Binder and...?

[Kiyona]

Hello all,

I am playing a Binder that just reached level 6. From now on I am supposed to play something more mundane, and I was hoping you guys could give me some advice.

We are playing a very low power campaign in some areas (namely magic and healing), that's why I am changing class. The other two characters are a fighter/warblade (unsure of name, the one from tome of battle) and a rogue/swordsage.

What are good classes to consider? Any traps? Any general advice?

[killianh]

well if you already have 2 melee guys, I would probably suggest either warlock (fits for fluff, and has low magic abilities) or one of the prebuilt magic classes (beguiler, dread necromancer, or warmage)

[Kiyona]

Warlock would be really nice, and very fitting for my character I think. (She has a thing for Naberius as it is.) But, I am not sure it would be allowed, seeing as it is not a mundane class. But I'll see what my DM has to say.

Would it work? Crunchwise I mean. Not interested in powergaming, but it is a challenging campaign, especially without proper healing, so I need it to atleast a competent build. It would be kinda cool actually...

My stats are:

Str 14
Dex 16
Con 14
Int 12
Wis 8
Cha 18

[killianh]

With those stats warlock seems to be a good way to go. Warlock has a built-in range touch attack that can be used every round, plus get a short list of spells that can be used every round. Truthfully though (if it wouldn't be considered too powerful) I think crunch wise your best bet is some sorcerer levels, followed by the PrC anima mage.

What exactly is meant by mundane classes? core only? low power builds?

[Feralventas]

Battledancer1 for Charisma to AC. At 6th level Binder, you can grab Paimon and between his +4 untyped bonus to Dex and Cha to AC, you should be pretty hard to hit.

Paladin2 gets that Charisma to Saves as well, though I'm not sure what your alignment is looking like.

If you're going to go for Warlock, take into account that your ranged attack won't scale without more levels in Warlock.

Crusader is technically mundane, though your DM may or may not think so.

Rogue is a great way to work with the stealthy-styled vestiges as well as dodge inquisitors.

Fighter2 for the bonus feats isn't bad.

[GenghisDon]

You might be best off simply making a new character.

Adding mundane class(es) is going to make the character weaker, although seeing the other 2 players are TOB classed, weaker doesn't seem so desirable.

If a mundane dip is enough to satisfy, then any of the PH martial classes (L1-4 or so), rogue, scout, hexblade, or knight should be ok. Knight of the Sacred Seal & Binder levels thereafter.

[Prime32]

Crusader is technically mundane, though your DM may or may not think so.There's already a swordsage, so it should be fine.

What about factotum?

[Con_Brio1993]

Low power campaign, and a tier 3 Binder isn't allowed but the TOB is?

[Psyren]

Low power campaign, and a tier 3 Binder isn't allowed but the TOB is?

This; the others aren't being nearly as hurt by multiclassing as you are. I'd ask to stay straight Binder.

[Madara]

Warlock would certainly fit thematicly, and is known as an easy dip class.

Binder 6/Warlock 3/Anima Mage X?

Depends on how high you think the game will go. Still, Binders aren't very "Supernatural" compared to other casting classes. Multiclassing in those with spells at this point will do you no good because you'll be so far behind. Ur-Priest?(Not low powered)

[GenghisDon]

Low power campaign, and a tier 3 Binder isn't allowed but the TOB is?


This; the others aren't being nearly as hurt by multiclassing as you are. I'd ask to stay straight Binder.

Agreed, but I think it's more a strange case than "low power". It's apparently low MAGIC, but not so low power (somehow).

[Telonius]

You've been playing Binder for a few levels now - what has your character's party role been? I'm guessing not combat, more melee support. Also not sneakiness/trapfinding (unless the Rogue is going more combat than sneak).

If Warlock or any full-casting class is out, Factotum could fill in basically anything you really need. If you're pulling Face duties (as suggested by Naberius), the skill points are really nice.

If Factotum is also unavailable, Rogue could work. Just work with the other guy to make sure you're not stepping on each other's toes.

[Urpriest]

I think we really need a clear idea of how low power/low magic/mundane are defined in your campaign, and also whether you are multiclassing out of Binder or making an entirely new character.

That said, since you've got a skillmonkey and a beatstick, I'm going to echo others' suggestions that you go for Crusader for a party support character. Already as a Binder you have some interesting abilities that synergize with Crusader, with Dahlver-Nar in particular being an interesting choice.

[sonofzeal]

Honestly, I think straight Binder works even in a "low magic" game. A Wizard gets dozens of spells all willy-nilly, but a Binder has to WORK for their magic, and it's relatively low-level magic at that. In a "low magic" game, I might summarily replace Wizards with Binders and call it a day. Depending on the group (and with player consent), I might play up the binding rituals and make them more significant and perhaps more risky, with more significant downsides on a bad pact.

To me, "low magic" as opposed to "no magic" means that magic is known, but limited and/or difficult. A decent sized town might not have anyone in it who openly uses magic, with town healers and even priests simply having ranks in appropriate skills (Heal and Know:Religion, respectively). And I think a Binder fits into that sort of setting in a way that a Wizard or Sorcerer wouldn't. Sorcerers are like living magic batteries, which obviously doesn't fit. And even Wizards are predicated on magic being something you can distill down to a few lines on a page that can be stored for future reference. Binders though? A Binder themself hardly has any magic, just barely enough to invoke quasi-divine entities from beyond reality. And it's those entities bringing some of that magic in with them from outside reality, rather than reality itself being innately magic-ful as it is with almost every other magic-using class.

I'd talk with your DM. I'm generally skeptical of any DM who mandates that a player change something about a character that's already been in the game, if everyone's having fun. Hopefully you can reach an agreement that lets you advance in the way that feels most natural for you.

[GenghisDon]

So do I, BUT...maybe it's intended to a "sword & sorcery" game where "magic-users" are the villains & get their throats slit by sneaky rogues & kicked in the balls & decapitated by brawny hero types.

A bit more clarity would indeed be helpful.

[Kiyona]

Hey guys!

Sorry for my absence, been at work all day.

Well, it is not really low-power, but low magic/healing. The healing bit is to get more of a sense of realism (mostly in the "fighting is deadly, maybe we should think about not charging in head first), but the low magic is mostly because DM is new to 3,5 and want to be sure to be able to plan good encounters/campaign.

So I think warlock is out. =)

He's not forcing me to change, he allowed binder at first cause he thought it was cool (sonofzeal explained it much better than I), and because the group needed some versatility. But I think it is starting to get away from him with the warblade, swordsage and binder. And I want to make it easier on him and don't really mind changing. Everyone is having fund right now, but everyone will be having fun if I change too. Thanks for the concern though! =)

Battledancer sounds promising, were is it from?

I am not afraid of being below the other two players in power, cause I will get a boost of some sort in that case. But, I want to be able to contribute somehow to the group, and not have a build that just doesn't work.

Oh, and please excuse my terrible english, my spell check is of and english is not my native language.

[GenghisDon]

No worries Kiyona

I honestly think Binder 20 ought be fine then. The TOB characters will be kicking ass just fine & you aren't optimising a "magic" character to mess with your poor DM's head.

Have fun!

EDIT: The best help for the new(ish) DM is probably slowing advancement/XP down, so he or she can get a handle on various abilities, skills & tactics. Halving the standard d20 rate should still provide enough rapidity for you players to feel you are progressing, and give him/her time to learn.

[Psyren]

If he's managed Binder this far then you have no real reason to switch horses now. They do get some new toys as they gain levels but nothing game-breaking - vestige abilities deal mostly with defense and mobility, and your best tricks are still going to be once every 5 rounds just like now.

If you're really worried about your DM keeping up, just avoid Zceryll (as that would bump you to T2.) Stick with the vestiges in the book and you'll all be fine.

[ThiagoMartell]

If he is worried about Binders, wait until he gets a taste of Iron Heart Surge :smallbiggrin:

If you want more of a martial Binder, you could stick to the more martial vestiges - such as Paimon. Are you familiar with Dulcinea, the Dancer's Daughter (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9321125&postcount=154)?

[Feralventas]

I'm of a mind to agree that keeping with Binder shouldn't be too potent when compared to the Swordsage and Warblade. If you're still concerned about your own character's potency, then taking a few of the 1 and 2 level dips in the other classes mentioned above should do plenty to weaken your character while still getting something for your trouble.

Battledancer is from Dragon Magazine Compendium, and it's a capoeira themed sort of Monk.

Fighter and Rogue are easy enough to find in the PHB, and Crusader's in the same book as the 'Sage and the 'Blade.