- I <3's Commoners
- Most GM's (or PFS) aren't a fan of NPC classes on PC's, cause they suck.
- In a few Pathefilder threads, people have said that a Wizard with no spellbook is effectively a commoner once they cast the spells they have prepared, since they can't prepare anymore...even cantrips (they're at will, but still need to be prepared, to change them, otherwise you're locked into the same set of 3 at lvl 1)
- So I could play a Wizard...who's spellbook is either lost or stolen....and only has a few spells prepared, barring cantrips. Basically a commoner with a very limited resource, and the ability to use scrolls and such (if they're spells on the sorcerer/wizard spell list)...I like this idea ALOT.
- or I could have my spellbook, but leave slots open (meaning needing 15min to prepare a spell before casting it) to represent a more....ritual style of magic..
I'm trying to find a way to show a character that, while he's capable of magic, is *very* hesitant to use it, due to past problems, or even an innate fear of it. The magic would be a last resort/hail mary type thing, that, while powerful...I'm not sure if I can describe the feeling.
Does this makes sense? Basically a Wizard that's more physically focused, but still semi-capable of magic, if he has to.
Thoughts?
|
Blindmage:
The issue you are going to get is that in the pursuit of a credible character concept, you are going to perhaps infuriate.. perhaps discourage other people from playing wit that character. Season 4 seasons in particular expect the whole of the party to be contributing towards the end goal, and purely mechanically you are looking at 3-4 encounters per scenario with a lot of them being combat based. If you are a commoner essentialy, its going to prove a lot of heartache when the fighter/cleric/ other says 'Cast X!' and you say .. sorry.. I dont do spells/combat/ other.
Also keep in mind that everyone has to hang around for 15 minutes while you memorise. It might not happen in game.
This actually kinda reminds me of when I used to play a Wage mage in Shadowrun (one of the earlier editions) . I purposely took more Cyberware than I should of , just to try to see how the character worked. Half the time when I used magic, it nearly killed me. It was pretty fun until It did actually kill me.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Please don't do this. In character and out, people are being flung into inane adventures where people, monsters, traps, and the very environment itself are trying to kill them. You do not take bob the accountant with you to fight the dragon, you consult with him afterwards to count up the hoard.
Or read your will.
Thanks,
posted the idea to facebook for my gaming friends to talk over and everyone is basically ripping it apart :(
Concept-wise...he's pretty awesome.
It's not like I'd be ripping the spells out of a character built as a caster, he'd be designed with this in mind. Hell Scrolls could be a viable way for quicker magic...
Ideally people won't suspect him of being a caster at all, he seem more like a weaker fighter or a rogue maybe, crossbow at range, lots of skills, heavy on spellcraft, knowledge arcana and similar things.
I can;t think of another way to show this style of character, if there's a archetype or build that would give the same feel with better mechanics, by all means toss it out. There's just so much in Pathrfinder, so many options. I could be missing something obvious.
Edit:
BigNorseWolf: Can you see the theme I'm shooting for? Not necessarily a do nothing commoner, a combat focused guy that uses his abilities with magic as a last ditch/Hail Mary thing. Maybe he made a horrible mistake with magic in his past and has vowed not to use it unless absolutely necessary.
|
|
Blind: Ive got no problem with your concept
A) You are going to find 'absolutely necessary' will happen about 5-6 times a game :)
B) You are a Pathfinder. You get picked because you either failed the test to join the Aspis Consortium and they took pity on you, or you could handle yourself. If they know you are a Wizard who is loathe to use his magic because he sees it as bad (tbh this fits a Sorc more than a Wizard) then its unlikely they would send you out.
C) If this was a gm credit character, Id run with it. It might never actually see play, but one day Id whip it out and it would be a level 9 character with skills.
D) Do it. Let me know how the play history of the character goes :)
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
As fun as your character sounds, I honestly don't know that the concept would fit very well in PFS. By its nature, Pathfinders are required to engage in combat and/or skill checks, neither of which your character would be effective at. Therefore, you'd be a bit of a dead weight for the rest of the party. Because your character might make the difference in choice of subtier or regarding 4-player scaling, you might also be making the adventure more difficult for everybody else.
It's a fun idea in theory, certainly. In practice, I think it would get very old very quickly - especially for your teammates who have to drag you through scenario after scenario.
ok..
What about switching it to a sorcerer with the Brutal bloodline that focuses on using his claws and weapons, and blasting the crap out of things when it gets down to the wire. Take Gifted Adept and...crap forget the name of the other one to boost the caster lvl of his go to spell...having the extra damage from the bloodline and the extra damage from the lvl boosts should make his magic potent, but limited.
If i focus his build around his natural attack, maybe go Ranger from then on, or fighter for more feats, leaving his magical past behind him.
|
Blindmage, I like your character concept and would love to see it at a home game. Where the GM can work with you and the group and taylor threats to the characters.
This is PFS you are talking about and I can not see the Society sending this guy out into the field. You would, likely, get yourself and your team killed. This is the guy to would talk to in skyreach who is manning the libary.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Keep in mind that all PCs in PFS are agents of the Pathfinder Society. They are not random schmucks thrust into adventure by circumstance; they are professionals. Specifically, they got to that position by either undergoing 3 years of grueling training, or receiving a field commission by virtue of having already achieved some impressive feat of exploration or recovery. If you're making a PFS character, you need to make sure they fit that role.
When I build a character, I try to give the character four basic roles.
1: Something they do very well in combat
2: Something they do tolerably well in combat
3: Something they do very well out of combat
4: Something they do tolerably well out of combat
Occasionally, I'll intentionally fail at some other role, such as ranged damage or in combat healing. I don't see this as a problem so long as I can still contribute to the group in a meaningful way, during any foreseeable circumstances. Sometimes this means expensive consumables like lots of Potions of Fly to help me overcome my weakness at range. Sometimes it means an extra feat that I didn't necessarily need.
Play what you want to play, but be polite and do your best to make sure that you're not incidentally making the game less fun for everyone else.
All that having been said, I like the concept. For PFS purposes, I'd say that you should wrap this flavor and lore around something else, if only for viability. A sensei monk or evangelist cleric would both give you the opportunity to contribute to combat exclusively by talking during battle. Bards would give you the same thing, but with a few more skills to use for helping out of combat. Add spellsong to the mix and nobody need ever know that you're casting spells at all. You can re-flavor and re-contextualize anything you want to, so there's a fun opportunity here to try to cram the character concept into the rules in such a way that people are even excited to see your character.
You could try taking your level of wizard, dumping your spellbook, and then leveling another class as an attempt to survive while you try to recover the spellbook. Personally, I would enjoy doing this with Witch. Frustrated by the fact that he's reliant on the magical abilities of both his familiar and his patron, he works and works to recover an heirloom spellbook to return to the family practice of wizardly magic.
I guess what I'm trying to say is don't shy away from a good character concept, but be considerate of your fellow pathfinders and their ideas of fun when building it. Take who you want to play, and squish them into the rules wherever they'll fit and still be functional.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Keep in mind that all PCs in PFS are agents of the Pathfinder Society. They are not random schmucks thrust into adventure by circumstance; they are professionals. Specifically, they got to that position by either undergoing 3 years of grueling training, or receiving a field commission by virtue of having already achieved some impressive feat of exploration or recovery. If you're making a PFS character, you need to make sure they fit that role.
To add to the above...
I presume you're interested in this concept because you're keen to explore the roleplaying opportunities such a concept will obviously bring. I dig that, and I enjoy playing with people who like to explore those kinds of situations.
But in doing so in PFS games, you're actually asking the other players to play their characters in a way that would be totally contrary to how they would probably react to your character. Let me use an analogy to present this idea.
I'm a musician IRL. I'm performing week in, week out, at a professional level. Let's say I happen to be hired for a gig at a jazz festival, the guitarist gets sick and we get a fill-in. if the sub isn't good enough and can't fill the role he's been hired for I don't really give a damn how nice he is. I'm pissed. And in a naturally irrational human way, that guy becomes the focus of my displeasure, at least in the moment. And apart from that, if I'm calling the shots (throwing solos, directing traffic), I'm gonna shut that guy down musically as a form of self-protection. I want him to play as little, and as quietly, as possible, so he doesn't totally wreck my gig.
Also, any other musos I respect and like will hear about this, not because I wanna screw the guy's chances of getting work, but because I don't want my friends and colleagues getting stung like I did.
Sounds harsh, but that's how people are in professional settings. Ask a doctor how s/he feels when teaming up with an incompetent surgeon. Any soldiers out their? How do you feel when someone in your squad doesn't put in and possibly puts you in danger? Even waiting staff turn on the waiter whose effort drops every time he has a bad day.
So, while your concept might work really, really well in a home game where the situation is often very different, the strictly professional PFS set-up kinda makes it a really bad idea. For the other PCs to accept you, the players need to portray their characters' reactions to yours in a very unnatural way.
So, mechanically, as a game-player, you cause a bad situation, yes, but that's not my point, nor do I really care about that if I'm at your table. What I care about is, roleplaying-wise, you create a bad situation that makes me feel like I have to misrepresent my character to accommodate yours.
It's not really winning from any angle in PFS.
But, just to reiterate, that concept is totally workable in a game with a different premise! And if I was a part of that home game as it was being set up and organised, I could really easily work with that as your concept :)
Regarding the OP's original concept, I'm reminded of the movie cliche where a super-effective special-ops team is shown how capable they are, and then for one reason or another, their boss saddles them with a new guy that tags along and they have to protect him. The leader of the ops team objects, yelling, "He's gonna get us all killed!" The movie then proceeds to show how the guy is a hindrance. Eventually, they get to a scene where the new guy rocks some of his skills and saves the day in a way the special ops guys couldn't do.
Pathfinders really are supposed to be special-ops teams. In order to be "that guy", you'll definitely need to be able to pull off the payoff at the end...where you save the day in some unexpected way. Otherwise you probably just will get everybody killed...and nobody wants to watch that movie. :-)
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I haven't read the whole thread, but if you're going for a guy who's a bit hesitant about magic and might not be guessed as a magic user at first glance, why not make an Eldritch Knight? At 1st level, you're NOT a magic user, and at 2nd level, you don't look any different - you just get fidgety when someone asks you what you were reading all morning.
The Eldritch Knight's eventual progression from mostly-martial to competent caster could even mirror a really cool character development arc as he learns to come to grips with this whole "magic" thing he's capable of.
posted the idea to facebook for my gaming friends to talk over and everyone is basically ripping it apart :(
There's a reason for that. In a homegame it might be an awesome concept because you can change the challenges, but in PFS your just making a gimped character that risk everyone else's lives.
You also brought up 2 threads in the paizo forum and on facebook looking for someone to say its good. Why not just ask how to make it work?
What about switching it to a sorcerer with the Brutal bloodline that focuses on using his claws and weapons, and blasting the crap out of things when it gets down to the wire. Take Gifted Adept and...crap forget the name of the other one to boost the caster lvl of his go to spell...having the extra damage from the bloodline and the extra damage from the lvl boosts should make his magic potent, but limited.
If i focus his build around his natural attack, maybe go Ranger from then on, or fighter for more feats, leaving his magical past behind him.
Too much multiclassing. He wouldn't have good casting and good martial powers. You may want to look at Dragon Disciple.
I should also add if you want to be a caster in disguise you can do that with any character without gimping them.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The only time one of my PCs has ever died, it was a TPK in which a player of a 7th-level wizard pregen was making decisions to do things like throw daggers at the bad guys.
You have freedom of speech in America. You can say things, unpopular things, even in public and it's supposed to be okay. But there's a line (such as yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater) where it's not okay anymore, because you're trampling on others. Cross that line, and it's not your right anymore.
You don't have to optimize to the Nth degree. You can make some sub-optimal choices for the sake of your concept. But there's a line (such as being a commoner in an adventure made for professionals, where the GM can't make adjustments) where it's not okay anymore, because you're hurting others. Cross that line, and it's not your right anymore.
An important thing to keep in mind and something that I think causes most tabel disagreements is your expectations regarding play style.
If you personally are interested in a flawed PC and the challenges of surviving with it or roleplaying its flaws, that is one style.
If you are more interested in having a PC that can beat down the door and beat down the monster in a pretty straightforward and consistantly successful way, that is a different style.
I'm not making a judgment on one style or the other, but from my experience, PFS is weighted much more towards the latter than the former when it comes to most people's expectations. PFS is about succeeding at the scenarios. I have seldom seen deep immersive roleplay at one of these; it's simply not most people's priority. I think the conflict you're having is stemming from that.
Everyone needs to consider their group and what the majority wants. If you're in the minority you can either join the majority or find a group with people who think like you. I think you'll find more acceptance of such PC concepts outside of PFS.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
An important thing to keep in mind and something that I think causes most tabel disagreements is your expectations regarding play style.
If you personally are interested in a flawed PC and the challenges of surviving with it or roleplaying its flaws, that is one style.
If you are more interested in having a PC that can beat down the door and beat down the monster in a pretty straightforward and consistantly successful way, that is a different style.
I'm not making a judgment on one style or the other, but from my experience, PFS is weighted much more towards the latter than the former when it comes to most people's expectations. PFS is about succeeding at the scenarios. I have seldom seen deep immersive roleplay at one of these; it's simply not most people's priority. I think the conflict you're having is stemming from that.
Everyone needs to consider their group and what the majority wants. If you're in the minority you can either join the majority or find a group with people who think like you. I think you'll find more acceptance of such PC concepts outside of PFS.
The two are not exclusive. You can have really deep, really immersive sessions in PFS - the Blakros Matrimony is a great example. The trick is to remember that BOTH have to be present. You can't shirk either responsibility in the game. Normally, I'm telling people not to shirk RP, but it cuts both ways.
|
I've seen the melee sorcerer done well (as a dwarf, no less). Focus on self-buffs and in practice it plays a lot like a mutagen-focused alchemist.
You might also look at a Witch who takes fairly unusual Hexes -- things like Tongues and Mount. The fluff with a Witch is that your familiar teaches you your spells, so you could play that where the magic isn't even really coming from you, but from an unknown power, and thus your reluctance.
But really, the character that sounds like what you're talking about is a Rogue with the Minor Magic Rogue talent. Especially if you flavor your Sneak Attack as 'Lucky Shots'. You've got lots of skills, a little bit of magic, and some 'accidental' combat skills.
I'd only planned on have a level of wizard, then switching to something else. But it seems like the more people post, the less viable even that sounds.
Getting though that first level could be tough.
Part of what's getting to me is the metagaming thing. Some other friends have said:
"that's completely ignoring the amount of metagaming that would be involved to force the other characters to bring them along and continue to tolerate their presence, which would be ineffectual at best, and outright hindrance at worst."
to which I reply:
"What about the metagaming of assuming he's a caster when you know OOC, but IC he's shown no signs at all, is fighting with weapons, you see no book/familiar/ect, but since you know that mechanically I've chosen to use levels or Wizard, I should be throwing Magic like it;s new years and I'm carrying fireworks?"
Since this is a roleplaying game, shouldn't that count for something?
I get that mechanically he's a poor choice. But can't that change as he grows? From the way I've had it explained, you level in PFS at a decent rate. Once I'm through lvl 1 and moving away from the magical part (possibly towards a PrC later on to show growing into it)..what's the harm then?
People talk about 're-flavouring" things alot...how it this any different? I'm putting a different spin on the caster class, and it's not really the main focus of the character.
|
|
Just a Thought, Not something I've run numbers on or anything. What about making the character a Magus? You would still have the casting in the background that you could use less. and focus on other aspects of the character. Heck there are some archetypes that would probably work well with the concept as they trade out some spell-casting ability.
|
|
Just a Thought, Not something I've run numbers on or anything. What about making the character a Magus? You would still have the casting in the background that you could use less. and focus on other aspects of the character. Heck there are some archetypes that would probably work well with the concept as they trade out some spell-casting ability.
+1
I've never run a magus, but those that I've played with or GM'ed against seemed as though they would work for your concept, mostly. Others have said that most of the Pathfinders are professionals; that's true. How did your character come to be traveling with them? It's not a trivial point.
As I read this thread, I had no idea that you were only looking to have a single level of magic user (of some kind). I have seen many characters with a dip into another class for flavor. It seems to work fine. Maybe not at first level. Wizards/Sorcerers are notoriously difficult to play well at first level.
What about a qinggong monk?
You can take vow of poverty or whatever, to be like a simple common man.
You can stil fight and contribute.
You get some spell-like powers that you may or may not use. (But you won't get your first one until 4th level).
|
It seems that most people are against this character. With that in mind, you can still play this character. It is because of characters like that that I make sure that my characters are hyper optimized / munchkined.
I've played with a monk who wouldn't fight because he was a pacifist and had no useful skills. I've played with a summoner who only climbed walls all game. I've played with a shadow dancer who shot 1 arrow and snuck the rest of game (he didn't use any other skill besides perception.) I've played with a monk who excelled at throwing doors demand to be up front. I've played with a magus who could only hit on a nat 20 and who had a 7 con.
I don't know who you play with and I don't know how the rest of your build will go. If you stick with Wizard/sorcerer and specialize with weapons/natural attacks your half bab will severly hinder your output and the party. All I ask is that you don't gimp a character because of flavor or mechanics.
Ok, lets try this again.
I have a concept for a character that is focused on ranged weapon combat, and melee if necessary. He has a distrust of magic due to past incidents with casters or magical things. At one time he was a practitioner of the arcane arts, but he stretched too far and something went wrong, maybe he tried tapping into the primal flows of magic and it backfired. Now while he's learnt to defend himself and his friends with mundane means he will call upon his arcane talent if needed, although he personally would rather not, he's not a stupid man and knows that sometime you have to do things you hate for the greater good.
As for how he's a Pathfinder? Perhaps he was a decent wizard, then he tried to do too much (ala the Primalist archetype) ad things went wrong. (looking at the charts it's very rare, but it's possible to have some very deadly/dangerous effects happen). and since Primalists aren't allowed as Pathfinders, he's bee forced to change how he operates while he slowly rebuilds his craft in a way that is safer.
- Now my first thought of taking a few levels of Wizard with a bonded object obviously was met with a metric f%$kton of "it's wrong and sucks"
- what about some form of Sorcerer? Perhaps the Brutal bloodline? pick blaster type spells and cantrips, the Gifted Adept trait could be handy for his signature effect. he'd have claws for melee and could use a crossbow for range.
- Someone mentioned a Magus. I know nothing about the class and haven;t really looked at it yet...maybe? I'll be looking at it pretty soon.
- A Rogue, using the Magic Talents and the half-elf Arcane Training racial trait could work here (or with any of these really)
Perhaps we can start over with this?
A human wizard with 11 Int and 20 Strength and a spear is a scary proposition at 1st level if you never even think about casting a cantrip.
Hey, you've also got a magic mouse (or whatever)...
Yes! Exactly...if the spear (or other weapon) is his bonded object..
|
|
While it's always nice to have a character concept you cannot ignore the mechanics. You can build an effective character with 1 level of wizard and 11 levels of fighter.
It seems that you really want to go level 1 wizard. Please, feel free to go for it, just make sure that you are effective at some of the higher levels.
|
|
Ok, lets try this again.
I have a concept for a character that is focused on ranged weapon combat, and melee if necessary. He has a distrust of magic due to past incidents with casters or magical things. At one time he was a practitioner of the arcane arts, but he stretched too far and something went wrong, maybe he tried tapping into the primal flows of magic and it backfired. Now while he's learnt to defend himself and his friends with mundane means he will call upon his arcane talent if needed, although he personally would rather not, he's not a stupid man and knows that sometime you have to do things you hate for the greater good.
As for how he's a Pathfinder? Perhaps he was a decent wizard, then he tried to do too much (ala the Primalist archetype) ad things went wrong. (looking at the charts it's very rare, but it's possible to have some very deadly/dangerous effects happen). and since Primalists aren't allowed as Pathfinders, he's bee forced to change how he operates while he slowly rebuilds his craft in a way that is safer.
- Now my first thought of taking a few levels of Wizard with a bonded object obviously was met with a metric f%$kton of "it's wrong and sucks"
- what about some form of Sorcerer? Perhaps the Brutal bloodline? pick blaster type spells and cantrips, the Gifted Adept trait could be handy for his signature effect. he'd have claws for melee and could use a crossbow for range.
- Someone mentioned a Magus. I know nothing about the class and haven;t really looked at it yet...maybe? I'll be looking at it pretty soon.
- A Rogue, using the Magic Talents and the half-elf Arcane Training racial trait could work here (or with any of these really)
Perhaps we can start over with this?
This seems like a Pathfinder with a large bag-o-tricks. It will be fun to see you make it work. Let us know if it works out well.
- Now my first thought of taking a few levels of Wizard with a bonded object obviously was met with a metric f%$kton of "it's wrong and sucks"
- what about some form of Sorcerer? Perhaps the Brutal bloodline? pick blaster type spells and cantrips, the Gifted Adept trait could be handy for his signature effect. he'd have claws for melee and could use a crossbow for range.
- Someone mentioned a Magus. I know nothing about the class and haven;t really looked at it yet...maybe? I'll be looking at it pretty soon.
- A Rogue, using the Magic Talents and the half-elf Arcane Training racial trait could work here (or with any of these really)
Perhaps we can start over with this?
Well a dip into wizard isn't always bad, foresight school kicks some butt, but your "I want arcane magic but I don't want to use it" thing is where it gets messy. Casting is extremely powerful, but choosing to go caster and not cast doesn't work out very well, and choosing to go partial caster just kills the character.
Going sorc and then not using magic is just gimped. Terrible BAB means you won't really be contributing and in melee you have a good chance to get instagibbed. You might want to consider dragon disciple or certain bard archetypes if you want less casting but to still be effective in melee, but pure caster and just not using spells ends badly. Another alternative is witch, because you can spam hexes and only use spells when necessary. Supernatural abilities are cool like that. Asking how you can do this gets a very different vibe than asking if it works.
Magus do like to use magic. Their gig is to use spell combat to attack and cast on the same turn and use spell strike to channel touch attacks through their blade. While certain archetypes use less magic(Kensai), they still focus on hitting things with spells and using spell combat.
Rogue with minor magic might work. Just remember your a rogue first and not some insane partial caster who doesn't use spells.
Keep in mind the bonus from the Transmutation school is an enhancement bonus, so it won't stack with your Belt of Whatever. But you could put it into a secondary stat then, and upgrade to a +4 Belt in your primary stat pretty early, rather than going +2/+2.
Ok, I can see what people mean about my expectations about the style and flow of the games, especially in a PFS setting where things are much more rigid.
How about a Crossblooded Sorcerer with the Brutal and Warped bloodlines?
It would give him some melee with the claws, and eventually wings. The Brutal part will punch up his damage at lower levels, especially with Gifted Adept on something like Burning Hands. And Warped would give his magic that oddness with things like Youthful Appearance twisting to add odd bonuses and such by warping the effect.
This way, while his main combat focus is the crossbow, he has a viable fall back if things start closing in, or he gets overwhelmed, either pop claws and shred things, or if they're back further burn them.
The lessened amount of spells known would fit also, showing his..reluctance to focus and learn more magic than he has to.
most of oour local games don't go past 10. I could use it for PFS though so..11?
You really should look at Magus.
There are archetypes to make him even less caster, but basically you can play a magus as a physical wizard without gimping your character.
His mechanics make him a better gish (sword and spell), but it's a way to make your concept viable.