|
My friends and I decided to create whole new characters when PRPG Beta became available. I grew rather tired of game-mastering, so I decided to change thngs for a bit and play. I've rolled 6x3d6 - and came up with this: 18, 18, 17, 17, 17, 16. I men, wow. But then, I realized that I was in a bit of problem. Character that gifted with physical and mental abilities should be something more than an average lvl1 PC - but what? In 2nd Ed. that place was reserved for paladins, with their high ability req's, but what to do in 3.p game? Is it justifiable to create prestige class available at 1st level, bu with high ability requirements?
|
Amazing rolls. Consider playing a class that is typically more mentally oriented, such as a human sorcerer. With those stats, you can be a decent combatant in addition to having amazing spellcasting and socializing ability.
If you can convince your DM, maybe he would let you gestalt class (2 classes at once). Keep in mind, your character is already really powerful, so this makes them moreso.
Contributor
|
I'd be careful about creating a whole new prestige class or any other class that builds on what is already a pretty powerful character. As Jal Dorak has indicated, the character already has the ability to handle most any kind of challenge just by the nature of his physical and mental makeup.
Adding additional powers to that mix creates the risk of having that one character outshine the other characters in the group almost all the time...which can lead to problems at the table. Players may be able to deal with a character who got lucky rolls, but may not be so forgiving if he gets cool powers that they can't have just because of those rolls.
However, you do have the ability to do some things that many characters never do...even without creating a new class. You could have a fighter with lots of skills (maybe try using the variant fighter ability presented in the PFCS hardcover) and play him like a strong detective type.
I know I'd love to play a Pathfinder version of Agent Pendergast from the Douglas Preston and Lincoln Child books (Relic, Reliquary, Still Life with Crows, and several others). He's basically a cross between Jet Li, Sherlock Holmes, and Indiana Jones...but he's an albino with a New Orleans Southern accent...you probably need to read the books. Regardless, a character like that would need high scores in every ability.
Anyway, I'd say stick with the core classes and look at possibilities there, rather than creating a special class or prestige class. But those are just my two cents.
|
|
Mulitclassing possibilities are endless, but I would rather create something unique, that would reflect those scores and - perhaps - provide a reason for them. A rogue chosen at birth by Luck; a fighter born at the battlefield and blessed by the god of war; a dwarven cleric last of his bloodline, destined to restore it. But a rogue is a rogue, fighter is a fighter and cleric is a cleric, no mater how gifted. I think that there should be classes that reflect unique destinies of such characters, not available to common men.
|
|
Mulitclassing possibilities are endless, but I would rather create something unique, that would reflect those scores and - perhaps - provide a reason for them. A rogue chosen at birth by Luck; a fighter born at the battlefield and blessed by the god of war; a dwarven cleric last of his bloodline, destined to restore it. But a rogue is a rogue, fighter is a fighter and cleric is a cleric, no mater how gifted. I think that there should be classes that reflect unique destinies of such characters, not available to common men.
Why not use the optional swapping rules in the PHB? Exchange a few class abilities for others freely. For example, make a Sorcerer, but exchange your familiar for Turn Undead. Maybe even add a few, like Smite Evil.
|
I would really have to disagree that a rogue is a rogue, a fighter a fighter and a wizard a wizard.
I would say that D'Artagnian is a rogue unlike what most people play rogues as. He certainly is not a fighter with his skills. I would certainly never create a prestige class available at lvl 1. Almost by definition it isn't a prestige class.
I would create a core character and build to a prestige class. Just like usual.
You want a character who destined for greatness. But he has to get there first. Even if he has the basic building blocks of greatness, he has to achieve that greatness himself. He has to go from birth to boyhood to teenager to man to hero. The very best part could easily be the story of how he manages to achieve his prestige class. Or does he fall short of the destiny that was laid out before him?
Was he born to common starving beggars in the streets and lived a childhood that challenged him mentally and physically? Does he take that childhood and start off in a career meant to raise himself out of poverty and into wealth and power? Along the way does he learn he has the ability to affect the destiny of others? Does he learn that he can ease the suffering of the poor, bring justice to a corrupt land and in so doing become something more than himself?
The story of his growth is what I would focus on and not the mechanics. Play the guy like a normal PC at first, with an eye to a prestige class you like. Have him change over time and become more heroic. Most PCs are not very heroic at all, but rather greedy mercenaries. Make him a hero in every facet of the word, and no matter what his class he will be different.
Try reading this book if you have time. It is a great read.
Super abilities are going to make you stand out regardless of what "class" you choose. You don't need a "super class" to take advantage of them all.
What you need is a melee/casting class. Paladin is good, Ranger is good. Both are strong melee with moderate to weak spell casting. I would probably recommend Paladin just because of the synergy you'll get out of all those good stats.
(good str/wis/con/int/cha? Yes please! and good dex just for kicks).
Alternatively go Cleric. Largely for the same reasons- all the stats are useful.
If you want to purely shine on your ability scores I would shy away from arcane casters. Having a high Str really doesn't in any shape or fashion make you a better arcane caster. Its nice, but it doesn't really "shine" like it would with the Caster/melee cleric type, or Melee/caster Paladin or ranger.
Rogue is good too actually. high str to offset dual wielding and stacks with SA, good con dex and int, and cha. Only wis is left in the dust, and even that has usefulness with alot of skills. a full 6/6 useful ability scores.
If you can't decide- then let the party all pick their new class first then you shore up the gap. No cleric? There ya go. No rogue? Now there's you!. The good thing about so many high scores is that you can literally pick ANY class and be 100% at it.
-S
|
|
Yes, it will be Golarion campaign. And I'm still loking for something different - not more powerful than core classes. Perhaps a duskblade or a warlock in Golarion? A class that already exists, but not in core rules. Imagine, the only warlock in the world, or knight, or warlock knight...
DUDE KNIGHTS ROCK!
I can see a good story coming from playing a Knight at first, then multiclassing to a Paladin or Cleric.
|
|
My first class will be rogue. It fits the background of the character I've created. Then possibly two-weapon wielding paladin.
Ok I can see that too. The dual wielding can build upon the experiences of the rogue.
So, come on tell us more about what you are working out. This can be a really cool charcter or epic proportions... no pressure :)
|
|
DM just decided to allow PC's to start with two levels in chosen class(es), so my character will be Rogue 1/Paladin 1. Main reason for the rogue is character's background (orphan abandoned to the streets until his teacher found him is one idea) and a lot of skills. Now, I would like to modify paladin a little. If I remove Divine Bond and spellcasting ability, would it be to much to replace them with druid's animal companion?
Another option that would fit your background story would be a battle sorcerer (from the SRD -variant on a straight up sorcerer).
|
Just because you've got good stats doesn't mean you need to come up with some special class or anything along those lines. It's actually kind of offensive to suggest that.
That character already gets the benefit of high stats and that's what will set it apart. It gets more hit points/skill points/etc for every level it takes in any class, so it's going to automatically appear better then average on a character sheet in any class.
Being one of the best starting wizard/fighter/druid/cleric/bard/sorcerer/whatever you pick/etc should be quite enough.
|
|
Ok, forget the stats. Forget the special destiny and background. I decided that I would like to play a kind of druidic paladin, and I would like to sacrifice some of the paladin class abilities to gain druid's animal companion. What should be traded? It is well worth to mention that I'm playing with these guys very long time and that we're all friends. Nobody minds the high scores of my character. In fact, they are pleased, because this is my first PC in years. Most of the time I'm DM. So... any suggestions?
The classes that require multiple ability scores to work are the best options. The monk is one of them. The Swordsage is a VERY good option too. But the good ol' rogue would have a lot of personality wuth thos scores.
I would go rogue/ranger/wizard.
With those stats you can even go for president!
Don't go multiclass.
Go single class Bard.
With stats like these you'll be brilliant in everything you'll do : combat, skills, spells and all.
And you'll level faster.
I do not agree with a class for this one set of rolls. I have played as and with some of the best characters all created with less then super rolls. I have heard every complait about bad rolls, getting the 3 or 6 or 9 on a roll and begging for re-rolls.
The rolls mean nothing but what you put into them, and i do not really think a new class to befit this great set of rolls is called for. It would help you more in skill and abiltys class more then say a fighter or a rage monkey, but even that said, they would be the most likely to be played into another class.
I find alot of people do forget to this is a roleplaying game to, so as much as my bird like worbling( not to offend anyone on the post) or any of my other player/dms might like to think. So.. i think this could be the best think for a very interesting game.
But i say again rolls are rolls are rolls, only mean so much, you will run into stronger giants, and smarter villans, so do not let that all go to your head, and play them how they should be, in the game.
Hope it helps your case and everyone else's.
If I remove Divine Bond and spellcasting ability, would it be to much to replace them with druid's animal companion?
As a GM, I would have no problem with you changing your divine bond for a druid's animal companion. I would require a good backstory, and of course, the deity would have to be carefully chosen.
|
|
If I remove Divine Bond and spellcasting ability, would it be to much to replace them with druid's animal companion?As a GM, I would have no problem with you changing your divine bond for a druid's animal companion. I would require a good backstory, and of course, the deity would have to be carefully chosen.
I agree. It would actually be kind of nice to see a druidic paladin. I don't really see this as a prestige class or special class for having high abilities, but rather a variant class similar to Unearthed Arcana.
Are you sticking with the orphan on the streets theme or something more primitive and wild? I think an orphan on the streets that developed the animal companion first is rather cool. Rather STreet Shaman-esque from Shadowrun. The nature of being on the streets can easily inspire one to greatness and to champion Good, so a paladin would be a natural choice. Combined with the animal companion from childhood (perhaps your animal totem?) the druidic paladin becomes quite interesting.
Dang now I wanna play one!
So let me get this straight.
You rolled ridiculously good stats...
...and you want to be even MORE special?
|
|
Well, all of my characters were special, even with average scores. I always try to create unique backgrounds and personal histories, even if the character will last just one game session. For instance, this character - I will call him Rand for now - is 6'3'' Varissian vith long white hair and one eye colored blue, one green. He grew up at the Varissian traveling circus or some such, but he newer did fit in. Life at he circus made him a rogue. One day he rescued a little lame bear cub from a heartless trainer who tried to made it dance by burning it's feat - and connection was made. Then, some people came to the caravan and told him that he has a greater destiny. That's how he became paladin. During the rogue level, the bear was still a cub, but it grew up to the size of brown bear in time for Rand to become a paladin. Rand knows that he doesn't look like a Varisian, and he want's to find out who is he. He heard about Seoni and figures that she prety much looks like him, so he would like to find her and ask her some questions. That's it for now.
Ok, forget the stats. Forget the special destiny and background. I decided that I would like to play a kind of druidic paladin [snip] So... any suggestions?
Check out the Sentinel class from Dragon 310. It's a paladin variant that is more focused on the natural world. Rather than a mount, they gain a celestial minion which is like a celestial animal companion.
It's a class (and paladin mount replacement option) that I'm quite fond of and I think it might suit You too.
|
|
Well, some changes were made to our soon to begin game: One of the players wants to play warforged artificer, so the whole game is moved to Eberron. The other one want's to explore the possibilities of a gestalt character. DM said: "Fine, but you'll all need twice as many exp to level up." What are your experiences with gestalt characters, if any? To me it looks a lot like the old demihuman multiclassing in 2nd Ed.
I actually rather like Gestalt characters. I think they are best-suited to a game where there are only a few players (fewer than the standard 4/5 anyway) and the group would otherwise have holes in their class diversity or players would need to run multiple characters to offer decent diversity.
In terms of the comparison to pre 3E multiclassing, it's been far too long since I've played 2nd Ed, but [from what I recall] I think Your basic analogy is correct. Characters simultaneously advance in two-classes at each level-up. This means that You could have a character who is a 6th level Sentinel (NG paladin variant) and a 6th level Druid but they would be a 6th level character rather than a 12th level character.
As far as running Gestalts alongside non-Gestalt characters, I have have yet to see a concensus on a fair and viable way to do this. However, Your DM's idea to require a Gestalt to need 2× as much XP to level seems about right. An easier solution might be to have the normal party members advance using the Fast XP progression while the Gestalts advance using the medium or even slow progression. In this way, the Gestalts will remain 1 or 2 levels behind [the non-Gestalts] at lower-levels but may be behind by 3 or 4 levels as You approach level 20. (Just compare the XP values needed to reach each level on the XP chart.)
Mind You, a Gestalt shouldn't be counted as having a character level that is the sum of their dual advancements, otherwise they'll be nigh useless well before the non-Gestalts are 10th level.
|
|
The board just ate my post! grmph! again! Well, I'm sorry to say that I probably won't play that druidic paladin. DM penalized me and decided that I should be the last to choose classes, and one other guy wants to play warforged artificer/paladin. We'll probably have a sorcerer/cleric as well, so I realy don't know what to play now.
|
|
The last couple of hours I've been busy helping the other players with their characters, so I've neglected my own. The party will consist of a favored soul/sorcerer, who will later take levels in exorcist of silver flame/silver pyromancer and artificer/paladin who will later take levels in spellcarved soldier - and my own character. Game master has given his ok for me to play Thri-kreen, so my character will start with Thri-kreen's racial levels and proceed to take levels in fighter/wildlander.
You should play a "Paragon".
I came up with this Class Idea a while ago, but never fully designed it.
Basic Idea:
You are constantly trying to reach and break your limits to reach ascendency.
Think of a Monk/Cleric/Paladin something.
I would propose:
Medium BAB (All simple weapons, light armor)
4 or 6 Skill points (maybe increasing through special bonus feats)
Three good stats OR Will at 1st and improving the other on certain class levels
Bunch of special abilities like diamond body, divine health, etc.
Just look at the Monk, Paladin and Cleric domain lists and see what might fit.
No spells (just don't fit the concept)
Capstone Ability: ASCENSION
You become an native outsider with DR10/opposed alignment or magic (don't know)
.
.
.
.
Ok. The more I think about it, the more I realize that it's just a monk without this stupid unarmed fighting stuff.
But maybe that's the way the "Monk" should be after all.
Away with the unarmed combat and give him/her more special abilities (as I said, take a look at Paladin/Cleric/Druid maybe)
and include more general bonus feats.
But If this might be to much work, just consider a Gestalt Monk.
Sorcerer, Wizard, Cleric and Druid might all be quite powerful combinations with the abilities you rolled.
Cheers!
Actually, I never really liked them... :(
(At least, not in a western orientated fantasy setting)
thrown weapon. i would say take quick draw and latter weapon focus this will help you in the earler levels to hit something, you will have the weapon out quick, and most other range feats will work.
Brutal throw will let you use your stg over dex
and then Power throw is the power attack but in throw form,and you need brutal throw and power attack, so for monk, i would let it go, uless you do take fighter, but the skills you would lose.
|
|
I'll play fighter/wildlander. The party needs designated combatant, and the others decided it should be me, because my character has best stats. I'll play Thri-kreen, so I'll use those throwing weapons of theirs in conjunction with wildlander's bonus feats. I'll just replace archery weapon style with throwing weapons, and wildlanders have nice skills per level.
|
this doesn't have to be your character since you already seem to have decided but a melee/sorceror can be a good primary combatant with the arcane strike feat(or something like that) from complete warrior that lets you channel your spells into your attacks, for huge damage bonus. This works especially well with the fighter/spellcaster prestige class from the DMG.
Sorry for being unspecific in names of things BTW, I dont have my books with me so...
One of the ideas I was working on was fighter.warlock or paladin/warlock.
Aren't the Warlock and Paladin's alignment requirements incompatible? Paladins are required to be Lawful Good, while [if memory serves me correctly] Warlocks cannot be Lawful (unless also Evil). Is my recollection correct or is the alignment statement for the Warlock merely flavor rather than a restriction?