Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Gat 04-11-05, 03:44 AM	I play a roque with str 10 and con 10.And we are in a dungeon and we do nothing but fighting the other two fighters are doin good with the monsters but i with only 1d6 arrow feel no use what should i do in combat to enjoy the adventure.
Shir 04-11-05, 04:08 AM	You could get a crossbow (1d8 damage) :D You could try to hide in shadows (for the sneak attack damage). You could try to flank a monster (sneak attack again) You could just assist a fighter (give the fighter a +2 to hit) If you have UMD and the party's cleric is busy, help out with a wand of CLW. Talk to your DM. Explain that combat only is not very interesting for your character. Ask for some other challenges (RP or traps)
Black Kitten 04-11-05, 05:15 AM	Like he said. Play on tactics. I had a halfer rogue/assasin some time ago and he was pretty deadly. Help the fighters. Even a level 1 halfling rogue with a shortsword will do 1d4+1d6 damage. Not top (compared to a greatsword wielding human fighter, for example), but good enough to be of help. Also, indeed talk to your DM that you'd like to use your skills! Yes, that's right... skills... the thing you get 8+int per level off. That should boost your usefulness. (my current party doesn't have a rogue and we're scared to death with the prospect of having to do a dungeon crawl without one)
TheBard 04-11-05, 06:29 AM	Just say "I search for traps!" all the time. Eventually, the GM will come up with the fabulous idea to add traps to the dungeon, which you can find. Suddenly, you're the most valuable asset to the group, especially when the lead warrior stubles into a fireball trap. *g*
Lina_Inverse 04-11-05, 07:13 AM	I play a roque with str 10 and con 10.And we are in a dungeon and we do nothing but fighting the other two fighters are doin good with the monsters but i with only 1d6 arrow feel no use what should i do in combat to enjoy the adventure. build a better charecter.this is your own fault,no one elses.
cambric 04-11-05, 08:02 AM	build a better charecter.this is your own fault,no one elses. That's a good character...so what if it's not "power-gamed". :rolleyes: Do as it's been suggested...skills, skills, and skills. I have a 13th level rogue and I've focused on the diplomacy side of skills, along with disable device, open lock, and search. (btw: my rogue has a 9 str and an 8 con, and he's lived! It's how you play them...hopefully, you're dex, int, and chr are higher.) Cam
Ratheus 04-11-05, 08:28 AM	Gat - While too many points are being placed directly on your deficit of strength and consitution, I imagine the rest of your attributes match up quite well, making you a more than capable character. You probably have a high dexterity as a rogue - gain the weapon finesse feat and use a rapier in combat, it's your best bet for melee. Invest in a magical weapon, something to amplify your damage. A frost, flaming or shock weapon adds 1d6 to your damage with every hit, and is the same cost as a +1 weapon. A rapier with one of these abilities costs 2,320 gold, and a light crossbow with one of these abilities costs 2,335 gold. The wand of cure light woulds costs a mere 750 gold, and provides 50 charges (that's 15 gold per cure light wounds). This is a real bargain, and with a couple skill points in use magic device, you can slap it on your fighters like there's no tomorrow. Especially useful when they're fighting a single, tough opponant. Try to remain hidden and unseen with skills like hide in shadow. Keep your AC as high as possible - taking the shield proficiency feat allows you to use large shields and gain a +2 armor bonus. A heavy wooden shield is only 7 pounds, so it won't weigh you down too much. You can always put it away when you don't want the -2 armor check penalty to interfere with your skill checks. You'll find it more effective than spending that feat on dodge (unless you take it as a prerequisite for mobility). Also, keep your tumble skill high. It'll allow you to get out of combat when you need to without attacks of opportunity. And, of course, I give you big props for taking what others would whine about and refuse to play - then making it work. You're a real gamer.
Joe Khol 04-11-05, 08:34 AM	I play a roque with str 10 and con 10.And we are in a dungeon and we do nothing but fighting the other two fighters are doin good with the monsters but i with only 1d6 arrow feel no use what should i do in combat to enjoy the adventure. Tell the DM. You character isn't best suited to a mindless hack-and-slash dungeon and he should be either offering more variety for his non-fighter players or should have told you what to expect before you created the character. In a good hack-and-slash dungeon, the rogue's key features are traps, scouting and sneak attack. Also talk to the other players. It sounds to me like they're not using any kind of tactics including making use of your rogues talents.
Lina_Inverse 04-11-05, 12:04 PM	That's a good character...so what if it's not "power-gamed". :rolleyes: Do as it's been suggested...skills, skills, and skills. I have a 13th level rogue and I've focused on the diplomacy side of skills, along with disable device, open lock, and search. (btw: my rogue has a 9 str and an 8 con, and he's lived! It's how you play them...hopefully, you're dex, int, and chr are higher.) Cam an adventurer who cannot fight is a dead adventurer.and in D&D you play adventurers.
Santrilla 04-11-05, 12:09 PM	an adventurer who cannot fight is a dead adventurer.and in D&D you play adventurers. Not true. Sorcerers don't fight, but in a party they're very handy. An adventurer who does nothing BUT fight is in trouble when the party comes against damage-resistant monsters, or traps.
Dowanroden 04-11-05, 01:27 PM	Lina, you're a sad case. I made a character once that only had 8 Str in 3rd Edition. Sure, she was hurt alot but damn could she talk herself out of a bad situation, like this one encounter with a band of orcs. She had somehow managed to convince them that fighting her party was a worthless endeavor because they were so very much stronger. The orcs left the party alone after conveying some info pertaining to the adventure at hand. Another character of mine helped her party flank some hidden crossbowmen by goading them on with creative puppets made from her clothes. That same character then helped kill an invisible monster by tossing snow at it. Adventurer's should value more than just Strength and Constitution. After all, what good is it to be as strong as Conan if you have all his smarts too?
aleph_woodenglenn 04-11-05, 01:49 PM	I , for one think that CHR should not be "the stat dump dump" ability (except for bard and sorcs of course), and that low STR or CON shouldn't make any character useless. Every ability should have its uses in any given dungeon/adventure. the idea that: an adventurer who cannot fight is a dead adventurer is misguided. If this is the case, an adventurer who can only fight should be just as dead in a well balanced campaign. While the DM may be running a mostly hack-n-slash, you may want to some how remind him that there typically should be a need in any given adventure for people with a rogue's skills (the frequent trap check sounds like a good idea to me). There was a time (1 & 2e) when a party without a rogue/thief would be a dead party. in combat stealth is key, use that DEX that took your above avg stat to finesse, dodge, etc.
Swiss619 04-11-05, 01:52 PM	What level are you? High enough to have a bow enchanted to do more damage? Crossbow reload timesmake them doless damage long term than longbows. Also, 2 feats youmight want to invest in are Combat Expertise and Improved Feint. CE is a prerequisite for IF, and IFlets you Bluff as a move action. Combined with feats like Skill Focus: Bluff and Persuasive, you can have a Bluff bonus so high that you can be guaranteed to sneak attack anything that can be sneak attacked. Justmake sure to have the magical bow so you aren't helpless against things that areimmune to sneak attacks. Also, look for strength improving magic items. Then, get a Mightybow to replace the longbow: that way you can add your strength modifyer to your damage roll. It's extra GP, though, but it'snot magic, so it'll stack with enchantments.
cambric 04-11-05, 06:16 PM	an adventurer who cannot fight is a dead adventurer.and in D&D you play adventurers. I'm not being rude here, but we ROLE play...not saying you don't but it "sounds" like you don't. We have more ROLE playing "adventures" than ROLL playing adventures. Sure, you do need to "fight", but thats the: Fighters, Paladins, Rangers, Barbarians, some Clerics, and Druids job...NOT the rogue's!! I too have used my "talking" skills to get out of many "messes"...and Lina, that's ROLE playing...Charisma and Intelligence...remember, there are six stats, not just strength and con! My one rogue, with the 8 con, had only like 30 hit points at 10th level...absolutely hilarious how often he just about died...but for years we still talk about the scraps he got the party out of...there wasn't a lock he couldn't pick...a device he couldn't disable...and could talk himself out of almost every situation. Brute stupidy, I mean strength, doesn't always save the day...believe it or not, a little bit of intelligence and some charisma can save lives! I don't mean to sound sarcastic or rude, but there are reasons there are Bards and Rogues!! Aleph said it well...Charisma isn't always a dump stat!! I've seen more MEMORABLE characters in my campaigns who actually have low strength and constitutions, because that requires THINKING and ROLE playing to survive in many situations. Cam
Phrennzy 04-11-05, 07:44 PM	How a character that is not skilled in combat be usefull in the dungeon Step 1: Pick a demon lord. Step 2: Swear undying loyalty to that demon lord. Step 3: Gain untold powers. Step 4: Profit.
HypnoticMonk 04-11-05, 09:53 PM	Some out of the box ideas... Up against a spellcaster? Throw a thunderstone his way (DC 5 to hit the ground at his feet) If he fails his save, you lower his initiative ( easier for others to get to him to disrupt his spells) and knock out his casting 20% of the time. Carry not only that Wand of Cure Lights but some Healing Potions and maybe even some scrolls with spells that the mages in your party aren't carrying. Grab up some of those lesser carried mundane items from the PHB for emergencies no one else is prepared for. ( "gee if only we had a crowbar, we could pry open this door before the water filled the room. .." ) [yes ye olde bag of holding is handy for carrying that extra stuff] (I played a 1st edition monk and even with decent scores, I had to find ways to be useful, so yes I know what you are going through. Good luck and ignore all those number junkies out there. If you succeed with your character as is, you will have achieved something those who are addicted to 18s would never be able to do)
Mikal 04-11-05, 10:49 PM	double post.
Mikal 04-11-05, 10:57 PM	Not true. Sorcerers don't fight, but in a party they're very handy. An adventurer who does nothing BUT fight is in trouble when the party comes against damage-resistant monsters, or traps. Sorcerer's fight. With magic. And while the 10 str isn't an issue, a 10 con is a very rookie mistake, one that leads to a lot of death, especially for a d6 or d4 HD PC I'm not being rude here, but we ROLE play...not saying you don't but it "sounds" like you don't. We have more ROLE playing "adventures" than ROLL playing adventures. Sure, you do need to "fight", but thats the: Fighters, Paladins, Rangers, Barbarians, some Clerics, and Druids job...NOT the rogue's!! If that's not the rogue's job, then why are you complaining? DO your job and shut up about not being effective in a combat situation. Or, in this case, stay out of this arguement. The OP wanted to know how he could be effective in a dungeon. Having a con above 10 would DEFINATLY help out, since he might have a chance to survive a cat scratch full attack. I too have used my "talking" skills to get out of many "messes"...and Lina, that's ROLE playing...Charisma and Intelligence...remember, there are six stats, not just strength and con! My one rogue, with the 8 con, had only like 30 hit points at 10th level...absolutely hilarious how often he just about died...but for years we still talk about the scraps he got the party out of...there wasn't a lock he couldn't pick...a device he couldn't disable...and could talk himself out of almost every situation. Well.. that's good. But this isn't about your character, who, if he truly did have 30 points, must have been quite a drain of party resources when combat DID come around. But again, not the point. The point here is how to make the OP's rogue a better combatant. And Lina's point DOES hold true in almost 100% of cases: An adventurer who cannot fight (either with sword or magic, or yes, even 'social skills') is dead. Brute stupidy, I mean strength, doesn't always save the day...believe it or not, a little bit of intelligence and some charisma can save lives! Now you see, I was all set to believe you wern't sarcastic or rude, but when you decided to call strength stupidity, I have to rethink that. I don't mean to sound sarcastic or rude, but there are reasons there are Bards and Rogues!! Aleph said it well...Charisma isn't always a dump stat!! I've seen more MEMORABLE characters in my campaigns who actually have low strength and constitutions, because that requires THINKING and ROLE playing to survive in many situations. Cam yes. you're right. Charisma can be important, as can bards and non fighting rogues. However, this isn't about your personal crusade against 'rollplaying' (which by the way, is the second most stupid dnd term ever, trumped only by munchkin). This entire thread is about how to make the OP's rogue a better fighter, because thats what he wants to be. Save your rants for other threads. And to help out the OP, yeah, the str isnt a big deal, but those con mods are gonna hose you. Get a crossbow, and start hiding/msing and getting sneak attack damage ASAP.
allenchan 04-12-05, 03:18 AM	Well, I think a lot of the other posters summed it up. You built a rogue thats probally not suited for a dungeon crawl. If you knew it was a dungeon crawl ahead of time, this is sort of your own fault. However, skill-based cahracters are not without their merit in dungeons. if the DM isnt providing enough chances for you to sneak and scout and disable traps then maybe talk to him about it. Consider just multiclassing into fighter at later levels, too. If you're fighting oozes and molds in a dark, dank dungeon, your diplomacy and whatnot are pretty friggin useless.
Solidcobra 04-12-05, 03:29 AM	I'm with Lina on this one. Don't whine cause you made a bad character. yes, bad. "ooh, but i roleplay" "ooh, but my focus isn't battle" No, fragging, ****. No wonder you suck in combat and dungeon crawls then. See it like this...when you go hiking (play D&D), you have a backpack (character) with limited room, and your back with limited weight lifting capability. (Limited feats, skills, gold, spells...) Now, who has more fun on the hike(d&d game)? The guy who randomly throws stuff into the pack and finds that his food sucks and is squished, forgot a backpack, etc. (the guy who thinks that you must suck to roleplay) or the guy who chooses exactly what gear is better than other stuff, puts them down in the right places to get the most out of his equipment, etc.(powergamer)? That's right. the second one... "Roleplaying" isn't a reason not to be strong. Edit: TheBard. that's great, really. But the player didn't ask "how do i play a fun, but statistically inferior peasant?" he asked how he could be better in combat. Also, i must say, rollplay is the most stupid term ever. easily. no exceptions. Yeah. cute. you "ROLEplay, not roll-play". REAL fragging cute, excuse me, i'm busy ROLEplaying my character beating a monster of his CR plus three by himself while the others are clearing equally difficult challenges that put us on the edge. :rolleyes:
TheBard 04-12-05, 03:33 AM	I can't quite comprehend how a character can be badly build or "ineffective". I play a character. Not neccessarily a hero. One of the most fun character I've ever had was a farmer. I took the stats for a commoner, far less than the average starting character. He was fed up by his wife and kids and cows, took his pitchfork and hit the road. Sure, he was "ineffective". But fun to play, that's what makes him effective again. *g* Imagine such a guy meeting his first "real" monster. Or getting some shiny stuff. Ah, memories. So, if you don't like the way your rogue acts in combat, make combat fun! In a roleplaying style. Not rollplaying (which I must say, is a term I like quite a lot).
Solidcobra 04-12-05, 03:34 AM	Now for actual advice... First of all, kill'im off. redo the whole thing. yeah. 10 con is a very newbie mistake. ALWAYS max con after your focus stat. Rogues needing high dex is a myth, i prefer str for my warrior-rogues. So, put stats in order of Int Con Str Dex Cha Wis That order. That should keep you alive...mostly. Now, for feats, emphasis on sneak attack. two weapon fighting is a great way to go, since your str will>your dex, no need for weapon finesse. I suggest a two-sided sword, just cause they're cool. A few levels of fighter (2) for the feats never hurt anyone. Good things otherwise are stuff such as boots of blink (same cost as boots of haste, same effect but blink instead. sneak attack goodness), wands and scrolls (did i forget to mention "MAX YOUR GODDARN UMD!"? silly me.) PrCs? Assassin is good. They get spells, the use of poisons and death attack. Let the wizzy cast invisibility on you, a save or die PLUS sneak attack damage. not bad batman...not bad. Urge the fighter to grapple. when he does, you can sneak attack his victim for mucho damage.
cambric 04-12-05, 08:26 AM	Sorcerer's fight. With magic. And while the 10 str isn't an issue, a 10 con is a very rookie mistake, one that leads to a lot of death, especially for a d6 or d4 HD PC What are all the scores? That would give us a better gauge if it was a "rookie" mistake or the best he could do with what he had. If that's not the rogue's job, then why are you complaining? DO your job and shut up about not being effective in a combat situation. Or, in this case, stay out of this arguement. The OP wanted to know how he could be effective in a dungeon. Having a con above 10 would DEFINATLY help out, since he might have a chance to survive a cat scratch full attack. Guess I'm not understanding your point on this one..."DO your job and shut up about not being effective"? The question was a viable one: How to stay alive...use intelligence: hide, stealth...SKILL POINTS are the most effective way. Would it help out...SURE! Yes, it would...but the fact is, he won't DIE because he "only" has a 10 in his con! Well.. that's good. But this isn't about your character, who, if he truly did have 30 points, must have been quite a drain of party resources when combat DID come around. But again, not the point. The point here is how to make the OP's rogue a better combatant. And Lina's point DOES hold true in almost 100% of cases: An adventurer who cannot fight (either with sword or magic, or yes, even 'social skills') is dead. Drain on the party resources? Um, no...it's called let each class do what they're supposed to do...you know, TEAM work. My strengths were: Hiding, unlocking, disable device, and speaking for the party...a drain, no, quite the opposite! A rogue going into a dungeon should be with others that are there to support them...not being the main or even secondary fighter...sneak attack is a great weapon! So they can fight, we just have to on OUR terms. :P Now you see, I was all set to believe you wern't sarcastic or rude, but when you decided to call strength stupidity, I have to rethink that. Yeah, that part was semi-sarcastic...the meaning is this: Too many people think with their muscles and not their brains! Your view is this: 10 con, your going to DIE down there. Um, it's one stat...no negative...and as a ROGUE, that's not too far from the realm of being realistic. Sure, a higher one would be "nice", but as I asked earlier, what were ALL the stats? Dex and Intelligence are the 2 main for a rogue...Charisma if you're going to be the parties spokesperson...Wisdom, probably a dump stat, unless you have a reason otherwise. yes. you're right. Charisma can be important, as can bards and non fighting rogues. However, this isn't about your personal crusade against 'rollplaying' (which by the way, is the second most stupid dnd term ever, trumped only by munchkin). This entire thread is about how to make the OP's rogue a better fighter, because thats what he wants to be. Save your rants for other threads. Not a "personal" crusade against 'roll playing', it's called adding flavor and not always going by the "stats" like it's a video game. This isn't a rant, this is being helpful: Use SKILLS, go with your strengths...and just because you have low stats doesn't mean the PC is worthless, like your implying, and for people to say, "kill him off and start over", well, that is probably not an option...PLAYING to your strengths is an option, and that's what I was explaining: ROLE play...in dungeons, at least the ones I've been in, there are traps...you're probably scouting...and you have sneak attack, so go with what you have, not with what you can't get! If you worry about hit points, when you get your next feat, take toughness! And to help out the OP, yeah, the str isnt a big deal, but those con mods are gonna hose you. Get a crossbow, and start hiding/msing and getting sneak attack damage ASAP. Not going to "hose" you, a negative to your con, yeah, it would hurt...but play smart and you'll live and probably have some great stories to tell later about how you lived with a "10" con. Maybe I'm totally off base and you don't have a fair DM, and maybe that's what's happened to other posters, but I have a great DM and he plays it fair! If I'm smart, I live...sure, some bad dice rolls and I've gone into the negatives, but thankfully I have had great team work and the cleric got to me fast. And if I went to my DM, or if my players came to me and said, "I only have a 10 con, I want to give up...kill myself...or something, I just need a better character" I wouldn't want them in my game, nor would he want us in his...go get a video game so you can get the "stats" you want...we play the game as the world is: You don't get to hit the restart button...you play with what you've been given. Cam
SammasterT 04-12-05, 11:18 AM	After all, what good is it to be as strong as Conan if you have all his smarts too? Hmmm. Lets see. Born to humble barbarian begins in Cimmeria. TRavelled throughout most of the known Hyborean World during his freebooting days, mastering every langauge he encountered, masterihng culture to the extent that he was able to rise to positions of great influence in various societies on numerous occassions. Finally, he becomes the King of Aquilonia, the most powerful of the nations of Hyborea. Conan's brains seem up to par with his braun. WTF?!?!? You're other point was well taken though. Character stats matter far less than player ingenuity and creativity. This thief might try using the terrain to his advantage, ie. ledges, shafts, small spaces, loose rocks, crumbling architecture, etc. ?!?!?!? Maybe try tripping up the oppostion if possible?!?!?!? Use speed to lure some off on a chase?!?!?! Then again, a well placed arrow shaft, at the right time -- or the wrong time even!!! -- can be really, really handy in and of itself
LCD2YOU 04-12-05, 11:49 AM	I play a roque with str 10 and con 10.And we are in a dungeon and we do nothing but fighting the other two fighters are doin good with the monsters but i with only 1d6 arrow feel no use what should i do in combat to enjoy the adventure. So? My Rogue had an 12 Str and 11 Con yet he was THE guy for the dungeon crawl. He never stood toe to toe with anything unless he absolutely had to do so. If they were in tight quarters, he stay back with the mage, actually a little in front or to whatever position the mage wasn't covered on, and take AoO with combat reflexes (yeah a high dex with Combat Reflex, gotta love it) to those trying to get through. If there was room to maeuver properly, he never hit an opponent face to face if there was a way to get behind them. Then there's the spot, search, open lock and disable device. Your Rogue is not meant for toe to toe combat. If you do that, you're palying nothing but a sub-par fighter.
Lina_Inverse 04-12-05, 12:39 PM	how does the lina play the game?the way it was MENT to be played. i roleplay a hero,an adventurer.he travels with a group of buddies,knowing theres safety in numbers and that they can cover his weaknesses.he and his buddies arm themselves to the teeth,staring death head long.and go out and make the world a better place.along the way they meet friends and enemys.they ingage in witty banter,and generally do cool things.but when it comes down to it,they all know they wouldnt last the night if they didnt kick so much ass. besides,as noted.he asked about in a dungeon.he needs to suck up he made a big mistake.
striderII 04-12-05, 03:55 PM	This post will be in two parts - the helpful part, and the rant part. (This is to aid those who choose not to read rants) First, the helpful part: I play a roque with str 10 and con 10.And we are in a dungeon and we do nothing but fighting the other two fighters are doin good with the monsters but i with only 1d6 arrow feel no use what should i do in combat to enjoy the adventure. It's quite possible that your DM isn't taking your capabilities into account. Other than your 10 Str and Con, what are your other ability scores? What are your skills? Rogues are typically good at scouting, diplomacy/bluffing (and detecting these), opening locks, and finding and removing/disabling traps. Is your DM providing you with the opportunity to utilize these skills? (assuming you have them). Also, are you playing a race with low-light vision or darkvision? These (and other racial abilities) may very well aid you in tasks that are typically the rogue's purview. It seems like you are playing in a very combat-heavy game. This may be due to DM inexperience (he doesn't know how to craft a more layered game), or due to the preferences of the other players (and/or yourself, in which case rogue was a poor class selection). Answer some of these questions, and you will probably receive more useful help. Now, the rant part: build a better charecter.this is your own fault,no one elses. This is, perhaps, the most unhelpful, annoying, pointless waste of anyone's time I've ever seen. The OP comes asking for help, and you pretty much tell him he's a piece of crap. Way to go. Never mind the fact that I've never seen a single post of yours that was anywhere near legible. If English is your native language, then I suggest returning to the first grade so you can learn it over again, as you have no concept of punctuation, grammar, or sentence structure. Trust me, you'll sound much more intelligent that way. If English is not your native language, disregard that portion of my rant (although the statement was still entirely non-helpful). If that's not the rogue's job, then why are you complaining? DO your job and shut up about not being effective in a combat situation. Or, in this case, stay out of this arguement. The OP wanted to know how he could be effective in a dungeon. You are partially correct in your assumption. The OP wanted to know how he could be more effective in a *dungeon*, not necessarily combat. The last time I checked, opening doors, scouting ahead of the party, and disabling a nasty trap (to name a few things), aren't typically considered combat, are they? or the guy who chooses exactly what gear is better than other stuff, puts them down in the right places to get the most out of his equipment, etc.(powergamer)? That's not necessarily powergaming (as, clearly, your definition of "powergaming" is dissimilar to mine), but *making sense*. The example, while possibly good intentioned, was poor. Yeah. cute. you "ROLEplay, not roll-play". REAL fragging cute, excuse me, i'm busy ROLEplaying my character beating a monster of his CR plus three by himself while the others are clearing equally difficult challenges that put us on the edge. Maybe you are roleplaying your character, maybe you aren't. We have only your statement to go by. Quite frankly, it's also possible that you're simply arranging numbers on a sheet of paper and calling it roleplaying (since "roleplaying" is a rather subjective term). I'm sure there are some primates who can do the same, but it doesn't make them better than the other primates by definition, does it? they all know they wouldnt last the night if they didnt kick so much ass. Oh, I see. Metaphorical ***** waving. Thank you so much for showing me the one and true way the game was "ment" (as an aside, try "meant") to be played. Somehow, I missed it in the past sixteen years. Sheesh. strider
Krelios 04-12-05, 04:36 PM	The "Video Game Generation" like Lina and Solid who are more concerned with a character's combat power than any sense of story or reason are what is ruining the hobby. I know it sounds self-righteous, and it probably is, but if that's all you're looking for, there are lots of video games out there that don't weigh you down with all of this "story" stuff you are trying so hard to get around. In D&D the "reason" should come before the numbers. That being said, I would focus on all of the tactics available to your rogue, as has been suggested. Aid Another, Flanking, Sneak Attack, Feint, Tumble, Use Magic Device, etc. can all be VERY beneficial in combat, even if you have low physical stats. Also, do not underestimate alchemical items. If you're fighting something with damage reduction, sneak attacking with a vial of acid can dramatically change the course of a fight.
HypnoticMonk 04-12-05, 08:27 PM	how does the lina play the game?the way it was MENT to be played. i roleplay a hero,an adventurer.he travels with a group of buddies,knowing theres safety in numbers and that they can cover his weaknesses.he and his buddies arm themselves to the teeth,staring death head long.and go out and make the world a better place.along the way they meet friends and enemys.they ingage in witty banter,and generally do cool things.but when it comes down to it,they all know they wouldnt last the night if they didnt kick so much ass. besides,as noted.he asked about in a dungeon.he needs to suck up he made a big mistake. A- I suppose the game was "MENT" to be played with no regard to punctuation rules, proper grammar, or correctly spelled words. B- Any group can decide to play this game just about anyway they want to. ( Theoretically, you could play Monopoly with D20s, just don't act huffy when people tell you that isn't the way they do it. ) However, the vast majority of the people I have played with over the years don't think a character is a bad character if they have low stats. What they have agreed on, however, is that a sign of an inferior, under-confident player is someone who HAS to have high stats or they whine and say "This is a bad character!!"
Quarterstaff 04-12-05, 08:59 PM	Jesus lay off you jerk. He simply asked how to make his character better for his adventure. So go troll somewhere else okay. The way i always delt with inferior stats was to focus on my strengths. like with your bow if thats the kind of character you want to be. think about certain prestige classes. my favorite for ranged combat was the order of the bow initiat. Extra damage and a whole mess load of fun to roleplay.
trapspringer 04-12-05, 09:29 PM	Ignore all the other posts. I will now solve all your problems. *Cracks knuckles* Let's say you are a level 3 halfling rogue with 10/16/10/14/12/14. Very average stats. But, you still deal 1d4+2d6 when you sneak attack. You sneak attack any time you flank, your opponent has not acted in the regular combat round (it doesn't matter if he knew you were coming- look up 'flat footed in the DMG and the PHB, then show your DM), you are invisible, you have quick-draw and flick of the wrist (the next two feats you should pick up, flick of the wrist can be found in complete warrior), you palm a dagger (also in complete warrior, in the back under new uses for skills) or you feint (PHB). As a level three halfling rogue, you can do all sorts of fun things. With the above stats, you have 10 skills maxed out!! That's lot of skills. You also have an insane hide and move slently. You should use this to move ahead of the party a little and scout out the area. Your slieght of hand can make for a lot of fun, too. DC 20 relieves someone of a possesion. Sure they get a spot check, but if you beat that DC, they still lose what your after. Read up on slieght of hand. If you have max ranks in UMD, you need to roll a 13 or better to ue a level one scroll. Not too shabby, that ray of enfeelement. 1d6+1 str penalty will slow down the opposing orc barbarian to around... str 10. wow. Did I mention you can sneak attack with touch spells like shocking grasp? (what is a person's flat footed, touch ac? 10. :D ) Ask your DM if you will be playing dungeon crawl for the rest of the campaign. If so, you ma want to grab a level of ighter to pick up the feat, proficienies, and HD. You will want to take quick draw, flick of the wrist, of I. inititiative. Or not, strait rogue will build you sneak attack faster. I would suggest you work on some alchemy, too. You have all those nifty skill points, use 'em for something fun like alchemists fire and thunder stones. Remember, as a halfling you wiegh around 33 pounds. That is a light load for a medium character with 10 strength. A person can throw their light load. Might want to remember that if you need to get somewhere high or far and the barbarian doesn't have any ranks in jump. tie a rope to the halfling and let him fly. As for Lina: There should be more roles in a (dungeoneering) party than guy who kills stuff one and guy who kills stuff two. You need a healer, a trap finder/disarmer, a party stuff maker, a niche filler bard , a nuke specialist, a diplomat, etc. Most characters can fill a few rolls at a time. BTW, a rogue really, really doesn't need str... at all. By level five, that 3d6 will make any +2 they could get from str look pathetic. They will need a good int, con, cha, and DEX more than a good str, becasue all of those things are used to get sneak attack (or not die in the process). If they have the slack to put something into str, good, but otherwise, no. I run two dungeon crawl campaigns right now. If a party had no rogue, no fighter, no caster, and no healer, they would die quickly in my dungeons. Most doors have some kind of trap, most bad-guys have some sort of strategy, and most problems they come across are a LOT easier with magic. I still remember the time when the two barbarians were trying to get to a dungeon on the underside of a floating island. They made sooo many climb checks, and just when the second barbarian was one climb check away, be rolled a natural one. He blew 6 actions points trying to catch himslef on the way down, succeeded 20 feet up, then rolled another natural one. He spent his last action point not dying. He did eventually make it up. The whole thing took around 7 minutes, almost killed a barbarian, and basically showed the players balance is a good thing.
Mikal 04-12-05, 10:05 PM	The "Video Game Generation" like Lina and Solid who are more concerned with a character's combat power than any sense of story or reason are what is ruining the hobby. I know it sounds self-righteous, and it probably is, but if that's all you're looking for, there are lots of video games out there that don't weigh you down with all of this "story" stuff you are trying so hard to get around. In D&D the "reason" should come before the numbers. Or perhaps they just decided to help out the OP with what he wanted, rather then getting all santimonious. :rolleyes: What are all the scores? That would give us a better gauge if it was a "rookie" mistake or the best he could do with what he had. Well the OP said Str 10 and Con 10. The 'rookie mistake' I was referring too was the Con Score. Usually, a low con means death, especially at lower levels, and especially with newer players who don't know tactics enough to stay alive. Guess I'm not understanding your point on this one..."DO your job and shut up about not being effective"? The question was a viable one: How to stay alive...use intelligence: hide, stealth...SKILL POINTS are the most effective way. Would it help out...SURE! Yes, it would...but the fact is, he won't DIE because he "only" has a 10 in his con! Skill points don't help when you're in a dungeon corridor and you're ambushed by goblins. In general, I'm sure his rogue is fine. In a dungeon enviroment, he's a meat snack waiting to happen. And I DID give advice to the rogue: stay back, get a raised weapon, and try to hide in shadows while the meat shields soak damage. And odds are he WILL die because he only has a 10 in con. He's low level. So he has 6-12 hp. One lone orc can drop that without a critical hit. He's in a very dangerous situation. Drain on the party resources? Um, no...it's called let each class do what they're supposed to do...you know, TEAM work. My strengths were: Hiding, unlocking, disable device, and speaking for the party...a drain, no, quite the opposite! A rogue going into a dungeon should be with others that are there to support them...not being the main or even secondary fighter...sneak attack is a great weapon! So they can fight, we just have to on OUR terms. :P a 10th level 3rd edition character with 30 hp has NO terms in which he will be able to fight. You're dead in one average attack. As such, you'd be a great liability. Would I call on you to help lower the rates on my mortgage? Sure? But would I ever be irresponsible enough to take you adventuring anywhere your CR would allow? Hell no. Yeah, that part was semi-sarcastic...the meaning is this: Too many people think with their muscles and not their brains! Your view is this: 10 con, your going to DIE down there. Um, it's one stat...no negative...and as a ROGUE, that's not too far from the realm of being realistic. Sure, a higher one would be "nice", but as I asked earlier, what were ALL the stats? Dex and Intelligence are the 2 main for a rogue...Charisma if you're going to be the parties spokesperson...Wisdom, probably a dump stat, unless you have a reason otherwise. Con is one of the most important stats in the game. Period. It directly impacts your survivability on several levels, for ANY class or race (unless you're undead). Yes, Dex and Intelligence are important, but Con is too. You may be flashy and tumbly and smart as a whip, but it doesn't matter when Throg the Barbarian rages in and cleaves you without critting. Not a "personal" crusade against 'roll playing', it's called adding flavor and not always going by the "stats" like it's a video game. This isn't a rant, this is being helpful: Use SKILLS, go with your strengths...and just because you have low stats doesn't mean the PC is worthless, like your implying, and for people to say, "kill him off and start over", well, that is probably not an option...PLAYING to your strengths is an option, and that's what I was explaining: ROLE play...in dungeons, at least the ones I've been in, there are traps...you're probably scouting...and you have sneak attack, so go with what you have, not with what you can't get! If you worry about hit points, when you get your next feat, take toughness! Or.. be smart, and try and create a tougher character next time around. DON'T NEGLECT YOUR HP Not going to "hose" you, a negative to your con, yeah, it would hurt...but play smart and you'll live and probably have some great stories to tell later about how you lived with a "10" con. The problem is that, at low levels, you can play as smart as you want, but the nature of the beast is that luck rules the combat game at this point, and 10 con with d6 HD equals Dead PC 95% of the time. You're other point was well taken though. Character stats matter far less than player ingenuity and creativity. I was going to agree with you totally, but this line smacks of total metagaming. A player's ingenuity and creativity should matter zip as far as his PC is concerned. I swear, it gets old seeing a PC with 8 wisdom and intelligence being the battle master, giving all the sage advice, while the wizard and cleric, with 18's in said stats, sit there picking their noses. Roleplay your mental stats! I can't quite comprehend how a character can be badly build or "ineffective". Simple. Look at the OP. He obviously feels ineffective in this situation. And a badly built character is one who cannot do the job he is meant to, nor any other useful job that an adventurer is expected to handle. One of the most fun character I've ever had was a farmer. I took the stats for a commoner, far less than the average starting character. He was fed up by his wife and kids and cows, took his pitchfork and hit the road. Sure, he was "ineffective". But fun to play, that's what makes him effective again. *g* Imagine such a guy meeting his first "real" monster. Or getting some shiny stuff. Ah, memories. That doesn't make him effective. That makes him 'fun'. There's a difference between the two. If you're having fun, then alls well and good. So, if you don't like the way your rogue acts in combat, make combat fun! In a roleplaying style. Not rollplaying (which I must say, is a term I like quite a lot). 'Rollplaying' is a term which causes division and is an insult to those who whose style isn't deep immersion. If I had my way it'd be banned. But feh. And this isn't about having 'fun'. The OP doesn't want fun in combat. He wanted tips on how to be more effective, which, hopefully he's picked up.
kliate 04-12-05, 10:19 PM	Skill points don't help when you're in a dungeon corridor and you're ambushed by goblins. In general, I'm sure his rogue is fine. In a dungeon enviroment, he's a meat snack waiting to happen. And I DID give advice to the rogue: stay back, get a raised weapon, and try to hide in shadows while the meat shields soak damage. And odds are he WILL die because he only has a 10 in con. He's low level. So he has 6-12 hp. One lone orc can drop that without a critical hit. He's in a very dangerous situation. Skill points are probably the most desirable things of all when ambushed by goblins...taking a moment: Listen: If the goblins are moving and you hear them, you're not going to be surprised Spot: If the goblins aren't making a sound, but there's at least some visibility to work with, you'll see them coming and won't be surprised Tumble: You're surrounded by goblins with 1 hit point left, your defending weapon broken and your armor disolved by the ooze in the last room? Tumble is the skill that allows you to survive. With a standard action and 5 ranks of tumble, you can add 6 to your armor class (total defense action, and the bonus noted under tumble), maneuver to almost any point in the battle, and sneak attack their leader whom you noticed by using... Knowledge (Local): to remember what goblins tote around as status symbols. Know your enemy and all that. For that matter, if you notice the goblins far enough in advance you may well be able to Hide and Move Silently right on past them, and employ Use Magic Device to begin unloading a wand of fireballs. They come after you, you disappear again and the party mops up the survivors.... Never, ever, underestimate the value of skills.
Mikal 04-12-05, 11:40 PM	Skill points are probably the most desirable things of all when ambushed by goblins...taking a moment: Listen: If the goblins are moving and you hear them, you're not going to be surprised Spot: If the goblins aren't making a sound, but there's at least some visibility to work with, you'll see them coming and won't be surprised Tumble: You're surrounded by goblins with 1 hit point left, your defending weapon broken and your armor disolved by the ooze in the last room? Tumble is the skill that allows you to survive. With a standard action and 5 ranks of tumble, you can add 6 to your armor class (total defense action, and the bonus noted under tumble), maneuver to almost any point in the battle, and sneak attack their leader whom you noticed by using... Knowledge (Local): to remember what goblins tote around as status symbols. Know your enemy and all that. For that matter, if you notice the goblins far enough in advance you may well be able to Hide and Move Silently right on past them, and employ Use Magic Device to begin unloading a wand of fireballs. They come after you, you disappear again and the party mops up the survivors.... Never, ever, underestimate the value of skills. Yes.. all that is possible. Except that if he botches one of those skills, he won't survive the mistake, with his 6 hp, when the goblins notice him. Skills alone won't give someone survivability. Just like hp alone won't. To be honest, it takes both for a rogue to get by. And on a side note: how can someone unload said wand of fireballs when they're low level. At most you'll be lucky to have a wand of burning hands, and who needs it more-- the rogue who might be able to use it, or the wizard who will be able to, and will be less useless then the rogue after about 2 rounds of combat where he casts spells?
weasel fierce 04-13-05, 03:18 AM	Maybe its time to talk to the DM and ask if he could actually put some thought into his dungeon design ? Adventures that are nothing but combat gets bored rather quickly.
Callista 04-13-05, 03:28 AM	This is why a rogue should always, always max out Bluff. Feinting in combat=Flat-footed opponent=Sneak Attack. Not to mention Tumble: Flanking oponent=Denied DEX bonus=Sneak attack. And UMD: Wand of Grease+DC 10 Balance check=opponent denied DEX bonus=Sneak Attack. And, maybe, if you're lucky, a prone opponent too.
Solidcobra 04-13-05, 04:49 AM	Funny how i and Lina have to defend ourselves for helping the guy with what he asked... But, yeah, you're right. I am of a videogame generation. I've been playing games since i was 4, but only playing D&D for around six years. Fact: Powergaming is good. You don't have to suck to be a good roleplayer. Playing a weak character must not equal being a good roleplayer either, it just means you suck at math. You mustn't shape the stats around the character ("My char likes baskets. so i take craft: basketweaving, skill focus: basket weaving and the greater basketweaver PrC!"), you can shape the CHARACTER around the STATS. ("I'm planning to be a rogue who goes fighter/assassin. I'm gonna play a slightly ruthless halfling exiled from his people for his unorthodox ways of helping them against goblin assaults and...") Really, try it. Imagine...wouldn't it be fun to be STATISTICALLY STRONG AND STILL ROLEPLAY A FUN AND INTERESTING CHARACTER? Note: Strong mustn't mean "i'm a one-man army" just "good at the field you choose". you can be a strong bard, which likely means that you buff your friends and cast "curse"-style spells on your enemy, etc. A strong rogue is either sneak-attack based or a skillmonkey. The game isn't about just stats or just roleplay. It's a combination, in this thread we are supposed to focus on the stats though since THAT IS WHAT THE TOPIC CREATOR WANTED. PS. Lina is kickass. Just want everyone who hasn't seen that fact to know. DS.
Callista 04-13-05, 05:24 AM	Hmm, not quite. I've seen a rogue played with almost total disregard to sneak attacks or traditional rogue skills. This particular person focused on diplomacy, bluff, any sort of skill that allowed her to be an insanely good con artist. With her skills to back it up, she talked her way out of most battles, fought her way through some (with Feint-empowered sneak attacks), and even recruited a couple of random-encounter foes to their side. So, yes. Rogues are very flexible. In anything but pure hack 'n' slash, you can also build them to be diplomats or con artists; and though they won't be huge on the battle end of things (except for ambushes), if you need someone to sweet-talk the king or talk those orcs out of eating you for dinner... it's the rogue. Consider this: If your backstory is realistic; and you write it first; then you will have a good idea of how your character lives and survives. S/he is an adventurer, which means s/he could not have survived without some knowledge of what it takes. Playing a weak character doesn't make sense since adventuring is a business in which only the strong survive; and at any rate, you want them to live long enough to get their personality worked out. A realistic backstory (and RP skills) will lead to a strong character if you can build characters at all. The Rogue/Paladin in my sig evolved completely out of a backstory and the events that occurred as I played her... and not only is she second only to the party's munchkin ranger in dealing out damage; she can also provide arcane and clerical magic, and some measure of diplomacy. Had I started out to build a strong character and built the backstory around the character, I wouldn't have come up with the character I have now; and, likely, the character would not have been as strong. Story and stats go hand-in-hand... build them together, and you really can't go wrong.
striderII 04-13-05, 09:37 AM	The "Video Game Generation" like Lina and Solid who are more concerned with a character's combat power than any sense of story or reason are what is ruining the hobby. I know it sounds self-righteous, and it probably is, but if that's all you're looking for, there are lots of video games out there that don't weigh you down with all of this "story" stuff you are trying so hard to get around. In D&D the "reason" should come before the numbers. Absolutely, Krelios. Well said. heres the gods honest truth.you actors are ruining my hobby.us real roleplayers came first.when there werent arguements about where balence between combat and rp was,its not hard to figure out. now you actors come along,and complan and whine and think your better.why dont you just go shut up and go play one of the countless systems designd for your kind.and leave us roeplayers and wargamers what is ment to be ours.k? the truth,is the acting style is just as much a lesser form of gameing as pure wargameing.and i dont see the wargamers being egotistical im better than you jerks.so go take your inferior style,and bad attitude and shove it.ive had enough of your kind preening about.and im getting ******. This is the most ridiculous, pig-headed, poorly thought out thing I've ever read. I can't stop laughing about it. You can't honestly be serious, can you? Can't see the wargamers being egotistical? Well, if you're a wargamer, then maybe you should take a look in the mirror, there, sparky. If not, maybe you should really think about it. I'll reiterate from my rant before: metaphorical ***** waving (or perhaps envy? I'm not sure). Feel free to be ******. I honestly don't care. You weren't helpful to the original poster at all, you can't be bothered to spell correctly, or use proper grammer, or *anything* that even vaguely resembles the use of the intelligence given to rock, and then you come on here being sancitmonious? You, sir, are a complete and total waste, and far too annoying for this hobby. Find another immediately. I suggest one where nobody with any kind of worth has to deal with you. Ever. A player's ingenuity and creativity should matter zip as far as his PC is concerned. Oh, right. Gods forbid the player actually, y'know *play* their character. Also, gods forbid that people playing a roleplaying game have ingenuity and creativity. Simple. Look at the OP. He obviously feels ineffective in this situation. And a badly built character is one who cannot do the job he is meant to, nor any other useful job that an adventurer is expected to handle. He's a rogue feeling overshadowed by two fighters in combat. We know absolutely *nothing* about the rest of the character, or the dynamics of the party, or anything else. Taking one facet of the character/party/adventure and expecting to know all there is to know is, quite frankly, unrealistic, and a bit stupid. Funny how i and Lina have to defend ourselves for helping the guy with what he asked... You *may* have helped (but only after telling the guy his character was crap...way to go), but Lina did absolutely nothing constructive. So how about you quit lying to yourself and join the rest of us in this thing we like to call "reality"? Sound good? You mustn't shape the stats around the character Really? Are you sure? What about the character concept that includes: "my character is a tough dwarven warrior who has developed his great strength from years of forging weapons and armor. He's a tough, wily kind of guy, but he's a bit gruff and aloof with others". Where are you putting your highest stats? Charisma? I think not. Strength is an obvious choice here, as is Constitution. Oh, but I forgot....you play "mechanics first" (at least, that's how it appears). You wouldn't put a high stat in Strength because it fits your concept, you'd do it because you're playing a fighter. Sorry, I must be doing something horribly wrong. Imagine...wouldn't it be fun to be STATISTICALLY STRONG AND STILL ROLEPLAY A FUN AND INTERESTING CHARACTER? I find it utterly amusing that those who are somehow "against" roleplayers always seem to go on this "roleplay = weak character" argument, although I've never seen a roleplayer say that their character was weak. They may have *weaknesses*, but that does not equate to a weak, or poorly made, character. That's just sad, really. Honestly, go back to the videogames, and let the people who have a clue play. Thank you. strider
cambric 04-13-05, 10:22 AM	Funny how i and Lina have to defend ourselves for helping the guy with what he asked... But, yeah, you're right. I am of a videogame generation. I've been playing games since i was 4, but only playing D&D for around six years. Fact: Powergaming is good. You don't have to suck to be a good roleplayer. Playing a weak character must not equal being a good roleplayer either, it just means you suck at math. You mustn't shape the stats around the character ("My char likes baskets. so i take craft: basketweaving, skill focus: basket weaving and the greater basketweaver PrC!"), you can shape the CHARACTER around the STATS. ("I'm planning to be a rogue who goes fighter/assassin. I'm gonna play a slightly ruthless halfling exiled from his people for his unorthodox ways of helping them against goblin assaults and...") Really, try it. Imagine...wouldn't it be fun to be STATISTICALLY STRONG AND STILL ROLEPLAY A FUN AND INTERESTING CHARACTER? Note: Strong mustn't mean "i'm a one-man army" just "good at the field you choose". you can be a strong bard, which likely means that you buff your friends and cast "curse"-style spells on your enemy, etc. A strong rogue is either sneak-attack based or a skillmonkey. The game isn't about just stats or just roleplay. It's a combination, in this thread we are supposed to focus on the stats though since THAT IS WHAT THE TOPIC CREATOR WANTED. Just so much to say, but Strider II did an excellent job, so I will just add a few things: First: Role playing versus Roll...as you stated, you want strong stats, but that's not realistic...I have a feeling that you play to just wipe out everything, and good for you. If you have fun, go with it...that's fine. My last session, where I'm playing a bard, the wizard and I spent the whole session "talking"...meaning, "ROLE" playing...no attacks. Does that mean I'm better? NOPE! Just means that some of us see D&D as MORE than just numbers...and when you and and several other posters say, "kill the character and start over...con is too low, you won't live, start over...etc." that's where some of us get a bit upset, for as I stated, and was ripped on by Mikal, that I had a low con rogue and I was only trying to prove a point that you can live with a low con! And a 10 is not low, it's average! I even asked several of my old players about my pc and they read Mikal's comments and they laughed...I was told, "without you, we would've died several times over...you're only one of 2 players that actually lived through the entire campaign." So it can be done...but I admit, it does take some work, team wise and DM, and an understanding that you can "survive" and that's what the OP was asking. Second: You made a comment about bards, "buff your friends, curse your enemies"...well, you got half of it right. The bard is a great spokeperson for a group...and they do some good buffs, but I'm playing him where he charms his enemies, and controls them. Nothing like having an enemy stop fighting and work on being your friend to frustrate the dm! And if that doesn't work, a well placed shatter can swing the tide of battle. Your writings definitely show a lot of years of video gaming...but our points where that ROLE playing out a character and not "worrying" about stats can be MORE fun for SOME people, but not all...obviously. Cam
striderII 04-13-05, 10:45 AM	Just so much to say, but Strider II did an excellent job, so I will just add a few things: Thanks for the compliment, cambric. It seems as if our playstyles/approaches are similar...if you're ever in my area for a lengthy bit of time, feel free to let me know. :) So it can be done...but I admit, it does take some work, team wise and DM, and an understanding that you can "survive" and that's what the OP was asking. I'm going to put on my cynic hat here....wait, it's still on my head, along with my jerk hat, and a-hole hat...never mind. In any event, I suspect there will be at least one comment from the powergaming group that suggests your DM somehow "coddled" you. As if attempting to kill the PC's is more important that appropriately challenging them, or something. Just thought I'd give a friendly warning. :) strider
Callista 04-13-05, 11:50 AM	Well, survival doesn't mean you have the capacity to dish out damage. It just means you can hide or sneak or have a high AC and/or evasion. Simple enough. Rogues don't really do a lot of damage in combat, unless they're really good at sneak attacks. Focusing on the sheer versatility of a rogue is a better idea--supporting the fighters, for example. And, oh, by the way--two fighters?! Why are you not getting flank-empowered sneak attacks? And please, please tell me you have Weapon Finesse and a rapier or dagger or something... A note... in the power gamer vs. role player debate... aren't both sides often a little egotistical? Both sides have skills they're proud of; both sides feel that the way they play is perfectly right. And, for that matter, there are people who can both build good characters and role-play them well. When you get into these debates, please, step into your opponent's shoes for a minute, look around, and then give your opinion.
cambric 04-13-05, 11:57 AM	Thanks for the compliment, cambric. It seems as if our playstyles/approaches are similar...if you're ever in my area for a lengthy bit of time, feel free to let me know. :) I'm going to put on my cynic hat here....wait, it's still on my head, along with my jerk hat, and a-hole hat...never mind. In any event, I suspect there will be at least one comment from the powergaming group that suggests your DM somehow "coddled" you. As if attempting to kill the PC's is more important that appropriately challenging them, or something. Just thought I'd give a friendly warning. :) strider Definitely! Will let you know, and to you too if you're heading to Michigan. As for "coddling" me? LOL. Then they don't know our DM, he is fair...very fair. He has the same belief I do: Play smart, work as a team, and you'll probably live...the dice will determine it, not him. I was very smart, I never stayed near a battle...that became the "running" joke: Fighter: Battle ahead, let's prepare...and of course Nayland will... Rogue (Nayland) ME: I'll be heading to the back, yeah...I'll protect the wizard. Wizard: Protect me? I have more hit points than you... That was the "fun" thing about it, I would "slip into the darkness and wait my opprotunity"...then tumble out of the way. The DM would use AoE spells: Fireball, Cone of Cold...etc. But we have to LOVE evasion and Improved Evasion!! :D Back to the discussion: there is no "right way" or "wrong way" to play D&D when comparing Role versus Roll playing...but some people have learned to adapt to the "negatives" that can occur. Every single one of our players, in both campaigns, have "weaknesses", but they are not "weak". (Kudo's to who wrote that earlier!) Cam
striderII 04-13-05, 12:25 PM	A note... in the power gamer vs. role player debate... aren't both sides often a little egotistical? Both sides have skills they're proud of; both sides feel that the way they play is perfectly right. And, for that matter, there are people who can both build good characters and role-play them well. When you get into these debates, please, step into your opponent's shoes for a minute, look around, and then give your opinion. Well, when I read something like lina's rant (which was simultaneously one of the most amusing and insulting things I've ever read here), I'm going to get a bit defensive and riled up. It's the Irish blood in me, I suppose... ;) Besides, somebody had to rise up against that sort of nonsense...I couldn't just take it lying down. :) Definitely! Will let you know, and to you too if you're heading to Michigan. Will do - although the only time(s) I've ever been to Michigan, I've only been as far as the airport in Detroit (which is a fairly neat airport). But I'll keep ya in mind. :) As for "coddling" me? LOL. Then they don't know our DM, he is fair...very fair. He has the same belief I do: Play smart, work as a team, and you'll probably live...the dice will determine it, not him. I was very smart, I never stayed near a battle...that became the "running" joke: Fighter: Battle ahead, let's prepare...and of course Nayland will... Rogue (Nayland) ME: I'll be heading to the back, yeah...I'll protect the wizard. Wizard: Protect me? I have more hit points than you... That was the "fun" thing about it, I would "slip into the darkness and wait my opprotunity"...then tumble out of the way. The DM would use AoE spells: Fireball, Cone of Cold...etc. But we have to LOVE evasion and Improved Evasion!! Oh, I know. It's the people with the "if the DM isn't throwing the most powerful monster possible for your level at you, he's coddling you" opinion that you may very well hear from. As if every opponent the party faces has to be a monster or something. Jeez. Every single one of our players, in both campaigns, have "weaknesses", but they are not "weak". (Kudo's to who wrote that earlier!) Well, let's look back and check.... They may have *weaknesses*, but that does not equate to a weak, or poorly made, character. Hey, that was me! I rock! *lol* :) strider
Solidcobra 04-13-05, 01:42 PM	Double post.
Solidcobra 04-13-05, 01:44 PM	....ooooookay. Rrrright. Let's make a deal. I'll go back to video games and stay away from D&D if you go back to your drama clubs or whatever the heck you did before playing D&D, kay? Seriously. I say that powergaming is good, i defend my opinion, i provide help and info relative to the thread in question. what do i get? Something fitting the gamefaqs P&P boards, that's what. (If you have ever been there, you know what i mean) And really, i wasn't saying anything untrue. If he wants a rogue effective in combat, con 10 and str 10 are kinda...not good. At all. Then go on about how con isn't needed if you play smart all you want, that minotaur zombie won't give a damn, he still slams you for 3d6+ow. If he wants a rogue effective in combat, his statset makes that a difficult task at the very best. Really, "let those people who have a clue play" my tail. I don't need clues. i have the damn walkthrough right here. :rolleyes: Really, nothing against roleplaying at all. I've played in games where stats don't matter, i still obsessively make a char that will be just a bit stronger than bare minimum for survival. Habit? Yes. Is it useful? Yes. Is it a lot more fun in games where you actually roll dice than sucking and dying to enemies of half your CR? Yes. *Sighs* Oh well, at least cambric's civil. unlike StriderII... By the way. Linas rant WAS more civil and nice than yours, striderII. That'd be all until someone wants to harass me for liking the math part of D&D, which started out as a wargame, will always have its wargame roots, will always be about stats and gaining power in raw "i kill you" manner, but yet have evolved into a game where you play roles. I love this game, i can safely say i don't love all the gamers though. Thank you. *Bows*
striderII 04-13-05, 02:09 PM	....ooooookay. Rrrright. Let's make a deal. I'll go back to video games and stay away from D&D if you go back to your drama clubs or whatever the heck you did before playing D&D, kay? Actually, my participation in drama clubs, etc, didn't happen until after I started playing D&D (although, admittedly before I started LARPing). As I started playing D&D back in the seventh grade, I see no reason to go back to whatever it was I was doing...even if I could remember what that was, exactly (other than middle school). Seriously. I say that powergaming is good, i defend my opinion, i provide help and info relative to the thread in question. what do i get? Something fitting the gamefaqs P&P boards, that's what. (If you have ever been there, you know what i mean) You provided a kind of help, but only after a backhanded smack at the OP. I mean, really, who wants to listen to someone who starts out by saying "dude, your character sucks"? If you really want to help, leave the editorial comments to yourself. *Sighs* Oh well, at least cambric's civil. unlike StriderII... By the way. Linas rant WAS more civil and nice than yours, striderII. Y'know....when someone rants like lina did (as poorly written as it was, due to lina's own admitted laziness), I am going to rip right back. I'm certainly not going to be nice about it, and I could have been much worse, but I wasn't. That being said, I am a rotten, elitist, bastard - I've never made any bones about it. strider
Solidcobra 04-13-05, 02:11 PM	No, no. See...Lina was at least general about her rant. She basically said "i'm right. all others are wrong". which is, if non-legit, at least not like what i feel that you did. "Hey, Solid. shut the hell up and go back to diablo 2 you newbie" If you didn't mean it like that, i'm sorry for seeming snappy/annoying/whatever. If you DID mean it like that though...i'm not sorry at all. :P
striderII 04-13-05, 02:24 PM	No, no. See...Lina was at least general about her rant. She basically said "i'm right. all others are wrong". which is, if non-legit, at least not like what i feel that you did. "Hey, Solid. shut the hell up and go back to diablo 2 you newbie" If you didn't mean it like that, i'm sorry for seeming snappy/annoying/whatever. If you DID mean it like that though...i'm not sorry at all. :P Please explain to me how the following is "general" (I'll even go ahead and not only bold relevant text, I'll actually clean it up so it's freakin' *readable*): Here's the gods honest truth. You actors are ruining my hobby. We real roleplayers came first, when there weren't arguments about where balance between combat and rp was. It's not hard to figure it out. Now you actors come along, and complain and whine and think you're better. Why don't you just shut up and go play one of the countless systems designed for your kind, and leave us roleplayers and wargamers what is meant to be ours, okay? The truth is, the acting style is just as much a lesser form of gaming as pure wargaming, and I don't see the wargamers being egotistical "I'm better than you" jerks. So go take your inferior style, and bad attitude, and shove it. I've had enough of your kind preening about, and im getting ******. I'm fairly certain the rant had a targeted audience, which I'm proudly a part of. Add to that the rant is the largest, smelliest pile of crap I've ever seen (even after fixing all of the grammatical errors and such....really, how can somebody be too lazy to put in an apostrophe, for crying out loud? Lina, is your shift key infected with the bubonic plague, perhaps?) The rant was targeted, it was offensive, and it's not the first time I've seen lina be horribly non-helpful, and just essentially spit on somebody who's honestly seeking help. My *****ing was more directed at Lina than you, Solid, although I really don't think that "your character sucks" is a good way to start a post intended to help someone - I would propose that it would put them off a bit. As for the "go play videogames" comment....if that's your way of helping people (by insulting them first), then I stand by my comment. You can say after the fact that you're into roleplaying and all that, but your initial posts made it seem quite to the contrary. Add to that the majority of the posters were essentially telling the OP how to maximize his character's combat prowess, which was not necessarily what he wanted. Yes, I know he mentioned combat in the initial post, but the topic title is not about combat, it's about being useful in a *dungeon*, which, let's face it, for a rogue, means a lot of things *other* than combat. strider
Solidcobra 04-13-05, 02:32 PM	I do admit, i was blunt. Very blunt in fact. And i do easily come across as rather extreme in my views. I'm colored by my semi-communist country (Sweden if you're wondering). Heck, just 30 years ago our schoolbooks went "In the beautiful and wonderful country china, Ruled by the wise and great leader Mao"... Oh well. No hard feelings, i hope? *Extends hand with half-smile* >_> Hate to make enemies. Even online. Heck, especially online...
striderII 04-13-05, 02:52 PM	I do admit, i was blunt. Very blunt in fact. And i do easily come across as rather extreme in my views. I'm colored by my semi-communist country (Sweden if you're wondering). Heck, just 30 years ago our schoolbooks went "In the beautiful and wonderful country china, Ruled by the wise and great leader Mao"... Oh well. No hard feelings, i hope? *Extends hand with half-smile* >_> Hate to make enemies. Even online. Heck, especially online... No worries. I am quite extreme in my views, as well. I'm not going to tell someone how to play, but I do have my preferences, and my feeling is that, while I'll defend your (general "your") right to play the game as you see fit, that doesn't mean that I have to personally see it as a "legitimate" (used loosely) way to play the game. See what I mean? strider ps. I assure you, that while quite strong (although, not as strong as I originally wanted), my rant was intended to be defensive in nature...although...the best defense is a good offense.... ;)
trapspringer 04-13-05, 07:40 PM	I must say, I think when people 'role-play' for four hours of a four hour game session and call that D&D, they have mande a mistake. That is not, in fact D&D IMHO. You may be utilyzing D&D rules during the session before and after, but D&D is, fundamentally speaking, a game of numbers and dice, creative problem solving, and adventure. I think mixing in a modicum of role-play makes the game infinitely more enjoyable (infinite is a short way of saying A WHOLE FREAKIN' LOT), but you still should be looking at around four encounters (though definitely not four combats) per session. Social encounters count as well, remember, but their should be some risk or problem. Otherwise, just go write a book. Or join drama club. Drama club is at least as cool as D&D and would accomplish four hours of role-play. None of that means that you should player an int 3 fighter. I just strongly advocate the use of the rules. Ya know, the game and all that. When you get involved in a social encounter, you should role-play a little, and the DM should turn that into a bonus or penalty on the die roll, modified by skill and charisma. There are, of course, exceptions. If someone decares something really ingenious, they should get it out right. If they blunder up (I am actually a llamasu polymorphed into a halfling [see PHB], just flunk them. Of course, having fun is the important thing. I don't care too much if you want to call 4 hours of two people talking to each other while pretending to be a wizard and a rock-star while two others sit around bored to tears D&D v 3.5, But I really think you should re-read the DMG, PHB, Monster manual. You will find that, like, 95/100 of the book is about numbers and dice rolls.
striderII 04-13-05, 07:55 PM	I must say, I think when people 'role-play' for four hours of a four hour game session and call that D&D, they have mande a mistake. That is not, in fact D&D IMHO. You may be utilyzing D&D rules during the session before and after, but D&D is, fundamentally speaking, a game of numbers and dice, creative problem solving, and adventure. I think mixing in a modicum of role-play makes the game infinitely more enjoyable (infinite is a short way of saying A WHOLE FREAKIN' LOT), but you still should be looking at around four encounters (though definitely not four combats) per session. Social encounters count as well, remember, but their should be some risk or problem. Otherwise, just go write a book. Or join drama club. Drama club is at least as cool as D&D and would accomplish four hours of role-play. None of that means that you should player an int 3 fighter. I just strongly advocate the use of the rules. Ya know, the game and all that. When you get involved in a social encounter, you should role-play a little, and the DM should turn that into a bonus or penalty on the die roll, modified by skill and charisma. There are, of course, exceptions. If someone decares something really ingenious, they should get it out right. If they blunder up (I am actually a llamasu polymorphed into a halfling [see PHB], just flunk them. Of course, having fun is the important thing. I don't care too much if you want to call 4 hours of two people talking to each other while pretending to be a wizard and a rock-star while two others sit around bored to tears D&D v 3.5, But I really think you should re-read the DMG, PHB, Monster manual. You will find that, like, 95/100 of the book is about numbers and dice rolls. Just because the rules are there does not mean that they are *required* to be used. Your comments involving "creative problem solving", and "social encounters" directly involve roleplaying. If you want to encourage people to re-read things like the DMG, perhaps you should read the section where it covers styles of play. You know - the part where a roleplaying-heavy, rules-light version is just as valid as any other style. strider
cambric 04-13-05, 08:04 PM	I must say, I think when people 'role-play' for four hours of a four hour game session and call that D&D, they have mande a mistake. That is not, in fact D&D IMHO. You may be utilyzing D&D rules during the session before and after, but D&D is, fundamentally speaking, a game of numbers and dice, creative problem solving, and adventure. I think mixing in a modicum of role-play makes the game infinitely more enjoyable (infinite is a short way of saying A WHOLE FREAKIN' LOT), but you still should be looking at around four encounters (though definitely not four combats) per session. Social encounters count as well, remember, but their should be some risk or problem. Otherwise, just go write a book. Or join drama club. Drama club is at least as cool as D&D and would accomplish four hours of role-play. None of that means that you should player an int 3 fighter. I just strongly advocate the use of the rules. Ya know, the game and all that. When you get involved in a social encounter, you should role-play a little, and the DM should turn that into a bonus or penalty on the die roll, modified by skill and charisma. There are, of course, exceptions. If someone decares something really ingenious, they should get it out right. If they blunder up (I am actually a llamasu polymorphed into a halfling [see PHB], just flunk them. Of course, having fun is the important thing. I don't care too much if you want to call 4 hours of two people talking to each other while pretending to be a wizard and a rock-star while two others sit around bored to tears D&D v 3.5, But I really think you should re-read the DMG, PHB, Monster manual. You will find that, like, 95/100 of the book is about numbers and dice rolls. It was ONLY 2 of us, for campaign reasons...there were "rolls" for knowledge for both of us, perform so I could get information, and investigations. So, besides the "battle", we did everything else you suggested...but being a "Rock Star". So...nobody was "bored to tears" thank you very much...never said there were "others" there. Normally, we have a 6 person party...but the dm needed "ROLE" playing from 2 of us to get something done. My point was this: TOO MANY PEOPLE THINK D&D IS ONLY NUMBERS!! (as you yourself just mentioned 95/100 of the book is about that...so you think it). That's all several of us have been trying to say, there is MORE to to D&D than "JUST" numbers. Granted, you might have thought it boring, it wouldn't surprise me if you did...I've done the "bash and attack" video experience with D&D and it finally bored ALL of us...everyone in our group has been playing for at least 10 years, with a couple of us at 25 years...again, NOT saying we're "better" or it's "better", it's just different...so maybe you can see that, instead of just looking for the "numbers." :D Cam
striderII 04-13-05, 08:16 PM	That's all several of us have been trying to say, there is MORE to to D&D than "JUST" numbers. Granted, you might have thought it boring, it wouldn't surprise me if you did...I've done the "bash and attack" video experience with D&D and it finally bored ALL of us...everyone in our group has been playing for at least 10 years, with a couple of us at 25 years...again, NOT saying we're "better" or it's "better", it's just different...so maybe you can see that, instead of just looking for the "numbers." Back to the cynic hat.... Dude, this won't happen - not with the "rules first, rules in the middle, rules last" mentality that 3.X is pushing. Add to that the "video game generation" mentality...and these kids don't want to play roles, they want to crunch numbers. Maybe they should go be accountants or something.... Those of us in the "old guard", as it were (which I may or may not be a part of....does 16 years count?), have to teach who we can before the video gamers get to them. It's sad, but we're a dying breed, as games these days almost have to pander to the lowest common denominator. strider
trapspringer 04-13-05, 08:56 PM	Your missing the point. You are constantly saying people are missing something, when in fact I get what you are saying completely. Role play adds to the experience of D&D. What I think many advocates of heavy RP miss is that a well run combat is never bash and attack. My point is you demean combat by using words and phrazes with a negative context and which over-simplify a fight. Whether or not this is your goal I do not know, but it makes me think your DM doesn't run interesting combats. I use phrazes and words which put a negative spin on FOUR HOURS of role play. Because I think you need no more than 34%/66% RP/adventure. It's a game of heroes. The first and greatest video-game. The best unfinished novel ever written. The best play ever performed. All rolled into one. I DM. I DM a lot. I almost never have a strait-up fight. There has to be something happening on the field, in the air, something. My players have fought things on a floating island plummeting towards a major city (and tried real hard to save the city). They have tried to outrace a giant octopus tentacle chasing the wizard up a rope-ladder with the fighter and ranger raining arrows down past the wizard (usually, lol) and into the octopuss. They have wrestled with a goliath for the right to face great trials in a temple of light. They have played goat-ball. They fought an abomination of science on a run-away lightning rail train which continued to jerk and smash and tip as they fought, forcing balance checks. the fought twin minotaurs on giant Ion stones hundreds of feat above the ground in the hopes of aquiring a powerful artifact. No two combats should ever be the same. A good fight is a series of surprises and suspensful situations which lead to near death and ultimate success for the palyers, if they think creatively and quickly. Other encounters include climbing down the underside of a city which extends past a water-fall, maneuvering through a bunch of flying boats (ala the fifth element) riding flying brooms chasing after a crook on a flying carpet) riding giant monsters that can (and tend to) maul a man if he blinks wrong, convincing a church offical to hire them, figuring out that a note left by an evil kobold sorcerer will explode after 1d3 days, (preferably before 1d3 days -1 second has transpired), and, believe it or not, role play (and as basically all of these encounters entail role play, that shouldn't be much of a stretch). My point is four hours is too long to spend on any one thing. If I show up at a session, and a DM tries to get me to roll d20s for four hours, I will leave, but not before unloading my hammer gun on him. If he thinks four hours isn't too much time to spend discussing a problem IC, I will leave, similarly employing my hammer gun. Unless everyone had fun. You should read that part in my original post. In between these things, the players should interact, plan, discuss tactics, the results of the combat, screw around with each-other, NPCs, make purchases, seek corperate sponsership, etc. But not for four hours. An hour per session is probobly a pretty good estimate for the amount of role-play in a 4 hour session at my table. Honestly, I'd like to add on about 30 min to that, but I don't care too much. Besides that, the rules are basically just numbers. Most everything else is injected by the players. That is my point. It doesn't make it wrong, but the core rules spend almost NO time on role-play that doesn't have numerical consequences (what they [those pesky numbers] refer to as 'in game effects'). The examples that pop into my mind are the discussions of the outlook of races and classes (the first 1/10 of the PHB, I think) pretaining to other races and classes, and the discouragement of metagaming in the DMG. There are, of course, other examples, these are just those that occur most readily. As for the 3 up, that is my point. I agree. Those encounters DO involve role playing. That is why they are awesome. Both the player and character are involved. We need more encounters like this. But you have to remember the NUMBERS are directly involved in role playing this type of encounter. Spotting an invisible person is only dc20 if they don't try to hide (DMG), so you shouldn't get an auto *he doesn't see you* make your roll. When you get inside the cult club house and start nosing around, make a search check! If you were smart and asked questions and are searching for the right thing in the right area, you get a bonus! If your invisibility wears off, use disguise and try to lie your way out. RP a little. Talk to the gaurd. Then make a diplomacy check with a bonus or penalty. NUMBERS!! Modified by RP. A role play encounter should still have numbers in it, because that is why they are there. To express the reality of the world. Because that is why you dropped all that money on rule books. To employ rules. If you don't want to use 3.5 rules, don't play D&D. (or at the very least, don't spend all that money) very simple. And yes, I do think D&D is all numbers. The players add the rest and make it fun. Neither part is good with out the other. And no, strict role playing is not better, it is in fact much worse. Just like strict hack and slash. It sucks. Neither should be done for four hours in a row, because there shouldn't be anything that requires four hours of role play, or four hours of hack and slash. Keep in mind, all of this is a generalization. There are always exceptions to the rules. But they are few and far between.
striderII 04-13-05, 09:21 PM	trapspringer, You're certainly entitled to your opinion. However, if given the choice between four hours of IC talking, or four hours of combat, I'll take the first option ten out of ten times. It may be because I'm a LARPer, but I'm not sure. Feel free to game however you please - if you're having fun, it's all cool. strider
trapspringer 04-13-05, 11:07 PM	For Chris's sake, no!!! Re-read my previous post, plz! Both suck!!! That is my point. Niether is good. Balance. Nichi! Darwin! That shiznit. (See, movie reference, I must be right.) A solid game of D&D shouldn't rely on either. Their shouldn't need to be a choice. That is my point. I emphasise one side because it is your side. I am personally an advocate of game balance. A balanced game requires a diverse array of encounters. A diverse array of encoutners depends on having a certain fraction of role play encounters. There are basically three types of encounters. Puzzle/trap, social, and combat. 33/33/33. ergo 34/66. Balance.
HypnoticMonk 04-14-05, 01:32 AM	Strider, Cambric, count me on your side. As I have said before, those who feel a need to PowerGame/Munchkin their way through a game because they are addicted to the idea that high stats are the key to ultimate happiness.. are the same people who will buy sportscars and toupees later in life to compensate for ... "deficiencies". (Insert mini-"manhood" joke here) If D&D was only numbers, then I would have never chosen to play the wargame some people want to make it into. I am a gamer who wants to be part of a story filled with heroism, derring-do, honor and some occassional side-splitting humor. If I was playing with just a compilation of perfectly planned out stats on a character sheet that defined that miniature of mine by using some technique laid out for you in the latest version of "Min/maxing for Dummies" book, I don't think I would get those things as easily. P.S. If either of you two are near Pittsburgh, drop me a line and we can compare notes.
Al2902 04-14-05, 05:41 AM	I'm not sure which I found more entertaining - lina's self-parodying (it was a self-parody, right :twitch: ) and intemperate rant or striderII's hilarious hatchet-job of it. Anyway, back to the OP: The fundamental problem is that there is a mismatch between your character's abilities as far as I can tell (though, as many have argued, it would be helpful if you posted a fuller stat block) and the DM's conception of how the campaign should run. This is no one's fault as such. It would apply equally if you were a semi-moronic half-orc barbarian with 18 Str, 18 Con, Power Attack and Cleave in the middle of a campaign centred around court intrigue, subtle wordplays and high politics. Whilst the character can still be of some use, such as in scouting, disarming traps, opening locks and other "dungeon-based" activity, he is, I'm afraid, not mechanically optimised for the campaign style he has found himself in. There are four solutions as far as I can tell: 1. Mechanically bolster the character. This can either be through the usage of good tactics, as have been repeatedly outlined above. Lesser used tactics can be surprisingly effective, such as tripping or feinting, or use of UMD. Alternately, make the most of what you have and take feats like Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Weapon Finesse and the like. 2. Scrap the character and get a new one. Now, I don't know how long you've been running the character, nor how attached you've become to him, but there is always the possibility of cutting your losses, retiring the character and starting afresh. This should not be a stigma. If you're really not enjoying the campaign, this might be a valid option. 3. Talk to your DM about changing the campaign direction. As a DM, I try to vary the campaign to allow all of the different party members to shine - my group have a slightly cynical mentality that enables them to "guess" which style of adventure will come up next :) (e.g. just had a long dungeon crawl, need some social challenges). A more varied campaign may allow the talents of the character to come to the fore. 4. Keep this as they are. By the very fact that you posted, this may not be desirable, but it is perhaps possible to play a reasonably entertaining character without being mechanically strong. Just keep him out of the thick of combat with that dearth of hit points!
cambric 04-14-05, 07:49 AM	Trap: Let me explain something, we'll start at the beginning... When the OP requested help on how to survive dungeon adventures, some of the replies tells the OP to rebuild their character, or to kill them off...or accuse the OP of whining, the OP wasn't whining, they came here to ask for HELP and people suggest the above, as I show: build a better charecter.this is your own fault,no one elses. and Mikal went into a lengthy discussion too about how wrong I was to suggest something "outside" needing high stats. We also have: I'm with Lina on this one. Don't whine cause you made a bad character. yes, bad. "ooh, but i roleplay" "ooh, but my focus isn't battle" No, fragging, ****. No wonder you suck in combat and dungeon crawls then. Edit: TheBard. that's great, really. But the player didn't ask "how do i play a fun, but statistically inferior peasant?" he asked how he could be better in combat. Also, i must say, rollplay is the most stupid term ever. easily. no exceptions. Yeah. cute. you "ROLEplay, not roll-play". REAL fragging cute, excuse me, i'm busy ROLEplaying my character beating a monster of his CR plus three by himself while the others are clearing equally difficult challenges that put us on the edge. :rolleyes: AND: Now for actual advice... First of all, kill'im off. redo the whole thing. yeah. 10 con is a very newbie mistake. ALWAYS max con after your focus stat. Rogues needing high dex is a myth, i prefer str for my warrior-rogues. Here's another: how does the lina play the game?the way it was MENT to be played. i roleplay a hero,an adventurer.he travels with a group of buddies,knowing theres safety in numbers and that they can cover his weaknesses.he and his buddies arm themselves to the teeth,staring death head long.and go out and make the world a better place.along the way they meet friends and enemys.they ingage in witty banter,and generally do cool things.but when it comes down to it,they all know they wouldnt last the night if they didnt kick so much ass. besides,as noted.he asked about in a dungeon.he needs to suck up he made a big mistake. So you see, SOME people have blinders on...they look at ONE option: HIGH STATS!! Now, you have myself, StriderII, HyptonicMonk, and a couple others who stated, and I paraphrase here: You can have ROLE playing and use SKILLS to survive, you don't need a HIGH con, you can survive. Never did was it said, "Role playing is BETTER"...at least I never meant that, what I was trying to get across is the silly notion that STATS don't make a game, it doesn't "create" the PC, they are there to give guidelines. Now, you come in and you did offer some great advice, after you cracked your knuckes :) but you also say that spending 4 hours "ROLE" playing isn't D&D...WHAT?? Now, I did explain, it was ONLY 2 of us that time...why? Because we do have some people in our group who would rather just do the battles, and that's cool too! The dm thought it would enhance the game by having 2 of us, with the higher Charisma and Intelligence to go and do some investigations...and you also imply that our DM doesn't do interesting combats... Your missing the point. You are constantly saying people are missing something, when in fact I get what you are saying completely. Role play adds to the experience of D&D. What I think many advocates of heavy RP miss is that a well run combat is never bash and attack. My point is you demean combat by using words and phrazes with a negative context and which over-simplify a fight. Whether or not this is your goal I do not know, but it makes me think your DM doesn't run interesting combats. I use phrazes and words which put a negative spin on FOUR HOURS of role play. Because I think you need no more than 34%/66% RP/adventure. It's a game of heroes. The first and greatest video-game. The best unfinished novel ever written. The best play ever performed. All rolled into one. Quite the contrary, he does...but there are MANY times that we are involved with: Puzzles, traps, and social skills, we do utilize many different methods... Trapspringer, your 34/66 is pretty good...but the 34 would only be for combat, since puzzles/traps and social are speaking. The traps, ok, you roll for the skill, but you will be asking the dm about the make up of it and such...and puzzles, you definitely make it a "social/intelligence" skill, so that would fall under the ROLE part. AND NOW: to the reason of this post, I was pointing out that there is FAR more to D&D than the stats, unlike some people seem to think, as I showed in my examples...StriderII and myself, for sure, agree that ROLE playing takes more meaning now for us than before...NEVER did we say it's "the only way or the best way", just saying that it's better for US! Then I gave examples and especially trapsinger wants to believe that is ALL we do...it was a freak'n example!! Some posters have understood that's all they were, EXAMPLES!! Just because some people ROLE play, that doesn't make them "better" D&D players...but when the OP gets ripped, told to kill their PC and start over, or that their stats are too low, etc...then that's when it was brought up that ROLE playing has its place and you work from there...use skills!! Sometimes, brain over brawn works wonders...and when I tried to use an example, I got ripped for that too. I appreciate the support I did get, because it shows me that some people do adventure outside their STATS and ROLE play...and there is a HUGE difference in ROLE and ROLL...even though someone doesn't like the term...but oh well, that's the best way of explaining. Personally, I got bored to tears over, "you enter the dungeon, ROLL to hit (insert creature)...you turn the corner, ROLL to hit (insert creature)...you enter a room ROLL to hit (insert creature)...and on, and on, and on...BUT that doesn't make me a better player, just different...that's ALL we were saying to a couple of the posters, there is FAR more to D&D than Stats. And I do finding interesting, when it comes to players who focus on STR and CON, and have a low CHA, that when they go into a city and meet people, they ACT as if they have a high CHA too...but when in battles, they make sure that those people who do have a low STR/CON are pentalized...but it's ok to have a 10 CHA and speak perfectly to the nobles. ?? Anyhow, enough ranting for me...most I've ever done. Cam
Solidcobra 04-14-05, 07:54 AM	That's because charisma isn't social grace or good looks. Your sorcerer doesn't throw fireballs better because he extends his pinky while drinking tea. Charisma is more like..."it", the diff between ignoring someone and going "who was THAT?" when someone exits a room. A cha 8 fighter. Yeah. people kinda don't care much. A cha 22 sorc, whenever he enters a room, all heads turn. Charisma is that when you talk, people listen, basically. Not social grace or your cup size (for females at least). Sorcs with high charisma get skills because when THEY talk, the universe listens, not cause they have DD-size breasts.
cambric 04-14-05, 09:06 AM	That's because charisma isn't social grace or good looks. Your sorcerer doesn't throw fireballs better because he extends his pinky while drinking tea. Charisma is more like..."it", the diff between ignoring someone and going "who was THAT?" when someone exits a room. A cha 8 fighter. Yeah. people kinda don't care much. A cha 22 sorc, whenever he enters a room, all heads turn. Charisma is that when you talk, people listen, basically. Not social grace or your cup size (for females at least). Sorcs with high charisma get skills because when THEY talk, the universe listens, not cause they have DD-size breasts. Charisma is social grace, it's how you speak, interact, and looks...though, someone could look "ugly", but yet have an amazing personality that people will just "listen" too. Many examples of that in history. From the SRD: CHARISMA (CHA) Charisma measures a character’s force of personality, persuasiveness, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and physical attractiveness. This ability represents actual strength of personality, not merely how one is perceived by others in a social setting. Charisma is most important for paladins, sorcerers, and bards. It is also important for clerics, since it affects their ability to turn undead. Every creature has a Charisma score. You apply your character’s Charisma modifier to: • Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, Gather Information, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Perform, and Use Magic Device checks. These are the skills that have Charisma as their key ability. • Checks that represent attempts to influence others. • Turning checks for clerics and paladins attempting to turn zombies, vampires, and other undead. Sorcerers and bards get bonus spells based on their Charisma scores. The minimum Charisma score needed to cast a sorcerer or bard spell is 10 + the spell’s level. (BOLDING MINE) It's many factors, but it definitely is "social grace" and "good looks" that it is associated with. Cam
Mikal 04-14-05, 09:19 AM	and Mikal went into a lengthy discussion too about how wrong I was to suggest something "outside" needing high stats. We also have: Wrong. I went into a lengthy discussion about survivability and the con stat. Never once did I say he needed to have high stats to survive everything. Just that a 10 in con usually equals death for an adventurer. Especially one looking to be useful in combat. So thanks for twisting my words around to suit your needs! :rolleyes:
striderII 04-14-05, 09:24 AM	For Chris's sake, no!!! Re-read my previous post, plz! Both suck!!! That is my point. Niether is good. Balance. Nichi! Darwin! That shiznit. (See, movie reference, I must be right.) A solid game of D&D shouldn't rely on either. Their shouldn't need to be a choice. That is my point. I emphasise one side because it is your side. I am personally an advocate of game balance. A balanced game requires a diverse array of encounters. A diverse array of encoutners depends on having a certain fraction of role play encounters. There are basically three types of encounters. Puzzle/trap, social, and combat. 33/33/33. ergo 34/66. Balance. trapspringer, I don't feel I was clear, or perhaps I didn't mention it at all...I'm for balance, too. I should think that, perhaps, my comments on skills and such for the OP instead of necessarily combat might be a clue to that end...perhaps not. All I was saying in response to your post is that, if I HAD to choose between 4 hours of roleplay, and 4 hours of combat (and I had no other choice), that I would pick the 4 hours of roleplay. I'm an actor, and I"m a LARPer...it's what I prefer. That doesn't mean I dislike combat/puzzle solving, etc...I just place less emphasis on them than others here do (*cough*lina*cough*). Balance *is* what should be strived for...but the definition of balance is subjective to each group of players. Strider, Cambric, count me on your side. As I have said before, those who feel a need to PowerGame/Munchkin their way through a game because they are addicted to the idea that high stats are the key to ultimate happiness.. are the same people who will buy sportscars and toupees later in life to compensate for ... "deficiencies". (Insert mini-"manhood" joke here) Hey, to be fair...don't knock sportscars, man. Ever drive a Viper? :) P.S. If either of you two are near Pittsburgh, drop me a line and we can compare notes. I'm about three hours east of Pittsburgh (go Steelers!) - feel free to contact me sometime, either by PMing me here, or email me: strider1276 at hotmail dot com. I'm not sure which I found more entertaining - lina's self-parodying (it was a self-parody, right ) and intemperate rant or striderII's hilarious hatchet-job of it The sad truth is...I don't think it was a self parody. This is a person who really does think it's all about the numbers, the power, and the dice. This is a person who thinks Bards are better generals than Fighters. This is a person who use "18th level" anything to explain why someone else's point is wrong (ie. "well, if I had an 18th level bard running my army, I'd conquer half your world within a game year"). So, no, I don't think it was a self-parody. But I do thank you for your kind comments on my hatchet-job. Not my best work, but it's not shabby. :) Never mind the fact that lina can't be bothered to comment at all....hopefully lina's either crying in a corner somewhere, or has left the hobby for good, or something where we don't have to deal with him/her/it any longer. That was my goal, anyway. AND NOW: to the reason of this post, I was pointing out that there is FAR more to D&D than the stats, unlike some people seem to think, as I showed in my examples...StriderII and myself, for sure, agree that ROLE playing takes more meaning now for us than before...NEVER did we say it's "the only way or the best way", just saying that it's better for US! Then I gave examples and especially trapsinger wants to believe that is ALL we do...it was a freak'n example!! Some posters have understood that's all they were, EXAMPLES!! Just because some people ROLE play, that doesn't make them "better" D&D players...but when the OP gets ripped, told to kill their PC and start over, or that their stats are too low, etc...then that's when it was brought up that ROLE playing has its place and you work from there...use skills!! Sometimes, brain over brawn works wonders...and when I tried to use an example, I got ripped for that too. Exactly. I don't say my way is better for everyone. I certainly prefer it, and over years of experience, I've honed it down to what is most enjoyable for myself and other like-minded individuals. I'll certainly defend anyone's right to play how they like...just don't expect me to actually respect a style that I find distasteful, though. Cambric, feel free to contact me as well, as described above. :) Or, for that matter, lina, you can feel free, too....I have more from whence the last rant came, don't worry. ;) strider
cambric 04-14-05, 09:34 AM	Wrong. I went into a lengthy discussion about survivability and the con stat. Never once did I say he needed to have high stats to survive everything. Just that a 10 in con usually equals death for an adventurer. Especially one looking to be useful in combat. So thanks for twisting my words around to suit your needs! :rolleyes: Then I apologize, I took these comments: Sorcerer's fight. With magic. And while the 10 str isn't an issue, a 10 con is a very rookie mistake, one that leads to a lot of death, especially for a d6 or d4 HD PC Having a con above 10 would DEFINATLY help out, since he might have a chance to survive a cat scratch full attack. But this isn't about your character, who, if he truly did have 30 points, must have been quite a drain of party resources when combat DID come around. But again, not the point. The point here is how to make the OP's rogue a better combatant. And Lina's point DOES hold true in almost 100% of cases: An adventurer who cannot fight (either with sword or magic, or yes, even 'social skills') is dead. And to help out the OP, yeah, the str isnt a big deal, but those con mods are gonna hose you. ...that you did go against what I was "trying" to communicate. You did offer some good advice, but my previous post should've inserted these comments, so that you could see how I took it. What I was trying to point out was the ROLE playing part, that if you use your STRENGTHS and not look at the weaknesses, you CAN SURVIVE a dungeon adventure...MANY of them. Cam
Mikal 04-14-05, 09:41 AM	Then I apologize, I took these comments: ...that you did go against what I was "trying" to communicate. You did offer some good advice, but my previous post should've inserted these comments, so that you could see how I took it. What I was trying to point out was the ROLE playing part, that if you use your STRENGTHS and not look at the weaknesses, you CAN SURVIVE a dungeon adventure...MANY of them. Cam Well of course if you use your strengths you can survive--which is why i suggested the OP never ever ever ever get into melee. And, when I say that a 10 in con is a rookie mistake, it really is. 10 con+low HD= dead PC most of the time. I wasn't saying plug in an 18 every time, but hell, if you got an extra 12,13,14, whatever, put it into con! It's singularly (to me anyway) the most useful stat for any class, because its use is universal for any class (outside, again of undead). I mean, high stats are nice, but unless the DM is throwing wacked out encounters, you're SUPPOSED to be able to run a character with a 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8, which, if i had to use, I'd put in dex, con, int, cha, wis, str, as a rogue, unless i was being silly and wanting to try twfing, in which case i'd go dex, con, str, int, wis, cha. but, that's me.
cambric 04-14-05, 09:53 AM	Well of course if you use your strengths you can survive--which is why i suggested the OP never ever ever ever get into melee. And, when I say that a 10 in con is a rookie mistake, it really is. 10 con+low HD= dead PC most of the time. I wasn't saying plug in an 18 every time, but hell, if you got an extra 12,13,14, whatever, put it into con! It's singularly (to me anyway) the most useful stat for any class, because its use is universal for any class (outside, again of undead). I mean, high stats are nice, but unless the DM is throwing wacked out encounters, you're SUPPOSED to be able to run a character with a 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8, which, if i had to use, I'd put in dex, con, int, cha, wis, str, as a rogue, unless i was being silly and wanting to try twfing, in which case i'd go dex, con, str, int, wis, cha. but, that's me. Point taken...but sometimes, you're "stuck" with low scores, that's why I was interested in finding out what were the rest of the rolls. But "sometimes", there is a backstory to a PC, yes...surprising to some that people create a nice history. MY particular reason for an 8 Con was that he was struck with a "curse"...(our dm LOVES when we do stuff like that) and so, he was very weak in strength and health...being an elf, the -2 to con made it even worse, but I did survive and that is what got this whole thing going, I wanted to explain that it's not always a "rookie" mistake! I had been playing D&D for over 20 years at the time I made that PC. Cam
Mikal 04-14-05, 09:58 AM	True. That's why I like adding in the word 'usually' when I make such points, rather then always. I mean, yeah you can have an 8 con by choice and survive (tho i'd personally... try not to), but, at least from the tone of the OP, that isn't the case. But yeah, knowing the stattage of the rest of the character would help. Though if I have to say, if he has even worse stats in general, and that was the best he can spare for con, he got hosed on his rolling.
striderII 04-14-05, 10:01 AM	Point taken...but sometimes, you're "stuck" with low scores, that's why I was interested in finding out what were the rest of the rolls. But "sometimes", there is a backstory to a PC, yes...surprising to some that people create a nice history. MY particular reason for an 8 Con was that he was struck with a "curse"...(our dm LOVES when we do stuff like that) and so, he was very weak in strength and health...being an elf, the -2 to con made it even worse, but I did survive and that is what got this whole thing going, I wanted to explain that it's not always a "rookie" mistake! I had been playing D&D for over 20 years at the time I made that PC. Do you remember (or have you seen) something from back in the day called the "Rogue's Gallery"? There was a character in there named Calvyn who was a 14th level Half-Elf Berserker with a Con of 8. He had been inflicted with mummy rot, and, while it was cured before it killed him, there was nothing the clerics could do for his health...or his sanity, for that matter. We've used him quite a few times...one friend of mine was only person that played him at all (which we were quite fine with, as he did an *excellent* job). Those were some hilarious times. (Now I'll wait for the deluge of people claiming that a 14th level character with a Con of 8 should have died a long time ago....like the numbers matter or something, sheesh....) strider
Mikal 04-14-05, 10:07 AM	(Now I'll wait for the deluge of people claiming that a 14th level character with a Con of 8 should have died a long time ago....like the numbers matter or something, sheesh....) strider Technically, they do. Not many Half Elven 'Berserkers' with an 8 con will last from 1st level to 14th.
cambric 04-14-05, 10:11 AM	Though if I have to say, if he has even worse stats in general, and that was the best he can spare for con, he got hosed on his rolling. I agree totally...if that was the case, all low numbers, if I was the DM, I would force a re-roll. I do have the "feeling" that it was a newbie mistake, but wasn't positive and knowing that I got away with it, I wouldn't want to assume that from the OP. StriderII: yea, I remember that character...if played "well", I could "see" how he lived that long, but for a front line fighter, I would NOT have/want a starting con average, let alone LOW! :eek: Cam
striderII 04-14-05, 10:17 AM	Technically, they do. Not many Half Elven 'Berserkers' with an 8 con will last from 1st level to 14th. To be honest, I have no doubt I could do it. But this isn't about that. StriderII: yea, I remember that character...if played "well", I could "see" how he lived that long, but for a front line fighter, I would NOT have/want a starting con average, let alone LOW! It can be done, but I don't think that was the point of Calvyn. His mental instability was more of a comic relief thing, and I think that they made him a berserker more for lack of anywhere else to put him. The purely chaotic classes were pretty much limited to berserker and wild mage back then...and who wants a crazy person being able to manipulate things like Wands of Wonder and wild magic areas? :) strider
HypnoticMonk 04-15-05, 04:16 AM	To be honest, I have no doubt I could do it. But this isn't about that. It can be done, but I don't think that was the point of Calvyn. His mental instability was more of a comic relief thing, and I think that they made him a berserker more for lack of anywhere else to put him. The purely chaotic classes were pretty much limited to berserker and wild mage back then...and who wants a crazy person being able to manipulate things like Wands of Wonder and wild magic areas? :) strider Gee you had fun, created a memorable character, provided some good memories for your friends,... but you didn't have a prefect set of high stats??? How in the name of E.Gary Gygax did you ever accomplish such an amazing and improbable thing?? What?? You roleplayed?? You didn't treat the game like it was a real life and death struggle where one bad number might be a fatal crack in your personal blast shields, but instead a game where the most fun for many is to create an entertaining story?? You focused on the positive and made the best of a character with a less-than-favorable stat or two?? that's just crazy talk... ( "We would have kept the baby, but he had an CON of 8.. so Dr. Muchkin said we had to put him up for adoption...)
R-man 04-15-05, 04:28 AM	Start using a reach weapon and tripping opponants with it. This will allow you to stay "behind" the fighter and will be increadably valuable to help ease the pressure on your fighter. Think about upping your UMD and getting some combat effective wands, ie being a supplementary wizard/cleric. Read up on hiding immediatly after firing your bow.(-20 on hide check) With your low physical stats I assume that you have good numbers somewhere. What are they? What feats have you taken. You must excel somewhere, you will want to make use of what you do have and not complain about what you don't have.
striderII 04-15-05, 09:03 AM	Gee you had fun, created a memorable character, provided some good memories for your friends,... but you didn't have a prefect set of high stats??? How in the name of E.Gary Gygax did you ever accomplish such an amazing and improbable thing?? What?? You roleplayed?? You didn't treat the game like it was a real life and death struggle where one bad number might be a fatal crack in your personal blast shields, but instead a game where the most fun for many is to create an entertaining story?? You focused on the positive and made the best of a character with a less-than-favorable stat or two?? that's just crazy talk... ( "We would have kept the baby, but he had an CON of 8.. so Dr. Muchkin said we had to put him up for adoption...) I know, I know...I must be doing something wrong. *sigh* Happily, I have the experts here on these very boards, who, despite having only played for a few short years, can tell me exactly what I'm doing wrong, and how best to maximize my numbers. I'm ready to shed all of that stupid "roleplaying" I've done for most of the past 16 years, and learn how to really play D&D. I so can't believe I typed that.... :P strider
cambric 04-15-05, 09:20 AM	I know, I know...I must be doing something wrong. *sigh* Happily, I have the experts here on these very boards, who, despite having only played for a few short years, can tell me exactly what I'm doing wrong, and how best to maximize my numbers. I'm ready to shed all of that stupid "roleplaying" I've done for most of the past 16 years, and learn how to really play D&D. I so can't believe I typed that.... :P strider :rofl: :bow: :heehee
striderII 04-15-05, 09:55 AM	:rofl: :bow: :heehee *takes a bow* Thank you, thank you...I'm here 'til Thursday....tip your waitress! :) strider
tiercel 04-15-05, 09:23 PM	Powergaming vs roleplaying aside.... Every character has weaknesses. (Having low hp in a high-combat setting, is, admittedly, a pretty siginficant one.) But for every weakness, a character should have sort of strength. So, the challenge is always - how do I use my strengths to make up for my weaknesses? (More broadly, how can the party as a whole use its strengths to make up for weaknesses?) If you don't have many hp to lose, then don't lose them. If your Dex is insane, crank up any ability or item that makes you even harder to hit. Don't let enemies notice you: Hide and Move Silently. Don't stay in their reach: Spring Attack. Don't get into a fight in the first place: boost your Diplomacy to insanely idiotic levels. (You can make Diplomacy checks as a full-round action at -10, you know.) If you aren't having fun using the strengths you have, or if your strengths don't seem to apply because of your DM/other players ("sorry, your partymates already charged the orcs, and they wouldn't have listened to your Diplomatic efforts anyway"), then consider changing your character. Not because he's "weak," but only if you aren't having fun with him. If you like your character but not the game, maybe you should nose around for another game, if possible. Some gaming groups just like lots of combat - there's nothing wrong with that, but it's hard to have a non-combat specialist in a combat-heavy game and everyone to have fun.
WizO_Cat 04-15-05, 10:48 PM	Ok, after reading the thread, I've just got one comment: keep the poss on the subject matter of the thread, not other guests. I see that some have been able to keep the discussion to the subject matter of the thread, but others have not. I highly suggest to those who have not that they keep their posts to the subject matter of the thread now or else I'm going to have to close the thread and take other disciplinary actions. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.
striderII 04-15-05, 10:57 PM	Ok, after reading the thread, I've just got one comment: keep the poss on the subject matter of the thread, not other guests. I see that some have been able to keep the discussion to the subject matter of the thread, but others have not. I highly suggest to those who have not that they keep their posts to the subject matter of the thread now or else I'm going to have to close the thread and take other disciplinary actions. Thanks in advance for your cooperation. I'm obviously part of the "others have not" portion, I guess. Well, while I did have some parts of my post (at least the initial one) that attempted to help the original poster (who hasn't come back and posted anything that I've seen), the rest of my initial post, and subsequent ones, were against those whose only "help" was "you suck". If trying to tell people to stop being down on a player who asks for help is against the policy of WOTC, then, with all due respect, let me know, or suspend me, or ban me, or whatever it is you need to do. I'd rather prefer a warning or clarification first, though. Again, with all due respect (as I'm sure being a moderator is a pain in the hindquarters), my ire gets *quite* raised when someone honestly needs some help, and the "help" they get involves "your character sucks, you idiot". I suppose the ball is in your court. strider
HypnoticMonk 04-16-05, 08:58 AM	On topic - One thing I just thought of is that maybe you should go to the other players for help. Figure out ways to use your skills better in the structure of a team. Many parties end up just being as a bunch of individuals, doing their own thing, instead of working together as a true team. My guess is that at least one other player has a weakness and maybe those of you who do can learn to lean on each other a bit. Mostly on topic - If you do make this character succeed, you will be a lot better gamer than those power gamers who pray three times a day at an altar with 3 dice setup to show a total score of 18 ( and just what three numbers are showing at that altar?? hmmm???? TOLD you powergaming was Evil!!). Just think, if you learn to make the most of what you have with this rogue of yours, when you DO happen to design a character with higher numbers, you will truly be able to use that extra power wisely. You won't find yourself one of those who NEED to have large numbers to be an effective player. (Those people are easy to find. When someone asks for advice on how to make a low stat character more viable, they shout out "KILL OFF YOUR CHARACTER, YOU LOSER YOU!!" and "LOW STATS ARE DEATH!! DON'T BE A WIMP, GET A REAL MAN'S SET OF NUMBERS!!!" and other similar subtle statements. )
striderII 04-16-05, 12:43 PM	On topic - One thing I just thought of is that maybe you should go to the other players for help. Figure out ways to use your skills better in the structure of a team. Many parties end up just being as a bunch of individuals, doing their own thing, instead of working together as a true team. My guess is that at least one other player has a weakness and maybe those of you who do can learn to lean on each other a bit. Mostly on topic - If you do make this character succeed, you will be a lot better gamer than those power gamers who pray three times a day at an altar with 3 dice setup to show a total score of 18 ( and just what three numbers are showing at that altar?? hmmm???? TOLD you powergaming was Evil!!). Just think, if you learn to make the most of what you have with this rogue of yours, when you DO happen to design a character with higher numbers, you will truly be able to use that extra power wisely. You won't find yourself one of those who NEED to have large numbers to be an effective player. (Those people are easy to find. When someone asks for advice on how to make a low stat character more viable, they shout out "KILL OFF YOUR CHARACTER, YOU LOSER YOU!!" and "LOW STATS ARE DEATH!! DON'T BE A WIMP, GET A REAL MAN'S SET OF NUMBERS!!!" and other similar subtle statements. ) Precisely. Hypnotic Monk speaks wisdom. Be still and listen, young grasshopper. strider -not banned yet :)
HypnoticMonk 04-16-05, 07:53 PM	Precisely. Hypnotic Monk speaks wisdom. Be still and listen, young grasshopper. strider -not banned yet :) If you can snatch the not-filled-with-18s character sheet from my palm, you will have achieved enlightenment....
striderII 04-18-05, 11:11 AM	If you can snatch the not-filled-with-18s character sheet from my palm, you will have achieved enlightenment.... *waves several character sheets in the air* You mean like these? ;) strider
HypnoticMonk 04-18-05, 12:32 PM	Well done, young Kane ::: looking around ::: psst, strider, did everyone else abandon this thread?
cambric 04-18-05, 12:56 PM	Well done, young Kane ::: looking around ::: psst, strider, did everyone else abandon this thread? Nope...just never heard from the OP...and it seemed to have died down. Cam
HypnoticMonk 04-18-05, 08:46 PM	Maybe those who we disagreed with went away to compare their BIG numbers to each other ( "You show me Your 18 and I will show you Mine!" ) Ultimately there is one thing that truly helps survivability : experience. I don't mean the accumulation of points that help us go up in level. I mean the kind of experience that comes with watching, listening, and learning. I had my stupid years when it came to this game (and to life itself, but that's another sad story ..). Eventually you just learn. You grow out of your "I have to have ALLLLL the magic and gold and power!!!" phase. [ I had a second cousin of mine show up at the table with 5 ( yes count them 5!!! ) 18s, yet he couldn't roleplay his way out of a paperbag.] You learn, just as in life, to adapt and to cope with shortcomings and overcome them. That's a true "hero" ( in game context only) in my eyes.
Yama-san 04-18-05, 09:14 PM	See it like this...when you go hiking (play D&D), you have a backpack (character) with limited room, and your back with limited weight lifting capability. (Limited feats, skills, gold, spells...) Now, who has more fun on the hike(d&d game)? The guy who randomly throws stuff into the pack and finds that his food sucks and is squished, forgot a backpack, etc. (the guy who thinks that you must suck to roleplay) or the guy who chooses exactly what gear is better than other stuff, puts them down in the right places to get the most out of his equipment, etc.(powergamer)? That's right. the second one... I'm with one of the earlier responders to all of this, and I don't agree with Solidcobra. If the DM is running a game where there is next to nothing for a skill heavy character to do, it's a problem with the game overall (particularly if they just roll stats and not use any kind of point-buy system). Talk to your DM. It's amazing how they respond.
cambric 04-18-05, 09:18 PM	I have to agree, it "usually" does take years of experience. My first "major" PC, still play him after 25 years!!, rolled these scores...now mind you, this was 1st edition, 3 dice...in ORDER!! How the scores fell, that's what you were "stuck" with...there were 7 people + the DM that witnessed this...and to this day, I still play in the same campaign, same DM and he said I "shot my karma with those rolls"... Str 18 Dex 18 Con 18 Int 14 Wis 13 Chr 18 ALL NATURAL!! Now...as I said, for 25 years I've played and he's now just got to level 13...we would "retire" our mains for a while, play other PC's, screw up the balance of the world and require our "mains" to unretire type of stuff...but here's the thing, I've had MORE fun with all my other characters that had MUCH lower scores! The "best" one I had, his highest stat, rolling 4d6, was a 16!! Rest were: 15, 14, 10, 10, 8. I had to ROLE play my butt off with that guy...and still is the best one I've had. Again, does that make us "better" for the experience...NOPE!! Not at all!! But it has made ME wiser!! I do feel bad when I get upset with some people who "have to have" the highest stats possible...but then I remember, I was there once too! I was the "envy" of the group...I was a ROGUE for crying out loud...and I "still" can wipe out most fighters! I have 113 hit points...an AC of 22...bluff skill unmatched for use in battles...and after a while, I've gotten SO bored with him...no real challenges. So here's to us "old farts" that have been through the "power gaming" phase: :pint: Cam Edited for oops: Meant this reply to HypnoticMonk...but good comment to you too Yama-san!!
striderII 04-19-05, 09:30 AM	Well done, young Kane ::: looking around ::: psst, strider, did everyone else abandon this thread? I think they're tired of our so-called "roleplaying superiority". The best part, though, is that lina can't defend him/her/itself, but can sure lash out at others. Funny, that. I think the OP turned tail and fled after the first or second "you suck, you made a crappy character" reply. Which is sad. Although, I am a regular on a forum elsewhere where the typical greeting is "Welcome to the pit. Grab a helmet.", so maybe I can't honestly say much. :) So here's to us "old farts" that have been through the "power gaming" phase: Cheers. :) strider
Solidcobra 04-20-05, 07:36 AM	I'm mostly tired of having to defend myself for my views, really. Bad con was a bad idea. His character DOES suck statistically. not my fault. And i've been through my "must roleplay everything. including going to the potty" phase and have now entered my powergamer phase. all hail powergaming!
cambric 04-20-05, 09:32 AM	I'm mostly tired of having to defend myself for my views, really. Bad con was a bad idea. His character DOES suck statistically. not my fault. And i've been through my "must roleplay everything. including going to the potty" phase and have now entered my powergamer phase. all hail powergaming! First, powergaming is not a bad thing, if that is what you like to do, so mellow out about taking that personally... Second, where you got "hammered" is when you, and others, state, as I've already commented about, that the PC sucks! It does NOT suck!! As for their stats sucking...um, we only know 2 of the stats...and a 10 in strength for a rogue definitely does NOT suck! Does the 10 in con? "Maybe", but all we were trying to point out is that it can be survivable!!! Third, and I have doubted if you understand what the attributes mean, because you really misunderstood "charisma": Originally Posted by Solidcobra That's because charisma isn't social grace or good looks. Your sorcerer doesn't throw fireballs better because he extends his pinky while drinking tea. Charisma is more like..."it", the diff between ignoring someone and going "who was THAT?" when someone exits a room. A cha 8 fighter. Yeah. people kinda don't care much. A cha 22 sorc, whenever he enters a room, all heads turn. Charisma is that when you talk, people listen, basically. Not social grace or your cup size (for females at least). Sorcs with high charisma get skills because when THEY talk, the universe listens, not cause they have DD-size breasts. If powergaming is your thing right now...cool!! :pint: to you and your fellow powergamers!! BUT: The issue was, how to make his PC survive in a dungeon...and it doesn't help when you have people tell you that your PC "sucks"..."kill it off"..."start over"...when those options "might" not be possible. My current DM, I had these stats to use for MY rogue: 15,14,14,12,10,8 That's what I rolled...was I happy? Not doing jumping jacks, let me tell you...but his, and my, belief is you make the best of it...and I did SURVIVE!! And actually, it has been my best character I've ever had! We don't get the option of "quitting", if we quit the character, we get to wait until the next story arc comes around...and that's "usually" 6-8 MONTHS of real time. Again, we're NOT better players...but we've realized that HIGH STATS do NOT make the game "better" for us...nor does it make the game itself "better". In the future, all we were trying to point out is that there ARE other options than "QUITTING" a character just because your STATS "supposidly" suck. Cam
striderII 04-20-05, 10:17 AM	I'm mostly tired of having to defend myself for my views, really. Bad con was a bad idea. His character DOES suck statistically. not my fault. And i've been through my "must roleplay everything. including going to the potty" phase and have now entered my powergamer phase. all hail powergaming! Hey, you want to powergame, go right ahead. I've never said you couldn't. Is it to my taste? No. Do I have any problem with stating my opinion, even if it's not in a tactful manner? No. Like Cambric said, we only know two of the stats. By my count, there are 4 other stats that we don't know the first thing about, never mind skills, available magic items, etc. First of all, my main problem wasn't you, it was lina. You were kind of a tangental issue that got drawn along for the ride. That said, I didn't really like your "help" being "you suck, kill the character....oh, or here's how it could be better". That was my problem, not your powergaming. strider
mrpopstar 04-21-05, 01:07 PM	I've been missing something for the past 11 years of my life. A 10 in constitution for a non-combat character "sucks"? Why didn't anyone tell me!? I should toss out the six characters I have that are level 8+, alive and well, in addition to sporting 10's in constitution. I mean, I can't very well take these characters into public; they "suck"! :rolleyes:
allenchan 04-21-05, 02:43 PM	I've been missing something for the past 11 years of my life. A 10 in constitution for a non-combat character "sucks"? Why didn't anyone tell me!? I should toss out the six characters I have that are level 8+, alive and well, in addition to sporting 10's in constitution. I mean, I can't very well take these characters into public; they "suck"! :rolleyes: We have told you. Multiple times. Burn your character sheets, its a waste of paper as is.
striderII 04-21-05, 07:30 PM	We have told you. Multiple times. Burn your character sheets, its a waste of paper as is. I actually have two responses, because I'm not entirely sure how this was meant. Response #1: If it was sarcastic. Pretty good, dude. I chuckled. Response #2: If it was serious. Um...well, clearly we aren't paying attention to you, because you are horribly, totally, completely *wrong*. When idiots speak, my ears close. I *really* hope Response #1 is the correct response. strider
sabbattack 06-23-05, 10:03 AM	Sorry, I have to set something right. The OP is a mistake. MY mistake. I'm his DM. I should have never let him play let alone use a point buy system for stats. First he tried min-maxing (to the far end as you can see), then he posted here whining because he thought he was useless in a dungeon. He forgot to mention that the "dungeon" was an abbandoned bunker that lasted 1 session only and he felt completely useless in it... DUH! The guy can't RP, built this character just to test my nerves since he's only "sleight of hand"ing all the NPCs he meets all the time to no avail. Wanted to see if I'm cruel enough to kill his PC, he told me. I'm surprised that everyone inside these forums (including myself) is so trigger happy to start pages-long discussions an a trolly post, that the OP abbandoned (like he abbandoned DnD in general, another funny tale) 2 days later. Sorry for the ranting. My mistake again.
Gat 06-29-05, 05:57 AM	Sorry, I have to set something right. The OP is a mistake. MY mistake. I'm his DM. I should have never let him play let alone use a point buy system for stats. First he tried min-maxing (to the far end as you can see), then he posted here whining because he thought he was useless in a dungeon. He forgot to mention that the "dungeon" was an abbandoned bunker that lasted 1 session only and he felt completely useless in it... DUH! The guy can't RP, built this character just to test my nerves since he's only "all the NPCs he meets all the time to no avail. Wanted to see if I'm cruel enough to kill his PC, he told me. I'm surprised that everyone inside these forums (including myself) is so trigger happy to start pages-long discussions an a trolly post, that the OP abbandoned (like he abbandoned DnD in general, another funny tale) 2 days later. Sorry for the ranting. My mistake again. First of all as i told you via phone there is a misunderstanting about this I didnt write this post to coplain or whine as you said.I wrote it cause i wanted to improve myself for the fact that we enjoy ourselves in your campaign we curently play.Anyway i apologize cause i didnt know that the dungeon will last for one session.But let me expose your lies First i Rp very good :D as you can see the others player said that.No i didnt made this character to test your nerves (your nerves are very easy to break doing anything) is true that i sleight of hand every Npc i meet cause is part of my Rping that's why i took the skill focus feat.It is lie that i abadoned dnd cause i still play still reading (still tourma).Yes i minmaxed but aint no crime that. So respect me as i respect you playa next time i see ya in tha street so get down or lay down and if you lay down you con stay down. Tourmalinis still on the streets new album september 2007 TA TA TA TA TA TA TA TA TA TA TA TA TA TA TA TA TA TA TA
Tsipaf 07-01-05, 04:06 AM	how does the lina play the game?the way it was MENT to be played. i roleplay a hero,an adventurer.he travels with a group of buddies,knowing theres safety in numbers and that they can cover his weaknesses.he and his buddies arm themselves to the teeth,staring death head long.and go out and make the world a better place.along the way they meet friends and enemys.they ingage in witty banter,and generally do cool things.but when it comes down to it,they all know they wouldnt last the night if they didnt kick so much ass. besides,as noted.he asked about in a dungeon.he needs to suck up he made a big mistake. well the Rock sais " know your role and shut your mouth!!!" That thing u "roleplay " is not a hero . It si a psychopath who has nothing else to do but to kicking @ss.this is not a hero .Great stats dont make heros and na sai sigouri u dont had 2 have a 18 on Str and Con to be a legend. for example if u have even read Elric of Melnibone(maybe the greatest fantasy hero) u ll see that his Con and Str score was not above 6.And that guy destroy the whole universe by himself.Sam from Lord of the rings is another great character with no high stats.Even Restlin from Dragonlance has a con=6.Finally if u have classic education ( i doubt it ) u must know that all the Greek heros ( cause all the heros r Greek) didnt spend their time killing monsters(only Hercules).But u can know that if u think that RPG is playing Baldurs Gate.NOW CAN U DIG THAT SUCKA!!! HEY Gat mi masas, your rogue is one hell of a character.He is the "Person" if u know what i mean. T.A 4 LIFE
Occams_Razor 07-01-05, 05:46 AM	To the OP, I would suggest that you try shifting your expectations slightly and see if it helps. I have a guy playing an exalted monk/cleric with Vow of Peace and Non-violence in my campaign, and he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn if his fist were glued to it. However, he is a great asset simply because he provides the rogue/invisible blade with flanking which allows that character to do more than enough damage for both of them. Plus, against undead, he can just wipe most of them out with a couple of turn checks. I would suggest trying various tactics, but also be aware of your successes whatever form they come in, and try not to view your character as a success based on the amount of damage he does per round nor the number of kills he racks up. If that doesn't work, try some other tactics described above, and if you still can't be satisfied with the character, ask the DM to let you change characters. Look for something that you would enjoy playing. Remember, it's a game, and it's suppsoed to be fun, don't let it be anything less. Good gaming.
Dragonspirit 07-01-05, 01:30 PM	You can supplement your abilities. Get a wand or two of magic missiles and level up your use magic device. Flank for the fighters while doing total defense. Invest in a feat like Improved Trip.
Ezell Pike 07-02-05, 06:28 PM	Alchemists fire might help here. If enemies ac's are too hight for you to hit due to armor or natural armor. It' a touch attack that does d6 the first round and d6 the second unless your foes feel like wasting time to put out fires. So if you attack and hit once a round for three rounds your foe will take 5d6 from ranged touch attacks. It gets bloody expensive though at 25gp a pop. At low level this could really hurt a white dragon. If a party of 5 adventurers bombarded it with these in round one. Even characters that would have little chance of hitting its normal ac score d6 X 2 for this round its next turn will probably be devoted to stopping that. Giving you another round to do it. In two rounds even if it extinguishes fire from round one you have probably inflicted in the neiborhood of 70pts of damage. If it does not spendthe time to extingush this two round total jumps to 105pts. It cost the party 250gp or less.