Player oddities


3.5/d20/OGL


I would like to compare notes with my fellow DMs here on the boards. The last player from my original group has recently left my gaming table, and with him appears to have gone a set of traditions carried on from that first group. These mainly came in the form of extreme precautions. Now, said last player of the old group was by far the most cautious, even paranoid, of that original bunch. Nevertheless, there were certain commonly observed habits throughout the group:

  • Never have a Constitution score less than 12. To my original group, it seemed like there was a Commandment which stated "Thou shalt not lack a positive Constituion modifier." I made a character once with a negative modifier in the score, and everyone else was either horrified or mystified as to why I would do that. Even a score of 10 was considered terrible. 12 was squeaking by; what you wanted was 14 or better. This is, of course, because of hit points and character survivability. It always struck me as odd that the importance of the ability was so weighted. Nobody likes having their character die (okay, maybe some people), but do most of you find that players consider Constitution such an "ultimate" score that their PCs will never have a negative modifier?

  • Never learn or use an offensive touch spell. Why? Don't get into melee, of course. I have always liked spells like shocking grasp, but am the only one who ever takes them (and since I almost always DM, that's a rare occurence). If the spell required a melee attack roll, those guys wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole.

  • Never learn or use a spell with a HD limit. This isn't a self-preservation technique, but it is still a belief that was widely held in the group. I've always loved spells like cause fear and scare, and even the lowly sleep. They are extremely powerful as a 1st level character, and by the time their use is severly compromised, even a sorcerer can switch the spell out for something else. Other casters are even less hindered. However, the group I first played with would never take one of these spells, because they didn't trust that they wouldn't encounter something, somewhere, sometime which might exceed the HD limit and render the spell useless against that one specific creature. Nevermind that they also loved using color spray, which is automatically useless against all undead, vermin, and constructs regardless of HD.

  • Never specialize. Choosing a class was specialization enough. We did have one player who munchkined his characters and would come up with some unwieldy beast of a one-trick-pony. But if it came to, say, a wizard, the players would invariably avoid choosing a specialist school, because of their absolute fear and aversion to limiting their options. I, on the other hand, will often create a character who is centered around what he can't do as much as what he can, specifically cutting off certain possibilities to enhance the character's focus and "feel."

  • Never wear heavy armor. There was one player who liked paladins and clerics, and the correspondant heavy armor. Every other player typically fell to disliking his characters because of it. Once when that one player was absent, I found the rest of them plotting to sell his full-plate for something lighter just so he wouldn't be slowed donw. Note that said player was perfectly fine with his movement limitations. However, it violated the sense and rules these others had about character building and so they couldn't stand it. Nevermind they loved gnomes and halflings, which are automatically slower with or without armor.

    Those are some of the more pervasive ideas which they held as a group. There were others, too; some lesser, some more of one person's idea which influenced the others from time to time. Like I said, the last player from that group has left the table, for good so far as I can tell; and the new group, literally a bunch of RPG newbies, have none of those prejudices or opinions yet. Reflecting back on what was, I'm just curious what other DMs think about these things, what their own experiences with their players have been, and what other strange "rules" your groups decide to operate under.


  • Never bunch up.

    Always have a means to fly.

    Don't ever provoke AoOs.

    Fortification early and as much as possible.

    Never leave an area with less than maximum HP.

    Always memorize all your spells (this one drove me nuts. I didn't do it. Ever. Generally half or more of my spell slots were empty. The question would come, "But what if you run out of spells?" IT NEVER HAPPENED! Not once. However because I left slots open there were plenty of times I was able to sit down memorize the exact spell we needed and get us moving again. However this one never seemed to change).

    Shadow Lodge

    Wow. That group of players is strange to me. It seems they ignored some role-playing applications because they were afraid. I agree with you on a lot of things. Shocking grasp is a good spell IMO, and one I'd consider taking(especially with a familiar) and even try to make it an area effect with create water.

    Always have a cleric in the party.

    Always have a rogue.

    Both are equally annoying to me.

    Be sure to post how your new group is doing, so we can now what strange unspoken rules they come up with.

    Shadow Lodge

    Abraham spalding wrote:
    Always memorize all your spells

    This is why I prefer sorcerers, no one can tell you to always fill your slots.

    *Looks at Abraham*
    But then they tell what spells you should have picked instead of the ones you did...

    The Exchange

    I once made a focused specialist wizard, which barred off three schools from me. It was very disheartening when we would come across a spellbook and I found that every spell in there was from one of my forbidden schools, but my justification is that those spells didn't stop me from killing them so who needs them? He was a very arrogant character, barely ever leaning a spell that wasn't conjuration (his specialty). Orbs, armor, and creatures, all the time. I loved using the cantrip from the Spell Compendium, Create Caltrops.

    Despite that, I will never take Transmutation as a forbidden school. You just don't dot that, no matter what.


    Dragonborn3 wrote:
    Abraham spalding wrote:
    Always memorize all your spells

    This is why I prefer sorcerers, no one can tell you to always fill your slots.

    *Looks at Abraham*
    But then they tell what spells you should have picked instead of the ones you did...

    Are you complaining about my recommendations ? If so I could not recommend anything.

    Liberty's Edge

    My players share some of your old group's, err, taboos. Low Con isn't even considered by anyone but myself (and I'm often DMing), people die way too easily. This despite the one character I made with about 6 Con who outlasted about four or five other characters in the game showing that longevity isn't about HP alone.

    Offensive touch spells are used rarely, if ever. One person occasionally makes a cleric who may cast inflict spells in melee but that's about it. The greatness that is shocking graps eludes my group as well. I don't think it's something conciously avoided but it's definitely something people don't do. HD limit spells are used often, they're a fan-favourite in my games.

    As for specialists and heavy armour, my group is the opposite of yours. Specialist wizards are far more common than general wizards. In fact whenever someone in my group considers playing a wizard they normally ask "What kind of specialist should I make?" and most of the best wizards were specialists. Heavy armour is also loved in our games, no one cares that it restricts movement. Medium armour is the unloved child for us; it's light or heavy, that in-between stuff isn't worth our time! :P

    Some funny things my group engage in:

    - Low Dex isn't funny. Ever. Bad AC, bad Initiative, bad ranged attacks are not cool. Make sure to have at least a 10-11, consider improving that though.
    - Ability scores generally have to be awesome or better. If your character isn't pimping at least three 15's you aren't cool.
    - Dump stats are the rule. If you don't have at least one low score there's something funny going on. I don't know why the group likes this one, maybe my players are masochistic?
    - Never, ever provoke an AoO.
    - Get ready for a fight with every encounter. This one annoys me so much. By "get ready" I mean that the players often provoke fights. For instance, I describe a gnoll lazing on the side of the road and one character moves up chatting to it. The party and gnoll chat for a bit then one character hurls a weapon or spell or something to kill it. When asked why they killed a lone gnoll they just replied "We don't want to get ambushed down the road!" Ugh. (Admittedly that one gnoll was lazing around to inform his buddies of passersby to ambush them later :P but it's still annoying when some random NPC dies due to paranoia)

    Sovereign Court Contributor

    This totally reminds me of Lord Bedlam Havok's Protocols from the system neutral PC Pearls (Goodman Games). Of course I helped write them, so its no wonder I'm reminded. They were however, based on the protocols as written up -- I kid you not -- by the most paranoid player ever to sit at my table.

    Here are a few for fun and giggles:

    20 Protocols for General Exploring, Pillaging & Looting
    1. Don't be first.
    2. Don' t open anything.
    3. The continual light stone is always the first thing in a room or around a corner.
    4. Avert your eyes from mirrors, for they may suck your soul.
    5. In fact, don't touch mirrors unless you want to travel through them.
    6. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING is more important than getting that tentacle out of your nose.
    7. If you're certain you can sneak up on it – you can't.
    8. Always throw a coin into the mysterious liquid, puddle or pond.
    9. Just because nothing happened to the coin doesn't mean you can drink it, search it, or bathe in that stuff!
    10. Hotties in distress are luring you to your doom.
    11. If it weighs less than a pound take lots of it.
    12. When something big swallows you it is difficult to draw a tulwar. Always wear spiky gloves or gauntlets on your fists. If it doesn't aid you in combat it can't impede your spellcasting.
    13. If it is on fire hit it with water. If it is made of metal use adamantine. If it is bony bludgeon it; if fleshy poke it. If it has no anatomy blast it, and if it just turned into a monster use silver – don't bother with cold iron. If you need cold iron you will find it while adventuring.
    14. Spread out. Only disaffected teenagers clump together, and standing in lines is for country dances.
    15. The front entrance to everything is guarded and or trapped.
    16. The Dragon is never sleeping. The Necromancer is never sleeping. The Demon King is never sleeping.
    17. The world only attacks adventurers while four out of five of them are naked and asleep. Don't ask me why, but it is so.
    18. Don't dream.
    19. Why take only one dagger when it is just as easy to take six?
    20. When in doubt, get the hell out.

    Shadow Lodge

    Abraham spalding wrote:
    Are you complaining about my recommendations ? If so I could not recommend anything.

    Recommendations are fine... when making a spells known/per day list. Not when I show you a spells known list and you cross out a spell while rolling your eyes and saying I should have picked this spell instead.

    My point? If recommendations are wanted, they will be asked for. Otherwise it is not a recommendation.

    RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

    I actually DID provoke an AoO once....then remembered it was a vampire dropping 2 negative levels a hit, and I was only 3rd level....good thing I had a high Con score! ;-)

    I once DMed for a party where the tank was a Small (homebrew otterfolk) bard...he was also the primary healer. The fighter/rogue was kenku with Str and Con of 6 or 8. The wizard was an Empowered Awakened parrot (3d6 x 1.5). The other PC was a homebrew skill-based magician....that didn't max out ranks in the skill required for spellcasting (Spellcraft)!!! At least he had pistols.

    Then the otterfolk dude had to go on a IRL archaeological dig, so the plot of the campaign was to rescue him from an evil alchemist-artificer-penance mage. By the time they rescued him, several of his bones had been replaced with windwood instruments.


    Dragonborn3 wrote:
    Abraham spalding wrote:
    Are you complaining about my recommendations ? If so I could not recommend anything.

    Recommendations are fine... when making a spells known/per day list. Not when I show you a spells known list and you cross out a spell while rolling your eyes and saying I should have picked this spell instead.

    My point? If recommendations are wanted, they will be asked for. Otherwise it is not a recommendation.

    And yet you asked...


    The 'adventurer's tax' of a 12-or-greater CON score is one my group (and myself, for that matter) are quite prone to. Given I've heard the phrase adventurer's tax, I suspect it's somewhat common. I do take some refuge in that I'm almost always playing something in melee and it's often a dwarf.

    Your primary spellcasting stat must start at 18 (assuming you're a primary caster class), or you are a failure. I've seen this violated twice in the course of about 6 or 7 char-gen sessions - once by myself (started at 17) and another time with a bard stopping at 16 CHA to focus on his DEX for archery. Though I suppose bards aren't really primary spellcasters. I suppose this is fairly standard, though.

    For that matter, if your 'prime requisite' isn't at 18 at level 1, something's wrong. This is typically one of STR (fighter-types), DEX (TWFers, archers, rogues), or the requisite spellcasting stat.

    You don't dump stats unless you're a Sorcerer or Wizard and it's WIS, or the occasional clumsy Cleric. Surprisingly, there's exactly one CHA dump amongst about 20 charsheets I just flipped through.

    Skimming through my character sheets, there also seem to be quite a few mithril chain shirts. I can't exactly fathom why off the top of my head; perhaps because they completely remove ACP (I'm not actually sure they do off the top of my head)?

    Sorcerers are best (read: exclusively) used to gain entrance to the Dragon Disciple class so that they may go melee-mancer on people's ass. This has actually never quite come to fruition (as the campaign falls apart or the character gets retired), and is recently being diversified (ironically by a guy who usually swears by prepared casters).

    An early one that seems to have subsided as time has gone on was the fact that you absolutely must have two or three bandoleer's worth of healing potions. Granted, this may be skewed because out of our recent parties, one is running a PF Beta Paladin and Cleric, the former basically keeping himself in top-shape and the latter taking care of everyone else, and the other is very low-level.

    My group also has a bizarre aversion to rogues. I can count three off the top of my head, of which one the player quit after two sessions, one was in a very short-lived campaign, and the other one was retired very early in. Needless to say, traps do not figure prominently into our games, though usually a bard or ranger takes some cross-class ranks in Disable Device (again, usually PF Beta).

    Dark Archive Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games

    Here's a few from my group:

    * The Rogue always goes first in marching order.
    * The Wizard/Sorcerer always goes last (and is at least 10 feet away from the nearest party member).
    * The Fighter is always first in the room, once the Rogue opens the door.
    * During character creation, if you don't roll an 18, keep rolling up sets of stats until you do.
    * Any rolled stat below 10 makes for a discarded stat set. Start rolling a new character, and keep trying till you get an 18.
    * NEVER take Toughness as a feat.
    * If you are a Wizard or Sorcerer, take Eschew Materials at level 1, even though neither DM pays much attention to spell components).
    * Item Creation feats are wasted feats.
    * If you're out of town and meet someone on the road, kill them and take their stuff.
    * If you're out of town and meet someone at the entrance to a cave, kill them and take their stuff.
    * If an NPC/Monster surrenders, take all of their stuff, then either kill them or tie them naked to a tree/stalagmite/boulder.
    * NEVER surrender, no matter how hopelessly outnumbered you are (this tendency makes some plotlines harder to use in campaigns than others).
    * Always play Neutral-aligned characters (Chaos/Law is fine, as long as Neutral is part of the alignment).

    Shadow Lodge

    I am shamed to admit my earlier posts were out of line... a lot. I apoligize to Abraham for my mistake, I was thinking of one spell list I showed, and he was talking about a spells list he help me create at my request.

    Liberty's Edge

    Larry Lichman wrote:


    * NEVER surrender, no matter how hopelessly outnumbered you are (this tendency makes some plotlines harder to use in campaigns than others).

    This one is common for my games as well. It was funny to see the PCs continue to struggle against a sorcerer with stoneskin who was literally sitting in his chair laughing as the PCs tried to kill him.

    Then again I remember an old campaign where the game nearly revolved around the PCs surrendering or being incapacitated (due to bad rolls and close calls) only to come back a second time rejuvenated and ready to kick donkey and chew bubblegum.


    There's a couple that my group has...

    1. Blow up the dungeon. If not the dungeon than at least a few rooms. If not a few rooms than at least set something on fire.

    2. Destroy all magic items with said destruction.

    3. Any magic items not destroyed, proceed to skip by not searching for them where they are. Search everywhere else.


    My old group was conscious of AoOs and tried to avoid them, but not at the expense of executing whatever plan they had developed or getting into a tactical situation. Sometimes they even got really noble and risked the AoOs to get to a downed character and pour a healing potion down his throat.

    The Dex thing wasn' that big of an issue, either. Most of the party had a tendency to prefer hgh-Dex characters and classes like monks, rogues, rangers, and the like. So naturally, their Dex tended to be, well, high. Even when they got full plate, they would like to get at least a 12 Dex to maximize on its armor bonus. That being said, they could bring themselves to live with a low Dex if the dice had been particularly unfavorable. All except one person, the one who just now left the table.

    He was the one player who liked heavy armor (yes, the one the others had plotted against to switch his armor). He couldn't stand to have a negative Dexterity modifier. Why? Because that was one point of AC he could never get back. It seemed like he was sure all kinds of painful death would await his characters if he didn't get that one point. There were several character builds I looked over with him and, in order to really make the character the way he seemed to want it, suggested taking a hit to his Dexterity (since we started using point-buy and doing so would let him shift those into his Strength, Constitution, Wisdom, whatever). He would look at me aghast and never take the suggestion. He compromised and handicapped his character's strength in minor ways just to avoid this one tiny "flaw."

    That same player would tend to form strange opinions of things based off poor examples and freak occurences. He rolled up a 1st level monk once, excited to no end to get to play one since he never had before. The very first combat, a hobgoblin rolls two consecutive 20s on him with a longsword, and proceeds to get virtually maximum damage. Dead monk. Then he refuses to play monks anymore, because they "die too easily." Nevermind a raging barbarian of the same level would have gone down from that one hit, too. There was no way around it. But that was the first and last monk he made. I think he's probably gotten over it by now, but since he's left the table, I'll never know.

    That incident also strengthened his belief in the need for a high Constitution score. Also nevermind that if he had put an 18 in that stat and chosen dwarf as his race, he still would have died from the hit.

    Another strange thing about the group was that, even though the players zealously followed these guidelines about what you had to do to make a decent character and/or not get killed on day one; they typically were extremely haphazard in the game itself. When it came to mechanics, they had convoluted notions, but when it came to taking action with their characters, chaos and recklessness were the order of the day. One of them got bored when the party was deciding how best to bypass a trap, so he just said "To hell with it!" and ran across the room hoping the dice would favor him. Same player, much later, got a magic item (this was in a game run by my co-DM; he loved weird magic items) which allowed him to "capture" a breath weapon. It was some kind of flask, with a number of gemstones. As he "captured" the breath weapons of monsters, another gem would begin to glow, indicating another slot filled. He could then use that exact same monster's breath weapon by pressing the gemstone, causing it to spew out of the flask with the same effect, damage dice, size, and DC as the monster.

    Of course, he had to willingly fail his save to capture the breath weapon, just standing there holding the flask. He loved that thing and used it every chance he got. We had to take a long detour in a desert one time to get a scroll of stone to flesh after encountering a gorgon; and he nearly died a fiery death when we fought a red dragon.

    I'm happy to report that my new group, being a bunch of newbies, haven't learned the rules enough yet to have any conception of what's "good" and "bad," or otherwise developed prejudices about how a character "should" be made. So far, their creed has been more or less "If it's fun, and if it's cool, do it."

    "I want a sorcerer with a morningstar! Can I do that? Cool!"

    "I want to use a hand-crossbow. Can I do that? Cool."

    "I want to leap over there and attack him from behind. Can I do that? Cool."


    Saern wrote:
    Another strange thing about the group was that, even though the players zealously followed these guidelines about what you had to do to make a decent character and/or not get killed on day one; they typically were extremely haphazard in the game itself.

    Well, there's their balance. They play haphazardly so they have to be meticulous about the build in order to compensate.

    My players don't seem to have hard-set rules as a group. In fact, I've seen an elven sorcerer with Con as her dump stat. But I know I have at least one. I don't dump stat Con - hit points are simply too important for survival across the board - I'll find something else to dump if I'm doing point buy stat generation. Average is the lowest I'll go. Most other stats are up for dumping depending on the character.

    After that, honestly, I'm not sure that I have any other set rules. Maybe someone observing me would point out a couple more.

    Scarab Sages

    For me personally, I don't make min/max characters, I usually don't have an 18 in my primary ability score, but I also don't usually have an 8...I like balanced characters...just me personally I suppose.

    As a DM I have found that almost all skill modifying feats are never taken, they're more like a 3/4 feat. This does not apply to Disable Device.

    I'm toying around with a game sometime where my players don't know their own stats, HP, etc. They will describe who their characters are and I will build those characters. I will roll damages, they can roll the d20s.

    It kind of forces a bit of mystery into the characters. I would have trigger words to describe relative HP conditions, etc.


    My players now accept my way of gaming... I have a tendency to have the common man end up the hero at the end. So the characters they roll-up usually have pretty average stats (by most gamers' standards). This is always a shock when we accept a new player at our gaming table and he rolls a character for the first time. The new player usually looks at me with disbelief when I say "No, these stats are acceptable; You can play these..."

    Let's just say that it makes it really special when someone gets an 18 in my games. And I find it easier not having to "boost" every monster encounter to challenge the PCs. They always seem to be between half and 25% percent of their hit points during most of my adventures. Keeps them on their toes, if you will.

    :)

    Ultradan

    Liberty's Edge

    Some common parameters with my group:

    -Point-buy is the standard, stat-rolling is only done occasionally (usually out of nostalgia).

    -Neutral is the prevailing alignment (LN, CN, N, NG, NE) with CG thrown in now and then. No one every plays LG, and no ever plays a paladin.

    -Characters are NEVER archetypal, and NEVER have a backstory beyond being orphaned, or estranged from any family members.

    -No one claims a personal share of treasure. It is always kept in a group treasury. Magic items are distributed by the consensus of the group, as well.

    -The more verbose, formal, or pretentious the NPC, the more likely the party members will show disrespect, make threats, attempt to intimidate, or use mind-affecting spells/powers on them. It's asking for trouble to give this group an audience with a king!

    -The party RARELY runs, even if clearly overmatched. The character death rate in our current campaign is pretty high, and I've even nerfed several encounters that would have driven the count much higher.

    Silver Crusade

    Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

    In my 8 years of playing (wow time flies) I've always had players more concerned with doing cool stuff than worrying about provoking AoOs and min-maxing their characters.

    That said the few times we rolled stats we'd always have a player who would roll brilliant stats and another who would roll mediocre stats and the one with the better stats would consistently shine more in everything.

    So to make sure every player has an equal footing we instituted that all players gain an 18, 17, 15, 13, 11 and 10 during character creation. For lower powered games each of those numbers gets moved down one, but we rarely play lower-powered.


    If your PC is an Elf it MUST use a Longsword. Always.
    If your PC is an Elf it MUST use a Longbow. Always.
    All rooms MUST be searched. Always. All bodies MUST be searched. Always.
    All prisoners found WILL betray the party. Always.
    Dwarves MUST be a fighter and NO OTHER CLASS. Ever.
    Halflings MUST be a rogue and NO OTHER CLASS. Ever.
    Gnomes MUST be an illusionist and NO OTHER CLASS. Ever.
    Thou shalt ALWAYS listen at doors.
    Thou shalt ALWAYS search for traps at said door.
    If you have a high Dex you MUST fight with two weapons.
    I have a player who in thirty plus years of playing has never played any character except an Elf so he can get +2 on Dex. IMO badly. So bad he might as well play a human with false ears.


    Saern wrote:
  • Never have a Constitution score less than 12.
  • Never learn or use an offensive touch spell.
  • Never learn or use a spell with a HD limit.
  • Never play a specialist wizard.
  • It sounds like those guy read something on a web site about how to make "optimal" characters and took it too much to heart. In particular, I've seen dozens of "internet pundits" raving that Sleep is terrible and Color Spray is awesome, but I seem to get great use out of Sleep nonetheless.

    Other "optimization taboos":

    • Never buy a scroll of a spell that allows a saving throw.
    • In fact, never buy charged items of any kind (even if the charged item is dirt cheap and will last you your whole career).
    • Never play a fighter.
    • Never play in a party without an arcane spellcaster and a divine spellcaster.
    • If you're a spellcaster, never take a level in a non-spellcasting class (well, maybe one level of fighter for a fighter/magic-user type).

    Etc., etc.

    Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

    Hmm, well I pay the 'con tax' normally as well, I'll also play psionics whenever I can. I'm also prone to dump wisdom, both because I (the player) have a low wisdom, and because I like classes that just happen to have good will saves.

    I know my players (when I DMed) wer dragged kicking and screaming to point buy, even though we used a 28 point buy and that could make a 15/14/13/12/11/10. I was constantly fighting the urge to throat punch the human rogue player because with a 16 intelligence he was still whining "I don't have enough skill points"

    One player always plays halflings. One always played CN characters.

    RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

    One of the players I play with has phenomenal luck with her dice. To the point where we assume she'll get a natural 20 at least once per combat, and at higher levels when her tanks get multiple attacks, at least once per round.

    I don't think any of the players I play with have typical character types. One is a bit of a min/maxxer, but other than that, most just try to have fun. I usually try to make versatile and/or highly mobile characters (druids, scouts, rogues, rangers, barbarians), but not always (dwarven fighter-ranger, archivist, cloistered cleric/shiny servant of Pelor, draconic sorcerer, dragon shaman, etc.)


    Ok. Heres the player oddities in MY group.
    1. Thou shalt ALWAYS multi-class.
    2. The DM shall never ever allow the players the power of the WISH/Miracle spell. All we want to do is raise our stats to a nornal level because lets face it low stats suck.
    3. the regular charecters classes are so boring lets play the most insane obscure far fetched out of world race/class/PrC/etc. possible.
    Case in point there should not be ANY warforged in the forgotten realms. Nor should spellfire show up in Xendrick.
    4. When it's time for other charecters to do what they were built for lets have the player thats not involved because ALL he does is combat(stupid monks)leave the table to read source books then when combat does happen he has no idea whats going on.
    5. The DM shall never ever give us players the money we deserve. I have read some of my DM's old modules AFTER were done with them. He likes to change PP to gold or gold to silver. Gems,objects de art unless you take merchantile background your gonna get hosed on the value.

    Dark Archive

    Saern wrote:

    Never have a Constitution score less than 12.

    Never learn or use an offensive touch spell.
    Never learn or use a spell with a HD limit.
    Never specialize.
    Never wear heavy armor.

    Huh, I pretty much do all of these. Although I do sometimes make use of spells like Scare and Sleep (although I do prefer Color Spray to Sleep, easier to pick and choose who is affected...).

    My Clerics never go above Mithral Chain Shirts. The extra +1 from a Mithral Breastplate never seems worth the bother of paying for another set of armor. In fact, the only character I've had in 'heavy' armor was a Warlock with Battlecaster who Fell Flew all over the battlefield in Mithral Fullplate...

    I never prepare offensive touch spells as arcane casters, although Duskblades and Inflict-based Clerics of Wee Jas (with the Magic Domain, so that they can use a Wand of Spectral Hands and deliver their 'touch' spells from 30 ft. away) occur occasionally.

    So far, I've never played a Specialist. I like some of the Specialist abilities (such as the Necromancer variant in Unearthed Arcana), but I'm more likely to play a Dread Necromancer, if I want to specialize in Necromancy. The joy of being a Wizard is being able to learn *any* spell on the list. Playing a Sorcerer or a Specialist for a measly extra spell slot per day hardly seems worth the enormous sacrifice in versatility. Yeah, that's right, not only do we avoid Specialists, our group also avoids Sorcerers, for the same reason!

    Con 12+? The only time this isn't a good idea is if the character is on the path to becoming a construct or undead. Extra hit points are always a good thing. I really don't like having any attribute under 10, with Charisma and Strength the only two I would 'dump' for most characters.

    We do tend to break the 'always have a cleric, always have a rogue' rules though. It's been fifteen years or so since anyone has played a rogue (or bard, whatever) in one of our games. Our group loves fighters, barbarians, rangers, wizards, clerics, monks and druids. Sometimes we'll have a group that's two clerics, a druid and a ranger or something. We have had cleric-less groups (in one group, my ranger/archer with a wand of CLW was the party healer), and we've had almost invariably rogue-less groups. In fact, we haven't had a 'thief' in the party since 2nd edition, and that was a Holy Slayer in an Al-Qadim game.

    We definitely follow the 'if it's not nailed down, take it' rule. That's why Haversacks can carry so much stuff. And note that if it can be crowbarred up, it's fair game. (That golden statue or solid jade altar that the adventure didn't bother to write up a value for? Shrink Item, stow in bag. Let the GM figure out what it's worth when we get to town.)

    Items that must be had;
    Mithral Chain Shirts
    Heward's Handy Haversacks
    Wands of Cure Light Wounds
    a magic weapon of some sort

    Nobody uses potions (and rarely scrolls), and those found as treasure are forgotten in party treasure, sometimes for four or five levels, before being sold off.

    Shadow Lodge

    The 'dump stat' I use changes depending on the character concept, though I was never one to think Charisma was only defining physical beauty. Always wanted to try an average looking sorcerer.

    Half-orc wizards are fun to play, because few people if any would choose to play that character,and even fewer would expect him to be effective...


    Steven Tindall wrote:
    ... 3. the regular charecters classes are so boring lets play the most insane obscure far fetched out of world race/class/PrC/etc. possible.

    Yeah... What's wrong with a plain old rogue? Or a human fighter?

    I find that it dulls the whole magical element of a story when every player makes a character like a plane-touched half-yak-folk-lore master/dragon disciple... And end up with a group of six totally non-compatible characters that should be at war with each other.

    Sure, it sounds cool; But how do you roleplay a character like those that walk in the local inn at some major city? I really think that those far-fetched classes and races (and combinations of them) are for those who have a serious lack of imagination... I've played standard races/classes for over twenty-five years and every one of my characters were totally unique.

    I'd keep all the "extra" classes for cool NPCs that the party will encounter maybe once during a campaign. Surely seeing things of the sort around every other corner makes them all PLAIN in my view.

    (sorry for the rant - I must be getting old! lol)

    Ultradan

    Dark Archive Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games

    Ultradan wrote:
    Steven Tindall wrote:
    ... 3. the regular charecters classes are so boring lets play the most insane obscure far fetched out of world race/class/PrC/etc. possible.

    Yeah... What's wrong with a plain old rogue? Or a human fighter?

    I find that it dulls the whole magical element of a story when every player makes a character like a plane-touched half-yak-folk-lore master/dragon disciple... And end up with a group of six totally non-compatible characters that should be at war with each other.

    Sure, it sounds cool; But how do you roleplay a character like those that walk in the local inn at some major city? I really think that those far-fetched classes and races (and combinations of them) are for those who have a serious lack of imagination... I've played standard races/classes for over twenty-five years and every one of my characters were totally unique.

    I'd keep all the "extra" classes for cool NPCs that the party will encounter maybe once during a campaign. Surely seeing things of the sort around every other corner makes them all PLAIN in my view.

    (sorry for the rant - I must be getting old! lol)

    Ultradan

    Preach it, Ultradan! As a diehard player of humans (Rogue, Fighter, Cleric) for over 30 years, I can tell you that no two of my PCs are exactly alike in spite of their common race.

    Although, I am intrigued by your yak-folk reference...


    Larry Lichman wrote:
    ...Although, I am intrigued by your yak-folk reference...

    I like using things in the monster manual that players aren't used to seeing. I once thought of an adventure about an entire herd (i.e.: village) of Yak-folk in some far away land that lived off the surrounding plains until some major catastrophy sent one of their kind across the land to the area where the players were to ask for help.

    Having something far-fetched like yak-folk augmented the feeling that their village was realy far away. Almost alien by what we're used to, even for a fantasy world.

    Ultradan


    Ultradan wrote:
    Steven Tindall wrote:
    ... 3. the regular charecters classes are so boring lets play the most insane obscure far fetched out of world race/class/PrC/etc. possible.

    Yeah... What's wrong with a plain old rogue? Or a human fighter?

    I find that it dulls the whole magical element of a story when every player makes a character like a plane-touched half-yak-folk-lore master/dragon disciple... And end up with a group of six totally non-compatible characters that should be at war with each other.

    Sure, it sounds cool; But how do you roleplay a character like those that walk in the local inn at some major city? I really think that those far-fetched classes and races (and combinations of them) are for those who have a serious lack of imagination... I've played standard races/classes for over twenty-five years and every one of my characters were totally unique.

    I'd keep all the "extra" classes for cool NPCs that the party will encounter maybe once during a campaign. Surely seeing things of the sort around every other corner makes them all PLAIN in my view.

    (sorry for the rant - I must be getting old! lol)

    Ultradan

    Agreed. I'm a whippersnapper, but my philsophy is still "If it ain't in the Player's Handbook, I don't need it." (Barring the magic items in the DMG, of course) There are some occassional exceptions, typically for a feat to allow a non-standard character concept to work better; but even then, I never really feel the need to look for race/class options beyond the PHB. My favorite race is human, and not just for the bonus feat; I like humans because they allow me to roleplay character psychologies without the added expectation of roleplaying a given race's perspective. Plus, I reject the thought that humans are "boring." I think we're pretty awesome. :)

    I outright ban any race not found in the PHB or MM (and even then I keep players on a short leash), unless there's some serious reason to allow them (which, so far, there hasn't been). I detest the notion that these creatures walk around in the world with whole cultures and civilizations, yet don't seem to have any significant impact on wold history and culture. That could be remedied, of course, but that isn't the kind of world I want to run. So I just ban them.

    I'd put a "threadjack" tag here, but it's my thread, so I don't think it's necessary. :)


    Yeah well I think it's absolutely insane for any fighter to want weapon specialization for anything other than a sap, so I don't allow that! Spell casters aren't allowed more than a 14 spell casting stat -- any more is play munchkinism!

    Another thing, you don't get the 15 point buy -- that's too good, only 10 in my games!

    Liberty's Edge

    Abraham spalding wrote:

    Yeah well I think it's absolutely insane for any fighter to want weapon specialization for anything other than a sap, so I don't allow that! Spell casters aren't allowed more than a 14 spell casting stat -- any more is play munchkinism!

    Another thing, you don't get the 15 point buy -- that's too good, only 10 in my games!

    Whoa! Sounds awesome, can I play? I've been meaning to get into a low-powered game forever!

    Shadow Lodge

    Michael D Moore wrote:
    Abraham spalding wrote:

    Yeah well I think it's absolutely insane for any fighter to want weapon specialization for anything other than a sap, so I don't allow that! Spell casters aren't allowed more than a 14 spell casting stat -- any more is play munchkinism!

    Another thing, you don't get the 15 point buy -- that's too good, only 10 in my games!

    Whoa! Sounds awesome, can I play? I've been meaning to get into a low-powered game forever!

    Hm... my interest is also sparked(don't worry, it has resistance).


    Abraham spalding wrote:

    Yeah well I think it's absolutely insane for any fighter to want weapon specialization for anything other than a sap, so I don't allow that! Spell casters aren't allowed more than a 14 spell casting stat -- any more is play munchkinism!

    Another thing, you don't get the 15 point buy -- that's too good, only 10 in my games!

    Sense Motive result... irony.

    Note that I said, "If it's not in the PHB, I don't need it." I realize that my players have different attitudes and I respect that; I don't keep a list of banned books. They are always free to come to me with a character idea or option loaded with supplemental material. I happen to be a very story-oriented person, so in order to appreciate and enjoy their character, I need a good story explanation. In cases where the build is "unusual," this need increases. However, if they can present that case, I'm game to let them proceed. And I'm almost always "on their side," trying to work with them to come up with something which will let them play the character they want. I do not support any game filled with arbitrary DM decisions, made with no basis in the RAW or well-established, discussed, and agreed upon houserules.

    That being said, I also think that a DM is entitled to limit player options in a campaign world to preserve the tone of that setting. I.e., no warforged in FR. I would try to make a reverse statement of "no X in Eberron," but one of that setting's guiding principles seems to be "If you look long enough, you can find anything in this setting." To me, that destroys any structure, uniqueness, and identity of the setting.

    I'm a fan of Tolkien and the historical Middle Ages. I like to run a campaign and have designed a world which reflects those things. Throwing in a half-million new races, all of which have to find some room in the world and bring a different tone and feel, is not a teneble option to running the world I want to run. Hence, they are one of only two things I outright ban, no exceptions.

    Spoiler:
    The other is psionics. As far as I'm concerned, they are redundant and pointless.


    I've come to believe psionics is 'either or' Either you are in a world where magic exists or a world where psionics exists. I have to admit as well that I've never seen them used in a game/fantasy world context where they didn't annoy me in some way. The limitations idea makes magic, the magical more interesting.


    Saern wrote:

    :: Good information first, followed by a blurp I want to comment on ::

    That being said, I also think that a DM is entitled to limit player options in a campaign world to preserve the tone of that setting. I.e., no warforged in FR. I would try to make a reverse statement of "no X in Eberron," but one of that setting's guiding principles seems to be "If you look long enough, you can find anything in this setting." To me, that destroys any structure, uniqueness, and identity of the setting.

    First off, with that first paragraph that what you said eariler can be seen in a much different light, and I can agree to, and with it.

    (Tangent on settings material)
    Agreed that somethings just don't belong in some settings, however I kind of like Eberron for a more Pulp fiction sort of game. Grant not something I want every time, but with that in mind it can become a lot more fun, and interesting. Granted everything is gray... but just how gray and what can you do with it.


    - The rogue always takes some of the treasure off the top and that is ok.
    (I was shocked the first time this happened when I joined the group as a DM, but they were all ok with and expected it)

    - The class defines the character concept
    (I tried to play a character who was a bard class but the history of the character was that he had tried several careers and while he could have succeeded at any he hadn't found one that fit until joining the watch as an investigator... he would inspire his team with tactical recomendation in combat... but I just kept being referred to as a minstrel)

    - Searching for loot is not heroic
    (They rarely remember to search anything and even when I up the treasure in the adventure by 50% or so they are still coming out below overage wealth levels)

    - No reason to think about what others will do in combat
    (The guy going right after you has a charger build? No reason to make sure he has a path to charge)

    Sean Mahoney

    RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

    MrFish wrote:

    I've come to believe psionics is 'either or' Either you are in a world where magic exists or a world where psionics exists. I have to admit as well that I've never seen them used in a game/fantasy world context where they didn't annoy me in some way. The limitations idea makes magic, the magical more interesting.

    Steven Brust's fiction has both side by side, and it seems to work. I've played with some guys who've used psionics, but never have myself. I think I tried to make an NPC who used it, but it didn't work out very well. So I'm no expert.


    My players seem to have only one hard and fast rule:

    In the dungeon or in the wilderness never split up the party, ever!

    In the city however, it is OK to split up, and look up the worst tavern in town and get drunk there. This has got PCs killed in the past, but these PCs keep doing it.


    Luna eladrin wrote:

    My players seem to have only one hard and fast rule:

    In the dungeon or in the wilderness never split up the party, ever!

    In the city however, it is OK to split up, and look up the worst tavern in town and get drunk there. This has got PCs killed in the past, but these PCs keep doing it.

    I thought I was the only PC who ever did that. Actually not get drunk there but to use my drow beauty to seduce an evil wizard. Needless to say I was dropped in one round by a vicious psionic attack and teleported into a dungeon...


    One of my players consistently does this. He has been found drunk and robbed, lying in the gutter, has contacted a disease once, and once got into conflict with the local thieves' guild where he died in their trap-filled lair. But that does not stop him from doing it again and again.


    My players always tell me that freedom of movement and death ward aren't all that great. then they get grappled or death spelled into oblivion. And thats with me, as DM, giving our cleric recommendations on his spell list. I also have a player who insists on at least one rogue level, no matter what. weird.


    I Notice Not so much in the campaign that i run but ones that i have played in with the group we have. All the players try to figure out a way to kill their teammates " Just in case" it always seems to cause a rift between the players and little mini alliances get formed with inn the group


    Dexterity, Dexterity, Dexterity. Don't think I've ever seen it as a dump stat...ever. Then again, the majority of our games are in the 1st-10th level range, where that bonus to initiative and AC are just too good to sacrifice. If we wear armour, we have as much Dex as our Armour will allow.

    Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 3.5/d20/OGL / Player oddities All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.
    Recent threads in 3.5/d20/OGL