Help! A player wants to play "Captain America"

[Rechan]

I'm stunned at the amount of negativity here. Are you kidding? In a game where in 3e we had kung fu guys punching dragons, a man with a shield and a fist is somehow breaking your suspension of disbelief? He doesn't want to wear blue spandex and fight for the US of A; he just wants to fight with a fist and shield, and be a Strong, Noble Fellow.

The player knows exactly what he wants. It's not beyond the realm of possibility. It's inventive and fun and works in Sword and Sorcery, damnit. If he wanted to play a half-Tri-keen storm trooper, then certainly I could see a problem, but this is not one.

But then, perhaps I'm weird. I'd rather cator to the players, give them the game they want while still ensuring that it's balanced, rather than tell them No. Considering that I let my PCs flesh out areas of the campaign setting, and pursue their own goals, the game is about their character. I want my players to be entitled; it gives me direction.

WIth that said, I highly recommend this line of argument go into a separate thread instead of clogging up my rules-question thread. Got a beef with the concept, go talk about it on General. I want to know how to do it, not stomp on the player's idea.

 

[mlund]

We had a two-weapon shield fighter / slinger back in the 3.5 days in Living Greyhawk. Mongo wasn't particularly good at fighting compared to a dedicated power attacker, but we got through things OK.

The concept has certainly been supported in recent WotC 3.5 products and there is no reason why you can't give it a go in 4.0.

The previously mentioned Monk Conversion has some great references for converting unarmed damage and other non-standard weapon attacks.

Personally, I recommend giving the Light Shield a 1d8, one-handed weapon profile for bashing with a +3 Proficiency bonus (comparable to a Long Sword) and the Heavy Shield a 1d10 with a +2 Proficiency bonus (comparable to a Warhammer). Whatever direction the character takes, swap out any Military Weapon Proficiencies for special use of Shield and Fists.

For the "glove" attack, I recommend making it a 1d6 weapon with +3 to hit and the "off-hand" property - comparable to a Short Sword.

Adjust the character's starting gold downward the combined cost of a Longsword and a Short Sword and make sure that Magic Weapons for this character take the form of Gloves / Gauntlets or Shields w/ Weapon Enchantments instead of typical Shield Enchantments.

If you do that you keep all the mechanics pretty much identical, preserving balance, but you've let the character flavor his equipment and fighting style to suit his own brand of cool.

- Marty Lund

 

[KarinsDad]

Are you kidding? In a game where in 3e we had kung fu guys punching dragons, a man with a shield and a fist is somehow breaking your suspension of disbelief?

...

WIth that said, I highly recommend this line of argument go into a separate thread instead of clogging up my rules-question thread. Got a beef with the concept, go talk about it on General. I want to know how to do it, not stomp on the player's idea.

You set the table. You gave people the idea that this guy wants this concept or nothing in your first post with the way you phrased it. So, you inadvertently invited this type of conversation. It's not that people were trying to be negative, it's that you inadvertently set them up to respond that they wouldn't do it in their game.


As I see it, there are no worthwhile fighting unarmed rules or classes in the 4E system. They probably will not exist until PHB II. So adding them in at this point is a houserule. It's like asking to change up the system to create a PC monk class. Punching is an improvised weapon in 4E. That's the rule. If you want it to be more damage than that and to work with class powers and feats, it requires houserules.

With that said, I highly recommend this line of questions go into the house rules forum instead of "clogging up" the rules forum. This question has nothing to do with the rules. It has to do with modifying the rules to accomodate the character concept.

 

[thundershot]

I had a concept back in 3E having a Captain America character... A paladin that used that returning shield from the Expanded Psionics Handbook.... Never came to be, alas...



Chris

 

[Jasperak]

Let him play a Fighter. Allow a feat that lets him add damage to his punch attack (d4+1+ST i think). Allow a feat that lets him shield bash, and a feat that requires shield bash, and allows him to throw his shield (medium shield - 5 squares, heavy shield - 3 squares). Maybe one more to let him catch it after it is thrown, up to you.

A heavy, weighted gauntlet could conceivably do d6 base damage, but it would most likely be a specialty weapon.

Option 2: Let him play a melee Cleric. The flavor text for any ranged spell is he throws his shield, any melee attack he punches with his glove or shield. With this option he needs to learn shield, and needs good ST and Wisdom, just like Cap. His weapon damage could be based off any one-handed weapon, like war-hammer. His Gloves will cost as much as a War-hammer.

Remember that flavor text is just that. If Lance of faith becomes Flying Shield of Justice, few should complain. "Why does it do Radiant Damage?"

"Because he's Captain ****'ing America."

Option 2 FTW. That is awesome. This post should have finished this thread. I cannot wait to see what else everyone has come up with.

EDIT:
Question 1) Rygar or Captain America, whats the difference?

Question 2) Why all the hate against a concept that seems like it would work with only minor flavor reskinning?

Nowhere does it look like the player would be getting any advantage over another player. This is 4e people; leave your Conan/Tolkein-only fantasy at the door. Look at all of the powers and tell me Captain American doesn't have a place in D&D. D&D can make room for 1st-level teleporting but not shield throwing and punching?

Question 3) Why are people getting pissy at something they don't have to allow at their own table?

 

[ValhallaGH]

Moved

 

[Jasperak]

What I find great about this thread is all the different ways people are coming up with to make Captain America.

 

[Umbran]

With that said, I highly recommend this line of questions go into the house rules forum instead of "clogging up" the rules forum. This question has nothing to do with the rules. It has to do with modifying the rules to accomodate the character concept.

KarinsDad, perhaps you have forgotten that we don't find the "that's a houserule, go talk about it over there," form of dismissal to be appropriate. Please review the Special civility rules for rules forums to refresh your memory.

Everyone - if you think something is inappropriate for this forum, you should report the post, rather than try to personally police the rules forum. If nothing else, you'll need a moderator to actually move the discussion. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I would say Warlord (multi feat into Ranger)

Count the shield as a D8 +2 prof High crit

redo the throw anything feat from 3.5 That should do the trick/

 

[ryryguy]

Rechan -

There's a few things that might depend on what exactly the player is envisioning.

Does he want specifically to fight "unarmed"? If not, then just copy the stats for any one handed martial weapon and say it's the "leather fighting gauntlet". If finding enchanted ones as treasure hurts your idea of realism in your game world, you can always say the fallen empire of Rah-key Ba'alboah perfected a long-lost fighting technique using this gauntlet. So while you wouldn't find them on the shelf at the local village weaponsmith, it's perfectly reasonable to find a rare, ancient magic one in a dragon hoard. Plus, the players can always enchant them too. So you might only need to place one or two as treasure over the whole campaign.

Hopefully he doesn't want to be pure unarmed too... I'd try to steer him away from that. You can do as suggested for the ranger/monk, but I think that solution is lacking because if you can't get the enchantment bonuses (including bonus critical damage) on your unarmed attack, you'll lag behind. You'll still need some kind of gloves or "ki straps" or whatever in that case.

You mention that he might want to "eventually" throw the shield. Does he fight mainly with the glove and the shield is just a secondary attack? And does he want to bash with the shield in melee too? And if so, is melee shield just a side thing or a major feature?

If it's a secondary attack, then the build I'd go for is sword and shield fighter, with a feat allowing him to throw the shield as a weapon - again, copy the stats for a one handed martial throwing weapon to use for the thrown shield. For balance, compare if he actually had the throwing weapon instead of a shield, and the Two Weapon Defense feat. Feat 1: you can throw a light shield like a 1d6 thrown weapon (choose one and copy stats). (Same AC bonus as TWD) Feat 2: You can throw a heavy shield like a 1d8 thrown weapon (choose one and copy stats). (Better AC bonus but one more feat.) He's doing a little better than the standard two-weapon melee/thrown fighter with TWF/TWD because he also gets the Ref bonus from the shield, but... meh. He's not getting the to-hit bonus of TWF, I think it's pretty much a wash.

For minor melee, a third feat allows him to treat the shield as an off-hand weapon doing 1d6 (choose 1d6 weapon and copy stats). But for balance, he can't use the shield as a weapon for purposes of TWF/TWD feats. He can mix in some of the fighter's shield related exploits as well.

Finally, going with this shield-as-weapon style, let him find and make shields that are enchanted just like weapons. (Any enchantment that can affect a thrown weapon.) No defensive enchantments on these shields, that would break the slot system. It will be expensive for him to bear the cost of two separate enchanted weapons (shield and glove) which makes me less afraid it'll be broken.

If he wants shield attacking and throwing as major features, that's going to be a little tougher. I do like the idea of the cleric whose ranged powers just have the flavor text of a shield throw. In this case do not treat the shield as a weapon, treat it as an implement. You can hold an implement and a shield simultaneously so there's no balance impact I can see. He'll be just like a regular cleric with an enchanted implement for ranged powers and an enchanted weapon (glove) for melee.

Finally, if the shield is a major feature and it's usable ranged, I think you pretty much have to go ranger, because ranger is the ranged attacker. Tacking ranged stuff onto paladin or fighter just isn't going to work IMHO. I'd say for the shield ranger just follow the above advice about throwing and bashing feats and shield enchantments, and I think you could use the regular ranger build otherwise.

I like that you're trying to accommodate your player's wishes. However you do have to be sure that he still does have to make some choices. He can't have everything - he can't be as good a defender as a fighter and as good a ranged attacker as a ranger by loading too many goodies onto his shield abilities. I'm not saying he's some crazy munchkin trying to break the rules here, and it sounds like you are sensitive to the issue. It's just that you can venture into the "too much" zone accidentally when you're in accommodation mode.

In fact I think the idea of presenting him with different builds based on the different classes is a perfect way of framing this. That should help you present the trade-offs in a clear and concrete way. "This guy (fighter) mainly beats people up with his glove, and can throw the shield for minor damage... this guy (ranger) can actually use his shield with lots of fancy powers, but he's more fragile in melee..." etc.