Help needed. Nitty-gritty campaign. Woodsy character.

[HowlingWolf]

Hey everyone,

At the moment, I am trying my best to design a character for a friend to play in a nitty-gritty campaign, and failing utterly. She wants a woodsy-type warrior, a scout so to speak. It's rediculous, really. Her DM should just design her a simple variation..good grief..let her have a warrior with 4 sp and light armor, throw in stealth and nature skills. Problem is, they go by the rules, and do not use homebrew. I've done the same thing myself--just make one up on the fly. Well, I came up with that maybe she could use a fourth or even fifth level multi-class to simulate a character class with the appropriate numbers.

Background:Players choose to start out at levels two or three. Only NPC classes may be used -- Warrior, Adept, Aristocrat, Expert. 16 Point Buy.

Only solution I've yet to come up with. Make her a "packaged" character, this to ensure balance. The word "packaged" used to mean pre-determined,
built, and balanced. What with the campaign being set in the 20th century,
she wants a survivalist-type. Now, the character should have hp/attack base
equal to a warrior of appropriate level, as well as being limited to light armor.
The best I could come up with was to allow her to have a 2 expert/2 warrior,
pre-choose her feats, and skills, thus limiting her character. Package deal.

She could take 14 on strength/dexterity, 10 on wisdom/endurance. She'd essentially match up to a 3rd lvl warrior with skills. Feats:WF:Crossbow, WF:
Club, Self Sufficient. That's pretty well balanced, as compared, atleast I think so. Anyone have any ideas or suggestions. I'd like to see it built a little
bit stronger. Do you guys think that it'd be balanced as compared to a 3rd level warrior? Is there anyway we could make it more "ranger" without giving any serious boosts, such as bonus gear, or a dog?

[Asteron]

Why in the Nine Hells are they using only NPC classes?

[Malrone]

Ah lawd, a game where a woodsman can't even own a proper dog...

I think a survivalist ought to have decent Con, (Rangers get the Endurance feat as a bonus), but that is a matter for your discretion. Warrior/Expert is the best I can fathom given the... restrictions. Really, I don't see what else is even possible.

[Seharvepernfan]

Aristocrat would be a simpler build that has the same things, minus fortitude saves. She can use a dog with handle animal.

[HowlingWolf]

Why do they make it so complicated? The DM believes, adamantly, that he
has to go by the rules to the letter. Or, I suppose, he's just to lazy or thinks
it has to be his way or the highway. So, to the keep the peace amongst them, that's what I have to work with--the rules. I tried building them an NPC class, just a warrior with the skills, 4 sp, light armor prof, simple weapons, and saves--big whoop. I got the expected reply, "That's not in the
BOOKS!! We can't use that." Ugh. After that I ended up even more annoyed
when he told them they could have only 10's and 11's across the board
because they are playing normal characters.

I ended bringing in my weights--I cleaned and pressed 180, held my breath
for a little over three minutes, and popped a red balloon at 35 yds with a
recurve bow. I smiled at him and said, "Well, I guess by your 'rules', I'm a regular guy with a strength of fourteen, and a con of twelve. Want me to stand on one leg, juggle tennis balls for you, and sing Amazing Grace at the
same time?"

Well, with the advice you guys gave me, I statted out a character for her. To
thank all of you for the replies I decided I'd reply and post what I could. I'll
stat out the character as best I can, but it won't look like in the manuals lol.
Also, they are playing in a 20th century type campaign, so..it outta be interesting.

Alyssa Oakbark.

2 Exp/2 War*

10's and 11's.

Hit Points:14
Skill Points:38
Skills:Survival, Knowledge:Nature, Healing, Handle Animal, Stealth, Perception, Profession, Climb, Jump, Swim.
Attack:3 (without modifiers)
Defense:12 (2 from armor).
Saves:3/0/3
Feats:WF:Crossbow, Self Sufficent, and either Toughness or WF:Club or Staff.
Possessions:Guard dog (Rottie named Spottie), Light Crossbow, Club,
clothes, backpack, survival gear, binoculars, light armor (2).

3rd level Warrior. Mr.Stinky

3 War

10's and 11's.

Hit Points:12
Skill Points:22
Skills:Typical warrior skills per edition.
Attack:3
Defense:16-18
Saves:3/1/1
Feats:Weapon Focus, Combat Reflexes, Point Blank Shot or Improved Init or
Firearms Proficiency
Possessions:Medium armor (possibly with shield), weapon of choice (insert
name), backpack, gear, etc.

So, I think that worked pretty well. Depending on the warrior's weapon of
choice, he will likely dominate or both damage and defense. While the woodsman, above, has more versatility. So, I'm guessing it does work.

[HowlingWolf]

(Tried to edit my writing so that it would come together better, but it didn't work, it's still all over the place.)

Why do they make it so complicated? The DM believes, adamantly, that he
has to go by the rules to the letter. Or, I suppose, he's just to lazy or thinks
it has to be his way or the highway. So, to the keep the peace amongst them, that's what I have to work with--the rules. I tried building them an NPC class, just a warrior with the skills, 4 sp, light armor prof, simple weapons, and saves--big whoop. I got the expected reply, "That's not in the
BOOKS!! We can't use that." Ugh. After that I ended up even more annoyed
when he told them they could have only 10's and 11's across the board
because they are playing normal characters.

I ended bringing in my weights--I cleaned and pressed 180, held my breath
for a little over three minutes, and popped a red balloon at 35 yds with a
recurve bow. I smiled at him and said, "Well, I guess by your 'rules', I'm a regular guy with a strength of fourteen, and a con of twelve. Want me to stand on one leg, juggle tennis balls for you, and sing Amazing Grace at the
same time?"

*Oh, to answer the question, why only NPC classes, he said that it makes it
easier, and the game quicker.

Well, with the advice you guys gave me, I statted out a character for her. To
thank all of you for the replies I decided I'd reply and post what I could. I'll
stat out the character as best I can, but it won't look like in the manuals lol.
Also, they are playing in a 20th century type campaign, so..it outta be interesting.

Alyssa Oakbark.

2 Exp/2 War*

10's and 11's.

Hit Points:14
Skill Points:38
Skills:Survival, Knowledge:Nature, Healing, Handle Animal, Stealth, Perception, Profession, Climb, Jump, Swim.
Attack:3 (without modifiers)
Defense:12 (2 from armor).
Saves:3/0/3
Feats:WF:Crossbow, Self Sufficent, and either Toughness or WF:Club or Staff.
Possessions:Guard dog (Rottie named Spottie), Light Crossbow, Club,
clothes, backpack, survival gear, binoculars, light armor (2).

3rd level Warrior. Mr.Stinky

3 War

10's and 11's.

Hit Points:12
Skill Points:22
Skills:Typical warrior skills per edition.
Attack:3
Defense:16-18
Saves:3/1/1
Feats:Weapon Focus, Combat Reflexes, Point Blank Shot or Improved Init or
Firearms Proficiency
Possessions:Medium armor (possibly with shield), weapon of choice (insert
name), backpack, gear, etc.

So, I think that worked pretty well. Depending on the warrior's weapon of
choice, he will likely dominate or both damage and defense. While the woodsman, above, has more versatility. So, I'm guessing it does work.

[Asteron]

*Oh, to answer the question, why only NPC classes, he said that it makes it
easier, and the game quicker.

...

So, I think that worked pretty well. Depending on the warrior's weapon of
choice, he will likely dominate or both damage and defense. While the woodsman, above, has more versatility. So, I'm guessing it does work.

The only thing that this DM's rules are going to accomplish is to get the PCs killed. Quickly. There is a reason that the average person is not an adventurer. The first group of goblins they meet is going to crush them.

And NPC classes? They were never meant to be used by players. That is breaking the rules.

Honestly, I don't know why players put up with stupid ideas such as these. Given a choice between playing with these rules and not playing at all, I would not play.