Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Tinari 08-23-07, 08:03 PM	I have a character concept, but there is no actual class that really fully fits it quite right. There's a close fit, but it's ... eh. I'll explain. A rather wild, untamed character who uses psionics to become a savage creature of battle. Wilder fits beautifully, right? The character is timid, unsure of themself and has no concern for physical appearance. Charisma needs to be the primary stat? Egoist perhaps? Thoughtful and intelligent, but very frail and the amount of powers is way outside the range of what I need. Psychic Warrior? Perhaps, but she's not a pure combatant. It'd burn quite a few feats to realize the characters empathic nature and ability to subsume wounds of allies continually (low PP reserves) The best SEEMS like being a wilder, and switching the prime manifesting stat to Wisdom. Would a request like that be viable or make much sense? Is it worth worrying about? Is it worth trying to change the characters characteristics to fit the "character" ?
nightside_samurai 08-23-07, 08:18 PM	Charisma does not only represent physical appearance. It can represent force of personality and the ability to lead. IMHO I don't see the need to switch stats.
Kalai_Eljahn 08-23-07, 08:18 PM	While I'm not that experienced with actually using psionics...Psychic Warrior does have WIS-based casting and a high enough wisdom can get you nice bonus power points. I like how flexible the class is for builds, and you will have a relatively large number of feats to spend. Compared to the incredible number of cantrips offered to an indifferent sorcerer, psion powers really aren't that spectacular in number. That said it seems like a reasonable proposition. Casting stats vary widely; with enough sourcebooks you can pretty much pick and choose for magic, at least. You might eventually decide, though, that Charisma would work. It's a very peculiarly defined statistic - and that means you can exploit what it means.
Mælstrøm 08-23-07, 08:22 PM	I guess my advice in this particular matter would not be widely accepted or even heard on these boards, but I really have to point out that not every hero character out there has his primary stat maxed out!!! Min-maxing makes a lot of sense in a dangerous world, but then again, so does coming up with an original character concept. I played a halfling fighter, which is a bit downwind if you take into account that strength is not the better part of a halfling. And I have played a monk who had Charisma 8 but still maxed out diplomacy - why? Because he was working as border patrol for the royal highness and he simply WANTED to end differences NOT with his hands but with his tongue. So please don't think that you have to have the best roll/value in the primary attribute. Go about it this way, I have found it makes much more believable characters: Picture your character. What do you want him to look like? What are his strengths and weaknesses (aside from class)? What makes him or her go? Assign the values/rolls accordingly. THEN apply the class, not by picking the class that fits the best attribute squarely on the head, but rather by deciding what happened to this character during "creation"? Where do the class skills and abilities come from? Who taught him or her? Will he have the most damage or the most spells/powers? Probably not. But can you see a real character there? A real man or woman? Someone you would want to slip into? Yes? Then you are done... I hope this helped a bit. To all the min-maxers, be it players or DMs: game balance does not come from building your character like everyone else does, it comes from one source and one source only: the DM. If the DM allows an imbalance to take the fun out of playing a character that is not min-maxed, then it is the DM who did not do his or her job. Yes, it's that simple. To paraphrase: Min-maxing does not an enjoyable gaming session make ;)
Vaelan 08-24-07, 12:01 AM	The character is timid, unsure of themself and has no concern for physical appearance. Charisma needs to be the primary stat? People need not be aware of or fully embrace their greatest natural talents. Perhaps the fact that so much attention seems to be paid to her, a reasonable consequence of Charisma, is one of the reasons why she is timid and insecure.
heffroncm 08-24-07, 02:45 AM	That, or the timid, insecure, unkempt character actually, despite the natural talents that would seem to recquire otherwise, STARTS with a LOW charisma. Something on the order of 11 or 12. Bump your other stats, focus on other things, and up your Charisma as you go. Start it at 12, drop 5 points into as you level, pick up a Tome for it as you level, get a +6 item for it. You'll end with a perfectly respectable Charisma, plenty of extra power points, and you'll have an entire character story that revolves around discovering your natural talents a little late in life and doing your best to take advantage of them. Don't worry, a Melee-focused Wilder with high Physical stats can do just as well as one with high Charisma early on.
queenfange 08-24-07, 09:49 AM	Even a timid and unsure character could be extraordinarly forceful and strong-willed when they need to be or are provoked. If that isn't the case, a charisma of 12-13 could still be OK, provided that he (or she) wasn't socially awkward or wishy-washy, just quiet and cautious. And I agree- you don't need to start out with a charisma of 15+ to be a successful wilder as long as you place your other abilities wisely, make good use of other talents besides just your psionic powers (skills!), and keep improving your charisma as you level. If you're really not comfortable with this, I would talk to your DM about using Wisdom instead. It's up to him or her, but they'd probably help you work out a solution.
Kalai_Eljahn 08-24-07, 11:31 AM	Come now Maelstrom, min-maxing can be fun in itself (says the half-elf bard player :D). You do want to make sure you like the character you're playing.
PhaedrusXY 08-24-07, 03:17 PM	If you have access to Complete Psionic, look at the Ardent. I think it will be perfect for what you have in mind.
IceFractal 08-25-07, 12:10 AM	you don't need to start out with a charisma of 15+ to be a successful wilder While you don't always have to max-out your casting stat, you actually do need a starting stat of 15 just to be able to use your powers without outside help. Even using all your raises from levelling, a starting stat of 14 will fall short at level 15, when your 17 Charisma is too low to use 8th level powers. This can be boosted by items, but requiring external assistance from items to use your powers fully is a specific trait that may not be appropriate for all characters - it seems a bit odd for a wild, untamed one, actually. This doesn't apply if the game isn't going all the way to 20th level, though:Ending Level Starting Score 20 15+ 14 14+ 9 13+ 5 12+ 2 11+ That said, even a high-Charisma character could act this way, as a result of psychological quirks. Just as even high-Wisdom Clerics can sometimes be blinded by their convictions. On the gripping hand, switching the casting stat to Wisdom shouldn't cause any problems either.
Stardust 08-25-07, 04:36 AM	I don't know how much it'll help, but I'll just point out that i'm currently in a game with a wilder character. This particular character has high charisma, but is so nuts that we're (the rest of the party) still not sure that he even knows he has psionic powers. His general insanity is pretty evident and most people probably wouldn't get along well with him at all, but he still has high charisma. Why? Because regardless of his interactions with people, he has a hell of a mental force to exert when he chooses to. Charisma is just that - force of personality. This can be separated from looks and social aptitude very easily - just don't put any ranks in social skills and even consider talking with your DM to create a flaw or a trait to reflect this. You should definitely go ahead with the idea if it's what you want to play though, the wilder in our game is great fun. If something with a brain attacks us, it's as good as done for. Normally one of the other party members shouts something like 'Nasherak, that giant crab wants to hurt you!', Nasherak screams and a few seconds later its brain is leaking out through its ears. Of course, we also have a robotic warlock with magical-mechanical augmentations instead of invocations (Eldritch blast = magical machine gun etc.) and a dwarven cleric who hates dwarves and gods. Good times ^_^
Nox_Noctis 08-25-07, 04:50 AM	So please don't think that you have to have the best roll/value in the primary attribute. Go about it this way, I have found it makes much more believable characters: Picture your character. What do you want him to look like? What are his strengths and weaknesses (aside from class)? What makes him or her go? Assign the values/rolls accordingly. THEN apply the class, not by picking the class that fits the best attribute squarely on the head, but rather by deciding what happened to this character during "creation"? To paraphrase: Min-maxing does not an enjoyable gaming session make ;) That is only one way of looking at it. The flipside to the idea that you choose stats based on class is that because of your stats it was only natural that you ended up as whatever class you are. Thus, you don't pick a high Charisma because you're a Paladin, but rather you became a Paladin because you were so charismatic. People do not tend to pursue weakness or mediocrity; they tend to pursue that which they feel they can attain and which they are best suited for. A character who is highly uncharismatic is unlikely to try(or succeed) becoming a Paladin. To make it clear, I'm just using Paladin as an example. A Fighter and strength(or dexterity for an archer) works just as well, as does a Wizard and intelligence. There is nothing inherently wrong with min/maxing as long as you don't just do it in a munchkin-like manner. Optimization is an integral part of real life, and should be considered at least in some ways in character creation to stay true to the reality of psychology(which, unlike physics, can be fairly consistent with the real world).
Mælstrøm 08-25-07, 09:54 PM	That is only one way of looking at it. The flipside to the idea that you choose stats based on class is that because of your stats it was only natural that you ended up as whatever class you are. Thus, you don't pick a high Charisma because you're a Paladin, but rather you became a Paladin because you were so charismatic. A Fighter and strength(or dexterity for an archer) works just as well, as does a Wizard and intelligence.Of course our knacks and fables tend to light the way and help us choose professions, I have never said they don't. It's just not for everybody. The real world has so much diversity, surely you will agree that this way, the abilities/knacks leading to the right job, happens for everybody? People do not tend to pursue weakness or mediocrity; they tend to pursue that which they feel they can attain and which they are best suited for. A character who is highly uncharismatic is unlikely to try(or succeed) becoming a Paladin. [...]As much as an ability bonus helps in learning or knowing a certain topic or skill, it is far from being the most important thing. True mediocrity does not come from bad scores but from bad ranks. The difference of a +1 or a +4 bonus does not really matter much to a 10th-level character any more. Having spent no or few points in a certain skill over those ten levels however will have a great impact, thus making someone oustanding or mediocre. Optimization is an integral part of real life, and should be considered at least in some ways in character creation to stay true to the reality of psychology(which, unlike physics, can be fairly consistent with the real world).I agree that physics are not very consistent, but just as inconsistent are our skills when it comes to choices. The choices of a certain individual affect his world and his future, and again, his predisposition may support certain paths, but they do not dominate his goals nor limit his possibilities. We do not play roleplaying games to swim with the current, be one of the masses for whom that might be true, but rather to be an outstanding individual, maybe a true hero. A person deciding against all odds to become a hero, to follow the way of the paladin or the fighter is a far more likely hero than the one saying: "well I'm kinda strong, I guess I am good at beating people up, I should check out fighter school" (I am cranking up the contrast, of course, but it holds true). Last not least, psychology is not really the strongest argument you can make, since the subconscious controls people far more than they want to realize or admit. Despite best intentions, people end up hurting themselves or others time and again, and certain talents (high ability scores) have nothing to do with this automation. Here you have Joe the fighter, with excellent (min-maxed) ability scores to boot and maybe even an interesting background story. And here you have a young, desperate man who has never really felt like a tough or strong guy, but who still wants to become a good fighter, and, against all odds, decides to make it his goal to learn all there is about fighting. Thus begins his quest for his perfection... If I wanted to go overboard here (please notice that I am acknoledging that this is way exaggerated), I could say that min-maxing takes the originality out of a character, thus making the background story mediocre. Of course, that is not true, there are many great background stories/origins even for the meanest min-maxed characters out there. Still, writing a background story for a truly original character concept is more fo a challenge, don't you think? ;) BTW, I am not using the term min-maxing derogatory in any way, it is an accepted terminus as far as I know, and it describes the process adequately.
Nox_Noctis 08-26-07, 03:45 AM	Of course our knacks and fables tend to light the way and help us choose professions, I have never said they don't. It's just not for everybody. The real world has so much diversity, surely you will agree that this way, the abilities/knacks leading to the right job, happens for everybody? It may not happen for everybody, but certainly for most logical people. As much as an ability bonus helps in learning or knowing a certain topic or skill, it is far from being the most important thing. True mediocrity does not come from bad scores but from bad ranks. The difference of a +1 or a +4 bonus does not really matter much to a 10th-level character any more. Having spent no or few points in a certain skill over those ten levels however will have a great impact, thus making someone oustanding or mediocre. I was not speaking necessarily of mediocrity in skill points. I mean that a Cleric that can only cast level 2 spells because his Wisdom is so low is mediocre, and would likely not be able to get any further as a Cleric, and would likely give up due to that lack of success. While you can certainly roleplay this and run into a dead end, most people would realize this weakness ahead of time and avoid the situation altogether. Even with subconscious desies you still have to account for subconscious realizations as well. The subconscious will undoubtedly realize you are not up to the task and try to deter you in one way or another. I agree that physics are not very consistent, but just as inconsistent are our skills when it comes to choices. The choices of a certain individual affect his world and his future, and again, his predisposition may support certain paths, but they do not dominate his goals nor limit his possibilities. We do not play roleplaying games to swim with the current, be one of the masses for whom that might be true, but rather to be an outstanding individual, maybe a true hero. A person deciding against all odds to become a hero, to follow the way of the paladin or the fighter is a far more likely hero than the one saying: "well I'm kinda strong, I guess I am good at beating people up, I should check out fighter school" (I am cranking up the contrast, of course, but it holds true). What we roleplay to achieve is debatable. Different people want different things. I, for one, like high degrees of verisimilitude(accepting magic and the givens, of course), and like to roleplay believable characters(my latest is a quite-cruel Drow priestess[as opposed to the now-cliche good Drow]). Also, inherent to being a PC class is already that greatness. The NPC classes represent the normal people. Also, keep in mind that just because you want to become a class does not mean you can. You could never make it through training for instance, or you could simply never find someone willing to train you in the first place. This is why so many people have NPC classes rather than PC classes(in the world, not among the player base). If you want to play the mediocre character striving to be something more, play a NPC class and become a PC class later. Starting as a PC makes no sense if that's what you want to play. Last not least, psychology is not really the strongest argument you can make, since the subconscious controls people far more than they want to realize or admit. Despite best intentions, people end up hurting themselves or others time and again, and certain talents (high ability scores) have nothing to do with this automation. See my above argument regarding the subconscious. Also, do not say they have nothing to do with this. Also, automation has nothing to do with this. :P Returning to the real point, the may not always be relevant, but the majority of the time they are. Most people don't delude themselves to the self-destroying degrees you describe. Here you have Joe the fighter, with excellent (min-maxed) ability scores to boot and maybe even an interesting background story. And here you have a young, desperate man who has never really felt like a tough or strong guy, but who still wants to become a good fighter, and, against all odds, decides to make it his goal to learn all there is about fighting. Thus begins his quest for his perfection... Again, this character is best suited to be a Warrior and then become a Fighter. If I wanted to go overboard here (please notice that I am acknoledging that this is way exaggerated), I could say that min-maxing takes the originality out of a character, thus making the background story mediocre. Of course, that is not true, there are many great background stories/origins even for the meanest min-maxed characters out there. Still, writing a background story for a truly original character concept is more fo a challenge, don't you think? ;) Don't even use an argument if you know it's not true. Exaggeration is one thing; gross hyperbole is another; falsifications are entirely their own. The problem with this is that the "truly original" stories are often so forced and contrived, or actually cliche. Originality does not come from playing a Drow, but being Chaotic Good(this should be clear where I'm getting this). Unfortunately, many people think it is. They think, "most Drow are evil," and decide to play a Good one. However, the good Drow are so incredibly rare in-world, and yet so common among the player base that it loses all believability. This is, of course, just one example. It happens to be one of the ones I find the most annoying. Anyway, you can be perfectly original with an established concept. Just because you're a skilled Wizard doesn't mean you have to be like every other skilled Wizard out there. Each player will (hopefully) have their own story.
Mælstrøm 08-26-07, 09:11 PM	[...] I mean that a Cleric that can only cast level 2 spells because his Wisdom is so low is mediocre, and would likely not be able to get any further as a Cleric, and would likely give up due to that lack of success. While you can certainly roleplay this and run into a dead end, most people would realize this weakness ahead of time and avoid the situation altogether.Well, you can begin with an ability of 14 or 15 and raise it during the adventure, can't you (every four levels)? And if you can't raise it quickly enough for new spells, yes, you could switch to another class, your character suddenly realizing he's been fooling himself. Makes for an interesting character concept, at least to me. Or you could ask the DM whether he might help you along/simply generally discuss your thoughts on your character, and he might decide to help you out if the character works out, giving you a potion or some such that will raise your ability by one point... Even with subconscious desies you still have to account for subconscious realizations as well. The subconscious will undoubtedly realize you are not up to the task and try to deter you in one way or another.If that were only true, Nox, if that were only true. I am surely not saying that everybody's subconscious is out to destroy him, of course not, but there are those whose subconscious has been so badly programmed (by themselves) that they actually sabotage themselves. Before you disagree, please acknowledge that I am studying psychology and am learning my fair share about medicine, disorders and treatments, so I know what I am talking about. Take alcoholics, for example. For decades, everybody thought they have no choice. The general "knowledge" was that it was inherent, genetics, and that they couldn't do anything about it, they were not in control; as a result, you had many alcoholics that fell back into the pit, or that had one or two relapses, excusing it with the "fact" that they were not to blame, that they couldn't help it, at least after the first drop (which might have been introduced without their knowledge). Today, alcholoics are taught the truth as we now know it (not that I am saying we have reached the bottom of the disorder, but we have certainly made headway): they learn that no genetics are controlling them, and that they DO have a choice in the matter, that it is their decision to fall back even after they had the first drop. What is the result? They do not have an excuse any more ("Well I came into contact with alcohol again, and then I couldn't do anything about it any more"), and many many alcoholics are now healed holistically and adultly, with the knowledge that it is always in their hands, and in fact many alcoholics decide to drink alcohol later in life and suddenly are able to control the amount they are taking in. Why? Because they do not have a scapegoat any more and are being told the truth about their own psyche and their options. (Please note that I am not being disrespectful, this is scientific and medical fact). Another study, for example, gave probands a test to do and afterwards measured how long they took to get to the elevator. The probands were divided into two groups, a test group and a control group. The test group had to answer questions about old people and their ailings and/or geriatric conditions, the control group received questions about youth. Those that had to answer questions about old people in average needed twice as long to get to the elevator as those that answered questions about youth. This is called profile activation (I am not sure about the English term as I have learned it in German). Everybody of us carries around profiles according to their upbringing. These profiles can be good ones or bad ones; "hispanics carry knives" could be one, however untrue it is, or "old people are always ill". They are not true, but they "ring true" because of what we continually see in our lives. In some cases, these profiles differ from person to person (some have met hispanics and actually know that they are just like everybody else, and that the same percentage of hispanics carries knives as Caucasians or black people). In the aforementioned test (which was run multiple times), it was found that triggering the "old people" profile made people walk more slowly. These profiles are triggered by sensory input, meaning ALL THE TIME (since you cannot "not sense" unless you are in a sensory deprivation chamber. Your senses always pick up information on your surroundings). For instance, if your "inferiority" profile is triggered before a test, you get a worse result than when our "superiority profile" is triggered (this also has been tested at length). So to sum up, the subconscious is far more powerful than many people realize, and once we know this, we can try and pay attention to those things and maybe actively work to change these profiles to our advantage. If we are not aware of this, we continue to be (partially) controlled by our activated profiles. What we roleplay to achieve is debatable. Different people want different things. [...]I was aiming at the underlying goal each and every person on the planet has: to increase happiness and to avoid unhappiness. Playing roleplaying games, on that basic level, is done to further that goal. If you want to play the mediocre character striving to be something more, play a NPC class and become a PC class later. Starting as a PC makes no sense if that's what you want to play.Well that is one possibility among many. If you prefer this way for struggling PCs, then by all means, go ahead. I think it is a great idea and had actually thought about it myself some time ago; but it is a different "level" of mediocrity than simply playing a not-or-not-yet-min-maxed character, true? So both is viable (it's not either-or as you put it. Even if it were, it is subject to personal preference). [...] Returning to the real point, the may not always be relevant, but the majority of the time they are. Most people don't delude themselves to the self-destroying degrees you describe.Well, I won't haggle about percentages here. Of course there are many people out there who have control over their lives; whether it is the majority I can't say. I only know that an ever-growing percentage of people are having more and more difficulties finding their purpose in life. These problems can help you program yourself in a self-destroying way. "Can", not "do". Don't even use an argument if you know it's not true. Exaggeration is one thing; gross hyperbole is another; falsifications are entirely their own.I know, and I am sorry. I shouldn't have brought it up. I was saying I was exaggerating, and thus I shouldn't even have said it at all. My apologies! [...] Unfortunately, many people think it is. They think, "most Drow are evil," and decide to play a Good one. However, the good Drow are so incredibly rare in-world, and yet so common among the player base that it loses all believability. This is, of course, just one example. It happens to be one of the ones I find the most annoying. [...]Well I will give you another example: Jedi! Take the Star Wars Roleplaying game for just one second, and think about the fact that almost all the groups out there either have or at least had or will have at one point a Jedi character among them. How rare are Jedi? In a galaxy of millions of planets with trillions and trillions of people, around TEN THOUSAND were Jedi even at the height of the Jedi order. So how can so many groups have a Jedi if they are so rare? Same explanation as with the "good Drow" example: because other gaming groups should not be taken into account in the universe you and your GM/DM are creating! Each group creates their own universe, and in that universe the idea of having a Jedi in your group of heroes simply means that we are paying attention to this one group where there actually is a Jedi, compared to so many other groups of smugglers, soldiers or what-have-you which do not have Jedi in their ranks. Maybe it is lame to come up with the idea of a good-aligned Drow after the story has been written. I am not the one to judge. I will even admit that I have ripped off a character concept from a well-known marvel comic once or twice and gave it a twist. Lame? Again, I don't know. Maybe it is. But if I can have fun with it and the others don't mind and can have fun as well, is this really a problem? As you said in your last sentence: "Each player will ... have their own story." ;) Thus, no two good-aligned drow will be alike, and each player will take it to new heights, thus making it original (not the character concept, but the character). And if you want a truly one-in-a-million original character concept, then you really cannot fall back on a printed and established base class because it has been played to death! You would need to make your very own base class and all PrCs needed to play that unique character. Still, all of us fall back on established base and PrC classes and still manage to make original characters; that's gotta account for something, doesn't it? PS: If I misunderstood or misinterpreted you in any way, please accept my apologies and let me know! Thanks