Post/Author/DateTime	Post
rogue_lettuce 05-29-06, 05:05 PM	Cmon guys, help me out here. I'm hopefully going to join a low level game that already has a cler/bard, fight, rang, sorc OR wiz[not sure which] and I want to know what class/race combo you guys think I should choose, plus an idea of both the character's background concept and their fighting style [do they trip a lot, do they grapple spellcasters and wear armour spikes, do they use purely offensive spells, etc]... Any ideas? I thought of playing a slow, grudgebearing and grumpy alcoholic. That would be interesting. :) Also a rogue, who compulsively lies. So he would be saying "no, the room's not trapped, it's fine" when it's full of poison gas or something. I know it's a bit wacky and not that serious but it would make for some good rp. :P Other ideas?
Dharan_Aelorothi 05-29-06, 09:53 PM	You should try a schizophrenic Half Kobold half Orc paladin of Corellon Larethian, that uses only a sling and a sap. Then say that he can only use those weapons because he's allergic to anything with more than a d4 of damage. One of his personalities likes to draw comics, and the other is a homosexual rapist. This should lead to some interesting encounters!
Tramp4life 05-30-06, 12:23 AM	Although Dharan said it in a sarcastic way which you may not get, I tend to agree with him...your character concepts, while interesting to YOU, may not be fun for everyone else. Your characters would not only be "less than helpful," they'd be an active hinderance. And, there'd be no reason to adventure with you...EVER. A character who'd be great in a book or movie won't necessarily be good for an RPG...
Nani? 05-30-06, 12:29 AM	Make it a slow, grudgebearing alcohlic dwarf rogue. He does not lie, he just exagerates "a bit" (translation: a lot). It fits your character ideas, is flexible in your combat style (buy different skills, dip into fighter), and lets you fill an unfilled nitch. How about that. All the Best, Nani?
rogue_lettuce 05-30-06, 08:22 AM	Although Dharan said it in a sarcastic way which you may not get, I tend to agree with him...your character concepts, while interesting to YOU, may not be fun for everyone else. Your characters would not only be "less than helpful," they'd be an active hinderance. And, there'd be no reason to adventure with you...EVER. A character who'd be great in a book or movie won't necessarily be good for an RPG... Jeez, you're obviously blessed with your gaming group. This is light fodder for the people involved. In fact, the ranger is probably still adamant that an owl could lift him... :mad: Last time I checked, the point of the Character Development boards were to NOT be about character optimization, so yes, they WOULD be a hinderance, that was the point, but it would make the game more interesting and fun. It's not always about 'winning', you know.
Dharan_Aelorothi 05-30-06, 09:01 AM	Yeah, in my last post I was kinda sarcastic, but the underlying message (that none of you got, except maybe for Tramp) was to make something that nobody has already thought of. Like right now, I'm working on a Hobgoblin Monk (LG). You don't see those very often. Or something odd that could actually be beneficial. If all else fails, go "Drizzt" and make a good-aligned drow character. Just don't end up with an Elven Barbarian named Glorfinmad (thank you, Erik Schoenek) Oh, and you have permission to make a hobgoblin monk if you want (not like I have that power, but I just wanted to say that)
rogue_lettuce 05-30-06, 12:31 PM	So other people have played compulsive liars? I wasn't aware of this. Something no one else has thought of eh? How about a psionic quadraplegic?
Dippiey 05-30-06, 04:31 PM	Although Dharan said it in a sarcastic way which you may not get, I tend to agree with him...your character concepts, while interesting to YOU, may not be fun for everyone else. Your characters would not only be "less than helpful," they'd be an active hinderance. And, there'd be no reason to adventure with you...EVER. A character who'd be great in a book or movie won't necessarily be good for an RPG... Characters have to have flaws too
Reversefigure4 05-30-06, 07:05 PM	When your flaws consist of "fighter who is grumpy", that's fine. Maybe you'll gimp the party a bit in social roleplaying, but it's fine. When your flaws are "rogue who lies about traps", expect some pain by the second time your party is injured by a trap you claim isn't there. The first flaw is a personality. The second one is active malevolence, and the sort of person than no sane party would adventure with.
Tramp4life 05-31-06, 01:05 AM	I point to Jane from Firefly, Tyr from Andromeda, or Rigel from Farscape...GREAT characters who are developed and fun to watch. I'm betting they aren't fun in their group. When you always have to watch and see if someone is lying, or check your 6 to see if someone is going to sell you out...I'm sorry...NOT fun for me. I spend a lot of time on my characters and I put a lot into them. One getting killed because some butt-pirate's idea of funny is to sell me out to the Succubus? Or, I get imprisoned and beheaded because someone sold me out to the magistrate?!? Or, worse, I get the poisoned ballista bolt in the arse because the Rogue thought it would be funny?!? Characters DO have flaws. But, c'mon, Reverse is right...give me a freaking break! In my group, there are arguments, there are times when 2 opposing character's needs (plots) come to a head, there are times when people do mind-bogglingly dumb things that inhibit "winning..." But, we don't actively try to screw each other by coming up with drunken, pathological liars, murderers, or <fill in random psychosis here>. (OK, I do play drunken ***** mongers sometimes) In other words, I'm glad you're not in my game if that's your idea of a "little flaw." And, butt-pirate was not meant to refer to anyone in particular...nor was it meant as derisive towards gays...it was a general term for "some dude."
Tramp4life 05-31-06, 01:10 AM	For character development, how about a blind fighter or monk...blind fight, blind sense, or something...he'd have minuses still, but he'd be different, and maybe useful considering the rules. You want random? How about a sorceror or wizard who took a vow of silence. REALLY not optimal, but do-able and challenging... You want different? How about a Paladin who vows never to hurt a woman (Protector of hos <not the garden tool??)...then, when the others want to kill a gnoll maiden, you HAVE to stop them... You want different, how about a character who takes party money and donates it to the needy...we had a guy steal party funds to host a dinner for hundreds of homeless in a port town...It was FUNNY, and in character. You want neat? How about a sorceror who firmly believes he's descended from dragons (not a Kobold) and FIRMLY believes he's destined to ascend. Lots o' potential there. You want Neat-O...how about a Half Orc Paladin or something I did, a Barbarian Monk...FAR from optimized (lost my rage ability 'cause I went lawful), but effective in his own way. You want crazy, refuse to wear metal armor as a cleric. All things that don't get you killed... And, a quad psionic was done...Prof X, anyone?
rogue_lettuce 05-31-06, 07:43 AM	All things that don't get you killed... Why do you assume the rogue would get killed for lying about traps? The other players would just assume she had failed her search checks. And to the other poster, it's not active malevolence if said character is a COMPULSIVE liar. By definition that's a part of their personality and mental state, which isn't easy to overcome! And if anyone's interested I was actually thinking about it being a curse, so we have to go on a quest of some kind to find someone to remove it, etc. A plot hook. I don't try to actively screw over other party members. Far from it. In the past I have been the last vestige of sanity left in the room disapproving of the rogue sneak attacking the barbarian because the barb attacked the druid's companion because... You get the idea.
Dharan_Aelorothi 05-31-06, 11:59 AM	Why do you assume the rogue would get killed for lying about traps? The other players would just assume she had failed her search checks. . Still, the other players don't want to play with a rogue that fails every search check. That happened to me once, and it ended with a TPK. The whole party was smashed/impaled/dissolved in acid/poisoned/electrocuted/turned into an arrow pincushion before they finally died. My first attempt at incorporating real traps failed miserably, because our rogue sucked on that particular day.
Tramp4life 05-31-06, 08:06 PM	Why do you assume the rogue would get killed for lying about traps? The other players would just assume she had failed her search checks. The first failed check where I ate some pit trap, I'd be annoyed. By about the 5th time something bad happened, I'd assume the rogue was useless and he'd be a front line fighter. And, if he said anything other than, "Yes sir, I'll take this point position and attack the dragon without question even though I'm only in studded leather," I'd skewer him/her. What about other lies? Compulsive liar means you can't help it...Lie about weapons, lie about magic, lie about values? What about a klepto? At least then the compulsion gets you (and maybe everyone else) in trouble, but being a rogue, you may be good at it.
FIREBLAST3DRAGONMASTER 05-31-06, 08:34 PM	:d How About A Half-gitzerai/half-orc Rogue/assassin Who Has Been Possessed By A Demon From The Lower Denizens Of The Nine Hells Who Is Bent On Makeing The Material Plane His Domain!!! Sorry For The Rambling But You Didn't State What Alignment The Party Was. It Would Still Be Cool!!! If That Doesn't Work Then You Could Always Make A Human Fighter/sorcerer Also Known As A Spellblade And He Would Use Primarily Defensive Spells To Buff Himself And A War Hammer To Bash Peoples Skulls Open.
rogue_lettuce 06-01-06, 04:53 AM	:d How About A Half-gitzerai/half-orc Rogue/assassin Who Has Been Possessed By A Demon From The Lower Denizens Of The Nine Hells Who Is Bent On Makeing The Material Plane His Domain!!! Sorry For The Rambling But You Didn't State What Alignment The Party Was. It Would Still Be Cool!!! If That Doesn't Work Then You Could Always Make A Human Fighter/sorcerer Also Known As A Spellblade And He Would Use Primarily Defensive Spells To Buff Himself And A War Hammer To Bash Peoples Skulls Open. Is this a poor attempt at humour?
Need_A_Life 06-01-06, 01:28 PM	I dunno. I'm fascinated with his capital letters, most of that sort of people don't use capital letters, this guy uses them compulsively. You could play an alcoholic, no problem. You could play grumpy, no problem. You could play grudgebearing, no problem. You could play a compulsive liar, some problems. But if it ruins everyone elses sense of fun, then remember that it's YOUR fault. If you get everyone elses characters killed and they're upset saying "but it was in-character" is either going to make them laugh at you or make them remove several of your teeth (through the delicate tool of a clenched fist). P.S. Then You Could Always Make A Human Fighter/sorcerer Also Known As A Spellblade And He Would Use Primarily Defensive Spells To Buff Himself And A War Hammer To Bash Peoples Skulls Open. It's called a cleric, dude.
Reversefigure4 06-01-06, 07:30 PM	Just ask yourself this: "Would I travel with this character?" Grumpy the dwarf? Sure, he's a bit of a load at times, and I don't want him to be negotiating for me, but he's good in a fight, and his heart's in the right place. The arrogant sorcerer? He's a prat, but it's not like he's going to hurt me. Stabbity Death, the drooling psychopath? No thanks, I'll pass. The same for the rogue who compulsively lies about traps, the druid who thinks it's funny to poison me while I sleep, the theif who steals from me, the paladin who screams about witchcraft and smites anything that looks at him sideways, the monk who surrenders at the beginning of every combat and refuses to fight... ... If you wouldn't want to travel with your own character, then it won't be fun for anyone else to play with.
rogue_lettuce 06-02-06, 04:42 PM	:devil: Just ask yourself this: "Would I travel with this character?" ... If you wouldn't want to travel with your own character, then it won't be fun for anyone else to play with. As already mentioned, it's quite a different issue if this is a curse bestowed on him by the BBEG. Also, by the time they're adventuring with him, it's too late. :schemes: The other players' game won't be ruined by it, trust me. I've known them about 5 years now, on a daily basis [school] so I wouldn't do something that would ruin the game for them. :)
Mr. the Hun 06-03-06, 11:44 PM	Well, Rogue Lettuce, this is what it comes down to. You're expecting that your players compensate for your character flaws and accept them, even if they cause annoyance and/or physical harm to their characters. If you want to be a courteous player, don't play an dick. Even an unintentional dick. If you don't care about that, play whatever you want. I don't know your group. Maybe their cool with that. Maybe they are all playing compulsize liars who seek their own interests. Maybe that's the campaign arch. I wouldn't know. All I know is, a character who is a repeated bane to the party via a choice the player who made him decided upon wouldn't be a character in that campaign for too long before something nasty happened to him. (shrugs) That's D&D.
FIREBLAST3DRAGONMASTER 06-06-06, 03:26 PM	Hey sorry about the caps I love em. And it wasn't a joke what else would an alchoholic o if he thought he was possessed by a demon. Actually it was something random and i had to put it out there sorry.
Fithero 06-06-06, 10:19 PM	what else would an alchoholic o if he thought he was possessed by a demon. Probably.... *anything* but that. Its like the Joan of Arc movie where she finds the sword out in the field. Of all the possiblities of how it could have come to be there, she chose the one where it was placed there by god with the bright lights and all that. As for your character, be as flawed and as f*cked up as you want, just aslong as youve got enough good points to counter-act it. Maybe you do lie about the traps that are in there, but then again maybe you enjoy fighting up front with the fighters (something alot of rogues dont do). If your grumpy then you can always back up whoever is instigating a fight. Grudge bearing is fine if you ask me, nothing like revenge for a motivation to go after the BBEG. Alcho? Easy, as long as your willing to take the negs for being off your face aswell as the following hang over, drink all you want. Heck, it would make an interesting rp session where the rest of your part tries to get you to stop drinking, or when your all trapped in a dungeon and the booze has run out! :P Hope this helps some Later
rogue_lettuce 06-08-06, 06:58 AM	As already stated, I'm not playing with the most mature players in the world, and I just wanted to take it as an opportunity for a roleplaying challenge. The group wouldn't hang, draw and quarter me. Also, I have yet to see an interesting and original concept that I want to play. Which was the whole point of starting this thread. So if you guys can do better...? I'm playing a human oriental-style nomad monk grappler with poor eyesight who refuses to use ranged weapons under any circumstances, in self-imposed exile from his homeland. Not the most original idea, but more interesting than most of my previous characters. I'd like more ideas for future games, if possible?
Reversefigure4 06-08-06, 08:25 PM	:devil: As already mentioned, it's quite a different issue if this is a curse bestowed on him by the BBEG. Also, by the time they're adventuring with him, it's too late. :schemes: My point was not 'in-character, would anyone travel with him'? It was 'Out of character, is he so annoying that he'd disrupt the game for others'? In other words, would YOU be happy if someone else in the group playing the Chaotic Evil "Mr Stab Your Character in The Face While He's Sleeping Because It's Monday And Mr Stab Doesn't Like Mondays". Personally, I'd rather not play in a group with such a character - so accordingly, I don't play such characters myself so as not to annoy the group. The same for the compulsive liar rogue, Rapy McRapist, etc. Still, your mileage may vary. If you play in the sort of group that's full of such 'flawed' characters, and everyone enjoys it, that's your business. Sorry, I have no ideas for such characters, but I wholeheartedly support Dharan's double personality comic drawing Kobold Paladin from the second post. It's certainly unusual.
slimgoodbody 06-09-06, 12:06 AM	I'd just like to chime in and say that A) Just because the CD forums aren't specifically about optimization, in no way are they against it. One of the biggest fallacies people maintain about (god I hate this term) "rollplay vs. roleplay" is that to have an interesting or roleplayable character, you have to somehow be inneffective. This is simply untrue. You need to be able to pull your own weight, as the entire balance of the game you are playing is based around your ability to do so. Which brings us to... B) In the game I run, a friend of mine who only ever makes those "wacky" unorthodox characters has now had his second character in a row die in as many games. His character will not be raised from the dead by the party, because while they are effective combatants, they are still adept roleplayers. They literally have absolutely no reason to spend money to raise some grumpy, unhelpful, dead-weight goblin that they met mere moments before he died. No one liked his character, and he was a drain on party resources. His character was built poorly with an "interesting" multiclass choice that downright neutered his ability to face challenges of his level. This meant that not only could he do nothing, the rest of the party would constantly have to stop what they were doing to move his dead weight, and that is unnacceptable for the rest of the party to be required to do. It was sacrificing the fun of the group at the altar of the one player. What you need to understand is that you can have your cake and eat it, too. Build your character well and in the direction you want to roleplay him. You don't need a character with a Wisdom of 6 if you want to play an airhead. He could have a Wisdom 8, 10, or even 12. You just <i>play</i> him as an absentminded fellow. I know plenty of people who couldn't remember which car is theirs in a parking lot that can pull it together when their friends depend on them.
rogue_lettuce 06-11-06, 05:16 AM	What you need to understand is that you can have your cake and eat it, too. Build your character well and in the direction you want to roleplay him. You don't need a character with a Wisdom of 6 if you want to play an airhead. He could have a Wisdom 8, 10, or even 12. You just <i>play</i> him as an absentminded fellow. I know plenty of people who couldn't remember which car is theirs in a parking lot that can pull it together when their friends depend on them. And I don't know where people get the idea that such a rogue would be ineffective? Oh well. I guess I'm not going to get any more positive comments. *kills thread*
slimgoodbody 06-11-06, 08:14 AM	I didn't mean to shoot you down. :weep: I'm just saying that your character doesn't need to be below average to be fun. You're still a hero. Just be a quirky hero. :)
rogue_lettuce 06-11-06, 04:03 PM	I didn't mean to shoot you down. :weep: I'm just saying that your character doesn't need to be below average to be fun. You're still a hero. Just be a quirky hero. :) That's ok, all I meant was that I never suggested the rogue wouldn't make up for his shortfallings in other areas [especially if we're looking at the FLAW rules - free feat! :D]
slimgoodbody 06-11-06, 06:22 PM	That's ok, all I meant was that I never suggested the rogue wouldn't make up for his shortfallings in other areas [especially if we're looking at the FLAW rules - free feat! :D] You do have a point. If you can shine more in different area, it makes the weakness more worth it. You just have to make sure you're able to pull your own weight and not harm the rest of the party in a pinch.