...so why is killing people evil again? [PrC Variant]

[ExHunterEmerald]

Okay, this is a class designed for non-evil assassins. I also made it nonmagical.
Requirements
Skills
Disguise 4 ranks, Hide 8 ranks, Move Silently 8 ranks.
Special The assassin must kill a target designated by the organization that he will join.
ASSASSIN VARIANT: Neutralizer
{table=head]Level|Base Attack Bonus|Fort Save|Ref Save|Will Save|Special

1st|

+0

|

+0

|

+2

|

+0

|Sneak attack +1d6, death attack, poison use

2nd|

+1

|

+0

|

+3

|

+0

|Sneak attack +2d6, +1 save against poison, uncanny dodge

3rd|

+2

|

+1

|

+3

|

+1

|

4th|

+3

|

+1

|

+4

|

+1

|+2 save against poison, sneak attack +3d6

5th|

+3

|

+1

|

+4

|

+1

|Improved Uncanny Dodge, sneak attack +4d6

6th|

+4

|

+2

|

+5

|

+2

|+3 save against poison

7th|

+5

|

+2

|

+5

|

+2

|Sneak attack +5d6

8th|

+6

|

+2

|

+6

|

+2

|+4 save against poison, hide in plain sight, sneak attack +6d6

9th|

+6

|

+3

|

+6

|

+3

|

10th|

+7

|

+3

|

+7

|

+3

|+5 save against poison, sneak attack +7d6[/table]

[Captain van der Decken]

Looks good to me. Not as powerful as standard assassin, (Captain Obvious, huh?) - maybe give it something instead of the magic?

Edit: Extra sneak attack. Still, 2d6 isn't quite worth the spells..

[ExHunterEmerald]

Looks good to me. Not as powerful as standard assassin, (Captain Obvious, huh?) - maybe give it something instead of the magic?

Edit: Extra sneak attack. Still, 2d6 isn't quite worth the spells..

First I gave it full sneak every level, then I was like "...wait..."

What about a unique capstone ability?

[Captain van der Decken]

Yeah, something along those lines.

Something to do with the organisation? I know there are PrC's with that kind of thing, but none come to mind.

[Wraithy]

cappywhatnow?

anyhoo does this class have a name?

finally waves of neutral assasins who are just doing their jobs

[Captain van der Decken]

Decken, for short.

Just above the table - Variant Assassin: Neutraliser.

[ExHunterEmerald]

Yeah, something along those lines.

Something to do with the organisation? I know there are PrC's with that kind of thing, but none come to mind.

Well, I wanted a pre-req, but not the "kill just to be an assassin." It's basically the same, only your shadowy Order of The Cloak of Pelor can order you to kill a LE noble, or your Cult of Chaos can initiate you by killing a local high priest of Heironeous.

If there aren't any such organizations, no need for that.

[Baron Corm]

capstone: when someone is killed by your death attack, they have a 50% chance of being unable to be ressurected even through true ressurection and wish/miracle.

this makes assassinating someone like a king actually useful. it's not destroying their soul, because that would be decidedly evil, but it prevents their soul from returning to their body. i'd give this at level 9 since you have nothing else there. you could also make the chance start at 10% or 1% at level 3 because you have nothing there either.

[Morty]

Good job. I would give it alignment restriction to 'any nongood', though. And yeah, it needs something in return of losing magic.

[ExHunterEmerald]

Good job. I would give it alignment restriction to 'any nongood', though. And yeah, it needs something in return of losing magic.

I have...peculiar alignment and honor views. One of which is that killing (in D&D) is never inherently evil, and neither is poison/assassination. "For the greater good" is bandied around a lot, but I believe to some degree in it.

[crazedloon]

Well a cool capstone would be the ability to "summon" a cohort or more from your orginization. Then you could have a list of things you could get (all obviously lower level then you) such as wizards,other assasins,fighters clerics and whatever you "need" however you can only do this 1 time (and they stay around for a number of days equal to your Cha bonus) for every "mission" you complete for the orginization.

It would alow fun side quests to do missions for the orginization.

[Counterpower]

I agree with the OP on the current requirements. Codes of honor often have restrictions on knifing someone in the back with no warning, but codes of honor aren't the only definition of Good. Then again, I also think that the only thing making assassins as written evil are the prerequisites.

I like the idea of capstone abilities based on the organization. Maybe an ability similar to a smite ability that allows you to increase the damage you do to a certain alignment or group? Or make it increase the DC of the death attack's save.

[Bobbis]

Taken from a PrC I made for basically the same purpose:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29993

Vow of Justice (Sp)
Once per week a Shadow of Justice can vow to kill an enemy for a wrongdoing; this vow must be made so the enemy can hear it and the enemy automatically understands the sentence spoken. Against the target of the vow the Shadow of Justice gains a +1 morale bonus on attack and damage rolls, her weapons are treated as having the fiercebane special ability, and she functions as if she has true seeing against the target only. If the target is in any way in the material plane the target functions as being completely in the material plane for the Shadow of Justice (for example Ethereal, Blinking, etc). The vow lasts until the creature is dead or for one day. If the Shadow of Justice fails to kill the target within a day she takes a -1 penalty on attack and damage rolls for the next day. The weekly counter starts when the vow is made.

If the enemy is killed by the Shadow of Justice while the vow is in effect, the creature can not be brought back to life by any means short of a wish or miracle.

(Fiercebane is from the DMGII, it functions as the bane ability but also confers extra damage on a critical hit (1d10 for a x2, 2d10 for a x3, 3d10 for a x4) and glows faintly within 100 feet of the target.)

should be easily moddable for your class.

[Miles Invictus]

Assassins are evil because they're focused on killing, and because they stab people in the back, and because they use save-or-die effects. Why don't you play a Fighter, Rogue, or Wizard instead?

For completeness, you should put the Assassin's hit die and skill points per level.

If the capstone only has a chance of preventing resurrection, it's not powerful enough. It should increase the casting time, too -- say, days instead of minutes (minimum of one day). And the caster shouldn't know if it will be a success until the spell has been cast. This keeps it useful, even if it doesn't actually prevent resurrection.

[ExHunterEmerald]

Ooh, that sounds jolly good.
I'll add that in a sec. Thanks!

[ExHunterEmerald]

Assassins are evil because they're focused on killing, and because they stab people in the back, and because they use save-or-die effects. Why don't you play a Fighter, Rogue, or Wizard instead?

You mean aside from flavor?
Because good people can be devoted to death too. Hell, most in D&D are.
Show me a fighter, and I'll show you someone with Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization on his greatsword.
I don't want to play a fighter because I want to play a sneaky type.
I don't want to play a rogue because I want a specialist killer.
I don't want to play a wizard for various reasons.

And as for flavor?
I don't look at a class and say "Ooh, look, this class uses save-or-die abilities and provides excellent battlefield control!"
I look at a class and say "Ooh, this wizard casts spells."
If I want to play a guy who goes into houses and snaps necks I play Splinter Cell I say "that guy is an assassin." Yes, I could do it with a rogue. Hell, I could do it with a wizard if I cross-classed and got enough lucky rolls. The point is, I want a specialist, I want a certain flavor.

And that's the Word.

[Miles Invictus]

For the record, I was using irony to make a point. Specifically, that there's nothing about the assassin concept that makes them worse than your run-of-the-mill adventurer.

[ExHunterEmerald]

For the record, I was using irony to make a point. Specifically, that there's nothing about the assassin concept that makes them worse than your run-of-the-mill adventurer.

Oho? Sorry then. I'm a twitchy individual. I have a history of taking offense at things I shouldn't.

[YPU]

I have...peculiar alignment and honor views. One of which is that killing (in D&D) is never inherently evil, and neither is poison/assassination. "For the greater good" is bandied around a lot, but I believe to some degree in it.

Indeed, “there is no way to talk right killing a person with poison and a dagger in the back!” well, how does now he wont lead his army’s to pillage and burn innocent villages work for ya?

[ExHunterEmerald]

Indeed, “there is no way to talk right killing a person with poison and a dagger in the back!” well, how does now he wont lead his army’s to pillage and burn innocent villages work for ya?

Heehee.
Yeah, I just...fail to parse the whole thing. Killing is killing, and killing can prevent killing en masse.

[ArmorArmadillo]

One of your requirements is to kill someone because you're guild told you too: that is an evil act. Even if it was a bad person, killing someone to gain access to a guild is murder for profit. Also, to focus on stopping a bad person is good, to focus on killing them, as itself a goal, is vengence, which is Neutral at best.

As for the class itself, too powerful. The advanced Sneak Attack and low requirements make it too much better than more levels in rogue; as for the loss of spells, the spells were a limited boost to an assassin. Even with their utility, they pale in comparison to a heavily reusable extra ability in the sneak damage.

Consider reducing it to normal and adding extra abilities (perhaps extra "Assassin" tool techniques available only to him?

Also, you need skill progression and hit die.

I like it, but perhaps you should reflavor it as a stealth and poison expert rather than a true "assassin."

[Deepblue706]

One of your requirements is to kill someone because you're guild told you too: that is an evil act. Even if it was a bad person, killing someone to gain access to a guild is murder for profit. Also, to focus on stopping a bad person is good, to focus on killing them, as itself a goal, is vengence, which is Neutral at best.

As for the class itself, too powerful. The advanced Sneak Attack and low requirements make it too much better than more levels in rogue; as for the loss of spells, the spells were a limited boost to an assassin. Even with their utility, they pale in comparison to a heavily reusable extra ability in the sneak damage.

Consider reducing it to normal and adding extra abilities (perhaps extra "Assassin" tool techniques available only to him?

Also, you need skill progression and hit die.

I like it, but perhaps you should reflavor it as a stealth and poison expert rather than a true "assassin."

My thoughts, exactly.

See, an "Assassin", per DMG, is someone associated with that specific guild of assassins. "Assassins" kill people for personal gain. There's more than just a difference of fighting style.

If a Fighter goes to kill for personal gain - guess what? He's evil.

If a Wizard goes to kill for personal gain - guess what? He's evil too.

Now, an assassin doesn't really have to be of any alignment. If there was an evil overlord ruling your country with an iron first, and you killed him from the shadows, you could be good, neutral, or evil, depending on why it was you were there in the first place. It's not that killing people is inherently evil, it's that killing things with poor justification is evil. As said, to kill only so that you may join the ranks of a guild is certainly evil, regardless of who you're killing.

I agree that you shouldn't label it as an "assassin", unless, that is, you decide to remove the whole guild aspect. Ninja came about because peasants didn't feel like being pushed around anymore - and they assassinated the leaders who they saw as responsible for their problems. They were assassins, but they could have been neutral, even good. Even evil.

[Miles Invictus]

D&D places an incredible emphasis on combat, and pays only lip-service to peaceful solutions. In the context of the game, the creators encourage violent resolution. They expect you to bash skulls in. Hell, your archetypical quest is something along the lines of "These guys have green skin. Kill them and loot the corpses." You can slay hundreds of sapient beings on the word of some random city official (who, conveniently, offers you treasure) and retain a Good alignment. But kill someone to join an organization, and you're considered Evil. You can't tell me that's not at least a little inconsistent.

[MeklorIlavator]

If a Fighter goes to kill for personal gain - guess what? He's evil.

If a Wizard goes to kill for personal gain - guess what? He's evil too.

You know, your right. Of course, this means that there are only evil alignments in DnD, and that all paladins automatically fall.

Adventuring is murder for profit, after all.

[Captain van der Decken]

As for the class itself, too powerful. The advanced Sneak Attack and low requirements make it too much better than more levels in rogue; as for the loss of spells, the spells were a limited boost to an assassin. Even with their utility, they pale in comparison to a heavily reusable extra ability in the sneak damage.

Spells such as Freedom of movement? Invisibility? Dimension Door? Spider Climb? Cat's Grace?

Not worth 2d6 sneak attack?

And those are just the core ones. Swift action flat foot spells, anyone?

[flawed.Perfection]

Adventuring is murder for profit, after all.

A bit one-sided, since adventuring isn't always 'kill & loot'. It may be like that for the players, but not necessarily for the characters... There can be tons of reasons to adventure, not all of them by default > material gain.

[Krellen]

The rules state that killing someone - or judging them in any other way, for that matter - based on their appearance ("green skin") is Evil. See Lawful Evil for explicit mention of this. This idea that "Killing Evil is Good" simply is not supported by the rules.

But any further discussion ruins this thread, which is supposed to explore the mechanics of this class and not become another alignment argument. Those get carried on over in the Gaming forum.

Mechanically, I'd concur with AA: the extra sneak attack is too good. Comparing this character to a pure Rogue, there's little incentive to remain a Rogue. Assuming this is a variant Assassin, and thus identical to that class in ways you have not mentioned, you are giving up 40 skill points - the largest sacrifice - one BAB, and three special abilities in exchange for +2d6 Sneak Attack (effectively two Epic Feats), a +5 bonus to poison saves, death attack and the Hide in Plain Sight ability, which is another Epic Feat (since Rogues don't have access to that ability via special abilities.) The sacrifice is not enough for what is gained.

[Maxwell]

It seems like it would be a whole lot easier to simply remove the roleplaying requirments on the assassin in the DMs Guide and add new ones.

However, if you would like to remove the magical aspect and focus on pure stealth, then +2d6 Sneak Attack is to powerful for the current class. Rather than get rid of it I would add more requirments. At the moment, rouges only need to get a couple ranks in Disguise, get Hide and Move Siliently (most rouges do), and wait till 5th level.

[MeklorIlavator]

A bit one-sided, since adventuring isn't always 'kill & loot'. It may be like that for the players, but not necessarily for the characters... There can be tons of reasons to adventure, not all of them by default > material gain.

But most do revolve around gaining personal power, if only to defeat a greater evil. Remember "for the greater good" doesn't work in DnD alignment systems.

The rules state that killing someone - or judging them in any other way, for that matter - based on their appearance ("green skin") is Evil. See Lawful Evil for explicit mention of this. This idea that "Killing Evil is Good" simply is not supported by the rules.

So killing anyone is evil? Wow, almost 100% of DnD characters are evil.

[Falrin]

1) We all have seen the debate on "evil" assassins. They are not only evil is you keep the fluff from the DMG.


Ignoring fluff please states those peoples alignments.

- Joe the fighter is hired (1000GP) to stop goblins that are raiding a small town. He tracks them down, kills 20 henchmen, kills their leader and leaves.
- Jill the wizard had joined the army (30 GP/day). She is ordered to kill the invading hobgoblin general. She casts greater invisibility, teleports in, casts finger of death (save-or-die) and gets out.
- Jack the assassin is hired (1000 GP) to kill the goblins wizard. He sneaks past the guards, studies his victim, kills here with poisoned shot and leaves.


2) How about adding:

'death strike damage'
1d6 at every even LvL.
If you study a person for three rounds you add this damage to your normal sneak attack.

'death strike'
If you study a person for three rounds you double your sneak damage adding a max of your assassin LvLs extra.
(5 rogue, 1 assassin gets 7d6: 3d6 rogue, 1d6 assasin, 1d6 death strike)
(5 rogue, 5 assassin gets 11d6: 3d6 rogue, 3d6 assasin, 5d6 death strike)