Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Bopple 05-09-07, 10:30 PM	I am going to play a ranger in Eye of the lich queen adventure. Which favored enemies would you recommend for my ranger?
Kaleanae en'i Mori 05-10-07, 08:03 PM	they are scaley and have wings! and humans
Tevin Kevlak 05-11-07, 06:19 PM	Well, I'm not sure if it's legal in Eberron but in FR rangers could choose organizations for their FE bonuses. If your dm lets you do this The Emerald Claw might be a valid choice, other than that, Dragons and/or Undead would be a logical conclusion to come to.
korcheck 05-12-07, 01:47 PM	Well, I'm not sure if it's legal in Eberron but in FR rangers could choose organizations for their FE bonuses. If your dm lets you do this The Emerald Claw might be a valid choice, other than that, Dragons and/or Undead would be a logical conclusion to come to. you know I forgot all about that I will have to look at that feature again.
Nevarre 05-12-07, 07:56 PM	I am going to play a ranger in Eye of the lich queen adventure. Which favored enemies would you recommend for my ranger? Are you saying that you're specifically tailoring your PC for that adventure?? Want us to give you an overview of the plot as well while we're at it? :P
Bopple 05-13-07, 03:36 AM	If I had wanted that, I'd have directly asked the proportion of the races in the adventure. And actually, I chose Human and Undead and just wanted to double-check it not to waste all of my favored enemy features. Anyway, are you happy being a jerk? :P
Nevarre 05-13-07, 04:39 AM	If I had wanted that, I'd have directly asked the proportion of the races in the adventure. And actually, I chose Human and Undead and just wanted to double-check it not to waste all of my favored enemy features. LOL! True, but that *might* have been a tad obvious ;) To answer your question then I would say - Choose a favoured enemy that fits with the background and adventuring experience of your ranger; then it's never wasted, even if your DM never throws those types of creatures at you... Anyway, are you happy being a jerk? :P YUP! :D And I see I'm in good company!
Bopple 05-13-07, 08:21 AM	To answer your question then I would say - Choose a favoured enemy that fits with the background and adventuring experience of your ranger; then it's never wasted, even if your DM never throws those types of creatures at you... Yeah, I assume you'd gladly play a knight of chalice with long backgrounds in an one-shot adventure with no evil outsider. :P YUP! And I see I'm in good company! You can think what you want. :D
Nevarre 05-13-07, 08:43 AM	Yeah, I assume you'd gladly play a knight of chalice with long backgrounds in an one-shot adventure with no evil outsider. :P Never really given it any thought. But since you asked... My choice of character never has anything to do with the specific adventure I'm about play, unless I'm offered advice by the DM: "In this one you'll be Church Elders in Thrane, so I would suggest that you avoid Shifters" etc. If the DM didn't offer any advice, then I wouldn't know about the 'no evil outsider' and if I was of a mind to, playing a knight would be as good a character as any. In fact, even if it turned out there were no 'evil outsiders' in the adventure then I'm sure that there is fun to be had - even though my PCs abilities/feats aren't specifically tied to plot/adversaries the DM is going to throw at the players. I don't think I would bother with the 'long background' if it's a one-off adventure though (especially if it's not one DM wrote). You can think what you want. :D Phew! That's a relief. :cool:
Bopple 05-13-07, 09:07 AM	My choice of character never has anything to do with the specific adventure I'm about play, unless I'm offered advice by the DM: "In this one you'll be Church Elders in Thrane, so I would suggest that you avoid Shifters" etc. Oh? What's the difference? You are also using player knowledge and changing your character, in that case. Ah, because it's not your own decision? :P If the DM didn't offer any advice, then I wouldn't know about the 'no evil outsider' and if I was of a mind to, playing a knight would be as good a character as any. In fact, even if it turned out there were no 'evil outsiders' in the adventure then I'm sure that there is fun to be had - even though my PCs abilities/feats aren't specifically tied to plot/adversaries the DM is going to throw at the players. What does it have to do with having fun with using class abilities? Then why don't you just go out play a commoner? :P I don't think I would bother with the 'long background' if it's a one-off adventure though (especially if it's not one DM wrote). Whoa, what happened to this? Choose a favoured enemy that fits with the background and adventuring experience of your ranger Phew! That's a relief. :cool: Really? :P
Nevarre 05-13-07, 09:39 AM	Oh? What's the difference? You are also using player knowledge and changing your character, in that case. Ah, because it's not your own decision? :P I game with my friends, and want to have fun doing so. :) If the DM asks me to avoid a certain kind of character for his adventure, then I would probably do it - or work with him to make it acceptable. It's never completely 'my decision' is it? If the DM doesn't like the character he can refuse to allow me to play it, leaving with the choice of either changing the character using the 'player knowledge' you mention, or not playing the game. What does it have to do with having fun with using class abilities? I'm not sure I understand the question. :confused: Then why don't you just go out play a commoner? :P I'm not specifically sure I understand why that question is relevant. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with playing a 'commoner' (by which I assume you mean playing a peasant or other non-adventuring character-type). Of course, most players like having characters that have a 'special-ability' that makes them different from everyone else's (be it, spell-casting, the ability sneak around unseen, etc), and this is something that hasn't been explored for the 'commoner' classes (at least that I'm aware of..) In Eberron, the PCs are supposed to be 'special' - the heroes of the world, so by definition they can't be 'common' - right? (Though it would make for an interesting game for the PCs to start off as commoners and then discover their destiny - perhaps they start to manifest dragonmarks... But I digress :) ) Whoa, what happened to this? Note the reference to 'long background'? I was simply quoting you. Even in a 'one-off adventure' there is no reason not to have an understanding in your head about where the character comes from and their adventuring career - it doesn't have to be a 'long background' just an understanding as to why your PC is different from the next ranger with favoured enemies of humans and undead. In the case of your ranger, I'm sure you at least know what country he/she is from and why he doesn't like humans and undead. That's the point I was making really. Choosing something like Favoured Enemy readily fits into the background of your PC IMO Purely out of interest - have you discussed with your DM, what favoured enemies you should take?
Bopple 05-13-07, 10:18 AM	I game with my friends, and want to have fun doing so. :) Completely irrelevant. Your choice of favored enemy(or whatever class features which have a certain narrow window of application) absolutely has nothing to do with your or their fun. If the DM asks me to avoid a certain kind of character for his adventure, then I would probably do it - or work with him to make it acceptable. No. Again, it has nothing to do with his or your fun. It's never completely 'my decision' is it? If the DM doesn't like the character he can refuse to allow me to play it, leaving with the choice of either changing the character using the 'player knowledge' you mention, or not playing the game. No, you are twisting the truth. "Advising against a too specialized character or a wrong option for an one-shot adventure" is never "does not like". And why would your dm advise against a certain option? Because it would weaken the party and the party would fail to finish the adventure fully. And he might be worried you might get less fun than other members would do, because you wouldn't be able to use the full power of your chosen class. And why would I am worried about choosing a wrong favored enemy? Because it could weaken the party and might cause the failure. Because I might be unable to use the full power of my chosen class - ranger. Both are basically same - a sort of benign metagaming. And you endorse your dm's just because it's your dm, and you blame me just because I am not your dm. What a reasonable way to argue, don't you think? :P I'm not sure I understand the question. :confused: I am saying you cannot blame my desire to use the full power of my chosen class. I'm not specifically sure I understand why that question is relevant. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with playing a 'commoner' (by which I assume you mean playing a peasant or other non-adventuring character-type). Of course, most players like having characters that have a 'special-ability' that makes them different from everyone else's (be it, spell-casting, the ability sneak around unseen, etc), and this is something that hasn't been explored for the 'commoner' classes (at least that I'm aware of..) In Eberron, the PCs are supposed to be 'special' - the heroes of the world, so by definition they can't be 'common' - right? (Though it would make for an interesting game for the PCs to start off as commoners and then discover their destiny - perhaps they start to manifest dragonmarks... But I digress :) ) To make your long story short, it's not fun to play a commoner - with no special ability of what-so-ever. Let's see what you have said, again; In fact, even if it turned out there were no 'evil outsiders' in the adventure then I'm sure that there is fun to be had - even though my PCs abilities/feats aren't specifically tied to plot/adversaries the DM is going to throw at the players. Playing a knight of chalice in an adventure with extremely few evil outsider is like playing a warrior. Of course you can have fun with a warrior or even with a commoner, for certain matter. But standard PC classes can offer much more with their special class abilities, on top of that 'certain matter'. Note the reference to 'long background'? I was simply quoting you. Even in a 'one-off adventure' there is no reason not to have an understanding in your head about where the character comes from and their adventuring career - it doesn't have to be a 'long background' just an understanding as to why your PC is different from the next ranger with favoured enemies of humans and undead. Typically, one-shot adventure has very little to no character development or background immersion. Such background has no real bearing with playing an one-shot adventure. In the case of your ranger, I'm sure you at least know what country he/she is from and why he doesn't like humans and undead. That's the point I was making really. Choosing something like Favoured Enemy readily fits into the background of your PC IMO Now you argue you know what depth of background my adventure would require, better than me? Whoa, my omniscient Lord Jerk. :P Purely out of interest - have you discussed with your DM, what favoured enemies you should take? Purely out of interest? You are SO good at hiding your snobbish side. :P And yes, I met and asked him today. And he recommended human and undead.
Nevarre 05-13-07, 11:40 AM	OK. This is getting a little out of hand.. I honestly have no interest in arguing with you over this. I questioned your motives for asking the question, which was obviously a mistake, and you label me a jerk, and then an 'omniscient Lord Jerk'. If you want to discuss our different opinions then why repeatedly resort to name-calling? We can both be accused of twisting or miss-interpreting each-others words, intentionally or otherwise, and this thread is unlikely to come to a resolution that we both agree - so let's not bother. I'm sure we can both find something more fun to do. Suffice to say that my opinion on asking people about what abilities should be assigned to ones PC prior to playing a specific published adventure differ from your own. As do the reasons for DMs 'issues' with characters, why people do or don't play commoners, etc.
crashbangboom 05-15-07, 02:15 AM	I agree with Nevarre, I have a player in my group that does the same thing, I tell him "this is eberron", and leave it at that.
Amaril 05-15-07, 07:42 AM	Hmmm... Favored enemy for Eyes of the Lich Queen? I'd go with giants, fey, or aberrations definitely. Yeah, lots of aberrations. If you honestly want to know what creatures are prevalent in Eyes of the Lich Queen, read the backcover text, but be prepared to justify to your DM why your character has experience with that creature type such that it would be a favored enemy.
korcheck 05-15-07, 03:40 PM	as a dm I let the game decide a favored enemy if you think anbout it a favored enemy is something fought often enough to know their quirks if you fight a bunch of goblins the first game then thats your enemy
Dragom 05-16-07, 12:20 AM	The favoured Enemy thing does kind of require you to perform at least one dissection doesn't it? If only for fluff?
Bopple 05-16-07, 06:07 AM	I questioned your motives for asking the question You did not have any idea of what kind of game my DM was planning on this specific official adventure, but you just insulted me without checking anything at all. That's called 'rudeness'. which was obviously a mistake Yes, rudeness is usually a mistake. Suffice to say that my opinion on asking people about what abilities should be assigned to ones PC prior to playing a specific published adventure differ from your own. As do the reasons for DMs 'issues' with characters, why people do or don't play commoners, etc. Exactly. You don't know what my DM required of me at all. You have no right to judge others without proper information, solely on your own opinion. So just shut up and stop pretending you have been behaving civil, please.
Nevarre 05-16-07, 12:50 PM	I agree with Nevarre, I have a player in my group that does the same thing, I tell him "this is eberron", and leave it at that. Yeah, that's pretty what I did with the Shifter Ranger PC in my group. I gave the player an idea of the creatures his character was likely to have encountered in the Eldeen Reaches, and he decided on one that best fit his character and background (orcs). As it happens he's not come into 'conflict' with them in the games I've run, but it's made for some good roleplaying encounters in Sharn - with the PC trying to keep her hot temper in check in the presence of them. :)
Bopple 05-16-07, 01:40 PM	You are still attacking me indirectly by quoting others'. Aren't you done with it yet? My dm recommended what to choose. Doesn't that ring a bell to you? Or are you trying to argue you are my dm? Mind you own business.
Nevarre 05-16-07, 02:53 PM	Oh please.. I'm not attacking you, directly or indirectly. I was merely commenting on what crashbangboom wrote; adding my own experience. Nothing more sinister than that.
korcheck 05-16-07, 05:31 PM	children I believe one of you two should quiet down about the whole thing I don't care which but someone needs to be the better person and let it drop before the eye in the sky closes this thread if you wish to continue getting info from here that would be the wisest course of action. I like it when people disagree with me,it makes for a spirited debate but name calling is not condusive to a good enviroment. Expect debate on this board if you post and come back with a good sound justification thats all it takes.
Dragom 05-16-07, 06:04 PM	Tailoring a Character to fit an Adventure does have some merits. A city focused character working in the wilds is at a severe disadvantage. In addition to making people wonder how such a character got dragged away from his detective agency and what paying employer thought this was a good idea. However a TPK is not something a DM should plan on, and should already be working to avoid such an out come. It is in his best interest and the best interest of the player that he does so. Or else how could the group have the fun of completing the adventure? Like wise a ranger who allways has the advantage of striking at his favoured foes can threaten to steal the show from his team mates. This can bring out resentment, backbiting and accusations of favoritism from your fellow players and can kill the campaign as surely as a TPK. And as this is a bit of a danged if you do and danged if you don't situation some caution is advisable. But ofcourse every game is different. You could be metagamming to keep up with the joneses as it were or your group could be friendly enought to simply allow you your time in the spot light.
Altera 05-16-07, 08:02 PM	Speaking as someone who has a well experienced person gm'ing our weekly games (like we do currently ;) ), I think that it's down to the GM to figure out what the player should or shouldn't take during character creation. But on a personal note I think it's a bad idea letting someone know the perfect character type they should choose as a favoured enemy - as Dragom says the choice could steal the show from the rest of the party, and an unhappy party makes for a bad adventure. Of course you're perfectly within your right to ask, but if you don't get the reply you want don't go insulting someone and calling them a jerk and such like - more than anything that just shows poor personal character and helps your cause in no way what so ever. I mean look at it like this: if you were about to play a game Cleudo and a player asked you "who should I go for when I track down the killer?", would you tell them to help tailor their detective? Of course not - my Eberron shifter has humanoid orcs as a preferred enemy - this was discussed and decided due to the location she lived in in the Eldeen Reaches. If I never see an orc, so be it - what does it matter? I would hardly expect our GM to let me make a choice just so it fits in perfectly with a scenario. Bopple - Nevarre has not attacked you - he just gave another answer to the question you asked. If you don't like it, build a bridge and get over it. It's obvious you're a pationate player of the game and you play a certain way, but maybe - just maybe - you're taking things a wee bit too seriously. This is after all just a game. As the saying goes: different strokes for different folks - what might be right for you may not be right for some...just don't get upset when someone disagrees with you. But hey - seing as this will probably get you angry with me too can I ask to be a squire to my omniscient Lord Jerk, Nevarre - ALL HAIL NEVARRE! :cheer:
Subtle Knife 05-16-07, 08:10 PM	This thread would be funny if it weren't so sad. Bopple, Nevarre, grow up. Both of you. SK
Bopple 05-16-07, 09:45 PM	he just gave another answer to the question you asked. I even hadn't asked him one question. But you say I asked him another question? just don't get upset when someone disagrees with you. Since when was it a disagreement to be sarcastic to and to stick tongue at a total stranger, under prejudiced assumption? In my vicinity, that's called rudeness. I'm not attacking you, directly or indirectly. I was merely commenting on what crashbangboom wrote; adding my own experience. Nothing more sinister than that. After everything was debated and 2 days have passed, and then timely after my reply, you were suddenly filled with the urge to quote on him? Yeah, perhaps a 5 yr-old might believe that. I say again, mind your own business, please. Edit) My dm just contacted and showed the exact proportion of the races(I didn't ask him) to all the party members. He was worried about TPK. Perhaps this might satiate 'your' persistence about 'my' game.
Bopple 05-16-07, 09:57 PM	And seriously, a 5-9th lvl(which this adventure targets) ranger has only 2 favored enemies. Even if you tailored the ranger as best as you can, the portion is about 30% at max. And how can he always steal the show? What is worse, With PHB2 and many other splatbook feats, a fighter can consistently deal more amount of damage per round than a ranger can, even against ranger's most favored enemy. With Dungeonscape introduced, rogues can sneak-attack the creatures immune to criticals. Now sneak-attack is much less situational than it used to be. And we all know sneak-attack is devastating against those who are susceptible to it. Spot-light of a ranger? Umm.. what spot-light?
Bopple 05-16-07, 10:44 PM	Furthermore, people do metagaming, everyday. There are virtually no people who take certain weird combo of favored enemies - like Animal/Fey/Plant. Actually, animal is one of the most common thing you can find. But it's nigh impossible to see anyone taking animal as his favored enemy. Choosing the effective/efficient cut from the classes and feats is also metagaming. Avoiding the races unsuited for certain classes is too. Many even discuss which skills each member should take. Psionic classes are generally avoided in a campaign or an adventure with many encounters per day. Ect. ect. Heck even the authors metagamed - everything is based/calculated on classic 4-man party. And people usually try to fill all the roles. But my question about a ranger(whose fighting ability without favored enemy, can go down to the level of mediocrity) in an one-shot adventure deserves an insult based on long-term campaigns? Yeah, whatever.