Party Member Suggestion

[Auramis]

Looking for a suggestion on what to add to this party. Our Dungeon Master is rather open with us and has asked what he thinks should be added to the party, because he doesn't like it being just the 3 people it is now. Currently, our party is as follows:


4 Cleric/1 Fighter/5 Pr Paladin/3 Swift Wing
5 Sorcerer/8 Dragon Disciple
3 Wizard/4 Druid/6 Arcane Hierophant


We had a rogue/scout in our party, but he was ineffective in our current campaign and has benched himself (can't skirmish or sneak when we're fighting loads of undead). As it stood, our last battle had the rogue literally was just attacking like a gimpy fighter (worse, even). With our BBEG being a Dracolich with a Lich Kobold minion, they wanted something that would be more effective.

EDIT: Player's opted for a Marshal rework (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=186681) that the DM approved of. Felt like he'd have more fun with this than the roguish characters.

No, our party isn't well optimized. No, we don't care. We're just trying to have fun.

[Platymus Pus]

Looking for a suggestion on what to add to this party. Our Dungeon Master is rather open with us and has asked what he thinks should be added to the party, because he doesn't like it being just the 3 people it is now, which are as follows:


4 Cleric/1 Fighter/5 Pr Paladin/3 Swift Wing
5 Sorcerer/8 Dragon Disciple
3 Wizard/3 Druid/7 Arcane Hierophant


We had a rogue/scout in our party, but he was ineffective in our current campaign and has benched himself (can't skirmish or sneak when we're fighting loads of undead). As it stood, our last battle had the rogue literally was just attacking like a gimpy fighter (worse, even). With our BBEG being a Dracolich with a Lich Kobold minion, they wanted something that would be more effective.
Number 2 sounds fun.
You want somethign like that right?

[JusticeZero]

I think they meant "That is what we HAVE, what would synergize well with these three".

[Auramis]

I think they meant "That is what we HAVE, what would synergize well with these three".

This. Sorry if I wasn't clear about that. Apologies. x3

[eggynack]

A beguiler (PHBII, 6) or factotum (DS, 14) would do the sneaking thing pretty well, if that's the kinda thing you're looking for. If that's not what you're looking for, I'm not sure what it is you're looking for. By the way, the arcane hierophant is breaking the rules, because he needs +4 BAB to get in to the class, and he only has +3 when he enters. I just thought that it might be the kinda thing you'd want to know. He should probably have two buffer levels of mystic theurge in between the druid and the hierophant, to get his BAB up to speed.

[ArcturusV]

My suggestion would be something in the Skill based character line. Rogues, Factotums, usual suspects. I know often you hear that's useless because your Wizard/Cleric can just cast a spell to negate a skill use... but having that skill character means you don't have to burn a slot on that "Pass a skill challenge" section.

Plus a more mundane character who uses wits and cunning to do what the spellcasters do with mojo can be fun to play if you have the right mindset. Think Conan versus all the sorcerers he has been in stories with, rather than comparing him to Aquaman among the Justice League.

[Auramis]

By the way, the arcane hierophant is breaking the rules, because he needs +4 BAB to get in to the class, and he only has +3 when he enters.

That's actually a typo on my part. I got the levels mixed up. Actually a 4 druid and a 6 AH. Fixing that now.

[RenegadeWizard9]

I think that a bard/ranger might be useful, becuse of the various extra skills and bonuses. You're playing core rules right?

http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/5.jpg (http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm)

[DarkSonic1337]

(can't skirmish or sneak when we're fighting loads of undead). As it stood, our last battle had the rogue literally was just attacking like a gimpy fighter (worse, even). With our BBEG being a Dracolich with a Lich Kobold minion, they wanted something that would be more effective.

Magic Item compendium. Truedeath crystal, greater. Attach it to your weapon and it counts as ghost touch, gets +1d6 against undead, and can score critical hits and sneak attack against undead. 10,000g

Also consider house ruling things that benefit sneak attack to also benefit skirmish. Scout came about pretty late and as a result has little splatbook support.

[Octopus Jack]

I second the Factotum suggestion for a skill focused character though Ranger could work nicely if you're fighting lots of enemies with a single type, ie undead, you might want to look into the Mystic Ranger ACF to give you a little more spellcasting potential and that makes Sword of the Arcane Order a very worthwhile feat but also makes you fairly MAD unless you can persuade your DM to key the wizard spells off your Wisdom.

You can also go Shooting Star Ranger for even more spellcasting potential ontop of your combat aptitude but I believe both that and Sword of the Arcane Order are from a Forgotten Realms book and fairly setting specific so ask your DM.

[Segev]

Sadly, wands take a standard action to activate even if the spell in them is Swift-cast, so Grave Strike and Golem Strike wands are not useful to the rogue. However! You sound like you're using 3.5, so there exists a solution!

Shuriken are enchanted as ammo. Get Spell Storing Shuriken, and get your wizard/druid to put Grave Strike into some, Golem Strike into others, and Vine Strike into the rest. When facing things that need these tricks, spend one of your attacks hitting yourself in the foot with the shuriken. It's a few measly points of damage per round, but the X-Strike spell triggers for the cost of a single attack out of your full attack. Now use the rest.

The Truedeath Crystal is an even better solution, if you can afford it.

This can let your rogue player come back. Heck, say when he "benched" himself he went to work figuring out how to solve these problems, and came up with one of the above solutions.

If the DM will house rule that the rogue can UMD the wands and activate them as swift actions because they ahve swift spells in them, that works, too. If not, you can try to talk him into a special "wand holder" magic item or a feat to let the rogue cast from wands at the cast speed of the spells stored in them (probably with a +3 to UMD checks with wands, as well, at that point).

[Invader]

Hard to beat a radiant servant of Pelor for an undead heavy campaign.

[PurpleSocks]

Alternatively you could unbench the Rogue/Scout and take the penatrating strike ACF that allows you to deal half damage to undead/constructs/plants etc and ask your DM if you can tweak it so it applies to your skirmish damage as well.

Oh and theres errata somewhere that states wands can be activated as a swift action if the spell is so don't forget wands of gravestrike and UMD to apply full damage to undead.

If you've got your heart set on benching your character I'd go the Wildshape ranger route with levels in MoMF, Natures Warrior & Warshaper. Obviously make your favoured enemy the undead, and get knowlege devotion and ranks in religion for all the killing power.

If you want a boatload of immunities and some fun flavor go for a Warforged with adamantine body (you keep the AC bonus in wildshape). If it doesnt't fit the setting your DM might ban it but its still less broken than the Arcane Heirophant.

[Auramis]

After talking about it with DM, he thinks that a factotum, in terms of roleplay, wouldn't fit with our party. Factotums are great (and we all love them), but the lack of any kind of specialty in anything and mimicry of the skills other party member have may actually offend the party members.


The paladin would probably take offense to a non-holy man turning undead as if he were a cleric. He would take even more offense to the fact that a factotum over level 9 would actually turn better than he would.
The hierophant would take offense that the man is making magic something so rudimentary as just finger wiggling and doing what he can.
The sorcerer likely wouldn't care, possibly find it even funny, but one party member getting along with the character seems too limited. The DM wants someone we can all get along with.


He's shifted focus to bards and marshals, perhaps a combination of the two, to offer party auras and still provide some skills from the bard class. He seems particularly fascinated in this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=186681) retooling of Marshal.


Alternatively you could unbench the Rogue/Scout and take the penatrating strike ACF that allows you to deal half damage to undead/constructs/plants etc and ask your DM if you can tweak it so it applies to your skirmish damage as well.

He has said that he may bring the rogue back eventually, having retrained for this. For now, he's excused the rogue as going off for the sake of training for this. The rogue roleplayed a sense of worthlessness after the fight he was in and was determined to go and better himself. He felt emasculated and felt a solo quest was the best thing for himself.

Concerning all of the magic items, the DM would prefer a character who doesn't necessarily have to rely on magic items. He wants them to be capable of operating well without them.

[Segev]

...wait, does the PALADIN operate well without magic items? Or is the fact that he's not using charged ones with obvious specific application to expanding his abilities obscure the fact that he really is kind-of dependent on them to shine?

[Auramis]

...wait, does the PALADIN operate well without magic items? Or is the fact that he's not using charged ones with obvious specific application to expanding his abilities obscure the fact that he really is kind-of dependent on them to shine?

Yes, he operates well without the magic items. Granted, he has a holy sword, but he would be just as effective without it due to his spellcasting ability. He's Pr Paladin, after all, so he's more like a cleric than a true paladin.

[Segev]

Ah.

The unfortunate truth is, if the DM truly wishes PCs to "operate well wtihout magic items," he's saying he wanst nothing but casters.

[Fax Celestis]

Ah.

The unfortunate truth is, if the DM truly wishes PCs to "operate well wtihout magic items," he's saying he wanst nothing but casters.

...or incarnates.

[Segev]

Incarnum-users, like Vestige-Binders and Psionic classes, are "effectively casters." Though I'll grant that Incarnum-users and Vestige-Binders can "feel" a bit less like casters if you want.

[Firechanter]

May I ask _who_ is supposed to play the 4th party member -- is it a PC or a DMC?

If DMC, bringing back the Rogue/Scout with Sneak-Enabler should do fine.

If PC, the player still won't be happy as a strictly mundane T4 character in a group of T1s.

If you need a skill monkey, consider an Able Learner mix of Skill-based class (1) and Cloistered Cleric (rest). That should give the player enough skills, plus quasi-full Cleric spellcasting.

Or how about a Necromancer that can do hostile takeovers on the enemy undead creeps?

[John Longarrow]

If the player is up for it, either Rogue or Beguiler mixed with SwordSage can be real fun. You can do a lot, you have massive skills, and with maneuvers you can pull off some decent combat tricks.

Course if you are staying in an undead-centric game then sneak isn't going to be too good, so mixing crusader with Factotem could be a nice change.

[HalfQuart]

Sadly, wands take a standard action to activate even if the spell in them is Swift-cast, so Grave Strike and Golem Strike wands are not useful to the rogue.

Oh and theres errata somewhere that states wands can be activated as a swift action if the spell is so don't forget wands of gravestrike and UMD to apply full damage to undead.
Rules Compendium states:

Activating a spell trigger item takes the same amount of time as the casting time of the spell that the item stores, but activating the item doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity.
With a publish date of October 2007, that should take precedence over the Spell Compendium (published December 2005):

Activating a spell completion item, activating a spell trigger item, or drinking a potion is a standard action even if the spell from which the scroll, potion, or item is made can be cast as a swift action.
That said, some people ignore the Rules Compendium's language altogether, so check with your DM if it is important to your build. In any case, you will need to have the wand in hand, or use Quick Draw, a Wand Chamber, etc. to be able to use the wand.

[Auramis]

Ah.

The unfortunate truth is, if the DM truly wishes PCs to "operate well wtihout magic items," he's saying he wanst nothing but casters.

I don't entirely agree with you on this, nor does the DM. We're just in a world where magic items aren't dropping off trees, so finding specific items like gems that allows rogues to function against undead isn't going to be found around the next corner.

Besides, we're not optimizing for the best of the best, we're just having fun. The rogue wasn't having fun. Ergo, he wanted to reroll and bench the rogue (at least for now).

[Amphetryon]

Kobold Cleric with the Kobold Domain can take care of any trapfinding duties the benched Rogue was handling, while being utilitarian in an Undead-heavy campaign at the same time.

[Auramis]

the player still won't be happy as a strictly mundane T4 character in a group of T1s.

That's more for him to decide. Besides, the reworked Marshal I presented is easily T3.

He opted for that Marshal, either way. If he doesn't like it, we'll just change again. No big deal. xD

[Segev]

I don't entirely agree with you on this, nor does the DM.You're free to. And if your game proves this general statement wrong, more power to you.


We're just in a world where magic items aren't dropping off trees, so finding specific items like gems that allows rogues to function against undead isn't going to be found around the next corner.If the Rogue is off trying to better prepare himself for this kind of thing, he could be on a quest for precisely that sort of gem. No need for it to be "found around the next corner;" it's the Legendary Ghoulslayer's Heart, which the rogue hunted down based on its mythical property of allowing the undead to live just long enough to be slain.


Besides, we're not optimizing for the best of the best, we're just having fun. The rogue wasn't having fun. Ergo, he wanted to reroll and bench the rogue (at least for now).Which is fine. I was (and I believe others were) trying to offer ways for him to improve his effectiveness if he wants his character back.

Although, it could be that he wasn't having fun precisely because he is the only non-full-caster in the party, and thus the solution is to bring a caster in. Beguiler does seem the most straight-forward "magic rogue" replacement. Good skill selections, etc.

If the rest of the party is heavy melee (the druid and the PrPaladin may well be), a dragonfire inspiration Bard could be a solid choice. Backs up the party with hefty buffs, can have a few good utility spells to fill gaps in the wizard/druid's and cleric's typical load-out, and has a reasonable array of rogue-ish skills.

[Fouredged Sword]

Why not all the classes?

Human.
Factotum 5 / Chameleon 10.

This character can do anything, and be anything.

[Platymus Pus]

You could go for pure ranger and focus all of your bonuses on undead along with str and dex depending on the type of ranger you build.
A +10 to hit and dmg against undead is pretty nice along with skill checks.
Then you have 4 other +2's as a bonus against whatever you want.
Then favored terrain.
And some useful spells.
No one else could track like you or make perception checks like you could.
A decent choice if you know what you'll mostly be facing.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OI2lQ_FPUpnXD4i3sBLgzvgyOV9l43gKL0JM83co7iI/edit?pli=1
I recommend the last for most fun

[Segev]

What does the player of this new PC want to do, in terms of how he wants to participate in the game?