PDA

View Full Version : Wis based factotum



Myrmex
2009-10-30, 01:47 AM
So if you made all the Factotum's abilities run off wisdom, refluffed his abilities "float like butterfly, sting like bee," and called it a monk, how monk-y would it seem, to you?

I know there's unarmed swordsage, but let's pretend you already pointed it out so we don't have to bring it up. Also, mix it with unarmed swordsage! Yaaay synergy!

BobVosh
2009-10-30, 01:53 AM
Not very. Unarme...oh I see what you did there.

Anyway Factotum doesn't seem monkish to me. Just feels too rogue like.

Still better than monk.

FMArthur
2009-10-30, 02:07 AM
Trapfinding, Arcane Dilettante, and Cunning Brilliance don't seem like they'd fit a monk. Everything else... would actually make for a surprisingly cool monk. I think you've got a really good idea here.

Myrmex
2009-10-30, 02:28 AM
I really like the factotum mechanics, and I think you could adapt it to a lot of classes so you could have something with a wizard or monk or warrior flavor, but still have it do other things. I've been toying with the idea of a whole party of factotums refluffed and keying off different ability scores.

Haven
2009-10-30, 02:48 AM
I really like the factotum mechanics, and I think you could adapt it to a lot of classes so you could have something with a wizard or monk or warrior flavor, but still have it do other things. I've been toying with the idea of a whole party of factotums refluffed and keying off different ability scores.

"I am going to punch you until you accept my versatility."

Ernir
2009-10-30, 04:29 AM
I was actually trying to homebrew a wisdom-factotum. A spirit shaman type who has access to all sorts of random knowledge through the ancestors he keeps communicating with.

As a Monk? Nah...
Would require more than changing the ability score to get that flavour, I'd say.

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-10-30, 01:04 PM
Trapfinding, Arcane Dilettante, and Cunning Brilliance don't seem like they'd fit a monk. Everything else... would actually make for a surprisingly cool monk. I think you've got a really good idea here.

Trapfinding and Arcane Dilettante could easily be swapped out for the monk's unarmed progression plus its bonus feats (getting a monk bonus feat each time it would otherwise gain a new spell slot), and Cunning Brilliance could easily be flavored as using an obscure fighting style for a while. Given those changes, I think monk-as-factotum would work quite well.

Zovc
2009-10-30, 01:11 PM
Trapfinding and Arcane Dilettante could easily be swapped out for the monk's unarmed progression plus its bonus feats (getting a monk bonus feat each time it would otherwise gain a new spell slot), and Cunning Brilliance could easily be flavored as using an obscure fighting style for a while. Given those changes, I think monk-as-factotum would work quite well.

Agreed, you need to change more than Intelligence to Wisdom to end up with a monk.

Why is a monk so good at skills?

Tavar
2009-10-30, 01:18 PM
Have you seen what the traditional image of Monks entails? They easily have ranks in Swim, Climb, Jump, various knowledges, tumble, listen, spot, balance, intimidate, concentration, bluff, diplomacy, preform, Escape Artist, handle animal, hide, move silently, heal, sense motive, speak language, survival, and use rope. And that's just the common base, I'm sure you could find some that use other skills as well.

Myrmex
2009-10-30, 01:20 PM
Agreed, you need to change more than Intelligence to Wisdom to end up with a monk.

Not that much, though.


Why is a monk so good at skills?

Monks are good at tumbling, jumping, climbing, swimming, balancing, hiding, spotting, listening and moving silently, but int isn't that monk-y of a stat, in my opinion.

I just watched Kill Bill 1&2 again this weekend, and I think a lot of the characters in it could be represented well with a factotum-as-monk approach. Beatrix Kiddo was a superb sword fighter, and also good with kung fu, and could run, jump, climb, and sneak.

You could multiclass around fighter & rogue & whatever, but that's messy and not as cool as spending 12 inspiration points after being knocked down by 80% of your HP to make 4 extra attacks and kill your opponent.

Zovc
2009-10-30, 01:25 PM
Not that much, though.



Monks are good at tumbling, jumping, climbing, swimming, balancing, hiding, spotting, listening and moving silently, but int isn't that monk-y of a stat, in my opinion.

I just watched Kill Bill 1&2 again this weekend, and I think a lot of the characters in it could be represented well with a factotum-as-monk approach. Beatrix Kiddo was a superb sword fighter, and also good with kung fu, and could run, jump, climb, and sneak.

You could multiclass around fighter & rogue & whatever, but that's messy and not as cool as spending 12 inspiration points after being knocked down by 80% of your HP to make 4 extra attacks and kill your opponent.

It's not the same. A factotum can be good at anything, that includes any skill. Why is a martial artist good at things that aren't climbing, concentrating, jumping, swimming(?), and tumbling?

I'm not saying that a monk should be anything like a fighter, rogue, and whatever, I'm saying that a monk should not be anything like a rogue.

Ravens_cry
2009-10-30, 01:32 PM
Agreed, you need to change more than Intelligence to Wisdom to end up with a monk.

Why is a monk so good at skills?
You got to do something while bored at the monastery. :smalltongue:

Moriato
2009-10-30, 01:32 PM
A character like that really could solve any problem by hitting it.

Locked door? PUNCH IT!

Need to disable a trap? KICK THE CRAP OUT OF IT!

Magic item wont work for you? HEADBUTT THAT SUMBITCH!

Myrmex
2009-10-30, 01:40 PM
It's not the same. A factotum can be good at anything, that includes any skill. Why is a martial artist good at things that aren't climbing, concentrating, jumping, swimming(?), and tumbling?

"If on your journey, you should encounter God, God will be cut."
What a bad ass line. Anyway, I recommend you watch Kill Bill. Their are so many awesome intimidate checks & Bill is crazy with diplomacy.

You could remove some class skills from the class, but why bother? You only get to choose 6 or 7 skills, realistically, that you can be good at. Most people I have played with also role play, so their skill selection will be based around some theme. If they want to be Ciao Lin, Horse Brother, and choose ride, handle animal, knowledge nature, etc, and another wants to play Qual-hu, the Iron Fist, and chooses knowledge history & nobility, diplomacy, intimidate, why not let them? They both have perfectly monk-y themes, and it's not like they're making their own demiplanes to gaterape solars.

A monk based factotum will be a little more MAD, since there's no synergy between a high int & bonus skill points, and if you're going to be hitting things, dex, con and str would be pretty good to have, which means you might have 8 int. This still leaves you with enough skills to do what monk-y things you want to do.

Furthermore, I feel like a few times a day, a hero (any hero) should be able to attempt a skill and stand a good chance at success. I am really not a fan of how crippled in virtually every activity, save one, D&D characters are. It encourages a lot of metagaming.

Zovc
2009-10-30, 01:45 PM
You could remove some class skills from the class, but why bother? You only get to choose 6 or 7 skills, realistically, that you can be good at. Most people I have played with also role play, so their skill selection will be based around some theme. If they want to be Ciao Lin, Horse Brother, and choose ride, handle animal, knowledge nature, etc, and another wants to play Qual-hu, the Iron Fist, and chooses knowledge history & nobility, diplomacy, intimidate, why not let them? They both have perfectly monk-y themes, and it's not like they're making their own demiplanes to gaterape solars.

Then why don't you give all classes every skill as class skills? Why can only a monk be Ciao Lin, Horse Brother? Why can't I be a horse wrangling fighter with ranks in handle animal and knowledge (nature)? Hell, why doesn't he get a bonus to those skills? Because that's not what every fighter does. This is just the way the system works, in my opinion, there is a REASON Factotums have every skill as their class skill; where as there is no reason for a Monk to have every skill as a class skill, but not for a fighter or cleric to have every skill as a class skill.

Myrmex
2009-10-30, 01:46 PM
A character like that really could solve any problem by hitting it.

Locked door? PUNCH IT!

Need to disable a trap? KICK THE CRAP OUT OF IT!

Magic item wont work for you? HEADBUTT THAT SUMBITCH!

Look at the monk as presented in the PHB. It has a bunch of mystical, weird-ass abilities that are things a wire-fu monk might have, maybe. Except the whole thing doesn't work. Especially if I don't want to play a monk that can't hit opponents, but can talk to plants at level 12 or something.

Instead, you get a template like factotum that mechanically lets you do just about anything (and monks in most media can do "just about anything"), and you then can decide what sort of monk theme you want to go with, and still be competent.

Myrmex
2009-10-30, 01:47 PM
Then why don't you give all classes every skill as class skills? Why can only a monk be Ciao Lin, Horse Brother? Why can't I be a horse wrangling fighter with ranks in handle animal and knowledge (nature)? Hell, why doesn't he get a bonus to those skills? Because that's not what every fighter does. This is just the way the system works, in my opinion, there is a REASON Factotums have every skill as their class skill; where as there is no reason for a Monk to have every skill as a class skill, but not for a fighter or cleric to have every skill as a class skill.

May I direct your attention to this post:


I really like the factotum mechanics, and I think you could adapt it to a lot of classes so you could have something with a wizard or monk or warrior flavor, but still have it do other things. I've been toying with the idea of a whole party of factotums refluffed and keying off different ability scores.

Moriato
2009-10-30, 01:49 PM
Look at the monk as presented in the PHB. It has a bunch of mystical, weird-ass abilities that are things a wire-fu monk might have, maybe. Except the whole thing doesn't work. Especially if I don't want to play a monk that can't hit opponents, but can talk to plants at level 12 or something.

Instead, you get a template like factotum that mechanically lets you do just about anything (and monks in most media can do "just about anything"), and you then can decide what sort of monk theme you want to go with, and still be competent.

I wasn't saying it was a bad thing, personally I think it's hilarious.

Myrmex
2009-10-30, 01:54 PM
I wasn't saying it was a bad thing, personally I think it's hilarious.

Well, I mean, you COULD fluff it as a punch-happy monk smashing everything just right, or you could fluff it as his super-secret monastery training.

Zovc
2009-10-30, 01:55 PM
I suppose the difference here is, I like the factotum as is. I think (while you are honoring it, to a large extent), you are pooping on the class by having every other class borrow from it.

I am also captivated by the idea of an "all-factotum" game, actually. It'd almost be like a fantasy-set Burn Notice. I, however, would do Gestalt instead of "Factotum-morphing."

For example, "the Muscle" could be a Factotum//[Warblade/Duskblade], where as "the Sneak" could be a Factotum//[Beguiler/Rogue/Int-based Spellthief]. I'm not afraid to say, "Yeah, you can be a Cloistered Cleric and cast off of Intelligence instead," though, incidentally.

I wouldn't do full gestalt, mind you. I'd let players start with level 2-6 characters and just have THOSE levels gestalt, but each level after that be regular (one class a level, that is).

Myrmex
2009-10-30, 02:00 PM
But I don't want everyone to be super smart brainiacs. I just want classes to get more out of their primary ability score and have a wider range of capabilities, while still remaining more or less "mundane."

Zovc
2009-10-30, 02:06 PM
But I don't want everyone to be super smart brainiacs. I just want classes to get more out of their primary ability score and have a wider range of capabilities, while still remaining more or less "mundane."

...but to get any more from their primary ability score would imply that they were either a living muscle (strength), agile freak (dexterity), or animated rock (constitution); but more 'oustanding,' from a personality standpoint would imply a super smart braniac, obscenely insightful sage, or the most magnetizing person ever.

How else could a person's Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma possibly impact every aspect of their life significantly.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-10-30, 02:58 PM
Then why don't you give all classes every skill as class skills? Why can only a monk be Ciao Lin, Horse Brother? Why can't I be a horse wrangling fighter with ranks in handle animal and knowledge (nature)? Hell, why doesn't he get a bonus to those skills? Because that's not what every fighter does. This is just the way the system works, in my opinion, there is a REASON Factotums have every skill as their class skill; where as there is no reason for a Monk to have every skill as a class skill, but not for a fighter or cleric to have every skill as a class skill.I think WotC went wrong with the 3.5 skills. It shouldn't list class skills, it should list non-class skills. Everyone in a fantasy setting should get ride, for example. Make things like Know:Arcana, UMD, and Disable Device restricted to certain classes, but in general, any class needs to have the option of lying to people.

Zovc
2009-10-30, 03:05 PM
I think WotC went wrong with the 3.5 skills. It shouldn't list class skills, it should list non-class skills. Everyone in a fantasy setting should get ride, for example. Make things like Know:Arcana, UMD, and Disable Device restricted to certain classes, but in general, any class needs to have the option of lying to people.

Anyone can make an untrained bluff check. You can put ranks in bluff whether or not it is a class skill, and your charisma modifier affects how well you can bluff, too.

If I'm remembering how d20 modern works properly, they have packages of class skills chosen at creation.

Tavar
2009-10-30, 03:12 PM
Anyone can make an untrained bluff check. You can put ranks in bluff whether or not it is a class skill, and your charisma modifier affects how well you can bluff, too.

If I'm remembering how d20 modern works properly, they have packages of class skills chosen at creation.

Being able to put ranks in something doesn't mean that you can actually do it reliable. Kinda like how monks can survive, but that doesn't mean they are actually useful. DnD rewards super specilization, and punishes genrealization. This, combined with the way they overvalued skills, means that unless you have a skill as a class skill, you'll suck at it past level 3 or so(once the dice stop mattering so much).

Zovc
2009-10-30, 03:14 PM
Being able to put ranks in something doesn't mean that you can actually do it reliable. Kinda like how monks can survive, but that doesn't mean they are actually useful. DnD rewards super specilization, and punishes genrealization. This, combined with the way they overvalued skills, means that unless you have a skill as a class skill, you'll suck at it past level 3 or so(once the dice stop mattering so much).

How big of a lie is a monk/fighter/barbarian supposed to be able to convince me of?

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-10-30, 03:16 PM
Anyone can make an untrained bluff check. You can put ranks in bluff whether or not it is a class skill, and your charisma modifier affects how well you can bluff, too.

If I'm remembering how d20 modern works properly, they have packages of class skills chosen at creation.Taking most skills as non-class skills is generally pointless. 5 ranks in a non-class skill takes until level 7. A guy with a class skill got that at level 2. The disparity is too high for any useful use of the skill, which is stupid when you consider that things like Spot don't appear on most classes skill lists.

Tavar
2009-10-30, 03:20 PM
How big of a lie is a monk/fighter/barbarian supposed to be able to convince me of?

Considering the amount of fighters who bluff or feint IRL, a decent one. And don't get me started on Sense Motive, Listen, Spot, Tumble, Balance, or Diplomacy.

Godskook
2009-10-30, 03:25 PM
How big of a lie is a monk/fighter/barbarian supposed to be able to convince me of?

Well, Jedi = space monks + fighters, and wookie ~= barbarian, so monk/fighter/barbarian is roughly equal to a Jedi wookie. Really, are you going to argue with a Jedi wookie? I mean:

JW: Grrrrr(waves hand)
Sidekick: He says that these aren't the droids you're looking for.
StormTrooper1(fails save): Ok, move along
StormTrooper2(makes save): (Oh god, its a wookie. Hope it moves on, hope it moves on, hope it moves on, hope it moves on, hope it moves on,..............)

FMArthur
2009-10-30, 03:30 PM
How big of a lie is a monk/fighter/barbarian supposed to be able to convince me of?

What about those classes strikes you as impeding your ability to lie? That's sort of what it comes down to - mechanics stomping on fluff for no sensible reason.

Starsinger
2009-10-30, 03:33 PM
Then why don't you give all classes every skill as class skills? Why can only a monk be Ciao Lin, Horse Brother? Why can't I be a horse wrangling fighter with ranks in handle animal and knowledge (nature)?

I agree with everything you just said. Why can't all classes have all skills and you use your skills to further develop your character? Why can't your Rogue by Ciao Lin, Horse Brother? Why can't Fighters be sneaky if they choose? Why are Sorcerers restricted from dancing?

Tavar
2009-10-30, 03:41 PM
I agree with everything you just said. Why can't all classes have all skills and you use your skills to further develop your character? Why can't your Rogue by Ciao Lin, Horse Brother? Why can't Fighters be sneaky if they choose? Why are Sorcerers restricted from dancing?

Cause Wizards screwed up skills. Personnally, I think Sstoopidtallkid's idea had merit: have about 5-6 restricted skills, and the rest are always open. Plus, I'd bump up CS by about 2 for every class.

Moriato
2009-10-30, 04:27 PM
I don't know about opening up every skill as a class skill, but it would certainly make sense to be able to choose what skills are your class (or, I guess you'd have to say "primary") skills.

Thinking about basing how many "primary" skills you would get, it seems like if you base it off of any stat, like int, and someone is going to cry foul because their barbarian doesn't get enough class skills, so that's no good. Base it off of class and you have the same problem. Give everyone the same amount, and you run into 4e's major problem of "everyone is the same" and I hate that, so... I don't really see a good way to implement it.