PDA

View Full Version : Change of Knight of the Rose Requirements



Mirdur
09-22-2004, 12:29 PM
I was discussing this with a player of mine who plays a Knight of the Rose. He wants to have a Dragon mount since the begining of the game, but he doesn't want to get levels in the Dragon Rider prestige class ( he says that he has too many classes being a fighter/cleric/KC/KS?KR). The problem is that to have a larger dragon he would have to get the dragon cohort feat from draconomicon but it's just silly to get it and leadership....

So my question is if it would be ok, to change the requirement of the knight of the Rose and put dragon cohort in the place of leadership. Since in the novels the rose knights usually ride dragons and the two feats are very simillar I don't see a great problem. I'd like to hear your opinions about this.

Sephzero
09-22-2004, 12:35 PM
I suspect one of the reason that a Knight of the Rose is required to get Leadership is to represent the Knight as a leader of men. Therefore the leadership which provides him a body of followers and cohort provide the imagery. It also, I guess shows that he is able to gather and lead troops and stuff.

It is not necessary entirely to require a player to get a feat to get a dragon as it is there more to help properly gauge when a player is of a level to obtain such a mount without unbalance. The draconic cohort simply allows a player to obtain a dragon with far less of the whole role-playing issue it seems of convincing a dragon to work with them. I figure there are plenty of cases where dragons and riders have worked together without the need of such feat. Just that having it as a cohort puts it more in the player's court of control then the DMs.

OldschoolDL
09-22-2004, 03:30 PM
the nuisant oldschool man hobbles in on his cane..

cackle cackle cackle

too many classes to have. Too many things to think about, too many choices. feats double down split up of classes boggles the mind. can imagine how this would play out if Krynn was played like a real world..

You wish to be a dragon rider...

yes...

do you have your Dragon mount license...

well no..

You have to have this level, this class, this form, this guideline all signed in triplicate and witnessed by a gnomish notery public.

its not like oh I don't know a Dm, excuse me, GM wouldn't write in a happenstance where a Knight of the Rose saved the life of a Bronze dragon or some such variety and in return the Dragon would agree to be his partner in aerial combat. Teach him the ropes as it were.

He wanders away before the guys with white coats and the butterfly nets come get him.

WildKnight
09-22-2004, 04:45 PM
the nuisant oldschool man hobbles in on his cane..

cackle cackle cackle

too many classes to have. Too many things to think about, too many choices. feats double down split up of classes boggles the mind. can imagine how this would play out if Krynn was played like a real world..

You wish to be a dragon rider...

yes...

do you have your Dragon mount license...

well no..

You have to have this level, this class, this form, this guideline all signed in triplicate and witnessed by a gnomish notery public.

its not like oh I don't know a Dm, excuse me, GM wouldn't write in a happenstance where a Knight of the Rose saved the life of a Bronze dragon or some such variety and in return the Dragon would agree to be his partner in aerial combat. Teach him the ropes as it were.

He wanders away before the guys with white coats and the butterfly nets come get him.


Once again, the fact that you dont understand the rules of 3E shows through in your derogatory comments toward the system...

Any character could have a Dragon who he was friends with, and occasionally accompanied him into battle, just like in 2nd Edition. You dont have to have the Dragon Rider PrC, or even the Dragon Cohort Feat.

HOWEVER, once again, just like in 2nd Edition... if you allow one character to have a Dragon who does his bidding during all of his adventures, and dont give the same advantage to all players, it becomes highly unbalancing, very quickly.

To answer the original question...

No offense but it sounds alot like your player is trying to weasel you into giving him a Dragon w/o having to pay anything for it. I'd say, make him take a level or two of Dragon Rider, or take the Dragon Cohort Feat, or make him at the very least apply his Leadership Feat to the Dragon (though unless hes very high level and has a great Charisma score, chances are he cant get much of one that way). I'm always suspicious whenever a player starts saying "well, I want this feature of X Class, but I dont think its right to have too many character classes..."

Mirdur
09-22-2004, 05:12 PM
No offense but it sounds alot like your player is trying to weasel you into giving him a Dragon w/o having to pay anything for it. I'd say, make him take a level or two of Dragon Rider, or take the Dragon Cohort Feat, or make him at the very least apply his Leadership Feat to the Dragon (though unless hes very high level and has a great Charisma score, chances are he cant get much of one that way). I'm always suspicious whenever a player starts saying "well, I want this feature of X Class, but I dont think its right to have too many character classes..."

Actually no Wildknight, it was me that came with the sugestion os trading leadership for the dragon cohort feat not my player. The reason was because I thought that the dragon cohort feat had the requirement of have the leadership feat, but it has come to my atention that it doesn't have this requirement. He wants to be one of the knights that ride in a dragon since the begining of the game and in order to do so, he would have to be an experienced knight. The problem is that to be a rose knight you have to have the leadership feat, that works almost the same way as the dragon cohort feat.

So I thought to let him change dragon cohort feat because they are very similarand wouldn't unbalance the rose knight class. Also in order to make it more official to give him a dragon cohort. Other problem of having the dragon cohort and the leadership feat is that the player would have to cohorts, one for the leadership feat and another for the dragon rider feat and this seem too much to me. That's the reason oI started this forum, because the rose knight in the DLCS wasn't made thinking of riding dragons and it was made also before the draconomicon, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to let players change dragon cohort for leadership.

I agree with you also about the idea of letting all the players having dragons become to unbalanced in game terms. It's one thing to allow a player ride a dragon in 1 session, other to let a dragon be with a player all the time. Also the game has many ways for a player to get a dragon as a cohort, so it is only a one way street. The player can make his character the way he wants.

WildKnight
09-22-2004, 05:27 PM
Actually no Wildknight, it was me that came with the sugestion os trading leadership for the dragon cohort feat not my player. The reason was because I thought that the dragon cohort feat had the requirement of have the leadership feat, but it has come to my atention that it doesn't have this requirement. He wants to be one of the knights that ride in a dragon since the begining of the game and in order to do so, he would have to be an experienced knight. The problem is that to be a rose knight you have to have the leadership feat, that works almost the same way as the dragon cohort feat.

So I thought to let him change dragon cohort feat because they are very similarand wouldn't unbalance the rose knight class. Also in order to make it more official to give him a dragon cohort. Other problem of having the dragon cohort and the leadership feat is that the player would have to cohorts, one for the leadership feat and another for the dragon rider feat and this seem too much to me. That's the reason oI started this forum, because the rose knight in the DLCS wasn't made thinking of riding dragons and it was made also before the draconomicon, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to let players change dragon cohort for leadership.

I agree with you also about the idea of letting all the players having dragons become to unbalanced in game terms. It's one thing to allow a player ride a dragon in 1 session, other to let a dragon be with a player all the time. Also the game has many ways for a player to get a dragon as a cohort, so it is only a one way street. The player can make his character the way he wants.

On the surface, that doesn't seem like a bad idea... I might even do it myself. But what if a Wizard player comes to you next and says "you know, I want to have a Dragon but I don't want to have to give up any Wizard levels or use any of my very limited number of Feats. Can I exchange a Wizard Bonus Feat for Dragon Cohort at 10th level?"

Will you allow other players to trade Feat requirements for PrCs for Feats they like better?

Have you considered that the Knight of the Rose probably requires Leadership, not for the Cohort, but for the Followers to represent the warrior he should be able to lead?

All of that being said... your solution is workable, I just worry that other players will try to take advantage. But since its not my game, its not my concern.

OldschoolDL
09-22-2004, 05:30 PM
Once again, the fact that you dont understand the rules of 3E shows through in your derogatory comments toward the system...

Any character could have a Dragon who he was friends with, and occasionally accompanied him into battle, just like in 2nd Edition. You dont have to have the Dragon Rider PrC, or even the Dragon Cohort Feat.

HOWEVER, once again, just like in 2nd Edition... if you allow one character to have a Dragon who does his bidding during all of his adventures, and dont give the same advantage to all players, it becomes highly unbalancing, very quickly.

To answer the original question...

No offense but it sounds alot like your player is trying to weasel you into giving him a Dragon w/o having to pay anything for it. I'd say, make him take a level or two of Dragon Rider, or take the Dragon Cohort Feat, or make him at the very least apply his Leadership Feat to the Dragon (though unless hes very high level and has a great Charisma score, chances are he cant get much of one that way). I'm always suspicious whenever a player starts saying "well, I want this feature of X Class, but I dont think its right to have too many character classes..."


and im also being quite silly at the same time who knows that you all got this handled quite well. Prefer to be that nagging echo of the past whispering in the wind and such. Im glad I always get responded to so seriously.

In terms of DMing. You'd have to personally make up the situations to allow someone to fly a dragon or not. a Dragon wouldn't go trapsying around the countryside with a party. Dragon flying would be a specific activity especially for Knights of Solamnia. Dragon riders would only be during War time situations i'd imagine. As it was said about the leadership factor it was true in my day and in the Novels. When you make the transfer from Knights of the Crown to sword to Rose you not only get the benefits of the change but new responsiblities especailly if you were called into active duty. Knights of the Sword could lead a certain amount of Knights of the crown and perhaps lower Sword Knights, and Rose Knights were to have the leadership skills to lead whomever is around regardless crown or sword knights. Except Lord Knights or Rose knights of higher level. which gives you the sense that the more aristocratic Knights of Solamnia like the Crownguards and others who basically rose through the ranks through political means lead groups of mean but were poor leaders since they were in it for their own ends.

In my thinking someone being able to ride a dragon, having the experience for it does not consistute someone can actually be assigned a Dragon. Or even if they are assigned a Dragon that doesn't mean that person has that dragon at his beck and call.

I have a player in my game who written a storyline for himself before arriving in the game that he briefy bonded and fought with a Copper Dragon name Spitstrike. Now that is great and all, but once when the war was over Fallion was assigned to Palanthus and the Copper was assigned to the Eastern corners of Ansalon to patrol the few free lands there from the Dragon armies who was within their territorial borders therein. Now the player gets that he even though he had given himself experience in dragon fighting, that I acknowledged doesn't mean I am gonna give him the opportunity in my logical train of thought for my storylines that he'll instantly hop on some nearby dragon. perhaps in the endgame I will have him reunite with Spitstrike when he takes on Anthraxus the Oinodaemon and herald of Morgion, or Orcus the Demon prince and Herald of Chemosh.. lol

Mirdur
09-22-2004, 06:47 PM
On the surface, that doesn't seem like a bad idea... I might even do it myself. But what if a Wizard player comes to you next and says "you know, I want to have a Dragon but I don't want to have to give up any Wizard levels or use any of my very limited number of Feats. Can I exchange a Wizard Bonus Feat for Dragon Cohort at 10th level?"

Will you allow other players to trade Feat requirements for PrCs for Feats they like better?

Have you considered that the Knight of the Rose probably requires Leadership, not for the Cohort, but for the Followers to represent the warrior he should be able to lead?

All of that being said... your solution is workable, I just worry that other players will try to take advantage. But since its not my game, its not my concern.


I understand your concern about players wanting to get away with PrC requirements and I'm not known to make any concessions in matter of game rules, but this one in my opinion is a really particular situation. It wasn't the player that come to me complaining about this (and they do it a lot), it was I that spoted the "problem".

I don't pretend letting they change requirement for PrC, but I think that the solamnics should have a Dragon Chivalry class. In terms of rules it's kind of silly for a solamnic to get the dragon cohort feat. In terms of roleplay not all the rose knights need to be leaders in my opinion, let the dragon cohort become a requirement for a Rose knight makes in my opinion a nice variant PrC for rose knights. It would make 2 kinds of rose knights, the ones that go fighting in dragonback in battle and the leaders of the order, the ones with followers and fortress to protect.

Mirdur
09-22-2004, 06:55 PM
and im also being quite silly at the same time who knows that you all got this handled quite well. Prefer to be that nagging echo of the past whispering in the wind and such. Im glad I always get responded to so seriously.

In terms of DMing. You'd have to personally make up the situations to allow someone to fly a dragon or not. a Dragon wouldn't go trapsying around the countryside with a party. Dragon flying would be a specific activity especially for Knights of Solamnia. Dragon riders would only be during War time situations i'd imagine. As it was said about the leadership factor it was true in my day and in the Novels. When you make the transfer from Knights of the Crown to sword to Rose you not only get the benefits of the change but new responsiblities especailly if you were called into active duty. Knights of the Sword could lead a certain amount of Knights of the crown and perhaps lower Sword Knights, and Rose Knights were to have the leadership skills to lead whomever is around regardless crown or sword knights. Except Lord Knights or Rose knights of higher level. which gives you the sense that the more aristocratic Knights of Solamnia like the Crownguards and others who basically rose through the ranks through political means lead groups of mean but were poor leaders since they were in it for their own ends.

In my thinking someone being able to ride a dragon, having the experience for it does not consistute someone can actually be assigned a Dragon. Or even if they are assigned a Dragon that doesn't mean that person has that dragon at his beck and call.

I have a player in my game who written a storyline for himself before arriving in the game that he briefy bonded and fought with a Copper Dragon name Spitstrike. Now that is great and all, but once when the war was over Fallion was assigned to Palanthus and the Copper was assigned to the Eastern corners of Ansalon to patrol the few free lands there from the Dragon armies who was within their territorial borders therein. Now the player gets that he even though he had given himself experience in dragon fighting, that I acknowledged doesn't mean I am gonna give him the opportunity in my logical train of thought for my storylines that he'll instantly hop on some nearby dragon. perhaps in the endgame I will have him reunite with Spitstrike when he takes on Anthraxus the Oinodaemon and herald of Morgion, or Orcus the Demon prince and Herald of Chemosh.. lol

I know that I as a DM have to make the situation that a player of mine gets to ride a dragon. But I want to give the players that work and get the proper feats more contact with dragons since they are trying harder in game rule terms then the others.

Also in both the dragon cohort feat in the Draconomicon and in the Dragon rider PrC in DLCS states that the dragon cohort isn't made for the dragon to follow the player everywhere they go. It says clearly that a DM should limit this.

I understand that I can give a player a dragon in any moment I want and some players have ridden dragons before thei get the PrC Dragon rider and the dragon cohort feat. But I want some rules to make it more constant and official.

Sephzero
09-22-2004, 07:05 PM
The point is that there are a lot of restriction when it comes to getting a dragon since for the most part, it unbalances the game when it is compared to rest of the party. Which is why you usually won't find easy answers to getting your hand on dragons. If you want to replace the prerequiste on the Knight of the Rose then do so, but understand the precedent that you are creating. Basic game mechanics don't always flex to easy especially when it comes to granting players a powerful allies like a dragon. It is the DM's capability of trying to adapt these rules to better suit their own players' need.

It is also important to remember that much of the Knight of the Rose's class features were designed to draw off the fact that they are leaders. Their ability to Rally Cry, Inspire Couage, Inspire Greatness, and Final Stands are all flavored off his capabilities of leading his followers into battle. Though they can be used without the leadership, some of its backing might be somewhat diminished. You might have problems with the leadership bonus that are obtain. The Knight of the Rose has part of its ability and foundation built off the fact that the character has leadership as a feat.

Shugi
09-22-2004, 11:12 PM
From a rules perspective, exchanging Dragon Cohort for Leadership creates an implication you may not want -- that prospective Rose Knights must learn how to ride a dragon.

Obviously the dragon choice is up to you, but here are a few things that could help in game terms:

Skill: Perhaps a Ride check (with applicable DC) allows someone to ride a creature one size smaller than normal. An appropriately high Ride check (for example, +19 if the DC is 20) means the rider will have no problem riding the smaller-than-normal mount.

Feat: Mighty Steed (Bestiary of Krynn) gives smaller dragons the ability to carry riders.

Your player should probably benefit from one or the other... not both.

Mirdur
09-23-2004, 12:17 AM
From a rules perspective, exchanging Dragon Cohort for Leadership creates an implication you may not want -- that prospective Rose Knights must learn how to ride a dragon.

Obviously the dragon choice is up to you, but here are a few things that could help in game terms:

Skill: Perhaps a Ride check (with applicable DC) allows someone to ride a creature one size smaller than normal. An appropriately high Ride check (for example, +19 if the DC is 20) means the rider will have no problem riding the smaller-than-normal mount.

Feat: Mighty Steed (Bestiary of Krynn) gives smaller dragons the ability to carry riders.

Your player should probably benefit from one or the other... not both.

I Think I didn't make myself clear, I don't intend not using the PrC of the Rose Knight from the DLCS. I'm thinking of using 2 rose knight PrC, the 2 are the same in all aspects with one difference, one has the leadership requirement and the other the dragon cohort requirement. In other words, the character will be able to choice to get the dragon cohort feat or the leadership in order to become a rose knight. This way there will be 2 kinds of rose knights, one to be a leader of men, to protect fortress and other to fight in dragon back, that has some greater bound with a dragon. It was never my plan to eliminate completely the leadership requirement.

It is also interesting that if the character wants to later become a dragon rider he gets an extra feat in the 1st level, since he already has the dragon cohort feat. So it would be ok if he made the choice to later become a dragon rider.

Thanks for the advice Shugi, the dragon of my player has mighty steed.

Sephzero
09-23-2004, 12:24 AM
Since you are planning on following that path, you might want to consider on how the difference of two aspects of the Knight of Rose is going to play out in the order. Since the power levels of the Knights prestige class plays off expanding the next level of measure from the prior ones.

You might also consider how this effects the other Knight prestige classes, since they are just as capable of riding dragons too.

Mirdur
09-23-2004, 12:36 AM
Since you are planning on following that path, you might want to consider on how the difference of two aspects of the Knight of Rose is going to play out in the order. Since the power levels of the Knights prestige class plays off expanding the next level of measure from the prior ones.

I'm thinking of using the dragon cohort feat as the dragon cohort feat in the dragon rider class. In other words allow a player to get a dragon with ECL equal to his level, not 2 levels lower. I'm using also all the drawbacks of the dragon cohort feat and the dragonrider class. The player will have to pay to keep the lair of the dragon, share the treasure, the dragon won't travel for place he doesn't want (a red going to icewall for instance), and the dragon will not get stronger with XP and the dragon going his away when he wants to start a family (an adult), or begins to feel he is getting too weak (the level difference betwen them get too high).

So I don't see any real problem to change the leadership bonus to a dragon cohort bonus.

Sephzero
09-23-2004, 12:42 AM
Leadership bonus just gives you increase to your Leadership score and since your leadership score is equal to your character level + cha modifier, there doesn't seem much usefulness in having it unless you are going to allow them to have a cohort with a higher ECL then the character level. So I don't see how exactly that would work.

Mirdur
09-23-2004, 12:47 AM
I think that you aren't recalling correctly the leadership table from the DMG. For a player have a cohort of level 11 he would have to have a leadership score of 16, in order to have a leadership score of 16 in the 11th level he'd have to have a CHA of 20, wich is highly unlikely, so the cohort bonus make this easier.

Sephzero
09-23-2004, 12:54 AM
Forgot about that part. I was applying the adjustment already to the cohort level table.

Perhaps, but it might create some interesting conflict since you are simply applying to cohort on the basis of the increase in power in the dragon mount. Also note that allow a player character to have a cohort of equal level to him can possibly provide some unbalancing power issues since even the draconic cohort only reduces ECL of the dragon by 3, while still following the CL-2 rules.

Mirdur
09-23-2004, 01:01 AM
Yes, I know, but the dragon cohort ability that a dragon rider get, doesnt have the Cl -2 limitation, that's why I said that I'd be using both of the drawbacks. If I kept this limitation, a player would only be able to ride a dragon in really high levels, and being so would be almost useless in most campaigns that a player wants to ride a dragon. The solution in my opinion is to use all the drawbacks to reduce the number of times the dragon will appear in the campaign, but make the player riding a dragon more oficial in game terms.

OldschoolDL
09-23-2004, 01:13 AM
just baffled and collapses in confusing... lol

Im sure you'll figure it out to a creative purpose, even if you have to fudge motify or loosen the rules a bit