I've been asked not to post here so after this I wont anymore.
In pathfinder dance is charisma because all perform skills fall under the one skill. Which is why I said the skill system isnt perfect.
No other poster has the RIGHT to say who can post and who can't.
Jacob, even though we are in disagreement, you have the right to voice your opinion. As long as it doesn't degrade to personal attacks, prejudice, sniping or snarky comments, which are meant to offend.
If you want to continue the intelligent and respectful debate we are having, feel free to do so.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is why I keep insisting that linguistic ability and/or reading comprehension is not indicative of stupidity.Interesting becuase I've always got the impression from your posts that ability sores are strictly mechanics and have no bearing on RP.There are those who believe that ability scores have no effect on RP. There are those who believe that ability scores do effect RP.
which are you?
Both. Humorously, the two are not mutually exclusive.
Ashiel, I totally agree.
Standardisation can limit the potential and diversity of roleplaying in Pathfinder games.
Previous posts by others use the descriptive words 'retarted' or 'spastic,' implying that if you have a low ability score you are hopeless (and suffer from a disability) at tasks involving that attribute.
For example, in George R.R Martin's ASOIAF, there are many characters who possess non standardised attributes.
Stannis Baratheon is a prickly character, harsh and far from charming. Yet he has leadership skills, a leader of men, and is respected by Davos Seaworthy and others. He has a low Charisma in relation to attractiveness, social charm, although a high Charisma when it comes to people trusting his ability to lead them successfully.
Jamie Lannister, is very attractive and charming, yet many people do not like him, branded with the name Kingslayer, looked down by many people who do have a good judge of character (Blackfish comes to kind).
With standardisation, you cannot have the above characters in a Pathfinder game, just stereotypes: charismatic and attractive and uncharismatic and ugly.
And having a flaw or a disability is seen as a hindrance a penalty, where in fact it makes for some very interesting characters like Bran Stark (spinal damage, cannot walk), Tyrion (a disfigured dwarf), Jamie Lannister (amputee), Davos Seaworthy (poorly educated) and Barristan Selmy (elderly, at least by warrior standards).
Maybe its time we need to have a Pathfinder iconic who suffers from a disability who is destined for great things.
Maybe its time we need to have a Pathfinder iconic who suffers from a disability who is destined for great things.
Isn't the oracle blind or something?
Guess we'll continue to disagree.
The PF system as any system is flawed. The skill system is one of the flawed areas in PF.
I dont care how much passion you have for your art, if you're a spastic clubtz with no manual dexterity you will never be very good with any instruments or at dance.
Also without a good strength and dexterity you'll never be very good at crafting armor and weapons. A 3 dex, 3 str person with a couple ranks craft armor would suck at it.
At least is my opinion.
No matter how may ranks in survival skill you have it doesnt change the fact you have no willpower, common sense, awareness, and intuition. 3 Wis.
Edit: sorry if the Dance reference hits to close to home.
Ashiel made a low charisma fighter with good diplomacy. The same method could be used for crafting.
Maybe its time we need to have a Pathfinder iconic who suffers from a disability who is destined for great things.Isn't the oracle blind or something?She is. Also, a LG atheist.
She's fun. :)
Yeah okay I didn't know. That's really cool.
I had a quick check there are no rules for making a blind character, apart from giving your character the blind condition, the line of thinking is that disadvantaged or disabled characters should be at an advantage too.
If you were going to get into a fight with a blind character, or a one armed character you would most likely underestimate them, have your guard down.
Players don't intentionally explore characters with disabilities because there is only penalties, especially in relation to a blind character. And please no one bring up illusions, hopefully you understand what I am getting at.
Edit: I suggested to a fellow player (who is playing a Dwarven druid), that they have a missing eye, and an eye patch, an injury from a past battle, provides exposition- tough and hardened character, and replied 'cool idea, but what penalty will I get, yeah no thanks.'
The oracle curses are a decent start-off point for introducing disadvantages or disabilities without making the character unplayable.
Also, here's the Meet the Iconics post for Alahazra, the iconic Oracle. Like all the Meet the Iconic blogs it's a great read. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe its time we need to have a Pathfinder iconic who suffers from a disability who is destined for great things.Isn't the oracle blind or something?She is. Also, a LG atheist.
She's fun. :)
Yeah okay I didn't know. That's really cool.
I had a quick check there are no rules for making a blind character, apart from giving your character the blind condition, the line of thinking is that disadvantaged or disabled characters should be at an advantage too.
If you were going to get into a fight with a blind character, or a one armed character you would most likely underestimate them, have your guard down.
Players don't intentionally explore characters with disabilities because there is only penalties, especially in relation to a blind character. And please no one bring up illusions, hopefully you understand what I am getting at.
Edit: I suggested to a fellow player (who is playing a Dwarven druid), that they have a missing eye, and an eye patch, an injury form a past battle, provides exposition- tough and hardened character, and replied 'cool idea, but what penalty will I get, yeah no thanks.'
Moreover, many players are loathe to have a disadvantage at all because they worry that they won't be able to put forth the numbers we often see on the boards. It is easy to get lost in the efficiency of the character and what they can do rather than what makes up the whole of the character, the good and the bad.
This often comes up when we have these threads about high and low stats and if someone should or is being penalized "enough" by what what is in the book. Many are quick to point out workarounds so that they can get a mechanical advantage or otherwise not be at a disadvantage by dumping a stat. This is where some GMs and other players, right or wrong, take offense.
I've had this happen a few times over the years, with instances like someone wanting to have a great strength but look "sexy", full of feminine curves and very unmuscular. Then down the road they wanted to flex their muscles and intimidate an NPC "like the Hulk" (in their words.) The other players were less than amused and had a long talk at the table about accurately painting a picture of your character.
What we came up with in the end was this: we don't care how you describe your stats, be they high or low. We do want consistency. If you drop Intelligence to 7 or 4, be able to explain how your character interacts with the world. We expect no less explanation of your 16 or 20. Are your quick witted? Book smart? Highly perceptive? All the good and the bad make up your character and how they are portrayed to the rest of the table. Deciding that you want to drop your charisma into the gutter but then not wanting to have any sort of character reason why it is that low is, at least at our table, considered poor form.
|
The oracle curses are a decent start-off point for introducing disadvantages or disabilities without making the character unplayable.
They're also available to everyone with Variant Multiclassing into Oracle (which has some other fun effects, too).
The oracle curses are a decent start-off point for introducing disadvantages or disabilities without making the character unplayable.
Also, here's the Meet the Iconics post for Alahazra, the iconic Oracle. Like all the Meet the Iconic blogs it's a great read. :)
Thanks Kudaku, I will definitely check it out.
I've been asked not to post here so after this I wont anymore.
In pathfinder dance is charisma because all perform skills fall under the one skill. Which is why I said the skill system isnt perfect.
Given that my experiences with dance judges during my time spent as a dancer, and following my sister's presence in her schools competitive companies before being selected as a dance youth ambassador for Youth Dance Academy (which requires you to be individually picked from groups by the judges from dance tournaments, regardless of company), I can assure you that how you project yourself is often as important if not more-so than technical skill.
As a novice blacksmith, I can say it doesn't take that much oomph to work iron either. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see a skinny blacksmith without bulging muscles. Maybe lean muscles sure, since you're repeatedly lifting light objects (most hammers are only around 2 lbs. in weight).
Guess we'll continue to disagree.
The PF system as any system is flawed. The skill system is one of the flawed areas in PF.
I dont care how much passion you have for your art, if you're a spastic clutz with no manual dexterity you will never be very good with any instruments or at dance.
Also without a good strength and dexterity you'll never be very good at crafting armor and weapons. A 3 dex, 3 str person with a couple ranks craft armor would suck at it.
At least is my opinion.
No matter how may ranks in survival skill you have it doesnt change the fact you have no willpower, common sense, awareness, and intuition. 3 Wis.
Edit: sorry if the Dance reference hits to close to home.
You seem unnecessarily hostile. Your examples are shot down by people who have actual experience in the fields your imagining up for examples. Your position adds nothing positive to the game. You seem to be angry. What exactly is it that we must "continue to disagree" on? You posed some challenges, I met them swiftly with trivial effort, because it's not that hard when you're not burying your head in the sand and thinking about characters like they're real people.
I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make anymore. Where is the disagreement? Is it just on principle at this point?
|
GM: "Jonathan's never been one that one would describe as graceful, except when it comes to the dance. His movements while less technical than his peers are powerful and demand attention, invoking emotion in onlookers".
The on-lookers could see the dancers passion for his art and although his moves are technical correct, his graceless and stumbling form is less then inspiring.
GM: "Though Janice struggles to carry heavy loads, she makes a good living delivering parcels around the city and she knows the job well. When she needs the extra muscle (for carrying loads heavier than 30 lbs), she uses her knowledge of the job to hire and coordinate one or more untrained laborers whom she instructs and directs until the job is completed".
After a couple times working for Janice the untrained laborers put a skill point into Profession (porter) and now can make a lot more then the pittance Janice was paying them shutting Janice out of the bigger load commissions. I guess she can still make SOME coin continuing to being a carrier of small parcels.
GM: "Kale isn't known for his conversational skills, but he knows his clients have better uses for his mouth. His clients aren't looking for someone to take home to momma, they're looking for an intoxicating night of lust and he provides. Rumor has it that some of his clients prefer him because they can get him to try most anything, almost like he doesn't know the word no. However, he is very, very good at making his clients remember the word yes, though usually at the expense of the rest of their vocabulary".
While the courtesan knew all the skills for making someone feel good his lack luster application of those skills barely arouses his clients causing most clients to spend their coin somewhere else.
Just because the game mechanics allow these kind of combinations doesn’t mean it isn’t silly to justify them.
And frankly... giving an Int 3 character lots of ranks in Profession (banker) is nonsensical.
Just because the rules let you give a creature ranks in a skill doesn't mean that you should. For the same reason, just because you can use a paintbrush to paint with vomit doesn't mean you should. Part of building cool and believable NPCs is knowing what not to do.
‘I don’t care how much passion you have for your art, if you're a spastic clutz with no manual dexterity you will never be very good with any instruments or at dance.’
I agree this example is flawed .
You posed some challenges, I met them swiftly with trivial effort, because it's not that hard when you're not burying your head in the sand and thinking about characters like they're real people.
Justifying silliness doesn’t ‘meet my challenge’. This is our disagreement, I prefer my games to reflect reality at least to some degree. Otherwise you get stupid s%*# silliness like a character running around with an 8’ boomerang as a weapon.
Other things we disagree on is that skills let you disregard ability scores. Your ability scores are your ‘raw talent and prowess’ as per the CRB. Skills don’t change that you would need to spend a ability point or more and or magic to change.
Now had you said you spend a feat to give Jonathan skill focus Perform (dance) and said he was a dancing savant I would have had less of a problem with your example.
Edit: of course this is all just my opinion.
|
|
I dont care how much passion you have for your art, if you're a spastic clutz with no manual dexterity you will never be very good with any instruments or at dance.
Also without a good strength and dexterity you'll never be very good at crafting armor and weapons. A 3 dex, 3 str person with a couple ranks craft armor would suck at it.
At least is my opinion.
You'd be wrong. My boyfriend is a spastic clutz and not very strong either. When he got a job at the factory he was afraid he couldn't do it, because the manual work was not only hard but also required quite a bit of dexterity and quickness (to keep up with the machines and other workers in his line). Just after half a year of work he's able to operate several machines with his eyes closed.
Practice makes perfect.
Also, Dance isn't about Dexterity. It's about Charisma.
After being at work and gaining some confidence there, how was he outside work? was he still just as clutzy as he was before getting his job?
just curious.
It's not that she doesn't believe they exist. She just doesn't worship any of them. That's what atheism means in Golarion.
In the hopes that we can put that argument to rest immediately:
Despite the undeniable power of the gods, atheism still exists in the Inner Sea region, though in a slightly unusual sense of the word. Few of Golarion’s atheists doubt the gods’ power or existence; rather, they believe the gods are unworthy of worship.
Though she maintains that she has never worshiped a god—the cornerstone of her bitterness toward both her father and her homeland—she has come to respect a wide variety of deities, whom she refers to as "powerful and strategic allies."
Much like "wield", "hand", and "attack", Pathfinder has its own (somewhat unusual) definition of atheism.
Something my roommate pointed out to me about Courtesans. They are common whores. A good example of a Courtesan is Inara from Firefly/Serenity.
Hold up. You think Inara is a good example of a common whore?
Justifying silliness doesn’t ‘meet my challenge’. This is our disagreement, I prefer my games to reflect reality at least to some degree. Otherwise you get stupid s~!& silliness like a character running around with an 8’ boomerang as a weapon.
Other things we disagree on is that skills let you disregard ability scores. Your ability scores are your ‘raw talent and prowess’ as per the CRB. Skills don’t change that you would need to spend a ability point or more and or magic to change.
Now had you said you spend a feat to give Jonathan skill focus Perform (dance) and said he was a dancing savant I would have had less of a problem with your example.
I don't think anyone is saying the ability scores do not matter at all. What is being said is that with ranks in a skill the ability scores can be low and you can still be at least decent in that area.
Of course someone with a higher ability score will be better, all things being equal, but there are ways to be good, or at least decent at a skill that has a low ability score attached to it.
|
|
What I should have said was that characters with these drawbacks would never be as good as someone with no noticeable drawback and though would mostly likely not progress further since no one would higher them over someone obviously better.
See I believe that the game should have some grounding in reality. Its my impression from post I've read in the past, on this thread a others, that some people like a feel good super special snowflack game.
At least again this is the impression I get.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I should have said was that characters with these drawbacks would never be as good as someone with no noticeable drawback and though would mostly likely not progress further since no one would higher them over someone obviously better.
See I believe that the game should have some grounding in reality. Its my impression from post I've read in the past, on this thread a others, that some people like a feel good super special snowflack game.
At least again this is the impression I get.
Except in reality, if we want to ground things in reality, people who aren't as smart or fast or whatever do manage to succeed and get hired. There are many many people that manage to get along quite well even with drawbacks or deficiencies.
No, someone with a lower score might not ever be as good as someone born with all the advantages (higher scores.) But the world is full of stories of people who have managed to excel despite not being the best of the best of the best. One can substitute great effort (skill levels) to make up for some deficiency (lower stats).
What you do in your own game is your business. What your players like is theirs. But telling people that they are playing a super special snowflake game is just being insulting for no reason. Your way is not the only way, or the only opinion.
Justifying silliness doesn’t ‘meet my challenge’. This is our disagreement, I prefer my games to reflect reality at least to some degree. Otherwise you get stupid s~!& silliness like a character running around with an 8’ boomerang as a weapon.
Other things we disagree on is that skills let you disregard ability scores. Your ability scores are your ‘raw talent and prowess’ as per the CRB. Skills don’t change that you would need to spend a ability point or more and or magic to change.
Now had you said you spend a feat to give Jonathan skill focus Perform (dance) and said he was a dancing savant I would have had less of a problem with your example.
I don't think anyone is saying the ability scores do not matter at all. What is being said is that with ranks in a skill the ability scores can be low and you can still be at least decent in that area.
Of course someone with a higher ability score will be better, all things being equal, but there are ways to be good, or at least decent at a skill that has a low ability score attached to it.
I think the larger question is whether some stats have any effect at all outside of the skill bonuses (or spells or other specific effects). Ability checks are a common thing in some editions. Do the existing skills cover all uses? Or are there gaps where the raw stat matters?
I think the raw stat matters for ability checks. I use those for some cases that the game does not have a specific rule for. As an example if someone want to see how much they could drink before getting drunk I would call for a constitution check.
What I should have said was that characters with these drawbacks would never be as good as someone with no noticeable drawback and though would mostly likely not progress further since no one would higher them over someone obviously better.
That is also incorrect though, and that is what my last comment when I quoted you was trying to say.
A level 5 character with a +2 modifier and 5 ranks will not be as good as a level 10 character with a 10 ranks and a -2 modifier.
Now of course maybe you meant two characters of equal level.
So you can still have the characters both at level 5 and 5 ranks, but one has a -2 mod and the other has a +2 mod. This can be overcome with feats.
However like I said the higher ability score pulls ahead if everything else is equal.
Are you implying that you put an artificial cap on what a skill can be modified to be based on someone's ability score.
You have not directed said it, but I think it is being read that way.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd also like to point out...
Justifying silliness doesn’t ‘meet my challenge’. This is our disagreement, I prefer my games to reflect reality at least to some degree. Otherwise you getstupid s&!~silliness like a character running around with an 8’ boomerang as a weapon.
Your reasoning is breaking down here for several reasons.
1. You have not successfully made the case that any of your challenges were silly, nor have you successfully made the case that my interpretations of them were nonsensical and/or silly. You're arguing without a position to be grounded upon because you have not shown with certainty that this is wrong.
2. You're committing slippery slope fallacy in a really big way. There is no logical connection from having low-Charisma prostitutes or dancers with poor Dexterity to using man-sized boomerangs as weapons.
Side Note: A low charisma is actually probably really common for most prostitutes. Mind you, I'm not intending to insult prostitutes with implied lack of Charisma (I consider myself to be of low Charisma as well). However, low Charisma means you are more amiable to the wishes of others and more likely to indulge them. Which is one of the reasons that I commented that Kale the low-Charisma courtesan is known for letting his clients talk him into trying stuff most others aren't into (the base Diplomacy DCs to get him to do something are -4 lower than usual, which means that even difficult Diplomacy checks are pretty easy; a request that has a +5 DC has a 50% success rate for an average commoner). That seems reasonable. We can probably also imagine a full character profile for him as well.
Example: We know that Kale is...
1. A mighty fine prostitute thanks to being great at Profession (Courtesan).
2. Really amiable. It's easy to get him to like you and do things for you (Diplomacy DCs -4). Is this because he harbors a positive appreciation for everyone in a free-love sort of way, or is it because he harbors repressed feelings of longing and is trying to fill a void in his life? Perhaps both? Is he suffering from abandonment issues? Perhaps he has poor self esteem? Lots of great questions!
3. How does this translate to his work? He's probably pretty popular amongst doms and is a natural sub given his amiability. He might have a reputation for being that one that will seemingly do most anything you ask for, sometimes not even within reason, so he attracts a strange crowd.
Sheesh, I could build an entire character around this. We could start with his childhood right up to why he's covered in piercings in his skin. Maybe his actual romantic partner is an androgynous tiefling he met after an unusul menage trois involving a druid and her animal companion.
Back on Topic: Besides being grossly hostile, you have failed to establish a position to carry your argument from. You are making assumptions without support for those assumptions and acting indignant when others do not make the same assumptions and expect a little more in the way of evidence when there is evidence to the contrary.
Ability Checks in Prior Editions: Ability checks used to be more prevalent because prior to 3E there was no real skill system (2E had noncombat proficiencies but calling it a skill system is kind of a joke). Instead, for most any task you attempted you'd default to an ability check (possibly with a modifier imposed by the GM). At least until the ****ing thief came along and ruined it for everyone.
You all seem to me to be looking at this from the wrong POV.
A low score, say Cha for example, Is not a problem to an Adventurer.
An adventurer can be like Link or The Dragonborn. He doesn't need to be charismatic because at the end of the day he is still out there smashing urns to make money and slaying horrible monsters to save the realm, and that's his place in the world. A shopkeeper on the other hand? There are pages of rules in Ultimate Campaign about how Diplomacy directly interacts with bartering and pricing objects. A shopkeeper with low Cha would be completely screwed because he couldn't sell a crackhead a bag of cocain if he tried, he could never out-barter that swindler of a ratfolk junk merchant who keeps trying to hawk him baubles at outrages prices, he could never talk his way into a fairer rate for paying off the local thieves guild for protection. You all need to understand that adventurers are simply one proffesion in the Pathfinder universe.
Yes, in certain older style of games, yes this is true.
But in contemporary adventures, like Pathfinder's Adventure Paths, there are few dungeons, overpopulated with monsters that are bristling with traps.
Story, an interactive narrative, politics, moral/immoral ambiguity, and character development play a major role in the unique experience that is Pathfinder.
What I should have said was that characters with these drawbacks would never be as good as someone with no noticeable drawback and though would mostly likely not progress further since no one would higher them over someone obviously better.
See I believe that the game should have some grounding in reality. Its my impression from post I've read in the past, on this thread a others, that some people like a feel good super special snowflack game.
At least again this is the impression I get.
Except in reality, if we want to ground things in reality, people who aren't as smart or fast or whatever do manage to succeed and get hired. There are many many people that manage to get along quite well even with drawbacks or deficiencies.
No, someone with a lower score might not ever be as good as someone born with all the advantages (higher scores.) But the world is full of stories of people who have managed to excel despite not being the best of the best of the best. One can substitute great effort (skill levels) to make up for some deficiency (lower stats).
What you do in your own game is your business. What your players like is theirs. But telling people that they are playing a super special snowflake game is just being insulting for no reason. Your way is not the only way, or the only opinion.
i completely agree,
@Jacob Saltband Furthermore 'super special snowflake game' is a divisive, and derogatory way of describing previous posts that are exploring concepts that provide depth, realism, diversity, creativity and character development in the Pathfinder game.
But you must realise this, trying to win an argument at any cost, moving the goal posts (started at Str 7, moved to Str 3 as a way of measuring attributes), and dismantling posters thoughtful views to 'as long as you have fun.'
Read any well written fantasy novel, they will have the previously mentioned themes in them. And the Adventure Paths often echo such things, Indigenous Canadian mythology comes to mind, treated with respect and brought to life by the wonderful artwork of Eva Widermann.
|
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to appologize to the board.
I find it easier of late to combative and argumentative then reasonable. I'd understand if you dont except my apology. My excuse/explanation is that live has been annoying of late. At the end of last year, dec 31, my company reorganised and I got a pay cut so now I make roughly $500 less a month. In Feb I left the group I'd been with for 3-ish yrs and havent found another...sucks. March my mother got sick and because I now have no money I took the train instead of a plane and she passed away 30 min before I got there.
So being an ass is easier right now.
Again I'm sorry if I offended anyone.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to appologize to the board.
I find it easier of late to combative and argumentative then reasonable. I'd understand if you dont except my apology. My excuse/explanation is that live has been annoying of late. At the end of last year, dec 31, my company reorganised and I got a pay cut so now I make roughly $500 less a month. In Feb I left the group I'd been with for 3-ish yrs and havent found another...sucks. March my mother got sick and because I now have no money I took the train instead of a plane and she passed away 30 min before I got there.
So being an ass is easier right now.
Again I'm sorry if I offended anyone.
S'cool man. Everybody has rough days sometimes and it would be wrong of us to hold anything against you. Sorry that life's been on a downswing and I hope the tide changes for you soon. Also, my condolences regarding your mother. I lost mine recently too. It's the little things I find the hardest. If you need to vent or be an ass for a while without reciprocation, feel free to PM me. If nothing else I can promise I won't "tl;dr" you. (^~^);
While I was thinking about Kale our poor-Charisma prostitute, I started thinking that it might be pretty fun to play a game where we randomly roll some commoner statistics using the usual 3d6 method and then build a an imaginary profile for them.
While I was thinking about Kale our poor-Charisma prostitute, I started thinking that it might be pretty fun to play a game where we randomly roll some commoner statistics using the usual 3d6 method and then build a an imaginary profile for them.
Str: 3d6 ⇒ (5, 4, 1) = 10
Dex: 3d6 ⇒ (1, 4, 2) = 7
Con: 3d6 ⇒ (1, 4, 3) = 8
Int: 3d6 ⇒ (6, 2, 1) = 9
Wis: 3d6 ⇒ (3, 1, 4) = 8
Cha: 3d6 ⇒ (5, 5, 4) = 14
Farella Drakenshield
N Female humanoid (human) aristocrat 1AC 9 (+1 armor, -2 Dex)
Hp 3 (1d8-1); Fort -1, Ref -2, Will +1;
Melee rapier +0 (1d6/18-20)
Skills -- Bluff +6, Diplomacy +6, Intimidate +6, Knowledge (Nobility) +3, Linguistics +3, Perform (String Instruments) +6, Sense Motive +6
Feats -- Open Minded (+1 skill point/level), Skill Focus (Sense Motive)
Languages -- Common, Draconic
Equipment - silken ceremonial robe, rapier, additional treasures
Favored Class (Aristocrat): +1 Skill Point / Level
Farella is the youngest daughter of Duke Regenold of house Drakenshield and her general attitude and sense of self worth are very reminiscent of the wyrms that adorn her family crest. The youngest daughter out of four children, Farella has been spoiled by both her family's wealth and status and the added attention and acceptance of her aging parents.
Uninterested in anything resembling work and hating the effects the sun has on her skin, she scorns outdoor activities such as horseback riding. To the frustration of her tutors she has traditionally preferred reading copper-piece romance novels and other lowborn literature rather than sticking to her schoolwork, and at least three of her instructors have resigned after experiencing her disinterest in study and her father's ire at their failure to arouse his "genius angel's" interests.
Prone to finding hobbies and then dropping them once she has grown bored or frustrated with them, she was instructed by several reputable teachers on the arts of fencing and fashionable weaponry but dropped it before she ever mastered more than enough to look good swinging her sword. She mostly carries her rapier as a fashion accessory and status symbol because she thinks it makes her look cooler (and she isn't wrong).
Farella's charm belies her selfish attitude. While she has no interest in practical concerns, she is very popular in her school and at court. Those who she counts as friends are blessed with her ability to seemingly make problems go away for them, while those who find themselves in the shadow of her ire may find themselves constantly troubled by ill gossip and missed opportunities because of a poisonous word dripped from her lips.
It's unclear if it's an appreciation of the art that she has or the attention, but one interest that has remained with Farella is that of stringed instruments. Farella is versed in several but her favorite is the harp, especially large and elaborate harps. She draws great pleasure in performing for others and frequently plays at social gatherings after smoothly baiting an invitation out of her hosts.
Farella's relations with her siblings are strained. Being older, most have their own concerns and view her as the spoiled brat of the family (which she is), seeing her as impractical and selfish, though most still humor her wishes as she's very good at being a nice sister when she wants to be. She and her mother have been on excellent terms since her birth. Her mother takes great pleasure in bragging about her daughter's charm and talent to her friends and Farella adores the attention.
Her relationship with her father is more complicated. Though quite spoiled as she gets virtually anything she asks for, she is most covetous of her father's time for which is the one thing she gets very little of. With all of his duties as a duke, he has little time for family life, spending most of it working or preparing defenses and funds for repelling the next orc incursion into the region. This difficult situation is one of the primary reasons why he's so prone to spoiling his children, Farella especially. Whenever possible, Farella attempts to get the attention of her father and can hold great contempt for anyone who would steal his time from her.
Peculiarly, while her maidservant would never admit to such in polite company or anywhere where it would get back to her employers, she would note that Farella's interest in the harp developed after Duke Regenold had an affair with a harpist that had been invited to perform at one of their banquets during Farella's youth. It leaves one to wonder, if this is true, what exactly goes on inside of Farella's head, and whether Farella was inspired by the music or the attention that the harpist conjured with it.
EDIT: Fun fact. Farella's point buy is -4. She's actually far below the average commoner. :P
Also, forgot to drop her +2 from Human into her stats so she has a floating +2 to be dropped more or less anywhere. I'd probably drop it into Charisma to just make those traits even more pronounced.
I'm curious about people's opinion on how common, or rare character's who have this higher + ability scores are.
We know 10-11 is average, and I'd say 12-13 is not uncommon.
With the example of strength- I think in every village/neighborhood in game, has several folks that are known to be good at some heavy lifting. So, maybe 1 in 10 characters have a 12-13 strength.
It's when you get higher than that range, that you start to wonder how rare it is.
Would it be 1 in 50, or 100, that possesses 14-15?
When we get to a score of 20, which is a high as possible among the common races, I'd say that character would be renown throughout the kingdom or region. I think of someone like The Mountain from Game of Thrones.
I'm curious about people's opinion on how common, or rare character's who have this higher + ability scores are.
We know 10-11 is average, and I'd say 12-13 is not uncommon.
With the example of strength- I think in every village/neighborhood in game, has several folks that are known to be good at some heavy lifting. So, maybe 1 in 10 characters have a 12-13 strength.
It's when you get higher than that range, that you start to wonder how rare it is.
Would it be 1 in 50, or 100, that possesses 14-15?
When we get to a score of 20, which is a high as possible among the common races, I'd say that character would be renown throughout the kingdom or region. I think of someone like The Mountain from Game of Thrones.
The high end of characters with no class levels is 15 after racial modifiers. The low end of anyone if their racial penalty falls into their low score is 6. If that does not happen it is an 8.
If you have a PC class you might have a 17 after racial modifiers, and that is for NPC's. If you get to level 4 you can push that to an 18. I dont think many NPC's get past level 5.
In Golarion while a 20 is rare I dont think it automatically makes you known in the region, but there is a high chance you have an important position. I would say people in your city know who you are.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm curious about people's opinion on how common, or rare character's who have this higher + ability scores are.
We know 10-11 is average, and I'd say 12-13 is not uncommon.
With the example of strength- I think in every village/neighborhood in game, has several folks that are known to be good at some heavy lifting. So, maybe 1 in 10 characters have a 12-13 strength.
It's when you get higher than that range, that you start to wonder how rare it is.
Would it be 1 in 50, or 100, that possesses 14-15?
When we get to a score of 20, which is a high as possible among the common races, I'd say that character would be renown throughout the kingdom or region. I think of someone like The Mountain from Game of Thrones.
Hard to say, but it's probably not that uncommon to find people with really high/low ability scores. If using the 3d6 method, we can bet that out of about 100 people, roughly 4-6 people should have an extreme score in any direction (3 or 18) with far more having very high or very low scores in different areas.
Breakdown thanks to Anydice
3 0.46%
4 1.39%
5 2.78%
6 4.63%
7 6.94%
8 9.72%
9 11.57%
10 12.50%
11 12.50%
12 11.57%
13 9.72%
14 6.94%
15 4.63%
16 2.78%
17 1.39%
18 0.46%
Now if we're talking point buy, the core rules note that nonheroic characters use 3 Point Buy. If not left to % chances, it's less likely to find characters with exceptionally high ability scores because the likelihood that they'll get an 18 in a score on 3 point buy is really, really low, unless it's the only thing they're good at at the cost of pretty much everything else (which would make sense thematically from an overcompensation/specialization perspective).
Similarly, you will never find characters with exceptionally low stats because the point buy chart doesn't support it. However, if you were to allow any stat that rolling would, the formula can be reverse engineered to allow you to point-buy down to 3, which would make it more reasonable for characters have have more varied statistics.
I'm curious about people's opinion on how common, or rare character's who have this higher + ability scores are.
We know 10-11 is average, and I'd say 12-13 is not uncommon.
With the example of strength- I think in every village/neighborhood in game, has several folks that are known to be good at some heavy lifting. So, maybe 1 in 10 characters have a 12-13 strength.
It's when you get higher than that range, that you start to wonder how rare it is.
Would it be 1 in 50, or 100, that possesses 14-15?
When we get to a score of 20, which is a high as possible among the common races, I'd say that character would be renown throughout the kingdom or region. I think of someone like The Mountain from Game of Thrones.Hard to say, but it's probably not that uncommon to find people with really high/low ability scores. If using the 3d6 method, we can bet that out of about 100 people, roughly 4-6 people should have an extreme score in any direction (3 or 18) with far more having very high or very low scores in different areas.
Breakdown thanks to Anydice
3 0.46%4 1.39%
5 2.78%
6 4.63%
7 6.94%
8 9.72%
9 11.57%
10 12.50%
11 12.50%
12 11.57%
13 9.72%
14 6.94%
15 4.63%
16 2.78%
17 1.39%
18 0.46%
Now if we're talking point buy, the core rules note that nonheroic characters use 3 Point Buy. If not left to % chances, it's less likely to find characters with exceptionally high ability scores because the likelihood that they'll get an 18 in a score on 3 point buy is really, really low, unless it's the only thing they're good at at the cost of pretty much everything else (which would make sense thematically from an overcompensation/specialization perspective).
Similarly, you will never find characters with exceptionally low stats because the point buy chart doesn't support it. However, if you were to allow any stat that rolling would, the formula can be reverse engineered to allow you to point-buy down to 3,...
Good points. Even the basic NPCs- the majority of the world- get's an array of a couple of above average scores, even before racial mods.
I'm curious about people's opinion on how common, or rare character's who have this higher + ability scores are.
We know 10-11 is average, and I'd say 12-13 is not uncommon.
With the example of strength- I think in every village/neighborhood in game, has several folks that are known to be good at some heavy lifting. So, maybe 1 in 10 characters have a 12-13 strength.
It's when you get higher than that range, that you start to wonder how rare it is.
Would it be 1 in 50, or 100, that possesses 14-15?
When we get to a score of 20, which is a high as possible among the common races, I'd say that character would be renown throughout the kingdom or region. I think of someone like The Mountain from Game of Thrones.The high end of characters with no class levels is 15 after racial modifiers. The low end of anyone if their racial penalty falls into their low score is 6. If that does not happen it is an 8.
If you have a PC class you might have a 17 after racial modifiers, and that is for NPC's. If you get to level 4 you can push that to an 18. I dont think many NPC's get past level 5.
In Golarion while a 20 is rare I dont think it automatically makes you known in the region, but there is a high chance you have an important position. I would say people in your city know who you are.
Yes, level 5 for NPCs is a good benchmark, the highest level follower a character can receive through the Leadership feat is level 6 and that is if the character is of a very high level (at the end of their career) and with a high charisma and /or owns a castle, guild house or religious temple.
In relation to measuring character level, Justin Alexander (The Alexandrian), a talented writer and play-tester of D&D 3.5e stated in one of his essays: "take Aragorn, for example. He’s clearly described as one of the best warriors in Middle Earth. But what do we actually see him do? Let’s take The Fellowship of the Rings as an example:
He leads the hobbits through the wilderness with great skill. (The highest Survival DC in the core rules is DC 15. A 1st level character can master the skill for non-tracking purposes. Aragorn, as a master tracker, would need to be 5th level, have at least one level of ranger, and have spent one of his feats on Skill Focus (Survival) to achieve all of this.)
So what can we conclude form this? Aragorn is about 5th level.
Edit: Alexander also states "In Moria (fighting orcs): “Legolas shot two through the throat. Gimli hewed the legs from under another that had sprung up on Balin’s tomb. Boromir and Aragorn slew many. When thirteen had fallen the rest fled shrieking, leaving the defenders unharmed, except for Sam who had a scratch along the scalp. Aragorn slays no more than six or seven CR 1/2 orcs in this encounter. A trivial accomplishment for a 5th level character.
I'm curious about people's opinion on how common, or rare character's who have this higher + ability scores are.
We know 10-11 is average, and I'd say 12-13 is not uncommon.
With the example of strength- I think in every village/neighborhood in game, has several folks that are known to be good at some heavy lifting. So, maybe 1 in 10 characters have a 12-13 strength.
It's when you get higher than that range, that you start to wonder how rare it is.
Would it be 1 in 50, or 100, that possesses 14-15?
When we get to a score of 20, which is a high as possible among the common races, I'd say that character would be renown throughout the kingdom or region. I think of someone like The Mountain from Game of Thrones.The high end of characters with no class levels is 15 after racial modifiers. The low end of anyone if their racial penalty falls into their low score is 6. If that does not happen it is an 8.
If you have a PC class you might have a 17 after racial modifiers, and that is for NPC's. If you get to level 4 you can push that to an 18. I dont think many NPC's get past level 5.
In Golarion while a 20 is rare I dont think it automatically makes you known in the region, but there is a high chance you have an important position. I would say people in your city know who you are.
I missed your post earlier, just saw it now.
I remember reading somewhere (good chance of it being the Inner Sea setting), that most NPC won't be higher than 5th level without a PC class. That gels with what you're saying.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm curious about people's opinion on how common, or rare character's who have this higher + ability scores are.
We know 10-11 is average, and I'd say 12-13 is not uncommon.
With the example of strength- I think in every village/neighborhood in game, has several folks that are known to be good at some heavy lifting. So, maybe 1 in 10 characters have a 12-13 strength.
It's when you get higher than that range, that you start to wonder how rare it is.
Would it be 1 in 50, or 100, that possesses 14-15?
When we get to a score of 20, which is a high as possible among the common races, I'd say that character would be renown throughout the kingdom or region. I think of someone like The Mountain from Game of Thrones.The high end of characters with no class levels is 15 after racial modifiers. The low end of anyone if their racial penalty falls into their low score is 6. If that does not happen it is an 8.
If you have a PC class you might have a 17 after racial modifiers, and that is for NPC's. If you get to level 4 you can push that to an 18. I dont think many NPC's get past level 5.
In Golarion while a 20 is rare I dont think it automatically makes you known in the region, but there is a high chance you have an important position. I would say people in your city know who you are.
Yes, level 5 for NPCs is a good benchmark, the highest level follower a character can receive through the Leadership feat is level 6 and that is if the character is of a very high level (at the end of their career) and with a high charisma and /or owns a castle, guild house or religious temple.
In relation to measuring character level, Justin Alexander (The Alexandrian), a talented writer and play-tester of D&D 3.5e stated in one of his essays: "take Aragorn, for example. He’s clearly described as one of the best warriors in Middle Earth. But what do we actually see him do? Let’s take The Fellowship of the Rings as an example:
He leads the hobbits...
Interesting breakdown, but let's also look at what Gandalf does- pretty much nothing magic-wise that a low- to middle level wizard couldn't do, even though he is considered one of the most powerful characters in Middle Earth. All of these would make the typical PC, at low levels even, legends in Middle Earth. I just don't think it makes for a good comparison.
...I'm curious about people's opinion on how common, or rare character's who have this higher + ability scores are.
We know 10-11 is average, and I'd say 12-13 is not uncommon.
With the example of strength- I think in every village/neighborhood in game, has several folks that are known to be good at some heavy lifting. So, maybe 1 in 10 characters have a 12-13 strength.
It's when you get higher than that range, that you start to wonder how rare it is.
Would it be 1 in 50, or 100, that possesses 14-15?
When we get to a score of 20, which is a high as possible among the common races, I'd say that character would be renown throughout the kingdom or region. I think of someone like The Mountain from Game of Thrones.The high end of characters with no class levels is 15 after racial modifiers. The low end of anyone if their racial penalty falls into their low score is 6. If that does not happen it is an 8.
If you have a PC class you might have a 17 after racial modifiers, and that is for NPC's. If you get to level 4 you can push that to an 18. I dont think many NPC's get past level 5.
In Golarion while a 20 is rare I dont think it automatically makes you known in the region, but there is a high chance you have an important position. I would say people in your city know who you are.
Yes, level 5 for NPCs is a good benchmark, the highest level follower a character can receive through the Leadership feat is level 6 and that is if the character is of a very high level (at the end of their career) and with a high charisma and /or owns a castle, guild house or religious temple.
In relation to measuring character level, Justin Alexander (The Alexandrian), a talented writer and play-tester of D&D 3.5e stated in one of his essays: "take Aragorn, for example. He’s clearly described as one of the best warriors in Middle Earth. But what do we actually see him do? Let’s take The Fellowship of the Rings as an example:
Take the world of Golarion, particularly the way APs interpret it, its surprisingly very similar.