Christopher Rowe 151's page

I don't think any GM is going to give you flack for taking a self-imposed RP penalty to social skill rolls.

I had a character with above average Charisma that was not interested in social skills either. I didn't give him any ranks in social skills because he had no intention of using them. He simply told the truth and gave facts.

Me: Do this or I will punch you in the face.

DM: Roll intimidate.

Me: I'm not trying to intimidate him. I'm simply telling him that if he doesn't do this, that I will punch him in the face. He can do with that information whatever he likes.

DM: He tells you "Go suck an egg, I don't want to do that!"

Me: I punch him in the face.

DM: Initiative...

I had bonuses to Social Skills because of my Charisma and even a bonus to certain situations granted by the DM because of my reputation, but had no interest in using them. My character was of the "I'm going to tell you how things are going to be and it would be in your best interest to agree with me" school of thought.

Edit:
Interestingly enough, I was the leader of the party (not the face) because the other characters respected my guy's honesty and he even had some very loyal troops once he got Leadership.

I had a concept for a character of this type.

The Professional

Essentially he was a Rogue with the Rough and Ready Equipment trait that spent most of his first level skill points in profession or craft skills like cook / laborer / blacksmith / gravedigger, etc...

The trait lets you use any tool that is a part of your profession or craft (at least one rank) as an improvised weapon with no pentalty and a +1 trait bonus to hit. So, you end up with a guy who uses shovels, picks, gardening shears, etc... as weapons. This character was going to be a handy-man turned adventurer with a million and one stories concerning his various and sundry occupations.

(in your best Jethro voice) "Did I ever tell you about the time I was a gravedigger for the church of Iomedae? I was digging this grave for ol' Aunt Mae you see and..." then he whack's the guy who is attacking the party fighter with a shovel (from a flanking position of course).

Rogue fit the concept well and had enough skill points to have lots of profession / craft skills and still hit the big ones (Perception, etc..)

For this concept, I could totaly see the handy-man for the local Pathfinder chapter deciding it was high-time he do his part and help these local adventuring types.

A good friend of mine is gay and after creating the illusion of a manticore doing the Macarena (or the "Manitcorana" as he called it) another player (new to the group) said "that is SO gay!!". Realizing his faux pas, he looked to my friend sheepishly and appologized to which my friend responded "that's OK, sometimes things are just gay...". I'm fairly certain that I may have wet myself a little that night...

Just how did these parties come together anyway? Did one or two of these guys walk into a tavern and say "Well Bob, who should we pick to be our adventuring partners, friends and comrades in arms against the coming darkness". To which the second man says "I know Jim, how about that foul smelling weak stick of a man with the terrible case of terrets (STR, CHA 7 Wizard) or perhaps that thickly muscled imbiscile sitting in the corner picking his nose and drooling on himself (INT, WIS, CHA 7 Fighter). The first man looks at the second and says "Sure thing Bob, those look like two people we can place our trust in to guard our lives and be our indellible companions. But to be honest I would like to add that overly self-righteous man at the bar who seems to be trying to set fire to his own hair with a tindertwig (INT, WIS 7 Paladin)".

The campfire talk with these groups must be an interesting mix of "Boobs are awesome, I like pie!! and awkward silences..."

The point here is that I would not want to hang out with people like that and I'm pretty sure, neither would my characters.

I don't know what got into me yesterday... Sorry for the ranting, also apparently either my brain or my "m" key is broken "ammount", "immagine"? I don't even know what that is... Again sorry for the thread jack.

On topic, the "blaster vs. GOD wizard" debate crops up quite often. People seem to think that there is only one way to play any given class.

Also, I dislike when someone creates a thread in the rules section asking for the RAW on some particular ability/class/feat and then asks how that interacts with the 27 houserules that are in effect in their DM's game. "So you're saying that since my DM allows vital strike to work with spring attack that RAW, I can also get my iaijutsu strike in for free?, AWESOME!!"

And just for the record, the summoner and alchemist ARE broken... Almost every uber-7,000 points of damage from a full attack build on here starts with "So, you take a synthesist summoner..." or "My alchemist with Feral Mutagens and Vestigal Arm who happens to be the unholy love child of AM BARBARIAN...". That seems to me to point to a couple of classes with inherent balance issues...

Oh yeah, forgot an overused thread: "is X class balanced with Y class?" although this seems to crop up along with the "why do rogues suck" and "alchemists are awesome" threads and may or may not be a symptom of that.

With their feral mutagens, vestigal arms/legs/heads and massive stat boosting alchemical mixtures, what's not to like. Never mind that every build on the boards reduce their wis and cha to 7 to make their veritable killing machine. I have to say that if you're primary combat tactic is to shoot up a bunch of green glowing liquid, grow an extra arm or two and rage/freak on the enemies, all while sporting the common sense and hygeine habits of an oranguatan, then I'm not going to want to hang out with you all that much. Nothing personal...

And this is my beef. I have watched "that guy" dump his int, wis, and cha down to 7 so that he can have massive physical abilities and and equally massive damage output so many times, its kind of ruining the game for me. Just try to immagine what being around a person like that for any reasonable ammount of time would be like. I'm sorry but I'm not going to place my trust in a guy that got into the local adventuring guild on the mental handicap affirmative action clause, that he can handle himself outside of combat without a leash and food bowl.

Even worse is when you see this same guy trying to make awesome tactical decisions on the battle mat like his character is General Patton at the battle of the bulge. I'm fine if you want to dump all of your mental stats for a huge con so that you can run all day accross the country several times, but the moment that you try anything more tactical than "I gotta save Bubba and Lieutenant DAN!!!", I'm going to take issue... You are not playing your character, plain and simple...

"RAW vs. RAI" threads where RAW / RAI is apparently whatever the poster wants it to be to support a groundless, silly and pedantic argument

For example:

"Well it says that I have to have a free hand when I draw the weapon, it doesn't say anything about when I strike with it. While the devs may have MEANT Iaijutsu strike to be used one handed, the RAW says I can use two hands..."

Give it up, the Devs never intended you to be able to wield a Greatsword for an Iaijutsu strike. IT'S ONLY USABLE WITH A ONE HANDED WEAPON. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, it is the way it was meant, the way it was written and the way it was supported in the rules. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT DON'T USE IT...

Sorry, end rant...