Skill Levels - Too High or Am I High Handed?

[Presto2112]

1) If this is a legal build, don't penalize the character unless this is not the kind of game you want to run. "I want to run high-combat, with conversatoins as just flavor-text to get you to the next combat" is perfectly legitimate, but this is an awful character for that kind of campaign, because he has the ability to affect the plot with his social skills.

2) This character can be a blessing, because he's powerful enough that you can really unleash a nasty skill-based opponent. Ordinarily, an opponent with a +20 Bluff check can't really act, because he could say "I'm actually your father under the effect of a Polymorph spell -- I only look like a black dragon" and the party would fall for it, and then have to roleplay "The black dragon sounding believable" when it says such idiotic stuff as that and succeeds in its bluff check.

3) Allow this character to succeed in trivial cases. Let him bluff his way past the guard easily, when the other people have to sneak by or beat up the guard. Let him find out stuff that might not have shown up until next chapter. Plan for these kinds of skills, both in terms of "Special Challenges designed to let this guy shine" and "What do I do if he succeeds here?" I once had a character turn an opponent from Hostile to Friendly with a diplomacy check of 37. Had to do some fast thinking, there. Changed quite a bit of that adventure.

4) Read up on these skills. Know the rules. Diplomacy has limitations. It can turn someone Friendly, but that doesn't mean that they're charmed. It means that they will deal with you in this situation as they'd deal with someone they liked. If you've just been caught robbing the king's vault, and Diplomacy turns a guard Friendly, that means that he's going to give you a chance to come peacefully, just like he'd do if he found a friend robbing the king's vault. He doesn't say, "Oh, okay then, off you go, good luck selling that loot!" By the same token, Gather Information only works if that information is known by someone in the area, and it takes several hours.

5) Consider modifying the rules to let the player have more choices. I use a "-5 per time increment shorter" approach for some of my players and things like "Research" or "Gather Information". He can take the usual "several hours" as normal, or he can drop to "tens of minutes" for -5, "single minutes" for -10, or "single rounds" for -15, or even "single round" for -20. At a +17, that guy would find out a ton of useful stuff in two to five hours, but he could also find out some stuff in just one hour (the tens of minutes setting, -5 penalty), giving him the option of hurrying stuff up. If you put a time limit on things ("We've got to find out where the assassin's guild is located by midnight, and it's already 10:30!"), this means that the checks get harder, and the PC gets to shine by doing something that would ordinarily be just about impossible.

This build, if legal, is perfectly viable. It's just something you have to plan for, just as if the character had, well, spells.

I'd offer this as extra advice. A lot of these skill can often require opposable checks. If tis character has high ranks in Diplomacy, Bluff, etc., his / her main rival could be just as high in Sense Motive and other similar checks. Nothing stopping you from stymying him / her with someone equal in opposing skills. Don't have the nemesis show up everywhere, mind you, but enough to become annoying.

 

[Endur]

These skill levels are not out of line for a 3.5 min-max 6th level character. Just like somebody who is playing an Half Orc Barbarian might have a Strength of 22 not counting rage. (Str 17, +2 race + 1 level +2 gauntlets of ogre power).

For better or worse, D&D is all about specialization.

I was wondering if I if am being too high-handed for the sake of game balance, or has one my player's created a character that is out of line.

One of my player has a Bluff +17, Diplomacy +23, Intimidate +18, Gather Information +17, and Sense Motive at +14. The character is only 6th level. Essentially, the character is a "Face Man," but these skill levels are out of line, right? No?

Any comments?

 

[Kalendraf]

In 3.5, skill boost items are slightly more expensive than they were back in 3e, but they are still pretty gosh darn cheap. The new pricing is only 100 x bonus squared, so items that confer a small bonus are pretty cheap. Achieving the numbers you have listed appears to be within reach for a 6th level character, though they would likely have to pour nearly all their resources (skills, feats, items, etc) to reach it.

The 23 ranks in diplomacy looks high, but it is reachable:
9 ranks + 2 synergy (bluff) + 2 synergy (sense motive) + 2 racial bonus for being half-elf + 2 negotiator feat + 4 charisma modifer (18 cha) + 2 skill boost item (costs only 400 gp) = 23 Other feats like skill focus (diplomacy) or a higher skill boost item could push that number even higher.

The other numbers you listed are all lower, but have similar skill synergies and feats to allow them to be nearly as high. I would guess the character is legit, and now it's up to you as DM as to how to handle it. A character such as this will be great in many non-combat situations, but may be pretty pathetic in an actual fight.

 

[JPL]

I think the trick is to tailor adventures to the PCs in such a way that everyone gets a chance to do their thing...but in a way that doesn't derail that whole adventure.

Faceman never pulled a con that wrapped up the whole adventure [episode] with a neat little bow. He pulled cons that moved the story forward, cons that solved one little subproblem. But only the combined talents of the group got the whole job done.

And Face wasn't just a specialist. He could fight. He could help build crazy crap. Your player might want to keep in mind that they will eventually run up against, say, hordes of zombies, and all the charm in the world won't help.

 

[Zaarastara]

First off, thanks everyone for responding to this post. I appreciate it.

The character in question is a Warrior 1, Courtier 3, Expert 2, Wizard 1. In my campaign, the characters started with NPC classes and moved into their respective PC classes. Everyone essentially designed their characters as an NPC for free, and then added a 1st Level class. This character joined the group when everyone was 4th level.

The Courtier is from Rokugan (yes, I got talked into allowing it and did not see the stacking potential) which gets huge bonuses to Charisma based skills. The Expert is from Unearthed Arcana and provides the player with a wealth of feats. The math all adds up.

The problem is that she far outstrips all of my NPCs in the social department. The city's bishop is considered very social based and he can't hold a candle to this character. The PC is completely social based, having no combat skill and very low rankings in knowledge based skills. Her primary focus is social interaction. However, in that capacity she is unbeatable.

Sure, I could go gunning for her socially. Make NPCs that are able to keep up with this 16 year spoiled princess. Yes, the character is only 16 years old. However, that just seems contrived. I have asked the player to remake the character under "Core Rules" and I have faced some strong resistance. I was wondering if I am just being a control freak by wanting some balance in the campaign world.

 

[Mallus]

I don't see a problem with the character. Plenty of weaknesses and one real strength.

As DM, though, you have to remember that its up to you to interpret what those die rolls actual mean, and the scope of the what they can accomplish.
Its up the DM to provide a super-social character a sense that their abilities matter, but it hardly means that skill set is the solution to every problem. Sometimes persuation isn't just isn't enough, no matter how persuasive you are...

A charming character without wealth, power, or powerful allies is still charming, but hardly capable of winning everyone over to their will. Unless all their after is a dinner date. Then they're set.

 

[Anabstercorian]

I'd say you are entirely within your rights to demand he remakes his character 'core'.

 

[JPL]

Isn't the UA Expert really designed for campaigns where the standard character classes aren't available?

Well, no matter. As DM, you are well within your rights to step in and point out that this particular combo isn't working out.

On the other hand...why not just have some NPCs around who are equally tricked out? In a world where there are super-persuasive teenagers, the adults will surely be equipped to handle them with massive Sense Motive bonuses.

But this character is really a one-trick pony. Yes, she's great socially. Put her in a dungeon and bust out the zombie hordes and suddenly she looks UNDER-powered.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

The courtier is not core, and you're allowed, as DM, to ban anything non-core from your game without being a control-freak. (You can ban core stuff too, but you better have a good explanation )

As it is, Diplomacy isn't well-designed (the DC doesn't very with the "victim" of the Diplomacy attempt), and hampered by DMs not remembering the massive number of confusing rules (there's a -10 penalty for rushed Diplomacy, you can't use Diplomacy on someone who is hostile, petrified with fear or just not listening, not to mention "ad hoc" modifiers), and so forth.

Seems to me classes shouldn't be handing out bonuses to Diplomacy. Even the bard doesn't get such bonuses (although glibness is broken IMO - Bluffing, except for combat bluffing, is still silly).

 

[shilsen]

Sure, I could go gunning for her socially. Make NPCs that are able to keep up with this 16 year spoiled princess. Yes, the character is only 16 years old. However, that just seems contrived. I have asked the player to remake the character under "Core Rules" and I have faced some strong resistance. I was wondering if I am just being a control freak by wanting some balance in the campaign world.

Firstly, I would say that this PC is already balanced. You have a character which is incredibly specialized and hence incredibly good in one area and lousy at everything else. The general lack of expertise balances out the narrow specialization.

That being said, I don't think there's anything wrong with asking the player to remake the character under "Core Rules". As long as everyone else in the campaign is facing the same restrictions, you're being completely fair. Personally I would not do it, simply because I don't think what you have described is as big a problem as you describe (for a lot of reasons other posters have already mentioned on this thread), but if it is a serious issue for you, go ahead.