Unusual beguiler multiclassing

[ewoods]

So I've got a halfling beguiler in a new campaign and during the last game, my DM threw me a twist. I was "cursed" by some pool and now, every odd level, I have to take a level of some divine class. My first thought was Archivist, since they're intelligence casters too, but they're also tier 1, and my DM doesn't allow tier 1 classes. Other than that though, there are no other restrictions on classes or source books.

My original concept for my character was a sort of "passive" diplomat. I fight when I have to, but if I can get out of a fight through lies, charisma, and diplomacy, I'll choose that option. Anyone have any good ideas for a divine class that might be complementary? Obviously I want my character to be able to effectively participate in the group, but I tend to be more concerned with roleplaying and character concept than with power leveling.

[Flickerdart]

Go find someone capable of casting Remove Curse, get curse removed, play game without the DM ham-fistedly forcing you to play your character in a particular way.

[Fax Celestis]

Does it have to be divine? Can you play a religious barbarian?

Because beguilerbarian is hilarious. Invisibility, rage, then Rage and charge.

It is in no way optimal, but it may make your DM stfu.

[ewoods]

I WISH it was that simple! LOL I don't really know how it works. But we're playing tomorrow and I have to level up to 3rd and have no idea what to pick. I thought about maybe Healer?

[Randomguy]

What level are you at, and what are your stats?

In any case, a 1 level dip in Cloistered Cleric might be useful.

[ewoods]

We leveled up from 2nd last game, so I'm trying to decide on my 3rd level. My stats are:

Str 8
Dex 20
Con 8
Int 16
Wis 13
Cha 16

Cloistered Cleric might be a good option, but would that still be a tier 1 class?

[Vedhin]

You could take a level in Shugenja. They can be found in Complete Divine, and are Charisma-based casters. I've seen arguements for them being anywhere from Tier 2 to Tier 4.

[OldTrees1]

Ranger might work. They are not tier 1 (So they would be allowed). They have lots of skills which is half of your original character concept.

Alternatively you could aim for a dual progression class (Mystic Theruge, Arcane Heirophant) in order to reclaim normal beguiler progression.

Another option is to take levels in a fast progression prestige class like Ur-Priest.

What level will you have to start taking divine at? Is it your 3rd level? 5th? 7th?

[A_S]

Cloistered Cleric might be a good option, but would that still be a tier 1 class?
Yes.

There are really very few divine caster classes that aren't tier 1. Spirit Shaman and Favored Soul, I guess. Neither has anything resembling synergy with Beguiler.

Divine Bard could conceivably mesh pretty well with Beguiler's flavor. If you go this route, I'd probably try to get into Fochlucan Lyrist at level 11, which would require two feats (Shape Soulmeld and Open Least Chakra) for evasion, and the ability to speak Druidic (which probably requires a 1-level Druid dip, unless you can get your DM to let you learn it some other way...Druids are tier 1, but dipping for one level certainly wouldn't make you a tier 1 character). Going this route would let you keep your diplomat theme (Bards are also very good at this role), and add on some party support in the form of Bardic Music.

All that advice is really just making the best of a bad situation, though. The real answer is that the curse you have is a terrible idea by your DM. 3.5 is an awful system for building characters without the ability to plan ahead, because everything requires feat chains that you have to see coming several levels ahead of time to qualify. Plus, being able to play the kind of character you want to play is the whole point of D&D!!!!!

[nedz]

Divine Oracle works well with Beguiler, but it's hard to qualify for if you didn't plan for it and certainly not at level 3.

You could retire your character and start a new one. It's kind of a pain but this sounds like very poor DMing.

Maybe try talking to your DM and tell him that this is a very bad idea.

[Chronos]

Take the Arcane Disciple feat, and call Beguiler a divine class.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Don't level up. Per PHB p58-60, there is nothing stating you have to gain a level when you get enough XP. State that you don't believe your character has received the proper instruction to be able to gain a level in any divine class. Get the curse lifted, or find a dead magic area to temporarily suppress the curse, and then take more Beguiler levels.

This is not about what levels you take in the game, this is entirely about your DM trying to shove your character in a direction that you most likely don't want to take him. Find out why this is, maybe your DM thinks your character is too powerful and wants to nerf you by forcing you to multiclass. Maybe your DM is just a control freak. In any case, talk to him outside the game and find out what's going on and why he's trying to force you into multiclassing.

Consider retraining some of your feats to get Vow of Peace, Nonviolence, and Poverty, and take Apostle of Peace, all of which are in BoED. The Beguiler spell list and your character's style of play are perfect for the above vows, and Apostle of Peace is a divine caster which can (eventually) fulfill your DM's desire to force you into a divine class.

[nedz]

Take the Arcane Disciple feat, and call Beguiler a divine class.

The trouble is you need 4 ranks of Know(Religion) which is cross class for Beguiler. It's the same problem as Divine Oracle where you need 8 ranks.
If you had planned to do this, and it's a solid Beguiler build, then you would have taken one of Educated or Cosmopolitan feats already.

Dipping one of these would give you Know(Religion)
Bard, Cleric, Monk, Paladin, Wizard, Duskblade, Marshal, Warlock, DFA, Healer, Factotum, Savant, Wu Jen, Adept, Aristocrat, Expert

This would open up Divine Oracle at 6th, which is an even numbered level.

So maybe something like
Beguiler 2 / (Divine) Bard 1 / Beguiler +1 / (Divine) Bard +1 / Divine Oracle 10 — with Skill Focus (Know — Religion) as your level 3 feat.
The DM hasn't said that you can't take the divine class on even levels.

This last point open up the option of switching to a divine class at level 3 and staying with it.
Beguiler 2 / (Divine Class X) 18

I don't like any of this mind, the DM should butt out of the player's character decisions — other than in general terms.

[Randomguy]

It looks like your only options are Paladin, Ranger, Divine Bard, Shugenja, Favoured Soul and Spirit Shaman.

If you want to abandon your character concept completely then you can start taking all your levels in either Paladin or Ranger and make a decent melee character. You could also maybe fit some Dragon Disciple in this build.

Otherwise, your better off taking the rest of your levels in a divine class anyway.

You could do something like: Beguiler 2/Favoured Soul 1/Rogue 1/ FS 1/Shadowbane Stalker 10.

This way all of your levels (except the 2 favoured soul levels) give you a bunch of skill points that you can use towards diplomacy and stuff, but you still get some powerful divine spells. Make sure to grab Detect Evil as a spell known, it's required for Shadowbane Stalker. The downside is you need to be LG.
You could modify the build a bit by fitting in 2 more levels of Beguiler, for second level beguiler spells.

You could also keep your character concept but just make most of the rest of your levels Divine Bard levels. Here are some example builds that do that:

Beguiler 2/Divine Bard 1 (Feat: Extra Music)/Beguiler 1/Divine Bard 1/Beguiler 1 (Feat: Melodic Casting)/Lyric Thaumaturge 10/Divine Bard 4.

Or this: Beguiler 2/Bard 18

Both of those builds could fit in a level of Mindbender.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Just pick up the feat Alternate Source Spell from Dragon 325, it's a +0 metamagic that turns an arcane spell into a divine spell.

[elvengunner69]

Go find someone capable of casting Remove Curse, get curse removed, play game without the DM ham-fistedly forcing you to play your character in a particular way.


Yes.

All that advice is really just making the best of a bad situation, though. The real answer is that the curse you have is a terrible idea by your DM. 3.5 is an awful system for building characters without the ability to plan ahead, because everything requires feat chains that you have to see coming several levels ahead of time to qualify. Plus, being able to play the kind of character you want to play is the whole point of D&D!!!!!




This is not about what levels you take in the game, this is entirely about your DM trying to shove your character in a direction that you most likely don't want to take him. Find out why this is, maybe your DM thinks your character is too powerful and wants to nerf you by forcing you to multiclass. Maybe your DM is just a control freak. In any case, talk to him outside the game and find out what's going on and why he's trying to force you into multiclassing.

Consider retraining some of your feats to get Vow of Peace, Nonviolence, and Poverty, and take Apostle of Peace, all of which are in BoED. The Beguiler spell list and your character's style of play are perfect for the above vows, and Apostle of Peace is a divine caster which can (eventually) fulfill your DM's desire to force you into a divine class.

Amazing insight into a person you've never met and don't know why it happened. I agree if you do something risky or stupid in a role playing game you should NEVER have anything bad or unattended happen. When the Beguiler dipped his hands into the God of Deaths well he should have gained the celestial template and given a wand of major cool illusions and 16 bonus feats! What a lousy Dungeon Master who actually made an outcome that has some sort of negative consequence he should be cast out never to return!

Excellent stuff as always. :smallamused:

[Fax Celestis]

Amazing insight into a person you've never met and don't know why it happened. I agree if you do something risky or stupid in a role playing game you should NEVER have anything bad or unattended happen. When the Beguiler dipped his hands into the God of Deaths well he should have gained the celestial template and given a wand of major cool illusions and 16 bonus feats! What a lousy Dungeon Master who actually made an outcome that has some sort of negative consequence he should be cast out never to return!

Excellent stuff as always. :smallamused:

This isn't a negative consequence. This is just the DM making the player play what he wants him to play.

[elvengunner69]

This isn't a negative consequence. This is just the DM making the player play what he wants him to play.

Uh no...did the DM force him to touch the stuff in the well? I think not.

[Fax Celestis]

Uh no...did the DM force him to touch the stuff in the well? I think not.

Bestow curse and greater bestow curse have delineated, comparable effects that can be built into equivalent curses. The curse the player is suffering at first level is comparable to an epic spell.

[OldTrees1]

Bestow curse and greater bestow curse have delineated, comparable effects that can be built into equivalent curses. The curse the player is suffering at first level is comparable to an epic spell.

Some DMs/Players like the Deck of Many things. Some hate it. Personally I do not like such effects. However my brother enjoyed when he was permanently polymorphed into a gnome at 3rd level. The OP should figure out whether they would enjoy rolling with the curse (using our advise in order to gauge its effects) or if they should talk to their DM to resolve their difference of opinion.

[Chronos]

elvengunner69, I take it you're the DM?

No, dipping your hand into the well of the god of death shouldn't be consequence-free. But a lot more logical consequence, as well as a kinder one, would have been to kill the character. At least that way, he could either be raised, or if that weren't possible, roll up a new one. As it is, though, you've made his character irreversibly unplayable. What fun is that?

[Piggy Knowles]

OK, say your first two levels are beguiler, yes? And you have to alternate levels with a non-beguiler class?

How about...

1. Beguiler1-
2. Beguiler2-
3. Paladin of Tyranny/Slaughter1-
4. Beguiler3-
5. Paladin of Tyranny/Slaughter2-
6. Beguiler4-
7. Ur-Priest1-
8. Beguiler5-
9. Ur-Priest2-

And then take Mystic Theurge from there, so that every level you're taking both an arcane and divine class. You'll have a somewhat rough time of it for a bit, but you'll catch up pretty quickly. (Paladin of Tyranny/Slaughter can be replaced with any divine class that boosts your fort saves.)

Fluff can be that dipping your hands into the god-well has driven you mad, and now you want to steal power from the gods. Might as well make the best of a bad situation, no?

[OldTrees1]

I second Piggy Knowles build but since he started as a Beguiler (Skillmonky/Caster), I would replace the paladin levels with Ranger (more skill points).

Beguiler 2/Ranger 1/ Beguiler +1/Ranger +1/ Beguiler +1/ Urpriest 1/Beguiler +1/ Urpriest +1/Mystic Theruge 10/Beguiler +1

16/20 levels of Beguiler progression if he rolls with the curse
In addition he has 9th level Divine Spells

An alternative build would alternate Mystic Theruge and Beguiler levels for more skill points

Beguiler 2/Ranger 1/ B+1/R+1/ B+1/ Urpriest 1/B+1/ U+1/B+1/Mystic Theruge 1/B+1/MT+1/B+1/MT+1/B+1/MT+1/B+1/MT+1/B+1

16/20 levels of Beguiler progression if he rolls with the curse
In addition he has 7th level Divine Spells
and an average of 4+Int skill points per level

[Piggy Knowles]

Yeah, fair enough, I completely forgot that ranger is technically a divine class. That said, knowledge (religion) is a required skill for Ur-Priest that rangers do not get, but paladins do. Of course, there are many ways to circumvent this issue (Knowledge Devotion comes to mind, for a free extra knowledge skill), and there's probably some ranger ACF with knowledge (religion).

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Amazing insight into a person you've never met and don't know why it happened. I agree if you do something risky or stupid in a role playing game you should NEVER have anything bad or unattended happen. When the Beguiler dipped his hands into the God of Deaths well he should have gained the celestial template and given a wand of major cool illusions and 16 bonus feats! What a lousy Dungeon Master who actually made an outcome that has some sort of negative consequence he should be cast out never to return!

Excellent stuff as always. :smallamused:

PHB 2, Chapter 8, after the curse is lifted he can retrain those junk levels he's being forced to take into whatever he would have taken. This is still an extremely unfair setback, and the DM in question is still unfair and arbitrary in how he's handling the 'curse' in question.

My advise would be don't take that divine level, just take another Beguiler level and suffer whatever drawbacks the curse inflicts. Taking a divine level is the means of avoiding the curse's drawback, but it's a trap; a pseudo-permanent (or permanent, given the retraining rules are optional and subject to an unfair DM's whims) crippling of the character that should not even be considered. Suffer the drawbacks and get the curse removed, don't take that divine level.

[OldTrees1]

Yeah, fair enough, I completely forgot that ranger is technically a divine class. That said, knowledge (religion) is a required skill for Ur-Priest that rangers do not get, but paladins do. Of course, there are many ways to circumvent this issue (Knowledge Devotion comes to mind, for a free extra knowledge skill), and there's probably some ranger ACF with knowledge (religion).

Good point about the Knowledge Religion ranks. Unfortunately there is no Ranger alternate class/alternate class feature that gives Rangers Knowledge Religion as a class skill.

So the ranger version would probably take Knowledge Devotion (good feat).

Is there any Arcane/Divine theruge class with more skill points per level?
Arcane Heriophant gets 4+Int skill points but requires 3 levels of druid.

[elvengunner69]

elvengunner69, I take it you're the DM?

No, dipping your hand into the well of the god of death shouldn't be consequence-free. But a lot more logical consequence, as well as a kinder one, would have been to kill the character. At least that way, he could either be raised, or if that weren't possible, roll up a new one. As it is, though, you've made his character irreversibly unplayable. What fun is that?

Yes and here is the entire story:

They stumble upon a magic well -- the Healer in the party recognizes a symbol associated with the God of Death. The Fighter, Healer & Rogue in the party want no part of the well...The Beguiler decides to dip his hand in even though it is obviously magical.

Beguiler fails a fortitude save (moderate DC) and falls unconscious. They have to bring him to a temple (of Mystra iirc) and he gets restored but has a compulsion to aid the God of Death and must take a divine lvl class every other lvl until the compulsion is fulfilled (which is about to happen so at MOST he will have one lvl of a divine class).

If it was 1 lvl or 12 lvls to me the point I made is still valid. Role playing at some point should have unintended consequences and should punish (if appropriate) foolish actions. His entire party said 'Don't touch it'. He touched it. Consequence.

I was not trying to force him into anything. I didn't say, 'go ahead touch the dark mysterious death water' his other players said 'Don't do it'. Action - Consequence.

[Fax Celestis]

Two things: if it were a temple of Mystra, she would probably prefer her benefactors to be on the arcane paths.

And this is still wildly out of line with other situationally similar curses.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Yes and here is the entire story:

They stumble upon a magic well -- the Healer in the party recognizes a symbol associated with the God of Death. The Fighter, Healer & Rogue in the party want no part of the well...The Beguiler decides to dip his hand in even though it is obviously magical.

Beguiler fails a fortitude save (moderate DC) and falls unconscious. They have to bring him to a temple (of Mystra iirc) and he gets restored but has a compulsion to aid the God of Death and must take a divine lvl class every other lvl until the compulsion is fulfilled (which is about to happen so at MOST he will have one lvl of a divine class).

If it was 1 lvl or 12 lvls to me the point I made is still valid. Role playing at some point should have unintended consequences and should punish (if appropriate) foolish actions. His entire party said 'Don't touch it'. He touched it. Consequence.

I was not trying to force him into anything. I didn't say, 'go ahead touch the dark mysterious death water' his other players said 'Don't do it'. Action - Consequence.

You don't have to level up when you get enough XP. He can just not gain his next level until he's fulfilled that compulsion, and avoid multiclassing entirely.

[Talya]

You never ever ever force a character to take a class they weren't going to take as part of a "consequence." That's not a consequence. It's just killing them off without telling them you killed them off. (Killing them WOULD be a consequence. And a perfectly acceptable one.)

[Urpriest]

Yes and here is the entire story:

They stumble upon a magic well -- the Healer in the party recognizes a symbol associated with the God of Death. The Fighter, Healer & Rogue in the party want no part of the well...The Beguiler decides to dip his hand in even though it is obviously magical.

Beguiler fails a fortitude save (moderate DC) and falls unconscious. They have to bring him to a temple (of Mystra iirc) and he gets restored but has a compulsion to aid the God of Death and must take a divine lvl class every other lvl until the compulsion is fulfilled (which is about to happen so at MOST he will have one lvl of a divine class).

If it was 1 lvl or 12 lvls to me the point I made is still valid. Role playing at some point should have unintended consequences and should punish (if appropriate) foolish actions. His entire party said 'Don't touch it'. He touched it. Consequence.

I was not trying to force him into anything. I didn't say, 'go ahead touch the dark mysterious death water' his other players said 'Don't do it'. Action - Consequence.

I'm just confused as to why the consequence is an OOC one, and not an IC one.

[Blueiji]

Yes and here is the entire story:

They stumble upon a magic well -- the Healer in the party recognizes a symbol associated with the God of Death. The Fighter, Healer & Rogue in the party want no part of the well...The Beguiler decides to dip his hand in even though it is obviously magical.

Beguiler fails a fortitude save (moderate DC) and falls unconscious. They have to bring him to a temple (of Mystra iirc) and he gets restored but has a compulsion to aid the God of Death and must take a divine lvl class every other lvl until the compulsion is fulfilled (which is about to happen so at MOST he will have one lvl of a divine class).

If it was 1 lvl or 12 lvls to me the point I made is still valid. Role playing at some point should have unintended consequences and should punish (if appropriate) foolish actions. His entire party said 'Don't touch it'. He touched it. Consequence.

I was not trying to force him into anything. I didn't say, 'go ahead touch the dark mysterious death water' his other players said 'Don't do it'. Action - Consequence.

I just don't understand why taking a divine class is necessary to show devotion to a god.

I've played a paladin using the rogue class. It's not like I used homebrew or anything, I just role-played the character as a paladin who happened to have a more stealth-oriented skill set.

Couldn't the consequence of the curse be "compelled worship" and nothing more? Nothing is stopping a Beguiler from being religious, and nothing says you have to take a divine class to have a religious character.

[ewoods]

I actually wasn't too upset with what happened. I wouldn't say I was happy, of course, and I'd PREFER to stay on the character path I had set out, but I wasn't angry. I can roll with it well enough. :)

I decided to stick my hand in the pool because everyone else in the party was taking FOREVER. I think we spent probably 45 minutes of real-world time trying to figure out what, if anything, we were going to do with it and I got impatient. My fault. LOL

My only gripe though, is that another party member also touched the water, but they were already a divine class, so it really had zero effect on them. Essentially, the curse as it stands gets worse the further your character is away from a divine path. That part of it seems a little unfair...

Still, I think Ranger or Divine Bard might be good choices! Especially if it's only a level or two, I think I can make Divine Bard work well with my character concept.

[A_S]

Amazing insight into a person you've never met and don't know why it happened. I agree if you do something risky or stupid in a role playing game you should NEVER have anything bad or unattended happen. When the Beguiler dipped his hands into the God of Deaths well he should have gained the celestial template and given a wand of major cool illusions and 16 bonus feats! What a lousy Dungeon Master who actually made an outcome that has some sort of negative consequence he should be cast out never to return!

Excellent stuff as always. :smallamused:
The problem is not that your player faces negative consequences. The problem is that the specific negative consequence you picked is one that denies your player the ability to engage in what most of us think is the most fun part of D&D (making up a character concept that you like, and playing that role).

As others have mentioned, lots of other kinds of negative consequences (death, ability loss, item destruction, hideous disfigurement, a curse to permanently exude the odor of moldy cheese) would have been fine, because they would have been bad things that happened to the character, rather than what amounts effectively to a mandate to play a different character.

I guess your player says he doesn't really mind, so maybe you're lucky enough to have laid this curse on somebody who wasn't particularly attached to his character concept. The reason you got such a strong reaction, though, is because the curse you chose is one that would make a lot of people go, "well, this campaign just got extremely unfun." Ruining people's fun in D&D is, generally speaking, not good DMing.

[DR27]

If it was 1 lvl or 12 lvls to me the point I made is still valid. Role playing at some point should have unintended consequences and should punish (if appropriate) foolish actions. His entire party said 'Don't touch it'. He touched it. Consequence.

I was not trying to force him into anything. I didn't say, 'go ahead touch the dark mysterious death water' his other players said 'Don't do it'. Action - Consequence.Are classes a metagame construct or-in game construct? Have his actions have a in-game consequence, a role-play consequence - not metagame consequences. Maybe think of a consequence that actually requires in-game actions, not mechanical character build changes. The Geas spell is probably a place to start. Your current solution sucks, frankly.

[elvengunner69]

Yeah, yeah I know opt-fu or nothing and yes this God wants DIVINE DEVOTION...crazy concept I know. Too Bad Frodo didnt' get a +5 Vorpal sword after tossing the ring in the cracks of doom. Or Maybe when Gollum fell into the pit he should have become a half lava elemental. God knows we don't want anything creative to happen.

Stuff your judgment folks...you aren't invited to my game anyway (at least some of you anyway...:smallwink:

Seriously I'm not mad about your criticism you all have your opinions. It was the consequence of his actions and now he has to pay (only one lvl so he'll have to adapt).

Oh word of advice - just because you don't like doesn't make it wrong or bad. Anyway I'm done talking about it (queue the I would walk out of your game comments I'm sure). The player doesn't like it but is making the most of it...wow he's roll playing! He's taking a bad situation (brought on by himself) and dealing with it!

That sounds just horrible.

[elvengunner69]

I guess your player says he doesn't really mind, so maybe you're lucky enough to have laid this curse on somebody who wasn't particularly attached to his character concept. The reason you got such a strong reaction, though, is because the curse you chose is one that would make a lot of people go, "well, this campaign just got extremely unfun." Ruining people's fun in D&D is, generally speaking, not good DMing.

Sorry I don't DM were you can be uber cool and have everything go perfect. Was trying something creative and different. I guess we have different outlooks at what is fun.

[Fax Celestis]

Sorry I don't DM were you can be uber cool and have everything go perfect. Was trying something creative and different. I guess we have different outlooks at what is fun.

I guess we do.

My concept of fun involves keeping in-character and out-of-character separate. Seems like yours doesn't.

[A_S]

Sorry I don't DM were you can be uber cool and have everything go perfect. Was trying something creative and different. I guess we have different outlooks at what is fun.
As I said in the portion of my post you've removed, having "everything go perfect" is not the requirement. Lots of things can go wrong and still be fun. They include:

Dying.
Being compelled by a mysterious pool of cursed liquid to serve the god of death.
Getting mind-controlled and forced to fight my party.
Having all my stuff get stolen.
Accidentally waking up Cthulhu.

They do not include being told by my DM that I have to play a different character now. If that does sound fun to you, then yeah, we have different outlooks on what is fun. As you've already pointed out, it would therefore probably be more enjoyable for both of us to avoid being in the same game of D&D.

But please don't straw-man what I was saying into "I can't handle bad things happening to my character" to make your point. Respond to what I actually said, instead.

[DR27]

*whine*How old are you? The fact that you are getting so defensive tells me that you know the way you are running the game isn't conducive to player enjoyment. Be mature about the criticism that forum posters are giving you. Can the comments you are receiving help you run a better game? Probably. If you really don't think so, then ignore it, don't throw a tantrum that the world just doesn't understand your genius.

[elvengunner69]

How old are you? The fact that you are getting so defensive tells me that you know the way you are running the game isn't conducive to player enjoyment. Be mature about the criticism that forum posters are giving you. Can the comments you are receiving help you run a better game? Probably. If you really don't think so, then ignore it, don't throw a tantrum that the world just doesn't understand your genius.

I can be defensive about what I believe if I want. I have no problem with disagreement but I will defend what I do. You asking me how old I am and replacing my post with 'whine' is mature?

Good one.

[elvengunner69]

As I said in the portion of my post you've removed, having "everything go perfect" is not the requirement. Lots of things can go wrong and still be fun. They include:

Dying.
Being compelled by a mysterious pool of cursed liquid to serve the god of death.
Getting mind-controlled and forced to fight my party.
Having all my stuff get stolen.
Accidentally waking up Cthulhu.

They do not include being told by my DM that I have to play a different character now. If that does sound fun to you, then yeah, we have different outlooks on what is fun. As you've already pointed out, it would therefore probably be more enjoyable for both of us to avoid being in the same game of D&D.

But please don't straw-man what I was saying into "I can't handle bad things happening to my character" to make your point. Respond to what I actually said, instead.

Honestly I am 100% okay with everything you said. I was trying something different to see what the effects are and how the character would react. If it goes terrible for him he can always 'retire' the character and do another or as the one person suggested he could just not level until the compulsion is over.

My initial thinking is that the only person that would mess with the well was the one divine character. She wanted nothing to do with it though.

[Flickerdart]

The dungeon master builds an entire world. The players each build a single dude. While the DM is wholly within his rights to determine what happens to the characters (with obvious caveats), determining what they are is overstepping that authority. Messing around with your players' characters is about as "creative" and "different" as hosting a dinner party and then demanding someone wear a filthy t-shirt you found behind the washing machine.

[elvengunner69]

The dungeon master builds an entire world. The players each build a single dude. While the DM is wholly within his rights to determine what happens to the characters (with obvious caveats), determining what they are is overstepping that authority. Messing around with your players' characters is about as "creative" and "different" as hosting a dinner party and then demanding someone wear a filthy t-shirt you found behind the washing machine.

You would be 100% correct but I didn't force anything on this player. He chose to touch the magical death water. The Death god is LN (can't remember his name of the top of my head but a Faerun one) who instead of killing him is making him serve him. A mechanic of service is divine character class. Also again, he was advised by his other 3 party members to NOT touch it. He touched it and missed out on a DC 10 fort save. This is their active quest so he will at most have 1 lvl of a divine character. Hardly demanding and divine characters are hardly filthy.

[Flickerdart]

You would be 100% correct but I didn't force anything on this player.

http://forum-img.pinside.com/pinball/forum/?bb_attachments=985180&bbat=115642&inline

Making up an item that strongarms your player into changing his character is forcing him.

[A_S]

You would be 100% correct but I didn't force anything on this player. He chose to touch the magical death water. The Death god is LN (can't remember his name of the top of my head but a Faerun one) who instead of killing him is making him serve him. A mechanic of service is divine character class. Also again, he was advised by his other 3 party members to NOT touch it. He touched it and missed out on a DC 10 fort save. This is their active quest so he will at most have 1 lvl of a divine character. Hardly demanding and divine characters are hardly filthy.
(emphasis mine)

The bolded part is the only part that's wrong with this.

You're right that it's perfectly fair for there to be consequences to something like touching a pool of magical death water against the advice of the party. It's even fine for those consequences to include compulsory service to Kelemvor. But that should be handled in character (via hallucinatory visions of Kelemvor's avatar informing the character of what they must do, maybe?). It should not be implemented mechanically as a restriction on what kind of character the player is allowed to play. The fact that divine classes aren't bad is irrelevant; it's not about the "nerf" you may or may not be imposing on your player, it's about denying your player choice over the one thing players are supposed to have control over in a tabletop roleplaying game (who they are, that is, what role they choose to play).

[elvengunner69]

http://forum-img.pinside.com/pinball/forum/?bb_attachments=985180&bbat=115642&inline

Making up an item that strongarms your player into changing his character is forcing him.

I created a mechanic attached to the well. He being arcane should have left to the Divine character. He didn't he suffered the mechanic. It's cool I get it that some of you don't like it. That's fine. I'm trying to show why I did it. My thought was the only person that might touch it was the healer not the Beguiler...

At any rate there are lots of solutions offered above and doubt 1 lvl of Ranger or something else will kill his character. And if it does he can just be a 3rd lvl Beguiler and deal with the consequences of not fulfilling his debt to the God of the Dead. I have that possibility worked out as well.

I seriously get what you are saying or what you think I am doing - I just disagree.

[elvengunner69]

(emphasis mine)

The bolded part is the only part that's wrong with this.

You're right that it's perfectly fair for there to be consequences to something like touching a pool of magical death water against the advice of the party. It's even fine for those consequences to include compulsory service to Kelemvor. But that should be handled in character (via hallucinatory visions of Kelemvor's avatar informing the character of what they must do, maybe?). It should not be implemented mechanically as a restriction on what kind of character the player is allowed to play. The fact that divine classes aren't bad is irrelevant; it's not about the "nerf" you may or may not be imposing on your player, it's about denying your player choice over the one thing players are supposed to have control over in a tabletop roleplaying game (who they are, that is, what role they choose to play).

I get 100% what you are saying -- I just don't agree. I don't think anything is hands off/can't do. Obviously it is just a game but how many people in real life do jobs or things they hate doing? I've known lawyers who made great money and hated it. Well that experience as lawyer just doesn't disappear if they chose to be writer? Or what about the unintended consequence of a decision that leads you down a different life/career/vocation path? It happens...obviously in D&D we have magic/god thing that can interfere. That is what I saw this as. I also think of the Elminster books...I'm pretty sure when he wanted to get revenge on the Sorcerers that killed his family he wasn't thinking he would become a Rogue/Cleric/Wizard...pretty sure he wanted to go straight to wizard (at least after Rogue) and Mystra decided for him no you'll be a cleric (a divine class no less lol). So there is even precedence in away in this same universe.

[elvengunner69]

I will apologize for being defensive but this kind of language makes me that way...I have no problem with disagreement but I don't think these comments are 'constructive'.

“play game without the DM ham-fistedly forcing you to play your character in a particular way.”

“It is in no way optimal, but it may make your DM stfu.”

“All that advice is really just making the best of a bad situation, though. The real answer is that the curse you have is a terrible idea by your DM.”

“Maybe try talking to your DM and tell him that this is a very bad idea.”

“fulfill your DM's desire to force you into a divine class.”

“you've made his character irreversibly unplayable. What fun is that?”

[ewoods]

...and Mystra decided for him no you'll be a cleric (a divine class no less lol). So there is even precedence in away in this same universe.

So I can take a level of cleric then? ;)

[Flickerdart]

I created a mechanic attached to the well. He being arcane should have left to the Divine character. He didn't he suffered the mechanic. It's cool I get it that some of you don't like it. That's fine. I'm trying to show why I did it. My thought was the only person that might touch it was the healer not the Beguiler...
Irrelevant. You created a mechanic that forced a player to surrender significant decisionmaking over their character. Any consequences of that are your fault alone.

[erikun]

I think you're free to run your game the way you like.

I also think that if I was going to create an in-game consequence for an in-game action, I would first consider a method that affects in-game play. I would not start taking XP away from the character and forcing the character to acquire traits which actively and permanently impair the character's core concept.

It's ultimately up to your player, though, how well they will accept the change.

[Dictum Mortuum]

I guess we do.

My concept of fun involves keeping in-character and out-of-character separate. Seems like yours doesn't.

I think that this post sums it all up.

@elvengunner69: Of course you can play your game as you wish, but this is a non-argument, as anyone can do that.

First of all: divine spellcasters are granted spells by the deity they believe in. So, in your world Kelemvor is actually a weirdo who likes forcing people into acquiring divine spellcaster levels in order to grant them spells.

Why? Just grant him spells and have him pray to Kelemvor, no need to dip into other classes.

Second: I get that he might just be a weird guy who likes forcing people to take cleric levels or something; what I don't get is the "every odd level" multiclassing :P How in Zeus's name is Kelemvor able to count what level his latest beguiler toy is :P

[elvengunner69]

So I can take a level of cleric then? ;)

Is it tier 1? If yes then no. :)


Irrelevant. You created a mechanic that forced a player to surrender significant decisionmaking over their character. Any consequences of that are your fault alone.

Right like I mentioned above -- inspiration was based on what Mystra did to Elminster? Maybe if I had a cute zombie seduce him first...(just a joke)


I think that this post sums it all up.

@elvengunner69: Of course you can play your game as you wish, but this is a non-argument, as anyone can do that.

First of all: divine spellcasters are granted spells by the deity they believe in. So, in your world Kelemvor is actually a weirdo who likes forcing people into acquiring divine spellcaster levels in order to grant them spells.

Why? Just grant him spells and have him pray to Kelemvor, no need to dip into other classes.

Second: I get that he might just be a weird guy who likes forcing people to take cleric levels or something; what I don't get is the "every odd level" multiclassing :P How in Zeus's name is Kelemvor able to count what level his latest beguiler toy is :P

Well Kelemvor is Lawful Neutral -- I would think he would want someone serving him to have some 'divine' connection. Again that was my thinking and also as I mentioned above this was partly inspired by Mystra/Elminster.

True he probably doesn't but since the service is temporary I thought every other lvl could accomplish this.

Also I don't see how character class is off limit? Does it say in the rules specifically these can never be altered? If so I will pull this requirement immediately with out further argument. If it isn't in there then it is just a style you prefer not a rule by any means.

[Crake]

Man, I've dragged my players through some serious dirt and mind games (sometimes at the same time!), but never once would I consider doing something like this. Like.... ever.

As for the whole "the player seems to be taking it well" thing, let's be honest, this could quite possibly be the player's only option at a D&D game in his area, and the last thing he wants to do is rock the proverbial boat and get kicked out by an angry DM because he didn't agree with a decision he made.

Edit: If you really want Kelemvor to have some divine connection to the player, why not gestalt the player with 1 level of some divine class of your choosing for the duration of the curse, then when it wears off, have them lose the divine class, or, should they choose to embrace it, give them the option of trading out the divine class level for one of their own, that way the player's options are permanently limited, but they retain the option of traveling down that path should they choose to do so.

[elvengunner69]

Man, I've dragged my players through some serious dirt and mind games (sometimes at the same time!), but never once would I consider doing something like this. Like.... ever.

As for the whole "the player seems to be taking it well" thing, let's be honest, this could quite possibly be the player's only option at a D&D game in his area, and the last thing he wants to do is rock the proverbial boat and get kicked out by an angry DM because he didn't agree with a decision he made.

You are wrong on every level. He could have fought the compulsion like I said. I had a consequence for that too.

You are providing a 'perfect' example of how 'constructive criticism' is not constructive but just criticism.

Also he could play in other groups...there are lots in our area. So he can quit or kick me out as DM if he wants. I've never played angry DM guy you can ask him. PM him if you want.

[Flickerdart]

Right like I mentioned above -- inspiration was based on what Mystra did to Elminster? Maybe if I had a cute zombie seduce him first...(just a joke)

I'm not sure how that excuses anything.

[Dictum Mortuum]

Is it tier 1? If yes then no. :)



Right like I mentioned above -- inspiration was based on what Mystra did to Elminster? Maybe if I had a cute zombie seduce him first...(just a joke)



Well Kelemvor is Lawful Neutral -- I would think he would want someone serving him to have some 'divine' connection. Again that was my thinking and also as I mentioned above this was partly inspired by Mystra/Elminster.

True he probably doesn't but since the service is temporary I thought every other lvl could accomplish this.

Also I don't see how character class is off limit? Does it say in the rules specifically these can never be altered? If so I will pull this requirement immediately with out further argument. If it isn't in there then it is just a style you prefer not a rule by any means.

It's not that is off limit, it's just completely irrelevant.

It's like Kelemvor is now Deadpool and controls people through psychic powers making them acquire divine spellcaster levels every odd level. How can he possibly know that info since it's just a metagame concept :smallsigh:

clerics, fighters, beguilers, etc exist in the D&D world in a 'fluff' fashion that you just seem unable to grasp.

Levels, odd levels, skill points, feats and stuff like that on the other hand, do not exist. Once two fighters meet, they don't compare their abilities saying "I'm two levels higher than you" :P

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Well Kelemvor is Lawful Neutral -- I would think he would want someone serving him to have some 'divine' connection. Again that was my thinking and also as I mentioned above this was partly inspired by Mystra/Elminster.

True he probably doesn't but since the service is temporary I thought every other lvl could accomplish this.

Also I don't see how character class is off limit? Does it say in the rules specifically these can never be altered? If so I will pull this requirement immediately with out further argument. If it isn't in there then it is just a style you prefer not a rule by any means.

Any character can serve any deity, regardless of class. Character class does not exist in-character, it is a metagame construct. Requiring him to learn more of what he's meddling in by taking ranks in Knowledge: Religion would be far, far more fitting.

What happened to Elminster was in a book, written by one person, inflicted on his own favorite character by himself. It's a direction he already wanted to take the character. What you're doing is inflicting a change of path on someone else's character, and it is absolutely unacceptable.

[Studoku]

Is it tier 1? If yes then no. :)
Cleric being tier 1 is based around a character taking most or all of their levels in cleric/relevant prestige classes. Forcing someone to staple one level of cleric onto their build isn't going to make them tier 1. If you have to force OP to take a divine class, there's really no reason to ban cleric from a power standpoint.

[OldTrees1]

To all those that continue to say that this curse was qualitatively wrong instead of merely quantitatively wrong:

Remember the following curse in the Monster Manual: Lycanthropy
Being bite by a werewolf is far more crippling than the curse this DM made. If you are the kind of person to hate a DM for using Lycanthropes then fine. However please do not have the gall to claim that DMs that use Lycanthropes are "playing D&D wrong".

In some campaigns your character build is sacred. In others it will not be.

[Crake]

To all those that continue to say that this curse was qualitatively wrong instead of merely quantitatively wrong:

Remember the following curse in the Monster Manual: Lycanthropy
Being bite by a werewolf is far more crippling than the curse this DM made. If you are the kind of person to hate a DM for using Lycanthropes then fine. However please do not have the gall to claim that DMs that use Lycanthropes are "playing D&D wrong".

In some campaigns your character build is sacred. In others it will not be.

The difference is that once lycanthropy is cured, all the drawbacks of it are removed too. And lycanthropy isn't that hard to cure. I've personally been a werejackal on a wizard before and it was all gone about 2-3 sessions later, before we had leveled up and I had to endure LA and racial HD issues

[JusticeZero]

has a compulsion to aid the God of Death ..
must take a divine lvl class every other lvl until the compulsion is fulfilled (which is about to happen so at MOST he will have one lvl of a divine class).He should not take the level at this time. One level that was unplanned is a permanent crippling, whereas being under level is a consequence that is temporarily troublesome. In any case, that curse has two, COMPLETELY UNRELATED components. One can serve God X without taking divine classes just fine.

[OldTrees1]

The difference is that once lycanthropy is cured, all the drawbacks of it are removed too. And lycanthropy isn't that hard to cure. I've personally been a werejackal on a wizard before and it was all gone about 2-3 sessions later, before we had leveled up and I had to endure LA and racial HD issues

And levels can be retrained or level loss + xp as a river. The issue is of scale (quantitative) not of type (qualitative).

[Waker]

I could immerse myself in the arguments about the curse and it's story/mechanical issues, but enough people have argued about it. Instead I'll just ask if you as the DM (or see if the player is interested) would allow the Incarnate to count as a "divine" character. You shape spirits of the dead and yet-born into the form of equipment, so that could have some flavor that works with Kelevmor. Furthermore the class can work just fine with Beguiler, especially if you later take levels in Soulcaster.

[Crake]

And levels can be retrained or level loss + xp as a river. The issue is of scale (quantitative) not of type (qualitative).

The other issue is that removing the curse is out of the player's hands. To get rid of lycanthropy all you need is a remove curse at the right time. To get rid of this curse, he needs to go through a bunch of loops for a god, then MAYBE he gets out of the curse, and even then he needs to spend time rebuilding his character, which of course requires going on a rebuild quest, that is entirely up to the DM, who may not even set aside time for it depending on his whims.

You're taking agency away from the players, and in a game where the DM has 99% of it, he doesn't really need more

[Fax Celestis]

A mechanic of service is divine character class.

A.

A.

A.

The implication here is that there are other means to serve. Telling him "you are obligated to serve Kelemvor for a period of time" is reasonable. Telling him "level in cleric" is not. Do you see the difference?

[OldTrees1]

The other issue is that removing the curse is out of the player's hands. To get rid of lycanthropy all you need is a remove curse at the right time. To get rid of this curse, he needs to go through a bunch of loops for a god, then MAYBE he gets out of the curse, and even then he needs to spend time rebuilding his character, which of course requires going on a rebuild quest, that is entirely up to the DM, who may not even set aside time for it depending on his whims.

1) Level loss + xp as a river is in the default rules. So the criticism is only valid as a quantitative criticism.



You're taking agency away from the players, and in a game where the DM has 99% of it, he doesn't really need more

2) Your opinion on the proper ratio between player and DM agency is a preference. Your preference is not universal and is not an excuse to claim that someone is "Not playing D&D right". This goes in both directions. I personally don't like it if the DM has more than 80% control. However that is merely a preference and I do not have the right to claim you are playing D&D wrong if you let the DM have 99%.


3) Now if we can agree that it is invalid to say the DM is "Not playing D&D right", then we can move on to give advise on how the DM could improve. What about the curse worked well, what did not work well, what are the alternatives? That is how this derailment should have gone.

[Crake]

1) Level loss + xp as a river is in the default rules. So the criticism is only valid as a quantitative criticism.

Except xp gains only scale when you're behind in ECL. It doesn't account for levels lost due to having to pick a class that doesn't synergise with anything else you have. The only way to get rid of that is with a character rebuild, as stated, which is entirely up to the DM.

As for player agency, aside from games where a DM is introducing a group of new players, I don't think I've ever heard of a game where the DM has control over a character's levelup choices beyond limiting what sources are available. Would you be happy to play in a game where the DM just handed you a new character sheet when you leveled up, told you your character's motivations, goals, how you should play him/her, and corrected you when you weren't doing as he described? While that may be a hyperbole, that is what it boils down to here. The DM may as well just write a book

[elvengunner69]

A.

A.

A.

The implication here is that there are other means to serve. Telling him "you are obligated to serve Kelemvor for a period of time" is reasonable. Telling him "level in cleric" is not. Do you see the difference?

I do and I will use a real world example were I think it is fine the way I did it...

Friend A - one of the smartest kids in school. Wanted to be a Class profession of Doctor...

At age 17 he got his girlfriend preggers (dipped his wand in the holy water so to speak :smallbiggrin:). They kept the kid, finished high school but guess what...instead of going to college he got a job. Worked for 10 years as a construction worker - different class (Parents were supportive to a point).

Point is he was ready to be a Class X (Beguiler if you will) until lvl 20 but he did X and had to switch. Why is it so hard for this concept to translate into D&D? To me it doesn't take a stretch of the imagination and I see nothing in the rules prohibiting it. I don't see character creation as such a holy institution that I think some of you do. Sure making characters is fun but spending time with your friends collaborating on a story is much more fun.

Play it your way and get mad when someone like me does something like this. Point is there is nothing wrong with the mechanic I created but some of you don't like it. Judge as you want - end of day who really cares?

As I stated here and to him...he doesn't have to take it. He can fight the compulsion...and of course the GofDeath doesn't say 'Take a lvl in cleric' -- he is marking this Beguiler for his use because he was foolish enough to dip into his holy water. Not being evil he didn't want to kill him but I think a lesson was learned.

He has a chance to release the compulsion quickly or not lvl up and wait until he fulfills the compulsion. Or spend the money to have a cleric remove curse.

Lots of options and (gasp) lots of role-play possibilities!

[thethird]

Wow...

As I was reading I was going to suggest using some incarnate levels, which are okay with a beguiler and aren't overpowered on their own. Of course, that is not a divine class, i.e. it doesn't cast divine spells.

I also thought that at forgotten realms everyone had to have the favor of a deity for spells, but maybe I'm misremembering I don't normally play on Faerun. If it is the case, why not just switch its divinity to Kelemvor and have Kelemvor give him a quest of something? That would be a chance to "punish" him, but also a chance to grow in character and make the party move forward. And I'm pretty sure Kelemvor is a really nice dude, without the capability to break the 4th wall and read character sheets to see if they take odd levels in classes.

Are you using multiclass penalties? Because if so (and in the internet RAW is normally assumed vaseline) this curse is much worse than it appears. Its levels are going to be Beguiler, Beguiler, Divine, Divine, Divine, Beguiler, Divine, Beguiler, Divine... in order to avoid XP penalties.

By the way to which classes is he limited?

Favored Soul, Mystic, Adept, Ranger, Paladin, Shugenja, Spirit Shaman (which I still don't know which tier is), Divine Bard?

Of those I don't see any matching the concept of a Beguiler and at the same time matching the fluff of Kelemvor. Of course fluff is mutable, but mixing that with the crippling progression to avoid xp penalties and the lost levels in a casting class which already is delayed totally cripples the character.


The player doesn't like it but is making the most of it...wow he's roll playing!

What does roll playing mean? Is it food? Also... do you realize that class levels are game constructs which should not appear in character? If kelemvor knows about class levels, does that mean that someone can know about class levels with a knowledge check?

[Crake]

I do and I will use a real world example were I think it is fine the way I did it...

Friend A - one of the smartest kids in school. Wanted to be a Class profession of Doctor...

At age 17 he got his girlfriend preggers (dipped his wand in the holy water so to speak :smallbiggrin:). They kept the kid, finished high school but guess what...instead of going to college he got a job. Worked for 10 years as a construction worker - different class (Parents were supportive to a point).

Point is he was ready to be a Class X (Beguiler if you will) until lvl 20 but he did X and had to switch. Why is it so hard for this concept to translate into D&D? To me it doesn't take a stretch of the imagination and I see nothing in the rules prohibiting it. I don't see character creation as such a holy institution that I think some of you do. Sure making characters is fun but spending time with your friends collaborating on a story is much more fun.

Play it your way and get mad when someone like me does something like this. Point is there is nothing wrong with the mechanic I created but some of you don't like it. Judge as you want - end of day who really cares?

As I stated here and to him...he doesn't have to take it. He can fight the compulsion...and of course the GofDeath doesn't say 'Take a lvl in cleric' -- he is marking this Beguiler for his use because he was foolish enough to dip into his holy water. Not being evil he didn't want to kill him but I think a lesson was learned.

He has a chance to release the compulsion quickly or not lvl up and wait until he fulfills the compulsion. Or spend the money to have a cleric remove curse.

Lots of options and (gasp) lots of role-play possibilities!

The difference is that nobody forced him to make that decision. He made a choice to have the child, he could have abandoned the mother/child and gone off to be a doctor or simply paid childsupport/been a deadbeat. Your story proves everyone else in the thread. The choices made by Friend A were just that, his choices, nothing barring his conscious forced him into any of that.

Also, is there any hint as to what would happen to the player should he decide not to follow the orders of a god? From the sound's of things there doesn't really seem to be much option here, despite you saying he can fight the compulsion if he wants to.

[BeardMcStonekeg]

Judge as you want - end of day who really cares?

Yeah, as long as the OP is having fun no should care but...



Point is he was ready to be a Class X (Beguiler if you will) until lvl 20 but he did X and had to switch. Why is it so hard for this concept to translate into D&D?

Because spending time with your friends collaborating on a story is fun and telling someone they have to arbitrarily change their character in the story and a player vs. dm mentality are things you generally don't do when you want to facilitate collaboration.

I think this may be helpful:

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p9ew?Should-the-Paladin-Fall-A-Guide

[DR27]

Why is it so hard for this concept to translate into D&D?D&D is not RL, don't pretend it is. D&D is there to be fun, not to force us into roleplaying the most difficult moments in life through mechanical character restriction. Saying that ****ty thing happens in real life, so I can force my players to play concepts other than they want is less than optimal. You made this same point earlier with lawyers, and it made no sense then. It makes no sense now to say that weird **** happens, so deal. D&D isn't real life. D&D lets the player character have control of their actual character concept. You can lead a game that results in those difficult decisions while role-playing, but reaching out and actually changing the character itself? Just play with yourself, it does what you want. If you want to play with other human beings? You might have to allow others to participate. :O

End of the day, we care because other DM's might think that your way is optimal, when it is apparent to most that your way restricts character choice without adding to the fun. In short, screw your "interesting character design." Instead, I'll take collaborative world-building and character design over your method any day.

[Dictum Mortuum]

I do and I will use a real world example were I think it is fine the way I did it...

Friend A - one of the smartest kids in school. Wanted to be a Class profession of Doctor...

At age 17 he got his girlfriend preggers (dipped his wand in the holy water so to speak :smallbiggrin:). They kept the kid, finished high school but guess what...instead of going to college he got a job. Worked for 10 years as a construction worker - different class (Parents were supportive to a point).

Point is he was ready to be a Class X (Beguiler if you will) until lvl 20 but he did X and had to switch. Why is it so hard for this concept to translate into D&D? To me it doesn't take a stretch of the imagination and I see nothing in the rules prohibiting it. I don't see character creation as such a holy institution that I think some of you do. Sure making characters is fun but spending time with your friends collaborating on a story is much more fun.

Play it your way and get mad when someone like me does something like this. Point is there is nothing wrong with the mechanic I created but some of you don't like it. Judge as you want - end of day who really cares?

As I stated here and to him...he doesn't have to take it. He can fight the compulsion...and of course the GofDeath doesn't say 'Take a lvl in cleric' -- he is marking this Beguiler for his use because he was foolish enough to dip into his holy water. Not being evil he didn't want to kill him but I think a lesson was learned.

He has a chance to release the compulsion quickly or not lvl up and wait until he fulfills the compulsion. Or spend the money to have a cleric remove curse.

Lots of options and (gasp) lots of role-play possibilities!

All I see is a Commoner X with lots of profession (construction worker) ranks.

[carlknoch]

At first I couldn't believe how many whiners there were in this thread. Whiners who's only way to have fun is apparently to have everything they want, and for things to go exactly as planned in their campaigns. Then I remembered what forum this was, and after seeing all the "how can I min-max this character?" threads realized that it goes with the territory here.

Some people posting here seem to only have fun if their characters can be superheros with no real consequences. And while some campaigns are run by DMs who want to cater to those players, others are run by creative DMs who don't mind throwing in wild consequences that create huge problems that must be dealt with. (I like those games.) Some DMs like to make things more realistic, and not have every single thing that a group encounters be level appropriate and "fair". Things aren't fair in any world in my opinion. Things aren't level appropriate just because you happen to be the character who's sticking your hand in the bad stuff. If a dragon lives nearby, and you're a group of first level characters and decide to go kill it, you are dead. So you don't go. And those that do go there shouldn't whine to the DM "But you forced us to die because we went there! You should have made it level appropriate!"

So if you can't have fun in a campaign that actually has serious bad things happen to people (as in an Elric style low fantasy campaign) then find a campaign where it's high fantasy and good always wins like a Chronicles of Narnia kind of thing. (No one of importance dies, everyone wins and becomes kings and queens!) I personally would hate to have players that can't roll with adversity of all sorts, including a compulsion that forces them to take every other level as an arcane caster, which I've done in my campaign. And all my players rolled with it just like the OP was doing, and tried to look at the best way to deal with it without saying things like "Oh that's just the DM being a meanyhead! He's trying to make me play something I don't want! He's using an out of character mechanic that's forcing me to be a different person! He's not allowing me to fight Great Wyrms at first level and get all the magic treasures! Boo Hoo!"

I certainly appreciate the group I play with at times like this.

[nedz]

I will apologize for being defensive but this kind of language makes me that way...I have no problem with disagreement but I don't think these comments are 'constructive'.

“play game without the DM ham-fistedly forcing you to play your character in a particular way.”

“It is in no way optimal, but it may make your DM stfu.”

“All that advice is really just making the best of a bad situation, though. The real answer is that the curse you have is a terrible idea by your DM.”

“Maybe try talking to your DM and tell him that this is a very bad idea.”

“fulfill your DM's desire to force you into a divine class.”

“you've made his character irreversibly unplayable. What fun is that?”


The problem is that you have crossed what for many people is a red line.

The principle is that Players control their characters. If Players don't control their characters then what is the point of them playing ? You may as well all read a novel or perform a play.

As originally presented in the OP the character had to take half of their levels in a divine class thus instead of playing a Beguiler they would now have to play some sort of theurge, which is a complete character re-specification.

Now many people like the idea of bottom up character building where characters grow organically level by level; unfortunately 3.5 doesn't support this concept very well, in fact it appears that 3.5 was designed to punish such an approach. The consequence of this is that you end up with a very unbalanced party, which is very difficult to DM and can break the campaign.

You are obviously aware of such issues otherwise you would not have banned T1

So: I stand by my statement that this was a very bad idea for the two reasons listed above.

Incidentally I've made far worse mistakes in my DMing career — the trick is to learn from them.

[Red Rubber Band]

At first I couldn't believe how many whiners there were in this thread. Whiners who's only way to have fun is apparently to have everything they want, and for things to go exactly as planned in their campaigns. Then I remembered what forum this was, and after seeing all the "how can I min-max this character?" threads realized that it goes with the territory here.

This kind of shallow thinking and blanket stereotype approach really is not called for :smallannoyed:

[Lord Haart]

Elvengunner69, i have but one question to you. A question that, in my opinion, explains the real reason why most of those people are bothered.


Is the curse also supposed to make the Illusion, Mind Games and Tricks Experto Extraordinaire suddenly start having great troubles at developing his own arcane skills? That is, is there an in-game reason for a beguiler to get to the next circle later than he was gonna to? "He'll spend too much of his free time on clerical duty to keep studying" is, i'm afraid, an unconvincing answer as long as he did have time for adventuring, blackjack, hookers and some campfire social roleplay before (and as long as the experience gained in class isn't directly proportional to the time spend studying/practicing in a "No, i can't go on dinner with you, it will make me level up later" kind of way).

If it wasn't, then whatever else, the beguiler has the right to progress his class without penalizing it overtly or subtly (such as by counting clerical levels into his ECL). Partial gestalt was already suggested. When the curse ends, you can take the cleric levels away so he won't have more levels than the party, or he could choose to keep them legitimely.


And while i both understand and belong both in the "Player has teh rights to decide whether he'll only RP devotion or accomodate it into his build however he wants" camp of thought and especially in the "there's no such things as „cleric levels“ in-universe; there is such thing as „cleric“, but it can be served by a lvl 1 Expert with ranks in knowledge: religion and has nothing to do directly with the class" one, i'm not convinced that most of people here would complain if the question was about forcing a free partial gestalt on certain levels.

[Fax Celestis]

I most certainly would, because now you're taking one of the most powerful members of the party and making him even more powerful. Intra-party balance goes both ways.

[elvengunner69]

The problem is that you have crossed what for many people is a red line.

The principle is that Players control their characters. If Players don't control their characters then what is the point of them playing ? You may as well all read a novel or perform a play.

As originally presented in the OP the character had to take half of their levels in a divine class thus instead of playing a Beguiler they would now have to play some sort of theurge, which is a complete character re-specification.

Now many people like the idea of bottom up character building where characters grow organically level by level; unfortunately 3.5 doesn't support this concept very well, in fact it appears that 3.5 was designed to punish such an approach. The consequence of this is that you end up with a very unbalanced party, which is very difficult to DM and can break the campaign.

You are obviously aware of such issues otherwise you would not have banned T1

So: I stand by my statement that this was a very bad idea for the two reasons listed above.

Incidentally I've made far worse mistakes in my DMing career — the trick is to learn from them.

I appreciate your comments but don't think it was a mistake. Neither does the OP (as we talked about in much depth) and even discussed it with a DM (from a different group who also posted about it in here) and he agrees there is nothing wrong with the mechanic (in fact I stole some of the concept/idea from him).

Bottom line for me is he was dumb enough to stick his hand in the well -- failed the fort save...sucks to be stupid.

We'll never agree and while appreciate the different opinions there is nothing that will convince me to change my mind. Luckily I don't play with some of you and vice versa. It doesn't really accomplish much in my opinion to keep telling each other we are wrong. So I'm done with the topic and I don't mean that snotty it just seem pointless to keep arguing about it.

For those that disagreed in a respectful manner I really thank you...I appreciated (and disagreed) with your comments. Those that were jerks..well whatever have fun power gaming I guess and may your axes always be sharp and you always rolls 20s.

[Frosty]

Stay classy, elven. Stay classy.

It's not about powergaming. You can compel him to take levels in "Lightning Warrior" (you all know what I'm talking about) and it's still wrong on principle. Forget the power level. Unless it's something like "Dominate Person" (which can be removed and tends not to have permanent effects as big as taking a level), characters should be free to rp their character how they want to.

[DR27]

Stay classy, elven. Stay classy.

It's not about powergaming. You can compel him to take levels in "Lightning Warrior" (you all know what I'm talking about) and it's still wrong on principle. Forget the power level. Unless it's something like "Dominate Person" (which can be removed and tends not to have permanent effects as big as taking a level), characters should be free to rp their character how they want to.Just stop responding.