Nice overview of the class. In our game, Neutral Assassins are called Bounty Hunters. Instead of an assassination attack, Bounty Hunters did a waylay/knockout attack with a blunt weapon that causes the victim to be knocked unconscious instead of killed. Otherwise, Bounty Hunter is the same as the Assassin.
I personally would say that James Bond is Lawful Evil - he believes in a well ordered system (HM Government) and is willing to use violence, even torture to uphold that system. Lawful Evil in the sense of 'necessary evil' maybe, but arguably evil all the same.
We borrowed the disguise kit from 3e, and made it a necessary part of the assassin's gear. We figured if you needed thief's tools to pick locks, why not require a disguise kit for assassins? It's costly (50 gp), weighs 5 pounds, and is good for 5 uses. We also subjected the disguise attempt to Charisma modifiers (the higher the assassin's charisma, the more convincing he/she can be). Also, we nerfed assassins down a bit, by house-ruling that they don't have the Pick Pockets nor Climb Walls abilities. PP is strictly for thieves, and CW only for thieves and monks. To make up for this, we ruled that assassins get Hide in Shadows and Move Silently staring from 1st level, and all other thieving abilities starting at 3rd level. As for assassination, surprise advantage alone is not enough to validate the attempt. You don't just round a corner in a dungeon, happen upon an enemy NPC, and slit their throat out of the blue. We borrowed the "death attack" concept from 3e, and ruled that in order to attempt an assassination, the assassin has to be hidden, unobserved, and needs to spend 3 rounds observing the target, after which the instant kill attempt can be made.
Any Assassin which reaches 13th level would be considered a threat to Guildmasters and would probably be eliminated when convenient. Now, if you allow Assassins to Dual Class, it may be prudent to switch to a Cleric, Fighter, Magic-user, Illusionist, Thief, or Monk for the second class at this point (because you would no longer be a threat to the Guildmaster). It’s worth considering if your ability stats would allow it.
2e had a version of Assassin that is close to the 1e version found in Scarlet Brotherhood for the Greyhawk setting, along with the monk, but both had specific restrictions meant for Greyhawk. If you wish to use these classes, I highly suggest ditching the Greyhawk restrictions and open the classes up a bit.
The Assassin has always been overlooked imo. Great video showing you how much fun he can be to play. Question, did you ever have anyone quit, or be forced to quit your games back in the day because of the Satanic Panic?
My introduction to the Satanic Panic was the unfortunate incident at Michigan State University, the kid that ran away and the PI said it was cause of D&D. It was a, news wise, big thing. I know it ended up having NOTHING to do with D&D, but that FACT was conveniently overlooked/ignored by the media. Shame too as the kid need help, and that was swept out of view. Separately, I have never understood why an Assain HAD(!) to evil at all. Yes, I understand that killing people for money is not good, but that does not mean killing people 'sneakily/unfairly' is evil. The most obvious example to this are snipers, but there is also the attempted assasination of Hitler. Only for propaganda purposes would anyone say either of those are evil acts. I suspect most governments would/do(??) make use of the skill set that Assassins bring to the table. (For brevity I skip over spying and bounty hunting.) I like your rules and the other respondent who made certain thief skills available at 1st level.
the wild swings of effectiveness tend to really balance the class out (drop even mighty foes in one shot, or else are feebs), though I found the class really depends on the DM adjudication, a wise DM, way more than probably is best for many. I didn't realize that until decades later/the internet (humble brag). BTW zealots or easy-peasy pleaser DMs alike may create problems running the class. To be fair, there is also the issue of players...ranging from groups with zero subtlety or chill never letting surprise help much(= sad assassin), to role play conflicts (all to common).
I used assassins, & DMed many. Never had a problem with them slaying giants or the like if the weapon made sense (a crossbow, say). Dragons? hard to surprise unless they are sleeping, but I allowed them too, just used their effective HD/level as per dragon saving throws, so adults & up were harder than usual to assassinate. 1e dragon generally are much smaller, and intended to be combatted pretty often, in my humble opinion. I always required a to hit roll for such combat-like assassination of opportunity rolls. Guilds are indeed fun to run games centered on assassins (or thieves guild for thieves, even better for gaming); I had plenty of PC conflict vs guilds though; variety is the spice of life and gaming alike. Generally fight to level up is problematic, but the various attempts to get to L14 guild master & handful to grandmother of assassins were ways tons of fun & epic. My players died in the attempts about half the time, too! Still, it was so far along, it always made for a fine ending or capstone anyway. Druids were the next best/most fun of the "fight to advance" types.
PHB pg 29 about surprise attacks is actually pretty stupid, because it says if you fail the assassination attempt you still get the normal attack. That’s pretty dumb. It’s like saying, “Even if you lose, you still win!” Edit: I phrased this incorrectly and gave the wrong intent or impression. I basically meant to say that it should be painfully obvious that you would want to choose either assassination or backstabbing in preference to a normal attack, since you still gain the benefit of the normal attack and don’t lose that even if the assassination fails. Of course, this assumes you are attempting to kill the enemy (which is usually what murder hobos are trying to do). So, assassination or backstabbing are no-brainers. I suppose they had to say it though, or some DMs would be ruling that a failed assassination attempt does no damage.
My all time favourite class, though I ran mine as more like a Ronin. The only time he ever backstabbed was in taking out a Displacer beast, otherwise he always faced his opponent mano et mano. ( Karn Dreadstar/ Adayo Arinuri).
One of my favorite classes, and it's been very popular in my gaming groups. In my campaign, though most NPC assassins are evil, PC assassins do not have to be. The exclusion of assassins from 2e was one of the big reasons for my dislike of it.
Such a needless class. But so many have been so, I don't know why they eliminated it and kept so many other redundancies. Yet another reason skill-based games work better.
Nice overview of the class. In our game, Neutral Assassins are called Bounty Hunters. Instead of an assassination attack, Bounty Hunters did a waylay/knockout attack with a blunt weapon that causes the victim to be knocked unconscious instead of killed. Otherwise, Bounty Hunter is the same as the Assassin.
That a nice name for a Bandit
I personally would say that James Bond is Lawful Evil - he believes in a well ordered system (HM Government) and is willing to use violence, even torture to uphold that system. Lawful Evil in the sense of 'necessary evil' maybe, but arguably evil all the same.
Beyond 15th level a character becomes the local Guild Master and is forced to retire from field work. Now they become administrators.
Assassins, the ultimate NPC
You can build entire campaigns around these guys
We borrowed the disguise kit from 3e, and made it a necessary part of the assassin's gear. We figured if you needed thief's tools to pick locks, why not require a disguise kit for assassins? It's costly (50 gp), weighs 5 pounds, and is good for 5 uses. We also subjected the disguise attempt to Charisma modifiers (the higher the assassin's charisma, the more convincing he/she can be). Also, we nerfed assassins down a bit, by house-ruling that they don't have the Pick Pockets nor Climb Walls abilities. PP is strictly for thieves, and CW only for thieves and monks. To make up for this, we ruled that assassins get Hide in Shadows and Move Silently staring from 1st level, and all other thieving abilities starting at 3rd level. As for assassination, surprise advantage alone is not enough to validate the attempt. You don't just round a corner in a dungeon, happen upon an enemy NPC, and slit their throat out of the blue. We borrowed the "death attack" concept from 3e, and ruled that in order to attempt an assassination, the assassin has to be hidden, unobserved, and needs to spend 3 rounds observing the target, after which the instant kill attempt can be made.
Any Assassin which reaches 13th level would be considered a threat to Guildmasters and would probably be eliminated when convenient.
Now, if you allow Assassins to Dual Class, it may be prudent to switch to a Cleric, Fighter, Magic-user, Illusionist, Thief, or Monk for the second class at this point (because you would no longer be a threat to the Guildmaster). It’s worth considering if your ability stats would allow it.
I like creating Dual-Classed Assassin NPCs to mess with the players. 😜
Of course, *ANY* Assassin in disguise can wreak havoc for PCs. ❤️
2e had a version of Assassin that is close to the 1e version found in Scarlet Brotherhood for the Greyhawk setting, along with the monk, but both had specific restrictions meant for Greyhawk. If you wish to use these classes, I highly suggest ditching the Greyhawk restrictions and open the classes up a bit.
The Assassin has always been overlooked imo. Great video showing you how much fun he can be to play. Question, did you ever have anyone quit, or be forced to quit your games back in the day because of the Satanic Panic?
No. Fortunately, we were older during the Panic so it had no effect on our gaming other than a news story.
My introduction to the Satanic Panic was the unfortunate incident at Michigan State University, the kid that ran away and the PI said it was cause of D&D. It was a, news wise, big thing. I know it ended up having NOTHING to do with D&D, but that FACT was conveniently overlooked/ignored by the media. Shame too as the kid need help, and that was swept out of view.
Separately, I have never understood why an Assain HAD(!) to evil at all. Yes, I understand that killing people for money is not good, but that does not mean killing people 'sneakily/unfairly' is evil. The most obvious example to this are snipers, but there is also the attempted assasination of Hitler. Only for propaganda purposes would anyone say either of those are evil acts. I suspect most governments would/do(??) make use of the skill set that Assassins bring to the table. (For brevity I skip over spying and bounty hunting.) I like your rules and the other respondent who made certain thief skills available at 1st level.
the wild swings of effectiveness tend to really balance the class out (drop even mighty foes in one shot, or else are feebs), though I found the class really depends on the DM adjudication, a wise DM, way more than probably is best for many. I didn't realize that until decades later/the internet (humble brag). BTW zealots or easy-peasy pleaser DMs alike may create problems running the class. To be fair, there is also the issue of players...ranging from groups with zero subtlety or chill never letting surprise help much(= sad assassin), to role play conflicts (all to common).
I used assassins, & DMed many. Never had a problem with them slaying giants or the like if the weapon made sense (a crossbow, say). Dragons? hard to surprise unless they are sleeping, but I allowed them too, just used their effective HD/level as per dragon saving throws, so adults & up were harder than usual to assassinate. 1e dragon generally are much smaller, and intended to be combatted pretty often, in my humble opinion. I always required a to hit roll for such combat-like assassination of opportunity rolls. Guilds are indeed fun to run games centered on assassins (or thieves guild for thieves, even better for gaming); I had plenty of PC conflict vs guilds though; variety is the spice of life and gaming alike. Generally fight to level up is problematic, but the various attempts to get to L14 guild master & handful to grandmother of assassins were ways tons of fun & epic. My players died in the attempts about half the time, too! Still, it was so far along, it always made for a fine ending or capstone anyway. Druids were the next best/most fun of the "fight to advance" types.
Gorgeous class. Still have them in my games.
PHB pg 29 about surprise attacks is actually pretty stupid, because it says if you fail the assassination attempt you still get the normal attack. That’s pretty dumb. It’s like saying, “Even if you lose, you still win!”
Edit: I phrased this incorrectly and gave the wrong intent or impression. I basically meant to say that it should be painfully obvious that you would want to choose either assassination or backstabbing in preference to a normal attack, since you still gain the benefit of the normal attack and don’t lose that even if the assassination fails. Of course, this assumes you are attempting to kill the enemy (which is usually what murder hobos are trying to do). So, assassination or backstabbing are no-brainers. I suppose they had to say it though, or some DMs would be ruling that a failed assassination attempt does no damage.
My all time favourite class, though I ran mine as more like a Ronin. The only time he ever backstabbed was in taking out a Displacer beast, otherwise he always faced his opponent mano et mano. ( Karn Dreadstar/ Adayo Arinuri).
We don't allow Assassins as a Player Character in a collective group I'm in. We also don't allow Evil PCs.
Where's that Chevalier-Palidan cover vid?
Coming soon.
I can't believe I found this video I prefer adnd over 5th
One of my favorite classes, and it's been very popular in my gaming groups. In my campaign, though most NPC assassins are evil, PC assassins do not have to be.
The exclusion of assassins from 2e was one of the big reasons for my dislike of it.
if your watching these and not subscribed and liking his videos .... shame on you :)
Thanks for the video! I don't allow Assassins or any Evil in my 1E AD&D campaigns, along with a few other things that are in the books.
Such a needless class. But so many have been so, I don't know why they eliminated it and kept so many other redundancies. Yet another reason skill-based games work better.