Warlock/wizard synergy. The wizards supplies Scribe Scroll, the warlock supplies the spell prerequisite using Imbue Item, and they Scribe Scrolls of every spell the wizard doesn't already know, so he can copy them into his spellbook. It isn't even obscure.
I never even thought of that one, lol, but there will be no lol's if any of my players try it.
Now I want to add a houserule spell: Summon Bigger Cheese.
I parry.
My cheese contribution: "The book does not say I can't so I can."
Ya know what? No one else need post for you sir just won the thread.
|
Warlock's ability to blast every round for eternity and casters' ability to cast Orisons/Cantrips thousands of times a day.Damn those fighters, they can attack every round for 2d6+6 at 1st level, with no daily limits. Broke
Ahahahahahaha. You sir, are fantastic. I shut down an "always needs something to complain about" player with the exact same argument.
|
|
Gotta add this...
At our local convention, a player had a character that was Barbarian1/ Paladin 3. His back story was that he was a "raging alcoholic until taken in by a kindly cleric who showed him a better way." He could Rage and then use his Lay On Hands (with the Mercy effect) to "cure' his fatigue! And it is all legal, RAW!
Gotta add this...
At our local convention, a player had a character that was Barbarian1/ Paladin 3. His back story was that he was a "raging alcoholic until taken in by a kindly cleric who showed him a better way." He could Rage and then use his Lay On Hands (with the Mercy effect) to "cure' his fatigue! And it is all legal, RAW!
in 3.5 you lost the ability to rage if you ceased being chaotic :)
|
|
Gotta add this...
At our local convention, a player had a character that was Barbarian1/ Paladin 3. His back story was that he was a "raging alcoholic until taken in by a kindly cleric who showed him a better way." He could Rage and then use his Lay On Hands (with the Mercy effect) to "cure' his fatigue! And it is all legal, RAW!
Well, it DOES require an alignment change, Rules As Written. I think it's extremely irresponsible of a DM to allow a character created beyond 1st level to just "explain away" something like that if it is being done to allow a particularly lucrative character build (and you would be hard-pressed to convince me game power wasn't the motivating force behind the Barb/Pal you mentioned). Any character created past 1st level cannot utilize any build that would *require* an alignment change.
If a character wanted to, using your example, start out 1st level as a Barbarian and actually PLAY through the alignment shift, then I'd say he earned it. It should take a while (more than on level, at least 2) and not be easy.
I know not everyone likes to get into the actual *role-playing* aspect of RPG's, but it's really the only thing that balances voluntary alignment change (something that can be ludicrously abused) at all.
Gotta add this...
At our local convention, a player had a character that was Barbarian1/ Paladin 3. His back story was that he was a "raging alcoholic until taken in by a kindly cleric who showed him a better way." He could Rage and then use his Lay On Hands (with the Mercy effect) to "cure' his fatigue! And it is all legal, RAW!
Well, it DOES require an alignment change, Rules As Written. I think it's extremely irresponsible of a DM to allow a character created beyond 1st level to just "explain away" something like that if it is being done to allow a particularly lucrative character build (and you would be hard-pressed to convince me game power wasn't the motivating force behind the Barb/Pal you mentioned). Any character created past 1st level cannot utilize any build that would *require* an alignment change.
If a character wanted to, using your example, start out 1st level as a Barbarian and actually PLAY through the alignment shift, then I'd say he earned it. It should take a while (more than on level, at least 2) and not be easy.
I know not everyone likes to get into the actual *role-playing* aspect of RPG's, but it's really the only thing that balances voluntary alignment change (something that can be ludicrously abused) at all.
I do however find that alignment restrictions on classes to be cheesy. You can say all assassins have to be evil, but it's not true, it just keeps people out of the prestige class that would like to play one. Why does every barbarian have to be chaotic? Why can't he be lawful and just get angry if he's fighting to the death? It's very silly in almost every circumstance. Paladins it makes them simple, but why can't Asmodeus have paladins who smite good? Why doesn't nethys have true neutral paladins? Silly Silly Silly.
|
|
I do however find that alignment restrictions on classes to be cheesy. You can say all assassins have to be evil, but it's not true, it just keeps people out of the prestige class that would like to play one. Why does every barbarian have to be chaotic? Why can't he be lawful and just get angry if he's fighting to the death? It's very silly in almost every circumstance. Paladins it makes them simple, but why can't Asmodeus have paladins who smite good? Why doesn't nethys have true neutral paladins? Silly Silly Silly.Gotta add this...
At our local convention, a player had a character that was Barbarian1/ Paladin 3. His back story was that he was a "raging alcoholic until taken in by a kindly cleric who showed him a better way." He could Rage and then use his Lay On Hands (with the Mercy effect) to "cure' his fatigue! And it is all legal, RAW!
Well, it DOES require an alignment change, Rules As Written. I think it's extremely irresponsible of a DM to allow a character created beyond 1st level to just "explain away" something like that if it is being done to allow a particularly lucrative character build (and you would be hard-pressed to convince me game power wasn't the motivating force behind the Barb/Pal you mentioned). Any character created past 1st level cannot utilize any build that would *require* an alignment change.
If a character wanted to, using your example, start out 1st level as a Barbarian and actually PLAY through the alignment shift, then I'd say he earned it. It should take a while (more than on level, at least 2) and not be easy.
I know not everyone likes to get into the actual *role-playing* aspect of RPG's, but it's really the only thing that balances voluntary alignment change (something that can be ludicrously abused) at all.
I disagree, but it may be because I have never had a problem with the idea that in the D&D world moral and philosophical standpoints are NOT relative and are in fact tangible and, indeed, sometimes physically manifested.
Barbarians have to be chaotic because they draw their super-human ability to rage from the innate chaos of their soul. It's something they create within themselves by having their very being aligned with the philosophical concept of chaos.
For Paladins, I have always took the view (sometimes they're written this way, sometimes they aren't) that, while loyal servants of their deity, they are primarily bastions and physical manifestations of the philosophical concept of law and the moral concept of good. Also, I don't know if this is RAW, but I usually allow Paladins of deities who are only one step away from Lawful Good (I.E. Lawful Neutral and Neutral Good) to further indicate that they are paragons of Law and Good first and of their god second, though they espouse Law and Good through the priorities of their deity.
And I agree with you, to an extent, on the Assassin. Always thought the restriction should be "only nongood". Just because I think alignment restriction has a sensible purpose does NOT mean I always think it's well handled.
I disagree, but it may be because I have never had a problem with the idea that in the D&D world moral and philosophical standpoints are NOT relative...I do however find that alignment restrictions on classes to be cheesy. You can say all assassins have to be evil, but it's not true, it just keeps people out of the prestige class that would like to play one. Why does every barbarian have to be chaotic? Why can't he be lawful and just get angry if he's fighting to the death? It's very silly in almost every circumstance. Paladins it makes them simple, but why can't Asmodeus have paladins who smite good? Why doesn't nethys have true neutral paladins? Silly Silly Silly.Gotta add this...
At our local convention, a player had a character that was Barbarian1/ Paladin 3. His back story was that he was a "raging alcoholic until taken in by a kindly cleric who showed him a better way." He could Rage and then use his Lay On Hands (with the Mercy effect) to "cure' his fatigue! And it is all legal, RAW!
Well, it DOES require an alignment change, Rules As Written. I think it's extremely irresponsible of a DM to allow a character created beyond 1st level to just "explain away" something like that if it is being done to allow a particularly lucrative character build (and you would be hard-pressed to convince me game power wasn't the motivating force behind the Barb/Pal you mentioned). Any character created past 1st level cannot utilize any build that would *require* an alignment change.
If a character wanted to, using your example, start out 1st level as a Barbarian and actually PLAY through the alignment shift, then I'd say he earned it. It should take a while (more than on level, at least 2) and not be easy.
I know not everyone likes to get into the actual *role-playing* aspect of RPG's, but it's really the only thing that balances voluntary alignment change (something that can be ludicrously abused) at all.
Barbarian rage can be easily explained as getting high on an adrenaline rush. Since I think alignments are silly, I also think them manifesting themselves physically/magically is silly :) But since they exist I try to play nice.
Yeah, and crossbows! Totally cheesy that you can keep shooting them, up to 10 times a minute for as long as you want!
Huh? Since when?
I know you like to be sarcastic sometimes, but, for the sake of the discussion, I'll point out that crossbows need ammunition, which can't be supplied "as long as you want" except by using a magical mean of some sort... or an equally infinite Strength.
And they can be fired up to 50 times a minute (5 times per round), too, if you have Rapid Reload, Rapid Shot, and a high enough BAB (possibly more if more feats exist to increase your rate of fire, or, again, some magic implement).
EDIT: To stay in the topic of the OP, I'd like to add Wild Shape as "cheese" (yes, despite the fact that many posters here don't seem to like it). I find this ability very versatile and on the verge of broken if we use older D&D material like feats and prestige classes.
Recently my group was having the discussion of what requires the biggest "stretch of imagination" to allow when playing Pathinder/3.5
Allowing for such things as spells, prayers, monk powers, etc We came to the conclusion that the spiked chain was the biggest stretch. No one could logically see how someone could effectively wield a spiked chain in combat and yet it was one of the most powerful wapons in 3.5 before it's nerfing.What do you all see as "the biggest cheese"?
LOL
No disrespect to the spiked chain wielders of the world
in 3.x I say:
- spiked chain- animated shield.
In 3.x and PF
- the druid (Me and my animal living in the woods. I don't like people I like animals)
- the monk (monks really doesn't fit the game world)