op or broken character

[tracedarkwind]

have someone whos running a game and said i could make any char within any of the books "minus psyonics" starting at level 5 i would prefer not to be a caster class but i want some ideas on something that might change his way of thinking about allowing everything lol so any help in possabilities for character ideas

[TaiLiu]

Hold; I want to see if I'm reading this right. You want to punish your DM for giving you options?! :smalleek:

[RFLS]

...please go and rethink basically everything about that post. I don't think anyone on this forum is going to help you destroy a game in which a DM is allowing the players the option to build a character as they prefer. Attempting to destroy that is narrow minded and destructive, not to mention the total disregard it displays for your fellow players (http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/35979150.jpg).

[Waker]

I am also quite confused, why would you want to punish a DM for giving you options?

[RFLS]

Wait, guys, if we're careful and don't post too much, he might come back. That's always fun. (http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120402225425/random-ness/images/3/34/Michael_Jackson_popcorn.gif) In seriousness, though, an explanation of any sort would be appreciated.

[Flickerdart]

Restricting available content based on what book it's from (and not for, like, an actual reason) is the worst thing. Go bake a cake for your DM right now.

[eggynack]

This post is wrong in every way that counts, and a few that don't.

First of all, your spelling and grammar are pretty terrible. I find that one of the cornerstones of a fundamentally wrong post is for the actual writing to be bad underneath everything.

Second, why do you want your DM to run less books? More books means more options, and more options tends to mean more fun.

Third, if there were actually a problem with using a ton of books, which there isn't, then creating a broken character and shoving it in his face is not the answer.

Fourth, lots of books don't actually lead to characters that are that broken on average. As has been noted in the past, the most broken books in the game are the core ones.

Fifth, how exactly do you plan to show up the DM with a high powered build without casting? Casting is the most powerful thing in the game, so any reasonable attempt to show your DM up would logically use it.

Sixth, what's your in-game endgame here? You just kinda win every encounter trivially and make the game boring? That's a surefire way to make everyone at the table, yourself included, have less fun.

That's about all I can come up with offhand. I think that six ways in which a post is wrong is enough to call a post fundamentally wrong in every conceivable way when that post is two lines long. Still, the post was pretty wrong so there might be some I've missed.

[TuggyNE]

*waves hand* OP, you want to go home and re-think your life.

No, but seriously, this is just … a terribly terrible idea. Please, please do not do this to your DM, who has committed the terrible sin of giving you Nice Things.

[Malak'ai]

What? Why? :smalleek:
Why the hell would you want to try and break a game where the DM is nice enough to let you use basically anything you wanted? I just don't see the point!
Basically all I get out of you're post is that you want to be an asshat and screw up any chance of being allowed into a game like that again.

[Eslin]

{Scrubbed}

[TaiLiu]

This guy signed up today -
We shouldn't be dismissive of a poster merely because of his or her sign up date. :smallconfused:

[Vizzerdrix]

I'm with the OP. It is the DM's duty to keep content in check.

OP, go Truenamer on his behind. All 20 levels of it. It's casting with skillchecks. Go take a look at the capstone.

[eggynack]

We shouldn't be dismissive of a poster merely because of his or her sign up date. :smallconfused:
Is it OK to be dismissive of a poster because they signed up recently, and their post is riddled with errors both syntactical and logical? That seems pretty reasonable to me.

[WhatBigTeeth]

You should play a monk or a druid to show him that one book in particular might need some limitations.

[Ravens_cry]

This guy signed up today - he obviously has 6 giant HD and regeneration 5/fire or acid, move along.
Frost Giant!
No . . . that's not right . . .

[Aharon]

I'm with the OP. It is the DM's duty to keep content in check.

OP, go Truenamer on his behind. All 20 levels of it. It's casting with skillchecks. Go take a look at the capstone.

This is excellent advice. You get exactly what you asked for, an op or broken character :smallsmile: I concur.

[eggynack]

I'm tossing another nomination for playing a truenamer for a number of reasons.
You have access to many magical abilities, and unlike the stupid wizard you can cast them at will.
The truenamer is so broken that it exists outside the boundaries of the tier list. It has a quantity of power that literally no other class in the game has.
They get access to a skill that almost no other class has access to.
They're outside of core, so your DM will have to rethink letting you access these crazy books for sure.
With you playing a truenamer, even with low optimization your party is likely to be ridiculously imbalanced.
At level 20, you can do one of the most powerful things in the game. With that kind of power, the rest of the class is likely to be equally good.
With a high focus on intelligence, the truenamer is capable of maxing out the majority of his skills. Even the rogue can't say that, and the factotum is left far behind in the distance.
They get damage over time abilities, and everyone knows how powerful they are.

You'd be crazy not to play a truenamer with all of that stuff.

[tracedarkwind]

{Scrubbed}

[eggynack]

You said, " i want some ideas on something that might change his way of thinking about allowing everything." That pretty clearly indicates that your intention is to do something that the DM doesn't want you to do. That's not us misunderstanding you; that's you saying something other than what you mean. Seriously, I don't think clarity of language is too much to ask when you're trying to get help.

Edit: For future reference, here is a fixed version of your post that's actually indicative of what you want: "My DM is starting up a high powered campaign. All books are accessible, except for psionics which isn't allowed. Can you guys give me some advice on how to build a high powered character? Thanks in advance." See? It's not that hard, and writing with grammar takes a trivial amount of time if you put any effort into it. Moreover, this post clearly indicates your intentions of building a character that fits into the campaign you're playing. The thing you posted did not do that. Additionally, if your intent is to play something that exceeds the intended power level of the game, which seems possible, then I go back to the things I said above.

[Aharon]

It would be nice if you used proper puncuation and spelling. It makes reading your posts easier and it makes people less likely to think you have fire resistance - it shows you actually care about an answer and don't only intend to incite people.

Given that, here's a serious answer:
Most non-caster characters aren't overpowered or broken. If you don't want to ruin the game, you shouldn't use the TO builds like Hulking Hurler or Cancer Mage.
When you say "not a caster", do you mean not a traditional caster (I.e., no vancian-like casting as the cleric, wizard, sorcerer and druid)?
Or do you also want to stay away from other casting systems (Incarnum, Shadow magic, Pacts, Truenaming,...)?

If you want a completely casting-free character, a bit of direction would still be helpful. What kind of role do you wish to fill?

[Malak'ai]

{scrubbed}

If you asked your question in such a way that your intention could actually be understood, then you'd get the desired answers.

Now, ignoring your little insult to us who have replied prevously, if you want something to showcase your ability to twral through books and come up with powerful builds then some sort of Caster or Gish would be your best bet. If you're set in stone about not wanting to have any casting, then build yourself a Diplo/Bluffamancer Rogue ir an Ubercharger Barbarian.

[eggynack]

I neglected to mention this in my last post, but the title of your thread is, "op or broken character". What are we to take from this, apart from the idea that your intent is to build a character that is either too powerful compared to the party, or breaks the game? Also, I didn't notice it before, but your posts actually have no punctuation at all outside of quotation marks. Do you think that punctuation is just some kind of pedantic nonsense dreamt up by cruel English professors? The things have actual purpose. What you're effectively saying when you make a post like that is that your time is far more valuable than ours. You're also implying that you want to teach your DM a lesson about how you shouldn't be allowed near the big boy books, but that's a separate issue.

[nedz]

Hi and welcome to the playground.

The other problem with your question is that you have given us nothing to go on. If you said something like: "I have this cool character concept, how do I build it ?" then you would get more than enough helpful advice; but asking "How do I piss off my DM ?" isn't going to bear much fruit. Even if we went along with your premise: we don't know the guy.

[TypoNinja]

{scrubbed}

Your problem is, it looks like you are asking us to help you ruin the game you are in.

This is typically a bad thing. Your game contains more than just you, and deliberately ruining peoples fun is generally frowned upon.

I can't speak for anybody else, but I hope to enhance peoples enjoyment of the game, as my enjoyment has grown from what I've learned here. Telling you how to upset your DM, and the rest of the players in your game seems like a net loss of enjoyment to me. I've no interest in helping with that.

[AuraTwilight]

As a general rule, you shouldn't be a jerk to someone who's going through the effort of DMing for you, or for the other players making time out of their schedules to play with you.

That being said, if you want a high-powered, but not broken, and non-caster character, I would recommend the Tome of Battle.

[sonofzeal]

As a general rule, you shouldn't be a jerk to someone who's going through the effort of DMing for you, or for the other players making time out of their schedules to play with you.

That being said, if you want a high-powered, but not broken, and non-caster character, I would recommend the Tome of Battle.
^ this.

At lvl 5, ToB is pretty baller. That decreases significantly next level, when iterative attacks start coming into play and a Fighter or Barbarian's damage jumps significantly while a ToBer stays much more level. Still, they're viable throughout, and probably your best bet.

The best recommendation for ToB for you is that they have a low optimization floor - even a poorly-optimized ToBer will kick goblin arse, and you don't need personal access to a vast library, or encyclopedic knowledge of a dozen rules tricks, to pull it off. Simply put, the classes themselves are strong, Warblade especially. You may not win, but you're guaranteed to be a contender.

[Seffbasilisk]

Level 5? Dark Whispergnome Monk/Swordsage with Bracers of Armor. Even better if you can go druid/swordsage, and take the non-wildshaping varient, which gives you Wis to AC. Bracers of Armor (assuming you can get the DM to take them as armor, and monk to not [easy diplomacy skillcheck]) + Wis bonus twice to AC, cracked out hide/move silently, and a few maneuvers just to feel like you're from a comic book.

Punpun is like a nuke, it just ends games. Avoid it.

I broke the infinite puncher down to level 13, but it's probably been reduced further. Halfling with a gauntlet that punches for damage infinite is fun if you include targets such as castles.


If I may step out of the whole Casters are t3h win crowd, there's a cool template, +1 LA, it's basically super-weak lycanthropy that WotC had out. It's enough to let you qualify for Warshaper. This doesn't seem much, but can be outrageously practical. For instance, I once had a warshaper character that was captured, put on a farce of a trial, and executed by guillotine (the party was...inefficient), he woke up an hour later in the sewers, having grown a new head back. No vital organs in the head + fast healing and enough HP to eat the crit...

[Boci]

No vital organs in the head + fast healing and enough HP to eat the crit...

If it worked for your DM, cool. But its hardly something you can count on. I imagine most DMs (myself included) would just say vital organs or no vital organs, losing your head causes enough damage to kill you.

[GnomeGninjas]

You should play a monk or a druid to show him that one book in particular might need some limitations.

Don't do monks. The DM will conclude that your monk sucks because you aren't using splats, not that your monks sucks because core is highly unbalanced.

[Gavinfoxx]

If you want to play a powerful character in 3.5e without playing a caster, you are doing it wrong. Casting is, by far, the most powerful thing in 3.5e. Some might go so far as to say it is the only truly powerful thing in 3.5e.

[HalfQuart]

How about just Druid 5, set up to go into Planar Shepherd at level 6? I don't think you'd really be able to break anything until 5th (ECL 10) or 9th (ECL 14) level, but it's still a rather strong option. (Yes, I know you said preferably not a spellcaster.)

[killem2]

No I won't help you. This is not a good way to begin a d&d session. Enjoy your freedom to make a character, don't abuse it.

[Renen]

How about just Druid 5, set up to go into Planar Shepherd at level 6? I don't think you'd really be able to break anything until 5th (ECL 10) or 9th (ECL 14) level, but it's still a rather strong option. (Yes, I know you said preferably not a spellcaster.)

Oi, dont help a guy who signed up on this site just to ask how to destroy his DM's game.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: Thread locked to avoid further flaming.