Talk:Assassin, Variant (3.5e Prestige Class)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search


Since assassination seems to be a plotted-out thing, maybe this one should use Intelligence instead of Wisdom? It seems more appropriate that way.--Ddragon Necrophades 01:12, 16 November 2008 (MST)

Not really, it more like instinctive defence. But I would totally see a feat allowing to add Int instead of Dex (ala Paladin Serenity).--Lord Dhazriel 11:12, 16 November 2008 (MST)

Any Alignment[edit]

Hmm... How do you explain the Alignment: any? I somehow cannot imagine a Lawful Good Assassin... Pharen 12:17, 22 March 2009 (MDT)

So let make one. Mya Lawful good Assassin 3, Mya is a young lady she was trained by her father who was a renowned assassin. She only cares in the welfare of the people of the world and kill cultist of dark gods or murderer with her stealth, and found employment as a governmental agent. So yeah, while she may be cheap and unoriginal she is clearly lawful good. --Lord Dhazriel 11:42, 17 April 2009 (MDT)
Agreed, There is alway's some way or some form to make any alignment work for nearly any type or class, alignements are as good as broken and should preferably be used as guidelines instead of actual rules.

I've never understood the requirement for an Assassin to have an Evil alignment. The excuse given for it was "Assassins kill people." All classes of characters kill people. Most high level characters have kill hundreds of creatures, including all character races. An Assassin could be a highly trained killer that works for a government, religious order or organization. They would be protecting the interest of the group for whom they practice their trade. These groups could be of any alignment. I believe this restriction exist because most of the game generators come from a Judeo-Christian background that teaches killing is evil. When I am running a game, I allow Assassins to have any alignment the player desires. (previous unsigned edit)

The issue is the special requirement. Killing a target solely to take the class will shift you right to evil. If you can justify the kill to yourself "he needed to die" it doesn't count. If the victim isn't innocent, it doesn't count. Even a kill for unjustified revenge does not count. If you weren't evil before you fulfilled that requirement, you are after. If you remove the restriction on alignment, you have to modify the special requirement as well. My idea.

Special: you must incapacitate and kill someone outside of combat without being detected by anyone, and kill no one else that day.

This may still cause an alignment shift, but you can pick someone who deserves to die and still pass it. 21:35, 11 December 2015 (MST)


Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because this class is really quite balanced, since the possible uses of sneak attacks when combined with shadow hand manuveurs are really quite handy and versatile in any given situation. → Rith (talk) 21:42, 16 April 2009 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 4.5 out of 5 since pretty much everything is in order (Though, that deadly strike could be reworded for a little clarification). → Rith (talk) 21:42, 16 April 2009 (MDT)

Formatting - 3.5/5 I give this class a 3.5 out of 5 because interwiki linking is very good all around, and, while the preload isn't filled out, it's still present, and the creator of this class intends to fill it out eventually. → Rith (talk) 21:42, 16 April 2009 (MDT)

Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because a martial assassin is just a cool idea, though the flavor parts of the preload still need to be added in. → Rith (talk) 21:42, 16 April 2009 (MDT)

Changed rating since flavor is independant of the preload. → Rith (talk) 11:38, 17 April 2009 (MDT)


ok, i love the class, but where are the manuever and stance descripions? -Tyraxor 10:58 5/16/09

Tome of Battle. --TK-Squared 12:54, 16 May 2009 (MDT)
tome of battle. book of nine swords.

You know, it was about time someone had got around to doing another "martial adept" class. Lord Dhazriel's assassin is definitely a better way to run an assassin character than a PrC that uses magic. -- Mythos Specialist 12:26, 18 May 2009 (MDT)


Power - 2/5 I give this class a 2 out of 5 because it seems to have virtually everything any combat rogue-type character would want without doing any real work. Full maneuvers? Check. Full BAB? Check. Full Sneak Attack progression? Check. When comparing to other combat rogues, there seems to be nothing to outweigh all of these things. Why would anyone take a rogue, swordsage, etc, when they could just take this class that has everything? Furthermore, it gets abilities that virtually all other rogueish classes have to work to get--Wisdom to AC that most other rogues need to take 2 levels of swordsage to get, dexterity to damage which most other classes need to get through Shadow Blade, and a few other things that all other rogueish characters have to work to get. --Ghostwheel 10:16, 22 July 2009 (MDT)

Lack of UMD, without use magic device 90% of the rogue most useful tricks are out, golemstrike and gravestrike? out. The ability to cast divine power from a scroll? out. Swordsage get more maneuvers. For full sneak attack, rogue gain access to many classes granting this, the nightsong enforcer by example. These class while available to the assassin do not advance maneuvers and stance, so basically are subpar for the assassin. The assassin isn't as skilled as the rogue, therefore cannot fill the whole skill-monkey role in the party, it basically a glass cannon sneak-attack warrior. --Lord Dhazriel 12:49, 22 July 2009 (MDT)
That's what combat rogues are. Most combat rogues out there do that just fine without getting full BAB, full access to maneuvers, AND full sneak attack all from one class. They're also fine if they don't use UMD--which isn't that hard to get with a cross-class skill point, a masterwork tool, and a skill boosting item. Or one could go Rogue 4 / Assassin 16 to get +19 BAB with Penetrating Strike from Dungeonscape to ignore half the immunity to sneak attack. And most combat rogues go Rogue 4 / Swashbuckler 16, working for Sneak Attack + High BAB--those aren't good skill monkeys either, but do just fine. On all counts, this "Assassin" trumps the others on all accounts as far as primary combat is concerned. --Ghostwheel 19:52, 22 July 2009 (MDT)
Most combat rogues go rogue 4/swashbuckler 16? Um, what? lol. Surgo 20:35, 22 July 2009 (MDT)
Yeah, with a 1 or 2 level dip into swordsage for Assassin's Stance/Island of Blades. But the above works just as well, since you get full Sneak Attack and high BAB. Can multiclass into Invisible Blade and similar things, but a good, basic combat rogue build is Rogue 4 / Swashbuckler 16. --Ghostwheel 22:28, 22 July 2009 (MDT)
Most good rogue don't waste their time on swashbucklers. As I said, a wand of divine power, full bab +6 str and extra hp. Where do I sign! UMD all the way, and it what this class lack. This class was made to be balanced against monsters, so if you wnat to prove it overpowered go with monsters, not some random build I never heard of. --Lord Dhazriel 22:34, 22 July 2009 (MDT)
So let's say that UMD is the big clincher. Whoop dee doo. Like there aren't a dozen ways to get it as a class skill. The lack of a single skill does not make this class balanced. Especially since those ways are often feats, and with this class you don't need Shadow Blade, Adaptive Style, or anything like that. --Ghostwheel 00:16, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
Other classes don't matter, unless you multiclass. Maneuvers are extremely pathetic compared to spells. So if basically as a assassin I get UMD as a class skill through a feat, I wasted a feat a rogue didn't. And the rogue with a wand of divine power have full bab, ability to crit undead, construct, plants and shit. And the assassin cannot fill the skill monkey role efficiently, oh without UMD or shiny alternate class feature it actually not possible to crit plant, undead and construct. An assassin don't have access to many rogue PrC and ToB PrC cripple your sneak attack. And you actually failed a tgiving me a reason why this class is overpowered, you just said: "Lot of stuff lol" and presented me an obscure builds as a absolute comparison. Whoop dee doo. Now let see if you can actually back up these claims. --Lord Dhazriel 00:30, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
Just to respond to this one, UMD can be added as a class skill with one feat if particular races are chosen. --
Because, when compared to other sneak attackers and martial adepts, it gains everything. Full BAB, full sneak attack, full maneuvers. No other WotC class comes close to that. Items can be taken off your character. Wands lose charges. DMs sometimes don't have magic marts. UMD is easily gotten. There's very little this class doesn't give, and those things could be taken with a dip into another class, where most other builds have to jump through hoops to get half the things this class gives. Just because maneuvers aren't as powerful as spells doesn't make them underpowered either. They're there as substitutes to SA, not gotten fully on top of it. --Ghostwheel 00:42, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
It seems my commentary vanished...all right then.
Am I the only one who thinks this review sounds retarded?
Yes. You are the only one. Your rebuttal sounds far more childish, inane, and abusive. (Anonymous Man)
Let's find something comparable, eh? Why not... Warblade!
So, maneuvers. Full maneuvers is a great problem, right...? Massively overpo... oh. Huh. Look at that. Assassin has exactly as many maneuvers as the Warblade (half of what a Swordsage gets), a little less breadth to select said maneuvers from (four schools as opposed to five), and the maneuvers reload a lot slower (full-round action as opposed to swift action).
Side note, no, an Assassin does need Adaptive Style if they want to actually use it for... I don't know, adaptation? Same reason a Warbie or Crusader would get it, rather than the immense increase in reload speed that the Swordsage gets.
So... maneuvers are about equal with the Warblade, if not a little behind. Let's try out class features. Hm... yup, Assassin definitely has more, given the sneak attack.
On the other hand, a Warblade has about twice the HP, and Sneak Attack... yeah, powerful, but it's also relatively easy to shut down.
To finish off... what the hell? Your objection to this class appears to boil down to, essentially, the fact that a player can take this class, and settle in - if they want to play 'sneaky killer with freaky abilities', they can just sit down in the one class and have fun, rather than multiclass crazily through a half-dozen different books. Horror of horrors. I know, it's really just WRONG that a person can play the game without spending hours of their life poring through various books for the appropriate classes and feats, jumping through hoops to play a character halfway close to their intended one, isn't it? --Pale Wolf
After reading through, I have to agree with Ghostwheel. This is far superior in every way to the swordsage, rogue, and other sneak attacking classes (Lurk, Spellthief, Ninja, and so on). I think maneuvers were created so that martial adepts could be powerful without resorting to Sneak Attack. Giving a class full sneak attack progression on top of maneuvers and full BAB seems far too much, regardless of the number you get.
As for the above, comparing it to the warblade is a poor choice, since the warblade is most dissimilar--not in the number of maneuvers or the BAB, but as far as class skills (so many here...), Wisdom to AC (even with a buckler and Improved Buckler Defense for a higher AC than that of a normal Swordsage), sneak attack, access to specific schools (getting the much-coveted Iron Heart school while still retaining access to Shadow Hand to access Shadow Blade easily, adding Dex x2 to damage and Desert Wind for its bonus damage boosts, great on full attacks and even more amazing with Sneak Attack.
And as was mentioned above, by dipping into another class (classes are not created inside a vacuum) you can easily pick up UMD and/or the ability to ignore immunity to Sneak Attacks (for half, at least). Also, there's a reason that SA progression is coupled with full BAB in certain PrCs--it's powerful. Being able to get the benefits of those prestige classes without losing any BAB at all, as well as full access to maneuvers... is just wrong.
Finally, it was mentiond that you could pick up a wand of Divine Power. However, two things stop you from doing this; first is the cost. According to the "item level by cost" table in Magic Item Compendium, a player should have access to said wand very late in the game--around level 15. Second, activating the wand uses up the most precious resource in D&D, actions. Both of these coupled together make it less than optimal, and that's if the DM lets you get one in the first place.
In short, getting access to boosts and strikes when combined with a full sneak attack progression is just way too powerful. -- 04:58, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
... Getting Shadow Blade? Dex x2 added to damage? Letting two essentially identical abilities stack? If your DM allows you to pull that, he DESERVES to have you getting overpowered and messing with his cheerios.
And yes, Sneak Attack's powerful. It's also easy to shut down - as soon as combat starts and they're not flatfooted, the Rogue or Assassin has to pull crazy stunts to keep getting flatfooted (hide and hope their spot doesn't beat it, for instance), or flanking (and going into rather dangerous areas of the battle TO flank, and they're completely without that recourse when alone. And you can also just make it 100% useless with ease - constructs, undead, concealment. Any one of those, and there is ZERO way to pull off a Sneak Attack... and boom, there goes the class's biggest class feature.
Regarding the dipping to get Sneak Attack to apply half-damage against normally invalid targets? That's an exploit of a poorly-worded rule. It is meant to substitute for the Rogue's trapsense. A DM would be well-advised to make that 'sneak attack against constructs/undead increases when trapsense would increase', since if you get it with a level dip, you're basically getting the trapsense ability from a number of levels of Rogue that you didn't actually take, if you're getting any more Sneak Attack than a Rogue of that level should have.
And, compare the strikes available, before you call it way too powerful. Notice how almost all of them burn your turn so you can't full-attack, and do significantly less damage than said full sneak attack? Most strikes are not even USEFUL for the Assassin, unless you want something to tide you over while you're fighting in no-sneak-attack conditions - though the Assassin's rather limited selection of maneuvers means you probably don't have enough to spare for that purpose anyway. The maneuvers an Assassin would be selecting are mostly boosts and little toys like Zephyr Dance to help with the dual facts that A: everyone wants to kill them, and B: low HP.
You're right, though. This is superiour to the Rogue, Spellthief, etc, in one sense - outright physical combat. You may note that it is significantly _inferior_ in many others. Rogue utterly OWNS it in the skill arena, and in dealing with traps, and has a few more rather nice abilities. Spellthief will lose eight falls out of ten in a sneak attack match, no question, the AC and BAB differences give an Assassin a significant edge in that. But they completely blow the Assassin out of the water in regards to their 'special effects' (Spellthief magic versus Assassin maneuvers), and Spellthieves get to add all their rather funky abilities on top for THEIR specialty, doing crazy things with magic and generally causing trouble for casters. (And they can also just steal a Divine Power from a cleric if they really need full BAB, evening up one of the Assassin's big edges in about three seconds... and they still have a skill advantage over the Assassin to boot, though not as grand of one as the Rogue)
This class is built to be good at one thing, and one thing only - sneaking up on people and making them dead. It sacrifices everything else - extra skills (even the Warblade will have more skills, since Warbies benefit from having high Int more than Assassins do), variety and number of maneuvers that the swordsage has, the HP to withstand heavy combat (you can get mowed to 50% HP in one hit with this thing)... Tradeoffs. That's the _essence_ of balance. --Pale Wolf
-facepalm- Where to start...? Let's go with dexterity to damage. The rules state that as long as a bonus comes from a different effect and is a different kind of bonus, it stacks. Period. That means, for example, that a Monk with Kung Fu Genius multiclassed with Factotum could use Cunning Defense to get Int to damage twice. It also means that someone could take Shadow Blade along with this class to get Dexterity to damage twice.
Next, you seem to think that maneuvers are of no real consequence. Have you seen some of the boosts? Combine Flashing Sun with Burning Blade to get an extra attack on a full attack, while adding +1d6+3 damage to *every* attack on that round. At level 3. On top of +2d6 Sneak Attack damage. Oh, and sneak attacking is very, very easy. Take a look at Island of Blades. Means that you just have to have a summoned creature, an ally, whatever, next to the enemy and you sneak attack for free. Now let's say you're actually alone. There are still options. Distracting Ember will let you flank on your own, as can Cloak of Deception. Both of these are boosts, allowing you to use your full attack ... while alone. Add on Assassin's Stance to count as a rogue 4 levels higher than yourself as far as sneak attack dice are concerned. Maneuvers aren't limited to strikes, and are far from being weak.
Third, like the guy above said, classes are not made in a vacuum. Should be, could be, would be. Saying a DM should house rule this or house rule that doesn't work. The class should work both on its own, and taking into consideration other classes. Dipping 4 levels into Rogue (oh no, I've lost 1 BAB) allows you to easily sneak attack. Further, as previous posters have mentioned, there are wands that are activatable as a swift action which allow you to sneak attack plants, constructs, and others. And UMD isn't hard to get at all.
Fourth, skill points are cheap. You can get a +2 bonus from a masterwork item to any skill for ~50 gp. A +5 item costs only 2.5k. At low level, you can start as a rogue for massive skill points at the start, as well as Trapfinding. At higher levels, boosts to skills aren't hard to get.
Fifth, not everyone will be able to even touch an assassin. Make a 5th level assassin. Make him a halfling. Check his AC. Compared to other characters, it's easily sky-high when combined with a mithral chain shirt. Add on Improved Buckler Defense, and you can continue twf-ing with a buckler on your hand, giving you another boost to AC. Swordsages have a higher AC than most classes, and this transfers to this class.
Sixth, most of the game is about combat. Look at the rules in the PHB. Look at how many dozens of pages are devoted to combat (including spells, weapons, armor, combat rules, class abilities that relate to combat, and so on) versus how many are towards character interaction. This may very well be a failing of the game itself, but the power of classes is often based on how well they do in combat. And I'll repeat it; skills are cheap. As for spellthieves stealing Divine Power, not every party includes a cleric, and it still wastes the most precious resoruce to use it at the start of combat.
Just an example for these numbers... let's try them out. Assuming a +2 Dex item, +1 Mithral Shirt, and base 16 dex and wis (before racial mods) a halfling's going to have 10 + 1 (size) + 5 (dex) + 5 (armor) + 3 (wis) = 24 AC. Add on a +2 item of wis, or a +1 Ring of Protection and +1 Amulet of Natural Armor and it gets even higher. And even higher if you nab Improved Buckler Defense.
Same character, but let's look at damage at level 3 with Burning Blade + Flashing Sun, in Island of Blades for easy flanking. That's attacks at 1 (size) + 1 (masterwork weapon) + 3 (BAB) + 4 (Dex) - 2 (Flashing Sun) = +7/+7, and damage is 1d4 (Small Shortsword) + 2d6 (Sneak Attack) + 1d6+3 (Burning Blade) + 4 (Deadly Precision) + 4 (Shadow Blade) for 1d4+3d6+11 damage on each attack. If both attacks hit, that's 48 damage on average. At level 3. And it grows far faster than other classes, since you not only gain full maneuvers, but also full Sneak Attack progression on top of full BAB. --Ghostwheel 08:45, 23 July 2009 (MDT)

←Reverted indentation to one colon

I can't really defend or criticize this class since I don't know much, if anything, about maneuvers and stances and whatnot, but I will say, Ghostwheel, that your halfling will have a base speed of 20 feet (assuming there's no stances/whatevers to change that) and as such might have difficulty getting into position to full attack people in melee, regardless of how effective he may be once he gets there. Also, that stuff is kind of expensive for a third level character. If you go by the DMG's wealth by level guideline (which to fair is a bit silly since all campaigns are different), a 3rd level character is supposed to have 2,700 gp worth of stuff. A +2 ability-enhancing item costs 4,000 gp. I'm also just going to say, I'm sure that, given your knowledge of optimization (as you seem to know a fair bit), you could probably find ways to deal similar levels of damage with other classes, or attain a similar level of defense. I don't know if you could do both with the same class, which is perhaps why you think this class is overpowered, but I'm sure it's hardly unique in it's ability to deal damage or dodge people. -- Jota 09:50, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
While the AC example was level 5, and thus had the +2 item, +1 armor, etc, the damage was a level 3 one, and had only a masterwork shortsword, nothing else--which I think is an acceptable at that level. In fact, if you picked up Two-Weapon Fighting, you could be making another attack for even more damage (50% more damage, assuming all the attacks hit, for up to 72 damage on average).
As far as comparing to other classes, the AC was an example that the swordsage can easily duplicate; I was trying to make the point that it's not necessarily that easy to hit the two classes, so lower HP is less of a problem.
And the damage... I don't think I could readily achieve that kind of damage at that low a level. Nothing comes to mind that can do equivalent damage, especially at that low of a level. Even things on the Wall of Cheese would be hard-pressed, since many need to be higher than level 3 before they come into their own. --Ghostwheel 10:21, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
Two +2 Items (8,000), +1 Mithral Armor (2,100) and a masterwork short sword (~300) is greater than 9,000. You're not good at this wealth by level thing, are you? --TK-Squared 10:25, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
The other thing I would add, touching on what TK said, is that the DMG suggests caps on most expensive item as well, so prevent ye' olde barbarian (or whatever) to put all his money into a +4 weapon or something equivalent at level 7 (purely hypothetical example, probably a load of bull in practice). Anyway, if I recall the suggestion is about 1/3 of your total wealth, so even your fifth level character (total: 9000/max single item: 3000) wouldn't have access to those +2 items. I'm not advocating that system necessarily as correct, but it is a benchmark established by Wizards that we can (sort of) use as a comparison point. -- Jota 11:05, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
The level 5 example for AC had a +2 dex item (4k) and +1 Mithral Armor (2.1k) for 24 AC at level 5. You'll notice that the wisdom bonus to AC was 3, since I mentioned a base wis of 16. That leaves enough money for a +1 Short Sword if you want it, two if you're willing to let go of the +2 dex item. There is nothing outrageous in there, and it doesn't go over the wealth cap at all. Even without the +2 dex item, that still leaves you with 23 AC--nothing to sneeze at. I only made mention of a +wis item for future levels, as an example of how a swordsage/assassin could increase their AC in ways that a wearer of heavy armor normally couldn't. --Ghostwheel 11:32, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
"+2 items", plural. clarity plz --TK-Squared 11:47, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
Corrected, will try to make less typos in the future ;-) Though my point still stands--less HP doesn't matter as much when foes can't hit you, and when you have (Improved) Evasion to ward off AoEs that deal HP damage. --Ghostwheel 11:49, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
I made a little sidebar with a variant for less optimized games, as a side note: the whole thing was playtested, and it no crime for a class to be actually as powerful as a actual build. And wis to AC isn't actually that good, I remember a uber-abjurant champion build I made with an AC over 50 at 12th level, not much can actually hit this thing. But silly am I, we are not talking about a build but a class. Anyway, I made this little sidebar as said above, I doubt it will be enough to close this discussion but at least I try. --Lord Dhazriel 15:19, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
As far as AC is concerned, I wasn't comparing it to the builds that go out of their way to get a huge AC, but to what most people play. For example, comparing the level 5 version to a character with +2 full plate and at least 12 dex, both the swordsage and assassin outdo him as far as AC is concerned. Not that it's a bad thing, but... that's kinda the point I'm trying to make; the reason it's overpowered isn't because it can do the same thing that other builds can. It's that it can do things that other builds (that don't resort to extreme cheese) can't. That is, up to 13d6 SA at level 20 (Assassin 19 / SA Fighter 1 + Assassin's Stance), dex to damage twice, full BAB, and full maneuvers all at the same time. It's not any one of those things, but all of them together that unbalances the class. --Ghostwheel 21:46, 23 July 2009 (MDT)
For the "variant", I feel as though this is a good start; however, perhaps that might be the primary, and the class as-is could be variant for people playing in a party with only clerics, druids, and wizards? And instead of making it Sudden Strike (which is easily turned into sneak attack at higher levels with Greater Invis) perhaps you might change it to +1d6 SA every 3 levels? (Starting at level 3, so people don't just dip into the class, but are encouraged to take it a bit higher.) --Ghostwheel 05:55, 24 July 2009 (MDT)
Ghostwheel you seem to be a smart person so I won,t lie, this class is pre-optimized. Most of my classes are in fact. The main class was made to be a stealthy and deadly martial adept, it supposed to be better than the rogue when fighting. This class was meant to be taken from 1 to 20 (except if I actually make a PrC for the assassin), and thus compound stealthy and deadly abilities without having 3 or 4 class and thus much more usable by newbies and deadly in the hand of an expert. This is how I made the class, some may disagreed hence why I made the sidebar. I will actually make the low-powered variant as an actual class to complete the page instead of some messages, Stay tuned. --Lord Dhazriel 00:10, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
You talk about pre-optimization; I'll point to three classes I consider "pre-optimized". The crusader, the swordsage, the warblade. All three are usable by deadlies, and also good in the hands of experts. However, this class just seems to be a gestalt of the rogue and swordsage along with the BAB of a fighter. Rather than pre-optimized, I'd say this class is overoptimized. As I said before, there is no class that can do what this one can all at once. (Full BAB, full Sneak Attack, full maneuvers.) Making a class that's stronger than the others is easy. Balancing the class is a bit harder. In this version of the assassin, you give the class everything one could ever want in a combat-oriented rogue, giving up very little in comparison. Thus, when compared to the three classes I mentioned above, as well as other sneak attackers, this class is overpowered. If you want to make a "stealthy and deadly martial adept", look no farther than the Swordsage. Basically giving the Swordsage full BAB and Sneak Attack isn't going to make the class balanced is not the right thing to do in my mind. --Ghostwheel 00:57, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
This is offtopic and please move it to my own talk page, but I don't remember the Swordsage ever being worth shit. Has something changed that I'm not aware of? Surgo 01:21, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Okay, first of all the warblade, crusader and swordsage are not pre-optimized. They are good classes, yes but not pre-optimized. This class isn't even close to a rogue/warblade in term of power, with a slower maneuvers recovery, less disciplines available, lack of trapfinding, skills and UMD. And the swordsage is a poor assassin, you need to have top equipment and need a lot of knowledge in the game to make it a good assassin. This class work very well with other powerful classes like the cleric, the druid and the wizard. Of course this class still pale in comparison to strong spellcasters. Yo like comparison then why not comapre it to the druid? or the cleric perhaps? While martial adept are good, they are not pre-optimized. The swordsage is versatile but almost useless because of mid-bab and slow recovery mechanic make sure you run out of ammo soon enough. The warblade and the crusader are big meat shield, the crusader is random (and no experienced gamers would say that something basing itself on random is pre-optimized) which is more often than not a pain in the ass fro him. Yes he get a lot of awesome maneuvers, but something he won't have the one he need in his hand.
The warblade is the best of the lot IMO, he get a very fats recovery mechanic and have nothing to envy to the assassin. He gain access to some of the most kickass discipline and with good bab and a d12. He also actually get better skills than the assassin, because a good warblade will have a good Int. Now, why make a pre-optimized class strictly worse than a optimized build, because the battle rogue cannot do some stuff the assassin can make the class overpowered? I call bullshit on this one, if we go by that logic every class are badly underpowered because they are outperformed by high-end builds. Pre-Optimized mean: you don't need to tweak it further, you have everything you want there and you won't suck monster's wang because you made a bad feat choice. I am making a low-powered version, the main version was extensively play-tested and I trust it perfectly balanced against monsters and other powerful character builds. That is all I have to say. And funnily the class was play-tested in a gestalt game too. --Dhazriel 01:41, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
You can say it was playtested, but I haven't seen the playtesting or the conditions under which it was playtested, so saying that doesn't really add much at all. Now ask yourself, not what happens when a newbie who takes Alertness and Magical Aptitude as feats plays this class, but when someone who knows what to do with it? The class needs to be decent in the hands of a newbie, and good in the hands of someone who knows how to optimize characters--as the warblade, crusader, and swordsage are. Having played all three, none are bad at what they do. That's what I mean by "pre-optimized"--they can be used by a complete newbie who picks things just because they "look cool" or "sound nice" and the character still won't be useless.
Aside: Just an example of a swordsage, take Insightful Strke (class ability) for tiger claw. Then use Pouncing Charge when combined with Improved Two-Weapon Fighting and Searing Blade. When you actually look at the attack and damage rolls, it's far from unimpressive.
So is this class supposed to be one that's "newbie only"? Should newbies use this as a haven so they don't need to learn what good feats are and what aren't good feats? One of the biggest incentives to learn how the game works and what classes are good and what aren't is the promise of being able to be better. Telling them to use this class is like giving them Divine Metamagic for free because they won't think right off the bat to combine it with Persistent/Quicken Metamagic. Just because it won't be overpowered in the hands of a specific player does not make the class balanced. The problem isn't that just newbies will use it. If a class is open, everyone should be able to use it, and those who see the optimization potential in the class will use that too. Rather than that happening, a class should be balanced from the start, not only, "If just the newbies use it." --Ghostwheel 01:55, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Newbies to the game ought to be able to perform every bit as well as the rest of the party members who aren't as new. The playtesting was the Same Game test (use the search bar on the left) and quite legitimate. I'm really not seeing how this class suddenly gets mega-dangerous when a non-newbie uses it. From what I've seen so far, the argument against it is "it looks overpowered". Surgo 02:04, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
See my example above, of 72 damage in a single round should all attacks hit. I was actually 2 lower on the attack roll than I should have been, not counting in easy flanking from Island of Blades. --Ghostwheel 02:06, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
It's very late, I'll respond to this in the morning. Surgo 02:25, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
It was play-tested in the same-game test, in a gestalt play-by-post game. It was also play-tested in a small pseudo-game (made only to playtest the class). Sorry for not saying this before, silly me. --Dhazriel 02:21, 25 July 2009 (MDT)

←Reverted indentation to one colon

Having not seen the playtest itself, I can't say whether it was a fair and balanced playtest, and without having seen what feats were taken I couldn't say how optimized the person who played the class made it. That said, numbers don't really lie; 72 damage at level 3 is still there. --Ghostwheel 02:25, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
I am used to see similar number in my games. Well 72 may be a bit too much for your old average game however, it why I finished the variant. Sudden Strike at 3rd won't be as impressive as SA, I will also work on a maneuver-less variant. And I beta tested a lot of assassin, from the ultra-optimized archer assassin to the average one-dagger assassin. And yes, my games are usually very well optimized. --Dhazriel 02:35, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
...Just wondering, how do you get around 72 damage by level 3 using the "usual" wotc classes? --Ghostwheel 02:38, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
I never said with usual WotC class, that would be silly. We usually have very optimized build doing all kind of crazy shit around. An optimized assassin should also be able to do crazy shit too. However not all assassin can strike with 72 each round, of course optimizing the assassin further is going to do some crazy shit. And most classes does (I had a warblade able to do some serious damages, I still consider her one of my strongest character. She could do around 500 damages in AoO only, let not talk when she actually had to act on her turn :o). --Dhazriel 02:45, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Ah, that's exactly what I'm talking about. You're comparing this class to the classes that you use in your games, not to the classes published in WotC books. Thus why I mean that the less powerful "variant" should be the primary one, since people are going to expect classes to be balanced compared to most D&D classes, not to the ones in your particular game. And the more powerful version could the the one used in high-powered games, and where it might be expected to be optimized further. --Ghostwheel 02:50, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Well I still the main class is usable for CR-to-CR games, which is what I believe people should play. The example above was very high powered games, and actually and ironically both the warblade and the strongest assassin almost never used their maneuvers. If you don't go overboeard with powerful feats and shit you can actually play a perfectly okay assassin. And I never compare my classes to WotC SRD classes. A regular assassin will be one par with a regular warblade, a crazy assassin should be as powerful as a crazy warblade. I must admit I am only worries by one thing, Time Stand still + Sneak Attack. But it level 17 and everything is batshit crazy by then anyway. Overall, the class was meant to be used in CR should beat their own CR worth of monster type of game (which I think is the right style of game, hence why the stronger variant is the main one.) --Dhazriel 02:57, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Or, for example, UMDing a wand of Wraithstrike when combined with a sneak attacked Avalanche of Blades? I don't see a warblade dealing that kind of damage at level 3 no matter how crazy you get with it, or level 5 for that matter. --Ghostwheel 03:02, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Oh adding UMD is cheesy an would totally unbalance the class I agreed. Because it was balanced to deal without UMD... it would be like adding Initiate of Mystra to a cleric, because it not balanced to cast in a AMF. --Dhazriel 03:04, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Eh, Initiate of Mystra is on my Banned List; UMD not so much. *shrug* And as was mentioned before, skills are easy to get, and it's not hard to get it added to your list of class skills either. --Ghostwheel 03:06, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Look, I not big on the "DM should balance things" bullshit. But I balanced this class without UMD, it not cheesy for many classes but for this one it is. An ability use by Pun-Pun may be very respectable used by another class, in this case the DM should maybe add his grain of salt. I won't disfigure the whole class because it possibly easy to get as a class skill. I cannot foresee every possible abuse in a class. UMD should not get in the hand of the assassin, at least not without sacrifices (like taking a shit class like human paragon...). Of course, if you get it shit goes crazy. But we are talking about average games aren't we? By example Divine Metamagic is much much less cheesy in the hand of a pally (and a bit stupid too but oh well). Giving this class UMD will make it overpowered I totally agreed, but I can't do anything about that. Nerfing the class to prevent abuse won't actually help, again im not into the "DM should balance things" philosophy but still once in a while it good to know what your players are doing. It not hard to get wizard casting divine spell either, does it make divine spells unbalanced? --Dhazriel 03:15, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Some of them certainly are, but when comparing it to similar classes, all of which have similar options, from every way you look it appears a lot more powerful. I think we both agree that it's certainly a lot more powerful than other classes produced by WotC. And you have to be aware of potential abuse. For example, look at the |Mystic Blade class. By being aware that Persistent Spell might be used to abuse the free metamagic ability, the ability was changed so that it couldn't be abused. Classes should be balanced both by themselves, and when taking other material into account. While many WotC classes are underpowered for just the first one (most of the melee ones except the ToB classes and PsyWar, I think) they balance out when you have other books to choose from. But access to UMD does not need another book at all, so this class can be abused in and of itself. All you need to do is take a few ranks of UMD as a cross-class skill, and nab a +5 (2.5k) or +10 (10k) item as well as a masterwork tool (50 gp) to be able to use wands most of the time without a problem. --Ghostwheel 03:31, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Of course, however I think you must be aware of how I developed the class. The assassin won't wear heavy armor, he don't have so much skill point to spend and don't have heroic HP. The assassin should kill in one round, he should and in fact he must. With his d6 if he don't bring the enemy down with one blow, he risk to never see the end of the round. The assassin concept was to hit very very hard, so hard there will be no second round for the struck creatures. And I wanted to see a rogusih martial adept (I was disappointed by the swordsage). So I decided to allow the assassin to use maneuvers and stance, rogues already had their magic with UMD. So I took it off, I was I must say unaware of a way to obtain UMD cheaply (UMD is the best skill IMo, it to skill what leadership is to feat). The assassin was to compete with the awesome fighter, the warblade. be on par with him. It was simple, the assassin is half as resilient but hit harder. It no secret the assassin was meant to hit very very hard, harder than a warblade. However the assassin was so good at this stage, so I decided to reduce his discipline list and make it recovery time longer. So compared to a warblade, the assassin lose an entire round of damage. He better deal a lot of them when he hit, because he be losing a round to regain much of his damaging potential. The assassin with it slow recovery time needed to hit often, full bab was actually an attractive concept for the class. And anyway by the time he gain it second attack the rogue will already have it wand of divine power, so giving the assassin full bab was fair.
So now, the warblade stand with his ability to wear some good armor, deal some good damages, take a lot of hits and throw maneuvers all day long (with access to stronger disciplines). The assassin hit harder but is half as resilient but his higher AC and good chances to hit even out the massive HP and stronger faster maneuvers of the warblade. If we give the assassin back what he was stripped off, it become unfair. But as I said I was completely unaware of an easy way to obtain UMD easily. Or put cross-class skill point in it, but with so few skill points it going to be slightly harder. The problem is that UMD allow every classes to cast. Everyone is better with UMD, except casters who are already gods. Okay if very well optimized the assassin can deal an insane amount of damages, because you it was made to hit very hard. Any martial class getting it hand on wraithstrike become very very strong. If I could actually do something against UMD I would but I can't. It a design flaw, and I cannot do anything to remove that stupid flaw without completely rebuilding the whole thing. If you go over the top with optimization, taking UMD won't actually make you superior to your fellow super-optimized party members. If you don't exploit UMD, you should be as powerful as a warblade. If you do however, your very good. Your not Pun-Pun, you're just very very good. Better than a rogue maybe (except some wicked rogue builds) but still no match for a optimized spellcaster. Do you feel the class is overpowered, because it actually does what it was meant to do (hit very very hard) or because it able to be exploited with UMD and other powerful stuff? Do you feel the class as a whole is too strong, or just some very well optimized build? Because you know, I don't understand our common ground, are we in a super-optimized game or a low-powered adventure? Or rather is the class overdoing it in all games? I won't able to answer approximately if I do not know. --Dhazriel 04:02, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Lots of material to cover and not sure where to start, so I'll try to address things as they come to mind and hopefully hit all the points I'm trying to make.
Medium armor is actually a disadvantage over light armor + wis to AC. Compare the chain shirt to the breastplate to full plate. In a chain shirt, you need to invest a +4 modifier to get the maximum dex, which is conducive to Weapon Finesse, and most of the classes that have light armor gain a source of extra damage (like maneuvers or sneak attack) so that they don't need a high Strength. On the other hand, a Breastplate needs a +3 modifier to get the maximum dex, and warblades usually need a high Str. That means more MAD for them, since they usually don't have an extra source of damage when making multiple attacks per round unlike the Swordsage or Rogue. Finally, there's full plate, which only needs a +1 modifier, and gives a higher total bonus to AC than the two other comparable armors. Furthermore, speed is not reduced any more than a breastplate reduces one's movement speed. On top of that, Swordsages have wis to AC which (I usually put 16 into wis when playing a swordsage) which can give a boost to AC even higher than that of a character in full plate. On top of that, the Assassin keeps the wis to AC when using a shield, which opens up Improved Buckler Defense for an even higher AC. Thus, lower HP doesn't matter as much, since you're *far* less likely to be hit.
I'm unsure why you felt that Swordsages are underpowered. Let's take 2 examples, one at level 3 and another at level 9. The first is similar to the assassin, we'll assume base dex of 18 (after +2 racial mods from halfling), base str of 10, and a masterwork weapon. Combining Two-Weapon Fighting, Flashing Sun and Burning Blade (while in Island of Blades for easy flanking) we get 1d4 (Shortsword) + 1d6+3 (Burning Blade) + 4 (Shadow Blade) = 13 x3 = 39 damage in a single round--very respectable at level 3. An assassin almost doubles that damage easily. Now the level 9 example. Pouncing Charge (with Insightful Strike) + Improved Two-Weapon Fighting + Searing Blade + Shadow Blade, and we'll assume for the sake of this example that we won initiative, so we'll add Assassin's Stance onto that. Assumed equipment: +2 shortsword, +4 dex item, +2 wis item and +2 boost to dex from level. That gives us 4 attacks, with damage of 1d4+2 (shortsword) + 6 (Shadow Blade) + 4 (Insightful Strike) + 2d6+9 (Searing Blade) + 2d6 (Assassin's Stance) for a total of 37.5 damage per attack, or 150 if all 4 attacks hit. Also very respectable at level 9, and that's with very little optimization. So I'm not sure why the Swordsage doesn't do enough damage for you--compared to other classes at level 9, that's not bad at all.
Also, wraithstrike for other martial adepts is nice... but not quite as good, since they don't get an extra damage boost on top of everything else. This class has that on top of the usual maneuvers, making it more powerful than the other martial adepts.
You mention that warblades don't lose a round of damage, when that's only half-true; they can make a standard attack (can't use a maneuver strike), and those aren't necessarily going to do too much damage, so I don't see that as that big of a deal.
Bringing casters into this isn't necessary, I think. We're comparing to other similar classes, not casters who basically have "I win," powers. Instead, it's better to compare it to other A. Sneak Attack, B. Full BAB, C. Full maneuver classes. When compared to the above, Assassin clearly outclasses them in combat, and becomes "the best" choice, rather than "an equal amongst many". Casters basically trump all; saying, "It's not as strong as a CoDzilla/wizard," doesn't make it balanced either.
Finally, it's overpowered not because it can do "what it's meant to do", or because it can be abused, but because the obvious options (Shadow Blade, for example) make it far stronger than similar classes. We're comparing the class to similar classes in the system of "D&D 3.5", the basis for which is the printed books by WotC. None of the similar classes, when played normally or optimized, have as much damage potential as this class. In that it becomes "the best" is what I find unbalanced about it. It makes other classes who focus on combat through Sneak Attack or maneuvers for damage redundant unless you're going for a very specific combo that requires an exact build to play, or something that uses unbalanced material. --Ghostwheel 04:37, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
I played both low-powered games and over the top optimized game (and yet not being aware of a way to get UMD, maybe because I don't tend to focus on skills too much). If you use a shield for your AC you drop TWF, which greatly reduce your damage potential. The assassin and the warblade don't really suffer from MAD, when compared with say the monk. The fact is that I cannot deny that the assassin hit very hard, because it was meant to be that way. High AC are no stranger to me however, a battle sorcerer/abjurant champion (A powerful class granting a d10, full spellcasting and full bab) can attain a truly high AC with a minimum use of cheese. There so many way to gain a truly great AC I am not worried about it anymore, and not being hit don't kill your enemies. AC lose much of it significance at higher level where HP does not matter anymore. All the tricks you have done for an insane attack power or AC become nearly meaningless. Many spellcaster are able to use one-spell-one-kill with deadly effectiveness. At this point the assassin have to reach the spellcaster (something the spellcaster does not have to do) to kill it. Rogue use UMD (which even lose effectiveness at this point) and the assassin must rely on awesome maneuvers, mostly mobility maneuvers. The fact it that I won't deny that it stronger than an unoptimized rogue, it pre-optimized so it should be (since the rogue is not). However in average-high-powered game the assassin as written should fit in without problems. For low-powered game I have written a unoptimized assassin. --Dhazriel 14:08, 25 July 2009 (MDT)

←Reverted indentation to one colon

See the feat I keep on mentioning, Improved Buckler Defense. With it, you can attack with your offhand weapon and still keep the buckler's AC bonus, while only taking a -1 to attacks with your offhand. Next, the monk is a poor example of the kind of MAD I'm talking about, since it's so very terrible. Here's what I mean (assuming 32 pb). The Swordsage or Assasin can have their stats arranged as 8 18 14 10 14 8 and get -1 to damage from low str, but +4 to AC, attack, and damage from high dex (and Shadow Blade) for a total of 18 AC if they don't go halfling or anything similar. And next level they add even more to AC with the wis bonus. Alternatively, if playing a halfling, you could go 12 16 12 12 16 8 for similar results, and even more AC (23 at level 2). On the other hand, a warblade needs to put 16 into dex to reach their optimal AC. Which means you end up something like 16 16 14 14 8 8. With a breastplate (the highest form of armor in the Medium class) they still have an AC of only 18, and their primary score is 2 lower than that of the Swordsage/Assassin. That's what I meant by a bit more MAD.
And of course casters can do everything. You bring casters in, it's like comparing a handgun to a cruise missile. The two aren't really comparable to each other, which is why one needs to compare it to other, similar classes. Furthermore, your attack rolls never really drop too much from everything I've detailed so far. This class is stronger than every other similar class. It's like putting a bazooka on a gun --Dhazriel 14:56, 25 July 2009 (MDT)rack. Thus, compared to similar classes, it's overpowered. Compared to casters... Well, everyone's underpowered when compared to casters. They're in a completely different class. It's not just stronger than an unoptimized rogue. That's why that comparison doesn't matter. It's stronger than ALL the other similar classes as far as combat is concerned, even when that is the forte of some of them. UMD is also not a valid argument, since access to it is easy. I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat this, and I'm beginning to feel like a broken record player. This class beats every other class that is similar to it completely as far as combat goes. It's not an equal option amongst others when playing a combat-oriented character. In fact, it's not even a first amongst equals. If the rogue, swordsage, warblade, crusader, and duskblade are handguns, this is a bazooka. It's not the cruise missile that casters are, but that still doesn't make it balanced.
As an aside, I think I've shown very decent damage with a Swordsage and low and mid levels without any real optimization (just the obvious ones everyone takes when making a dextrous character from ToB, that is Weapon Finesse and Shadow Blade), dealing good damage without necessarily having to put everything into a single class. How is that subpar? It can be a good choice amongst equals. I think that works--no need to create an overpowered class to substitute what should be the swordsage's primary role, dealing damage in combat. --Ghostwheel 14:29, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
WotC similar classes are not pre-optimized... and really as I will repeat myself I balanced the class against 2 things, class-wise a warblade and with monsters. Personally I think balancing a classes against similar classes is a bad idea, I mean the warblade was my model not a balancing tool. The same-game test was used and the assassin was doing it fairly. And yet, I am not a big fan of: "caster should remain on top" things and I actively try to make classes able to rival casters (which is very difficult). But really the base here is monsters, so I can't defend the class effectively if we're just talking about comparison to other classes. The 10th level assassin was made to win 50% of the time against say: a Bebilith. Not win 50% of the time against a swordsage or a crusader. The other fact about classes, other classes shouldn't matter unless the new class make a old one completely obsoletes. The assassin doesn't make the rogue obsolete, it not a good skillmonkey and cannot do anything about trap. So really I can't really defend against class comparison because it not the game philosophy I believe in therefore with all due respect I won't make a class with a idea I don't like. I made a alternate weaker progression and even made a table for it, so there really no point on arguing with the main class anymore since it was made with another idea. --Dhazriel 14:56, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
First, I never said it should be able to win against another class--it shouldn't make them redundant though. And you say that you want to make it balanced compared to monsters...? Then let me show you how it beats the Bebilith out of the water, just as an example. I created a very basic character that is primarily of the Assassin class (just noted the combat stuff, the skills don't matter since we're just talking about how it looks compared to the monster. The levels of Rogue are mostly there for Penetrating Strike so we can SA creatures we couldn't normally do so to. Here's the character. With our better hide/move/spot/listen we're bound to see the Bebilith before it sees us, getting the upper hand. So we use Shadow Jaunt to teleport into its shadow (using Hide in Plain Sight), taking 10 on Hide and Move Silently--it could only see us if it rolled a 20 on Spot/Listen, so let's assume it fails. Then we attack.
Combo: Searing Blade + Flashing Sun while in Assassin's Stance, since we're going to be catching it flatfooted. Our attack sequence of +16/+16/+16/+11/+11, each hit dealing 60.5 damage on average. (1d4+1 Shortsword + 7 Shadow Blade + 7 Deadly Precision + 2d6 Assassin's Stance + 6d6 Sneak Attack + 2d6+8 Burning Blade). Should all attacks hit, that's 302.5 damage, but let's not assume that. Instead we'll weigh it against the Bebilith's AC.
{60.5 * 16 / 20) * 3 + (60.5 * 11 / 20) * 2 = 184.75 DPR against the Bebilith's AC, killing it in a single round on average. After calculating in its AC.
So yeah. This class, even when compared to similar-CR monsters, beats them completely. --Ghostwheel 21:59, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Well I could make sereval builds able to kill a Bebilith with the same efficiency with a dozen of class. A charger fighter could with the same ease do the same, so we have one build one creature. I am not impressed, as I did it with about 5 different assassin builds. You have a very well optimized build here, which is alright. Taking a single level of rogue for penetrating strike is cheese but well, it optimization after all. So the bebilith was killed in a single round, big deal the assassin is supposed to do that anyway. But yeah anyway this argument is getting very very long and soon the page will be so big I won't be able to post in it anymore (my computer is starting to get slower). If I wasn't that lazy I would gladly show numbers, but I am. So I guess I accept the rating, I disagreed and I don't think any amount of text can actually change your mind (not your fault, it take herculean effort to move a mind, including mine). Maybe a slight revision because I made an alternate progression for more average games. Thank for your concerns over the class balance, however if you have any idea for the alternate weaker progression I would gladly listen to them. Have a good day. --Dhazriel 22:14, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
I actually do; I think that making it gain SA at levels 3, 6, 9... instead of every odd one, reducing BAB to 3/4, and removing Deadly Precision (which feels over the top when Shadow Blade is already there in the same book that a big part of this class's abilities come from) would balance this class just fine. --Ghostwheel 22:52, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Yeah I think it would work fine actually, you see to be knowlegable in more avergae game I dosen't tend to play so I think I be doing that. --Dhazriel 22:53, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Done. --Dhazriel 23:02, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
I'd suggest placing the first level of SA at level 3, simply so that it doesn't replace the Swordsage completely should one want to dip into a class for Shadow Blade/Island of Blades/Assassin's Stance --Ghostwheel 23:07, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Yeah could work, and actually done. --Dhazriel 23:10, 25 July 2009 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because there doesn't seem to be any confusing or misleading text. --Ghostwheel 10:16, 22 July 2009 (MDT)

Formatting - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because the bottom part should either be formatted to work or go entirely. --Ghostwheel 10:16, 22 July 2009 (MDT)

Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 3 out of 5 because it doesn't appear to have much flavor to it. Instead, it looks like someone sat down and asked themselves, "If I had the perfect combat rogue build, I'd want X and Y and Z and..." and made a class out of that. --Ghostwheel 10:16, 22 July 2009 (MDT)

What? There a lot of fluff text, and really the class shouldn't be penalized because it generic. I mean I covered much of the assassin concept, from back street killer to religious extremist. Hmm maybe I could improve the flavor text a little. --Dhazriel 02:01, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
I remade flavor text to be less... bland. Should be way better now. --Dhazriel 02:18, 25 July 2009 (MDT)
Looks a lot better now *nod* Upping rating to 4/5, since it's not quite at a "perfect" level, but much better than before. --Ghostwheel 02:20, 25 July 2009 (MDT)

Deadly Precision[edit]

There's already a feat that does this. Two sources of melee damage bonus off the bat? Can be imbalanced easily. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs)20:51, 22 November 2009 (MDT). Please sign your posts.


Power - 4.5/5 I give this class a 4.5 out of 5 because can be overpowered.. already test it. --Kafeii 07:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because some ppl dont know where the maneuvers are.. (book of nine swords) --Kafeii 07:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because its ok --Kafeii 07:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because excelent flavor man.. you can make any background story with this class. --Kafeii 07:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


Power - 3.5/5 I give this class a 3.5 out of 5 because it is a bit strong but realy nothing out of the ordinary, I took a long close look at the heated debate above signalling me that it is a red flag but after reading most of it I only saw a few angry people within a pointless debate, yes it is stronger, yes it is better then a normal rogue, then there was a large portion on if-then-else mechanics and why it is more powerfull then a rogue slapped together with another template but at the end I only saw angry people that love rogues that felt nobbed by this assasin class and needed to put it back in order. I personally have a comletely different view on the assasin, a assasin can come in many forms and many, many different skills and styles. I definitly so not see an assasin as a rogue with some assasin template smacked onto it, I see a class that one player liked to play and builded it as he wanted to play it. However I do see a class that is a bit out of balance in BaB OR damage, both is a bit much hence the 3.5. New mechanics like stances? Fun! I may come back and alter my decision later when I read them tonight. Now I saw one remark on how "everything" MUST work with everything and that actually pisses me off, if we are only allowed to make exactly equally balanced classes and should stick to whatever is written in almost hundreds of books then there realy is no point in spending time and effort to make our own classes then? Why not just take something "like it" and just slap some thing that "does it" ontop of it. Why should we care to give out own perspective differnt classes in the homebrew if it may not be different. One size must fit all.... good lord get your head out of your arse, I agree with the fact that it is a bit more powerfull, it is "better" than a rogue, well so is a pirate, as you know everything is better with pirates! AAArrrggh --Crashpilot 15:45, 25 February 2011 (MST)

Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because there were no unclarities on what the author wanted to say / tell --Crashpilot 15:45, 25 February 2011 (MST)

Formatting - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because the setup is clear and there are no great suprises --Crashpilot 15:45, 25 February 2011 (MST)

Flavor - 1/5 I give this class a 1 out of 5 because it is basicly the same assasin as the original one, only now with more damage smacked against it and that's it. I personally fail to see any "real" difference, cool new tricks to murder someone with style and fashion. Actually it became less of an assassin in my eyes. I see it as an attempt to just increase damage output while ignoring assassin feel and basicly turning it into a fighter with sneak attack. Then again that is my perspective on matters. --Crashpilot 15:45, 25 February 2011 (MST)


Balance - X/5 I give this class a 1 out of 5 because -- 10:46, 26 November 2013 (MST)

Wording - X/5 I give this class a 1 out of 5 because -- 10:46, 26 November 2013 (MST)

Formatting - X/5 I give this class a 1 out of 5 because -- 10:46, 26 November 2013 (MST)

Flavor - X/5 I give this class a 1 out of 5 because -- 10:46, 26 November 2013 (MST)

Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!