PDA

View Full Version : Urpriest: I can get double what nows?



mootoall
2010-12-15, 01:37 PM
Seriously. Isn't this PrC a liiiitle bit ridiculous when you consider, say, Mystic Theurge? I'm AFB, but what would the Wizard X/ Ur-Priest X/ Mystic Theurge 10 progression be?

Psyren
2010-12-15, 01:41 PM
Progression? Do you mean a build?
Wiz 10/Ur-Priest 2/MT 8 without early-entry.
But there are better combos, as that one ends up MAD (needing both Int and Wis.)

My personal favorite is Ardent 10 (Dominant Ideal)/Ur-Priest 2/Psychic Theurge (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20040925b) 8

Toliudar
2010-12-15, 01:42 PM
Ur-Priest is indeed a powerful prestige class. Wizard 3 + whatever to get Ur-Priest prereqs + Ur-Priest 2 is a frequent entry for Mystic Theurge, and you would indeed get the Ur-Priest spell progression with Mystic theurge.

Hyfigh
2010-12-15, 01:42 PM
Seriously. Isn't this PrC a liiiitle bit ridiculous when you consider, say, Mystic Theurge? I'm AFB, but what would the Wizard X/ Ur-Priest X/ Mystic Theurge 10 progression be?

Yes. It's a great PrC for anything that can advance divine casting. 9th level spells over 10 levels and a caster level that synergizes with other caster classes? I'll take two...

You only need a single level dip to get this all started.

Edit: To clarify, the single-level-dip I refer to isn't specifically for MT, or other dual caster stuff.

GoatBoy
2010-12-15, 01:49 PM
I somehow doubt that the idea of advancing theurgic casting via PrC occurred to the designers of the Ur-Priest/Sublime Chord/etc.

WotC's writing team probably consists of one guy who creates the material, one guy who looks it over, and someone with an English degree who checks the spelling, all of whom are on a strict deadline from the publisher.

So, mistakes and glaring oversights will happen. I think it's a testament to WotC's good ability to create and foresee possibilities that the game plays as well as it does. Think of how many errors could have happened. Instead, you have a huge team of authors responsible for hundreds of books, and yet you don't necessarily have a new version of Pun-pun or Cheater of Mystra with every new supplement released.

mootoall
2010-12-15, 02:00 PM
Yeah, this PrC makes me just ... so happy. I mean, let's say Wiz 5/ some good PrC for Wiz spellcasting 5/Ur-Priest 2/ Mystic Theurge 8 ... it's so bright ... so vivid ... miracle and wish all the way!

Psyren
2010-12-15, 02:19 PM
@ GoatBoy - I think you're overreacting a tad. Ur-Priest is powerful, sure, but comparing it to Pun-pun? :smallconfused:

Hyfigh
2010-12-15, 02:22 PM
I didn't really gather he was comparing it to Pun-pun. He was reflecting on the fact that with all of the sources available, and them generally being written and proofed by different people, it's amazing there isn't more Pun-pun stuff involved. More saying that a slight goof like this is acceptable in the long run with the previous being taken into account.

GoatBoy
2010-12-15, 02:23 PM
@ GoatBoy - I think you're overreacting a tad. Ur-Priest is powerful, sure, but comparing it to Pun-pun? :smallconfused:

Hah, what I meant was that while Ur-Priest is an ingredient in some sickeningly powerful builds, it doesn't break the game in every conceivable method like Pun-pun does, and it's still considered a top-tier prestige class.

And, yeah, I've been browsing these boards a while, and sometimes I just want to grab people and shake them and scream, "THING'S AREN'T THAT BAD! THREE POINT FIVE IS MOSTLY FINE THE WAY IT IS! CALM DOWN! FOR THE LOVE OF PELOR, CALM DOWN!"

Then the doctors come in and tell me it's time for my pills. Yay, pills!

J.Gellert
2010-12-15, 02:29 PM
One day I will convince my DM to homebrew Ur-Wizard, and then Mystic Theurge it with Ur-Priest :smalltongue:

Douglas
2010-12-15, 02:32 PM
One day I will convince my DM to homebrew Ur-Wizard, and then Mystic Theurge it with Ur-Priest :smalltongue:
It's called Sublime Chord.:smallwink:

Psyren
2010-12-15, 02:32 PM
Hah, what I meant was that while Ur-Priest is an ingredient in some sickeningly powerful builds, it doesn't break the game in every conceivable method like Pun-pun does, and it's still considered a top-tier prestige class.

And, yeah, I've been browsing these boards a while, and sometimes I just want to grab people and shake them and scream, "THING'S AREN'T THAT BAD! THREE POINT FIVE IS MOSTLY FINE THE WAY IT IS! CALM DOWN! FOR THE LOVE OF PELOR, CALM DOWN!"

Then the doctors come in and tell me it's time for my pills. Yay, pills!

Fair enough, I misread.
And yes, pills are awesome :smalltongue:


One day I will convince my DM to homebrew Ur-Wizard, and then Mystic Theurge it with Ur-Priest :smalltongue:

You can do that with Sublime Chord (aka Ur-Sorcerer.) Just start with Savage Bard and you should have little problems qualifying for both.

J.Gellert
2010-12-15, 02:40 PM
Happy Firkraag is happy now :biggrin:

Duke of URL
2010-12-15, 05:39 PM
I think you can qualify with Wizard 9, although if PrCing and not using fractional saves, you'll want Wiz 3 / (something) 6 or Wiz 6 / (something) 3, to ensure you get the +3 Fort you need.

And, yeah, you'll get double 9th-level spells by ECL 19 (Wizard, et. al 9 / Ur-Priest 2 / MT 8), but you've put yourself 2 levels behind in Wizard casting.

Where it's easy to abuse Ur-Priest is through multiclassing. As I've pointed out in another thread, as long as you can get some fluff waivers in, my favorite Ur-Priest combo is Binder 1 / Warlock 4 / Ur-Priest 2 / Eldrtich Disciple 9 / Hellfire Warlock 3 / (any +1 arcane, like Mindbender) 1

It may be a little slow to really get rolling, but flavorful as all get out.

true_shinken
2010-12-15, 05:41 PM
"THING'S AREN'T THAT BAD! THREE POINT FIVE IS MOSTLY FINE THE WAY IT IS! CALM DOWN! FOR THE LOVE OF PELOR, CALM DOWN!"
Man, that made me laugh.

gorfnab
2010-12-15, 06:41 PM
Ur-Chord
Bard 7/ Mindbender 1/ Ur-Priest 2/ Sublime Chord 2/ Mystic Theurge 8

Hellfire Ur-Lock
Warlock 4/ Binder 1/ Ur-Priest 2/ Eldritch Disciple 2/ Hellfire Warlock 3/ Eldritch Disciple 7

The MAD Shadowcaster
Factotum 1/ Shadowcaster 5/ Ur-Priest 2/ Mystic Theurge 8/ Shadowcaster 4

Ruby Knight Vindicat-Ur
Human Paragon (with Able Learner) 1/ Crusader 4/ Ur-Priest 2/ Ruby Knight Vindicator 10/ Crusader 3

Psyren
2010-12-15, 06:47 PM
The MAD Shadowcaster
Factotum 1/ Shadowcaster 5/ Ur-Priest 2/ Mystic Theurge 8/ Shadowcaster 4

No need for Ur-Priest with them; go Wiz/Shadowcaster/Noctumancer/MT instead for dual 9s.

gorfnab
2010-12-15, 06:52 PM
No need for Ur-Priest with them; go Wiz/Shadowcaster/Noctumancer/MT instead for dual 9s.
That's if you want Wizard spells vs Cleric (Ur-Priest) spells. Like the build I posted says it's MAD.

A SAD Shadowcaster would be Shadowcaster 3/ Wizard 3/ Noctumancer 10/ Mystic Theurge 4 or Wizard 1 (Precocious Apprentice or other early entry trick) Shadowcaster 3/ Noctumancer 10/ Mystic Theurge 6

mootoall
2010-12-15, 07:41 PM
Ruby Knight Vindicat-Ur Human Paragon or Factotum(with Able Learner) 1/ Crusader 4/ Ur-Priest 2/ Ruby Knight Vindicator 10/ Crusader 3 This. Oh, gods, this. I love this so much ... And the name just makes me love it even more :smalltongue: Can this thread now be about "dual 9's" shenanegans in general? Especially if more beautiful things like this come up ... One thing about this build is that it's a bit MAD ... (All three mental stats if you want to take advantage of Factotum/Crusader, no?)

true_shinken
2010-12-15, 07:51 PM
Ruby Knight VinWindicat-Ur
Human Paragon or Factotum(with Able Learner) 1/ Crusader 4/ Ur-Priest 2/ Ruby Knight VinWindicator 10/ Crusader 3

Fixed that for you.

faceroll
2010-12-15, 07:54 PM
But there are better combos, as that one ends up MAD (needing both Int and Wis.)

That doesn't make Ur-Priest any less ridiculous. At least with cleric/wizard theurge, you have to sacrifice nines somewhere. Ur-priest you have to delay wizard casting for a couple levels, but by level 10, you've already got some really gravy wizard spells. And by level 15, you also have 5th level cleric spells to throw around.

And there really isn't that much MAD. You can pimp intelligence and put a 15 in wisdom. All you need is 19 wisdom to get ninths. It's no more MAD than an Archivist, and you get more spells and don't have to rely on the DM to throw you a bone with spells known.




Ruby Knight Vindicat-Ur
Human Paragon or Factotum(with Able Learner) 1/ Crusader 4/ Ur-Priest 2/ Ruby Knight Vindicator 10/ Crusader 3

How are you meeting the pre-reqs?

VirOath
2010-12-15, 08:14 PM
How are you meeting the pre-reqs?

He isn't. RKV requires Wee-Jas as a Deity, and though normally I wouldn't knock entry for it, just refluff it to a fitting ideal for the character rather than a strict Deity selection, it doesn't work.

Because Ur Priest can't have a Deity, or a living one by adaptation. It requires house-ruling on both ends, or a campaign where Wee-Jas is a dead god. It's on more shifty ground than Eldritch Disciple is with this, as atleast then you can get away with Dead Gods.

It's a build that has to pass under the DM's eye and approval to shift the world to make it work, while the player makes puppy dog eyes at him.

faceroll
2010-12-15, 08:17 PM
He isn't. RKV requires Wee-Jas as a Deity, and though normally I wouldn't knock entry for it, just refluff it to a fitting ideal for the character rather than a strict Deity selection, it doesn't work.

Because Ur Priest can't have a Deity, or a living one by adaptation. It requires house-ruling on both ends, or a campaign where Wee-Jas is a dead god. It's on more shifty ground than Eldritch Disciple is with this, as atleast then you can get away with Dead Gods.

It's a build that has to pass under the DM's eye and approval to shift the world to make it work, while the player makes puppy dog eyes at him.

I know how willing the playground is to waive fluff requirements. I meant feats. Do any of them require spell casting?

Random_person
2010-12-15, 08:17 PM
Or the player can kill Wee Jas first.

true_shinken
2010-12-15, 08:20 PM
Or the player can kill Wee Jas first.
Yeah, that's, like, so easy. :smallsigh:

gorfnab
2010-12-15, 08:22 PM
I know how willing the playground is to waive fluff requirements. I meant feats. Do any of them require spell casting?
Nope, Iron Will and Spell Focus: Evil have no prereqs.

faceroll
2010-12-15, 08:25 PM
Nope, Iron Will and Spell Focus: Evil have no prereqs.

Nice. I thought Ur-Priest had stiffer feat pre-reqs, for some reason. Hell, you could do wizard 5/incant5/ur priest 2/mt 8. Hahaha, suck it noncasters!

VirOath
2010-12-15, 08:26 PM
RKV only has Turn/Rebuke abilities required, Ur-Priest has no spell casting requirements, and rather has the mechanical requirement that you have to forsake any current clerical/favored soul/divine casting to take levels in it.

You could get in with Ur-Priest 1 if you wanted to revoke any and all not completely mechanical requirements, but on that logic you could get in Ur-Priest with a good aligned character. Anyways, enough of that, the reason for 2 levels of Ur-Priest is that RKV loses two levels of spellcasting, so that way it is 10/10 for Ur priest in the end.

And if the player managed to kill Wee Jas, then stepping down to this build I would allow completely, as it is a serious drop in power level at that point. God-killing for a build makes it even less feasible thanks to the wonders of Divine Ranks.

GoatBoy
2010-12-15, 08:29 PM
I made a build using the Ur-Priest and the Duregar racial class levels.

Ur-Dur.

I like this game.

Random_person
2010-12-15, 08:32 PM
Yeah, that's, like, so easy. :smallsigh:

I never said it was easy. I was merely pointing it out as an option.

Psyren
2010-12-15, 08:34 PM
He isn't. RKV requires Wee-Jas as a Deity, and though normally I wouldn't knock entry for it, just refluff it to a fitting ideal for the character rather than a strict Deity selection, it doesn't work.

Actually, the adaptation (ToB pg. 125) lets you use any deity. So pick a dead one and Ur-Priest is satisified.

VirOath
2010-12-15, 08:40 PM
Actually, the adaptation (ToB pg. 125) lets you use any deity. So pick a dead one and Ur-Priest is satisified.

Again, adapting both sides of the scale to make it work. Even then, if it's a Deity requirement, it should be kept to active ones or ideals. After all, it is talked about being an active organization.

So my comment about having to make puppy dog eyes to the DM to get it passed still applies.

true_shinken
2010-12-15, 08:46 PM
So my comment about having to make puppy dog eyes to the DM to get it passed still applies.
Indeed. And you'd need to be a pretty lenient DM to allow this.
"Oh, so you want me to change the fluff on two classes so you can be very very powerful? Even more versatile than you already are? Oh, sure, go ahead. Why not? Here are some cookies, I baked them myself."

Runestar
2010-12-15, 08:56 PM
The resume is going to look so badass.:smallamused:

1) Killed a deity just so I could qualify for a prc more easily.

Psyren
2010-12-15, 09:01 PM
Again, adapting both sides of the scale to make it work. Even then, if it's a Deity requirement, it should be kept to active ones or ideals. After all, it is talked about being an active organization.

You're well within your rights to do that as a DM, just as another would be to allow the combination.

true_shinken
2010-12-15, 09:05 PM
You're well within your rights to do that as a DM, just as another would be to allow the combination.

You're well within your right to play a pink antropmorphic bunny as well but that's no argument. His point is just that it is cheesy and you need special DM aproval to pull it, that's all.

Psyren
2010-12-15, 09:09 PM
You're well within your right to play a pink antropmorphic bunny as well but that's no argument.

The difference is, WotC didn't spend precious typespace in their sourcebook telling my DM that I should be allowed to play a pink anthropomorphic bunny. But they did for the Adaptation of RKV.

true_shinken
2010-12-15, 09:13 PM
The difference is, WotC didn't spend precious typespace in their sourcebook telling my DM that I should be allowed to play a pink anthropomorphic bunny. But they did for the Adaptation of RKV.
That's not what the adaptation section (or even prestige classes, really) are for. They are there for a DM to build his world and decide how things fit on it. Just read the description of prestige classes in the DMG, really. You can't say 'WotC told me Ur-priests can be servants of dead gods!' because that's advice for the DM.
Also, savage species has rules for playing antropomorphic animals, so...

Kylarra
2010-12-15, 09:14 PM
The resume is going to look so badass.:smallamused:

1) Killed a deity just so I could qualify for a prc more easily.I'd let you qualify if you did that. :smallcool:

Psyren
2010-12-15, 09:16 PM
That's not what the adaptation section (or even prestige classes, really) are for. They are there for a DM to build his world and decide how things fit on it. Just read the description of prestige classes in the DMG, really. You can't say 'WotC told me Ur-priests can be servants of dead gods!' because that's advice for the DM.

It's stronger than that. Adaptation means "we don't think it would be a huge issue if you adjusted it like this." Putting all that text after PrCs to simply say "Rule Zero applies" is wasteful.



Also, savage species has rules for playing antropomorphic animals, so...

Ooh, pink ones?

Matamane
2010-12-15, 09:17 PM
Oh yes

Bard X/Sublime Chord 2/Ur Priest 2/Mystic Theurge 8

true_shinken
2010-12-15, 09:23 PM
It's stronger than that. Adaptation means "we don't think it would be a huge issue if you adjusted it like this." Putting all that text after PrCs to simply say "Rule Zero applies" is wasteful.
You're not getting my point. Prestige classes already are DM territory, so you shouldn't just try to outmaneuver him (well, you should never try to outmaneuver a DM) here.


Ooh, pink ones?
Oh, like these one?
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/1718/tw400bqq2.jpg

Psyren
2010-12-15, 09:30 PM
You're not getting my point. Prestige classes already are DM territory, so you shouldn't just try to outmaneuver him (well, you should never try to outmaneuver a DM) here.

I'm not. I'm providing justification from WotC.
Which is more likely to carry weight?

"WotC says changing A and B to Y and Z is all right - read it here"

or

"hey, can you ignore those two requirements?"

The simple fact of it being printed in the book is meaningful.



Oh, like these one?
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/1718/tw400bqq2.jpg

Cute, but not nearly fuzzy enough :smalltongue:

true_shinken
2010-12-15, 09:31 PM
The simple fact of it being printed in the book is meaningful.
Oh, I agree completely.

Tael
2010-12-15, 09:45 PM
Or the player can kill Wee Jas first.

Heh.

Player: So, I'm making a few assumptions on things I've already done for my character's backstory, is that okay?

DM: Sure, what have you done?

Player: Well first he killed Wee Jas so that he could qualify for this prestige class, and then he moved onto Vecna, because everyone knows that he's a ****, and he's been hunting down Pelor for the last few years.

DM: Wait, what level are we playing again?

Player: Level 6.

VirOath
2010-12-15, 10:06 PM
Adaptation is "We understand that our content isn't going to fit in with the worlds that a DM creates 100% of the time, or can feel really restrictive. Here are a few ways to change up the fluff and requirements of the class while keeping with the general idea." It is more than Rule Zero, it is Rule Zero with Direction. Straight up Rule Zero would make it homebrew.

It's the same reason why the Red Wizard PrC, a very Setting Specific PrC was printed in a general book like Complete Warrior. Really to show off the adaptation point of it.

But if you are going to say that the Adaptation exists for a reason, then so does the "X in the World" and all the other headers. And if you are going to use adaptation for an argument, take a second look at RKV.

It talks not about being used for any god, it talks about being able to be a secret organization of temple to different gods, like Hextor, Vecna, or St. Cuthbert. That means, no dead gods, as they wouldn't have an active church or organization to support it.

It is the DM's choice to adapt it to another means, and talking with the DM about what you want in a character concept, as well as the current power status of the party and how it fits into the world is how it is supposed to work. It is the player's privilege to ask, not the DM's right to rule against it, it is not an option by default.

Otherwise, I'm sure we would be seeing more Warblade based RKV to have Ironheart Surge, as that adaptation block also mentions using more martial schools as alternatives to create more militaristic organizations, going as far as suggesting Iron Heart school itself and Warblade/Cleric.

But being as this is a build board without any Almighty DM watching over it (just our lovely mods), the Adaptation block can be touched, at best, lightly. It can be mentioned as a possibility, but making the acceptance of the Adaptation block the centerpoint of a build means that the post is better suited for Homebrew, as that is what you are giving out as advice at that point.

Marnath
2010-12-15, 10:12 PM
It talks not about being used for any god, it talks about being able to be a secret organization of temple to different gods, like Hextor, Vecna, or St. Cuthbert. That means, no dead gods, as they wouldn't have an active church or organization to support it.


That's not true, Myrkul of the Forgotten Realms still has a decent following and he's been dead quite a while, by the date suggested in the campaign setting anyway.

Psyren
2010-12-15, 10:12 PM
It talks not about being used for any god, it talks about being able to be a secret organization of temple to different gods, like Hextor, Vecna, or St. Cuthbert. That means, no dead gods, as they wouldn't have an active church or organization to support it.


Why not? If anything, a secret society dedicated to returning a dead god to divinity would be even more likely to purse both Ur-Priesthood and martial study, as they would expect violent conflict in their future.

Tenebrous has cults; so do Bhaal and Myrkul, despite being Deader Than Disco.

(Psyrogue'd by Marnath)


It is the player's privilege to ask, not the DM's right to rule against it, it is not an option by default.

The same is true of any PrC, adaptation or no adaptation. Again, I fail to see why it is so necessary to point out that Rule Zero exists.


It can be mentioned as a possibility, but making the acceptance of the Adaptation block the centerpoint of a build means that the post is better suited for Homebrew, as that is what you are giving out as advice at that point.

That's a ridiculous standpoint. Homebrew is anything that isn't published in a sourcebook. Adaptations? Are.

VirOath
2010-12-15, 10:31 PM
That's a ridiculous standpoint. Homebrew is anything that isn't published in a sourcebook. Adaptations? Are.

Not really. You are basically rewriting the class to suit your needs in this case, directly applying suggestions and optional parts of a book into a character and then passing it off as the DM having the right to refuse in the same way that the DM has the right to remove Sneak Attacks from rogues.

The rules stand as written, the classes stand as written, until a DM chooses to alter them. And yes, they should be altered and common sense applied, RAW shouldn't be chains that bind a DM, but rather guidelines to follow as he sees fit, and to fall back on.

RKV is written as a Wee Jas only PrC, with guidelines on how to change it. Assuming that it applies in the method you desire, as well as another PrC on the same character is not only stretching it thin but as well taking it for granted, that as a Player, saying an Optional Rule is in effect until otherwise dismissed by the DM.

It works the other way around, an optional rule needs to be approved before it is put into effect.

I'm not saying that it shouldn't be allowed in play, rather it should come to the situation to allow that and be brought up as an option if the adaptation is approved. I'm saying that applying the optional as RAW is rewriting the class to your own means, making your own homebrew.

After all, if the DM changes about the RKV to be an Iron Heart, Dwarf Only, Moradin Worshiping PrC, it's effectively his own creation taking heavy influence from RKV and using it as a template to build it off of. It's his homebrew and accepted by him. The player doing the same, is still making homebrew.

Tael
2010-12-15, 10:42 PM
How is an adaption not like taking an ACF or a Variant Class? I really don't see the difference in RAW legality.

Random_person
2010-12-15, 10:45 PM
The most obvious counterexample to the irrelevance of the Adaptation block is Unarmed Swordsage, which is hardly ever mentioned as anything but an RAW base class.

dextercorvia
2010-12-15, 10:49 PM
If you don't want to start as a bard, there is another option. Either a Gray Elf (20 Int) or Human (18 Int) can get into Ur-Priest via Mindbender (IIRC, you don't have a spare skillpoint until ECL7, but whatever). So:

Wizard5/Mindbender1/Ur-Priest1(2)/MT9(8)/Dweomerkeeper4

gets double nines and free wishes.

Beguiler5 works as well and has a nice fluff synergy with Ur-Priest.

VirOath
2010-12-15, 10:49 PM
Because an ACF or Class Variant is something that is strictly defined within the books, printed as supposed to be balanced and an equal trade. Whether it is or not, more often not, is up to the readers.

It has things you give up, things you take, and is pretty much in the same light as Racial Templates but for classes instead. Same thing for substitution levels for classes. Those are not only printed, but the end result is defined.

Adaptation isn't defined at all, it's a bundle of ifs, ors, and ands to give a guideline for a DM to change one thing into another to fit his campaign better.

In the end, the former is a tool for players to shore up on options and help better meet a character concept. The latter is a tool for DMs to help with world building and to make it easier to include PrCs in their setting to help the players as well as build interesting NPCs.


The most obvious counterexample to the irrelevance of the Adaptation block is Unarmed Swordsage, which is hardly ever mentioned as anything but an RAW base class.

Which is really closer to an ACF, just lacking the definition. It's implied to better fill the role of the monk, so the loss of armor as well as weapon use is a given. It's changing about class features themselves.

Yet again, if it is so reasonable to expect RKV to be allowed based upon the adaptation block to be part of a secret service to a dead god, then why bother with Crusader at all? Warblade would be a better fit, as it mentions changing the required school to Iron Heart anyways.

And it's all in the same block, it's got to be one way or the other. You either assume it will always apply and never preface, or accept that it is an optional thing needing DM approval for the change as a DM tool and always preface.

Unarmed Swordsage is normally bracketed with "If they will fly with it..."

GoatBoy
2010-12-15, 10:50 PM
Player: Well first he killed Wee Jas so that he could qualify for this prestige class, and then he moved onto Vecna, because everyone knows that he's a ****, and he's been hunting down Pelor for the last few years.

DM: Wait, what level are we playing again?

Player: Level 6.

"Okay, just hit level 2. So where can I find that "Tarraques" that everyone's always yammering about?"

Random_person
2010-12-15, 10:52 PM
Because an ACF or Class Variant is something that is strictly defined within the books, printed as supposed to be balanced and an equal trade. Whether it is or not, more often not, is up to the readers.

It has things you give up, things you take, and is pretty much in the same light as Racial Templates but for classes instead. Same thing for substitution levels for classes. Those are not only printed, but the end result is defined.

Adaptation isn't defined at all, it's a bundle of ifs, ors, and ands to give a guideline for a DM to change one thing into another to fit his campaign better.

In the end, the former is a tool for players to shore up on options and help better meet a character concept. The latter is a tool for DMs to help with world building and to make it easier to include PrCs in their setting to help the players as well as build interesting NPCs.

And yet, the majority of people on this forum seem to feel differently (see the Unarmed Swordsage).

Kylarra
2010-12-15, 10:59 PM
And yet, the majority of people on this forum seem to feel differently (see the Unarmed Swordsage).That's because they like what it does. Counterpoint: Arcane Swordsage.

Random_person
2010-12-15, 11:04 PM
While I don't deny that there exist adaptations which people flat-out ignore, I do deny that something being an adaptation makes it irrelevant to any RAW discussion. If memory serves, Arcane Swordsage isn't even completely statted out, whereas both Unarmed Swordsage and a change in the organization backing a prestige class leave no mechanics undecided.

faceroll
2010-12-15, 11:09 PM
I'm not. I'm providing justification from WotC.
Which is more likely to carry weight?

"WotC says changing A and B to Y and Z is all right - read it here"

or

"hey, can you ignore those two requirements?"


Certainly not the former, given WotC's track record. *cough*mystic swordsage*cough*


And yet, the majority of people on this forum seem to feel differently (see the Unarmed Swordsage).


While I don't deny that there exist adaptations which people flat-out ignore, I do deny that something being an adaptation makes it irrelevant to any RAW discussion. If memory serves, Arcane Swordsage isn't even completely statted out, whereas both Unarmed Swordsage and a change in the organization backing a prestige class leave no mechanics undecided.

I don't believe Unarmed Swordsage is proficient with any armor, yet he only gets his wisdom bonus to AC when wearing light armor.

(see the mystic swordsage)

Kylarra
2010-12-15, 11:10 PM
The unarmed swordsage has the amusing "Wis to AC in light armor without light armor proficiency" and "no improved unarmed strike, but increased unarmed damage". Easily remedied of course, but still technically incomplete. The Arcane Swordsage's fault, on the other hand, lies in the fact that like StP Erudite, it could utterly break the game if that variant is used.

faceroll
2010-12-15, 11:11 PM
That's an awful lot of white for a ninja to be wearing.

Psyren
2010-12-15, 11:13 PM
The rules stand as written, the classes stand as written, until a DM chooses to alter them.

Adaptations ARE written. See, right there on the page. In ink.

Marnath
2010-12-15, 11:20 PM
That's an awful lot of white for a ninja to be wearing.

Must be a rare snow ninja.

Jothki
2010-12-15, 11:24 PM
You don't actually have to kill Wee Jas if you can smoothtalk your DM enough. Say that you want your backstory to be that you were a champion of Wee Jas who was defending him when he was killed, lost a bunch of strength with his death, but have vowed to return him to life using the leftover remnants of his own power.

Then hope your DM doesn't look too closely at your entirely flavor-based build.

Random_person
2010-12-15, 11:32 PM
OK, I screwed up. I'm going to go away now.

woodenbandman
2010-12-15, 11:43 PM
wizards released something that is not entirely balanced?

INCREDULOUS!