|
So for some reason I've got it in my head that I want to be more of a pacifist for my wizard coming up in a Rise of the Runelords campaign. I'm going to try and not be too distracting to my friends in the game but I am pondering good ways to have a character who doesn't solve every problem through some amount of violence.
Not looking to subvert free will either since that's kind of a cop-out on the idea.
Anyone else tried to do something like this? Someone else done this to you and you hated it? Pitfalls?
Yes! If you prefer the non violent kind of wizard, then you will focus on battlefield control, and buff/ debuffs. This is exactly what makes the wizard a god instead of just a thug who can bend elements...
Try being an enchanter. Things want to fight you or your group, change their minds for them.
Also an option.
You're in luck! Wizard is one of the easiest classes to play non-violently.
Low level spells like Color Spray, Sleep, and Grease are both powerful and nonviolent. The metamagic feat Merciful Spell also turns any spell damage to nonlethal damage, and it's a +0 spell level metamagic so it doesn't take up higher level spell slots!
Second level spells like Create Pit, Glitterdust, and Web are nice battlefield control choices. Third level spells include Aqueous Orb, Stinking Cloud, Slow, and Deep Slumber.
I would highly recommend taking the Divination school, as you will be focused on battlefield control and so it will be extremely beneficial for you to be winning initiative. Take a trait to boost your initiative as well.
|
|
I've actually considered making this character a Diviner, it seems like a good fit. Not sure if any of the PrC's out there would quite fit. A Magambyan Arcanist or Cyphermage might be fun to try. The first kind of has a good idea of magic used for good ends. Plus you know, bonus divine spells. >.>
He wouldn't have a desire to make my allies better at killing people of course, or making people easier to be killed. Stopping combat definitely is a good idea though. Battlefield control, large scale things and then utility magic would work towards the best ends probably.
Have the other players built their characters already? If you want to build a more cohesive non-lethal party there are a lot of good build options:
Bard: Buccaneer
Cavalier: Order of the Blue Rose
Fighter (or any martial): Bludgeoner (archer or melee)
Monk: Monk of the Lotus
Paladin (or any melee): Blade of Mercy
Rogue: Sap Adept
It should also be easy to build an oracle, witch, or cleric to be nonviolent. I can go into more detail on these builds if you want.
Abjueres can also be kinda of non violent.
Don't be an adventurer. That should solve 99% of your violence-related problems.
What kind of theme/fluff do you want to apply to the character? Might help with that and go on.
There is that metamagic that allows you to convert to non-lethal and I think its +1 spell level if that. You could use transmutation and abjuration to create some sort of super jail for enemies you defeat. Then you could have a cool Arkum Asylum in Sandpoint (as a GM I'd love to play with that).
There is that metamagic that allows you to convert to non-lethal and I think its +1 spell level if that.
Merciful Spell, it's +0 spell level.
There is that metamagic that allows you to convert to non-lethal and I think its +1 spell level if that.Merciful Spell, it's +0 spell level.
See, perfect. You can fireball like crazy at that point and just drag your enemies away. If you could some how put them in stasis and toss them in a Leo- er... Secret Chest you could have them for safe storage until you toss them away.
|
|
I don't think you have to be violent as an adventurer.
Yeah, that certainly is an option for a last resort.
I also need to develop more of a ideal for exactly what it means. There are situations that might make it too unplayable.
Maybe more of an Everyone gets a 2nd chance then a pure pacifist.
Conveniently I've got like 2 months left before anything happens so I can continue to hash it out with the rest of the group. Haven't really had this long to put into a character so I want to use that time to really flesh it out.
Merciful Spell, I had totally forgot about that one. Thanks for reminding me! Though that nonlethal damage can still roll over since this is Pathfinder..
the rp would be funny to see this alongside an extreamly violent sorceress with an attitude problem
Battlefield Control is not non-violent. You're still applying violence in the form of fighters hitting the enemy. If you want non-violence, you need to be looking at avoiding combat altogether.
The problem here is that pre-made adventure paths tend not to be very suitable for that. And beyond that, if you don't discuss it with the other players first, either you will end up useless in the many combats, or they end up frustrated because they're built for combat and you keep avoiding them all.
Not doing any direct damage while still helping your side fight, is very viable, though.
|
|
Yes this is absolutely going to be a challenge to get working properly. Still I want to give it a try and make a character like this. It might actually become my new theme going forward for most games.
So definitely something to give people a chance to back down and try other options. Also have to decide who that all applies too. Don't really think most undead would be subject to things. Constructs probably not. What about outsiders though... Maybe just humanoids?
Has anyone actually tried to do this?
What do the other players think about stopping and preventing combat? If they agree, then it can work. Otherwise it's looking like an exercise in frustration.
In a way, casting any kind of restrictive spell at opponents is a kind of violence. Forcing them to fall asleep, for example. But Sleep is definitely a lot friendlier than many other options.
So if that sounds like what you're looking for, Sleep and Silent Image (to create a wall between you and them), are the obvious first level choices.
And IME, despite liking control wizards, players tend to applaud a well-placed Fireball more
They do. They often fail to appreciate just how much you're helping them with your silly little spells. Battlefield Control is not for people who crave affirmation. But if you're happy dictating reality from the background, then it can be incredibly powerful.
Battlefield Control doesn't even have to come from spells. In my last session, I saved our fighter's life and enabled the death of a mummy by throwing 1 sp worth of marbles in front of him. Death by attack of opportunity is my favourite damage source as a wizard. They may consider it their kill, but I know it was mine.
I think preventing combat entirely is MUCH MUCH harder than non-lethally ending a combat.
There are a few problems with avoiding combat:
1) no loot!
2) requires GM to hand out roleplaying experience to make up for the monster-slaying exp you lose
3) you won't be locking up/killing any of the evildoers, so it's hard to see how you'll stop them from doing more evil
4) the other players are probably looking forward to the combat part! If one player builds a character to be good at combat and then you keep preventing combat from happening, he will probably get antsy.
And honestly, if you are trying to prevent combat entirely, you should probably be playing a bard rather than a wizard, because getting good Diplomacy rolls is going to be a lot more important than whatever spells you can cast.
If your objection is "I don't want to help other players murder faster", work with your teammates so they can do nonlethal damage. If even one of your strikers is doing nonlethal, most of your enemies will end up alive at the end of the day.
2) requires GM to hand out roleplaying experience to make up for the monster-slaying exp you lose
Not necessary. The GM can still give out full XP for the avoided combat or the enemies that were somehow stopped, disabled, convinced or whatever you did to diffuse the combat.
3) you won't be locking up/killing any of the evildoers, so it's hard to see how you'll stop them from doing more evil
Yeah, this works best when the opposition aren't the actual bad guys in need to be stopped.
4) the other players are probably looking forward to the combat part! If one player builds a character to be good at combat and then you keep preventing combat from happening, he will probably get antsy.
This is the main one. Make sure the others aren't counting on combat, or you're guaranteeing that someone will be disappointed.
Personally I'm a big fan of games where you avoid combat, but the Pathfinder system and most APs aren't exactly the best place for that. Some old-school super-lethal sandbox where you simply have to avoid combat in order to survive, might work. Or a more socially oriented system.
I am playing a Wizard in our home brew that is 11th level and he has great pride in the fact he has never cast a "Damage Spell" in my entire adventure career. He does not dabble in "lesser, brute force" magic.
Enchantment spec....
He cooses to ignore the fact that casting haste deals more damage than any direct damage spell he could whip out because "it's not the same as some simple minded fireball"
Enchantment is the way to go.
Enchantment is the way to go.
From the original post:
Not looking to subvert free will either since that's kind of a cop-out on the idea.
It seems like Diplomacy and Intimidate are pretty much what you're working with if you want to avoid fights without using enchantments. Better hope there's also a Glory domain cleric?
|
I'm currently playing a similar concept in RotRL. My character is not averse to combat but prefers to try other options first. He's a Mystic Theurge using the guild rules from Inner Sea Magic so is Wiz 5/Cleric 1/MT 1 (effectively Wizard 7/Cleric 5 for casting). Luck and Artifice domains, Prescience subschool (Divination). Here are some things I've found useful for avoiding/reshaping/controlling encounters:
Social skills. Few of the encounters can be totally avoided purely through talking but sometimes you can hold the enemies' attention for a round or two while your group gets in better position. This can be better position for killing or for escaping or doing something else to avoid the encounter. Additionally, Intimidate and Bluff might be able to remove a combatant or two from the opposing side. You need not have all three, you can focus on either Diplomacy or Bluff and let the group handle the rest.
Rerolls. Both the Luck domain and Prescience subschool (sort of) grant rerolls of d20s. When you really have to get off a caster level check or dispel or whatever to implement your oddball plan, rerolls are your friend.
Spells. Calm emotions (cleric) probably tops the list of combat-avoidance spells, but charm person, fear spells, illusions, and physical barriers/restraints all have their uses. Fascinate is a great effect if you can get access to it.
Alternate Routes. Some encounters have built in ways to avoid them if you want, but if your GM rewards creativity you might be able to avoid some entirely through scouting/intelligence/forging your own path. Later in the game, get a Lyre of Building. Once a week you'll be able to build a bridge over/tunnel under that impenetrable-looking enemy camp.
Other PCs. You won't be best equipped to deal with certain situations as a wizard. See if you can encourage the other players to play a Druid with Wild Empathy or a Bard who can fascinate.
Sometimes you just have to fight. I don't think the goal of pure pacifism is realistic for RotRL. There are some things your wizard is going to want *gone* regardless of how nice he is.
Are you dead-set on wizard? You could probably pull off the concept nicely with an Aasimar cleric.
domains: Glory and Conversion Inquisition
strength 7, dexterity 14, constitution 12, intelligence 12, wisdom 20, charisma 10
traits: Innocent, Bully (if your GM will allow you to reskin it, otherwise maybe another trait will give you intimidate as a class skill?)
feat: Persuasive
at level 1, you will have +14 to diplomacy if you use your touch of glory (+5 wis with Conversion, +1 rank, +3 class skill, +2 racial, +2 Persuasive +1 Touch of Glory) and +15 to intimidate evil creatures or +13 vs non-evil (+5 wis, +1 rank, +3 class skill, +2 halo vs. evil, +1 trait, +2 Persuasive, +1 Touch of Glory.)
During combat, cast spells like Command and Forbid action.
Alternatively a human can take the Silver-Tongued racial trait which allows them to shift a creature's attitude by 3 steps if they beat the diplo DC by 10.
domains: Glory and Conversion Inquisition
strength 7, dexterity 14, constitution 12, intelligence 12, wisdom 20, charisma 8
traits: Fast Talker, Bully
feat: Persuasive
level 1 skills:
+14 diplomacy (+5 wis, +1 rank, +3 class skill, +2 trait, +2 Persuasive, +1 Touch of Glory)
+13 bluff (+5 wis, +1 rank, +3 class skill, +1 trait, +2 racial, +1 Touch of Glory)
+11 intimidate (+5 wis, +1 rank, +3 class skill, +1 trait, +1 Touch of Glory)
|
|
Indeed a Cleric or Oracle of some type would be a lot simpler with the concept, but I've got the time to try and really puzzle out how to do it with a wizard. Heck I'm thinking he'll even be some kind of doctor with the heal skill and various other bits of equipment. Plus the party already has someone who claimed a divine spell-caster focused character.
I'm thinking the character will mostly use guilt to make others feel bad about killing others then out-right stop them from defending themselves how they seem fit. Otherwise I'd be some kind of crazy paladin.
There might be some people who he can bring to justice but in the end the idea is that everyone deserves a second chance.
You character might be a worshiper of Sarenrae, even if he isn't a divine caster.