|
Post by Lady Winter Wolf on Nov 15, 2007 3:37:33 GMT -5
Since this is a pet peeve with many a player, I refer you to: Munchkinism The information is not meant to be a criticism, but a help guide.
|
|
|
Post by grond on Nov 15, 2007 20:18:53 GMT -5
Not to keep discussing the master of many forms but, I'm going to do that. I think that one of the best ways to power him down would be to restrict his forms list to MM1, and select mostly forms with a similar environment descriptors. That way it isn't so much like your character has traveled to every part of the multi verse that many of the rest of our PCs have never heard of. However, I also think that building a character that isn't dependent on specific treasure for his entire concept to work fully is also a good idea. Beyond that, I have no idea what to suggest.
|
|
|
Post by Rincewind on Nov 15, 2007 21:23:37 GMT -5
A guideline that may help which I mentioned for character creation of my own game: If your character REQUIRES more than two non-core books to make it enjoyable for you, it is a BAD idea. Your Master of Many Forms, for example, used about 5 non-core books minimum in just one session- one for the prestige class, one for his equipment, and three Monster Manuals other than MM1. You say you can twink with just the core rules, but honestly, if you did, it wouldn't annoy everyone else quite as much.
Ah well, just a thought to try to help you.
|
|
Tai Shar Shaidar
Braggart
Power Corrupts. Aboulute Power Corrupts Absolutely. But it Also Rocks Absolutely, Too.
Posts: 115
|
Post by Tai Shar Shaidar on Nov 15, 2007 22:07:06 GMT -5
My master of many forms restricted to MMI loses some forms, chief among those are the Wartroll, the Steel wing and, the warbound impairer. Let’s face it, all the monsters from all the MM abound in the world that our PCs exist in. And I’d have to say that in such a diverse world with as varied an array of creatures as have been presented since I joined the group it seems unlikely that a PC that has reached level 12 would be so limited in his familiar forms. Especially one like Ammon with the extensive knowledge that has of the natural world, the planes, dungeneering and the arcane, it was mentioned that Ammon needed a DC 24 knowledge the planes check to even know of the steel wing. That means that he would have to roll a 1 not to know about it. On top of that Ammon can when not rushed (i.e. Take 10) list 3 of its abilities and if he has time to stop and think about it (i.e. Take 20) he can list 5 abilities and that is all the abilities of the steel wing. I based my selection of that form on the fact that wild shape requires that you be familiar with the creature you wish to shape into. I’d say someone that can with a few moments thought list every characteristic of a monster should be considered a lot more then familiar.
Now I have not said much about it but you have all been ripping my PC apart on here and that is your right, he was overpowered for the campaign, but I won’t have it suggested that he is a Munchkin, he is not even fully optimized. I find it odd that because I pick feats, abilities and gear that compliment my PC I’m labeled a Munchkin, the master of many forms that I designed brakes no rules nor does he bend any he is built by the book, By the rules as written, even taking into account the most recent wildshape errata that restricted its power.
Ok now as to the statement that I’m gear dependent I’ll put forth that everyone is gear dependent, the only one exception that I know of is Vow of Poverty, and with out the gear that your PCs have you would have long ago died. The entire D&D concept for 3rd and 3.5 editions has been that a PC of a certain level is expected to have at least a certain value in gear to be considered on par with the advancing CR of the monsters that they face. On top of that this group is particularly well geared as you have at least 2 artifacts that I know of and a ship that could be one (if it isn’t).
Now on to concept, all my PCs do in fact have a concept behind them, but I think there is a major difference between my definition of the word and yours. My first step in designing a PC is normally a thought that starts off something like “Wouldn’t it be cool to play a PC that could ______“. That blank is never filled by be ungodly powerful, normally its something like wield 2 weapons as easily as 1, channel spells through his weapon, shift forms like a true shapeshifter. Then I design the pc and his background story. I also like to plan my PCs in advance, I see nothing wrong with that and I’ve learned by experience that randomly constructed PCs rarely get anywhere.
Now I am perfectly willing to play any class that you want me to, I’m adaptable. But I build my PCs a certain way and it has worked for me, starting story first is possible for me but I find it extremely difficult to design a story with no template to base it on. Hence the concept first design method that I use.
(I’ll apologize now if I have offended anyone I’m not trying to but I can’t just keep quiet.)
So i think i'll take Rincewind's idea and build an optomized PC from the 3 core books.
|
|
|
Post by Dragonsrule on Nov 15, 2007 23:38:09 GMT -5
Well as to are ship, you should see what we did to get ship. Ahh the memories. Burried alive in a Kobold temple. A necro who gets us in a Time Shift quandry. Boy those were the good ole days. If this guy does die, I will go back to my Original character, who died. I will go a straight up Ranger, no 1/2 dragon.
|
|
|
Post by pigdish on Nov 16, 2007 0:35:40 GMT -5
huh! I don't know what you said but in general I don't really buy into your argument about a character's familiarity about strange creatures just because they exist. I have a degree in Biology and I've studied Invertebrate Zoology, Plant Physiology, and many other topics (read as Knowledge skills) but no matter how much I've studied in any discipline I won't know every last thing out there. But you are able to validate your claims within the rules and mechanics of D&D and I can respect that.
It's true your character and in-turn you have been scrutinized for the character you recently introduced. Some if not all of the scrutiny does have merit but I don't believe it is malicious in nature. It is to maintain the integrity of the DM's game and point out the extremes of your character. Before I moved to Lancaster County I never heard of the term "Munchkin" or "Power Gamer". I've been gaming for 20 years (not just D&D) and the game has changed a lot. After playing in the groups here my initial impression of everybody I met would fit the labels of "Munchkin" or "power gamer". Before all my groups were core materials only. It was not because we didn't like the other books but more of we were happy running our homemade worlds within those rules. If we wanted something new we just made it up. Now after playing with the people here I had to adapt to the style of gaming here. Some people tend to "rules lawyers" (another term I never heard of before), while others are more carefree in their interpretation of the rules. I think the term "Munchkin" is thrown around way to much and lacks merit when directed at most people who are cited as being Munchkins. The implication of the term is that the person is cheating in some fashion or focusing on the statistical aspect of the game. News flash! D&D has always been about statistics at it's core mechanics. With the advent of D&D 3.0 the game the game became even more focused on numbers and no longer "min/max" but "max/max" a character. You not longer try to lower one value to increase another, you try to have the highest value or efficiency on EVERYTHING in the design of the character. Just look at the Skills section and you will find the synergy bonus table for example. I'm certain most people have placed points to get the most out of their skills. Are these people Munchkins? No, they are trying to play the best hero they have envisioned to play. After all the point of D&D is to play better than normal people who seek out danger and wealth rather than sitting on the farm. That's why most of the time players have higher than a 10 in an ability score. It's even more evident in our game since the DM wants a more epic campaign having us thusly roll 4d6 and keep ALL four dice. There is nothing wrong with that, it can and is fun to play an amazingly, larger than life character. I think having a person that makes a character that is thought out shows a passion for the game, possibly makes for a better player by knowing the ins-outs of their character, and it helps the party in game by providing a skill set that is beneficial to accomplishing the goals set before them. So my advice would be to think twice before calling a player a Munchkin and getting ready to burn them at the stake. Maybe it's jealousy or envy that brings the ridicule. Regardless of what it is, the game is designed for that type of behavior and players/DM need to adapt to it.
Couldn't agree more. D&D is all about the Phat L00t. Wrap it up in a complex story or a mindless dungeon crawl, somewhere along the line you want TREASURE. Treasure, treasure, treasure. High bonus, better effect, even better, and even higher. It never stops. Even that Vow of Poverty is about getting better, and higher. Just because you don't have items doesn't mean you are poor. No no no, not in D&D, the magical bonuses are almost as good with the added bonus of not having to find "stuff" to get better, you just magically get better. lol sweet! <tongue firmly in cheek>
In my opinion this is a bad way to start out the character creation process. It sets itself up for "the best" mentality. In my experience I've found it a good practice to start from the basics. Build up the character as a person THEN you can see how to be the best at what he is. But sometimes the character may not be the best at what he does. It' also important to think about HOW. How did he get that skill or item? One point I agree with is to map out the cycle of the character. I have always done that with my characters. They all have a beginning, a middle, and an end. Sometimes they don't get to the end but I always know where I want to take the character through his life. It doesn't always work out but that's why we play the game.
Phew! That was a lot of dissecting and commentating. Way past my bedtime so I'll end it here since the screen is getting blurry and my eyes are burning. DAMN YOU CAT DANDER!!!
|
|
|
Post by MjolnirH on Nov 16, 2007 9:42:50 GMT -5
chimin in cause I wanna ;D
just a question the "Master of Forms" which IMO sounds like a ridiculous concept if it moves out side the realm of animals and elements, however saw something about being 12 lvel and turning into a 12 HD creature. a 12th level character by his/her self would have serious problems going toe to toe with a 12 hd creature. so turning into a 12 HD pyrohydra is just plain goofy, I would think that toning down the creature HD such as a 12th lvel master of forms can turn into an 8th level creature. that would probably make more sense and be more balanced
just my humble opinion
|
|
|
Post by Rincewind on Nov 16, 2007 10:05:06 GMT -5
And I’d have to say that in such a diverse world with as varied an array of creatures as have been presented since I joined the group it seems unlikely that a PC that has reached level 12 would be so limited in his familiar forms. Especially one like Ammon with the extensive knowledge that has of the natural world, the planes, dungeneering and the arcane, it was mentioned that Ammon needed a DC 24 knowledge the planes check to even know of the steel wing. That means that he would have to roll a 1 not to know about it. On top of that Ammon can when not rushed (i.e. Take 10) list 3 of its abilities and if he has time to stop and think about it (i.e. Take 20) he can list 5 abilities and that is all the abilities of the steel wing. I based my selection of that form on the fact that wild shape requires that you be familiar with the creature you wish to shape into. I’d say someone that can with a few moments thought list every characteristic of a monster should be considered a lot more then familiar. Your knowledge checks are all very well and good, but the fact remains that a knowledge check is not the same as being familiar with an animal. I would expect a druid to make a knowledge check to see pretty much exactly what a polar bear is if he had never been in the arctic, but by the book's own definitions he cannot change into one unless he has and is "familiar" with them. You can make a DC 100 knowledge check, but it won't do you any good unless you've dealt with them personally. Anyway, I look forward to seeing what you come up with from the core books- just do it yourself, don't borrow from the Character Optimization boards. And please don't try to munckinize it anyway out of spite, that's really not the point.
|
|
Tai Shar Shaidar
Braggart
Power Corrupts. Aboulute Power Corrupts Absolutely. But it Also Rocks Absolutely, Too.
Posts: 115
|
Post by Tai Shar Shaidar on Nov 16, 2007 16:55:58 GMT -5
To clarify, i never borrowed anything from the Character Op boards i asked for an idea, every PC i Play I build. No one does it for me. The sum total "help i got on the PC amounted to "Why don't you try a master of many forms they are cool and not as broken as some of the other shifter PrCs"
|
|
|
Post by Antioch on Nov 20, 2007 12:11:36 GMT -5
Just because a druid may not specialize in feral combat does not make them a broken shape shifter. I've used my shape shifting ability in role play to avoid environmental obsticles. It is very handy even if it's not powerful in combat.
I am powered up on the offensive due to the parties lack of meat shields in the early game and trying to halfway fill that role. So I am part combat and part healing, which has been very useful in the game. A far cry from broken, if you ask me.
I agree with Rincewind. I may be able to make a knowledge check and identify a creature and some abilities of it, but that is far from being familiar with the creature.
I can read about a bear, see a picture of a bear, know what a bear is. But until you've seen one up close and studied it, I highly doubt your familiarity of it. A picture won't show you how dextrious their front paws are, that they actual have bone spurs that can be used as makeshift jointless opposable thumbs, their smell, their feel. I don't buy your - he read it in a library and is familiar with it argument. I think anyone that studied biology at a university would whole heartidly agree - which they are. Rincewind and Pigdish both have similiar degrees as I do in Biology.
You make some valid points...and you absolutely have a right to post your point of view. We aren't out to attack you personally. You bring a great deal of gaming experience to the group and really push the envelope for us and keep us on our toes. We enjoy having you.
I totally agree with your assessment of gear, but I think you lost what Rincewind was trying to say. Not everyone in the group can afford the small fortune to have all these non-core books that you are pulling from. That is why you are meeting with such confusion and resistance. I only have the 3 core books and 2 non-core - complete warrior and PHB 2. I haven't followed much of anything you have thrown at us so far, which is highly confusing and frustrating.
At lvl 12, I can only summon a lvl 6 creature with Summon Natures Ally. That is a 6HD creature. I think the guidelines put in the spells should be a good guide to you on forms. They put these restrictions on for a reason. To avoid being grossly overpowered, which is no fun for anyone in the group.
Personally, I didn't like LWW's definition on Munchkinism. I think it lost what the true "problem" was. If we're all playing checkers and you're playing chess, yes we use the same board (core rules)...but we have no flippin' idea what you're doing...which in turn doesn't make the game very fun for the others around. I don't like spending half a gaming session figuring out what the heck 1 character is doing. That was a total drag, which is why most are probably upset.
|
|
Tai Shar Shaidar
Braggart
Power Corrupts. Aboulute Power Corrupts Absolutely. But it Also Rocks Absolutely, Too.
Posts: 115
|
Post by Tai Shar Shaidar on Nov 20, 2007 20:24:49 GMT -5
Oh I get what rincewind is saying and I am perfectly willing to (and have already created a core only caster, evoker/lore master) stick to core only, but I was told that anything goes at the outset. I have been used to building my PCs from the all to the books and that’s what I did. No restriction was placed on my build so I saw no reason to restrict myself, and I’d like to point out that I don’t even bring the most books to the table on any given day. Oh and drawing spells from the spell compendium is exactly the same thing as my drawing forms from the 5 monster manuals. It is a gathering of all the best spells from literally dozens of books from multiple campaign settings. The 5 monster manuals represent 1 gray hawk.
Now to respond to your statement that what I did is not core that’s not really accurate, the polymorph spell can duplicate everything I did and more in one 4th level spell that nearly every wizard can cast. Its core and it has no familiarity clause it says any other living creature, however the polymorph doesn’t grant extraordinary special qualities like blind sense or dark vision, regeneration or scent. It doe confer the extraordinary attacks of the creature so a wizard pollymorphed into a Hydra of up to 12 HD at 12th level does get the 12 attacks. Plus the polymorph spell allows even more forms then the master of many forms. This is all in core.
|
|
Dmitri
Land Owner
D&D Geeks of the World Unite!
Posts: 1,466
|
Post by Dmitri on Nov 20, 2007 22:07:41 GMT -5
Weighing in for a moment... then retreating cause I am not in the game...
I think the issue is that powerful does not equal good in DnD. This is a collaborative game, and when a player or group of players ends up feeling worthless or meaningless in a game, then there is a problem. Whether that problem lies with the offended PC, the offending PC, or the DM is up for debate, but it is certainly a problem.
I will say this - roll playing can't and shouldn't replace roleplaying. Getting a high Knowledge check is less important than what your character would actually know in the game setting. As a musician, I can tell you - I know a heckuva alot about virtually every instrument, but can't play them all. I probably have a +35 modifier to my Knowledge (Gibson) check, but I sure couldn't build one.
Practicing self-limitation is key here - just because it is doable doesn't mean it should be done. Anyone can twink given a large enough budget and enough paper to crunch the numbers. Its like the fighter/wiz/pale master with still and quicken spell in full plate. It's possible, it's permissible, it's powerful, it's just not very good.
I'd encourage you to try creating a character concept first. Ask not "Wouldn't it be cool to play a PC who can do ________", but create a PC on the statement "Wouldn't it be cool to play a PC who believes _________ or hates __________ or loves _________ or survived __________ or..." You get the idea, I think. Don't imagine a cool power, imagine a cool person, and then give him or her powers to fit the person. A kid taken in off the streets who dedicates himself to study and personal perfection (emphasis on Knowledge: Religion to make sense of an evil world, low CHA skills because he is an academic, always carries around books and quill and ink, etc.) A character first, a class later. Personality first, class later. Anyway, that is my take on it - it's what I use to make my characters. They are always fun to play and strong, but I don't think anyone has ever used "munchkin" to describe my PCs.
|
|
|
Post by Antioch on Nov 21, 2007 7:54:42 GMT -5
These are all good ideas, and everyone creates a character differently. Breathes life into it differently. I think I'll take some of these suggestions to heart next time I roll a character. This is sort of the way I worked out the captain of our ship, Khan. I worked backwards to Dmitri's suggestion though.
I started out like Shar - wouldn't it be cool to make a Were-tiger. Ok, how did he become a were-tiger, they are not native to this land----answer, he was a sailor and traveled to distant lands. What does being a sailor entail---instead of other knowledges and skills, his are all based around sailing, not very useful on land, but that's who he is. Why is he now taken to land---trying to control the beast within, he came to land and lead an isolated life in the woodlands till he could master the beast.
Ok, so he was in isolation in the forest---what class could he have picked up to become an adventerer...I chose Ranger, makes sense so far.
So, I started to flesh a history, reasons for things, which leave you with a stronger character. I did not create a personality first, but rather a concept. And I don't see anything wrong with that. I think everyone could get their head around the concept and understood what I did. He had no really confusing abilities and I didn't push the envelope for him. I made him with 2 core books, though he is a strangly odd character for sure.
There is one flaw in your example with polymorph. I don't know a single DM that would be too terribly comfortable with allowing a polymorph of that magnitude at that level. Just to prevent overpowering. That is a restriction on the spell that is not listed in any manual. It's in the unwritten footnotes that state -- yeah it would be cool, but the DM would never let this fly.
I very much look forward to your next character my friend.
|
|
Tai Shar Shaidar
Braggart
Power Corrupts. Aboulute Power Corrupts Absolutely. But it Also Rocks Absolutely, Too.
Posts: 115
|
Post by Tai Shar Shaidar on Nov 21, 2007 11:19:14 GMT -5
There is nothing wrong with my description of the polymorph spell, just because most dm’s won’t allow it doesn’t change the fact that it represents nearly the entire power of my master of many forms in 1 4th level spell in the players handbook. As a side note I posted a reasionable polymorph fix months agon on this site but I don’t think many read it. I think say again that my pcs have all been dm aproved, I’d never show up with one that hadn’t been unless there was no alternitive. I have willingly restricted myself to the core 3 books for for my new PC and he has an extensive background story. That I will post when I have to time to type it up (at the moment is in one of my notebooks) I will also post my new caster as soon as I have time.
|
|
|
Post by Rincewind on Nov 21, 2007 12:04:42 GMT -5
It's probably worth mentioning that the polymorph spell has gotten rather badly broken with people choosing forms from new books, like the War Troll. It is such a problem that Wizards cut it out of some of their official campaigns- here's their notice.
"As part of our continuing effort to ensure a fair and equitable play experience for all participants, the polymorph spell and several related game elements have been designed as “restricted,” meaning that they are now unavailable for use in that campaign. If you’ve found these game elements to be problematic in your home game, we recommend that you implement the same change. See this announcement for more details on that restriction."
So mentioning one spell that's so overpowered that WotC has axed it from a campaign and has been actively redesigning monsters from every book to no longer have the spell might not be the best example you could pick.
|
|