Hello Ladys and Gents, just wondering if I can pick your brains for a good PC to play for Second Darkness. I would like to have good roleplaying possibilities and a decent fighter type. The group consists of a monk, oracle, mage, and figter (ranged). I am a bit torn between paladin, ranger, or a fighter. I guess I basically just want to have a valiant warrior type character. You know the first one in and last one out type of deal.
He is going to be a dwarf, so please keep that in mind and other than that I am open to anything. The stats I rolled before any racial modifiers are as follows, and yes they can be placed in any order. 18, 16, 15, 13, 12, 11.
I look forward to your input.
Cheers
P.S. I have already played a Paladin in 2E, and a Monk in 3E
Have you taken a look at the Cavalier? It can have the valiant warrior feel to it without the party annoyance of a pally.
Yeah, but from what I have seen it is mostly using mounted combat. Mounts are not my favourite thing. I had one once and they didn't really get used too much. I think if I did use a cavalier, it would be a modified one so I wouldn't have to have a mount.
Suggest taking ranger, I do. I've GMed SD twice and can tell you (not really a spoiler) that Urban Ranger or Infiltrator would be great archetypes to take.
I would not suggest taking a mount. Dangerous and deceiving, horses are. Plus you won't be able to take them to most of your encounter sites.
Suggest the following, I would:
Str 18, Dex 13, Con 12, Int 11, Wis 18, Cha 13 (racial adjustments included).
Hope this helps, I do, young padowan.
Second Darkness is a railroad-type, dungeon crawling, AP. It was fun, but it definitely became a grind late in the game. By the Chapter 6, it's just fight after fight after fight. But I digress...
Those stats you rolled are nothing short of excellent and you can do anything you want with 'em. There is no class barred to you. Well done.
- Fighter: I love this class, always will. I took a TWF'er into SD and never lacked for targets. You're not gonna be a skills guy, but that's okay. The only skill you'll really need in SD is the kill'n kind. As a Fighter, you'll excel at that...
Ranger: a TWF'er Ranger could have lots of fun in SD. I suggest taking Favored Enemy: Hu-mon. You'll have Riddleport on its knees in no time. Skills aren't of paramount use in this AP, so you can funnel those Favored Class bonus points into HP instead.
I Second the Urban Ranger thought.
|
Hello Ladys and Gents, just wondering if I can pick your brains for a good PC to play for Second Darkness. I would like to have good roleplaying possibilities and a decent fighter type. The group consists of a monk, oracle, mage, and figter (ranged). I am a bit torn between paladin, ranger, or a fighter. I guess I basically just want to have a valiant warrior type character. You know the first one in and last one out type of deal.
He is going to be a dwarf, so please keep that in mind and other than that I am open to anything. The stats I rolled before any racial modifiers are as follows, and yes they can be placed in any order. 18, 16, 15, 13, 12, 11.
My suggestion will sound odd. How ever it works and can be fun. He is a gambler in the making. I know he is not a valiant warrior type. He is more like the reluctent hero type. But most of the choices in the players guide for second darkness are this type. With starting in riddle port leting some one know your a good guy is like panting a target on your back. He can be the reluctant hero that acts valiant when needed. He just dose not feal the need to let every one know how he realy is. And in riddle port it's probly safer for them to think is just a bad fellow.
Dwarf Bard
Str 18
Dex 13
Con 17
Int 12
Wis 13
Cha 14
Traits: Optimistic Gambler, +1
Skills: Acrobatics, Perception, Stealth, Preform: Oratary, Preform: Act, Knowlage: Local, Knowlage: History
Feat: Lingering Performance
Spells:
0 level: Sift, Unwitting Ally, Mending, Lullaby
1 Level: Saving Finale, Timely Inspiration
Have you taken a look at the Cavalier? It can have the valiant warrior feel to it without the party annoyance of a pally.Yeah, but from what I have seen it is mostly using mounted combat. Mounts are not my favourite thing. I had one once and they didn't really get used too much. I think if I did use a cavalier, it would be a modified one so I wouldn't have to have a mount.
The mount is not the be all end all of the cavalier. Unless you sink feats into it, you now just have an animal companion horse.
Without the mount you have still: Challenges, Order Abilitys, Banner, bonus Teamwork feats + ability to share them, Bonus Combat feat or two, Better skills than a fighter (4+ int and more class skills)