Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

User avatar
Quarg
.
Posts: 5400

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Quarg » Mon Oct 27, 2014 9:19 am

Why is she a Barbarian? I'm just trying to get a sense of the character idea and then maybe look at other possible alternative classes from there...
Really...why are you reading this?

Eileen Ap'Fyretorr

User avatar
Aegis J Hyena
Game Master
Posts: 4295

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Aegis J Hyena » Mon Oct 27, 2014 9:39 am

If you've played a game called Chrono Trigger, she's essentially an Ayla clone.

Either way, I'm probably sticking with Barbarian.
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Capricornian/

It's Always Something. No, don't give me that look. It's Always Something.

User avatar
willpell
Banned
Posts: 2085
Contact:

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by willpell » Mon Oct 27, 2014 10:48 am

Aegis J Hyena wrote:If not a flat out Barbarian, then she'd be a primitive Warblade but I don't know a thing about prestige/modified classes.
Warblade is a base class. If you don't know Tome of Battle then it'd be tricky to build it...maybe have you start out as Barbarian but slowly introduce some Warblade possibilities if you're interested.
I DESPISE Psionics, so nothing there.
Funnily enough I used to feel the same way. The fluff was a complete turn-off, but for the sake of a couple players I swallowed my objections and got into it, and ended up deciding that I LOVED the mechanics. So now I just "reskin" it a little and I think it fits right in. You'll get to see some of the results in-play and can decide whether your present opinion stands; if so, I'll avoid emphasizing psionics in opponents and treasure.
She wouldn't be rogue-ery, she is more direct than that. If she needs extra muscle and knows her own stealth isn't up to par (which it kinda isn't unless she's in a jungle environment), then that's what others in her tribe were for, acting as a team.
Hm. If you're thinking of a jungle environment, then Neanderthal background may not work; perhaps you can be from a tribe of "jungle humans" a la Unearthed Arcana or something.
You either die Chaotic, or you live long enough to see yourself become Lawful.
Glemp wrote:To some extent, you need to be arrogant - without it, you are vulnerable being made someone's tool...for Herbert's sake, have the stubbornness not to submit to what you see instantly, because you can only see some facts at a time.
My long-neglected blog.

User avatar
Aegis J Hyena
Game Master
Posts: 4295

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Aegis J Hyena » Mon Oct 27, 2014 12:24 pm

I never read any of the non-core books, so I don't know a thing about Unearthed Unarcana. A tribe of jungle humans with a flair for combat / warrior / barbarian works for me if it works for you.
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Capricornian/

It's Always Something. No, don't give me that look. It's Always Something.

Nerre
Game Master
Posts: 4876

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Nerre » Mon Oct 27, 2014 5:03 pm

Me neither, we normally play AD&D (version 2.0), since the GM prefers that. I barely know 3.5 cause of the forum games and a few PC games.
Without the comic, I would not even know Psions.
:zzz:

User avatar
willpell
Banned
Posts: 2085
Contact:

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by willpell » Mon Oct 27, 2014 5:47 pm

Okay Quarg, belatedly putting the finishing touches on your character sheet now. I think I now understand the DFA as well as I need to prior to your getting any more Lesser invocations. There are a few tweaks I'd like to make to the class, but the only ones that come online prior to 10th level are a couple of the breath effects, and I think I'm just going to leave those grandfathered in, even if they contradict my lore. The higher-level breath effects hugely contradict my lore though, so I'll be making some changes to them whenever I feel ready. I'll try to make sure you get some warning well before 10th level arrives.
HP :75
Perhaps you missed the part about HD being maximized for PCs. Your total should be 93: 8+2 for each of your first seven levels (total of 70), 8+3 for the two levels at and after your second CON bump (another 22), and +1 from the Dragontouched feat. That last one goes away if you get Charisma-drained below the feat's prerequisite of 10, of course.
ARMOR CLASS
AC Total : 20
AC when Flat-Footed 16
AC vs Touch Attack 14
Base: 10
Armor: +4 (Twilight Mithril Chain Shirt +1)
Natural: --
Shield: --
Dexterity: +3/(+2)
Size: --
Magic: --
Misc.: +3 (Scales level 8)
Touch AC should be 13 (assuming your Gloves are in place). Also I'm not sure offhand how Twilight armor works (I know the property's main effect is to remove arcane spell failure, I don't know if there are other details), but if there isn't some specific reason, the total armor value of a +1 Chain Shirt (Mithril or otherwise) should be +5, since a normal Chain Shirt gives +4. So your total AC should be 21 (again, with Gloves), and Flat-Footed is 18 (Gloves notwithstanding).
REF : +7 = 2 + 2 + 2 + 1
I assume this is just you writing out the Gloves of Dexterity very explicitly. Normally I would just roll the bonus into the Dex mod (perhaps with color-coding to make it easier to pay attention when a spell alters your Dex mid-combat) and use the last column for things that specifically and exclusively boost saving throws (eg Cloak of Resistance). But no big deal either way as long as we both end up at the same total. (I like that she took the Lightning Reflexes feet, by virtue of being a walking advertisement for the need for Reflex saves.)
3-Entangling Exhalation:
Oooh...had to look around a bit for this one. If we were in a level 1 game I might be slightly annoyed, as this lacks any prerequisites to prevent you from using it then, and becomes a pretty major exploit, turning your initial 1d6 damage into as much as 27 over five rounds. Fortunately, such utility is entirely moot now. This isn't a very well-written feat in abstract terms, since it doesn't scale at all based on how much damage your breath actually deals; it's quite useless on large dragons with spectacularly deadly breaths, while its writers clearly didn't anticipate that the DFA would ever be created, and it's extremely good on them for the first few levels. Given that it never gets any better, I should probably allow you to Retain it once we reach a higher character level, but even if it's already pretty weak at ECL 9, I'd like to see it in use a few times, so I'll try to construct encounters where it'll be useful despite the currently-pitiful damage (even if the d4 of rounds was always 4, it would total 1d3 less damage than a straight-up level 9 breath, though of course you don't have that much quite yet; even so, getting 1d3 more but having to wait for it would kind of suck, so the only real benefit is the Entangle condition, and I'm eager to see how effective that proves to be, though it'll also be annoying since it'll require me to adjust NPC dex totals in the middle of the fight - at least I can plan ahead for this eventuality).
4-Extra Invocation:
You learn one additional invocation from the list available to you, choosing an invocation of one grade lower than the highest grade of invocation you know. For example, a 6thlevel warlock could learn a least invocation, while a 16th-level warlock could learn any least, lesser, or greater invocation.
I will go ahead and assume this is okay, but I'm hoping I won't regret it; while the writers of Dragon Magic probably intended for this feat to be applicable to DFA invocations, they forgot to actually say so anywhere that I can see, and since the feat has "warlock" right in the text, I'm now a bit worried about the possibility of an unforseen interaction. I'm probably just being silly though. Definitely check with me before taking it again though; currently it's just giving you a Least invocation and I've already looked at those, but I'll need to be more than passingly familiar with the full DFA Invoke list by the time you gain any more of them, either from the class or this feat.
Disguise: -2 =(+2 Cha -4 [glowing eyes])
Hide: -2 =(+2 Cha -4 [glowing eyes])
I will point out that you can avoid these penalties quite easily by keeping your eyes shut. Since the flaw penalizes more than two skills, I'm comfortable with it being possible to circumvent it by voluntarily blinding yourself during the situation. (And I will flat-out admit that I forgot about this aspect of your character when Varshyl first showed up, but since Disguise Self provides an effective +10 to Disguise checks, we'll just assume he saw a faint flicker of red in the eyes of your otherwise normal-looking form, but assumed it was just a trick of the light and didn't think to connect it with the description of an obviously scale-skinned woman that he was looking for.)
Listen: 4 =(2 ranks +2 draconic senses)
Search: 7 =(2 ranks +3INT + 2 DS)
Spot: 4 (+2 Ranks +2 DS)
I believe your total bonus is 3, since you have two draconic feats, calculating DracSenses as a +2 bonus, plus the +1 bonus from Dragontouched. It's all lost if you drop to 10 Charisma (and resumes when the problem is corrected), but otherwise the bonuses should all stack since they're nameless.
Ride: 6 =(2 ranks, +3 Dex, +1 saddleborn)
Technically this is only true as long as you have a saddle, which you don't...but you also don't have a horse, and when you get one, you'll usually gain the other, so good enough. But if you ever have to jump on a horse bareback, the -5 penalty does come into play, as one of the "baked-in" exceptions in the skill system that they really ought to mention more up-front than they do.
Knowledge (Others): 5 =( +3INT +2DK)
Note that since this isn't listing the +6 bonus from the Draconic Knowledge invocation (which seems to me as though it probably shouldn't stack with the Draconic Knowledge feat, but I suspect it in fact does according to the rules writers, and am content to assume so for your benefit unless I find proof to the contrary), I will point out that if you've chosen not to invoke Draconic Knowledge on a given day - or more likely if it's cut off somehow - you can't roll Knowledges you don't have ranks in at all, unless the DC is 10 or less (indicating that the knowledge is basic everyday stuff). I'm tempted to rule that the bonuses from Draconic Knowledge shouldn't apply to DC 10 rolls, since they're "man on the street" stuff that's very modern, and knowledge drawn from the Dragon Hivemind or whatever would tend toward the ancient. But since we already have one character who nailed all the Common Knowledge rolls, I guess I can assume that you got them all too, since your total check comes to 11 and thus you can't possibly fail to know anything that isn't DC 13 or higher, unless you go a day without invoking DK.
In the event that "your invocations stop working" becomes a plot point, I will assume that the DK feat represents those facts which you've fully internalized, rather than those that your brain is looking up on Magic Dragon Wikipedia in-between your conscious thoughts. However this will definitely only apply to subjects which you've invested at least a modicum of serious study in; any knowledge that you have regarding, say, Psionics or the Outer Planes at the moment is clearly "streaming" from wherever your invocations come from, and while the magic enables your brain and memories to access information you never actually learned, it doesn't make you any better at actually learning them, so the +5 worth of bonuses you get from INT and Feats don't do you any good on Trained-only rolls with untrained skills, except when magic specifically papers over that requirement. (Not that this means you'd stare at a demon or elemental and have no idea what it is, just because you can't roll K: the Planes; rather, you'd be able to tell it was something of the general sort, but would have no practical understanding of exactly what sort of demon or elemental it was, what its habits or weaknesses are, and how much of what you "know" about it is hearsay or legendry with no basis in truth.
Incantations
Just so you're aware, you appear to have chosen four Least invocations and one Lesser, when you are entitled to have taken two Lessers (one at 6th and one at 8th) and three leasts instead. I'm okay with that if you are.
Languages]Common; Elven; Dwarven; Orc; Draconic
Did you buy any of these with the Speak Language skill, or were you assuming that you got Draconic for free due to your backstory? If the latter, I'm inclined to agree with you, if that doesn't bother anybody. If the group would rather stay strictly legal and you didn't buy Speak Language, then as a special plot-related favor I would ask that the language you drop be Dwarven, as Draconic is obvious and the other two non-Common languages are likely to come up in short order. If you did buy a SL rank, or if nobody cares about you having two native languages, then all is well.
Slotted Gear
Arms: Rapier +1 Steel Masterwork Paralyzing 8340 gp
Two things. One, this is not actually slotted on your arms; you can still wear a pair of magic bracers while wielding a magic weapon. And two, where did you find the Paralyzing weapon ability? I'm not familiar with it offhand; is it in the DMG, the Magic Item Compendium, or somewhere else?
Feet: Boots of Dragonstriding 1,500 gp
Cloak of Weaponry 2,500 gp
I have no idea what these are either. Book please?
Silk Shirt Blue
Leather Pants
Since these aren't magic items, they also don't count as occupying a body slot. ;)
Signet Ring of her father and mother's joined crests
While this probably doesn't have any magic at the moment either, it certainly seems like the sort of thing you could get enchanted with something cool, upon earning the gratitude of some NPC magesmith.
Throat: Silver pendent with a target charm
I assume this is your True Strike focus. Technically the spell calls for it to be wood, but in view of holy symbols I guess springing for a silver one instead is not unreasonable. Just be aware that there are going to be some cases where I insist that you use EXACTLY the specified focus (whether the one in the book or a specified-by-me replacement). I take my "magical theory" far too seriously sometimes; if I'm firmly convinced that the symbolism of the spell can only operate by using a wooden object and not a metal one, that's how it's going to need to be (I'm not aware of a spell where I feel that way at the moment, but it's the sort of thing I might do, and I've definitely done similar things on other spells).
Gear
Rope of Climbing 3,000 gp - Cloak
Everbright Lantern 212 gp - Cloak
Eyes of Eagle 2,500 gp - Cloak
Wand of Grease 750 gp -Cloak
Wand of Resinous Tar 750 gp -Cloak
Wand of lessor Vigor 1000 gp? -Cloak
Wand of Mage Armor 750 go -Cloak
Quiver of Ehlonna - 1800 gp
50 Arrows -Quiver
Darkwood Composite Longbow 430 - Quiver
Quarterstaff -Quiver
The only things I don't recognize here are the Resinous Tar spell and possibly the Everbright Lantern (though I can hazard a guess on that one). In case you didn't catch it before, I will point out again that by my ruling, the Grease spell produces a NON-FLAMMABLE magical lubricant, which does not interact with normal matter in any way contrary to the specifications of the spell, regardless of what normal grease might do. And you should also be aware that Mage Armor does not stack with actual armor (since both give an "armor bonus" to AC, and named bonuses are not cumulative with each other unless they specifically say so, as for example "dodge bonus"es do); if you still want that one, either to use on allies or for when you're not wearing the Mithril shirt (not that I can think of much reason for you to ever take it off, given that it has no Armor Check penalty, and we agreed this game was going to stay PG-13 rated), you're certainly welcome to have it. I'll double-check the rest soon, but for now assume that it's approved. (Since you're using the listed 750-GP price for most of your first-level wands, I'll assume you got them secondhand with 50 charges in each of them; if you have leftover gold, you could instead have bought them with 63 charges for +25% of the price, as wands in my campaign are always created with that greater capacity and cost, unless the crafter specifically does otherwise.)

Okay, I'm going to have to double-check your skill numbers, but I'm assuming that the fact they didn't work out in the first place was more likely a math error on my part than anything else. So, contingent on these last few details, your character is formally cleared. Once again, sorry about how long it took.

EDIT - Some slight formatting issues here, please stand by.....
EDIT - There, that's got it.

Hopefully final EDIT - I double-checked your skill points and the discrepancy was mostly my own error, but you do indeed appear to have some skill ranks unspent. Assuming that you bought Speak Language, you spent 88 points, and that's the number of skill points 8 levels of DFA will give you (when you're still technically human, scales notwithstanding, and have an INTMOD of +3, so every level gives you 8 skill points and the first level counts quadruple). But you also have one level of Duskblade which gives you 6 more skill points - you had to spend 2 of them on Ride, since that's not a DFA skill, but that also means you didn't spend 2 skill points on those ranks, which are part of the 88 skill points I calculated before. So you still have 6 skill points left by my count (and may spend them as you see fit - the only skills a Duskblade gets which a DFA doesn't are Ride and Swim, and you didn't take the latter and only a little of the former, so there are no real issues to straighten out with regard to keeping your classes' skill lists separate. You may spend those skill points however you wish (either on some more skills or on up to three Skill Tricks - you could have a fourth if you ditched 2 SP from the existing ranks); if you want to up any more of your class skills by a rank or five, go ahead.
You either die Chaotic, or you live long enough to see yourself become Lawful.
Glemp wrote:To some extent, you need to be arrogant - without it, you are vulnerable being made someone's tool...for Herbert's sake, have the stubbornness not to submit to what you see instantly, because you can only see some facts at a time.
My long-neglected blog.

User avatar
spiderwrangler
Game Master
Posts: 21091

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by spiderwrangler » Mon Oct 27, 2014 6:58 pm

willpell wrote:In case you didn't catch it before, I will point out again that by my ruling, the Grease spell produces a NON-FLAMMABLE magical lubricant, which does not interact with normal matter in any way contrary to the specifications of the spell, regardless of what normal grease might do.

Instead of Grease, just call it Lube.
Games I GM:
► Show Spoiler
Games I play in:
► Show Spoiler

User avatar
Quarg
.
Posts: 5400

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Quarg » Tue Oct 28, 2014 6:56 am

willpell wrote:Perhaps you missed the part about HD being maximized for PCs. Your total should be 93:
And the character engine I was using apparently screwed something up...
Touch AC should be 13 (assuming your Gloves are in place). Also I'm not sure offhand how Twilight armor works (I know the property's main effect is to remove arcane spell failure, I don't know if there are other details), but if there isn't some specific reason, the total armor value of a +1 Chain Shirt (Mithril or otherwise) should be +5, since a normal Chain Shirt gives +4. So your total AC should be 21 (again, with Gloves), and Flat-Footed is 18 (Gloves notwithstanding).
Alright, no problems there, I didn't realize giving something twilight gave it a +1 to AC also...I've never played 3.5 outside of first level that much really...
(I like that she took the Lightning Reflexes feet, by virtue of being a walking advertisement for the need for Reflex saves.)
Yeah, which is also the reason I spent a level of her learning to be a Duskblade...It stacks decently and gives her the ability to deal with people who do get close...
3-Entangling Exhalation:

....so the only real benefit is the Entangle condition, and I'm eager to see how effective that proves to be, though it'll also be annoying since it'll require me to adjust NPC dex totals in the middle of the fight - at least I can plan ahead for this eventuality

I built her more for battlefield control than battlefield damage...I gave her some ability to deal with annoying enemies on a personal basis if need be but she's not designed to go take out the local village gang single handed. (That's what elves are for)

4-Extra Invocation:
You learn one additional invocation from the list available to you, choosing an invocation of one grade lower than the highest grade of invocation you know. For example, a 6thlevel warlock could learn a least invocation, while a 16th-level warlock could learn any least, lesser, or greater invocation.


Not sure about the whole warlock versus DFA...

Disguise: -2 =(+2 Cha -4 [glowing eyes])
Hide: -2 =(+2 Cha -4 [glowing eyes])

I will point out that you can avoid these penalties quite easily by keeping your eyes shut. Since the flaw penalizes more than two skills, I'm comfortable with it being possible to circumvent it by voluntarily blinding yourself during the situation. (And I will flat-out admit that I forgot about this aspect of your character when Varshyl first showed up, but since Disguise Self provides an effective +10 to Disguise checks, we'll just assume he saw a faint flicker of red in the eyes of your otherwise normal-looking form, but assumed it was just a trick of the light and didn't think to connect it with the description of an obviously scale-skinned woman that he was looking for.)

Really she was more trying to either require a second glance for someone looking specifically for her, or be considered a non-threat if the man was threatening Cassian,
But yes she would have likely been next on his list of people to ask if the gang hadn't been there.

Listen: 4 =(2 ranks +2 draconic senses)
Search: 7 =(2 ranks +3INT + 2 DS)
Spot: 4 (+2 Ranks +2 DS)


I believe your total bonus is 3, since you have two draconic feats, calculating DracSenses as a +2 bonus, plus the +1 bonus from Dragontouched. It's all lost if you drop to 10 Charisma (and resumes when the problem is corrected), but otherwise the bonuses should all stack since they're nameless.[/quote]

Apparently the engine again dropped a bonus (or knocked it off perhaps) I didn't realize that dragontouched gave any bonus but being able to take draconic feats...

Ride: 6 =(2 ranks, +3 Dex, +1 saddleborn)

Technically this is only true as long as you have a saddle, which you don't...but you also don't have a horse, and when you get one, you'll usually gain the other, so good enough. But if you ever have to jump on a horse bareback, the -5 penalty does come into play, as one of the "baked-in" exceptions in the skill system that they really ought to mention more up-front than they do.


More an obvious character trait based on the background I chose for her, any land officer is at least expected to ride with a saddle, but I doubt someone like her has done any bareback (unlike my assistants RL)

Knowledge (Others): 5 =( +3INT +2DK)

Note that since this isn't listing the +6 bonus from the Draconic Knowledge invocation (which seems to me as though it probably shouldn't stack with the Draconic Knowledge feat, but I suspect it in fact does according to the rules writers, and am content to assume so for your benefit unless I find proof to the contrary), I will point out that if you've chosen not to invoke Draconic Knowledge on a given day - or more likely if it's cut off somehow - you can't roll Knowledges you don't have ranks in at all, unless the DC is 10 or less (indicating that the knowledge is basic everyday stuff). I'm tempted to rule that the bonuses from Draconic Knowledge shouldn't apply to DC 10 rolls, since they're "man on the street" stuff that's very modern, and knowledge drawn from the Dragon Hivemind or whatever would tend toward the ancient. But since we already have one character who nailed all the Common Knowledge rolls, I guess I can assume that you got them all too, since your total check comes to 11 and thus you can't possibly fail to know anything that isn't DC 13 or higher, unless you go a day without invoking DK.
In the event that "your invocations stop working" becomes a plot point, I will assume that the DK feat represents those facts which you've fully internalized, rather than those that your brain is looking up on Magic Dragon Wikipedia in-between your conscious thoughts. However this will definitely only apply to subjects which you've invested at least a modicum of serious study in; any knowledge that you have regarding, say, Psionics or the Outer Planes at the moment is clearly "streaming" from wherever your invocations come from, and while the magic enables your brain and memories to access information you never actually learned, it doesn't make you any better at actually learning them, so the +5 worth of bonuses you get from INT and Feats don't do you any good on Trained-only rolls with untrained skills, except when magic specifically papers over that requirement. (Not that this means you'd stare at a demon or elemental and have no idea what it is, just because you can't roll K: the Planes; rather, you'd be able to tell it was something of the general sort, but would have no practical understanding of exactly what sort of demon or elemental it was, what its habits or weaknesses are, and how much of what you "know" about it is hearsay or legendry with no basis in truth.


And I guess I took the 5 to mean that she's got lots of little odd facts she's found out about odd and end things tangental to her main lines of inquiry...For example, you may never have studied art, but if you've studied history or religion your likely to know the basic subjects of a good number of them when they are based on those events you've learned about. But the system above works for me...

Incantations
Just so you're aware, you appear to have chosen four Least invocations and one Lesser, when you are entitled to have taken two Lessers (one at 6th and one at 8th) and three leasts instead. I'm okay with that if you are.

I'll have to look at that again because there were two recommended Lessers versus the Leasts...

Languages Common; Elven; Dwarven; Orc; Draconic

Did you buy any of these with the Speak Language skill, or were you assuming that you got Draconic for free due to your backstory? If the latter, I'm inclined to agree with you, if that doesn't bother anybody. If the group would rather stay strictly legal and you didn't buy Speak Language, then as a special plot-related favor I would ask that the language you drop be Dwarven, as Draconic is obvious and the other two non-Common languages are likely to come up in short order. If you did buy a SL rank, or if nobody cares about you having two native languages, then all is well.

I thought I had bought it, again relied on the engine to tell me how many to choose...and would likely move skill points since I sort of have the character knowing Dwarves quite well in my own mind. (Just like I know candadians quite well from growing up on the border too)

Slotted Gear
Arms: Rapier +1 Steel Masterwork Paralyzing 8340 gp


Two things. One, this is not actually slotted on your arms; you can still wear a pair of magic bracers while wielding a magic weapon. And two, where did you find the Paralyzing weapon ability? I'm not familiar with it offhand; is it in the DMG, the Magic Item Compendium, or somewhere else?[/quote]
Book of Exalted Deeds/Magic Item Compendium apparently have different versions...

Feet: Boots of Dragonstriding 1,500 gp

Magic Item Compendium

Cloak of Weaponry 2,500 gp

PlayerÔÇÖs Guide to Faer├╗n
Modification of Najjiers Cloak of Weapondry, But it is a modification really in color and giving it multiple pockets for up to 25 pounds rather than a single pocket...very similar to the
Magic Item Compandium Cloak of Weapondry but only allowing a single object up to 25 pounds and costing 200 less in gold.

Silk Shirt Blue
Leather Pants

Since these aren't magic items, they also don't count as occupying a body slot. ;)


I stuck the mundane in there for reference by other players. For crying out loud she has translucent chainmail armor...and this is PG-13

Signet Ring of her father and mother's joined crests


While this probably doesn't have any magic at the moment either, it certainly seems like the sort of thing you could get enchanted with something cool, upon earning the gratitude of some NPC magesmith.[/quote]
( Orignially I was going to have in be a ring of Endurance but when you dropped the food issue, I decided to save the cash...)

Throat: Silver pendent with a target charm

I assume this is your True Strike focus. Technically the spell calls for it to be wood, but in view of holy symbols I guess springing for a silver one instead is not unreasonable. Just be aware that there are going to be some cases where I insist that you use EXACTLY the specified focus (whether the one in the book or a specified-by-me replacement). I take my "magical theory" far too seriously sometimes; if I'm firmly convinced that the symbolism of the spell can only operate by using a wooden object and not a metal one, that's how it's going to need to be (I'm not aware of a spell where I feel that way at the moment, but it's the sort of thing I might do, and I've definitely done similar things on other spells).


I would change it to wood if need be I only had 'target focus' and not the wood attribute when I was making the Duskblade spell selections.


The only things I don't recognize here are the Resinous Tar spell and possibly the Everbright Lantern (though I can hazard a guess on that one). In case you didn't catch it before, I will point out again that by my ruling, the Grease spell produces a NON-FLAMMABLE magical lubricant, which does not interact with normal matter in any way contrary to the specifications of the spell, regardless of what normal grease might do. And you should also be aware that Mage Armor does not stack with actual armor (since both give an "armor bonus" to AC, and named bonuses are not cumulative with each other unless they specifically say so, as for example "dodge bonus"es do); if you still want that one, either to use on allies or for when you're not wearing the Mithril shirt. [/quote]
Erp...yeah haven't played characters with that spell much so that little non-stacking point I missed. Yeah, Grease/RT wands are again suggested battlefeild control spells (they counteract each other). So rather than have the armor I likely should investigate that magic sheild spell a bit more and/or look replacing the Grease/RT and the armor with that tenacle spell wand...again focused on battlefeild control.



So you still have 6 skill points left by my count (and may spend them as you see fit - the only skills a Duskblade gets which a DFA doesn't are Ride and Swim, and you didn't take the latter and only a little of the former, so there are no real issues to straighten out with regard to keeping your classes' skill lists separate. You may spend those skill points however you wish (either on some more skills or on up to three Skill Tricks - you could have a fourth if you ditched 2 SP from the existing ranks); if you want to up any more of your class skills by a rank or five, go ahead.

Again the engine said 88 and I applied 88 so if you say I have 94, I will go apply 94 although what do you mean Skill Tricks???
Last edited by Quarg on Tue Oct 28, 2014 7:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Really...why are you reading this?

Eileen Ap'Fyretorr

User avatar
Amara
Spokesperson in Training
Posts: 1312
Location: Somewhere buried in research papers.

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Amara » Tue Oct 28, 2014 7:22 am

Skill tricks may be found in Complete Scoundrel, but I'll link a quick reference.
Basically, they're sort of like mini-feats that have a prerequisite skill level, and you spend skill points on them. You can only have one skill trick per skill, but CAN retrain them.

User avatar
willpell
Banned
Posts: 2085
Contact:

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by willpell » Tue Oct 28, 2014 8:37 am

Quarg wrote:And the character engine I was using apparently screwed something up...
Ah, I see the size of the problem.
Alright, no problems there, I didn't realize giving something twilight gave it a +1 to AC also...I've never played 3.5 outside of first level that much really...
You can't make armor Twilight unless it's first +1, which costs +1000 gold; making it +1 Twilight costs the same amount as making it +2, which is +3000 more, a total of +4000 gold on top of the basic cost for a Masterwork armor (which is itself 150 more than the same armor as non-Masterwork, unless you make it out of Mithril, in which case it costs 1000 more than the base cost and is considered Masterwork at no further cost). Thusly, a normal Chain Shirt is 100 gp, a Mithril one is 1100, a +1 Mithril is 2100, and a +1 Twilight Mithril is 5100. (Note that the Mithril cost varies depending on the weight of the armor; a chain shirt is Light Armor, and gains nothing from being Mithril other than to lose its armor check and some of its spell failure penalties. Taking a suit of what is normally Medium armor and making it out of Mithril turns it into Light armor, but costs significantly more: +4000 instead of +1000, to be specific. And turning Heavy armor into Medium Mithril Armor costs a total of +9000 gold, letting you tromp around in +8 AC full plate instead of a +8 AC +3 Breastplate, with about the same costs and penalties, but with the advantage that the Mithril Full Plate costs significantly less to enchant further.)

Except for Mithril, which is calculated differently and not really worth bothering with, all these cost increases are doubled with respect to weapons. A masterwork weapon is +300 gold, a +1 weapon is +2000 gold on top of that, and either raising it to +2 or giving it a "+1 Bonus"-costed special ability, such as Ghost Touch, costs +6000 gold more.
Not sure about the whole warlock versus DFA...
Both of them are designed to be sort of "wizard lite" classes, which have the ability to deal small amounts of damage every round (the Warlock uses a to-hit roll and deals non-elemental damage, while the DFA defaults to fire damage and uses a Reflex save, allowing you to completely ignore the need for attack rolls - my sample NPC Adept walks around in armor she isn't proficient in and doesn't even care). The main difference is that since the Warlock was designed earlier, it has a lot of extra goodies designed for it, including more invocations as well as Feats (such as Extra Invocation), while a player of a Dragonfire Adept has pretty much nothing but the book it appeared in to work with.
Apparently the engine again dropped a bonus (or knocked it off perhaps) I didn't realize that dragontouched gave any bonus but being able to take draconic feats...
Nope, it also gives you 1 hit point (which is all you need to be in the peak of health; gotta love D&D rules), +1 to the three perception skills, and a +1 save bonus vs. Sleep or Paralysis (because Dragons are immune to these). All of which requires you to stay at 10 Charisma, so if a monster Drains your charisma, those bonuses turn off until you're Restored.
Book of Exalted Deeds/Magic Item Compendium apparently have different versions...
Hm, I'd better look into that. At a guess I'm more likely to approve the BOEXD version, as MIC seems to underprice things a bit (such as Zaks's Portable Hole, which is why we compromised on a cost of like 10K gp, instead of either 20K or less than 5K).
PlayerÔÇÖs Guide to Faer├╗n
Modification of Najjiers Cloak of Weapondry, But it is a modification really in color and giving it multiple pockets for up to 25 pounds rather than a single pocket...very similar to the
Magic Item Compandium Cloak of Weapondry but only allowing a single object up to 25 pounds and costing 200 less in gold.
Gonna have to look at this one a bit too; Forgotten Realms stuff tends to be a bit more powerful than normal D&D, especially where wizards are concerned.
Erp...yeah haven't played characters with that spell much so that little non-stacking point I missed. Yeah, Grease/RT wands are again suggested battlefeild control spells (they counteract each other). So rather than have the armor I likely should investigate that magic sheild spell a bit more and/or look replacing the Grease/RT and the armor with that tenacle spell wand...again focused on battlefeild control.
If you want to drop the armor in favor of the spell that's your choice, but don't complain when a Dispel Magic leaves you defenseless....
Again the engine said 88 and I applied 88 so if you say I have 94, I will go apply 94 although what do you mean Skill Tricks???
It's a mechanic that lets you acquire a few pseudo-Feat abilities, generally cinematic "stunt" kind of things like running up a wall briefly or precisely mimicking a sound. They cost 2 skill points each and have steep skill prerequisites; if you're interested I can figure out which ones you qualify for and describe them for you.
Amara wrote:Skill tricks may be found in Complete Scoundrel, but I'll link a quick reference.
Basically, they're sort of like mini-feats that have a prerequisite skill level, and you spend skill points on them. You can only have one skill trick per skill, but CAN retrain them.
That should say "one skill trick per two character levels"; nothing stops you from taking all the tricks based on, say, Jump if your character's entire deal is supposed to be bounding across rooftops.
You either die Chaotic, or you live long enough to see yourself become Lawful.
Glemp wrote:To some extent, you need to be arrogant - without it, you are vulnerable being made someone's tool...for Herbert's sake, have the stubbornness not to submit to what you see instantly, because you can only see some facts at a time.
My long-neglected blog.

User avatar
Quarg
.
Posts: 5400

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Quarg » Tue Oct 28, 2014 8:43 am

Lets see if any of these tricks have any character value etc before deciding if they are applicable...

I just like the idea of carrying things around in a cloak rather than a backpack as it is much more flexible for someone who has to maintain reflexes against attackers...
Really...why are you reading this?

Eileen Ap'Fyretorr

User avatar
spiderwrangler
Game Master
Posts: 21091

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by spiderwrangler » Tue Oct 28, 2014 8:59 am

Skill tricks weren't even on my radar when I built Kast... I may have to look into that at next level. Hopefully there is something good with Listen and Spot checks... :)
Games I GM:
► Show Spoiler
Games I play in:
► Show Spoiler

User avatar
Amara
Spokesperson in Training
Posts: 1312
Location: Somewhere buried in research papers.

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Amara » Tue Oct 28, 2014 9:24 am

Ah yeah, I shouldn't type while half awake...again.
Skill Tricks wrote:You canÔÇÖt learn more than one skill trick at any given
level, and your total skill tricks cannot exceed one-half
your character level (rounded up) .
For listen and spot there is...

Clarity of Vision (prereq 12 spot) - Notice Invisible Enemies for 1 Round
Point it Out (prereq 8 spot) - Grant ally a free Spot to see something you've spotted
Spot the Weak Point (prereq 12 spot) - Make your next attack a touch attack
Listen to This (prereq 5 listen) - Perfectly repeat what you've recently heard


I think the only time I've ever used Listen to This is when I was playing a bard with William's syndrome. That was...a weird game.

User avatar
Quarg
.
Posts: 5400

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Quarg » Tue Oct 28, 2014 2:14 pm

Well I think the only ones I could really use would be...
Group Fake Out (I like but becomes expensive fast...)
Never Outnumbered (Intimidate 8 ) Yeah, might be useful
Swift Concentration (I'm not sure with the feat that gives me a Con of 10 for almost everything that this is worth it anyway)

Opinions, Thoughts?
Really...why are you reading this?

Eileen Ap'Fyretorr

Nerre
Game Master
Posts: 4876

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Nerre » Tue Oct 28, 2014 3:05 pm

I created a Fremling (winged gremling) wizard using http://www.pathguy.com/cg35.htm:
► Show Spoiler
Please tell me if he is okay that way. A friend is playing a similar char in our D&D 2.0 game and he is quiet fun. :)
:zzz:

User avatar
willpell
Banned
Posts: 2085
Contact:

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by willpell » Tue Oct 28, 2014 3:14 pm

Nerre wrote:I created a Fremling (winged gremling) wizard using http://www.pathguy.com/cg35.htm:

A fremlin is a winged gremlin. Fremlins -are imune to attacks made with normal weapons. -opponents need a +1 weapon or better to hit. -fly with a movement speed of 12 and maneuverability class of B. -are of size type tiny (1/3 damge).[/spoil]

Please tell me if he is okay that way. A friend is playing a similar char in our D&D 2.0 game and he is quiet fun. :)
Yeah, this is not okay. Core races only, please. If you want to be a small flying creature, perhaps a Nycter or Desmodu (two different species of bat-people)? But I don't even have stats for regular gremlins, let alone winged ones, so I really can't approve this.

EDIT - By "core races" I don't mean only those in the PHB, but rather only those in 3rd edition Dungeons and Dragons supplements. No 3rd-party D20 system supplements, no homebrews (except mine), and no Pathfinder. (As far as I'm concerned, Pathfinder is just somebody's homebrew, and I trust nobody else to match my exacting standards. There are things about the system I like, but not enough to actually adopt them.)
You either die Chaotic, or you live long enough to see yourself become Lawful.
Glemp wrote:To some extent, you need to be arrogant - without it, you are vulnerable being made someone's tool...for Herbert's sake, have the stubbornness not to submit to what you see instantly, because you can only see some facts at a time.
My long-neglected blog.

Nerre
Game Master
Posts: 4876

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Nerre » Tue Oct 28, 2014 3:40 pm

It is no 3rd party, it is from an ADnD corebook. Old, but it is core. Or was core, back then. There was even a mentioning of it as a player race. :/
Uploaded the PDF to my space: http://www.nerregatt.de/games/TheComple ... anoids.pdf (page 25-27). The PDF is old and seems broken. If there is a white patch where text should be, just copy the block into a text editor and it will show. Don't know what happened.
But if you tell me it is not okay, I will look for something else.
:zzz:

User avatar
willpell
Banned
Posts: 2085
Contact:

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by willpell » Tue Oct 28, 2014 4:57 pm

I'm afraid I don't know anything about AD&D rules and am not up to any conversions. Please stick to 3.5 or maybe 3.0; those are the only systems I know.
You either die Chaotic, or you live long enough to see yourself become Lawful.
Glemp wrote:To some extent, you need to be arrogant - without it, you are vulnerable being made someone's tool...for Herbert's sake, have the stubbornness not to submit to what you see instantly, because you can only see some facts at a time.
My long-neglected blog.

User avatar
Arch Lich Burns
Will NOT Shut Up!
Posts: 17412
UStream Username: burnsbees
Location: Behind you
Contact:

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Arch Lich Burns » Tue Oct 28, 2014 5:25 pm

Will, I am a bard. I am supposed to know all the common things. And a lot of uncommon things. :P

.... My ac should be 19=10+4 (mitheral)+5 (deflection from ghost0 ...correct?

User avatar
willpell
Banned
Posts: 2085
Contact:

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by willpell » Tue Oct 28, 2014 6:08 pm

Arch Lich Burns wrote:Will, I am a bard. I am supposed to know all the common things. And a lot of uncommon things. :P
Not sure what you're referring to.
.... My ac should be 19=10+4 (mitheral)+5 (deflection from ghost0 ...correct?
I'm not too clear on the rules for incorporeal creatures - I think that since your armor isn't ghost touch, it doesn't apply except against ethereal opponents, while your deflection bonus doesn't apply except against non-ethereal ones, but I'm not 100% sure in either case. One thing I do know is that pretty much everything other than ghost touch weapons has a 50% chance of failing to affect you, but that's only if it would have affected you in the first place, so...yeah, I dunno. I'll have to look at the rules in some detail whenever we end up in a fight. But the first time I'll probably make one-time spot-rulings in your favor, just so you have the chance to pack on more than four Hit Dice before you start taking serious damage.
You either die Chaotic, or you live long enough to see yourself become Lawful.
Glemp wrote:To some extent, you need to be arrogant - without it, you are vulnerable being made someone's tool...for Herbert's sake, have the stubbornness not to submit to what you see instantly, because you can only see some facts at a time.
My long-neglected blog.

Nerre
Game Master
Posts: 4876

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Nerre » Sat Nov 01, 2014 11:31 am

willpell wrote:I'm afraid I don't know anything about AD&D rules and am not up to any conversions. Please stick to 3.5 or maybe 3.0; those are the only systems I know.
Can I pick all monsters/humanoids, which base level does not exceed the starting level Aegis and I choose? For example if it is something with 2-3 levels in humanoid and we would start at e.g. 5, would that be ok? I found a PDF but it will take some time to work through the races. :)

3.5 is so overwhelming and overloaded compared to ADnD (D&D 2.0). :shock:
:zzz:

User avatar
willpell
Banned
Posts: 2085
Contact:

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by willpell » Sun Nov 02, 2014 1:46 pm

In general, this is fine, but not all options are created equal. For instance, the regular "Gnoll" is a valid option, but not at all a good one; the Flind Gnoll is a little better but still weak, so if you think playing hyena-men is really cool, you're kind of screwed in terms of getting a terribly effective build. Really, all creatures with racial HD except dragons and outsiders are pretty bad, although magical beasts and monstrous humanoids are okay; ones with Humanoid HD are pretty much the worst.

I understand if you don't want to play a boring old human, but between mechanical inefficiency and flavor issues, there are a lot of races that just aren't a good choice. I suggest you toss out your top 10 or so ideas and see what I say about them.
You either die Chaotic, or you live long enough to see yourself become Lawful.
Glemp wrote:To some extent, you need to be arrogant - without it, you are vulnerable being made someone's tool...for Herbert's sake, have the stubbornness not to submit to what you see instantly, because you can only see some facts at a time.
My long-neglected blog.

Nerre
Game Master
Posts: 4876

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Nerre » Sun Nov 02, 2014 3:01 pm

Hmmm...

The sources I find are highly contradicting each other about what are "normal" races without homebrew. Help! :(

I read about a few I find interessting:
Ogre Mage
High Ogre
Gargoyle
Minotaur
Spellscale
Mul
Tiefling,

but there is a lot more.
Are all listed here ok: http://www.pathguy.com/cg35.htm
:zzz:

Nerre
Game Master
Posts: 4876

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by Nerre » Sun Nov 02, 2014 3:47 pm

How about this guy:
► Show Spoiler
:zzz:

User avatar
willpell
Banned
Posts: 2085
Contact:

Re: Recruitment Thread for Pell's D&D 3.5 Game

Post by willpell » Sun Nov 02, 2014 3:54 pm

Nerre wrote:The sources I find are highly contradicting each other about what are "normal" races without homebrew. Help! :(
Erg, afraid that there's really no solution to that other than to vet everything individually.
I read about a few I find interessting:
Okay, in order from "most recommended" to "least":
Spellscale
I think these guys are spectacularly cool; there are just two flavor changes that have to be made. First, they're called the Dracaena; second, while you can use the mechanics of their "Blood-Quickening Meditations" as-is for now, the flavor needs a bit of adjustment, since they're based on Greyhawk's "Dragon Pantheon", and my setting takes it as read that the True Dragons don't have gods of their own, nor want anything to do with the gods of others - the power in their own flesh and blood is all the divinity they will acknowledge. As a member of a dragon-descended race like "kobolds" or "spellscales", you're welcome to worship a deity if you wish (the most common choice is Oggravant, the Chaotic Neutral god of Doing Whatever The Hell You Want). You can even worship an actual dragon, while praying to a "divine force" corresponding to the dragon's nature, and Bahamut and Tiamat are common choices, so the distinction of saying that these two aren't actual gods is fairly abstract (it mostly just amounts to the fact that you could theoretically go kill them, whereas killing one of the real deities of Whiteleaf is a functional impossibility, even for epic-level characters, and there aren't any of those). But the other dragons listed for the BQMs, if they exist at all, are just ordinary members of their species, so using them as quasi-gods is kinda pointless. I'm planning to fix all this eventually with some new flavor for the race, but for now you'd just kind of have to play them as-written, and I'd just have to live with it until I got around to creating the fixed version, which I would then expect you to switch to.
Tiefling
This, on the other hand, is a completely straightforward recommendation. I have absolutely no problem with you playing a Tiefling, and if you and Aegis are both starting at level 3, you'll be very timely in getting your Level Adjustment removed, quickly rendering your character no worse off than a "normal" race. If you start higher than that, it'll probably already be a fait accompli, although there's some wonky math that I might or might not be willing to account for.
Gargoyle
Minotaur
Both of these are high-LA races, but if Aegis is cool with starting a little higher, you could play either one of them without much problem. As Monstrous Humanoids (or possibly a Giant in the Minotaur's case), they have tolerable stats on their HD, so you wouldn't suffer too much playing them.
Ogre Mage
These guys are ECL 12, so I don't think I can approve you playing one just yet, as my familiarity with levels above 9 is minimal. (For the record, I call them Bakemono.)
High Ogre
Never heard of this.
Mul
Not allowed at all.
but there is a lot more.
You keep setting 'em up, I'll keep shooting most of them down. But you've already got two low-level options and two higher-ECL ones, so if you'd rather get on with it, I'd say go with one of these four.
Are all listed here ok: http://www.pathguy.com/cg35.htm
You should probably stop using this, since my game is NOT PATHFINDER. I thought that was adequately clear. If you need to use Internet resources, try dndtools.eu or something.
Nerre wrote:How about this guy:
Barbarian is fine, but Mul is not, as I was in the process of saying when you posted him. If you switch him to Human or Dwarf or something, he could probably work with minimal adjustment, although....
Grott likes pie!
You might want to come up with a better motivation than this.....
Aggressive
Farsighted
Stout
I don't think you're allowed to have this many Traits - I think generally one or two per character is the limit. I can double-check if you want.
You either die Chaotic, or you live long enough to see yourself become Lawful.
Glemp wrote:To some extent, you need to be arrogant - without it, you are vulnerable being made someone's tool...for Herbert's sake, have the stubbornness not to submit to what you see instantly, because you can only see some facts at a time.
My long-neglected blog.

Post Reply