PDA

View Full Version : Are bloodlines worth it as a player?



Scalenex
2007-02-22, 04:59 AM
Not sure what a bloodline is? Check out the friendly SRD

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/bloodlines.htm

I was planning to give my next character, a barbarian/sorcerer a minor or intermediate bloodline of White Dragon (though I haven't quite ruled out demon or devil) to represent the source of his unlikely sorcerous powers.

My DM pointed that I had interpreted the rules incorrectly in my favor. I thought levels spent on bloodline would contribute to the feat I get every three levels and the ability score increase I get every four levels, but after reading the rules very carefully, I realize that I would not gain those. Also, I sadly realize that the levels sacrificed for a bloodline wouldn't even count towards the acquisition of the power itself. So in a sense taking a bloodline is like taking a race or template with a level adjustment, only you get the powers slowly and pay the levels back even slower. Still, I view the interest rates as being too high. To illustrate this, compare a major Dragon bloodline to the half-dragon template. Both cost three levels, the half-dragon just requires them upfront but gives you more power in all cases.

So pertending I took a minor dragon bloodline, I am 11th level and about to get ot 12th, the 12th level power is +1 Strength. Original plan was that at 12th level, I'd gain no hitpoints, skillpoints, or anything like that but my strength modifier would go up +1 as I get +1 to strength for my bloodline and +1 for the fact that I gained a level divisible by four.

So what do people on the Giant Forums think about bloodlines in general?

P.S. Try not to get into tangents on the origins of bloodlines and who would have to mate with what or how many generations traits would persist.

Caelestion
2007-02-22, 05:03 AM
Don't forget that bloodlines add to caster levels - they're like powered-up level adjustments that you don't need to take all at once.

Dark Tira
2007-02-22, 05:11 AM
Bloodlines are worth it if you never end up paying for them. If your character or campaign is unlikely to ever reach the 12th level there's no reason not to grab a minor bloodline, except for the cheese factor. Otherwise, it's almost always better to grab a template.

Oh, and if you want something to reflect that your sorceror has draconic blood I'd suggest using the Draconic Heritage feat from Complete Arcane, Races of the Dragon, and Complete Mage.

Zincorium
2007-02-22, 05:17 AM
Key point: Feats and ability score adjustments are based on hit dice. If you don't have a hit dice for an effective character level, then it doesn't count. Racial hit dice do.

As far as bloodlines go, I'm conflicted as far as mechanics and I don't like the concept that much. Since I don't like half elves or half orcs conceptually either, take that preference for what you will.

Mechanically, the benefits you gain tend to not be very important. They're nice, but if they make or break a character you're already in trouble. What they're good for is a spellcaster who doesn't worry too much about hit dice or base attack bonus, but needs some extra sparkle to give them something to look forward to at each level, instead of just a few more spells and that's it. That you gain higher level spells and more spells slower than normal might be worth it if you're satisfied with the amount of progression you already have.

When you actually break it down, even minor bloodlines are about the value of a whole bunch of magic items that don't take up slots. That they take away levels of BAB, hit dice, skill points, and/or spells known and castable that are the meat and drink of an adventuring life makes that look like not such a good deal.

Isomenes
2007-02-22, 02:19 PM
My DM pointed that I had interpreted the rules incorrectly in my favor. I thought levels spent on bloodline would contribute to the feat I get every three levels and the ability score increase I get every four levels, but after reading the rules very carefully, I realize that I would not gain those.


This should not dissuade you from taking the class. It provides, more than anything else, an awesome seed for backstory. Its material advantages are more useful if you plan your character out a few (or several) levels in advance, or if you start mid-level. I started a Bard7 with 1 level of intermediate Copper dragon bloodline, partly for the Perform check bonus, but also because we are running a dragon campaign, with a Red Wyrm to slay in the far distant future. Sure, it hindered me slightly, but I've only got one more bloodline level to take, and this can be worked into the story as part of a transformative process.

If you look at it solely from a mechanics perspective, you bleed every drop of roleplaying potential from the variant. Don't sell your game short--have fun with it!

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-22, 02:22 PM
Isomenes: you can have the same draconic-ancestry fluff without actually using the bloodline mechanics, you know.

I'd say that as a general rule--no. Bloodlines aren't worth it, mechanically. There are occasional exceptions.

Isomenes
2007-02-22, 02:27 PM
Isomenes: you can have the same draconic-ancestry fluff without actually using the bloodline mechanics, you know.

Which chews up feats. Meh.


I'd say that as a general rule--no. Bloodlines aren't worth it, mechanically. There are occasional exceptions.

Did you read the part where I said "ignore the mechanics?" Powergaming's great, but the bloodline tradeoff is only bad if you're trying to "win" D&D.

oriong
2007-02-22, 02:31 PM
No, you're missing his point.

You can have the exact same 'heritage' with no feats, no bloodline. Just put it in your character's backstory.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-22, 02:39 PM
Which chews up feats. Meh.
No, it doesn't. You don't have to take a Draconic Ancestry feat to play a character with draconic ancestry. You can just, you know, say, "my character has draconic ancestry." Roleplaying > mechanics.



Did you read the part where I said "ignore the mechanics?" Powergaming's great, but the bloodline tradeoff is only bad if you're trying to "win" D&D.The bloodlines are a mechanic. Why would you ignore the mechanics when taking/discussing a mechanic? You can have draconic ancestry as fluff. You can write it into your backstory. You can say that your higher stats, better spellcasting, etc. as you level up normally is from getting in touch with that heritage. You can have the exact same fluff without actually taking the bloodline. The bloodline mechanic doesn't influence the fluff one way or the other. Therefore, the only reasons to take the bloodline are mechanical ones.

Isomenes
2007-02-22, 02:39 PM
No, you're missing his point.

You can have the exact same 'heritage' with no feats, no bloodline. Just put it in your character's backstory.

Which loses you the mechanical benefits. They're not stellar, sure, but they also provide a framework on which to build. And who's to say magic items to replace said benefits are available or prevalent?

The OP asked whether there were benefits. I say, sure there are benefits. You just can't expect them to happen all at once. There's certainly nothing wrong with the idea. (Insofar as nothing is wrong with the idea of half-elves or half-orcs. :smallwink:)

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-22, 02:45 PM
Which loses you the mechanical benefits. They're not stellar, sure, but they also provide a framework on which to build. And who's to say magic items to replace said benefits are available or prevalent?
...the mechanical benefits are worse than just taking class levels. A character with class levels and "draconic heritage" fluff in his story is exactly the same roleplay-wise, and better mechanically.


The OP asked whether there were benefits. I say, sure there are benefits. You just can't expect them to happen all at once. There's certainly nothing wrong with the idea. (Insofar as nothing is wrong with the idea of half-elves or half-orcs. :smallwink:)Yes, there are benefits. "Roleplaying potential", as you implied, isn't one of them. That's the same either way. The benefits a bloodline level gives you are less than the benefits an actual class level does, nineteen times out of twenty.

oriong
2007-02-22, 02:46 PM
Weren't you just saying 'ignore the mechanics'?

If the mechanical benefits aren't worth the drawbacks then the non-existant role-playing benefits aren't going to make them any better.

Isomenes
2007-02-22, 02:54 PM
...the mechanical benefits are worse than just taking class levels. A character with class levels and "draconic heritage" fluff in his story is exactly the same roleplay-wise, and better mechanically.

Yes, there are benefits. "Roleplaying potential", as you implied, isn't one of them. That's the same either way. The benefits a bloodline level gives you are less than the benefits an actual class level does, nineteen times out of twenty.

Well, you've made your case. Mechanically, bloodlines are worthless.

I still maintain that, for an inexperienced roleplayer (myself being one of them), it provides a useful guide to how a character with a bloodline might progress. Sure, it provides no grand mechanical benefit. But I think our difference is one of first principles--the notion of whether a mechanically better PC is necessarily the goal. I don't have any particular attachment to it; you seem to.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-22, 02:58 PM
Well, you've made your case. Mechanically, bloodlines are worthless.

I still maintain that, for an inexperienced roleplayer (myself being one of them), it provides a useful guide to how a character with a bloodline might progress.
No, what they do is train inexeprienced roleplayers to link mechanics *to* roleplaying and become nigh-unable to separate them. Inexperienced or not, "...and so my character has draconic ancestry and is a little bit dragonlike, and that's where his spellcasting comes from" isn't exactly complicated. If people start going "oh, draconic blood... I should take a draconic bloodline, then," they'll start thinking that they need to have some mechanical backup for anything in their fluff; they'll tie their roleplaying *to* the mechanics, which, in a game like D&D, is limiting.



Sure, it provides no grand mechanical benefit. But I think our difference is one of first principles--the notion of whether a mechanically better PC is necessarily the goal. I don't have any particular attachment to it; you seem to.
I certainly don't see any reason to make your PC mechanically *worse* when you're not even getting Roleplaying Benefits out of it.

headwarpage
2007-02-22, 03:01 PM
Bears is right on this one. You can roleplay bloodlines without actually taking the levels. You can even look over the bloodlines as written, use that as a roleplaying seed, and then not actually take the bloodlines. You gain all sorts of interesting abilities as you level up - ability score increases, spellcasting, class features, etc. Your character doesn't realize that he's getting these things because he gained a level. Maybe he feels like it's his diabolic/draconic/celestial heritage manifesting itself.

But if you still want to do it, go for it. But the mechanics of the bloodlines aren't vital to the fluff, and it's probably not the best choice mechanically. If you understand that, and still want to do it, more power to you.

Isomenes
2007-02-22, 03:04 PM
No, what they do is train inexeprienced roleplayers to link mechanics *to* roleplaying and become nigh-unable to separate them. Inexperienced or not, "...and so my character has draconic ancestry and is a little bit dragonlike, and that's where his spellcasting comes from" isn't exactly complicated. If people start going "oh, draconic blood... I should take a draconic bloodline, then," they'll start thinking that they need to have some mechanical backup for anything in their fluff; they'll tie their roleplaying *to* the mechanics, which, in a game like D&D, is limiting.

Sure, the possibility exists, but it's a bit specious to say that it will eventually happen. Practice is practice.


I certainly don't see any reason to make your PC mechanically worse when you're not even getting Roleplaying Benefits out of it.

Here lies the crux of the matter.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-02-22, 03:27 PM
I look at bloodlines the same way I look at LA- either give it to everyone for free, or don't even include it in your game. It's just another crunchy reason to weaken your character in a misguided attempt to achieve better fluff.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-22, 03:31 PM
Sure, the possibility exists, but it's a bit specious to say that it will eventually happen. Practice is practice.
Not really. I think it's safe to say it can and does happen, from the amount fo players who can't seem to divorce mechanics from roleplaying.


Here lies the crux of the matter.
So... why do you want to make your character worse? And if you do, why not just do so by playing a similar but weaker class or slightly worse build, rather than by taking bloodline levels?

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-02-22, 03:37 PM
Wait wait wait- I just reread this stuff and found a major loophole. If your DM is foolish enough to let you make your own custom bloodline and you have no soul, you can really use this to epicly cheesy proportions.

Pick your favorite ability, and put all three bloodline points into it. Then choose 1-4 skills that you like. Finally, the real kicker- 10 special abilities. This really isn't explained very well, but apparently that qualifies for energy resistance, damage reduction, natural armor, some very nice extraordinary abilities (like Use Oversized Weapon), a few useful class features, and feats of any kind regardless of prerequisites.

My god... the power. For three levels, that's like hitting the jackpot.

Caelestion
2007-02-22, 03:44 PM
"you have no soul"

I presume you're talking about their conscience? Obviously though, a strict theme should definitely be enforced.

Fax Celestis
2007-02-22, 03:45 PM
"you have no soul"

I presume you're talking about their conscience? Obviously though, a strict theme should definitely be enforced.

Granted, but getting things like Awesome Blow for free, when you normally wouldn't qualify? Sweeeeeeeet.

Noneoyabizzness
2007-02-22, 03:59 PM
have a titan blooded dread necro right now, it's fun if only to boast the bloodline of a long forgotten death god.

the bloodlines are only as good as you make them

Caelestion
2007-02-22, 04:01 PM
Heh. There's always the bonus ability "DM slap" too.

ravenkith
2007-02-22, 04:09 PM
Yes if you go custom, you can very easily make a 'demigod' bloodline.

Pick your favorite god, and go to town.

Heck, you could pretty much take any racial or class special ability from regeneration to multiple arms to spell like abilities.

Oversized weapon would be very impressive though, especially if you're a medium sized critter.

TheElfLord
2007-02-22, 04:45 PM
Wait wait wait- I just reread this stuff and found a major loophole. If your DM is foolish enough to let you make your own custom bloodline and you have no soul, you can really use this to epicly cheesy proportions.



Thankfully I'm not that foolish

Isomenes
2007-02-22, 04:50 PM
Not really. I think it's safe to say it can and does happen, from the amount fo players who can't seem to divorce mechanics from roleplaying.

Without any evidence, it's easy to make this assertion.


So... why do you want to make your character worse? And if you do, why not just do so by playing a similar but weaker class or slightly worse build, rather than by taking bloodline levels?

Because I'm not focused on doing everything the "better" way--I enjoy exploring things for the sake of exploration. Yes, despite evidenced superiority on a single axis. It's not your problem. Don't act as if everyone thinks like you, or should.

Person_Man
2007-02-22, 05:00 PM
It's rarely worth it to take Bloodlines, just as its rarely worth it to take races or templates with Level Adjustment. (Of course, there are a few exceptions, like Feral or Mineral Warrior, but for the most part its a very bad idea). Dipping into Fighter is a much better way to get bonus feats, and all the other benefits are pretty minor, not nearly worth the tradeoff of lost HD and class abilities.

As Dark Tira mentioned, its always to your benefit to take a minor Bloodline if you're never going to see 12th level, but any DM that allows that is going to have 5 players with minor Bloodlines.



Because I'm not focused on doing everything the "better" way--I enjoy exploring things for the sake of exploration. Yes, despite evidenced superiority on a single axis. It's not your problem. Don't act as if everyone thinks like you, or should.

Isommenes, I don't think Bears is suggesting that everyone thinks like him or should. I think he's correctly observing that Bloodlines are a Pareto Inefficiency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_efficiency). From a pure utility maximizing point of view, you are always better off doing something else. By choosing to play a Bloodline, a PC is choosing to play a weaker version of the same class, when he can play a stronger version by just taking more levels of the same exact class. It's like choosing to play Dan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_%28Street_Fighter%29) from Street Fighter. You could play Ryu or Ken and have the same exact style of play, but better. You could just roleplay that your name is Dan.

Isomenes
2007-02-22, 05:21 PM
From a pure utility maximizing point of view, you are always better off doing something else. By choosing to play a Bloodline, a PC is choosing to play a weaker version of the same class, when he can play a stronger version by just taking more levels of the same exact class. It's like choosing to play Dan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_%28Street_Fighter%29) from Street Fighter. You could play Ryu or Ken and have the same exact style of play, but better. You could just roleplay that your name is Dan.

It's not about the strongest class.

It's not about the strongest class.

It's not about the strongest class.

Bears is perfectly correct when he says there are better choices to make, mechanically speaking. I have already stated that I agree with him in this respect. My reasons for liking bloodlines stem from curiosity. His basic premise is one that he fails to consider might not be held by others when he asks, "Why do you want to make your character worse?"

My answer: because I choose to explore other facets of the game. It's interesting. Not everyone plays to make their character the strongest. Some play because, well, it's play. I chose to share why I like it.

That's all.

Fhaolan
2007-02-22, 05:36 PM
My answer: because I choose to explore other facets of the game. It's interesting. Not everyone plays to make their character the strongest. Some play because, well, it's play. I chose to share why I like it.

That's all.

It's just a game, afterall. And the point of games is to win at them. If you can't win, you must be a loser. Q.E.D.

Just kidding. :smallbiggrin:

"If winning is not important, then, Commander, why keep score?" - Worf, STNG

Fax Celestis
2007-02-22, 05:37 PM
My answer: because I choose to explore other facets of the game. It's interesting. Not everyone plays to make their character the strongest. Some play because, well, it's play. I chose to share why I like it.

That's all.

That may be all, but I do believe that you're of the mind that you can't roleplay well if you optimize. This is patently false.

Optimization is a mechanical aspect, while roleplay is a fluff aspect. The two are entirely divorced from each other. Hell, I could take the rogue as-is and change the fluff. Suddenly, the rogue is a freedom fighter! Or an assassin! Or even a tinkerer!

Mechanics and fluff are two different concepts that are entirely unrelated to one another. There's no reason you should make yourself mechanically worse for the sake of roleplay, since the two should be completely unrelated (and actually are, unless you make them otherwise).

It's like taking Monkey Grip, a tried-and-true mechanically poor feat, for the purpose of saying, "My character uses a gigantic weapon". Instead of taking the feat, save yourself the feat and the -2 on attack rolls, and merely describe your weapon as larger than normal. Similarly, describe your character as having golden-tinged skin and greenish eyes instead of taking a gold-dragon bloodline. Fluff-wise, it's exactly the same, but mechanically, you're better.

In essence, your mechanics should not determine your fluff, optimized or not. Similarly, your fluff should not determine your mechanics. The two are entirely unrelated, and should not be treated like they are.

Seatbelt
2007-02-22, 05:44 PM
I think Bears and Isomenes are both justified. Bears says "You can have a character with unique fluff and still be mechanically viable". Isomenes says "Hmm.. bloodlines are cool. I think I want to try a character with this bloodline mechanic, just for ****s and giggles." I mean, let's face it. Being the strongest character at the table is fun. But then so is being the guy with the crazy mechanic.

oriong
2007-02-22, 05:46 PM
This is not entirely true, only generally true. Fluff and mechanics are connected, especially in a class/level based system like D+D.

For instance it's pretty well impossible to have the 'fluff' of a wizard or sorcerer and the mechanics of an Int 6 half-orc barbarian.

That said, fluff is a lot more flexible than mechanics and usually there are better options than to sacrifice mechanics for a non-existant gain.

Zincorium
2007-02-22, 05:46 PM
It's not about the strongest class.

It's not about the strongest class.

It's not about the strongest class.

Bears is perfectly correct when he says there are better choices to make, mechanically speaking. I have already stated that I agree with him in this respect. My reasons for liking bloodlines stem from curiosity. His basic premise is one that he fails to consider might not be held by others when he asks, "Why do you want to make your character worse?"

My answer: because I choose to explore other facets of the game. It's interesting. Not everyone plays to make their character the strongest. Some play because, well, it's play. I chose to share why I like it.

That's all.

Okay, you aren't even giving a solid argument here, and you're saying class where you should be saying character. The weakness in the argument is that there's really nothing to be curious about in terms of bloodlines. You know what you get. It's spelled out. Unless the DM comes up with new bloodlines and doesn't tell you what they do, there is absolutely nothing that will surprise you by taking bloodlines.

As far as interesting, only a small few of the abilities you gain are unique or interesting, most are just things that you could have picked up some other way without taking it.

With all that in mind, I don't think anyone except you is thinking that these mechanics, and that's all bloodlines are, make a character more interesting. They're a way of reflecting stat-wise a character background trait which you can reflect with little effort.

The only reason to make mechanical decisions is for mechanical reasons. If your fighter picks power attack instead of weapon focus, it's not because some bully picked on him as a kid or something, it's because the fighter's player likes power attack more. Actually taking the bloodline and taking it's levels is the same way, a mechanical representation of something else.

If bloodlines had more unique abilities or were balanced better with a character class level, they'd be decent, but as it is they're more than a little dull.

Isomenes
2007-02-22, 05:57 PM
I mean, let's face it. Being the strongest character at the table is fun. But then so is being the guy with the crazy mechanic.

Quoted for truth.

Go win D&D. You be right. I'll be happy.

Caelestion
2007-02-22, 06:09 PM
Bloodlines are still better than a full LA though, simply because four of them is like a free Practised Spellcaster feat.

JaronK
2007-02-22, 06:24 PM
Bloodlines are better for casters than a similar amount of LA from templates, because you get +1 Caster Level and +1 class level for purposes of abilities based on class level (such as the Dread Necromancer's amount of undead controlled). That said, LA is pretty much never worth it for casters anyway, and Bloodlines aren't better enough.

If your DM lets you do LA paydown on Bloodlines, though, then they become very much worthwhile.

It's quite useful for Shadowcraft Mages in fact, because Major Bloodline will bring their concealment from 40% to 55%, which is pretty noticeable.

JaronK

Noneoyabizzness
2007-02-22, 06:53 PM
also hellfire warlock,

lots of stuff to consider with bloodline LA

TheElfLord
2007-02-22, 07:56 PM
Wow, I have to give you guys credit. On this forum thread hijacking is down to an art. The OP's sig asks you guys not to highjack based on this class is more powerful than that class. You guys went with it. In his post he asked you not to highjack it based on what would have to have sex with what and such. You went with it. Instead you guys highjacked his thread with a discussing on roleplaying fluff and mechanics. I'm impressed.

Back on topic. I've never used bloodlines. I'm looking forward to them in my upcoming game. Several NPC's will have bloodlines are various sources. Could the player just say he has the ancestry with nothing mechanical to show for it, sure. But then, are the only reasons people play races mechanical ones? If you don't like the elves abilites do you pick human as your race and just say that you are an elf? I agree that roll playing and mechanics do not always have to be linked, but I think saying they are completly seperate goes a little too far. I also think the OP should take the bloodline because I'm courious to see its effects in game.

SpiderBrigade
2007-02-22, 09:01 PM
I don't really see how you can "hijack" a thread that starts with
So what do people on the Giant Forums think about bloodlines in general?

TheElfLord
2007-02-22, 09:10 PM
I don't really see how you can "hijack" a thread that starts with

I fail to see how a discussion about the relationship between rollplaying and mechanics can count as anything but hijacking. A good deal of the posts don't even refere to bloodlines and those that do use them as support for their position, not to give feedback to the OP.

Caelestion
2007-02-22, 09:13 PM
I suppose failing to see is either a cyclops bloodline or an invisible stalker bloodline, depending on whether you fail to see others or others fail to see you.

MeklorIlavator
2007-02-22, 09:19 PM
They don't directly refer to them, but all are about bloodlines, if not directly. They focused they broad "thoughts on bloodlines" topic to the more focused "the interaction of flavor and mechanics in DnD, in relation to bloodlines".

Person_Man
2007-02-22, 10:07 PM
I fail to see how a discussion about the relationship between rollplaying and mechanics can count as anything but hijacking. A good deal of the posts don't even refere to bloodlines and those that do use them as support for their position, not to give feedback to the OP.

The OP asked what we think of Bloodlines. 90ish% of us think they're garbage. Then we debated whether or not they're garbage. Once we establised that they are in fact trash, we started arguing about whether or not playing with garbage adds anything to the fun of the game. And now we're arguing about what we're arguing about, so yeah, I guess we're off track now.

But unless the OP posts a specific build that he wants optimized or would like fluff advice on, we've basically played out all the angles I can think of, so the threads essentially dead anyway.

EvilElitest
2007-02-22, 10:18 PM
No, what they do is train inexeprienced roleplayers to link mechanics *to* roleplaying and become nigh-unable to separate them. Inexperienced or not, "...and so my character has draconic ancestry and is a little bit dragonlike, and that's where his spellcasting comes from" isn't exactly complicated. If people start going "oh, draconic blood... I should take a draconic bloodline, then," they'll start thinking that they need to have some mechanical backup for anything in their fluff; they'll tie their roleplaying *to* the mechanics, which, in a game like D&D, is limiting.



I certainly don't see any reason to make your PC mechanically *worse* when you're not even getting Roleplaying Benefits out of it.

Dude, stop bulliying him. All he states was that he did not really care about the mechanical details of the bloodlines and bite his head off. I can understand wanting to get you opinion out, but calm down. I am all for tearing apart people with bad opinions, but only when they stick their neck out, he was just sorta commenting. Yeah you apperently have more experience than him, but that is no reason to bully him so. What did he do to deserve that sort of treatment, when he admits to being inexperienced?
Some respect please.
From,
EE

EvilElitest
2007-02-22, 10:27 PM
That may be all, but I do believe that you're of the mind that you can't roleplay well if you optimize. This is patently false.

Optimization is a mechanical aspect, while roleplay is a fluff aspect. The two are entirely divorced from each other. Hell, I could take the rogue as-is and change the fluff. Suddenly, the rogue is a freedom fighter! Or an assassin! Or even a tinkerer!

Mechanics and fluff are two different concepts that are entirely unrelated to one another. There's no reason you should make yourself mechanically worse for the sake of roleplay, since the two should be completely unrelated (and actually are, unless you make them otherwise).

It's like taking Monkey Grip, a tried-and-true mechanically poor feat, for the purpose of saying, "My character uses a gigantic weapon". Instead of taking the feat, save yourself the feat and the -2 on attack rolls, and merely describe your weapon as larger than normal. Similarly, describe your character as having golden-tinged skin and greenish eyes instead of taking a gold-dragon bloodline. Fluff-wise, it's exactly the same, but mechanically, you're better.

In essence, your mechanics should not determine your fluff, optimized or not. Similarly, your fluff should not determine your mechanics. The two are entirely unrelated, and should not be treated like they are.

No, your of the mind that you have to be good to rolplay. He likes some of the mechanics of bloodlines, if he wants to play it that way, then that is fine. If he acknowlages that, then what is the problem. Don't limit people with roleplaying unless they hurt others. The only person he can hurt is himself, and he is aware of that and does not care.
From,
EE
sorry for double posting, i quoted two different people in to different posts, my mistake. But people are being reallly rude, so i was not thinking.

Scalenex
2007-02-22, 10:48 PM
I fail to see how a discussion about the relationship between rollplaying and mechanics can count as anything but hijacking. A good deal of the posts don't even refere to bloodlines and those that do use them as support for their position, not to give feedback to the OP.

Fluff versus crunch is in many ways the center of this discussion, I don't consider this thread hijacked and I'm the sensitive one about this. Normally I don't mind taking something non-optimized in order to hew more closely to roleplaying oppurtunities as I see them, I am reluctant to do more because in this specific case, the mere class decsion of playing a Barbarian/Sorcerer is pretty limiting since I'm obligating myself to charge into battle with little or no armor and reduced hit points (the test is to see if my sorcerery buff spells make up for it not), so I don't want to limit myself further. That being said I appreciate the attempting rescue Elf Lord, even if it wasn't necessary.


It's rarely worth it to take Bloodlines, just as its rarely worth it to take races or templates with Level Adjustment. (Of course, there are a few exceptions, like Feral or Mineral Warrior, but for the most part its a very bad idea). Dipping into Fighter is a much better way to get bonus feats, and all the other benefits are pretty minor, not nearly worth the tradeoff of lost HD and class abilities.

[quote=Person_Man;2074622]

Isommenes, I don't think Bears is suggesting that everyone thinks like him or should. I think he's correctly observing that Bloodlines are a Pareto Inefficiency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_efficiency). From a pure utility maximizing point of view, you are always better off doing something else. By choosing to play a Bloodline, a PC is choosing to play a weaker version of the same class, when he can play a stronger version by just taking more levels of the same exact class. It's like choosing to play Dan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_%28Street_Fighter%29) from Street Fighter. You could play Ryu or Ken and have the same exact style of play, but better. You could just roleplay that your name is Dan.

Seeing the term Pareto Inefficiency makes me smile being an unemployed Economist. It made me feel less nerday about weighing costs and benefits. At first I thought the level cost about 80% of a class level (losing everything but casting level, 1/4 an ability point, and 1/3 of a feat) but now I learned that you lose 95% of a class level and are delayed the very bloodline power that the sacrifices are made for. I was saddened because I consider the former trade-off barely worth it now I consider it like a loan, you get the benefits up front without paying anything but pay more interest later on compared to a standard LA which you pay up front.


Wait wait wait- I just reread this stuff and found a major loophole. If your DM is foolish enough to let you make your own custom bloodline and you have no soul, you can really use this to epicly cheesy proportions.

Pick your favorite ability, and put all three bloodline points into it. Then choose 1-4 skills that you like. Finally, the real kicker- 10 special abilities. This really isn't explained very well, but apparently that qualifies for energy resistance, damage reduction, natural armor, some very nice extraordinary abilities (like Use Oversized Weapon), a few useful class features, and feats of any kind regardless of prerequisites.

My god... the power. For three levels, that's like hitting the jackpot.

This is just turning it around. Bloodlines take a monster and extrapolate bloodline powers from it. Custom designing a bloodline based on your preferences like this would require you to build the monster. I don't view this as a cheesy loophole (unless you picked really exotic feats) but even if it is, there is a way to impose karmic penalties on the would-be cheese. Force him to fight with the very creature he created, someone who is better than him at everything that makes him special.

One thing I wish this forum had more of was people talking about their own characters with bloodlines, there's got to be a few.

Ramza00
2007-02-22, 11:05 PM
Bloodlines are rarely worth it mechanically. Additionally there are other ways to get similar flavor. Thus they are not worth it.

Hellfire Warlock is a huge exception to this general rule.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-02-22, 11:18 PM
A Frankenstein complex? Like, the DM lets you play it, but your character now has fluff that includes his existence being responsible for the creation of a terrifying monster that he will have to face off against (perhaps multiple times) during a campaign?

Fluff and crunch just made a very tasty sandwich.

Hamster_Ninja
2007-02-23, 03:18 AM
Ramza, what bloodline is it that's good for Hellfire Warlocks?

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-23, 03:29 AM
Hamster: pretty much any of'em, since the bloodline levels stack with Hellfire Warlock levels for HFW abilities... so you have more effective HFW levels than you could normally have, which is great for the hellfire blast and such.

Hamster_Ninja
2007-02-23, 03:38 AM
Ah, figured it would have something to do with them increasing CL. Was looking for one that reduced con penalties.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-23, 03:45 AM
For that, you want a level of Binder to bind the vestige Naberius; your CON damage is healed at a rate of 1 point/round.

Jack Mann
2007-02-23, 03:50 AM
Dude, stop bulliying him. All he states was that he did not really care about the mechanical details of the bloodlines and bite his head off. I can understand wanting to get you opinion out, but calm down. I am all for tearing apart people with bad opinions, but only when they stick their neck out, he was just sorta commenting. Yeah you apperently have more experience than him, but that is no reason to bully him so. What did he do to deserve that sort of treatment, when he admits to being inexperienced?
Some respect please.
From,
EE

No one has bullied Isomenes. They've simply shown that he's wrong and self-contradictory. He denied it, so they pulled out further proof. Bears didn't insult him. He simply outargued him.

If it seems like bullying, it's simply that Isomenes's points are easily countered. His arguments are extremely weak, he's had difficulty countering the arguments of others, and he's contradicted himself on a fairly major point (mechanics don't matter, but mechanics do matter).

There's nothing disrespectful about telling someone that they're wrong, nor in telling them why they're wrong.

Demented
2007-02-23, 04:48 AM
A completely bonkers perspective:


Class levels of "bloodline" do not increase a character's character level the way a normal class level does, but they do provide certain benefits (see below).
[...]
If the character does not take a class level of bloodline before reaching the character level indicated on the table, he gains no further bloodline traits and must take a 20% penalty on all future XP gains.
[...]
Before he reaches 3rd character level, he must take a level of bloodline in order to continue gaining bloodline traits.
[...]
It counts as a normal class level (with no class skills) for the purpose of determining maximum skill ranks.

The SRD repeatedly refers to taking a "level" of Bloodline. And yet it seems to infer that a level of Bloodline isn't an actual level, especially in the way that it says you must take a Bloodline level before reaching a particular character level.... as if you take Bloodline levels between character levels.

So, from the comments above, one could almost make the mistake of assuming that taking a level of Bloodline is merely a formality used to spend experience and delay, but not disrupt, your future levels. Meaning you could end up being a 20 Fighter/3 Bloodline. :smallconfused:

That makes munchkin heaven, of course, since there'd be almost no reason not to have a Bloodline unless you get fed experience by the spoonful. On the other hand, it fixes everything wrong with bloodlines, and even adds some very unique bonuses: Your caster level would actually go above and beyond normal caster levels, and you could also gain skill ranks above and beyond what a normal 20 class levels would allow.

But to think that way is even more soulless than to craft a Pseudonatural Paragon Phrenic Tarrasque Bloodline.


Anyway, all that said....
A minor bloodline actually comes out about even if you're a level 20 Commoner. But at level 12, you've only gotten about half of your bloodline and you've already taken the full cost, so it's not friendly until after you've reached level 20.

As for fluff.... The idea of a commoner who has acid resistance 5 from a bloodline and Profession (oozologist) is just too much fun.

Pvednes
2007-02-23, 06:09 AM
You have to be careful, because bloodlines can easily break your game.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-23, 06:12 AM
You have to be careful, because bloodlines can easily break your game.

Ha! You made a funny!

Charity
2007-02-23, 06:28 AM
No one has bullied Isomenes. They've simply shown that he's wrong and self-contradictory. He denied it, so they pulled out further proof. Bears didn't insult him. He simply outargued him.

If it seems like bullying, it's simply that Isomenes's points are easily countered. His arguments are extremely weak, he's had difficulty countering the arguments of others, and he's contradicted himself on a fairly major point (mechanics don't matter, but mechanics do matter).

There's nothing disrespectful about telling someone that they're wrong, nor in telling them why they're wrong.

Just thought I'd poke my snout in to wholeheartedly concur with Mr Mann here.
^ heh

Aquillion
2007-02-23, 06:42 AM
They also seem to have been thrown together a little too thoughtlessly to fit the cookie-cutter form... for instance:

Doppelganger affinity +2Oh, yeah, that's going to come up a lot. Just think of all the times your party has had to bluff a doppelganger... If you'd had someone with a Doppelganger bloodline, that might have succeeded!

Tormsskull
2007-02-23, 07:04 AM
I don't know a whole lot about bloodlines (these kind anyway), but I would assume their value is all based on how the DM is using them. The whole fluff/crunch issue is kind of interesting. When I DM a player can put weird things in their background, but that doesn't make them true.

In other words, if a mechanical item (feat, class, race, skill, ability, whatever) entitles a character to some kind of fluff, then no one can assume that fluff without taking said mechanical item.

If in my campaign world I had a special school for wizards, and I had created a feat that could be taken at level 1 only called "Student of [Insert Name of Wizard School Here]", then a player would be required to take that feat if they want their character's backstory to reflect that they went through the school. They can lie and say they went to the school (which in its self might be another interesting role-play angle), or say something like they tried to go to the school but got kicked out, but their character cannot have actually gone through the school without taking the feat.

I think that's why some choices (perhaps bloodlines are one of them) may not give a character a powerful new mechanic but may give them a cool/interesting role-play device. Using the above example, in that same campaign world inns/taverns/shops may give a discount to all graduate students of the school. Or they may be able to buy their scrolls at certain stores for a reduced price.

Etc. Anyhow, the best advice would be to talk to your DM about it. If the DM looks at the mechanics of bloodlines and thinks they aren't very good maybe he will help you out by giving them at a reduced cost or increasing their effectiveness. Most DMs will gladly work with a player who is trying to make an interesting character (as long as they aren't trying to do a powergrab).

Bender
2007-02-23, 07:54 AM
Quoted for truth.

Go win D&D. You be right. I'll be happy.

I support this. I didn't know about bloodlines, I glanced at them and thought they are neat. I'm the kind of person who wouldn't mind choosing a feat or a spell or magic item by name, without reading the mechanics. I'm also the kind of person who thinks "winning" is just not an issue in D&D. I'm even playing a level 3 character when all the others are level 6, I'm completely useless in that campaign and we're all having a lot of fun. (actually, most of us are useless, and one likes to be as strong as possible and is very proud that we depend on him to beat the scary monsters)

Sure, you can pretend the fluff of having a demonic bloodline, but you can't pretend to suddenly notice you have electricity resistance, unless you actually have it.

This is not an argument against anything said in this thread. It's an argument in favour of making suboptimal character choises if you think that's fun.

Rigeld2
2007-02-23, 07:55 AM
He likes some of the mechanics of bloodlines, if he wants to play it that way, then that is fine.

Did you read the part where I said "ignore the mechanics?" Powergaming's great, but the bloodline tradeoff is only bad if you're trying to "win" D&D.
I dont think its the mechanics he likes. He likes the roleplaying flavor he gets out of it. The problem is, we here at GiantITP like to help people not suck. Taking bloodline levels is like activley making the choice to suck. I'm not even talking about above average here - class levels are always better than bloodline levels, so an average character will be better than a bloodlined one.

And anything the bloodlines give you can be roleplayed.

Dark
2007-02-23, 08:07 AM
So, from the comments above, one could almost make the mistake of assuming that taking a level of Bloodline is merely a formality used to spend experience and delay, but not disrupt, your future levels. Meaning you could end up being a 20 Fighter/3 Bloodline. :smallconfused:
That's how I read it too. In fact I don't see how you could read "Class levels of bloodline do not increase a character's character level the way a normal class level does" any other way -- a 20 Fighter/3 Bloodline is still a 20th level character. Also, all the bloodlines are statted out for 20 character levels, presumably in addition to the bloodline levels they require.

What I can't figure out is where the experience goes. Experience normally accumulates, it isn't deducted when you take a level. Instead, your target for the next level goes up because taking a level will increase your character level. So what happens when you take a level that doesn't increase your character level?

The whole thing looks badly drafted to me.

edit:

And anything the bloodlines give you can be roleplayed.
Water breathing is a little hard to roleplay if you don't actually have it :)

Seriously, that argument makes about as much sense to me as "Gnomes are a weak race; you should take dwarf instead, and just pretend to be a gnome."

Tormsskull
2007-02-23, 08:11 AM
And anything the bloodlines give you can be roleplayed.

Could you provide an example of the types of things that a character gets for choosing a bloodline (I can't follow a link to the SRD ATM)? You might be right (depending on how your DM handles fluff v crunch stuff) but I can't help but think you're wrong.

Bender mentioned electricity resistance earlier. Is that something that a bloodline gives you? If so, how would you role-play that without actually having the ability?

Rigeld2
2007-02-23, 08:29 AM
edit:

Water breathing is a little hard to roleplay if you don't actually have it :)

Seriously, that argument makes about as much sense to me as "Gnomes are a weak race; you should take dwarf instead, and just pretend to be a gnome."
For the gnome/dwarf thing, if you want the looks of a gnome, but the stats of a dwarf... whats wrong with that? Anything? At all?

And sure, I guess I went a little too far saying anything a bloodline gave you could be roleplayed, but nothing you get is really worth losing a class level.

Although, as you are discussing, its poorly worded and youre not really losing a class level, so I guess im unsure on my opinion.




Bender mentioned electricity resistance earlier. Is that something that a bloodline gives you? If so, how would you role-play that without actually having the ability?
Theres two ways to look at this.

One, you can ignore the mechanics completely, as was suggested earlier by Isomenes, and just roleplay the bloodline, roleplaying that electricity hurts you less if you want to, while still taking the full damage for it.

Two, you could work with the DM to allow Resist Energy to be Permanancied, and roleplay a ritual that brought your demonic resistances out, just happening to spend the same amount on the ritual as you would on the spell.

If you care about the mechanics, which is something that most people are saying is irrelevant. If its all about roleplay, and youre taking the bloodline for roleplay reasons, why care about the mechanics aspect? At all? I mean, I can accept you not caring about the mechanics aspect and realizing that your character will be worse off, I just want to advise against it. But if youre going to take the Bloodline for the roleplay aspect, and realize that its worse off, dont complain if I decide not to take a Bloodline and roleplay the fact that I have one.

Tormsskull
2007-02-23, 08:54 AM
But if youre going to take the Bloodline for the roleplay aspect, and realize that its worse off, dont complain if I decide not to take a Bloodline and roleplay the fact that I have one.

That of course depending on if your DM would allow you to do that. I would think in a campaign where you can choose the fluff of a skill/ability/feat/bloodline without having to take the mechanics, then the mechanics themselves would be really devalued.

Let's take an example feat:

Gold Dragon Blooded [Feat]
In years past, perhaps your great-great-great grandfather, or maybe even further generations back, your family line was mingled with that of a gold dragon. Your hair carries a tint of gold to it, your eyes as well.
Requirements: Character level 1
Benefit: +2 Charisma

When I look at that feat I read the whole thing. I don't see it as:

Feat Name [Feat]
Blah
Requirements: Character level 1
Benefit: +2 Charisma

By taking that feat I am making my character have gold dragon blood in his veins. Not everyone can have gold dragon blood in their veins because that would just be silly. So to have gold dragon blood (and the entitlement to role-play as such) comes at the cost of a Feat.

If a DM were to say a player can take the fluff of a feat without taking the actual feat its self, then it would encourage players to simply look at the requirements and benefits and see if it is an optimal choice to make. A lot of people seem to play that way now, but I prefer not to.

Noneoyabizzness
2007-02-23, 09:25 AM
from the op'ing side, it's not an optimal choice. of course if we did everything right from an OP sided arguement, we'd never play first level, not play anything except clerics, druids or punpun, only do point buys, and have few interesting and unique stories.

the real question is: are bloodlines worth it?
mechanically:better than a half(insert creature here), and in some builds obscene. blooded feats better for some sorc builds
flavorwise-unless it's your daddy, bloodlines make sense, and just give you a "grow into your heritage" feel that 2e had to it.

gotta say though, am eager to get to oversized weapon. a necromatically powered large great axe is going to be the stuff of WTF. and leading an army of living and undead. gwahahahaha

Scalenex
2007-02-23, 09:31 AM
Could you provide an example of the types of things that a character gets for choosing a bloodline (I can't follow a link to the SRD ATM)? You might be right (depending on how your DM handles fluff v crunch stuff) but I can't help but think you're wrong.

Bender mentioned electricity resistance earlier. Is that something that a bloodline gives you? If so, how would you role-play that without actually having the ability?

A minor Bloodline sacrifices a level at 12th and they get a bonus power or aptitude every 4 levels until 20th. An intermediate bloodline sacrifices a level at 6th and 12th and gets a bonus every even level. A major bloodline sacrifices a level at 3rd, 6th and 12th and gets a bonus every level. The first 5 powers of an intermediate bloodline are always the only 5 powers of the Minor Bloodline, likewise for the Major Bloodline and the first 10 with respect to the intermediate.

I tried copying and pasting SRD stuff but the formatting didn't work

Here's the generic version

1st Power +2 to specific skill
2nd power Bonus Feat (nearly always one without prereqs)
3rd power +1 to ability score (often Str)
4th Power Misc Power, usually +1 AC or 5 points of energy
resistance or a spell like ability of 3rd level or less
1/day
5th Power +2 to social skill checks with ancestral creature
6th Power Misc Power number two
7th Power +2 to another skill
8th Power Another bonus Feat
9th Power +1 to ability score
10th Power Another Misc Power
11th Power +4 affinity to social skill checks

and so forth and so on

Ramza00
2007-02-23, 09:45 AM
Another good way to use bloodlines is with warweaver. Bloodlines allow you to expand the lvl of spells you can use with your eldritch tapestry.

1 Bard 1
2 Bard 2
3 Bloodline 1
4 Bard 3
5 Bard 4
6 Bloodline 2
7 Combat Medic 1
8 Combat Medic 2
9 Combat Medic 3
10 Warweaver 1
11 Sublime Chord 1
12 Bloodline 3
13 Sublime Chord 2
14 Combat Medic 4
15 Combat Medic 5
16 Warweaver 2
17 Warweaver 3
18 Warweaver 4
19 Warweaver 5
20 X 1

Now you can use up to 8th lvl spells with your eldritch tapestry due to bloodlines. You are a great on the spot battle healer. Note Warweaver and Combat Medic are unusual prestige classes in that during every level you can change what spellcasting you support if you have multiple spellcasting, works real well with bard and sublime chord.

Will need to take the feat Aereni Focus to get Heal as a class skill, or find out another way to do that. If all else fails you can put in a lvl of cleric at the beginning but losing another spellcasting lvl will hurt a lot.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-02-23, 09:58 AM
Able Learner for human players (which is the best race anyway) nets you every single skill as an in-class skill, permanently.

Ramza00
2007-02-23, 10:11 AM
Able Learner for human players (which is the best race anyway) nets you every single skill as an in-class skill, permanently.
Wrong, it allows you to spend 1 point to get 1 rank and thus don't face the cross class skill penalty.

It doesn't increase the maximune ranks of a skill you can get. At lvl 5 a bard pays for Heal at a 1:1 ratio but he is still limited to (5+3)/2=4 max skill ranks.

Now if he takes 1 lvl of Cleric with able learner he can always buy skills at a 1:1 ratio and his skill cap is now his HD+3. (And due to how Bloodlines are not a typical LA they are counted towards his maximun HD even though he doesn't get a HD)

Dark Tira
2007-02-23, 10:11 AM
Able Learner for human players (which is the best race anyway) nets you every single skill as an in-class skill, permanently.

Not quite true. Able learner lets you spend skill points as though it was an in-class skill but the normal cross-class skill maximum is still in effect.

bah, Ramza beat me to it.

Person_Man
2007-02-23, 10:12 AM
Water breathing is a little hard to roleplay if you don't actually have it :)

Seriously, that argument makes about as much sense to me as "Gnomes are a weak race; you should take dwarf instead, and just pretend to be a gnome."

First, Water Breathing is only a 3rd level spell. In the rare cases you need it, you can just have someone cast it on you. Or invest in a Ring of Water Breathing or potions of Water Breathing. Or you can invest in 3 levels of Dragon Shamen, and get it plus your normal feats/hit points/Saves/BAB from levels plus some useful Dragon Shamen auras, while still maintaining a draconic descendant fluff. So spending 3 class levels to get it from a Bloodline seems silly.

And if you want to play a Gnome you can just use a Whisper Gnome (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20040807a&page=3). They rock, and they're Gnomes. Playing a Bloodline is very much like playing a PHB Gnome (assuming your DM allows publically available Races of Stone material in his game, not that far of a stretch, considering we're comparing it to an Unearthed Arcana variant rule). If you choose to play a PHB Gnome, you are purposefully choosing to play a weaker version of the same race.

Also, on the whole "don't pick on Isomenes" thing - no one is picking on Isomenes. We're just arguing. If we ran into each other in a bar and somehow got into a similar argument, we'd probably leave as good friends - because seriously, when do you argue about D&D in a bar? (Unless its after a gaming session, in which case you always argue over shots, were the person who can do the most shots wins the argument). You should read some of the vicious disagreements I have gotten into with other regulars on the boards. It doesn't mean we hate each other, it just means we disagree about D&D.

Fax Celestis
2007-02-23, 10:44 AM
Also, on the whole "don't pick on Isomenes" thing - no one is picking on Isomenes. We're just arguing. If we ran into each other in a bar and somehow got into a similar argument, we'd probably leave as good friends - because seriously, when do you argue about D&D in a bar? (Unless its after a gaming session, in which case you always argue over shots, were the person who can do the most shots wins the argument). You should read some of the vicious disagreements I have gotten into with other regulars on the boards. It doesn't mean we hate each other, it just means we disagree about D&D.

We're all nice people here. Nice people with strong opinions.

...shots of what, dare I ask?

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-02-23, 10:53 AM
Oh yeah, I forgot about that catch. But it does make it easier to work with.

Isomenes
2007-02-23, 01:23 PM
Also, on the whole "don't pick on Isomenes" thing - no one is picking on Isomenes. We're just arguing. If we ran into each other in a bar and somehow got into a similar argument, we'd probably leave as good friends - because seriously, when do you argue about D&D in a bar?

I'll second that. Just because I've got a bellyful of bile over being told I'm not allowed to consider something interesting doesn't mean I dislike anyone, and they're not wrong to tell me I'm wrong. It's like getting a free education in D&D, the hard way. :)

I still think bloodlines are an interesting way to develop a character, but that's because I don't feel a need to play the "better" one. Same for the Whisper Gnome example. What's wrong with the PHB gnome? It's just quirky, and I like quirky. Maybe that will change as I create more characters.

Ramza00
2007-02-23, 01:49 PM
Personally I wish they removed bloodlines, and transform them into paragon classes where you can take at certain levels, and you actually get hps, bab, and such during those levels.

Person_Man
2007-02-23, 02:28 PM
Personally I wish they removed bloodlines, and transform them into paragon classes where you can take at certain levels, and you actually get hps, bab, and such during those levels.

Yeah, I'm hoping that in 4.0 (whenever that comes out) they abolish LA races/Bloodlines, and switch from open ended casters (Wizard, Sorcerer, Cleric, Druid) to limited spell list casters (Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Warmage), and then put a permanent ban on publishing new spells for an existing class. This would balance the classes, prevent most of the problems of codex creep, and it would give them a huge opportunity to create a lot of new classes for all the different aspects of magic and various possible bloodlines out there. Considering the many schools of magic and dozens of iconic monsters out there (dragons, mind flayers, lich, etc) there are literally a hundred new books that they could write filled with new fluff and crunch, but with every class built to be balanced against the pre-existing classes.

Zincorium
2007-02-23, 05:52 PM
I'll second that. Just because I've got a bellyful of bile over being told I'm not allowed to consider something interesting

No one has told you that you're somehow 'not allowed' to do it. You can, and that's why we keep telling you it's a bad idea. If you weren't allowed, we would have no reason to say anything, right?



I still think bloodlines are an interesting way to develop a character, but that's because I don't feel a need to play the "better" one. Same for the Whisper Gnome example. What's wrong with the PHB gnome? It's just quirky, and I like quirky. Maybe that will change as I create more characters.

You like the 'quirky' aspect. But that doesn't make bloodlines a good idea in general, so we still don't precisely agree with you, while at the same time respecting your opinion. They make a character more complicated to play, since you have to remember to just 'lose' a level somewhere and keep track of all the little things the bloodline gives you, while at the same time doing little to nothing to improve them mechanically (and I don't think they're terrible, just a little worse than normal. Like playing an expert instead of a rogue).

And realize that if you say you don't like choosing the better option, we'll take you at face value and leave it at that. Most people like choosing the average option at worst, and if there's a good option for what they wanted to be doing, then it would only be fair to recommend that one to them instead.

Isomenes
2007-02-23, 06:54 PM
You like the 'quirky' aspect. But that doesn't make bloodlines a good idea in general, so we still don't precisely agree with you, while at the same time respecting your opinion. They make a character more complicated to play, since you have to remember to just 'lose' a level somewhere and keep track of all the little things the bloodline gives you, while at the same time doing little to nothing to improve them mechanically (and I don't think they're terrible, just a little worse than normal. Like playing an expert instead of a rogue).

It's more on the little side than the nothing side.


And realize that if you say you don't like choosing the better option, we'll take you at face value and leave it at that. Most people like choosing the average option at worst, and if there's a good option for what they wanted to be doing, then it would only be fair to recommend that one to them instead.

But that's just as valid a reason for taking bloodlines--class progress is not always the most important goal. I think that it's very silly to focus on why you should look at "better" mechanics when the point of the game is to explore what's out there. It's a neat idea. Why malign it just because it's less mechanically powerful?

EvilElitest
2007-02-23, 10:32 PM
No one has bullied Isomenes. They've simply shown that he's wrong and self-contradictory. He denied it, so they pulled out further proof. Bears didn't insult him. He simply outargued him.

If it seems like bullying, it's simply that Isomenes's points are easily countered. His arguments are extremely weak, he's had difficulty countering the arguments of others, and he's contradicted himself on a fairly major point (mechanics don't matter, but mechanics do matter).

There's nothing disrespectful about telling someone that they're wrong, nor in telling them why they're wrong.

Bulling is any act where a stronger person takes advantage of anoughers weakness in an insulting manner. I agree with your option about bloodlines, and i am not arguning that, but what he did was agree with your option and then say he wanted to do it anyways. If he was disagreeing with you i could understand you vindictive comments, and i would most likly have backed them up myself, but he said he wanted to go with it anyways and you beretted him in a particually harsh manner i think was underserving. It would be fine if you went
"Bloodlines as an option suck dude. They really suck and are not worth it unless your a hellfire warlock. If you want to play that way fine but don't say i did not warn you."
Makes a point and raises no harsh feelings. Maybe because i am southern and this appeal to me but i don't think you need to be more rude than nesserary. Or as the captain from Lonesome Dove would say
"I can't stand rudness in a man, i won't stand for it."
[Insert accent in above sentence]
A debeat is fine, but you pretty much one by the first page. Take some mercy i beg of you.
From,
EE

Demented
2007-02-24, 01:02 AM
It's not just the "Better" option, though since that angle is being the only one mentioned, people ARE going to argue as if it's the only complaint.


Look at it this way:
You have a pure 4th level Sorceror and a 3rd level Sorcerer with a level in Gold Dragon Bloodline.
Theoretically, they're the same, one just has a bloodline.

Yet the 4th Level Sorceror could, with justification, mock the other Sorceror for being weaker. For all that lovely gold dragon heritage, he's still only 75% as durable against a badger with rabies, has a weaker will save, and less skill points to boot. Not to mention lesser spellcasting ability, even if his save DCs are the same.

The Sorceror with the bloodline would never hear the end of it.
(See: That ear's not only stylish, it's practical!)

By all logic, having the bloodline of a powerful creature like a dragon is supposed to make you more powerful, not less.

Maybe if these were, say, Kobold bloodlines.

Zincorium
2007-02-24, 01:47 AM
Bulling is any act where a stronger person takes advantage of anoughers weakness in an insulting manner. I agree with your option about bloodlines, and i am not arguning that, but what he did was agree with your option and then say he wanted to do it anyways. If he was disagreeing with you i could understand you vindictive comments, and i would most likly have backed them up myself, but he said he wanted to go with it anyways and you beretted him in a particually harsh manner i think was underserving. It would be fine if you went
"Bloodlines as an option suck dude. They really suck and are not worth it unless your a hellfire warlock. If you want to play that way fine but don't say i did not warn you."
Makes a point and raises no harsh feelings. Maybe because i am southern and this appeal to me but i don't think you need to be more rude than nesserary. Or as the captain from Lonesome Dove would say
"I can't stand rudness in a man, i won't stand for it."
[Insert accent in above sentence]
A debeat is fine, but you pretty much one by the first page. Take some mercy i beg of you.
From,
EE

One, please use the enter key or something else to break up your block of words, it's hard for me to read and understand. Just a personal request.

Two, again, nobody is bullying him. At no point was he told that his opinion was worthless or that we didn't like him. But his argument stunk, so I and a few other people decided to say so. Just like Isomenes, were entitled to opinions on other people's opinions.

That Isomenes proceeded to make it a matter of 'winning' D&D and telling us all that we were just trying to make powerful characters without having fun struck me as both a misaimed generalization and somewhat insulting. Thus, my rebuttal.

I don't see either my debate with Isomenes as being a matter of intimidation, but then I'm not the one making the claim of bullying, now am I?

Rigeld2
2007-02-24, 11:06 AM
Bulling is any act where a stronger person takes advantage of anoughers weakness in an insulting manner. I agree with your option about bloodlines, and i am not arguning that, but what he did was agree with your option and then say he wanted to do it anyways. If he was disagreeing with you i could understand you vindictive comments, and i would most likly have backed them up myself, but he said he wanted to go with it anyways and you beretted him in a particually harsh manner i think was underserving. It would be fine if you went
"Bloodlines as an option suck dude. They really suck and are not worth it unless your a hellfire warlock. If you want to play that way fine but don't say i did not warn you."
Makes a point and raises no harsh feelings. Maybe because i am southern and this appeal to me but i don't think you need to be more rude than nesserary. Or as the captain from Lonesome Dove would say
"I can't stand rudness in a man, i won't stand for it."
[Insert accent in above sentence]
A debeat is fine, but you pretty much one by the first page. Take some mercy i beg of you.
From,
EE
And please. Spelling and grammar check. I'm guilty of mispelling words, but not "one" instead of won, "debeat" instead of debate, "underserving" instead of undeserving, etc.

And the rest of your posts are similar. Firefox 2.0 has a built in spell check, just FYI.

MeklorIlavator
2007-02-24, 11:34 AM
A debeat is fine, but you pretty much one by the first page. Take some mercy i beg of you.
From,
EE

You may think that people won the debate, but the other side of the debate did not accept that and continued to present arguments, therefore the debate was not over and had not been won. If a side in a debate wants to stop the debate, they should stop presenting arguments.

Also, your hyperbole and reckless use of the term"bullying" actually committed be more bullying than Bears with Lasers committed. You were in effect making an ad hominen attack and doing it in a way that could cause severe repercussions if it were true. I believe that bullying could get one banned on this forum, and your attack really makes any argument where one person says that the other is incorrect an automatic case of bulling(which clearly isn't the case).

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-02-24, 11:58 AM
This can only be settled in a duel of honor, in a fight to death on the high steppes of the bloody plains, stripped to the waste in the frigid snow and ice and wielding a blunted and rusty shortsword! You do not wish to be dishonored, do you?

Dark Tira
2007-02-24, 12:05 PM
I'm going to reverse my previous opinion and say with the right prestige classes bloodlines are mechanically worth it. Ramza's warweaver example was spot-on but somewhat obscure and convoluted. A simpler build to show usefulness would be:
1 Rogue
2 Bloodline 1
3 Bloodline 2
4 Bloodline 3
5 Rogue
followed by 10 levels of Chameleon.

This gives 26 caster levels at level 15 at the cost of 3 levels of class features. In general I wouldn't say it is worth it, but I'm sure certain min/max builds can abuse it.

NullAshton
2007-02-24, 12:06 PM
It's not just the "Better" option, though since that angle is being the only one mentioned, people ARE going to argue as if it's the only complaint.


Look at it this way:
You have a pure 4th level Sorceror and a 3rd level Sorcerer with a level in Gold Dragon Bloodline.
Theoretically, they're the same, one just has a bloodline.

Yet the 4th Level Sorceror could, with justification, mock the other Sorceror for being weaker. For all that lovely gold dragon heritage, he's still only 75% as durable against a badger with rabies, has a weaker will save, and less skill points to boot. Not to mention lesser spellcasting ability, even if his save DCs are the same.

The Sorceror with the bloodline would never hear the end of it.
(See: That ear's not only stylish, it's practical!)

By all logic, having the bloodline of a powerful creature like a dragon is supposed to make you more powerful, not less.

Maybe if these were, say, Kobold bloodlines.

While the sorcerer with the bloodline is more alert, better at sense motive, slightly stronger, and has resistance to fire to boot. Tons of small bonuses that can be convienent.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-02-24, 12:33 PM
Okay, I built my own custom bloodline using their rules. I think I'd play this one-

Deity Bloodline- One of this character's ancestors was actually a god of some sort. The blood has become too thin to grant the character a divine rank, but it's still potent enough for a major bloodline.
1 Intimidate +2
2 Use Oversized Weapon
3 Strength +1
4 Powerful Build
5 Deity Affinity +2
6 Extra Domain
7 Spot +2
8 Power Attack
9 Strength +1
10 Improved Natural Armor
11 Deity Affinity +4
12 Divine Vengeance
13 Listen +2
14 Divine Might
15 Strength +1
16 Knock Down
17 Deity Affinity +6
18 Resistance to Electricity 5
19 Search +2
20 Resistance to Cold 5

Rigeld2
2007-02-24, 04:14 PM
I'm going to reverse my previous opinion and say with the right prestige classes bloodlines are mechanically worth it. Ramza's warweaver example was spot-on but somewhat obscure and convoluted. A simpler build to show usefulness would be:
1 Rogue
2 Bloodline 1
3 Bloodline 2
4 Bloodline 3
5 Rogue
followed by 10 levels of Chameleon.

This gives 26 caster levels at level 15 at the cost of 3 levels of class features. In general I wouldn't say it is worth it, but I'm sure certain min/max builds can abuse it.
You dont get to pick where you take the bloodline levels. For a major bloodline, they happen at 3rd, 6th, and 12th. And I think your caster level would be 23 at level 17, since Chameleon says that your caster level is twice your class level, and bloodlines add to caster level. So, you could do Rogue2/Bloodline1/Rogue2/Chameleon1/Bloodline1/Chameleon5/Bloodline1/Chameleon4.

Dark Tira
2007-02-24, 04:23 PM
You dont get to pick where you take the bloodline levels. For a major bloodline, they happen at 3rd, 6th, and 12th. And I think your caster level would be 23 at level 17, since Chameleon says that your caster level is twice your class level, and bloodlines add to caster level. So, you could do Rogue2/Bloodline1/Rogue2/Chameleon1/Bloodline1/Chameleon5/Bloodline1/Chameleon4.

Not quite true. You can grab the bloodline levels anytime before the required level or even after the level with an experience penalty. from the SRD:

Before a character with a bloodline reaches the indicated character level, he must take one class level of "bloodline."

and throwing in the example from the SRD for good measure:

if he reaches 3rd character level and has no bloodline levels, he does not gain the bloodline trait due him at 3rd character level (Strength +1) and must take a 20% reduction on all future XP gains. If he later meets the minimum required bloodline levels, he gains his 3rd-level trait at that time (as well as any other traits he may have failed to receive for not taking his bloodline level right away), and the XP reduction no longer applies to future gains.

The caster level thing is more open to interpretation. The SRD says:

Include the character's bloodline level when calculating any character ability based on his class levels (such as caster level for spellcasting characters, or save DCs for characters with special abilities whose DCs are based on class level).
Which I take as bloodline levels being added to chameleon levels for the purpose of calculating caster level and not the bloodline adds caster levels to chameleon caster levels.

For Reference:
Info on the Chameleon is here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/iw/20041210b)
Info on Bloodlines is here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/bloodlines.htm#bloodlineLevels)

EvilElitest
2007-02-24, 10:34 PM
You may think that people won the debate, but the other side of the debate did not accept that and continued to present arguments, therefore the debate was not over and had not been won. If a side in a debate wants to stop the debate, they should stop presenting arguments.

Also, your hyperbole and reckless use of the term"bullying" actually committed be more bullying than Bears with Lasers committed. You were in effect making an ad hominen attack and doing it in a way that could cause severe repercussions if it were true. I believe that bullying could get one banned on this forum, and your attack really makes any argument where one person says that the other is incorrect an automatic case of bulling(which clearly isn't the case).

what to do you mean the other side, next to no one says that bloodlines are worth it except for hellfire warlocks. The only argument at the point where i complained was that one person wanted to play one anyways and was being treated in a rather nasty way because of it.
As for creating more bullying, i don't think so. We have reached the area of an argument, where both sides disagree. And so we debate both sides and one person wins. However all of the anger is aimed at me in an argumentative manner, therefor is not bullying. I just don't see what annoyed bear so much that he had to use such an vindictive argument when the posts in question were hardly offensive in any manner i could see.
Isomenes stated he wanted to play that way disregarding the flaws and i think that is an acceptable option.
As for instigating bullying on this thread, i don't have any reason to do so. If i did, i would simple troll. If i thought it was really bad i would have reported it, but as it was i simply asked you to stop.
From,
EE

MeklorIlavator
2007-02-24, 10:44 PM
what to do you mean the other side, next to no one says that bloodlines are worth it except for hellfire warlocks. The only argument at the point where i complained was that one person wanted to play one anyways and was being treated in a rather nasty way because of it.
As for creating more bullying, i don't think so. We have reached the area of an argument, where both sides disagree. And so we debate both sides and one person wins. However all of the anger is aimed at me in an argumentative manner, therefor is not bullying. I just don't see what annoyed bear so much that he had to use such an vindictive argument when the posts in question were hardly offensive in any manner i could see.
Isomenes stated he wanted to play that way disregarding the flaws

Well the debate was if bloodlines were worth it, and one person still said they were, so the there is the other side. Also, what vindicative arguments? There was nothing like some of the last pages of the "Tanking" thread (look at what Krellen posted on the last page)

EvilElitest
2007-02-24, 11:33 PM
Well the debate was if bloodlines were worth it, and one person still said they were, so the there is the other side. Also, what vindicative arguments? There was nothing like some of the last pages of the "Tanking" thread (look at what Krellen posted on the last page)

Concerning Tank thread
Wow, that was vindictive. And unbeliveably funny. Looks like Bear's ego was hurt, though i will say that Krellen unspeakably rude in that post. Still funny though.

The difference is of course that their opitions are quite different and they have already made that clear. And are arguing because of it. However Isomenes had admitted his idea was not smart and decided to do it anyways and was berieted quite badly for it.
And argument is fine, but only when both parties are not admitting they are wrong. Their i am fine with people being mean. When one party acts much better than the other dispite because of they are not acting smart, i am fine to. But when the second party admits it and is treated rudly anyways, then is am a tad bit concerned.
As for comperasion, I had not read the tanking thread up until this point and that makes that point not relevent.
from,
EE

MeklorIlavator
2007-02-24, 11:40 PM
Where did he admit he was wrong?

EvilElitest
2007-02-25, 12:10 AM
Where did he admit he was wrong?

right here.

"you've made your case. Mechanically, bloodlines are worthless.

I still maintain that, for an inexperienced roleplayer (myself being one of them), it provides a useful guide to how a character with a bloodline might progress. Sure, it provides no grand mechanical benefit. But I think our difference is one of first principles--the notion of whether a mechanically better PC is necessarily the goal. I don't have any particular attachment to it; you seem to."

admits that they are mechanically worthless.
from,
EE

Demented
2007-02-25, 12:35 AM
While the sorcerer with the bloodline is more alert, better at sense motive, slightly stronger, and has resistance to fire to boot. Tons of small bonuses that can be convienent.

Quite right. The fire resistance in particular is very handy. Though the bonus to sense motive could easily be outdone by the normal skillpoints that the other sorcerer earned, unless they're both in an arms race to maximize sense motive, and even then, the sorcerer will have to wait until his 5th level to actually pull ahead. Likewise with strength, the sorcerer will have to wait until his 5th level before that extra strength is useful, since his 4th level ability point was delayed.

(His 20th level ability point is also completely gone, but it's made up for by two more ability points by then, and it probably wasn't going to be all that useful anyway. It's a very slightly bigger problem with a minor bloodline.)

Yahzi
2007-02-25, 01:22 AM
I still think bloodlines are an interesting way to develop a character,
Sounds to me like bloodlines are something the DM should impose on a character.

"No, you don't get a 12th level, because your ancient heritage is of the Ice Dragon Templars."

Role-play that, sucka!

:D

MeklorIlavator
2007-02-25, 01:30 AM
right here.

"you've made your case. Mechanically, bloodlines are worthless.

I still maintain that, for an inexperienced roleplayer (myself being one of them), it provides a useful guide to how a character with a bloodline might progress. Sure, it provides no grand mechanical benefit. But I think our difference is one of first principles--the notion of whether a mechanically better PC is necessarily the goal. I don't have any particular attachment to it; you seem to."

admits that they are mechanically worthless.
from,
EE

Then the debate changed to "do they help with roleplaying". Yes, they still talked about mechanics, because that was in addition to their arguments that this added no benefit to roleplaying.

EvilElitest
2007-02-25, 03:14 PM
Then the debate changed to "do they help with roleplaying". Yes, they still talked about mechanics, because that was in addition to their arguments that this added no benefit to roleplaying.

Yeah, and Bears kept the subject on mechanics, even though he had already won that argument. He basicly won and keep going at it. The argument then became
"I want to play this way even if it is mechanically unwise"
"No being mechanically unwise is a reason not to play and you should not do so. Becuase i know the mechanics better, i know that you should not do that"

That is using a stronger knowlage of the rules to assert what can and can not be played
from,
EE

Zincorium
2007-02-25, 07:31 PM
Yeah, and Bears kept the subject on mechanics, even though he had already won that argument. He basicly won and keep going at it. The argument then became
"I want to play this way even if it is mechanically unwise"
"No being mechanically unwise is a reason not to play and you should not do so. Becuase i know the mechanics better, i know that you should not do that"

That is using a stronger knowlage of the rules to assert what can and can not be played
from,
EE

Using stronger knowledge of the rules to assert what is and is not a good idea isn't bullying, it's the entire point of most debates in this subforum. A weaker knowledge of the rules doesn't mean you get a free pass, it means you need to do research and then make assertions, not make assertions and then tell people they're arguing with you wrong.

What people were hammering at him for was that if the mechanics are bad, then unless there is some other useful balancing aspect, such as only being able to roleplay a character by using it, or a unique ability that is impossible to get otherwise, then it is simply a bad choice. If you make bad choices without good reasons, and then brag that your position is unassailable because 'it isn't about winning', then people are going to strike back.

EvilElitest
2007-02-25, 10:07 PM
Using stronger knowledge of the rules to assert what is and is not a good idea isn't bullying, it's the entire point of most debates in this subforum. A weaker knowledge of the rules doesn't mean you get a free pass, it means you need to do research and then make assertions, not make assertions and then tell people they're arguing with you wrong.

What people were hammering at him for was that if the mechanics are bad, then unless there is some other useful balancing aspect, such as only being able to roleplay a character by using it, or a unique ability that is impossible to get otherwise, then it is simply a bad choice. If you make bad choices without good reasons, and then brag that your position is unassailable because 'it isn't about winning', then people are going to strike back.

That makes perfect sense. I will still disagree with Bear's apoach, as i think that he should have been a little more kind. I am not protesting Bears arguing about bloodlines usefulness, i am aruging how people handled the situation. I think they should have been more kind about saying what a bad choice it was. But he acknowlaged that the choice is bad and i don't see how it is ok to hammering somebody for a flaw they are willingly embracing. He did not make a bad choice without a good reason, he did it because he wanted to try it out. That is, I think, a perfectly acceptable way to roleplay.
from,
EE