[CUTE] Evaluation Process: Darling [Class]

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

As outlined in the Evaluation Methodology thread, this thread is for discussing, editing and evaluation of the Darling base class for Project C.U.T.E.

The darling was intended to function as a combat support class with charisma-based abilities, a sort of alternative rogue without its basis in stealth- just the opposite, in fact, as an opponent has to see the Darling to be attacked by them.

The Darling is primarily intended as a support class, but as always it should be considered in light of how well it balances against other C.U.T.E. classes, all of them, though I would ask you refrain from comparing in any detail to standard D&D classes; the C.U.T.E. campaign is deliberately structured differently from and is unlikely to balance with those materials.

And now the delicious meatiness:
Darling
Some children are cuter than others. This fact of life, more often than not, results in nothing more than the favor of those foolish adults that consider cuteness to be an indicator of goodness.
Sometimes, for some children, however, this cuteness- this adorability- can become a potent weapon in their attempts to gain favor and defeat their foes. Such is the darling, a creature of passive-agression in the extreme.
A darling's power springs from the force of their personality, combined with their appearence; they adore those who indulge their whims, and strike with terrible force those who defy them or endanger their aims.
Adventures:
Darlings who choose the adventuring life are usually less sucessful examples of the class. When they find their home life doesn't allow them to get what they want, or simply that those around them are growing immune to their peculiar charms, they sometimes choose to move on, taking up the mantle of a wandering adventurer.
Characteristics:
Darlings are best suited to diplomacy out of combat, or, in combat, working alongside another class that fills the fighting role; their spite attacks provide potent offense, while their aura of adorability is a considerable defense. Without the support of healers and other characters capable of backing them up, however, they may quickly fall into trouble.
Alignment:
Some darlings are simply taking advantage of nature's blessings relatively peacefully, in the service of a good cause; some are malicious and cruel. Some utilize their abilties to further a personal code, while others strike at random. All, however, recognize in the simple fact that charm can get them along a fact that argues for a fatalistic universe, and thus most are in some respect neutral.
Religion:
Darlings are seldom strongly religious, believing their personal deeds are more likely to bring them gain or advance their goals than any hypothetical figure-in-the-skies. Those that do follow a deity often dote on it as others dote on them.
Background:
Darlings can arise almost anywhere and from almost any race, though obviously those fairer of face produce more. The spark of cuteness is fickle, however, and can find a home in almost any individual.
Races:
Darlings can belong to any one of the common races.
They are especially common among carebears, humans, and the fair races.
Other Classes:
A Darling often exists in an unspoken agreement with members of other classes; they utilize their gifts in the party's defense, and in return, they expect praise and affection appropriate to their contribution. Some Darlings choose a quieter, more advisory role, knowing that their aw-shucks suggestions to the party will seldom go unheeded.
Role:
The Darling's role in the party is as a party face and second-string combatant; while not as potent a fighter as some, the ability to deal extra damage and adversely affect her opponent in various ways makes up for the lack, while in social situations, a Darling's adorability abilities and high charisma are more than handy.

Game Rule Information
Abilities:
Charisma is the key ability for many of the Darling's class skils, and adds extra damage to their spite attacks, while either strength or dexterity can heighten the potency of their melee actions.
Alignment: Any.
Hit die: d8

Class Skills
The Darling's class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are: Appraise (int), Balance (dex), Bluff (cha),Climb (str), Craft (int), Diplomacy (cha), Disguise (cha), Escape Artist (dex), Gather Information (cha), Imagine (wis), Intimidate (cha), Jump (str), Listen (wis), Play( cha), Search (int), Spot (wis), Sense Motive (wis), Tantrum (cha).
Skill points at first level (6+ int modifier)x4
Skills at subsequent levels: 6+ int modifier.

Weapon and armor proficiency:
A darling is proficient with all simple and martial weapons, with light armor, and with shields.

Adorability:
Beggining at first level, a Darling is more difficult to target with attacks.
Any creature within a 60 foot radius capable of percieving the Darling must make a will save (DC 10+ class level + Cha Modifier) to resist the adorable effect.
Any opponent affected by adorability is subject to the Darling's spite damage.
In addition, each round the opponent is affected by Adorability, they take a cumulative -1 morale penalty on attack rolls against the Darling. This penalty can never exceed 1/2 the Darling's class level. Opponents can attempt a new save every round to break the effect. Mindless opponents and those otherwise immune to mind-effecting abilities are immune to adorability.
If a creature's adorability penalty to attack equals or exceeds their HD, they are affected as if by charm monster, rather than suffering the penalty. This effect is subject to the usual conditions for a charm spell, and the subject realizes something is wrong (and can still attempt saves).
An opponent who sucessfully saves against Adorability at any point can no longer be affected by the ability this interaction.

Spite:
The bewitching nature of the Darling's cuteness means those they attack seldom see it coming; therefore, they deal extra damage to such an opponent.
A Darling can deal spite damage to any creature that is aware of the darling, and meets a few other conditions.
This ability does not work against mindless creatures, but it does function against those immune to precision damage.
In order to deal spite damage, the darling must either enchant an opponent using their adorability, make a sucessful diplomacy check to engage the opponent, or make a bluff check to feint in combat (they usually appear to want to hug their opponent, in such a feint). They can also choose to throw a tantrum, drawing their enemy in to deal spite damage; a sucessful tantrum check against an enemy means that after that enemy attacks the Darling, they can deal spite damage the round after (though after that round, they must enchant or otherwise fool the opponent as normal).
Any opponent charmed by the Darling or their allies is also subject to spite damage, but the attack ends the effect as usual (after the damage is done).
The Darling's extra spite damage is +1d6 at first level, and increases by one d6 every two levels; +2d6 at third level, +3d6 at fifth, and so on, to a maximum of +10d6 at nineteenth level.
In addition to this normal use of spite, a Darling can deal damage to an opponent's intelligence, wisdom, or charisma. One point of damage to an opponent's ability score equates to two dice of normal damage for purposes of this ability; thus, an eleventh-level Darling could sacrifice all normal damage to assess a -3 penalty to one mental ability score, or sacrifice two dice of damage to deal a -1 penalty while also dealing the remainder (+4d6) as HP damage. This penalty can only be used on a given opponent once per combat, regardless of how much or how little ability damage the Darling chooses to deal with this effect. The penalties so inflicted remain for a number of rounds equal to (3+Charisma modifer).

Adorable Feature:
At fifth level, and every five levels thereafter (at tenth, fifteenth, and twentieth), the Darling gains an adorable feature from the following list. Any adorable feature that is not 'always on' can be activated as a swift action.
Endearing Lisp-
The Darling can apply double their charisma modifier to any charisma-based check that involves speaking.
Pout:
The Darling can pout to raise the DC to resist their adorability by five a number of times per day equal to their charisma modifier.
Sad puppy face:
The Darling gains the Sad Puppy Face feat, even if they do not meet the requirements. The Darling can make a sad puppy face as a free action.
Too pretty to get hurt:
Once per day per point of charisma bonus, the darling may gain untyped damage reduction equal to their charisma modifier, and spell resistance equal to 15+ charisma modifier. This ability lasts a number of rounds per day equal to the darling's class level. The duration need not be continuous.
Much too pretty to get hurt:
This ability can only be taken by a Darling who posseses the too pretty to get hurt ability.
Once per day per point of charisma bonus, the darling may double the damage reduction they recieve from too pretty to get hurt and gain spell resistance of 15+ 2x Charisma modifier. This ability replaces and supercedes Too Pretty to Get Hurt; it has the same duration, which, again, need not be continuous.
Snuggly:
While using the snuggly ability, the Darling gains a +5 bonus on grapple checks. While grappling an opponent, the snuggly Darling can apply her spite damage to attacks. The damage is increased by the Darling's charisma modifier.

{table]

Level
BaB
Fort Save
Ref Save
Will Save
Special


1st
+0
+0
+2
+0
Adorability, Spite +1d6


2nd
+1
+0
+3
+0
-


3rd
+2
+1
+3
+1
Spite +2d6


4th
+3
+1
+4
+1
-


5th
+3
+1
+4
+1
Adorable Feature, spite +3d6


6th
+4
+2
+5
+2
-


7th
+5
+2
+5
+2
Spite +4d6


8th
+6/+1
+2
+6
+2
-


9th
+6/+1
+3
+6
+3
Spite +5d6


10th
+7/+2
+3
+7
+3
Adorable Feature


11th
+8/+3
+3
+7
+3
Spite +6d6


12th
+9/+4
+4
+8
+4
-


13th
+9/+4
+4
+8
+4
Spite +7d6


14th
+10/+5
+4
+9
+4
-


15th
+11/+6/+1
+5
+9
+5
Adorable Feature, Spite +8d6


16th
+12/+7/+2
+5
+10
+5
-


17th
+12/+7/+2
+5
+10
+5
Spite +9d6


18th
+13/+8/+3
+6
+11
+6
-


19th
+14/+9/+4
+6
+11
+6
Spite +10d6


20th
+15/+10/+5
+6
+12
+6
Adorable Feature

[/table]

Comment away, my pretties!

[Yuki Akuma]

Three things on the Adorability class feature:

The penalty seems to be cumulative. You should point that out. Also, I can't spell that word.

Secondly, you don't need to point out the DC is Charisma-based when you already said to add their Charisma bonus in the DC formula.

Thirdly, it should only work on creatures that can perceive the Darling. It shouldn't work if the Darling is hiding.

And finally, about the class skills... Why would a Darling know how to appraise objects? And I don't think CUTE characters can take Tumble.. Play sort of replaced it.

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

Adorability, edited:

Adorability:
Beggining at first level, a Darling is more difficult to target with attacks.
Any creature within a 60 foot radius capable of percieving the Darling must make a will save (DC 5+ Darling's class level + Darling's Cha Modifier) to resist the adorable effect.
Any opponent affected by adorability is subject to the Darling's spite damage.
In addition, each round the opponent is affected by Adorability, they take a cumulative -1 morale penalty on attack rolls against the Darling. This penalty can never exceed the Darling's class level. Opponents can attempt a new save every round to break the effect. Mindless opponents and those otherwise immune to mind-effecting abilities are immune to adorability.
If a creature's adorability penalty to attack equals or exceeds their HD, they are affected as if by charm person, rather than suffering the penalty. This effect is subject to the usual conditions for a charm spell, and the subject realizes something is wrong (and can still attempt saves).

Class skills modified- thanks for catching me on that, I need to watch my consistency.
Anything else need doing, before we start considering balance and major changes?

Oh, and as to appraise; I thought that the darling, being spoiled by their parents more often than not, is likely to have expensive taste- and therefore an eye for quality.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

*guffaws*

This is great ;D


Can't stand 'darlings' though.

*shudders*

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

*guffaws*

This is great ;D


Can't stand 'darlings' though.

*shudders*
You really like it?
*shimmering sparkly puppy eyes*
Well, gosh, Mr. Tribble, sir....that's super.

But moving on.
Darlings being insufferable should be a class feature- they're designed to be manipulative, vicious, and cruel without being expressly evil.
Since the whole campaign is about kids, I thought it best to make a few character classes that were the additive inverse of heroic, and weren't even antiheroic- who were willing to go along with heroic aims for their own ends, but weren't, per se, "good" kids.
Because, y'know, kids are mean. Especially priveleged, adorable children.

Anyways....what do you guys think, is this enough to build a class around? They're really only got two abilities; the BAB is decent, but not great, so I'm having second thoughts about them as combatants.
Can they swing it?

[Mephibosheth]

I think they can swing the secondary-combatant/party face/secondary skill monkey role, especially with the Spite class feature and some of the Adorabe Features. I still think that you need to bump the DC of Adorability up to 10 + 1/2 class level (rounded up) + Cha modifier, and I think that clarifying or enhancing some of the Adorable Features would be good. Perhaps make them usable thrice per day instead of once, or usable a number of times per day equal to the Darling's charisma modifier. I also think that the rules for Pout are a little unclear. How are Diplomacy, Play, and Tantrum related to increasing the DC of Adorability? Do you have to pass a check or something? Also, I'm really confused about how the second option for using Pout works, so if you could make it a bit more clear, that'd be great.[/office space] Also, I still think that dropping the Hit Dice to d8 would maintain its survivability while simultaneously creating a greater divide between this and classes like Whiner and Storybook Hero that are all about combat and nothing else. Makes for a bit clearer separation of party roles.

So, yeah. I really like this class and I think that it's definitely workable.

Mephibosheth

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

Adorability:
Beggining at first level, a Darling is more difficult to target with attacks.
Any creature within a 60 foot radius capable of percieving the Darling must make a will save (DC 10+ Darling's class level + Darling's Cha Modifier) to resist the adorable effect.
Any opponent affected by adorability is subject to the Darling's spite damage.
In addition, each round the opponent is affected by Adorability, they take a cumulative -1 morale penalty on attack rolls against the Darling. This penalty can never exceed the Darling's class level. Opponents can attempt a new save every round to break the effect. Mindless opponents and those otherwise immune to mind-effecting abilities are immune to adorability.
If a creature's adorability penalty to attack equals or exceeds their HD, they are affected as if by charm person, rather than suffering the penalty. This effect is subject to the usual conditions for a charm spell, and the subject realizes something is wrong (and can still attempt saves).
Mk. III adorability, tinytext becuase I hate having to repost it s'much.

Addendum I:
As to pout, a sucessful diplomacy or tantrum check means the opponent is vulnerable to spite....and so does being held by adorability....so...er...hang on. I thought there was a reason.
*strikes*

Addendum II:
Fixed extraneous material in first use of pout.
The second use is essentially representing the Darling's power to turn past failure into present success by the power of petulance. For instance, if you made a Climb check against DC10, and rolled a 5, let's assume no modifiers; you'd then essentially have five petulance points to spend on any subsequent charisma-based skill check...not sure if that clarifies matters?

Addendum III:
I think dropping the hit die is a good idea, I was wondering myself why it's so high.

Anyways, thanks for the vote of confidence! I hope this one works out, too.

[Elrosth]

I was confused about Pout as well.

I agree with the Appraise skill as a class skill. Perhaps it is only available to Darlings, or available cross-class to other children raised in good homes? Perhaps it could be optionally cross-class for the old london campaign variant we were talking about?

I love this class, and if I can I'd like to call dibs on it for the playtest.

Edit: Oh, and I would be loathe to change the name to anything but Darling, but is that sort of shoehorning the class into mostly girls? Is that an issue, or don't we care?

I hope we don't care, because I love the name Darling, but I just thought I'd bring it up.

[Yuki Akuma]

I can certainly see a cute little boy being called "darling" by his parents.

[Elrosth]

Yeah, me too. I just wanted to check if it was consensus.

[belboz]

I'm curious about non-combat uses of Adoribility. You said that the opponent "perceives something as wrong" (even if charmed) and can attempt to make saves...but do they perceive it as an attack? That is, if a Darling goes up to someone and starts using Adoribility on them, do they know the Darling is hostile? I'd assume not.

Even if they do, it strikes me that the Darling is actually more potent as a Diplomacy monster than as a support combatant. Consider a 5th-level Darling with CHA 18. (They could even have started with CHA 17 and bumped it once). Suppose they pumped Diplomacy (gaining the maximum 8 ranks) and took Endearing Lisp as their first Adorable Feature. Suppose they also took at least 5 ranks in Bluff.

So that's a Diplomacy bonus of +18 (8 ranks, +8 doubled CHA bonus, +2 synergy), at level 5. Assuming we don't allow Negotiator as a feat (that would make the bonus +20). If the campaign allows half-elves, that could be +20 or +22. *If* they can't get their charm effect to work. I know who *I* want as party face.

Pout strikes me as broken as written...they can add the amount they failed *any* check to a CHA-based skill? Why not just try something with a monstrous DC, such as trying to climb a brick wall (DC 25) with no ranks in climb? If, say, they're 10th level, they can give themselves a -5 penalty to the check, for an average failure of 20 points. Wet the wall down, and you're up to 25 points. I'm sure someone could get a much more impressive total with some work, even without epic skill uses. (Taking a single rank in open locks, and carrying around an amazing lock to try to keep picking comes to mind).

Even just using climb, at 10th level, they can take pout, and have a CHA bumped to 20, and have 13 skill points in diplomacy, and have 25 petulance points for... a +50 diplomacy bonus!! (Or +54 if they're a half-elf negotiator.)

I don't think we want that. What level-10 appropriate challenge is going to make a sense motive check against d20 + 50? *If* they make a DC 20 will save in time to resist the adorability before they're charmed.

(Might make more sense to limit the *petualnce points*, as well as the penalty, to CL/2. Then a level 10 character could get a +30 bonus to diplomacy checks. Pretty uber, but somewhat more reasonable.)

Also: Put me in as an additional vote for lowering HD to d8, the standard "I'm not a fighter but I can swing a weapon just fine, thank you" hit die.

[Fax Celestis]

Quick notes:

Adorability:
5 + CLevel + Cha mod seems low. It's usually 10 + CLevel + Cha mod or 10 + 1/2 CLevel + Cha mod. -1 per round to a max of CLevel is too high. -1 per round to a max of 1/2 CLevel is better.

I just have a mental image of multiple Darlings taking on a tough enemy in unison, and simply full-defensing for twenty rounds, so that their foe has no hope of hitting them.

Spite:
The secondary ability is worded strangely. If I have +6d6, can I give up all six dice to reduce my opponent's Int by 6 points and only do it once? Or can I only reduce it by 1, but do it multiple times? Or neither? Also, it needs a duration, I'd say about 3+Cha mod rounds. Finally, I'd recommend progression as the rogue's Sneak Attack: 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, for a total of 11d6.

Too Pretty To Get Hurt:
Should be SR/DR, not AC. I'd say DR X/-, where X is Cha mod, and SR 15 + Cha mod.

Much Too Pretty To Get Hurt:
See "Too Pretty To Get Hurt" but increase to 2*Cha mod on both.

[Yuki Akuma]

I just have a mental image of multiple Darlings taking on a tough enemy in unison, and simply full-defensing for twenty rounds, so that their foe has no hope of hitting them.

This doesn't work for the same reason multiple bard buffs don't work: bonuses of the same type don't stack. In this case, it's a morale bonus (er, penalty).

[Fax Celestis]

This doesn't work for the same reason multiple bard buffs don't work: bonuses of the same type don't stack. In this case, it's a morale bonus (er, penalty).

Yes, but it's a morale penalty against a specific target, so they do stack, just not with each other.

[belboz]

In *combat* situations, I'm not that worried about a cap on Adoribility. How many rounds does your typical combat last, anyway? Surely not enough for the penalties to even hit CL/2 except at low levels.

It's in situations with lots of pre-combat interaction that the ability is so devastating. But like I said, if there's lots of pre-combat interaction, a properly built darling can defuse almost any situation; I'd worry more about ginormous sense motive targets than combat penalties at that point.

Also, don't forget the saves *each round*. Even a character with only a 25% of making the DC is probably going to break the effect before passing CL/2 once the darling hits level 8 or so.

One more question about Adoribility: As if by Charm Person? Or Charm Monster? I assume the latter; if the former, what happens to a non-humanoid whose penalty exceeds his/her/its hit dice?

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

New pout. The dang thing just bugs me.

Pout:
The Darling can pout to raise the DC to resist their adorability by five a number of times per day equal to their charisma modifier.

As to your question about adorability; I'd say that the opponent only percieves something as wrong in a combat situation, i.e. I should not feel as friendly as I do to someone attacking me. In a social/noncombat situation, they simply assume the 'logical' thing, that the Darling is adorable and lovely and their friend.

And yes, Darlings are ideal as Party Face; I might should tweak their flavor to reflect that.

Hit die has officially been lowered to d8.

By the way, I highlighted everything I changed in the first post, just for clarity.

DC for Adorability has been changed- could've sworn I did that before, but guess not.

Fax, I think I'm going to go ahead and keep it no greater than class level, penalty-limit wise.
Or maybe not...I keep changing my mind.
What do the rest of you think?


Spite's secondary ability has been reworded/reworked as follows:
In addition to this normal use of spite, a Darling can deal damage to an opponent's intelligence, wisdom, or charisma. One point of damage to an opponent's ability score equates to two dice of normal damage for purposes of this ability; thus, an eleventh-level Darling could sacrifice all normal damage to assess a -3 penalty to one mental ability score, or sacrifice two dice of damage to deal a -1 penalty while also dealing the remainder (+4d6) as HP damage. This penalty can only be used on a given opponent once per combat, regardless of how much or how little ability damage the Darling chooses to deal with this effect. The penalties so inflicted remain for a number of rounds equal to (3+Charisma modifer).

Spite doing slightly less damage than a rogue is intentional; I meant the potential to deal ability damage to make up for that, combined with the fact that they don't have to bother with the difficult business of attacking from stealth.

Belboz, it's as if charm monster; adorability functions on any creature, not just humanoids, as noted in the first part of the description; I mistyped.

Oh, ack! By the way, Fax:
Multiple darlings using their adorability on a single opponent do not cause that opponent to have a combined morale penalty; the penalty from Adorability only applies when that opponent attacks the Darling whose aura has affected him.
For instance, if a monster has been fighting two darlings- one of whom acted in the surprise round, and one of whom did not; the first darling has sucessfully affected it with Adorability for three rounds (thus assessing a -3 penalty) and the second darling has been doing so for only two rounds (a -2 penalty), then the opponent has a -3 penalty against the first darling, but only a -2 penalty against the second, and no penalty at all when attacking any other party member....I think that's what you were worried about?

Too pretty to get hurt/much too pretty are being changed. I don't have a problem with those edits, and I suppose they do make a certain amount of sense.



I think the Penalty cap on Adorability is our main concern at this point. What do you guys think, is a -20 to hit going to be unbalancing against a reasonable 20th-level opponent? Taking into account both the probability of their actually reaching that level without making their will save, and the probability that they will remain affected by it for any length of time.

By the way, I don't think I stipulate, but once an opponent makes a will save against Adorability, they can't be effected by it again that combat.

[Fax Celestis]

Okay. My issues are taken care of.

Well, but for two things:

First: you said you'll change Too Pretty To Get Hurt, but it remains the same.

Second: think you could use a color other than red to highlight with? I'm red-green colorblind, and it's really hard for me to read.

[belboz]

*Much* better. Now, the best 10th-level build I can come up with (20 CHA, Endearing Lisp, Sad Puppy Face, 13 Diplomacy, 5+ Bluff) has a diplomacy bonus of +29. (+33 for a half-elf with Negotiator, if that's allowed). A great party face, but not an instant-win for every RP interaction; you're not going to get a suspicious guard to hand over the keys, or an actively hostile henchman of the BBEG to look the other way, and you won't be making fanatics at pre-epic levels.

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

Okay. My issues are taken care of.

Well, but for two things:

First: you said you'll change Too Pretty To Get Hurt, but it remains the same.

Second: think you could use a color other than red to highlight with? I'm red-green colorblind, and it's really hard for me to read.
Gah! I forgot to save changes, my bad.

And I'll switch to blue, no problem.

Belboz- happy to oblige. I'm creative, but my 'nose for balance' is quite unreliable, so I...er..rely...on input from you all. ^^;

Remaining issues, everyone?

[belboz]

Just a minor one. Change "...for the remainder of the combat" to "...for the remainder of the interaction," perhaps, to cover non-combat uses? (Either pre-combat uses or uses purely for the charm effect.)

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

Just a minor one. Change "...for the remainder of the combat" to "...for the remainder of the interaction," perhaps, to cover non-combat uses? (Either pre-combat uses or uses purely for the charm effect.)


Ohhh, right, right.
Coming right up.

*changerino*


Fax, is that blue working for you?

[Fax Celestis]

Wonderfully. Thanks.

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

Wonderfully. Thanks.

No problem, oh concise one.
...
If you guys don't find more stuff wrong with this, this is going to be the shortest evaluation period ever.

[Elrosth]

So. I've been meaning to ask again about CUTE abilities working in the real world, but the other classes didn't lend much to my case. I was waiting for this one to come up.

How much of the abilities does a class like the Darling allow to cross over to the real world? I mean, kids aren't actually going to be casting spells, but I could *easily* see the darling using some of it's social abilities on real-world entities. Not only would she be party face for adventures, but she might even be on par with the Momma's Boy for appeasing the wrath of the mighty Mom and Dad.

So, am I using faulty logic, or should a distinguishing line be drawn somewhere with abilities that can or can't be used outside the imaginal plane?

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

So. I've been meaning to ask again about CUTE abilities working in the real world, but the other classes didn't lend much to my case. I was waiting for this one to come up.

How much of the abilities does a class like the Darling allow to cross over to the real world? I mean, kids aren't actually going to be casting spells, but I could *easily* see the darling using some of it's social abilities on real-world entities. Not only would she be party face for adventures, but she might even be on par with the Momma's Boy for appeasing the wrath of the mighty Mom and Dad.

So, am I using faulty logic, or should a distinguishing line be drawn somewhere with abilities that can or can't be used outside the imaginal plane?

I think in the Real World, the Darling is cute, but not supernaturally so.

Unless it specifically states otherwise, all C.U.T.E. abilities should be assumed to operate only in imaginal settings, I'd say.

[Elrosth]

Yeah, not supernaturally. But shouldn't she get something?

Not all children are equal in all things. I'm just curious how we want to handle interactions with things outside the imaginal plane.

[Fax Celestis]

What we should do is compile everything as if it is going to take place in the Imaginal, with a section later on how things function in the Actual.

I would venture to say that (Ex) abilities will still function as normal, but (Su), (Sp), (Ps), and untyped abilities will not.

[Elrosth]

Fair enough.

[belboz]

Just to check, I'm going to try to put together a "comparison" table with the Dreamer, like we had for the SH. I don't know how useful that was, but it might bring anything glaring to light.

OK, as with the SH, this table is unusual. For one thing, it skips BaBs and Saves, because BaBs are the same and Saves are a wash (1 good, 2 bad). It also only includes rows where one character or the other *gains* a special ability, and only includes relative advantages *gained* since the previous row. If this table (plus differences in weapon and armor proficiencies and anything I miss) looks reasonably balanced at each point (occasionally off is OK, but it should self-correct in a row or two), hopefully it means the two classes are balanced. HP are average Darling advantages.

{table]
LevelHP (ave)Special (Darling)Special (Dreamer)
1st+2Adoribility, Spite +1d6Out of It, Happy Thoughts
2nd+1 No, No, That Went Wrong! 1x/day, Bonus Feat
3rd+1Spite +1d6 extra
5th+2Adorable Feature, Spite +1d6 extraBonus Feat
6th+1 No, No, That Went Wrong! +1x/day
7th+1Spite +1d6 extra
8th+1 Bonus Feat
9th+1Spite +1d6 extra
10th+1Adorable FeatureEven happier thoughts; No, No, That Went Wrong! +1x/day
11th+1Spite +1d6 extraBonus Feat
12th+1 It's Not Meant To Go That Way! 1x/day
13th+1Spite +1d6 extra
14th+1 No, No, That Went Wrong! +1x/day; Bonus Feat
15th+1Spite +1d6 extra, Adorable Feature
17th+2Spite +1d6 extraBonus Feat
18th+1 No, No, That Went Wrong! +1x/day
19th+1Spite +1d6 extra
20th+1Adorable FeatureIt's Not Meant To Go That Way! +1x/day, Bonus Feat
[/table]

Anything glaringly wrong?

[Mephibosheth]

On the issue of what abilities work in the real world as well as the Imaginal Plane, perhaps we could create another type of descriptor for abilities, in addition to Su, Ex, and the like. Each class ability or feat would be described as Imaginal or Real, with Imaginal abilities (I) being limited in their use to the Imaginal Plane while Real (R) abilities can be used in either the real world or the Imaginal Plane. Things like skills, saves, and BAB would be considered Real abilities for the purposes of this distinction.

What do people think? Would this be useful, or is it just a waste of time?

Mephibosheth

[Yuki Akuma]

...Why would a child be able to carry their base attack bonus into the real world?

What children do you know who can hit a fly with a slingshot? Because a high-level CUTE character certainly could in the Imaginal.

[Elrosth]

Well, you know my vote. I wouldn't want them the same in the real world, but I'd at least like rules for how the *do* work there.

[belboz]

Shouldn't this discussion be on the Imaginal Plane Redux (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=homebrew;action=display;num=11595721 19) thread? It's really not Darling-specific; it might apply to any CUTE power.

[Fax Celestis]

For the comparison? No, looks fine to me.


On the issue of what abilities work in the real world as well as the Imaginal Plane, perhaps we could create another type of descriptor for abilities, in addition to Su, Ex, and the like. Each class ability or feat would be described as Imaginal or Real, with Imaginal abilities (I) being limited in their use to the Imaginal Plane while Real (R) abilities can be used in either the real world or the Imaginal Plane. Things like skills, saves, and BAB would be considered Real abilities for the purposes of this distinction.

What do people think? Would this be useful, or is it just a waste of time?
Makes a startlingly large amount of sense to me.

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

Yes to an additional category for distinguishing imaginal and real abilities, no to where you've drawn that line thus far.

[LoopyZebra]

Sorry to intrude, but I regularly read the CUTE process. Something I noted, none of the Adorable Features have time durations, and the abilities are worded so that it sounds as though they are a timed effect.

Another thing: Why must the Darling be neutral? This class seems like it could easily fill the role of an evil manipulator, and most of the fluff reads like that.

[belboz]

Sorry to intrude,

Not at all! This isn't a closed club; please participate as much as you're willing and able.


but I regularly read the CUTE process. Something I noted, none of the Adorable Features have time durations, and the abilities are worded so that it sounds as though they are a timed effect.
[quote]

Only a couple of them, I think--Too Pretty to Get Hurt and Much Too Pretty to Get Hurt. The rest are either instantaneous, effectively continuous, lasting as long as a grapple, or limited by the end of an encounter or a successful save. But you're right about those two.

[quote]Another thing: Why must the Darling be neutral? This class seems like it could easily fill the role of an evil manipulator, and most of the fluff reads like that.

I don't think the Darling has to be TN...I think it's like a druid; TN, NG, NE (there's your evil manipulator), LN, or CN. Although I have to admit I never understood the druid's alignment restrictions (in what way is NG like CN? the two "N"s mean totally different things), so I'm not sure I understand this one either.

Actually, just reread it, and it's not a restriction at all...it does say "most."

[Elrosth]

As for the justification on neutrality, they'd make a much better neutral-evil schemer than a lawful-evil dictator or a chaotic-evil barbarian.

And for NG vs CN, one represents following good for it's own end, and one represents following freedom for it's own end. Yeah, they're different, but I still understand it.

[Mephibosheth]

So, any word on the durations for Too Pretty to Get Hurt and Much Too Pretty to Get Hurt? I'd suggest 1 round/level, especially since the abilities are pretty powerful and usable multiple times per day. Another option might be to have them work kinda like Boots of Speed, allowing the Darling to gain the advantages of the abilities for a total number of rounds or minutes per day, which can be divided up however the Dreamer desires (activated and de-activated as a Swift action, perhaps).

Otherwise, anyone have any other issues that need to be discussed? It looks pretty good to me, but I may very well be missing something...

Mephibosheth

[Elrosth]

So the way it's set up now, do you have to use too pretty to get hurt and *then* much too pretty to get hurt, or can you just use much too pretty to get hurt and use the value you'd normally get from the first ability?

[Mephibosheth]

I would assume that Much Too Pretty to Get Hurt is an upgrade of Too Pretty to Get Hurt and the effect of MtPtGH replaces the effect of the TPtGH. At least, this makes the most sense to me. But maybe I'm wrong. I think we could use Shiny's clarification on this one.

On a related note, I've just noticed that TPtGH gives spell resistance equal to 5+Cha modifier, which seems pretty paltry to me, even as a low-level ability (and it is available at 5th level). I mean, how many casters are going to have difficulty rolling to defeat SR 9? Is this just a typo, with the intended value being 15+Cha modifier? Would 10+Cha modifier be more appropriate? Anyone want to clarify? Finally, it should be a little clearer what type of DR TPtGH and MTPtGH grant. Fax originally suggested X/-, with which I agree, but it should say that in the ability description.

Mephibosheth

[Fax Celestis]

The original suggestion for SR was for 15 + Cha mod.

[belboz]

As for the justification on neutrality, they'd make a much better neutral-evil schemer than a lawful-evil dictator or a chaotic-evil barbarian.


As a LE *dictator*, no. But as the LE toady to a dictator, possibly the real power behind the throne, I could see it very easily.

[Elrosth]

Yeah, and I could see a wrathful, evil witch of a kid throwing around her clout for CE. I was just speaking for the neutrality thing.

Yeah, sound more like the whiner, but I could see the mean girl with a sweet cover fitting here too.

[Mephibosheth]

Perhaps removing the alignment requirements but maintaining the alignment suggestions would be a good idea. Shiny, any thoughts?

[Elrosth]

and thus most are in some respect neutral.

It is already optional. Just strongly suggested.

[Mephibosheth]

Game Rule Information
Abilities:
Charisma is the key ability for many of the Darling's class skils, and adds extra damage to their spite attacks, while either strength or dexterity can heighten the potency of their melee actions.
Alignment: Any neutral.
Hit die: d8
Emphasis mine.

Apparently, some degree of neutrality is required...

[belboz]

Whoops, sorry, didn't see that.

Yes, I agree there shouldn't be an alignment restriction. I can really see a Darling of any alignment, although LG is a *little* bit of a stretch (because of spite). But even there, though it's certainly not paladin-esque, I could imagine a very pragmatic LG Darling using spite in the name of upholding a just order, against a *very* evil opponent.

[Elrosth]

Sorry, my bad. I missed that.

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

The following changes have been made:
Neutral alignment is now suggested, rather than required- thanks to loopyzebra for making me reconsider this.

Typographical error fixed on TPTGH; it is indeed SR 15+chamod.

Durations added to TPTGH and MTPTGH, of 1 round/level, divided as the Darling chooses.

Much too pretty to get hurt clarified as replacing too pretty to get hurt.

DR type clarified as 'untyped'.

Hope that takes care of everything. ^^;

[Fax Celestis]

Yup.

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

Yup.

Again with that inimitable concision. ^^;

[Fax Celestis]

Again with that inimitable concision. ^^;
I do try.

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

I do try.

Quite.

*gauntlet of shortness thrown!*

[Fax Celestis]

Ha.

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

At any rate; clarified activation time for Adorable Features.
Can't think of anything else that needs changing....

[Mephibosheth]

Vote?

[Elrosth]

Why does the vote need changing? :)

I think it's looking pretty good.

Do we maybe want to think of a special ability for level 20? Or are we fine with another adorability trait? I'm happy as-is, just asking.

[belboz]

Wow, that was pretty quick. But yeah, I can't think of anything else pre-vote.

Shiny? Give the word. Then everyone else--get me your vote within 48 hours of Shiny's OK. I think everyone knows the drill by now, but in case we have any newcomers:

The votes are for one of four categories:

A) "Core CUTE." High-quality, well-balanced, would fit with almost any version of CUTE. Compatible with all currently established core CUTE.
B) "Official CUTE Supplement." High-quality and well-balanced, but might not fit with the visions of a substantial portion of CUTE DMs. Compatible with all currently established core CUTE, but might not be compatible with other things from category B.
C) "Optional CUTE Supplement." Interesting and worthwhile, but with quality or balance issues.
D) Not admitted to CUTE.

Please vote for whatever level you think is most appropriate; I believe our vote-tabulating system should prevent any benefit from "strategic voting." To review, that system is:

First, the A votes are considered. If they have a majority, the class will be considered Category A.

Otherwise, the A votes will be counted as B votes, and if this gets B a majority, the class will be category B.

Otherwise, all A and B votes will be treated as C votes, and if this gets C a majority, the class will be counted as C.

If the D votes are a majority, the class will be counted as D.

Also, we should be thinking of the next base class for review.

The remaining relatively complete base classes, minus the spellcasting classes (which we should hold off on, since magic is under intense discussion over on CUTE II) are:

Crybaby
Panlid Champion
Ratcatcher
Scaredycat
Tantrum Thrower
Whiner

Thoughts?

[Elrosth]

Ratcatcher would be a departure from the basic "group" of kids we've been working with, since I believe the concept for that was basically a street urchin, right? Might be good to get a little variation into the system early, so we don't get stuck in one path and then have to try and force it to fit later. It'd also be good to work on what I think would be another skill monkey, since we just finished a main party face. Those two tend to go together in my head, so doing the two sooner might be handy.

I also wouldn't mind the scaredycat or the whiner for similar variety reasons.

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

I'm okay to start voting; send away, folks.

As to next class....maybe Scaredycat.

Ratcatcher I think we can wait on, as I'm thinking it's probably not core unless some serious reconfiguring happens.

[belboz]

Cool. The voting will end this Saturday, at 5:58 AM PDT (GMT-7). I will (hopefully) not be on-line at that hour, but I'll post the results later that day.

[edit: And Scardeycat sounds like a fine idea. I haven't seen storybookknight posting in CUTE recently, but he is still around. I'll send him an IM seeing if he'd like to act for the Scaredycat, wants to appoint a surrogate, or would just like us to appoint one.]

[The_Ferg]

Martial weapon proficiency is out of the question. In fact, the DC for the Adorability ability should lessen if s/he is carrying weapons and especially if those weapons are drawn. It just doesn't make sense. I can totally see an ability where his/her adorability ability allows OTHER characters to take spite damage, not him/her. Then, s/he would become more of a support character, which makes more sence, possibly taking on a slightly more powerful bardic role. And no shield or armor proficiencies either. S/he should take a penalty for having those on as well, unless the armor is glamered of course.

Another thing: d8 hit die? Honestly, this is a charisma based rogue/bard we're talking about here. d8 is ludicrous. d6 makes a lot more sense. Other than that, I kind of like it.

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

Well, I can see your point, The_Ferg, however, allow me to explain my rationale:

Adorability is intended to be a supernatural ability (remind me to clarify that in rules terms) that supercedes ordinary considerations of what is and is not actually 'adorable'.
The reason it functions like a charm spell and opponents make saves against it, the reason it's a mind-affecting ability, is because Adorability overrides their reason; they "recognize something is wrong"
because they find the darling cute even though they have a weapon in hand. They shouldn't, the opponent realizes he shouldn't, but he does anyway- thence the supernatural aspect.
Anyone can be cute when they aren't carrying a stick to beat you up with. You need a supernatural power to be cute whilst attacking.

As to spite damage being granted to all other characters, rather than the darling; I think granting everyone the damage-dealing equivalent of about eighteen rogue levels ( for a high-level darling) might be a bit too powerful, all things considered.

The fluff for Spite damage essentially suggests that the Darling is attempting, sucessfully, to appear slightly more harmless than they are, i.e. hiding their weapon behind their back, or holding it loosely, and spreading their arms out as if to hug their opponent. This puts the opponent off-gaurd long enough that they can make a specially vicious attack for extra damage.

Since it's unlikely that the Darling's personal cuteness could make an enemy percieve all their allies as harmless, it made more sense- to me- to give the Darling the spite damage.

A note about items, as well; most weapons and almost all armors in C.U.T.E. aren't "weapons and armor" in the traditional sense; a typical darling might be armored in a blanket and pillows, carrying a muffin-pan shield, and armed with a heavy book. For this reason, being harmless-looking while attacking/wearing armor is a bit more plausible for a character in the project than a normal D&D fighter et. al.

The Darling's hit die is a reflection of the fact that, in contrast to the rogue or bard, they are intended as a support combatant, more similar to a monk than a rogue or bard; with d6 hit dice, their survivability decreases dramatically. While their charisma-based abilities do have obvious noncombat, bard-like applications, their primary purpose is as combat abilities, and they are useless if used from stealth, and meelee-limited; thus, the extra hit points are necessary in my view.

That'd be my response to your concerns- if you've got a rebuttal, I'm very interested to hear it.

[belboz]

And the results are in! The darling is Core Cute (huzzah!), by a vote of 4-1-0-0.

I PMed Storybookknight, and he responded a couple of days ago that he'd "take a look" at the Scaredycat...but I haven't heard from him since. Should we keep waiting, or move on to a different class? I'd rather not use a surrogate except as an absolutely last resort (i.e., when we've finished all base classes which don't need one), or with the author's explicit permission.

[Shiny, Bearer of the Pokystick]

Huzzah indeed; I'll be adding it to the core listing and posting it tables and all in the complete content thread after I get home from work.

As to the next class....I'm trying to pick one I didn't personally do next just for variety, but lord knows it's hard.

Maybe the Panlid Champion, since having to throw out the entire class and rebuild it from scratch should be a change from the cakewalk review process for the Darling.
>_>;
<_<;