|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Long story short. My DM has challenged me to play a mediocre at best character, a halfling paladin. The race and class aren't the issue, my teammates are. To put it bluntly, they don't have any concept of group, just five individuals doing what they want. I am to basically play down to their level, and run a second rate character. I was, however, given a free hand in character concept and the ability to go nova as a last ditch effort. That being said, here is my idea:
A halfling paladin that wears little or no armor and is armed with dagger and light shield, and a sling for ranged attack. I will be taking the legate and hunting paladin archtypes. Legate and divine bond allow me to essentially always be armed and armoured, but not be obvious about it. Hunting paladin allows 1 ranger spell for each paladin spell level. Unsanctioned knowledge allows 1 spell from several possible lists, but cleric is fine. Celestial obedience will be of Tanagaar. Multiclass into evangelist of Tanagaar. At 14th level, Nova option. Cast sense vitals (ranger spell), quick cast halfling vengeance (cleric spell and lesser metamagic rod of quickening) and Tanagaars 3rd boon will give me 4d6 + 3d6 + 3d6 sneak attack (10 total) plus 2 per die. At 15th level I gain two more d6's. So I can appear as a crappy halfing ranger/rogue/whatever the hell I want. Relatively feat light (Fey Foundling, celestial obedience, risky striker, unsanctioned know!edge, piranha strike, skill focus knowledge planes, and arcane heritage for a protector familiar).
At constructive criticism welcome, just remember, NOT trying to optimize.
Thanks in advance.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
If there's problems with inter-player relations causing the lack of cooperation, a paladin character could possibly make things worse. Just IME.
A buckler keeps that hand free which makes loading a sling easier. Sling + buckler was a historical combo IIRC.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
It seems to me that you have builded another induvidual.
If the goal is to make the group play more cooperatively the consider the paladin archtype Holy Tactician (stacks with Holy Guide to get an extra teamwork feat).
Sharing teamwork feats is a great way to learn combat tactics IMO.
Some players are more "selfish" than others. It isn't inherently a bad thing, it's a balance to reach. If they don't hold teamwork as important, as long as the group runs correctly, still fine, the only limit is if the problem devolves into sessions not continuing and/or infighting.
*Khan* wrote: It seems to me that you have builded another induvidual.
If the goal is to make the group play more cooperatively the consider the paladin archtype Holy Tactician (stacks with Holy Guide to get an extra teamwork feat).
Sharing teamwork feats is a great way to learn combat tactics IMO.
Some of the players might be inclined to see this as a way to enforce teamwork, when it should come organically. Intent is good, but result could be very bad. The base paladin class might also be met with scorn : not every player who handles a paladin has been responsible enough, hence the poor reputation at numerous corners. Some would tell it loudly, or quit the table (Order of the Prism Shelynite or followers of Ragathiel who border dictatorship for instance)
The majority of responsible players suffers from the indiscipline of the minority, as sad as it is.
Philippe Lam wrote: Some players are more "selfish" than others. It isn't inherently a bad thing, it's a balance to reach. If they don't hold teamwork as important, as long as the group runs correctly, still fine, the only limit is if the problem devolves into sessions not continuing and/or infighting.
*Khan* wrote: It seems to me that you have builded another induvidual.
If the goal is to make the group play more cooperatively the consider the paladin archtype Holy Tactician (stacks with Holy Guide to get an extra teamwork feat).
Sharing teamwork feats is a great way to learn combat tactics IMO.
Some of the players might be inclined to see this as a way to enforce teamwork, when it should come organically. Intent is good, but result could be very bad.
Well that is not my experience with teamwork feats.
If there is an single strong enemy and you share outflank - then some will make good use of that.
If you are attacked by scores of enemies and you share paired opportunitists then most will rally together.
Or if you activate escape route when your wizard or other non-frontliners are in melee, then your group will most likely make use of it to rescue their ally.
Your response comes with the premise that teamwork will always get through. Theoritically, it makes sense because the potential is here. But if, and it's a big if, no guarantees because of either line of sight denial or more basically players who will not be inclined to do so. My own experience is opposite. Before asking for teamwork, I've often seen players being required to be self-reliant even if a little bit, or evolving characters so they will need it only at the worst of situations.
Players should be able to fight without teamwork if required. If they're too dependent on it, that's a problem. Extreme case but not invalid to illustrate it : an aid-focused halfling cavalier who was completely shut down because of deeper darkness, and possibly one-rounded if someone else didn't brought an oil of daylight.
The concept is a thing, how to make sure to be able to use it is another. This point requires spending some extra resources but it's a necessary devil.
Philippe Lam wrote: Your response comes with the premise that teamwork will always get through. Theoritically, it makes sense because the potential is here. But if, and it's a big if, no guarantees because of either line of sight denial or more basically players who will not be inclined to do so. My own experience is opposite. Before asking for teamwork, I've often seen players being required to be self-reliant even if a little bit, or evolving characters so they will need it only at the worst of situations.
Players should be able to fight without teamwork if required. If they're too dependent on it, that's a problem. Extreme case but not invalid to illustrate it : an aid-focused halfling cavalier who was completely shut down because of deeper darkness, and possibly one-rounded if someone else didn't brought an oil of daylight.
The concept is a thing, how to make sure to be able to use it is another. This point requires spending some extra resources but it's a necessary devil.
My statement is that if you give teamplay the opportunity to evolve it will more likely happen, but it might take a while.
If you build another self-reliant individual for a group like the OP mentioned - it will most likely never happen.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Instead of multiclassing away from paladin, why not take advantage of being a small paladin with a good charisma? Specialize in mounted combat.
Take weapon finesse and use a Rapier. With a high dex and low str your damage will be anemic to start but after you get a mount your damage will go up because you can use the mount's str for damage. Mounted Combat -> Ride-By Attack -> Spirited Charge finishes off your low to mid level progression. Now you are charging past enemies who you get a reliable x2 damage attack. Your enemies are forced to chase you to get 1 swipe at you, or just ignore your presence and take a one sided beating.
Since a Rapier has a great crit range, improve that either by feat or enchantment. Now you do a constant x2, with the occasional x4 damage. You're self healing, high AC, high mobility with a strong punch. While this won't out DPR a dedicated slugger who gets in a full round attack, you also aren't taking the beating that comes with it.
*Khan* wrote: My statement is that if you give teamplay the opportunity to evolve it will more likely happen, but it might take a while.
If you build another self-reliant individual for a group like the OP mentioned - it will most likely never happen.
Time is exactly the sticking point. The game is played differently as it was several years ago. It's more individualistic and self-gratifying. There is NO guarantee players will give teamwork time to settle, unless the group is inherently built for that. And like I alluded earlier, some anti-game to lower the team efficiency to the point it can make the characters weaker instead of stronger, on the players to ponder the risk vs the advantage.
From what the OP stated specifically about that group, the mindset of the group's players leads to being individualistic. So what you suggest might fall into their deaf ears.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Thank you for the input. Both the GM and I have tried to encourage teamwork, with little positive results. A previous character was a melee hunter with badger companion. I was told it was broken and overpowered because we had teamwork feats, and used them very effectively. A lone player also picked teamwork feats, and we did well. But the majority chose not to and were quickly relegated to secondary roles.
When I mean secondary roles, I don't mean a supportive character role. One player consistently forgot to level up, and another never added armor bonuses. This made them doubly weakened, once from play style and once from self inflicted mistakes. Sadly, these are not newbies, several have been playing for decades.
Also, several posted good advice such as weapon finesse or mounted combat. This is good advice normally, but the DM chose the race and class in an effort to free me from their poor choices, and allow me to help when they fail. To put it bluntly, I was asked to play down to their level as we have been unsuccessful to raise their game.
Ironically, out of game we have a good deal of teamwork and are actually good friends of almost twenty years.
The Sarducci wrote: Thank you for the input. Both the GM and I have tried to encourage teamwork, with little positive results. A previous character was a melee hunter with badger companion. I was told it was broken and overpowered because we had teamwork feats, and used them very effectively. A lone player also picked teamwork feats, and we did well. But the majority chose not to and were quickly relegated to secondary roles.
When I mean secondary roles, I don't mean a supportive character role. One player consistently forgot to level up, and another never added armor bonuses. This made them doubly weakened, once from play style and once from self inflicted mistakes. Sadly, these are not newbies, several have been playing for decades.
Also, several posted good advice such as weapon finesse or mounted combat. This is good advice normally, but the DM chose the race and class in an effort to free me from their poor choices, and allow me to help when they fail. To put it bluntly, I was asked to play down to their level as we have been unsuccessful to raise their game.
Ironically, out of game we have a good deal of teamwork and are actually good friends of almost twenty years.
Well the good news is that your GM is going to make encounters easier so the less character-creation interested players can have fun at combat too.
This means you can just grab Weapon Finesse and perhaps Fey Foundling and the rest can go into what ever fun you like.
Perhaps Agile Manuevers could be fun - to teach the enemies some manners.
I like your idea with a familiar - perhaps a hunting falcon or if you are going for fun option - a little fat dachshund which always get stuck in branches or between rocks when you are out hunting.
Oh Kay. So if OP wants to "play down to their level" but also wants "to be able to nova when needed" I don't think paladin is a good choice. I've played the character OP is talking about. Its called a wizard.
And you don't build 'down to their level'. You just build the wizard you want to play. And then you twiddle your thumbs and follow the other players around. Occasionally you throw some buffs. Mostly you sit on your spells and only use them when the situation calls for it.
You get over the idea that you need to contribute to every encounter. You wait for everyone else to hit a brick wall they can't get over, or for the others to panic before you take action. That way they get their chance to shine, and so do you.
Also you get to be that 'air of mystery' about you.
And since you need something to do while you aren't casting spells, get real comfortable with your skills and use them to help the party. While skills alone won't achieve much, it will give the impression that you're doing something helpful.
Just a quick clarification. The race/class combo is assigned by DM in preparation for next campaign (unsure if AP or homebrew). That is set to most likely be able to help the party the most (assumption on my part. DM might just find it amusing. IDK). Also, I do not want to play down to there level, I was asked to after years of trying to up there game. The playing down is to keep us players on an equal level so the game keeps us all involved. The "Going Nova" option is merely an ace in the hole if an encounter goes real bad real fast. Hopefully never used. Thus the less than ideal build, but which may be fun.
*Khan*, good idea on the familiar. I have a few "cute" dogs. And a few chickens.
|
