Ever since D&D 3.5 got released, one of the hottest rumors for the past few years is 4th Edition. Aside from throwing theories when it'll be announced (right now it's anywhere from 2007 to 2010), many a gamer has theorized what the new system will be like, and more often, these theories incorporate the gamer's own biases.
One theory that's up in the air is the point-buy system. To those familiar with the existing D&D game, that doesn't refer to how you "buy" your stats but rather how you create your character as a whole. A good example of a point-buy RPG system is Steve Jackson's Generic Universal Role Playing System (GURPS). Characters don't have "levels" or "classes" but instead "buy" each individual ability from the ground up, from stats to skills to special abilities. Then there are game systems who strike it somewhere in between. Legend of the Five Rings (L5R) for example looks to me like a hybrid system. A lot of elements you purchase is based on a point value, but there's still "levels" and "classes" involved, such as what your insight rank is or how experienced you are as a bushi. Mongoose Publishing's True20 system also seems like a hybrid, albeit leaning more towards class levels rather than the point buy system.
D&D of course is a class-based RPG. The main benefits of leveling up is that you gain a level (duh!), and that entails you getting more abilities. Now each system, whether class-based or point buy, has its own advantages and weaknesses. Classes, for example, fit a certain archetype, and they're not as customizable as a point buy character. However, one thing going for class-based RPGs is its ease of us. Anyone who's tried making a point buy character and a class-based character will discover that the latter is usually faster to do. Most video game RPGs are similarly class-based, with your character getting more abilities based on leveling up. It's not such a big secret really, because the fact of the matter is, class-based RPGs incorporate less of a steep learning curve than point buy systems. Is it more customizable? No. But it is more manageable, especially for gamers who are starting out.
Again, this isn't an article that says one is better than the other. If you want ease of use, go for a class-based system. If you want flexibility and customization, go for point buy. D&D, however, I think will stick to the former, mainly because of its business plan, which is to say it's a mainstream RPG and trying to acquire mainstream gamers.
This is a series of articles focused on how to optimize your D&D character.
There are eleven basic classes in the Player’s Handbook and I’ve divided them into three categories: simple, average, and difficult. This is in relation to the learning curve of using these classes rather than their effectiveness. If you’re a veteran of the D&D game, this might not be so helpful to you, but beginning players might want to take a look at the chart to see why certain classes are more difficult to play more than others.
Average
Monk -- The Monk is a tricky subject. First, he suffers from what we call Multiple Attribute Dependency (MAD) which in lay man's terms means he needs a lot of high stats, at least if you want to play him effectively. It wouldn't be so bad perhaps if it weren't for player expectation. I mean when you hear the word monk, the first thing that comes to mind are these martial artist who excel in combat. Unfortunately, the D&D Monk doesn't excel so much in combat, thanks to his average base attack bonus. And while there are a couple of orcs and goblins you can hit with your attack bonus, you start feeling a monk's impotence when you start facing off the higher AC monsters like Dragons (so if you want to be able to hit things, invest in Strength). His hit points, on the other hand, are in the medium spectrum. Enough to survive an encounter, but not high enough to linger, so defense becomes an issue (so raise your Dexterity, Constitution, and Wisdom). Aside from his deceptive combat capabilities, the Monk is a class that has various abilities sprinkled over twenty levels. Beginning players might be overwhelmed by the options presented to them, but it's obviously not as overbearing as say, learning spells. On a more positive note, the Monk has uncanny resilience: high saves in everything, evasion, and the ability to add Wisdom to your AC. Experienced players will even take the Monk class to a higher level as a mage-killer, thanks to his virtual immunity to evocation spells (which usually require Reflex saves), increased mobility, and the ability to stun opponents.
Recommended Supplements: Complete Warrior, Player's Handbook II, Sandstorm
Paladin -- D&D's holy warrior poster boy, the Paladin, can be quite a challenging class to utilize. First off is the role-playing aspect, the code of conduct, which might not appeal to every player. Less experienced GMs will even assume that he has the same concept of a Paladin's code of conduct as the player. Another learning curve a player needs to master is the rules for mounted combat because as soon as the Paladin reaches 5th-level, he gains his special mount (while flavor-wise is a great concept, takes some getting used to rules-wise). Much like the Monk, a Paladin also suffers from MAD, since he not only needs to raise his physical attributes, but his mental ones as well (Wisdom for spells, Charisma for the Paladin's other abilities). The Paladin's small spell list and turning abilities is also something a player needs to familiarize himself, although again, it's not as overbearing as the abilities of some other classes. A Paladin, however, is not by any means a "weak" class, and the role-playing challenge can be rewarding.
Recommended Supplements: Book of Exalted Deeds, Complete Divine, Complete Warrior, Draconomicon
Ranger -- While not as complicated as the Monk or the Paladin, the Ranger is nonetheless a step above playing your typical Fighter. For one thing, your less-than-d10 hit points means you're going to have to play your Ranger smart (more so if you take the two-weapon fighting path). Another aspect that complicates a Ranger's life is choosing the right favored enemy (which actually depends on you communicating with your GM), which becomes an issue to someone who's not familiar with D&D's cosmology. Your animal companion can also give players additional burdens, whether it's acting as a mount, or simply another character the player needs to control when combat occurs. Finally there's your meager repertoire of spells, as well as skill set. Thankfully, they comprise a small list, and isn't too overwhelming.
Recommended Supplements: Complete Adventurer, Complete Warrior, Player's Handbook II
Difficult
Bard -- A jack of all trades yet a master of none, the Bard isn't necessarily a hard class to play, it's simply knowing how to play him well optimally. As a bard, it might be tempting to wade into combat, or cast all your spells, but unfortunately, you don't really have a lot of hit points, nor a lot of spell slots either. So where does a Bard excel in? Finding the answer to that is what makes playing a Bard quite difficult, and the answer is support: Inspire Courage for example is a boon most combatants would find helpful, irregardless of level. A Bard also has a more comprehensive spell list compared to a Paladin or a Ranger, but not as extensive as the other spellcasting classes. Finding your niche is the name of the game when it comes to playing a Bard.
Recommended Supplements: Book of Exalted Deeds, Complete Adventurer, Complete Arcane
Cleric -- One thing the Cleric shares with most of the classes in what I deem the "Difficult" section is the fact that he has 9th-level spells. And honestly, that's a huge reading list. If you also slap on the optional turning rules (basically the [Divine] feats in supplements like Complete Divine), that's another set of headaches for starting players. Still, the Cleric is one of the more powerful classes in the game: good hit points, two good saves, ability to wear heavy armor, 9th-level spells and domain powers make it a terrifying package.
Recommend Supplements: Book of Exalted Deeds, Complete Warrior, Complete Divine, Spell Compedium
Druid -- As some of you might assume by now, classes with 9th-level spells make it to this list automatically. An addition consternation to the Druid class is the need to keep track of your animal companion, and worst of all, the powerful-but-leading-to-rules-confusion Wild Shape ability. Perhaps the problem with the Druid is that a player wanting to use him optimally doesn't just need to keep track of all the new spells that gets published, but all the new monsters (specifically animals, but can apply to other creature types as well) as well. Again, much like the Cleric, the Druid is a very powerful class, more so than the Cleric because one can solely focus on the Wisdom ability score and simply use Wild Shape to make up for any lacking in the physical attributes.
Recommended Supplements: Book of Exalted Deeds, Complete Divine, Draconomicon, Monster's Manual, Spell Compedium
Sorcerer --
In a way, a Sorcerer is played more easily compared to a Cleric, Druid,
or Wizard simply because he doesn't prepare spells. Once you've made
your choice of what spells you know, it's simply a matter of having the
spell slots to use them or not. No more problems of "if only I prepared
this spell" and similar situations-- that is, once your character has
been made, your only concern is how to play him and not the mid-game
tweaks (i.e. what spells do I prepare today?) that plagues most
spellcasters. Still, that's still a huge task, and once you've chosen a
spell to know, you have to live with that choice for most of your
Sorcerer career. Low hit points also make the Sorcerer one of the most
fragile classes in the game.
Recommended Supplements: Complete Arcane, Complete Mage, Races of the Dragon, Spell Compedium
Wizard -- I'll be blunt: it's a nightmare to play a wizard. You have access to 9th-level spells and that list is amorphous. Unlike divine spellcasters, your spell's known is determined by your spellbook, and while that's not a problem in the early levels, it is later on as you level up as you have to keep track of pages spent in your spellbook and the cost of additional spells (whether copying it from another wizard's spellbook or from a scroll). Then there's the fact that you have to prepare your spells every day, but unlike Clerics and Druids, your spell slots are less so you really have to make those spells count. And then you continually ask yourself the question whether I should expend my spell now or later. A Wizard also has one of the lowest hit points in the game, so surviving becomes an issue as well. The Wizard is a powerful class, make no mistake about it, but the learning curve is one of the steepest.
Recommended Supplements: Complete Arcane, Complete Mage, Spell Compedium
What's fascinating about RPG games (be they D&D, Legend of the Five Rings, World of Darkness, or -insert favorite game system here-) is that they attract a diverse group of people. And while people will have a stereotype of what a gamer is--and some gamers do reinforce this stereotype--for the most part a gaming group is comprised of a wide spectrum of personalities. Sometimes, the diversity comes from within the gaming group, with a player having a different agenda for playing the game. At other times, the diversity comes from the various gaming groups: one group might favor this particular gaming style, while another might favor a vastly different one.
A few years ago, I met this gamer whose agenda was to push the role-playing aspect of RPGs. That's not a bad thing, mind you, but we found a disagreement that escalated into him not talking to me ever again. The disagreement centered around the thesis of which was the "higher" function of RPGs. He believes that the role-playing aspect was the highest form of role-playing games. Thus, he favored the game systems which favored such mechanics (or lack thereof) such as the World of Darkness line. Of course my tastes run opposite of his. I like to kill stuff. And in a certain way, that reflects my personal preference for D&D because it is a RPG system best suited for combat. The gamer's criticism was that people who game for hack-n-slash, for lack of a better term, was somehow the inferior gamer, and that the role-player was the superior one. At this point, I think you'll see why we came into conflict. But my stance wasn't quite as antagonistic (which is strange coming from the hack-n-slash gamer).
I think the debate can be summed up as whether to role-play (flavor, atmosphere, etc.) or to roll-play (mechanics, luck, etc.). As much as I'd like to side with the latter, my stance was that there was no absolute answer. For me, it's the combat part of RPGs. For you, it might be the make-believe and pretending aspect of RPGs. Ultimately, it depends on what kind of gamer you are, or what gaming group you're with. God forbid there'd be only one type of RPG game (even if it'll be D&D). Unfortunately, the gamer in question did not want to give ground. He was as uncompromising at gaming as he was with religion. There was an absolute answer, and that was role-playing was the highest virtue any gamer could aspire to when it came to RPGs, irregardless of your preference or gaming group. "It's a role-playing game after all," he'd reason.
Now I'm not saying role-playing isn't important. It is. It's just that people play RPGs for various reasons. Some of them is to role-play. Others just to hang out with friends. And of course, there will be those who play because it's a form of catharsis. Or what the heck, because killing stuff (in the game, not in reality) is fun. Again, I'll stress the fact that the reasons why people play RPGs varies from person to person, from gamer to gamer, from gaming group to gaming group. If you want to emphasize role-playing in your group, that's fine with me. But honestly, you can't claim that role-playing is best for my group in the same way that I can't insist that combat is best for your group.
Let's assume that the gamer was right. Role-playing is indeed king when it comes to role-playing games. What does that make the pioneers of the RPG genre? The first RPG, D&D, was born out of war gaming. And perhaps that's why to this day, D&D is more or less a combat-oriented system (and we've returned to the use of miniatures). Does that make the players of 1st Ed. and AD&D inferior gamers? One might even extrapolate that video game RPGs and MMORPGs are simply hack-n-slash RPGs. Again, does that imply that such people are inferior gamers? To me, it's not a matter of inferiority or superiority, but a difference in playing style. It's just that: different. And while I prefer combat-oriented RPGs to say, social ones, that's not to say I'm dropping the role-playing aspect entirely. I role-play my character, whether it's as common or as different as it is to my true persona. And in a certain sense, every gamer role-plays whenever he plays an RPG. He's not just Bob Baker, while-collar worker and the exemplar of the common man, he's an Elvish archer, or a raging barbarian, or this unique, powerful spellcaster. There will always be an element of role-playing or disbelief. Even when you're playing video games that's so. You're "this character" who can do this and that, not simply you-of-the-real-world. Of course people role-play to varying degrees. Some characters are simply stereotypes of existing fiction tropes. Others add layers upon layers of characterization, whether that's lots of emotional conflict (from both internal and external sources), or simply choosing a difficult character to role-play (it might be someone that's opposite of your typical personality or gender).
In a certain way, calling the gamer who criticized me a gamer is wrong.
A gamer plays games, not debate on the intellectual superiority of one
type of gamer over another. He's lost the point of playing role-playing
games. While he emphasizes the role-playing part, he's forgotten why we
play role-playing games in the first place: because it's a game,
because it's fun. Why is a game fun? Well, that depends on what kind of
person you are. Far be it for me, or anyone, to insist on what's fun
for you.
This is a series of articles focused on how to optimize your D&D character.
The Player’s Handbook starts out explaining Ability Scores and then followed by Race. It’s only after those pages that we finally see Character Class. To someone who’s unfamiliar with the game, getting to know Ability Scores and Race is important. From an optimization standpoint, however, character creation begins with Character Classes. Why? Because more often than not, a good chunk of your concept for your character will be derived from the classes you take. Yes, there’s a conceptual difference between a dwarf wizard and an elf wizard, for example, but in the end, you cannot deny that there’s more in common between the two compared to say, a dwarven fighter and a dwarven cleric, even if they’re both dwarves. Choosing where to dump your highest, and lowest, Abillity Scores is also dependent on the class you pick (you don’t want to end up with a Sorcerer who has Strength 18 for example but a measly Charisma 12), as well as what races are advisable.
There are eleven basic classes in the Player’s Handbook and I’ve divided them into three categories: simple, average, and difficult. This is in relation to the learning curve of using these classes rather than their effectiveness. If you’re a veteran of the D&D game, this might not be so helpful to you, but beginning players might want to take a look at the chart to see why certain classes are more difficult to play more than others.
Simple
Barbarian – Barbarians are for the most part simple to use because they’re focused on combat, and most likely melee combat at that. For most people, the challenging question they ask themselves is to Rage now or to Rage later. Aside from that, the other choices aren’t as overwhelming. You don’t have room for lots of Feats so you needn’t bother with the more complex feat trees (i.e. taking Whirlwind is out of the question as it has too many prerequisites for example). Early on, players might ask what method of fighting should I use. However, Barbarians being low on defense to begin with (more so when raging), it’s best to focus on their strongest selling point, which is the ability to deal a lot of damage. More often than not, the best choice for a Barbarian is to wield a two-handed weapon and forget about defense. That’s what your d12 hp is for.
Recommended Supplements: Complete Warrior, Frostburn, Races of Stone
Fighter – Unlike the Barbarian, the Fighter is a flexible class in the sense that you can mold your character to fit one of many warrior archetypes, rather than being a jack of all trades. On one hand, the sheer number of feat options available to you can be overwhelming, but it’s similarly more forgiving to a starting player as well because a wrong feat at a certain level isn’t as crippling compared to most classes (where they’re most likely limited to one feat every three levels). The biggest challenge for a Fighter is where to find his focus (thrown weapons, archery, tripping, grappling, defensive, two-weapon fighting, two-handed weapons, sword and shield, etc.) and to maximize that strength. Still, as complex as that sounds, a Fighter needs only to concentrate on combat when a dangerous encounter begins, and his seemingly lack of options in other arenas (skills, spellcasting) make him one of the easier classes to pick.
Recommended Supplements: Complete Adventurer, Complete Warrior, Draconomicon, Miniatures Handbook, Player’s Handbook II
Rogue – The Rogue actually excels in many arenas such as dungeon exploring (by the sheer fact that he’s the only class, at least in the Player’s Handbook, that has the trapfinding ability) and combat (thanks to Sneak Attack), but these are abilities that are packaged with the class. It’s not like you can discard a dice of Sneak Attack to get another ability. While choosing a Rogue’s method of fighting is a secondary priority, his first, and the focus of a beginning player, should be what Skills he picks. Much like the Fighter who has to focus on a certain method of combat, a Rogue must focus on what Skills he should be good at because despite possessing the largest pool of skill points, it’s still not enough to do everything. In addition to simply picking skills, he must synergize them as well. I mean there’s little reason to take Hide if you’re also not going to take Move Silently. And if you want to detect your opponents, the pair Spot and Listen skills should almost always be taken together, to give you at least two chances of sensing the enemy. And while the page devoted to Skills is quite a lot, it’s a lot less than the Spells spellcasters need to know, and they’re more generally used compared to Feats (honestly, do you really need to read the description to figure out what Jump does?). Once that’s done, the Rogue’s next responsibility is to figure out how to stay safe in combat, yet still manage to deal out his Sneak Attack damage on the enemy.
Recommended Supplements: Complete Adventurer, Races of Destiny, Races of the Wild
I was browsing through some of the forums at Wizards of the Coast and while D&D 3.5 is far from perfect and without its own flaws, perhaps one of the noticeable complaints are coming from the old guard, the gamers who played D&D 1st Ed. and 2nd Ed. That's not to say that their complaints aren't valid, or that all old gamers are like that, but they do make up a percentage of the gaming community, and they are lodging the same complaints over and over again. Perhaps one of the biggest hurdles of the existing game is that it has a legacy to live up to, a 1st Ed. and 2nd Ed., and the rules of D&D 3.5 are significantly different, mechanics-wise if not in the spirit of it.
I love D&D 3.5, but then again, I'm nearly as old as the original I6 Ravenloft module. In other words, I don't belong to those generation of D&D players who came from the Gygax-era but it's also not as if I haven't played AD&D (I've ventured, and died, in the original Temple of Elemental Evil). And then D&D 3.0 came around and became committed to it. I made the switch to D&D 3.5 when it was announced and because the changes made sense to me (although I'm sure some will disagree with me on this point, and it's perfectly valid... different strokes from different gaming groups). Of course there are still some gaming groups who've stuck to AD&D and that's fine also. Perhaps my biggest gripe are the people who converted to D&D 3.5 with the same expectations they had of 1st Ed. and 2nd Ed. Unfortunately, that's not possible, at least with the present perspective. D&D 3.5 after all is 3.5, not AD&D.
First off, the fact of the matter is, D&D has grown. It's no longer the game you played in the basement with your friends, it's a game that everybody (well, not everyone...) plays in the basement with their friends. It has a bigger scope, a bigger reach, and it's also being operated by a huge toy company. What that means is that the game needed to be streamlined to fit a lot of people's needs. And honestly, not to bash any of the old D&D game designers, without which the present game would not exist, the old D&D had a steep, and more importantly, seemingly capricious learning curve. Just look at how you generate stats. In order to get tangible benefits in combat, one needed to roll at least a 17 for Strength, and even when you did manage to roll a lucky 18 for it, you needed to roll percentile dice for it to determine how much stronger you are compared to other Strength 18 characters/monsters. Depending on your race and class (let's not even go towards the dual-class, multiclass arena), experience points needed to level up varied (a Wizard needed more experience, for example, compared to a Fighter). While I could live with the attack bonus matrices chart for characters of THACO (to hit armor class 0), the present system made it more comprehensible (base attack, for example, followed a formulaic progression, and for AC, we didn't need to readjust our minds to think that lower is better when it comes to defense). That's not to say there's not much to appreciate in AD&D. It's just that one needed to be masochist in a lot of things, from character generation to facing adventures like The Tomb of Horrors. Suffice to say, I'm happy with D&D 3.5 and while it's not perfectly balance, it's a lot more safer for the players, and easier to comprehend for beginning players.
The second complaint by the old guard is that D&D 3.5 is more: more detailed (in terms of adventures), more rules-intensive, more commercial. I'm sorry but those complaints are plain crap. It's something people got used to that when something was finally done right, they didn't recognize it was better because they've been so used to the inefficient one. For example, in terms of existing adventures, some were complaining that the books had too much detail: too much NPC stats, the rooms were completely filled, etc. If you have the time to tweak every nook and cranny of the adventure, you're not the target market. Wizards of the Coast is tailoring these adventures for people who want custom-made adventures (that's why they're buying pre-made adventures after all). That means that they want to run the adventure out of the box, and that means the less homework to do, the better. Of course some GMs meet these expectations half-way: they buy the adventure, and either draw inspiration from it for their own adventures, or modify it to their own liking. And honestly, nothing is stopping you from doing it that way. But if your complaint is that a dungeon is too fleshed out (i.e. no empty rooms), why did that suddenly become a bad thing?
As for D&D being more rules intensive, it's there to help starting GMs out. Experienced and veteran GMs will have their own set of house rules and rule calls. The extensive rules are there to help players and GMs alike resolve actions beyond the "I attack and damage the guy" decisions. Too little rules and the GM will have to make a lot of ad-hoc decisions on the fly. Too much and anyone, both players and GMs, can get overwhelmed. But is D&D 3.5 truly overwhelming? At least now, my Fighter knows he can trip, grapple, sunder, or disarm foes. It's not a perfect system as there will be some actions a Fighter might want to do that isn't covered in the rules, but covers a lot of ground and still leaves the GM to make decisions of his own on the fly in case a player wants to do something unconventional. The additional rules also helps players from different backgrounds, in fact from all over the world, find common ground instead of merely depending on the house rules of their present GMs. It's what makes organizations such as the RPGA possible (hence there are also more restrictions in the RPGA in comparison to a "standard" D&D game).
Finally, the complaint that D&D is more commercial thanks to its line of maps, miniatures, and the like? You know why video games are appealing? Because they're tangible. D&D still exercises your imagination but honestly, it's a lot easier for everyone if they had physical representations of what they're roleplaying, from the world they're in to their characters to the monsters they face. Is it essential to do so? No. But I'm sure a lot of gamers, especially the newer ones, are glad that the current system supports miniatures and miniature-like combat. (As an aside, we should also remember that the original D&D had its roots in war games, and what would war games be without miniatures?) Tangibility also doesn't merely extend to sight but to sound as well. Enterprising GMs might come up with background music or sound effects to emphasize the gaming atmosphere, but that's all tricks of the trade.
Again, I'm not saying that everyone should adapt the D&D 3.5 style of gaming, or that it's infinitely superior to 1st Ed. or 2nd Ed. If you want to keep on playing AD&D, go ahead and do so if that's what makes you happy. However, I will say that the current D&D is as product of its time just as AD&D was part of the 80's. I won't apply D&D 3.5 expectations on AD&D, and similarly, some people should realize that they can't apply certain 2nd Ed. or even 1st Ed. expectations on the current game. That would be a regression in gaming.
One of the things the game designers at Wizards of the Coast did right with Complete Mage is Optional Material Components for spellcasters. While not a new concept, I'm quite satisfied the way it was presented in this book.
Take for example one of the items listed, Angel Down: "Popular lore has it that this fluffy golden material is reputedly made up of pinfeathers from celestials' wings. In fact, it is pollen gathered from various rare flowers found growing on the Upper Planes."
"When angel down is used as a component in an abjuration spell, the spell's duration is doubled as if affected by the Extend Spell feat."
Compare that to Optional Material Components found in Book of Exalted Deeds. Celestial Blood: "If a spell to which this component is applied deals damage, there is a 30% chance that the spell deals an extra +2d6 points of damage to an evil target. The celestial who gave the blood must still be alive for this to function."
From a mechanics point of view, what I disliked about the latter is the fact that you're already paying extra for a spell, and you're not even sure if you'll be receiving any benefit from it. Think of it as after a side-adventure obtaining these rare spell components, when you finally cast it... nothing happens. Honestly, a chance of not functioning is okay once in awhile, but before Complete Mage, most of the Optional Material Components effects weren't constant and depended on varying chances of success.
From a flavor point of view, what I liked about the entries in Complete Mage is that the items were given backgrounds and a brief description (and I have a soft spot for items that seem like originating from a mystical source when it's not).
Oh wow, what an oxymoron. Anyway, I caught this thread at the Wizards of the Coast message boards about playing Dungeons & Dragons on the computer and the general concensus was Baldur's Gate and Return to Temple of Elemental Evil were the closest approximations of AD&D (2nd Ed.) and 3.5. However, that doesn't really solve the problem of playing D&D online as D&D Online is an unwanted bastard while Atari is not without its own set of faults when it comes to its D&D video games. So the solution?
Honestly, all you need to run any pen-and-paper RPG, irregardless if it's D&D or not, is a chat program. Enter OpenRPG, an open-source program that combines chat-program, dice roller, and map generator in one. It's still not face to face gaming, but it's the next best thing. And the potential I see for chat-based RPGs is the suspense/paranoia aspect. No more calling out players to a room to have a "private" chat with them. One can easily send a private message to a player regardling what they see or hear that the others don't, including being dominated by a vampire or replaced by a doppelganger.
Here's the same character I posted earlier albeit equipped with NPC gear. Notable changes is also how I computed for his hit points (average for hit die) but take note that he was built with the 32 standard point buy rather than the default 25.
Donovan Spellshield CR 20
Human Sorcerer 2/Fighter 4/Abjurant Champion 5 (CM 50)/Dragonslayer 9 (Dr 125)
NG medium-sized humanoid (human)
Init +3; Senses superior low-light vision, darkvision 190 ft., blindsense 195 ft.; Listen +0, Spot +0
Languages Common, Draconic
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
AC 25, touch 16 (+14 against incorporeal touch attacks), flat-footed 22
(+3 Dex, +9 armor, +3 deflection)
hp 204 (20 HD); DR 3/-
Immune fear
Resist acid 5, cold 5, electricity 5, fire 5, sonic 5; SR
Fort +20 (+4 Con, +5 resistance), Ref +15 (+3 Dex, +5 resistance), Will +21 (+5 resistance)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speed 30 ft. (6 squares)
Melee +5 adamantine greathammer +31 (8d6+15)
Ranged +22 ray
Base Atk +19; Grp +26
Atk Options arcane boost, Arcane Strike, Power Attack, Close-Quarters Fighting, damage bonus (dragons), Improved Critical (dragons).
Special Actions abjurant armor, extended abjuration, swift abjuration, overcome draconic spell resistance.
Combat Gear +5 adamantine greathammer
Sorcerer Spells Known (CL 19th):
6th (3/day)—karmic retribution (CM 109) (DC ).
5th (6/day)—dragonsight (SpC 73)†, arcane fusion (CM 96).
4th (7/day)—dimension door, greater invisibility, flight of the dragon (SpC 95).
3rd (7/day)—protection from energy, greater mighty wallop (RDr 115)†, ferocity of sanguine rage (DM 67), repelling shield (CM 115) (DC ).
2nd (7/day)—see invisibility, mirror image, heroics (SpC 113), wraithstrike (SpC 243), arcane turmoil (CM 96) (DC ).
1st (8/day)—endure elements†, ray of enfeeblement, expeditious retreat, ectoplasmic armor (SpC 78)†, ray of clumsiness (SpC 166).
0 (6/day)—resistance, detect magic, read magic, dancing lights, light, ghost sound, mage hand, message, prestidigitation.
† Already cast
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abilities Str 25 (+6 enhancement), Dex 16 (+2 enhancement), Con 18 (+4 enhancement), Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 20 (+4 enhancement)
SQ summon familiar, martial arcanist, aura of courage,
Feats Iron Will1st, Power Attackbonus, Combat Casting3rd, Dodgebonus, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Greathammer)bonus (MM4 101), Improved Toughness6th (CW 101), Combat Reflexesbonus, Close-Quarters Fighting9th (CW 97), Arcane Strike12th (CW 96), Rapid Metamagic15th (CM 46), Lightning Reflexesbonus, Extend Spell18th.
Skills Concentration +21 (+17 ranks, +4 Con), Knowledge (arcana) +6 (+6 rank), Spellcraft +18 (+16 ranks, +2 synergy), Tumble +14 (+11 ranks, +3 Dex).
Possessions +5 adamantine greathammer (MM4 101), +5 twilight mithral shirt (BoED 112), vest of resistance +5 (CArc 150), belt of giant strength +6, amulet of health +4, cloak of charisma +4, boots of speed, ring of protection +3, gloves of dexterity +2, 290 pp.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abjurant Armor (Su): Any time you cast an abjuration spell that grants you an armor bonus or shield bonus to AC, you can increase the value of the bonus by your abjurant champion class level.
Extended Abjuration (Su): Double the duration of abjuration spells you cast, as if you had applied the Extend Spell feat to them (but without any change in level or casting time).
Swift Abjuration (Su): You can cast abjuration spells as a swift action, as if you had applied the Quicken Spell feat to them (but without any change in level). The maximum level of spell you can quicken in this way is equal to 1/2 your class level (rounded up).
Arcane Boost (Su): You gain the ability to burn arcane energy to empower your martial abilities. As a swift action, you can spend one of your uncast spells or spell slots to grant yourself one of the following insight bonuses for 1 round.
• Bonus on attack rolls equal to the spell's level.
• Bonus on weapon damage rolls equal to twice the spell's level.
• Bonus to AC equal to the spell's level.
• Bonus on saving throws equal to the spell's level.
• Resistance to acid, cold, electricity, fire, and sonic equal to 5 x the spell's level.
Martial Arcanist (Ex): Your caster level in a chosen arcane spellcasting class is equal to your base attack bonus (unless it would otherwise be higher).
Aura of Courage (Su): A dragonslayer gains immuinity to fear (magical or otherwise). Allies within 10 feet of the dragonslayer gains a +4 morale bonus on saving throws against fear effects.
Damage Bonus (Ex): A dragonslayer gains a bonus on weapon damage rolls against dragons equal to his class level.
Overcome Draconic Spell Resistance (Ex): A dragonslayer may add his class level to any caster level checks made to overcome a dragon’s spell resistance.
Improved Critical (Ex): A dragonslayer gains the effect of the Improved Critical feat for any weapon he uses against a dragon.
Just got a hold of a PDF copy of Complete Mage (because the supplier here in the Philippines still doesn't have the latest books, I'm actually still waiting for Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords) and I was able to make a gish (a Githyanki term for fighter/sorcerers) character that doesn't resort to the Polymorph spell for most of his buffs. In fact, thanks to the Complete Mage spell Arcane Fusion, all you need is one round to buff, and then you can start casting extend wraithstrike the next turn and start hitting monsters and NPCs.
Donovan Spellshield (PC)
Human Sorcerer 2/Fighter 4/Abjurant Champion 5 (CM 50)/Dragonslayer 9 (Dr 125)
NG medium-sized humanoid (human)
Init +5; Senses superior low-light vision, darkvision 190 ft., blindsense 195 ft.; Listen +3, Spot +3
Languages Common, Draconic
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
AC 31, touch 22(+14 against incorporeal touch attacks), flat-footed 26; Dodge, retributive amulet, boots of speed;
(+5 Dex, +9 armor, +5 deflection, +2 sacred)
hp 255 (20 HD); DR 3/-
Immune fear, death spells and effects, energy drain, negative energy effects;
Resist acid 5, cold 5, electricity 5, fire 5, sonic 5;
Fort +22 (+6 Con, +5 resistance), Ref +17 (+5 Dex, +5 Resistance), Will +24 (+3 Wis, +5 Resistance)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speed 30 ft. (6 squares)
Melee +5 adamantine collision greathammer +34/+29/+24/+19 (8d6+25/x4)
Ranged +24 ray
Base Atk +19; Grp +29
Atk Options arcane boost, Arcane Strike, Power Attack, Close-Quarters Fighting, damage bonus (dragons), Improved Critical (dragons), boots of speed.
Special Actions abjurant armor, extended abjuration, swift abjuration, overcome draconic spell resistance.
Combat Gear +5 adamntine collision greathammer
Sorcerer Spells Known (CL 19th):
6th (4/day)—karmic retribution (CM 109) (DC 22).
5th (6/day)—dragonsight (SpC 73)†, arcane fusion (CM 96).
4th (7/day)—dimension door, greater invisibility, flight of the dragon (SpC 95).
3rd (7/day)—protection from energy, greater mighty wallop (RDr 115)†, ferocity of sanguine rage (DM 67), repelling shield (CM 115) (DC 19).
2nd (8/day)—see invisibility, mirror image, heroics (SpC 113), wraithstrike (SpC 243), arcane turmoil (CM 96) (DC18 ).
1st (14/day)—endure elements†, ray of enfeeblement, expeditious retreat, ectoplasmic armor (SpC 78)†, ray of clumsiness (SpC 166).
0 (6/day)—resistance, detect magic, read magic, dancing lights, light, ghost sound, mage hand, message, prestidigitation.
† Already cast
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abilities Str 30 (+6 enhancement, +5 inherent), Dex 20 (+6 enhancement), Con 22 (+6 enhancement, +2 inherent), Int 16 (+6 enhancement), Wis 16 (+6 enhancement), Cha 22 (+6 enhancement).
SQ summon familiar, martial arcanist, aura of courage.
Feats Iron Will1st, Power Attackbonus, Combat Casting3rd, Dodgebonus, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Greathammer)bonus (MM4 101), Improved Toughness6th (CW 101), Combat Reflexesbonus, Close-Quarters Fighting9th (CW 97), Arcane Strike12th (CW 96), Rapid Metamagic15th (CM 46), Lightning Reflexesbonus, Extend Spell18th.
Skills Concentration +23 (+17 ranksm +6 Con), Knowledge (arcana) +9 (+6 rank, +3 Int), Spellcraft +21(+16 ranks, +3 Int, +2 synergy), Tumble +16 (+11 ranks, +5 Dex).
Possessions belt of magnificence +6 (MH 42), +5 adamantine collision greathammer (XPH 165, MM4 101), +5 soulfire twilight mithral shirt (BoED 112), manual of gainful exercise +5, cloak of resistance +5, boots of haste, retributive amulet (BoED 116), ring of protection +5, manual of bodily health +2, ring of wizardry 1, 240 pp.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abjurant Armor (Su): Any time you cast an abjuration spell that grants you an armor bonus or shield bonus to AC, you can increase the value of the bonus by your abjurant champion class level.
Extended Abjuration (Su): Double the duration of abjuration spells you cast, as if you had applied the Extend Spell feat to them (but without any change in level or casting time).
Swift Abjuration (Su): You can cast abjuration spells as a swift action, as if you had applied the Quicken Spell feat to them (but without any change in level). The maximum level of spell you can quicken in this way is equal to 1/2 your class level (rounded up).
Arcane Boost (Su): You gain the ability to burn arcane energy to empower your martial abilities. As a swift action, you can spend one of your uncast spells or spell slots to grant yourself one of the following insight bonuses for 1 round.
• Bonus on attack rolls equal to the spell's level.
• Bonus on weapon damage rolls equal to twice the spell's level.
• Bonus to AC equal to the spell's level.
• Bonus on saving throws equal to the spell's level.
• Resistance to acid, cold, electricity, fire, and sonic equal to 5 x the spell's level.
Martial Arcanist (Ex): Your caster level in a chosen arcane spellcasting class is equal to your base attack bonus (unless it would otherwise be higher).
Aura of Courage (Su): A dragonslayer gains immuinity to fear (magical or otherwise). Allies within 10 feet of the dragonslayer gains a +4 morale bonus on saving throws against fear effects.
Damage Bonus (Ex): A dragonslayer gains a bonus on weapon damage rolls against dragons equal to his class level.
Overcome Draconic Spell Resistance (Ex): A dragonslayer may add his class level to any caster level checks made to overcome a dragon’s spell resistance.
Improved Critical (Ex): A dragonslayer gains the effect of the Improved Critical feat for any weapon he uses against a dragon.
One of the deviations of 3.0 from the D&D versions that preceded it was the introduction of Prestige Classes. While not really an entirely new concept, it did make a distinction between classes you can take right from the start, and those that needed you to fulfill certain prerequisites. And for the most part, I'm happy with it as it gave players additional flexibility when building their characters. D&D characters stopped being monochromatic (that is, you just pursued one class from levels 1-20) and had a lot more variety.
The less than stellar Planar Handbook was actually a font of new game mechanics. One was Touchstone sites, a concept that would appear and be refined in succeeding books (such as the Dungeon Master's Guide II for example). I'm not a fan of site-based treasure, however, and the other concept that caught my eye (and apparently the game designers there are Wizards of the Coast) was its introduction of Substitution Levels. Substitution Levels are a cousin of Prestige Classes. Whereas the latter was like an "advanced" character class, the former modified existing classes. The Fighter was still a Fighter, the Bard still a Bard. What changed was how they operated mechanically at key levels, imbuing them with a different flavor yet still retaining their "essence".
Substitution Levels would catch on in the later books, especially in the Races series. In a way, this was where it shined as one could see how a Dwarven Fighter was different from an Elven one, even if they were still the same class. The Forgotten Realms supplement Champions of Valor also took advantage of this to showcase the differences between the various Paladin orders/organizations. There are just four Prestige Classes in the book, but over two dozen Substitution Levels. It's really a minor tweak on the classes, but opens up a lot of flavor and distinction, especially on the side of the GM who wants to differentiate racial/cultural/societal differences via class features.
A lot of 3.5 books these days contain Substitution Levels for the core classes in the Player's Handbook. It's a minor tweak on the game system (after all, most Substitution Levels don't expand to more than 3 levels at most) yet it has had a big impact in terms of game design. And perhaps what's best about it is that as a GM, I don't have to necessarily use any of it, or all of it. It's quite a modular system that can easily be adaptable or not used at all.
Neighborhood
Explore friends, family, friends & family, or entire neighborhood.
