Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Ooraka 03-19-08, 09:19 AM	Well, I'm playing a war-based campaign where I am playing an Orc fighter with a 16 int. Is it such a good idea to play, as I am playing him as a tactical fighter, where he knows his way around the military, and is able to help in most situations. Any advice would be welcome. :)
Radijs 03-19-08, 09:51 AM	Tactical fighters in an army. The first thing I tend to think of in such cases are older & veteran sargeants who know that orders coming from the officers should be interpreted creatively. That its more important to do thinks smart and safe rather then glorious. A nice example of this is Sargeant Jackrum from T.Pratchett's "monstrous regiment". As for the build I think I'd go for a rogue/fighter mix or something similar.
Drackthor 03-19-08, 10:30 AM	Sergeant Johnson from the Halo series was, imo, one of the best grizzled-but-intelligent sergeant characters I've seen. He's in just about every Halo novel, but Contact: Harvest features him as the main character, along with a little explanation as to why he's how he is, and a few displays of it.
Ooraka 03-19-08, 12:30 PM	Thank you for the sdvice, but I'm just trying to play something different than your average fighter.
Radijs 03-19-08, 12:48 PM	You're saying our advice is no good? Then I'd like to say gimme some sugar. Please explain yourself more verbosely and in greater detail on what you are looking for.
Ooraka 03-19-08, 12:59 PM	Your advice is well logged. You both make good points. And the mention of a rgoue is a good idea, although the DM is using a no-magic campaign. I am just trying out new ideas, and will take yours into consideration for future levels.
Dog_O_War 03-19-08, 01:15 PM	What you're looking for is Ghazghkull Mag Uruk Thraka. An Orc (or "Ork" as the above is put) that is far superior to most "normal" and even intelligent members of many races. Just because you are smart does not mean you should forget your roots - this means that you may still speak in a manner befitting an Orc, but there is a great cunning which lies behind those eyes. Tactical feats - you(PC) need to know what equipment and strategy will work best in a given situation; you should know combat expertise and other int-based feats (like whirlwind and improved disarm), and should revel in out-thinking your opponent (taking the weapon of an opponent that obviously thought highly of himself, only to have it used against him). Obviously knowledge skills are your friend (that +3 bonus is a good kicker), but I wouldn't stray too far from specialty; maybe history and local, with a token point or two in some others to allow you a 15 when taking 10. Other things like command - TAKE LEADERSHIP! Charisma may be the bench-mark for how many followers you get, but leadership is the key in getting those followers. Besides, loyalists in an army prefer a smart leader that keeps them alive as apposed to a charismatic leader that sends them to their deaths. I really suggest a bard companion for this one as he offers group buffs. Alternatively you could work out a deal with your DM on a version of the purple dragon knight from the Faerun campaign setting. Lastly, you will feel so completely dissatisfied if the other players at the table never follow your plans or treat you on a default setting; you should really talk this over with the others to make sure they know your desires for your character and to ensure greater co-operation. Don't inform them for the first time when describing your character to them, otherwise you'll be very dissapointed.
DrMorganes 03-19-08, 01:26 PM	To quickly answer your question: if you like the concept, it's a good idea. A bit more verbose answer: You can approach this from two (not necessarily mutually exclusive) directions. First, from a roleplaying perspective, having a "knows his way around the military, and is able to help in most situations" sort of character does not require having an above-average INT score. I think you first need to define what sort of help you feel he can/should provide in "most situations". From a mechanical standpoint, Fighters don't get a lot of love from a high INT score. INT 13 is all you need for Combat Expertise, and you only need that if you're going the Improved Trip/Disarm/Sunder route. Beyond that, it's extra skill points and bonus languages. Pure Fighters have an unimpressive class skill list, but the skill tricks in Complete Scoundrel mean there are benefits to having a higher INT. More on this in a bit... Coupling both of those together, you can still play the combat-wise sergeant (which really is more a function of a decent WIS score than INT) with an INT of 10 and a WIS of 12, and keep the ability scores in STR, CON, and DEX where they'll do the most good. If you like the idea of an intelligent martial character, Fighter is not an optimal choice of class. Feats don't scale with level, and feats are really the only thing fighters have going for them. Having an INT of 16 means 5 skill points per level, which gives you a little room to play with skill tricks and perhaps move into the Battle Trickster prestige class. However, if you're considering per-encounter abilities, I think you'd get more mileage from playing a Warblade. 4 base skill points per level (vs the Fighter's 2), a wider range of class skills (and reasons to actually take ranks in specific skills), full BAB, light & medium armor, shields (except tower shields), d12 HD, AND class features that actually benefit from having an INT score a wizard would covet. 'Course, this also means you have to sell your DM on allowing Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords. I think the martial adepts are quite balanced, but not all DMs share that opinion...
WilliamTanner 03-19-08, 03:49 PM	I suggest you write up some additional character concepts, with backgrounds, and see which character you are the most interested in playing. If it is the smart orc fighter, go for it.