I've been reading through this thread almost from the beginning. There's one point somewhere around the 40th-50th comment that I had to say something about:
Sorry, didn't mean to anger you into sarcasm. Be tactical sure, but NO they shouldn't be as tactical as any character with an 18 INT. Unfortunately our own intelligence bleeds into the characters and so as responsible gamers you need to ask yourself occasionally if something is reasonable.10 Int is average. 100 IQ is average. 120 IQ is more than one standard deviation beyond the norm, counting for above average, but not-quite-gifted intelligence, so we could assume that this 12 INT sorcerer is actually a pretty bright old coot. The fact of the matter is, as much as we all want to be special, just under 70% of the population's IQ falls between 85-115, sothere's no WAY your personal mind is going to "influence" the sorcerer more than it would the wizard.
That is, unless you personally have an IQ of 180 (which is way past the genius line...to the point where the government would probably have contacted your parents when your initial testing results came in).
Most posters assume they have an above average IQ. The truth is debatable (comprehensive IQ tests aren't commonly given and many people distrust the entire notion) but it's a long standing gamer conceit.
Maybe cdglantern meant that an above average IQ combined with meta-textual knowledge of the game system could approximate a high in-game Int?
That is exactly what I suggest. The example that is easiest is as follows. As we fight, we are given a perfect grid to look down upon from a birds eye view. We are also given minutes to make split second decisions. So when placing a character on the grid to be in the most advantageous place, it is easier to do it from the players perspective than it would be if you yourself were actually in that room, looking across the field, instead of down upon, and given only a few meager seconds to determine the best course of action. Now I am no genius, but I can make more intelligent decisions as a player, than a character with my intelligence could, simply because of perspective.
This is just one example.
|
So to recap the arguements are Lichs are powerful and gain a lot of powerful abilities vs So?
Heres a question
One...Would you allow the character Raving Dork posted? Yes or No
Two...Would you allow a PC to gain the Lich template?
Three...Would the Group you play in have a problem with a PC gaining a powerful template?
Yes or no explain it you wish but please answer the question first.
1) yes...I have no issues with the character as is...2 strength and all. It is within the rules and I am okay with that.
2) yes...if the campaign has evil allowed. Most games I run do not...but some do. However I would use the guideline given (as there is no rules) and apply a 2 LA for the template...on top of the cost and RP req.
3) no...but once again, we would follow the guideline and apply LA...which makes those powerful templates less tasty for powergaming purposes and are more role play options.
So basically what would annoy me if I was one of the players would be his attempts to basically try to get the lich template for free against the guidelines.
wraithstrike wrote:
If he insisted on being a Lich at level 11 I probably would have had a benefactor loan him the money he needed for a service to be named later.
Actually, Hama could have done just that. The party benefactor agreed to pay for Hama's ritual in full provided she signed a magical contract that would forever bind her to his service for forever and eternity. She turned down the offer. Had it been for 50 years or 100 years, then she would have said yes, but not for eternity.
Also, why would low mental stats make any difference when she was young? She was a ditzy blonde, so what? Now that she is older and has some tact, she is doing things. Also, the imp corrupted her (well, corrupted her more) with the tempations of lichdom in return for something she didn't think she even had to begin with (her soul). You don't need to be a genius archmage for something like that to happen.
I would not have taken the forever deal either, and I would not have tried to give a player that deal. One very dangerous quest or something less dangerous, but conflicting with the party's goals would have been more like it.
I guess someone is keeping score. :)
The reason why I am against RP'ing equaling free mechanical things is that it opens up a whole bag of worms*. Now I don't know how your DM will hand the lich's power in comparison to the group, but in most groups the template gives a considerable power boost, and it gets rid of a caster's need to even make most fort saves, which is the one most likely to kill them. The defenses are one reason we are against the LA. We can only go by norms, since we don't know how you DM does things.
Taking force of personality would allow you to add your charisma to your will saves.
*What if Fred the fighter RP's himself to be weak(actually dumping strength) and makes a dex fighter then ask the DM to let him add dex to damage with his reasoning being that his focus on his dex allows him to do so. (The story would be more detailed than this, but you get my point)
I have been on the interwebs long enough to know that a person can justify anything if they want it bad enough, and how is the DM going to decide when to say no.
PS: I did not see the link to the character sheets. Not knowing what they can do is one reason why I doubt the template will only put you on par with them, instead of passing them in power. I will look for it(the link).
So to recap the arguements are Lichs are powerful and gain a lot of powerful abilities vs So?
Heres a question
One...Would you allow the character Raving Dork posted? Yes or No
Two...Would you allow a PC to gain the Lich template?
Three...Would the Group you play in have a problem with a PC gaining a powerful template?
Yes or no explain it you wish but please answer the question first.
1: Yes if it was a resulted from careful planning from the group.
2: Yes, see above.
3: Not anymore - see below
BenignFacist wrote:
Realizing that PK'ing was not on the cards until climatic ending allowed you to gamble more so with your dump stat, extremely more so, then usual.Are you implying that a normal play group would attack its own members? Even though this is an evil game, I was hoping for (and counting on) smart evil, not stupid evil.
Not a normal group, no, but our group used to, constantly plan and often attack. Flex statistical muscles, swagger and boast.
Games crumbled, characters were remade, names were called.
It was a constant 'Who can utilise the system teh bestus' cold war. Nonone would be openly hostile at first but everyone had their finger on a big red button 'Just In Case' :)
We're still good friends for what it's worth.
We had a true role-player who'd want the most normal characters as possible, myself who just enjoyed making and breaking characters/campaigns and then there were three others who were.. very paranoid and desperate to be the last ones standing, even though there was no open intention of anyone being a target.
It was simply a way for them to have the option, if they chose to use it, to do what they wanted and damn the party!
Hey, we were young and... ..jerks! :)
..ah the days.
So not, not a normal group, but you're not in a normal situation! Now we plan out our campaigns together, map out possible character paths and generally work together to build a dynamic enviroment for character growth.
Anyway, enough of memory lane.
Good luck with being the last one standing! :)
(Ravingdork is with the most points so far.)I will remember this later one because basically his argument is that RP'ing should get you free stuff.
Edit: Now it makes more sense.
I'm at the last page now, phew. Just went low to see responses to my post, hehe. RD is still ahead (although I don't like min/maxers to much)
Wraith, I didn't understand your edit mate, care to shed some light on the subject?
|
|
On a side note...good god is the cleric gimped. 17 wisdom on a 25 point buy on a level 9 character?!? He really should have lowered the strength and upped the wisdom and use spells to melee when he felt like it. And his armor check should be -5 when using the greatsword and not the shield and -7 when using the shield. And a large shield is a BAD idea for cleric anyways. You can cast just fine with a light shield and a weapon...or using a two handed weapon so you should pick one of those and stuck with it.
Oh and the barb/monk's AC is 1 high. The second monk AC bonus happens at monk 8, he's only monk 6.
And the archer doesn't have deadly aim?!?...FYI the archer with rapid shot should be WAY outdoing the barb/monk unless she is being played like an idiot (or the enemies are...which may explain how you survived 10 high level paladin archers...smiting/rapid shooting paladin archers should have dropped you in round one to...um dead). Also her armor check should be -1 not -2. Her stats once again...not so good. She really should have more strength.
And this is from a quick glance.
(Ravingdork is with the most points so far.)I will remember this later one because basically his argument is that RP'ing should get you free stuff.
Edit: Now it makes more sense.
I'm at the last page now, phew. Just went low to see responses to my post, hehe. RD is still ahead (although I don't like min/maxers to much)
Wraith, I didn't understand your edit mate, care to shed some light on the subject?
Before the edit it sounded like I was on RD side, and against him at the same time. I was quiet confused and I was the one that wrote it so I edited to make it clear that I don't think RP'ing should get you free stuff. Making yourself easily killable on purpose gets you no pity points here since he could have been a lich with a hardier character.
RD I checked the file you posted. The way those guys are built the template will put you far ahead of them unless the are getting something special also.
When you get the template I would like for you to post and tell us how the DM kept everyone even with using a level adjustment. Those guys don't stand a chance if you decide to kill them once you become a lich.
I am honestly surprised that you and the barbarian/monk are not dead.
PS: Your group does have nice pics for the characters.
(Ravingdork is with the most points so far.)I'm at the last page now, phew. Just went low to see responses to my post, hehe. RD is still ahead (although I don't like min/maxers to much)
I agree. I'm not going to beat a dead horse, but I'm with the "why should you be punished for having a better character" line of thinking.
Heck, I want to know HOW did you it RavingDork?
I've got a game coming up soon where I'm 99% sure I'm going to play a wizard. I'm going to be a Diviner going into Loremaster: needless to say, this guy is obsessed with knowledge.
I've already gotten DM approval to play a venerable elf if I wanted to. I WAS basically going to make him a former arch-mage who lost all of his power to senility (blatant FF4 Tellah ripoff, I know) who is adventuring to remember how he lost it and get his power back. But for fear of the retardedly low physical stats I could have, I've decided to (so far) avoid that route (the game doesn't start for three weeks, so I have time to decide).
Obviously your higher constitution score helped to keep you alive. But if I played a venerable elf I'd have to deal with a -8 to con, which doesn't even make it worth doing anything but dumping in a point-buy game (since there's a minimum of 1). I mean, to not have a negative I'd have to max out that score in point-buy! At least as an elf the dex wouldn't be horrendous.
The challenge of it seems fun, but dying in one hit or failed save doesn't, so I am not going to play the elderly route. I'm just curious how you even MADE IT to level 9.
Most posters assume they have an above average IQ. The truth is debatable (comprehensive IQ tests aren't commonly given and many people distrust the entire notion) but it's a long standing gamer conceit.
Everyone thinks they're smarter than they are not just posters. Trust me. Nobody thinks they're stupid. Stupid people tend to think they're (at worst) average. Average people all think they're smart (and that their kids are super-geniuses that are the heads of the class), and moderately intelligent people all think they're geniuses that should rule the world. None of us are actually as bright as we think we are.
Anyway, it's like you said, comprehensive IQ tests aren't usually given (after elementry school, at least...oddly enough, most are given around ages 5-6, when 9 or so is the earliest you should be evaluating that kind of thing) and nobody is ever happy with their results when they take a genuine one.
(Ravingdork is with the most points so far.)I'm at the last page now, phew. Just went low to see responses to my post, hehe. RD is still ahead (although I don't like min/maxers to much)I agree. I'm not going to beat a dead horse, but I'm with the "why should you be punished for having a better character" line of thinking.
Heck, I want to know HOW did you it RavingDork?
His group plays looser with the rules than most of us do. That is not inherently a bad thing as long as you have fun, but he has more leeway than most of us would give him.
He went venerable, and most of us no matter what your age would not allow you to get the ability adjustments from those ages.
The main argument we are having with him now is his trying to get the lich template without playing the level adjustment, and thinking its ok as a common rule to do so. Well as least that is the attention grabber for me.
His group plays looser with the rules than most of us do. That is not inherently a bad thing as long as you have fun, but he has more leeway than most of us would give him.
He went venerable, and most of us no matter what your age would not allow you to get the ability adjustments from those ages.
The main argument we are having with him now is his trying to get the lich template without playing the level adjustment, and thinking its ok as a common rule to do so. Well as least that is the attention grabber for me.
No, no, I know about rule-wise how to do it; I want to know how he managed to stay alive that long with such atrocious physical stats. EVERYONE has heard of the "dump all physical stats" druid back in 3.5. Theoretically you would be phenominal when you hit 5th level, but the hard part was always surviving until then. It's the same thing with dumping CON score liches.
And, anyway, as was stated, I don't think he should have the LA either if he earned it over the course of playing. It's not HIS fault his teammates were too short-sighted to plan equally effective characters long-term. I'm kind of tired of the whole "roleplayers>rollplayers, death to minmaxers" whining. They're both aspects of the game, and it would be a different game entirely without either. It's like someone argued earlier; earning something is totally different than creating a character with a template already in place.
It's like someone argued earlier; earning something is totally different than creating a character with a template already in place.
Not mechanically.
His group plays looser with the rules than most of us do. That is not inherently a bad thing as long as you have fun, but he has more leeway than most of us would give him.
He went venerable, and most of us no matter what your age would not allow you to get the ability adjustments from those ages.
The main argument we are having with him now is his trying to get the lich template without playing the level adjustment, and thinking its ok as a common rule to do so. Well as least that is the attention grabber for me.
No, no, I know about rule-wise how to do it; I want to know how he managed to stay alive that long with such atrocious physical stats. EVERYONE has heard of the "dump all physical stats" druid back in 3.5. Theoretically you would be phenominal when you hit 5th level, but the hard part was always surviving until then. It's the same thing with dumping CON score liches.
And, anyway, as was stated, I don't think he should have the LA either if he earned it over the course of playing. It's not HIS fault his teammates were too short-sighted to plan equally effective characters long-term. I'm kind of tired of the whole "roleplayers>rollplayers, death to minmaxers" whining. They're both aspects of the game, and it would be a different game entirely without either. It's like someone argued earlier; earning something is totally different than creating a character with a template already in place.
The DM is being nice that is how. He just does not realize it yet. If he was not being nice then the barbarian monk would(should) be dead.
If you read the lich section in the PRD he has only done what Paizo suggested a DM make a player to do get the template. Doing what you are supposed to do should not get you freebies.Edit:If I make you take point blank shot before I make you take precise shot should you get another feat for free?
Not mechanically.
It's like someone argued earlier; earning something is totally different than creating a character with a template already in place.
So what? What is this, numbers communism? If one guy's better at designing his characters than everyone else, instead of reaping the rewards for it, we should tear him down a peg, or give unwarranted rewards to the people who didn't put in the time/effort of designing a character like RD did?
So what? What is this, numbers communism? If one guy's better at designing his characters than everyone else, instead of reaping the rewards for it, we should tear him down a peg, or give unwarranted rewards to the people who didn't put in the time/effort of designing a character like RD did?Not mechanically.
It's like someone argued earlier; earning something is totally different than creating a character with a template already in place.
We are not against one person making a good character, but we are against bypassing the rules, which is what giving a template minus the LA is doing, especially when he has done nothing special to get it.
If I say it enough times someone will get it.
I like the character and think she is awesome in that she was planned out well. I also think that if you are doing LA, then do them and if you aren't, then don't. Why should it matter if the template is inherited or acquired? Both will give different RP opportunities and challenges, but both do give something equally. Why start saying that A is true unless B occurs in which case A is not true but C is? Seems too convoluted. To say RP experience can get you something extra beyond just levels, seems like a way around established rules.
Furthermore, if this person truly does own all the books everyone uses, you cannot blame the others for not having as thought out characters as they do not get the time with the books. I don't see a LA as a negative, I see it as balance. So you give up 4 fewer spells per day, but in actuality gain enough to warrant the template. If the DM wants no LA cool! If the GM did, and the player was upset by that, well then that would be a little odd as well. If they wanted to play a lich, it should be worth the small sacrifice, if it isn't, then don't add the template.
We are not against one person making a good character, but we are against bypassing the rules, which is what giving a template minus the LA is doing, especially when he has done nothing special to get it.
Hm...I know they changed a lot with the move from 3.5 to Pathfinder, but did they actually get rid of Rule Zero? Cause I'm pretty sure he said somewhere his DM did say it was ok.
We are not against one person making a good character, but we are against bypassing the rules, which is what giving a template minus the LA is doing, especially when he has done nothing special to get it.Hm...I know they changed a lot with the move from 3.5 to Pathfinder, but did they actually get rid of Rule Zero? Cause I'm pretty sure he said somewhere his DM did say it was ok.
What is your point?
The DM allowing something does not make it ok. I have given my reasons for why the LA should not be dropped. Can you give a reason as to why it should be dropped, and before you go back to the pathetic rule 0 argument, rule 0 only tells what will happen not what should happen, and should happens to be the point of contention at the moment.Your turn, bring more logic and less snark this time.
We are not against one person making a good character, but we are against bypassing the rules, which is what giving a template minus the LA is doing, especially when he has done nothing special to get it.Hm...I know they changed a lot with the move from 3.5 to Pathfinder, but did they actually get rid of Rule Zero? Cause I'm pretty sure he said somewhere his DM did say it was ok.Agreed. If you are going to hold anyone at fault, it should be RD's DM. And since none of us know how that DM handles power differences in their game, nor how they might be planning (or not planning) on accommodating a lich in the party, it all seems rather pointless.
edit: And I think LA should be dropped because Pathfinder doesn't use LA. They intentionally leave power variances to DMs to adjudicate on a case by case basis.
Dropping LA is a bad idea. Not going by CR or a flat formula is a good idea. If you drop LA it restricts players from doing a lot of things or the DM has to counter the abilities of the monster/template in question to keep the players even, which kind of defeats the point of having the monster/template.
I am not blaming RD for anything. I am just saying his logic for not getting a level adjustment is faulty.PS: The messenger(who happens to be RD) always gets killed.
Your turn, bring more logic and less snark this time.
That wasn't snark, it was sardonicism. :-P It was just that the guy asks for help, and it turns into a flame war about a topic he DIDN'T bring the thread up for.
...
Ouch, I did the same thing, in retrospect.
Hey, RD, so that I actually contribute to what you ask for;
If you make it to lich, craft your phylactery onto a gold coin, use some magic to cover the aura, grab a bunch of change, find the biggest dragon you can find, put the coin in the middle of the pile of coins, and offer him some tribute. Red dragons won't ask questions about free gold if you tell him it's just because he's so phenomenally amazing that you think he deserves it just for existing. Instant protection. And should some random adventurer defeat said dragon, he'll probably spend the coin and it'll just go floating around the world's economy, lost to anyone searching for it.
Throw down a contingency spell on it, where if anyone attempts to scry or otherwise magically search for your phyllactery, it's covered a with an illusion of you wearing a necklace or other magic item you commonly wear).
That ought to keep you alive long enough once you make lich. As for until you GET there...sleep with rope-trick (have a summoned monster lift you into there) with a permancy'd invisible rope, and alarm cast on the rope. I didn't look at your spell list, but they're all cheap wands (except permancy, but I think that's worth a one-time cost)
Rule Zero states that the Dm has the final word on rules of the game at his table.
Rule Zero as states that if the DM abuses that power the group has the right to revolt and this seems like the case, the group is threatening to revolt.
RD asked us to justify his character, if his DM OKed it then that should be the end of it unless the group has a legitimate issue with RD's character.
Either way Mr. Fishy doesn't sit at RD's table so Mr. Fishy opinion is a whisper in the wind.
The reason why I am against RP'ing equaling free mechanical things is that it opens up a whole bag of worms*. Now I don't know how your DM will hand the lich's power in comparison to the group, but in most groups the template gives a considerable power boost, and it gets rid of a caster's need to even make most fort saves, which is the one most likely to kill them. The defenses are one reason we are against the LA. We can only go by norms, since we don't know how you DM does things.
Taking force of personality would allow you to add your charisma to your will saves.*What if Fred the fighter RP's himself to be weak(actually dumping strength) and makes a dex fighter then ask the DM to let him add dex to damage with his reasoning being that his focus on his dex allows him to do so. (The story would...
I'm generally against roleplaying granting free (permanent) stuff too. I mostly just refuted the notion that I hadn't already given anything up.
I will remember this later one because basically his argument is that RP'ing should get you free stuff.
No it's not.
On a side note...good god is the cleric gimped. 17 wisdom on a 25 point buy on a level 9 character?!? He really should have lowered the strength and upped the wisdom and use spells to melee when he felt like it. And his armor check should be -5 when using the greatsword and not the shield and -7 when using the shield. And a large shield is a BAD idea for cleric anyways. You can cast just fine with a light shield and a weapon...or using a two handed weapon so you should pick one of those and stuck with it.
Oh and the barb/monk's AC is 1 high. The second monk AC bonus happens at monk 8, he's only monk 6.
And the archer doesn't have deadly aim?!?...FYI the archer with rapid shot should be WAY outdoing the barb/monk unless she is being played like an idiot (or the enemies are...which may explain how you survived 10 high level paladin archers...smiting/rapid shooting paladin archers should have dropped you in round one to...um dead). Also her armor check should be -1 not -2. Her stats once again...not so good. She really should have more strength.
And this is from a quick glance.
Quick glances can be misleading.
The cleric is a warrior first and foremost. He's made for cutting and killing, not for spellcasting. The spells are merely there to help him fight better, as well as to protect himself and his followers.
I believe the barbarian/monk has a monk's robe for the extra AC, among other advantages.
Yes, the archer does not have deadly aim. He might not be aware it exists. I'll look into that. He's focused on survival, mostly by being ready for anything and being aware of the situation (min/maxed perception). Also, his ACP should be -3 with a buckler and elven chain.
Paladin archers can't easily smite a witch they can't see. I also used to have a zombie hydra that I turned on them so they had more important things to worry about than little old Hama. Lost the hydra though.
I am honestly surprised that you and the barbarian/monk are not dead.
What!? Really!? He kills EVERYTHING that comes within his reach! And with his speed, things don't stay out of his reach for very long. He is considered the most powerful character in the group (at least in terms of raw combat ability).
The challenge of it seems fun, but dying in one hit or failed save doesn't, so I am not going to play the elderly route. I'm just curious how you even MADE IT to level 9.
I used a lot of Charisma-based checks to make the enemy think I was just a harmless old lady wagon driver (which I almost am anyways). I contribute by pumping out a lot of low-level spells modified by the silent and still metamagic feats (so as to not appear to be casting), but only after I get my defenses up. If I need to, I also cast invisibility and/or gaseous form. Part of it is looking like the least threatening/desireable target (which is easy when the enemy has a greatsword-wieldign crusader of a death god and a giant orc martial artist bearing down on them) while another part of it is simply staying the hell out of the way (I seek total cover a LOT).
His group plays looser with the rules than most of us do. That is not inherently a bad thing as long as you have fun, but he has more leeway than most of us would give him.
He went venerable, and most of us no matter what your age would not allow you to get the ability adjustments from those ages.
The main argument we are having with him now is his trying to get the lich template without playing the level adjustment, and thinking its ok as a common rule to do so. Well as least that is the attention grabber for me.
Choosing to be venerable, even at level 1, is perfectly within the rules. Not granting the bonuses (AND the penalties) is a house rule. Granted, it's not a bad house rule (one of the few things I did like about 4E was that they got rid of aging modifiers--I could play a dim-witted senile old man, or an old strong woman. I was no longer limited. I merely had to assign my stats the way I saw the character).
Though I came off pretty strongly against LA in the beginning, I'm not so much (now) saying that I refuse to accept it so much as I'm saying "there is a better way to find balance."
The DM is being nice that is how. He just does not realize it yet. If he was not being nice then the barbarian monk would(should) be dead.
If you read the lich section in the PRD he has only done what Paizo suggested a DM make a player to do get the template. Doing what you are supposed to do should not get you freebies.
Edit:If I make you take point blank shot before I make you take precise shot should you get another feat for free?
I'm still not getting what is so horrible about the orc...
In any case, our GM has been anything but nice when it comes to throwing us to the grinder.
Also, since when is giving up 240,000gp worth of your magical gear a freebie?
So what? What is this, numbers communism? If one guy's better at designing his characters than everyone else, instead of reaping the rewards for it, we should tear him down a peg, or give unwarranted rewards to the people who didn't put in the time/effort of designing a character like RD did?Not mechanically.
It's like someone argued earlier; earning something is totally different than creating a character with a template already in place.
We are not against one person making a good character, but we are against bypassing the rules, which is what giving a template minus the LA is doing, especially when he has done nothing special to get it.
If I say it enough times someone will get it.
Funny. I was thinking something similar:
The character spends 120K gold to gain tangible benefits orders of magnitude more powerful if you tried to duplicate them with magic items. But that's balanced because they spent 120K. Your logic eludes me....
That's because you are looking at it the wrong way. You should be comparing the lich template to 240,000gp worth of magic items, since that's what you could create with 120,000gp. The phylactery rules make it clear that the 120,000gp is the COST, not the MARKET PRICE. So I ask you all to look at it from that persepctive. What would a straight wizard with his many bonus item creation feats be able to make with 120,000gp and 6 months? How does that now compare to the template?
I am amazed no one has addressed this yet.
Your turn, bring more logic and less snark this time.That wasn't snark, it was sardonicism. :-P It was just that the guy asks for help, and it turns into a flame war about a topic he DIDN'T bring the thread up for.
I actually had to look that word up, and its a thin line between that and sarcasm. I took your statement as being in anger, but its all good now.
Back to the subtopic at hand...
The reason why I am against RP'ing equaling free mechanical things is that it opens up a whole bag of worms*. Now I don't know how your DM will hand the lich's power in comparison to the group, but in most groups the template gives a considerable power boost, and it gets rid of a caster's need to even make most fort saves, which is the one most likely to kill them. The defenses are one reason we are against the LA. We can only go by norms, since we don't know how you DM does things.
Taking force of personality would allow you to add your charisma to your will saves.*What if Fred the fighter RP's himself to be weak(actually dumping strength) and makes a dex fighter then ask the DM to let him add dex to damage with his reasoning being that his focus on his dex allows him to do so. (The story would...
I'm generally against roleplaying granting free (permanent) stuff too. I mostly just refuted the notion that I hadn't already given anything up.
I will remember this later one because basically his argument is that RP'ing should get you free stuff.No it's not.
...On a side note...good god is the cleric gimped. 17 wisdom on a 25 point buy on a level 9 character?!? He really should have lowered the strength and upped the wisdom and use spells to melee when he felt like it. And his armor check should be -5 when using the greatsword and not the shield and -7 when using the shield. And a large shield is a BAD idea for cleric anyways. You can cast just fine with a light shield and a weapon...or using a two handed weapon so you should pick one of those and stuck with it.
Oh and the barb/monk's AC is 1 high. The second monk AC bonus happens at monk 8, he's only monk 6.
And the archer doesn't have deadly aim?!?...FYI the archer with rapid shot should be WAY outdoing the barb/monk unless she is being played like an idiot (or the enemies are...which may explain how you survived 10 high level paladin archers...smiting/rapid
Fair enough the template was not completely free, but without an LA it is still underpriced.
The barbarian has an AC of 17. Unless he can pounce he should be dead.
I think the sorcerer legal RAW, but I dont think it is RAI, but he that is smaller issue than the lich without an LA to me.
If I say it enough times someone will get it.Oh! Hey! I get it!
My job is complete. :)
My job is complete. :)If I say it enough times someone will get it.Oh! Hey! I get it!
Still lost.
Also, I edited the above post. Please see the bottom section where I bring up some of what I've lost in the mere HOPE of becoming a lich.
My job is complete. :)If I say it enough times someone will get it.Oh! Hey! I get it!Still lost.
Also, I edited the above post. Please see the bottom section where I bring up some of what I've lost in the mere HOPE of becoming a lich.
I saw your previous post. You did not incur anything beyond the normal troubles to be a lich. You had to give up your items to pay for the phylactery, and you had to RP to get the information. By the book paying the money, and the RP'ing are what is expected.
you're fired ;)My job is complete. :)If I say it enough times someone will get it.Oh! Hey! I get it!
Convincing one person is not enough?
You people are so harsh.
I saw your previous post. You did not incur anything beyond the normal troubles to be a lich. You had to give up your items to pay for the phylactery, and you had to RP to get the information. By the book paying the money, and the RP'ing are what is expected.
True, but you can't possibly deny that losing 240,000gp worth of magical gear (that they otherwise would have had) will substantially weaken a character.
I saw your previous post. You did not incur anything beyond the normal troubles to be a lich. You had to give up your items to pay for the phylactery, and you had to RP to get the information. By the book paying the money, and the RP'ing are what is expected.True, but you can't possibly deny that losing 240,000gp worth of magical gear (that they otherwise would have had) will substantially weaken a character.
240000? You only need 120000 for the phylactery.
There seems to love at the end of the thread!
Joy! Interesting to read as well!
*happy pants of dancing*
I saw your previous post. You did not incur anything beyond the normal troubles to be a lich. You had to give up your items to pay for the phylactery, and you had to RP to get the information. By the book paying the money, and the RP'ing are what is expected.True, but you can't possibly deny that losing 240,000gp worth of magical gear (that they otherwise would have had) will substantially weaken a character.
True - however, it also highlights the other advantage of power resulting from an inherent character change rather than power gained from items:
You can sunder/steal/negate/drain the items but the template is a little harder to lose!
Anyhoo, loving the thread - shout out when/if your character reaches Lichdom and how the game/group reacts please! :)
Mr. Fishy has a great idea...CROAK. That'll show those bastards. Your character is old as dirt so have the DM declare you dead, then accuse one of your party members of the murder. Or a NPC if you want to mantain unity.
240000? You only need 120000 for the phylactery.I saw your previous post. You did not incur anything beyond the normal troubles to be a lich. You had to give up your items to pay for the phylactery, and you had to RP to get the information. By the book paying the money, and the RP'ing are what is expected.True, but you can't possibly deny that losing 240,000gp worth of magical gear (that they otherwise would have had) will substantially weaken a character.
Sigh. Pay closer attention. I shouldn't have to repeat myself over and over. I shall quote it for the nth time just for you...
Wasteland Knight wrote:
The character spends 120K gold to gain tangible benefits orders of magnitude more powerful if you tried to duplicate them with magic items. But that's balanced because they spent 120K. Your logic eludes me....
Ravingdork wrote:
That's because you are looking at it the wrong way. You should be comparing the lich template to 240,000gp worth of magic items, since that's what you could create with 120,000gp. The phylactery rules make it clear that the 120,000gp is the COST, not the MARKET PRICE. So I ask you all to look at it from that persepctive. What would a straight wizard with his many bonus item creation feats be able to make with 120,000gp and 6 months? How does that now compare to the template?
...I'm amazed that nobody has responded to this despite the fact it is, like, the 5th time it's appeared in the thread.
240000? You only need 120000 for the phylactery.I saw your previous post. You did not incur anything beyond the normal troubles to be a lich. You had to give up your items to pay for the phylactery, and you had to RP to get the information. By the book paying the money, and the RP'ing are what is expected.True, but you can't possibly deny that losing 240,000gp worth of magical gear (that they otherwise would have had) will substantially weaken a character.Sigh. Pay closer attention. I shouldn't have to repeat myself over and over. I shall quote it for the nth time just for you...
Wasteland Knight wrote:
The character spends 120K gold to gain tangible benefits orders of magnitude more powerful if you tried to duplicate them with magic items. But that's balanced because they spent 120K. Your logic eludes me....
Ravingdork wrote:
That's because you are looking at it the wrong way. You should be comparing the lich template to 240,000gp worth of magic items, since that's what you could create with 120,000gp. The phylactery rules make it clear that the 120,000gp is the COST, not the MARKET PRICE. So I ask you all to look at it from that persepctive. What would a straight wizard with his many bonus item creation feats be able to make with 120,000gp and 6 months? How does that now compare to the template?
...I'm amazed that nobody has responded to this despite the fact it is, like, the 5th time it's appeared in the thread.
I have repeated myself several times also so I feel your pain. There is not a market price for a phylactery because they are not market items. They are a special item for the lich template, and as such should not be bunched in with other magical items. You are also assuming DM's will allow you to bypass the WBL if you had the craft feats. Your DM might, but most would not allow you to double it. You are also not a wizard, and therefore not as equipped to drop feats on item creation feats, even if the phylactery was a regular "off the shelf" item.
Comparing any class to what a wizard can do assuming the wizard went a special route(item creation) as a way to get around a rule can probably be applied to any class in some form or another. There are to many what if's in that statement.If I(as the DM) kill the rogue and he says, but if I was a fighter I would have lived, should I allow him to live because it can be assumed he would have had enough hit points to live?
The way things are you did not lose 240000. You are losing 120000 which you are supposed to give up for the phylactery, and the other stuff was part of the RP, and mechanical difficulties involved in getting the Lich template so it still stands you have only met the requirements to get the template and its +2 LA.
|
That's because you are looking at it the wrong way. You should be comparing the lich template to 240,000gp worth of magic items, since that's what you could create with 120,000gp. The phylactery rules make it clear that the 120,000gp is the COST, not the MARKET PRICE. So I ask you all to look at it from that persepctive. What would a straight wizard with his many bonus item creation feats be able to make with 120,000gp and 6 months? How does that now compare to the template?
...I'm amazed that nobody has responded to this despite the fact it is, like, the 5th time it's appeared in the thread.
This may be the case but the party is rewarded in GP and treasure, tangible rewards, for slaying the monster, not some half credit system.
You are saying the because you have to spend it on a specific item that the 120,000 should instead be 240,000g in wealth? That is completely backwards. When you are awarded an item it is given to you based off of its cost to create(For the purposes of calculating GP reward on the tables) not its market price. A magic sword is found in the lair of a goblin king for instance. That sword represents its cost to create on the loot table not the price it would cost at market.If you are trying to twist the math like that you would instead be spending only 60,000g in magical items and weapons that would be acquired as rewards.
That's because you are looking at it the wrong way. You should be comparing the lich template to 240,000gp worth of magic items, since that's what you could create with 120,000gp. The phylactery rules make it clear that the 120,000gp is the COST, not the MARKET PRICE. So I ask you all to look at it from that persepctive. What would a straight wizard with his many bonus item creation feats be able to make with 120,000gp and 6 months? How does that now compare to the template?
...I'm amazed that nobody has responded to this despite the fact it is, like, the 5th time it's appeared in the thread.
This may be the case but the party is rewarded in GP and treasure, tangible rewards, for slaying the monster, not some half credit system.
You are saying the because you have to spend it on a specific item that the 120,000 should instead be 240,000g in wealth? That is completely backwards. When you are awarded an item it is given to you based off of its cost to create(For the purposes of calculating GP reward on the tables) not its market price. A magic sword is found in the lair of a goblin king for instance. That sword represents its cost to create on the loot table not the price it would cost at market.
If you are trying to twist the math like that you would instead be spending only 60,000g in magical items and weapons that would be acquired as rewards.
How is that backwards? In most cases, an item crafter can take what ever gold they have and, given time, turn it into twice it's worth in magical items. If it didn't, there would be little point to item creation (see 4E).
(And just to be clear, I am not trying to take a 50,000gp sword and selling it for 50,000gp which I then make into a 100,000gp item, or anything like that.)
If I had acquired 120,000gp in actual coin through adventuring and saving, and then spent 6 months crafting 240,000gp of RAW magical items that granted me abilities that were roughly analogous to those granted by the lich template, there would be no complaints from any of you like those we've seen in this thread. None. What's more, you likely wouldn't argue the detainment of my advancement by two levels.
However, since I have not taken that route and am instead trying to become a lich, everybody is suddenly up in arms because they absolutely insist on strictly following GUIDELINES. Illogical I say!
Does no one else see the double standards in action here?
|
|
What!? Really!? He kills EVERYTHING that comes within his reach! And with his speed, things don't stay out of his reach for very long. He is considered the most powerful character in the group (at least in terms of raw combat ability).
Quick glances can be misleading.Paladin archers can't easily smite a witch they can't see. I also used to have a zombie hydra that I turned on them so they had more important things to worry about than little old Hama. Lost the hydra though.
So the guys you fight all have animal int and just stand and full attack each other? They don't move? Use tactics?
That and the paladin encounter says your DM is giving you a free ride. Level 11 druid should at least know your square...even with the 50% miss chance for invis, your dead ...not unconcious, but straight out dead. If they are dealing with a hydra zombie as archers before a CASTER, then they are being played very poorly. Rule 1 of combat, geek the mage.