Fallen Blackguard

EnterHaerDalis

They should of made Blaggards Fallen after hitting 17 or 18 reputation. It seems just.

people would never of seen it comin

ZanathKariashi

Except they can't fall. They already damned and sold their soul for their unholy powers and can never renege on the deal, no matter how many good deeds they do from now till eternity (The Nameless One had a similar problem, though not for the same reason, his Crime was on a MUCH larger scale).

Paladins have a choice...if the life style isn't for them they're free to give it up, they lose their holy gifts, but are otherwise still basically a fighter (with no or lesser specialization depending on which rules you're using). Blackguards though are forever, even if they try from the moment they become one to repent, they can't, because their soul is already technically gone and their powers will be a constant reminder of what awaits them when they die, and since it was by completely by their own choice, not even the gods can intervene.

lDanielHolm

@ZanathKariashi: What? You are making things up from whole cloth. Nothing of what you said is even remotely accurate. Blackguards (which is the name for the Prestige Class in 3E, as well as the new kit in BG:EE) are not irredeemable, and they certainly are not without souls. They are villains of the foulest sort, but that does not automatically mean their souls are forfeit. Anti-paladins from 2E and 1E did not lose their souls either.

ZanathKariashi

Then why pray tell, are Anti-paladins unable to fall? It's actually listed as one of the big differences between a paladin and anti-paladin, that a paladin can fall from grace, but an anti-paladin is corrupted beyond hope as part their vows. (and a few other differences...they're not direct analogues of each other as the Complete Paladin clearly states, flavor-wise they are opposite numbers, but their abilities and restrictions are actually very different in most cases).

The BG Blackguard is literally based on the Anti-Paladin, all the abilities the are the same, save poison use, which is from the 3rd edition version.

Here the main caveat, becoming a Blackguard, even in 3rd edition, requires striking a soul bond with an evil outsider as a requirement to take the class. Even if they turn around and become of good alignment till the day they die, they never lose their blackguard powers they've already gained for literally the reason I stated, to remind them every day of the rest of their lives that they are damned forever more, they can simply not progress further in the class until they return to evil. The only way out of the deal is bargain the rights to your soul back (you still have your soul, you simply agree that when you die your soul will serve whichever power you've bargained with, which super-cedes any other rights others may have on your soul) which is highly unlikely to happen and any price you pay is likely to damn you even further due to the level of evil such a sacrifice would require, you could also kill the Bond holder as well I guess, though truly destroying a demon/devil is actually ridiculously hard to do (and it is very true that the gods CANNOT intervene if you made the agreement of your own will without trickery. In FR especially, AO would literally MAKE any god trying to claim your soul give it to the bond holder since those were the terms agreed upon. Now in 3rd, setting depending, you're required to have a true divine patron, which in the Blackguard's case would be whichever god the outsider that initiated you was allied with. In settings where you can worship an ideal or alignment, you would be indebted to the outsider directly.)

A Paladin that ceases to be lawful Good loses their abilities till they begin to act lawful good again and receive an atonement spell usually requiring some varying difficulty of quest based on the infraction that resulted in their fall from grace in the first place (In 3rd edition, In 2nd edition, you either lose them permanently or if there are extenuating circumstances you can potentially regain them via atonement spell...but that only applies to a small handful of circumstances and ANY willful violation of the code is irredeemable). As it clearly states, a Blackguard that ceases to be evil DOES NOT lose their abilities (aside from a handful of spells that are alignment based, but that affects any spell caster), they merely can't progress further in the class until they return to evil.

Kenji

Wouldn't it be "Redeemed Blackguard", instead?

Khyron

See no further than Nwn 1. One of the main npcs goes blackguard, yet you can redeem her and turn her back to the path of good and return to the service of Tyr. And afaik nwn is treated as d&d canon

lDanielHolm

ZanathKariashi said:

Then why pray tell, are Anti-paladins unable to fall? It's actually listed as one of the big differences between a paladin and anti-paladin, that a paladin can fall from grace, but an anti-paladin is corrupted beyond hope as part their vows. (and a few other differences...they're not direct analogues of each other as the Complete Paladin clearly states, flavor-wise they are opposite numbers, but their abilities and restrictions are actually very different in most cases).

Why are mages unable to fall? Why are thieves unable to fall? Your question makes as much sense. An anti-paladin is not actually a paladin.

ZanathKariashi said:

The BG Blackguard is literally based on the Anti-Paladin, all the abilities the are the same, save poison use, which is from the 3rd edition version.

Here the main caveat, becoming a Blackguard, even in 3rd edition, requires striking a soul bond with an evil outsider as a requirement to take the class. Even if they turn around and become of good alignment till the day they die, they never lose their blackguard powers they've already gained for literally the reason I stated, to remind them every day of the rest of their lives that they are damned forever more, they can simply not progress further in the class until they return to evil.

As far as I know, AD&D 1E and 2E only covered anti-paladins twice: Dragon #39 and Dragon #106, and neither one discuss the possibility of an anti-paladin falling. Though the BG:EE version isn't based on either.

Blackguards in 3rd Edition can "fall", by the way: they lose their powers if they fail to fulfill the prerequisites for the Prestige Class, as per the Ex-Member rule. One of those prerequisites is being "any evil" alignment.

ZanathKariashi said:

A Paladin that ceases to be lawful Good loses their abilities till they begin to act lawful good again and receive an atonement spell usually requiring some varying difficulty of quest based on the infraction that resulted in their fall from grace in the first place (In 3rd edition, In 2nd edition, you either lose them permanently or if there are extenuating circumstances you can potentially regain them via atonement spell...but that only applies to a small handful of circumstances and ANY willful violation of the code is irredeemable). As it clearly states, a Blackguard that ceases to be evil DOES NOT lose their abilities (aside from a handful of spells that are alignment based, but that affects any spell caster), they merely can't progress further in the class until they return to evil.

Blackguards are not paladins. Anti-paladins are not paladins. What holds true for paladins do not necessarily hold true for either of the others. That includes losing your powers. And as I said, blackguards in 3E do indeed lose their powers if they fail to fulfill the prerequisites for the prestige class.

ZanathKariashi

You do NOT lose a prestige class's abilities if you lose it's pre-requsites, you lose feats (unless otherwise specified by the feat) if you lose the pre-reqs (aside from a few classes that do specifically mention that as a result, as Ex-paladin does). A DM literally has to house rule that in, because with Psionic revision you literally can remove all the requisite skill/feats for any prestige classes you have and respend them as you please, as long as you're willing to bare the XP costs to go back that far. It was officially ruled that the above is a completely legit use of the ability and that it does not infact prevent use of the class...you merely can't progress further until the pre-reqs are met. You do lose access to any feats you no longer meet the pre-reqs for that weren't gained as part of a class feature.

Well here's the problem with that.....NWN is literally the ONLY example of that (Potentially) happening (I've been looking), and they also fudge the rule about paladins never being able to add levels again if they ever take another class save the ones allowed by their ethos (which I assure you, blackguard isn't on any of those lists). Not to mention the shear number of outright contradictions as part of it's story...and actually the canon is that Aribeth wasn't redeemed, she surrendered but still went to hell for her crimes after her execution. And even after end of Hordes, canonically she still went to hell. Which is exactly my point, just because you have a change of heart and decide to use your powers for good doesn't change what happens when you die.

I've read the Ex-Blackguard rule very carefully..it says pretty clearly they retain any spells and abilities they've already gained but cannot progress further in the class until they meet it's requisites again, which is the same for pretty much all but a handful of prestige classes. (well technically...the PnP one doesn't mention Ex-blackguards at all (because they can't lose their abilities)....the only mention anywhere is in NWN, which does state the above)

lDanielHolm

ZanathKariashi said:

You do NOT lose a prestige class's abilities if you lose it's pre-requsites, you lose feats (unless otherwise specified by the feat) if you lose the pre-reqs (aside from a few classes that do specifically mention that as a result, as Ex-paladin does). A DM literally has to house rule that in, because with Psionic revision you literally can remove all the requisite skill/feats for any prestige classes you have and respend them as you please, as long as you're willing to bare the XP costs to go back that far. It was officially ruled that the above is a completely legit use of the ability and that it does not infact prevent use of the class...you merely can't progress further until the pre-reqs are met. You do lose access to any feats you no longer meet the pre-reqs for that weren't gained as part of a class feature.

Get a copy of Complete Warrior (or Complete Arcane). Go to page 16 (page 17 in CA). Under "Meeting Class Requirements", it states the penalty for no longer meeting the requirements for a prestige class. (This is under the broader heading "Picking a Prestige Class" in CA.) In essence, you lose all class abilities not derived from Hit Dice (so you retain BAB, saving throws, skills, and feats, but lose any spellcasting, bonus feats, or other special abilities the prestige class grants). This is an expansion on the more standard rule that if you lose the prerequisite for an ability, you lose access to the ability until you regain the requirements (which is the rule you referenced regarding feats).

There are some who argue that the rule only applies to prestige classes from those two books, given that the rule only appears there, but that is a logical fallacy, considering the standard rule on losing prerequisites, especially since the rule contains to language to that effect.

Classes (not prestige classes!) generally do not have prerequisites, and as such, it is normally not possible to be in a situation where you are no longer qualified to have that class. At most, they have conditions under which members of that class become ex-members (a rule which some prestige classes share).

This is NOT a house rule. It is part of the 3.5 D&D rules.

ZanathKariashi

Well...that does present a bit of problem, if you're not using CW or CA. Or using Psionic handbook, since Revision was officially ruled to not harm any of your prestige class abilities (it was one of several things people were asking about), even if you not longer meet the requirements....perhaps that only applies to revision use, though they didn't say that was the case, it was just a flat, yes you can do this without any penalty, though you still need to meet pre-reqs for any feats (So if you revisioned yourself and removed power attack, but kept cleave, cleave would stop working till you relearned power attack). You could also as a mentioned example take a level of thrallherd and then revision away your inquisitor feat, which is a requirement, with no penalty all, save not being able to further gain levels until you met the pre-reqs, a lvl 10 thrallherd willing to drop the xp to do so, could revision themselves all the way to before they took the class and redistribute their feats, powers, and skills as they pleased, with no penalty at all to any of it's abilities.


2ndly, the DMG trumps all other source book when there's a mechanics contradiction (unless you're housing ruling, and all rules contained within CW and CA are optional, as it says in the first line of the book's introduction), and it clearly says you aren't penalized in such a case, unless a class specifically says otherwise.

EnterHaerDalis

what a modest can of worms I've opened. ^_^

anyhow I have a feeling Blackguards will lose a bit of their mojo at high levels when BG2:EE rolls out

I only picked Dorn up on my first play through, I feel like cheating taking him now..

lDanielHolm

All rules are optional. Language to that effect means essentially nothing. In a general rules discussion, we have to assume that they are in effect (otherwise there's precious little point). Since what we are discussing is the rules-as-written concerning prestige classes, the CW rule is relevant. What happens when you don't have access to those books isn't really important in this context.

As far as I am aware, the only thing the DMG mentions regarding prestige classes is that they have requirements, unlike regular classes.

I am unfamiliar with Revision; it does not seem to be reality revision (which is essentially the psionic version of wish). Rules clarifications in general, however, do not actually trump written rules, unless they are in the form of errata. If a rules clarification says something which is contradicted by a rule in a more primary source, the rules clarification is incorrect. (This has to do with the hierarchy of sources; as you say, the DMG is generally at the top, but there are more steps.)

ZanathKariashi

It's a 4th lvl telepathy manifestation. You spend so much xp and it lets you change any of your skill/feat/and power choices for the last so many levels (but can't change your class), depending on how much you're willing to pay. And you can cast it on other creatures, splitting the xp costs if you so desire.

It's quite nice, though a lot of people have justifiably argued that it is ridiculously overpowered (the xp cost is a joke, 50 xp per level, but you have to spend it for each level back you wish to revision...you want to revise the last 3 levels, 50 +100 +150 = 300 xp, and other then not letting you pick a new class, there are no other restrictions. You can even repick your bonus ability score if it happened to fall within the revised levels), but to date hasn't been altered in any way. But the writing for the ability is extremely vague aside from that, which is why they had such a large question and answer involved with it.


Oop, called it's Psychic Reformation, not revision...I have annoying habit of calling it revision..since that's basically what it does...revise your previous choices.