Malack min-max?

[Vreejack]

Being albino and apparently frail strongly suggests that Malack's dump stat is constitution. This is a pretty gutsy move for a player. I once played a lizardfolk who was slightly insane--sometimes violently so--and thought he was human (do not challenge his delusion!), but I was never brave enough to play a character with a very low con, probably because I could think of no interesting way to justify it. The frail albino not only explains this but lends him an air of hooded mystery.

He probably has a low strength as well. Surely he would not be terribly concerned about melee performance with that constitution. The only way for an adventurer like that to survive any length of time would be to have high resistance to magic and the ability to neutralize excess enemies while other group members take them on. Malack is probably a master of crowd control.

He is also almost certainly a min-maxer, with an extremely high wisdom. Not that this is a bad thing. A minimum score is a handicap and it can be fun to play it properly. Malack seems to be doing that here. He also seems to know a great deal about religious doctrine. Durkon knows almost nothing about his own pantheon, so perhaps Malack has a high intelligence as well for all those skill points.

Another handicap of Malack's seems to be his unwillingness to raise the dead, in any fashion. Notice that he is usually unwilling to raise zombies, except in this case where it seems to have been a gift of his god. He also never raise his own children, whom he still mourns. This suggests a very strong reservation against taking back anything that has "gone to Nerghal," as some might say it. Perhaps it feels like a form of theft, stealing from their god. One wonders if necromancy is generally disapproved of by the followers of Nerghal.

[FujinAkari]

Min-Max typically is a term which applies to PCs, which Malack is not.

[Chessgeek]

Min-Max typically is a term which applies to PCs, which Malack is not.

Out of curiosity, why isn't Malack a PC? He adventured for 35 years after all. Why does the term 'PC' only apply to the protagonists?

[Kish]

Because that appears to be what the term means. Redcloak, for example, has adventured for many years and now even has his own book, but he's a self-described NPC.

[JavaScribe]

Out of curiosity, why isn't Malack a PC? He adventured for 35 years after all. Why does the term 'PC' only apply to the protagonists?

Yes, this has been confusing me for some time. What the heck does "Player Character" mean in a universe that follows the rules of Dungeons and Dragons but isn't meant to represent an actual campaign.

[ti'esar]

I'd say Malack has higher chances of being considered a PC than Redcloak, considered that he was part of an organized, traditional adventuring party for many years. Team Evil, on the other hand, isn't really anything that could be considered a traditional adventuring party (although it always seemed like they did have some dynamics similar to evil campaigns I'd witnessed).

Although the most probable explanation is that "PC" is another way of saying "protagonist", in a world that obeys the laws of fiction as well as those of D&D. Under that concept, both Malack and Redcloak are antagonists and thus NPCs.

[theinsulabot]

Yes, this has been confusing me for some time. What the heck does "Player Character" mean in a universe that follows the rules of Dungeons and Dragons but isn't meant to represent an actual campaign.

duuuuuh, its the people who the plot focuses on, just like it would be for a DnD campaign. remember OOTS also is capable of repeatedly breaking the 4th wall and utilizing story telling mechanics in universe. Neither Tarquin or Malack or or order of the gates were PCs despite years of adventuring because that was all just part of their back story

[rgrekejin]

Yes, this has been confusing me for some time. What the heck does "Player Character" mean in a universe that follows the rules of Dungeons and Dragons but isn't meant to represent an actual campaign.

It's pretty simple, really. Roy, Haley, Durkon, Belkar, Elan and V are PCs. Everyone else is an NPC. The PCs are the protagonists of the story. That's all.

[DaveMcW]

Malack is a caster with a -2 CL for racial HD and -1 CL for level adjustment (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lizardfolk.htm). He is not a min-maxer.

[rgrekejin]

Malack is a caster with a -2 CL for racial HD and -1 CL for level adjustment (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lizardfolk.htm). He is not a min-maxer.

I dunno. We have definitive proof that Z is at the same level as the rest of his party (and most of the OOTS) despite the fact that Drow normally come with a pretty heavy level adjustment.

Not that I think Malack is a min-maxer (I doubt he is) but there is at least some evidence that traditional level-adjustment rules are being at best fudged and at worst flat-out ignored.

[Spacewolf]

I don't think PC can only apply to the OOTS after all there have been several people described as having PC class levels.

[rgrekejin]

I don't think PC can only apply to the OOTS after all there have been several people described as having PC class levels.

...well, yes, the vast majority of the enemies the OOTS have faced have had levels in PC classes. So do most NPC villains in actual DnD campaigns. Can you imagine how boring the game would get if you could only face Commoners, Adepts, Experts, and Aristocrats as enemies? Having levels in a PC class does not make one a PC.

[Felixc-91]

Malack is a caster with a -2 CL for racial HD and -1 CL for level adjustment (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lizardfolk.htm). He is not a min-maxer.Yeah, not a min-maxer, lizardfolk get bonuses to str and con with a drop in int. if he dumped the 2 stats his race have bonuses in that's almost the oposite of min-maxing.

[arcticintel]

Why would being albino imply his dump stat is constitution?

[theNater]

I'm pretty sure there's a significant random factor to stats in the OotSverse. It's possible that Malack simply rolled poorly on Con and couldn't upgrade it to decent levels by any reasonable means.

[Vreejack]

Why would being albino imply his dump stat is constitution?

It's a health issue. Albinos suffer health problems that normal organisms do not. It is an RP way of manifesting a low constitution.

On the other hand, lizard folk get +2 to both CON and STR, so neither one can be terribly minimized. Still, when was the last time you saw a character with a CON of five?

Then again another question arises. Where did he put all the points? I do not know.

Aside from that, why can't an NPC be min-maxed? Thog seems to be. NPC's are ideal for min-maxing as it lends to their characterization. In point of fact, since all of the characters in OOTS are fictional elements of a story told by one person, they are all technically NPC's, unless you want to suggest that Rich has a collection of friends who actually decide what each of Roy, Belkar, Durkon, etc. actually do.

[Emperordaniel]

On the other hand, lizard folk get +2 to both CON and STR, so neither one can be terribly minimized. Still, when was the last time you saw a character with a CON of five?

My avatar has a CON of 4 in the current campaign I'm in. And his HP total sucks as a result. :smallyuk:

[ref]

PC = Protagonist Character.

[Cizak]

Hasn't there been talk about other PCs than the Order? I can't remember exactly where so I may be wrong, though.

[Grim Reader]

What are the age categories of Lizardfolk? If he was older than Tarquin when they started adventuring, he could have a age penalty to Con. And a bonus to his mental scores.

Since people in the OotS-verse seem to have to make do with what the dice/genetics gave them, a timeout from adventuring could also be a good way for a spellcasters mental scores to catch up with his spell levels. Something that Ive never seen the need for in a normal campaign.

[Winter]

Hasn't there been talk about other PCs than the Order? I can't remember exactly where so I may be wrong, though.

There has. And as always, there's no solution.

What a PC and NPC is only makes sense at the gaming table and even then some DMs think there should be no distinction at all. In the scope of this comic we have two extremes that are clear (the Order are obviously PCs, probably Eugene and a few others as well), the mud farmers, nameless soldiers and their likes are NPCs are NPCs.
That's the end of the clear lines, everything else is undecided. Team Evil? The Linear Guild? The IFCC? Roy's Mother? Roy's Grandfather? The Scribblers? Capatin Scoundrél? Goblin Dan? Shojo? Lien? Daigo? Kazumi? Therkla? Celia?
We cannot know, we cannot decide - and it does not matter at all.

So I vote for dropping the silly NPC-vs-PC-debate.

[Sorator]

I dunno. We have definitive proof that Z is at the same level as the rest of his party (and most of the OOTS) despite the fact that Drow normally come with a pretty heavy level adjustment.
Not exactly. We still don't know for certain that Z wasn't blinded as well as being deafened, after all, so there's a little leeway there.


Not that I think Malack is a min-maxer (I doubt he is) but there is at least some evidence that traditional level-adjustment rules are being at best fudged and at worst flat-out ignored.

I disagree with one being better than the other (in this context, the story is what matters, not the rules the story's characters may or may not exactly follow), but I agree that Rich is likely fudging LA.

I can't say that I think Malack is min-maxed, not any more than any other character in OOTS is min-maxed (it's their life, after all, not just a game).

There are some bits that support the idea that the characters have been hired to play their parts here (remember after the Scribble exposition back during the Azure City trial, when it ended and everyone was off doing something else because they didn't get their three-panel warning? Not to mention several of the character-written book introductions bring it up as well, in particular Redcloak's.), but I think the only PCs are the OOTS members. What exactly PC means, in that context, I have no idea.

[rgrekejin]

I disagree with one being better than the other (in this context, the story is what matters, not the rules the story's characters may or may not exactly follow), but I agree that Rich is likely fudging LA.

Yeah, perhaps I phrased that badly. I'm not making a value judgement about either scenario, I'm equally fine with either, I just needed some comparative words.

[theNater]

What exactly PC means, in that context, I have no idea.
In that scenario, I would guess that being a PC means having an up-to-date membership in the local Actor's Union. That would be pretty much a must for major characters, but extras probably won't have it unless they're a major star doing a cameo.

[Winter]

Then again another question arises. Where did he put all the points? I do not know.

If clerics want a decent Int and also a decent Dex, they have to cut somewhere.

I always consider the lack of Int (or be totally ineffective in anything beyond Wis) and skillpoints of clerics (they should know their stuff) to be the biggest problem with 3.5.

Malack seems to have some Int.
If you go Int 16, Wis 16 you already did use up 20 poins. Wis 18, Int 14 is also 22 points.
Let's say Malack got hourseruled to be able to get back points from an assumed Con-penalty, he might have some 8 points left. A couple on Dex or Cha and those are gone as well.

[Kish]

If you go Int 16, Wis 16 you already did use up 20 poins. Wis 18, Int 14 is also 22 points.

You realize that, computer games aside, "point buy" is not the default character generation method in 3.xed any more than it was in previous editions?

[KillianHawkeye]

You realize that, computer games aside, "point buy" is not the default character generation method in 3.xed any more than it was in previous editions?

Yeah, I'd be much more willing to assume that characters in OOTS-world roll their stats randomly since real people don't have any control over that sort of thing.

[willpell]

He probably has a low strength as well.

This is less likely than the constitution, though not at all impossible. Unless he's spent a feat on Weapon Finesse, he needs Strength for his melee touch attacks to use Inflict spells, so he probably wouldn't want it to be too low.

As an aside, I personally question whether the lizardfolk race as portrayed in the current OOTS arc bears much resemblance to the MM lizardfolk; the latter are after all semi-aquatic, while these live in a desert, and the way they're drawn makes them look to have a much slimmer and more sinuous build that makes me think they'd be more likely to have a bonus to Dexterity than to STR and CON (and possibly getting them out of needing those RHD). They vaguely remind me of Firenewts or Asabis, both from Monsters of Faerun, both of which are reddish-toned reptilian humanoids that live in warm climes. They are far from an exact match, but seem slightly similar, as if sharing an inspiration. (I'm not familiar with Dark Sun, which is probably more likely to have provided sources for the Western Continent than Forgotten Realms, but I'd be surprised if it doesn't contain at least one desert-dwelling lizard race.)


Yes, this has been confusing me for some time. What the heck does "Player Character" mean in a universe that follows the rules of Dungeons and Dragons but isn't meant to represent an actual campaign.

I would theorize that it would imply a sort of Chosen One status; you could explain it in a game universe's terms with some sort of immortal extradimensional spirits which possess people and give them special destinies, or with the characters having the direct supervision of gods who see them as representatives (rather meta, no?), or something of the sort. Not that anything this serious applies to a gag comic like OOTS; it might work if you wanted something closer in tone to Goblins, which has had very little comedy in it since about the thirtieth strip, but still explictly acknowledges the distinction between PCs and NPCs while focusing largely on the latter as characters.


I dunno. We have definitive proof that Z is at the same level as the rest of his party (and most of the OOTS) despite the fact that Drow normally come with a pretty heavy level adjustment.

This could be easily explained by the use of the Unearthed Arcana mechanic for Reducing Level Adjustments; a drow needs only 9 class levels to dispense with his +2 LA, and the OOTS and LG seem to be well above that. Alternatively, since he's a designated antagonist for V much as Crystal was for Haley, he might just automatically match him level-for-level, without worrying about whether this is rules-legal.


I always consider the lack of Int (or be totally ineffective in anything beyond Wis) and skillpoints of clerics (they should know their stuff) to be the biggest problem with 3.5.

Totally agree here. The Cleric is one of my favorite classes because of the ability to customize your choice of deity and domains, but their x2 skills and lack of obviously suggested class skills (notably Sense Motive) really burn my toast. This is why the Cloistered Cleric (Unearthed Arcana again) is a wonderful, wonderful thing. Also see my sig for a homebrew cleric which is noticeably more skill-focused than the RAW version, without being quite as fragile or bookish as the Cloistered.

[quote[If you go Int 16, Wis 16 you already did use up 20 poins. Wis 18, Int 14 is also 22 points.
Let's say Malack got hourseruled to be able to get back points from an assumed Con-penalty, he might have some 8 points left. A couple on Dex or Cha and those are gone as well.

I believe someone mentioned the possibility of aging effects. Cleric is one of the classes that pushes you toward a high starting age in the first place (I forget whether it's in column 2 or 3 but I think it's the latter, along with wizards and druids; even column 2 tends to put you in the late 20s as a human, so middle age isn't far off). You have to be careful not to end up with lethal Con penalties, but between bonuses at every 4th level and the automatic increase in mental stats, a high-level character with a long career behind him can be very smart, wise and personable without having had to work super-hard at it earlier.

[Vreejack]

You realize that, computer games aside, "point buy" is not the default character generation method in 3.xed any more than it was in previous editions?

I am assuming that Rich had a character in mind and simply dropped the points in place so that Malakh looked plausible. Anything else would require a lot of pointless pain and suffering.

[ti'esar]

I am assuming that Rich had a character in mind and simply dropped the points in place so that Malakh looked plausible. Anything else would require a lot of pointless pain and suffering.

I'm deeply confused as to why you assume Rich actually bothers to keep track of his characters' ability scores in the first place.

[Vreejack]

There has. And as always, there's no solution.

What a PC and NPC is only makes sense at the gaming table and even then some DMs think there should be no distinction at all. In the scope of this comic we have two extremes that are clear...
We cannot know, we cannot decide - and it does not matter at all.

So I vote for dropping the silly NPC-vs-PC-debate.

Indeed. For this comic the term "Player Character" is only useful as a gag device--one which is routinely subverted. It has been hammered home that Roy and the gang are not players at a table, and there has already been a joke about them being fictional characters portrayed by actors--the very definition of a non-player character! So enough already, the term has no real meaning here.

[willpell]

I'm deeply confused as to why you assume Rich actually bothers to keep track of his characters' ability scores in the first place.

There have been a fair number of references to indicate that he probably does (offhand I remember Belkar's Profession: Gourmet Chef skill check having an ability score penalty). He *might* be off-the-cuffing these mentions, but that risks that he'd screw it up, so it makes more sense to assume he does have character sheets for the OOTSers, even if he plays a little fast-and-loose with them when the joke requires it.

[ti'esar]

As of the time of the (severely outdated, but see below) FAQ, Rich explicitly stated:


There are no hard-and-fast stats for the characters. I find that if I were to ever commit exact stats to paper, I would feel limited in what I could have these characters do in the future. For example, I might want to make a strip spoofing a particular feat, only to find that I didn.t give it to any of my characters. As a result, there will never be official game statistics for Roy, Elan, and the rest.

While this was a long time ago, I doubt it's changed, given that the direction since then is actually less focused on D&D. Rich most likely has a general idea of characters' level and tries not to break continuity with their "stats", but I strongly doubt there's written character sheets for the OOTS, or any other characters.

[theNater]

There have been a fair number of references to indicate that he probably does (offhand I remember Belkar's Profession: Gourmet Chef skill check having an ability score penalty). He *might* be off-the-cuffing these mentions, but that risks that he'd screw it up, so it makes more sense to assume he does have character sheets for the OOTSers, even if he plays a little fast-and-loose with them when the joke requires it.
A good general idea of the characters' capabilities will prevent screw-ups just as well as having specific stats down. Once you know that Roy is really strong and smart, and that Belkar has abysmal wisdom, having actual scores for those is unnecessary.

[JSSheridan]

Malack is a caster with a -2 CL for racial HD and -1 CL for level adjustment (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lizardfolk.htm). He is not a min-maxer.

DM: Ok, now roll for your character's race per the Reincarnation table.

Players: What?

[Psyren]

There have been a fair number of references to indicate that he probably does (offhand I remember Belkar's Profession: Gourmet Chef skill check having an ability score penalty). He *might* be off-the-cuffing these mentions, but that risks that he'd screw it up, so it makes more sense to assume he does have character sheets for the OOTSers, even if he plays a little fast-and-loose with them when the joke requires it.

I doubt that such sheets, if they exist, are more detailed than "Vaarsuvius knows these spells and has enough Intelligence to cast this." Or, "Durkon Wisdom is high enough to banish Sabine." While actual numbers can help with that, they aren't necessary.

[Tebryn]

There have been a fair number of references to indicate that he probably does (offhand I remember Belkar's Profession: Gourmet Chef skill check having an ability score penalty). He *might* be off-the-cuffing these mentions, but that risks that he'd screw it up, so it makes more sense to assume he does have character sheets for the OOTSers, even if he plays a little fast-and-loose with them when the joke requires it.

There is also a single quote that says he doesn't. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8264182&postcount=6)

[Kish]

"Belkar has a Wisdom penalty" is hardly something he's likely to forget.