OotS #435

[Voadam]

You are assuming that the character has a build that is remotely optimally min/maxed. There is no evidence that the OotS characters are built by min/maxers. Since he's a melee build ranger, there is no particularly great reason for him to be a Halfling. Worse yet, he's a ranger with a wisdom that is so low he doesn't qualify for any of his spells, and has infamously horrible spot and listen checks. In other words, he's a got a dump stat in one of the most important attributes for a ranger.

In fact, I think the biggest problem with the above stats is that they give Belkar as much as a 10 Wis. Belkar presumably has a wisdom penalty. One of the jokes of the script is that if Belkar had more than a minimum wisdom, it would totally change his moral outlook on life. I suspect that Belkar's wisdom is closer to 6.

I'm currently playing a ranger with an 8 wisdom. You can still use wands like a cure light wounds wand, you just can't use scrolls or the few spell slots that rangers get.

For Belkar to use a scroll he has to have the wisdom to cast the spell, so with the +4 wisdom boosting spell a base 6 won't cut it.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

Belkar has d&d stats?

 

[kenobi65]

Belkar has d&d stats?

It's very well-established that the OotS is, specifically, a group of D&D 3.5 characters, and that the characters have a metagaming level of awareness of the game mechanics and their own stats, abilities, levels, etc. Rich Burlew started the strip specifically to lampoon funny things about the rules, though the strip quickly evolved beyond those simple gags.

However, Rich has also said that he won't ever reveal the actual stats of the characters (if they're actually statted out at all), because he fears it would limit what he could do with the characters.

 

[Celebrim]

I'm currently playing a ranger with an 8 wisdom. You can still use wands like a cure light wounds wand, you just can't use scrolls or the few spell slots that rangers get.

For Belkar to use a scroll he has to have the wisdom to cast the spell, so with the +4 wisdom boosting spell a base 6 won't cut it.

I had thought of that, but decided that this was one of those cases where the rules were being tossed out in favor of story.

Belkar's wisdom changes to suit the needs of the story. When its funny, Belkar's wisdom is so low he fails spot checks when the enemy is in the same panel. When its funny, Belkar's wisdom is lower than lizards and turtles. When Belkar needs a higher wisdom, spells which only mechanically offer a +4 bonus mysteriously raise it to the 13 or whatever he need to use the scroll.

I still say that Belkar and Elan both are written in such a way that their wisdom is implied to be much less than merely average.

 

[DreadArchon]

You missed the feat: Craft Disturbing Mental Image.

Er... Maybe it's a Skill Trick?

I suspect that Belkar's wisdom is closer to 6.

...No. Just no. I don't think he actually needs low enough to get a penalty, even. Things like "I just failed another Spot check, didn't I?" imply that he's actually paying attention, as do his actions in general; most of his problems come from no ranks in those skills. In fact, I'd have given him an 11 or 12, but for the fact that we know this to not be the case. Most of his "low wisdom" moments are more from not caring than from not being capable of noticing, which is fine for someone just below average.

6 would put him like three and a half standard deviations below human norm, making him severely mentally retarded... In fact, with the perceptiveness implied by a 6, I think he'd be a paranoid schizophrenic.

 

[Celebrim]

...No. Just no. I don't think he actually needs low enough to get a penalty, even.

If it wasn't low enough to get a penalty, his wisdom wouldn't stand out to his comrades as being signficantly below normal.

Things like "I just failed another Spot check, didn't I?" imply that he's actually paying attention...

No, they are another example of the metagame brought within the game from which OotS derives much of its humor. Characters in the story know things about themselves which really only their players should know.

In fact, I'd have given him an 11 or 12, but for the fact that we know this to not be the case.

And this is supposed to improve my assessment of your ability to assess what constitutes or does not constitute low wisdom?

Most of his "low wisdom" moments are more from not caring than from not being capable of noticing, which is fine for someone just below average.

First of all, 'not caring' is very much an example of what makes someone low wisdom. And secondly, how can you go from assessing his wisdom as 11 or 12 (just above average) to just below average in the space of one sentence? So which is he in your estimation, just above or just below average?

...6 would put him like three and a half standard deviations below human norm, making him severely mentally retarded...

Aren't you confusing wisdom with intelligence here? If you are thinking 14 Int = 140 IQ and 6 Int = 60 IQ, then I don't think that this method really applies as well as you think it does and less so in 3rd edition than it ever did.

In fact, with the perceptiveness implied by a 6, I think he'd be a paranoid schizophrenic.

Yeah, and with a strength of 16, he could be a professional athelete... or something. Since when did moderately low wisdom become something so extreme? A 6 wisdom implies that you are 10% less likely to notice something than average, and 10% more likely to be tricked or decieved. Paranoid schizophrenic is a whole other field. It's like comparing low wisdom to being blind. One is relative attribute. The other is an absolute condition.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

It's very well-established that the OotS is, specifically, a group of D&D 3.5 characters, and that the characters have a metagaming level of awareness of the game mechanics and their own stats, abilities, levels, etc. Rich Burlew started the strip specifically to lampoon funny things about the rules, though the strip quickly evolved beyond those simple gags.

However, Rich has also said that he won't ever reveal the actual stats of the characters (if they're actually statted out at all), because he fears it would limit what he could do with the characters.

Well i know this. I do not think he has the characters have stats. It would be silly to do so, when he says it imposes limitations on the characters themselves. So my point is, why bother trying to find thier stats as if they had them to begin with, when they never had them at all. They weren't meant to be reversed engineered, but they do make commentary on d&d. Richard gets berated by rules lawyers just about every third strip, so its a good thing he dident stat those characters or we would never hear the end of it.

oh and Voadam, i meant no offense, just making a statement in a quizitive quasi sarcastic way. I only wanted to point out the above, as alot of people must have missed my prev post.

*edit*
to be clear.

 

[orsal]

6 would put him like three and a half standard deviations below human norm, making him severely mentally retarded... In fact, with the perceptiveness implied by a 6, I think he'd be a paranoid schizophrenic.

Aren't you confusing wisdom with intelligence here? If you are thinking 14 Int = 140 IQ and 6 Int = 60 IQ, then I don't think that this method really applies as well as you think it does and less so in 3rd edition than it ever did.

All six ability scores have the same distribution in the human population. The mean is 10.5 and the standard deviation is 1.7078. So a 6 is about 2.6 standard deviations below average. That would be in the lower one-half percent of the human population. If you know 200 people well enough to get a sense of their Wisdom, the least wise of all probably has a Wisdom, in D&D terms, of about 6.

 

[Nyeshet]

Of course, now I simply MUST see the slaad.

I'm a little impressed that Belkar is so completely CE that his only alignment options left for consulting are NE, CE, and CN (ie: the two devils and the slaad). All others see to still have all four alignments (good, evil, chaos, law) to consult with, but Belkar is so thoroughly CE that only evil, chaos, and a meta-alignment of chaotic evil remain to advise him.


I still want to know how a halfling ranger with two daggers is dealing enough damage to slay various creatures with one hit (from the chimera way back to the obviously 8+ level human rogue (archer w/ rapid shot) in this strip to the various hobgoblins. Granted, the hobgoblins are likely only first or second level warriors, while he is a 12th level Ranger (11) / Barbarian (1). And it is entirely possible that he has goblinoids (and almost certainly humans) as favored enemies. But even still he seems to put out quite a bit of damage for a 2WF dagger using str-penalty race combative. Rage can help, but it barely makes up for the str penalty he has to begin with.

Personally, I'm beginning to wonder if he might be some alternative class mixing features of rogue and ranger. Sneak attack would explain a lot, after all, especially if stacked with favored weapon bonuses. As it is Belkar lacks any use of ranger magic, animal companion, etc - several of the more useful features of the class. But if he gave those up for normal sneak attack progression then suddenly a lot becomes easier to believe / take in. (Also, if I recall correctly, didn't he state he wanted more skill points in the first strip - and then got upset because he didn't get any? Yet rangers *did* get more skill points, suggesting again that perhaps Belkar's class is mixing elements of Rogue and Ranger (as rogues did not gain any more skill points.)

In any case, I think Belkar will remain a mystery for a while yet to come.

 

[orsal]

(Also, if I recall correctly, didn't he state he wanted more skill points in the first strip - and then got upset because he didn't get any?)

No. He was upset that his daggers, which used to be just like any daggers, turned into small-sized daggers. Since his manhood is so tied up with his weapon power, this was a major blow to his pride.