By James Roffino
If you’re reading this, which I presume you are, then you’ve certainly heard of two terms: powergamer, usually referred to as a character who wants to engineer a character for the greatest return value, and munchkin, someone who usurps the rules, and tries to make their character “the best.” If you disagree with those definitions, calm down, because they have nothing to do with what I’m about to tell you.
You see, these players typically want to create the most devastating combat-oriented characters they can. They usually choose fighter or barbarian classes so as to “maximize their reward.” My friend, you and I are about to show them up big time.
We’ll just go through the classes you’ll probably have access to, and along the way, point out some useful advice.
The Bard: one of the most amazingly powerful D&D classes. Stop laughing. Who else can wander into town and have the guard draw swords, ready to chase them out? Bards have a spotty reputation at best because maybe one or two of them got wise and pulled off AMAZING feats. With a disguise self spell, the bard can impersonate a town mayor, and convince the mayor’s friends that he is indeed possessed by some evil spirit, causing the hapless mayor to be imprisoned. In the event that this were to happen to a series of towns, a nearby evil overlord or king would eagerly take advantage of the situation and lay claim to some surrounding land, increasing their holdings. This would be a very lucrative business for the bard, earning him or her some massive amounts of cash, and just about any bard could do it. This requires a few uses of a level 1 spell, and a wand just makes the idea much more interesting. The key is to not attempt to involve yourself in combat at all.
I should make that more clear. Non-combat spells and actions in D&D are the most potent forces in its world. Any spell that allows a saving throw is not your friend. But when a major image can convince a town that you are the most devastating necromancer in the world or the most benevolent angel, you have some serious leeway when it comes to money – and adventurers like money.
Barbarian – slave labor. Disregard it except if you’re multiclassing. A few wilderness survival abilities are great, if necessary, but it’s much more fun to be sleeping in the hands of a thousand capable women than sleeping in the dirt next to an angry bear.
Cleric – an interesting idea. Clerics have some really powerful spells, but their best asset is the ability to be “the healer.” You’d be surprised what a capable blackmailing healer can get out of his or her patrons. An angel could give you a feather, which could promptly be sold to pay for a town’s food for a day. And if you’re not a GOOD cleric, the potential skyrockets. Apparently, most DM’s will only enforce roleplaying requirements on good pc’s. so a lawful neural cleric can simply charge a flat fee, or barter for something. A chaotic neutral cleric can get whatever she wants from her customers, while the evil clerics typically just hand out healing if unnecessary, or a few inflict spells while saying “oops. Looks like it was his time.”
Factor in your spell power, and a cleric could make themselves look like the second coming. You know how much televangelists make? Well, in your case, you’re a real magical healer. Complete with special effects and big booming voice from the heavens. While not many of your patrons will be generous, there’s always the “big tippers.”
Druid – Druids can be the most powerful characters in D&D, but only in areas farthest away from civilization. And here’s the big catch. Far away from civilization is everyone’s weak spot anyways. My advice to druids is to pack powerful magical items like a mad shopkeep. Now, you always have the potential to live in cooperation with a nearby village, acting as a guardian of the people, and always having the power to unleash a carnival of bears on the little jerks if they get out of hand. It’s as I always say, the person who lifts their finger the least to summon a horde of someone else’s doom is the top dog. Just remember to befriend a few shambling mounds. They kick adventurer ass.
Fighter – Fighters aren’t all bad. In fact, everyone can benefit from one level of fighter. I’ve even built a necromancer who had a level in fighter and a level in rogue just because of the sheer terror people experienced when an invisible character hit them with a greatsword and inflicted sneak attack damage. Levels in fighter enhance your character, but minimize them. Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don’t.
Monk – the monk is the least exploitable character in D&D because so much of the class is written in stone, but don’t let that stop you. A monk can easily be a non-combat character, so long as you use the intimidate skill wisely, and hide your combat nature. If people think you’re a diplomat or a street rat, then you’re doing a good job. Spend all your money on a good wardrobe. Lots of cloaks.
Paladin – the best thing about the paladin is the focus on charisma. A paladin who takes perform (oratory) is the doom of evil a mile around. Not because they can talk someone to death, but because they can talk 100 people to action. Cocky as a person can be, 100 peasants with scythes are just scary enough that you have to wonder what else is hidden among their numbers. Oh, and contrary to what some people may think, a paladin need not have their holy symbol brandished at all times, but it’s best to have it out in the open when you charge down on the already retreating evil foe. Again, a cloak works well here. I’ve always wanted to take a 4-man group of paladins and obliterate a town of orcs by starting with a bar fight.
Ranger – rangers don’t have it as well as druids do, but that’s to be expected. What rangers do get is a companion much like gwehahanyhwhawhyavar, or whoever that black panther Drizzt drags around is. Having an animal companion is a lot like having two characters – flanking bonuses just roll in like a broken slot machine’s payout.
Rogue – now we’re getting somewhere. Nothing quite says “yoink!” like a rogue. And where I come from, “yoink” means “no touching me in combat.” For some reason, rogues are typically depicted with bladed weapons like daggers or swords. This is clearly a misconception. A rogue with a sword is a dead rogue with a sword in it. Do yourself a favor and NEVER create a rogue with a melee weapon. A heavy crossbow should do, with its 140+ range. If you need to get into melee combat, run back to town and laugh at the idiots who have to roll up a new character. Or if you’re like me, trap the rest of the party down there wherever they are, THEN run (or fly) back to town, laughing at the idiots who have to roll up a new character.
A rogue’s biggest asset is his or her skills. I recommend diplomacy, bluff, sense motive, listen, search, disguise, forgery, and use magic device. Forgery is a tricky one because many people think it only applies to writing. You can usually convince your dm to apply it elsewhere, such as creating a clever fake page from the book of vile darkness, and marketing it to an evil cleric. (By the way, there ARE pages missing from all sorts of those kinds of books, and I’d bet the BoVD has the most missing out of all of them.) If the evil cleric asks how you’re able to hold such an evil item without it burning you, you can easily point out that it’s not even a hundredth of the total artifact, so the itching sensation in your fingers is nothing more than an inconvenience. You could even scratch that “itch” later, so as to make the lie more believable. When he says, “but I already have the complete book of vile darkness” you could convince him that the book is a fake, and you could use it to find the person who has the real tome. All the while either contemplating the capture of the book as your own, or the glorious rewards you’d receive for ripping out all the pages one by one and burning the spine. (Thus permanently making the book fractionalized, and possibly finding a new hiding place for each page.)
Rogues have the best opportunity for roleplaying, because everybody likes them. They are also among the most powerful character classes. Their inability to take sulfur and bat guano and incinerate cities is their only real shortcoming. Which brings us to:
Sorcerer! – Definitely the best and coolest out of the core classes, the sorcerer has the spells, the tools, and the versatility necessary to make nations, planets, and pantheons tremble before his awesome pinky finger. The sorcerer’s spells get cool right away, with ghost sound, expeditious retreat, and silent image, and only go up from there, to the almighty wish spell, which sadly, most dm’s have turned into the “say one word and you die a horrible death that will be so painful your ancestors will feel it” spell. If your dm gets a serial killer look in his eyes when you hit 18th level, remember to bring a gun to all future game sessions. That usually stops the anti-wish backlash normally accompanying usage of the spell.
The spells a sorcerer gets allow him to take normal handhold materials and turn them into havoc incarnate. Forget using fireball as an offensive spell, use it to make people run in terror. Or start a fire to get rid of anything in the “forest of dm-created random encounters”. If your dm rewards you experienced based on kills alone, a simple burning hands spell applied to a bit of dry grass is enough to send your character into epic levels while the rest of the group remains at level 1. Even without the accompanying equipment, epic levels are good.
Now, some people have said that the sorcerer’s lack of spells to choose from is one reason to be a wizard. Well, that’s just not true, you see, because the sorcerer can create a wand or staff with any necessary spell, and that eliminates the wizard’s big plus right away. Mordenkainen’s disjunction and power word kill are two alternatives for wish that are just as versatile. If your kingdom needs materials to build something and they’re all out of mortar, the power word: kill and flesh to stone spells are a quick remedy. Sorcerers (and also wizards) are easily the most powerful core class, because combat needs to be NOWHERE on their resume. Factor in their ability to animate dead and you have a serious contender for “all around best class ever”.
But we’ll go farther – there’s another class we should look at.
Psion – the only version of the psion we need to focus on is the telepath. Anyone who uses and abuses mind-warping powers is easily one pick for the best of them all.
The psionic attack modes are all weak except for mind blast, an incredibly useful little trick that can send your foes to the floor stunned. Most DM’s I know will let you perform a coup de grace on a stunned character because they really can’t fight back and might as well be paralyzed or helpless. And better yet, if you cast something like charm person, or the equivalent, on someone while they are stunned, the dm may rule that they automatically fail their saving throw. I can tell you already like where this is going. It gets better.
I created a Cansin (dragon # 297) psion, and saw just how devastating a mind-warrior could be. Her name was Canne. Since she was a creature of chaos, I figured she’d better be chaotic neutral. But that wasn’t enough. There had to be something about my character that was unique and completely exploitable. So I came up with the idea that she changes gender at will. The DM really liked that. I figured that with a charisma and Intelligence of 20 each, I was pretty safe from combat. And thus, the most broken D&D character ever came about. Take note here, because his/her story could help you out in the creation of the uber-character of your own design.
The first session had Canne seduce a guard just for the sake of creating chaos. After scarring the poor fellow for life up on the top floor of a hotel, Canne had to flee – so she jumped out a window. Thanks to my foresight, a ring of feather fall helped me out. Without pants, there was only a slight bit of trouble getting out of town. My base speed of 40 feet (courtesy of “speed of thought” – a psionic feat) compared to their chainmail-reduced 20 foot base speed made quite a difference.
If you see a guardsman in silverymoon walking odd, Canne says hi.
Our second session had me as a scout when we were ambushed by worgs. NEVER assume that because you have a +18 to spot checks that you should be the lookout.
Luckily, Canne survived, and the next town we went through had us stealing horses from some stableman. Canne was the reason that he was too tired to fight off the thieves, who robbed him blind. Canne went into the stables to calm the horses down. Rolling a 19 on an animal empathy check was enough before the 4 ranks + 5 cha bonus. So take note: animal empathy is a good skill to take.
Sundabar was a pretty happenin’ place. Hellfire rained from the skies, the town became a crater, and I was the first one out. Take note: if the town you are in is being destroyed by hellfire, leave.
In Deadsnows, there was a nobleman who referred to Canne as “wench.” That was his last mistake, as I had JUST gotten enough power points to use mind blast. Down went him and his guards, and Canne killed him. That was the last step necessary to summon a chaos beast, something that Canne had been trying to do – it was a part of her background. Unfortunately, the chaos beast was killed by a demon that another party member had been worshipping. Canne promptly became indignant towards that party member, insisting, “You killed my mother!” (Untrue, but nobody knew that, not even the DM.)
The group then headed towards “the mines.” Dun dun duhhh…Get this: the group sees a chain operated elevator, and uses it. Halfway down, the silver dragon ogre of the group accidentally lets go. Canne floats. They don’t. The DM intervenes, and their lives are spared. We get down to the bottom, and explore. A cleric of some sort casts blindness on Canne. Bad news. Thankfully, I DID have a psicrystal, and a psicrystal of awareness at that. It led me back to the elevator. I pulled the chain down so that nobody could leave. Then I used alter self (a DM-given ability) to grow wings and fly away.
And Canne has not been seen since, even though he/she is still out there somewhere…
Regardless, a character example is one of the best things you could have for a guide like this, so I gave you one. Canne was never a combat-oriented character. That’s the reason he/she was the most powerful out of all the characters. And we’re not talking about wimpy characters. There were half-dragons, drow, dragon-drow, thri-kreen, ith-kon (think illithid), and others there. But Canne proved to be the most dangerous out of everyone by far. With a simple statement like “Oh, guards! This is the woman you want.” She could have killed off PC and NPC alike with a bat of an eyelash and a few words, or if the guards were female, simply act evil so they do whatever you wish.
Originally posted by Kingrames
The point was that a noncombat character is more powerful.
It's hard to tell. Your original post was fairly descriptive about what each class can do. Instead, I think you meant to put more of an emphasis on what illusions and non-combat things can do... but I still liked some of what you wrote. I'm just pointing out why it's hard to tell.
If you allow every abuse of the leadership feat I have seen across the boards, then yes, a non-combat character would be more powerful. Even then, a given non-combat character first has to survive the first encounter with the one he does not like before he can call his friends. In my campaign, (n)pc's don't have Nokia's.
I hope that I can someday run into a player who thinks that it's possible to 'win' at roleplaying games, and show them that participation in a group effort of overcoming challenges can be just as rewarding.
Aust manipulated the rest of us into fighting his battles and doing his dirty work for him, we generally ended up cleaning up his messes. In one scheme, however, Aust succeeded in assassinating the king and the king's guards (with the help of us, the party, and about 50 hired mercenaries dressed up like minstrels). He then proceeded to con his way into the vault and the citizenry's hearts. Using his lyres of building (which he commission with money from the kingdom coffers), he set about building public works the likes of which the citizens had never seen. Upon having secured his place in the hearts of the peasants, he set about taking over surrounding cities in the same manner. Finally after the Empire of Aust spanned the small-ish continent, and the emperor was setting his sights overseas the DM called it quits (I really had to agree with the DM at this point).
-Old French Admiral
Originally posted by OmiKapSi
I find it unfortunate that power seems to stem from someone’s ability to manipulate or dominate others into doing what one tells them to.
I hope that I can someday run into a player who thinks that it's possible to 'win' at roleplaying games, and show them that participation in a group effort of overcoming challenges can be just as rewarding.
That depends on what you mean by "win."
If a player "wins" by setting goals and achieving them regularly, then there's nothing wrong with that.
If a player "wins" by having fun doing things as his or her character that he or she would not normally do in real life, there's nothing wrong with that.
If a player "wins" by proving himself or herself better than the rest of the party, perhaps you as the DM should introduce something in the campaign that can't be won by fighting.
Sending a bunch of bloodthirsty assassins on a diplomatic mission is so out of character that it won't work, but when the characters in question have to negotiate with celestials to free one of their own comrades before he's plunged into the sea of holy water surrounding mount celestia - now there's a situation where perhaps the weakest, least hostile member of the group can shine.
Or is the Wizard missing from that list?
Bard- Love it. Powerful, yes, in combat as well as out if you play it right. Just because you can make yourself look like the mayor doesn't mean you are, certainly applies to his advisors and anyone else who has dealings with him
Cleric- Interesting? One of the more underestimated. Religious power with combat might. What more could you ask? As it stands I have a cleric in my group, 3rd level, of the death god and can kick almost twice as much butt in combat as a higher level fighter, not to mention the fact that he doesn't have to rely on others for healing. He can keep the party going and hold his own.
Druid- A Druid can do just as well in wilderness as out. It is because of his need and drive for balance that he succeeds.
Rangers- Fighters with wilderness capabilities.
Need I go on and on? I think I made my point.
The only way I see you are making a powerful character is to utilize roguish tactics with every, single class. Makes no sense. Bah!
I play with a DM who allows us to be very creative with what our characters do, or attempt to do, so some of us have seen what true power can be by using (somewhat) non-combative actions. We play a 2nd edition game.
An example of this is a recent dungeon-like area we entered which had a spiral floor and a large pit in the center. Picture a snail shell - the floor wrapping around the pit, going up and becoming gradually less in diameter. All along the walkway were small caves filled with slaves, each group being bossed around by large ogre-like beings, about 60 in all (with roughly 300-400 slaves). We were prepared to go in swinging, or possibly look for something to take out a lot of people at once, like some type of explosive, considering the slaves were mining something in this dungeon. Instead, my thief character decided to scout ahead using my (improved) invisibility ring (which was actually a rolled for magical item - i got VERY lucky). Having only a 8th level character, I was able to take out 90% of the ogres simply by initiating a touch attack on them with my sleep potion filled pin ring. As they dropped, I convinced (most of) the slaves to help me pull them into the caves to hide the body from the other ogres, after slitting their throats. Again, our DM doesn't exactly allow us to abuse abilities or do anything that is "broken," but with a ring I was lucky to find and some cheap sleep potion and an even cheaper pin-ring, I can take out anything without a resistance to sleep spells/potions. When you are invisible and moving silently, almost any DM will have to grant you a simple touch attack to prick an enemy as long as they aren't moving around much...
This is just one example of how you can get creative and come up with an action that is extremely powerful, without the benefit of a barbarian like attack power or even the magic of a wizard or sorcerer. Of course, the ring helps, but isn't absolutely necessary if your thief is working in the dark and can hide in shadows.
You would need potions of deep slumber, and even then its only a DC 13.
(Side note: What Silver Dragon would ever do the deed required to create such a half-breed?) so I grant that low level innate abilities may not be out of order.There was also not much mention of the encounters faced by the party as a whole. A more demonstrative point would have been made by describing a 'combat' encounter with a dangerous foe and how the character avoided crossing swords with it while still aiding the party and furthering their goals.
It was my general impression from the post that 'aiding the party' and 'furthering their goals' was not a very high priority with Cannes. This impression was further aided by the descriptions of the classes and why each was valued. There seemed to be several references to an 'all for one' mentality that usually doesn't work well in a gaming group. (ex. If you need to get into melee combat, run back to town and laugh at the idiots who have to roll up a new character. Or if you’re like me, trap the rest of the party down there wherever they are, THEN run (or fly) back to town, laughing at the idiots who have to roll up a new character.) Not only desert your teammates, but trap them first? Is Cannes actively opposed to the other characters?
It has always been my impression that characters should at least nominally work together in a roleplaying group. That's not to say that all individuals should be righteous do-gooders, but it seems to me that a certain cooperative element is missing from Cannes the Confused's personality.
Despite the opening lines of the post, I think it was very much about a 'munchkin' theme - though albeit not from a combat perspective.
Tastes may differ from table to table but reading this post has left me longing for the simple problems of a minmaxed fighter doing 30 points of damage per attack. Ah well, to each his own I suppose.
The key in a RPG is not to be the most powerful character but to know your role within your team and have its full support. Now being creative and "own" your "niche" in the team is a plus.
Originally posted by Kingrames
The point was that a noncombat character is more powerful.
While I enjoyed your article, and found it highly entertaining, I have to disagree with this statement.
If your DM is of the dungeoncrawl, hack-n-slash variety, a non-combat character is the last thing you'll want. It all depends on what the focus of the campaign is. I also note that your approach to noncombat power tends to be rather, well, antagonistic. Whatever happened to winning friends and influencing people?
By the by, I thought psionic characters were barred from chaotic alignments, as mental discipline is necessary to cultivate their powers?
:Originally posted by l337_monkey
Heh, that’s all well and good...all you need is a lot of sleep potions, a ring to go with it as well, and pray to your God(s?) that even the 10th level (or higher) Fighter fails a DC 11 Will save...oh wait, he has too many Hit Dice (only affects 4 HD).
You would need potions of deep slumber, and even then its only a DC 13.
Actually I'm playing 2nd edition so none of that comes into play - they would only get a saving throw.
Thank You.
Originally posted by OmiKapSi
I find it unfortunate that power seems to stem from someone’s ability to manipulate or dominate others into doing what one tells them to.
Just like real-life. ;)
The difficulty in assessing the power of non-combat characters is that a great deal of their effectiveness falls outside the parameters of the rules and is left to the DM to officiate. As such, these abilities can be highly variable based on the DM and so no concrete, objective comparison can be made.
Originally posted by Coldpenguin625
The whole focus of this "guide" is to make a super annoying character that makes other players want to beat you up after the game since all you do is try to steal the DM's attention and wander off on your own in order to screw up the game. My players play powerful characters both on and off the battlefield but they know enough to realize that regardless of how "kewl" it is to be powerful, keeping the game flowing and making sure that EVERYONE, not just you, has fun playing.
Believe it or not, my character was one of the least disruptive in this game.
When the group needed horses, I got them horses.
When the group was in the mines, there were at least 2 other characters whom had previously shown hostile attitudes toward me. One had "killed my mother," the chaos beast that I had summoned who my character believed was his/her mother.
This same other character was summoning demons, killed an entire town, and made sacrifices while protected by a powerful cursed ring. Then she infected the water supply of another town, causing everyone in the town to become undead. It was all about chaos, but if that wasn't my alignment I could have easily played something else.
The DM ended that campaign pretty quick when one player's character went insane and killed three other characters in one round, each with a critical hit. Never quite did anything that crazy again, and the newest campaign is quite tame in comparison.
Canne, by the way, wasn't really the son/daughter of a chaos beast, but rather spawned from the essence of a dead god. It was the only way I could justify his/her ridiculous rolls for ability scores. and the extreme to which canne was chaotic.
The point was not that such a character was powerful. The point was that this character, if assaulted by a raging barbarian of doom, could find some other way of dealing with the situation rather than attacking. If the campaign had been more tame, canne's abilities as a diplomat would have really been amazing.
To those of you who think abandoning the party was disruptive: Let’s just say that you just went blind and a demon-worshipping assassin who killed your mother is right behind you. do you try to leave? Well, I did. And I took the opportunity to make sure that assassin wasn't going to kill anyone else's mother. As my character would have done.
had the dm not intervened saving the demon worshipping assassin pc and the only remaining living pc's (after a shade slew another pc - a shade we weren't supposed to fight yet), the game would have continued, as we the group were still capable of accomplishing our mission.
What I chronicle here is proof that a non-combatant character in an almost purely combat-oriented campaign can be very powerful.
VERY powerful.
And to nameless one jr...
I believe that may have been a second edition rule. In 3e, psions are quite chaotic if they want to be.
As for Elendur, I feel for you man.
If I tried making a diplomacy roll, I always give some input. For example:
"But what about the vampires?" *
I then relate to the dm I am trying three things:
1. I am trying to get the lord of the castle to give us more supplies.
2. I am attempting to get more money.
3. I want him to like me more for risking so much.
The first two rolls are for bluff, or perhaps the dm could make it one roll.
The third roll is diplomacy, and the dm should probably not award much of a bonus, because the only thing I'm mentioning that could sway the lord's decision is the word "vampires" which, if he doesn't even believe in vampires, might mean that I fail horribly at my persuasion attempt.
If the dm told me "no, you can't do that" or "you fail" before I even roll, I'd be very angry.
That said, however, I consider the rogue and wizard to be potentially the two most powerful classes. Bards aren't far behind, either. Why?
Wizard is fairly self-explanatory and there are plenty of threads covering that already, so I won't go into it.
But why the rogue?
Certainly not for her combat ability - sneak attack, although powerful, is a very situational skill. Probably not for her scouting and 'hard' sneaking abilities either. What makes her an extremely powerful character is, more than anything, her large number of skill points and wide range of class skills. Effectively, great social skills combined with undercover skills give you a 00-calibre secret agent.
Why do I say this? Just consider James Bond for a moment? Why is he able to do what he does? How does he go after the big guns? Certainly not by blasting his way in, killing every enemy that comes along. Nor does he sneak in from the very edge, hiding behind every rock, tree and wall from London to Cuba/Moscow/Vietnam/wherever.
So how does he get to his target? He infiltrates target organisations. Bypasses the outer circle of his target's defences. Liaises with the target's inner circle. In D&D terms: Bluff, Intimidate, Sense Motive, Diplomacy, Disguise and Perform. Maybe even Forgery. Hide, Move Silently, Spot and Listen for the sneaking-in final approach to the target. Disable Device, Open Locks and Search to deal with obstacles. Also some miscellaneous skills which are not part of his primary repertoire, but are nevertheless a part of his character, and undeniably vital - Knowledge (relating to wines, antiques, etiquette, etc.), Appraise, Speak Language, Ride, Swim, Balance, Jump and Climb.
Also note that not every one of these skills is maxed. And they need not be, in order to make an effective character. In many cases just a few ranks is plenty. Why?
Consider your typical enemy organisation. High-level character at the top, surrounded by mid- to high-level lieutenants. Maybe a high-level cohort. Some lower-level sublieutenants. And a whole mass of low-level grunts kept there by money, force or indoctrination, who, in many cases, are not particularly loyal - and who make up 99% of the organisation. If the target isn't particularly isolationist, he or she will also have a social circle that most likely extends outside the boundaries of the organisation. Many members of this social circle will not be high-level characters; wealthy and influential they may be, but not high-levelled. What does this mean? A few points in the relevant Knowledge and Appraise skills and you can pass for an expert, making your Bluff and Disguise (which are probably well-developed skills) all the more convincing. A few points in Perform and you can deliver a toast, take the place of a regular actor and other things which make it all the easier to infiltrate. A few points in Intimidate can easily break a common soldier or low-ranking officer. A few ranks in Forgery can send an enemy grunt on a fruitless mission, allowing you to slip past. Not to mention your well-developed Bluff and Diplomacy. Naturally, high Charisma and Intelligence scores are vital, and high Dexterity (and, to a lesser extent, Wisdom) also help.
So what do you do when you reach your target? There's no way around it - you have to go in for the kill. Unless you're a physiology lecturer named Trefor you can't talk someone to death, so now you enter stealth mode. The domain of the 'typical' D&D rogue. But also note that Sneak Attack, although very effective in assassination, isn't the only way to kill someone, and that a direct confrontation need not even take place. How else can it be done? Ingested poison is a personal favourite - even high-level characters need to eat and, safe in their own stronghold, their guard will be down. Bedtime is another opportunity - a high-level character will still need to sleep. This usually involves taking off armour and becoming helpless for several hours. Then there are the indirect methods. See a dam? Mediaeval or modern construction, you can still make it burst. Depending on the scenario, you have Fireball wands or C4. Then there are alliances and other 'deals' you have made. Talk the ninjas into attacking the base in the volcanic crater. Bribe some lower-ranking members of the target organisation to disobey critical orders. Issue erroneous and misleading orders on behalf of high-ranking members of the organisation. Or provoke an all-out war between two different enemy organisations.
Now compare this to how every other class handles it. Fighters and barbarians have little chance of success. Paladins have the talking, but don't have the sneaking - they will still have to fight their way through the target's high-level bodyguards. Not to mention their honour code... Druids aren't particularly effective in urban environments or in built-up complexes. Rangers are like a combination Druid and Fighter. Monks have the sneaking but not the talking - they have to do everything themselves. A cleric has little alternative but the Rambo approach, albeit with spells rather than weapons. Which leaves Wizards/Sorcerers (although a sorcerer will probably be far less versatile), Bards and Rogues.
Combat-oriented classes: fighter, specialist fighter, monk
Non-combat: bard, druid, cleric, wizard, sorcerer, rogue, and anything else without a martial weapon prof. and superior unarmed capabilities.
I think it needs to be said that "power" is relative. A combat character's power is limited by his abilities and the situation. Swords don't always belong in a banquet hall, but decapitating a viceroy is the surest and quickest way of ending an argument. As was said in Brotherhood of the Wolf the beast is creating a problem (politically), no more beast no more problem. Also, combat power is more stable. Unlike a poorly timed joke, a sword strike is not going to backfire, turn around, and chop your own head off (unless of course, it's cursed).
Non-combat power can reach limitless heights through methods such as manipulation, deception, bribery, and countless others...however such power is tenuous. Suppose stupid peasant 'A' goes and tells not-so-stupid peasant 'B' about the "benevolent angel" that has appeared. If peasant 'B' or anyone else catches on to the ruse, the "devastating necromancer" is now "town cheat" and those 100 scythe-wielding peasants are now headed in his direction.
Each class has it's place and this is emphasized by the team aspect of D&D, however on a class to class basis, I think one would be justified in saying that non-combat characters are more VERSATILE rather than powerful. Granted, in many cases versatility is a form of power.
Just remember, when you negotiate or wildshape your way into having a Treant tear down the walls, make sure to pound any given wall section until it's just about to collapse, but hasn't yet, before moving on to the next one. Using the Stronghold Builder's Guide collateral damage rules, you can bring the whole place down like a house of cards, or a row of big granite dominoes, with everyone from the low-end "grunt" minions to the archvillain flattened in one fell swoop. Best of all, you 'defeated' them in the most decisive way possible, or at the very least set up one heck of a surprise round; and their magical treasure will remain more or less intact.
Of course, making use of this requires a setting wherein magic is common enough so that all the spells the character needs to be available on demand.
For example, you can see if your DM will let you get by with only taking the level adjustment and not the hit die of the troll to cut five ECL off there. If you'd like you can also try and convince him that you don't want the breath weapons of half dragon and try and angle for cutting one ECL off of each of those two. It'd take a wee bit of work but if you did that you'd get the ECL down to a 20. Then, just for the hell of it, if you could find a way to do it in game try and graft part of a golem to your arm to gain the half-golem template and you'd become immune to magic as well physical damage. It'd take some work but it'd be potent.
Originally posted by Kingrames
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don’t.
With that manner of thinking, yes it is easy to see how a non-combat character is more powerful. Although againin my opinion that is simply using one form of combat against another.
When the paladin joined the group, he was already somewhat in awe of the rogue, based on the stories he'd been hearing. Soon, with some good Diplomacy and Bluff roles on the thief's part, the were fast friends, while the NG wizard was alienated and despised for being an elf.
After a few more adventures, after a particularly close battle, the rogue decided to quit while he was ahead. He retired from the adventuring life with widespread fame and great wealth, including more than his fair share of the party's loot. Meanwhile, the paladin and wizard soon found themselves comfortably ensconced in unmarked graves.
Was the rogue powerful? Not particularly. Despite sneak attacks, he was probably the least effective character in the group at combat. But with a careful blend of cowardice, greed, and blatant lies, he got all the best rewards with none of the sacrifice. Not too shabby.
By the way, as DM I can testify that nothing was slanted in this rogue's favor. I went strictly by the books in regard to all Diplomacy and Bluff rolls, and even gave the other PCs fairly high bonuses against his Bluffs as they gradually became suspicious of his motivations. It was all careful roleplaying and a bit of luck.
That being said, that rogue ticked-off half the group out of game. One newbie player had a fair amount of trouble dealing with the fact that HE didn't trust the rogue, but his CHARACTER did.
Well, c'est la vie. The rest of the group and I found the whole situation hilarious.
THERE IS NOTHING LIKE A POWERFUL CLASS, THERE ARE ONLY SMART PLAYERS AND "NOT-SO-SMART" PLAYERS - NO MATTER WHAT CLASS YOU PLAY, YOU CAN BE THE MOST POWERFUL OF THEM ALL IF YOU CAN USE ALL YOUR QUALITIES IN THE BEST MANNER POSSIBLE!
;)
Jetty
~ Lock
I think I agree with Jetty's conclusion, actually ;)
~ Lock
I'm with the two of you! There are no weak NPCs, only weak (one-track-minded) players. As a player, you gotta look at your characters whole package--race, abilities, alignment, class, feats, and skills, and (really the best part because it's pretty much all you, the player) background--and PLAY it out. Roll/Role? It doesn't matter which, as long as you're taking all the NPCs elements and DEVELOPING them, staying mindful of them as much as possible.
And, let's not forget, the other players at the table, as well as the DM, have a strong influence on the development of your character, too. Unless you get bags of loot and the opportunity to "open the book" to go shopping, you're going to find treasure set by the DM and shared by the party. You never know what kind of item you might find or what rewards of fame and fortune might come your way. But that's part of the development of your character within a RPG (i.e., group) setting; and which sets pen/paper D&D apart from any video game.
ST
Other DMs don't favour this approach, and diplomacy, bluff and illusions don't work well against undead, constructs and most monsters who just want to eat you. Run away like a coward if you want, little rogue, but sometimes this just means you get hit in the back with a death spell...
Lakedemonias - Trickster, very fond of his own brand of diplomacy that lead people wondering if they had been insulted or not, also fond of the 'exploding pigeon' trick. Tended to carry large bulging bags of money to attract attention.
Jenarra - the only person I ever knew who wore a ball gown to a dungeon crawl. Known for her use of 'combat geometry', her fondness for complicated plans and traps that never worked, and her continual search for the perfect melancholic mood, which she seemed doomed to never find.
Perrin* - Cook, fireworks expert, nature lover, champion sandwich maker and occasionally psychotic rabbit. Eventually turned his attention towards destroying the cult of Vecna via careful marriage.
Stoneman* - Brought the fine art of venture capitalism to AD&D. Junk bonds, speculative ventures, transit deals and land valuation. The only person I know who tried to sell a lich on the open market. All within a carefully researched medieval paradigm. Occasionally dabbled in insane breeding experiments with captured monsters. Scariest adventurer I have ever met, bar none.
Jaspar - Thought he was cursed with lycanthropy as a curse from his patron deity for turning from the true path. Decided to go adventuring in order to try and get himself killed, that his stained blood no longer pose a threat to others.
I could go on... They are all AD&D classes (no prestige classes here), and cookies for anyone who can guess them all right. It's almost impossible, because the memorable things about these characters aren't their class abilities.
The point is that a really memorable character is more than a set of abilities. If you are defining a character's non-combat potential by their character classes, you're on the wrong track. I can see the point that Kingrames is trying to make, and it’s a good one, but he's still doing it by class, by capabilities and by stat sheet. You aren't limited to that. You can have whatever personality you want, do whatever things you want, and have a character that is both more capable and more powerful than a set of stats suggest.