Frustrated by Party Composition

[mmu1]

They tend to leave their enemies dead behind them, so no future villains will know their incredible tendancy to avoid explosions. (Which is a shame, as I'm about to take them into 'Spider Queen, and there's a few good Evocation specialists in there who are going to get a very nasty surprise!)

I'm curious, what's the party make-up, exactly? CotSQ has a decent amount of Evokers, but there's also a load of creatures that will require some pretty tough Fort and Will saves. Unless everyone has a lot of monk levels, it sounds like a good chunk of your party will be getting poisoned and running away in fear...

You make them sound very rash, I can't wait for the description of their encounter with Lady Quallen...

 

[elbandit]

Character class is a metagame concept, that explains/provides the mechanics by which the in-game character exists and behaves.

That is a nice thought but in practice I see players looking for what "cool new abilities" they could get with a new class as opposed to what would mechanically represent thier character.

I have a rogue in the party that wants to fight with a Rapier and throwing axe and his initial idea was to take a single level of Ranger and he said to me..."I could be get a level of ranger and get the two feats I want AND get track as a bonus not that I really need it". I just sighed and said no.

Why did I say no? Because he was trying to get the quick fix to his character concept instead of waiting till later in the game to do it. Plus I hate people taking 1 level of ranger for the twin weapon fighting feats.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Plus I hate people taking 1 level of ranger for the twin weapon fighting feats.

Again, doesn't bother me.

The advantages of two-weapon fighting are small enough that it almost qualifies more as a flavour concept than a mechanical power-up.

And it slows down his rogue progression, and he risks XP penalties if he isn't careful...

More power to him, I say

-Hyp.

 

[tarchon]

It's now got so obsessional amongst my players that one of them is making a new Paladin character. With a level of monk!

What! A religious warrior who's also a monk!? Getouttahere.

 

[Monde]

In Our Campaigns you have to have some exposure to a class or skills to multi class.

The DM will not let you take a level of Barbarian if you have been living in Silverymoon and taking "missions" form there. We have to find people to train us if we wish to multiclass.

It is very odd that a Wizard who spends all of his time in the wilderness suddenly knows evastion and how to pick locks. If he was in a city and someone has shown him to do it different story.

I had a bard 8/ranger 3 because we spent an even amount of time in the wilderness and towns. I was the scout for the party and only took my first ranger level after spending 2 bardic levels scouting. Our DM thought that I had spent enought time in the wilderness to have aquired the experience to be a ranger.

We always play like this. 1st level is something you are taught any other class that you wish to take someone must teach to you.

 

[yennico]

Hello Hypersmurf,

I had a stand-up argument with a DM once. She insisted that a Paladin/Rogue was an impossibility, because, quote, "Rogues are thieves".

A few weeks later, I submitted three completely different Paladin/Rogues for a new game she was starting. I don't think she ever replied...

-Hyp.

IIRC in one of the WotC splat books ( IIRC DotF) is a rog/paladin.

Just my 2 cents
yennico

 

[Bauglir]

It is very odd that a Wizard who spends all of his time in the wilderness suddenly knows evastion and how to pick locks. If he was in a city and someone has shown him to do it different story.

No odder than the same wizard getting up one morning and suddenly realising he can cast fireballs now.

 

[Monde]

No odder than the same wizard getting up one morning and suddenly realising he can cast fireballs now.

Excactly that is why any new skills or spells have to either be taught or studied before you can use them. Clerics need to spend the amount of hours equal to the spell level praying to receive any new divine spells.

These are house Rules as we found level advancement to be very fast and our party prefers to Roleplay level advancement.

 

[mmu1]

Re: Re: Frustrated by Party Composition

What! A religious warrior who's also a monk!? Getouttahere.

Uh-huh. Nothing strange whatsoever with combining an idealised chivalrous knight with a cartoonish wire-fu based martial artist.

Just because the class is misnamed a monk doesn't mean it has anything in common with monastic knight orders like the Templars...

 

[Hypersmurf]

Re: Re: Re: Frustrated by Party Composition

Uh-huh. Nothing strange whatsoever with combining an idealised chivalrous knight with a cartoonish wire-fu based martial artist.

Just because the class is misnamed a monk doesn't mean it has anything in common with monastic knight orders like the Templars...

What's your point? Show me anything in the Class Description of the 3E Paladin that suggests he's an "idealised chivalrous knight".

He's devoted to the ideals of law and good. He has a mount.

Nothing to say he has to be part of a knightly order, wear plate armor, use a lance... he just has to champion law and good.

How is that out of line with a must-be-lawful wire-fu hero?

-Hyp.