Talk:Spider Rider (3.5e Prestige Class)/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Its contents should be preserved in their current form. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1 |

Archive 2 →

Balance

I am not sure about the ballance of this class. Can anyone suggest improvements, please? Also, I would rather it if nobody rated this class yet- I dont think it is ready for a rating yet. Help is really appreciated, thanks! --Sam Kay 13:28, 10 August 2007 (MDT)

I've given this a good look through, and here are my comments

• Base save bonuses are a strange requirement for the class. If you want level 3 fighter-type then just say "BAB +3, proficiency with all martial weapons".
• Ease up on the skill requirements. If a level 3 fighter is going to qualify, then he should at least get some skills to pick. I'd make it Knowledge(Religion) or Knowledge(Nature) 3 ranks, Handle Animal 6 ranks. If you are getting the class at level 4 you should have at least mastered handle animal, and if you pick a ranger, you should have lots of skill leway.
• Level 1: what is Spider Empathy?
• Level 2: Share Spells should be for the mount not the rider. Also add the description by copying the code from the wizard or druid companions
• Level 3: Add Rebuke description
• Level 6+ From here on it just increases the number of times an ability can be used rather than giving new abilities.

What I would do is add some nifty new abilities (perhaps ones that actually make him a good rider), and change the number of times an ability works per day to a static number they get at the start (maybe one increase). For example: at first level you could make planar web 3/day and not increase it again. Then you will probably find a few empty levels which you can throw in your new abilities into.

Hide should also be a class skill, as should move silently. Either that, or you should remove Web Hide.

Cheers --Aarnott 08:52, 14 August 2007 (MDT)

Thanks! I have made the improvements. How is it now?

I left the BAB and Fort save requirements the same so that both the cleric (for clerics of lolth) and the fighter could achieve the class at 4th level. I will sort the "spiderkind" thing once we have got the class working fully. Yet again, Thanks --Sam Kay 13:46, 14 August 2007 (MDT)

With the benefits this PrC grants, 3rd level (a fighter 1/barbarian 2 meets them) seems a bit soon to be able to meet all the entry requirements. Although there are a number of exceptions, the general rule of thumb is that it should require at least five levels in order to meet the requirements. With the benefits this PrC grants (and they're quite nice), I'd require six or seven levels. —Sledged (talk) 17:56, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

I have sorted the Spiderkind thing. It has been renamed Spiderform (spiderkind is a term present in D20 stuff that is not SRD) and has a page explaining it. --Sam Kay 10:25, 16 August 2007 (MDT)

Are there any more improvements I can make before it is rated? --Sam Kay 08:37, 18 August 2007 (MDT)

I'll look at this later today. I can already see a few things from a quick scan -- only time will tell. --Aarnott 08:29, 20 August 2007 (MDT)

I can't wait to get this finnished! I am already creating a miniature to use when I take the PrC (I opted for the PrC over the Base Class, but I am taking fighter first so I will be a master rider anyway from the bonus feats!). I have modified the background as well now. --Sam Kay 08:48, 20 August 2007 (MDT)

Okay I have some comments ready and they all pertain to the following table (note it is indented and thus looks slightly off):

Table: The Spider Rider

Hit Die: D8

Level	Base Attack Bonus	Fort Save	Ref Save	Will Save	Spider Jump Length (Total Distance)	Special
1st	+1	+2	+0	+0	--	Spider Mount, Spider Empathy, Planar Web 4/day
2nd	+2	+3	+0	+0	10 ft. (10 ft.)	Summon Spider Swarm 3/day, Spider Jump
3rd	+3	+3	+1	+1	10 ft. (20 ft.)	Rebuke Spiderform
4th	+4	+4	+1	+1	20 ft. (40 ft.)	Perfect Rider +2
5th	+5	+4	+1	+1	20 ft. (60 ft.)	Summon Spider IV 1/day
6th	+6	+5	+2	+2	40 ft. (100 ft.)	Perfect Rider +4, Master Rider
7th	+7	+5	+2	+2	40 ft. (140 ft.)	Summon Spider V 1/day
8th	+8	+6	+2	+2	80 ft. (220 ft.)	Spider Knight
9th	+9	+6	+3	+3	80 ft. (300 ft.)	Summon Spider VI 1/day
10th	+10	+7	+3	+3	120 ft. (500 ft.)	Poison Touch 3/day
Class Skills (4 + Int modifier per level; ×4 at 1st level) Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), Ride (Dex), Use Rope (Dex), Balance (Dex), Tumble (Dex), and Knowledge (nature and religion) (Int).

So in the copy I made, I tried to make it look a lot more like a regular PrC. I think that Spider Jump should come earlier since it is a defining feature of the class. I think Servant of the True Spider Queen has an awesome name, but adds unnecessary clutter -- the class already gets spell-like abilities, no use giving it spellcasting. The Spider Bond ability can be included in the mount ability (clears up the table which looks cleaner). I axed the Summon Spider (large) and replaced it with Summon Spider spells because 1) I removed Servant of the True Spider Queen and 2) it is more clear that way.

Getting Spider Jump earlier would be much more fun to play. I would modify it so that they can include their mount in the jump.

As far as the spider bond goes... I would make it simpler rules. Instead of all the rules about "If a Spider Rider dies, the spider is killed instantly as well as if by a death attack. This cannot be negated by a death ward or similar spell", just change it to: "If the rider dies, the spider dies instantly". Also change Locate Object to Locate Creature ;). "The spider is immune to fear effects, and can speak, understand and read any languages that the Spider Rider can. The spider is no longer mindless (see below), but is rode as a creature of intelligence 1." --> should all be in the spider section.

Change all instances of class level with either "character level" or "Spider Rider level", the second being most preferable.

Summon spider swarm shouldn't summon tiny spiders. Instead have it summon 1d3 creatures from Summon Spider I and give Summon Spider 1 the option to summon 2 tiny spiders. That will give 2-6 tiny spiders or 1-3 small spiders. This is mostly a clarity/consistency thing.

Make the rebuking equal to your spider rider levels. You are already at least 3 levels behind.

Here is how I would word Spider Jump: At 2nd level as a free action, the Spider Rider gains the ability to travel between two points as if by means of a Dimension Door spell. He can travel up to the number of feet shown in the Spider Jump Length column of the Spider Rider table and a maximum number of feet from all the jumps in a day, equal to the value in parenthesis. The spider rider may include his spider mount in a Spider Jump. When this ability is performed it appears just like when a Jumping Spider "jumps".

Hope all this at least gives some ideas. The main idea here is that the class needs to be simplified, and standardized. Besides that, the ideas are there and it looks close to done. --Aarnott 15:26, 20 August 2007 (MDT)

Yeah, it was useful. Yet again, thanks! I have made all but one¹ of the modifacations you suggested (they where good), plus some of my own. How is it now, are there any more improvements I can make? Also, is the Epic version any good?

¹I changed the 10th level class feature.--Sam Kay 12:13, 21 August 2007 (MDT)

I can't say I have much experience with epic, so I can't give a solid answer on that one. As far as how it looks right now, it looks awesome (I'm going to likely throw some of these in the next session as opponents). As far as what is left... Minor cleanup (though not much is really needed and I removed some minor cruft I saw already). Also for the 10th level ability, I would consider making a Creeping Doom spell for spiders and have it cast at your Spider Rider level as normal. That will give 5 spider swarms instead of 3. Three spider swarms seems less powerful than Summon Spider VI, which isn't the point of the pinnacle of Spider Riding. I'm sure you can imagine how cool it would look when the Spider Rider, wounded from a fierce battle pulls out his trump card and millions of spiders crawl out of the underbrush, swarming his opponent. You might even want to make the Creeping Doom variant summon 1 spider swarm per caster level since they are a lot weaker than centipede swarms. That would be fair as well (10 swarms for the Rider) and be REALLY cool for a druid/cleric. Besides that, there is one correction on a mistake I made you should put in. Make the jump a swift action rather than a free action. Otherwise the intent of max distance per round is broken. I'll rate it once you feel ready :). With those things done, I think it deserves a 9 (based on the rating scale I cannot find anything ever made that fits a 10). --Aarnott 13:07, 21 August 2007 (MDT)

Do you think there is anything I can dio to improve it ti a 10? --Sam Kay 14:41, 21 August 2007 (MDT)

Well if it gets all tidied up and spelling/wording/grammar errors are gone, it would definitely be a 10, because balance-wise I think this class does not do much wrong. I doubt everyone would give a 10 though, as I said, every PrC I have ever seen really doesn't deserve a 10. There are always inherent flaws, so I think it is more a problem with the way our balance system works on DnD Wiki than the class itself. The way I see it, a 9 is the best you can get here, and a 9 is very good indeed. --Aarnott 15:13, 21 August 2007 (MDT)

I have just run it through a spell-checker, and sorted out the grammar (most of it was UK rather than US spellings), and I have compared it to other presteige classes to see how much needed tidying up, and I have sorted the Spider HD typo (one place said D10 HD, the other said D12 HD). So, it is now as good as I think I can make it.

About the rating thing, I would say to compare it to a 9/10 class, like the Prestidigitator (3.5e Prestige Class) or the Courier (3.5e Prestige Class): if it is better overall (balance, background and flavour) then it is a 10. If it is not so clear-cut, then it is a 9. Though I cannot judge the difference myself; I made it, and I am still learning how the D&D balance system works, so I will go with what you rate it.

I am ready for a rating now, there is little else I can do to it. Thak you very much for your help with the class: I doubt I could have made it so good without your help (it would be a 7 or an 8). --Sam Kay 05:25, 22 August 2007 (MDT)

Epic Table

PLease can anyone tell me why the epic table is so stretched? --Sam Kay 07:39, 14 August 2007 (MDT)

The reason it is so stretched is because of the class skills... If they go all the way across the screen so will the table. However, a solutuion you could try (which may make the table look very funny) would be to make the class skills only have a rowspan of 1 instead of the 7 it currently is. I hope this helps. --Green Dragon 11:41, 14 August 2007 (MDT)

Yeah, it did. Thanks, anyway. Have you got any other ideas why it is not working? --Sam Kay 13:43, 14 August 2007 (MDT)

The thing is that it is working since the table does not have a defined width. What you could try is to (right after class="d20") put width=500px (or whatever pixel amount makes it looks good). This will define the width and make it static. --Green Dragon 13:46, 14 August 2007 (MDT)

Thanks, the table is now fixed. --Sam Kay 13:52, 14 August 2007 (MDT)

Glad to hear it :). --Green Dragon 13:55, 14 August 2007 (MDT)

Rating - 9/10

I give this class a 9/10 for the following reasons:

What it has done well

• The background information is great. It gives a prospective player a good feel about what this PrC is about. It also allows them to develop ideas about how to roleplay the character.
• I think it is good that the PrC starts early in a PC's career (they start out learning the basics of combat, and then are gifted with powers from their god).
• Entrance prereqs to the class are fair.
• This class is not broken, but also not underpowered. I can't find a way to "break it", but I also see this as on par with paladins and rangers for power.
• As far as the main class text is concerned, it is very clear nad looks good.

Some things that could be improved

• I took a closer look at the monstrous spider rules, and there are a lot of extra rules that are unnecessary or confusing. They do work, they are just not perfect yet. The sections: Monstrous Spider Traits, Shrink, and Fast (to some degree) are ones that need cleanup.
• The monstrous spider rules also needs to be linkified.
• The epic Spider Rider is hard to comment on because I don't know epic rules all that well, but I think the lack of bonus feats is not good. Perhaps make it more inline with the epic arcane archer (type thing). Maybe don't even increase Spell-like abilities...

Conclusion

With some minor clarity changes, I think this class will become a great example for what a 10/10 prestige class on D&D Wiki is. It is balanced, has a great theme, and I want to play one! Some might argue that it does not really meet the 10/10 requirements, but I think that it is unique and also is a good example of some solid content. To me, that is a 10/10. Until the minor things are fixed with epic and the monstrous spider table, I will leave this at a 9/10. At the point they are fixed, this rating can be nullified, and I will change it to 10/10 :). --Aarnott 11:16, 22 August 2007 (MDT)

Thanks! I have made the suggested changes, how do you think it is now? --Sam Kay 12:55, 22 August 2007 (MDT)

Also, does this rating already have to be nullified? --Green Dragon 19:28, 22 August 2007 (MDT)

Rating still stands for a little bit until a couple things are fixed:

• Does the spider gain bonus HD? Or do the HD in the table replace its own? That needs to be clarified.
• Why is Weapon Specialization (Bite) a bonus feat? The spider cannot qualify! It would be better as Weapon Focus. Improved Grapple also makes me wonder -- can monsters even use it?

Just to let you know, I made some clarity changes and did some likifying. I don't think I fundamentally changed the way the spider works, but you should probably scan it because I did make a couple minor rules decisions based on what I figured you intent was (rather than just clearing up rules that were ambiguous but understandable). The class is just about done! --Aarnott 08:28, 23 August 2007 (MDT)

Sorted. Your clarity changes where correct, and where better than mine, so thanks! Have we improved it up to a 10, or is it still a 9? --Sam Kay 09:04, 23 August 2007 (MDT)

Yep -- time for me to write up a new rating. --Aarnott 09:22, 23 August 2007 (MDT)

Rating - 10/10

I give this entry a 10/10 because I believe it is a prime example of what a Prestige Class should look like on D&D Wiki.

• The background information is great. It gives a prospective player a good feel about what this PrC is about. It also allows them to develop ideas about how to roleplay the character.
• I think it is good that the PrC starts early in a PC's career (they start out learning the basics of combat, and then are gifted with powers from their god).
• Entrance prereqs to the class are fair.
• This class is not broken, but also not underpowered. I can't find a way to "break it", but I also see this as on par with paladins and rangers for power.
• Epic progression seems good
• Except for minor changes that will always happen with any technical writing, it is well worded.
• Lots of links to refer users to more information on the site.
• Obviously a cool concept.

This class is an example of what D&D Wiki pages should be, and from now on will only ever need minor grammar and wording reviews, if any changes at all. --Aarnott 09:27, 23 August 2007 (MDT)

Brilliant! Thanks Aarnott for all your help (plus other people's help with the base class version). Without the help given on this class, it would still be a 7/10 base class (or worse). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sam Kay (talk • contribs) 09:55, 23 August 2007 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

I'll second Aarnott's 10/10 rating. Given all the work on this article, I'd definately say it's the best PrC page, and possibly the best overall article on the wiki. --Othtim 18:20, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Ratings are no longer out of 10 but rather 20. This rating has been nullified for this reason. --Green Dragon 20:52, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

I love you too --Othtim 09:59, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

Disambiguation

I think there should be a disambiguation for this, as there are two versions. Any thoughts? --Sam Kay 12:36, 6 October 2007 (MDT)

I made one (Spider Rider). Is that what you had in mind? --Green Dragon 13:45, 7 October 2007 (MDT)

Thanks. --Sam Kay 09:37, 9 October 2007 (MDT)

No problem :). --Green Dragon 15:56, 9 October 2007 (MDT)

Play Test

I am currently playing a Spider Rider PC, so I thought I would keep a log of how well this PrC works. --Sam Kay 13:29, 18 September 2007 (MDT)

Session one, Monday 17th september, 2007:

The Spider Rider Seems to be working well. A lack of magic items due to some strange event and an apperance of rust monsters severly put me off guard, weakening performance. Overall, the spider works well, and seems to take the brunt of the damage. I have not had an opertunity to test special abilities.

Class Levels: Fighter 4/Spider Rider 6 (yes, abit annoying, but I am using Spider Rider more as a base class than the Prestige Class it is).

Session two, Monday, 24th september, 2007:

No oppertunity to test spider rider abilities this session (sadly). One attempt at a mounted charge, but the Rider took out the target without the spider's attacks (so no combined attack).

Class Levels: Fighter 4/Spider Rider 6.

Session three, Thursday, 26th september, 2007:

No oppertunity to test spider rider abilities this session (sadly). The shrink ability of the spider proved vital. Perhaps more uses per day is needed? Limitless shrimk ability might be needed; I will see how this works.

Class Levels: Fighter 4/Spider Rider 6.

Session four, Monday, 15th october, 2007:

The Spider Rider finally got to test out a mounted charge! The Spider Rider's mounted charge is really effective with a lance and the Knight of Lolth Arachne causes alot of damage, especialy with speed weapons. Very fun too. Really fun! No, I mean it, really really REALLY fun!!! No chance to test other abilities :(.

Class Levels: Fighter 4/Spider Rider 6.

Session five, wednesday, 14th november:

No chance to test spider abilities this session, sadly. Oh well...

Class Levels: Fighter 4/Spider Rider 8 (missed several sessions in this log).

Session six, Monday, 19th november:

No chance to test spider rider, although I did meet another spider rider. Yay!

Class Levels: Fighter 4/Spider Rider 8.

Session 7, Monday 26th november:

A roleplaying session.

Class Levels: Fighter 4/Spider Rider 8.

Session 8, Wednesday 28th november:

Hmm... Yet again, no chance to test Sp abilities etc. Perhaps they need to be more usable?

Class Levels: Fighter 4/Spider Rider 8.

Comment: You may not be playing the class to the best of what it can do. This class has really good mobility. When you enter combat you should throw a web in a tactical position on your first round. Unless the enemies are flying of course. I would probably do this every combat I can. Web is a great spell at all levels. Don't underestimate its ability to stop charges! Spider jump is a great way to split full attacks! Your character has a +12 BAB. You'll want to be full attacking, especially with haste (if you can get it). So if you hit an enemy twice for example and slay it, use spider jump, and then finish your attack sequence on a nearby enemy. Use Summon spider when the going gets tough to flank an opponent (+2 to hit helps). You can also help a rogue this way (sneak attacks!). Hope these suggestions help you get more bang for your buck out of this cool class! --Aarnott 12:13, 6 December 2007 (MST)

Ah, that would help... I had also forgotten Ride By Attack feat (which I have), so I can engage in a series of charges. I will make a sheet of notes to remind me of these things! Oh, about the haste, I have a +1 Speed Lance, and my Spider has +1 Speed Fang Weapons... Very useful. Thanks! --Sam Kay 06:28, 7 December 2007 (MST)

Found that web is useless against flaming creatures (not tested against other creature yet), but the Ride-By-Attack feat is good. Now our group is starting an epic campaign, so I can test it as an epic PrC. And the DM has ruled that I can apply a Paladin's Special Mount to my spider. Hopefully I can test the summoning abilities and the Web thing. --Sam Kay 04:28, 20 December 2007 (MST)

If you want help making an epic character I can try. If you want an optimized character... Well I know exactly what to do. But that isn't fun really. Certain abilities always become near-useless at epic levels. The spider jump ability will get more powerful than ever. The web one will be tougher to use (and yeah, obviously fire creatures are not a good thing to use it on). When you make your character, make sure to not use fighter levels to qualify for the Spider Rider. If paladin levels stack, they would be preferable. Let me know on my talk page if you want help and I'll see what I can do. --Aarnott 07:32, 21 December 2007 (MST)

It would seem that Spider Jump doesn't help you split up full attacks. Dimension Door states that once you use it, you cannot take action again until your next turn. But I'd imagine that it's at least a decent positioning and escape tool. (Although if attacking afterwards was intended functionality, that probably should be added into the ability description) --Finfreeze 22:39, 15 March 2008 (MDT)

Races

The flavour seems to contradict itself on Race- Arachne gives Bonds indiscriminately, but "Dwarves, gnomes, orcs (and half-orcs), and Halflings are never Spider Riders." You might want to have a look at clearing that up. MorkaisChosen 11:14, 6 December 2007 (MST)

Ah, I'll sort that. Thanks. --Sam Kay 11:38, 6 December 2007 (MST)

Spider Feats

Hey, since your spider now has an Int score, does that mean it gets feats too now? I've never played a paladin and I don't know if their mount gets to choose feats as they level. Obviously you have the bonus feats from the class, but just from being a, say, 14 HD creature, do you have 5 feats from that? -- Eiji 20:15, 2 January 2008 (MST)

Yes, all creatures with an intelligence score get feats, 1 per 4 hit dice. The paladin's mount gets to choose feats, as it has an intellegence score... --Sam Kay 03:20, 3 January 2008 (MST)

It's one for every HD divisable by 3 (plus one at first HD). —Sledged (talk) 09:35, 3 January 2008 (MST)

Sorry, thats what I ment. --Sam Kay 09:45, 3 January 2008 (MST)

Featured Article Nomination

— This article became a featured article! Green Dragon 15:09, 16 March 2008 (MDT)

Support — I believe this excellent prestige class should be made a featured article as it shows what truly can be created with devotion. With excellent fluff involving the Spider Queens Lolth and Arachne this class can fit into almost any campaign setting that includes the drow or under dark. Not only is the fluff excellent but the class has very interesting Class Abilities making it possible for the player to ride around on a huge spider.

User:Sam Kay has also produced quite a few feats for the Spider Rider adding into the awesomeness that makes this class great. With or without the feats you will still feel you are playing a very unique character.

Also as I have Dmed a game with this clan in it I can say that it works very well amongst other classes and has great balance. Sam Kay has created an amazing piece of work that is of WOTC standard. --ShadowyFigure 06:27, 6 March 2008 (MST)

Comment — This is not formatted right. A link to another version of this class is at the top of the page, that is not standard. It is standard to have a "See Also" header with links to related things on D&D Wiki. Template:Quote does not have a |orig or a |src. This nowhere near follows the new standards, as outlined by the Blackguard (Evaluational Prestige Class Layout). It needs to. Finally not enough links to the SRD exist. Once these things have been addressed it will, most likely, have my vote. --Green Dragon 13:42, 6 March 2008 (MST)

There's also an issue of overuse of capitalization. "Spider rider" is not a proper noun, so it should only be capitalized in headings, titles, beginnings of sentences, etc... The same is true for "monstrous spider," (including "egg" and "mount") "spiderkind," almost every spell reference (except the roman numerals which should stay capitalized). The "d" indicating die size is always lowercase, even when it's in titles and headings. See When to Capitalize. Also, spider bite damage: "d3" is not the same as "1d3." If your giving an amount in terms of die rolls, the prefix number is required. —Sledged (talk) 13:52, 7 March 2008 (MST)

Also, some more issues (these are just constructive criticism, please do not be offended). Take a look at the header depths, they still are not right. The first quote has colons in front of some of the wording. A colon is present in the first line of the class features, that also is not standard. Many of your links do not adhere to what MediaWiki recommends: I do not know what it is called, so I will give an example. Instead of [[SRD:Instant Reload|Instant Reload]] use [[SRD:Instant Reload|]]. Again, a colon is present in the first line of the Monstrous Spider Mount area and in that class features area. That is is not standard. The "Monstrous Spider Traits:" area is on it's own line from it's description. Not all the Su's, Ex's, etc link to the SRD. Also, what is up with the header called "Blackguards in the World"? Lol, Oops. Also, that quote does not have the |src and the |orig params. Also the <-the appropriate skills-> should be replaced with the table header in the "Spider Rider Lore" section. Finally only one link exists in the entire "Campaign Information" section— I am sure more links can be added. After these issues (and the capitalization issues Sledged mentioned above) are worked out, this class should be formatted completely correctly. Good work so far! --Green Dragon 14:40, 7 March 2008 (MST)

The Colons are supposed to be in the quote section. It denotes a mental conversation or thought being transferred telepathically (or simular), an idea from Trudi Canavan's books. --Sam Kay 06:54, 8 March 2008 (MST)

With [[SRD:Instant Reload|]], the wiki automatically inserts the local page name. So if you save it as [[SRD:Instant Reload|]], the next time you edit it, you'll see it as [[SRD:Instant Reload|Instant Reload]]. —Sledged (talk) 14:47, 7 March 2008 (MST)

Sorted, I think... --Sam Kay 08:22, 8 March 2008 (MST)

Some issues still have to be looked at... Take a look at the header depths, they still are not right (the correct header depths can be seen here). The first quote has colons in front of some of the wording. And, I think that is it. --Green Dragon 13:37, 8 March 2008 (MST)

Fixed 'em. --Green Dragon 22:17, 8 March 2008 (MST)

Comment — Needs a sample encounter complete with NPC. —Sledged (talk) 09:37, 8 March 2008 (MST)

Gee we don't ask for much now do we :) --Hawk 09:42, 8 March 2008 (MST)

If we're going to pretty her up and put on the street, might as well make her look as good as possible. —Sledged (talk) 10:18, 8 March 2008 (MST)

I agree, this needs an example NPC and encounter. --Green Dragon 13:29, 8 March 2008 (MST)

The NPC should not be on this page but rather be an inclusion ({{:NPC NAME}}). --Green Dragon 17:46, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Done --Hawk 21:03, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Oppose — Sorry Sam Kay and ShadowyFigure This article needs a few changes before I will support it for FA status: I would like to ask Sam Kay to read over the article and fix up the grammar in the flavor section at the top (everything between the Spider Rider heading and the prerequisite heading) some of it is pretty jumbled up I had trouble understanding a few bits, As GD said it needs more links and a see also section instead of the link at the top, and finally I will not oppose this article because it does not have an image but I would be a lot happier if it did even if its just a drawing of a spider (preferably monstrous spider). This is a great PrC very interesting flavor, well thought out and balanced so if my concerns above are addressed I'd love to see this PrC become featured. --Hawk 21:44, 6 March 2008 (MST)

I would also prefer FAs to be rated so if my concerns are addressed I'd be happy to change this to support and rate the class. --Hawk 21:48, 6 March 2008 (MST)

Is that better? --Sam Kay 11:10, 7 March 2008 (MST)

Ok we're getting there "Look! There a spider rider leading the left flank. See! he thought to his monstrous spider." it could be just me but I think the exclamation mark should be moved after "There". and how about this picture [1] someone can ask the creator if we can use it. --Hawk 19:33, 7 March 2008 (MST)

No, I was missing an "is". There is another picture we could use as well: the pic fotr the Knight of Lolth feat in Drow of the Underdark, but that would be a copyright breach... --Sam Kay 06:54, 8 March 2008 (MST)

I realize this isn't exactly the right time or place to ask but is that book good? I am very tempted to buy it would of already if i had the money. --Hawk 09:04, 8 March 2008 (MST)

The "all about the drow" chapter is brilliant, and really informative about the drow. The "drow options" chapter is good for drow NPCs, but not brilliant if you want to optimise characters (it's not really like, say, "complete mage" ore something), the "prestige classes" is, yet again, good for interesting NPCs, not so good for PCs, the "drow equipment" section has quite afew interesting items ect, though none I've ever used (if you like to make your treasure interesting, they could be useful in the underdark, the "monsters of the underdark" isn't exactly amazing, but it has afew good creatures for the underdark, the "campains and adventures" chapter is quite useful for DMs wanting to use drow (err... me!), and the "erelhei cinlu" section contains a complete drow city, which is greatly detailed and very useful; for another drow city, merely rename it and change the locations and you're set. Actually, I think the first and the last two chapters (plus the odd bits here and there) are worth getting the book for, but only consider it if you really like drow. It is the favourite sourcebook I own, mostly due to the chapters I stated above. It is best for DMs, though, not players. If you get it, also consider Underdark. Decide on whether you want it or not on how much you like drow. Don't get it just for the feats ect, like you might complete mage. Another thing to consider is the upcoming release of 4e. --Sam Kay 10:23, 8 March 2008 (MST)

An image an example spider rider NPC and you've got my vote. Side note - I was more interested in the flavor text of the book than more rules (I have rules out the wazoo) so that stuff wont be affected when 4e comes out. --Hawk 19:06, 8 March 2008 (MST)

Finish the NPC off (the monstrous spider) and I'll be satisfied. --Hawk 00:01, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

I have done that. --Sam Kay 10:07, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

Comment — In the body text of this article is this: "The Monstrous Spider mount's body cannot be destroyed unless the spider rider is also dead (and will be repaired instantly if the spider rider returns to life), and can be called to the spider rider when she wishes to perform the ritual." Is this intentional? So, I could have armour made of dead spider mounts, and it would be invulnerable? What exactly does "cannot be destroyed" mean? Also, isn't the fact that the spider rider loses it's class features when it's mount dies kind of overwhelming? Consider the Halfling Outrider, which is somewhat similar to this class. If the Halfling Outrider loses it's mount, it cannot develop in the Halfling Outrider PrC until a new mount is trained, which takes months or years. Also, can the mount be brought back to life via Raise Dead, Ressurection, Wish, Miracle, etc? The article does not address this. --Othtim 10:54, 8 March 2008 (MST)

Destroyed as in "cannot be damaged", you couldn't make armor out of them because you'd have to damage the body. The idea is that you couldn't prevent a rider from resurecting the spider by hiding or destroying the corpse, thus making the spider rider's most imprortant class feature. It doesn't loose it's class features if its mount dies; it looses its class features if it insults its spider, ceases to revere spiderkind or makes an important decision without consulting the spider; the first and last of which are almost impossible as the spider is an aspect of the rider's mind. This is what the article says on the subject;

"The Spider Rider can make a decision that the Monstrous Spider mount objects to. Switching from Lolth to another deity, offending the Monstrous Spider mount, ceasing to revere spiderkind, taking the spider for granted, or otherwise upsetting the spider can cause the spider to leave the rider. The Spider Rider loses all its supernatural and spell-like abilities gained from being a Spider Rider. The Rider can make amends only by contacting the monstrous spider mount to apologize. If the spider accepts the apology, the monstrous spider mount will come back to the rider and the rider will regain all Spider Rider class features."

There is nothing there that says death causes the spider rider to loose class features. I have dealt with the raise dead thing. --Sam Kay 12:52, 8 March 2008 (MST)

Fair enough. I'm still curious though, why not allow regular methods of raising the dead? is it some sort of divine mandate? I'm asking more about flavour than mechanics. I mean, what makes a Spider Rider's spider different than a regular monsterous spider, as far as being raised is concerned? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Othtim (talk • contribs) 13:35, 8 March 2008 (MST). Please sign your posts.

The spider is an aspect of the rider's existance. Attempting to raise the spider would be like trying to raise somebody who is still alive. If the rider was dead, it would be like trying to raise the rider's left side or something. It also prevents turning the spider into undead or casting reincarnate on the spider to turn it into a scorpion or something... --Sam Kay 12:07, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Fair enough, that's exactly what I was looking for! Thanks man :). --Othtim 10:02, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

Comment — This needs an image. --Green Dragon 13:51, 8 March 2008 (MST)

That image we are using on my test FA pages for this could we use it? --Hawk 19:01, 8 March 2008 (MST)

Or maybe this from wiki commons --Hawk 19:16, 8 March 2008 (MST)

And now it needs a description ;). --Green Dragon 12:26, 9 March 2008 (MDT)

Looks good. --Green Dragon 17:47, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Comment — I have a problem with the Summon Spider ability. There are three abilities with similar descriptions. I think it would be better to merge them into one ability with wording similar to: "At 5th level you may use summon spider as a spell-like ability once per day, plus one additional time every two levels thereafter. At 5th level this spell-like ability is used as a 14th level caster, with caster level increasing by one every two levels thereafter." Or somesuch. That would clear up space in this article. --Othtim 00:03, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Originally, it was one ability, but it was harder to understand than the three seperate abilities, which is why there are three separate abilities now. --Sam Kay 11:32, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Comment — Another comment. There is a Prestige Class called "Arachne" found in the "Faiths and Pantheons" sourcebook. This class is only superficially similar to the Spider Rider PrC here. You may want to check it out. Also, is there any reason that Selvetarme doesn't employ Spider Riders. He also has Spiders in his portfolio. Also is there a reason that Aranae (a deity mentioned in this article) is only mentioned once in the article? There are lines that say things like "holding grudges even against Arachne's drow" ... does this mean that they don't hold a grudge against Aranae's drow? Also, there's a line that says, "But the spider riders are divided: half of them worship Lolth, the other Lolth's sister - Arachne. This results in a war, a war that will last until one side is destroyed utterly: the War of the Spider Queens." Aranae is not mentioned at all. For me, this makes Aranae's mention in the "Special" section (under Entrance Requirements) confusing. After the previous two issues are addressed, I will support the article. --Othtim 00:25, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Other Spidery deities cannot employ Spider Riders because they do not have the same powers the Spider Queens do- being affilated with spiders is not enough. Aranae is not mentioned very much for a specific reason, which I will deal with shortly. "Holding the grudges even against Arachne's drow" means that they hold grudges against all drow, even those who are actually good. --Sam Kay 11:32, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

I understand, I just think it is unclear to the reader why these things are as they are. Perhaps "holding grudges against Arachne's drow" could be changed to "holding grudges even against good-aligned drow", or somesuch? As a reader I wonder if elistree's drow, etc, are exempt. And a line like, "two great spider queens hold the power to develop spider riders" or somesuch. --Othtim 18:17, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

For an explanation as to the Aranae thing, check out the deity page for her here. --Sam Kay 12:07, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Oppose — I cannot support an article that claims distinctive ownership and as such displays the editing message of "Spelling only, please!". I feel this message shows ignorance about a wiki's versatility, and for that reason should not become a featured article. --Green Dragon 20:54, 10 March 2008 (MDT)

Removed the "Spelling only, please!", and replaced it with the default message "constructive edits welcome". --Sam Kay 10:07, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

Looks good, thanks for doing that. --Green Dragon 16:57, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

Support — I support the spider rider PrC for FA status it is a great PrC it has plenty of flavor, is balanced, and I beleive meets all the criteria for FA status. --Hawk 18:32, 11 March 2008 (MDT)

Comment — All the commented out comments should be removed or implemented, if that has not already been done. --Green Dragon 20:29, 12 March 2008 (MDT)

I disagree a comment, support or oppose should only be striked out. Once the Nomination is over this section should be arvhived as FA Nomination (Insert date) --Hawk 20:33, 12 March 2008 (MDT)

Lol, the comments on the page ;), not these ones. Sorry about not being clear. --Green Dragon 20:36, 12 March 2008 (MDT)

Oh that I agree with lol --Hawk 20:39, 12 March 2008 (MDT)

Thanks for dealing with them. --Green Dragon 16:35, 13 March 2008 (MDT)

Comment — The links should not redirect, they should link to the correct page and be piped to display the same thing. --Green Dragon 20:37, 12 March 2008 (MDT)

I'd say "SRD:" redirects are okay. The redirects were originally implemented allow linking to common terms without having get the exact page name. To remove any ambiguity to what edition a redirect links, we just make sure a namespace is present. —Sledged (talk) 20:53, 12 March 2008 (MDT)

I would have to agree, redirects are okay, but not recommended. Also, make sure to not underestimate categories. For example light armor should not link to SRD:Armor but rather Category:Light Armor. --Green Dragon 19:01, 13 March 2008 (MDT)

Comment — More links to the SRD should be present. For example "Caster Level" should link to Caster level, "Hit Die" can link to Hit Die, etc etc. --Green Dragon 20:47, 12 March 2008 (MDT)

Here are two comments from Wikipedia's style guide regarding an acceptable amount of links.

1. A link for any single term is excessively repeated in the same article, as in the example of overlinking that follows: "Excessive" is more than once for the same term, in a line or a paragraph, because in this case one or more duplicate links will almost certainly appear needlessly on the viewer's screen. Remember, the purpose of links is to direct the reader to a new spot at the point(s) where the reader is most likely to take a temporary detour due to needing more information;
2. However, note that duplicating an important link distant from a previous occurrence in an article may well be appropriate (but see the exception about dates, below). Good places for link duplication are often the first time the term occurs in each article subsection. Thus, if an important technical term appears many times in a long article, but is only linked once at the very beginning of the article, it may actually be underlinked. Indeed, readers who jump directly to a subsection of interest must still be able to find a link. But take care in fixing such problems. If an editor finds themselves "reflexively" linking a term without having a good look around the entire article, it is often time to stop and reconsider.

This article is really overlinked in my opinion. For example, see the Monstrous Spider Mount/Class Features section. There are 14 occurrences of the link "monstrous spider" in about 20 lines, often with multiple occurrences of the same link in a single sentence. Really, is this necessary? I understand the idea of wanting to link the article into the wiki, but come on, is it really necessary to link the word "rebuke" 3 times in a single line (see Rebuke Spiderkind special ability). This over-linking is too much. It's unnecessary to link every occurrence of a word. --Othtim 12:58, 13 March 2008 (MDT)

Once per term per paragraph sounds reasonable to me. —Sledged (talk) 13:52, 13 March 2008 (MDT)

I agree. --Green Dragon 19:49, 13 March 2008 (MDT)

are there enough links now? --Sam Kay 14:33, 14 March 2008 (MDT)

Looks good to me. --Green Dragon 15:09, 16 March 2008 (MDT)

Comment — With the benefits this PrC grants, 3rd level (a ranger 1/barbarian 2 meets them) seems a bit soon to be able to meet all the entry requirements. Although there are a number of exceptions, the general rule of thumb is that it should require at least five levels in order to meet the requirements. With the benefits this PrC grants (and they're quite nice), I'd require six or seven levels. —Sledged (talk) 20:53, 12 March 2008 (MDT)

The BAB requirement was changed to +4. Thoughts now? --Green Dragon 16:40, 13 March 2008 (MDT)

Same as before. With the benefits this PrC grants, I'd require six or seven levels. —Sledged (talk) 17:59, 13 March 2008 (MDT)

That better? --Sam Kay 14:36, 14 March 2008 (MDT)

Much. Though I'd switch the required ranks for Ride and Knowledge. This is a favored-of-the-goddess PrC, which implies that it would be desired by characters who already have levels in deity-blessed classes, but a single-class cleric doesn't qualify until 17th level. Though changing the requirements will instead exclude single-class barbarians, fighters, rogues, and sorcerers. —Sledged (talk) 15:07, 14 March 2008 (MDT)

I've modified it so a fighter can achieve it by 6th and a cleric by 8th. --Sam Kay 15:19, 14 March 2008 (MDT)

That works. BTW, a fighter won't meet the Knowledge requirement until 7th level. You know, of course, that the sample NPC will have to be retrofitted. —Sledged (talk) 15:38, 14 March 2008 (MDT)

The infobox |minlvl param needs to be updated. --Green Dragon 13:06, 16 March 2008 (MDT)

Changed it to 7. --Green Dragon 14:44, 16 March 2008 (MDT)

Comment — It's amazing what's getting fleshed out with this PrC. We need more classes to be nominated. —Sledged (talk) 15:46, 14 March 2008 (MDT)

I think we should finish off this nomination first hell there is three more nominations as well anyway. --Hawk 22:06, 14 March 2008 (MDT)

Comment — Are we done? does anyone have any more suggestions or oppositions? --Hawk 22:06, 14 March 2008 (MDT)

Looks good to me. --Green Dragon 15:09, 16 March 2008 (MDT)