The Alexandrian: Calibrating Your Expectations
Jasin Zujovic
http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html
I particularly like Analyzing Aragorn and Concluding Thoughts: the
points that you don't need to be 20th level to be an epic hero, that D&D
models an astounding power range over 20 levels, and that a game
targeted at a particular atmosphere is best off targeted at a particular
level range too are ones that aren't discussed nearly enough in the DMG,
I think.
I also feel compelled to tout something kind of related I wrote on
ENWorld a while ago:
It's been pointed out to me once that most people's character concepts
are pretty static. It was in a different context (about characters
changing from self-serving mercs into selfless heroes), but I think it
still applies here, and that it's one of the reasons why people feel
that high-level games become cartoonish or super-heroish in a bad sense.
Everyone likes playing Ned Nimblefingers, rogue 1, a street urchin who
manages, along with his unlikely companions an apprentice wizard and a
young savage nature priestess, to defeat a plot by doppelgangers to
infiltrate the Town Council, and gets to rogue 4 along the way.
Most people would like playing Thanee of the Thousand Faces, rogue
13/shadowdancer 4, the Mistress of Whispers in the kingdom ruled by
Aelfric the Paladin King, her once adventuring companion, who has
creatures of evil more afraid of the night than Aelfric has them afraid
of the day, who can wear anyone's face, and enter any fastness, even
those with no locks to pick and windows to break, as she foils the plot
by the Grey Council, a circle of Hextor-worshipping lich clerics, to
bring down Aelfric's kingdom.
But unless the campaign is crafted to take into account this change (and
IME, it often isn't), many people feel a disconnect when they realize
that after few months of sewer-crawling and monster-bashing, Ned
Nimblefingers is now rogue 13/shadowdancer 4 and doesn't really fit the
concept they set out to play, since he's now much more of a legendary
ninja than a shifty urchin.
It's not impossible to deal with this. Age of Worms, so far as I've
seen, does a decent job. The PCs go from wannabe adventurers who get the
idea looting an ancient tombs might be a way to some quick cash, through
accidental saviors to a small garrison of besieged soldiers, to the
darlings of Greyhawk's fans of gladiator games. (That's about halfway
through.)
But considering the range of power levels D&D spans, if you create a
street urchin, or a merchant's bodyguard, or a poor peasant girl who
spontaneously manifests magical powers, it's best to be prepared that
those concepts won't work quite as well 15 levels later. You can easily
start out as a poor peasant girl, but by 15th-level she had better
evolved into a seductive manipulative sorceress who hides her humble
beginnings, or the legendary saint touched by the gods, or something
like that. A 16th-level, shapeshifting, teleporting, dead-raising, wind-
walking poor peasant girl with hundreds of thousands of gp in magical
equipment doesn't really make much sense.
So what about you, rgfd? Do you notice this genre-switching in D&D? Do
you play D&D because of it or despite of it? Do you do anything to fix
it? Tweak the rules to make the whole 20-level range more similar to the
sweet spot, or tweak the campaign and advancement pattern to spend more
time in the sweet spot?
--
Jasin Zujovic
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>But considering the range of power levels D&D spans, if you create a
>street urchin, or a merchant's bodyguard, or a poor peasant girl who
>spontaneously manifests magical powers, it's best to be prepared that
>those concepts won't work quite as well 15 levels later. You can easily
>start out as a poor peasant girl, but by 15th-level she had better
>evolved into a seductive manipulative sorceress who hides her humble
>beginnings, or the legendary saint touched by the gods, or something
>like that. A 16th-level, shapeshifting, teleporting, dead-raising, wind-
>walking poor peasant girl with hundreds of thousands of gp in magical
>equipment doesn't really make much sense.
I thought that this was fairly well handled in "The Deed Of Paksennarion".
Paks starts out at first level, and by the end of the trilogy is somewhere
in the 14-17 range (probably something along the lines of 8 Fighter/2
Ranger (Bow)/4+ Paladin). Through all of it, she still remains a peasant
girl, and people around her still react to it. Nobles are put off by it,
and at the end of book 3 when she's in deep kimchi, she gains the sympathy
of many people in part based on her background.
You can't really expect to live 15-18 years (hell, longer for Elves,
Dwarves) as something, and expect to leave that aspect of your life
entirely behind you, no matter how high up in level you get.
Nobody is static. If players expect their characters to remain the same -
EVEN WITHOUT GAINING ANY LEVELS AT ALL - well, they're badly mistaken.
Christopher Adams
>
> So what about you, rgfd? Do you notice this genre-switching in D&D? Do
> you play D&D because of it or despite of it? Do you do anything to fix
> it? Tweak the rules to make the whole 20-level range more similar to the
> sweet spot, or tweak the campaign and advancement pattern to spend more
> time in the sweet spot?
The change doesn't bother me. I hate the Bildungsroman in literature and I never
play it in games, but on the other hand people change, and their past
experiences contribute to the person they are now.
I anticipate events in the campaign which will cause a major redefinition of the
character and/or the character's self-image, and plan for them so that I know
what to do with the PC when it eventually happens.
The longest-running campaign I ever played in was my first Third Edition game,
back in 2002 (though it started in 2001). There were moments of discovery,
moments of self-discovery, moments when what a character *thought* was true
about her backstory turned out to have been a lie, et cetera. On the other hand,
there was character continuity because all of the PCs had long-range goals to
which they were committed; there was no PC who was a simple soldier caught up in
grand events. These goals just became more specific as opportunities presented
themselves. "Gain magical power", for instance, became "Join and eventually
assume control of the Circle of Kwalish in Sigil", which then became "Use the
members of the Circle of Kwalish to achieve lichdom", which then became "Forge
an alliance with one side or the other in the Blood War for greater power and
the ability to preserve your immortal existence".
--
Christopher Adams - St Ives, New South Wales
-------
What can change the nature of a man?
-------
Sydney-based gamers - Get in touch with
SUTEKH at the University of Sydney!
http://forum.sutekh.info/
Loren...@gmx.de
<snip>
Maybe players think "I am a shifty urchin." instead of
"I start as a shifty urchin and because of that I have the following
likes, dislikes, and fears...and I want someday become
[rich, accepted by society, master of the thieves guild....]"
The DM's responsibility is to reflect the PC's development in
the way NPCs and society in general treat him, expanding
the street urchin's world from the filthy backyards to the streets,
the town, kingdom, continent,...
LL
Eric P.
thusly
(in article <InL1i.37540$M.6...@news-server.bigpond.net.au>):
At the top level, that's been the way of things with my characters as
well. Fellow players have expressed varying degrees of interest in
their characters' futures. Specific levels or level ranges were never a
goal, but rather a character (mine included) would begin play with both
a short-term goal and a long-term outlook. Related to this, lately I've
been seeing newly-written characters with a note included, saying
"Wants to become a ___" with the blank being replaced by a class,
whether base or prestige. Historically, my characters have proceeded
with the idea of "I want to develop in whatever ways will make me the
most effective agent of change along such-and-such a life path."
There are times, of course, when you find an exception to this way of
thinking. One character has gone from thinking "I want to become the
greatest knight around" to "I want to become the greatest swordsman
around" to "I will give my all to protect my closest friend, wherever
he may go and whatever he may do, as long as he lives and acts
honorably." Another has maintained the same thought throughout 36
levels of adventuring: "I want to become the most powerful and capable
wizard I can possibly be, and will always seek ways to increase my
ability with arcane magic. Above all, I will prize and accumulate all
the magical knowledge I can find. And, OK, using that magical knowledge
and ability to fight evil is fine, too."
Interestingly enough to me, when I create new characters, much more
thought and detail goes into their background and worldview, as well as
to their aspirations in the adventuring life, than did during my first
few years of playing.
The only issue I've faced with 3.x rules that I find problematic and
counter to character development is that it takes longer (read: more
character levels) to attain improvement goals that follow the
character's concept than it did back in the 2.x (Player's Option) days.
Happy gaming,
Eric
==============================================================
Posted with Hogwasher. For a free Test Drive click on:
http://www.asar.com/cgi-bin/product.pl?58/hogwasher.html
==============================================================
Jasin Zujovic
> >But considering the range of power levels D&D spans, if you create a
> >street urchin, or a merchant's bodyguard, or a poor peasant girl who
> >spontaneously manifests magical powers, it's best to be prepared that
> >those concepts won't work quite as well 15 levels later. You can easily
> >start out as a poor peasant girl, but by 15th-level she had better
> >evolved into a seductive manipulative sorceress who hides her humble
> >beginnings, or the legendary saint touched by the gods, or something
> >like that. A 16th-level, shapeshifting, teleporting, dead-raising, wind-
> >walking poor peasant girl with hundreds of thousands of gp in magical
> >equipment doesn't really make much sense.
>
> I thought that this was fairly well handled in "The Deed Of Paksennarion".
> Paks starts out at first level, and by the end of the trilogy is somewhere
> in the 14-17 range (probably something along the lines of 8 Fighter/2
> Ranger (Bow)/4+ Paladin).
Hm... I haven't read the books, so take this for what it's worth, but
might you be making the very mistake Justin talks about in the article?
14th-17th level? The level range in which you (well, not you, if you're
a fighter type, but people around you) start by living in your own
extraplanar mansion staffed by phantom servants, and end by bringing
back from the dead someone who fell into a volcano?
What does the heroine do in the books that you give her such a high
level?
--
Jasin Zujovic
Keith Davies
Gets a little spoily by the end, when I go over the things Paks had done
by the end of the series.
Tough to say
. when training at Fin Panir (where the paladins and clerics of Gird are
based) she is described as one of the best fighters there -- the
armsmaster who trains the paladins, knights, and clerics 'only moves
faster when fighting the knights', and she is described as being able
to outfight him unless he uses his powers.
At this point she could still be < BAB +6, possibly.
. when she returns to Phelan's keep she drills with the troops (because
she's serving as a corporal, for now), but she also trains with the
captains and the Duke
I don't doubt she picked up at least one level of ranger between leaving
Fin Panir and returning to Phelan's keep. Between increased skills
(when she left Master Oakhollow's she didn't know much at all about
plants and the like, when she passes through again she's learned at
least some) and her greatly improved use of the bow (early she's 'been
trained' but isn't good, when she comes back she's gotten good enough to
have been given a blackwood bow).
She becomes a paladin ('of sorts') at this time, but hasn't yet come
into all her abilities. By the end of the book she's getting a handle
on them (but still isn't comfortable enough to say she's mastered them).
So, by the time she's returned to Phelan's keep I'd say she's got at
least one level of ranger, probably two, and possibly three. She almost
certainly got ranks in Knowledge(Nature) and Survival (and you have to
level to get ranks in skills), she's certainly gotten better with a bow
(could be 'just a feat' -- which could mean she leveled in Ranger at the
right time, or it could be that she's got Rgr2 and got the archery
combat option). She exhibits elements of the Endurance feat, too, which
you get at Rgr3.
So, I estimate she could be as low as Ftr2 or 3 when she leaves the
company, another level or two when she reaches Fin Panir, another level
or two more when she leaves Fin Panir and reaches Master Oakhollow's,
Rgr 1-3 (probably 2, she could've picked up Endurance already) when she
returns to Master Oakhollow's. At least Pal1 when she leaves and
returns to Phelan's keep. Probably another level or two by the time
they're in Verella, and probably one more at the end of the book.
Almost certainly she was Pal5+ by the time she left Phelan's because she
had her mount.
Unless paladin is a PrC -- there's a decent argument for it for this
setting, and I'm assuming this is the case or she'd be even higher level
-- Pal5+ leaving Phelan's, then probably 1-3 more by the end of the
book.
This means at the end of the book she'd have Ftr{4-7}/Rgr{1-3}/Pal{3-5},
resulting in a level between 8 and 15; if I had to be specific I'd say
probably level 12 or 13.
A lot depends how the other major characters would be rated. She did a
*lot* of fighting at times (heh, in the dark elf city she fought *lots*
of orcs -- grinding), and had several episodes that could be considered
having enough encounters to provide sufficient XP to level.
> What does the heroine do in the books that you give her such a high
> level?
This may get spoily for the books, but I'm not going to break things
down to an encounter by encounter level -- especially since many were
elided in the books.
So, off the top of my head:
. train in Phelan's company (makes her a Ftr1; she's one of the best in
her recruit company and stays on top of it -- Saben was probably just
a War1, maybe War2 later);
. fighting in Phelan's company for several years;
. 'special missions' (Dwarfwatch to Rotengre, breaking the siege at
Dwarfwatch, the sack of Rotengre, the Halveric rescue, guarding the
bolthole);
. the mountain pass (the snow cat, freeing the elflord, breaking the
power holding the elfen taig);
. hunting bandits;
. killing the hool (gibba?);
. defeating the webspinner priest;
. training in Fin Panir (skill increase, though this might just be where
she leveled and not the cause of it);
. capture by the dark elves, and all that came of it;
. finding Luap's Stronghold;
. the hard winter (which may or may not have provided XP, but was
important to the character development, could be story award);
. return to Master Oakhollow's, the nature of courage;
, daskdraudigs;
. second return to Master Oakhollow's, highfire;
. return to Phelan's keep;
. discovery and destruction of agents of the webspinner;
. receives her paladin's mount;
. death of a king, quest to find his heir;
. fighting dark priests along the way, facing webspinner (or avatar or
agent);
. finding heir, his proclamation;
. rescuing heir, torment, possibly redemption of thieves' guild;
. battle to protect heir;
. seeing the heir placed on his throne.
She's been a busy girl, our Paks. Notice how the 'encounters' and
'adventures' change over time. Her first 'big' one is the Race to
Rotengre, by the end she's placing a king on his throne.
Keith
--
Keith Davies "History is made by stupid people
keith....@kjdavies.org "Clever people wouldn't even try
keith....@gmail.com "If you want a place in the history books
http://www.kjdavies.org/ "Then do something dumb before you die."
-- The Arrogant Worms
Werebat
Plus, he's apparently changed genders... Oh, wait, that DOES happen now
and then...
- Ron ^*^
Justin Alexander
> But unless the campaign is crafted to take into account this change (and
> IME, it often isn't), many people feel a disconnect when they realize
> that after few months of sewer-crawling and monster-bashing, Ned
> Nimblefingers is now rogue 13/shadowdancer 4 and doesn't really fit the
> concept they set out to play, since he's now much more of a legendary
> ninja than a shifty urchin.
This is a really good point. It's not something I've internalized well
because when I create a character I'm usually envisioning not just who
the character is now but also where I think the character might be
going. I don't just create a street urchin -- I create a street urchin
who will use his wits and his guile to gain power in the city's
underworld. I don't just create a barbarian from the northern wastes
-- I create a barbarian who will slowly learn the ways of the
civilized world without ever losing the noble purity of his youth.
And sometimes that journey doesn't shape up the way either I or the
character think it will. But since I'm never thinking of my character
as a static entity, I've just naturally adjusted.
On the flip-side, I've always wanted to play a game where everyone
designs their James Bond: James Bond goes on countless adventures and
he's always James Bond. But I've never found a group who wanted to
just play for the joy of the game -- they want their XP and their GP
to validate the experience.
--
Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>At Sun, 13 May 2007 14:21:15 -0700, Matt Frisch wrote:
The translation is of course not perfect because the books take place in a
very low magic setting. The character is also more closely following the
restrictions on 1E Paladins (mandatory poverty, and such). The
interpretation of how the paladin class works, though very very obviously
based on D&D, is still a bit different. The Paks version of Divine Grace
provides complete immunity against...well, most all forms of magic, for
example. Calling it divine grace is an aproximation, and not what the
ability is modeled after...the book came out a decade before 3rd edition.
>What does the heroine do in the books that you give her such a high
>level?
Quite a lot, really. The course of the trilogy takes about 5 or 6 years,
roughly. The first 3 years are spent doing almost nothing but weapons
training and fighting...the third year is about 8 months of continuous
warfare.
Saving kings, saving kingdoms, being repeatedly described as one of the
best fighters by everyone in a position to know it...
She would not be an ideal sort of character...she's got weapon
focus/specialization in both shortsword and longsword for example (and no
dual wielding), so this isn't powergaming or anything like that.
It's an aproximation just based on the things she's seen to do, except for
the Paladin levels, cause she picks up her mount for sure, and then does a
fair bit after that. So, I was going on 1E data there where the mount comes
at level 4, not 5. In 3.5 she gets at least one more (probably 2 more,
considering what she goes through) after that.
Weapon Focus/Specialization Shortsword
Weapon Focus/ Specialization Longsword
Probably Improved Critical: Longsword
Cleave (and thusly power attack by D&D terms, but this isn't really ever
evidenced in the books)
Improved Disarm
Leadership isn't out of the question.
Mounted Combat
Ride-By Attack
Spirited Charge might not be out of line, considering the last battle.
As for the ranger levels, the difference in knowledge of nature that occurs
during her stay with the Lyonyan Rangers is too marked to just be
incidental information. Plus she gets quite a bit better with a bow,
possibly even enough to have the mounted archery feat.
Tell me if this doesn't sound like Rapid Shot from 2nd level ranger:
Siger was already there with her bow, and had set up the targets.
"Now let me see," he said eagerly. Paks strung the bow and chose an arrow.
The wind had dropped a little, but she knew her first shaft might miss. She
bent the bow smoothly, and released it. She was lucky: Siger grinned
delightedly. "Do it again," he said. She placed three more arrows in a
pattern one hand could cover, as fast as she could draw the bow. She heard
murmurs from those watching.
It's an awful lot of feats for someone who doesn't have a pretty sizeable
pile of levels to get them, even being human.
Jasin Zujovic
> > What does the heroine do in the books that you give her such a high
> > level?
>
> This may get spoily for the books, but I'm not going to break things
> down to an encounter by encounter level -- especially since many were
> elided in the books.
>
> So, off the top of my head:
>
> [...]
>
> She's been a busy girl, our Paks.
Oh, I wasn't asking how she'd manage to get the XP for such high level.
I was wondering why Matt thought she was that high in the first place.
Does she do anything that is obviously out of reach of a low- or mid-
level character?
Being the best swordsman in the world doesn't require a 17th-level
fighter. A Pal5 is fine too, as long as the world is populated by War1
soldiers, Ftr2 knights and Pal3 elite holy warriors.
--
Jasin Zujovic
Jasin Zujovic
> >> >But considering the range of power levels D&D spans, if you create a
> >> >street urchin, or a merchant's bodyguard, or a poor peasant girl who
> >> >spontaneously manifests magical powers, it's best to be prepared that
> >> >those concepts won't work quite as well 15 levels later. You can easily
> >> >start out as a poor peasant girl, but by 15th-level she had better
> >> >evolved into a seductive manipulative sorceress who hides her humble
> >> >beginnings, or the legendary saint touched by the gods, or something
> >> >like that. A 16th-level, shapeshifting, teleporting, dead-raising, wind-
> >> >walking poor peasant girl with hundreds of thousands of gp in magical
> >> >equipment doesn't really make much sense.
> >>
> >> I thought that this was fairly well handled in "The Deed Of Paksennarion".
> >> Paks starts out at first level, and by the end of the trilogy is somewhere
> >> in the 14-17 range (probably something along the lines of 8 Fighter/2
> >> Ranger (Bow)/4+ Paladin).
> >
> >Hm... I haven't read the books, so take this for what it's worth, but
> >might you be making the very mistake Justin talks about in the article?
> >14th-17th level? The level range in which you (well, not you, if you're
> >a fighter type, but people around you) start by living in your own
> >extraplanar mansion staffed by phantom servants, and end by bringing
> >back from the dead someone who fell into a volcano?
>
> The translation is of course not perfect because the books take place in a
> very low magic setting.
Which to me suggests low levels overall, if you want to model it in
D&D...
> >What does the heroine do in the books that you give her such a high
> >level?
>
> Quite a lot, really. The course of the trilogy takes about 5 or 6 years,
> roughly. The first 3 years are spent doing almost nothing but weapons
> training and fighting...the third year is about 8 months of continuous
> warfare.
>
> Saving kings, saving kingdoms, being repeatedly described as one of the
> best fighters by everyone in a position to know it...
Again, isn't this exactly what Justin was talking about? You don't need
to be a high-level fighter to be the best swordsman in the world. All
you need is to be a higher level fighter than other people.
> It's an aproximation just based on the things she's seen to do, except for
> the Paladin levels, cause she picks up her mount for sure, and then does a
> fair bit after that.
Considering the way D&D multiclassing worked at the time the books were
concieved, wouldn't it be more likely that the author concieved
Paksenarrion as something closer to Pal5 by the end?
> So, I was going on 1E data there where the mount comes
> at level 4, not 5. In 3.5 she gets at least one more (probably 2 more,
> considering what she goes through) after that.
>
> Weapon Focus/Specialization Shortsword
> Weapon Focus/ Specialization Longsword
> Probably Improved Critical: Longsword
> Cleave (and thusly power attack by D&D terms, but this isn't really ever
> evidenced in the books)
Why Cleave?
> Improved Disarm
> Leadership isn't out of the question.
> Mounted Combat
> Ride-By Attack
> Spirited Charge might not be out of line, considering the last battle.
>
> Tell me if this doesn't sound like Rapid Shot from 2nd level ranger:
>
> Siger was already there with her bow, and had set up the targets.
> "Now let me see," he said eagerly. Paks strung the bow and chose an arrow.
> The wind had dropped a little, but she knew her first shaft might miss. She
> bent the bow smoothly, and released it. She was lucky: Siger grinned
> delightedly. "Do it again," he said. She placed three more arrows in a
> pattern one hand could cover, as fast as she could draw the bow. She heard
> murmurs from those watching.
Indeed it does.
> It's an awful lot of feats for someone who doesn't have a pretty sizeable
> pile of levels to get them, even being human.
I'm out of my depth here, without reading the books, but my feeling is
that you're going about this the wrong way.
You're picking individual abilities, some of which seem to me rather
hard to discern from "flavour text" (would something like "she was a
master of the sword and the bow" mean she had Weapon Focus in both, or
just that she was a warrior-type?), and then inflating the levels to
make room for all of them.
The question that really needs to be asked, IMO, is: if you wanted to
capture the atmosphere of Paks's adventures as best you could using D&D
classes, which levels would you use? Looking at the big picture, do the
stories feel more like the stories you can tell about a 1st-level game,
or a 5th-level game, or a 15th-level game?
Is the answer really 15th? Could you imagine Paks killing fifty ordinary
soldiers singlehandedly? Could you imagine her wrestling down a lion,
without weapons or armour? A 15th-level fighter is the kind of person
who can do those kind of things.
Of course, you can say that this is a different kind of setting, where
D&D's rules don't apply exactly, and where 15th-level fighters should be
just extraordinarily skilled warriors, and not the superheroes they are
in D&D... but that was Justin's point (as I saw it): that if you want to
look at fiction through the lens of D&D, it's simpler to just pick the
level range that captures the approximate feel, rather than changing the
feel of an arbitrarily picked level range through extensive houseruling.
--
Jasin Zujovic
Peter Knutsen
[...]
> On the flip-side, I've always wanted to play a game where everyone
> designs their James Bond: James Bond goes on countless adventures and
> he's always James Bond. But I've never found a group who wanted to
> just play for the joy of the game -- they want their XP and their GP
> to validate the experience.
Rules systems where the PCs start out highly competent, and "grow" only
slowly, have enjoyed some success. The less "growth" there is, in terms
of the player characters' abilities, the more a campaign can be said to
be about being instead of being about becoming.
--
Peter Knutsen
sagatafl.org
Eric P.
(in article <MPG.20b24e344...@news.iskon.hr>):
It's reasonable, I think, to assume (yes, dangerous word!) that a given
setting has several adventuring bands running around that aren't
represented by players, unless it's specifically decided that the
heroes in play are the only ones of their level of ability and
experience.
- E
D.J.
<ericpN...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
]It's reasonable, I think, to assume (yes, dangerous word!) that a given
]represented by players, unless it's specifically decided that the
]heroes in play are the only ones of their level of ability and
]experience.
Very reasonable. I rarely heard of local games that didn't have NPC
adventuring groups. My players encountered a number of NPC
adventuring groups in my campaign. Sometimes they would be lost and
trying to find their way out, sometimes they would argue with the
player characters over who had the 'rights' to a particular dungeon
level.
JimP.
--
http://www.linuxgazette.net/ Linux Gazette
http://crestar.drivein-jim.net/testy/ May 12, 2007 1E AD&D blog
http://www.drivein-jim.net/ March 2, 2007: Drive-In movie theatres
http://poetry.drivein-jim.net/ poetry blog Mar 27, 2007
Keith Davies
She *could* be as low as Ftr1/Rgr1/Pal5, actually.
1. Ftr1 from her time with Phelan's company; I can't see her being War1
with her reputation of ability
2. Pal1, maybe Pal2 until she returns to Master Oakhollow's (she does
exhibit *some* paladin gifts -- specifically a really shaky /detect
evil/ and maybe, but not provably, laying on hands... and some more
/lay on hands/ while with the elves).
3. I can't justify her having anything *but* have taken Rgr1 while with
the elves, what with the skill bump. I'd be willing to accept her
improvement with the bow as either a feat at the right time, or just
handwave it because she never used a bow much before this.
4. *Must* be Pal5 while at Phelan's keep, she got her horse.
As I said, though, it depends also on how powerful the things she fights
are.
Aaron F. Bourque
> She *could* be as low as Ftr1/Rgr1/Pal5, actually.
>
> 1. Ftr1 from her time with Phelan's company; I can't see her being War1
> with her reputation of ability
> 2. Pal1, maybe Pal2 until she returns to Master Oakhollow's (she does
> exhibit *some* paladin gifts -- specifically a really shaky /detect
> evil/ and maybe, but not provably, laying on hands... and some more
> /lay on hands/ while with the elves).
> 3. I can't justify her having anything *but* have taken Rgr1 while with
> the elves, what with the skill bump. I'd be willing to accept her
> improvement with the bow as either a feat at the right time, or just
> handwave it because she never used a bow much before this.
> 4. *Must* be Pal5 while at Phelan's keep, she got her horse.
>
> As I said, though, it depends also on how powerful the things she fights
> are.
Reading this subthread, I wonder how much of this crap with Paks and
her horse could be eliminated if D&D had d20 modern's more flexible
talent trees rather than linear progression. (I'm not saying Paladin's
Mount should be a 1st level talent, but it could reduce her necessary
Paladin's level by one or two).
Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque; or it could just be DM fiat that she
gets her horse earlier, but then again, level 7? Legendary!
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>At Mon, 14 May 2007 07:04:43 GMT, Matt Frisch wrote:
It simply doesn't follow 3.0 or 3.5's expected wealth by level tables.
There is evidence of several characters with demonstrably high level. But
throughout the trilogy, there are only 2 scenes (both short) that are not
told from the protagonist's perspective. So you see a lot more of that side
than any other.
>> It's an aproximation just based on the things she's seen to do, except for
>> the Paladin levels, cause she picks up her mount for sure, and then does a
>> fair bit after that.
>
>Considering the way D&D multiclassing worked at the time the books were
>concieved, wouldn't it be more likely that the author concieved
>Paksenarrion as something closer to Pal5 by the end?
I never said it followed the rules exactly, and a level a year in some very
active years seems really low to me.
Paladin the whole time? There is some evidence to suggest it. During her
3rd year in Aarenis, there are several supernatural type events that take
place leading the reader (as well as several characters) to believe that
the gods have an interest in her. But again, it doesn't strictly adhere to
any edition's ruleset very well.
>> So, I was going on 1E data there where the mount comes
>> at level 4, not 5. In 3.5 she gets at least one more (probably 2 more,
>> considering what she goes through) after that.
>>
>> Weapon Focus/Specialization Shortsword
>> Weapon Focus/ Specialization Longsword
>> Probably Improved Critical: Longsword
>> Cleave (and thusly power attack by D&D terms, but this isn't really ever
>> evidenced in the books)
>
>Why Cleave?
Couple examples of hitting multiple opponents in one swing.
>> It's an awful lot of feats for someone who doesn't have a pretty sizeable
>> pile of levels to get them, even being human.
>
>I'm out of my depth here, without reading the books, but my feeling is
>that you're going about this the wrong way.
>
>You're picking individual abilities, some of which seem to me rather
>hard to discern from "flavour text" (would something like "she was a
>master of the sword and the bow" mean she had Weapon Focus in both, or
>just that she was a warrior-type?), and then inflating the levels to
>make room for all of them.
That's certainly a possibility. However so much of what is described just
falls so neatly into what feats do, it's hard to look past it.
>The question that really needs to be asked, IMO, is: if you wanted to
>capture the atmosphere of Paks's adventures as best you could using D&D
>classes, which levels would you use? Looking at the big picture, do the
>stories feel more like the stories you can tell about a 1st-level game,
>or a 5th-level game, or a 15th-level game?
That's the thing that caused me to bring it up in the first place...the
nature of the story changes over time, partly in response to her growing
abilities. Towards the end of the third book, she receives a "Back off your
quest, OR ELSE" personal call from an evil deity...that's certainly not the
sort of thing that happens to a sheepfarmer's daughter running away from
home to avoid an arranged marriage and join a mercenary company.
>Is the answer really 15th? Could you imagine Paks killing fifty ordinary
>soldiers singlehandedly?
No, there's too much realism injected into it for that.
>Of course, you can say that this is a different kind of setting, where
>D&D's rules don't apply exactly, and where 15th-level fighters should be
>just extraordinarily skilled warriors, and not the superheroes they are
>in D&D... but that was Justin's point (as I saw it)
And his point that I saw was that many character concepts that fit well
into low level characters don't work as easily at high level.
Even if you reduce the superhero aspect of level 10+ play (which clearly
doesn't fit into a lot of fiction), the characters will still change. If
the wily street urchin has enough XP-generating activities to hit 15th
level, then even disregarding his ability to sneak attack for 8d6 and kill
(what to an ordinary person is a) powerful monsters in one hit, he's really
not a simple street urchin anymore. He's going to have gone through quite a
bit.
But that doesn't mean that his background as a street urchin becomes
unimportant to his later life. Say he got picked up by the city watch at
level 2 for stealing from a merchant, and escaped and fled the town. At
15th level when he comes back to warn the town about an invading army,
maybe they don't really believe him because they remember him as a guest in
their cells.
Ed Chauvin IV
hastily scrawled:
>> Being the best swordsman in the world doesn't require a 17th-level
>> fighter. A Pal5 is fine too, as long as the world is populated by War1
>> soldiers, Ftr2 knights and Pal3 elite holy warriors.
>>
>It's reasonable, I think, to assume (yes, dangerous word!) that a given
>setting has several adventuring bands running around that aren't
>represented by players, unless it's specifically decided that the
>heroes in play are the only ones of their level of ability and
>experience.
Isn't that what "best swordsman in the world" means? That there isn't
anyone else of that level of ability and experience?
--
DISCLAIMER : WARNING: RULE # 196 is X-rated in that to calculate L,
use X = [(C2/10)^2], and RULE # 193 which is NOT meant to be read by
kids, since RULE # 187 EXPLAINS homosexuality mathematically, using
modifier G @ 11.
"I always feel left out when someone *else* gets killfiled."
--Terry Austin
Ed Chauvin IV
<matu...@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> hastily scrawled:
>
>She would not be an ideal sort of character...she's got weapon
>focus/specialization in both shortsword and longsword for example (and no
>dual wielding), so this isn't powergaming or anything like that.
>
>It's an aproximation just based on the things she's seen to do, except for
>the Paladin levels, cause she picks up her mount for sure, and then does a
>fair bit after that. So, I was going on 1E data there where the mount comes
>at level 4, not 5. In 3.5 she gets at least one more (probably 2 more,
>considering what she goes through) after that.
>
>Weapon Focus/Specialization Shortsword
>Weapon Focus/ Specialization Longsword
>Probably Improved Critical: Longsword
Question: Do you base this on a single scene, or does she quite
regularly do exceptional damage with her longsword?
>Cleave (and thusly power attack by D&D terms, but this isn't really ever
>evidenced in the books)
If she's got Power Attack, she's probably just playing it smart and
not using it most of the time. ;-)
>Improved Disarm
>Leadership isn't out of the question.
>Mounted Combat
>Ride-By Attack
>Spirited Charge might not be out of line, considering the last battle.
OK, I've not read the books, but it sounds to me that 3 years "spent
doing almost nothing but weapons training and fighting" equates to a
good bit of Ftr levels. OK, so she's got her Mount that means at
least Pal5 and that gives her 2 feats so far, not including her
starting feat or the human bonus feat.
Prerequisites for your list of feats include Power Attack and Combat
Expertise, bringing your total up to 13. However, you seem unsure
about a few and so I'll leave them off. Improved Critical, Leadership
and Spirited Charge all seem to be based on single scenes as opposed
to long term trends. It's not necessary to have any of these feats to
produce similar sounding effects once or twice. So we've got to give
her 9 more feats WF/S*2, PA, Cleave, CE, ID, MC and RbA.
Fortunately, all of these are Fighter bonus feats so that means she
can pick them up fairly quickly. That puts her at best Ftr8/Pal5 just
based on your list of feats. And honestly, I still think it's likely
you're overinflating the feat list a bit.
>As for the ranger levels, the difference in knowledge of nature that occurs
>during her stay with the Lyonyan Rangers is too marked to just be
>incidental information. Plus she gets quite a bit better with a bow,
>possibly even enough to have the mounted archery feat.
>
>Tell me if this doesn't sound like Rapid Shot from 2nd level ranger:
Depends on when it happens. If it's early, then yes. Mid-career, it
could just be another level of almost anything. More importantly, if
it's late in her career she's got a high enough BAB to make those
shots without any feats.
>It's an awful lot of feats for someone who doesn't have a pretty sizeable
>pile of levels to get them, even being human.
Honestly, it's more likely that she's got a level or 3 of some kind of
prestige class.
Come to think of it, if we go ahead and give her Spirited Charge and
WF:Lance she qualifies for Cavalier and doesn't need any levels of
Paladin. The advantage being that Cavalier gets the mount at Cav1.
So, Ftr9/Cav1.
Christopher Adams
>
> Very reasonable. I rarely heard of local games that didn't have NPC
> adventuring groups. My players encountered a number of NPC
> adventuring groups in my campaign. Sometimes they would be lost and
> trying to find their way out, sometimes they would argue with the
> player characters over who had the 'rights' to a particular dungeon
> level.
Paizo Publishing introduced a rival band of adventurers in the Savage Tide
Adventure Path, and possibly in the Age of Worms as well.
Jasin Zujovic
> >Of course, you can say that this is a different kind of setting, where
> >D&D's rules don't apply exactly, and where 15th-level fighters should be
> >just extraordinarily skilled warriors, and not the superheroes they are
> >in D&D... but that was Justin's point (as I saw it)
>
> And his point that I saw was that many character concepts that fit well
> into low level characters don't work as easily at high level.
That was mine, I think? :)
> Even if you reduce the superhero aspect of level 10+ play (which clearly
> doesn't fit into a lot of fiction), the characters will still change. If
> the wily street urchin has enough XP-generating activities to hit 15th
> level, then even disregarding his ability to sneak attack for 8d6 and kill
> (what to an ordinary person is a) powerful monsters in one hit, he's really
> not a simple street urchin anymore. He's going to have gone through quite a
> bit.
Exactly.
> But that doesn't mean that his background as a street urchin becomes
> unimportant to his later life.
Oh, by no means. I wasn't implying that "street urchin" is not a good
concept just because the character will simply have to become something
more by 15th level. But I think the player will need to start thinking
of the the character as something other than "street urchin" when it
becomes appropriate (even if it's just an outgrowth like "street urchin
who rose to be Grandfather of Assassins"), otherwise he's setting
himself up for that "high levels are silly and cartoonish (in a bad
way)" feeling.
--
Jasin Zujovic
Keith Davies
If I were to do this setting in d20 I'd go with the prestige class
paladin. It fits the setting rather better.
She'd still need to be at least seventh level, though -- BAB +4 to get in,
one level of cleric for casting /protection from evil/ (so no BAB gain),
then Pal2 for special mount.
If ranger is a prestige class too, then she's up to at least seventh
level (BAB +4 to get into that one)... but it would require that she be
able to cast /calm animals/ as a divine spell.
So, Ftr4/Clr1[1]. She now qualifies for ranger and paladin prestige
classes. Plus two levels of paladin, she's at least seventh level. If
ranger is a prestige class (uncertain, but it's clear she's got a level
of ranger) this would put another level in -- Ftr4/Clr1/Rgr1/Pal2, for
8th level.
Eighth level, IIRC on Justin's scale eighth level is in the heroic-but-
not-superheroic range. There's room for her to be higher, consindering
some of the things she does and get involved with later.
[1] Animal domain, she's got a strong rapport with animals, though we
never see her doing something 'supernatural' with them through her
own power. I'd forgotten that it does add Knowledge(Nature) to the
class skill list, but she probably lacked the skill points at that
time. I'm not sure what her other domain would be. Healing
perhaps (she has healing abilities 'early', but those are part of
the cleric spell list anyway), Good? Luck, maybe (though it doesn't
fit Gird, her patron saint). Protection would fit too.
It doesn't help that "she's not a /common/ paladin"; she's chosen by
several gods, rather than just one as most paladins are.
Keith Davies
> On Mon, 14 May 2007 11:45:28 +0200, Jasin Zujovic <jzuj...@inet.hr>
> scribed into the ether:
>
>>At Mon, 14 May 2007 07:04:43 GMT, Matt Frisch wrote:
>>
>>> The translation is of course not perfect because the books take
>>> place in a very low magic setting.
>>
>>Which to me suggests low levels overall, if you want to model it in
>>D&D...
>
> It simply doesn't follow 3.0 or 3.5's expected wealth by level tables.
> There is evidence of several characters with demonstrably high level.
> But throughout the trilogy, there are only 2 scenes (both short) that
> are not told from the protagonist's perspective. So you see a lot more
> of that side than any other.
Indeed. Magic arms and armor aren't generally seen. Captain Dorrin's
sword, Tammarion's sword, Paks' sword (formerly the half-elf's), her
mail (from the taig after she freed the elflord). The king's sword, of
course. 'Many elven blades' shed light, but they're, well, elven.
The cursed weapons and armor of the dark priests and the dark elves.
The elfhorn. Some scrolls the half-elf has. One ring. (no, not *the*
One Ring.)
Occasional potions of healing (Paks is given one. Ever. That I'm aware
of).
That's about it for magic items seen. Paks is one of the few characters
in the series to have (been seen with) more than one of these things,
and even then she never got to keep them. They might have been as
little as +1 each, for a total of maybe 4k gold in gear.
When do PCs usually get that? Pretty early, IIRC. And while it sounds
like a lot, this covers her time traveling with several groups of fairly
established people, including several nobles.
Magic is common enough to be recognized, but uncommon enough to be
noteworthy.
>>> It's an aproximation just based on the things she's seen to do,
>>> except for the Paladin levels, cause she picks up her mount for
>>> sure, and then does a fair bit after that.
>>
>>Considering the way D&D multiclassing worked at the time the books
>>were concieved, wouldn't it be more likely that the author concieved
>>Paksenarrion as something closer to Pal5 by the end?
>
> I never said it followed the rules exactly, and a level a year in some
> very active years seems really low to me.
Heh. In a campaign I'm playing in, we leveled after a couple of fairly
busy *days*.
> Paladin the whole time? There is some evidence to suggest it. During
> her 3rd year in Aarenis, there are several supernatural type events
> that take place leading the reader (as well as several characters) to
> believe that the gods have an interest in her. But again, it doesn't
> strictly adhere to any edition's ruleset very well.
True. And there's a very good argument for at least one level of ranger
(she spent a summer working the forests of Lyonya with them, after all,
and the skill improvements, etc.)
So, she might've gone Pal2, Rgr1, Pal2+ without breaking the rules.
>>> So, I was going on 1E data there where the mount comes
>>> at level 4, not 5. In 3.5 she gets at least one more (probably 2 more,
>>> considering what she goes through) after that.
>>>
>>> Weapon Focus/Specialization Shortsword
>>> Weapon Focus/ Specialization Longsword
>>> Probably Improved Critical: Longsword
>>> Cleave (and thusly power attack by D&D terms, but this isn't really ever
>>> evidenced in the books)
>>
>>Why Cleave?
>
> Couple examples of hitting multiple opponents in one swing.
Could just be description, though -- the carry-on of one blow is the
iterative attack of the next.
She's got the strength for Power Attack, though. She's not *immensely*
strong, but 13+ isn't that high, either.
>>> It's an awful lot of feats for someone who doesn't have a pretty sizeable
>>> pile of levels to get them, even being human.
Improved Critical requires BAB +8, so she'd be at least eighth level
right there. Assuming she has that feat.
If it were done in AD&D terms weapon specialization could be had at
first level (though I forget; could be specialized in more than one
weapon in 1e? I know you could in 2e).
>>I'm out of my depth here, without reading the books, but my feeling is
>>that you're going about this the wrong way.
>>
>>You're picking individual abilities, some of which seem to me rather
>>hard to discern from "flavour text" (would something like "she was a
>>master of the sword and the bow" mean she had Weapon Focus in both, or
>>just that she was a warrior-type?), and then inflating the levels to
>>make room for all of them.
>
> That's certainly a possibility. However so much of what is described
> just falls so neatly into what feats do, it's hard to look past it.
True enough.
>>The question that really needs to be asked, IMO, is: if you wanted to
>>capture the atmosphere of Paks's adventures as best you could using
>>D&D classes, which levels would you use? Looking at the big picture,
>>do the stories feel more like the stories you can tell about a
>>1st-level game, or a 5th-level game, or a 15th-level game?
>
> That's the thing that caused me to bring it up in the first
> place...the nature of the story changes over time, partly in response
> to her growing abilities. Towards the end of the third book, she
> receives a "Back off your quest, OR ELSE" personal call from an evil
> deity...that's certainly not the sort of thing that happens to a
> sheepfarmer's daughter running away from home to avoid an arranged
> marriage and join a mercenary company.
Indeed. I figure eighth level is a *low* estimate of what level she
would be. Early on she was a target of the dark gods, by the time the
story ends they treat her as a *threat*.
>>Is the answer really 15th? Could you imagine Paks killing fifty ordinary
>>soldiers singlehandedly?
>
> No, there's too much realism injected into it for that.
Well, in the time she spent among the dark elves she did face a lot of
orcs, one on one and against small groups. Her wounds were never fully
healed between fights, and she has no idea how many there were.
Would she have beaten 50 of them, at one time, by herself? I doubt it.
OTOH, 'properly done' *nobody* should be able to, without supernatural
abilities (dogpile! Then beat the shit out of him at the bottom... or
simply let the weight crush him).
>>Of course, you can say that this is a different kind of setting, where
>>D&D's rules don't apply exactly, and where 15th-level fighters should
>>be just extraordinarily skilled warriors, and not the superheroes they
>>are in D&D... but that was Justin's point (as I saw it)
>
> And his point that I saw was that many character concepts that fit
> well into low level characters don't work as easily at high level.
Also, in some lights Paks *is* at least approaching superheroism (of a
sort) by the end of the book. Not the flashy fly-through-the-air type,
but in the nature of her tasks.
Keith Davies
> Mere moments before death, Matt Frisch
><matu...@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> hastily scrawled:
>
>>Weapon Focus/ Specialization Longsword
>>Probably Improved Critical: Longsword
>
> Question: Do you base this on a single scene, or does she quite
> regularly do exceptional damage with her longsword?
I can't remember any examples right now.
>>Cleave (and thusly power attack by D&D terms, but this isn't really ever
>>evidenced in the books)
>
> If she's got Power Attack, she's probably just playing it smart and
> not using it most of the time. ;-)
>
>>Improved Disarm
>>Leadership isn't out of the question.
>>Mounted Combat
>>Ride-By Attack
>>Spirited Charge might not be out of line, considering the last battle.
>
> OK, I've not read the books, but it sounds to me that 3 years "spent
> doing almost nothing but weapons training and fighting" equates to a
> good bit of Ftr levels. OK, so she's got her Mount that means at
> least Pal5 and that gives her 2 feats so far, not including her
> starting feat or the human bonus feat.
>
> Prerequisites for your list of feats include Power Attack and Combat
> Expertise, bringing your total up to 13. However, you seem unsure
> about a few and so I'll leave them off. Improved Critical, Leadership
> and Spirited Charge all seem to be based on single scenes as opposed
> to long term trends. It's not necessary to have any of these feats to
> produce similar sounding effects once or twice. So we've got to give
> her 9 more feats WF/S*2, PA, Cleave, CE, ID, MC and RbA.
Leadership could simply be high Charisma. Paladins are described as
being likeable and easily trusted. In fact, they make a point of saying
it.
> Fortunately, all of these are Fighter bonus feats so that means she
> can pick them up fairly quickly. That puts her at best Ftr8/Pal5 just
> based on your list of feats. And honestly, I still think it's likely
> you're overinflating the feat list a bit.
heh. Mounted Combat... her horse saves *her* from being hit more than
the other way around. However, she is described as using a bow
successfully (no misses, at least) from horseback; she could have
Mounted Archery, wich requires Mounted Combat.
I'd probably give her WF(short sword, long sword, maybe longbow later),
probably not Cleave or Improved Disarm (she's not notably intelligent,
remember), maybe start on the ranged tree (could be granted by ranger
levels).
>>As for the ranger levels, the difference in knowledge of nature that occurs
>>during her stay with the Lyonyan Rangers is too marked to just be
>>incidental information. Plus she gets quite a bit better with a bow,
>>possibly even enough to have the mounted archery feat.
>>
>>Tell me if this doesn't sound like Rapid Shot from 2nd level ranger:
>
> Depends on when it happens. If it's early, then yes. Mid-career, it
> could just be another level of almost anything. More importantly, if
> it's late in her career she's got a high enough BAB to make those
> shots without any feats.
This would be BAB +11, yes? Rapid Shot (whether as a feat or through
ranger) could get it to her earlier. It's in the third book, but
relatively early on.
>>It's an awful lot of feats for someone who doesn't have a pretty sizeable
>>pile of levels to get them, even being human.
>
> Honestly, it's more likely that she's got a level or 3 of some kind of
> prestige class.
Which you normally can't qualify for before fifth level.
> Come to think of it, if we go ahead and give her Spirited Charge and
> WF:Lance she qualifies for Cavalier and doesn't need any levels of
> Paladin. The advantage being that Cavalier gets the mount at Cav1.
> So, Ftr9/Cav1.
Does cavalier also give various magic stuff, such as /light/, /detect
evil/, and healing abilities?
Oh, hey. /Neutralize poison/. She *does this* in the third book.
Pal4 spell, they don't get those until 14th level at least. Clerics get
them at 7th, but she's *really* not described as a cleric.
OTOH, she might've gotten that instead of /remove disease/ at 6th level,
and IIRC it was about the time she got her horse (before it, I think).
Eric P.
(in article <gbdh43ha5qm4svurc...@4ax.com>):
> Mere moments before death, Eric P. <ericpN...@sbcglobal.net>
> hastily scrawled:
>
>>> Being the best swordsman in the world doesn't require a 17th-level
>>> fighter. A Pal5 is fine too, as long as the world is populated by War1
>>> soldiers, Ftr2 knights and Pal3 elite holy warriors.
>>>
>> It's reasonable, I think, to assume (yes, dangerous word!) that a given
>> setting has several adventuring bands running around that aren't
>> represented by players, unless it's specifically decided that the
>> heroes in play are the only ones of their level of ability and
>> experience.
>
> Isn't that what "best swordsman in the world" means? That there isn't
> anyone else of that level of ability and experience?
>
Certainly. Learning of the existence of others of high ability will be
all the more inspiration for the character to attempt to attain a
higher degree of mastery. In this case, without destroying the
competition.
Justin Alexander
> >Weapon Focus/Specialization Shortsword
> >Weapon Focus/ Specialization Longsword
> >Probably Improved Critical: Longsword
>
> Question: Do you base this on a single scene, or does she quite
> regularly do exceptional damage with her longsword?
Disclaimer: I have not read these books. I am talking out of my ass.
That being said: These feats are the ones most commonly mis-diagnosed
in these exercises. (They're even more commonly mis-diagnosed when
people try to stat themselves up.) People see "skilled with weapon X"
and jump to "they must have Weapon Focus and/or Weapon
Specialization".
> >Cleave (and thusly power attack by D&D terms, but this isn't really ever
> >evidenced in the books)
>
> If she's got Power Attack, she's probably just playing it smart and
> not using it most of the time. ;-)
Based on another post regarding this, it sounds as if Cleave is being
mis-assigned because of some fluff text which could just as easily be
explained by having a BAB of +6 (if that).
> >Improved Disarm
> >Leadership isn't out of the question.
> >Mounted Combat
> >Ride-By Attack
> >Spirited Charge might not be out of line, considering the last battle.
The "Improved" feats are also high on the bloat list when it comes to
feat selection. It's important to remember that anyone can perform a
disarm without having the improved feat.
Similarly, the mounted combat feats get mis-assigned. Note that ANYONE
can (a) ride up to someone; (b) hit them; and (c) continue riding past
them. The only thing Ride-By Attack lets you do is accomplish all that
in a single combat round.
> OK, I've not read the books, but it sounds to me that 3 years "spent
> doing almost nothing but weapons training and fighting" equates to a
> good bit of Ftr levels.
Possibly. Paladins get the same BAB progression, though. There's no
reason to suspect that this weapons training and fighting isn't
modeled adequately by the Paladin's BAB.
> OK, so she's got her Mount that means at
> least Pal5 and that gives her 2 feats so far, not including her
> starting feat or the human bonus feat.
The idea that she's at least a 5th level Paladin seems justified, but
I want to point out that "she as ability X and you need to be level Y
to get ability X, so she must be level Y" is a common fallacy in these
exercises.
> Prerequisites for your list of feats include Power Attack and Combat
> Expertise, bringing your total up to 13. However, you seem unsure
> about a few and so I'll leave them off. Improved Critical, Leadership
> and Spirited Charge all seem to be based on single scenes as opposed
> to long term trends. It's not necessary to have any of these feats to
> produce similar sounding effects once or twice. So we've got to give
> her 9 more feats WF/S*2, PA, Cleave, CE, ID, MC and RbA.
I would assume that the Spirited Charge is there because she dealt a
devastating blow in a scene. Well, that could just be rolling a
critical hit. But let's give it the benefit of the doubt and give her
Power Attack so that, in that dramatic moment, she can give it her
all.
That gives us Power Attack and Leadership. With a 5th level human
Paladin, that leaves us with 2 more feats to tweak with.
> >As for the ranger levels, the difference in knowledge of nature that occurs
> >during her stay with the Lyonyan Rangers is too marked to just be
> >incidental information. Plus she gets quite a bit better with a bow,
> >possibly even enough to have the mounted archery feat.
> >
> >Tell me if this doesn't sound like Rapid Shot from 2nd level ranger:
>
> Depends on when it happens. If it's early, then yes. Mid-career, it
> could just be another level of almost anything. More importantly, if
> it's late in her career she's got a high enough BAB to make those
> shots without any feats.
With a BAB of +6/+1 she can get off three shots in 12 seconds. That's
one shot every 4 seconds which would be more than enough to draw
murmurs from the crowd. (And actually it would be more like one shot
every 3 seconds, since she doesn't have to take a full attack in the
second round to do it.)
>From what I've read in this thread it sounds like she probably lands
somewhere in the 6th to 10th level range. Better than anything anybody
in the real world has ever achieved.
Ken Arromdee
Justin Alexander <jus...@thealexandrian.net> wrote:
>> >Cleave (and thusly power attack by D&D terms, but this isn't really ever
>> >evidenced in the books)
>>
>> If she's got Power Attack, she's probably just playing it smart and
>> not using it most of the time. ;-)
>
>Based on another post regarding this, it sounds as if Cleave is being
>mis-assigned because of some fluff text which could just as easily be
>explained by having a BAB of +6 (if that).
She doesn't have Cleave; she has the first/second edition fighter ability
to attack many opponents who have less than one hit die.
--
Ken Arromdee / arromdee_AT_rahul.net / http://www.rahul.net/arromdee
"You know, you blow up one sun and suddenly everyone expects you to walk
on water." --Samantha Carter, Stargate SG-1
Keith Davies
> Ed Chauvin IV wrote:
>> >Weapon Focus/Specialization Shortsword
>> >Weapon Focus/ Specialization Longsword
>> >Probably Improved Critical: Longsword
>>
>> Question: Do you base this on a single scene, or does she quite
>> regularly do exceptional damage with her longsword?
>
> Disclaimer: I have not read these books. I am talking out of my ass.
>
> That being said: These feats are the ones most commonly mis-diagnosed
> in these exercises. (They're even more commonly mis-diagnosed when
> people try to stat themselves up.) People see "skilled with weapon X"
> and jump to "they must have Weapon Focus and/or Weapon
> Specialization".
Weapon Focus with both weapons is appropriate, Specialization perhaps, I
don't see Improved Critical. She's skilled -- proficient, at least --
with a number of other weapons (and unarmed combat[1]) but particularly
skilled with short sword and long sword. Possibly with longbow later.
[1] I wouldn't give her IUS, though -- the times she's had to use
unarmed combat, it was fairly realistic. She used it just long
enough to get a better weapon or to pin an opponent when she was
unarmed.
>> >Cleave (and thusly power attack by D&D terms, but this isn't really ever
>> >evidenced in the books)
>>
>> If she's got Power Attack, she's probably just playing it smart and
>> not using it most of the time. ;-)
>
> Based on another post regarding this, it sounds as if Cleave is being
> mis-assigned because of some fluff text which could just as easily be
> explained by having a BAB of +6 (if that).
I think so. She's not noted for hacking her way through hordes of
opponents, though she has on occasion faced more than one at a time.
I stand by my conclusion of iterative attacks + fluff rather than
Cleave.
Similarly, I wouldn't give her Power Attack. She's not particularly
noted for hitting *hard*, but often.
>> >Improved Disarm
>> >Leadership isn't out of the question.
>> >Mounted Combat
>> >Ride-By Attack
>> >Spirited Charge might not be out of line, considering the last battle.
>
> The "Improved" feats are also high on the bloat list when it comes to
> feat selection. It's important to remember that anyone can perform a
> disarm without having the improved feat.
Improved Disarm, I wouldn't give her.
Leadership... I'd call it high Charisma and leave it at that. She had a
chance at Leadership, if you will (someone offered to be her cohort, at
least), but she's never had followers or a cohort. She *is* a leader,
but she doesn't have the feat.
I don't count the squires, they're along for another reason.
> Similarly, the mounted combat feats get mis-assigned. Note that ANYONE
> can (a) ride up to someone; (b) hit them; and (c) continue riding past
> them. The only thing Ride-By Attack lets you do is accomplish all that
> in a single combat round.
I'm inclined to give her Mounted Combat. The training at Fin Panir
includes it, and she's done it more than a few times since then. It
feels a lot like she gained a feat -- fighting from horseback isn't as
good in 3e until you get it,
Also, she's been fairly useful with a bow from horseback, at speed.
This could just be high skill and sucking down the -4 or -8 penalty, but
it feels more likely to be a feat to me.
I wouldn't give her Ride-By Attack. When she's fought from horseback
she's always ridden in and fought, I don't remember her moving past.
Spirited Charge... nah. She *has* charged into combat on horseback, but
I don't remember her ever using a lance. If she caused an unusually
large amount of damage at the end of a charge I'd call it a critical and
leave it at that.
I'd assign her, by the end of the book:
. WF (short sword, long sword)
. Endurance (could be from Rgr3)
. Mounted Combat
at least. I'd also be inclined to give her
. Rapid Shot (could be from Rgr2)
. Mounted Archery
The latter ones could all just be because she's higher level, of course
(more iterative attacks for Rapid Shot, and a higher BAB to overcome the
penalties of shooting from horseback at speed)
She exhibits Spring Attack at least once, and possibly more than that.
I'd wave that off as storytelling license, though; she doesn't really
exhibit 'mobility fighter' behavior the rest of the time.
A human fighter could have all the above by Ftr6:
1: WF, WF, Endurance
2: Mounted Combat
3: Point Blank Shot
4: Rapid Shot
6: Mounted Combat, Mounted Archery
As a paladin, it'd take until Pal15:
1: WF, WF
3: Endurance
6: Point Blank Shot
9: Rapid Shot
12: Mounted Combat
15: Mounted Archery
(this one also explains her neutralizing poison -- Pal4 spell, castable
at Pal14 or Pal15.)
Ranger, Rgr:
1: WF, WF
2: Rapid Shot
3: Endurance, Mounted Combat
6: Manyshot[2], Mounted Archery
[2] not exhibited, IMO
As a mixed-class character:
Ftr1: WF, Endurance
Ftr2: WF
Rgr1: Mounted Combat
Rgr2: Rapid Shot
Pal1:
Pal2: Mounted Archery
Pal3:
Pal4
Pal5: (paladin mount)
Feat order selected more or less arbitrarily, and not necessarily in
order presented by book. In this case I must give her at least one
level of ranger for exhibited skill gains, and at this point might as
well give Rgr2 for Rapid Shot or she'll need to spend two feats to get
it.
In any case, she still hits Pal5 before the end of the book (paladin
mount).
If we go with the prestige paladin (which fits the setting) I can see:
1 Ftr1: WF, WF, Endurance
2 Clr1: (exhibits healing, detect evil)
3 Ftr2: Mounted Combat, Point Blank Shot
4 Ftr3:
5 Ftr4: Rapid Shot
6 Pal1: Mounted Archery
7 Pal2: paladin mount
This assumes she *doesn't* actually have any levels in ranger (I find
this hard to support, honestly, considering the skill jump... though a
later level of cleric (animal domain) could do it).
1 Ftr1: WF, WF, Endurance
2 Clr1: (exhibits healing, detect evil)
3 Ftr2: Mounted Combat, Point Blank Shot
4 Ftr3:
5 Ftr4: Rapid Shot
6 Clr2: Mounted Archery, (skill bump, more exhibited divine power)
7 Pal1: Mounted Archery
8 Pal2: paladin mount
I'm still not satisfied about where she gets the ability to neutralize
poison, though. It's described as part of her lay on hands, but AFAIK
it's never been part of it.
>> OK, I've not read the books, but it sounds to me that 3 years "spent
>> doing almost nothing but weapons training and fighting" equates to a
>> good bit of Ftr levels.
>
> Possibly. Paladins get the same BAB progression, though. There's no
> reason to suspect that this weapons training and fighting isn't
> modeled adequately by the Paladin's BAB.
I think she adequately exhibits, by the end of the books, the feats I've
identified. She certainly has WF with two weapons, I can't believe she
*doesn't* have Endurance, Mounted Combat and Point Blank Shot are both
required (more or less) for actions she *has* exhibited (unless her BAB
is high enough to explain it[3], in which case she'd already have room
for the feats).
[3] hitting from horseback while traveling at speed *could* be just dumb
luck, the demonstrated firing rate no... though I suppose again it
could be literary license in describing it, since she wasn't
threatened or in combat at the time.
>> OK, so she's got her Mount that means at least Pal5 and that gives
>> her 2 feats so far, not including her starting feat or the human
>> bonus feat.
>
> The idea that she's at least a 5th level Paladin seems justified, but
> I want to point out that "she as ability X and you need to be level Y
> to get ability X, so she must be level Y" is a common fallacy in these
> exercises.
Well, if you're trying to model something within the rules, that's how
it works out (see my comments about neutralize poison -- which she *did*
do). If you use the prestige paladin she needs only Pal2, but needs
five levels in front of it.
Considering the sorts of things she was doing at the time, she fits into
your 6-10 level range, so I'm inclined to accept it.
>> >As for the ranger levels, the difference in knowledge of nature that
>> >occurs during her stay with the Lyonyan Rangers is too marked to
>> >just be incidental information. Plus she gets quite a bit better
>> >with a bow, possibly even enough to have the mounted archery feat.
>> >
>> >Tell me if this doesn't sound like Rapid Shot from 2nd level ranger:
>>
>> Depends on when it happens. If it's early, then yes. Mid-career, it
>> could just be another level of almost anything. More importantly, if
>> it's late in her career she's got a high enough BAB to make those
>> shots without any feats.
>
> With a BAB of +6/+1 she can get off three shots in 12 seconds. That's
> one shot every 4 seconds which would be more than enough to draw
> murmurs from the crowd. (And actually it would be more like one shot
> every 3 seconds, since she doesn't have to take a full attack in the
> second round to do it.)
Possibly. It still puts her at sixth level at this point. She can do
this earlier using Rapid Shot.
> From what I've read in this thread it sounds like she probably lands
> somewhere in the 6th to 10th level range. Better than anything anybody
> in the real world has ever achieved.
I'll accept that range, yes. As a minimum; she *could* be higher.
The only thing that pushes for even higher is that she healed someone of
a fatal poison. A Clr7 could do it, but not a single-digit paladin.
Jasin Zujovic
> The only thing that pushes for even higher is that she healed someone of
> a fatal poison. A Clr7 could do it, but not a single-digit paladin.
Cleansing Hands
Prerequisites: lay on hands, Wis 13.
Benefit: You can use your lay on hand ability to grant a touched
creature a +5 sacred bonus on his next saving through against poison.
This uses up 20 hit points out of your daily allotment.
OK, I made this up, but you have to make stuff up when you model fiction
in D&D. The question is, when do you need to make up less stuff? IMO,
Justin is right: taking lower level characters, slowing advancement (and
perhaps giving them houseruled abilities such as the above) tends to
produce better results that dropping another 5 or 10 levels on the
character because that's when you get one particular ability in D&D, and
then having to change the basic rules to bring back the 15th-level
character back in line, because fantasy fiction depicts heroic humans
and not superheroes.
--
Jasin Zujovic
Lizard
wrotC:DRIVE_E
>So what about you, rgfd? Do you notice this genre-switching in D&D? Do
>you play D&D because of it or despite of it? Do you do anything to fix
>it? Tweak the rules to make the whole 20-level range more similar to the
>sweet spot, or tweak the campaign and advancement pattern to spend more
>time in the sweet spot?
I began a character as a drunken reprobate swashbuckler. Due to good
GMing and long stretches of 'downtime' (1 year of real time==3-4 years
of game time), he evolved into a respected (well, mostly) diplomat and
leader. An important part of D&D, IMO, is having the world react to
your characters changes. When the villagers you grew up with see you
slaughtering invading giants or leading the charge against a dragon,
they will treat you differently. The nobles and leaders will start
inviting you to parties and trying to get you to sign on with their
retinues. People who disdained you are now your bestest buds.
The "Midkemia" novels, based as they are on an old D&D campaign, model
this well -- peasent boys and apprentice wizards grow in combat power
and gain political power along with it.
--
Personal Blog:http://www.xanga.com/lizard_sf
Ranty Political Blog:http://www.pontification.com
Keith Davies
> At Tue, 15 May 2007 08:01:36 GMT, Keith Davies wrote:
>
>> The only thing that pushes for even higher is that she healed someone of
>> a fatal poison. A Clr7 could do it, but not a single-digit paladin.
>
> Cleansing Hands
>
> Prerequisites: lay on hands, Wis 13.
>
> Benefit: You can use your lay on hand ability to grant a touched
> creature a +5 sacred bonus on his next saving through against poison.
> This uses up 20 hit points out of your daily allotment.
>
> OK, I made this up, but you have to make stuff up when you model fiction
> in D&D. The question is, when do you need to make up less stuff?
Paks, in these books, is a remarkably close match to D&D3e rules (except
the neutralize poison).
Adding a new ability like this doesn't particularly bother me, to be
honest. However, *RAW* the exhibited abilities argue for a higher
level. Well *this* ability, and that's because of when it becomes
available.
This is the only sticking point for high level for me. Everything else
leaves her mid-level (8-10 range, most likely).
> IMO, Justin is right: taking lower level characters, slowing
> advancement (and perhaps giving them houseruled abilities such as the
> above) tends to produce better results that dropping another 5 or 10
> levels on the character because that's when you get one particular
> ability in D&D, and then having to change the basic rules to bring
> back the 15th-level character back in line, because fantasy fiction
> depicts heroic humans and not superheroes.
I more or less agree with you. Remember that my estimates (before feat
examination and allocation) put her around eighth level. Even after
that, she comes out about the same.
Gary Thompson
wrote:
>
> On the flip-side, I've always wanted to play a game where everyone
> designs their James Bond: James Bond goes on countless adventures and
> he's always James Bond. But I've never found a group who wanted to
> just play for the joy of the game -- they want their XP and their GP
> to validate the experience.
>
Why not try to structure it _like_ James Bond? Everybody makes a
level-whatever character. Each "mission" would consist of a brief
introductory encounter, followed by a return to base, where the
characters would be given a budget of x gp to outfit themselves, and
then the main adventure. The reward, rather than increasing the level
of the players, could be gradually increasing the equipment budget.
Of course, for efficency's sake, you'd probably have to structure the
game somewhat differently, with the introductory adventure at the end
of the night, in order to give the players time to pick out their eq
for the main event.
Ooh. What about making the rule that each magic item can only be used
on one adventure? Then the reward would simply be the ability to keep
one item per game.
Jim Davies
>Our Justin Alexander has an interesting article here:
>
>http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html
It's pretty good. I take exception with his reasoning that 5th level
is as high as it gets, which seems to be that one optimised 5th-level
character with an 18 can do one or two things at world-class level,
ergo, nobody can possibly be any better than that.
He reasons that no fantasy heroes can be bignumth level merely because
they're the best whatever in the world. That's fair enough if they do
human-type things. Elric can't be modelled as a balanced D&D character
of any homebrew class below 15th (what level is Summon Arioch?); Conan
takes down some incredibly powerful characters who can themselves wipe
out countries (if you pick the right book). Fafhrd is well within
single figures, though.
Also, the Jump skill is completely buggered. 3.0 was better than 3.5,
but still pretty ropy.
snip
>So what about you, rgfd? Do you notice this genre-switching in D&D? Do
>you play D&D because of it or despite of it? Do you do anything to fix
>it? Tweak the rules to make the whole 20-level range more similar to the
>sweet spot, or tweak the campaign and advancement pattern to spend more
>time in the sweet spot?
This is what annoys me about 3x. By being aimed in a strictly Gamist
sense at those wanting to get to 20th level in a RL year, it makes the
characters grow up far too quickly. It's hard to build a decent
background when the PCs can teleport across it a month after leaving
their parents' ruined hovel as a 1st level fighter.
It can be tweaked (lower the xp, lower the treasure) but then the PCs
are inevitably much richer than the NPCs.
--
Jim or Sarah Davies, but probably Jim
D&D and Star Fleet Battles stuff on http://www.axsm89.dsl.pipex.com
becaue pipex's technical support is crap and so http://www.aaargh.org doesn't work.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Keith Davies
> On the grave of Jasin Zujovic <jzuj...@inet.hr> is inscribed:
>
>>Our Justin Alexander has an interesting article here:
>>
>>http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html
>
> It's pretty good. I take exception with his reasoning that 5th level
> is as high as it gets, which seems to be that one optimised 5th-level
> character with an 18 can do one or two things at world-class level,
> ergo, nobody can possibly be any better than that.
I didn't get that from the article. I got that nobody 'normal' could do
better than that.
PCs -- heroes -- *aren't* normal.
So, simple split here:
. NPC classes more or less top out at fifth level
. PC classes up to fifth level are 'good but normal'
. PC classes after fifth level are getting into 'heroic realms'
And so on. His thesis is that being 'mundane best' doesn't require high
level.
> He reasons that no fantasy heroes can be bignumth level merely because
> they're the best whatever in the world.
I'd say more that they don't *need* to be. His professed thesis is that
people tend to mark them higher than necessary to support their rank,
just because of their rank.
> That's fair enough if they do human-type things. Elric can't be
> modelled as a balanced D&D character of any homebrew class below 15th
> (what level is Summon Arioch?); Conan takes down some incredibly
> powerful characters who can themselves wipe out countries (if you pick
> the right book).
I'll grant that in those stories the characters are almost certainly
high level, of necessity. However, for many of the Conan stories,
especially REH's, he doesn't need to be nearly so high level.
Of course, it doesn't help that they're presented out of sequence, and
that it's often unclear what order they happened in.
> Fafhrd is well within single figures, though.
Within his setting, Fafhrd is one of the major mortal figures, though.
This suggests that Nehwon is a largely low-level world... which I think
is pretty reasonable.
I'm reminded of a comic strip (Dork Tower, I think).
"How do we know Gandalf was really powerful?"
"Well, he fought the Balrog."
"How do we know the Balrog was powerful?"
"He fought... Gandalf."
>>So what about you, rgfd? Do you notice this genre-switching in D&D? Do
>>you play D&D because of it or despite of it? Do you do anything to fix
>>it? Tweak the rules to make the whole 20-level range more similar to the
>>sweet spot, or tweak the campaign and advancement pattern to spend more
>>time in the sweet spot?
>
> This is what annoys me about 3x. By being aimed in a strictly Gamist
> sense at those wanting to get to 20th level in a RL year, it makes the
> characters grow up far too quickly. It's hard to build a decent
> background when the PCs can teleport across it a month after leaving
> their parents' ruined hovel as a 1st level fighter.
One of the things that snaps my suspenders of disbelief, yeah. I choose
to ignore it as much as I can.
However, I've considered several times limiting PCs to one adventure per
year. Not a hard 'this is all that is possible' sort of thing, but that
adventure-worthy things come up about that often. Gain one, maybe two
levels per adventure. This'll cause the PCs to gain levels at a
somewhat 'sane' rate (world-wise), without messing with the RL-timing.
> It can be tweaked (lower the xp, lower the treasure) but then the PCs
> are inevitably much richer than the NPCs.
I think that leveling can be too fast now, yes. I've got a character
who went from 'just made sixth level' to seventh level after about two
days' adventuring.
This wouldn't bother me too much, except that we've got probably another
week or two of work on this adventure -- at this rate we would hit
10th-14th by the time we're done, depending how busy we are.
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>Mere moments before death, Matt Frisch
><matu...@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> hastily scrawled:
>
>>
>>She would not be an ideal sort of character...she's got weapon
>>focus/specialization in both shortsword and longsword for example (and no
>>dual wielding), so this isn't powergaming or anything like that.
>>
>>It's an aproximation just based on the things she's seen to do, except for
>>the Paladin levels, cause she picks up her mount for sure, and then does a
>>fair bit after that. So, I was going on 1E data there where the mount comes
>>at level 4, not 5. In 3.5 she gets at least one more (probably 2 more,
>>considering what she goes through) after that.
>>
>>Weapon Focus/Specialization Shortsword
>>Weapon Focus/ Specialization Longsword
>>Probably Improved Critical: Longsword
>
>Question: Do you base this on a single scene, or does she quite
>regularly do exceptional damage with her longsword?
It happens occasionally. The rarity could qualify as "normal" criticals,
without imp crit boosting their frequency.
>>It's an awful lot of feats for someone who doesn't have a pretty sizeable
>>pile of levels to get them, even being human.
>
>Honestly, it's more likely that she's got a level or 3 of some kind of
>prestige class.
>
>Come to think of it, if we go ahead and give her Spirited Charge and
>WF:Lance she qualifies for Cavalier and doesn't need any levels of
>Paladin. The advantage being that Cavalier gets the mount at Cav1.
>So, Ftr9/Cav1.
Well, Cavalier certainly doesn't apply. She doesn't ever use a lance
(trained for a spear, but never actually fights with one outside of
training). Paladin is really unquestioned. It's literally straight from the
gods.
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>Ed Chauvin IV <edc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Mere moments before death, Matt Frisch
>><matu...@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> hastily scrawled:
>I'd probably give her WF(short sword, long sword, maybe longbow later),
>probably not Cleave or Improved Disarm (she's not notably intelligent,
>remember)
Yea, that's one of those things that I have to write off to differences in
genre. She learns both elvish and dwarvish during the course of the books,
and that would mean a higher int than I would give her credit for. It's
also why I didn't list Combat Expertise, despite it being a pre-req for a
couple of the feats I -did- list.
>> Come to think of it, if we go ahead and give her Spirited Charge and
>> WF:Lance she qualifies for Cavalier and doesn't need any levels of
>> Paladin. The advantage being that Cavalier gets the mount at Cav1.
>> So, Ftr9/Cav1.
>
>Does cavalier also give various magic stuff, such as /light/, /detect
>evil/, and healing abilities?
>
>Oh, hey. /Neutralize poison/. She *does this* in the third book.
>Pal4 spell, they don't get those until 14th level at least. Clerics get
>them at 7th, but she's *really* not described as a cleric.
>
>OTOH, she might've gotten that instead of /remove disease/ at 6th level,
>and IIRC it was about the time she got her horse (before it, I think).
The poison neutralization to me just fell under the general category of the
lay hands ability. The intrinsic abilities of the girdish paladins seems to
be a fair bit better than what D&D gives. Since there are at least 2 other
orders of paladins in the world, and they are not described at all, it's
hard to say just how common these are. At one juncture it is mentioned that
some of the other martial orders make use of abilities that gird does not,
which would seem to hint that there would be some variations in the exact
abilities of paladins of Falk or Camwyn.
1) Ability to detect evil. Feeling a powerful evil source happens
spontaneously, requires no concentration and is permenantly active.
Concentration allows for a narrowing down of the evil's location.
2) Lay On Hands...but the amount of healing that she and other paladins
seem capable of appears to go well beyond D&D limits, as well as the
ability to fix things besides raw hitpoints.
3) Light...no real D&D equivalent, since it is considerably more functional
than a simple lightspell. There are numerous instances of a paladin's light
being used as an effective defense mechanism.
4) Complete immunity to all mind affecting spells. Additionally, there are
a couple of instances of being put under direct attack by some sort of
spell/power, but it is completely ignored. She has her light on in both
encounters, so it is hard to say what the source of her protection is. It
could be the light, it could be a reflection of this power.
Neither she nor any of the other paladins seem to evidence any actual
spellcasting, but then there's the brain surgery they give her at the end
of the second book, and Amberion takes part in this. Nothing like that is
described in the 4 powers afforded to paladins...so that's a tough one to
answer.
Matt Frisch
Arromdee) scribed into the ether:
>In article <1179210403.3...@e51g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
>Justin Alexander <jus...@thealexandrian.net> wrote:
>>> >Cleave (and thusly power attack by D&D terms, but this isn't really ever
>>> >evidenced in the books)
>>>
>>> If she's got Power Attack, she's probably just playing it smart and
>>> not using it most of the time. ;-)
>>
>>Based on another post regarding this, it sounds as if Cleave is being
>>mis-assigned because of some fluff text which could just as easily be
>>explained by having a BAB of +6 (if that).
>
>She doesn't have Cleave; she has the first/second edition fighter ability
>to attack many opponents who have less than one hit die.
That's a fair point. I'm not even sure 2nd edition was out when the books
were first printed. I first read the trilogy somewhere in the range of
'89-91.
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>Justin Alexander <jus...@thealexandrian.net> wrote:
>> Ed Chauvin IV wrote:
>>> >Improved Disarm
>>> >Leadership isn't out of the question.
>>> >Mounted Combat
>>> >Ride-By Attack
>>> >Spirited Charge might not be out of line, considering the last battle.
>>
>> The "Improved" feats are also high on the bloat list when it comes to
>> feat selection. It's important to remember that anyone can perform a
>> disarm without having the improved feat.
>
>Improved Disarm, I wouldn't give her.
She does do a couple of tricks (and teaches the tricks to others) to let
her take weapons away from opponents. Could just be instances where the AoO
for not having this feat didn't land, but then I'd never describe her (or
anyone else) as having a really stellar armor class. The best we ever see
her in is a slightly magical (and probably mithril) chain shirt.
>I wouldn't give her Ride-By Attack. When she's fought from horseback
>she's always ridden in and fought, I don't remember her moving past.
>
>Spirited Charge... nah. She *has* charged into combat on horseback, but
>I don't remember her ever using a lance.
Spirited charge doesn't require a lance. It just does a hell of a lot more
damage when you use one.
> If she caused an unusually
>large amount of damage at the end of a charge I'd call it a critical and
>leave it at that.
But this is probably reasonable.
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>Aaron F. Bourque <aaronb...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On May 14, 9:18 am, Keith Davies <keith.dav...@kjdavies.org> wrote:
>>
>>> She *could* be as low as Ftr1/Rgr1/Pal5, actually.
>>>
>>> 1. Ftr1 from her time with Phelan's company; I can't see her being War1
>>> with her reputation of ability
>>> 2. Pal1, maybe Pal2 until she returns to Master Oakhollow's (she does
>>> exhibit *some* paladin gifts -- specifically a really shaky /detect
>>> evil/ and maybe, but not provably, laying on hands... and some more
>>> /lay on hands/ while with the elves).
>>> 3. I can't justify her having anything *but* have taken Rgr1 while with
>>> the elves, what with the skill bump. I'd be willing to accept her
>>> improvement with the bow as either a feat at the right time, or just
>>> handwave it because she never used a bow much before this.
>>> 4. *Must* be Pal5 while at Phelan's keep, she got her horse.
>>>
>>> As I said, though, it depends also on how powerful the things she fights
>>> are.
>>
>> Reading this subthread, I wonder how much of this crap with Paks and
>> her horse could be eliminated if D&D had d20 modern's more flexible
>> talent trees rather than linear progression. (I'm not saying Paladin's
>> Mount should be a 1st level talent, but it could reduce her necessary
>> Paladin's level by one or two).
>>
>If I were to do this setting in d20 I'd go with the prestige class
>paladin. It fits the setting rather better.
Indeed. I've been tempted over the years (generally whenever I re-read the
trilogy, which I just did a few weeks ago) to stat out prestige classes for
paladins and marshals of gird. Both are poster-children for prestige
classes.
> It doesn't help that "she's not a /common/ paladin"; she's chosen by
> several gods, rather than just one as most paladins are.
As described, paladins aren't personally selected by the gods at all,
although certainly the gods take part. Paks is certainly extraordinary
though, and some of the things that happen to her fall well outside of
standard 3.x level progressions. She heals Canna very early on, as maybe a
2nd-4th level fighter. That -could- be credited to the medallion being
somewhat magical, but neither the High Marshal nor the Paladin who see it
are able to locate such magic, and it seems as though they should be able
to.
Keith Davies
> On Tue, 15 May 2007 00:48:53 GMT, Keith Davies <keith....@kjdavies.org>
> scribed into the ether:
>
>>Ed Chauvin IV <edc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Mere moments before death, Matt Frisch
>>><matu...@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> hastily scrawled:
>
>>I'd probably give her WF(short sword, long sword, maybe longbow later),
>>probably not Cleave or Improved Disarm (she's not notably intelligent,
>>remember)
>
> Yea, that's one of those things that I have to write off to
> differences in genre. She learns both elvish and dwarvish during the
> course of the books, and that would mean a higher int than I would
> give her credit for. It's also why I didn't list Combat Expertise,
> despite it being a pre-req for a couple of the feats I -did- list.
Speak Language, cross-class. She needs only two ranks.
>>Oh, hey. /Neutralize poison/. She *does this* in the third book.
>>Pal4 spell, they don't get those until 14th level at least. Clerics get
>>them at 7th, but she's *really* not described as a cleric.
>>
>>OTOH, she might've gotten that instead of /remove disease/ at 6th level,
>>and IIRC it was about the time she got her horse (before it, I think).
>
> The poison neutralization to me just fell under the general category
> of the lay hands ability. The intrinsic abilities of the girdish
> paladins seems to be a fair bit better than what D&D gives. Since
> there are at least 2 other orders of paladins in the world, and they
> are not described at all, it's hard to say just how common these are.
> At one juncture it is mentioned that some of the other martial orders
> make use of abilities that gird does not, which would seem to hint
> that there would be some variations in the exact abilities of paladins
> of Falk or Camwyn.
Indeed, /lay on hands/ does seem unusually good. She's also on a
specific quest from the gods, and the one she healed was important to
them. For that matter, she didn't *request* healing of the gods, she
was *told* "fix him".
So, while it greatly exceeded what she probably should've been able to
do with Paladin (class) abilities alone, it doesn't bother me.
As I recall there were abilities that were shared 'by all paladins', but
in varying amounts (light might be just a little bit to see by, or
enough to light a battlefield, for instance). And Paks is unusual
*anyway*.
> 1) Ability to detect evil. Feeling a powerful evil source happens
> spontaneously, requires no concentration and is permenantly active.
> Concentration allows for a narrowing down of the evil's location.
I'm tempted to allow this anyway[1] Overwhelming, you feel it whether
you want to or not. The darkdraudigs almost knocked her on her ass,
despite her not looking for it.
[1] IMC, not just the setting.
> 2) Lay On Hands...but the amount of healing that she and other
> paladins seem capable of appears to go well beyond D&D limits, as well
> as the ability to fix things besides raw hitpoints.
Yep. I'm adding feats to expand on what /lay on hands/ does IMC.
> 3) Light...no real D&D equivalent, since it is considerably more
> functional than a simple lightspell. There are numerous instances of a
> paladin's light being used as an effective defense mechanism.
And 'active defense' at that (against the lance the priest used, for
instance).
> 4) Complete immunity to all mind affecting spells. Additionally, there
> are a couple of instances of being put under direct attack by some
> sort of spell/power, but it is completely ignored. She has her light
> on in both encounters, so it is hard to say what the source of her
> protection is. It could be the light, it could be a reflection of this
> power.
I'm not sure about 'all mind-affecting spells'. The paladins are immune
to fear and a few other things, and (IIRC) cannot be *compelled* unless
they choose to be.
Which, admittedly, covers most mind-affecting spells.
> Neither she nor any of the other paladins seem to evidence any actual
> spellcasting, but then there's the brain surgery they give her at the
> end of the second book, and Amberion takes part in this. Nothing like
> that is described in the 4 powers afforded to paladins...so that's a
> tough one to answer.
Under 'healing', perhaps. And 'spellcasting' doesn't *necessarily* mean
chanting, waving magic widgets around, and so on. Game-mechanically it
does (for how it interacts with other things), but there could be a
flavor thing that works in their favor.
So, heavy duty healing (removing conditions, neutralizing poison, etc.)
might actually be spells, but considered 'part of the healing gift of
paladins'.
Similarly, a ranger casting /pass without trace/ isn't necessarily
'casting a spell', he's just really, really good at not leaving tracks
sometimes.
This is one of the things that makes it a little harder to gauge.
Keith Davies
My copy of _Sheepfarmer's Daughter_ is copyright 1988, and says the
first printing was June 1988.
So, no 2e yet. That was early 1989.
Heh. I'm willing to model Paks in 3e. It's actually fairly easy, once
the parameters are nailed down.
2e? Oh gods no. I was leafing through my 2e PHB recently[1].
*read* "Damn." *simpler mechanic in 3e, same effect*
*read* "Damn." *simpler mechanic in 3e, close enough*
*read* *toss on counter* "how did we *play* that mess?"
[1] looking for information on specialist wizards, decided to ignore it,
left the book in the can after for something to laugh at.
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>Matt Frisch <matu...@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 May 2007 11:45:28 +0200, Jasin Zujovic <jzuj...@inet.hr>
>> scribed into the ether:
>>
>>>At Mon, 14 May 2007 07:04:43 GMT, Matt Frisch wrote:
>>>
>>>> The translation is of course not perfect because the books take
>>>> place in a very low magic setting.
>>>
>>>Which to me suggests low levels overall, if you want to model it in
>>>D&D...
>>
>> It simply doesn't follow 3.0 or 3.5's expected wealth by level tables.
>> There is evidence of several characters with demonstrably high level.
>> But throughout the trilogy, there are only 2 scenes (both short) that
>> are not told from the protagonist's perspective. So you see a lot more
>> of that side than any other.
>
>Indeed. Magic arms and armor aren't generally seen. Captain Dorrin's
>sword, Tammarion's sword, Paks' sword (formerly the half-elf's), her
>mail (from the taig after she freed the elflord). The king's sword, of
>course. 'Many elven blades' shed light, but they're, well, elven.
Well, the King's Sword and Tammarion's Sword being the same weapon, I don't
know how much extra credit I'd give :)
Her mail could just be nonmagical mithril, although I'd probably give it a
+1, based on its ability to take a full-arm sword stroke to the side, and
the -sword- breaks.
>The cursed weapons and armor of the dark priests and the dark elves.
The evil priests also seems to wear enchanted armor...helms seem popular,
and one of them wears a breastplate. But these things seem more like the
effect of conjuration magic than permenant weapons. Kind of like an evil
version of spiritual hammer. When confronted with good power, those items
tend to disintegrate into dust.
>>>Why Cleave?
>>
>> Couple examples of hitting multiple opponents in one swing.
>
>Could just be description, though -- the carry-on of one blow is the
>iterative attack of the next.
>
>She's got the strength for Power Attack, though. She's not *immensely*
>strong, but 13+ isn't that high, either.
If I were statting her out personally, I'd go:
Str: 14, Dex: 12, Con: 14 (maybe 16), Int: 10 or 11, Wis: 10-12, Cha: 16
>If it were done in AD&D terms weapon specialization could be had at
>first level (though I forget; could be specialized in more than one
>weapon in 1e? I know you could in 2e).
1E UA, which is where weapon spec is introduced doesn't make any mention of
the ability to specialize in more than one weapon, but the rules are not
all that clearly written anyway.
>>>Of course, you can say that this is a different kind of setting, where
>>>D&D's rules don't apply exactly, and where 15th-level fighters should
>>>be just extraordinarily skilled warriors, and not the superheroes they
>>>are in D&D... but that was Justin's point (as I saw it)
>>
>> And his point that I saw was that many character concepts that fit
>> well into low level characters don't work as easily at high level.
>
>Also, in some lights Paks *is* at least approaching superheroism (of a
>sort) by the end of the book. Not the flashy fly-through-the-air type,
>but in the nature of her tasks.
Surviving the torture sequence at the end is fairly superheroic. I tend to
skip past that section...I've read it a couple of times, and even reading
about it is kind of stomach turning. There are obviously a couple small
examples of divine assistance during the proceedings, and then one really
HUGE instance of it. Can't really give her credit for that part.
Keith Davies
> On Tue, 15 May 2007 08:01:36 GMT, Keith Davies <keith....@kjdavies.org>
> scribed into the ether:
>
>>Justin Alexander <jus...@thealexandrian.net> wrote:
>>> Ed Chauvin IV wrote:
>
>>>> >Improved Disarm
>>>> >Leadership isn't out of the question.
>>>> >Mounted Combat
>>>> >Ride-By Attack
>>>> >Spirited Charge might not be out of line, considering the last battle.
>>>
>>> The "Improved" feats are also high on the bloat list when it comes to
>>> feat selection. It's important to remember that anyone can perform a
>>> disarm without having the improved feat.
>>
>>Improved Disarm, I wouldn't give her.
>
> She does do a couple of tricks (and teaches the tricks to others) to
> let her take weapons away from opponents. Could just be instances
> where the AoO for not having this feat didn't land, but then I'd never
> describe her (or anyone else) as having a really stellar armor class.
> The best we ever see her in is a slightly magical (and probably
> mithril) chain shirt.
Not very often. She was disarmed by Siger (but got him back using an
entirely different trick), ISTR she disarmed the armsmaster at Fin Panir
(in the training hall), you might be able to count her disarming her
opponent in the challenge in Verella. Perhaps count when she was facing
the orcs among the dark elves, but I don't think so.
I don't think she had Improved Disarm. AFAICT she only disarmed an
opponent when she didn't have a better option. She didn't do it often
enough to warrant her spending a feat (in the "it's worth it to me"
sense).
Even ignoring the Combat Expertise prereq that I'm not sure she'd
qualify for.
>>I wouldn't give her Ride-By Attack. When she's fought from horseback
>>she's always ridden in and fought, I don't remember her moving past.
>>
>>Spirited Charge... nah. She *has* charged into combat on horseback,
>>but I don't remember her ever using a lance.
>
> Spirited charge doesn't require a lance. It just does a hell of a lot
> more damage when you use one.
True, it doesn't... but she doesn't act like she's got it. She'll ride
hard to the fight, and fight hard once she's there, but she's not really
focused on mounted combat the way Spirited Charge would indicate.
I only suggested Mounted Archery because she didn't seem to have trouble
doing it at speed, and that usually lays some serious penalties on you.
She might've just had a high enough attack bonus otherwise to eat the
penalties.
>>If she caused an unusually large amount of damage at the end of a
>>charge I'd call it a critical and leave it at that.
>
> But this is probably reasonable.
I think so, yes.
Keith Davies
> On Tue, 15 May 2007 00:13:01 GMT, Keith Davies <keith....@kjdavies.org>
> scribed into the ether:
>
>>paladin. It fits the setting rather better.
>
> Indeed. I've been tempted over the years (generally whenever I re-read
> the trilogy, which I just did a few weeks ago) to stat out prestige
> classes for paladins and marshals of gird. Both are poster-children
> for prestige classes.
No kidding. They're an *argument* for prestige classes.
Actually, I'd be inclined to have prestige classes for paladin and high
marshal. Marshal would probably work just as well with standard cleric
(possibly with some fighter levels mixed in; as I recall they all get
martial training before clerical... though it's probably save to wave
that away).
>> It doesn't help that "she's not a /common/ paladin"; she's chosen
>> by several gods, rather than just one as most paladins are.
>
> As described, paladins aren't personally selected by the gods at all,
> although certainly the gods take part.
Normally the gods don't have nearly as much a hand in it. Originally
they did, now the martial orders find candidates, train them, and
present them. The gods may or may not grant them their powers (and
mounts). IIRC, they finish the ceremony and the mounts are there when
they're done. Or something like that.
> Paks is certainly extraordinary though, and some of the things that
> happen to her fall well outside of standard 3.x level progressions.
Maybe. Or maybe not.
> She heals Canna very early on, as maybe a 2nd-4th level fighter. That
> -could- be credited to the medallion being somewhat magical, but
> neither the High Marshal nor the Paladin who see it are able to locate
> such magic, and it seems as though they should be able to.
If she started as a paladin (I don't think she did, but if) she would've
gotten /lay on hands/ at Pal2. Some things happen later that suggest
she's may have /divine grace/ (or is just lucky, of course).
If using the prestige paladin (which more or less requires at least one
level of cleric, for /protection from evil/) she might've had Clr1 by
then. No, she wasn't formally trained (or even informally trained) or
invested, but if the gods were that interested in her it could've been
applied 'behind the scenes', as it were.
Keith Davies
> On Tue, 15 May 2007 00:39:30 GMT, Keith Davies <keith....@kjdavies.org>
> scribed into the ether:
>
>>sword, Tammarion's sword, Paks' sword (formerly the half-elf's), her
>>mail (from the taig after she freed the elflord). The king's sword, of
>>course. 'Many elven blades' shed light, but they're, well, elven.
>
> Well, the King's Sword and Tammarion's Sword being the same weapon, I don't
> know how much extra credit I'd give :)
*shh*. Trying to avoid spoiling.
> Her mail could just be nonmagical mithril, although I'd probably give it a
> +1, based on its ability to take a full-arm sword stroke to the side, and
> the -sword- breaks.
Seem fair, yes.
>>The cursed weapons and armor of the dark priests and the dark elves.
>
> The evil priests also seems to wear enchanted armor...helms seem
> popular, and one of them wears a breastplate. But these things seem
> more like the effect of conjuration magic than permenant weapons. Kind
> of like an evil version of spiritual hammer. When confronted with good
> power, those items tend to disintegrate into dust.
I'd accept that. It would certainly make more sense to me, especially
with how the armor of the later priests (in the forest) is disposed of.
>>>>Why Cleave?
>>>
>>> Couple examples of hitting multiple opponents in one swing.
>>
>>Could just be description, though -- the carry-on of one blow is the
>>iterative attack of the next.
>>
>>She's got the strength for Power Attack, though. She's not *immensely*
>>strong, but 13+ isn't that high, either.
>
> If I were statting her out personally, I'd go:
> Str: 14, Dex: 12, Con: 14 (maybe 16), Int: 10 or 11, Wis: 10-12, Cha: 16
Probably somewhere around there. I'd want to see how the points worked
out, if I were statting her as a PC. I'd probably go with the higher
values for Con and Wis (she's remarkably tough (could be Endurance feat
+ divine grace) and strong-willed.
OTOH, a little too trusting and makes some unwise decisions. Probably a
little wiser than average but still fallible due to inexperience.
>>If it were done in AD&D terms weapon specialization could be had at
>>first level (though I forget; could be specialized in more than one
>>weapon in 1e? I know you could in 2e).
>
> 1E UA, which is where weapon spec is introduced doesn't make any
> mention of the ability to specialize in more than one weapon, but the
> rules are not all that clearly written anyway.
I remember double specialization (+3/+3), too.
>>Also, in some lights Paks *is* at least approaching superheroism (of a
>>sort) by the end of the book. Not the flashy fly-through-the-air
>>type, but in the nature of her tasks.
>
> Surviving the torture sequence at the end is fairly superheroic. I
> tend to skip past that section...I've read it a couple of times, and
> even reading about it is kind of stomach turning. There are obviously
> a couple small examples of divine assistance during the proceedings,
> and then one really HUGE instance of it. Can't really give her credit
> for that part.
I've never been fond of that bit either. And yes, explicit divine
intervention (some subtle, some *really* not).
However, considering the things she gets into and deals with, it's fair
to consider her at the high end of heroic and getting into superheroic.
Of course, the climactic battle wasn't much after that, so a bit of
extra flash (she'd been saving her Action Points) isn't unreasonable.
Justin Alexander
> On the grave of Jasin Zujovic <jzuj...@inet.hr> is inscribed:
>
> >Our Justin Alexander has an interesting article here:
> >
> >http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html
>
> It's pretty good. I take exception with his reasoning that 5th level
> is as high as it gets, which seems to be that one optimised 5th-level
> character with an 18 can do one or two things at world-class level,
> ergo, nobody can possibly be any better than that.
Actually, with a 5th level character, you can be world class in about
4 different, broad-based skills. Even more if you're particularly
gifted with high ability scores.You can only be of legendary stature
(like an Einstein) in roughly 2, but I'd welcome any historical or
contemporary examples you think achieved Einstein's or Newton's
stature in more than two completely separate disciplines.
> He reasons that no fantasy heroes can be bignumth level merely because
> they're the best whatever in the world. That's fair enough if they do
> human-type things. Elric can't be modelled as a balanced D&D character
> of any homebrew class below 15th (what level is Summon Arioch?);
Actually, no, I didn't do that. I specifically allowed for and
discussed superhuman characters in fantasy. Gandalf is one that I
mentioned, Elric is potentially another.
> Conan
> takes down some incredibly powerful characters who can themselves wipe
> out countries (if you pick the right book).
Quite possibly. But not if you're talking about the character of Conan
as created by Robert E. Howard. I'm not shocked to discover there's
some pastiche out there where Conan does some ridiculously overpowered
things (compared to the character that Howard created), but you can
probably get away with statting up Conan as a 5th level character.
Statting him up much beyond 7th or 8th is completley wrong. (Again, if
we're talking about REH's Conan.)
> This is what annoys me about 3x. By being aimed in a strictly Gamist
> sense at those wanting to get to 20th level in a RL year, it makes the
> characters grow up far too quickly. It's hard to build a decent
> background when the PCs can teleport across it a month after leaving
> their parents' ruined hovel as a 1st level fighter.
>
> It can be tweaked (lower the xp, lower the treasure) but then the PCs
> are inevitably much richer than the NPCs.
This depends on how your structure your treasures and encounters. I
already have a problem whenever I try to run by-the-book urban
adventures because NPC gear value is roughly 3x the treasure-per-
encounter guidelines (so PCs become wealthy too fast).
D&D assumes that about 25% of the treasure PCs accumulate will be
spent on consumables or other non-power granting activities. You just
have to figure out how to bleed wealth away from the PCs faster than
that. Taxes aren't a bad way to go. Getting involved in civic projects
and the like is another. (These are solutions which have worked in my
urban campaigns.)
You can also find ways to lock up wealth in non-accessible forms.
Introduce soulbound items that knock off 10-20% of an item's cost, but
the item only works for a single individual (the PCs may welcome the
cheaper costs on commissioned items, but will be hurt by NPCs carrying
soulbound items). Have the PCs spend their wealth of magical tattoos
or training or inherent boosts to their stats. Drow weapons melting in
sunlight is only one of many similar schticks (including magical items
which only work for particular species).
The other solution to this problem is to simply adjust the pace at
which adventures happen. Instead of running the campaign in "real
time" where every day of the character's lives are played out at the
table (leading to a frenetic pace where the PCs run from one crisis to
another with nary a break inbetween), take a page from Ars Magica and
let a season or two or three pass until the next crisis arises.
The Mad Afro
> It's been pointed out to me once that most people's character concepts
> are pretty static. It was in a different context (about characters
> changing from self-serving mercs into selfless heroes), but I think it
> still applies here, and that it's one of the reasons why people feel
> that high-level games become cartoonish or super-heroish in a bad sense.
[snip]
> But considering the range of power levels D&D spans, if you create a
> street urchin, or a merchant's bodyguard, or a poor peasant girl who
> spontaneously manifests magical powers, it's best to be prepared that
> those concepts won't work quite as well 15 levels later. You can easily
> start out as a poor peasant girl, but by 15th-level she had better
> evolved into a seductive manipulative sorceress who hides her humble
> beginnings, or the legendary saint touched by the gods, or something
> like that. A 16th-level, shapeshifting, teleporting, dead-raising, wind-
> walking poor peasant girl with hundreds of thousands of gp in magical
> equipment doesn't really make much sense.
I have yet to meet a player who really expects to stick with a rigid
character concept through the run of the campaign. Most of the folks
I've played with will come up with a basic concept and backstory,
maybe an image that they bring to the first session, and over time
that image changes with experience, levels, and new books (meaning new
options) at the table.
The fun part is keeping the soul of the character intact, no matter
what she's able to do, and the size of the stage on which she plays.
No matter how high level your peasant girl gets, she'll always
remember her older sister's wedding day, when the Duke rode in on his
black horse, claimed his Prima Nocta rights, and took her sister
away. She felt powerless then, and it was that sense of powerlessness
and anger that may have awakened her latent sorcery; the thing that
drove her to become a badass. But she'll always remember what it was
like when she wasn't, and if this is allowed to color the roleplaying
experience, makes things more interesting.
People change over time, so I guess it's a safe bet that PCs will,
too.
--
Jay Knioum
The Mad Afro
Gary Thompson
Even better: don't let them choose anything that grants a permanent
bonus (manuals, tomes, the permanacy spell). Parcel these out slowly
as major rewards.
tussock
> Jim Davies wrote:
>> This is what annoys me about 3x. By being aimed in a strictly Gamist
>> sense at those wanting to get to 20th level in a RL year, it makes the
>> characters grow up far too quickly. It's hard to build a decent
>> background when the PCs can teleport across it a month after leaving
>> their parents' ruined hovel as a 1st level fighter.
>
> One of the things that snaps my suspenders of disbelief, yeah. I choose
> to ignore it as much as I can.
>
> However, I've considered several times limiting PCs to one adventure per
> year. Not a hard 'this is all that is possible' sort of thing, but that
> adventure-worthy things come up about that often. Gain one, maybe two
> levels per adventure. This'll cause the PCs to gain levels at a
> somewhat 'sane' rate (world-wise), without messing with the RL-timing.
One character level per game year, hard limit. Turns out the 3e
style of hectically trying to get yourself killed every day and waking
up as a team of demi-gods a few weeks later doesn't match any kind of
story I'm much interested in long-term.
Adventure can be terrifying intermissions in an otherwise
reasonably normal life, and generally something to be avoided; gives the
characters "back story" time to grow together and come alive.
Plus, writing up a couple year's background to an event doesn't
seem so out of place if it'll take two or three years in game to resolve.
Perhaps that's my middle age bias coming out.
--
tussock
Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
~consul
> On Mon, 14 May 2007 07:59:07 -0700, Eric P.
> ]It's reasonable, I think, to assume (yes, dangerous word!) that a given
> ]represented by players, unless it's specifically decided that the
> ]heroes in play are the only ones of their level of ability and
> ]experience.
> adventuring groups. My players encountered a number of NPC
> adventuring groups in my campaign. Sometimes they would be lost and
> trying to find their way out, sometimes they would argue with the
> player characters over who had the 'rights' to a particular dungeon
> level.
That was something that I liked about Shackeled City, as it had NPC groups that came in and out, and grew in power with the PC's doing "Other Stuff".
--
"... respect, all good works are not done by only good folk. For here, at the end of all things, we shall do what needs to be done."
--till next time, Jameson Stalanthas Yu -x- <<poetry.dolphins-cove.com>>
~consul
>> However, I've considered several times limiting PCs to one adventure per
>> year. Not a hard 'this is all that is possible' sort of thing, but that
>> adventure-worthy things come up about that often. Gain one, maybe two
>> levels per adventure. This'll cause the PCs to gain levels at a
>> somewhat 'sane' rate (world-wise), without messing with the RL-timing.
> One character level per game year, hard limit. Turns out the 3e
> style of hectically trying to get yourself killed every day and waking
> up as a team of demi-gods a few weeks later doesn't match any kind of
> story I'm much interested in long-term.
> Adventure can be terrifying intermissions in an otherwise reasonably
> normal life, and generally something to be avoided; gives the characters
> "back story" time to grow together and come alive.
> Plus, writing up a couple year's background to an event doesn't seem
> so out of place if it'll take two or three years in game to resolve.
> Perhaps that's my middle age bias coming out.
Anything to justify a life not yet wasted? ;)