Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Realmslore
 Sages of Realmslore
 The Xanathar’s Guide Hexblade = Moonblade?
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

prototype00
Seeker

21 Posts

Posted - 11 Nov 2017 :  06:08:31  Show Profile  Visit prototype00's Homepage  Send prototype00 an AOL message  Send prototype00 a Yahoo! Message Send prototype00 a Private Message  Reply with Quote  Delete Topic
So Xanathar’s Guide to everything is out, and the Hexblade is making waves, so I thought I’d poll the august experts here as to their feelings of reflavouring the Hexblade as a Moonblade heir?

The fluff lends itself well, these are semi-sentient/sentient armaments that bestow on their weilder a wide range of powers.

Would it be a good fit?

TomCosta
Forgotten Realms Designer

USA
473 Posts

Posted - 11 Nov 2017 :  13:20:22  Show Profile Send TomCosta a Private Message  Reply with Quote
It's quite a bit darker than moonblades IMO, but as you say, reflavouring could work. Go for it.
Go to Top of Page

prototype00
Seeker

21 Posts

Posted - 12 Nov 2017 :  01:21:59  Show Profile  Visit prototype00's Homepage  Send prototype00 an AOL message  Send prototype00 a Yahoo! Message Send prototype00 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Quite a bit darker than the blades of maiming and spontaneous combustion (if you aren’t “The Chosen One”)?

Whew! That’s real dark then! ;)
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14555 Posts

Posted - 12 Nov 2017 :  02:40:37  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Yes, you get burned to death if you are not 'worthy' (racially 'pure').

I never liked elves......

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone

Go to Top of Page

TomCosta
Forgotten Realms Designer

USA
473 Posts

Posted - 12 Nov 2017 :  03:06:00  Show Profile Send TomCosta a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I only mean the stated powers of moonblades (once you were accepted by it) were not, for the most part, all that dark (aside from perhaps, the shadow). The hexblade is all about the power of curses and hexes and the like. As written it is tied to the Shadowfell and 4E's Raven Queen, all of which is pretty dark stuff.
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14555 Posts

Posted - 12 Nov 2017 :  22:14:18  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I think Prototype just means to strip the mechanics out and apply new fluff, is all.

I'm a big fan of 'less is more'. Or, in other words, rather than have thirty five thousand similar PrCs (as it was in 3e), just create generic ones (mechanically), and re-flavor them as needed.

I recall having similar thoughts about monsters way back when, when a new MM was being discussed on the Paizo boards. I suggested just adding templates to base creatures (they were creating a lot of variant skeletons, zombies, and 'ghosts', from what I could see), rather than create entirely new MM entries for each and every flavor.

I got attacked for it. I stopped going to the Paizo boards after that. Seems some people LOVE spending money on the same thing over and over again. You know that meme with Frye (Futurama) yelling, "Take my Money!!!" Yeah, thats the Pathfinder people.

Although I've heard the 'rabid fanboism' has died down somewhat in recent years - they even had a flop or two, from what I heard (I wouldn't know, I've come home to FR and here I'll stay).

Of course, if we make ever flavor of character class just that (a 'flavor'), and every monster another template glued onto an existing beastie, they wouldn't sell very many splats, now would they? Although I think thats the way 5e is going, which I am very happy to see. Adventures over unnecessary splats. Warms my ancient, cold heart (I am a type of 'gamer undead' - that which has no life).

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone


Edited by - Markustay on 13 Nov 2017 19:11:30
Go to Top of Page

Brimstone
Great Reader

USA
2909 Posts

Posted - 13 Nov 2017 :  17:34:35  Show Profile Send Brimstone a Private Message  Reply with Quote
For some people it's scary to think outside the box.

"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14555 Posts

Posted - 13 Nov 2017 :  19:30:10  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Its just that when I flip through the pages of these splat books (all editions), and see very similar spells (which no-one is ever actually going to use, since the basic spells is all anyone needs), or a bunch of very similar PrCs (we had three - I think - different PrCs that used 'circle magic' - why not just have them all be 'Circle Casters'?) But the worst thing was the never-ending monster manuals. Some people love them, but do we really need 50 different types of 'skeleton monster' with its own write-up? We had TWO different pterodactyl-people in FR in 2e! (one with wings and one without, IIRC).

This is why I am completely in favor of what the OP is attempting here - take the crunchy bits and reflavor them. Maybe even a substitution or two for powers/abilities.

I had the same idea years ago for 'special beasts' - combining familiars, Druid/ranger 'pets', and Paladin's mounts under one, single set of (companion) rules, and using that to build a more folklore-based Witch class. While I totally get combining too much stuff washes-out the 'flavor' entirely (*cough* 4e *cough*), there has to be some sort of happy middle ground.

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone

Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
30431 Posts

Posted - 13 Nov 2017 :  22:11:19  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay

But the worst thing was the never-ending monster manuals. Some people love them, but do we really need 50 different types of 'skeleton monster' with its own write-up? We had TWO different pterodactyl-people in FR in 2e! (one with wings and one without, IIRC).



That's a complaint I've often had... Quoting from myself, referring to the fact that every single monster book includes dragons and undead:

quote:
Okay, so we've got the main bunch of metallics, and the main bunch of chromatics. I'm fine with that.

The gem dragons are okay, though it's obvious they were created for no more purpose than having neutral dragons.

Aside from those, I don't see a need for too many other breeds. A couple oddballs, like steel dragons, song dragons, or fang dragons, are fine, but that's it.

Instead, we've had lesser metallics, lesser gemstones, lesser chromatics, and a host of goofy dragon types created simply to have more dragons.

I realize that the name of the game is Dungeons & Dragons, but in my opinion, the main breeds of chromatic and metallic fill most of our draconic needs. We don't need all those niche dragons -- the true dragons overlap most of those niches.

It's the same with undead. We have all the classic ones, but then there are ones that have identical creation methods to others and yet are dramatically different, and then there are the really weird ones, like my theoretical green howling yodeler -- "a green howling yodeler is created when a heartbroken half-elven male name Frehd falls off a mountain while yodeling, lands in a pool of green Jell-O, and then freezes to death while a trio of dire penguins laugh at his struggles to get out".

Yeah, that's over the top, but I've seen some official undead that have really unlikely origins, to the point of being near-ridiculous.

I'd rather have something wholly new, rather than "bizarrely formed undead #43,612" or "highly-specialized niche dragon #309".

Instead of "Pokopo dragons are majestic dragons that evolved on and are only found on the north shore of this one tiny island that's barely bigger than a halfling's bed," how about some highly intelligent amphibious monkey found on temperate shorelines?

Or instead of "ice cube dragons that occupy the same spot as white dragons but look like ice cubes and have a Slurpee breath weapon," how about some critter that burrows in ice, can suck heat out of nearby creatures, and has a natural ability to magically shape ice?

I've got nothing against the creation of more monsters, I just get tired of seeing undead and dragons every time a new monster book comes out. Especially considering that with draconic dominance of the food chain, some of these niche dragons should be quickly killed or driven off by true dragons.

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

Editor and scribe for The Candlekeep Compendium

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14555 Posts

Posted - 14 Nov 2017 :  07:14:36  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I'm all about that slurpee breath weapon.

Yeah, totally on the same page with you - 'Blazing Bones' - He's like skeleton... with blazing bones!

Just NO.

And some of those monsters in the SJ books... a living meteor? Please explain to me just how many times are you going to use THAT on your players? Orcs and goblinoids have always been the 'best bang for the buck' - one page entry, 56 billion usages and counting.

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone

Go to Top of Page

sleyvas
Great Reader

USA
6219 Posts

Posted - 14 Nov 2017 :  13:35:46  Show Profile Send sleyvas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay

I'm all about that slurpee breath weapon.

Yeah, totally on the same page with you - 'Blazing Bones' - He's like skeleton... with blazing bones!

Just NO.

And some of those monsters in the SJ books... a living meteor? Please explain to me just how many times are you going to use THAT on your players? Orcs and goblinoids have always been the 'best bang for the buck' - one page entry, 56 billion usages and counting.



Lol, I was intrigued with the vampyre ... no not the one from ravenloft that was a living humanoid who drank blood or whatever.... I'm talking about the undead being that accidentally set things on fire. I only ever saw it in use in the first undermountain, but I loved the idea of an artist who liked to paint and sketch, who was plagued by the fact that he could no longer pick up a brush, pencil, or touch a canvas. You know, that guy who was known for "painting with light", whose patrayals were always so bright and vibrant... and now can't go out in the sunlight.

Alavairthae, may your skill prevail

Phillip aka Sleyvas

Edited by - sleyvas on 14 Nov 2017 13:37:56
Go to Top of Page

The Masked Mage
Master of Realmslore

USA
1366 Posts

Posted - 22 Nov 2017 :  08:56:03  Show Profile  Send The Masked Mage an AOL message  Click to see The Masked Mage's MSN Messenger address Send The Masked Mage a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by Markustay

But the worst thing was the never-ending monster manuals. Some people love them, but do we really need 50 different types of 'skeleton monster' with its own write-up? We had TWO different pterodactyl-people in FR in 2e! (one with wings and one without, IIRC).



That's a complaint I've often had... Quoting from myself, referring to the fact that every single monster book includes dragons and undead:




I never minded the new monsters, what I hated was that they continuously reprint with tiny variations old material and called it new. Version after version after version had the same monsters with slight changes served up for us - zero creativity.
Go to Top of Page

Starshade
Learned Scribe

Norway
159 Posts

Posted - 14 Dec 2017 :  12:16:00  Show Profile Send Starshade a Private Message  Reply with Quote
My first thought was to make Erevan Ilesere the patron of elven Hexblades, and therefore attribute the elven hexblade being able to use moonblades to him, eventually to the crafting of the "hex moonblade".
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2017 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000