite. A psion is a full caster that can wear heavy armor, which makes it stronger and more versatile than the sorcerer, but psion is still T2 because it only learns so many powers. As long as you keep the entity's class abilities relatively fixed over character time (as opposed to fixed player-to-player), it'll be T2. The question is whether it's high or low. Obviously, you're shooting low, way low; I'ma shoot high, because that just fits with the existing characters I'm thinking of.

Definitely good work. It really does a lot with very little, opening a whole new conceptual niche, which is where the real fun of homebrew is ^.^

[Pyromancer999]

I really like the idea behind this class: it's brilliance is in its obviousness, perhaps. Finally, a class I can use to build random FF-y bosses that don't seem to fit in. And what's more, something available to the fledgling Ansem.

I'm not so sure about the implementation. As a programmer, I love the complex system of feature inheritance for how it trims down the size of the source. As someone who wants to use the rules, I don't like flipping pages around to find out what a particular class feature does. Wherever possible, I'd say merge in pre-existing rules. Obviously, that doesn't work everywhere, and probably the best thing for usability is just add examples; they're well-used in the books, and rules like this could definitely benefit.

I'll probably get down to nuts and bolts later as I come up with a competing homebrew more aligned with my conceptions.


But, I want to say something concrete, so, f worrying about T3, go for T2. Sure, optimizers can break it easy, and even laymen can ruin a world sometimes, but there are two handy answers that can remove that high-tier fear. A) Optimizers can break anything. I saw a broken truenamer once. Don't worry about them, you can't beat them. B) Most people enjoy a reasonable game. Maybe that's just a lucky experience on my part, but consider the DM who says "use core plus this Entity homebrew I've linked". If he's letting wizards in, a T2 class isn't going to make the DM's life any harder. If a DMs really worried about banning sorcerers, let him ban the Entity too. Entity is a high-magic concept anyway.

Also, I see the main difference between T's 1&2 is T1 can have an arbitrarily long 'spellbook', but T2s are finite. A psion is a full caster that can wear heavy armor, which makes it stronger and more versatile than the sorcerer, but psion is still T2 because it only learns so many powers. As long as you keep the entity's class abilities relatively fixed over character time (as opposed to fixed player-to-player), it'll be T2. The question is whether it's high or low. Obviously, you're shooting low, way low; I'ma shoot high, because that just fits with the existing characters I'm thinking of.

Definitely good work. It really does a lot with very little, opening a whole new conceptual niche, which is where the real fun of homebrew is ^.^

Thanks. Still, I'd say this is more tier 2 than tier 3, especially with the Tier-change options. Most would say that this should be tier 1, but what people have to remember is that even gods and similar Entities, no matter how powerful, tend to not really extend out of a certain range of powers, which is why tiers 2 and 3 were both fine for this class. Still, most people like Tier 1, so I included an option for that.

[Volthawk]

If you use 'So Fly' to grab flight, what manoeuvrability do you have?