PDA

View Full Version : Could he/she be useful



Evard
2010-07-03, 02:43 PM
After reading the COMMONER thread I was wondering.. Could a regular ol' commoner in a party be useful? Would the commoner need to be a way higher level and has anyone tried this (maybe as a punishment to the resident wizard for being waay to cheesy :p)

Would you ply in a game where the houserule was "If you abuse the rules/meta-game/destructive to the game then Ao (or whatever that god's name is) will smite you with a spell... This spell will turn your character into a commoner of your level for X days

:p

I think I would cause it would be fun during a battle if someone said "hey that's a balor I know all about them *blabs about them*" even though their class is barbarian and never been close to Balor or Balor lore. *Insert awesome graphic lightning bolt* and as the barbarian charges at the Balor the huge scary hulk turns into Bruce Banor.

Mwuhhaha

Kylarra
2010-07-03, 02:49 PM
After reading the COMMONER thread I was wondering.. Could a regular ol' commoner in a party be useful? Would the commoner need to be a way higher level and has anyone tried this (maybe as a punishment to the resident wizard for being waay to cheesy :p)

Would you ply in a game where the houserule was "If you abuse the rules/meta-game/destructive to the game then Ao (or whatever that god's name is) will smite you with a spell... This spell will turn your character into a commoner of your level for X days

:p

I think I would cause it would be fun during a battle if someone said "hey that's a balor I know all about them *blabs about them*" even though their class is barbarian and never been close to Balor or Balor lore. *Insert awesome graphic lightning bolt* and as the barbarian charges at the Balor the huge scary hulk turns into Bruce Banor.

MwuhhahaDefine useful. I mean sure, you can abuse handle animal, UMD, diplomacy with the same broken skill system that 3.X brings, but you're not going to be doing anything in particular... frankly, metapunishment ideas like that played in any serious manner would make me wonder why I'm playing with a DM who isn't willing to directly address perceived problems.

Jorda75
2010-07-03, 02:55 PM
If I remember correctly according to the DM's guide major cities will have at least one level 20 commoner living there. Even with 10's in all ability scores he would have a BAB of +10/+5, +6 to all saves and an average of 40 hp, I'm sure you could find a use for such a character.

Even a level 1 commoner has his uses, but if you wanted to keep them safe they would quickly become a liability for a party of adventurers.

Evard
2010-07-03, 03:08 PM
Well I'm always playing video games where you have to keep someone safe that is half way useful. Also if I was to run a one shot where they need to protect a commoner then I would want the commoner to be useful (or even played by someone for maximum fun!)

JaronK
2010-07-03, 03:29 PM
Commoner 1 is actually a useful starting level anyway due to Infested with Chickens and Tasty. That's two flaws (yay bonus feats!) that actually do useful things... the first gets you an endless supply of chickens, the second makes things attack you (good for a tank). I'm actually playing a Commoner 1/Crusader 2/Henchman 2 in game right now and it's hilariously awesome (and I can hold my own with the party Psion and Socerer).

Mostly, though, it comes down to optimizing things other than class. Shock Trooper + Valorous Skillful weapons gets the job done quite nicely even as a Commoner, for example.

JaronK

mucat
2010-07-03, 03:36 PM
First off, to the OP's question about punishing a player by making him play a commoner, I would say absolutely not. You don't use in-game events to deal with out-of-game issues, ever.

That said, a commoner can be perfectly useful and fun to play without resorting to rules abuse. Not as useful as a skilled specialist, usually, but far from pointless.

A competent DM will describe game events in enough detail that there are lots of useful things needing to be done at any moment...some of which require specialized skills, others not. A fight or other time-sensitive situation becomes a matter of prioritizing; there's no way to do everything we want to do on a given round...so anyone with two good hands and a quick mind can pitch in and make themselves important.

Manipulating the environment to leverage some tiny advantage into an overwhelming one, coming up with a fiendishly clever plan, or winning the day through diplomacy (and I don't mean abusing the bloody skill; I mean actually understanding what needs to be said and saying it) are all potentially campaign-changing moves that rely on brains and gumption, not class skills.

When I think back over past campaigns, trying to remember characters who really saved the party from disaster, it was rarely because of a spell or an attack roll. It was because they noticed something the others didn't, or had the presence of mind to cut that damned rope right now or cover that window, when everyone else was doing something a lot flashier and a lot less important. None of these characters were commoners, of course...but they could have been, and still saved the party's collective ass.

Frankly, I wouldn't at all mind playing a commoner now and then. If my character dies and it won't make sense to raise 'em for a session or two, but we just rescued a random civilian? Great, give me control of that person. I'll find a way to make 'em interesting and useful. If you catch me doing nothing but whining about how useless the character is, then I've got only my own lack of ingenuity to blame.