D&D classes question [Archive]

Azin

07-26-2003, 02:39 PM

The paladin is the paragon of all that is good and right. The typical "knight in shining armor," he strives always to help the downtrodden, protect the weak, and fight evil wherever it may arise.
Bound by a strict code of honor and duty, the life of a palidin is a hard one to live. Often what is right and what is law conflicts, and sometimes the law itself is the evil, or the ruler in power. A careful balance must be maintained, for a paladin who looses his honor looses his power. This is why the paladin has to be more than just a warrior, he must be a diplomat and peacemaker.
Paladins tend to be short lived, for their honor and duty often forces them into battles that cannot be won, against enemies that cannot be defeated. But their sacrifices and good deeds do not go unrewarded, for one of such pure and unwavering intent often earns the grace of a god of light and is granted the power to heal injury and desease.
Also, a paladin of sufficient experience is given a companion to aid him in his eternal struggle against evil... his mount. This animal may not always be a horse, possibly some beast of legend like a pegasus or giant eagle. But whatever it may be, the mount is smarter and stronger than any other of its kind, and grows more so the longer it travels with its master. However, the death of a mount in battle is a traumatic experience for the paladin, causing much grief and heartache. Although another mount may appear, it will not be for at least a year and a day.
A paladin who turns away from the light, away from good and law, who falls from the grace of the gods, or who fails in a task of honor, looses his special powers. A quest of atonement may be attempted to regain his status, but most fallen paladins never achieve this. Generally, the fallen continue their lives as fighters, or maybe become priests to atone for their sins, but a few become so bitter that they fall into darkness. These dark knights, the anti-paladins, the black guards; they who use powers granted by beings of darkness to oppose all that is good in the world, are the greatest foe of the true paladins.

It depends on what edition D&D your playing. In 2nd they're pretty much the most powerful warrior class. In 3rd, they're so-so.

Valiente

07-28-2003, 02:22 PM

Paladins are soooo super busted. As far as character creation goes, paladins can be hard to construct, since they need pretty good stats in every ability. Paladins of course need to have a good Strength and Con scores, but JUST as important, if not more so, is Charisma, followed by wisdom. Int and Dex can kind of take a hit with low stats, but paladins really can't afford to have a negative modifier. If your DM has you roll stats and you end up with some less than great stats, you might consider playing a cleric. [Clerics and Paly's are my two favorite classes ^_^]

Paladins -are- the extreme good guys, yes. However, that doesn't mean they're stupid. They won't throw their lives away for any old reason, or even some really good reasons. They defend the innocent and downtrodden, and uphold laws, unless the law can be proven to be vastly unjust. This is of course, because paldins MUST be LG in alignment. Again, clerics can be just about the same as a paladin, without their combat prowess of course; they trade that in for spell casting. Clerics too, have a little more room to vary in alignment, since LG is one of the most difficult alignments to play properly.

Also important in creating a paladin, is how many levels you plan to advance as a paly, and what type of paly you want to play, meaning mounted or not. Paladins get incredible abilities with their mounts. Depending on the setting, you may be able to switch freely between cleric and paly. (Example is the Forgotten Realms setting--the god Tyr lets his clerics and palys switch freely between the classes without losing the paly abilities.)

And also, keep in mind what race you want to play. Elves make decent paly's, but the hit they take in con can suck, and in my opinion is not worth the dex they get, since a great asset to a paladin is the fact they can wear heavy armor. Halflings are just small, and again, their dex mod doesn't really make up for it. Humans and aasimars(obviously) make the best paladins, and even really awesome cleric/paly mixes.

Just to let you know what you can do with the two classes, I had a character in the Forgotten Realms that was a 3/1 Cleric/Paly that had a 13/11/13/16/20/16 for stats. I also took a feat featured in Dragon Magazine that let me apply my characters wisdom modifier for my divine grace and turning checks. Couple that with the spell-casting prodigy feat, and my character was an uber bad ass.

Hope that long winded explanation helps ^_^

Fieonna

07-28-2003, 08:11 PM

Thank you all so much! I now definitly know that my character is NOT a paladin as my friend was suggesting, but my DM came over the other day to roll my character stats and discuss the character. We decided she'd be a better bard than anything. But still thank you all for your descriptions, I'm sure it will definitly help in the future. :-D

nautyvampyregod

08-15-2003, 09:40 PM

I hate to say this...but Bards are wussies. I mean, dont get me wrong, if you want a heavy roleplay character and not a real heavy battle character, Bard all the way. Other than that they arent very helpful. They tend to get in the way alot and be aloof. I like to call 'em cannon fodder.

WarhookDM

08-15-2003, 10:41 PM

I kind of agree with nauty, above, on this one. If you have a good enough charisma score to be a good bard, you would be an even better sorceror. And while sorcerors are limited in the spells they can KNOW, they can cast the ones they do know MANY times.

If you decide to go that way, I would suggest learning EITHER mage armor OR shield as a known spell, but NOT both; shield gives you more bang for the buck, while mage armor lasts significantly longer. That being said, I would go for the shield spell, then when you are high enough level, taking Persistent Spell as a feat, and casting shield first thing every morning. Either that or Extend Spell combined with mage armor. I would also suggest being an Elf, and selecting either Weapon Finesse (Rapier) or Precise Shot for your first feat. Most likely the latter.

Then I would think long and hard about either the Eldritch Knight or Arcane Archer prestige classes (likely the first; although A.A. has some potential, it is geared more toward Rangers, frankly).

For added combat ability, the Sor/Pal combo can become absolutely lethal; I have a Pal7/Sor4/Spellsword5/Eldritch Knight1 PC who is getting ugly. His base attack is +24 with his (+3) Bastard Sword. Because of his 20 Charisma and a Cloak of Resistance, his weak save is Reflex, at +18. If I had it to do over (this is my first 3rd Ed. PC, and I've been playing him for 2 1/2 years; also, Eldritch Knight only recently became available), I would most likely not have taken Spellsword at all, and would already be a 9th level caster, instead of only 6th.

nautyvampyregod

08-20-2003, 01:51 AM

I want to pit my monk against your paladin spellsword guy...I went twenty straight levels as a monk, mazed him out at 30 for monk, then took two in rogue and cleric....he effing rocks...

Fieonna

08-21-2003, 01:22 AM

Well, I personally think the Bard will suite my character the best, and yes I rolled pretty well in my stats. She's actually a really kick ass character, and I"m excited to use her. We made it so she doesn't realize she's a bard, so she's actually like nothing at the moment except someone trying to find someone else. She's not much of one to fight, unless she really has to. thanks for all your input!

Azin

08-23-2003, 12:12 PM

One-on-one, bards may not be the best in combat. But if you a traveling with a large party with a number of frontline fighters, the bard does become useful. The bardic songs may not grant a large bonus to the fighters, but it effects them all. I ran a campaign with three fighters, a paladin, a ranger, and a bard, and by the end any of the warrior-types would have died to protect the bard, who's magic had helped them squeek through numerous bad situations. Also, being a part-time DM myself, if a bard doesn't do well in a campaign, it could be more the fault of the DM then the character. A good DM will position scenarios so that all the characters have a chance to use their talents.

nautyvampyregod

08-23-2003, 02:39 PM

This is true, but if you position them correctly, the bard can do a number of things to screw it up....and if the person doesnt play the bard right, theres no point to having them....if I were the fighters...I would use him as cannon fodder...good trap finder

WarhookDM

08-28-2003, 11:58 PM

Nauty, there is no way I'm going to put a 17th level PC up against a 30+ level PC. I'm crazy, but I ain't STOOPIIID!!! :D

The bard sounds interesting, although the roleplay aspect sounds a bit challenging. How will you gain new spells if you don't know WHAT you are? Random rolls?

OneWhoWalks

09-07-2003, 01:44 AM

Bards aren't much for all out brawls, but nor are they worthless for as combatants. A bard with a high dex (which most I've encountered have), a high cha (which all worth-while bards have), several ranks in bluff (for makeing feint attacks), and weapon finesse (rapier) and be fairly impressive one on one. and with a magic rapier (especialy keen and/or wounding), it gets even better.personaly, I like bards, if only beause I have a thing for the charismatic swashbuckeling-type warrior, and Bard lends some magic to the the mix. and who doesn't like a bit of magic? ganted they lack the spell selection of a wizard, or even a sorcerer, but the get arcane healing spells, and spontanious casting, which is fancy.....

Gamior

09-08-2003, 04:39 PM

Lol I don't like people bad mouthing Bards! My 1st ever character was a Bard and I loved him to bits, he rocked! Sure he couldn't fight all that well but I got him all the way to level 11. Granted he died twice but the party loved him so much they went out of their way to bring him back lol. Also besides the whole death bits he was the longest lasting character in the entire group! So in the end he had more items than you could shake a stick at! Although he did find an evil +4 bastard sword that was evil and old him to do evil acts but so long as he didn't get low on health he could resist it. Bards rock, though this was in 2nd Ed.

nautyvampyregod

09-10-2003, 06:43 AM

second edition bards were ok.....and my first character ever was a bard as well, but he kicked massive butt, he had high everything, I rolled an average of a sixteen on everything but wisdom. He wielded a two-bladed sword, and helped out in a lot of aspects....mostly because I got placed at the head of the group to walk over all the traps...

and about the fient thing, its worthless unless you have someway of getting an extra standard action every round....cuz you cant attack as a move equivalent action and fienting in combat takes a standard action to use.....at least in the 3.5 version. Now, if you can fient in combat and then somehow get an attack of opportunity, then it works...but it was a nice thought. I tried to do that in a one on one with my rogue assassin...and the only reason he could do it was because he got an attack of opportunity right after the matter. They made the fienting in combat effectively worthless in 3.5, even if you have multiple attacks per round....

Hennet

09-22-2003, 04:36 PM

hey, i was just wondering, Do you know anyothing about making a like a werewolf or vampire class, not for your campaing. But me and my firneds saw the movie underworld, and it would make a kick ass campaign, so i was wondering if you could tell me, or send me in the right direction in order to find out what the stats and everything woulkd auctually be?

email at ssbryce@yahoo.ca

thx. i really appreciate it.

NytWolf

09-22-2003, 10:44 PM

Use the templates from the monster manual would be my suggestion....

Lord Trowa

09-24-2003, 04:08 PM

All the classes are good for certain things. Personally, I enjoy the characters I have created, mainly for roleplaying, but I do battle with them with my friends. My ranger, who has quite good stats for a human, is my main fighter, and my druid, who has the stats for her magic and stuff, is my roleplayer. I'm also creating very powerful characters, but they will be used for roleplaying only. :p

moo_poo323

09-24-2003, 06:36 PM

Personally, I feel rogues are the best. A good rogue had very good dexterity, pretty good charisma. With dex, you could pick off so many guys with that. The charisma is good to get people to join you. Pretty much have them do your fighting instead of you. While they're fighting people, you can be stealing items, such as gold, wizards items, etc. The down side is they don't have magic, but magic weapons are just as good.

Rogue Light

09-27-2003, 11:50 PM

This might seem a little off topic, but what exactly is a druid supposed to do? All that they seem like are Clerics who have a thing for nature, and the only difference that they have from nymphs is that druids can be dudes.

IceMage

09-29-2003, 01:16 PM

let me ask my brother

Thanatos5150

09-29-2003, 07:01 PM

OK, i see this thign has already been answered, so i will leave it alone
_Icmage's brother

Akiric

10-18-2003, 10:10 PM

From what I'v seen Bards are either Rogues with an extra use for charisma or just faces for groups, and as for Druids, they have wild shape...yea. I actully have a something about palys I want to asks, who thinks paladians should only be LG, it seems to me that LN would work too, but the only GM I got to agree with me ****canned the game after two sessions, because our rogue was commeting murders left and right and I wasn't inforcing the law, but the thing is, yes LN should have a problem with murder, but the people killed where murders them selves, so sorry if I didn't pull a Vash and make a stand aginst all murder.

Valiente

10-20-2003, 05:15 PM

What was the rogues alignment? And how did your paly know for sure that the victims were murderers?

I was involved in a group where I was the only LG charrie--everyone else was CN. And it wasn't easy. However, the other players did a really good job at hiding their sneaky and underhanded business from my character (the cleric/paly I mentioned before) so there wasn't too much trouble, for my character at least. The others were constantly walking on egg shells...it made for some good gaming.

Anyways, I think paladins could maybe swing NG, as well as LN, depending on what god they serve, and depending on the rest of the party. If I had been in your position, depending of course on the rogues alignment, I probably would have given the rogue a headstart before I reported him to the officials. Sounds kind of an a-hole thing to do, but that's just how paladins are, and that's why they're so hard to play. You might not want to hurt your friends feelings OOC, but you also should remember what you're playing. Paly's get their uber abilities for a reason. But that's my humble (or maybe not so humble) opinion.

If you want to play a LN character that's really close to a paladin, consider the Cavalier prestige class from S&F; it's a really great class, though you'll never get divine health or divine grace or anything like that...unless you prestige into it -from- paladin, which I think you can do. Would need to look at it again.

Akiric

10-20-2003, 10:42 PM

The rogue was NE, and I was asked to investigate the cause of all the sudden murders happeing in the city and I much as I don't won't to admit this I metagamed a little to solve the mystery, which is another reason I didn't turn him in.

The past few D&Ds I'v played have worn me out on being any form of Lawful since my normal group consist of 3 other players, one (my brother) can role-play with the best of them, so no problem there, the 2nd, will only play a TN or CN fencer, and the third's favorite is NE, but he plays other alignments if he has to. My personal fav would probably be NG, and they get upset when I play an assassins...I don't know way

Valiente

10-20-2003, 10:46 PM

Heheh..

Personally, I HATE the CN alignment. It's the BS "I'm picking this so I don't really have to RP at all" alignment. Blech.

I'm surprised your DM lets there be any evil characters in your party--lots don't, cause it can make for a mess in and out of character, but more power to ya if you can manage it.

NG is probably my fave too, with LG coming up second. I like a challenge ^_~

BTW, Akiric, I have a thread in the Fantasy forum going. You might want to check it out. It's a home-brew world I made, but it's going very well, and so far it looks like about half the players have a good understanding of D&D--at least they play like they do, LoL. Check it out, if you want. It's called "The Iron Eternity"

Ebonnaire

10-22-2003, 06:17 PM

Actually, Chaotic Good is a pretty good alignment in itself, you're still good but you don't answer to anyone, you do what you want without worrying about what the others will say to you. I don't agree about what you said about CN, Valiente, it's just as valid of an alignment. You're chaotic, so you're adaptable and you have little regard for your group's expectations. As a neutral, you can go either way, making you a very dynamic personality. I've been a chaotic neutral sorceress, so I know that you can rp just as much as anyone with that alignment type. Come to think of it...I haven't been anything BUT a sorceress since 3.5 came out...meh. Does anyone else play the mutations in their campaigns? I think they make for good entertainment, even if my last character got stabbed through the heart by an acolyte of the Church of Karameikos for having flames in my eyes. Bah, go figure. I hate fanatical clerics and their churches. Back on topic, I'm impressed by anyone who'd be LG. That's a pain in the ass and by far the hardest alignment to maintain. Cheers.

Valiente

10-22-2003, 06:23 PM

No, I understand what you mean about CN being a good alignment, Ebon. I really do.

However, most of the games I've played in that people have been CN (most, not all), those players have shown NO gaming skills at all, and they used that alignment as their excuse for it, which I why I personally don't like it at all. If someone can really pull it off, I'm first in line to say congrats, but the majority of people I've seen attempt it, haven't 'gotten' it. I feel the same was about LE--my fave evil alignment of course--because like LG, and CN, you have to think to play it correctly. I admire intelligence ^_~

And yes, CG is also a fun alignment. I agree.

Ebonnaire

10-22-2003, 07:10 PM

LE is a treat to play. The trick is to subtly corrupt the rest of your party to your intentions. I agree with what you said about CN and some people not conforming to their alignment and using it as an excuse for lack of insight during the game. I have decided not to DM anything but epic campaigns simply because I was so tired of players making rash moves and decisions that a character of their true alignment never would, and then trying to cover up by saying, 'but I'm neutral, I can do what I want!' Ugh. It takes a special type of person to DM. Namely one who won't kill all of his players. In or out of game. So I do agree with you, I only misunderstood you.

moo_poo323

10-22-2003, 07:23 PM

CG is even better. You can steal things, and yet, kill the bad guys. And assassins I have to say are THE greatest multi class. If someones not looking at you, you can backstab them. But you have to ask good questions, like 'did the person ever make eye contact with me?' and the backstabbing thing. If your in a room full of people, if there's a person not focusing on you, they could die.

Valiente

10-22-2003, 07:44 PM

Yeah...but Assassin's are also evil... hard to play in most games. Just like Blackguards, which are just so frickin' cool.. The 3.5 DMG actually has some pretty good prestige classes, which makes me happy, heh.

Ebonnaire

10-23-2003, 05:56 PM

I've played most prestige classes except maybe the duelist, which is just as well, as I have no interest. 3.5 in general is much better than 3.0. I like that the game is still evolving, getting better and more intuitive. Too bad that they changed some good stuff, like having a toad familiar give you a +2 constitution. Still, there's fun things to do...like mutations.

Valiente

10-23-2003, 06:01 PM

Heheh, yep.

And hey! The 3.5 ranger doesn't suck! Woohoo!!

Aaand, I like the fact they space some stuff out more, so people can't take one level of a class just to get the insane-o crazy abilities you could at first level..but that's just me. Some people really hate that.

Ebonnaire

10-23-2003, 06:20 PM

The ranger is actually decent, and we played an epic the other day with a 30th level ranger who could turn into the most deadly unicorn you could imagine. Of course, he tried to kill himself by charging over a cliff blindly, but that's just him being a dumbass. He's just lucky our cleric doesn't mind patching him up. My char would be terrified to get within ten feet of that horn.

I haven't yet played a ranger myself, but I guess they changed it a lot. I've been lazy and haven't memorized the book yet.

WarhookDM

10-27-2003, 02:05 AM

Paladins can be a huge challenge to play. If your DM is of the opinion that Paladin LG = Anal Retentive Lawful Stupid, they are impossible to play, and retain Paladin status. Sadly, most DM's seem to fall in this category, which is why Paladins aren't real popular with most gamers.

In my campaign, I have a Paladin/Sorcerer character who is pretty cool. I did lose my paladin abilities twice (once thru a nasty trap; the other time thru total stupidity on my part), but was able to atone and regain the abiliies. That character is one nasty customer. And I was also able to open the eyes of the other players regarding the difference between Lawful Stupid, and a well played Paladin with a reasonable DM. The general reaction when he went to a house of ill-repute, and rented one of the ladies was classic. LOL. He even gets drunk (well, OK, with his Fort save, tipsy) once in a while, too. That usually raises a few eyebrows. But he is also building a large temple to his god, rescues children, slays BBEGs, and such. Much fun.

Having said this, I think my next PC will either be a druid (I've never run one), or some kind of psionic class (as DM, I've come up with some really NASTY psions/psy-warriors for the party to fight; I seem to have a talent for it).

I don't really favor any particular class, but prefer to give most of my characters some interesting quirks or focuses that never fail to make them interesting to be around. Like the fighter/thief (1st Ed.) who fell in love with throwing knives. . .before I retired him, he was up to around 25 knives on his person, only one of which was visible. His comrades strip searched him once (he was unconscious), and STILL missed one. . .LOL.

Ebonnaire

10-28-2003, 07:23 PM

How can you be a Paladin and a sorcerer? Sorcerers are feared and 'evil'. You must not tell anybody in game what you are. In my campaign all sorcerers have mutations too, so that it's too obvious...like Lotana, who has to wear gloves at all times because her hands are bewitched and covered in runes from her knuckles to her wrists. But the bonus is that she gets the ability to have 3 magic missiles a day charge from her fingertips. Nice ablility when you first start out. I was a level one and able to do 7 magic missiles in combat. Pretty nice.

Paladins...what can I say about them? They smite things. 'Nuff said. In that, they redeem themselves. Because honestly...ever wonder WHY DM's don't like them and think they're Anal Retentive Lawful Stupid? Because the people who play them usually make them that way.

Psionics are forbidden by myself and the current DM. We had a player who knew all of the rules
and kept manipulating everyone and everything in
the game with his powers. It pissed everyone off so much that we all purposely got our characters
killed or put in jail, then invented a killswitch with
the DM so that the guys characer would die. It was a relief, to say the least.

They missed one? I'm almost afraid to ask where that knife was...

WarhookDM

10-28-2003, 08:24 PM

Yeah. They missed one. Even I was shocked when the DM read to them the count and locations. When I compared it to my sheet, he and they had missed one. Unfortunately, I cannot remember WHERE it was . . . :D Under 3rd Ed., Sorcerers are not automatically evil, simply odd. And the power combination can be rather frightening. His WEAK save is reflex, at +18. Of course, the 24 Cha helps (20 natural, and Torc of Cha +4). That gives him an across the board +7 to his saves. His only weakness, at this point, is his caster level, in comparison to the other casters in the group. Of course, the levels of Spellsword don't help that either (Oh how I wish Eldritch Knight had been released sooner. . .), but they did get his Spell fail rate down to something acceptable.

Valiente

10-29-2003, 12:02 AM

About you Paly/Sorceror...how exactly did you pull that off? Guessing you took your levels in Sorc. first, then went straight Paladin--since you can't do it the other way and still retain the powers. Maybe in the FR setting there's a deity that let's you switch between the two, but usually that only works for clerics. Eh, I dunno. Still seems odd to me.

Ebonnaire

10-30-2003, 07:11 PM

Yeah, I've never heard of it, really. Though it's not impossible. Paladin Sorcerer. Meh.

At least in our campaign, they're evil. We're 3.5, not 3.0, but they ARE feared. Seen as evil, not necessarily so. My sorc is actually chaotic good. It's my favorite alignment because it relates so closely to how I am out of game. It's a breeze to play. Good fun too, I piss them all off by going off by myself without telling them, doing what I want without checking in, but they love me when I save their asses from giant polar bears with scales.

WarhookDM

10-30-2003, 09:33 PM

He started as a Paladin, and kept that until 8th Level. At Ninth level, since the group had only one other arcane caster, and he was also a split class, my Paladin began advancing as a sorceror. Note: if you advance in any other class, you do NOT lose the paladin abilities. You simply may not ever advance as a Paladin again. You only lose the Paladin Abilities if you cease to be Lawful Good. Kind of the same restrictions as being a monk, if significantly more specific. Unfortunately, after he had gained 2 or 3 levels of sorceror, he died, and lost a level of Paladin when the group had a Raise Dead performed. This is why he is now a 7th level Paladin. Currently, he is a Pal7 / Sor4 / Spellsword5 / EldKnight1. He will end up gaining 1 more level of spellsword, then advance solely as an Eldritch Knight. His caster Level is currently level 6. If he survives to level 20, he will be casting at level 9 at that point; and will reach 18th level caster at level 28 or 29 (if I keep playing him that long; this is only the second PC I've had that didn't retire between level 5 and 10, and the other one became a semi-retired NPC at around twelfth level).

Valiente

10-31-2003, 12:24 AM

Ahh, that's right. Thought you lost the abilities.*shrug* Heh, I hardly multi-class, or make it to a level where prestige classes open up. Most of the games I've been in fizzle out 'round 4th level or so. Sigh...

WolfDrake4000

11-09-2003, 10:35 PM

The Paladin is a verry noble class that strives to fight for thier god, and upholde thier deities good name. (Usualy Heironeous, Pelor, or St. Cuthbert.) You must be lawfull good, but you might go evil and later become a Black Gaurd, a paladin, but evil.

moo_poo323

11-13-2003, 04:37 PM

Me and my friends created a prestige class for rogues; the infilterater. GIves you pluses to ranged, but I forgot how much :( I prefer to create fighter prestige classes. PM me if you want to know one of mine

Valiente

11-14-2003, 08:23 PM

Indeed...black guards are bitchin'...just usually not for PC play, heh.

Yayo

12-14-2003, 03:32 PM

i do not like paladins, i would prefer an assassin. but thats me.

Valiente

12-14-2003, 05:31 PM

Awww, come on...Paly's are awesome. ^.^

Sometimes playing the ultimate good guy can be a lot of fun.

Yayo

01-01-2004, 04:18 PM

i HATE paladins.good guys suck. thats just what i think, i like the whole if you don't give me your money and let me kill you then i will kill you then take you money type person. but there are times where my heart softens up and i do something nice. i am always cn so i do what i want.

moo_poo323

01-11-2004, 12:45 PM

Chaotic can live. Chaotic evil can live. Neutral can live. Chaotic good can live. Lawful evil canl live. Lawful good must die. They're always so perfect! Plus, you can't threaten people. Can't fight anyone good. Have to obey the laws. Chaotic Good is the best alignment. Actually, neutral is. DON'T TELL ANYONE I SAID THAT!

caliga

04-28-2004, 12:05 AM

heh i was searching on the web for different things and this thread popped up and i wanted to add my thoughts to the paladin.

LG isnt a bad thing, like others mentioned usually the problem is that players and/or DMs have the image of the anal good guy. I played a paladin who was more of a down to earth character, and if he passed a farm with an old man pulled his own plow he would go over to help. My idea of the paladin has always been more like the Knights of Solamnia if you've read the dragonlance novels, before the cataclysm if you've read that many, before they became all political.

Yayo

04-28-2004, 02:20 PM

i am starting to like more less evil characters, granted i do have one, but i still HATE palys, i like the rouge, i can play a halfling rogue great, but i am starting to like CG wild elf barbarians a lot. but i still don't like palys, but i do have to give my all my props to Valiente because i think the paly would be one of the HARDEST classes to play, still don't like 'em.

Adash the Rogue

05-03-2004, 07:52 PM

Personally... you shouldn't badmouth certain Bards... have you played NWN? If you have think about umm... what's her name? SHE ROX!!!!! :rotflmao: :rofl:

MediocreSurgeon

06-16-2004, 09:26 PM

Nuka

07-18-2004, 09:34 AM

Well I think Pallys arnt bound to the same alignment anymore now that UnEarthed Arcana came out. Now they can be good,bad, chaotic and i like how they kept away from the nuetruals. I think pallys were ment to be used by people wanting to play extreme alingnments, but i always liked doing those. They even added a prestigeus pally just in case you want to take a couple of levels in cleric first.

hamster

07-19-2004, 01:00 PM

Seems like most people here seem to favor fighters or rogues (fighters meaning phys. fighting types...pallys, rangers, monks, etc...)where are the good old wizards? the niastiness personified sorcerers?

also on a similar note...why does it seem everyone dislikes or at least distrusts psionics? is it an issue of game balance? not wanting to get another book? so far only warhook has mentioned positive reactions to psi-char's (yay warhook!).

my FAV character class would most likely be wizard...the ability to MAKE magical items is just way too cool to pass up, for me...close behind wiz would probably be psion...they're very similar, and still cool. its nice being able to use psionic rollerblades (skate power), especially when fleeing for your life

vilerwormchild

07-19-2004, 02:19 PM

Mordrid

07-19-2004, 03:18 PM

I have always had a soft spot for the bard. They are the least used but when used properly, can be great members of a party. Bard music is a great way to add that extra little lift to a party. Bardic knowledge is also a powerful tool

Yayo

07-19-2004, 09:02 PM

I just recently started a bard, and I am enjoing it. I use to think it would suck, okay they just play music, but thats not all they do. If we make up songs, and go to a bar, our dm gives us a certian amount of experince based on the song and our preform check, its not a lot, but better than nothing, plus your charcter can get some money as well!!! But I think the rouge is the most important, as well as the ranger.

WarhookDM

07-20-2004, 07:28 PM

Not me bub I love psionics, the happiest day of my gaming life was when my DM let me play a neutral evil Githyanki Psychic Warrior in his new extra planar adventure. Yep he's ambitious and not too bright, but hey it's all about the insane butchering of living(and non-living) things, at least with players like the ones in the group I play with.

Yup, not bright at all. Also, either you plan on retiring that PC before reaching high levels, or you missed the built in limit on Githyanki: the queen of the Githyanki is some sort of demi-god, and she kills EVERY GITHYANKI that reaches 17th level, and feeds on its soul. How exactly were you going to get around that? Just curious.

I like psychic warriors and psions a lot. But I dislike playing monstrous races as PC's, unless it came about as a result of reincarnation or a powerful curse (polymorph other is REALLY nasty!).

hamster

07-20-2004, 08:25 PM

i just had a nasty thought...if a psion made his will save to retain his mind and abilities after baleful polymorph into say, a toad, he would be incredibly powerful....as i recall, the effect makes you into the shape of the new thing, but you retain your mental stats, HD, feats, and so on, as long as the new form would allow you to do so...you take on the physical stats of the form, however...i think...

so now you've got this uber-powerful amphibian doing all kinds of crazy psi-stuff, until and unless he can adventure enough to regain his old form again...thats crazy!

Yayo

07-20-2004, 10:57 PM

That would be pretty crazy! A little toad running around doing all that stuff, I would have to say I couldn't decide if I would run from it, or if I would stay and look at it.

vilerwormchild

07-21-2004, 02:11 AM

How exactly were you going to get around that? Just curious.

Like I said the Dm is not too bright, not that he's a bad DM, he's just easily suckered into doing what his friends say, my best bet is to turn renegade at some future level (not now the other Githyanki will skin me alive) and stop worshiping the Lich Queen,, when I will change my alignment to Chaotic Evil. Hopefully I can convince the DM that the Lich Queen never leaves the Astral plane and there you have it, my soul is safe and I get to keep my silver sword (if I ever get\win one), and with all the assasins the Lich Queen will send after me, imagine the experience and booty for the party. Otherwise before I'll get eaten I will give my silver sword to one of my comrades and create a new 16th level character from scratch, as far as I know nobody will come after a silver sword with no owner.

But hey I'm still at level 7, so I'll think of something by then.

Yayo

07-21-2004, 06:28 PM

You shouldn't be able to convince your DM to do anything. That takes the whole fun out of everything. I have a DM in my group that does that ****, so I simply don't play in his campaingns, I play for the challange, not the power. Thats why sometimes I let the DM pick out my charcter, or make some crazy one, like a half-orc sorcerror, its more fun. But you shouldn't be able to get your DM to do that ****. Your DM shoulden't do that, and your group shouldn't do that to your DM. You could **** up a great campaign idea doing that. Not tring to bitch at you or anything, good luck with your charcter anyway.

vilerwormchild

07-22-2004, 05:27 AM

I see no harm in begging/convincing one of my best friends to allow me to play one of my favourite monsters or to not send a vicious monster after my ass. Oh and for a little comic relief here's the party.

The leader: Level 7 male Tiefling fighter 4 \wizard 3 CN
Level 6 female Drow Cleric LE
Level 8 male Elf Druid CG
Level 7 male Githyanki Psychic warrior NE (Me)
5 Hd D12 Pseudo Dragon (now this guy's weird, he wanted to play his dead paladin's faightful pseudo dragon, which according to him is carrying the soul of the late defender of Justice) NG

I love it when a party is balanced between good and evil, Law and Chaos and it's hilarious to see opposite alignments roleplay their hatred for each other.

Yayo

07-22-2004, 06:49 PM

Okay, mabey you should ask someone I know to DM for you because, no offense but that campaign is ****ing retarded. You shouldn't be able to convince your DM not to send someone after you because you or your other players have done some stupid ****, if I was the DM, well um... you would all die because of lack of experince points 'cause I would deduct them for stupid ****, and trying to convince me to change the story line, and I don't think I am alone on this one either. Have a merry day!!!

vilerwormchild

07-23-2004, 07:55 AM

Yep it's called playercide and what's so retarded, it's actually a very interesting storyline, we're all trying to close a rift which has recently opened to the outer planes and kill whoever opened it and as far as I know you can't deduct experience because the player already earned them except for spells and items ofcourse.

Yayo

07-23-2004, 11:43 AM

It dosen't say you can't do it. Ask Valiente on that on, she is the one that told me I should do it when I am DMing and the PC's start doing stupid ****. But the story line does sound good, I'm not really into sci-fi though, I got the Psyonics book, but I'm not into it. But yeah, you can deduct xp, well it don't say you can't at least.

Denod Vamdo

08-02-2004, 11:20 AM

My question is that my friend has a book and it says that there is a 1st lvl Druid spell called 'Magic Stone' and in my book it says that its a lvl 1 Cleric spell.

Hariman

08-02-2004, 12:10 PM

My question is that my friend has a book and it says that there is a 1st lvl Druid spell called 'Magic Stone' and in my book it says that its a lvl 1 Cleric spell.

Magic Stone is both. The listing in the Player's Handbook has it as a 1st level spell for both Cleric's and Druid's. But It's only useful if you are a throwing type character or a terminal Sling user, or desire extra damage in a pinch.

Now for the conversation, Experience deduction is up to the DM. I only use it on the current session's exp. for EXTREMELY stupid decisions (Five rounds of not realizing that "Sound" is not on a list of immunities given by an enemy party, from a veteral player of 13 YEARS.) I really haven't had to use it much, though.

How you use Exp deduction is up to you. Me personally, I think there are better ways of punishing PCs and their players. Destroy an item or two, split up the party, put them at the mercy of something that demands that one of them die for the others to leave.

As for keeping a Githyanki alive past level 17, ya got me! Kill the *****? Run like a little coward from his fate? Stop metagaming and let him die?

As for me, I've got to level up a dead Ninja to make him the new villain of the campaign, he was the only enemy I've made so far that was a truly evil bastard. (He killed his own party members! or at least tried.)

Hariman

PS, a thought just occured to me. Maybe some people enjoy PLAYING THE CHARACTER over cajoling the DM into protecting the character. Some people actually let their PCs face the consequenses of their actions, instead of metagaming their way out of it. TTfN

WarhookDM

08-02-2004, 12:24 PM

Don't level up the dead ninja. . .make him a ghost! That will make him truly MEAN!! And it might put him at a CR that will be truly frightening for the party, without giving him much in the way of gear for the PC's to add to their inventory. . . *evil grin*

Hariman

08-02-2004, 06:59 PM

But there is a good reason for him coming back. The party already watched him die messily after being dropped off of a cliff by a copper dragon. (Fall. . . . SPLAT!!! THAT kinda messy.)

And the current villain hasn't shown his face yet, he's only sent underlings that have a specific "Face with slash marks on it" symbol. (Hello plot twist!!)

Besides, I'm DMing for one guy (playing a 4 person party) who has 13 years of D&D under his belt, who really isn't surprised by what I have thrown at him. The worst thing that he fought with one of his PCs was a group of "Green Mech Piloting Fungus Bunnies" (Not Fungus loving bunnies, bunnies made of green fungus.)

Besides, this Ninja Killed his Monk teammate and tried to kill the cleric and the "Rogue" of the party when everything went bad. This guy is just too evil to make into a ghost, but he is from BESM, not D&D, so ghostly traits aren't out of the question. I might even give him the "Deathtouched" template out of an issue of "Dragon" magazine.

But I do appreciate the advice, I'll keep the Ghost Idea in mind for other enemies. Hmm, An Evil Badass Back from the Grave Ninja Leading ghosts and worse, sounds MEAN, maybe a pet dragon in there too, just for kicks!

Now if I could only remember some more of the enemies that the party killed.

TTfN, and Thanks,
Hariman

PS. Boobytrapped equipment. But you raise a good point about no equipment left. Even though most of the best equipment is bought by the party, +5 throwing knives are dangerous to leave lying around. I'll keep items in mind for battles "Never give an Enemy anything that you don't want the PCs to have".