The Chazter's page

With all the skills and skill points rogues have at their disposal, you might expect to see a lot of variety from one rogue to the other, but it seems they almost always end up with the same classic 'thief' skills. Has anyone tried something different? How did it work out?

According to Chase's 2006 Calendar of Events, today, the 13th, is 'Embrace Your Geekness Day'. The description of the holiday in the calendar starts with "Are you into Dungeon games?". So, I was just wondering, which comes first...Does playing a dungeon game make you a geek OR do geeks just naturally gravitate to dungeon games? Hmmm.

Ok. So we've heard everyone talk about their favorite race, class, combo, etc. Well, how about your least favorite enemy or your most feared opponent...not just the baddest of the bad period, but the baddest at different CRs? Just wondering.

Recent threads have gotten me thinking about how expansions, specifically those that introduce new feats, classes, races or prestige classes that might not be as well balanced as the core groups, could lead to an arms race among players. For example, if one player buys an expansion the other players don't have which contains a new class that seems a little too good to the other players, another player may then purchase an expansion to find themselves a new class so as not to feel at a disadvantage. The DM might then up the difficulty of encounters to keep them challenging for the new classes, which would then put players who didn't purchase an expansion at a further disadvantage...unless they choose a new class too. I've seen this happen to some extent in games I've played. Has anyone else experienced something similar in their games?

In case you never check that board, here's an interesting post I noticed last week. I've added to it slightly...
If you were plunged into a D&D world permanently, which setting would you choose, and what race & class would you want be? Unless you're itching to play a human commoner, assume you could be polymorphed into whatever race you like and be trained in whatever skills you desire. Think about more than just being the biggest baddest mo-fo on the block. If you're stuck there and want to survive or even prosper, how would you do it?

Forgive this most humble question from an unworthy player who has only the Player's Handbook... Are there any variant racial write-ups for the standard elf in any of the official supplements? What I'm looking for is something that focuses on elves non-militant cultural interests like their aptitude for the magical arts, their love of lore, their affinity with nature and their talent in the performing arts. I'd like to find a racial package that replaces most of the free weapon feats with skill bonuses like Spellcraft, Use Magic Device, Knowledge(history or nature), Survival and Performance(oratory, dance, singing). BTW, why do elves 'as is' get so many free weapon feats while ignoring these other interests? They could be so much more…interesting, IMHO.

Aside from the obvious benefit(i.e. more or enhanced powers and abilities), why do you choose to play a prestige class? Since my 3ed experience is limited, I'm going by my 2ed experience that many players, at least the ones I was around, chose kits mostly if not entirely for the extra powers and abilities gained rather than the roleplaying potential, which always seemed like a munchkiny thing to do to me. Unless you're trying to pimp your pc, why not just stay with the class you start with, multi-class if want more versatility, and define your character by your actions and roleplaying rather than a prestige class? Just asking...

I like to play rogues. Rogues, that is, not thieves. They're adventurers, not criminals. They use their talents to help the party succeed, just as the other party members do, not to prey on innocents. So, why do I have to go to out-of-the way shops to purchase a new set of tools? Why am I the one that gets funny looks when something turns up missing (because, it turns out, the freakin' mage misplaced it). Every class has talents which could be used for good or bad, so why am I the usual suspect? Are every warrior's tools-of-the-trade(i.e. their weapons) considered 'assasin's' tools? No? Then why are every rogue's tools-of-the-trade considered 'thieves'' tools?

I like to play rogues. Rogues, that is, not thieves. They're adventurers, not criminals. They use their talents to help the party succeed, just as the other party members do, not to prey on others. So, why do I have to go to out-of-the way shops to purchase a new set of tools? Why am I the one that gets funny looks when something turns up missing (because, it turns out, the freakin' mage misplaced it). Every class has talents which could be used for good or bad, so why am I the usual suspect? Are every warrior's tools-of-the-trade(i.e. their weapons) considered 'assasin's' tools? No? So, why are every rogue's tools-of-the-trade considered 'thieves'' tools?

The Craft skill is listed as usable untrained, but I'm wondering how much an untrained crafter can actually do without supervision? Some skills, like Alchemy, for example, seem practically impossible without at least some training. I'm not talking about just throwing chemicals together to see if you come up with something useful, but rather trying to accomplish a specific task like create this or identify that. Your thoughts?

Hi. I'd like to join a small group of mature players for some serious D&D. I like good stories, interesting NPCs, unusual encounters and lots of roleplaying. I don't like hack-n-slash or munchkins. Although I'm fairly new to 3.5, I'm a quick learner and a reliable player. If you've got the game and you need another player, let's talk more. Thanks!

As everyone knows, Paladins are not allowed to use poison because it violates their code of conduct. So what is it about poison that makes it so bad? Some of you may say that it's bad because one's enemy doesn't necessarily know when one is using it against them, so it's a hidden advantage, and that makes it dishonorable. Others may say that it causes unnecessary pain or suffering, so that makes it evil. But I don't understand either of these arguments since many creatures use natural poisons simply for defense or capturing prey. Does that make them dishonorable or evil creatures? What if a Paladin were to use toxins for the same reasons? And if the use of posion is not permissable, why is the use of magic ok? Both can be hidden advantages, and both can cause several unpleasant effects on one's enemy. Whether you strike a foe with a sword that's enchanted to do extra damage or coated with poison to do extra damage, the intent and effect are the same. And since toxins could be used to incapacitate or capture an opponent without having to fight to the death, just as magic could, that would seem to make them a useful tool for a good and lawful character. What am I missing?

Ok, I may be wrong about this, but it seems like most talk here and most games I've played in recently focus on combat and power-gaming rather than story and roleplaying. I always liked D&D as a system for interactive story-telling with a little combat thrown in for excitement, but it seems like it's become more of a video game with a little story thrown in for flavor. Now, I like a good first-person shooter on the pc as much as the next guy, but when I play D&D, I want something with a lot more depth. Am I way off here? What do you guys think?