Post/Author/DateTime	Post
drasticale 05-16-05, 06:29 PM	My DM is thinking about running his second campaign (See character below and insert him into the Eberron pre-mades) in Eberron in the Eldeen Reaches. Now, me and my DM don't see eye to eye on character ideas. I come up with cool, and innovative ideas that keep me interested; and he complains that they are all 'cheese'. That he couldn't see them in the game world... My characters are usually not stereotypical - below character being the closest thing to stereotypical I've made. We're starting at level 2; so I was thinking a talentan halfling barbarian/soulknife... He's learned to tap into the wellspring of his rage; and form his mind blade out of chaos... I think it was a cool idea... But, he didn't like it. I tried to play another character he didn't like for his first attempt at running the Eberron pre-mades... A monk/druid (who started out as an apprentice character <Mnk 0/Drd 0>.) Mainly because he'd warned me of the lack of time between adventures to actually explain how I became a Druid. <The story behind him, was I wanted to test how the tiny viper animal companion could initiate a grapple from wrapped around my arm, while I was in a grapple> The game didn't last; and partly was because he didn't like the character... Or even try to learn and like it... So, I've stopped making characters I like, that he can't get into. Now, if you are still with me... I'm looking for ideas on a character, because he's dropping hints. He is telling me he wants me to be a shifter wilder, in his 'oh-so subtle' way. Any ideas that could make it interesting, without me just succumbing to the usual... 'Yeah, I'm a wilder, who was trained by another wilder here in the reaches'; would be appreciated. Phew... complaining is hard.
Flack Jack 05-16-05, 07:50 PM	Well Sir Drasticale have you ever played morrowind? Of course you have, and it's a good thing too since that is what my advice revolves around. The races Argonian, and Khajit say a lot on "wild" things like "What Khajit do for you?", and "I smell death on you." I recomend you take out a sheet of paper, and jot down these linguistic habbits so you may use them for your shifter. Furthermore the wilder is kind of like a mix between a barbarian, and a soul knife. Just minus the soul knife of course. This meens that if you still feel low about the short character you could embody some of his characteristics into this new adventurer. P.S. I apreciate your support for the psionics handbook, I personally recieved some gruff from my peers for it, and I hope that you have met a more open group of nerds, uh I meen gamers to play with.
UltimateReality 05-16-05, 08:43 PM	I come up with cool, and innovative ideas that keep me interested; and he complains that they are all 'cheese'. That he couldn't see them in the game world...I'm going to go out on a limb here and, based on your examples, make a guess: you like to make characters based around an interesting mechanical idea, concept, or combination, whereas your DM is "hardcore RP" and wants personality to be front and fore... Am I right? If so, this means that no matter what character you make, if you present him with mechanics first, he'll probably be reluctant. Now, if you are still with me... I'm looking for ideas on a character, because he's dropping hints. He is telling me he wants me to be a shifter wilder, in his 'oh-so subtle' way.Um...you might want to ask your DM if he wants to take a break and be a player for awhile. DMs tell players what character options they have available to choose from, not what characters to play. I would politely suggest that he might want to try a shifter wilder as an NPC or offer to DM for a bit if he really wants to play again. Otherwise, the character concept is appreciated, but you are by no means bound by it. Any ideas that could make it interesting, without me just succumbing to the usual... 'Yeah, I'm a wilder, who was trained by another wilder here in the reaches'; would be appreciated.Actually, XPH p. 30: "Background: A wilder is typically self-taught. Most wilders were left too long on their own as children, sometimes forced by cruel circumstance to live alone in the wild." Doesn't sound like someone taught you to me. ;) Maybe something tragic involving your family or tribe... I'm reluctant to offer more advice without knowing if you really want to play this concept or are just doing it to appease your DM.
Cloud Divider 05-16-05, 09:20 PM	My DM is thinking about running his second campaign (See character below and insert him into the Eberron pre-mades) in Eberron in the Eldeen Reaches. Now, me and my DM don't see eye to eye on character ideas. Does he give much more information as to why he vetoes some of your concepts? Saying they're "cheese" is one thing, but does he say why he thinks so? Part of the reason I say that, is that while I'm generally pretty flexible when it comes to concepts, I still reserve the right to veto - primarily for things I may find unbalanced ("No, you can't play Special Core Class X from 3rd Party Book Y...The campaign groundrules were for core book + Complete Whatevers + XPH classes only..."), or for reasons that may violate what I deem to be setting "continuity" issues (for instance, in my campaign, with very rare exception, all psionic characters must have some tie-in to the Kalashtar, Dreaming Dark, or other Sarlonan entity...whether the character is aware of it or not, is a different story). I come up with cool, and innovative ideas that keep me interested; and he complains that they are all 'cheese'. That he couldn't see them in the game world... Again, I really can't speak to whether they were "cheese" or not. That said, whether he can see them in the game world or not is something that may be open to a bit more discussion. We're starting at level 2; so I was thinking a talentan halfling barbarian/soulknife... He's learned to tap into the wellspring of his rage; and form his mind blade out of chaos... I think it was a cool idea... But, he didn't like it. Did he happen to give any details as to why he didn't like it? It may be as simple as that he (like me), wasn't kosher with psionics being quite as "openly" available in Khorvaire (in my opinion, open availability of psionics drastically reduces the mystery behind the Sarlonans, Kalashtar, and Dreaming Dark). Now, had the character say...run across some arcane (as in wierd and mysterious, not Arcane in the proper d20 terminology) tablet, idol, or other Plot Device, dating back to the first Sarlonan/Kalashtar exodus to Khorvaire that awakened his powers... Or run across an itinerant Kalashtar that saw his potential and subtly mentored him, that'd make it all kosher in my book. Re: the Mnk0/Drd0 Apprentice The game didn't last; and partly was because he didn't like the character... Or even try to learn and like it... So, I've stopped making characters I like, that he can't get into. Well, there really is something to be said about being able to wrap your head around your players' characters as GM. Generally speaking, having at least a basic understanding of what the character is about makes it WORLDS easier to GM for, when it comes to adventure design - if I know what motivates the character -- or simply, just what hooks I have to work with - it makes it much, much easier to integrate a character into my game. Did you have anything like that with your Apprentice (beyond just wanting to have your tiny viper grapple when you'd grapple)? It may not necessarily be that it's the GM not digging the stats or race/class combo - there just may not be any meat for him to sink his GMing teeth into. So I'm generally a big fan of getting at least a minimal background character sketch (not drawing - but something kinda like a bio). NOTE: I'm not necessarily looking for ten pages of fiction. The kind of stuff I want to know about as GM are the hooks - what drives the character, who his friends and enemies are, his hopes and dreams, a genuine secret he knows, etc...and "narrator"-level knowledge while the character may not know that his long-lost father is Dr. Evil, it's something the player wants to have happen. Stuff like that. That kind of stuff goes a LONG way. And you can hash out that info with the GM pretty quickly - maybe even in just a paragraph. Now, if you are still with me... I'm looking for ideas on a character, because he's dropping hints. He is telling me he wants me to be a shifter wilder, in his 'oh-so subtle' way. Try couching the character with some hooks to work with. Maybe he's a wilder because he had a wierd near-miss with a Dal Quor manifest zone (a really, REALLY minor manifest zone) - say, an ancient Sarlonan or even a previously-unknown Giant/Quori battlefield with some serious psychic fallout or something, and he's wracked by wierd nightmares, which may or may not be related to his wild psychic powers. Good luck!
Solarious 05-16-05, 09:59 PM	Alright. First we have psionics: most psychic power comes from either Dal Quor or Xoriat. We have the Shadow Marches, which is conspicuously close to Xoriat for some reason. I'll let you figure out the implications of that. As for Dal Quor, we have the Dreaming Dark and the Inspired everywhere. You won't have any problems worming them in: they're probably already there somehow. As for Wilders, their powers are fueled by unchecked emotions and tremendous flares of power. Most of them are chaotic... lawful ones are nearly unheard of. What do you think Wild Surge and Psychic Eneveration are such a large part of the Wilder class? ;) I also suggest looking at the Wilder subsitution levels for the Shifter, in Races of Eberron. They're pretty nice, I hear.
drasticale 05-17-05, 12:30 AM	Okay, while I do profess to being someone who likes mechanical tidbits of the character, I will admit that each and every character I put to the forefront has at the least an outline of his life, and of his goals. My ideas spring mostly from... 'Hey, that'd be cool!' Like my half-orc sorcerer; or my current quest... Making a fighter that uses spiked gauntlets. But after I get my ideas, I like to justify them... My DM's have a love-hate relationship with how deeply I get involved with my characters... I have a habit of typing up short stories about how one would act in a situation to give the DM an idea of how the character would act... That, and I like to write. He hasn't justified most of the ideas he has shot down, and he does even less now that he has just seemed to give up. I am interested in playing a Shifter Wilder, because I have expressed interest in toying with all the new pieces of Eberron... and the XPH for that matter, considering I'm normally stuck playing a second edition 'kill, kill, kill, kill, kill, count...' sort of game... where sadly enough, my 8 foot tall warrior has the most personality of the group, and seemingly the only one with world dominating aspirations... <You'd be surprised what a little knowledge of the trade routes, and the celebrity of saving the kingdom multiple times can earn you...>
Cloud Divider 05-17-05, 09:44 AM	But after I get my ideas, I like to justify them... My DM's have a love-hate relationship with how deeply I get involved with my characters... I have a habit of typing up short stories about how one would act in a situation to give the DM an idea of how the character would act... That, and I like to write. Yeah, I can understand the love-hate relationship from the GM's perspective. There's a fine line between fleshing out a character enough to make him interesting and playable, and taking things to excess. For instance, in one campaign I ran, I ha one player whose PC almost seemed to have a "parallel life" between what actually happened in game, and where the player's "ideal future history" crossed paths. Normally, it wouldn't be too big a deal, to take the "parallel universes" approach and be done with it; but in this case, it caused a few issues when I pulled a few fairly serious plot twists in the game that didn't jive with the player's "future history". I think it caused a little frustration on his part, as well... On some level, it's kinda like GMing a campaign setting, and making up material when you need it, and then out comes an official canon book that does things differently. Technically, it shouldn't matter. But to some folks, it does... He hasn't justified most of the ideas he has shot down, and he does even less now that he has just seemed to give up. I think you might really benefit from a friendly "sit-down chat" with your GM over coffee or beers or tacos or whatever, and try to hash out these things in a more "collaborative" sense. Go from broad strokes, and then fill in the spaces in the middle. Who knows - maybe the GM's got a plot point he wants to try out, and he needs an "inside man" to be able to pull it off (been there, done that), and he's steering you for a legit reason. Or, as others have said, he needs to learn a little more flexibility. >snip<...considering I'm normally stuck playing a second edition 'kill, kill, kill, kill, kill, count...' sort of game... I'm not sure if this Eberron game is being run by the same GM, but it may just ultimately be that you've got a style mismatch with this particular group/GM. Though, it seems rather strangely restrictive as a game of indiscriminate hacking. I could certainly buy a certain level of restrictiveness in a heavy "concept" game...
drasticale 05-17-05, 06:10 PM	I'm not sure if this Eberron game is being run by the same GM, but it may just ultimately be that you've got a style mismatch with this particular group/GM. Though, it seems rather strangely restrictive as a game of indiscriminate hacking. I could certainly buy a certain level of restrictiveness in a heavy "concept" game... Nah, he was a player in that one... We have two groups we play with. And I enjoy both, but I do like the world of Eberron, and how it always feels like you are moving...
PoeticJustice 05-17-05, 09:44 PM	Regarding your Wilder: (These are merely to get you started) During a childhood excursion to the Shadow Marches, your mind was tragically and irrevocably altered by a brush with a Daelkyr Artifact, imbuing you with Psionic powers that made you hated and feared by your tribe, causing you to have been outcast some weeks ago. Now looking for new companions out of lonliness and longing for acceptance and appreciation for your unique abilities, you decide to adventure with the rest of the party. OR Your Shifter was born during a planar conjunction with Xoriat, and he has been imbued with the psionic power of the plane. After your tribe was killed by Brelish commandos during the Last War, you were raised by a Brelish Kalashtar but could never conquer the chaos of your mind or the conflict in heart. Seeking to reconicle the two, you leave everything you've known behind OR You have no memory of childhood. For untold years you've roamed the woods, alone and apart of society, with it's rules, wars, and comforts. You are a living expression of savage passion given flesh by the fickle fates that control the Eldeen Reaches. Feeling that you know all and have seen all of the Reaches, you decide to expand your horizons and explore, lending your talnets to a group of slow, stupid mortals unaccustomed to your home.
drasticale 05-17-05, 11:45 PM	You have no memory of childhood. For untold years you've roamed the woods, alone and apart of society, with it's rules, wars, and comforts. You are a living expression of savage passion given flesh by the fickle fates that control the Eldeen Reaches. Feeling that you know all and have seen all of the Reaches, you decide to expand your horizons and explore, lending your talnets to a group of slow, stupid mortals unaccustomed to your home. Ooooh... I might have to yoink that one... I haven't been haughty in a good long while...
great_grunty 05-18-05, 02:55 AM	I never said you "couldn't" be your halfling barbarian soulknife, or you halfling paladin. I just said i didn't like them because of 1. in my opinon they were cheesy and 2. i like my psionics quori based unless they have some training from kalashtar or they're special circumstance, like the racial substitution levels from races of eberron.
Salla 05-18-05, 01:13 PM	Well, let's see ... 1. This is a definition of 'cheesy' that I'm not familiar with, but what constitutes cheese is subjective. I'd have no problems with any of these characters, in fact, I'd embrace them as they aren't stereotypical examples of, well, anything. They're different, and different is good, especially since the combinations you listed above are rather suboptimal. Classes aren't rigid stereotypes, either for personality or background; a character isn't even aware of his class. 2. If the DM 'encourages' you to play something, don't play it. If you do, in my experience, it's a fair bet he'll spend the rest of the game telling you how to 'play it right'. Admittedly, I've only really seen this twice, but both times it ended poorly.
Gurv 05-18-05, 01:49 PM	1. This is a definition of 'cheesy' that I'm not familiar with, but what constitutes cheese is subjective. I'd have no problems with any of these characters, in fact, I'd embrace them as they aren't stereotypical examples of, well, anything. They're different, and different is good, especially since the combinations you listed above are rather suboptimal. Classes aren't rigid stereotypes, either for personality or background; a character isn't even aware of his class. Another word to use in place of stereotype is archetype. I have several players who seem attracted to playing half-orc bards and dwarven druids, claiming that they want something different. But you have to remember that dwarven fighters are different: most are smiths (and in Eberron, bankers and merchants). The first thing to remember is that your first non-stereotypical behavior is being an adventurer in the first place. There is nothing wrong with playing the axe-wielding dwarven fighter or the stealthy halfling rogue. A good roleplayer will find ways to make even these "cliché" characters interesting. It isn't your ability to throw energy blades from atop a dinosaur while raging that makes your character cool; it is how you play the character. My suggestion is to stop coming up with mechanical combos and designing concepts around them and do it the other way: come up with character concepts and then find mechanics to make it work. I am not suggesting boring or suboptimal choices, just ones that make a little more sense. Another problem that comes up is that some players play nothing but the off-the-wall types. In a party of these, the originality of the character is lost because everyone is a weirdo with a unlikely background. If you want to play the occasional oddball, you must establish what the baseline is for normal. I once played an evil elven mercenary who was a master knife fighter. This quirkiness was completely overshadowed by the albino minotaur plague cleric, the insane necromancer, and the fire-worshipping (ready for this?) paladin. It wasn't any fun, because no one was very interested in anyone's quirks because we all had them on huge flashing signs. We were a walking circus...couldn't go anywhere without attracting attention, and virtually anything that happened was instantly pinned on us, whether we did it or not. 2. If the DM 'encourages' you to play something, don't play it. If you do, in my experience, it's a fair bet he'll spend the rest of the game telling you how to 'play it right'. Admittedly, I've only really seen this twice, but both times it ended poorly. This, I have a serious problem with. I am not saying that the DM should be telling the player what to play all the time. But if he has a certain adventure or campaign in mind, then he might well be trying to tell you that you are not going to enjoy it if you pick something weird. If the DM tells you to play something, then there is a problem and maybe he should be the one playing. But ignoring what he encourages is like ignoring what he wants the game to be like. He has a right to influence the game. There is something that a lot of players tend to forget. The DM is playing this game too, and his enjoyment of it is just as important as your own. If you are doing things that take away his enjoyment of the game, he has just as much right to walk away from a game as you do. Many people are willing to point to the DM as the guy who is supposed to sit back and let the players do whatever they want and never influence their characters in the slightest way. Well, if you want your PC to influence the game world that the DM is creating, then you have to let that world influence your part in the game as well. That means acting on his suggestions about what works in the game and what doesn't. If you insist on creating characters that don't make sense for the setting and adventures he wants to run, don't be surprised when those characters have no impact on what happens.
drasticale 05-18-05, 03:59 PM	I've got a question on Psionics... Now, I've been talking with my GM< and he just brought up the fact that I'd have to take a feat to even be a Shifter Wilder... he says I have to have Wild Talent to gain a power pool... Personally, I don't think this is right... it's like making a fighter use a feat to be specialized in the weapon he wanted to use... I figure a first level psionic character as per the XPH is given a power pool, so that means they are psionic anyways... You don't have to be naturally psionic, that just helps right? Thanks again.
Gurv 05-18-05, 04:31 PM	I've got a question on Psionics... Now, I've been talking with my GM< and he just brought up the fact that I'd have to take a feat to even be a Shifter Wilder... he says I have to have Wild Talent to gain a power pool... Your DM is wrong, unless he is using Rule 0. There is nothing preventing any race from taking levels in any psionic class. Having power points is not a requirement for entering a psionic class. Your DM may be thinking of the requirement for maintaining a psionic focus, which does require one to have power points. Many psionic feats and abilities can only be used by creatures with power points because they depend on using the psionic focus. Creatures which naturally have power points, including kalashtar and the races in the XPH, can take maintain a psionic focus and therefore take psionic feats without taking a psionic class. That is their only advantage. The fact that you used the term "power pool" suggests a mindset more in line with earlier editions of psionic rules. To my knowledge, the term is used only once in the SRD to describe power points.