Classes that make your group go UGH!

[Andrew R]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Adamantine Dragon wrote:

Well, you guys have me in one way. Dudes with swords fighting equally with dudes with guns is definitely "high fantasy" in the purest sense of the words...

Also dudes with magic fighting dudes with guns. And being threatened by them! (The guns, I mean. The magic is pretty advantageous, unless the enemy has overwhelming fire superiority.)

Like the scene in Wizards where he just shoots the villain instead of the anticipated mage duel?

[Beckett]

It was kind of funny and unexpected, but it was also much more of a let-down.

[TriOmegaZero]

Andrew R wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Also dudes with magic fighting dudes with guns. And being threatened by them! (The guns, I mean. The magic is pretty advantageous, unless the enemy has overwhelming fire superiority.)

Like the scene in Wizards where he just shoots the villain instead of the anticipated mage duel?

If it's one on one, the order mage can probably alter the angle of the bullet to miss, or reinforce his armor to reduce the force of the blow. If he's up against a volley, he's likely to end up unconcious from the effort or dead from the shots.

Or the chaos mage will ignite all of the gunner's powder at once.

Never seen Wizards.

[Ornery Hobbit]

rkraus2 wrote:

Our group has some of these tendencies. My last group had it is spades, we had a player will skill point addiction. He had to have a lot of skill points, both from class and from race (human) and from INT.

Then, he wondered why he didn't do as much damage in melee as the 8 INT fighter.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
We may try to fix it though for our next campaign. We've debated writing the main party roles on pieces of paper, and then drawing randomly.

I think it will be a good challenge, and push us to be better as players.

That's actually a cool idea, especially if you can get the players who are willing to work with it.

[Ornery Hobbit]

meatrace wrote:

Monks.

UGH!

bigkilla wrote:

The only classes that make me go UGHH are Oriental/Asian themed characters. But they are banned from my games so its all good.

but only in a Western European based fantasy setting

GnomePaladin wrote:

Gunslingers, in high fantasy settings...

Adamantine Dragon wrote:

But in my mind, just my opinion here, but it's a strongly held one, once you introduce guns, you've left high fantasy behind.

What they said

As for myself I almost exclusively multi-class and shoot for non-run of the mill concepts. In the recent past I've played:

Human Fighter/Ranger Horse Archer (Go Ghengis Go) bountyhunter who had trained his mount to do all kinds of stupid pet tricks mimicking conversation;

Elf Fighter/Rogue with the TWF feats who used chakrams almost exclusively and had woke up in the gutter so often from being tossed drunk from bars he actually slept at night;

Human Fighter/Druid with a lot of speed boosts (she could outrun her lioness in a sprint) who deserted the army to guard the veld and was on the lam;

Halfling Ranger/Sorcerer who was a tough talkin' tobacco chewing rancher somewhat patterned on the Outlaw Josie Wales;

Half-Orc Cleric/Summoner (Sythethist) lumberjack who used four axes in combat and absolutely butchered common everytime he opened his mouth;

Human Sorcerer (Stormborn)/Druid (Weather) high-cycling paranoid bi-polar who focused on electricity, cold and sound spells;

Human Bard (Dervish Dancer)/Magus (Kensei) who was a womanizer with a parrot familiar that would squawk lewd comments at beautiful women at inopportune times.

and a

Human Fighter/Cleric teamster who carted a slew of domestic farm animals around with him either on his buckboard or tied to the back of it.

They might not be hammer powerful, but they're a lot of fun to play

[darth_borehd]

Beckett wrote:

Isn't it like a +20 or +40 to Sense Motive for something that is basically BS thatthe listner wouldn't believe, no mater what (aka Hey, I've heard of you. . .).

It's a max of -20 for an impossible lie. Still not hard considering most NPCs and monsters have bad Sense Motive checks. Add to that a penchant for identity theft via forgery and Disguise so he can set other people up for his shenanigans.

With a Glibness spell on top of that, he can convince NPCs of just about anything.

[Deyvantius]

I used to game with a prick who had to be the leader every time. No matter what his CHA was his character always took the lead and ran all the group conversations with important NPCs.

what sucked the most was that we gamed at his house and so nobody would ever tell him anything or try and take over. I eventually settled into the "quiet brooding" type characters and didn't bother with CHA anymore.

The group was the best I ever gamed with, but man that guy really pissed me off.

[WhipShire]

Ornery Hobbit wrote:

rkraus2 wrote:

Our group has some of these tendencies. My last group had it is spades, we had a player will skill point addiction. He had to have a lot of skill points, both from class and from race (human) and from INT.

Then, he wondered why he didn't do as much damage in melee as the 8 INT fighter.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
We may try to fix it though for our next campaign. We've debated writing the main party roles on pieces of paper, and then drawing randomly.

I think it will be a good challenge, and push us to be better as players.

That's actually a cool idea, especially if you can get the players who are willing to work with it.

We tried something like this once. Players new we be switching up PC's but not how we were going to do it. Everyone made their PC and then we had everyone slide their character to the left. Lasted til about 6th level before people were tired of playing outside their comfort zone...