Yes, exactly.
One of my players in my PbP is playing exactly that kind of character: Archivist Bard, would most of the time rather be a wallflower and go about with her reading and studying and all and leave the talky-talky to the party Oracle (and Gunslinger, though that's mostly because he won't shut up more than him having the Charisma/skills).
But that's not how a high CHA character works in the book's limited definition, so does that mean she's playing them wrong? I very much think not.
I live in a very carefully controlled media bubble. What is a "fluttershy"?
Character from the My Little Pony cartoon. Short version: timid, reclusive animal-friend druid type with a surprisingly high number of ranks in Intimidate for the rare moments it becomes necessary.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I assume that's related to this "brony" word I hear occasionally.
Not my thing, but give 'er if you're into it.
That's my general rule.
If you like it, give 'er.
Could stand a few more people with that mindset.
Which to bring this conversation full circle, seems to be the core problem here - as Kirth put it, "One-True-Way"ism.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Could stand a few more people with that mindset.
Which to bring this conversation full circle, seems to be the core problem here - as Kirth put it, "One-True-Way"ism.
People like that grind my gears big time, even though I have been guilty of similar behaviour in the past: Hypocrisy for the win.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even troll threads have useful discussion in between the trolling.
Often, some of the most useful discussion occurs between the trolling as more inflammatory subjects are prone to come up in a troll thread.
At this point I am convinced that no one (generalized statements yay) can be this closed minded, hard nosed, and just down right wrong on so many levels. I think we have been trolled to the greatest extremes.
Maybeee...
Orthos I am listening I just do not agree...
Then I am thanking every inch of heaven that I do not game with you.
so your saying if your character has a wonderful personality but a 5 CHA uglyness in the game, everyone will run from you, children will scream in terror, gangs of drunk people will attack you in the streets for no reason... you cant walk down a street for 5 seconds without something like this happening...
honestly I dont see how a character like this would even be playable, I certanly wouldent allow it, it would disrupt the hell out of the game.
Ever seen The Goonies?
Sloth.
Abysmal INT, abysmal CHA. Scared the kids to death every time they saw him... until one of them stood up to their fears and found out he wasn't such a bad guy. Then all of them eventually loved him.
I rest my case.
The more I read your posts the more it seems like you are going out of your way to make the game miserable for any character that doesn't fit your perception of how they should be played. BAD GM. BAD. NO COOKIE.
Orthos I am listening I just do not agree...
Flesh- I think your placing too much import on looks, I read the thing about the elephant man, so... the lowest stat you can have is a 5 CHA, and the elephant man had a 5 CHA solely because of looks...
so your saying if your character has a wonderful personality but a 5 CHA uglyness in the game, everyone will run from you, children will scream in terror, gangs of drunk people will attack you in the streets for no reason... you cant walk down a street for 5 seconds without something like this happening...
honestly I dont see how a character like this would even be playable, I certanly wouldent allow it, it would disrupt the hell out of the game.
I think the problem is you're imagining CHA 5 in your head as a lot worse than it actually is.
I showed that a first level character can easily end up with a high CHA skill even with a CHA of 5.
It's only a -3. It's bad, but it's not as bad as Elephant man. His CHA was probably like 2, at most, physically.
Remember, a guy with 5 CHA who puts A SINGLE rank in Intimidate has a positive Intimidate bonus (assuming its a class skill.)
5 CHA takes only only 3 skill ranks to negate the negative.
3 levels of skills and a 5 CHA character can be as diplomatic as a 10 CHA first level character.
5 CHA does not make you totally socially inept.
It's only a -3 on a roll.
A CHA 10 guy has an average roll of 10.5 on a CHA skill.
A CHA 5 guy has a 7.5
That's not a huge difference.
let me ask, with all your playing of 5 CHA ugly characters... have you ever had a DM actually RP THIS level of terror and fear from appearance to your "nice but extremely ugly" characters?
I doubt it. probably because you say "well... he has bad manners too!" (facepalm)
You are doing an awful lot of assuming. You really should stop doing that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
in PF Sloth would eventually get brutally murderized by suspicious villagers...
Maybe in black and white, one dimensional Baalbamoth world.
Not in 3 dimensional, a million shades of grey Fleshgrinder world.
Sloth would be extremely useful to a medieval society. He's strong, dumb (meaning he'll do grunt work without much question), and would be great at scaring off bandits.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Orthos I am listening I just do not agree...
Flesh- I think your placing too much import on looks, I read the thing about the elephant man, so... the lowest stat you can have is a 5 CHA, and the elephant man had a 5 CHA solely because of looks...
so your saying if your character has a wonderful personality but a 5 CHA uglyness in the game, everyone will run from you, children will scream in terror, gangs of drunk people will attack you in the streets for no reason... you cant walk down a street for 5 seconds without something like this happening...
honestly I dont see how a character like this would even be playable, I certanly wouldent allow it, it would disrupt the hell out of the game.
let me ask, with all your playing of 5 CHA ugly characters... have you ever had a DM actually RP THIS level of terror and fear from appearance to your "nice but extremely ugly" characters?
I doubt it. probably because you say "well... he has bad manners too!" (facepalm)
my point is this... if you are recieving a +6 bonus for having a high strength... and you could have only gotten that by having a -6 neg on charasma... how much does your str effect the game and how much does your CHA effect the game?
they should both be equal, that +6 Str will help you win and survive, that -6 CHA should cause you to fail and nearly get killed.
how often does your STR help you nearly survive? 2-3 times a game? how often does your CHA nearly get you killed? once every 10 games?
scint- ok make it a person in a wheel chair and he says "hey wheels, wanna buy this car" or a person person with dwarfism "hey tiny tim, wanna buy this car?" any way you wanna put it, somebody is "discriminating" and coming out as charming funny etc.
No...because even though my 22 strenght makes me have a 4 charisma my AVERAGE (10) intelligence tells me that I should let the bard of the group do the talking so I don't anger everyone we come in contact with.
See I've pin pointed the problem here. You don't understand the basic concepts of the game and how its a GROUP endevour...not to mention the general basics of the stats and feats associated with character creation. Thats why you think there is ONLY one way to play the game...all out combat or all out RP. There is no equal balance in the world you play in. Its okay little buddy its not your fault...I blame your GM...still.
in PF Sloth would eventually get brutally murderized by suspicious villagers...Maybe in black and white, one dimensional Baalbamoth world.
Not in 3 dimensional, a million shades of grey Fleshgrinder world.
Sloth would be extremely useful to a medieval society. He's strong, dumb (meaning he'll do grunt work without much question), and would be great at scaring off bandits.
Furthermore, just up and killing a PC - or attempting to, Sloth's crazy STR and CON would probably make it difficult - for nothing more than being really ugly and socially inept is the move of a douchebag GM. There are tons of different ways you can have NPC react to that kind of character. Flee in terror. Badmouth him around town. Have the local law chase him off - they'd rather have him leave than have to clean up the blood. Have children throw things at him.
If your answer for everything like this is "mob of peasants with torches and pitchforks" the problem here is bad GMing. YOU are the one disrupting the game by your choice of NPC reaction, not the player.
To expand my point using "imagine this dice is perfectly formed" statistical math, lets look at the real difference between 10 (average) and 5 (bad).
In an untrained roll off. Just rolling a D20 and adding either 0 (10) or -3 (5) we know the average, as I stated before, is 10.5 for the 10, and 7.5 for the 5 (because both have the same average roll chance, one just gets a -3 on that average)
So, each side of a D20 represents a 5% chance (in the 'my dice is perfectly weighted' world that doesn't actually exist, but is supposed to)
So let's strip the .5, since both have it, and make it 7 to 10.
That -3 represents 15% on a dice roll.
That means a 5 score is only 15% worse than a 10 score.
That means a 5 CHA is only 15% more awkward/ugly than a 10 CHA.
A 5 INT is only 15% stupider than average (which stays close to my IQ example from several posts ago).
15%
Less than 1/5th
So a 5, not as bad as you make it out to be.
flesh- I think you just made my point..
how advantagious is an 18 stat in your classes main ability score? why is CHA almost always a dump stat?
ans: because of the perception that its not that bad to have a low CHA stat but its awesome having a high (STR DEX INT WIS etc) because those feed your class abilities.
you get massive bonuses for that 18 stat, but hardly any negitives from your horrible CHA.
that is MIN/MAXing at its core, and why I see it as powergaming
(polite bow)
Every class has dump scores.
CHA is not a dump stat for several classes. Clerics, Sorcerers, Skill-based Rogues, Bards, Paladins, Oracles...
And do you know what a lot of those classes can dump? Strength.
Putting a low score in a stat that is effectively worthless for your class isn't minmaxing or power gaming, it's called "doing it right."
If my fighter had high CHA, he wouldn't have become a fighter, he'd have become a profession where charisma is useful.
I'm good with computers and bad with mechanical stuff, so I didn't aim to become a mechanic.
Why in Mork's name would someone with crappy stats in a prime ability score even bother becoming that class?
A weak man isn't going to aspire to be a fighter.
A stupid man isn't going to aspire to be a wizard.
People usually aim for what they can hit.
|
|
flesh- I think you just made my point..
how advantagious is an 18 stat in your classes main ability score? why is CHA almost always a dump stat?
ans: because of the perception that its not that bad to have a low CHA stat but its awesome having a high (STR DEX INT WIS etc) because those feed your class abilities.
you get massive bonuses for that 18 stat, but hardly any negitives from your horrible CHA.
that is MIN/MAXing at its core, and why I see it as powergaming
(polite bow)
Maybe in a world where there is ONLY combat and you are the ONLY player. I run Council of Thieves and the party I had was largely Cha based characters...now those characters have died and they don't have Cha characters...so guess who is having trouble dealing with acting and stuff? APs do a good job of combining both in combat and out of combat skills and abilities (same for PFS adventures). If your GM isn't running those situations right and leading you along like puppies on a leash then he is doing it wrong. There are clearly advantages to be had if you roleplay social stuff in a lot of APs. Kingmaker is a GREAT example of this.
|
Flesh- I think your placing too much import on looks, I read the thing about the elephant man, so... the lowest stat you can have is a 5 CHA, and the elephant man had a 5 CHA solely because of looks...
Based solely on looks, no way that man had a 5 CHA. More like a 1, maybe a 2 if you're generous. He wasn't in the Pathfinder Society, and he didn't use point buy. He rolled a 3, and took a -2 penalty for his condition.
What are the rules for a 0 CHA again?
Every class has dump scores.
CHA is not a dump stat for several classes. Clerics, Sorcerers, Skill-based Rogues, Bards, Paladins, Oracles...
And do you know what a lot of those classes can dump? Strength.
Putting a low score in a stat that is effectively worthless for your class isn't minmaxing or power gaming, it's called "doing it right."
If my fighter had high CHA, he wouldn't have become a fighter, he'd have become a profession where charisma is useful.
And before you come in with the "he should have more moderate stats all around, lower his STR and CON so he can have good INT and CHA as well", you can do that. But you will always be less good at your job than someone who didn't.
Why do evil masterminds who have high mental scores and moderate physical scores despite being fighters or rogues have big dumb strong mooks? Because the mooks are better at fighting. The smart boss lets them do the job they're better at because they're better at it and it lets him do the thing HE'S better at - thinking, planning, and/or talking to people.
Same goes in a party. If you have a high-CHA character like a bard, he's going to be doing the talking with his Bluff and Diplomacy and maybe Intimidate. A low-CHA barbarian is going to be doing the fighting, and being scary with his Intimidate ranks. A middle-of-the-road fighter will be worse than both, but can provide a good supporting role - serving as a flanking partner for the barb or rogue, helping hold the line, maybe even popping in with a good idea or social quip that helps the party from time to time.
But he'll never be as good at fighting as the barb, and never be as good at talking as the bard, because guess what? They're made to do their jobs. The fighter's trying to do everything, and as a result is master of nothing.
What are the rules for a 0 CHA again?
Core rules: you go catatonic. In a mindless coma until you heal.
At 1 you're conscious though. Also --, but I don't think that applies here.
Orthos- so your saying character concept means very little. that it would be stupid for say a fighter to have a INT as his second highest stat because it would not benifit the role the game dictiates he must fill?
Yay, you're putting words in my mouth! That's at least a step up from making assumptions! Or is it down? I forget.
I've played a ton of high-Int fighters. I like role-playing tacticians, and mechanically I like having more skill points. But that comes at a cost - those points put in Int could have gone into Str instead. And if there's another fighter in the party who DIDN'T put those points in Int and went with them in Str instead, YES, he is going to be better at killing enemies and doing a fighter's job than the high-Int fighter.
Doesn't make EITHER character less legitimate. It just makes the tactician a tactician - a commander - and the dumb-but-stronger fighter is the muscle, who follows the orders of the tactician.
Also. YOU'RE. NOT YOUR.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
flesh- your now trying to convince me that CHA is not the most common dump stat. sorry I'm not buying it.
Ossian then maybe your doing it right, but its not what I see from most DM's, and again the main reason why I see that CHA is the most popular dump stat.
also... CHA does not effect no of skills, resistance to mind effecting spells, or other combat important effects. maybe if CHA effected more in the game... it would not generally be considered as least valueable.
It's a common dump stat for classes that don't need it.
Strength is a common dump stat for classes that don't need it.
I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I'm trying to explain that just because your GM is bad and your gaming group is dysfunctional does not mean PF or Powergaming is the problem.
The problem with your gaming group are the people sitting at your table.
I am a minmaxer and an RPer. Nothing you can say changes that. No stereotype you can invent negates the fact that I am both RPer and minmaxer, as are many of us.
The people you game with are not. I get it. They appear to be terrible at pen and paper gaming. But that's your and their problem, not something you should be trying to hoist on every person who ever built a mechanically coherent character.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Charisma is definitely important. Paladin, Sorceror, Summoner, Oracle, Bard, Inquisitor, Rogue, Gunslinger, Cleric, Cavalier, etc. use Charisma for LARGE portions of their classes. Dumping Charisma would hurt all of those classes in one way or another and limit their capabilities. Count em. Thats a list in the double digits. Have you played anything other than a fighter?
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've played a ton of high-Int fighters. I like role-playing tacticians, and mechanically I like having more skill points. But that comes at a cost - those points put in Int could have gone into Str instead. And if there's another fighter in the party who DIDN'T put those points in Int and went with them in Str instead, YES, he is going to be better at killing enemies and doing a fighter's job than the high-Int fighter.
Doesn't make EITHER character less legitimate.
They'd actually make a pretty good team. The tactician comes up with the plan, and the beast makes sure that the plan is successful. Especially if the go all-in and pick complimentary feats.
High int fighters can be fun, with a half decent CHA for the few class skills that use it.
Also gives you Combat Expertise, which opens up a lot of fun feats.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
High int fighters can be fun, with a half decent CHA for the few class skills that use it.
Also gives you Combat Expertise, which opens up a lot of fun feats.
Since its mentioned this goes back to the initial reason for this thread. Baal you made a trip fighter, so obviously you took Combat Expertise and Improved Trip. Imagine your goal is to trip the enemy and the "powergamer" just runs up and bashes them in the face. Thats how a team works!
Completely unrelated tangent here, but...Flesh...Grinder?
You wouldn't happen to be a badarsed Canadian-Norse-Viking warrior with a penchant for orcs, would you?
Just asking because I know of such a person who has used that name before.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Orthos- this is what you said...
But he'll never be as good at fighting as the barb, and never be as good at talking as the bard, because guess what? They're made to do their jobs. The fighter's trying to do everything, and as a result is master of nothing.
so the fighter wasnt "made to do his job" and who exactly decided what his job was if not the system?
and your whole point was that the fighter was "less legitmate" because he couldent fufill his role...
you flipflop like that then call me the troll... interesting...
Nothing I said there contradicted what I said later. I see no flipflop. Anyone else see one? Feel free to correct me, but I don't see the contradiction.
A fighter's job is normally to fight things. To run up and hit them with a sword. Or shoot a bow at them if he's ranged. If he splits his skills and stats around to do other things, it reduces his ability to do that.
A character that doesn't make those sacrifices is better at doing that task. Thus the fighter will be worse at doing that job. Simple as that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh man, I didn't even really read the OP thoroughly.
He made a trip fighter?
You can make a trip fighter from hell with the right feat selection.
Lots of free attacks.
Go with Vicious Stomp (you'll need Combat Reflexes and Improved Unarmed Strike), this gives you a free unarmed stomp anytime you trip someone (or if they fall prone for any reason).
Grab "Fury's Fall" to add Dex to CMB to trip
"Ki Throw" to trip opponents into other positions, "Improved Ki Throw" to trip them into their friends (neither require Ki pools)
"Spinning Throw" to combine bullrushes and trips into one move that's a swift action.
Combined with the normal "trip line" feats, you can push an enemy into another, trip both, get a weapon AoO on your main target and free Unarmed Strike AoOs on BOTH targets.
You just trip and stomp.
|
|
Oh man, I didn't even really read the OP thoroughly.
He made a trip fighter?
You can make a trip fighter from hell with the right feat selection.
Lots of free attacks.
Go with Vicious Stomp (you'll need Combat Reflexes and Improved Unarmed Strike), this gives you a free unarmed stomp anytime you trip someone (or if they fall prone for any reason).
Grab "Fury's Fall" to add Dex to CMB to trip
"Ki Throw" to trip opponents into other positions, "Improved Ki Throw" to trip them into their friends (neither require Ki pools)
"Spinning Throw" to combine bullrushes and trips into one move that's a swift action.
Combined with the normal "trip line" feats, you can push an enemy into another, trip both, get a weapon AoO on your main target and free Unarmed Strike AoOs on BOTH targets.
You just trip and stomp.
Yea I've been readin everything thoroughly and pointing out the numerous flaws in his logic and explanation of the "problems" he had with the "powergamer". His main argument and beef was that the Lizardfolk Barbarian that was made by rolling stats was doing 5 times the damage of his trip based fighter so the game wasn't "fun" for him and his friends.
See why this whole thread is like a thread from the movie Idiocracy?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Flesh- nice that you go into attacking my group and my dm rather than really dealing with the flaw in your arguement I pointed out.
you claim to be a RPer and a MIN/MAXer... flesh... if min/maxers are RPers then why does almost every min/maxed build focus on combat effectiveness rather than a build to fit a concept? I dont think I've ever seen something like "BEST FORMER SLAVE NOW MOST CHARATBLE CLERIC BUILD!" which would highlight just how many slave/donation raising skills you can mash into one character... something to think about eh?
I didn't say "minmaxers are RPers", I said people can be both at the same time.
And why can't combat effectiveness BE A CONCEPT.
My "Skeleton Key" Barbarian build is both combat effective and a themed character concept. He's a master of breaking stuff. He loves to break things. He takes great enjoyment in the sound of breaking objects.
He is both amazing in combat while having a coherent character concept.
He is generally quite calm and reserved... until something makes him lose his temper. Then he breaks things and people.
My ECL 3 Half-Giant psychic warrior can do 6d6+7 damage in one swing, he also has a background story a page long and I spent two days learning to emulate a Nigerian accent to play him.
You seem to have this issue where only character's who suck at combat are "valid RP characters."
Guess what, my characters are amazing in combat while also having RP backstories.
They are both coherent characters AND mixmaxed characters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If min/maxers are RPers then why does almost every min/maxed build focus on combat effectiveness rather than a build to fit a concept? I dont think I've ever seen something like "BEST FORMER SLAVE NOW MOST CHARATBLE CLERIC BUILD!" which would highlight just how many slave/donation raising skills you can mash into one character... something to think about eh?
I think you are mixing a min/maxer with a borderline munchkin. I have plenty of characters with strict concepts, but that will in no way stop me from optimizing to some degree. I have a Kuthite Cleric and I will have her enter the Pain Taster prestige class, putting a dent to my spellcasting at some part. However, the feats and a certain trait I have will help counter-balance the decreased usefulness to the party.
Look, there are people who care for one extreme (RP only) and to the other (Powergaming only) but there are also those who want to have the best of both worlds (or in rare cases, they end up having the worst of both). No matter how good a character concept I'd think a basket-weaving 12-year old peasant boy with no combat skill would be, I would still NOT make that kind of character, since D&D / PF is a group game and I don't want to have the role of "dead weight". Then again, who does? And thus shall I repeat what both I and Fleshgrinder just said. "People can be both (min/maxing and RPing) at the same time."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I dont think I've ever seen something like "BEST FORMER SLAVE NOW MOST CHARATBLE CLERIC BUILD!" which would highlight just how many slave/donation raising skills you can mash into one character
Because D&D is a game with combat in it and most people don't enjoy being utterly useless when combat does roll around.
If you want to play a completely social game with no combat mechanics I think you're playing the wrong system.
I dont think I've ever seen something like "BEST FORMER SLAVE NOW MOST CHARATBLE CLERIC BUILD!" which would highlight just how many slave/donation raising skills you can mash into one characterBecause D&D is a game with combat in it and most people don't enjoy being utterly useless when combat does roll around.
If you want to play a completely social game with no combat mechanics I think you're playing the wrong system.
Burning Wheel might be more his thing. From what I understand it's got more rules for social interactions than it does for combat.
Heh.
By the way, non-combat characters can be just as optimized as battle bruisers. Search for a Diplomancer build sometime. In many ways they can be even more game-breaking than their combat cousins - a powerful combat build might destroy combat encounters, but the GM probably planned on the party beating those (if not so easily); a Diplomancer can destroy plot-related social encounters that the GM may not have expected the group to bypass at all, like persuading the king to give away the key to the royal vault or something equally ludicrous.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You seem to have this issue where only character's who suck at combat are "valid RP characters."
Didn't you get the memo? The only things that count as RP are going shopping, acting emo, and being a Mary Sue.
Hey, baal... if you don't mind me asking, just out of curiosity, how old are you?
Also; this has actually been a surprisingly nice thread to read, especially the part about ability scores being interpreted in different ways.
Also; this has actually been a surprisingly nice thread to read, especially the part about ability scores being interpreted in different ways.
We're trying to keep it civil. It's gotten difficult a few times, but good to know all's remained well. =)