Help! My paladin is doing book-learning! [Archive] - Wizards Community

Help! My paladin is doing book-learning! [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
FeceMan
01-24-07, 12:56 AM I'm reopening this thread because of moderation idiocy that resulted in it being closed because the title was "trolling."
What I wanted to focus on was a question about divvying up party responsibilities. In terms of accepting a role you either aren't accustomed to, or don't like (cleric, bard, fighter typically), how compromising are you? Is there a line to be drawn when you sacrifice enjoying your place in the group with fulfilling your duties?
Always-Late
01-24-07, 01:28 AM Nobody I know really cares about having a balanced party.

If the party s bard, rogue, sorceror, swashbuckler, then that's the party we get.
Thomar_of_Uointer
01-24-07, 01:59 AM I tend to have a wide range of characters "on file" (seriously, there's a file on my computer with about thirty characters written up). I'll just ask who's already in the party, pick a niche that hasn't been filled (considering both roleplaying and mechanical aspects), and then grab the character who looks most fun to play. I actually like to do the roleplaying aspect more than the mechanical aspect, like dropping an angsty emo barbarian (rapier-wielding pacifist who accidentally killed his sister, I submitted this character for the UnCon level 1 character contest) into a group that already had a paladin because I figured the paladin character wasn't deep enough and needed a good upstaging.
Salla
01-24-07, 02:40 AM I never have that problem, as I can play anything reasonably well, though obviously some more than others. About the only things I'll never consider playing are bards and druids, just 'cause I hate the flavor of the classes.

I do know players, though, who should NEVER play spellcasters.
MindLich
01-24-07, 08:16 AM I'm reopening this thread because of moderation idiocy that resulted in it being closed because the title was "trolling."

Hey man, it was not a "MODERATION IDIOCY", the tittle was trolling. If you don't want to name your thread correctly with a name that briefly describes the thread contents and attracts the persons with interest in the subject, well don't post a thread friend.
Shriven
01-24-07, 09:51 AM Hey man, it was not a "MODERATION IDIOCY", the tittle was trolling. If you don't want to name your thread correctly with a name that briefly describes the thread contents and attracts the persons with interest in the subject, well don't post a thread friend.

Trolling is (among other things) the deliberate posting of a ridiculous opinion in order to incite angry responses. Feceman's title is at worst unclear and at best really rather amusing. It is in no way trolling.

Seriously. Lighten up, please.

On topic, I'm fairly flexible about filling party roles. I'm happy playing most archetypes, though I don't particularly like playing arcane casters. Generally I can find a way to play a character that is both fun for me and useful for the group (even if I have to ask other players for optimising suggestions).
claypigeons
01-24-07, 09:59 AM My group doesn't get too hung up on who is playing what. As long as there is some form of healing readily available (wands, scrolls, cleric, favored soul...), we are good to go.

Beyond that everyone can play pretty much whatever they want as long as it meshes with the idea/theme of the game and wont cause static later (playing a blatently evil person in a group with a paladin, or something equally as 'bad')
Iry
01-24-07, 10:15 AM 100% Agreed. Play whatever you wish, however you wish, as long as it's not any kind of Lone Wolf who will act without the parties wishes in mind.
parad0cz
01-24-07, 11:10 AM Well, as my gaming group tends to number 3, 3 is the number...

LEt me start again.

There is 4 of us, and one DMs, that leaves holes. The rules assume 4, and we ALWAYS have DMPC(aside, thats why we are fairly sympathetic to having them, as well as one of us is really good with them). We usually have a healer, otherwise GM's(me included) can be a bit stingy with the healing to control aspects of smashitude. Usually, it ends up that the DM controls the tankish characters. The reason seems to be twofold: one, its simpler to run that kind of character while dming; two, it allows players to play more diverse characters.

Not to threadjack, but it got me to thinking. In the Old Days, you had for roles in the party: Fighter, Cleric, Mage, Thief. Everything was parceled nicely, and all were needed.

Nowadays its not so simple, or cut and dried. ANd with all the options, something tends to get missed. Which may or may not matter in a given campaign. Not having anyone with trapsense, much less your standard 'locksmith' rouge might not matter too much if you arent runing a dungeoncrawl.

What would be your general list of necessary or nicetohave roles and niches? A list you could hand to the players, and let them divvy the roles? That way you might not have to have a rogue and mage proper, but maybe you could get by with a beguiler and bard. You'd be able to pick and choose components and come out with a well rounded party

So i thought this, some roles importance might change dependent on the campaign:

Roles:
Healbot
Face(Seems more necessary nowadays)
Sensor(listen, spot etc)
Main offensive(Max or close to max BAB)
OpenLock/DisableDevice Trapfinder
Defensive Shield/Tank
Wilderness Dude(Survival/Know Nature)
Guy Who Knows Stuff

I also considered Buffer and DeBuffer. These are nice to have, but im not sure they make proper roles.

While writing this, i found how well, not as necessary arcane magic is. I thought it would be more so, but with Direct Damage being a suboptimal choice, it seems the role for an arcane caster would be Arcane Toolchest. Basically to deal with problems otherwise unable to be overcome with fly, teleport, Identify etc. odd, what you think?

As you can see, most of these roles can be doved together nicely, which can open up niches for nontraditional characters.

So what roles am i missing? How wouuld you list it?
FeceMan
01-24-07, 12:29 PM Hey man, it was not a "MODERATION IDIOCY", the tittle was trolling. If you don't want to name your thread correctly with a name that briefly describes the thread contents and attracts the persons with interest in the subject, well don't post a thread friend.
The tittle was trolling, was it?

The title of the closed thread was not, in fact, trolling. In truth, it had to do with the contents of the thread.
draco1119
01-24-07, 01:14 PM ...an angsty emo barbarian (rapier-wielding pacifist who accidentally killed his sister, I submitted this character for the UnCon level 1 character contest) into a group that already had a paladin because I figured the paladin character wasn't deep enough and needed a good upstaging.
I remember him. He was borderline-evil, wasn't he?

As far as filling roles, in my group, we generally tend to have one gap. In one game, we have no trapmonkey, and in teh other, we have no true healer. The DMPC fills the role for us. :)
HermitIX
01-24-07, 02:53 PM The tittle was trolling, was it?

The title of the closed thread was not, in fact, trolling. In truth, it had to do with the contents of the thread.

The title of your other thread; which had the exact same question as this thread was “help my paladin killed a baby.” That has nothing to do with the question at all. And you did the exact same thing in this thread. Party roles have nothing to do with paladins "doing" book learning.

Original thread
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=773283
(different handle same thread)
kelvinaw273
01-24-07, 02:58 PM My first question when joining a group is: "What does the party need?"

I then try to bend around that in some way.
Thomar_of_Uointer
01-24-07, 03:34 PM I remember him. He was borderline-evil, wasn't he?

As far as filling roles, in my group, we generally tend to have one gap. In one game, we have no trapmonkey, and in teh other, we have no true healer. The DMPC fills the role for us. :)

Reformed evil. Nothing puts the value of a living soul into perspective like killing someone you love. It was the emotional angst involved with it that made him fun to roleplay. I still have yet to kill someone with that character (hooray for Improved Disarm!) and he's probably not going to kill the person who set him up for it (it's much more satisfying to let him rot in prison).
FeceMan
01-24-07, 03:36 PM The title of your other thread; which had the exact same question as this thread was “help my paladin killed a baby.” That has nothing to do with the question at all. And you did the exact same thing in this thread. Party roles have nothing to do with paladins "doing" book learning.

Original thread
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=773283
(different handle same thread)
Okay, I'll try to explain this to you.

Suppose that there is a group that needs a paladin for whatever reason. One of the players feels obligated to make said paladin despite his or her wishes to play another class. The player then makes the paladin but seeks a way to enjoy his character while still being the paladin (thus compromising the paladin’s role). In the example of the previous thread title, the paladin would have ditched his Code of Conduct and killed a baby. In the example of my thread title, the paladin is doing “book-learning.”

Paladins do not kill babies and they do not do “book-learning.” Paladins smite things and have sticks up their asses. That is the paladin’s role. Paladins do not study or read books. They kill evil creatures. And, if played by a player who isn’t an idiot, the paladin might be diplomatic or merciful. However, the majority of paladins smite things and have sticks up their asses.

See? It’s easy enough for anyone to understand now.

(And, for your information, it was not my thread.)
ProZocK
01-24-07, 06:55 PM Okay, I'll try to explain this to you.

Suppose that there is a group that needs a paladin for whatever reason. One of the players feels obligated to make said paladin despite his or her wishes to play another class. The player then makes the paladin but seeks a way to enjoy his character while still being the paladin (thus compromising the paladin’s role). In the example of the previous thread title, the paladin would have ditched his Code of Conduct and killed a baby. In the example of my thread title, the paladin is doing “book-learning.”

Paladins do not kill babies and they do not do “book-learning.” Paladins smite things and have sticks up their asses. That is the paladin’s role. Paladins do not study or read books. They kill evil creatures. And, if played by a player who isn’t an idiot, the paladin might be diplomatic or merciful. However, the majority of paladins smite things and have sticks up their asses.

See? It’s easy enough for anyone to understand now.

(And, for your information, it was not my thread.)

I am truly sorry, but no.
This is the WORST way you could EVER try to name a thread...
"Hey, let me follow and strange logic in my head and then use it to name a thread! Everyone will know exactly what I am talking about! And lets put DEAD BABYES on the title!"

Not the smartest move pal :D
FeceMan
01-24-07, 07:52 PM Not the smartest move pal :D
1. The other thread wasn't my thread.
2. I was naming this thread after the other thread.
WizO_Cat
01-24-07, 09:47 PM OK, I'm going to close this thread at this time since this one really is more about what the old thread was about more than what the subject was in the first place.

If you want to restart it, that's fine. Just keep the title on the subject of the thread. Just call it "Divying up responsibilites" or something like that.

If you want to discuss moderation, feel free to e-mail a moderator, and if you don't feel comfortable with that, ou can always e-mail their supervisor. Just don't bring it to this board, for here it is off-topic. Thanks.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
FeceMan 01-24-07, 12:56 AM	I'm reopening this thread because of moderation idiocy that resulted in it being closed because the title was "trolling." What I wanted to focus on was a question about divvying up party responsibilities. In terms of accepting a role you either aren't accustomed to, or don't like (cleric, bard, fighter typically), how compromising are you? Is there a line to be drawn when you sacrifice enjoying your place in the group with fulfilling your duties?
Always-Late 01-24-07, 01:28 AM	Nobody I know really cares about having a balanced party. If the party s bard, rogue, sorceror, swashbuckler, then that's the party we get.
Thomar_of_Uointer 01-24-07, 01:59 AM	I tend to have a wide range of characters "on file" (seriously, there's a file on my computer with about thirty characters written up). I'll just ask who's already in the party, pick a niche that hasn't been filled (considering both roleplaying and mechanical aspects), and then grab the character who looks most fun to play. I actually like to do the roleplaying aspect more than the mechanical aspect, like dropping an angsty emo barbarian (rapier-wielding pacifist who accidentally killed his sister, I submitted this character for the UnCon level 1 character contest) into a group that already had a paladin because I figured the paladin character wasn't deep enough and needed a good upstaging.
Salla 01-24-07, 02:40 AM	I never have that problem, as I can play anything reasonably well, though obviously some more than others. About the only things I'll never consider playing are bards and druids, just 'cause I hate the flavor of the classes. I do know players, though, who should NEVER play spellcasters.
MindLich 01-24-07, 08:16 AM	I'm reopening this thread because of moderation idiocy that resulted in it being closed because the title was "trolling." Hey man, it was not a "MODERATION IDIOCY", the tittle was trolling. If you don't want to name your thread correctly with a name that briefly describes the thread contents and attracts the persons with interest in the subject, well don't post a thread friend.
Shriven 01-24-07, 09:51 AM	Hey man, it was not a "MODERATION IDIOCY", the tittle was trolling. If you don't want to name your thread correctly with a name that briefly describes the thread contents and attracts the persons with interest in the subject, well don't post a thread friend. Trolling is (among other things) the deliberate posting of a ridiculous opinion in order to incite angry responses. Feceman's title is at worst unclear and at best really rather amusing. It is in no way trolling. Seriously. Lighten up, please. On topic, I'm fairly flexible about filling party roles. I'm happy playing most archetypes, though I don't particularly like playing arcane casters. Generally I can find a way to play a character that is both fun for me and useful for the group (even if I have to ask other players for optimising suggestions).
claypigeons 01-24-07, 09:59 AM	My group doesn't get too hung up on who is playing what. As long as there is some form of healing readily available (wands, scrolls, cleric, favored soul...), we are good to go. Beyond that everyone can play pretty much whatever they want as long as it meshes with the idea/theme of the game and wont cause static later (playing a blatently evil person in a group with a paladin, or something equally as 'bad')
Iry 01-24-07, 10:15 AM	100% Agreed. Play whatever you wish, however you wish, as long as it's not any kind of Lone Wolf who will act without the parties wishes in mind.
parad0cz 01-24-07, 11:10 AM	Well, as my gaming group tends to number 3, 3 is the number... LEt me start again. There is 4 of us, and one DMs, that leaves holes. The rules assume 4, and we ALWAYS have DMPC(aside, thats why we are fairly sympathetic to having them, as well as one of us is really good with them). We usually have a healer, otherwise GM's(me included) can be a bit stingy with the healing to control aspects of smashitude. Usually, it ends up that the DM controls the tankish characters. The reason seems to be twofold: one, its simpler to run that kind of character while dming; two, it allows players to play more diverse characters. Not to threadjack, but it got me to thinking. In the Old Days, you had for roles in the party: Fighter, Cleric, Mage, Thief. Everything was parceled nicely, and all were needed. Nowadays its not so simple, or cut and dried. ANd with all the options, something tends to get missed. Which may or may not matter in a given campaign. Not having anyone with trapsense, much less your standard 'locksmith' rouge might not matter too much if you arent runing a dungeoncrawl. What would be your general list of necessary or nicetohave roles and niches? A list you could hand to the players, and let them divvy the roles? That way you might not have to have a rogue and mage proper, but maybe you could get by with a beguiler and bard. You'd be able to pick and choose components and come out with a well rounded party So i thought this, some roles importance might change dependent on the campaign: Roles: Healbot Face(Seems more necessary nowadays) Sensor(listen, spot etc) Main offensive(Max or close to max BAB) OpenLock/DisableDevice Trapfinder Defensive Shield/Tank Wilderness Dude(Survival/Know Nature) Guy Who Knows Stuff I also considered Buffer and DeBuffer. These are nice to have, but im not sure they make proper roles. While writing this, i found how well, not as necessary arcane magic is. I thought it would be more so, but with Direct Damage being a suboptimal choice, it seems the role for an arcane caster would be Arcane Toolchest. Basically to deal with problems otherwise unable to be overcome with fly, teleport, Identify etc. odd, what you think? As you can see, most of these roles can be doved together nicely, which can open up niches for nontraditional characters. So what roles am i missing? How wouuld you list it?
FeceMan 01-24-07, 12:29 PM	Hey man, it was not a "MODERATION IDIOCY", the tittle was trolling. If you don't want to name your thread correctly with a name that briefly describes the thread contents and attracts the persons with interest in the subject, well don't post a thread friend. The tittle was trolling, was it? The title of the closed thread was not, in fact, trolling. In truth, it had to do with the contents of the thread.
draco1119 01-24-07, 01:14 PM	...an angsty emo barbarian (rapier-wielding pacifist who accidentally killed his sister, I submitted this character for the UnCon level 1 character contest) into a group that already had a paladin because I figured the paladin character wasn't deep enough and needed a good upstaging. I remember him. He was borderline-evil, wasn't he? As far as filling roles, in my group, we generally tend to have one gap. In one game, we have no trapmonkey, and in teh other, we have no true healer. The DMPC fills the role for us. :)
HermitIX 01-24-07, 02:53 PM	The tittle was trolling, was it? The title of the closed thread was not, in fact, trolling. In truth, it had to do with the contents of the thread. The title of your other thread; which had the exact same question as this thread was “help my paladin killed a baby.” That has nothing to do with the question at all. And you did the exact same thing in this thread. Party roles have nothing to do with paladins "doing" book learning. Original thread http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=773283 (different handle same thread)
kelvinaw273 01-24-07, 02:58 PM	My first question when joining a group is: "What does the party need?" I then try to bend around that in some way.
Thomar_of_Uointer 01-24-07, 03:34 PM	I remember him. He was borderline-evil, wasn't he? As far as filling roles, in my group, we generally tend to have one gap. In one game, we have no trapmonkey, and in teh other, we have no true healer. The DMPC fills the role for us. :) Reformed evil. Nothing puts the value of a living soul into perspective like killing someone you love. It was the emotional angst involved with it that made him fun to roleplay. I still have yet to kill someone with that character (hooray for Improved Disarm!) and he's probably not going to kill the person who set him up for it (it's much more satisfying to let him rot in prison).
FeceMan 01-24-07, 03:36 PM	The title of your other thread; which had the exact same question as this thread was “help my paladin killed a baby.” That has nothing to do with the question at all. And you did the exact same thing in this thread. Party roles have nothing to do with paladins "doing" book learning. Original thread http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=773283 (different handle same thread) Okay, I'll try to explain this to you. Suppose that there is a group that needs a paladin for whatever reason. One of the players feels obligated to make said paladin despite his or her wishes to play another class. The player then makes the paladin but seeks a way to enjoy his character while still being the paladin (thus compromising the paladin’s role). In the example of the previous thread title, the paladin would have ditched his Code of Conduct and killed a baby. In the example of my thread title, the paladin is doing “book-learning.” Paladins do not kill babies and they do not do “book-learning.” Paladins smite things and have sticks up their asses. That is the paladin’s role. Paladins do not study or read books. They kill evil creatures. And, if played by a player who isn’t an idiot, the paladin might be diplomatic or merciful. However, the majority of paladins smite things and have sticks up their asses. See? It’s easy enough for anyone to understand now. (And, for your information, it was not my thread.)
ProZocK 01-24-07, 06:55 PM	Okay, I'll try to explain this to you. Suppose that there is a group that needs a paladin for whatever reason. One of the players feels obligated to make said paladin despite his or her wishes to play another class. The player then makes the paladin but seeks a way to enjoy his character while still being the paladin (thus compromising the paladin’s role). In the example of the previous thread title, the paladin would have ditched his Code of Conduct and killed a baby. In the example of my thread title, the paladin is doing “book-learning.” Paladins do not kill babies and they do not do “book-learning.” Paladins smite things and have sticks up their asses. That is the paladin’s role. Paladins do not study or read books. They kill evil creatures. And, if played by a player who isn’t an idiot, the paladin might be diplomatic or merciful. However, the majority of paladins smite things and have sticks up their asses. See? It’s easy enough for anyone to understand now. (And, for your information, it was not my thread.) I am truly sorry, but no. This is the WORST way you could EVER try to name a thread... "Hey, let me follow and strange logic in my head and then use it to name a thread! Everyone will know exactly what I am talking about! And lets put DEAD BABYES on the title!" Not the smartest move pal :D
FeceMan 01-24-07, 07:52 PM	Not the smartest move pal :D 1. The other thread wasn't my thread. 2. I was naming this thread after the other thread.
WizO_Cat 01-24-07, 09:47 PM	OK, I'm going to close this thread at this time since this one really is more about what the old thread was about more than what the subject was in the first place. If you want to restart it, that's fine. Just keep the title on the subject of the thread. Just call it "Divying up responsibilites" or something like that. If you want to discuss moderation, feel free to e-mail a moderator, and if you don't feel comfortable with that, ou can always e-mail their supervisor. Just don't bring it to this board, for here it is off-topic. Thanks.