Post/Author/DateTime	Post
cetiken 01-17-07, 03:38 AM	Hypothetical Scenario: Player A sits down two seats from you and introduces himself. He's playing a wizard. A half-orc wizard. A transmuter to be precise. What's your opinion?
Lupo 01-17-07, 04:02 AM	Hypothetical Scenario: Player A sits down two seats from you and introduces himself. He's playing a wizard. A half-orc wizard. A transmuter to be precise. What's your opinion? can't be worse than some wizzies i already have encountered :rolleyes:, at least someone doing this is supposed to KNOW what he is doing :D ciao martin m.
Britt 01-17-07, 04:46 AM	I would think that's odd and wait to see how well he plays. Personally, after my primary character, I started purposefully making underpowered characters to try to challenge myself somewhat. I can break the game if I want to, but that's not fun for me or anyone else. I usually find a way to do something extremely well, but it's usually at a much lower level than I could achieve if I really wanted to. Some of my fun characters are a grey elf monk, gnome clr/brd/mystic theurge, warforged monk, dwarven bard/marshal, among others.
UMiskatonic 01-17-07, 09:06 AM	I'm in. Transmutation spells often work on your own party, where spell DCs are not such a big deal. If he said he was an evoker, or an illusionist, I'd raise an eyebrow, but give him the benefit of the doubt.
Bob_the_Theurge 01-17-07, 10:30 AM	Hypothetical Scenario: Player A sits down two seats from you and introduces himself. He's playing a wizard. A half-orc wizard. A transmuter to be precise. What's your opinion? I ask him what he does in combat, what his stats are. For all I know, his goal is to be a combat-buffer for the party, and then cast Tenser's Transformation in order to wade in and smack the baddies around. And that might be a nifty concept to see in action.
Simpi 01-17-07, 10:59 AM	I say nothing and expect nothing. It's his character, he can do whatever he wants with it and nobody should have any issues with. Unfortunately, it seems lots of people are not so open minded and cannot keep any comments to themselves or somehow think that they know what is best for other peoples characters. For example, I was once told in quite clear terms that my half-orc should dip into barbarian level and take extra rage because he would be more effective in combat. Statistically that is true but did this a.....e who did it online game (only thing which prevented me from slapping him) stop for even a single moment to consider what I want from MY character and what MY concept of it might be. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad
Fleetfang 01-17-07, 11:07 AM	I agree with Bob and Miska. Guarded optimism. Especially if I don't know the player. In addition to wondering about the build, I'd probably size up the player as well: Is he 10-years-old, 20, 40? Is he speaking intelligently? Does he look like he's properly dressed himself? Does he smell funny? I find that someone who is self-aware enough to pay attention to things like personal hygine is more likely to have the self-awareness that he's got a non-standard (and possibly sub-optimal) build on his hands. Thus, I'm willing to give more of the benefit of the doubt to the guy if he's not a stanky mumbler who has his pants on backwards. In any case, I'd keep any doubts to myself to begin with and then see how things play out in the scenario. And I'd certainly ask him what he sees as his role in the party. A Transmuter half-orc isn't necessarily a bad combination. There are worse ways to go for building a gish. Statistically that is true but did this a.....e who did it online game (only thing which prevented me from slapping him) stop for even a single moment to consider what I want from MY character and what MY concept of it might be. While telling someone what to do with their character isn't truly accepted behavior when the advice isn't asked for, I'm pretty sure that slapping another player is a bannable offense. :P What prompts the question, cetiken?
clik_ml 01-17-07, 12:42 PM	How a wizard is built stat-wise has far less to do with their effectiveness than their spell selection and tactics. Just about any wizard can be either awesome or awful, depending upon how they are played. So I don't see a huge problem. Taking a -2 to the primary casting stat is obviously not optimal by any standard, but not hopeless either. One could still afford a 14 int, which is sufficient to be effective if done properly. Heck, I often will try to make something worthwhile out of a sub-optimal concept (usually involving halflings). I have a halfling archer who I'm proud of as being almost as good as the stereotypical wood elf archer. Now, if someone says they have a 10 strength archer or any sort of swashbuckler, I wince... but still try to keep an open mind that they will somehow be useful. It hasn't turned out to be the case yet where they have ever been useful, but I'm always hopeful.
jstorrie 01-17-07, 02:48 PM	-2 Int? Oh, noes! It's not that big of a deal. At least he's not playing a Mystic Theurge. If half-orcs got -4 to Int, I might wince a little, but half-orc wizard isn't all that much worse than dwarf paladin, and no one bats an eyelash at them.
Mommy was an Orc 01-17-07, 03:16 PM	I'd agree with what's been said - not to mention, don't forget they might have been reincarnated. They might not even have a penalty to Int...
Morgen 01-17-07, 03:48 PM	Sounds fine, what's wrong with a half-orc wizard?
amnuxoll 01-17-07, 04:22 PM	My most twinky PC is a half-orc sorcerer. He's very very effective and a riot to play. Just because your tablemate is playing a half-orc transmuter that doesn't mean a thing about that character's effectiveness. I think your real question is: "How do you react when it becomes apparent that one of the PCs in your party is grossly suboptimal?" My short answer is: I have fun, the same as I do every time. My long answer is: You learn to adjust your tactics and your decisions to compensate. It's usually pretty easy to do with some preplanning. If I find myself irrevocably sitting at a table with four bards and a wizard I play down. I organize a strategy pow-wow before the mod starts so we know how we're going to deal with it. In a party like that, for example, someone has to volunteer to be the cork so the rest of the party can do their thing. You also make it clear to the judge that you're in a lousy spot and ask him to adjust his play style to keep it balanced. That can be done without cheating. Then you relax and enjoy the session because you'll probably have a funny story or three to tell afterwards. :AMN:
Vanadium 01-17-07, 04:22 PM	I, too, do not see anything wrong with a Half-Orc wizard. If anything, he's probably got an excellent story to tell of how that happened. However, I think this does raise an interesting point. I've seen some pretty bizzare builds in my short time at LG (playing in a relatively busy area with people making secondary characters seems to do that), but at what point does a build go from being offbeat or quirky to downright useless? I've seen offbeat builds that were weak, but only one or two that I thought were downright bad, and in these instances it was due to poor character planning and design. Then again, opinions vary from person to person. I saw a newcomer with a cleric of Wee Jas and the DM ruled that he channeled positive energy. The reason was because in the DM's opinion the character would have been "worthless" otherwise despite having a fully charged wand of CLW and the ability to, you know, memorize cure spells. Of course, remembering all the rules for Wee Jas, that might be an offbeat character in its own right.
_metz_ 01-17-07, 05:07 PM	Not everyone needs to optimise, Dwarf Sorcerors, Orc Bards with Bagpipes, all are fun things that are unusual and give great roleplaying applications. A half orc wizard might be as useful in combat as a performance monkey, or some other fluff character, you as DM just have to sit and deal with it. That is how RPGA works, the games are designed to be able to be adjusted situationally so that it can be played by 4 level 5 rogues in an APL 6 or a balanced party of 7s. Whilst one is more dangerous of course, its the DM that can really make the encounters difficult, a good (or some would say bad lol) DM can kill any party if the mod is written right. At least the player may have the right attitude that its not just about the combat encounters. Though personally I do think a Half orc transmutist is a little odd... 2 points behind the curve unless str 16 which is pointless if you are changing forms... But hey its their choice.
Bob_the_Theurge 01-17-07, 05:12 PM	I, too, do not see anything wrong with a Half-Orc wizard. If anything, he's probably got an excellent story to tell of how that happened. However, I think this does raise an interesting point. I've seen some pretty bizzare builds in my short time at LG (playing in a relatively busy area with people making secondary characters seems to do that), but at what point does a build go from being offbeat or quirky to downright useless? When a build actually cannot help the party, or worse yet, hurts the party, it becomes "useless." Now, many character builds are simply not built around combat, and I've no problem with these as long as they can do something to help out, and usually these players know what they're doing as well. Far more dangerous is the party of 8-year-olds who know nothing more than "rarr, charge into combat." I've seen offbeat builds that were weak, but only one or two that I thought were downright bad, and in these instances it was due to poor character planning and design. I've seen builds that are weak at certain points but building towards later strength (entry for certain PrC's is certain this way). But even those have something they can do in combat, and the players can figure out what they need to do to be somewhat effective. Then again, opinions vary from person to person. I saw a newcomer with a cleric of Wee Jas and the DM ruled that he channeled positive energy. The reason was because in the DM's opinion the character would have been "worthless" otherwise despite having a fully charged wand of CLW and the ability to, you know, memorize cure spells. Actually, the DM was (a) outside of the bounds of the rules, (b) wrong, and (c) doing something LG-illegal, and should have been reported to the senior GM and/or Triad. Of course, remembering all the rules for Wee Jas, that might be an offbeat character in its own right. See above. Now, to everyone who keeps talking about how Mystic Theurges are "underpowered", I'll remind you of a few things you may have forgotten: #1 - by the third round of combat, your wizard or cleric has blown his wad. Mine, however, is still going strong and still has spell options. Interactive going long? No problem. Many encounters in your Delve? Not a big deal for me. #2 - I can buff up the whole party - everyone can have resist energy, mage armor, blur, and the tanks can even have a Spell Immunity and Greater Magic Weapon apiece - and still have spells left over going into combat. #3 - There are plenty of lower-level spells that can be absolutely brutal in combat. You just have to know how to use them. And if you forget this, I'll be happy to stick you inside of a Web, or a Grease, or even stick you in a stone box till you remember. And you don't get a saving throw against the stone box either.
Vanadium 01-17-07, 05:39 PM	When a build actually cannot help the party, or worse yet, hurts the party, it becomes "useless." Now, many character builds are simply not built around combat, and I've no problem with these as long as they can do something to help out, and usually these players know what they're doing as well. Far more dangerous is the party of 8-year-olds who know nothing more than "rarr, charge into combat." It gets worse when the party is composed of 20-year-olds with the same mentality. I don't know why, but it does. And, the fact of the matter is it doesn't take too long to find that a vast majority of builds optimized for out of combat suck swampwater while in it. Take a look at most supertweaked Diplomancers for how crazy that mentality can get. Of course, many supertweaked tanks aren't too handy when attempting to socialize, but they seem to be trying harder, at least around here. Actually, the DM was (a) outside of the bounds of the rules, (b) wrong, and (c) doing something LG-illegal, and should have been reported to the senior GM and/or Triad. It really didn't develop into a problem. The guy playing the cleric said he knew he had to channel negative and played accordingly. The issue didn't present itself, either, as there were no undead that mod and he didn't get in a position where he would have wanted to spontaneously heal. I think the DM was just having a bad day and didn't want to see us overwhelmed as the mod was supposed to be hard. Now, to everyone who keeps talking about how Mystic Theurges are "underpowered", I'll remind you of a few things you may have forgotten: If you play a theurge in such a manner, then I wouldn't mind seeing you at the table. You know what the combination does for you, and you built around the limitations of the path you chose. However, if you were showing up and (thankfully you don't seem to be) claiming to be a primary divine and arcane caster, I'd find that grating. If you played as if you were a primary in both, that would also be a very bad situation. Still, the path of a theurge is something I never would do myself. I keep coming back to the staggering opportunity cost for those low level slots and split casting scores.
solbergb 01-17-07, 06:18 PM	Hypothetical Scenario: Player A sits down two seats from you and introduces himself. He's playing a wizard. A half-orc wizard. A transmuter to be precise. What's your opinion? Depends on his spells. If he's packing save throw dependent spells, such as "slow" then he's "deoptomized". If he's packing buff spells, such as enlarge, haste, attribute boosters, polymorph, and the usual "gish" defensive spells (alter self, mirror image, etc) - then he may well be "optomized" especially if he occasionally uses that extra strength for fighting when no other fighter is a better target for his buffs. A grey elf transmuter would want more save dependent spells and to cut down on the party buff spells when caught in a party with no decent melee characters (or summon his own perhaps). You can't judge a wiz by the race, but rather by the spells. Most of the wiz power is in what he preps. Just about everything else is secondary, although attribute allocations and racial modifiers will argue for certain spell picks.
Istaran 01-17-07, 06:19 PM	Wee Jas is LN. LG clerics of Wee Jas are possible, as that is only one step away. LG clerics of Wee Jas channel positive energy. The special rule is that Neutral (non-good) followers of Wee Jas channel negative energy. You did not specify if the cleric in question was LG or not. So to revise: Actually, the DM was (a) outside of the bounds of the rules, (b) wrong, and (c) doing something LG-illegal, and should have been reported to the senior GM and/or Triad. or (d) the character was Lawful Good. What do you do with a newbie who has claimed two traits (channels positive energy and is LN) which are mutually exclusive? I would imagine you require them to change one or the other to come into compliance.
Bob_the_Theurge 01-17-07, 06:35 PM	Wee Jas is LN. LG clerics of Wee Jas are possible, as that is only one step away. LG clerics of Wee Jas channel positive energy. The special rule is that Neutral (non-good) followers of Wee Jas channel negative energy. You did not specify if the cleric in question was LG or not. So to revise: or (d) the character was Lawful Good. What do you do with a newbie who has claimed two traits (channels positive energy and is LN) which are mutually exclusive? I would imagine you require them to change one or the other to come into compliance. Perhaps. But I'd also explain to them the difference between the two and let THEM choose, rather than insisting "no, this is how your character's going to be."
Bob_the_Theurge 01-17-07, 06:54 PM	If you play a theurge in such a manner, then I wouldn't mind seeing you at the table. You know what the combination does for you, and you built around the limitations of the path you chose. However, if you were showing up and (thankfully you don't seem to be) claiming to be a primary divine and arcane caster, I'd find that grating. If you played as if you were a primary in both, that would also be a very bad situation. Still, the path of a theurge is something I never would do myself. I keep coming back to the staggering opportunity cost for those low level slots and split casting scores. I've got Heighten Spell and Empower; my low level shots can blow off with a +4 on their save, or a few extra dice, if I have to. Empowered Ray of Enfeeblement is a BRUTAL opening round attack; minimum 9 strength gone, max 16. When the enemy's just dropped an average of 6 points of to-hit and the same or better to damage (probably a lot better when it's a power-attack monster) it's lovely to behold. I've got CWI, so I've got a 23 Wisdom and 20 Charisma. Not too shabby; sure a straight caster comes in higher in their prime stat, but only by a point or two. You think of it as the "opportunity cost" of higher level spells; I look at the fact that I've got the spell selection of a 10th level Cleric added to the spell selection of an 11th level Sorceror, I total up the number of options that gives me, and I'm quite happy with my build. The other thing you're failing to consider is how well the two sides complement each other; the Sorceror spells fill in holes in a Cleric's repertoire, and vice versa. I didn't need to learn Dispel Magic, and was able to take Fly instead, because it's already on my Cleric list. Likewise, if I need a big boom spell, I'm sure I can find space to memorize a Flame Strike, or else I'll just light off an Empowered Fireball. I've been described at times as "the ultimate cohort", but so what? I take that as a point of pride. My job in a party is to fill in the gaps and make sure that everyone else has the breathing room to do what they do best. Do we have a dexterity-based fighter, or a grappling specialist? Divine Agility and Freedom of Movement will come in handy. Do we have a party consisting of a Ranger, a Druid, a Cleric, a Fighter, and me? Wonderful - I've got a particular Divine feat that will make our healing spells that much more effective, all around. Do we have time to prebuff? I've got more minute-per-level options than you can shake a stick at. Want the enemy to quit moving around? I can stick the big baddies in a box, web them up, make up to 16 enemies at once flat-footed and half movement... the list goes on. I can cut a combat in half if I want, I can give the whole party 20% miss chance, I can slap Greater Invisibility on Mister Rogue... you name it, I've got a way to make it better. You see the Theurge glass as half empty. I see it as a half empty cauldron of boiling oil, ready to be poured out onto the enemy's heads. ;)
Mommy was an Orc 01-17-07, 07:03 PM	Now, to everyone who keeps talking about how Mystic Theurges are "underpowered", I'll remind you of a few things you may have forgotten: #1 - by the third round of combat, your wizard or cleric has blown his wad. Mine, however, is still going strong and still has spell options. Interactive going long? No problem. Many encounters in your Delve? Not a big deal for me. A Mystic Theurge doesn't actually have a real spells per day advantage until 10th level. It isn't until 12th level that the spells per day advantage involves spells other than 1st level - which is important, because any Wizard or Cleric should be able to craft 10 Pearls of Power 1st after a couple of adventures. When the 3rd round of combat rolls around and those wizard or clerics have run out of their top tier spells, they're still casting spells that are a Mystic Theurge's top tier spells - at even APL, a specialist wizard or cleric should have generally have 5 5 4 of their top 3 levels of spells where a Mystic Theurge has 8 6 0. On odd APL, it turns into 5 4 3 vs 8 0 0.
solbergb 01-17-07, 07:48 PM	Mystic theurges are not a power build, not in terms of spells/day or in terms of spellpower/round. They're just very flexible. In the hands of a skilled player who knows how to get the most out of a lot of low level options they can contribute pretty well to just about any party. They are not, however, a class for people who sleepwalk through combats or who prepare the exact same spell mix every day (or in the case of spont caster theurge, pick bad spells). They aren't forgiving at all to a player who doesn't know what he's doing - unlike the component classes (wiz and cleric are probably the most forgiving classes in the game to a bad build. Bad spell selection at the table can still sink them, but it is nearly impossible to mess one up if you chose a 14+ primary casting attribute and have higher than 9 constitution)
cetiken 01-17-07, 09:50 PM	Some good thoughts and suggestions. I guess I'm still struggling with the power gamer part of me. 8) In any case the desire to build a half-orc wizard has come over me again (possibly for use in the Ruins of Greyhawk thing). I had a lot of fun wading into melee during year one with touch spells charged up. If only it hadn't been for that unfortunate fireball... For those who were curious about stats here’s what it currently looks like: Str: 13 Dex: 14 Con: 14 Int: 15 Wis: 8 Cha: 6 As I'm still in the building stages I wouldn't mind some input about banned schools. I'm currently thinking enchantment and evocation. And yes, I do plan to primarily buff the party, but a few spell focus feats make slow and baleful polymorph options... especially after I can craft a headband.
Lord Yod 01-17-07, 10:00 PM	What do you do when your friend tells you she wants to play a swashbuckler 3/bard 2/divine oracle X/duelist X? (with maybe something else in there too) I was driving at the time, and I nearly wrecked. :eek:
zigspatty 01-17-07, 11:35 PM	[QUOTE=Lord Yod;11215035]What do you do when your friend tells you she wants to play a swashbuckler 3/bard 2/divine oracle X/duelist X? (with maybe something else in there too)[QUOTE] You ask "Why?" of course. If she's got an idea of a particular character type, she might be open to ways to build it that's more effective. I mean, she DID mention this before her singing duelist was 5th level, right? As to the half orc wizzie, much depends upon the rest of the party. Well-played, he's probably fine and may promise an interesting game. I'm far more bothered when I discover that the sole "divine caster" is a multiclass mix that's not going to be able to provide the healing power that is a cleric's forte.
Mommy was an Orc 01-18-07, 12:02 AM	Str: 13 Dex: 14 Con: 14 Int: 15 Wis: 8 Cha: 6 As I'm still in the building stages I wouldn't mind some input about banned schools. I'm currently thinking enchantment and evocation. And yes, I do plan to primarily buff the party, but a few spell focus feats make slow and baleful polymorph options... especially after I can craft a headband. One of the things to consider is Summoning. DC doesn't matter at all, just what level Wizard are you and is your Int high enough to cast spell level X. It does seem a shame though not to have a 14 or 16 Str as said Wizard.
paigeoliver 01-18-07, 12:28 AM	Halfling archers are some of the best characters in the game. The almost constant availability of increased mobility via riding dogs easily makes up for not being a wood elf. Plus the fact that a halfling archer build usually has a much better to hit bonus means that their final attack hits much more often than a wood-elf archers. Finding a bow above STR 20 is nearly impossible, so the wood-elf doesn't really have all that much longterm advantage over the halfling, since you can easily make a rage-based halfling archer with that same 20 STR who also has a 20+ dex. My halfling archer (currently 7th level) will be turning into a rage based archer build over the next two levels. I will be based on minimum damage per hit, and maximum attack bonus, with no elemental enchantments, just a huge plus. Ideally my arrows should be 1d6+13 each (+5 bow, +5 str, +2 weapon spec, +1 point blank shot). Granted that isn't the best damage in the world, but it is pretty decent, especially when you consider that even my last iterative attack will rarely miss. How a wizard is built stat-wise has far less to do with their effectiveness than their spell selection and tactics. Just about any wizard can be either awesome or awful, depending upon how they are played. So I don't see a huge problem. Taking a -2 to the primary casting stat is obviously not optimal by any standard, but not hopeless either. One could still afford a 14 int, which is sufficient to be effective if done properly. Heck, I often will try to make something worthwhile out of a sub-optimal concept (usually involving halflings). I have a halfling archer who I'm proud of as being almost as good as the stereotypical wood elf archer. Now, if someone says they have a 10 strength archer or any sort of swashbuckler, I wince... but still try to keep an open mind that they will somehow be useful. It hasn't turned out to be the case yet where they have ever been useful, but I'm always hopeful.
Mattastrophic 01-18-07, 02:45 PM	A pet peeve I've developed over my LG career: Players who think of themselves as somehow 'better' than the rest of us because they choose to 'roleplay' by being a half-orc wizard or a dwarf bard or a grey elf fighter. Heck, anyone who 'roleplays' by intentionally suboptimizing, then turns around and calls themselves a better roleplayer than the rest of us because of it, I can't stand them. It might be a problem unique to elitist Geoff, though. Regardless, you don't have to be a grey elf barbarian to be unique, you can be unique in so many other ways and still be effective in combat and social situations. Suboptimization != good roleplaying. I do admit, my own characters may appear at first glance to be intentionally suboptimalized, but I'm like Britt; I like to take strange prestige classes and 'make them work.' My main is an optimized Virtuoso. Yes, that's possible. -Matt
bhale187 01-18-07, 02:49 PM	I say nothing and expect nothing. It's his character, he can do whatever he wants with it and nobody should have any issues with. Unfortunately, it seems lots of people are not so open minded and cannot keep any comments to themselves or somehow think that they know what is best for other peoples characters. For example, I was once told in quite clear terms that my half-orc should dip into barbarian level and take extra rage because he would be more effective in combat. Statistically that is true but did this a.....e who did it online game (only thing which prevented me from slapping him) stop for even a single moment to consider what I want from MY character and what MY concept of it might be. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad Bravo!!!!!!!! It's a game ladie and gentlemen, let everyone enjoy it in their own way.
LGMoses 01-18-07, 02:56 PM	isn't geoff overrun by giants? just curious. Its close to the Yeo if I remember correctly.
cetiken 01-18-07, 04:56 PM	A pet peeve I've developed over my LG career: Players who think of themselves as somehow 'better' than the rest of us because they choose to 'roleplay' by being a half-orc wizard or a dwarf bard or a grey elf fighter. Heck, anyone who 'roleplays' by intentionally suboptimizing, then turns around and calls themselves a better roleplayer than the rest of us because of it, I can't stand them. It might be a problem unique to elitist Geoff, though. <clip> Hum? I don't think I ever claimed that it would be better to sub-optomize. In fact I know i won't be able to do other things that I'd like to do well. Personally I can't stand holier than thou attitudes either. On the other hand playing a character like this one can be a lot of fun. I only feel slightly guilty by not bringing a wizard who had DCs in the 22-26 range and says to evil scarry mosters with goobers of HP save or die. I know I like it when other players do that. Of course I have a irrational aversion to elves so it makes it kinda hard. Perhaps the gnome illusionis would be more fun. Its just so hard to use the Silent Image line of spells right.
Japangirl 01-18-07, 06:01 PM	isn't geoff overrun by giants? just curious. Its close to the Yeo if I remember correctly. I was told that it pushed out the giants and is now overrun by the Fae they invited in to help kick out the giants. Could be mistaken though.
Mattastrophic 01-18-07, 07:11 PM	I don't think I ever claimed that it would be better to sub-optomize. I'm not saying you did; I'm pointing out that you might see someone else running with a similar concept, but solely to maintain that same holier-than-thou attitude. I say just play what you want. If you're playing a typically suboptimal race/class combination, just make sure it's for your own enjoyment, not out of some attempt to broadcast any sense of superiority. Heck, that applies to any build, optimized or not! -Matt
LGMoses 01-18-07, 11:25 PM	I was told that it pushed out the giants and is now overrun by the Fae they invited in to help kick out the giants. Could be mistaken though. o, yeah, its sterich i"m thinking of methinks. I think a lot of places have been overrun by giants. The Yeo is full of stout spearmen though if we can ever get our stuff in order and start shipping out mercs again.. After what Keoland did to us though I don't know if we'll ever trust ne other countries with our proud soldiers.
Japangirl 01-19-07, 02:26 AM	Bah. Yeomanry has very few high level people to stop the BK influx of people wanting access from the land of milk and honey. Too bad for us that while the geographical regions are close (TX/OK to LA/AR), the two regions are across the Flaeness from each other.
ranagrande 01-19-07, 04:10 AM	A pet peeve I've developed over my LG career: Players who think of themselves as somehow 'better' than the rest of us because they choose to 'roleplay' by being a half-orc wizard or a dwarf bard or a grey elf fighter. Heck, anyone who 'roleplays' by intentionally suboptimizing, then turns around and calls themselves a better roleplayer than the rest of us because of it, I can't stand them. It might be a problem unique to elitist Geoff, though. Regardless, you don't have to be a grey elf barbarian to be unique, you can be unique in so many other ways and still be effective in combat and social situations. Suboptimization != good roleplaying. I do admit, my own characters may appear at first glance to be intentionally suboptimalized, but I'm like Britt; I like to take strange prestige classes and 'make them work.' My main is an optimized Virtuoso. Yes, that's possible. -Matt I'd just like to point out that no race/class combination by itself is inherently suboptimal. To use one of your examples, if that Dwarf Bard was eventually going to become a Bard/Fighter/Barbarian/Dragon Disciple/Deepwarden, it could be very optimized indeed.
Bob_the_Theurge 01-19-07, 08:28 AM	Bah. Yeomanry has very few high level people to stop the BK influx of people wanting access from the land of milk and honey. Too bad for us that while the geographical regions are close (TX/OK to LA/AR), the two regions are across the Flaeness from each other. You should be glad we're willing to drop by and contribute a few TU's to your cause every now and again. Besides, it's not our fault your triad gives out actually good access, while our triad is on a consumables and "you only get the access if you're in a very specific meta-org" kick.
Iswald 01-19-07, 12:03 PM	For example, I was once told in quite clear terms that my half-orc should dip into barbarian level and take extra rage because he would be more effective in combat. Statistically that is true but did this a.....e who did it online game (only thing which prevented me from slapping him) stop for even a single moment to consider what I want from MY character and what MY concept of it might be. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad Was this before or after they saw how effective your character was in combat?
Japangirl 01-19-07, 12:34 PM	You should be glad we're willing to drop by and contribute a few TU's to your cause every now and again. Besides, it's not our fault your triad gives out actually good access, while our triad is on a consumables and "you only get the access if you're in a very specific meta-org" kick. <-- BK person here lol. I was saying it's lucky for the Yeomanry folks we are so far away.
fletch137 01-19-07, 02:25 PM	Bah. Yeomanry has very few high level people to stop the BK influx of people wanting access from the land of milk and honey. Too bad for us that while the geographical regions are close (TX/OK to LA/AR), the two regions are across the Flaeness from each other. Tell me about it. I was stationed in Norfolk, Va. for four years at the world's largest Naval base and had a totally land-locked RPGA region. Go Navy, right? Living Greyhawk totally needs an Active Duty Region...
Simpi 01-19-07, 02:57 PM	Was this before or after they saw how effective your character was in combat? What does it matter? The point is he crossed into "personal insult" category when he thought he is some kind of authority to "suggest" something what my PC should do. Go Navy, right? Living Greyhawk totally needs an Active Duty Region... That would be favouritism, not to mention making RPGA an organisation that takes a political stance. That is not something I would tolerate for one minute and would immediately resign as Triad member and withdraw all my modules from play. Not that it would hurt no-one else than local players but it is the principle that matters. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad
Samwise 01-19-07, 08:51 PM	That would be favouritism, not to mention making RPGA an organisation that takes a political stance. I don't see how it is either. Recognizing that a specific group of players has to move around a lot and assigning them a separate region carries no more favoritism than the regular assigning of regions and meta-regions. As for a political stance, it does nothing of the sort, any more than any other regional assignment does. Should people threaten to leave if they don't like some new country being assigned a region? It is political only if you make it so, and in that case the responsibility is exclusively yours for any consequences. I think an active duty region would be a great idea, and I've said so since the campaign began.
NiTessine 01-19-07, 09:24 PM	I don't see how it is either. Recognizing that a specific group of players has to move around a lot and assigning them a separate region carries no more favoritism than the regular assigning of regions and meta-regions. As for a political stance, it does nothing of the sort, any more than any other regional assignment does. Should people threaten to leave if they don't like some new country being assigned a region? It is political only if you make it so, and in that case the responsibility is exclusively yours for any consequences. I think an active duty region would be a great idea, and I've said so since the campaign began. Would it apply to all militaries or just US, and wouldn't it be handier to just assign regions to Middle East and the Balkans? Say, enlarge Bone March to encompass the former Yugoslavian republics and give Lordship of the Isles or Sea Barons to Turkey and the Middle East? I notice something of the sort was already done, with the Perrenland-Ratik makeover.
Samwise 01-19-07, 09:46 PM	Would it apply to all militaries or just US, and wouldn't it be handier to just assign regions to Middle East and the Balkans? Say, enlarge Bone March to encompass the former Yugoslavian republics and give Lordship of the Isles or Sea Barons to Turkey and the Middle East? I notice something of the sort was already done, with the Perrenland-Ratik makeover. For the first, how many militaries operate in different regions in their home countries? As for expanding regions, that still doesn't address the issue directly, which is simply a job that transfers some players to a new region every year or so.
NiTessine 01-19-07, 10:05 PM	For the first, how many militaries operate in different regions in their home countries? As for expanding regions, that still doesn't address the issue directly, which is simply a job that transfers some players to a new region every year or so. US, Canada, and Australia, I'd assume. However, if they simply move from one region to another, I do not see an issue. They will have a region and a metaregion to play around in. People stationed overseas, however, may still end up somewhere without those. That is the issue I see here, and it applies also to UN peacekeepers and NATO forces, not just the US military - not to mention the actual natives of those areas. It'd be also a tad simpler to adjudicate than a region defined by a profession rather than clear, geographical guidelines.
Samwise 01-19-07, 10:19 PM	US, Canada, and Australia, I'd assume. However, if they simply move from one region to another, I do not see an issue. They will have a region and a metaregion to play around in. People stationed overseas, however, may still end up somewhere without those. That is the issue I see here, and it applies also to UN peacekeepers and NATO forces, not just the US military - not to mention the actual natives of those areas. It'd be also a tad simpler to adjudicate than a region defined by a profession rather than clear, geographical guidelines. So one country with eighteen regions, one with three regions, and one with two regions. I'm seeing a bit of difference in scale there. As for natives of those areas, if there is enough local interest, there will be a region. Obviously there isn't, and so something else is needed. Any such regions would have the majority of its players on a temporary basis. And no, having a region to transfer to isn't the same thing. Jumping regions can completely wreck a character concept, particularly with meta-org involvement.
NiTessine 01-19-07, 11:39 PM	So one country with eighteen regions, one with three regions, and one with two regions. I'm seeing a bit of difference in scale there. As for natives of those areas, if there is enough local interest, there will be a region. Obviously there isn't, and so something else is needed. Any such regions would have the majority of its players on a temporary basis. And no, having a region to transfer to isn't the same thing. Jumping regions can completely wreck a character concept, particularly with meta-org involvement. Nevertheless, those countries are composed of multiple regions and they do have militaries. In this case, I think, their exclusion would be favouritism. Also, the region will be very exclusive by its very definition, requiring not only residence, but also profession, and a profession with some fairly rigorous physical and mental requirements. This problem is compounded by the definition of the region in that it lacks geographical borders and how this, coupled with its spread-out nature, interacts with the rules for holding bordercons. Also... there is no Living Greyhawk activity that I am aware of in either Spain or Italy, yet they hold regions. I do, however, know of a group playing Core modules in Turkey. It's a bit difficult, of course, for there to be interest in RPGA campaigns in places where people do not know of the RPGA. The lack of effective advertising is a topic for another thread, though. You have a point with the character concepts, but if I knew I was going to be moving to a new region every few years, my characters wouldn't be putting down deep roots, either.
Samwise 01-20-07, 12:06 AM	Nevertheless, those countries are composed of multiple regions and they do have militaries. In this case, I think, their exclusion would be favouritism. That opens the door to the claim it is "favoritism" for there to be more US regions. Regions are determined by the number of players. If there are enough RPGA members in a specific profession that moves around enough to make participating in a regular region difficult, I see no favoritism in creating a separate region for them. Also, the region will be very exclusive by its very definition, requiring not only residence, but also profession, and a profession with some fairly rigorous physical and mental requirements. And? Since when does exclusivity or rigorous requirements invalidate someone from consideration for something? Universities have rigourous mental requirements, and exclusive access to facilities. Is it favoritism to allow conventions to be held on their grounds? Do not go so far to avoid claims of favoritism that you engage in bias. That would be equally unfair. You have a point with the character concepts, but if I knew I was going to be moving to a new region every few years, my characters wouldn't be putting down deep roots, either. Isn't that for them to decide? I fail to see the difference between that and telling someone they need a level of barbarian and extra rage to be more effective in combat. The whole purpose of the regional system is so players can have a more direct connection to the campaign.
NiTessine 01-20-07, 12:40 AM	That opens the door to the claim it is "favoritism" for there to be more US regions. Regions are determined by the number of players. If there are enough RPGA members in a specific profession that moves around enough to make participating in a regular region difficult, I see no favoritism in creating a separate region for them.It depends entirely on how you do it. If the execution is handled so that players from outside the region cannot play their modules, it will look like favouritism, regardless of the actual motives behind it. Besides, where's the harm in including Australian and Canadan militaries in it? I'd assume there to be proportionally similar amounts of gamers in them, even though there's considerably less personnel, and with the way you guys have been spreading naval bases over the Pacific, there's even something of a geographical closeness, there. And? Since when does exclusivity or rigorous requirements invalidate someone from consideration for something? Universities have rigourous mental requirements, and exclusive access to facilities. Is it favoritism to allow conventions to be held on their grounds? Do not go so far to avoid claims of favoritism that you engage in bias. That would be equally unfair.Nope, it's not unfair. Our largest local gaming convention is held in a building of the Helsinki Technological University. Of course, the convention cannot be exclusive to university students. Military bases, on the other hand, are a tad more difficult for outsiders to access. Problem, again, exacerbated by the fact that in the university example, the regional modules will be playable in home games outside the university. Isn't that for them to decide? I fail to see the difference between that and telling someone they need a level of barbarian and extra rage to be more effective in combat. The whole purpose of the regional system is so players can have a more direct connection to the campaign.Military personnel are hardly the only professional group who keep moving around. I am not entirely opposed to the concept of this region, but I see a great danger of it becoming completely exclusive, which can only harm both the campaign and the region - you can only fit so many gamers in one military base. So, tell me, how do you figure the rules would have to be adjusted and how outsiders could effectively participate in events of the region?
Samwise 01-20-07, 01:06 AM	It depends entirely on how you do it. If the execution is handled so that players from outside the region cannot play their modules, it will look like favouritism, regardless of the actual motives behind it. How accessible are adventures from other regions now? Is it favoritism that I can't get to Finland to play a Naerie adventure? Besides, where's the harm in including Australian and Canadan militaries in it? I'd assume there to be proportionally similar amounts of gamers in them, even though there's considerably less personnel, and with the way you guys have been spreading naval bases over the Pacific, there's even something of a geographical closeness, there. Then given populations of the countries, there probably aren't enough people in those militaries to support a region. And as I said, this is only political if someone chooses to make it so. That is bias, and that is unreasonable. Nope, it's not unfair. Our largest local gaming convention is held in a building of the Helsinki Technological University. Of course, the convention cannot be exclusive to university students. It is in the regular course of events. And they have easier access to other gamers, and can use the university facilities to support their games days. Once you start down that road, anything can be seen as favoritism, no matter how self-destructive it is in the long run. Why not just be happy more people are playing? Military bases, on the other hand, are a tad more difficult for outsiders to access. Problem, again, exacerbated by the fact that in the university example, the regional modules will be playable in home games outside the university. Except the whole point is home games will be played only in the region, that being military bases. There is no problem there at all beyond assuming every region is equally accessible to a neighboring region. Military personnel are hardly the only professional group who keep moving around. Not on the same scale, or with the same degree of change in region. I am not entirely opposed to the concept of this region, but I see a great danger of it becoming completely exclusive, which can only harm both the campaign and the region - you can only fit so many gamers in one military base. So, tell me, how do you figure the rules would have to be adjusted and how outsiders could effectively participate in events of the region? It won't be completely exclusive, events will still be available at the big convention open fiestas. Before Ratik was recreated, how exclusive were Perrenland adventures? And why must outsiders effectively participate in the events of the region? Is that some requirement I don't know about? That all major regional plotlines must be open to everyone in the campaign to influence? Or does it just mean getting some chance to play, some time? The rules don't have to be changed at all, they just exist the way they are now. And you wouldn't fit the gamers on one base, you'd fit them on all the bases. Even just one group on a base would be one regional group more.
NiTessine 01-20-07, 01:52 AM	How accessible are adventures from other regions now? Is it favoritism that I can't get to Finland to play a Naerie adventure? Pretty accessible, and I'm speaking from the point of view of a man separated from his closest foreign region by a thousand miles of open sea and a language barrier. The language barrier, incidentally, also separates me from the three other nations in my region. Then given populations of the countries, there probably aren't enough people in those militaries to support a region. And as I said, this is only political if someone chooses to make it so. That is bias, and that is unreasonable.Hey, I didn't say anything about politics. Besides, there'd be probably more active LG players in Australian and Canadian military bases than there are in Italy and Spain. It is in the regular course of events. And they have easier access to other gamers, and can use the university facilities to support their games days. Once you start down that road, anything can be seen as favoritism, no matter how self-destructive it is in the long run. Why not just be happy more people are playing?Your logic here is a bit strange, since a university and a military base are in fact polar opposites as to gamer accessibility. A university gaming club brings together gamers both within and without the university and facilitates the growth of the hobby. Most of our games are held in a club room of a university dormitory, but only a couple of our regular players are actually enrolled. Military bases, on the other hand, are not really accessible to outsiders. I know it'd be impossible to have a game with one in a Finnish base, and I'd expect American bases would be even stricter about that. Except the whole point is home games will be played only in the region, that being military bases. There is no problem there at all beyond assuming every region is equally accessible to a neighboring region. Indeed, and I don't think it should be a problem. It's difficult enough with these pesky oceans and physical distances. Adding armed guards to the equation is just unfair. It won't be completely exclusive, events will still be available at the big convention open fiestas. Before Ratik was recreated, how exclusive were Perrenland adventures? About as exclusive as Naerie adventures are to you, or Keoland adventures to me. It just takes some time, a bit of money, and some energy to go down there to play some. And why must outsiders effectively participate in the events of the region? Is that some requirement I don't know about? That all major regional plotlines must be open to everyone in the campaign to influence? Or does it just mean getting some chance to play, some time? The rules don't have to be changed at all, they just exist the way they are now. I think every region should be open enough that, should I find myself in the neighbourhood, can shoot off an e-mail to their Yahoogroup and have a reasonable chance of finding a group to play a regional module with. I think this is the minimum degree of openness that should be required of every region, to allow for players and characters to have a direct connection with the campaign, as you put it.. Being able to theoretically find a game anywhere is one of the core concepts of the campaign. Is this possible to achieve with the normal security of a US military base? And you wouldn't fit the gamers on one base, you'd fit them on all the bases. Even just one group on a base would be one regional group more. Precisely, and since all gamers are not on the same base, you may end up with a base that doesn't have enough gamers. I know of few things that embody frustration as well as a group of four Living Greyhawk players. By the way, which region were you thinking for this?
Samwise 01-20-07, 02:14 AM	Pretty accessible, and I'm speaking from the point of view of a man separated from his closest foreign region by a thousand miles of open sea and a language barrier. The language barrier, incidentally, also separates me from the three other nations in my region. Well, most military bases have off-base living quarters. Those could easily be acceptable places to run games. Hey, I didn't say anything about politics. Besides, there'd be probably more active LG players in Australian and Canadian military bases than there are in Italy and Spain. Then why count the number of bases? And wouldn't bases all over the world mean an extra region "adjacent" to even more people? Your logic here is a bit strange, since a university and a military base are in fact polar opposites as to gamer accessibility. A university gaming club brings together gamers both within and without the university and facilitates the growth of the hobby. Most of our games are held in a club room of a university dormitory, but only a couple of our regular players are actually enrolled. Most universities require people hanging around for long hours to be students, especially after hours in university facilities. Military bases, on the other hand, are not really accessible to outsiders. I know it'd be impossible to have a game with one in a Finnish base, and I'd expect American bases would be even stricter about that. Not a clue really. Indeed, and I don't think it should be a problem. It's difficult enough with these pesky oceans and physical distances. Adding armed guards to the equation is just unfair. Most universities have armed guards. Being able to theoretically find a game anywhere is one of the core concepts of the campaign. Is this possible to achieve with the normal security of a US military base? That depends on what you the bounds of "theoretically" are set at. Precisely, and since all gamers are not on the same base, you may end up with a base that doesn't have enough gamers. I know of few things that embody frustration as well as a group of four Living Greyhawk players. Then it doesn't, just the way some cities or towns don't have enough players. The RPGA can make regions available, it can't make players available. By the way, which region were you thinking for this? Not a clue. Just for the heck of it, let's say Hepmonaland or the Amedio Jungle.
NiTessine 01-20-07, 02:32 AM	Well, most military bases have off-base living quarters. Those could easily be acceptable places to run games. Okay, fair enough. This works. Then why count the number of bases? And wouldn't bases all over the world mean an extra region "adjacent" to even more people? I'm counting hypothetical players more than bases. By the way, would the region only encompass bases within USA, or also bases located within other regions, such as Ramstein or the Guam bases? I assume that "dual citizenship" wouldn't be possible. Most universities require people hanging around for long hours to be students, especially after hours in university facilities. Mmh. Cultural differences. Over here, they don't. Even lectures are open to anyone. Most universities have armed guards. :eek: That depends on what you the bounds of "theoretically" are set at.There being no rules, laws, or regulations forbidding me from trying. Then it doesn't, just the way some cities or towns don't have enough players. The RPGA can make regions available, it can't make players available. Fair enough. Not a clue. Just for the heck of it, let's say Hepmonaland or the Amedio Jungle. Mmh. I think these are better as Core regions. Don't we have an Ulek or an Urnst of some description still unallocated?
Iswald 01-20-07, 03:26 AM	What does it matter? The point is he crossed into "personal insult" category when he thought he is some kind of authority to "suggest" something what my PC should do. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad You're kidding, right? If you mention what classes your PC has before you start playing and it's suggested that your PC may be better with a level of barbarian, it's completely different than if the advice is given after the mod finishes. In the first case, there's an assumption of how your PC will perform based on past experiences with other PCs. In the latter case, it could be he thought your PC sucked in combat and thought it would be helpful to provide some advice to you. Anyway, why are you taking random advice as an insult?
Iswald 01-20-07, 03:33 AM	Instead of defaulting to no home region, there should be a default home region for everyone. This would allow more mods to be played, promoting LG.
Simpi 01-20-07, 03:39 AM	Anyway, why are you taking random advice as an insult? Because I did not ask for it. The guy must have seen I was obviously doing my PC differently, sticking to LN spinning halberd style half-orc ranger/fighter than doing the usual half-orc X/barbarian1 + extra rage with greatsword that I dare to say 90% of the half-orcs in LG are. What he was suggesting is I ditch my entire concept and make my PC into a carbon copy of almost every other half-orc tank out there (not to mention abusing alignment shift sytem). That if something is an insult and had it been face to face game, he would have clearly noticed my anger. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad
Simpi 01-20-07, 03:52 AM	For the first, how many militaries operate in different regions in their home countries? Russia and China come to mind right now and there are lots of others as well. Sure, they don't have a region to begin with but should we show sympathy for them by giving them a region to play in? EU (7 regions, including Ekbir) has also sent troops to various parts of africa. Would I give any of the above a region? No. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad
cycloptic_squirrel 01-20-07, 03:53 AM	(not to mention abusing alignment shift sytem). Yay for someone not seeing alignment system as more than a ruleset to be broken! :cheer:
NiTessine 01-20-07, 08:11 AM	Russia and China come to mind right now and there are lots of others as well. Sure, they don't have a region to begin with but should we show sympathy for them by giving them a region to play in? EU (7 regions, including Ekbir) has also sent troops to various parts of africa. Would I give any of the above a region? No. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad The Chinese already sorta have a region. Hong Kong is in either Perrenland or Ratik, I forget which. The Russians might actually find a use for a region. I hear there's a fairly lively gaming community in Moscow. Give them Lordship of the Isles, so that we can have a bordercon in Karelia and destroy the red scum, again. :cool:
RanielK 01-20-07, 08:16 AM	That would be favouritism, not to mention making RPGA an organisation that takes a political stance. That is not something I would tolerate for one minute and would immediately resign as Triad member and withdraw all my modules from play. Not that it would hurt no-one else than local players but it is the principle that matters. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad Why would that be favoritism? What region is Iraq in? The Sinai? Cyprus (at least the UN controlled no-man's land between the Greek Cypriots and the Turk Cypriots)? South Korea? Any number of African countries (Legio Patria Nostra)? Bosnia? Kosovo? The middle of the Atlantic? The Indian Ocean? The Pacific? Need I continue? There are any number of men and women who serve their respective countries in uniform. Where those countries send them and the politics involved in those deployments does not take away from the fact that gamers serve willingly and at the same time wish to have the opportunity to play D&D and LG. One can work out only so often. Watch the same movie so many times before going stir crazy. One can play cards up to a certain point (though spades goes over well before pay day). You play with those in uniform already (the ones fortunate enough not to be deployed into the boonies anyway). To say it would afront you to the point of abandoning you voluntary post over giving Active Duty service members of all countries an expanded chance to play smacks to me of politics. Miles Ward 12 year veteran of the Army DoD Contractor, Camp Fallujah, IZ
Samwise 01-20-07, 09:42 PM	Mmh. I think these are better as Core regions. Don't we have an Ulek or an Urnst of some description still unallocated? Heh. If you want to expand the power of the Sheldomar more, sure. :P I just picked those as really beyond any other region locations. As for the rest, I don't have the answers. But if we just look for reasons not to do something, we'll never find a way to make them work. We've made a lot of things work in this campaign.
Cardinal Teplin 01-21-07, 12:08 PM	I suspect the problem is more that 'active duty', while a defined subset of people, is not a geography, and thus suffers the same problems as all the other suggestions for non-geographical regions have had - consistency, availability to outsiders, organisation across the areas it is supposed to represent, etc. As for military personnel posted outside their home country, well most countries do this. Certainly US, almost all european countries, australia, Japan, Israel, and so on. And that's not including mercenaries and 'contracters' Some of these are almost certainly going to include some degree of political tension. Would it cause a problem to have in the active duty region, for example, active members of the Communist party, or those of a nationality that might be actively opposed to your own country or its allies? These are the kind of issues that have been to demonstrated not to be a problem. If people really want this to happen, get a group together, sort out a triad, potenital membership, boundaries (who is in and who isn't), how to handle cross-region participation, and how to insure than the international and scattered nature of the region isn't going to be a problem. Based on the level of understanding demonstrated here (universites with armed guards?!?) I don't think we're anywhere near solving all the issues, and so I don't think it will happen, but I'd like to see what emerged were I to be proved wrong.
RanielK 01-21-07, 12:31 PM	I suspect the problem is more that 'active duty', while a defined subset of people, is not a geography, and thus suffers the same problems as all the other suggestions for non-geographical regions have had - consistency, availability to outsiders, organisation across the areas it is supposed to represent, etc. As for military personnel posted outside their home country, well most countries do this. Certainly US, almost all european countries, australia, Japan, Israel, and so on. And that's not including mercenaries and 'contracters' Some of these are almost certainly going to include some degree of political tension. Would it cause a problem to have in the active duty region, for example, active members of the Communist party, or those of a nationality that might be actively opposed to your own country or its allies? These are the kind of issues that have been to demonstrated not to be a problem. If people really want this to happen, get a group together, sort out a triad, potenital membership, boundaries (who is in and who isn't), how to handle cross-region participation, and how to insure than the international and scattered nature of the region isn't going to be a problem. Based on the level of understanding demonstrated here (universites with armed guards?!?) I don't think we're anywhere near solving all the issues, and so I don't think it will happen, but I'd like to see what emerged were I to be proved wrong. First things, first. "(universities with armed guards?!?)" Yeah, they're called campus cops. As a male member of the Corps of Cadets on Texas A&M's College Station campus, I would provide escort for female students late at night. They would call up the duty desk and I would walk them from where they were to their dorm. Seems 18-25 year old women are desirable (youth, beauty, naivety, all that) and some sickos like to take all of that away (kidnaping, rape, murder, etc). Secondly, minor correction. The Japanese are not allowed to send out their troops. Germany isn't allowed to send combat troops (though a loophole where the Germans consider MP's combat troops and the rest of the world doesn't allows German MP's to conduct peacekeeping mission abroad). Third, how do you know I as an american haven't already met a member of the Communist Party on base? I'm socialist my self (only makes sense the US Army is one of the largest socialist organizations inside the US, "from each his abilities, to each his needs, except during work" (tm) US Army). I've worked with hillbillies that had to be taught how to bathe and why the rest of us cared. I've lived on a French base with a large French Foreign Legion contingent (Brits, Swedes, Nords, Germans, you know all manner of rif-raf ;) ). Some of my co-workers lived on a Turk base (not a US base in Turkey). There was some culture shock for you. They also spent time on a Ghurka base. New Years was fun, "Hey lets fight a bull with our knives! If we win, we get to eat dinner!" Well not totally honest. Like a Ghurka would ever say "If we win." Right now, the base I'm own is positively covered with Ugandans. Great guys! Though the guy who answered "why did you come here" with "They promised I'd get to shoot someone" was scary. Short story long, most of the folks I know in the military are used to culture shock and fitting into a new situation. Getting along with someone to play a game should be all in a days work. As far as setting up triads and boundaries and writers, there's the rub. I would like to see a region for those deployed, but don't see it being practical to set up with all the extra constraints on top of the problems of standing up a new Region. I feel deployed service members should be allowed to play their home regional and metaregional adventures when out in the boonies or at sea. I realize verification of whether or not the event really took place would be nigh on impossible (thus opening it up to accusations of cheating), but lets face it. These guys want entertainment, not stacks of paper showing their character is "UBERMUNCHKIN!!!"
Mommy was an Orc 01-21-07, 12:37 PM	Well, most military bases have off-base living quarters. Those could easily be acceptable places to run games. I think this is sounding suspiciously along the lines of a superregion that everyone can play. Isn't that the reason Core mods exist? If I were going to do something like this, I'd make the region of the kind where anyone going to an area of the world that was considered 'regionless' would belong to. So people on international waters can play in it, but not people living in Virginia on a military base. They've got Geoff. So if you lived in Brazil, you'd technically belong to this region. People in Brazil could hold conventions, which outsiders could visit. If Brazil then developed enough support to deserve its own region(or nearby countries), then they'd move, just as Ratik did. The nice aspect of it is that you've got a group that can provide a solid triad(people in the U.S Navy or who live in regionless areas for whatever reasons), and it gives people who live in Core only areas a way to play other mods without having to travel. It also means the region is not specifically the military's region even if the triad was all U.S. Military. That would help with what Cardinal Teplin was bringing up.
Cardinal Teplin 01-21-07, 04:47 PM	Seems 18-25 year old women are desirable (youth, beauty, naivety, all that) and some sickos like to take all of that away (kidnaping, rape, murder, etc). Hmm.. rest of the world seem to manage. Secondly, minor correction. The Japanese are not allowed to send out their troops. Germany isn't allowed to send combat troops (though a loophole where the Germans consider MP's combat troops and the rest of the world doesn't allows German MP's to conduct peacekeeping mission abroad). Sure, technically. But in practice, German peacekeepers and Japanese minesweepers and engineers are posted abroad. Third, how do you know I as an american haven't already met a member of the Communist Party on base? I don't, but I wouldn't want to say that this kind of thing wouldn't cause any problem for any armed servicemen around the world. The problem is not unsurmountable, but it needs to be looked at.
LGMoses 01-21-07, 10:55 PM	God Bless America!:w00t: I think that the "region for the regionless" idea from Mommy was an Orc is the best way to implement this idea mentioned so far if it should be implemented. Sounds like a good idea. I'm just not sure if theres enough people for it to be worth it. That is up to the Circle to decide. Everybody have a nice day and enjoy the discussion. ... man has this thread gone offtopic.
Fleetfang 01-22-07, 12:10 PM	More Offtopic: RanielK! Howdy! Fightin' Texas Aggie Class o' '98, myself. Whoop! --Fleetfang
Britt 01-22-07, 12:47 PM	Damned Aggies! ;) UT and former OU and OSU student here :)
RanielK 01-22-07, 02:19 PM	More Offtopic: RanielK! Howdy! Fightin' Texas Aggie Class o' '98, myself. Whoop! --Fleetfang Howdy Ag! Class of '94 myself. At least until I met the Dixie Chicken. :embarrass Engineering and beer don't mix well. Who knew?
_m_ 01-22-07, 07:02 PM	just to throw in a (silently belated) 2c opinion: i ran a guild in WOW, which, by total coincidence, and much to my surprise, was made up of nearly 80% armed services people. so yeah, i get the feeling that a miltary base region would go just fine.
KarmaInferno 01-23-07, 07:27 PM	On the actual topic at hand... I find that oddball combos tend to be played by people that give a good amount of thought to their characters. They might be 'underpowered', but the players at least are mostly paying attention to what they're doing. I find far more worrisome to see at the table are those folks playing 'generic character X' who seem to be at the game entirely to sit there as moribund blobs of flesh for four hours, pick up their AR, and leave. They barely speak, their concept of character interaction is, "I, uh, cast magic missile", and they are the reason for more stupid character deaths than I have ever encountered. I don't mean module-related deaths, I mean stupid deaths. I had one such guy literally stand in one spot for an entire fight trying uselessly to hit a bad guy with arrows (very poor to-hit bonuses), while another party member bled out from not being stabilized. Another was a lance-charge build, and due to there not being any way to set up lance charges in a particular fight, the player waffled the entire time unable to think of an alternate strategy. The guy with the wierd character? Welcome! The guy who can't even seem to remember his own character's name? Please find another table. Please! -karma
LGMoses 01-24-07, 12:16 AM	The guy with the wierd character? Welcome! The guy who can't even seem to remember his own character's name? Please find another table. Please! -karma Thats y I name all of my characters after what they do. My lance fighter is Lance Charger and my Shock trooper goes by the title Shockinaw Jackson :D just kidding
Dr.Cornelius 01-25-07, 02:12 AM	Personally, after my primary character, I started purposefully making underpowered characters... Britt - I have the utmost respect for the effort you put into LG. That being said, I hope you will try to understand another player's perspective on your statement about intentionally playing underpowered characters. Now I have been playing D&D on and off for over twenty years but am new to LG. Here is what I observed at Gencon So Cal and a local convention: Sitting at a low APL table, one of the players pulls out a binder filled with stacks of characters and six inches of ARs. The LG veteran leafs through the binder and casually says "I think I will play my ....." and proceeds to pull out an absurd dilettante of a character. Inevitably this "roleplaying" character spends an excessive amount of table time talking about himself and finding reasons to hinder the party from completing the adventure. Later in the game he makes it clear that his "real" character is a 14th level uber-optimized power munchkin and that the only mods he takes seriously are at APL 12 or above. Well some of us just started recently and are still slogging through APL 4. We would appreciate it if the long time players showed just a little more respect for the other people at the table. It is one thing to play an obnoxiously useless character with your gaming buddies and another to burden a party of random strangers at a con with useless levels that add to APL but not effectiveness.
CdrcJsn 01-25-07, 02:43 AM	Well some of us just started recently and are still slogging through APL 4. We would appreciate it if the long time players showed just a little more respect for the other people at the table. It is one thing to play an obnoxiously useless character with your gaming buddies and another to burden a party of random strangers at a con with useless levels that add to APL but not effectiveness. How useless was he? If he's a support character, it might be possible that you didn't realize his combat effectiveness (reflected in increasing other party member's effectiveness). On the other hand, if he was a rogue1/swashbuckler1/monk1/warmage1 archer character... It seems though that the problem at your table was more of a player personality problem. Like Britt, I too have been accused of being a powergamer and started playing odd builds fairly recently to counteract this habit (a single classed melee bard, mystic theurge, weird generalist caster with levels of cleric, bard, and wizard). The main difference though is that a powergamer playing an odd build is still a powergamer. The challenge though is making a non-optimized build as effective as one of the core classes. I'm just guessing that your experience was with someone who either failed to properly 'powergame' his odd build character, thinks he's a powergamer but really isn't, or is just a rude person and didn't care about the rest of the party's success or failure. Personally, I'd welcome someone with an odd build...just as long as they pull their own weight in the party. I've seen the other end of the spectrum with uber cheesed characters that can end a combat by themselves. It's not fun. I've done so before and after experiencing it from the other end, have tried not to do it again. That's one of the main reasons my 18th level cleric opted out of the holy word nuke build when it came time to play the high level campaign.
Dr.Cornelius 01-25-07, 03:27 AM	How useless was he? If he's a support character, it might be possible that you didn't realize his combat effectiveness (reflected in increasing other party member's effectiveness). I have enough D&D experience to know a useless character when I see one: 1. Cleric 3/Wizard 3 - technically a 6th level character but about as effective as a 4th, so the party ends up being down two character levels in the APL calculation. 2. Mr "how many levels can I take before gaining +1 BAB?" - Bard 1/Rogue 1/Swashbuckler 1/Monk 1/Marshal 1 is just absurd. 3. Bard with +30 Perform and not much else. 4. Int 6, Cha 6 character. The player was dead on as a foolish moron, so I guess he deserved a roleplaying award. 'm just guessing that your experience was with someone who either failed to properly 'powergame' his odd build character, thinks he's a powergamer but really isn't, or is just a rude person and didn't care about the rest of the party's success or failure. My take is rudeness. Or simply not understanding that the other players at the table may not appreciate his disposeable "fun" character half-assedly playing at low APL and making clear that only high level mods and characters mattered. And this happened at three or four tables with different players, otherwise I would have written it off as an outlier. Personally, I'd welcome someone with an odd build...just as long as they pull their own weight in the party. Agreed. I am talking about the ones that don't pull their weight. I've seen the other end of the spectrum with uber cheesed characters that can end a combat by themselves. Thus one of the fundamental problems with LG: 95% of the encounters are a walkover for prepared, optimized parties with reasonably good tactics. So the other 5% of encounters designed to seriously challenge these uber-parties end up inadvertently TPKing random, unbalanced parties of strangers.
Britt 01-25-07, 03:44 AM	Britt - I have the utmost respect for the effort you put into LG. That being said, I hope you will try to understand another player's perspective on your statement about intentionally playing underpowered characters. Now I have been playing D&D on and off for over twenty years but am new to LG. Here is what I observed at Gencon So Cal and a local convention: Sitting at a low APL table, one of the players pulls out a binder filled with stacks of characters and six inches of ARs. The LG veteran leafs through the binder and casually says "I think I will play my ....." and proceeds to pull out an absurd dilettante of a character. Inevitably this "roleplaying" character spends an excessive amount of table time talking about himself and finding reasons to hinder the party from completing the adventure. Later in the game he makes it clear that his "real" character is a 14th level uber-optimized power munchkin and that the only mods he takes seriously are at APL 12 or above. Well some of us just started recently and are still slogging through APL 4. We would appreciate it if the long time players showed just a little more respect for the other people at the table. It is one thing to play an obnoxiously useless character with your gaming buddies and another to burden a party of random strangers at a con with useless levels that add to APL but not effectiveness. Thank you for the respect :) On the character issue, don't worry, I am still completely effective; I just do it with strategy, planning, and smrts ;) Also, my powergaming tendencies tend to take over to some degree and I usually end up making my undergamed character extremely useful in some way. For example, my third character was a pacifist grey elf monk with a 6 STR and 10 CON, 16 INT/DEX/WIS. Not a typical monk by any means. However, with Alertness, elf bonuses, eyes of the eagle, Skill Focus (Spot), revery, and max ranks in Spot and Listen, I was a perfect scout and night watch. In combat, I would focus on disarming and aiding defense or attack or going total defense in front to be a low-hp shield. Luckily, since he was totally detached in a Buddhist sense, he didn't care if he died (which helps survival for the entire party a lot). When the rebuild came, I couldn't help but make him into an enlightened fist. If I had played for about four more levels and found the right items, I would have been able to do 16 points of STR damage in a round, no save. The next character was a compulsive liar gnome cleric of ralishaz/bard that was going mystic theurge. I made him to eventually mess up interactives in other regions by casting glibness, modify memory, and the like on major NPCs :). In combat, I focused on debuff spells like unluck, wave of grief, bane, doom, and the like. It was /extremely/ effective, but it's not what you would expect. There are other characters, but the point is that I've found that good strategy is far more important than good builds. If I want any challenge at all, I have to avoid uber-powergaming my characters, or most mods are a cakewalk. I encourage anyone that thinks mods are too easy to try building less powerful and more entertaining charactes and try to let your brain do the winning for you, rather than asking for the mods to be more difficult. In my experience, it is better to write for the average table and let powergamed parties walk the mod. They have the option of making less powerful characters, and if they aren't having fun, that's what they should do. Non-powergamers don't have the option of making more powerful characters just on a whim, and we shouldn't be TPKing the majority to please a minority.
CdrcJsn 01-25-07, 03:48 AM	My take is rudeness. Or simply not understanding that the other players at the table may not appreciate his disposeable "fun" character half-assedly playing at low APL and making clear that only high level mods and characters mattered. And this happened at three or four tables with different players, otherwise I would have written it off as an outlier. Hmm...by your profile, it seems your region is in the Pale? Did this happen at a local con? I've been to all the local cons, so I'm now officially curious as to whom you are referring to :plotting: I hope it's not me. I have ridiculous 'fun' characters but try to pull my weight in fights (or at least I like to think so). Cedric Atizado
Mommy was an Orc 01-25-07, 09:25 AM	I have enough D&D experience to know a useless character when I see one: 3. Bard with +30 Perform and not much else. A pure Bard build, even played by an idiot, should still be effective to a party if you simply ask them to do Inspire Courage on the 1st round of every combat. In fact, if that's what they were doing on the 1st round of every combat, they were probably being extremely useful to the party just on the basis of how the mathematics of a bard work - game designers(and players) tend to really underestimate the value of a +1. The problem with Bards is that they need to be extremely aggressive at making sure people remember their bonuses, especially at a convention. A lot of unusual builds can be effective when played by the right players. I slam Mystic Theurge all the time as an underpowered PrC, I grimace when someone tells me they're playing one - but I'd have Britt playing a Mystic Theurge in a heartbeat. Maybe not that Monk, though ;)
Samwise 01-25-07, 01:07 PM	I have enough D&D experience to know a useless character when I see one: 1. Cleric 3/Wizard 3 - technically a 6th level character but about as effective as a 4th, so the party ends up being down two character levels in the APL calculation. So mystic theurge should just be removed from the campaign? That's what we'd have to do to "prevent" builds like that. And depending on spell selection, such characters can be quite effective, especially with practiced spellcaster. 2. Mr "how many levels can I take before gaining +1 BAB?" - Bard 1/Rogue 1/Swashbuckler 1/Monk 1/Marshal 1 is just absurd. I've never seen anything like that, so I don't know if there is something else there. 3. Bard with +30 Perform and not much else. Who uses fascinate to shut down every encounter if he wins initative. It gets worse if he can throw suggestion into the mix. And that's not counting other abilities. Naturally it can be even worse with some marshal to motivate Dex so he always wins initiative, but not everyone wants to be that overpowering. 4. Int 6, Cha 6 character. The player was dead on as a foolish moron, so I guess he deserved a roleplaying award. Technically he would require Wis 8 to be a foolish moron. This would just be a simpering moron. That doesn't say anything about his ability to deal damage in combat though. A beatstick fighter doesn't have to be smart or self-assured to unleash 100+ damage per round.
KarmaInferno 01-25-07, 04:07 PM	2. Mr "how many levels can I take before gaining +1 BAB?" - Bard 1/Rogue 1/Swashbuckler 1/Monk 1/Marshal 1 is just absurd. I object! I played one of those! Granted, it was in LF, not LG. But still! His BAB at 9th level was exactly +1. It's probably just as well that none of his primary abilities/specialties depended on his BAB, huh? -karma
Fleetfang 01-25-07, 04:48 PM	Dr.C, It sounds like you've had some bad experiences within a short time with LG. Reading this post and some other things you've written lead me to believe that you're really frustrated with the way the campaign works. I don't know how experienced you are with power-gaming yourself, but as Sam posted, there are merits to most of the nutty examples you mentioned. especially with the Mystic Theurge example. Wiz3/Clr3 is a bad level to be at. It's rough for the allies, but can be extremely taxing on the player of the MT-to-be, too. Like Arcane Trickster (which is a better example with about 4 or 5 levels of 'suck' in the most popular build), one has to understand and appreciate the fact that at lower levels, YES, the even most efficient build to get to a PrC is oftentimes going to be underpowered before the Prestige Class kicks in... usually around 8th level or so, which you haven't yet experienced in LG. But the player of such a character makes the cost/benefit analysis and then makes the call. Do I want to be underpowered at APL 4 and 6 in order to totally kick out the jams at APL 10? I won't have Fireball or Fly for four levels longer this way, but I'll get other abilities instead... and later on, I'll be able to cast 80-someodd spells per day! While I've seen you bring up some good points (like selfish players of braodly role-played characters who sidetrack the mod or monopolize time to the detriment of other peoples' fun), I've seen some others that make sense only when looking at the short term (raise dead being a percentage of wealth instead of a flat cost -- revisit that idea when you're 12th level and getting 6600gp per MOD and ask yourself then which is the better deal in the long run). I don't want to come off like I'm some old grognard with 20 LG PCs. I've got four. And the highest is 10th. But I think you need to step back and reassess your initial reactions to 'the way things work' and put some trust in the system and the folks who have set the groundwork for how it works before you lose too much hair over these kinds of frustrations. Once you play in the campaign for a bit longer, then you'll start to see how it works and that this is the best system that we've got, and it IS always getting better. Beyond that, start looking around the table and figuring out who you enjoy playing with and who you would rather avoid. Gaming is a passtime that we do for fun. Once you find a group of LGers who you enjoy playing beside, there's no reason to compromise. Personally, I don't think I've had to play LG with someone that I don't like in almost a year. And even if I do run into some guy who has a cremepuff build, then HEY, I get to be the hero who saves everyone's bacon, and afterwords I've got a story to tell. Also, thank your stars that you weren't around for the days when parties had to fight over who got the +2 keen longsword or the magic fullplate. [shudder]
_m_ 01-29-07, 04:56 PM	I have enough D&D experience to know a useless character when I see one: 1. Cleric 3/Wizard 3 - technically a 6th level character but about as effective as a 4th, so the party ends up being down two character levels in the APL calculation. i have an even MORE messed up, unoptomised theurge style character. he's got 4 wizard, 3 shadow caster, 1 template, 2 noctumancer (twin arcane / shadow progression. effectively its a shadow mystic theurge). thats an extra 2 lvls behind the regular theurge curve (1 too many wiz, and a +1 lvl adjust). however, i'd be fairly confident that if you asked anyone at any of the tables i just played at at 'canberra summer fun' if my character was patheric and underpowered, i doubt you have a single complaint. i realise thats a little arrogant sounding, but the point im trying to make is, a well played character > a well built character every time.
Dr.Cornelius 01-30-07, 03:12 AM	i have an even MORE messed up, unoptomised theurge style character. he's got 4 wizard, 3 shadow caster, 1 template, 2 noctumancer (twin arcane / shadow progression. effectively its a shadow mystic theurge). thats an extra 2 lvls behind the regular theurge curve (1 too many wiz, and a +1 lvl adjust). however, i'd be fairly confident that if you asked anyone at any of the tables i just played at at 'canberra summer fun' if my character was patheric and underpowered, i doubt you have a single complaint. i realise thats a little arrogant sounding, but the point im trying to make is, a well played character > a well built character every time.Two points: 1) No doubt many builds are above the iconic power curve after the prestige class(es) kick in. But until then you are burdening the other party members. This is OK if you are playing with a regular group, but IMHO it is not polite to subject a random group of strangers at a convention to your "teh suck levels". Especially in challenging (read: lethal) mods. 2) I believe theurge you are referring to in this thread was also referenced in another thread: ...im playing a gnome wizard. combat comes around: i instant counterspell your first spell. i do an immidiate action teleport when you try and hit me, then hit you with a 15d8 cone attack with will save instead of reflex, then instant teleport back to where i was, followed by dispelling ur armour, and the recasting said armour on myself. if i'd told you i could do all these things before combat, u wudnt make me go and get all my books and certs to show you how its done, because trusting or not, no dm is going to believe u have 10 round immidaiate reactionary dimension door that you can act after casting, unless you show them. Link to original thread (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=778810) I just don't know what to say. That many immediate actions at that APL seems a bit over the top. How much of that is due to the combination of prestige classes and how much is due to uber-powerful AR access? Why don't you post the build along with AR access on the LG character forum and let others marvel at your mad skillz? Your point about well played characters is well taken. I have no objection to a skilled player bringing an offbeat, seemingly sub-optimal build and making it effective and interesting. What I do object to is arrogant LG veterans playing tourist with absurd, obnoxious builds at low APL tables and intentionally trying to screw up the adventure because they think it is "fun".
Lupo 01-30-07, 03:31 AM	Two points: 1) No doubt many builds are above the iconic power curve after the prestige class(es) kick in. But until then you are burdening the other party members. This is OK if you are playing with a regular group, but IMHO it is not polite to subject a random group of strangers at a convention to your "teh suck levels". Especially in challenging (read: lethal) mods. 2) I believe theurge you are referring to in this thread was also referenced in another thread: Link to original thread (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=778810) I just don't know what to say. That many immediate actions at that APL seems a bit over the top. How much of that is due to the combination of prestige classes and how much is due to uber-powerful AR access? Why don't you post the build along with AR access on the LG character forum and let others marvel at your mad skillz? Your point about well played characters is well taken. I have no objection to a skilled player bringing an offbeat, seemingly sub-optimal build and making it effective and interesting. What I do object to is arrogant LG veterans playing tourist with absurd, obnoxious builds at low APL tables and intentionally trying to screw up the adventure because they think it is "fun". immidiate actions count towards your character's swift action for the next round, only one immidiate OR swift action per character and round (FAQ 12/20/06 p.50). there might be an immidiate action and a contingency and a contingency from a familiar but that should be all possible ones. ciao martin m.
Dr.Cornelius 01-30-07, 03:43 AM	immidiate actions count towards your character's swift action for the next round, only one immidiate OR swift action per character and round (FAQ 12/20/06 p.50). there might be an immidiate action and a contingency and a contingency from a familiar but that should be all possible ones. ciao martin m.Why don't we let the player in question explain just how her character pulls off that many actions. I am sure it follows RAW but I am guessing that it involves a lot of "access".
cycloptic_squirrel 01-30-07, 03:46 AM	Why don't we let the player in question explain just how her character pulls off that many actions. I am sure it follows RAW but I am guessing that it involves a lot of "access". You're dirty.:P
Dr.Cornelius 01-30-07, 04:46 AM	Surely you can come up with something more articulate than name calling?
Cardinal Teplin 01-30-07, 09:51 AM	Nonetheless, m's point is entirely valid. I'd rather share a table with a well-played character, than a tricked out character that's run badly. Trying to make the most effective build you can is a curve with diminishing returns. The question is really what you feel you need in LG. Many people assume that, for example, the more damage a fighter does in combat, the better he is. This is rarely bourne out in practice. In practical terms what matters is how many rounds it takes for him to take someone out, not his damage. Squeezing those last few points out of a build probably won't make much difference to the end result of a combat, and probably won't change who lives or who dies. In that sense, it really doesn't matter what the build is of the person who sits down wirh you, so long as they have a relatively effective character. Their attitude, and to what extent you can work as a team, is far more important. If you're sitting down with someone who has a big stack of characters and doesn't care if the party lives or dies, then you have problems no matter what build their PC has got. Talk to the player, not the character sheet. You'll live longer.
Fleetfang 01-30-07, 10:52 AM	1) No doubt many builds are above the iconic power curve after the prestige class(es) kick in. But until then you are burdening the other party members. This is OK if you are playing with a regular group, but IMHO it is not polite to subject a random group of strangers at a convention to your "teh suck levels". Especially in challenging (read: lethal) mods. Frankly, Dr.C, I don't think you're being reasonable. We can completely agree on the point about people sabotaging the adventure or not caring if the party succeeds or fails. I whole-heartedly agree that that's wrong. In my opinion, a big portion of this game is about the cooperative process and the collaborative way that seven people can come together and create a unique story (even if that same mod is run hundreds of times). What I don't agree with is your belief that people with suboptimal builds (whether made intentionally to screw everyone else, for "role-playing", or for the challenge of making a crap build work, or simply because their prestige class requires suboptimal choices before it 'kicks in'). For one, those four reasons are not inherently the same. The first is malicious, the second is a play style, the third is a player's choice to make things more interesting for themselves, and the last is an unfortunate side-effect of a far-sighted power gamer. It's unfair and irrational to lump all of them into the same boat. And secondly, wouldn't you say that everyone who attends a convention or a game day where they're not necessarily playing with their 'home group' has a right to play who and what they want? At least as much right as you have to play the character that you want? I forget if it was on this thread or not, but David Christ made a very elegant post that pretty much said that everyone has the right to play what and how they want to, as long as they don't interfere with the fun that others are having at the table. That's good sense, and a good attitude to have. The trick is that for every case, except the jerk who is INTENTIONALLY and KNOWINGLY and MALICIOUSLY trying to screw his fellow players, you're probably talking to fellow gamers who want to have a fun time, want to succeed, and have no intention WHATSOEVER to get themselves or you killed or to screw up the goals of the mod. Now you may have some experiences in the past that make you hypersentistive to people who aren't super-optimized for the here and now 100% through their entire 15-level career. It seems like you are taking it personally if someone plays Living Greyhawk and doesn't have some super-character that's optimized to all hell. I'm pretty good at what I'm doing when I make a character now. I've got a paladin who does something like 150+ damage every round; I've got a rogue/bard who has a +30 diplomacy (in spite of two Cha curses) and can find 9th level magical traps while taking 10 on searches; I've got a druid who is one level away from having a huge, 170hp, 32 AC tank of an animal companion that will literally trample every enemy on the battlefield... at APL 6. These are solid builds that haven't had much in the way of 'suck'... But do you know what my first 3rd edition PC was? He was a Sorcerer/Rogue who went Arcane Trickster after following the Spring Attack tree. The party's druid was better at scouting, better at bypassing traps, and better at tossing spells. He couldn't hit anything worth a damn, couldn't bypass SR, and he had woefully crappy hit points and saves. Talk about useless. But I reexamined the way I played the game. I talked to other players who could help me figure out better combinations, better class progressions, better spell selections... I had people help me. Now maybe you took to D&D and the nuances of LG like a fish to water, but not everyone is a natural at this. There's a learning curve that you need to cut people some slack for. Maybe instead of instantly thinking that every sub-optimal build you run into -- or every build that you think is sub-optimal (as I think we've proven that a lot of your examples aren't crap builds at all) -- rather than thinking that those players are out to get you, maybe you should step back a second and think about it. Maybe give them the benefit of the doubt. Like the Original Post revealed: So the guy has a half-orc wizard... So what? if he's got the right focus (like Transmuter self-buffer, say, or someone who doesn't focus on save spells) then that's a perfectly legitimate build. Not on the surface, but I think the string of posts on Page 1 of this thread pretty much agrees that the combination is fine. And if, after you give them a chance, if they aren't playing up to your high standards, then maybe they ARE just new to this and they need a little guidance. Rather than saying that they need to stay at home before "burdening" you with their sub-optimal build, maybe you can take the opportunity to offer some help to them. Or you could tell them to their face that they're out of line, they're endangering the mission with their boneheaded character build, that they're going to get your character killed, that they need to go home and play with people they know so you don't have to deal with the sub-optimal levels in their build, that they shouldn't have come to a convention where you are forced to play with them, and they should have known that this was going to be a leathal mod, and even though the blurb didn't say anything about an uber-tricked-out-templated-spellwarped-spellstitched-pack-of-runehounds they should have talked to someone to find out how leathal it was going to be, and that they should stop spending their time and money and energy getting their jollies by focussing their every effort and every second of their recreation time in a focussed plot to ruin your enjoyment of the game. You're on to them. And it's not going to work this time. Yeah, you could tell them that. Or, you know, that other option about keeping things in perspective, keeping an open mind, and seeing if you can help them be a better team player. Whatever you think makes more sense.
Simpi 01-30-07, 11:10 AM	I've got a druid who is one level away from having a huge, 170hp, 32 AC tank of an animal companion that will literally trample every enemy on the battlefield... at APL 6 Let me quess, this is something that uses dipping into beastmaster class and combining it with natural bond? Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad
Britt 01-30-07, 11:11 AM	Let me quess, this is something that uses dipping into beastmaster class and combining it with natural bond? Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad How would Natural Bond help with a beastmaster build? I keep hearing people mention this, but I can't find any way that the feat would do anything for a beastmaster build.
bitznarf 01-30-07, 11:16 AM	*sits happily on the sideline, eating hot dogs and roasting marshmallows* :pint:
Crazy Boro 01-30-07, 11:19 AM	Let me quess, this is something that uses dipping into beastmaster class and combining it with natural bond? Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad Sounds more like a wasteland druid going beastmaster for a dire tortoise. The big drawback is that they're real big and really heavy so they can cause some problems with fitting them into places. Best thing is a reduce animal, but even then they are large size and thousands of pounds.
Simpi 01-30-07, 11:24 AM	How would Natural Bond help with a beastmaster build? I keep hearing people mention this, but I can't find any way that the feat would do anything for a beastmaster build. Well, i've seen some talk about it that apparently with "favourable" reading of said feat/prestige class and some relatively recent Sage Advice ruling one could someway stack both of them. It was just my first hunch, knowing that lots of LG players visit CO boards to get their ideas. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad
Japangirl 01-30-07, 01:04 PM	How would Natural Bond help with a beastmaster build? I keep hearing people mention this, but I can't find any way that the feat would do anything for a beastmaster build. Beastmaster increases effective druid level (EDL) by 3 (well 4, Beastmaster + 3) so a Druid 5/Beastmaster 1 has EDL of 9. If you take an advanced animal companion, it decreases your EDL by a certain number. Let's say our theoretical Druid 5/BM 1 wants to take a Brown Bear animal companion (EDL -6). With the BM level, this druid now has EDL of 3 for the purposes of animal companion advancement (Druid 5 + BM 1 + 3 special - 6 advanced animal). Take Natural Bond, and you have an EDL of 6 (your full HD but not exceeding your HD, as the feat specifically says you can't do that) for a Brown Bear with +4 HD, +4 Natural Armor, +2 Str/Dex, and Evasion at APL 6. By the way, considering how the Sage has ruled on Practiced Spellcaster (the feats have very similar wording), it seems that you could take a -3 EDL animal companion and be at EDL 9 (more than your total HD) still for purposes of animal companion advancement. But because Natural Bond hasn't been included in the FAQ like Practiced Spellcaster has, it's hard to say for sure. Oh crap, I shouldn't have explained that. Now Britt won't un-Limit the feat, and my Beastmaster/Druid will have to stay at level 1 forever :weep: .
Britt 01-30-07, 01:20 PM	If you take an advanced animal companion, it decreases your EDL by a certain number. No it doesn't. Reread the section on animal companions. The druid is treated as being a lower level for the purposes of determining the abilities of an advanced animal companion. Nowhere does it state that your EDL is lower; it just says that your animal companion gains abilities AS IF your level were lower. It doesn't actually reduce your druid level or effective druid level. Another way to look at this is to say "what level druid would you need to be to have this animal?" If you are getting an animal companion that a druid of your character level could not normally get, due to Natural Bond, then you are using it incorrectly. You basically have to intentionally misread the feat and animal companion text to think that it means that you can get an animal companion as if you were a higher level druid than your character level. Furthermore, bringing up the Practiced Spellcaster text only hurts your case. Everyone knows how Practiced Spellcaster works, and assuming this works in a similar way means that you know that Natural Bond shouldn't work this way. No one could honestly think the feat was intended to work this way, and at best this is a matter of interpreting the intent of the rule. Interpreting it to apply in this way is highly dubious. the creature gains abilities as if the character’s druid level were lower than it actually is. Subtract the value indicated in the appropriate list header from the character’s druid level and compare the result with the druid level entry on the table in the sidebar to determine the animal companion’s powers. (If this adjustment would reduce the druid’s effective level to 0 or lower, she can’t have that animal as a companion.) For example, a 6th-level druid could select a leopard as an animal companion. The leopard would have characteristics and special abilities as if the druid were 3rd level (taking into account the –3 adjustment) instead of 6th level. As explained in the text on page 35, a druid of sufficiently high level can select her animal companion from one of the following lists, applying the indicated adjustment to the druid’s level (in parentheses) for purposes of determining the companion’s characteristics and special abilities. Add three to your effective druid level for the purpose of determining the bonus Hit Dice, extra tricks, special abilities, and other bonuses that your animal companion receives (see page 36 of the Player’s Handbook). This bonus can never make your effective druid level exceed your character level.
Japangirl 01-30-07, 01:30 PM	No, you use Beastmaster to get access to the animals you can't normally take. Natural Bond will never ever allow you access to new and better animals, I completely agree. What Natural Bond allows you to do is advance them further than you would otherwise be able to do. So for example, a Druid 6 with Natural Bond could not take a Brown Bear companion, as that is a -6 animal and you can't go to zero. But combined with Beastmaster, you could get a Brown Bear at the Druid 6 advancement instead of the Druid 3 advancement. The feat specifically says that it increases your effective hit dice by three for the purpose of animal companion advancement, not to exceed your hit dice, and that is exactly how you are using it. Your bonus from Natural Bond causes your effective druid level to equal your hit dice, not to exceed it. Practiced Spellcaster helps the -3 animal at EDL 9 argument because of how the Sage says to apply it in the order most beneficial to the player (Wild Mage, anyone?). The arguments about Practiced Spellcaster do not affect the -6 animal companion at all, because the feat will never cause your EDL to exceed your HD with a -6 companion. I don't think Natural Bond should work with BM and -3 companion, but it should work with BM and -6 companion.
Britt 01-30-07, 01:56 PM	What Natural Bond allows you to do is advance them further than you would otherwise be able to do. So for example, a Druid 6 with Natural Bond could not take a Brown Bear companion, as that is a -6 animal and you can't go to zero. But combined with Beastmaster, you could get a Brown Bear at the Druid 6 advancement instead of the Druid 3 advancement. The feat specifically says that it increases your effective hit dice by three for the purpose of animal companion advancement, not to exceed your hit dice, and that is exactly how you are using it. Your bonus from Natural Bond causes your effective druid level to equal your hit dice, not to exceed it. No, Natural Bond lets you advance your animal companion as much as a full-class druid as a non-full-class druid, just like Practiced Spellcaster allows you to cast as a full-class caster as a non-full-class caster. You CANNOT get an animal companion with the feat that a druid of your level without the feat could not get. That is giving you an effective druid level higher than your class level. Beastmaster allows this because the class specifically says it does. Natural Bond says the exact opposite. Getting a higher level animal companion does NOT treat you as a lower level druid for purposes of advancement of your animal companion. You have to appropriately distinguish between how your animal is treated and how you are treated. If you have full druid levels and get a +3 animal, you are not treated as a level-3 druid for the purposes of your animal companion; your animal is treated as if you were level-3. Read the text I quoted carefully and you'll see that the adjustments for tougher animals are a difference in how the animal is treated, not how you are treated. Natural Bond adjusts how you are treated and is capped by your character level. Since you are not treated differently for having a tougher animal companion, Natural Bond does not affect that modifier. More importantly, it makes more sense to limit it this way. It is extremely unlikely that the authors intended to allow a druid to have a 4th level druid's animal companion at 1st level because of one feat. Even more, can you think of any other feats that let you gain class abilities of a higher level character than you are? I can't think of any off the top of my head, and if there are any, I bet they are worded very particularly.
Japangirl 01-30-07, 02:08 PM	I would agree, possibly, with that analysis, if the sage hadn't screwed up Practiced Spellcaster beyond belief. As it currently stands, you can take Practiced Spellcaster to gain caster levels up to your HD and then any bonus caster levels you gain from prestige classes go on top of that (thus Wild Mage goes from CL -2 to +3, to with the feat +0 to +3, to with the Sage's ruling +1 to +6). So it sounds to me like that little caveat about not exceeding your HD doesn't really apply in any of the feats. Even if that weren't the case, how then does Natural Bond interact with Rangers? Rangers have 1/2 ranger level for purposes of animal companions, and this would let their animal companions be treated as if the ranger had their druid level (ie 1/2 ranger level) +3 not to exceed hit dice right? So a sixth level ranger would have an animal companion of EDL 6 (three from 1/2 ranger, three from feat) and would be able to take a -3 companion, something a 6th level ranger cannot normally do. If a Druid 6 takes Natural Bond and a -3 animal companion, is the druid's animal companion treated as though the druid is 3 or 6? If 3, what is the purpose of the feat then? Beastmaster and Natural Bond use the same language to describe their effects on animal companion advancement, so I'd say they can be used together to make a -6 companion at level 6 advance as if the druid was EDL 6.
Britt 01-30-07, 02:24 PM	Except you are also misreading the FAQ. It specifically says the -3+1d6 are applied as one step, so you could NEVER get +6 from wild mage. That would effectively be allowing Practiced Spellcaster to bump your CL above your character level, which it cannot do. I suppose rangers would act as if they were 3 levels higher for the purposes of animal companions, so it would be very powerful for them. A 6th level ranger acts as a 6th level druid (3+3) for his animal companion. An 8th level ranger acts as a 7th level druid (4+3) for his animal companion. A 4th level ranger acts as a 4th level druid (2+3, cap of 4) for his animal companion. A 6th level druid with a -3 companion acts like a 6th level druid, i.e. they have a tougher animal companion with no advancements, just like a 6th level druid would. A Wiz3/Drd3 acts like a 6th level druid for his animal companion. The purpose of the feat is that it allows characters that have somehow taken a hit to their druid level, such as multiclass characters, to continue with an animal companion as if they hadn't taken a hit. A feat doesn't have to be useful to everyone that has that ability to be useful at all. This feat is not intended for straight-class druids or druid/beastmasters. Beastmaster and Natural Bond do NOT use the same language. Natural Bond has specific language limiting its application, while Beastmaster does not. The highest EDL a Beastmaster can ever have is character level +3. Natural bond is only going to help a Beastmaster if they have a hit to their druid level for some reason, such as multiclassing. If you apply the Beastmaster's +3 bonus first, then Natural Bond can't add anything, since that would raise your EDL above your character level. If you add Natural Bond first, it can't ever raise your EDL above your character level, so you can't get the Beastmaster bonus to go above character level +3.
Fleetfang 01-30-07, 02:38 PM	Does anyone else find it ironic that this power-gamer conversation is happening under this thread title? To answer the curiosity, yes, I've currently got a Bright Lands Druid 6 who will dip into Beastmaster 1 next level. He will then have an EDL of 10 for his animal companion and pull out the Dire Tortoise from Sandstorm. Fenton Thornass and his pet tortoise Gamorra will then be perfectly legal playing down to APL 6 (though I'm fairly confident that they'll be just fine at APL 8). Yes, it's big and heavy, but with judicious prudence, I think I can avoid bringing him along on sea voyages and tight dungeon crawls and the like. And as for the current debate, I really was hoping that Natural Bond might work with Beastmaster, but I really have to agree with Britt on this one.
Simpi 01-30-07, 03:19 PM	To answer the curiosity, yes, I've currently got a Bright Lands Druid 6 who will dip into Beastmaster 1 next level. He will then have an EDL of 10 for his animal companion and pull out the Dire Tortoise from Sandstorm. Fenton Thornass and his pet tortoise Gamorra will then be perfectly legal playing down to APL 6 (though I'm fairly confident that they'll be just fine at APL 8) This is exactly one of the reasons why I dislike new material being given out to PCs without the actual writers guidelines changing from the usual APL distribution as it forces modules into standard "three-fights format" and to tricked out encounters. This has actually gone past the point where I actually don't want to run LG modules online ever again as I would not get any fun out of them myself. Cheating in online-games (even in OpenRPG) is also surprisingly easy and I am not so naive to think that it has not happened in my tables. Large number of players are also "Too much talking, I want to hit it" type of people who insult most NPCs they meet and when combat comes, they usually have feign surprise cards to negate any need to actually see monsters and when monsters die in one round to latest one-trick thing. Sometimes they even gloat at DMs direction. Authors simply need to look for other means for PCs to actually fail in modules (as you know, if everything always succeeds, where is the drama?) as I don't see how any PC would actually be challenged by fights unless they are extremely tricked out builds (Something I don't want to do personally). It remains to be seen how viable this would be in LG format. For example, I am sure that players would hate my guts if I put above mentioned druid/beastmaster + dire tortoise combo on APL4 which ruleswise is EL6 encounter but really an EL9 fight. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad
Fleetfang 01-30-07, 04:11 PM	Sampo, I'm sure that I should say something here like 'don't hate the playa, hate the game!' but in all honesty, that particular PC is one I started to see how far I could go with just a straight druid. Over the course of a couple of adventures (and some very poor die rolls on my PC's part) his animal companion has proven time and time again to be more effective in combat than he is. I saw the opportunity to follow the story of the character while still doing something outlandishly ridiculous by following perfectly clearly written rules straight and by the letter. One level dip into a core prestige class. I still have some ambivalence about it, as I don't want to diminish the fun of the game with such an overpowered animal. If things get too easy, then I'll trade him out for a dire wolf or something like that and everyone can calm down. And I fully intend to keep things on a tight leash so as not to drop a nuke on everythign we encounter. It also helps that the PC's character is mild-mannered and apathetic about most things, so he's not looking for any glory or fame, and he's not eager to kick anyone's butt anywhere. As for having your hands bound on the writers' guidelines, Sampo, sorry. New LGCS is coming out soon. Maybe there's a chance to trick things out there. And if you want some mods where happy endings aren't always the run of the course, play some Verbobonc Y6 mods. It's nice to lose from time to time, you're right. Because then the victory down the line will be that much harder fought for. To bring things back to the original post, about players who make choices based on roleplaying... does that mean that I can't make an uber-effective PC, motivated by roleplay? I was going to go straight Druid, but it seemed that beastmaster was the right way to go with the way this character played out over his first 5 levels. By following that whim, I'm not diluting a build, but making it even better. Is that just as wrong to do?
UMiskatonic 01-30-07, 07:46 PM	Hmm, If I'm right, the American embassy in Finland is actually considered to be part of America, and vice versa. Could the wide world of RPGA gaming be as close as the capital of your nation? I don't know how you would convince an embassy to hold a gaming convention, but it would be big fun. Maybe it's as easy as raising the ticket price, and paying for the space. As far as everyone else who doesn't have a region, make a Bright Sands character, and play 20 Cores/year and some adaptables. Should keep you busy. If you're forced to travel to play more, then you're in the same position as everyone else. Sure, you miss out on some 16 mods a year (regionals/meta-regionals), but nothing's perfect. If gaming is THAT important to you, move to a place that makes it easier.
Britt 01-30-07, 08:05 PM	I'm pretty sure a ruling has come down before that embassies don't count. You have to be physically in the designated area, not within land owned by that country.
NiTessine 01-30-07, 08:35 PM	If I'm right, the American embassy in Finland is actually considered to be part of America, and vice versa. As I recall, there are some very specific LG rules concerning embassies. I think that they mostly go "no". Besides, I'm not quite sure how the heck one would go about arranging such games, without a gaming contact in either the staff or the ambassador's family. Besides, actual travel from region to region is so much more rewarding. You get to expand your horizons, be confounded by people speaking in unknown tongues, partake of strange local cuisine, get lost in foreign cities and have horrible misunderstandings due to incomprehensible accents.
_m_ 01-30-07, 08:39 PM	I'm pretty sure a ruling has come down before that embassies don't count. You have to be physically in the designated area, not within land owned by that country. What about new caledonia... is it france?
Britt 01-30-07, 09:22 PM	What about new caledonia... is it france? Come to me with a specific situation that requires a ruling and I'll get one for you :)
Simpi 01-30-07, 11:46 PM	Come to me with a specific situation that requires a ruling and I'll get one for you :) Give ruling on other overseas territories as well such as Falklands, French Guyana, Saint-Pierre & Miquel and Greenland on do they count as part of the region. For example, could one play Naerie regionals in Greenland or Sunndi regionals in Aruba. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad
Britt 01-31-07, 12:04 AM	Is there any gaming in Greenland or the other places that needs a ruling?
cycloptic_squirrel 01-31-07, 12:25 AM	Surely you can come up with something more articulate than name calling? I apologize. The comment was meant to be a lighthearted demonstration that 'You cant put a hard age cap on maturity.' Well, that, and I have the dirty mind. No offense was meant to you nor your argument. (C'mon it was a dirty comment though.;) ) Fleetfang's pretty much said it, but let me add two cents. Calm down. There are jerks in out hobby. (Fortunetly, I think they are in a small minority.) Unless you can accept that and find a way to deal with them, I'd stay away from cons. In a random mustering you could end up with anything including the bored girlfriend, the hyper-caffinated kid, the hung over college punk, the guy who is just getting off his second straight night of midnight madness, or even the person who think it'd be a hoot to 'make the mod interesting'. I wouldn't consider any of them optimal, but with patience and a helpful word or two in the right place, I don't think any of them would be worthless. Work with them, help them get what they play LG for, and they'll have more fun. Then you'll have more fun (smiles are contagious) and they'll be a heck of a lot more willing to do your thing once combat hits.