The Innkeeper's page

18 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.



1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:

I'd say a bigger problem is people ignoring class and background aspects because they see some mechanic they want and toss all flavor and fluff out the window in the pursuit mechanical coolness or fluffy snowflakeness.

This. Some class abilities/descriptions are very flavorful and would have an impact on a character's personality and background.

For instance, I once had an elven ranger with favored-enemy elf. A lot of people might gloss over that, but it was a defining aspect of that character's roleplay for me. This was an elf who hated other elves, and that was worked heavily into his backstory and the way he interacted with other elves.

In saying "Your class is not your character" you could say, take favored enemy elf as an elf and instead of explaining it that he suffered some deep betrayal that made him embittered toward his own race and people... you could say your elf grew up in an area where there was in-fighting between elven tribes leading to a very different take on that particular ability in terms of roleplay.

In our current campaign, one of our characters has a few levels in ranger and practically worships dragons (Literally I guess considering his diety is Apsu.) We gave him favored enemies related to dragons to reflect the fact he knows a lot about and has spent time around those creatures. Spending a lot of time in the presence of good-aligned dragons means you know more about that evil dragon you need to help fight.

But if you literally never mentioned why you had this ability that causes you to be better at killing elves or dragons or whatever, it never affects your roleplay with elves/dragons etc. then I might say you're roleplaying your character wrong. Not because you chose to take an individualized spin on that element of your character, but because you chose to ignore it entirely.

TL:DR - The only way to roleplay your class wrong is to ignore it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Truestike is far from a useless spell but yes, the action economy makes it bad in most scenarios. A scenario that makes it good though is for-instance, a build based on a single big hit such as a mounted lancer or especially a sniper casting a silenced truestrike immediately before initiating an ambush.

Or anyone casting the regular version when the DM says something like "You hear them rushing toward the door. You have one round to prepare. What do you do?"

Their first hit is going to hit nearly unerringly and if they are a big hit focused build, that's huge.

Like most arcane spells, it's fine because while it is situational, you don't have to prepare it. Just keep it around as a wand or scroll for when you need it.

The psionic version is just straight better though. You can use it just like truestrike when needed, or use it for a +5 bonus as a swift. THIS DOES NOT ASSUME ANY ADDITIONAL POWERPOINT COST. This assumes 1 powerpoint AKA 5th level psion with an int of 11 can do this 25 times a day. A 5th level phycic warrior with a wisdom of 14 could manifest this 12 times per day.

It only gets better from there if you do choose to use more powerpoints.

As I said. It is objectively better in every single way.

Again I'm not arguing psionics are overpowered. Though I personally would never play a non-prepared caster over a psion. Then again I dislike non-prepared casters as a rule anyway. I feel like they match a well-played wizard in power level, filling a role of a less versatile caster who is very good at the things they are good at.