|
So you met a guy in a con that happens to live in the same area as you do, and told you that he DM's Pathfinder. You are starved for more games, and manage to convince him that you'd make a good addition to his group (without actually knowing what his group might be like). He agrees, and you exchange numbers.
A few week later, you receive a text, telling you to Roll the best char you can - he wants to test you first. 20 pts point-buy.
Now, you need to roll that character. What would you roll?
You need to keep in mind the following things:
1. You do not know if this is a solo-adventure, or a party.
2. If there is a party (and you don't know if there is), you don't know anything about their composition.
3. You have no knowledge wether this will be a one-shot, or a campaing, or some sort of a melee-tournament (solo or party).
4. You have no idea if he wants the best concept, or the best mechanical build you can do, so you aim for both.
5. You don't know about what books are legal for play. It's safe to assume that anything PFS legal is legal as well, but you don't have to confine yourself to that - At most, if you decide to use a strange or outlandish or lesser-well known entry from some book, you might want to think up a replacement feat/thing in case it gets shot down. (For example, you could make a reincarnated druid and decide to revert to the ordinary druid if it gets shot down). (it's quite safe to assume all monster races are illegal). (You can also use the pfsrd as a reference, so don't limit this to books you actually own)
6. You have no idea of the genre, and as mentioned, of the group's size or composition, so you might want to invest a bit in survivability (both in terms of self-sufficiency and in terms of being able to survive non-combat encounters)
7. You weren't told the level, so assume lvl 1. You don't know if you're ever going to level up, so you should be kinda efficient from lvl 1 forward - on the flip side, there's a chance that you get told to level the char up to X immediatly before the game begins. (in short, you should think a bit forward about the build, but not build the character around "it'll work at lvl 5 and forward").
8. Of course, you know nothing, so you might, or might not want to rely on the DM being nice and ruling things in your favor.
9. And as a final rule, you are free to ignore any rule written above (including this one).
So, go ahead and post what kind of a character you would roll up.
EDIT: Just to clarify, this is completely hypothetical question and I'm not making a char along these guideliness, rather, I want to see what kind of character -you- would roll. In effect: "If you had to roll a character and knew nothing about what you'll be rolling it for, what would you do?" ^_^
I'd stat out a 20pb Fighter and I would dump the heck out of CHA and gimp INT in the process. I'd be going for an AC-machine. That's what I would do.
/and yes, I would totally take a trait that gave me Diplomacy as a Class skill.
You're assuming all of these rules when you should really just ask this new GM to be more specific. Does he think you're a mind reader? But maybe the lack of rules is just a test to see how you create characters.
Personally, I'd choose an Archaeologist. I think they're the perfect generic adventuring class. They are good with skills, traps, evading attacks, and have some magic to use when in a pinch. If you aren't sure what to expect, then they can do a little bit of everything. You'd just have to focus on a fighting style. Maybe a rapier for crits? That depends on personal preference.
I'd ask the GM for more information.
I wouldn't.....not without asking what sort of character he's looking for.
Also....test me? Aren't you looking to join a new group of friends rather than apply for a job? I'd be having second thoughts myself.
Cheers
Mark
Maybe part of the test is to see what you consider the "best" character.
Maybe if you make a character around what you think makes it the best, he can judge your style by what you make.
You make a dump heavy, then he can expect that from you.
You make a level 5, then he knows that's what you consider the sweet spot.
You make one that is group/self reliant, he gets an idea of how you would act.
Maybe he just wants to see, through your eyes, what you consider to be the "best" aspects/part of the game by what you would be bringing to his table.
...Then again, you could text back your questions of clarification (level, solo, resources allowed, etc...), and know what it is he asking from you.
You're assuming all of these rules when you should really just ask this new GM to be more specific. Does he think you're a mind reader? But maybe the lack of rules is just a test to see how you create characters.
Personally, I'd choose an Archaeologist. I think they're the perfect generic adventuring class. They are good with skills, traps, evading attacks, and have some magic to use when in a pinch. If you aren't sure what to expect, then they can do a little bit of everything. You'd just have to focus on a fighting style. Maybe a rapier for crits? That depends on personal preference.
+1, I know there's the favorite button but was about to post the same thing. Generic Bard would also work as you can dip Rogue later if you start hitting lots of magical traps in solo play.
If this is a group you are now a force multiplier and bring up the slack in any deficient areas. Even if there is another Bard you are not a waist as you can get different effects going or just have more Rounds in the day for the group.
I think the guidelines are so loose it can't be anything but a test of what kind of player you are, what kind of characters you like and so forth. (It's possible he's a 'there's only one way to play' kind of guy - who therefore thinks the best character is well defined, but I'd be skeptical).
As such I'd go for the kind of character I'd like to play. At the moment that's a separatist cleric of Irori whose main interest is in empowering the poor and downtrodden of society.
Hu-mon Fighter 1
|
|
|
V
13 STR: 17+2 19 (+4)
5 DEX: 14 (+2)
5 CON: 14 (+2)
-1 INT: 9 (-1)
2 WIS: 12 (+1)
-4 CHA: 7 (-2)
I love a CHA dump in the morning!
several classes come to my mind: Magus, Bard, Inquisitor, Alchemist, ranger, oracle and druid. They all have spellcasting, decent defense and offense and are pretty good at skill checks. They can easily help a group, and they can also do some solo adventuring. I would probably build it for a solo adventure. You can always make a flexible character fit into a group. I would not dump any stat.
Human Paladin.
STR 14 (+2 racial)
DEX 12
CON 13
INT 10
WIS 10
CHA 16
Skills: Ride, Diplomacy, Sense Motive
Feats: Power Attack, Mounted Combat
Favored Class Bonus: HP
Future Progression: Work to Inheritor's Crusader Prestige Class, and 5th level, Bonded Mount
I wouldn't.....not without asking what sort of character he's looking for.
Also....test me? Aren't you looking to join a new group of friends rather than apply for a job? I'd be having second thoughts myself.
This! Oh man, so much this. Even as a hypothetical this blows up the supposed social joy of tabletop gaming. Test?! Test what? Test whether or not I'm willing to ask a few questions before I join a group? Test whether or not I know how to return a text with an inquiry? Test my ability to be the proverbial blind being lead by the blind? I wouldn't roll up a character until I had answers to at least the first 6 questions.
|
Like Tomppa said, don't get hung up on the fluff.
If some random GM dude actually did this to me, I'd tell him to get bent. "Testing" new players is the behavior of an adversarial GM in my experience, and I'd rather just stay home and play Skyrim if Mr. Texty is my only option for gaming. So Tomppa chose to present the topic in a manner many players find confrontational or vague, who cares? The gist of the post is to poop out a random character you'd play if you could throw caution to the wind. Have fun with it.
|
Heh, nice so far. Don't get tangled into the fluff in the beginning, rather, tell me (and the rest of us) what kind of a character you'd roll ^.^
The problem is, as written, I wouldn't bite at all. I'm not joining a game or group, sight unseen, without more information. What Mark Norfolk posted, definitely goes for me as well.
Put additionally, IMO-- there is no one best character I could make-- it really depends on the game, the group, campaign, play-styles and everything else.
Like Tomppa said, don't get hung up on the fluff.
If some random GM dude actually did this to me, I'd tell him to get bent. "Testing" new players is the behavior of an adversarial GM in my experience
I have to agree with you. If it were me and I wanted to join the group, I'd ask the DM if he couldn't maybe arrainge some kind of meet and greet. The "test" thing is just kinda crappy.
|
|
Heh, nice so far. Don't get tangled into the fluff in the beginning, rather, tell me (and the rest of us) what kind of a character you'd roll ^.^The problem is, as written, I wouldn't bite at all. I'm not joining a game or group, sight unseen, without more information. What Mark Norfolk posted, definitely goes for me as well.
Put additionally, IMO-- there is no one best character I could make-- it really depends on the game, the group, campaign, play-styles and everything else.
So, let me rephrase the original question:
The group you play with, right now, cancel the next session since most of the people are sick or out of town. DM still wants to throw something together, and asks you to roll up a lvl 1 character. He doesn't know who'll come yet, nor what he'll be throwing at you, and neither do you.
(I specifically wanted to avoid this set up to negate any presumptions you might have about allowed sources and group preferences, etc).
Or, to make it even more simple:
Roll up a lvl 1 character, without knowing what you'll face.
(which I wanted to avoid because it's -too- open in a way, and I wanted to present points you might want to considerate).
Also, it's not a question about wether or not you'd play or not, it's a question of what you'd roll up IF you did play.
The reason behind the topic is that I'm curious about what people would roll up (obviously). Would you go for a solid team player? A flexible survivalist? Would you have a solid build ready, or would you present just a class/race combo?
I see what you went for, Tomppa, and I'm sad that more people are ignoring what you really asked for them.
As for my character, I would like it to be the "glue" in the party - everyone's second-best friend. Though there are others in the party each person would probably get closer to than me (since the Paladin is a little odd, even among good parties), I expect to be considered trustworthy and reliable, but not often the first choice when personal role-playing comes to the fore.
In gameplay mechanics, the valuable combination of healing support (aided with the Inheritor Crusader ability at 7th level, 2nd in that class), and valuable combat ability (full BAB, high Strength, mounted and dismounted capabilities), will create a member who can contribute in several ways while not overshadowing anybody.
|
|
So, let me rephrase the original question:The group you play with, right now, cancel the next session since most of the people are sick or out of town. DM still wants to throw something together, and asks you to roll up a lvl 1 character. He doesn't know who'll come yet, nor what he'll be throwing at you, and neither do you.
(I specifically wanted to avoid this set up to negate any presumptions you might have about allowed sources and group preferences, etc).
Or, to make it even more simple:
Roll up a lvl 1 character, without knowing what you'll face.(which I wanted to avoid because it's -too- open in a way, and I wanted to present points you might want to considerate).
Also, it's not a question about wether or not you'd play or not, it's a question of what you'd roll up IF you did play.
The reason behind the topic is that I'm curious about what people would roll up (obviously). Would you go for a solid team player? A flexible survivalist? Would you have a solid build ready, or would you present just a class/race combo?
This is, I know, still not what you're really looking for-- but some of us (or, just one of us, if I'm a minority of one again)-- have to make the decision that I actually want to play with a particular group first, then get some impression of what the adventure is going to be, what the world is, background and all that... and then I start thinking about characters.
Unfortunately, at this stage o' life and gaming.... I just don't do random characters for unknown situations, unless, say-- I was playing paranoia or something. If it's that open-ended a "1 shot" setup, my response is likely going to be to tell the GM "make a few pre-gens, and I'll do some fine tuning on mine after the other players are selected, but before the game starts". Which, actually, is an answer in and of itself to "What kind of character..." questions.
Another side point: my current group-- if we're missing too many players to proceed with the regular game, we have several back-up plans more or less in place... two of which are: spend a relaxing afternoon on card-and/or-dice games ("Red Dragon Inn" has been a recent favorite), or just kick back and spend an evening chatting and discussing campaign ideas (for when the current adventure/campaign eventually winds to a close)-- occasionally we "play-test" a one-shot idea someone has, that's usually been brought up as a back-up for the next time we don't have a full gaming quorum, well before the day that happens.
One of the biggest problems for me is, that I do not start with numbers, solid builds, game mechanics, etc. Haven't done that in any game, any system, for a long time. I start with a concept, an idea, come up with a character I'd enjoy playing... from the standpoint of personality, background, attitudes, ideas, generally all the details you'd want for a character in a fantasy story... and then I figure out the mechanics to make that character work in game terms (and sometimes do some fine-tuning/minor alterations to concept so that the character will be more effective mechanically and mesh better with the game system-- because raw concepts do not necessarily take into account that things in the game world do not work in pure narrative fashion-- such modification is never done, by me anyway, in such a way that it radically alters the original concept). To some extent, I have been inspired by the fluff text from some of the game books (including class/race fluff text and story points)-- but I don't get inspiration from "wow, nifty mechanics/that'd be a powerful build!" anymore.
IMO-- that approach to the game doesn't work with such a test as you propose (and I'm here posting anyway-- not to be a troll, but rather to point out that that sort of information-gap really interferes with the character creation process for me-- and possibly for others out there who approach things the same way I do).
Super-survivor who can handle things without much help; or team-player? To answer that question-- I'd really want to know how many team-mates I'm going to have. And I really hate making characters who turn out to be "fish out of water" in the situation/adventure the GM is presenting. I guess the thing I would do, if I had to do a total sight-unseen creation, is make several characters, and then inform the GM that the character I'm going to play in his/her game, is the one who'd most likely say "yes" to the pitch at the beginning of the adventure (as opposed to running the other f***ing way, the moment the situation's presented and shown to really not be a good fit).
I'd roll with whatever the heck kind of character I'd been jonesin' to play recently. This changes on a monthly basis or so.
-At this very moment, I would like to play an Inquisitor (just so happens those are pretty handy).
-I'd also love to play a Dwarven Witch with a Charisma of 6 (not for the min-max dump, but for the fun of playing a creepy, gross, backwoods weirdo of a dwarven witch).
-On the other hand, a big ol' power fighter or barb goes a long way toward making sure the party can actually kill things (I've seen parties sometimes all roll up individually and get to the table with a group that just can't do any amount of damage reliably and quickly when needed).
|
|
Not knowing who I was playing with I would want the three S' covered:
-self-healing
-social skills
-survivable
At this moment I'll say an Oracle of Battle with equal parts charisma and strength, and wearing heavy armour if I can afford it. Human with Lightning Reflexes to really have my bases covered.
Maybe the best character would include a one page write up with history, personality, and/or appearance.
|
Well, As many have stated already, as presented, not my cup of tea, and I'd take my ball (teaball?) and go home.
Now, in the spirit of the question, rather than the letter, I personally would roll a six die and have it be 1-2: half-orc barbie, 3-4: Halfling rogue, 5-6: Dwarven Fighter. I like the classics, but I'd find some way during play to given each one a personality that really goes against the stereotype.
If actually given the ability to mine the GM for information and I usually try to fill a niche that isn't well covered, and if everything in that regard is taken and the group is well fleshed out already and no gaps need be filled, I'd likely try my hand at a Monk, since I haven't really had a chance to play one in PF yet.
Make a vanilla character, don't go too fancy with this one, show you are familiar and competent within the mechanics. My vote goes for bard, adapt to any situation even if you aren't the best at any given task. Plus buffs, everyone loves them some buffs preferably in the form of a rousing violin solo*.
*Not all adventurers prefer the violin
I see what you went for, Tomppa, and I'm sad that more people are ignoring what you really asked for them.
Hey, my CHA-dumped Tank is nothing but all about the party. With Diplomacy as a Class skill he can even roll face-man lite if it's called for. As the party Tank, he'll keep the baddies off the artillery. Boranon, that's his name, believes that it is his duty to Pharasma to keep her stocked full of fresh souls. He's kinda like Sgt. Hartman that way.
/ see - even with a CHA dump, my Fighter has depth. :P
Make something you would enjoy playing, that isn't a 1 trick pony.
Write a 1-2 paragraph backstory with some backleads he could use (or you could explore in a larger backstory) and some things looking forward (for you or him to flesh out as things go along).
Include ideas for your character leveling up going forward.
(such as saying you may go in X direction with the character or maybe Y depending on whats going on in game and what the group needs).
Focus on making a solid.. whatever it is you choose.. with good ideas to branch off in directions that you also think are fun.
For instance:
A cleric is a solid choice. You can completely change the feel of it by simply changing dieties without really changing your feat/spell/skill selection that much.
A rogue is also a good choice, though you'll have to decide up front whether you are going dex or str based. Kind of hard to change later.
Switch Hitting ranger is good. Yuo can go either direction after level 1, depending on the needs of the party while having early-ish access to wands of CLW (if the group needs them) and other things.
Things not to do:
Don't give him a character designed with 1 schtick and only 1 schtick. Pyro-mancer sounds kewl until you find out the campaign is primarily against fire resistant/immune monsters. (same goes for enchantments).
Don't write 1 sentence of backstory. Give enough to give him ideas and to give you room to grow.
Don't write 2 pages of backstory. Wall of backstory is bad. This isn't a novel for him to read. If he wwants more than 1-2 paragraphs let him ask. Then let yourself loose, if you are so inclined :)
Just some thoughts.
Have fun in the new game though :)
-S
it's a trap, good players ask some of these questions to the GM, and if you just show up with what you think is a good match, he'll say that the spot was filled in the last minute.
Also "best character" seems weird, I would just pick something average that I like and is versatile. An alchemist perhaps, got a little bit of healing, can jump in in melee, and can deal nice damage while he could later even be a mediocre controller.
I would need more info. If it was a PFS game I would have more than one character made, and pick the best one.
I do understand what the OP is asking, but the wording is so vague that without answers I would just not play. Not playing is less stressful than me being annoyed.
I'd prolly roll a combat oracle, half-orc, similar to this one...
Self-sufficient, and decent in combat...heavy armor, heavy flail, cures...
Typically, I would need more info. Typically I approach character creation in three ways. Four, technically, but I group a few of them together due to similarity.
1a.) I do it by character concept first. Start off with a back story, design a personality, and go from there. Pick class/features that compliment/fit the character I've designed.
1b.) I find a class feature, or something in the rules, that spawns a character concept. For example, the Fleet feat spawned the idea of the young-templated halfling hungry ghost monk of the sacred mountain (hungry ghost monk/monk of the sacred mountain).
An orphan, abandoned in the wild to become a wild child, she was adopted by an exiled Sacred Mountain monk, whom delved into the forbidden teachings of the Hungry Ghost sect. During her time as an oprhan, she learned the value of speed, namely getting away from food merchants and wild beasts, and such life lessons stayed with her well into her monk training. After her master was assassinated, she continued her training, with a focus on speed.
The general thought process was, unless something happens in-story to change her mind, she would take 'running' based feats above all else. Initially, the idea was to pick up 10 applications of Fleet (+50 movement). Her first 2 levels are Barbarian levels, to represent her wilderness, wild-child upbringing. In all, it would result in movements of 20 (halfling) + 10 (2 barbarian levels) + 5 (swift foot rage power) + 60 (18 monk levels) + 50 (10 applications of Fleet) = 145ft per move action (cant tell if young template reduces speed). Max speed achieved, lol. After looking over the feat list at a later point in time, I decided to drop 2 Fleet and pick up Run and Endurance. Totally suboptimal, but a story driven lass inspired by a single feat.
2.) The other way I build is mechanically. Namely "what do I feel like trying to mix and match today?". I will typically find a few features, feats, what not I'd like to try and blend, and theorycraft a build from 1 to whenever it works. Usually I wind up with wacky stuff, just because I like to build silly things (see my halfling monk above).
3.) The last way I build is organically. Make something basic and just go level by level...
Now, in the spirit of the question, I'd probably build organically. Pick something simple. Probably a high-int Lore Warden fighter with a bunch of skills. Use Combat Maneuvers to control the battlefield.
Sorry if I misunderstood....but if the fluff was meant to be ignored why was it there?
Anyway I'd probably go my good old fallback: the cleric. A party helper. Dwarven, CG, probably with Selective Channelling. Personality to be rounded out during play.
Cheers
Mark
If I had to make a character for a random game, I'd probably make a cleric, although last time I was in a similar situation I made a witch with the Healing hex.
If some dude I barely know said he wanted to "test me" before joining his game, I probably would decline to play in his campaign.
A census taker tried to test me once.
Definately a bard arcane duelist. If i dont know what I need to be able to do, a bard is a great choice. And the arcane duelist adds a little oompth. Thgough I might consider the new dervish bard if I though I could use the dervish dance feat. I might go there with both.
I would come up with a basic character background, maybe a paragraph, and expect to develop it as we play in terms of personality and motivation, depending on the adventure I am presented with.
Inquisitor, with bow and animal domain (companion).
I'd tell him to piss off.