Susano-wo's page

RE: XP: this is a meta level thing. XP is a way to determine when, in the course of playing the game, the characters level up. NPCs unless they are partying with the PCs (and maybe not even then) don't get or need XP. they are whatever level is appropriate, and raise to whatever level is appropriate when is becomes so.

I mean, I'm not saying if you are doing it differently that's wrong, but I don't think that's the default assumption

I agree that it would be nice to see more weapon diversity. Not so much for the realism angle (though there are cases where more diversity makes sense realism-wise) but just because its more interesting. Its more fun to have people wielding all sorts of different weapons, instead of the same set of several weapons. Some of this is due to the aforementioned problem with certain fighting styles being difficult or impossible to do while others are easy as pie, but some of it is just that people, as Buri said, over-estimate the difference in how much difference 1d2 makes, which is usually all it is.

That being said I have liked the idea for a long time of a system where you just get to make weapons and armor (especially armor) based on advantages and disadvantages and just call them what you want. Hell, I re-flavor things all the time. People will ask me what my armor is and I'll describe it and add "its a chain shirt equivalent armor." :P So I will have to check that link

jeremiah dodson 812 wrote:

I'm tired of how over powered (IMO) two handed STR builds are. All you need is a high STR a two handed weapon and Power Attack and your done. The two points of shield AC in a sword and board build doesn't make up to the noticeable dip in damage out put, and the feats needed for TWF in addition to excess money it costs and the 5' step game makes it not stack up, and finesse builds are a feat taxing joke!

You're right. I think it's time Paizo hit the fighter with the nerf bat. Too op for my poor wizard, who just points and things die. Sometimes the fighter gets in the way, oops, too bad. Dead.

Except that's not what was said. He said they were OP, but its clear from the context of the rest of the post that he is referring to its power and ease of use compared to the two other major styles, TWF and single weapon w/ shield. And barring specific feats or a lot of investment (in the case of TWF), and sometimes both, its hard to compete with the damage output of using a 2-hander, and the shield user doesn't get something that outweighs the loss of damage, unless *maybe* you invest in the feats necessary to use your shield as your second weapon

Whether other classes um, outclass the fighter entirely is another issue, especially since the 2H, S&B or TWF is more of a full BAB and some 3/4 BAB question, not a fighter specific one.

AS far as tired builds, I don't play frequently, and have had campaigns be too persistent to have a lot of those, but I can definitely relate to tired players/play styles. The "Why am I working with this idiot/a%~%#@%/psychopath" type particularly speaks to me. The PC flag only works if people compromise both ways.

I think its fair to characterize that the prolific appearance of the evil guy who kills people for no reason as a relatively modern trend. You have that kind of character in myth and history, but it seems like a more recent trend to use it as a short cut to get you to see he is evil.

Yeah, definitely easier with a good campaign, just not fundamentally different. It all lies in the metagame, as you said. Don't bring your lone wolf along without a hook to tie them in to the other PCs (unless its really sandboxy, I suppose :D), and don't bring your Psycopathic murderer along without some thing to make him play nice either. :D

I wouldn't say that evil characters cannot be motivated by anything other than greed.

A lot of people think of evil as just selfishness or just murderousness, so when they think "Evil Campaign, they think Psycopath Campaign. This is where most of the problem lies, I think.

Evil means different things to different people, but it hardly means that they must like killing, or be unable or unwilling to curb that desire. It also doesn't mean they cannot have loyalty. They can be motivated by just about anything that wouldn't push them into neutral territory.

I think what you need for an evil campaign to work is about the same thing you need for a good campaign to work. The players need to on the same page in terms of tone and theme, etc, and they need to make characters that will be able to work together at least as much as is needed for the campaign.

Yeah, I use evil eye on my witch, but its because of the effect on miss, and I generally use it A: for saves so I can land spells etc, and B: as a backup. (though maybe I should grab misfortune, given that my save DC is good relative to a lot of enemies, and its not mind affecting)

Yeah, another voice for "The spell does what it says it does." Spell says it outlines the creatures for the duration, therefore it does. No appeal to how invis interacts with other things necessary or relevant. (No offense intended to those making those arguments, they just don't matter for this)

Is this going to be reprinted? The secondary market is insane right now ($100+ for copies)

Seconding that the character should be competent for the campaign. After that, optimization is gravy. Character should be able to handle level appropriate enemies, with a couple of caveats. If combat is less of a focus you don't have to worry about that so much, but they ought to be competent in what the campaign is about, E.G. mystery solving. The other exception would be if you are filling a necessary non-combat hole in the party. That being said, its very group dependent. As long as everyone is happy, no problem. If someone is unhappy, then discussion and probably compromise is in order.

And RE: the "what's fun about incompetence" crowd...holy straw man, batman! No one (in this thread at least) is arguing for incompetence. Just that they don't need to be 'optimized' if their build or concept is not optimized.(to whatever value they feel is being foisted on them) And that, to the optimization resistant crowd, is the point. Not incompetence, but freedom to take the character they want to play and run with it.

a little confused as to how the Dread Vanguard gets +1 Versatility from your description. Are the extra area effects that much more versatile than the spells?

Also, are you counting undead immunities as a bad thing?

I'm trying to help the OP to get some quality advice. I stand by my opinion that telling him "doing good, continue as normal" while players are quitting en masse is doing him/her no favors. Also this:

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

dismiss their points of view as a mere inability to criticize.

Isn't anything I wrote. It's simply not in my post. I didn't mean to imply it, didn't write that, nor did I wish to have readers infer it.

My belief is not that posters have an "inability to criticize." It is that people believe that the OP needs an ego boost after this devastating turn of events. I believe people think they are being good-hearted when they try to shore up his self-esteem. And I agree that they are being good hearted when they do that. However, I am suggesting that it's also not useful and even counter-productive. I believe that OP has strong enough character to power through some criticism, and even needs that criticism to get to his goal of running better games. So the truly "good person" thing to do here is help the OP get to his goal, which cannot be reached by telling him "they're nuts, you're cool" as everyone quits his games.

So you're being dismissive for a different reason, but still dismissive. I stated my opinion based on the info I had. I don't think the OP needs a boost because they are having a hard time, and I don't resume to know how good the poster's self esteem is based on one post. I think that they are being too hard on themselves and said so, but also offered my opinion on what could be done differently. Maybe the OP is misrepresenting things, but I can't comment on that because i have no knowledge of that.

The OP says they had a group of players quit due to difficulty. on an AP. How is this an indication that the OP is doing things to make them quit? And unless I'm missing something, this is the only time that they have mentioned people leaving, though there is one player extremely disruptive unsatisfied with this group, they have not left as far as we have been informed.

The player complaints, as stated, are largely unreasonable, and those that are can and should be fixed, perhaps by the methods that people have been suggesting. (seriously, have you read the responses? Plenty of people have said X.Y. or Z is a problem and offered solutions. In no way, shape, or form has this thread just been a back patting session for the OP)

Susano-wo wrote:

Thanks so far for all everyone's work. I'm enjoying reading this just to get more familiarized with Archetypes that I haven't personally used.

And yes, hidden wizard, you manifestly can voice your disapproval of this rating style. You have done so once before on this very page of the discussion, and no one shouted you down or anything.

Crouching Cleric, Hidden Wizard?

I'm pretty sure he's Secret Wizard.

Secret Wizard, then. My apologies.

They don't stack. That part still holds true no matter what shenanigans you try to pull. You simply have a case where you don't have the game telling you which takes precedence so you need your DM to decide how they are working it.

But, as Claxon said, don't try to game the system, or more precisely, don't try to twist the rules around and play on technicalities when it is obvious what was intended. (though mage armor being armor makes something one one of my characters invalid...crap >.<)

Thanks so far for all everyone's work. I'm enjoying reading this just to get more familiarized with Archetypes that I haven't personally used.

And yes, hidden wizard, you manifestly can voice your disapproval of this rating style. You have done so once before on this very page of the discussion, and no one shouted you down or anything.

Susano-wo wrote:

So, I know I might be ruining the gag, but, OP, is this a gag?

It's a gag, also a fun thought experiment.

Whew. hurray for fun experiments, then :D

I've had several issues come up in the last few sessions. So much that one player said it was frustrating playing my game. it's frustrating for me also...

Looks like its mostly them, not you. There are a few areas where it looks like you need improvement, but its nothing earth shattering, and I would follow the advice you have already gotten about what to do about those.

My 2 cents about your numbered points.
1. Every fight feels like a boss fight.
Whining because they can't one shot something is immaturity on their part. Sometimes things don't die so easily. Tough. (incidentally, don't advertise the CR, though they may know if its a non custom baddy.

2. I need to be constantly reminded of PC abilities.
Definitely try to remember effects, but yeah, it doesn't hurt as a player to remind your DM from time to time.

3. I announce things but not all players hear me, sometimes no one hears me and they deny I ever said it, making me question if I said it at all.
Pay attention to your DM, players! (also goes into pt 6, as others have pointed out.)

4. I forget abilities of my own monsters.
Definitely an issue, but hopefully some of the other suggestions made will help.

5. I hide all of my rolls, sometimes I roll for a PC and they don't like it.

Hiding your rolls and DCs it totally legit (though I agree that you should narrate the hit or miss in such a way that lets them know if it was close or not), and so is rolling for players when its a roll that should be hidden, like a passive perception or sense motive roll. (Of course you could also start using an innovation from 4E. Essentially, make all rolls that they are not actively trying to make, such as the aforementioned rolls, a take 10 attempt. Add 10 to their bonuses and treat that as their roll on such things. If they want to try to perceive something, they can roll the dice, but if they are not actively searching around or voicing--out load or mentally--suspicions about the Vizier, then use passive.)
Also, the player who refused to take damage is blatantly cheating. He is violating the rules of the game, and f+#%ing up the gamer social semi-contract by trying to essentially filibuster you into submission. I would warn the player once, and would refuse to DM for that player if they persisted.

6. I'm too slow.
Do what works best for your style. If HL is slowing you down, ditch it! sounds affects and music distracting you, ditch em! In the process you will alleviate what you can of the paying attention problem, and any attention span issues that remain are in their court.

7. If I create my own monster, or create my own ability they feel cheated.
This is asinine on their part. Custom monsters are a long standing tradition and one covered in the rules. Its ok, and makes the game more interesting to boot. These guys honestly sound like a bunch of entitled whiners, who complain when they can't gamefaqs all the monsters stats and when their oh so cool builds fail to curb stomp encounters enough. Sheesh.

So, I know I might be ruining the gag, but, OP, is this a gag? Like, how can we misrepresent the event of the stories to make say that the villains are the heroes?

Cause if its not, just looking at the Lord of the Rings (and not the Silmarillion, etc; the events of a book should stand on their own) we can see that Sauron A: sends wringwraiths to summarily execute people that can be considered at worst friends with someone who is in possession of stolen property, B: is instigating unprovoked war on Gondor (whilst using espionage/enchantment to keep a potential ally at bay, and attempting to drive the ruler of Gondor mad with dispait through false portents), and as for C:, lets bring it back to the king of the Rhohirim, as Sauron was doing double duty by also keeping him distracted so that Sauron could invade his land without resistance as well.

As for Saruman, reckless despoiling of the land is enough for me to call him a villain, not to mention the locking of a supposed friend on the top of his tower indefinitely for having he audacity to tell him he is wrong. And lets not forget that the magical genetics program was for the express purpose of creating a conquering army.

The eastern people were never demonized. They are portrayed as being deceived by Sauron. They have little if any characterization aside from being opponents in one battle.

The Orc do kind of become "acceptable targets," though in the book they are all killed whilst on the aforementioned hostile actions. The only exception is the retaking of Moria, which is dicey (do they still have the right to their ancestral home?), and in the epilogue (and thus is irrelevant to the topic of who is the real villain unless it proves that an earlier claim is a lie)

Oh and if we are going down this route, RE: Star Wars, this must be read: The Skywalker Paradigm
Though I like the dramatic opening to his original (this is the revised version)Archived at the insitance of us Portland/Eugene fans :D

well my computer ate my post, but I just want to say briefly: its not fair to let the rest of the party make whatever characters they want, and force you to cover their holes, which is what your OP sounds like. If its that important to not have any holes in party roles or skills, then everyone should be asked to do their part. As is, it looks like X martials filling beatstick role, a magus doubling up on beatstick roles, with you being asked to fill in for everything else.

Ross, I am 34, so that is my iconic batman as well. And he did plenty of badassed things while Bruce, feigning as much weakness as was necessary to deflect suspicion, but clandestinely using his abilities. That episode is an anomaly. :D

(now back to your previously scheduled topic) As far as the Vigilante class goes, I agree that not being able to use vigilante talents (at least those not reliant on the persona, like some of the surprise attack ones) is weird and immersion breaking. There should definitely be reasons to switch mechanically (or at least no inherent advantage either way, so that switching is purely according to who it is best to be seen as in any situation), but that is a very awkward way to do it. It's hard, especially in a social game (one, perhaps, filled with...Intrigue?), to play a character when you have to use or not use abilities that you cannot justify reasonably IC.

Yeah, goblins and their feats are designed to be kind of manic and crazy. The feat looks like it can be very useful, though even one on one it can be dealt with by smart opponents, especially opposing casters and ranged attackers

Oh, but "shame on you" is a bit much. It may be a knee-jerk reaction, and it might be a mistake to ban it, but its not exactly shame worthy

...but it is not like this FAQ is written as well as it could be either. It needs to be rewritten. I understand it, but I can also see where some people are genuinely not understanding it.

I agree. I understand what the ruling is, but only after Mark's clarifying posts. All terms need to be defined. Heck, until Mark posted what constitutes a subfeature, I didn't have a clear conception of what exactly that meant. Thank you for your clarifications, Mark, but the FAQ needs to be precise enough that you don't have to post such clarifications for it to be understood

Also, Kalindlara: do you primarily play at PFS? IF you do not, then I would not worry too much about stacking getting screwed up, if you have played with these combos and your GMs are fine with them, there's no reason to stop. The reason for rules on archetype stacking are to prevent imbalances from creative stacking, not to arbitrarily restrict.

Sounds fine. An (unnecessarily) stringent reading might be that it drops in their square, or that you have to use the action to stow it in their pack/pouch, but that seems just weird.

The best ruling seems to be either the giver uses an action to put an object into a willing receiver's hand using the manipulate object action, or a taker takes an object from a willing giver's hand using the same.

Nefreet wrote:

Thanks for the clarification!

(I'm not sure what the "hatchet thing" was, though)

That was in response to glass and Grellik.

This is Grellik. He is my PbP character, and I sometimes forget to switch to Susano-wo when posting on main forum threads :D

Thank you, that clarifies things completely. I know tables are always free to interpret differently, but I like to know what the designers intended, and why a certain thing is ruled one way or the other--It allows me to make further interpretations without resorting to FAQ inquires :)

(Oh and Diego, thanks for the clarification on the Omar's Hatchet...silliness. And now I just saw it in another thread...sigh >.<)

The FAQ request was because the definition of class feature was in doubt. The FAQ clarification doesn't really address that. But whatever. I don't have any control over how you address rules clarifications, just voicing disappointment.

Well, that was unhelpful. Aside from contradicting what is the overwhelming consensus of the written rules (everything aside from some archetype descriptions treats class features as a specific game term and separate from such things as skills, BAB, etc), it doesn't solve the overall question of what constitutes a class feature. If its every single thing a class gives you, including, say BAB, and saves, then the Ex-paladin feature is bizarre and basically means "Atone or create a new character," which is sort of the case now, (becoming a warrior class is a pretty big nerf anyway, but at least you still have the basics) but that definition makes it impossible to effectively play a fallen paladin. And that's just one example.

Tl;dr: Really wish they had actually given us a concrete and workable definition of what is and is not a class feature, rather than just FAQing this instance without giving us the principles to make further decisions.

Ok, so you are talking about a monk with holy powers. Which isn't taht different from a ki-monk. Though I suppose if you would rather it be its own class then that is that. I think it would be easily archetyped onto a Ki-monk

One more thing: Holy power from Buddha is hardly the norm for Asian fighting monks. In general, nothing would stem from the Buddha in any case. Buddha represents the greatest harmony with the universe, but the Monk would be drawing power by drawing close to the metaphysical principles of the universe itself.

But in any case, I think we can agree that having monk broken up would allow a more coherent design, and allow each classic martial arts fantasy archetype to shine :D

There have been plenty of Buddhist warrior priests with rather warlike tendencies through history. :D

I like Envalls breakup, and agree that the Brawler can work, but a more kung-fu feeling pure hand to hand martial character would be cool.

Aelrynth: While I agree in general about your assessment of Shaolin monks, what you are describing there is category one of Envall's breakdown with mystical practices. Unless you are assigning efficacy to their meditations, in which case they sound like classification 3. Or type 1 with an archetype.

I can see leaving a d8 hit die and using full BAB, though Paizo has linked BAB with HD type, so that may have been why they changed both as the same time. Though they made an exception in the BARB, so maybe they could have made one with the monk

The Unchained Monk has a flying kick style strike they can get at, I think 5th level. There are other style strikes, but I have a feeling flying kick will be the go-to 1st style strike people pick.

Style Strike

I wasn't actually aware that there was an archetype that granted that :P

Eh, it makes more sense than the other two. The paragon of physique and martial arts should have good Fort and Reflex. Will also, but its the lesser of the three. (of course then there's the question if they really needed to drop the saves anyway >.> If the class is underpowered, why not just pump it up?

Heck with flying kick, you will be flurrying most if not all the time anyway, so you probably wont even notice the BAB increase much. Unless you don't take flying kick, but who can pass up a pounce like ability every flurry?

the d20s you requested, MR DM sir: 1d20 ⇒ 1
the d20s you requested, MR DM sir: 1d20 ⇒ 17

I am game whichever way. Though I think I am interested in the meanwhile aspect--it utilizes the format in a way that would be impossible for face to face gaming.

oh, heh, sorry--I just figured out that the profile on the character section is independent of the campaign. I was waiting till Grellik was added to the characters in the campaign before updating his profile. I'll update that shortly

sounds fine by me. he plays by PC rules, then he oughta be illegible for Inspiration :D
(and thanks for the alert, I missed that I had a PM) I started a profile on openoffice, using Adrians, I think (though I looked at Ozz and Trissae's) but I figured I'd finalize that after I saw how it looked on the forum profile page.

Hah. hopefully you can get a couple more good rolls before the streak ends. :D (And ya gotta love getting 23 on a Disadvantaged roll! 23 whilst blindly pawing in the dark. hah!)

Its cool. I now with this format things move slowly and who knows how long it will take to get escaped. I'm confirmed on stats(bit the bullet and went for it. Cant worry too much about if its the ideal stat config for what I want :D), just need to do the background write-up. Luckily spells can wait for a while :D

The die roller is trying to kill you, adrian >.<

For the character as is? yeah, probably. Defintely not going to be multiclassing into rogue (if Grey is even allowing that :D). For a general 'monster' race to be used as another option in addition to the PHB races? Naw, these are the sorts of things that need to be considered before making a general use race.

Though a rogue build with bugbear would have a 16 dex max, so would need to use both 4th and 8th ability boosts on dex to get 20, whereas a +2dex race rogue could either split up the stats or use a +1dex feat, so there is that to consider

yeah, I think I will. wiiiiink. Seriously, though no complaints here :D

I'm in the same boat you are. I can see the argument that 2d6 is fair, an also see the argument that if you plan around it, 2d6 is too potent for a stealth based char. We'll probably just have to see how things play out (though I doubt Grellik will push that envelope too much, just because of the stat spread and class feature priorities, but we'll see)

probably good, yeah :D

yeah, I agree. (heck, I'm using it for fighter/mage :D)

Champion fighter archetype gives crits on 19-20. :D
But still, 1 in 20 or 1 in 10 are definitely less than 1 a long rest (and uncontrollable) on the other hand, half-orcs can also say "Nope!" to getting dropped once a long rest as well. But either way, I am fine with whatever gets decided on--I didn't pick it to be the bestest fighter ever, just one that stuck out to me as I constructed his backstory :D

@grey sounds good to me. I'll write it on my sheet :D

Brute is in the 5E monster manual entry (its what I mention in the parenthetical: bugbears as monsters get an extra die to their weapons, so 1d8 becomes 2d8, 2d6 becomes 3d6, etc. To make it not a "no duh" option for martial types, I figured it might be balanced with the Half-orc ability to do extra damage on crits if it was limited to, say, once or twice per long rest)

advantage on all STR saves seems to be pretty powerful and completely negates any need on my part to try to do things to try to get said advantage, but the weaker version sounds good. I am fine with ambush strike, and I am fine with either proficiency or none (of course, the proficiency is irrelevant to me personally, so I might be more apathetic than I might be otherwise :D)

But in any case, I figure Grey has enough to work with to approve a chassis for a bugbear PC race. Pretty sure all I need is that and to do the backstory writ-up all official-like and he'll be ready when the story calls for him :D

yeah, I'm pretty much cool with whatever periphery abilities get oked or come up with. The burly aspect is that they ate like 7ft tall, so, though they are not 'large,' they are way bigger than any of the PHB races.

My thoughts behind scaling down brute for player use is that if you get an extra, say, 1d6 damage a few times a day it pretty similar to the half-orc, get up to 1d12 extra damage 1 in 20 times, but of course you wouldn't want to make it too good (though with half-orc resilience, I think even if Brute beat out the half-orc crit feature many people might still take half-orc. But I am easy. Whatever Gray wants to do it fine with me :D

(and incidentally, I was thinking stealth instead of intimidate (though I wouldn't complain about both :D)

I think, looking at the options presented, that bugbear seems to mesh best with my vague mental archype I had in my head as well as meshing the best with the backstory, which I find I am rather attached to now :D
So, since Grey has given the go ahead, I'd like to fine-tune that bugbear racial template.

Since the AC seems to be pretty huge and the MM entry doesn't seem to have natural armor or anything, I think swapping that might be good. maybe some temp HP on rest to represent unnatural toughness (27hp for a challenge 1, though I think 5E monsters have more HP than equivalent PCs) as Trissae suggested, or toned down brute or surprise attack features (roll 1 extra weapon die on hit and do 2d6 damage if you hit in 1st round of combat after surprising someone, respectively)?(maybe limiting brute to once or twice a long rest, or reducing surprise attack damage dice to 1d6?

Right, being a STR fighter not having at least +1 STR (for a 16 starting) really hurts, and having a plus in what is essentially a dump stat is a lot less efficient, PB-wise, than having a plus in at least a peripheral stat.

I think, given the low total modifiers in a 5E character, most races can work for most classes (which is cool :D)

I think I'll incorporate the rival. Having a crime on his record actually accounts for his being in an outlaw group very well. if agents of the nation/friends of the rival found him, they may well come after him, making a legitimate profession very risky. Thanks :D

Grey, are you keeping to CHA being intimidate or can STR be used as the stat base?

oh, no, you got him onto puns! :D
RE AC: you are right, I wasnt thinking in terms of bounded accuracy, just looking at not getting hit 5% more vs doing more damage 5% more (or 10% with Champion archetype) (maybe something
RE too many feathers. I agree that too many incidentals can make a concept a cluttered mess, so its all about how well you make the details tie in. Heck, let me give the pitch and see if it still seems to not mesh. (just keep in mind I wrote it to get the idea accross, not to sound good. If this ends up being the end produict, I'll give it a better write up on my character page :D

Don't know forgotten realms geography nearly enough to even think of where this kingdom actually would be :D

I figure he is Lawful at heart, but recognizes that the law often pushes people who don't fit in onto the fringes, and that the powers that be tend to create order to society in such a way that they benefit, at the expense of the downtrodden.
his inner bugbear/tiefling/etc comes out in a lust for combat. He channels that to good ends, only fighting when he feels it is justified, though he does love to fight, and generally test his strength

@grey: If you want me to stick to PHB races, I can do that. I'll check out the various suggestions in any case and get back to you. :D[I had thought about Tieflings at one point, but their stat spread is really ppor for fighters, and only ok for INT casters (though cantrips are always fun :D)]

Definitely some points I hadn't considered, and a nice looking class setup(more creative than anything I could think of looking at the MM). Though I'm wondering if maybe, given that they have higher dex than hobgoblins or orcs, (heck they're not even quite as strong as orcs) maybe a +2str, +1 dex would prevent it from being a "every STR based build takes this" race. Oh and they have a big stealth bonus, so maybe swapping intimidate prof with stealth prof from half-orcs?

so you have compared to
+2STR, +1DEX//+2 str, +1 con
Dark Vision//Dark Vision
Languages: Common, Goblin//Languages: Common, Orc
Stalker: prof in Stealth//Menacing: Prof in Intimidate
Bulk: Advantage on str saving//Relentless: When reduced to 0hp, can
throws to resist being pushed//drop to 1 hp instead
back.
Tough Hide: +1 AC//When you crit, gain an extra x1 to the damage.
That actually looks pretty pound-for pound balanced to me, but I'm new to this edition :D
(sorry about the formatting, it looked all nice in the preview then the forum scrunched the text together so I had to separate some other way >.<
And I am not super attached to bugbears, per se. I was just thinking "Monstrous Humanoid" taken in, and accepted by a Knight (who happens to be a magic knight :D), then cast out (after the knights death) since others would not similarly look past his race.

So flipping through the 5E monster manual for those kinds of guys(bugbears, hobgoblins, and orcs came to mind), I noted that hobgoblins are more sneaky than the others (orcs being angry tribal, and Hobbos being very militaristic), with the implication that they are not as brave, and I thought maybe his bravery as a young child inspired the knight.

A thing I will say about the eldritch knight is that it seems slightly less studious than the normal wizard, given it has no access to arcana training and does not use a spellbook (though it's still an INT caster)