How to introduce new Classes properly? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

View Full Version : How to introduce new Classes properly?

Krazzman

2011-09-21, 07:28 AM

Hello again,

it's a hard decision to post this, but it becomes pretty clear that in my environment some nasty problems with any class not in the Core Rulebook (and some splat books). They have a sort of super stereotyped view on specific things, and I am afraid I contributed a bit to that. I might be a bit of a Optimizer/Powergamer, at least I try to be an effective member of the Group, but every time I mention something new it sort of goes on the others nerves and their most common statement would be: "Powergamer" or "That's completly OP"...

Examples:
1) Psionics:
While one thinks they are COMPLETELY overpowered, the other just sees them as Wizards with funny extra flaws and DMs that way.

I tried to Introduce Psionics for the fact that they appealed to me, the 2 Soulknifes were quite fun but we stopped at level 3 since one player couldn't stop mentioning how OP my class was...while playing a cleric, and the other was just a one-shot.
But the time I tried an Elan Psion it was a complete mess, I couldn't manifest in a Anti-MAGIC-Field, nearly all mobs were Immune to Mind affecting abilities (it were stupid gnolls...) and while the Magic-Immune Boss was also Immune to my Mind Blast, he even dispelled my Animated Object with Dispel Magic. I mostly got the flaws of a Psion and the effects of a Sorceror with a bad choice of spells... jeah nice...

2) Duskblade and Dragon Shaman:
I was quite psyched after discovering this two and thought directly about playing one. But somehow both DM's thought about the Duskblade being too powerful, one stripped me from all my gear and threw me into an ANIT-MAGIC-FIELD Arena while the other just made the Monsters harder... this class is obviously not favoured by my fellow Players and DM's...just like the Dragon Shaman

3) Tome of Battle:
After I said I found a cool book the others sighted again...
I never came to use any class/stance/maneuver from this book, although I wanted to. I mentioned something about stances being cool and Maneuver being some nasty bonus for melee and whoop Book of Unbalacing OP-ness was it called, at least I think thats what they thought. But somehow I think I slowly reached through with that one, while one now thinks it's not that OP if everyone is using it, the other is convinced it is a unbalanced, OP try to make melee confusing.

4) Pathfinder:
Pathfinder did some Interesting things and again it was a bit called "overpowered" at first but after a bit of looking into it it was accepted...atleast the CRB...the classes from UC, UM and APG are forbidden cause they didn't look into them and they won't do it because they think this is totally OP...

5) Monk, Fighter, and Barbarian:
In their opinion descent classes that are on the same level, if not superior to those squishy casters...
I once tried to explain the Tier system for classes with versatility, but every argument brought by me was "sundered".

a) Monks have only Niche abilities and are too squishy - But they have tons of abilities and with the proper feats can mob the ground with a wizard...
b) Fighters and Barbarians might be nice but are nearly only good for dealing damage, and can't even reach flying enemies - Nah, thats their job they are there to deal damage not to do anything else, and for flying enemies there are Bows/Crossbows...
c) The rogue can outlast them in Damage output and versatility due to his many skills, he can be the party face, an universal key and still contribute well in combat - jeah but, the fighter/barbarian could intimidate or smash the door and the Fighter gets more feats....

6) Tank:
Don't. Ever. Dare. to use this word for DnD/PF for them it's not existent because DnD/PF is not WoW, lol... While I once said I would take the role of a "Tank" they laughed and mentioned that there is not such a thing as Threat and the mobs will most likely first hit the squishy things...after telling how about Intimidating? Taunting? Dealing the most damage to qualify as a threat yourself? Block enemies to get to these squishy people? They just skipped the topic to threw jokes about WoW...

I don't know what to do to get them to test these new things, but somehow I ask if I can play a thing and then it's DM-fiat-nerfed into oblivion? I'm at my wits end, and don't know how to persuade the others to test them out or to read a few things about them. At least for the Pathfinder Stuff I got a bit of Backup now, but still I need advice to either how I swallow this up and just play with the things given or how to get the message to them without either insulting them or lower their fun.

Have a nice Day
Krazzman

Bayonet Priest

2011-09-21, 07:43 AM

I love how people freak out about anything new or non-core being OP and then allowing wizards, clerics, and druids in the party. One of my players was shocked when I told him that Monks are generally considered a very poor class, he thought them nearly overpowered. Later he played a cleric and I got my first look at 10th level cleric going to town on some badguys, he was terribly unoptimised and was still devestating.

I can understand considering stuff like Tome of Battle overpowered compared to the core melee (I love ToB myself but it will make all but the most optimized fighters cry) but the Soulknife? Really?

I don't know what to tell them, they just don't really understand the rules of the game.

Darth_Versity

2011-09-21, 09:09 AM

Unfortunatly, the best way to deal with such attitudes is to prove what over powered is. Make a strait Wizard/Cleric/Druid and prove just how strong they are.

Play a character using only core materials from the PHB and go to town. Dominate combat, social encounters and skill tests. Then when the others start to get uncomfortable with your dominating, point out that the overpowered classes they all complain about are not nearly so strong as that and cannot live up to full casters.

One person versus a room of people is difficuilt when trying to get them onto your side but you must prove that the classes they hold dear are weak, not that the ones you love are strong.

ThiefInTheNight

2011-09-21, 09:09 AM

skycycle blues

2011-09-21, 09:19 AM

Wyntonian

2011-09-21, 09:29 AM

Well, if a different group is available, I'd consider looking into that. Otherwise, take a turn DMing, and tell them up front that core classes are banned. See where they go with it. Remind them that if a whole group is "power-gaming", then it's all good, because they're on the same playing field.

Other-otherwise, make a mailman/god-wizard/CoDzilla/Bear riding a bear riding another bear shooting bears made out of bears out of his bear, all of whom are on fire. See if they think core is balanced after that. Then, politely request the underwhelming, poorly-scaled "support" that is the Dragon Shaman, or the game breaking ability of a soulknife to, y'know, have a weapon.

Madcrafter

2011-09-21, 09:59 AM

I'm not sure how well "giving them a taste of what power is" would work out. From reading Krazzman's post, it seems that doing something like that might just get him a cursed ring that produced a 5ft AMF around himself, while everyone blithely ignores what he is trying to show them.
I would suggest doing as others have suggested, DMing a game yourself (even just a single session one-shot) and ban core, and anything else you think the players are too comfortable with. Get them thinking outside their usual ideas, and give them some help to optimize a bit. That will probably help, unless they reject the whole idea as stupid and terrible, in which case a different group is preferable.

Urpriest

2011-09-21, 10:25 AM

Your spoiler about Psionics makes it look like you think that Psionics is immune to Antimagic Fields and Dispel Magic, which it isn't. Your spoiler about tanking makes it look like you think tanking can exist in 3.5, which any optimizer on this forum will tell you it doesn't. Battlefield control exists, but outside of the Knight or Crusader (and extreme Goad optimization) the term "tank" doesn't apply.

Jude_H

2011-09-21, 12:01 PM

Breaking the game with core classes will probably only add to the "that's broken"/ban list. That's probably not the point you want to make.

I'd second the suggestion to run a game with replacement classes. That would let the other players see how the systems work, and give you a chance to play with them. After a campaign with ToB and Psionics as the setting's default combat/casting systems, you'd probably have better luck pitching them in other games.

I'm curious about the Soulknife thing, though. How on earth did you make it look OP?

Madcrafter

2011-09-21, 12:16 PM

You can make any class look good, soulknife included, as long as everyone else is unoptimized enough.

If you really want to go with the "show them true power strategy", and manage to get wizard and such banned, go on a mission to get your group to ban all of core by breaking the classes one by one.

Flickerdart

2011-09-21, 12:35 PM

Some of the best Psionics powers aren't mind-affecting, so random immunity doesn't really stop you. But yes, by default Psionics and Magic interact as if each was the other (so you can't cast in a Null Psionics Field either).
What flaws do you mean though? Psions essentially are Sorcerers with more versatile casting, more powers known, immunity to ASF and able to cast when paralyzed.

Dragon Shaman...really sucks, Dragonfire Adepts are better. Duskblades can indeed be seen as overpowered (they cast spells and have full BAB, omg). I'm starting to see a problem with DM fiat in your group though - while making monsters tougher is a valid response to someone using a T3 class while everyone else is slogging through the lower tiers, gear-stealing shenanigans are something else.

Pathfinder has a higher power level than default 3.5 for a lot of things. The two systems don't work together very well, so your group is more or less correct here.

Rogue actually is pretty underwhelming in Core, since a lot of the goodies he needs aren't available, but he still has UMD. He can also take Intimidate, though, and has more skill points to do this. Also, most core feats suck - that Fighter is going to run out of things to take soon enough.

Ah! Now things make sense. If your DM has monsters ignore melee and go exclusively after casters, and spams AMFs everywhere, then it kind of makes sense that they think casters aren't as strong...

Andorax

2011-09-21, 01:23 PM

Bring them here?

deuxhero

2011-09-21, 01:40 PM

Play a God Wizard using only core material.

Don't even try too hard with cheesing spells, only use stuff completely in the manner it was intended for.

RecklessAbaddon

2011-09-21, 02:00 PM

if your group is lost, above the door of the game room it should read Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate.

I bought the 3.5 psionic books when i saw them used at a hastings (5 bucks a peice and it was buy 2 books get a used for $1 day) so since i was already buying a 40k book I got one of them for a buck and another for 5. When i had the friends read through the book they realized it wasn't.

Does your group just refuse to read through the rules?

Krazzman

2011-09-21, 02:40 PM

Wooow, thats quite a good response :D

To the Psion thing: no, it wasn't an AMF...but I couldn't exactly recollect the thing, while the boss (a caster) could cast at the same time...and he didn't cast dispel magic, it had just the effect...

And yes, in terms of Tanking I would say in DnD/PF it's called Battlefield Control. And yes I am aware to see it is not like in any MMO but Protecting the squishy casters is! there called tanking and in DnD invoced through numerous effects as you described, goad and some humans can be insulted to be angry at you.

Game-Breaking things wouldn't be good, as mentioned, it will go the way that I will be under a watch :/ One of us couldn't even buy a lance for his charger build....

The One-Shot Idea might be a good one, but with a few newbies it will be hard to enforce (+ we will play Pathfinder)

Have a nice Day,
Krazzman

hex0

2011-09-21, 02:49 PM

Dragon Shaman...really sucks,

I beg to differ but they surely aren't over powered. A lot of DMs are scared of the Fast Healing but don't realize it only goes to half.

Although at 4th level a copper dragon shaman could climb up a wall (or ceiling) and deal 2d6 acid damage up to 30 feet away every 1d4 rounds. Is that what he's afraid of?

Krazzman

2011-09-21, 03:07 PM

I beg to differ but they surely aren't over powered. A lot of DMs are scared of the Fast Healing but don't realize it only goes to half.

Although at 4th level a copper dragon shaman could climb up a wall (or ceiling) and deal 2d6 acid damage up to 30 feet away every 1d4 rounds. Is that what he's afraid of?

Yes, that was my tactic...

Grendus

2011-09-21, 03:43 PM

2d6 damage every 1d4 rounds? Did you point out that a commoner with a greatsword and 15 point buy does more than that? Did he forget to give his monsters a ranged attack?

Offer to run a gladiator style battle between a druid and any other class at levels 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20. I guarantee the druid will win every match past level 5, and probably level 1 as well (if they start right next to each other the melee could one shot the druid, though once your riding dog gets his teeth in odds are the fight is over). That should at least convince them that core is imbalanced (or that you're a hopeless powergamer). Once the druid has Wildshape, it's all over, he can take a form with good physical stats and dominate anything the monk/fighter/barbarian could hope to get.

Some of the best Psionics powers aren't mind-affecting, so random immunity doesn't really stop you. But yes, by default Psionics and Magic interact as if each was the other (so you can't cast in a Null Psionics Field either).
What flaws do you mean though? Psions essentially are Sorcerers with more versatile casting, more powers known, immunity to ASF and able to cast when paralyzed.

Depends. XPH covers this, there are two mentalities - psionics are the same, and psionics are different. Most people play with the former, where SR and PR are the same things, Dispel Magic and Dispel Psionics will dispel both, and an AMF/NPF will effect both casters and manifesters. The latter is very rare, only time I've seen it done is in a high magic/high psionics world, otherwise you end up with a very weird imbalance.

Dragon Shaman...really sucks, Dragonfire Adepts are better. Duskblades can indeed be seen as overpowered (they cast spells and have full BAB, omg). I'm starting to see a problem with DM fiat in your group though - while making monsters tougher is a valid response to someone using a T3 class while everyone else is slogging through the lower tiers, gear-stealing shenanigans are something else.

Dragon Shaman is a fine class, if everyone is sticking to T4 and T5 classes. It is on the lower end of abilities, mostly because of it's inflexibility. Since they aren't powergamers, it should be fine.

Pathfinder has a higher power level than default 3.5 for a lot of things. The two systems don't work together very well, so your group is more or less correct here.

I heartily disagree. Pretty much all of the T3 classes and most of the T4 classes that weren't directly translated to pathfinder (rogue, barbarian, etc) fit very well in a PF campaign. You can't tell me you think a Warblade would fall behind in a party with a Magus, Inquisitor, and Alchemist? How about a well built Binder, or a Beguiler? You would need a little translation, some spells were changed in Pathfinder, some weren't, but it's no worse than trying to use 3.0 material in 3.5.

Rogue actually is pretty underwhelming in Core, since a lot of the goodies he needs aren't available, but he still has UMD. He can also take Intimidate, though, and has more skill points to do this. Also, most core feats suck - that Fighter is going to run out of things to take soon enough.

Rogues do well enough in core, though they do shine a lot outside of it. The only time a core-only rogue would really struggle would be in a campaign of mostly plants, undead, and constructs. Agree on fighters though, core feats suck!. Unless you do something like the Horizon Tripper, core only fighters blow.

Ah! Now things make sense. If your DM has monsters ignore melee and go exclusively after casters, and spams AMFs everywhere, then it kind of makes sense that they think casters aren't as strong...

The divine casters should still be fine - druid has his AC to body check the monsters and is fairly tough, even in his humanoid form, and clerics are literally 1hp/level weaker than fighters which will rarely decide the battle. The only classes who would be completely shut down in an AMF would be wizards, and even then they could just... step ten feet to the right and start casting again. Sounds like the group just doesn't like change and resents you trying to introduce it. Find a better group, or offer to DM.

Starbuck_II

2011-09-21, 04:08 PM

Examples:
1) Psionics:
While one thinks they are COMPLETELY overpowered, the other just sees them as Wizards with funny extra flaws and DMs that way.

I tried to Introduce Psionics for the fact that they appealed to me, the 2 Soulknifes were quite fun but we stopped at level 3 since one player couldn't stop mentioning how OP my class was...while playing a cleric, and the other was just a one-shot.
But the time I tried an Elan Psion it was a complete mess, I couldn't manifest in a Anti-MAGIC-Field, nearly all mobs were Immune to Mind affecting abilities (it were stupid gnolls...) and while the Magic-Immune Boss was also Immune to my Mind Blast, he even dispelled my Animated Object with Dispel Magic. I mostly got the flaws of a Psion and the effects of a Sorceror with a bad choice of spells... jeah nice...

Well, the solution is stop using Mind affecting powers but you wouldn't know that at 1st level when you chose them.
What did you choose? Entangling exctoplasm is impossible (except size) to be immune to. Crystal shard isn't a bad blasting spell (no SR).
Were you using charm, mind thrust, etc?

Krazzman

2011-09-21, 04:14 PM

Does your group just refuse to read through the rules?

I don't know somehow I only know from One guy that really thinks they are completely OP (was playing a Soulknife with Psionic strike, and punched his NPC with average dmg of ~20 at level 3) and somehow he doesn't think it is worth to read it...

The powers the Psion had were Animate Object, Skate and the 1d10 dmg power. I couldn't think about the fact that the BBEG was a) Immune to powers and could Drain powers, and b) that this was fiated after my entry of the class... we had a psion the first tim.

For the part about the flaws, I personally think the starting spell list for wiz/sorc are a bit better than the powers the psion can select (could come from not reading enough about this).

Have a nice Day,
Krazzman

Flickerdart

2011-09-21, 04:24 PM

I don't know somehow I only know from One guy that really thinks they are completely OP (was playing a Soulknife with Psionic strike, and punched his NPC with average dmg of ~20 at level 3) and somehow he doesn't think it is worth to read it...
1d6(short sword)+1d8(psychic strike)+2d6(psionic weapon) does indeed give a pretty good damage output - an average of 15 damage before counting Strength, and a full 20 if, let's say, he has Strength 20. However, this takes two turns to set up (a full round to regain psionic focus and a move action to recharge psychic strike). On the other hand, a Fighter with a greatsword and Power Attack deals 2d6 base damage, +2 from the point of BAB he has over the Soulknife put into Power Attack, then +7 damage from Strength (assuming the same Strength 20). He hits for an average of 16 damage, and can do this every turn for the rest of his life - so in the two turns that the Soulknife deals 20, this Fighter deals 32.

Starbuck_II

2011-09-21, 06:37 PM

The powers the Psion had were Animate Object, Skate and the 1d10 dmg power. I couldn't think about the fact that the BBEG was a) Immune to powers and could Drain powers, and b) that this was fiated after my entry of the class... we had a psion the first tim.\

Mind Thrust is 1d10, will save negate, mind affecting. So yeah, easy to nerf.

I don't get Animate object nerf. Yeah, you can dispel it (legal).

what level were you? Dispel magic shouldn't be common at 1st-3rd.

Elboxo

2011-09-21, 06:44 PM

Realistically, your best bet is probably to DM a game yourself, and explain to them that the game is going to challenge them by requiring them to do something different from what they're used to. Ban Core, it'll help.

But other than that, they're probably not going to.

This

DM a game and have a wizard boss at the end, have his minions being: Duskblandes, dominated barbarians etc and a psion as his right hand man.
Don't tell them till afterwards the minions were the 'OP' classes, and then when the wizard does serious damage and then escapes, only to appear again and summon something nasty before really leaving, tell them the minions were the 'op' ones and the boss fight was the 'cute, defenceless wizard'

Gavinfoxx

2011-09-21, 07:03 PM

Hiro Protagonest

2011-09-21, 07:05 PM

Get Druid, Wizard, and Cleric banned. Seriously.

Play each of them using only PHB, DMG, MM1. Get them banned. They need recalibration of 'broken'. ONLY use things the way they were intended, OBVIOUSLY. THEN they will know what power is.

And the game doesnt suffer with tier 1's getting banned... not in the least...

If he does that two times in a row with two different classes (let alone three times), he's more likely to get HIMSELF banned. Play one of them, and then play a straight classed monk when they tell you to make a new character (or just offer to make a ne character when they say it's OP).

Vladislav

2011-09-21, 10:04 PM

When I game with new DMs, I usually come with two characters prepared. One is a Duskblade, the other is a Druid. Sometimes they say no to the former because "Duskblades are OP". Then I take the latter and politely ask if I can play "my backup character" instead; the answer is invariably yes, and everyone is happy.

Kenneth

2011-09-21, 10:49 PM

well I do kind agree with the 1st one.. psionics to me has alwasy fetl as an after though that is basically a 3rd srouce of magic that don't have a whole of on self balance in it. But that could just be my own judgement and disliek of spionics in a non oriental setting.

and I whole heartdly agree with teh 6th one.. there is no 'tank' in D&D you not going to run up and use Taunt, or mocking blow, or hand of reckoning or whatever to get everything to attack you and only you. battle field control is more an apt term as that is what you are doing with trip lockdown builds. not so much tanking.

think of D&D like PvP in a MMO the monsters go after who ever is the biggest threat to them at the time.. not who HAS the most threat

to clearify my point

you are a protection warrior in WoW. you are tanking Onyxia (yeah taking it back OLD schooL) you have the most threat on her dragon behind but teh mage popping out 15000 dps is the actual biggest threat.
In D&D the dragon would forget about the puny warior who really wasn't doing naything except saying ' you smell bad, your ugly and YOUR MOM!!" and go over and eat teh mage that is rocking her hard with a LOT of damage.

that is basically how its played... at least How I play my monsters in D&D.

Psyren

2011-09-21, 10:59 PM

Depends. XPH covers this, there are two mentalities - psionics are the same, and psionics are different. Most people play with the former, where SR and PR are the same things, Dispel Magic and Dispel Psionics will dispel both, and an AMF/NPF will effect both casters and manifesters. The latter is very rare, only time I've seen it done is in a high magic/high psionics world, otherwise you end up with a very weird imbalance.

"Most people" use the former because it is the default rule unless specifically stated otherwise. And psionics has plenty of non-mind-affecting powers just like magic.

Dusk Eclipse

2011-09-21, 11:04 PM

"Most people" use the former because it is the default rule unless specifically stated otherwise. And psionics has plenty of non-mind-affecting powers just like magic.

I like the partial transparency rule, both can affect each other but with either a boost to the defences, for example a creature with PR will have his PR+4 against spells while a creature with SR will have his SR+4 against powers

Flickerdart

2011-09-21, 11:07 PM

JaronK

2011-09-21, 11:13 PM

They obviously want to play at a lower power level. So why not just play as a few T5 classes? They might think Ninjas are OP (OMG full round invisibility!), but you're probably safe with a Swashbuckler or something. Or just play a DMM Cleric focused on buffing the party (Recitation, Righteous Wrath of the Faithful, etc) and make them feel appropriately awesome. If you use them to win, they'll think they're the ones doing it.

JaronK

Grendus

2011-09-22, 03:06 PM

Roll a druid and shatter his campaign. Give in to the dark side. Strike him and all his DMPC's down and take your place at my side on the playground.

RecklessAbaddon

2011-09-22, 03:36 PM

On the note of the player being banned, if it's the type of group that bans players I would just leave anyways. :smallbiggrin:

This group increasingly sounds like a bunch of little kids, I play with 12 year old that are better than these guys sound.

I really would just go full wiz/druid/cleric and just destroy with core. Each time the DM fiat-ed something that made the class suck I'd ask to use this other premade character with a different of the classes listed, and if they said no I'd say they just destroyed the usefulness of my character and I should be able to switch.

If they didn't let me switch I'd just leave after explaining why they are wrong, but maybe that is just the debator in me that is just confident in his ability to refute every single point the DM would make in a way to allow things. I'd probably even have a flow sheet for his arguments.

Although I'm just an argumentative debater like I said earlier. :smallcool:

Dsurion

2011-09-22, 04:22 PM

Krazzman

2011-09-22, 04:25 PM

They are not bad, nor like children, they have just some anticipation of me + new book = classes overpowered.
Heck I even played Monk twice, but despite I don't like the I punch things thing, it was neither effective nor made that much fun. So far I played 2 Clerics, that first supported, but since my highest cleric was only level 5... not soo much gamebreaking. My Wizards were one level 3 blaster and a mostly fluffed Fire Mage (UA Fire Domain variant). I just started to play rogues/gishes. I just like to stab things, infiltrate and be a lying bas**rd and/or dish some magic into this.
And Druid is most likely accepted as broken since my GF really likes Druids and played them a lot, even with natural spell etc. but Psions, Tome of Battle and even the Monk thing are just like it's carved in stone for them...

I will probably try to completely switch to Pathfinder and will probably ban core after the next campaign.

But I stay to my belief of: Tanking means Battlefield Control. If taunting by speech is successful is dependent on different factors: the DM approve of this, the monster understands you, the monster is not intelligent enough to know about magic things. Naturally you can't force everyone in Battle to attack you. But hindering movement/attacks seems to be similar to the thing I imagine of tanking.

Thanks and have a nice day,
Krazzman

RecklessAbaddon

2011-09-22, 04:36 PM

So you're solution to people playing the way you don't like is to break everyone else's toys, eh? Much more mature :smallamused:

Nah, this would all be to enforce my argument that the other classes that they fiat nerfed were nerfed without need. I never have a problem with a DM just changing rules, or saying something happens the way they say it does. But when someone just changes something because they see it as OP when it really isn't i'm going to show them how wrong they are. Even though i respect the power a DM has over a game I do not respect a DM decreeing something without any logical reason.

My group would never do these things because they don't care what you do. At the start of a game we are told what source books are allowed and what ones are not, maybe I'm just to used to DM's that have a fairly large amount of PnP experience.

I should note I DM about 33% of the time I play, I just can't play as often anymore because I've moved 3 hours away from my group. So at this point I just have a PC that just moves in and out of a campaign.

I've never encountered people like this, so the best i can do is offer up what I would do if I was presented with such a situation.

I personally agree with Kazz that their can be a character playing a tanky style roll while maintaining battlefield control. Most of my characters are really fluffy and most of my actions are more roleplay oriented than the absolute best thing i could do at the moment. I do min-max as much as any other player when it comes to trying to do what i want to do the best i can, but i don't let things like taunts not existing/stuns/etc not being available.

To me intimidate should very much be usable to tank, if an npc doesn't react towards the most intimidating opponent on the battlefield when they fail the check what else is the NPC thinking. A tank might not be able to tank every single encounter, but that doesn't make the characters decision to want to be the wall between his allies and those that threaten them.

Plus there are plenty of classes that offer abilities that can allow a tank style gameplay. Although my martial characters are often try to keep the PC's moving in a tactical fashion, like for example forming a solid character wall between

Although I also work with fellow DM's in my group with houseruling things that make this more doable.

But yes, against a dragon indeed it might be easy for it to ignore the giant of a man in full plate trying to keep his less defended comrades safe. But against a handful of brigands or mercenaries it is certainly possible.

Lord Vampyre

2011-09-22, 04:51 PM

But I stay to my belief of: Tanking means Battlefield Control. If taunting by speech is successful is dependent on different factors: the DM approve of this, the monster understands you, the monster is not intelligent enough to know about magic things. Naturally you can't force everyone in Battle to attack you. But hindering movement/attacks seems to be similar to the thing I imagine of tanking.

Many old school gamers just hate having MMO terms tied to their idea of roleplaying. It is an unfortunate eltist mentality, one that I happen to be a part of. Although, many of us like playing computer RPGs, we just haven't come to accept the new terminology when it is applied to tabletop. Does this make sense? Maybe not, but for some reason it diminishes the atmosphere of the game for us.

Atmosphere in a game is just as if not more important to many gamers as the mechanics are. This is why some of us don't allow psionics or the Tome of Battle. They have cool powers, but weren't delivered in a way that seemed to add to the fantastical feel of our imagined worlds.

However, if the DM is going to let you play something other than core, they need to make sure that you feel effective. Campaigns are at their heart are an attempt at cooperative storytelling. Players and DMs need to work together to make the story come to life for everyone. It's really easy for a DM to shutdown any character concept, but his job isn't to shut it down. A DM's job is to make every class and every player feel effective without seeming to be over powered to everyone else. Not an easy job, but when done correctly everyone feels important.