Help me with a kick butt char

[Bryan898]

I found out that I don't like only core. But this is what I quickly came up with (based loosely on the earlier character):

human Paladin 2/ Fighter 8; HD 2d10+4 plus 8d10+16 (HP 120); Init +5; Spd 20'; AC 24 t 11 ff 23 (+13 armor, + 1 dex); Bab/Grp +10/+14; Atk +16/+11 melee (2d6+8 /17-20/x2, adamantite greatsword); SA detect evil at will, lay on hands 6 hp, smite evil 1/day +3 Atk +2 Dmg; SQ Aura of good, divine grace; AL LG; SV Fort +18 Ref +12 Will +11; Abilities Str 18 Dex 12 Con 14 Int 8 Wis 10 Cha 16.
Skills: Not very many or very good, he/ she is a paladin after all; Feats: Greater Weapon Focus (Greatsword), Improved Critical (Greatsword), Improved Initiative, Improved Sunder, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Power Attack, Quick Draw, Weapon Focus (Greatsword), Weapon Specialization (Greatsword).
Possessions: Adamantite greatsword, +5 full plate, +4 cloak of resistance

 

[Thanee]

...Improved Sunder...

Yeah, right! A game with a two magic items limit, and you pick Improved Sunder!



Bye
Thanee

 

[Shadeus]

Yeah, right! A game with a two magic items limit, and you pick Improved Sunder!



Bye
Thanee

With only 2 magic items per person, odds are good you wouldn't sunder a magic item! And actually, with those abilites, take a 5 ranks in Hide and then you have a perfect candidate for a blackguard.

 

[LordSloth]

2 magic items? thats rather low. Ive always been a fan of magic items that envolve spells somehow, since many low level spells have superior effects than the low level enchantments. For prices on these things theres the "Estimating magic item cost" table in the SRD.

I would suggest putting continuous true strike on your weapon (1*1*2000*4) (possibly *1.5 if your DM rules that true strike is not something that a weapon would have affinity for) While not as good as a +X enchantment when facing a DR opponent, overall it means you pretty much hit unless you throw a critical miss. You can also drop the continuous part if you put it use activated on your weapon (activate on swing). your first attack is without true strike but every consequent swing of the encounter charges you up with true strike for the next one. If you have the money to spare, put speed on your true striking weapon. the one thing better than an attack that rarely misses is 2 attacks that rarely miss

Other fun stuff to put 'on swing' on your weapons is for example healing (i'd say faith healing but thats not core) even a lowly cure light of lvl 1 heals you 1d8+1 every time you take a swing at something (you dont have to hit according to the 'use activated' wording in the SRD). Also, between encounters you can just swing for a while and be at full health for the next one (1*1*2000*1.5(weapons dont have affinity for healing unless your DM is a nutcase )

Boots of continuous expeditious retreat (1*1*2000*2) are also not to be scoffed at. Especially in a tough world, extra manouvering in battle is a good thing, and flat out being able to outrun whatever is chasing you is also handy. If you are a rogue, also add trackless step to your footwear.

Another great low level spell to put on your items is command word mage armor. Afreely refreshable source of extra AC, who doesnt want that?

Anyway, i realise i havent really given you a character, just some ranting about spells on items. If you can bare to be a little fragile (other meatshields in the party) i advise to go dual wielding rogue (2-weapon fighting, weapon finesse, improved 2weap and whatever else you fancy) with true strike/hasted weapon (and cure light if you can manage the cost) and whatever other magic item you might fancy (maybe a second hasted weapon but i suggest you go for something defensive in nature like expeditious boots or a decent armor that gives con bonus or something AC boosting like mage armor). As long as you make sure you have flanking (can't be hard with barbarians and fighter etc around) you are doing lots of sneak attacks (2 bab, 1 haste, 2 offhand) on a fullround action and they rarely ever miss.

You can also be a little safer and go for a ranged rogue (be an elf for bow profs) and do your sneak attacks from a slight distance (though your damage output is way lower since you have less attacks and usually only the first one is sneak attack due to the high penalty on your hide check imposed by sniper shots.

I know rogues arent the sturdiest of characters but every decent party needs one and with proper love and care they become real damage machines (though still remaining pretty fragile)

 

[calypso15]

I would suggest putting continuous true strike on your weapon (1*1*2000*4) (possibly *1.5 if your DM rules that true strike is not something that a weapon would have affinity for)

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to read any farther than this...

Calypso

 

[Thanee]

LOL, yeah, someone simply hasn't understood the item creation rules there.

Sorry, LordSloth, but that is pure nonsense!

Bye
Thanee

 

[LordSloth]

I convinced my DM to allow it on grounds of the wording and he didnt find anything to fault it (and he did look

Now i do get that its prolly not allowed (instinctivly due to overpoweredness) but be nice to the noobie dnd player

I dont get why though, if you can get a ring of continuous invisibility or some such thing, why not true strike. It also has a duration measured in rounds so should be subject to *4, no? What am i missing?

 

[Rackhir]

I convinced my DM to allow it on grounds of the wording and he didnt find anything to fault it (and he did look

Now i do get that its prolly not allowed (instinctivly due to overpoweredness) but be nice to the noobie dnd player

I dont get why though, if you can get a ring of continuous invisibility or some such thing, why not true strike. It also has a duration measured in rounds so should be subject to *4, no? What am i missing?

A little thing called game balance. True strike is an extremely powerful spell if in the hands of a combat character. This is one of the reasons that it is a self only spell, so that a mage can't simply cast it on someone else. The action required to cast the spell or drink a potion is also a serious limitation on the use of the spell, since it prevents it from being used continously. Effectively what you are proposing eliminates all the checks on the effectivenes of the spell and for a trivial cost. Perhaps it is simply too good a spell for first level, but it does give the mages a chance of hitting things with their crossbow.

You are right in that strictly by the game rules, your item is permisable. However, that is one of the reasons you have a DM, to prevent game breaking things from being used. The DM is not simply a slave to the rules and can change them as necessary. That is one of the main reasons for having a DM, to be able to inject common sense into situations that might be within the letter of the law, but completely violate the spirit of the game. Your DM didn't do his job in permitting the item in the first place.

EDIT: Actually true strike does not have a "duration" per se. The SRD spell description says "See text", for duration. "The character's next single attack roll (if it is made before the end of the next round)". It specifies a single attack roll, not that the effects last until the character's next turn. So it doesn't have the "duration" that you need to calculate the costs of the spell in the item. I would rule that for that reason it couldn't be embeded in an item as a continual use spell. At best I would permit it to be used once per round.

 

[LordSloth]

Myes thats what i figured too but the people above seem to hint at an actual rule reason why its not allowed. Ive not been playing DnD very long so i am very willing to admit that there is an enormous amount of rules that i dont know.

Your point about game balance is offcourse valid, i do understand that this takes a backseat to the wording of the rules. If i were a DM (which i hopefully never will be, but thats not the point) i would also rule against it. Just wanted to know if there was an actual rule against it or not.

 

[Rackhir]

Your point about game balance is offcourse valid, i do understand that this takes a backseat to the wording of the rules. If i were a DM (which i hopefully never will be, but thats not the point) i would also rule against it. Just wanted to know if there was an actual rule against it or not.

Check my edited post above for a possible explanation of why you can't make such an item as you describe.