@Volkard: That makes sense. Thank you for the builds. Am I correct in thinking that an Int 11 Wizard could be made to work, but would take more system mastery than the standard high-Int Wizard?
I'd say no, I mean, even if, with LOTS of system mastery, it can be made to work, it will still work at a lower power degree than a 'normal' high INT wizard.
Exactly. It's not a "rule" so much as it is part of the "Gentleman's Agreement" between players, and most groups seem to have some version of this. At least with respect to being overly optimized compared to the rest of the group. It's a topic of many threads on this forum, GMs trying to deal with a player who has much more system mastery than the others in the group such that they can't sufficiently challenge them without overwhelming the others. The converse becomes true in the opposite way with an under powered character. Eventually the GM risks killing the character in every combat unless they hold back to the point that nothing is a threat to the others. Both are situation are bad."as optimized as the rest of your group" = "*this* optimized". Just because you don't define a universal bar right here doesn't mean you aren't setting some sort of arbitrary rule on players that the text simply doesn't support. You do not have to be as optimized as the rest of your group, full stop. That's a rule you, and those like you, made up. I'm under no obligation to vet my sheet with anybody but the GM.I don’t get that anyone is saying it’s a rule. It’s a courtesy. Those are not the same at all.
That's a matter between the GM and the player, not between the player and the other players. Also, this "gentleman's agreement" may be part of many tables, but it isn't universal--in fact, I've yet to experience it. Every table I've been at had players of vastly differing levels of system mastery, and that's fine--the default challenges are modeled according to the system guidelines, and if a character ends up dead, well, that happens. But I've never seen players at said tables get upset that someone else's character wasn't as strong as their own. Which is fortunate, because while that's an understandable outlook for, say, a team sport, it's a baffling mentality to have for a roleplaying game.
@Volkard: That makes sense. Thank you for the builds. Am I correct in thinking that an Int 11 Wizard could be made to work, but would take more system mastery than the standard high-Int Wizard?I'd say no, I mean, even if, with LOTS of system mastery, it can be made to work, it will still work at a lower power degree than a 'normal' high INT wizard.
I've been assured repeatedly on this forum that this would be a good thing on account of wizards being the most overpowered thing ever. Now it's the minimum bar?
a wizard is powerful thanks to its spells... a wizard that has restrictions on his access to spells not only stops being overpowered, it becomes a drastically underpowered squishy.
and I didn't note down who assured you that wizards were overpowered, I'm not in agreement with them.
I've also seen certain players ditch AC altogether (or saves). We're talking front-liners with 9 AC here.
Then they whine when the cleric stops healing them (after telling the cleric, earlier, to stop telling them how to play their PCs)
LOL you reap what you sow! :)
@Dragonchess: Since you're only taking 1 level of Skald, wouldn't Arcane Duelist bard be wash due to inspire courage? It's a standard action to start either way, and still a +1 bonus overall.
With the skald, the +1 also allows all the affected weapons to penetrate DR/magic. When party members already have magic weapons, it allows the affected weapons to gain defending, distance, flaming, frost, ghost touch, keen, mighty cleaving, returning, shock, or seeking. Need a bit more AC? You and your allies have defending weapons. Need to hit opponents that are far away? You and your allies have distance weapons. Fighting a troll? You and your allies have flaming weapons. Fighting a fire elemental (or similar creature)? You and your allies have frost weapons. Fighting shadows or other incorporeal foes? You and your allies have ghost touch weapons. And so on. It's more than just a +1 on attacks and damage.
@Volkard: That makes sense. Thank you for the builds. Am I correct in thinking that an Int 11 Wizard could be made to work, but would take more system mastery than the standard high-Int Wizard?
Yes, anything that deviates from the norm always takes more system mastery to remain effective.
@Klorox: Sorry, I didn't necessarily mean work as well as a high-Int Wizard, I meant as an effective contributor to the party. It seems to be kind of like playing a Dragon Disciple, in some ways, and while not the most optimal of choices, is still a reasonably effective option.
Basically this.
It essentially works out like a Dragon Disciple. With polymorpgh spells and multimorph you get more adaptability, but you give up stuff elsewhere.
Unlike the Dragon Disciple, except with a slightly different focus. Living Monolith give d8 HD and 3/4 BAB and only drops one caster level while providing DR/-, resistances, immunities, and eventual immortality.
Over the past few months, I've seen a slew of players asking how to make what is essentially an anti-class. The weak, sickly barbarian, the uncharismatic sorcerer, the fighter with no physical stats, and the one from the title, a stupid wizard. In short, the players wanted to take the attributes that a class's abilities sort of depend on, and purposefully put their lowest scores in them.
I get the reasoning behind it. If you have a character who has to struggle to overcome something, then they can feel like they have more of an arc. But if you are essentially less useful than your average commoner, why would someone bring you out into a dangerous situation? Which was why I made the case in No One Wins When You Build A Stupid Wizard that the way to have your cake and eat it too was to play a character who is actually another class. The weak "barbarian" is actually a slayer or a rogue who uses precision and tactics to overcome stronger opponents, the smart "fighter" is actually a magus or a wizard who is a soldier, using arcane power to compensate for physical frailty. Etc., etc.
I think for the most part the people complaining about it for story reasons are wrong but your advice is bad. You can make anti-classes work ridiculously well and is one of the most confusing aspects of the game. Fighter and wizard are the hardest but there are viable options.
I think for the most part the people complaining about it for story reasons are wrong but your advice is bad. You can make anti-classes work ridiculously well and is one of the most confusing aspects of the game. Fighter and wizard are the hardest but there are viable options.
Building an anti-class and finding ways to make it work is one of the best ways to improve system mastery.
You always learn new things in the process.
Nope. You must build one of these bog-standard wizard builds or you are doing it wrong and should go play Monopoly.
