the Hexer, AWESOME!...oh no I take that back

[pickin_grinnin]

Taking something because of story reasons or even making a character who is not a combat powerhouse is completely alien to them. And those people have slowly took over D&D as WotC caters to them more and more.

Yep.

You should see the flak I took over playing a dirt farmer in one campaign. Not from the DM or other players, but from some commenters on ENWorld. They simply couldn't conceive of a character with no standard class skills being an active and useful member of a campaign.

 

[Ahnehnois]

As with many things, the issue with the hexer is simply logical. Why have a prereq of Lightning Bolt as a divine spell? What is it about that specific spell that qualifies one to learn hexes?

The answer appears to be nothing. It's just a proxy way of saying "this class is for adepts". But by not saying what they mean, whoever wrote this created a loophole by which someone could get this one arbitrary spell from a divine source and qualify for a prestige class.

The lesson is that if you want a class to be for adepts only, say it explicitly.

***

Regardless, PF's witch is a better take on some pretty similar content, and it makes more sense for this concept to be available from level 1 rather than as an add-on to adepts.

 

[Ahnehnois]

You should see the flak I took over playing a dirt farmer in one campaign. Not from the DM or other players, but from some commenters on ENWorld. They simply couldn't conceive of a character with no standard class skills being an active and useful member of a campaign.

The first time I did something like that made by brain hurt too. D&D strongly suggests to us this notion of mercenary treasure-hunter superheroes; it's very difficult to unlearn that.

 

[emanresu]

my groups wants to fantasy role/roll play. If you live in a city and are always on concrete, well dirt farm away. You can roll to see how fast you dig a ditch and how far you throw a rock. For me, I've lived on a ranch, that'll be of no fun for me.

 

[Halivar]

The solution is to get your DM to waive restrictions if your character fits the "flavor" of the class, if not the actual mechanical requirements. When the rules are adhered to too strictly, they become a noose around the neck of fun.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Yep.

You should see the flak I took over playing a dirt farmer in one campaign. Not from the DM or other players, but from some commenters on ENWorld. They simply couldn't conceive of a character with no standard class skills being an active and useful member of a campaign.

I saw that thread.

I have to say that your description, at least, did not leave me with the impression that your PC pulled his weight. (And I'm the guy who usually gets criticized for my unusual PCs...)

 

[Derren]

I have to say that your description, at least, did not leave me with the impression that your PC pulled his weight. (And I'm the guy who usually gets criticized for my unusual PCs...)

Why does every PC has to "pull weight" equally anyway?
Why not just play for the story and how it unfolds (not necessarily meaning a predefined railroad story, but also where the actions of the PCs lead to in a sandbox game) where "not pulling as much weight" is simply part of it? Why not simply be the "loyal henchman" to the heroic (super)heroes instead of relegating that role to an overlooked NPC?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Why does every PC has to "pull weight" equally anyway?
Why not just play for the story and how it unfolds (not necessarily meaning a predefined railroad story, but also where the actions of the PCs lead to in a sandbox game) where "not pulling as much weight" is simply part of it? Why not simply be the "loyal henchman" to the heroic (super)heroes instead of relegating that role to an overlooked NPC?

Note that nowhere in my post did I use the word "equally."

But to rephrase: perhaps it was the way in which the story of the PC was presented, but it seemed as if the character described was a henchman who had almost no reason to be present on an adventure. He was a dirt farmer- not someone's squire, not someone's animal handler, etc.

Strong arguments have been made that Samwise Gamgee is the hero of LotR. He had motivation and purpose within the context of the story to be placed where he was, and how he acted was consistent with it.

I simply didn't get that vibe from the dirt farmer PC at all. Why would a dirt farmer- one clearly still interested in being a dirt farmer- leave his farm on an adventure?

For the proper context:

I once played a dirt farmer as a character in D&D 3e. Not as a one-shot - I played him for the whole campaign.

He had no fighting skills, no magic of any kind, no thievery skills, etc. His skills all revolved around farming. His stats were not particularly high, he had no weapons or armor, and he was a little eccentric. He had no interest in treasure or magic items. He mostly enjoyed digging things up and poking around in bushes and such. I played him as a challenge to myself, to see how well I could run a character who was pretty much a peasant with no skills that were applicable to the campaign.

The DM understood what I was doing, though the other players didn't. They just sort of tolerated me. While they fought, I poked around in the bushes, or dug in the dirt. When we went into cities, I explored trash bins and sewers. Etc. etc. The DM did a lot of rolls at various times to see if I stumbled across something interesting, but I generally didn't.

Until one day I did. My non-stop hunting and poking led me to discover something that nobody else did (or ever would have), which ended up having campaign-changing significance. In fact, the character ended up becoming one of the most important characters in the campaign because of it.

I'm all for playing the character envisioned in the mind. I like challenging PCs. I play lots of them.

But no magic, no weapons, no armor, no fighting skills?

"While they fought, I poked around in the bushes, or dug in the dirt. "

He comes across as a freeloader- why would an adventuring party feed & protect this guy? Why wasn't he a snack for a big nasty predator? This is a PC who verges on being an NPC...of the "always needs rescuing" variety.

At some point, a challenging PC stops being a challenge to yourself and starts being a burden to the other players at the table. This one may have reached it, and pickin_grinnin knows it.
"The DM understood what I was doing, though the other players didn't. They just sort of tolerated me."

Being "tolerated" is not the best place to be, socially.

 

[Derren]

But to rephrase: perhaps it was the way in which the story of the PC was presented, but it seemed as if the character described was a henchman who had almost no reason to be present on an adventure. He was a dirt farmer- not someone's squire, not someone's animal handler, etc.

I have not read that particular thread, but generally, at least when reading the forums, I do not gain the impression that "unoptimized" is seen by the majority as a valid way to play the game. Instead combat power is the only or biggest focus of any character. And sadly WotC listens to those people which resulted among other thing in PRCs being turned from classes to represent organizations and other role playing aspects, to pure power boost.

Skills in 3E are also an example of this. Nearly everyone maxes out certain skills, even if the benefit is minimal instead of broadening out or take skills which fit the character, maybe even cross class.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Skills in 3E are also an example of this. Nearly everyone maxes out certain skills, even if the benefit is minimal instead of broadening out or take skills which fit the character, maybe even cross class.

I don't know about that. I see a fair amount of spreading around of skill points. As a DM, I have to do it a little bit more simply and straighforwardly, but people can and will spend each point with care and come out with a couple ranks in a bunch of skills.

Mind you, I definitely think there are ways the system could be altered to encourage this.