Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Thievingrouge 09-04-04, 01:54 AM	I am currently in an eigth level ( different evels for every one, damn wight....) game playing a Dwarven fighter......I hate dwarves......Anyway I want to petition my GM to let me try something else, but It needs to be a fighter type due to the unbalance of the party: Gray elf Wiz7/loremaster1( I think) Centaur Fighter2 ( he shines when he can make those darn lance charges and kills most monsters he hits with that) Anthropormorphic cat rouge?/explorer?( he guides us quite well) Human sorceror6/ exalted arcanist2 (I think) Anthropormorphic bat druid7or8( PC never shows up so GM is thinking about writing him out soon) Human cleric of abraim(SP?)7or8( abraim is a knowledge god in our groups world called millemundi (if you don't know what it is go HERE (http://www.laww.org/Games/Millemundi/index.html)and find the zip file)( she's an npc because the player left a few sessions ago and she is still needed) human monk7 or 8(VOP... :( ) And me The dwarven fighter 8 ( damn wight). My problem is getting TO combat...... 400FT. with a X3 run speed and a 20ft movement takes awhile.... even when hasted it sucks.... This is a wilderness campaign( on an uncharted worldlet).So I was thinking of asking to be a Human Barbarrian, and later becoming a Frenzied berserker with the Always using power attack ( hit as hard as possible at the expense of accuracy)(Bad plan but it sounds fun to me) mentality. I want to know if that sounds good and what I should ask of the GM?
Mitchell 09-04-04, 02:39 AM	Why not see if you can be a cleric or druid? Either would allow the DM to get rid of the extra baggage, and you would have a unique role in the group... You could still fight, and you have two other melee types already, and the rogue/explorer can pitch in as well. Frenzied berserker = BAD. But if you hate dwarves, why did you pick one to begin with?
Thievingrouge 09-04-04, 02:42 AM	Needed the con..... high roll was a sixteen and second highest was a 13.....I would feel uncomfortable playing a caster because it is my first game.FRB sounds fun to roleplay if you wonder why I would like to become one.
Elrana 09-04-04, 05:02 AM	There is clearly the room, possibly one might even say the necessity for a ranger. Especially in a wilderness campaign. Go through the archery weapon style and at twelfth level step into the Order of the Bow initiate PrC. Human, elf or half-elf is your best bet. As soon as you have far shot you are laughing, watch as everyone else goes running off into combat while you just stay where you are spitting enemies on your arrows! I know some people recommend the PrC earlier, and this is all well and good, close combat shot is an awesome class ability, but it is well worth completing 11 levels of ranger, however you choose to divide them, by the time you reach about fourteenth. :)
Thievingrouge 09-04-04, 05:12 AM	Oh I forgot to mention the centaurs bow abilities too......He hits decently but it is a cannon a large longbow built to his strength (26 if I recall) so there I have no way to outshine him.The melee is in a poor condition right now( god knows why) with the monk always getting carried off ( 3 headed Dire hyenas suck, as due Bat-lguras and ankhegs)The centaur can do a lot of damage but he has too be able to get that charge in or he's just like me......ooooh 17 damage......The rouge/ explorer really isn't built for combat he is a scout and nothing ( except a guide) more. The dwarf never hits combat in a decent amount of time, and I'm often stuck using my bow( short bow). But I was looking at how much damage I could do If I were to have a 16 str and rage and frenzy with a mercurial greatsword....
Elrana 09-04-04, 05:32 AM	You will by far outshine the centaur in bow use. You will also have fighter BAB in case of melee. You will also be the single most useful PC your group has in the wilderness. Or you can run around with a big sword hitting things and that's about it. At the end of the day it is your choice, but the benefit of experience definitely points toward a ranger. If you are determined to go down the melee route then a TWF style ranger is also pretty damn awesome plus still has 6+ Int. skills per level and everything else that makes rangers great! :)
Ghaldrake 09-04-04, 05:49 AM	I say be a Dwarven barbarian. You would still have your con which you would need to rage well and for hp. they are as good as a fight in melee (if not better in the wilderness), and you get to use the Dwarven Urgosh/Dwarven Waraxe as martial wepaons because of your race. You will also have a base speed of the avrage 30ft because of fast movement and you wont have to worry about rogues sneak attacking you (unless they are 4 lvls above you). Is the campaign 3.5ed? If so the dwarves dont suffer from encumberance/larger armour restrictions. :D
Thievingrouge 09-05-04, 12:01 AM	Yes it is 3.5 but my speed of 20ft really hurts..... I do like that archery idea, but the centaur can fire at 1,000 some feet( with all those nice range increments, 10 I believe then the arrow goes no further) and moves so fast....The explorer does all that wilderness stuff too well....I was thinking human Barb. with a mercurial greatsword...BTW anybody click the link in the first post?
Elrana 09-05-04, 07:03 AM	I think you've made your mind up! So go with the human barbarian but I'm not certain that a mercurial greatsword is worth the feat. If you take Monkey Grip instead and use a standard greatsword one size too large for you you will be doing 3d6! With power atack that is 3d6 + magic + 1.5x strength + 2x power attack. Not to be sniffed at! If groundspeed really is your greatest worry then also take one level in cleric (worth it just for a few heal spells anyway) and pick the celerity domain and add another 10' to your base speed. :)