This isn't exactly something I would WANT to play, but I think could make for an interesting character that A) The party could be burdened with or B) That they need to escort/protect.
I have tried looking for something that I feel resembles Joxer the Mighty from Xena. I can't QUITE find anything that seems to resemble this in terms of execution and for simplicity sake I call this class the Fool (or Simpleton or DEAR GOD WHY ARE YOU STILL AROUND!?!?!?!)
I think this should be a character that is basically invulnerable to (permanent) harm and also COMPLETELY incapable of doing ANYTHING without serious Luck coming into play.
So I have a couple of ideas (keep in mind as a GM I would NEVER let someone Gestalt with this as it, when combined with REAL abilities would DEFINITELY throw off balance)
So lets start with the reverse concept of the Monk (i.e. ALL bad saves), THEN give 1/2 BAB and lets just say a d8 HD (I am willing to negotiate this, I know it isn't consistent with the typical PF pattern but bear with me).
As far as proficiency I think letting them be proficient with one simple weapon would suffice.
Skills: This is where I have mixed feelings. My instinct is to supplement here: 6+INT skill points/lvl and then (because it could be worth it) allow them a specific number of skills to be class skills and choose those at some personal way (maybe allow them to have their Intelligence modifier set the number of Class skills?)
Now for the meat of the class. It seems that the Fool shouldn't be able to do ANYTHING unless it is the AWESOME 1 in a million NEVER to be repeated sort of thing. Also, that should work BOTH ways so:
Expanding the critical range for weapons the fool is proficient with (there is only one unless they use a feat or something to increase that) and ALSO expand the critical failure (like rolling a 2 is a critical failure as well). Have BOTH of those ranges expand as the class progresses.
A feature that expands the confirmation of critical rolls should ALSO follow this progression. Possibly one the increases the multiplier? I would be interested in seeing what people this is appropriate. Keep in mind this is the hapless idiot NOT a competent warrior so... there is that.
The drawback of this (and this has been something we play with my group anyway) critical failure results in the potential for injury to the fool (typically only if you roll a 1 to confirm but I think there should be a set penalty, say -10 and if you don't roll above a DC -say 1/2 of your AC- then you end of stabbing yourself with the weapon etc.)
A feature that accesses a certain amount of Luck reserve (similar to Grit/Panache, but in the opposite vein) where you can reroll fails and increase the type of rolls allowed as the character progresses. (or maybe allow that to be the selected, Rogue Talent-esque, feature so you can craft your fool for whatever purpose you have).
And now here is the one feature that I would like some SERIOUS feedback on: Allowing the fool/dimwit/please go away! to convert lethal damage into nonlethal dmg I am not entirely certain how this should play out. Maybe some sorta d20 + Fool level + CHA mod???
As the progress in level allowing the Fool to do this to Magic dmg (like a Fumbling Evasion type of thing).
Those are the general concepts I have in mind. Something that seems difficult to kill, but only because it gets knocked out (OH! There should be a feature to help it stabilize when dying like +1/2 level to those checks!!!) and then fumbles around until it RUINS ALL OF YOUR CAREFUL PLANNING!!!
Any thoughts? Anybody see this and hear of something similar? I have never created a class before and this is the only "original" (which isn't terribly original) idea I haven't seen done (and no, I don't think the BARD counts as being a fumbling idiot)
Interested to see what ideas you all have :) Thanks
My reaction to your thread title was different from that after reading the body. Instead of Joxer, I was thinking of something more akin to a jester-like fool or the archetype of the fool tarot card. Since you are thinking of using rogue talent like abilities, it wouldn't be impossible to create a class that can encompass multiple possibilities. Just don't write something that will allow you to play specifically Joxer.
Skills
Its hard to say where to go with this. You could look at the peasant class, or the rogue. I'm not sure yet.
Proficiencies
Instead of simply granting 1 weapon proficiency, how about proficiency in the free weapons? The club, quarterstaff, and sling all have a cost of zero. A club could cover a wide range of strangely shaped items - it's almost an improvised weapon, the idea of a pesky fool with a slingshot could be fun, and what's more innocuous that a asking stick? I would stick to light armor, maybe shields, maybe not.
Saves
I would be more inclining to just go with all good saves, to make sure they don't die all the time. But if you went all bad saves, and had that luck/fortune pool, one of the abilities could allow them to reroll with a really nice bonus, and then have some misfortune befall them, such as slipping and falling prone, hitting head and knocked unconscious, swallowed fly and staggered, armor strap breaks. If you go with one good save, it him fortitude would be appropriate, representing all the hard hits he has taken over the years.
Attack
I suppose a low BAB is appropriate, but like the saves, some kind of bonus should be available, such as getting a lucky hit in by resolving the attack against touch AC.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The jester class from the dragon compendium might be a good inspiration but yeah it is heavily inspired on bard. There is of course, the prankster gnome racial bard archetype...
The jester always been one of the dragon magazine favorite and to be quite frank, it was well done. He was the champion of the verbal put down, granting bonuses to his allies while he humiliated his foes. He got deflect arrow and snatch arrows as bonus feats because of juggling. And playing around with various morale bonuses even immediate action if the opponent missed an attack.
An excellent class all around, but well guess you don't want to associate the class with bard but quite frankly even the default bard is basically a trickster/prankster.
Frankly if you don't plan to have anybody play the class...heh just make an npc and pick abilities that you like, nobody will bother checking them.
Frankly if you don't plan to have anybody play the class...heh just make an npc and pick abilities that you like, nobody will bother checking them.
You would think that. My party is REALLY slow when it comes to taking inferred directions (seriously, I can't throw a Haunt at them EVER again, they had NO idea what to do) and yet are oddly suspicious about EVERY NPC they encounter. The High Priestess of the kingdom got the remark: "B*tch what is you?" when they found out she had demons enthralled. She had to explain that she researched Truenames in order to do that.
Not that it would matter for this hapless idiot character. Maybe that would be a better title than Fool? I don't want to blur lines between the Bard, which has (even if it is limited) a role within the party. This character would be effectively the greatest asset/hindrance the party had and would do nothing for the enhancements of their abilities.
For the record: Bards are cool. Joxer is not (imo).
It sounds like you don't intend for PCs to play this class (or even for it to be playable by them, in a practical sense). If that is correct, you might be better served by creating a unique creature (even if it really is human, or appears to be human) or perhaps a template that you can apply to an NPC. From experience, I can tell you that such an endeavor can be very rewarding, and is probably less work for similar reward if you are intending to create a once-in-a-while encounter with this individual. Creating a new class is also very rewarding, but your concept sounds like it is deliberately creating something a PC couldn't/shouldn't play, so maybe your time is better served elsewhere.
As for the mechanics themselves, the advanced rogue talents Another Day and Defensive Roll both serve to mitigate attacks that would reduce them to 0 hit points or less. Perhaps you could modify (improve?) one or both to give your fool that uncanny resiliency.
|
|
You don't have to explain everything and frankly I never do. Someone calling himself a samurai could be a fighter or a rogue...most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Just like a priest could be a monk, a cleric, an oracle or even a rogue...but guess of course it depends of the kind world you run. Like if someone class is literally its profession in life, then yeah I guess. But frankly just saying to save time on preparation just do as suggested, a template or toss in some abilities here and there that you like.
It sounds like you don't intend for PCs to play this class (or even for it to be playable by them, in a practical sense). If that is correct, you might be better served by creating a unique creature (even if it really is human, or appears to be human) or perhaps a template that you can apply to an NPC. From experience, I can tell you that such an endeavor can be very rewarding, and is probably less work for similar reward if you are intending to create a once-in-a-while encounter with this individual. Creating a new class is also very rewarding, but your concept sounds like it is deliberately creating something a PC couldn't/shouldn't play, so maybe your time is better served elsewhere.
Probably less "couldn't/shouldn't" and more "wouldn't" this would be a pretty selective appeal. Most players, in my experience, want to play: Desdemona Diabolical Sorceress of the Abyss and not Norman the guy who died from stepping on a rusty nail.
I am open to suggestion as far as how to (while maintaining balance) create a "creature" that would possess these qualities as well. Any thoughts on that?
Ultimately I am wanting to create a devastatingly annoying NPC that the party is forced to keep alive (even without having an overt threat seeking to kill him) a la "Mindy and Buttons"-fashion.