Erdrinneir Vonnarc

Nether's page

98 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 98 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Well my on and off pally over the years has is a aasimar anti palladin/bones oracle/Unholy Vindicator /w imperious eldritch heritage. He is LE, weilds a kopesh and tower sheild while in bone armor. He is from the Eberron lands where the human nation had to decide between destruction or accept the powers of undeath to survive. He is a necromancer or sorts.

He is grim, but even though LE he does what is needed to be done, he doesnt kill children or anything, and values friends just like anyone else, he especially respects when others have made a sacrifice/s, he actually respect pally's even if they dont return the favor due to his death motiff and of course the undead cadre around him at all times (leadership +necro spells).

He is a very honorable, he wont fight a helpless opponent, first he will give them a weapon (usually from one of his horde) to defend themselves with then we fight to the death. If they throw the weapon down then they have chosen to forfeit their life, so he ends them and their cowardice.

All in all i have gotten along well with the party in both campaigns, and even though they dont like my undead they have come to appreciate them when sleep time comes calling.

He will stand in front of the enemy to protect his party, he even welcomes the pain and bloodletting of life thru combat, his and his enemies. He does not fear death in any form.

He also loves the undead because they are disposable and re-useable, where as human life is not so easily replaced. We make resurrection extremely difficult.


I much prefer most of the time being able to converse with the enemy vs always just jumping into a fight. A lot of the time that is what happens anyway but being able to talk to them gives the social game some face time, and you can sometimes find information out that you wouldn't normally been able to.

The fact that this is a gnome pally, makes it even better in regards to she approached the situation intelligently and logically instead of all fervor and emotion. Gnomes are known for their intelligence, and i thought this played out well, for the most part until villagers started spontaneously combusting.

OP, any chance of a update soon?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly what the OP is describing sounds more like he wants a Helen of Troy, she is ooohh awwww all so pretty that everyone wants her, but people don't flock to her because they think her beauty will make her a good leader.

In this case Cha is beauty and leadership ability though, so you are set on that front, but maybe try to show you are not just pretty, that you really are a good leader.

At 6'10 she is bumping her head on everything already, short of the grand designed places.

And just because your tall doesnt mean people won't want to pick fights with you.

It is still just as common today that people of the shorter height tend to be more personality of showing the big people. (aggressive in that regard)


OP, what is the problem here? Just drop the vow and pick another archtype.

I wouldnt show you the door for this munchkin move, as i find it common enough, but a good verbal slap of NO is in order. And like i tell my kid, once i have made a decision it is final, no more asking without consequences (grounding).

It should be plainly obvious to you. Just pick up something else and move on, end of discussion.


Just make yourself 6'10 like you want, treat it as a form of giant-ism, same thing Seranov said.

Why do you think being taller makes you more attractive?
That i dont get, as your height isnt going to make any more attractive, it wont help you with conquering the elves due to being charismatic ext.

Otherwise i would just go with the spell research as that would also make alot of sense, but it should only be able to be used once on any one person, ext as you want it to balance out with EP, unless higher lvl spell.


Azaelas Fayth wrote:
mousestalker wrote:
Azaelas Fayth wrote:
Odraude wrote:
It's like the bacon of doughnuts

Great now I want a Bacon Doughnut...

@Nether: Dunkin' Doughnuts. In my area Krispy Kremes get old fast.

Where we live Krispy Kremes never survive long enough to get old. :D
Here it is more of everywhere has Krispy Kreme Doughnuts.

OMG, i dont know where you live, but i want to move there!


The best magical knack upgrade would be if he allowed esoteric training from inner sea magic. Then you would pretty much be equal to full wizard with even better skills than any wizard skill monkey could hope for.


If anyone has not read thru the thread then at the very least just skim for the OP's comments as he gives more pertinent info on the session than was mentioned in the OP.

Otherwise whatever you say will just be bringing up the same misinformed comments that people that have read the thread will have to respond to again and again to inform you.

@johnlocke
She didnt run into the church, she didnt run out with everyone else. Again, read the OP's posts and you will appropriately informed so we dont have to keep repeating.


Odraude wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
Nether wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:


I do provide the donuts.
Are they Krispy Kream?

All of the idiocy from people raving about krispy kreams years ago used to to drive me nuts.

But, I have on a few occasions since had a glazed one steaming hot, and they almost melt in your mouth, so I can see how someone could get so stupid over a doughnut.

It's like the bacon of doughnuts

lol, soo true my friend, soo true!

If Blackblood is bringing this gold to the table, i will fly to where ever his game is just to play a game over some krispy kreams.

There is donuts, and then there is Krispy Kreams. It is like night and day .


blackbloodtroll wrote:


I do provide the donuts.

Are they Krispy Kream?


The ultimate lvl boosters is in sea of magic, under guilds with esoteric and eclectic training.


Ironic that your group uses almost the exact same stat array as ours, and we use max hd as well.

I have played a Paladin/Oracle/hellknight /w esoteric training over 2 years now, he is 17 and i love it.

We have had new players come in that are used to the point buy and were like, "this is way overpowered, this will be boring cake walk".

Well after they realized there is no worries about making the character you want to make, no worries about sad or mad, just fit your concept, the find how excited they are with their character, and have mentioned that they feel more attached to them then the regular pointbuy.

All in all, we have had the same experience as OP, our games have been really fun and all of us have been enjoying it immensely. We have 3 people that would gm, though two of us more so then the 3rd, but makes for a nice chance for me to play with my best friend who is the other main gm when we can.


@VM mercenario
@seto83

No one knew about the vampire until he knocked at the church door and one of the npcs let him in. The party knew 'something' was up when the wiz found one of his scrying eyes destroyed, but no one knew by what.

The pally's party fled the church minus one npc.

The pally did not run, and saw that she was up against something incredibly strong compared to her.

The vamp dominated villagers. Being holy, righteous and good pally does not mean you are required to just jump in and fight right away as a req. She held ground looking for another way to handle this. And even if she did jump in to fight the vamp right away, she would have died or dropped, then the vamp would still be free to dominate / suicide the villagers on the wall. The pally's sacrifice would have netted nothing at all except a pointless death/drop.

Then there is the vote for burning the villagers that the pally opposed.
Now the tricky part, which we still dont know the group policy on is pvp, it is allowed?

If pvp is allowed, the pally player is rolling a new character no matter the outcome, as in she is either dead or unconscious, but she cant adventure with that group anymore. Only possible way to adv with group is if she went anti paladin which doesnt fit how she handled this encounter.

If pvp isn't allowed, then she cant fight them and this would be the exact same thing that was described to happen, a vote but no combat.

The only way i see the pally staying with the group is by her understanding that they made some terrible judgment decisions under duress and acted cowardly, but she has been travelling with them and prolly knows them somewhat, so i could see her trying to redeem them, making sure they never forget this lesson in the future as the wrong thing to do.

You can look at the choices as only the in game ones matter, but i still think that some of the meta game has just as much say on what to do, and by that i mean the pvp and being able to play with the group. It would also destroy the gm's campaign, his time and effort creating it, as well as might break up the group depending if any hard feelings.

So taking all of that into consideration, i think the pally has managed to still stay on the good side of the line and hasn't crossed that line yet to falling.


To OP,

Sinse we are all bleeding in verbal jabs here trying to help you out, I think you should at least let us know what your solution to this is and what the players actually did after this in a update here.

Use a little more detail than the original post though pls.


seto83 wrote:
Paladin should be more pious then any cleric, braver then any fighter, an more honor bound then any monk that's the standard I hold them to.

I gotta ask then, do you compensate the pally in any way because of such strict req?

Because the class isnt balanced with that aspect in mind, so sounds like you put the class to high req, but do you give them anything because of that? Greater rp benefits in game? Bonuses to social actions at all times? Free room and board, repair, basic equipment free, leaders always taking their word as gospel? ext.

I am just trying to see how you make it fair, as they dont get any power advantage over any other class design because of this.


The one thing about burning the villagers, which as pointed out many time was very pointless in results, but the action tells the vamp that the party is really trying to hide something, or why else would a group of heroes go counter to their nature unless it was something soo important to them that they would do that.

So i really see the vamp going back there as soon as possible to find out what, and considering the dead is his realm of expertise, speaking with them shouldnt be to difficult.


ya i really agree with the idea's Stubs is saying. You need to not use magic items as a crutch here as it would be fairly common knowledge that there is many magic items out there that would give advantage in these situations, and so that at the very least would be a expected safeguard from the nobles to watch for.

Also, you need to proactively gather info on who the nobles contacts are, specifically looking for any diviners that they might have access to, and then you need to convince these people via bribe,diplomacy,death ext that backing your story is for the best.

This isnt a easy ploy, but it sure would be fun to play out.

The other option is, plant your flag on the turf and say hey, it is ours now, but diplomacy to say you will pay taxes, homage ext to the nobles. But things like bluffs or shows of strength would be needed to show them you have the power to hold this land, and it is up to them if they would rather fight you and lose, or accept you in the fold as willing partner that only makes them stronger/richer.


Weirdo wrote:


Darth_Grall wrote:
The next morning they wake up to a lightning strike, and find a hole in the roof & the church's weather vane impaled upon the cleric at his alter. Those who throw up Detect Magic sense the Hallow effect's fading for some unknown reason. They ring the church bells and call all villagers into the church to keep them safe(ironic, I know) and begin investigating the situation. They find a mechanism or two, an old diary written in celestial detailing the church's construction and how it was a "Safe" to protect something. Eventually the wizard, who has a Staff of Divination(again, they're reasonably well geared) used prying eyes to survey the town & set up a perimeter only to find that someone approaching the town destroyed one of his eyes. At this point, knowing all the town folk are inside they panic and scramble for part of the key and discover the scroll

...

You've just confirmed my suspicion that the party fled because you set the stage a little too well. This scene, with a big shock and a long suspenseful investigation followed by another scare, is remarkably similar to the one that caused my group to unload 5th level spells into a CR 4 Attic Whisperer. And believe me, they would have run if it hadn't been made clear that what was outside the building was worse.

I have to disagree with this, I think the gm did an excellent job of creating a gripping and dark story with this aspect. It is story elements like this that really add to the well, story and make the session so enjoyable, as it really helps immerse the players into their environment and shows them something strange is going on here.

The players have already been fighting the undead, there is nothing unexpected here. Strong or not, they would have already shown conviction to their goals just by coming here, so to run now is just silly. And really, the characters arent little school girls that had their candy taken by a bully, they are heroes after all.

Heck, these lands are already half way to Ravenloft already, and now after the burn em all episode, it would really make for a great addition to the lands; ie, the area now is unhallowed, and saturiated with dark energy/mists that raise anyone fallen to undead. Make the vamp the 'lord of the lands' and really set him up to be tormenting the players every step of the way.

Dominate npcs the players meet all along the way, and see how they react.
Graveyards that the pc's come near have the dead start to rise out of it, curse like.
Taunt the players with his knowledge of what they did, and emphasize that he thinks he is untouchabe, how he dominates mayors of towns and sets the militia's of good people on the party as they are evil doers :)

It would make for some great roleplaying on the players part as they would have some tough calls to make, though we just hope they make better choices than they have already, lol

The players will soo hate this vamp after a few sessions and the gm will have the players good and revved up to go after this guy hardcore. Issues of motivation will not be a problem after this. This will get that cleric stoked and renewed on her faith of purging the undead, and strengthening her resolve in this regard to becoming a true right hand of her gods wrath.


cp wrote:

If a paladin won't stop the murder of innocents.. then whats a paladin .. for.

If your group doesnt allow pvp, then what?

How would you solve this problem?

The palladin did speak up against it, but was over ruled. And yes she should have been a little more insistant.

For a gnome pally, it would have been even better if she could have come up with a different intelligent option that they would be willing to accept that didnt involve a human bbq.


Methulock wrote:

Dominated villagers does not excuse everyone BUT the paladin for their actions in your scenario.

The samurai chose a wholly dishonorable path; the cleric murdered innocents in her own church to cover a crime; the monk similarly murdered innocent people which is likely against the law of the land. Each of these characters deserve to be stripped of their abilities, not just the paladin.

That said, and as this is the advice forum...

Now, I don't know your group, but I fear you may be unintentionally bullying both the paladin character and the player.

The situation you placed the character in could easily be construed as hopeless and you should never assume what you think is obvious will also be readily apparent to the player. The situation was made invariably worse when their companions abandoned them and you continued the encounter even though it had already left your intended goal of "thinning their NPCs."

As for the player, you may have positioned them against their peers at the table. I'm not surprised the player shut down if this were the case. There are few, even among experienced gamers, who have the robust diplomatic and debating personal skills to talk a group out of a mob action such as the one that took place in your game.

What APs have you played that you could solo an bbeg encounter designed for 4+ players?

Because it doesnt matter what adventure you play, if your party bails on you, the encounter is still the same.

The GM showed that he wasnt going to penalize the Pally for sticking around, hence the vamp did not attack him. And vamps to me have always been intelligent enemies, not just mindless killing machines.


And the possibility of pc death was very limited as the gm already said he wanted to thin the npc heard a bit. Not that players know this, but even still, they could have handled this fairly well, and especially the pally and cleric could have really hammed up the rp against the vamp.


Harrison wrote:

This whole situation was horribly handled.

The GM threw an impossible encounter at the party and the players made some really terrible decisions based on thins impossible encounter.

As a GM, were it me, I'd have immediately regretted the situation, gone back to the party and told them the session sucked ass and told them they were gonna redo it and hopefully it wouldn't have gone to s%@& like it did.

The encounter was far from impossible, not sure what you have been reading but it was a huge overgeared party. The vamp was also given very little gear as well considering.

As mentioned prior, the party took on a Graveknight cr 7 and the Samurai alone just about aced him. Sounds like the encounter was fine.

The party is what failed. The pally saw the aura strength of the vamp, but the party didnt. So why did they run? They dont know how powerful he is, just like more of them would not know how powerful most of the things they fight are without detections appropriate.

Why should the encounter be changed just because the party failed? If anything the gm could give the pally some fiat of assistance or survivability even if dropped.

It doesnt matter what the CR was, if the party just runs leaving a player or two to handle it, they will always fail. This one is no different, it was well within the parties ability to deal with it if they fought it as a you know, party.


Jmacq1 wrote:
Serum wrote:
Jmacq1 wrote:

Unless they get away while you're fighting. Unless the Dungeon Master chooses to play the situation out differently. Unless the Paladin gets some lucky dice rolls.

Have you only roleplayed with ironclad "RAW" Dungeon Masters? If so, I feel very sorry for you. If I wanted to play a game where the only thing that matters is dice rolls, I'd play Yahtzee.

The villagers were dominated. They weren't going anywhere. In fact, it's possible the Vampire could even have used a couple as meat shields while still sending others into the prismatic wall.

Sure. He "could have." But I guess in your games the DM doesn't have any control over how situations play out? Doesn't reward players staying true to what their characters should be?

If you don't like the standards Paladins are flat-out described as being held to, then don't play them, and don't allow them in your campaigns (or tailor them so their codes are not so strict if that's your preference).

At a bare minimum, just standing around and seething in this particular situation sure as heck isn't remotely close to "Paladin-like" behavior. Especially when it seems to stem more from a player's concern over his character than a character's concern for themselves. I would even accept "fleeing" as acceptable in this instance if it were in an attempt to rally his companions to get back in there and fight it out, but just standing there being angry? Nope, not gonna keep all your fancy powers and bonuses when IIRC it flat-out states that "allowing evil through inaction" can "ding" a Paladin too.

I completely agree with the "DM rewarding players for staying true to their characters, and paladins fit this bill alot because they much more frequently will find themselves in this situation. A pally should be spared death in this case because the party has abondoned him, making it a futile encounter. I also love the 'diety boost pally with divine power' idea above, that levels the playing field as a gm fiat which also now puts the pally on even footing or closer to it with teh vamp. It would make for a great story, very memorable for the player and the party is 'shown' that cowardice is not rewarded, and actually everyone would in town would be kissing the pally's boots while spitting on the other party members.

But i do Disagree with your last paragraph, as this pally could show variation in how to fight this issue by being smart. Even more so to theme as the pally is a gnome. By attacking it forces the vamps hand into combat which the pally can see she is at a major dissadvantage. So how to save lives, fight the evil ext. while not pointlessly getting yourself/villagers killed. She could have called upon the villagers to brandish holy water and torches, while assisting the pally. The pally could have also used her cha/diplomacy to give a great rallying speech to the villagers. The pally could have also in talking / not commiting to combat yet delayed the vamp, hoping for her allies to rally or rethink things and come back. The temple / town doesnt sound to big, so talking very loudly in hopes that party members nearby hear and come back to fight.

Intelligent / wise solutions can be very rewarding while not being a cooky cutter pally. It is akin to setting an ambush, you draw an enemy in, as they attack your allies sucking them back, but if you don't wait for the enemy to pass you / get into the kill zone, more people are likely to die than the 'bait' because of it. It takes convinction to hold your sword for that right moment where it will be of far more value/effect.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darth Grall wrote:

Okay, back up and awake after doing my morning rounds. A few things:

-I really like the non-mechanical ideas you've guys thrown out there as to how to make the consequences of their actions stick. Between the Vampire spreading word of their failure, PTSD for their actions, the literal ghosts of their villagers selves haunting them, and relieving the events to given a chance at redemption... I think I will definitely be able to sort out something cool for all the players.
-As for the Cleric, yeah hammers gonna come down hard on her. I was annoyed by the player's actions and given their god's disposition I think that they will likely be stripped of their powers worse than the Paladin will.
-On that point, you guys have convinced me to punish the Pali, but again I don't know if a complete fall is appropriate. She at least tried to fight. She DID try to stop them from jumping into the prismatic wall but she's a Gnome & couldn't even grapple them well. She also did NOT approve of them burning everyone to death, she was just outvoted and frankly overwhelmed at this point. I'm thinking, in addition to the above ideas, I will partially strip her of her powers upon meeting with her an agent of their deity, who will express their disaproval but offer a means of redemption(ie, killing the Vamp & freeing this nation attacked by undead).
-As of the negative levels thing, there were 2 dhampir's in the party, the NPC & the Wizard. They wouldn't have been too penalized by fighting the vamp, sine they're essentially immune to negative levels till they get killed by them.

And lastly thanks to those who defended me in my absence, it's appreciated.

Wow, ok. This is a great opportunity as well as a wtf were you thinking moment.

No where in this thread have i seen anyone mention this; subdual damage. The pally could have tried to subdual shield bash the dominated villagers. Even as a small fry, she would prolly be knocking them out in a hit.

Does the pally have a good Cha? Diplomacy? She could have called on the villagers, "People of Orletemburnya, rise up and fight for your souls, gather holy water and cleanse this vile taint, brandish flame and burn him from your sacred domicile. Fight with me and your soul will find peace." There, 20+ villagers minus dominated ones to assist. Sure they might not equate to much, but it gives you some cannon fodder to use your attacks on while the pally fights the vamp with every fiber of her being.

Based on the bold info above, DO NOT punish the Pally with fallen, at best give her a slap on the hand for not stopping the players from burning the people, but at least she verbally spoke up against it. Now depending on if you have any in party pvp rules, that will determine if she even gets a slap. The only real thing she did wrong is let the villagers burn, but if no pvp is allowed, then there is nothing she could do, and therefore really didnt do anything wrong in her inactivity.

The cleric of Pharsma though, to me she was the worst by far. Based on what her god stands for, she should have been in there with the pally. Then she just runs and hides and starts 'praying' for intervention? What is she, a wet noodle with no spine? Out of all character classes, anyone playing a divine character should automatically accept that they are devoted and dedicated, they didnt get chosen by a god to represent their faith if they are spineless, and part of the reason they are the gods agents is to be their hand or arm, because the god is not everywhere. I just find the BEGGING for help soo pathetic in a divine char like a cleric. She is there to enforce her gods will, and her gods will in this case is destroy undead.

As for the rest of the party, this isnt just one incident of murder, this is MASS MURDER, this is on a whole new scale evil. This to me is an alignment shift right there to evil for most of the party. Just make sure you let the players know it is for the slaughter of the innocent, and that it isnt permanent.

Which brings me to my next point, was there a time limit to this? Was it more important for the party to get to the next location then say save the lives of the villagers?

The party after the church finds a scroll of greater dispel. Did they not have any curiosity to know why the vamp wanted that letter soo badly? Use the scroll on the wall, get letter and read it to find out what the dillio is.

Could the players not wait 10 days for the domination to wear off before moving on? They could easily set up defenses to protect the people, the dominated will need to be locked in a cellar for the time.
The party also now has the letter, which they could easily let the dominated know after they have set up defenses/ambush for the vamps return. He really would prolly make haste to come back for it instead of possibly going on to the next location the party had decided.

Or the players could have just you know, told the villagers to keep the dominated locked up as they either fortified and defended town, or evacuate. There was absolutely no benefit in burning the people alive, woman and childen ext, except to prevent anyone from relaying this incidents info which would greatly tarnish the characters reps.

The pally is the only one that should come out of this scott free. The Cleric should have it worse than even the other party members as she is dedicated to fighting the undead by her religious ferver and failed horribly.

As mentioned, the Ravenloft Mists style is a great chance for further character depth.

I would have the party cursed by this event until redemption or complete embracing of the vampires evil diety.

The vampire must be estatic with this outcome, sure he lost a general but just gained soo much more in a party of badasses. I would have him approach each character solo via agents, dominated npc's, dreams or even his dark god offering bidding of power and to join him and his dark god. Now that many of the groups alignments are evil, freely give them a 'evil' magic item as an offer of temptation. The items only work for evil alignment. Do this softly at first, in only requiring alliegance to him and his god (pact of sort) and next session they want a single good person killed that they will encounter, sell the 'it is only one person, and they are a greater bane to the people than for them'. Make it sound like they are fighting evil, but if they investigate or dig, it becomes clear that the action they are asked to do is very evil.

If the vamp is rebuffed, i would have him 'show' the players the error of their way. Now he dominates innocent people all along the way of the players and have them spy, try to kill players (not really, but the vamp will be amused to watch the players slaughter everyone he dominates, making their fall into darkness that much more concrete), have npc diplomats / mayors rally the town/city militia against the party, which happens to be good honest people, now the players are killing good people :)

Also, inquisitors ext should be dispatched to investigate and resolve the issue of a town massacre. They will prolly think it was the vamp at first but unless the players bluff it up to convince them it was, they will "Speak with Dead" and find out the truth.

All of the above as well as the redemption Ravenloft Mist style quests for each character as well.

Maybe such a sacrifice desecrated the area as well as brought the lands into a darker realm, merged like, and now undead / shadow creatures inhabbit the area naturally. The vamp could be given a huge elevation boost by the undead god, and now has new generals (lichs, necromancers, evil clergy ext at his whim). You just created a longer lasting and major villian for the players, and even more so because the players are 'responsible' for his elevation as well as the lands 'cursed transition'.

So much you can do with this, hope this wall of text helps. :)

Ps., i have been complimented many times from players that i have given/shown consequences in game and they might not have liked been 'happy' about it in character, the players absolutely loved it as it showed them drama, action and character growth/depth.

So i would say keep on doing what your doing, as fun is not just never never land stories, just like the cinema, drama, dark action, quality stories are just as fun if not more so than showing up and knowing they hit the I win button, sored, more along stories.


Well if you can kill it as fast as Salvator says, then in your 'customizing' i would just double to triple the hp and double the DR. If you need to give it even more as to drag the fight out. Make the fight so it isnt something trivial, as really a T should be an epic fight, not a 1-2 round laugh. So you as gm have the ability to make this thing into a truly epic battle / encounter.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would let your player get the sword at 16 so he can enjoy using it for 4 levels.

Also, i wouldnt use a Terrasque ´trivally´ as a CR encounter. I am not really a big fan of them myself but many like the oooh and ohhhh of the big wrecking ball. So i would build up to a major event about to happen, something that awakens / stirs the T into action, and what is the goal of this event?

Maybe it is a warrior/clan leader that wants to conqeror the whole area, but he needs to wipe out all of the kingdoms / clans in the area first so he can just plant his flag with some forces making him king. This wouldnt be an option for him otherwise as he just doesnt have a big enough army to do it, and once he starts attacking kingdoms others would ally against him. So solution, he has found a ritual/artifact that will allow him to summon and control the Terrasque for x hours a day, so he destroys the entire forces of a kingdom every other day or few days.

No one can stop this thing, and no one knows why it is happening. And please, dont make the BBEG a wizard, everyone assumes wizards are the only ones that can be bad guys. So have the group find these things out, around lvl 16 have the party be in the first kingdom to get axed by the T, but design the encounter as something for the players to witness the destruction, the death this thing causes, the wrath of it's wake, and give the players a taste of how powerful it is, that they just cant stop it. They need 'items' like legendary axe, samurai family armor/weapon ext. Customize this T, give it a breath weapon that is worse than any great wyrm dragon, fire as it just incinerates mass areas in a blaze but the 'special' item per character that is legendary items give immunity to the breath weapon. Now they have a way of fighting it.

Last fight is up to you, have the players fight the T first, then they take the final battle to the 'found out' warlord who is responsible for this. Let the players already have created a name for themselves in the area, so the titan mauler may show his family's new prominence ext and then they take the fight to this warlord and his forces.

Great opportunity to have some good CR's of guard squads as well as having waves of troops always showing up every so many rounds and at least once or twice during the big encounters like captain of the guard group, queen in waiting's evil band, ext, then they fight the warlord. Again waves of generic troops keep showing up every 3rd round or something so the players feel the pressure.

Then aftermath, the players can establish their legends as great family/clan in the area, claim some new land or divide up this guys lands as well as his new lands as there is no one alive to return them to the old kingdom ext. This will give the players a feel of completion as well as some lasting impression and i bet they will all be very estatic about your final campaign.

So this is my suggestion for an idea if you like it.

Cheers


ciretose wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
ciretose wrote:
It isn't vindictive to have something do what it says it does.

Well, maybe that's not what he's calling "vindictive".

I kid you not, I've had a GM say that if you had 6-7 CHA, he would have commoners mistake you for a troll and attack you on sight.

And that GM is an idiot and that isn't a strawman I would defend or fight.

I think the easiest parallel for all of the stats is Int to IQ and the bell curve both follow.

70 IQ is to 7 Int. Noticably slower than average, but not mentally retarded.

A 6 Charisma is pretty bad, but in your average high school there are probably 100 kids with that level charisma.

I would allow a 6 Charisma PC in my game, if they understood they were playing a character with a 6 Charisma until they did something about it.

The more i look at the 'bell curve' more and more, the less i think it makes any sense here.

So above some have shown that a 4-5 would be more likely a 70 IQ equivalent.

If that is the case, then to me it just makes absolutely no sense;
a '0' in a stat represents complete ability failure. So in Int, your brain is disfunctional that it cannot take care of itself or your body and you die. If a 10 is a 'normal' person, then i really cant see how a 5-6 is equal to a 70 IQ, which is the top level for being considered mentally retarded, but that level can still function in society fairly well.

So i fail to see how it makes any sense that 5-6 int functions fairly well to all of a sudden total brain death with just a few points drop.

If 10 is normal, then shouldnt that make a 70 IQ closer to 8-9 int stat?

There is people that have some serious mental malfunctions, they can't talk very well, they have a very hard time grasping new concepts or just understanding what someone might try to tell them in simple form. This to me much more so represents a 4-5 Int.


Tar-Tar wrote:
Nether wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Nether wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Nether wrote:

This goes right in the middle of role player and roll player. This is what many, or the very least I have been of the opinion of from the beggining of this thread, that if you dump stats, then you need to roleplay it.

Posters like Seranov have said they dont understand why they should have to role play stat dumping. Role playing dumped str is easier over all because if playing by the rules, your encumberance ext suffers, but it also is very hard to not play that. But in the case of Int,Wis,Cha which require the player to represent them, they can be ignored completely and the minuses ignored. So a player could play his Int 5 character far smarter and clever than he prolly should be.

All i ask of my players or any group i am in, is that players play their stats. If they have dumped stats, that is completely fine as long as they represent that in character. But it has been my experience at the gaming club that majority of the players there do Not at all.

Just to raise the old counterargument here:

If I'm required to roleplay my low Int or Wis, am I also required to roleplay my superhuman Int or Wis when I'm playing that character?
And how?

In this i can see where it goes to interpretation of 'representing' that stat. What should that stat also represent is not clear either.

But just like skills, most players will not have the skill or same lvl of skill, but they make some kind of effort and allow the stat / skill to compensate the rest of the way.

So say you play 18 cha, but you are not a very social person, which i have had people like in game before, but as long as they make an attempt then they have tried to represent, then as gm you should let the stat / skill carry the player thru.

Of course how you do this is subjective to different groups, but in regards to not even attempting to role play it, you are breaking game rules. Ie, Str doesnt require alot for

...

Ok, that is not what I was saying per say.

So when you play a character with a +20 bluff, how do you play that? What about +20 diplomacy? Stealth? Craft? Profession? ext.

It is the same as playing a high stat.

You need gm help to play it, as chances are you cannot describe how you do those skills either. Sure you roll and decide outcome, but how do you describe what you just did? There is no difference in playing the high stat or skill, both need gm/player help to be described in game world.

Again with a great tactician, you might not know much about tactics, nor gm, so he iether assigns you some bonuses to represent or tries to give you favorable postion.


Tar-Tar wrote:

Someone else already mentioned this, but if 7 is mentally retarded, 14+ is genius level. No wizard with an 16+ intelligence can ever be roleplayed correctly unless you're playing with someone who graduated college at the age of 15, so I don't get why you would try to argue that you have to roleplay the 7 as a retarded person. If so, that seems like a double standard to me. Besides, if someone has to roleplay a 7 cha, there's a good chance that that would translate to them being a complete jerk, and no one likes playing with that. That player would be throwing insults at people all the time, and then justify it because "it's what his character would say."

Besides, everyone's got their own play style. Whatever you enjoy, right?

I covered the playing a higher stat above, which is the same as most players can not represent their characters skills either, which again all of it requires social interaction with the gm and other players to represent it.

Well if you want to dump cha then yes, you are a jerk. The reason everyone dumps cha because they think it is in the game to be dumped for more stats, when well guess what, it is there to show your character, appearance, your likability and leadership ability. If you want to dump it then yes, you should be an unlikable person that is a jerk and always throws insults at everyone, including your part. If you dont want to have to be that guy, then dont dump cha.


littlehewy wrote:

Oops, deleted post with faulty math...

Now I've done it right (I hope - I'm a musician, we only usually need to count to 4), it turns out that if Int 7 means mentally retarded, then 16.2% of Golarion's human population falls into that category.

If Int 4 is mentally retarded, then about 1 in 50 are.

Looks like Int 3 (0.5%) is reserved for the mentally retarded. Sorry Nether.

Well if you go by bell curve, but after going thru this thread i am finding bell curve is not making as much sense. Because if 0 in a stat means you are so dis-functional that you literally die, then a Int 3 has got to be much worse than mentally retarded at IQ 70, which should be very close to 10 stat.

So avg american has 98 IQ, so avg in game is 10 Int. 70 IQ is the upper limit to being considered mentally retarded, but as pointed out by Seranov, you can still pretty much function like most avg people, you prolly just need more repition, time and maybe assistance to achieve similar skill lvls. So if 0 is death in stat, then i am thinking 70 IQ would be close to 10 int, so 8-9. Again this takes interpretation, but one thing that is clear, a stat lower than 10 is below the avg persons ability, and 0 is death, I would think we could come to some loose agreement to what a 6-7 Int would equate to. Same goes for wis and cha. But i would definitely disagree with a 3 being equal to a 70 IQ.


Seranov wrote:
Nether wrote:
Seranov wrote:
Everyone is playing their character. Why should someone who dumped Charisma, because it has absolutely no mechanical merit for their character, have to play like they are the Hunchback of Notre Dame?

I have mentioned prior that a 7 Int should make you mentally retarded. As you have pointed out, at the upper limit of 70 IQ people can still function, but are slower and take more repitition to achieve the same. I never disagreed with you on that, but you have assumed I said people should be slobbering idiots that can't function, which i never said.

I have also NOT said you are playing wrong, but if you dont role play the stats then it is the same as ignoring your encumbrance when you have a low str stat. This part has nothing to do with gaming style ext, it is the rules of the game. It's just some stats are just easier to play than others.

I can see in later posts you have said the opposite of what i quoted you on here, but i still chose to mention it because it defends what i have been saying.

No need to swear, as i have no problems with you with the exception of you assuming I was saying more than i did, ie telling you how to play correctly, the severity of stat ability ext., which i have not.

I'm saying that you should not be required to roleplay someone as horrendously disabled, unsocial or weak because of a 7. I bolded the relevant part of my quote.

A 7 is a -2 on a related check. A 5 is a -3. In a fantasy world, where very little of our real-world stuff matters, it's pretty safe to call someone with those stats "clumsy," "mildly unsocial," or a "little slow." Implying that they should have to play a character that is severely handicapped because you don't like dump stats is fine at your table, but we'd never do it at mine.

Again, if you'd actually read my posts, I've claimed I roleplay my stats. But my 7 Int 7 Wis Paladin was Forrest Gump, not a nearly-comatose idiot. My 6 Cha Inquisitor has trouble talking to and getting along with...

I have never said you are horrendously disabled though, all i have been saying is that you would be slower and at a deficit in ability from the avg of 10. If 10 is normal, 18 is best of race at +4, then a -2 should be a strong drawback of ability. How you represent that though, is up to you and your gm.

But i have been saying, that stats matter, and are the core to your character's abilities/disabilities and should be represented though.

I do not claim to know exactly how a stat number should limit you, just that it should limit you based on how low it is.

So a attr of 1-2 should be the opposite of a 18, barely functional in the simplest, vs genius. Well a -2 is halfway between normal and barely alive.

In this regards i dont see the bell curve making as much sense based on real world IQ correlation to Int for eg.

I have read posts after where you claim to play your stats, but where you and i fell off the wagon was at my quote post of yours. I know your more like a player i would like playing with as you later mention what I have been trying to say from the beggining, we just got into some 'bad?' miscommunication i am thinking as we seem to have simular views than not. We have just rubbed elbows the wrong way.


thejeff wrote:
Nether wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Nether wrote:

This goes right in the middle of role player and roll player. This is what many, or the very least I have been of the opinion of from the beggining of this thread, that if you dump stats, then you need to roleplay it.

Posters like Seranov have said they dont understand why they should have to role play stat dumping. Role playing dumped str is easier over all because if playing by the rules, your encumberance ext suffers, but it also is very hard to not play that. But in the case of Int,Wis,Cha which require the player to represent them, they can be ignored completely and the minuses ignored. So a player could play his Int 5 character far smarter and clever than he prolly should be.

All i ask of my players or any group i am in, is that players play their stats. If they have dumped stats, that is completely fine as long as they represent that in character. But it has been my experience at the gaming club that majority of the players there do Not at all.

Just to raise the old counterargument here:

If I'm required to roleplay my low Int or Wis, am I also required to roleplay my superhuman Int or Wis when I'm playing that character?
And how?

In this i can see where it goes to interpretation of 'representing' that stat. What should that stat also represent is not clear either.

But just like skills, most players will not have the skill or same lvl of skill, but they make some kind of effort and allow the stat / skill to compensate the rest of the way.

So say you play 18 cha, but you are not a very social person, which i have had people like in game before, but as long as they make an attempt then they have tried to represent, then as gm you should let the stat / skill carry the player thru.

Of course how you do this is subjective to different groups, but in regards to not even attempting to role play it, you are breaking game rules. Ie, Str doesnt require alot for rp, as rules take care of it pretty well. But rules

...

The rules would be inherent in the fact that the game mechanics have attr stats with +/- from the avg person of 10. Mental stats have a representation aspect though that is not covered by the mechanics to represent their score, so in playing the number on the sheet it is up to the player to show that score metaphysically, ie role playing. Then the game has 'role playing' in the title, which can be a bit of extrapolation on my part but i am thinking that aspect is very clear in a role playing game. I will review the core book to see if i am forgetting something, but i think the above should suffice. For those that want the hard mechanical rule in print about how to role play, well i guess there is a plethora of other resources i could refer you to.

I think gm help is important to represent stats/skills, as they are the ones that tell you how you interact with others. If you arent a brilliant tactician but your character is, that is where the gm should help you by making it come across as such. I think new GM's with exposure to just AP's have not developed these skills or they have been greatly diminished because of them. But this is another thread.


Seranov wrote:


I never said a SINGLE THING about not roleplaying your stats at all. But even if I had, who the hell are you to claim that would be wrong? Wrong for your table? That's a valid statement to make, assuming you aren't arbitrarily forcing your personal opinions on your group mates. But to say it's unacceptable for the tables that I play at, of which you certainly are not a participant, is so wrong it's funny.

The rules claim you would be wrong, that is who. Not I or anyone else, but the rules good sir.

As mentioned, you can play a low str easily because it is a physical attr that mostly affects the mechanical unless you describe your 5 str character having the muscles or Mr. Olympia with not reason nor background. But a low mental attr in a role playing game means the rules say you need to play that as it has a much greater effect outside of mechanics, but what constitutes are representing that is up to your gm.


Seranov wrote:
Nether wrote:

This goes right in the middle of role player and roll player. This is what many, or the very least I have been of the opinion of from the beggining of this thread, that if you dump stats, then you need to roleplay it.

Posters like Seranov have said they dont understand why they should have to role play stat dumping. Role playing dumped str is easier over all because if playing by the rules, your encumberance ext suffers, but it also is very hard to not play that. But in the case of Int,Wis,Cha which require the player to represent them, they can be ignored completely and the minuses ignored. So a player could play his Int 5 character far smarter and clever than he prolly should be.

All i ask of my players or any group i am in, is that players play their stats. If they have dumped stats, that is completely fine as long as they represent that in character. But it has been my experience at the gaming club that majority of the players there do Not at all.

You're attempting to put words in my mouth again, and you're still wrong.

I said that you shouldn't have to roleplay 7 Int as f!~@ing braindead. You shouldn't have to roleplay 7 Str as weaker than a ten year old girl. You CAN, but those numbers don't HAVE to be played that way.

I never said a SINGLE THING about not roleplaying your stats at all. But even if I had, who the hell are you to claim that would be wrong? Wrong for your table? That's a valid statement to make, assuming you aren't arbitrarily forcing your personal opinions on your group mates. But to say it's unacceptable for the tables that I play at, of which you certainly are not a participant, is so wrong it's funny.

And an aside: Stormwind Fallacy. Being anal-retentive about your stats NOT being min/maxed does not magically make you a good roleplayer. You are not necessarily any better at roleplaying than I am, just because you believe a 7 in a stat is crippling (which it's not).

I am not putting words in your mouth, i am quoting you.

Seranov wrote:
Everyone is playing their character. Why should someone who dumped Charisma, because it has absolutely no mechanical merit for their character, have to play like they are the Hunchback of Notre Dame?

I have mentioned prior that a 7 Int should make you mentally retarded. As you have pointed out, at the upper limit of 70 IQ people can still function, but are slower and take more repitition to achieve the same. I never disagreed with you on that, but you have assumed I said people should be slobbering idiots that can't function, which i never said.

I have also NOT said you are playing wrong, but if you dont role play the stats then it is the same as ignoring your encumbrance when you have a low str stat. This part has nothing to do with gaming style ext, it is the rules of the game. It's just some stats are just easier to play than others.

I can see in later posts you have said the opposite of what i quoted you on here, but i still chose to mention it because it defends what i have been saying.

No need to swear, as i have no problems with you with the exception of you assuming I was saying more than i did, ie telling you how to play correctly, the severity of stat ability ext., which i have not.


thejeff wrote:
Nether wrote:

This goes right in the middle of role player and roll player. This is what many, or the very least I have been of the opinion of from the beggining of this thread, that if you dump stats, then you need to roleplay it.

Posters like Seranov have said they dont understand why they should have to role play stat dumping. Role playing dumped str is easier over all because if playing by the rules, your encumberance ext suffers, but it also is very hard to not play that. But in the case of Int,Wis,Cha which require the player to represent them, they can be ignored completely and the minuses ignored. So a player could play his Int 5 character far smarter and clever than he prolly should be.

All i ask of my players or any group i am in, is that players play their stats. If they have dumped stats, that is completely fine as long as they represent that in character. But it has been my experience at the gaming club that majority of the players there do Not at all.

Just to raise the old counterargument here:

If I'm required to roleplay my low Int or Wis, am I also required to roleplay my superhuman Int or Wis when I'm playing that character?
And how?

In this i can see where it goes to interpretation of 'representing' that stat. What should that stat also represent is not clear either.

But just like skills, most players will not have the skill or same lvl of skill, but they make some kind of effort and allow the stat / skill to compensate the rest of the way.

So say you play 18 cha, but you are not a very social person, which i have had people like in game before, but as long as they make an attempt then they have tried to represent, then as gm you should let the stat / skill carry the player thru.

Of course how you do this is subjective to different groups, but in regards to not even attempting to role play it, you are breaking game rules. Ie, Str doesnt require alot for rp, as rules take care of it pretty well. But rules also say if you have a low stat/skill, you should role play that weakness, but it is up to each gm to gauge if that has been done. Same thing with high stat/skill, the gm needs to help the player out in roleplaying that.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw, that is exactly how I build characters. I develop them after I made the points that are strong/weak in. With you choice of words I bet you are one of those player that break mods with a pregen.

Thankyou. : )

Actually, my usual way of making characters involves just deciding what my stats are. Of course, if I turned up with six 18s the DM would impose rolling PDQ; it's like choosing your own switch!

I've recently started PFS; I've played Malachi Silverclaw (natch!) four times and Niamh Snowmane once. The restrictions of point-buy make me take it as a challenge to get the most bang for my buck!

Stats are:-
Malachi (human): Str18 Dex12 Con13 Int7 Wis7 Cha17
Niamh (halfling): Str5 Dex20 Con8 Int7 Wis7 Cha20

So, what story was behind their stats?

Malachi (human paladin): born in Cheliax; a country ruled by devil worshippers! Was the result of a breeding experiment to get powerful but obedient soldiers. Mother was an aasimar who's parents were human and half-celestial (who's father was an angel). Father was a tiefling who's father was a half-fiend (who's mother was a succubus). Although they hoped the breeding program would result in a half celestial/half-fiend, what they got was a full human! But there is some odd colouring of eyes/hair/skin, and really high Str/Dex and really low Int/Wis.

Niamh (halfling Dawnflower Dervish bard): found crawling out of a forest (Fey Foundling feat) by priests of Saranrae, Niamh was brought up in a church, but her aptitudes (and lack thereof) geared her to her eventual path. I role-play her as a good-hearted bimbo, mercurial of mood, gets into trouble by getting the wrong end of the stick, sleeping for 15 minutes then woken by our ranger and initially thinking she'd slept for 24 hours, falling out with the ranger for waking her early and refusing to use prestidigitation to dry him when he fell in the lake, quickly forgiving him when the baddy turned up. Her low physical stats are their own...

This goes right in the middle of role player and roll player. This is what many, or the very least I have been of the opinion of from the beggining of this thread, that if you dump stats, then you need to roleplay it.

Posters like Seranov have said they dont understand why they should have to role play stat dumping. Role playing dumped str is easier over all because if playing by the rules, your encumberance ext suffers, but it also is very hard to not play that. But in the case of Int,Wis,Cha which require the player to represent them, they can be ignored completely and the minuses ignored. So a player could play his Int 5 character far smarter and clever than he prolly should be.

All i ask of my players or any group i am in, is that players play their stats. If they have dumped stats, that is completely fine as long as they represent that in character. But it has been my experience at the gaming club that majority of the players there do Not at all.


Yosarian wrote:
Nether wrote:


A character with a 7 Int should literally be mentally handicapped, and you should be rp'ing your character like a mild retard. A Cha of 5 means you literally cannot function very well in a group, let alone society.

Why do people say stuff like this?

Assuming that NPC's role stats with 3d6, then 17% of all NPCs have an intellegence of 7 or under. That's not a "mild retard", that's about 1 out of 5 people. You're not a genius, but you're not an idiot either, you're just a little below average.

A Charisma of 5 or less is lower then that (about 5% chance), but that's still 1 in 20 people. If you work with 20 people, one of them has a 5 or lower charisma; he might be a little socially awkward, but he still gets by in society ok.

All the stat inflation in pathfinder makes people forget how low "normal" stats are. I think that's part of the reason that people get so up in arms about "stat dumping".

As this thread is showing, there is a few different ways to correlate what a 7 Int is equivalent to. Bell curve is only one way to look at this, but doesnt make it the only logical way to see it.

I had always looked at it as, min 3, max 18 represented barely functionally alive in stat way, and the best of the best of your race. So a +4 in Int is a genius, +3 superior int, +2 high int ext, but on the flip, if 10 or +0 is the norm, then a -2 should be pretty deficient and slow.

Stat increase from lvling doesnt really factor in here, as it represents the character actively working to improve said area (like working out) or in improving over your racial max you are improving in fantastical or mystical ways which are not normal, hence racial min/max being 3-18.


thejeff wrote:
TClifford wrote:

Dumping stats only count for point built characters. If you are rolling your stats, then you have to basically play with your luck, or lack there of. If you roll as 6 and decide to put that in INT, that isn't dumping. That is going with a concept based on the roll that you got.

Actually, it is really hard to dump stats unless you are strictly following the 3d6 rule. I haven't used that rule since 1e. Until the point buy idea came around the standard was 4d6 drop the lowest. Which, if you do the math averages out at around 14 per roll. Another meathod was to use 2d6 + 6, which comes out to 13 average.

It's not that hard. I just rolled up 8 sets of stats using 4d6 drop low. I got a 5, a 6, a 7 and a 9.

And only 1 18 :(

Someone will probably have a dump stat equivalent in most groups using 4d6 drop low.

To me, a 'dump stat' is when you have a choice, ie. pointbuy you lower a stat. If you have set rolls, i dont really see how you can dump stat as you have no choice, you are not able to dump the stat down for more points.


Luminiere Solas wrote:
it's a fantasy game in a universe with completely different rules from our own. where abominations we would find horrifically ugly in the real world, are considered the epitome of sexy. (night hags), a world where humans breed with everything, a world where people can perform nearly impossible feats of athletic prowess by 4th level, a world where the mightiest heroes can wade waist deep through hot lava with little regard for their lives or fall thousands of feet with minor scrapes, a world where old men can chant mathematical formulae, rub thier hands in bat feces, and create a 45 foot diameter globe of fire from over 400 feet away. a world where modern japanese schoolgirls wearing black pajamas can kill fire breathing spellcasting sentient reptiles with thier heirloom tokugawa era daisho. a world where native american shamans, wear the hides of the beasts of the sahara desert, kill brain eating space aliens while taking the form of prehistoric dinosaurs, and commanding thier sentient animated pet tree to assist them, a world where medieval knights, wear rennaiscance era plate armor, worship greek gods, wield roman era falcatas, and slice through sentient jello, a world where young female puppeteers dressed like fragile china dolls, wearing lots of makeup, with a simple cute dance, turn an entire audience into thier personal marionettes, a world where a clueless and sheltered alter boy, can present his silver cross, and due to his faith in the lord, damage all undead in a burst centered around himself, because he beleives in the lord, a world where the local apothecary can further detach himself away from humanity the more skilled he becomes. a world where a little half elf girl can manifest her imaginary friend into reality and have it protect her from local bullies. clearly not intended to mirror our own world.

Ok, so what is your stance on stat dumping?


David knott 242 wrote:

In regard to equating each point of intelligence to 10 points of IQ, that actually spreads things out too much. For example, an IQ of 140 or so is in the top 0.5% of the population and thus would map to an intelligence of 18. Extrapolating from that would give up a 5 point IQ difference for each point of intelligence. This means that, at the other end of the scale, somebody with an IQ of 70 would have an intelligence score of 6 -- possible in game only by random generation or by having a racial penalty to intelligence.

Ok so the avg IQ of the United States is 98, which we could say 100 = 10. A genius is 140+, which we could assume is an 18 Int, and mental retardation is 70 or lower, which .. not sure where to put this on the scale.

We could surmise the opposite that .5% would have a 3 Int. I dont have anything to back this part up with, just using logic.

Where would you put a 70 IQ based on this?


Seranov wrote:
TClifford wrote:

Wait...where am I dictating what you and your friends have to do at your gaming sessions? You can play the game how ever the hell you want. I am just voicing an opinion and explaining how I run it at my games.

Edit - I love how you are championing the mentally challenged and then call something retarded. Nice.

And I'm simply stating that the argument you were using is straight dumb.

Being against dump stats is one thing, and I have no problem with that. But I came in this thread to give my opinion on dump stats, and was promptly told I was playing wrong. That's when things don't go so well.

Quote anyone in this thread that is 'telling' you your playing wrong. I am not seeing that, and if i am wrong i will apologize.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Seranov wrote:
TClifford wrote:
I would like to point out that a 7 INT would be more than just -10% on a roll. We are talking more along the lines of 2 standard deviations from the norm. If you say that a normal INT of 10 is an IQ of 100, then 2 standard deviations would be an IQ around 70. At this point we would be talking about someone where they generally cannot complete elementary school. Most adults will need smarter help in coping with the world. Referring to this site

That link is hilariously wrong. Yes, a 7 Int is roughly high-60 to low-70s in IQ, but that educability bit? Complete and total b%@!%*&*.

Anyone, even the profoundly mentally handicapped, can receive a full and complete education. It takes longer, and has lots of extra requirements to help them retain and figure out how to use all that information and training, but to say that someone with the equivalent of 7 Int can't finish grade school? That's more retarded than anything we're discussing.

Seriously, it's a -2 on Int checks, mechanically, and that's it. If you don't like people dumping Int, that's fine, but don't try and dictate what people should have to do at any of the groups I play with when you're not even at the table.

Nether wrote:

Dump stat and not roleplaying it is exploiting or cheating if you will.

Just like old counterstrike online shooter, as long as everyone is cheating, it is ok, but if one person wasnt then his ability to have fun has just been destroyed.

Cheating? Exploiting? I'm starting to wonder if you're really the one who has any right to be saying other people shouldn't be playing TT PnP games.

Everyone is playing their character. Why should someone who dumped Charisma, because it has absolutely no mechanical merit for their character, have to play like they are the Hunchback of Notre Dame?

Well this response pretty much tells me what kind of player you are, the video game type.

Why someone who is only interested in the mechanical wants to play a 'social roleplaying' game is beyond me. See the irony here?

If you and your group are having fun, as i have said multiple times already, then more power to you. Your group is prolly not the norm that this thread is talking about. Our debate is done as your not grasping the points of fairness, and why a rule system is needed in that regard in a 'role playing' game.


Seranov wrote:

And, to me, it sounds like you're trying to accuse other people of badwrongfun because they're not playing the same way as you.

Who are you to say that my group is doing it wrong when we're all enjoying ourselves?

** spoiler omitted **

I didnt say anything of the kind. If you are enjoying yourselves that is great, but if you are doing the things i suggested above then you are exploiting game balance. If everyone in your group does it then you are all fine with that, which is your prerogative, but also re-balances the game to be balanced because everyone is doing it.

But stat buy was put in this game to put all characters on the same page of power, avoiding the imbalance of prior random rolling where one player rolled great and another rolled bad, then you have a big gap between the two that lasts for the rest of those characters game time.

Dump stat and not roleplaying it is exploiting or cheating if you will.

Just like old counterstrike online shooter, as long as everyone is cheating, it is ok, but if one person wasnt then his ability to have fun has just been destroyed.


Seranov wrote:
TheRedArmy wrote:
Seranov wrote:

Well, for your table, at least.

I know quite a few DMs who don't care, because as long as everyone at the table is having fun, who cares if half the party has 5 Cha and 7 Int?

I simply stated why I dump stats.

Maybe it's not fun for the GM?

As much as we talk about bad GMs and how they have a responsibility to the players, players have that same responsibility.

Balancing different playstyles is hard. If players can make one or two compromises to improve how much fun the GM is having while still having fun themselves, shouldn't they make that sacrifice?

I think what you are saying is "Maybe it's not fun for me?" because none of the DMs I have ever played with have said a single word about disliking us dumping our stats. My DM who let me play an Archer Paladin with 7 Int and 7 Wis (played pretty much as Forrest Gump the Paladin) absolutely loved the character, for example.

I mean, sure, there are DMs who don't like players to dump stats, but I've never played with any of them. If that's how things go at your table, more power to you. I'm just not going to claim you're wrong, nor do you have any right to claim my tables' style is wrong, either.

I'm not in here trying to say that dumping stats should be okay always, just why I do it. Which is really all anyone can bring to the conversation, because the whole topic is based entirely on opinion. Everyone's entitled to their own.

To me dump statting is about game balance and fairness.

I see far to many players that come into a game with dump stats and have no intention of rp'ing that. Then it isnt a penalty at all, they just cut that section out of their character sheet and ignore it, turning what should be a character weakness into a attribute point advantage.

In my above post, if you do rp your stats then i misunderstood your point, and i would say you have a strong group for being able to handle playing such character complexity. But this is not my experience.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Seranov wrote:

Well, for your table, at least.

I know quite a few DMs who don't care, because as long as everyone at the table is having fun, who cares if half the party has 5 Cha and 7 Int?

I simply stated why I dump stats.

Ok it is one thing to have fun and another to just completely ignore the game rules.

If i am understanding you based on your post, it sounds like your group dumps Int and Cha, but i'm left with the impression you do not role play those low stats.

A character with a 7 Int should literally be mentally handicapped, and you should be rp'ing your character like a mild retard. A Cha of 5 means you literally cannot function very well in a group, let alone society.

So it is great that you want to have fun, but it sounds like to me you are just dumping stats to get more stats and not playing to the dump stats, so in otherwords you just exploited the system to cheat for more points.

PF i think has taken the crown for dnd because this is exactly the type of thing that 4e did, it neutered role playing while PF gave us that element back along with kick ass art.

It is the thing that i have always wondered about, is why would the non rp'ers want to play pnp TT when they could play any majority of rp video games where rp is not important at all and you can do it at any time you desire.

In all the groups i play in, if anyone dump stats or just has a low stat then they need to play that, it needs to be part of the background ext, as when i gm i force players to play it, and then they get emo about how stupid their character is ext, well after that they dont dump stat their next characters as they know i will make them represent.

In my experience, most people that dump stat, have 0 intentions of playing that weakness. Well point buy is to make it so everyone is on equal terms, and dump statting just means you found a way to get more points with very little penalty if any as that area is just ignored. So now you have characters with unfair advantage.

On the flip, if it is rp'ed like littlehewy's concept, than more power to the player. But in my experiences, dump statting in general is an exploit.


littlehewy wrote:
Nether wrote:
Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
Vestrial wrote:


What I mostly don't like about dump stats is that the game encourages it due to low point buy, stats that are irrelevant, and a fairly large bonus for dumping.

In my game, you get more points to start, but don't get any bonus for stats bellow 10. You're welcome to drop stats for RP purposes, though. (That separates the RPs from the powergamers with a convenient excuse real quick.)

bad idea. remove the reward for dumping stats, and nobody will do it, in favor of flawless mary sues with no depth.

dump stats, while used by specialists, are hardly a bad thing. the flaws shape a character more than their advantages.

most of the stat dumping classes (anything martial) requires the extra points to keep up with the damned schrodinger's 20 int wizard and his absurd single attribute dependency.

No, dump statting is a dumb idea, with the only exception that the player's concept is with a lower stat.

How many of the 'heroes' in our own world would have a dump stat? Most of them i am guessing would not, and prolly higher averages across the board, with exceptions like Hawkings, well he would have some dump stats.

How is having a super negative stat make your character more interesting than one that doesnt?

Aren't you suppose to be the heroes? I am of the opinion that 'heroes' are not a bunch of broken people doing amazing things. Then you have all the attribute gear/items, which can give you +11 to each stat, and it is expected that you will have many of them eventually which guess what, gets rid of your dump stat failure.

Many people like playing joe avg or the underdog (who has dump stats hence why he is the underdog) which is fine, but they definately are not 'heroes' to me.

Simple solution here is give more stats, but make stat padding magic items less / rare, it balances out and then you dont have the vast majority of Pathfinders/characters looking like some dis-functional motley crue.

OP

...

Raistlin far more than Caramon. And the main reason Raistlin was such a favorite is because the guy that played him was a fantastic role player. If you listen to the interveiw with .. Margarett? or Tracy, can't remember who, but they talk about the player of Raistlin, and how the guy came to the first session dressed up, in character and they were all amazed at the character the guy was portraying. So i am thinking that it would have had very little effect on how likeable Raistlin was even if he didnt have a lower attribute. It was the player that made the character memorable, stats just represented what he wanted to portray.

Prolly the most successful dnd fantasy character today is Drizzt, and he is memorable because of the character, his social interactions and what he did. Yes he needs some high stats to also be the 'hero' he is, as well as actually being a step above the farmers/average people, but i think majority of the fans favor strong amazing characters over avg characters with a dump stat.


Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
Vestrial wrote:


What I mostly don't like about dump stats is that the game encourages it due to low point buy, stats that are irrelevant, and a fairly large bonus for dumping.

In my game, you get more points to start, but don't get any bonus for stats bellow 10. You're welcome to drop stats for RP purposes, though. (That separates the RPs from the powergamers with a convenient excuse real quick.)

bad idea. remove the reward for dumping stats, and nobody will do it, in favor of flawless mary sues with no depth.

dump stats, while used by specialists, are hardly a bad thing. the flaws shape a character more than their advantages.

most of the stat dumping classes (anything martial) requires the extra points to keep up with the damned schrodinger's 20 int wizard and his absurd single attribute dependency.

No, dump statting is a dumb idea, with the only exception that the player's concept is with a lower stat.

How many of the 'heroes' in our own world would have a dump stat? Most of them i am guessing would not, and prolly higher averages across the board, with exceptions like Hawkings, well he would have some dump stats.

How is having a super negative stat make your character more interesting than one that doesnt?

Aren't you suppose to be the heroes? I am of the opinion that 'heroes' are not a bunch of broken people doing amazing things. Then you have all the attribute gear/items, which can give you +11 to each stat, and it is expected that you will have many of them eventually which guess what, gets rid of your dump stat failure.

Many people like playing joe avg or the underdog (who has dump stats hence why he is the underdog) which is fine, but they definately are not 'heroes' to me.

Simple solution here is give more stats, but make stat padding magic items less / rare, it balances out and then you dont have the vast majority of Pathfinders/characters looking like some dis-functional motley crue.

OP if fine, he answered the one question i had for him in his OP, that he role plays.


johnlocke90 wrote:
Nether wrote:
Arizhel wrote:

No one expect the Inquisitor!

Blackpowder inquisition if you can get guns (might be a couple levels away, but nice not to have to spend the feats later)

Archer type, focus on leading from the rear.

Iquisitor
Garuda-Blooded Aasimar (Plumekith) Inquisitor 1
LN Medium Outsider (native)
Init +6; Senses darkvision; Perception +7
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 14, touch 14, flat-footed 10 (+4 Dex)
hp 8 (1d8); judgement of sacred healing 1
Fort +2, Ref +4, Will +5
Defensive Abilities judgement of sacred protection +1; DR judgement of sacred resiliency 1: magic; Resist acid 5, cold 5, electricity 5, judgement of sacred purity +1, judgement of sacred resistance 2-choose-
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Special Attacks judgement of sacred destruction +1, judgement of sacred justice +1, judgement of sacred piercing +1, judgement of sacred smiting (magic)
Spell-Like Abilities See Invisibility (1/day)
Inquisitor Spells Known (CL 1):
1 (2/day) Protection from Evil, Protection from Good
0 (at will) Disrupt Undead, Detect Magic, Guidance, Brand (DC 13)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 14, Dex 18, Con 10, Int 7, Wis 17, Cha 10
Base Atk +0; CMB +2; CMD 16
Feats Gunsmithing, Point Blank Shot
Traits Ethical Leader, Reactionary
Skills Acrobatics +6, Bluff +4, Diplomacy +4, Fly +6, Intimidate +5, Perception +7, Ride +8, Sense Motive +4, Survival +3 (+4 to track) Modifiers monster lore
Languages Celestial, Common
SQ disruptive shot (dc 13), domains (black powder inquisition), judgement (1/day)
Other Gear 150 GP
--------------------
TRACKED RESOURCES
--------------------
Judgement (1/day) (Su) - 0/1
See

...

Well a little more realistically, the average being 11, so a 7 is 4 points below with a -2 would make you mentally handicap. Not just a little slow, but very slow, and you would have a hard time grasping anything beyond simple commands/phrases. On the flip, 4 points at 15 Int would make you very smart/clever. 18 would put you at genius, and above that you are just a super genius of varying levels. I base this off of norm ranges from min/avg/max starting stat.

People want to dump stat, that is fine, but they also need to role play that stat as well, and in this case you should be a failure for leadership candidacy. Also I would think even a low level officer should have a +1 Cha, (12), and the higher ranking officers should have a higher Cha/Int mix.

I wish they would have made Knowledge: Tactics a standard option in that category as well.


metid wrote:

So, basically, I'm having a LOT of trouble putting a character together based on a concept I came up with. The general idea is a combination frontline fighter and a leader for the party, someone rather cocky and who believes they are the greatest general in the world. An obvious choice at this point would most likely be the cavalier, but I'd vastly prefer a sort of nimble fighter, with coordination skills to back it up.

I feel like I'm asking for the moon here, but the main issue with the cavalier is the mount focus, and I'd prefer to get bonuses to other sources, as the large-size mount would end up causing some issues in the long run and from a roleplaying perspective, I doubt this character would use it that often.

Any advice you could give would be excellent. Thanks!

Have you considered a lore/life/ancestor oracle?

lore i think offers the most for intellectual combat leader. sidestep to up your ac, use cha for knowledge skills, add any wiz spell, int increases by +5 between lvl 7-20 ext.

ancestor is a good mix, but gives you combat ability and the spirit shield is amazing.

Life oracle, you can take positive channeling, as well as feat to do negative channeling at -2 dice. But as tactition you would stand in centre of group coordinating while supporting them. (heals, control spells ext)

lastly is if you make a aasimar, take the purifier archtype, along with lore mystery, lets you use light/med armor to great effect, align channel, getting good outsiders to do what you want ext. As an oracle you have ok skill points, but with lore int boost you can increase your skill points by +2-3 points (plus its retroactive), take the additional skill point for favored class as you have healing spells. And with spells alone, you are buffing, healing, controlling the battlefield much to how i see a good combat leader. If you really want a little extra oomph in melee, take channel smite with this archtype.


Arizhel wrote:

No one expect the Inquisitor!

Blackpowder inquisition if you can get guns (might be a couple levels away, but nice not to have to spend the feats later)

Archer type, focus on leading from the rear.

Iquisitor
Garuda-Blooded Aasimar (Plumekith) Inquisitor 1
LN Medium Outsider (native)
Init +6; Senses darkvision; Perception +7
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 14, touch 14, flat-footed 10 (+4 Dex)
hp 8 (1d8); judgement of sacred healing 1
Fort +2, Ref +4, Will +5
Defensive Abilities judgement of sacred protection +1; DR judgement of sacred resiliency 1: magic; Resist acid 5, cold 5, electricity 5, judgement of sacred purity +1, judgement of sacred resistance 2-choose-
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Special Attacks judgement of sacred destruction +1, judgement of sacred justice +1, judgement of sacred piercing +1, judgement of sacred smiting (magic)
Spell-Like Abilities See Invisibility (1/day)
Inquisitor Spells Known (CL 1):
1 (2/day) Protection from Evil, Protection from Good
0 (at will) Disrupt Undead, Detect Magic, Guidance, Brand (DC 13)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 14, Dex 18, Con 10, Int 7, Wis 17, Cha 10
Base Atk +0; CMB +2; CMD 16
Feats Gunsmithing, Point Blank Shot
Traits Ethical Leader, Reactionary
Skills Acrobatics +6, Bluff +4, Diplomacy +4, Fly +6, Intimidate +5, Perception +7, Ride +8, Sense Motive +4, Survival +3 (+4 to track) Modifiers monster lore
Languages Celestial, Common
SQ disruptive shot (dc 13), domains (black powder inquisition), judgement (1/day)
Other Gear 150 GP
--------------------
TRACKED RESOURCES
--------------------
Judgement (1/day) (Su) - 0/1
See Invisibility (1/day) (Sp) - 0/1
--------------------...

I think this is a terrible idea for a combat leader.

One, you are not charismatic at all, and dont inspire anyone. Also your cha does nothing to help you with those social skills in leadership.

Two, you are literally a mental retard with int 7. You couldnt tactically fight your way out of a box, let alone lead others out of it.

There is not much about this character that strikes me as a leader.

1 to 50 of 98 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>