Hmmm, a different kind of dump stat.
::moseys out of the thread::
"He can't cast since he can't talk or hear his verbal spells, he can't see so he can't see who to attack or heal."
From the Deaf Oracle Curse he gets Silent Spell on everything he casts with no drawback, so he can still cast, and Clouded Vision means he can only see up to 30 feet, but gets dark vision. So he could cast, and as he levels he gets vision out to 60 with dark vision, blindsense, and then blindsight or he gets some bonus to perception that doesn't require sound, scent, and then tremorsense.
|
Let's actually take a look at what we have going on here.
Clouded vision isn't blind. It's short range darkvision. Deaf is deaf, but it also makes all your spells silent spells.
The main issue is that unless there is a wisdom based oracle variant I don't know of, this is ridiculously MAD, but I would ask the player what the plan is.
But if there is (or the player has a plan) this could also be a fairly effective self buffing melee machine.
Find out the plan. I am constantly surprised by what can be made to work.
Veldebrand has the right of it. I have considered such a build myself.
I think people are putting too much emphasis on the "blind" thing as the character is NOT blind with clouded vision. In fact, later the character will be able to "see" better than the other characters within 60'. And the same goes for "deaf". Later they will get better senses to compensate.
Do you think Stick had it easy starting out? Or Daredevil? No, they both learned to turn their handicap into their strength. This character could easily accomplish the same thing. I can see several ways out. I think people either haven't put any effort into seeing the possibilities or are so quick to dismiss it as a kneejerk reaction that they are blissful in their ignorance about the strengths of the build.
My sole consideration as a DM would be whether I wanted the player talking at the table If he's an ass, I'd approve this character concept in a heartbeat.
|
How do you discourage a player who adamantly wants to play a monk/oracle with a Vow of Silence and the Deaf and Clouded Vision curses?
The first thing that I think when I see this idea is that I would be tempted to disallow a Vow of Silence, because that would be meaningless for a deaf character. How does he *know* he's being silent? (Since it applies to all noise, not just speaking.)
If he pushed back hard, I would make sure that he understood that to enforce intent, I would extend a Vow of Silence to *all* outward 'speechlike' communication that he made -- no sign language and no telepathy. (Writing would be ok.) This is because a Vow is all about intent -- you are making a sacred oath to give something up. A disadvantage that is not disadvantageous does not accrue benefits. In a similar way, I would disallow a character with a Vow of Fasting from getting the ki bonus while wearing a Ring of Sustenance -- you would not be experiencing the privation that produces the extra ki, and your deity is not amused.
If he was okay with that ruling, then I'd let him play the character. I've actually been in a group with a similar (but less extreme character) and it worked fine -- but the player dropped it after a few sessions because he felt like he was missing too much.
Which still wasn't as bad as the time I made a character who vowed to only speak in rhyme. It sounded cool, but she ended up not speaking at all because I couldn't make up the rhymes quickly enough to keep up with the conversation.
How do you discourage a player who adamantly wants to play a monk/oracle with a Vow of Silence and the Deaf and Clouded Vision curses?
"I'm not going to allow that."
This pretty much sums up my opinion.
You wouldn't allow a broken character that was power-gaming
Don't allow a broken character that is horribly underpowered.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, one of the roots of modern sign language was monks who had taken a vow of silence The Anne Sullivan character even references it in Miracle Worker.
|
|
Actually, one of the roots of modern sign language was monks who had taken a vow of silence The Anne Sullivan character even references it in Miracle Worker.
I didn't know that. That's interesting.
What's odd is that I wouldn't have any qualms about letting a monk with hearing use sign language with a Vow of Silence. I'd probably even be ok with a deaf character using it -- if they learned the sign language sometime after character creation. (Since deaf people are certainly capable of speaking.)
The key point being that taking a Vow means giving something up, and as a GM I'd say that means your primary projected communication method.
|
|
How do you discourage a player who adamantly wants to play a monk/oracle with a Vow of Silence and the Deaf and Clouded Vision curses?
"I'm not going to allow that."This pretty much sums up my opinion.
You wouldn't allow a broken character that was power-gaming
Don't allow a broken character that is horribly underpowered.
Unless they have a way to make it work.
It actually could be a very effective stealth characters (all silent spells, darkvision, no armor...) if they have a workaround for the MAD issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why disallow? He will most likely tire of it quickly.
Why disallow? Part of my job as DM Is to help the other players have fun and be successful. If I don't do what I can to head off predictable problems that will undermine that, I'm not doing my job. Helping the player come up with a sustainable concept (not one they will tire of so soon) is something I should do.
I'm not really sure how many levels such a player would take. I think we've already shown that they are somewhat illogical/unpredictable from the start.
Does the character have a good backstory with room for roleplaying growth? Or is this a case of "I want to be a Half Celestial Half Dragon Drow with the Throw Anything Feat" silliness?
How do you discourage a player who adamantly wants to play a monk/oracle with a Vow of Silence and the Deaf and Clouded Vision curses?
Ask the player to explain in detail how the character will be more of a help than a hindrance to the rest of the party. Not just to you, to the rest of the group. If they can't, the character concept gets voted off the island.
I'd like someone to double check me on this... but I believe the Dual-Cursed Oracles only gain the "bonuses" from one of curses they take. The second curse never gets better. So if you took Clouded Visions as second curse, you never get beyond 30' range vision.
"A dual-cursed oracle must choose two curses at 1st level. One of these curses (oracle’s choice) never changes its abilities as the oracle gains levels; for example, an oracle with clouded vision never gains darkvision 60 feet, blindsense, or blindsight. The other curse comes with its normal benefits."
So he would only be gaining oracle curse bonuses for either deaf or clouded visions, not both.
I'd prefer the GM nixed another players ridonkulous idea rather than have my game time wasted whilst X player works out the idea is really stupid - meaning we have to not only carry his share of the load, but to have him using up game time unproductively.
Its really in no-ones interest to let some things (like the above) slide.
Inclusivity still has to have some boundaries.
In what way does a weak PC waste your time? In what way does he not carry "his share of the load"? Do you have a table minimum for DPR? Do you ban weak classes like Rogue at your table too? Or certain feat choices?
We're talking about playing a story-telling game here, not a competition. As long as the player is a good guy and gets along at the table and contributes something to the other players, even if its just a laugh, he's doing his part. He'll have to accept with good grace that his character isn't a shining beacon of power, but that leaves more glory to spread around the other PCs.
|
Dodson's correct observations
The character could pick either one. I believe if they chose the deaf as the lesser curse (that doesn't get better), they can still have the silent spell feat. Personally, in that situation I'd go with Clouded Vision as the improving curse. You'd get 60' dark vision pretty quick at level 5. 60' is within charge range of most characters.
There is nothing wrong with using free actions to read the lips of an ally telling you which direction to go, and then wondering off in the general direction said ally specified and/or following your group that "disappears" beyond your vision range. They could even be specific and pantomime the appearance of obstacles that you might encounter during your move actions. (*mouthing and using arm gestures* "in 100 ft go AROUND the rock to the LEFT side"). As long as that ally is within 10' , speaking a language you know, and you have 1 point in linguistics, you understand it just as well as anyone else ever could.
In most PFS games I play in, we are hardly ever in an open space with more than a hundred feet between landmarks. In fact many adventures are dungeon crawls. The 60' vision restriction would rarely come into play. There is also no facing in pathfinder. So you can't get caught with allies behind you yelling for help but unable to see. Just stick within visual range of at least one ally, you'll know how to react based on their reactions.
The vow of silence is the only thing I can see that would make this cumbersome. If the player carries around a dry erase board, they could act in character and scribble out what they want to communicate on it, and in-game it is just a chalk board.
Without the vow of silence restriction, no one can say when or how the character became deaf, so there is no reason to assume that the character didn't already know how to speak and therefore can speak normally.
There is a reason we have laws against discriminating against those with disabilities. In the right circumstance they can do a particular job as well as anyone else. I think that's the interesting thing about the Oracle Curses. You have a disadvantage that turns into an advantage, as long as you don't get hung up on the glaring weaknesses. It's upsetting that so many people would just cast aside an imaginary character in a fantasy game that has magic spells, items, and abilities at their disposable that can curb most of the problems associated with the curses.
I do get the argument about the other members at the table, and how they should feel about adventuring with another character that they might have to stay in LOS of, or pantomime with. But what does that say about your real life tolerance if you can't let a character in your group that might necessitate a small degree of accommodation. (and to what degree the character needs accommodating is determined by how well the player builds the character and plans ahead for certain problematic situations)
There's a spell called Oracle's Curse that gives your enemies the negative effects of your curse, but not the benefits... I wonder if that would apply for a double cursed Oracle? If so, that player may be a damned skilled minmaxer waiting to turn the tables on you.
Quite possibly.
Like someone said earlier, I'd run them through a quick test-your-character session, just to see if they can make it work.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Atarlost,
I chose my words carefully. I said in the "In the right circumstance they can do a particular job as well as anyone else."
So yes in real life that all makes sense. However this is a game and there are many many ways to get around the majority of the hindrances. I think it's a little hasty to disallow a couple of official paizo rules just because you aren't looking at it with an open mind.
And by open mind I mean, "how exactly will this effect the game mechanics and are we putting too many assumptions and bias on our initial reaction on a deaf / vow of silenced character".
Realistically, he just misses some perception check rolls (based on sound). His initiative is 4 points lower, and he has to communicate with a chalk board / hand gestures (1 point linguistic skill tax for everyone in the group probably).
Mechanic wise it doesn't seem like a major issue for the vast majority of adventuring in the game of pathfinder. Unless the DM took half the suggestions in this thread ans specifically tried to make his life miserable.
|
|
I'm not really sure how many levels such a player would take. I think we've already shown that they are somewhat illogical/unpredictable from the start.
I don't think you've shown that at all.
Let's say it is just an oracle dip. You get misfortune (which is borderline broken), darkvision for 30 feet and silent spell in addition to 4 orisons and two 1st level cleric spells they can cast (silently) three times a day. You are deaf and can't see past 30 feet, but you can get away with an 11 charisma.
Two levels of Oracle and if you take battle you get enlarge person, which is great for monks.
They must plan to take at least 4 levels of monk, otherwise the silence is fairly pointless. I can see this actually working pretty well in the right group.
|
|
Yeah I was goofing around with different builds too. The monk / Oracle is really MAD no matter how I tried to swing it, but it could be a fun character concept. I loved the Misfortune / Stunning fist combo someone mentioned.
Problem with Battle Oracle for 2 levels is that the Dual-Cursed archetype overwrites your first 3 mystery spells. So you get Ill Omen, Oracles Burden, and Bestow Curse.
Ill Omen doesn't have a save, so that's an effective spell even with low CHA. The other two, (Oracles Burden and Bestow Curse) wouldn't be effective if you took min CHA and boosted other stats.
You can look at Flames Mystery and maybe take some extra revelations to do Gaze of Flames, Obscuring Mist foolishness, and Cinder Dance is there for another 10' to an already high monk movement. Revelation strike is an option with access to Touch of Flame. Probably burning too many feats to go down all these routes, but some synergy is there.
|
|
Yeah I was goofing around with different builds too. The monk / Oracle is really MAD no matter how I tried to swing it, but it could be a fun character concept. I loved the Misfortune / Stunning fist combo someone mentioned.
Problem with Battle Oracle for 2 levels is that the Dual-Cursed archetype overwrites your first 3 mystery spells. So you get Ill Omen, Oracles Burden, and Bestow Curse.
Ill Omen doesn't have a save, so that's an effective spell even with low CHA. The other two, (Oracles Burden and Bestow Curse) wouldn't be effective if you took min CHA and boosted other stats.
You can look at Flames Mystery and maybe take some extra revelations to do Gaze of Flames, Obscuring Mist foolishness, and Cinder Dance is there for another 10' to an already high monk movement. Revelation strike is an option with access to Touch of Flame. Probably burning too many feats to go down all these routes, but some synergy is there.
Good catch on battle oracle.
Still with a two level dip, ill omen and misfortune synergy well with either stunning fist or a grapple type build. Particularly when you consider it is cast silently, preferably from complete darkness (since the player has darkvision)
I think we need more info on how the player plans to build out before we say it is impossible. Now I'm thinking if they get to 4th level and spam supernatural darkness around themselves...
Never underestimate your players creativity.
|
|
Maybe something like,
Human
Str 7
Dex 16 (+2 racial = 18) (+1 @8th, +1 @12th)
Con 13 (+1 @4th
Int 7
Wis 16
Cha 14
Monk 1 level, rest into Dual-Cursed Oracle, Outer Rifts Mystery.
Misfortune, Demonhide, wings of terror, Telepathy, Fortune, Planar Haze, Dread Resilience, Unearthly Terrain, (all really good revelations).
Feats: Weapon Finesse, Maybe the Shattered Defenses Chain with enforcer. Crushing blow.
Spells selection can focus on buffs.
With a +6 WIS/ CHA headband the character could get 9th level spells.
Get a + DEX belt, Agile amulet of mighty fists.
Would be a pretty good intimidate character. Of course he'd have to scare people with his looks and "displays of prowess" and not "verbal threats".
The AC would be high with Demon Hide, Wis, and DEX bonuses.
|
|
I think you are over investing in Charisma. They aren't going to be casting much that requires saves. You can have them with an 11 or 12 if you are only looking for 2nd level spells.
Similarly, I think you are also over investing in Dex.
I see this more as a monk with an oracle dip, as you need to be at least a 4th level monk to get anything out of the vow of silence.
Let's make it 4 and 4. You get first and 2nd level cleric spells, misfortune and another revelation (most of them have armors, so that is an option), and BaB stays the same.
From monk you get Wisdom to armor, and an extra +1 from monk. Movements +10, two bonus feats, unarmed up to 1d8, stunning fist is lower, but with misfortune and ill omen you are still better off.
I think it could work.
I'd prefer the GM nixed another players ridonkulous idea rather than have my game time wasted whilst X player works out the idea is really stupid - meaning we have to not only carry his share of the load, but to have him using up game time unproductively.
Its really in no-ones interest to let some things (like the above) slide.
Inclusivity still has to have some boundaries.
In what way does a weak PC waste your time? In what way does he not carry "his share of the load"? Do you have a table minimum for DPR? Do you ban weak classes like Rogue at your table too? Or certain feat choices?
We're talking about playing a story-telling game here, not a competition. As long as the player is a good guy and gets along at the table and contributes something to the other players, even if its just a laugh, he's doing his part. He'll have to accept with good grace that his character isn't a shining beacon of power, but that leaves more glory to spread around the other PCs.
How do you contribute? You cant talk so you don't add to discussions. You cant hear either so your just the guy that stands in the corner during RP.
The character wont just hinder the players fun. It will hinder the other players fun also. Where I to play in this game I would not want a player at the table that just waves his hands around and points all game. A character that I literally have to write everything down for in game. A character that is almost blind to boot so he is almost zero help as a scout.... He cant see or hear whats ahead nor can he communicate anything if he did... unless he pulls out a piece of chalk or a pin, ink, blotter, paper.... its just ridiculous.
All this talk about "Let the players play what they want to play!" is crap imo. Most DM's wouldn't allow a CE character in a good aligned party because of the problems it would present. This character would present just as many issues but for different even more frustrating ways.
As a DM I would nix the idea and ask him to consider something else.
|
|
Actually, I think the role playing aspect is the best part. I can imagine a lot a good player could do at the table with this kind of character, and it would create a lot of interesting situations throughout.
I think people are overlooking that the "curses" actually come out to more or less a net even early, and become advantages late.
You are deaf, but you also can cast silent spells.
You can't see past 30 feet, but you have darkvision for 30 feet.
I'm not saying this would be an optimized type build, but it could be a lot of fun to play and in the right group it could work really well.
I Think its great. I have a blind/deaf dual-cursed gunslinger Oracle of wind. he uses wind sight to see the entire battlefield points his seeking gun at the bad guy and pulls the trigger. He's set up to take advantage of vital strike with guns since he spends most of his move actions reloading. He's not easy to play but sure is fun.
Ignoring the metagame aspect of this character ever getting to leave the temple (no adventuring party with two brains cells even occasionally colliding would ever bring the guy along in the first place), the guy really is a hindrance to the group.
Whatever benefit they bring would have to be huge to over write that.
They can't do things like change tactics in mid battle or be warned as the battle goes on about something.. because they can't hear you talk.
Sure you can lipread if everyone is standing in front of you and nothign else is going on but when you are in combat and things are going on its not going to be nearly as easy- if possible at all- to read someone's lips.
He can't hear the bad guy talking he can't hear the good guy's warnings and he dang well better get the infravision because if not, he's worse than useless in the dark. (because he can't call for you and can't hear you calling for him). Sure, thats an extreme case- hopefully that kinda thing doesn't happen... but its not like darkness spells are rare. Even so simple a thing as "everyone move against the wall" when the darkness spell hits, he can't hear or act on.
The deafness curse borders on auto-ban anyway (at least to me, I understand other tables will vary) but combining it with someone who can't see and refuses to talk and what you have is a very unfortunate temple clergy man or something. Not an adventurer.
Absolutely ban the guy out right? No, probably not.
But refuse to acknowledge the severe hindrance this guy is to the party? Thats just not right either. Playing something like this really does involve the acceptance of the whole group not just any one person.
spells, magical items, and all that jazz really don't have any bearing on the rather overwhelming (imo) burden that the blind deaf mute guy is to the party.
-S
How do you discourage a player who adamantly wants to play a monk/oracle with a Vow of Silence and the Deaf and Clouded Vision curses?
I'd say "I think this is a really bad idea, I discourage you to do it"
Somehow, I have a feeling you did that already.
As for it being a really bad idea, I'm not convinced of that. If you could get advantage of both curses, it would make a viable character, especially past 9th level. There are many ways to communicate non-verbally, and a good player can manage fine without ruining the experience of the game for other players. I've seen it done, and I played a (larp) game with a mute player a few years back. Basic concepts such as "danger this way", "I'm on it", "I'll go ahead" and other adventurer's necessities are easy enough to convey without using international sign language. I'm afraid that the concept might be tiring however, and get old relatively fast...
Obviously, the other players need to be Ok with the concept as well. As a DM, I have more issues with character concepts that bug other players than concepts that bug me.
As for the character's background, no wonder a character like that got "sponsored" by a deity as an oracle and raised in a monastery. The monk/oracle fits the bill IMO.
Personally, I'd encourage him (her?) to drop the deaf curse however. Being 'forced' to ignore your fellow players, or force them to also talk in signs would be a bit too much for me. Buy a rod of silence metamagic...
'findel
MY problem with deaf oracles is what does the deaf pc do when the pcs are talking to someone wouldn't they get bored. I tihnk the only really way the party can talk about the party is with sign langauge or a chalkboard. If oracles didn't need charisma the other problem with a deaf character is charisma isn't that useful if you can't speak.
MY problem with deaf oracles is what does the deaf pc do when the pcs are talking to someone wouldn't they get bored.
Let the player enjoy (or not) his deaf character. I'm more worried about boring out the other players, who now have to deal with a member of their group than cannot interact vocally with them.
Playing a disability is a touchy subject IMO. I bet that if I had a deaf friend (or had much more contact with a deaf person), a deaf character wouldn't bother me at all...
I was thinking more of talking with npcs could get boring. In combat it probably won't be as much. If it was a dungeon crawl campaign I see it going better.
How do you contribute? You cant talk so you don't add to discussions. You cant hear either so your just the guy that stands in the corner during RP.... meaning we have to not only carry his share of the load, but to have him using up game time unproductively.
...
In what way does a weak PC waste your time? In what way does he not carry "his share of the load"? Do you have a table minimum for DPR? Do you ban weak classes like Rogue at your table too? Or certain feat choices?
We're talking about playing a story-telling game here, not a competition. As long as the player is a good guy and gets along at the table and contributes something to the other players, even if its just a laugh, he's doing his part. He'll have to accept with good grace that his character isn't a shining beacon of power, but that leaves more glory to spread around the other PCs.
The player contributes because he can still talk. He can describe his PC's actions. He can pitch ideas OOC. He can pitch in for pizza.
I'll grant you that in character he'll have trouble in RP scenes. But a lot of PCs do. The player's got to know that up front.
The character wont just hinder the players fun. It will hinder the other players fun also. Where I to play in this game I would not want a player at the table that just waves his hands around and points all game. A character that I literally have to write everything down for in game. A character that is almost blind to boot so he is almost zero help as a scout.... He cant see or hear whats ahead nor can he communicate anything if he did... unless he pulls out a piece of chalk or a pin, ink, blotter, paper.... its just ridiculous.
See my note above about the player still contributing.
I also contend it's not much of a burden on you. If your PC wants to communicate with his PC, all you have to do is say, "my PC writes ...." or "my PC signs ...." or "my PC grabs his arm and points". Likewise if by a miracle his PC notices something the rest of the party misses, he does the same to communicate.
Unless of course you're LARPing. Are you LARPing?
All this talk about "Let the players play what they want to play!" is crap imo. Most DM's wouldn't allow a CE character in a good aligned party because of the problems it would present. This character...
Nice vocabulary. Most eloquent, IMO.
You're right a CE character in a good aligned party is a problem. I won't DM for them. They are a problem. They tend to divide the party.
An under-powered PC is not a problem. If he dies, he dies. No big deal.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If he can surmount my basic challenge to all players: the character must be enthusiastic about joining the party and answering the call to adventure, whatever it may be.
I really do announce this at the outset of all my campaigns.
If he can make that work with this concept, and if it really is a bad idea, then it will be a swift death, and we can move on.
Otherwise, I expect I will find myself in my favorite position as a GM — constantly surprised at the turns which the story will take. Either way, because of this one requirement, I don't need to suffer as GM through forcing a character into the group constantly.
EL, complete agreement.
Atarlost, I disagree. A CE PC usually splits the party because his goals and methods in no way correspond to the rest of the party's. A deaf-mute PC (who meets Evil Lincoln's challenge) only provides an RP challenge.
Atarlost,
I chose my words carefully. I said in the "In the right circumstance they can do a particular job as well as anyone else."
So yes in real life that all makes sense.
The problem seems to be more along the point of: This character being in an adventuring party without training his body and mind first is illogical, and therefore breaks Immersion.
I'm a cripple IRL (paraplegic actually, but for game purposes, crippled) and I for one, wouldn't go journeying until I could handle myself.
He is a liability, and if the starting party is being recruited from the Pub/Tavern, there would be far better candidates to hire.