|
i posted my first post. i will try it too. am i allowed to use Umbriere in your Alvena setting?
I hope you are, because otherwise I'm alone right now. Personally, I'm hoping someone else volunteers to play Sigfried, or that Laerithe makes an appearance. Otherwise we're going to be severely lacking in our heavy armor.
Ash, if you have the time, I have an idea. I was curious how you would optimize a multi-class character, someone who's a little MAD. In particular fighter/rogue. I have already built this guy (he's half way to 2nd level atm), but I'd like to see what you'd do with him.
Here's the concept I started with: He's a Varisian who grew up wandering Avistan with his family, living out in the wilderness as often as the city. During his youth he was taught the basics of woodcraft, as well as some of the legal-gray-area skills that are typically associated with the gypsy-like Varisians. He learned to fight with knives and short swords from his uncles, but he's considering branching out into other styles of combat. He's not a toe to toe fighter by any means, preferring to move around his foes to find their weak spots. He believes not being hit is superior to being able to take a hit. He's gruff and taciturn for the most part, but has enough street smarts not to be a sucker.
I'm cramped for time, typing this last minute, so if that's not enough info, let me know.
Thanks,
-H
Sure, I'll try to do a writeup for him next. ^-^
i posted my first post. i will try it too. am i allowed to use Umbriere in your Alvena setting?
Absolutely Neko, that's why I started the Play By Post afterall.
Or do you mean in my Heroes of Alvena game on OpenRPG? ^-^I hope you are, because otherwise I'm alone right now. Personally, I'm hoping someone else volunteers to play Sigfried, or that Laerithe makes an appearance. Otherwise we're going to be severely lacking in our heavy armor.
I'll run Sigfried as an NPC so you guys will have a friendly face to talk to on a regular basis. I'm just a tad bit concerned that due to the lack of a minimap or graph or something that the tactical portion of the game might be a little diminished (which could either help or hinder in different ways).
I'll try my best to give you guys a good game. ^-^
i mean the one on open rpg.
i mean the one on open rpg.
You sure can. Heroes of Alvena is fairly high powered though (mainly because I can get downright wicked with NPCs. Mention kobolds in the HoA: Lobby on the Blackstar server and see what the players think of them :P).
It's a semi-persistent world so adventures are run in a fairly episodic style and players and GMs can plan games on the forum or run pickup games in the world. Due to my RL schedule the sight lacks a lot in the way of complete information on the world (getting it up when I can) so the list of deities and even some major events are fairly incomplete. I had planned to launch HoA sometime later when I got more of it finished, but the demand from some of my friends on OpenRPG resulted in starting games before the site was finished. :P
You can easily modify Umbriere. The major differences between the characters I posted here and the HoA characters are as follows:
If you're still interested, we'd love to have you.
We generally keep a room or two up on the BlackStar server (you can tell them from the "HoA:" in front of the room title, such as "HoA:Lobby").
PS: I thought I'd mention - for fun - that despite the high powered nature of the games, the NPCs I use are almost always entirely core built with the standard arrays, NPC classes or the occasional PC classed character, and rarely of a higher CR than the APL. They're just really, really mean. =P
do you allow the rich parents trait?
do you allow the rich parents trait?
That's the one that gives 900 starting gold right? Yeah, that's fine. Likewise, given Umbriere's theme, you might consider the ghost sight trait, which I think allows her to notice ghosts and incorporeal creatures with a DC 20 Perception check.
do you allow the rich parents trait?That's the one that gives 900 starting gold right? Yeah, that's fine. Likewise, given Umbriere's theme, you might consider the ghost sight trait, which I think allows her to notice ghosts and incorporeal creatures with a DC 20 Perception check.
is it possible to have both as my 2 traits? that is the one that gives 900 starting gold.
is it possible to have both as my 2 traits? that is the one that gives 900 starting gold.
Of course. ^-^
HorusHanabi's PC coming up next!
|
|
Ash, if you're not too busy running games and making dozens of pcs for people, I've got one more challenge that I've been working on myself, and I want to see your interpretation. Might need a bit of research depending on what books you read though. ;)
I'll post my ideas for him after I've seen what you can do. ^_^
Mergy I was thinking the same thing doing char builds the other night.
The APG lends itself to some great reworks, however the classes are somewhat limited to the Rogue and the Bard types, melee builds were pretty much unworkable.
The guy would have great Int and Wis, as well as Charisma to boot, yet his physical stats would only be average - and possibly affected by subsequent drug abuse (the new version with the nicotene patches was a bit watery imo)
|
|
Mergy I was thinking the same thing doing char builds the other night.
The APG lends itself to some great reworks, however the classes are somewhat limited to the Rogue and the Bard types, melee builds were pretty much unworkable.
The guy would have great Int and Wis, as well as Charisma to boot, yet his physical stats would only be average - and possibly affected by subsequent drug abuse (the new version with the nicotene patches was a bit watery imo)
I disagree on several stats. In the books Holmes is treated as cold and calculating, more like a machine than a man. Hugh Laurie's character from House M.D. is based partially on Holmes. That would nix charisma a bit. On the other hand, he does show a keen aptitude for disguise and acting, but that may be able to made up with skill points.
Furthermore, Holmes is remarkably strong for a man. I recall him bending a piece of iron straight in The Adventure of the Speckled Band, and he's described as an expert fencer and singlestick fighter. He's also a formidable boxer.
Take a look at Robert Downey Jr.'s interpretation for a younger version of Holmes, much more in physical prime.
I do agree on great Int and especially Wisdom. His perception should be legendary.
Fair enough.
I was more looking at CHA from his capacity to move and influence others, the disguise and acting, as well as the perceptive traits we both agree on. Presence. Je ne sais quoi.
Indeed he was (at some points) quite a strong physical character, however I had simply rolled out that the drug abuse may well have moderated this back down somewhat - possibly even sub par at times, but averaged out nonetheless.
With the fencing and boxing this could also be attributed to a higher Dex 'finesse' practitioner as well - with a rapier (or sword cane in the case of what I was mucking about with) we could safely go with Rogue and have a meaningful ability.
I actually am quite enjoying the recent TV adaptation, and that Sherlock is quite intriguing, but I did die a little death when he turned and uttered The game is on!. Seriously. True story.
Ash, if you're not too busy running games and making dozens of pcs for people, I've got one more challenge that I've been working on myself, and I want to see your interpretation. Might need a bit of research depending on what books you read though. ;)
I'd love to Mergy. It'd depend a lot on what sort of Sherlock Holmes we're talking though. I heard there was a new Sherlock Holmes movie put out recently (but I haven't seen more than a clip or two on Youtube) and I've never had the pleasure of reading the books (I'm so uncultured :P).
Here's the concept I started with: He's a Varisian who grew up wandering Avistan with his family, living out in the wilderness as often as the city. During his youth he was taught the basics of woodcraft, as well as some of the legal-gray-area skills that are typically associated with the gypsy-like Varisians. He learned to fight with knives and short swords from his uncles, but he's considering branching out into other styles of combat. He's not a toe to toe fighter by any means, preferring to move around his foes to find their weak spots. He believes not being hit is superior to being able to take a hit. He's gruff and taciturn for the most part, but has enough street smarts not to be a sucker.
Ok, keep in mind for a moment that I'm a bit rusty on my Golarion lore, some I'm going to be winging the Varisian bits as best I can (mostly going from the information I remember from my CotCT:EoA adventure path).
We'll call him "The Varisian" since a wandering vagabond look seems in for him, and I'd imagine he could make a scene around a few places and having been referred to in whispers by his ethnicity due to lack of identity.
The Varisian 15 Point Buy
1st Level Human Fighter 1
Init +3, Perception +5
AC 16, touch 13, flat-footed 13 (+3 armor, +3 dex)
Hp 11 (1d10+1)
Fort +3, Ref +3, Will +1
Melee Short Sword +3 (1d6+2, 19-20) or Rapier +3 (1d6+2, 18-20) or Slashing Gauntlet +3 (1d4+2) or Ranseur +3 (2d4+3, x3)
Ranged Sling +4 (1d4+2) or Dagger +4 (1d4+2, 19-20)
Str 14, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 7
Base Atk +1, CMB +3, CMD 16
Feats - Two-Weapon Fighting, Point Blank Shot, Double-Slice
Skills (6/level) - Acrobatics +4, Craft (Fletching) +6, Handle Animal +2, Survival +5, Ride +7, Sense Motive +2; Check Penalty -1
Overview: At 1st level, the Varisian has learned a lot of nice tricks from his uncle who's taught him how to use short swords and knives very well. He's well versed in two-weapon dueling. He will catch unwary opponents off-guard when he uses his two-weapon fighting to toss a pair of daggers (+2/+2 1d4+2, 19-20/x2) at people. He's good at woodcutting and has Craft (Fletching) which allows him to make bows and arrows from the wood.
2nd Level Human Fighter 2
Init +3, Perception +5
AC 16, touch 13, flat-footed 13 (+3 armor, +3 dex)
Hp 16 (2d10+2)
Fort +4, Ref +3, Will +1
Melee Dust-blade +4 (1d6+2, 19-20) or Rapier +4 (1d6+2, 18-20) or Slashing Gauntlet +4 (1d4+2) or Ranseur +4 (2d4+3, x3)
Ranged Sling +5 (1d4+2) or Dagger +5 (1d4+2, 19-20)
Str 14, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 7
Base Atk +2, CMB +4, CMD 17
Feats - Two-Weapon Fighting, Point Blank Shot, Double-Slice, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Dust-blade)
Abilities - Bravery +1,
Skills (6/level) - Acrobatics +5, Craft (Fletching) +6, Handle Animal +3, Survival +5, Ride +7, Sense Motive +3, Bluff +0
Overview: At 2nd level, the Varisian has cleverly applied the motions he uses with his sling and jump ropes and his skill to his short swords. He has had his uncle weld chains to the pommels of his short swords and after an exceptional amount of practice he has learned to loose the weapons and fling them accurately in a dazzling display of blades and chains. The weapon is effectively a slashing meteor-hammer (1d6 damage, reach, disarm, trip) that can be used against adjacent enemies as well. He has a pair of them. He calls them "dust-blades" because of sound they make when he whips them around.
Mechanical Summary: The dust-blade is merely a refluffed version of the Kusari-gama found in the 3.5 DMG under asian weapons, but has been modified to be a short sword on a chain.
3rd Level Human Fighter 2/Rogue 1
Init +3, Perception +5
AC 16, touch 13, flat-footed 13 (+3 armor, +3 dex)
Hp 22 (2d10+1d8+3)
Fort +4, Ref +5, Will +1
Melee Mwk Dust-blade +5 (1d6+2, 19-20) or Rapier +4 (1d6+2, 18-20) or Slashing Gauntlet +4 (1d4+2) or Ranseur +4 (2d4+3, x3)
Ranged Mwk Comp. Longbow +6 (1d8+2) or Sling +5 (1d4+2) or Dagger +5 (1d4+2, 19-20)
Str 14, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 7
Base Atk +2, CMB +4, CMD 17
Feats - Two-Weapon Fighting, Point Blank Shot, Double-Slice, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Dust-blade), Rapid Shot
Abilities - Bravery +1, sneak attack +1d6, trapfinding
Skills (12/level) - Acrobatics +9, Craft (Fletching) +6, Handle Animal +4, Survival +7, Ride +7, Sense Motive +6, Perception +5, Bluff +4, Disable Device +11, Stealth +11; Check Penalty -0
Overview: By 3rd level, the Varisian has learned how to really make a well timed blow, and has had to drive off a few bandits who've attacked his family's with his uncle. He's crafted his own longbow. Meanwhile, he's had to bust a few of his family members out of jail (don't ask, he won't tell) and has been practicing picking locks and disabling devices with his uncle. He's picked up some masterwork thieves' tools, masterwork cloak, and a masterwork survival kit.
4th Level Human Fighter 2/Rogue 2
Init +3, Perception +6
AC 18, touch 14, flat-footed 14 (+4 armor, +4 dex)
Hp 33 (2d10+3d8+5)
Fort +5, Ref +7, Will +2
Melee Mwk Dust-blade +7 (1d6+2, 19-20) or Rapier +5 (1d6+2, 18-20) or Slashing Gauntlet +5 (1d4+2) or Ranseur +5 (2d4+3, x3)
Ranged Mwk Comp. Longbow +8 (1d8+2) or Sling +7 (1d4+2) or Dagger +7 (1d4+2, 19-20)
Str 14, Dex 18 (17), Con 12, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 7
Base Atk +3, CMB +5, CMD 19
Feats - Two-Weapon Fighting, Point Blank Shot, Double-Slice, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Dust-blade), Rapid Shot, Weapon Focus (Dust-blade)
Abilities - Bravery +1, sneak attack +1d6, trapfinding, evasion, rogue talent (weapon training: Dust-blade)
Skills (12/level) - Acrobatics +11, Craft (Fletching) +6, Handle Animal +5, Survival +8, Ride +8, Sense Motive +7, Perception +6, Bluff +5, Disable Device +12, Stealth +12, Slight of Hand +10; Check Penalty -0
Overview: At 4th level, the Varisian is cleverly continuing to improve his skills and combat utility. Strategy wise, the idea is to use the reach weapons + sneak attack to great effect. We also grab a +1 dexterity item and boost dexterity by +1 for his level. We then grab a mithril chain shirt and a cloak of resistance +1.
5th Level Human Fighter 2/Rogue 3
Init +3, Perception +5
AC 18, touch 14, flat-footed 14 (+4 armor, +4 dex)
Hp 38 (2d10+4d8+6)
Fort +6, Ref +7, Will +5
Melee Mwk Dust-blade +9 (1d6+3, 19-20) or Rapier +7 (1d6+3, 18-20) or Slashing Gauntlet +7 (1d4+3) or Ranseur +7 (2d4+4, x3)
Ranged Mwk Comp. Longbow +9 (1d8+2) or Sling +8 (1d4+2) or Dagger +8 (1d4+2, 19-20)
Str 16 (14), Dex 18 (17), Con 12, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 7
Base Atk +4, CMB +6, CMD 20
Feats - Two-Weapon Fighting, Point Blank Shot, Double-Slice, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Dust-blade), Rapid Shot, Weapon Focus (Dust-blade), Iron Will
Abilities - Bravery +1, sneak attack +2d6, trapfinding, evasion, rogue talent (weapon training: Dust-blade), trapsense +1
Skills (12/level) - Acrobatics +12, Craft (Fletching) +6, Handle Animal +5, Survival +9, Ride +11, Sense Motive +8, Perception +7, Bluff +6, Disable Device +13, Stealth +13, Slight of Hand +11; Check Penalty -0
Overview: At 5th level, the Varisian hits another level of sneak attack, fleshes out some more of his skills, picks up trapsense, and takes Iron Will to make up for his weak will save. He then picks up a +2 strength item (4,000 gp) to buff his melee attacks further which combos well with Double-Slice.
Summary: From this point the Varisian is a balanced fighter and a balanced rogue. Depending on where he went from here he could either continue improving his skills, rogue talents, and sneak attacks, or begin going into fighter and picking up armor training and weapon training, while picking up both archery and two weapon fighting feats (improved, greater, and two weapon rend).
Hope you like it HorusHanabi. It's 3:53am and I'm dead tired; so maybe I didn't make too many mistakes. ^-^;;
The new Sherlock I was referring to:
I'm very particular on my fictional heroes being brought to life, and I quite like this one.
|
Yeah, how else do you do it? The dice are the final arbiter. Without them, it breaks down to a game of "I do this" and "No, you don't" or "Yes, you did", with no other justification then "I said so."
You could potentially roll the dice first and then based upon the result have the player narrate the outcome - if its a failure the player has his character trip over his tongue, accidentally insult the other person and forget to mention important information for example. If its a success but only just, the player may roleplay his character more as pleading than persuading, but remembering to mention the important facts that just manage to persuade the person.
Or perhaps you could role play things a step at a time, have the player describe his initial intentions, his "opening gambit" etc, then roll the dice for that to see whether he makes a good impression. Then perhaps roleplay some more and make further skill checks (ala an Unearthed Arcana Complex Skill Check, M&M2's Extended Skill Checks or 4e's Skill Challenge).
Or the player could roleplay a negotiation as he envisions his low charisma no skill character would, despite the player themselves being a much better speaker, e.g.
Low Cha PC: "Sir, I um, er, really need your help to save the princess. The dragon-thing that holds her prisoner can only be defeated by the Sword of Kahliss which is, um, in the King's vault. Could you get it for me? Um, you know, because you are so good and all, and um, I am sure the princess would be grateful."
<GM gives a bonus for saying that the princess might be grateful as the NPC is a known womaniser. Player rolls dice and actually rolls a success>
NPC Knight: "Adventurer, if I were to give you the sword I would hope you would not trip over it as much as you trip over your words. Your compliments are crude and an obvious ploy to appeal to my vanity. But I would not wish to see the princess a meal of a dragon. So I will do as you ask - but ensure that the princess knows that it was I who gave you the sword"
In that example, the player plays the numbers (low charisma, no Diplomacy skill), the speech he gives still is taken into acocunt by the GM (he provides a modifier for the social tactics used) but still the result is decided by the dice roll not GM fiat.
You'd rather players just play your way, which is to say you'll give 'em a situational bonus if you think it's deserved. What you don't tell 'em is, that in your mind, because of a low CHA, they've already received a negative modifier that they'll never be able to overcome.
I don't wish them necessarily to play "my way" - though I would prefer to play with players with similar play styles. But what I would rather not be doing as a GM is having to constantly contradict or edit the narration of the players because they are not playing the numbers.
Yes, I will give situational bonuses if I feel they are deserved - as in the above example, the player thinking to mention that the princess might be "grateful" was a good tactic worth a bonus (just as Luke plays to Han's greed in Star Wars to try to get him to help rescue Leia).
However, I am not sure what I said that gave you the impression that I would give a hidden negative modifier (over and above the Charisma penalty they already have). I simply would like the player to describe their character's actions and speeches with some consideration of the strengths and flaws of the character as represented by the stats.
For example, a character without Improved Disarm and a low CMB could still be successful in disarming an opponent, just as a character with a high CMB and Improved Disarm could, but I would prefer the player to describe it as:
"Grag desperately grabs for the foe's sword, but clumsily grabs the blade as well as the hilt suffering a nasty cut on his palm, but by luck Grag manages to leverage the sword from his opponent's hand letting it fall to the floor"
...rather than...
"Grag effortlessly lunges in, parrying the foe's heavy blade with his dagger and then with a quick flick of his wrist disarms the opponent with ease, leaving the foe surprised and almost in fear at Grag's skill in combat"
Both descriptions describe a successful disarm attempt, but the latter is rather at odds with the numbers of the character. Indeed, if the adventurer had a chronicler I could see the player of the adventurer describing the former, but the player of the chronicler recounting the events as the latter - poetic licence! :)
Gosh, don't you just hate it when mechanics get in the way of arbitrarily ruling one way or the other?
Seriously, I really have no clue where this is coming from - you seem to be acting like I just peed on your fireworks for some reason.
I never said anything about arbitrary rulings, I would just like the players to try and narrate their characters' actions and to talk in character with consideration of what their characters' abilities really are. Otherwise there becomes this disconnect between what the dice rolls and stats are saying and how the outcomes are described.
Yes, some players may struggle to "play up" to any abilities for which their charcters are highly competent and the player isn't, but "playing down" shouldn't cause as many difficulties.
I hope that makes my position a little clearer, I just wanted to express that IMHO a good roleplayer should "play the numbers".
|
|
Yes, I have to do it that way. I have a player who typically enjoys playing a short tempered barbarian killing machine (except the one time he played a blaster psion, he says magic is too complicated) who is actually amazingly charismatic and engaging in real life.
Okay, cool, I just wonder whether that player could perhaps "play down" his own charisma. Can I assume he roleplays out his character's short temper, perhaps insulting others even when that wouldn't be the best tactic diplomatically? If so, then that is all I would be expecting and I really don't think we have a disagreement here.
Next to him is another friend of mine who's admittedly a bit troubled in the social department. [...] he favors the charismatic guys with lots of tricks up their sleeves who are dashing and witty.
And this is a good point, it is more difficult to play the numbers when the player is "playing up". And in these cases I guess everyone has to accept that the character is being more eloquent than the player. But when it comes to third person narration (rather than first person in character speeches), that player could still play the numbers "Um, Brad the Bard approaches the fair maiden and compliments her really well with some poetry or something and then um, dashingly bows and kisses her hand"
shouldn't be punished for putting ranks in their skills only to be told "Nah, that wasn't a good enough speech".
So yes, I would never do this.
I didn't omit it. You added it when you decided there was a problem.
I didn't decide there was a problem, I added it into the mix because I wanted to clarify that when you made the statement about Sigfried being as good as a Cha 18 character, you were meaning a cha 18 charactder with no skills (and you were). Perhaps I should have phrased things a bit better like "Of course you reaslise that against a Cha 18 Bard with maxed out skills, he will get blown out of the water socially".
If your response had been something more along the lines of "Yes, I recognise that, but I feel he is good enough, just not the best" I think our debate would have ended with me saying "Cool" but you seemed to feel I was making an attack or something and started saying I was talking BS. So I apologise if I gave you the impression that I was trying to say you were wrong or something, I was just trying to clarify your position by using an example of the bard.
I said it was the equivalent of someone with an 18 charisma (and only an 18 charima).
But I am not sure you did say that, in that you didn't say "(and only an 18 charisma)" (if I am mistaken please correct me). Hence why I was trying to clarify the point.
BTW the quotes of yours I am referring to are:
"By 5th level, he is as good as someone with an 18 charisma."
"We can see he is just as charming as a 18 charisma character."
If they has read as:
"By 5th level, he is as good as someone untrained with an 18 charisma."
"We can see he is just as charming as an untrained 18 charisma character."
I don't think I would have even posted.
Please, don't put words in my mouth or take them out, because it's rude to play with other people's food.
I said "you omitted the context of skills for that Cha 18 character" - that isn't putting words in your mouth. Neither of the two quotes I mention above give a context of skills for that Charisma 18 character. Therefore no context was given, therefore that context was omitted. Now I don't think that omission was on purpose, or with any ulterior motive, it was just omitted and thus I wanted to clarify things.
You are labeling the character based on assumptions that you are making about what his 7 Charisma means - assumptions which are not supported by the physics of the game world.
I provided a description of how I imagine Sigfried would behave based upon his low Charisma (and the fact that the low charisma is not down to a poor appearance, quite the opposite). I am not saying that is the only way his behaviour could be imagined, just how I imagine it and would likely roleplay it if I was Sigfried's player.
I am not sure what you mean by "assumptions which are not supported by the physics of the game world", could you elaborate please?
By 2nd level he's kicked his bad habits and is like a normal person.
But you agree that he is still suffering from a low charisma, yes? That in other ways (how well he can Intimidate someone, how easily he is persuaded with Diplomacy etc) he is still below average.
In the scope of Diplomacy and Bluff then yes, by 2nd level he has learned enough to offset his naturally low charisma and be just as good as a normal person, if we define a normal person as Cha 10 and no skills in Diplomacy or Bluff.
Then your player learns a lesson about playing a character with poor social skills.
I think my example of the tumbling character muddied the waters, sorry for that.
The point I was trying to make, was that if the player consistently makes incredibly good IC speeches for his character whose stats are so poor he will consistently fail (apart from the odd occassion) then I will have to consistently contradict or edit that player's narrration to explain what really happened so as there is not a disconnect between the really incredible speeches and the consistent failures.
However, I feel it would be better for the player to roleplay the numbers and make stumbling, rambling, non-confident IC speeches that would provide a better connection with the consistent failures, and only on the odd occassion that he succeeds do I as GM potentially need to edit or contradict things.
Basically roleplay the character with a view to your likely chance of success (based on your numbers) to minimise the amount of "actually you don't say that, instead...."
Hopefully I have expressed my position re "playing the numbers" a bit more clearly this time. Thanks for taking the time to read this.
|
Another practical optimisation challenge for Ashiel:
I often paint a cool mini and then come up with a character for him/her, it would be interesting to see what your produce.
I've painted him with an orange cloak, blue tabard and some yellow detail. Was originally thinking Cleric of Sarenrae but you can take him anywhere you want.
Ok, keep in mind for a moment that I'm a bit rusty on my Golarion lore, some I'm going to be winging the Varisian bits as best I can (mostly going from the information I remember from my CotCT:EoA adventure path).
We'll call him "The Varisian" since a wandering vagabond look seems in for him, and I'd imagine he could make a scene around a few places and having been referred to in whispers by his ethnicity due to lack of identity.
The Varisian 15 Point Buy
14 Strength 'cause it's good for an athletic sort.
16 Dexterity 'cause he's grown up fencing Varisian style.
12 Constitution 'cause he's not into taking hits.
14 Intelligence 'cause he well rounded.
12 Wisdom 'cause he's no fool.
7 Charisma 'cause...
Very nice, Ash. Thank you. There's a lot of ideas I never thought of. I particularly like the dust-blade idea and the mysterious name. To nit pick a couple of things (not to diminish your work. I appreciate it very much.), you forgot to include the +2 to a stat for being human. I worked it out that it could be 14, 14(+2=16), 12, 14, 12, 10. But it was 3:30ish in the morning, so all's forgiven ;)
Thanks again, I'll be using a few of these ideas as I level up.-H
Very nice, Ash. Thank you. There's a lot of ideas I never thought of. I particularly like the dust-blade idea and the mysterious name. To nit pick a couple of things (not to diminish your work. I appreciate it very much.), you forgot to include the +2 to a stat for being human. I worked it out that it could be 14, 14(+2=16), 12, 14, 12, 10. But it was 3:30ish in the morning, so all's forgiven ;)
Thanks again, I'll be using a few of these ideas as I level up.
-H
Yeah sorry about that. I was getting sleepy and honestly kind of glossed over the ability score section, and I forgot to mention that it was 14, 14 (+2), 12, 14, 12, 7.
Glad you liked it as well. ^-^
Another practical optimisation challenge for Ashiel:
I often paint a cool mini and then come up with a character for him/her, it would be interesting to see what your produce.
This mini.
I've painted him with an orange cloak, blue tabard and some yellow detail. Was originally thinking Cleric of Sarenrae but you can take him anywhere you want.
Ok, well this definitely is a challenge. "Optimize a mini", so I'm guessing you want me to look at the mini and design a character around it? I could try that in my next post. Fill me in if I've erred a bit on what you meant. ^-^;;
Hmm, wow!
Color me impressed!
I certainly have enjoyed reading this thread, as it has stirred the creative juices quite a bit.
Could I interject with a challenge?
Character concept: A half-orc divination specialist who gets into brawls regularly over the nature of his ancestry. Sometimes he wins, sometimes he losses. Both his parents where half-orcs and he doesn't appreciate any implication otherwise. He is quick tempered, foul-mouthed, and cunning. In combat he tries to control the battlefield more than directly damage his opponents.
As far as familiar/arcane bond goes...I always have this vision of him with a falchion that was his fathers. Not really a requirement, but I am interested to see what you can come up with.
And I also see him as trading in the traditional wizard's pipe for a cigar.
This is my humble offering and prayer to you, Oh Mighty Ashiel, Angel and Mistress of Practical Optimization!
|
|
Ok, well this definitely is a challenge. "Optimize a mini", so I'm guessing you want me to look at the mini and design a character around it? I could try that in my next post. Fill me in if I've erred a bit on what you meant. ^-^;;Another practical optimisation challenge for Ashiel:
I often paint a cool mini and then come up with a character for him/her, it would be interesting to see what your produce.
This mini.
I've painted him with an orange cloak, blue tabard and some yellow detail. Was originally thinking Cleric of Sarenrae but you can take him anywhere you want.
Yep, you've understood perfectly.
I like painting and often pick through my minis, find one I like and then create a character from there. Sometimes I end up really uncertain what type of character I should create. For example: this guy became a sword-and-board fighter with the mobile fighter archetype.
Edit: that's not my paint job, that's all kinds of professional awesome.
Upon careful reconsideration, that request I have made seems unnecessarily specific. How about this instead:
A half-orc arcane battlefield control specialist who gets into brawls regularly over the nature of his ancestry. Sometimes he wins, sometimes he losses. Both his parents where half-orcs and he doesn't appreciate any implication otherwise. He is quick tempered, foul-mouthed, and cunning. In combat he tries to control the battlefield more than directly damage his opponents. He has a penchant for cigars and gambling.
Playing a battlefield controller is like playing bridge or hearts. You need to learn when to play your strong cards but also know how to take tricks with the middle of your hand, as well. Learn to apply just enough force to let the rest of the party clean up safely, but don't be afraid to err on the side of overkill. Overkill is much more efficient than emergency efforts to save the party.
Nice!
Nice!
Playing a battlefield controller is like playing bridge or hearts. You need to learn when to play your strong cards but also know how to take tricks with the middle of your hand, as well. Learn to apply just enough force to let the rest of the party clean up safely, but don't be afraid to err on the side of overkill. Overkill is much more efficient than emergency efforts to save the party.
Yes this was very well put D8mb.
.
..
...
....
.....
n thread, but one of history's most charismatic figures would have to be Adolf Hitler. He wasn't incredibly brilliant, especially tactically, but my god the man could draw an entire nation under his banner with his words alone. He had an incredible charisma, and amazingly strong will and personal magnetism.
He's also, for the most part, considered very unattractive by a lot of people.
Side Note: Hitler was a great public speaker (eventually) but he did not sway a nation with his words alone. Careful application of intimidation, propaganda, incarceration, torture and murder instigated by the informants, paper pushers and armed thugs also helped. Alot.
I simply state this because it's becoming increasingly obvious that Hitler:The Myth is being touted as a godly-charisma example rather than Hitler:The Man.
Go Go Leadership Feat and Circumstance Bonus: Poverty Stricken Nation!
It seems that an initial argument/perspective was/is being based on a lack of definition regarding Charisma, or rather, a lack of supported mechanics.
If there is one stat that depends upon the DM to support through a reactive campaign setting, it's Charisma. Seemingly.
::
While skills can compensate for a low charisma the character has to actively use them...
DM: 'The peasant punches your character in the face'
Player: 'wtf? why?'
DM 'You don't know.'
Player 'What? Ok, I ask him.'
Dm 'What are you going to ask him?'
Player '! I'm going to ask him 'Hey, why did you punch me in the face?'
*Diplomacy Check: SUCCESS!*
DM 'He says sorry but he couldn't help himself. '
Player: '..ok, and?'
DM: 'He says you reminded him of a guy...'
Player: '..AND?'
DM: '..that guy was a jerk.'
Player: '....!'
::
Unfair?
Maybe..
..but sometimes Life wins the Initiative...
stuff
So someone with a 22 charisma and 20 ranks in diplomacy...but who just isn't a very imaginative roleplayer has a worse chance at a social encounter than a Dwarf with a tanked charisma (5) who happens to be a very good roleplayer? That's the very worst kind of DM Fiat.
So someone with a 22 charisma and 20 ranks in diplomacy...but who just isn't a very imaginative roleplayer has a worse chance at a social encounter than a Dwarf with a tanked charisma (5) who happens to be a very good roleplayer? That's the very worst kind of DM Fiat.
Thank you for that GROSS respresentation, two days later. Put the other oar in the water and you might catch up.
Play as you see fit.
|
|
So someone with a 22 charisma and 20 ranks in diplomacy...but who just isn't a very imaginative roleplayer has a worse chance at a social encounter than a Dwarf with a tanked charisma (5) who happens to be a very good roleplayer? That's the very worst kind of DM Fiat.
Thank you for that GROSS respresentation, two days later. Put the other oar in the water and you might catch up.
Play as you see fit.
Ouch. Was there any need for that level of hostility? That was kind of rude.
@Squidmasher, Yes. That was the point, rude for rude.
If Meatrace wants to harpoon Mr. Fishy then he needs to bring the shark suit.
Mr. Fishy isn't in the business of taking crap. You disagree fine.
Mr. Fishy is willing to talk. You post bomb Mr. Fishy on a thread Mr. Fishy hasn't posted on in two days...them teeth ain't for show.
Ouch. Was there any need for that level of hostility? That was kind of rude.So someone with a 22 charisma and 20 ranks in diplomacy...but who just isn't a very imaginative roleplayer has a worse chance at a social encounter than a Dwarf with a tanked charisma (5) who happens to be a very good roleplayer? That's the very worst kind of DM Fiat.
Thank you for that GROSS respresentation, two days later. Put the other oar in the water and you might catch up.
Play as you see fit.
Got to agree Mr. Fishy -- it seems you don't like to swim in the water you put others in...
Some people didn't get to the thread until late -- and hey you put it out there and offered it up -- can't help it if people tell you it stinks.
If Meatrace had quoted Mr. Fishy and disagreed fine. But to arrive three days and two pages later to attack. Mr. Fishy is as nice as you are. If you want to talk, talk. If you want to bite don't act surprised when someone bites back.
If Meatrace wants to discuss Mr. Fishy post no problem.
|
|
If Meatrace had quoted Mr. Fishy and disagreed fine. But to arrive three days and two pages later to attack. Mr. Fishy is as nice as you are. If you want to talk, talk. If you want to bite don't act surprised when someone bites back.
If Meatrace wants to discuss Mr. Fishy post no problem.
He did post and disagree. You responded with a blatant personal attack and didn't even answer his argument. He wasn't even particularly rude, and what you did was pretty over-the-top.
That being said, I agree with Meatrace's point. People don't insist that the players of fighters or barbarians have crazy strength, monk players be super serene and know how to kill with a punch, or that people who play wizards be geniuses with superhuman intelligence. Why the double-standard for Charisma?
This thread reminds me of one of my oldest beef against 2E to 3E translation; Tieflings went from +1 CHA to -2 CHA.
Tieflings mostly decend from devils and demons, which usually have high CHA, not because they are pretty or trusworthy, but because they have an awe inspiring presence and a huge strength of character.
As for the Tiefling, the bonus to bluff is nice, but the CHA penalty hurts them in their very essence. A strong inner self, a resilient ego and an empathic link with your (planar) environment is what allows you to survive as an orphan of the lower planes. Besides, I always seen Tielfing making better sorcerers than wizards...
*sigh*
/rant
'findel
He did post and disagree. You responded with a blatant personal attack and didn't even answer his argument. He wasn't even particularly rude, and what you did was pretty over-the-top.That being said, I agree with Meatrace's point. People don't insist that people who play fighters or barbarians have crazy strength, monk players be super serene and know how to kill with a punch, or that people who play wizards be geniuses with superhuman intelligence. Why the double-standard for Charisma?
Mr.Fishy wrote:
stuffThats the post he was disagreeing with.
So someone with a 22 charisma and 20 ranks in diplomacy...but who just isn't a very imaginative roleplayer has a worse chance at a social encounter than a Dwarf with a tanked charisma (5) who happens to be a very good roleplayer? That's the very worst kind of DM Fiat.
We're reading the same post right? If he was using Hyperbole [Hyperbole is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech.] then Mr. Fishy owes Meatrace an apology. Mr. Fishy doubts that is the case. Mr. Fishy answered with the same tone. Please identify the "stuff" post.
Tieflings mostly decend from devils and demons, which usually have high CHA, not because they are pretty or trusworthy, but because they have an awe inspiring presence and a huge strength of character.Outsiders generally have high stats in every stat. You can make a case for tieflings having a bonus or penalty to any stat you want.
I honestly liked the CoT article on the different tieflings and felt it was one of the best efforts to handle them as a race.
The first book in the Council of Thieves had alternate stat mods and powers for tieflings. Bastards of Erberes?
|
|
This thread reminds me of one of my oldest beef against 2E to 3E translation; Tieflings went from +1 CHA to -2 CHA.
Tieflings mostly decend from devils and demons, which usually have high CHA, not because they are pretty or trusworthy, but because they have an awe inspiring presence and a huge strength of character.
As for the Tiefling, the bonus to bluff is nice, but the CHA penalty hurts them in their very essence. A strong inner self, a resilient ego and an empathic link with your (planar) environment is what allows you to survive as an orphan of the lower planes. Besides, I always seen Tielfing making better sorcerers than wizards...
*sigh*
/rant
'findel
You must remember, 3e was written by someone who developed for ICE (Rolemaster - Monte Cook), someone who outspokenly hated 1e and 2e (Skip Williams) and Jonathan Tweet (whom I really have no clue about prior to 3e, as I stopped buying TSR stuff @ 86 or so, never bought any WotC stuff prior to 2003 and am sure he never worked on Shadowrun or d6 Star Wars - the only games I played other than 1e AD&D in the '90s) so it's no wonder they made all sorts of silly decisions in the edition change.
Mr. Fishy has allow diplomacy and bluff to work with out a roll. Because the roleplay was good the story or lie was believible. Or would you rather let the dice screw you. As for the mechanics the RAW is a series of guidelines not the word of God there is a difference. A big one.
This is the post I was replying to. I did not attack you, mister fishy, in any way shape or form, and in fact I posed it as a rhetorical question. I used a hyperbolic example in order to show a mirror to you, and indeed all with your peculiar mindset. You responded with scathing vitriol. Calm down. If you want a discussion then don't shout and don't pull a knife. However I will now address you in the way you seem to want to be, disdainfully.
In THIS quoted post, you said you allow things that normally require a skill roll without such a roll because of good roleplay. I say this is unfair to those who are inferior at roleplaying. This is DM fiat by definition. You decide what strategies succeed, disregarding dice entirely.
If you told your players at the beginning of the entire campaign that social skills would be worthless, don't put points in them, and they still played with you it would indeed be fair. To me, however, this is no different than saying "Ok you detect magic, it has a PURPLE aura" what does purple mean? Well it's up to your knowledge of magic to decide. The player. Not the character. Or being able to jump a ledge or any other silly example quite frankly.
I'm there to play a character who is, more often than not, smarter stronger more perceptive and more sociable than myself. At best, in such social scenarios, I would give a bonus (+2-+4) or commensurate penalty based on how well or poorly it is roleplayed. Pass/fail on skills based on whether you impress the DM is no longer Pathfinder.
Ok, well this definitely is a challenge. "Optimize a mini", so I'm guessing you want me to look at the mini and design a character around it? I could try that in my next post. Fill me in if I've erred a bit on what you meant. ^-^;;
I have done that: see a mini and make a PC!
Gwaenlyn lived a rough life. Her mother died giving birth to her half-orc brother and her father took to drink. When she came of age, her father refused to allow her to become a warrior in the tribe, instead humiliating her in front of the entire village. She fled to the south and has dedicated her life to mastering the discipline of steel so that one day she can return home and gain back what was taken from her: her Honor in the tribe.
I am curious how you would write her up and see what you get :) I have already played her (RotRL, to level 9 before our campaign broke up due to schedule conflicts...) and just want to see how close you can peg her (with an image and a bit of backstory)
GNOME
You must remember, 3e was written by someone who developed for ICE (Rolemaster - Monte Cook), someone who outspokenly hated 1e and 2e (Skip Williams) and Jonathan Tweet (whom I really have no clue about prior to 3e, as I stopped buying TSR stuff @ 86 or so, never bought any WotC stuff prior to 2003 and am sure he never worked on Shadowrun or d6 Star Wars - the only games I played other than 1e AD&D in the '90s) so it's no wonder they made all sorts of silly decisions in the edition change.This thread reminds me of one of my oldest beef against 2E to 3E translation; Tieflings went from +1 CHA to -2 CHA.
Tieflings mostly decend from devils and demons, which usually have high CHA, not because they are pretty or trusworthy, but because they have an awe inspiring presence and a huge strength of character.
As for the Tiefling, the bonus to bluff is nice, but the CHA penalty hurts them in their very essence. A strong inner self, a resilient ego and an empathic link with your (planar) environment is what allows you to survive as an orphan of the lower planes. Besides, I always seen Tielfing making better sorcerers than wizards...
*sigh*
/rant
'findel
The D20 system is just Rolemaster divided by 5 and without the cool critical tables.
:-)
|
More concerning is that a number of players seem to think that you're supposed to "play the numbers" instead of "play the character" if you're to be a good roleplayer. I openly declare that I do not adhere to this concept, and I don't advise it to anyone else, because it is at its core exceptionally meta-gamey ("Dude, why would the princess talk to you, you have like an 8 charisma") and likewise offers very few options for how you play or tell a story about your characters ("So how do I have to act if I have a 11 Charisma?").I disagree with your entire premise.
If you have an 8 charisma, that won't stop the princess from talking to you. But, I'm sure she may not be happy with it (more likely to roll low on diplomacy and therefore degrade her attitude toward you) or might just take everything you say the wrong way (hence the minus to the social-skill rolls).
So, no, having a low charisma won't "tell me what to do" with my character, but it sure as hell will help the DM decide how others react to him.
In the same vein, your Cha -2 means in most situations your a boorish lout, you may be handsome (or not) but your a complete dick about it (think Gaston from Beauty and the Beast) you may think your a suave wooer of women, but at the heart of it your only that in your own imagination. Women who do fawn over you are willfully blind to your short comings because they admire your other attributes, (aka wealth, success, physicality.)
Skills are active things not passive, so your ranks in bluff and diplomacy mean when you try you know the right thing to say, you may not be genuine about it (bluff) but you can charm the pants off the naive farm girls, and then in the morning you fart in their bed, scratch yourself, and head back into the wide world to slay dragons and swive with the next maiden.
Skills are active things not passive, so your ranks in bluff and diplomacy mean when you try you know the right thing to say, you may not be genuine about it (bluff) but you can charm the pants off the naive farm girls, and then in the morning you fart in their bed, scratch yourself, and head back into the wide world to slay dragons and swive with the next maiden.
I agree. Mainly because it shamelessly supports my own stance on the matter:
A low charisma character using skills to offset their social downfalls:
Sure, it makes sense!
However, the character has to actively use their skills in order to do so.
When they're not, the world should treat them as their score indicates, assuming the DM is fairly representing the Charisma stat within the campaign world.
Such characters should have to actively work harder to enjoy the perks a character with a higher charisma passively enjoys.
I often paint a cool mini and then come up with a character for him/her, it would be interesting to see what your produce.
This mini.
Ok, well this definitely is a challenge. "Optimize a mini", so I'm guessing you want me to look at the mini and design a character around it? I could try that in my next post. Fill me in if I've erred a bit on what you meant. ^-^;;
Ok here goes. He looks like an elven archer which is pretty classic. Seems to be pretty mobile and wearing light to medium armor which could work great for a fighter or ranger (fighters can move in medium armor without troubles at 3rd level, while rangers can never wear heavy armor and access their weapon styles).
Since we haven't done a Ranger yet, let's do that.
We'll call the elven mini Silhandren.
Silhandren 15 Point Buy
1st Level Elven Ranger
Init +3, low-light vision, Perception +7
AC 18, touch 13, flat-footed 15 (+5 armor, +3 dex)
Hp 11 (1d10+1)
Fort +3, Ref +5, Will +1
Speed 20ft
Melee Longspear +3 (1d8+3) or Slashing Gauntlet +3 (1d4+2)
Ranged Sling +4 (1d4+2)
Str 14, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 7
Base Atk +1, CMB +3, CMD 16
Feats - Point Blank Shot
Abilities - 1st favored enemy, track, wild empathy
Skills (8/level) - Climb +6, Handle Animal +2, Heal +5, Knowledge (Dungeoneering) +5, Knowledge (Nature) +5, Perception +7, Stealth +7, Survival +5; Check Penalty -4
Overview: At 1st level, Silhandren sports a shortbow and point blank shot. At this level it's more cost effective to use a sling since a bow is very expensive. He's sporting scale mail (+5 armor, +3 dex) which is cheap and effective, and enjoys a +5/1d4+3 damage bonus with his sling at this level. Likewise he has about 115 gp left to spend so he can grab a heavy wooden shield as well for some additional AC in case of emergencies.
2nd Level Elven Ranger
Init +3, low-light vision, Perception +8
AC 18, touch 13, flat-footed 15 (+5 armor, +3 dex)
Hp 17 (2d10+2)
Fort +4, Ref +6, Will +1
Speed 20ft
Melee Longspear +4 (1d8+3) or Slashing Gauntlet +4 (1d4+2)
Ranged Mwk Composite Longbow +6 (1d8+2, x3) or Sling +5 (1d4+2)
Str 14, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 7
Base Atk +2, CMB +4, CMD 17
Feats - Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot
Abilities - 1st favored enemy, track, wild empathy, combat style feat (archery)
Skills (8/level) - Climb +7, Handle Animal +3, Heal +5, Knowledge (Dungeoneering) +5, Knowledge (Nature) +5, Perception +8, Ride +7, Stealth +8, Survival +6, Swim +7; Check Penalty -4, +1 Survival when tracking
Overview: At 2nd level, the majority of Silhandren's wealth has been invested in a masterwork composite longbow with a +2 strength modifier. This bow will serve him for many levels to come. He picks up archery style with his ranger level and chooses rapid shot, which combined with point blank shot gives him a significant damage boost.
3rd Level Elven Ranger
Init +3, low-light vision, Perception +9
AC 18, touch 13, flat-footed 15 (+5 armor, +3 dex)
Hp 24 (3d10+3)
Fort +4, Ref +6, Will +2
Speed 20ft
Melee Longspear +5 (1d8+3) or Slashing Gauntlet +5 (1d4+2)
Ranged Mwk Composite Longbow +7 (1d8+2, x3) or Sling +6 (1d4+2)
Str 14, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 7
Base Atk +3, CMB +5, CMD 18
Feats - Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Precise Shot, Endurance
Abilities - 1st favored enemy, track, wild empathy, combat style feat (archery), endurance, favored terrain
Skills (8/level) - Climb +8, Handle Animal +4, Heal +5, Knowledge (Dungeoneering) +5, Knowledge (Nature) +5, Perception +9, Ride +9, Stealth +11, Survival +9, Swim +8; Check Penalty -4, +1 Survival when tracking
Overview: At 3rd level, Silhandren picks up Precise Shot to ignore the penalties for firing into melee and also grabs Endurance and a favored terrain from his ranger levels. Like favored enemy, his favored terrain will likely depend on the campaign he's being played in. We also grabbed a masterwork cloak (+2 Stealth) and Survival Kit (+2 Survival). His equipment hasn't been changed much, so we have a lot of options - we could either grab a wand of cure light wounds and let the ranger function as a medic between fights or purchase a few minor potions (such as an oil of magic weapon for his bow or melee weapons in case of an emergency).
4th Level Elven Ranger
Init +4, low-light vision, Perception +10
AC 20, touch 13, flat-footed 16 (+6 armor, +4 dex)
Hp 30 (4d10+4)
Fort +6, Ref +8, Will +3
Speed 30ft
Melee Longspear +6 (1d8+3) or Slashing Gauntlet +6 (1d4+2)
Ranged Mwk Composite Longbow +9 (1d8+2, x3) or Sling +8 (1d4+2)
Str 14, Dex 18 (17), Con 12, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 7
Base Atk +4, CMB +6, CMD 20
Feats - Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Precise Shot, Endurance
Abilities - 1st favored enemy, track, wild empathy, combat style feat (archery), endurance, favored terrain, nature bond
Skills (8/level) - Climb +9, Handle Animal +5, Heal +5, Knowledge (Dungeoneering) +5, Knowledge (Geography) +5, Knowledge (Nature) +5, Perception +10, Ride +10, Stealth +13, Survival +10, Swim +9; Check Penalty -4, +2 Survival when tracking
Overview: At 4th level, Silhandren has purchased a mithral breastplate, a cloak of resistance +1, and gloves of dexterity +1, and has increased his Dexterity by +1. He also receives a hunter's bond in the form of either an animal companion or his adventuring companions. I'll discuss some benefits of each in a bit.
5th Level Elven Ranger
Init +4, low-light vision, Perception +11
AC 20, touch 13, flat-footed 16 (+6 armor, +4 dex)
Hp 30 (4d10+4)
Fort +6, Ref +8, Will +3
Speed 30ft
Melee Longspear +7 (1d8+3) or Slashing Gauntlet +7 (1d4+2)
Ranged +1 Composite Longbow +10 (1d8+2+1, x3) or Sling +9 (1d4+2)
Str 14, Dex 18 (17), Con 12, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 7
Base Atk +5, CMB +7, CMD 21
Feats - Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Precise Shot, Endurance, Deadly Aim
Abilities - 1st favored enemy, track, wild empathy, combat style feat (archery), endurance, favored terrain, nature bond, 2nd favored enemy
Skills (8/level) - Climb +10, Handle Animal +6, Heal +5, Knowledge (Dungeoneering) +5, Knowledge (Geography) +5, Knowledge (Nature) +5, Perception +11, Ride +11, Spellcraft +6, Stealth +14, Survival +11, Swim +10; Check Penalty -4, +2 Survival when tracking
Overview: At 5th level, Silhandren has had his longbow enhanced to +1, and has taken the Deadly Aim feat which begins at -2/+4 damage, which he will use whenever he needs to move and fire in the same round (since the benefits are similar to rapid shot at this level. It will combo well with Manyshot taken at 6th level as well. His equipment hasn't changed so the player has plenty of options to customize him. We'll be saving up for bracers of archery and perhaps a 1/day item of flame arrow for 2,160 gp (lasts 30 minutes when used).
Summary: We can see that Silhandren is an excellent scout, tracker, hunter, and archer. His archery isn't as strong as a strait fighter's but he enjoys a number of useful benefits and a lot of extra skill points over a fighter as well. Depending on his chosen enemies, terrain, and hunter's bond, he could go in different directions in terms of usefulness.
Notes: In a generic campaign where you're likely to run into almost anything conceivable, choosing animals, aberrations, constructs, magical beasts, and undead are good options for favored enemies because these categories are very broad. Choosing enemies like Humanoids requires you to specify a particular subtype which generally means only one sort of enemy.
When choosing terrain, the main contributing factor is where the campaign is taking place. If you're playing in a game with lots of dungeon crawling (such as World's Largest Dungeon) then Underground is an ideal choice. Urban is good in a game like Curse of the Crimson Throne since most of the game takes place inside a city. Forests and Mountains are likewise good because those are popular wilderness areas. In games with pirate or seafaring themes, water becomes an ideal candidate, and desert in egyptian themes as well. Planes is probably the poorest option unless you're in a Diablo style campaign, and is a poor choice for even Planescape style games because it requires you to pick a specific plane - where most of the other terrains can at least be found on other planes (you should be able to find deserts, mountains, and urban environments in places like the elemental plane of fire and Sigil).
When choosing a Hunter's Bond, the following should be considered. If you're running with an above-average sized party and your favored enemy options are good within the campaign then the party bond becomes far more attractive, since the more party members, pets, and summoned creatures you can get within range, the more benefit you receive overall. In particularly large parties you may even end up moving around the battlefield and then using another move action to grant the bonus to different groups within 30ft. Also, in this case you will want to focus more on Wisdom than usual since the bonuses last for a number of rounds equal to your Wisdom bonus (so trying to get this to around +5 isn't a bad idea). The downside is against enemies who aren't your favorites, it's a complete waste for you and your party.
An animal companion is probably the safest bet for a campaign where your enemy types are likely to change regularly, and is likewise better for smaller parties since you get an extra member. This extra member can help keep enemies away from you, or provide flanking bonuses to your allies, or to protect weaker members of your party. Likewise, the pet is more expendable than a player character, so Sparky can help take one for the team by grappling a big monster while the party flees (sad but heroic). Your pet can be armed with barding using excess wealth or materials collected off fallen enemies, and also benefits from group buffs like Haste and the paladin's Aura of Justice ability. Finally your pet gets all the benefits of your Favored Enemy and Terrain abilities, which likely makes a pet the stronger (due to versatility) choice.
I hope you like it Geraint. I'll try to get everyone else's requests up ASAP. ^-^
|
|
I dont completely agree with the idea behind this thread, but I understand your point of view, and feel it is just another way of playing.
Personally, my opinion of it is to allow the players to stat out the characters how they want, but they have to play that way as well(not saying that you dont feel that way). if they want to put an 18 in the one stat and a 7 in the other, you better believe the 7 is going to make it difficult to function sometimes.
That said, I think Im probably going to be stealing the characters for my own purposes.
I dont completely agree with the idea behind this thread, but I understand your point of view, and feel it is just another way of playing.
Personally, my opinion of it is to allow the players to stat out the characters how they want, but they have to play that way as well(not saying that you dont feel that way). if they want to put an 18 in the one stat and a 7 in the other, you better believe the 7 is going to make it difficult to function sometimes.
That said, I think Im probably going to be stealing the characters for my own purposes.
You don't agree that the numbers that represent your characters in-game should be made to fit the way you want your character to play in-game? If I may ask, why not? The idea, and point, of this thread is to show that you can have deep and realistic characters that function as intended within the system without requiring you to have super-powerful characters that have high stats in everything (and started partially because someone said you couldn't make a fighter who was decent socially without sacrificing your combat ability for a high charisma).
Lower ability scores do make it difficult to function sometimes. That's more or less a given. The dreaded 7 gives a -2 to things associated with that statistic, while a 5 (such as a dwarf with a charisma penalty) has a -3. That negative can be quite painful sometimes and it means you won't be innately good at that thing and you will also have a lower capacity compared to someone else.
I've never intended to suggest that having a low ability score in anything (including charisma) didn't have drawbacks, but the idea is to work within the system to achieve our desired goal (play the character you want with mechanical stability). It's like saying "You better believe not having a ranged weapon is going to be difficult sometimes". That's entirely true, and yet it might be offset by the ability to cast a spell at-will or similar which you use instead.
Also, feel free to use the characters. I hope you enjoy them. ^-^
In the same vein, your Cha -2 means in most situations your a boorish lout, you may be handsome (or not) but your a complete dick about it (think Gaston from Beauty and the Beast) you may think your a suave wooer of women, but at the heart of it your only that in your own imagination. Women who do fawn over you are willfully blind to your short comings because they admire your other attributes, (aka wealth, success, physicality.)
Skills are active things not passive, so your ranks in bluff and diplomacy mean when you try you know the right thing to say, you may not be genuine about it (bluff) but you can charm the pants off the naive farm girls, and then in the morning you fart in their bed, scratch yourself, and head back into the wide world to slay dragons and swive with the next maiden.
I can agree with this partially, and yet not quite completely. Galnorag notes that a character could be handsome but poor socially. However he defines that a -2 charisma means you are a certain type of person ("boorish lout, complete dick", etc). That I can't agree with, since it is similar to saying "having a high charisma means you're pretty". It COULD represent that, or it could be something different. Gaston might have a 7 Charisma and be a jerk, whereas he could be a handsome introvert and gets overly nervous in conversations, or any number of other character concepts. Ultimately he has a penalty to his charisma based skills.
Likewise, skills are passive and active, so I can't agree here fully. Many skills are passive, used as part of an action, or used when desired, or used with restrictions. Skill ranks can represent training, learning through doing, or just natural growth. It doesn't matter if you studied at a college or you just learned a lot through experiences, or by reading a book, putting 1 rank in a Knowledge skill can represent any of these things and more.
Also, many people don't stop to think about it, but having a low charisma means you're also more likely to like low charisma characters. Using the same example of Gaston from Beauty & the Beast (it really was a great example, Galnorag), it's possible Bell has an above average Charisma (she's definitely strong willed) while Gaston has a poor Charisma. Let's give Bell a +2 charisma and Gaston a -2 charisma.
Now the Diplomacy DC to make Bell indifferent is 17 (15 + Cha modifier). Gaston is 3rd level and invested a few skill points and has a +1 modifier. However, during an initial encounter with bell he botched the Diplomacy roll (5 points under 17) and made her unfriendly. Now the DC is 22 to get her back to indifferent and thus Gaston has pretty much no chance barring certain circumstance modifiers of influencing her in a positive way.
Meanwhile, Gaston is surrounded by women who are ready to throw themselves at him. They're pretty but likely have low marks in other charisma factors, so they might have a 7-9 charisma as well. The DC to impress these women is at low as 13 by default, so Gaston readily made those checks. Likewise, by making them friendly he also has less chance to piss them off (the DC is now 8) and he could take 10 and probably get them to swoon, especially if he sports a +2 circumstance modifier or similar.
Likewise, it's this reason dwarfs don't upset other dwarfs constantly. A dwarf with a -1 Charisma talking to another dwarf with a -1 charisma still has the same effective DC as a human talking to a human, since the DC is lowered by the charisma penalty of the other dwarf. Meanwhile dwarfs are rather impressed by humans, and they tend to love gnomes. But dwarfs come off rather poorly to humans.
See how it all works in the system? ^-^