Characters you can't stat in 3.5

[Arbane]

3.5 is a very flexible system. It allows players to pick choices in order to build characters that adequately reflect through game mechanics almost any imaginable concept.

I regard this as a load of hooey, and want to prove it by making a thread of characters that _can't_ be done in D&D without either being epic-level monstrosities, massive houseruling, or having lots of extras irrelevant to the character. Original character ideas, or fictional ones welcome, as are attempts to make the characters in 3.5.

Off the top of my head:

Edward Elric, from Fullmetal Alchemist. A kid with a mechanical arm and leg, who can transmute matter by touch.

The Architectomancer: A magician whose magic all involves buildings. They can conjure houses from nowhere, make doors or windows appear or disappear, cause hallways to become impossibly long, and otherwise create or mess with buildings and their internal structures, but don't have any other magic powers.

Any random Slayer, from Exalted: Granted powers by a mad Primordial, they have a wide range of abilities: scaring people into abject submission, shocking displays of brutal violence, the ability to shrug off any attack as long as they're inside a city at the time, being able to cause radiation poisoning to anyone who doesn't grovel before them, and being good enough at dancing to influence people's emotions.
(Exalted characters are kind of cheating for this, I know. Nobilis characters are just as bad.)

Rincewind: He's a "Wizzard" (according to his hat) who's accidentally memorized ONE spell: Unfortunately, it's one of the ones used to create the universe, and nobody's sure what will happen if he ever casts it. (Something bad, undoubtably.) His only other talents are languages and running away from things.

The Wicked Witch of the West. Is there a water-soluble hag in D&D?

The World's Luckiest Man. (Self-explanatory, I hope.)

The Super-Adaptoid: Marvel Comics villain who can imitate the powers of anyone it fights.

Any character (& their Stand) from Jojo's Bizarre Adventure.

[Ratatoskir]

Rincewind is a wizard with 9 int. If I remember The Colour of Magic well enough, he didn't so much memorize the spell as the spell hid in his mind.

World's Luckiest Man sounds easily represented by a bunch of luck feats, plus fortunes friend.

[ComaVision]

Edward Elric, from Fullmetal Alchemist. A kid with a mechanical arm and leg, who can transmute matter by touch.

Warforged grafts and transmutation spells.

[jiriku]

I am puzzled as to why you'd have such contempt for the statement. D&D is the iconic fantasy roleplaying precisely because it is a great vehicle for creating fantasy characters, and 3.5 is hands-down the most flexible edition of the game when it comes to character creation. Further, we're talking about the kind of game in which you can easily stat up the x-men, even though the system wasn't intended as a comic book superhero game.

Besides which, you're going about it quite backwards. Seppo said the game allows you to create almost any imaginable concept. Soliciting a community to invent original characters that can't be modeled in D&D will simply demonstrate that he was right -- the game allows you to create almost any concept, but not quite all.

Also, all of your examples are buildable.

[Silva Stormrage]

Edward clearly has polymorph any object at will.

Grafts can easily cover his mechanical limbs so we need a way of getting polymorph any object at will or close enough to at will.

Is there way of getting Polymorph Any Object as a lower spell level? We could get it as a StP erudite and refluff bestow power + recharging PP's as Ed simply "resting" and have him only manifest polymorph any object. Take Slayer for his good attacks and maybe take some powers that duplicate some of the abilities he gets such as Scar's destruction touch.

Its possible just needs a bit of refluffing

[DevilsAttorney]

I think the flaw of your logic is the fact that the rules described in the books are guidelines. You frown upon house ruling for the creation of said characters, but the truth of the matter is house rules are PART of the game (even if you do not have to use any). So fair enough, they cannot be statted out by purely using the rules available in the books, but house ruling allows you to create pretty much what you want, and use the rules already in place to use your creations.

I think what's missing is the original D&D catch phrase "Products of your imagination".

[Seppo87]

I feel that I need to clarify what I said, because it is being misinterpreted.
As long as you possess all the abilities of the character you chose, you can just ignore the ones in excess.

As a matter of fact, the system IS allowing you to translate in game mechanics the intended concept.
Does you character do X? Yes.
Does the system also give you Y and Z?
You're not forced to use Y and Z.

By a logical standpoint, my statement is entirely true.

Anyway, in the next days I'll try to crunch some of this stuff trying to keep extraneous elements down to a reasonable amount, just for fun. I used to do this in the past as a hobby, I'm pretty confident I can get reasonably close.


Silva is already doing a good job with Ed Elric in my opinion.
It just needs some fine-tunement with powers and feats selection, maybe characterial traits, then it's perfect.

[Zanos]

Rincewind is a wizard with 9 int. If I remember The Colour of Magic well enough, he didn't so much memorize the spell as the spell hid in his mind.

World's Luckiest Man sounds easily represented by a bunch of luck feats, plus fortunes friend.
You don't have to have wizard written on your character sheet to be called a wizard.

[Weirdbob95]

I'm an adamant believer that you actually can stat up almost any character in D&D. I don't know any of the characters you mentioned, so I'm just going by your descriptions here.

Edward Elric:
Young-aged human sorceror. Focus on transmutation and conjuration, learn only spells that mess with objects. Get several construct grafts.

Architectomancer:
Wizard/Shadowcraft Mage. Use your partially-real silent images to create walls in front of your enemies and otherwise shape the terrain. If needed, take the Spell Thematics feat and choose the theme of buildings.

Slayer:
Cleric/Bard multiclass. Persist Delay Death to become invulnerable, and use several bard spells to buff intimidate through the roof. Persisting Cleric buffs gives you melee power, various spells can be similar to radiation poisoning, and bard lets you dance at people.

Rincewind:
I'm not sure how this would be done in D&D. Pun-pun has the required power, but then again he's Pun-pun. The Locate City Bomb could be that powerful spell, but it doesn't fit with creating the universe. From a design standpoint, the creators of D&D tried very hard to not give this kind of power to players.

The Wicked Witch of the West:
Be a necropolitan Witch. As an undead, you're damaged by Holy Water (close enough).

The World's Luckiest Man:
There are a ton of abilities that let you reroll saves or skill checks, like the Luck Domain. Take them all.

The Super-Adaptoid:
A 19th level factotum can duplicate any 3 class abilities he wants to. Alternatively, Pun-pun can grant himself any ability in the game, but he *arguably* has to see that ability first.

[Palanan]

Without getting into the broader argument, I'd just say that Elsa is a little difficult to present as a coherent 3.5 character. She casts Fimbulwinter without even meaning to, but where did she get 120,000 XP when she's spent most of her life reading in her bedroom?

[Ratatoskir]

You don't have to have wizard written on your character sheet to be called a wizard.
I agree, in fact I have an alchemist that is adamant about being a wizard. But Rincewind has no remarkable abilities that need class levels, and has been trained to be a wizard. Might as well give him the class.

[Rakaydos]

Any caster with a non-vancian magic system. How many times did Luke skywalker have to memorize Mage's Hand to get his lightsaber unstuck from the ice? How long does it take an asari commando to run out of "psi points?"

[Seppo87]

Any caster with a non-vancian magic system. How many times did Luke skywalker have to memorize Mage's Hand to get his lightsaber unstuck from the ice?
Can't it be spontaneous or psionic?

[Snowbluff]

Any caster with a non-vancian magic system. How many times did Luke skywalker have to memorize Mage's Hand to get his lightsaber unstuck from the ice? How long does it take an asari commando to run out of "psi points?"

Or have it as an SLA, like a ghost or githyanki.

[Arbane]

Can't it be spontaneous or psionic?

You can still run out of power points...

[ryu]

You can still run out of power points...

No they can't. Not if they know what they're doing anyway.

[Snowbluff]

You can still run out of power points...

Can Luke levitate his saber non stop? Hell, he struggled just pulling it out of the snow. Who is to if he can't get exhausted using the force?

[Seppo87]

You can still run out of power points...
Aren't your standards too strict?
Maybe at low levels Luke has yet to learn how to properly use Force whenever he needs it.
At mid and high levels, however, it's hardly a problem, even without infinite PPs shenanigans.

[Oko and Qailee]

Edward Elric, from Fullmetal Alchemist. A kid with a mechanical arm and leg, who can transmute matter by touch.


Spell to power Erudite. WIth Earth Power and a Torc of preservation. YOu have infinite "alchemy" per day, like Ed. Just choose stone shaping/metal shaping/ and fabricate as spells you use.

"But his arm and leg"

Mighty Arm and Legs from Faiths of Eberron are literally flavor wise the same thing as Auto mail.

I've already done this build.

[Silva Stormrage]

You can still run out of power points...

How do the various star wars RPG do it? Do their force users have unlimited force powers?* Can they just lift up a ship 24/7 without exhaustion. As I said with my suggestion for Edward just refluff the variant power point recharge methods as "meditation" or what not and that works.

*Honest question, I have never played.

[Snowbluff]

Wicked Witch of the West is a Dry Lich, who take damage from water. A hammy one could die if they stood in a bucket's worth of water.

This is already sounding like moving goalposts, though.

[Oko and Qailee]

Without getting into the broader argument, I'd just say that Elsa is a little difficult to present as a coherent 3.5 character. She casts Fimbulwinter without even meaning to, but where did she get 120,000 XP when she's spent most of her life reading in her bedroom?

I mean, you can just do SorcererX/FrostMageY. In Frostburn spells there are tons of spells that match what else does. It's just the high level that's off putting... but Elsa IS powerful.

[Knaight]

Edward Elric:
Young-aged human sorceror. Focus on transmutation and conjuration, learn only spells that mess with objects. Get several construct grafts.


Spell to power Erudite. WIth Earth Power and a Torc of preservation. YOu have infinite "alchemy" per day, like Ed. Just choose stone shaping/metal shaping/ and fabricate as spells you use.

The first of these misses the infinite alchemy, the second one involves heavy magic item dependance. Neither of them models the numerous other skills Ed possesses (combat skills, a thorough knowledge of early-modern sciences, vehicular familiarities, etc.). The latter involves a fair amount of digging.

D&D 3.5 has a very broad breadth of things that it can model, but there are several systems every bit as broad, and in a lot of them it's a lot easier modeling things.

[Snowbluff]

See? A moving goalpost outside the scope of thread.

[Nilehus]

Biggest example I could think of would be Superman, simply because he can do nearly anything. Green Lantern would be an interesting one, though... Some form of Psion would be my guess. Definitely seems doable, though.

Elsa though? She seems like a textbook Sorcerer focused on cryomancy.

[sorryjzargo]

How do the various star wars RPG do it? Do their force users have unlimited force powers?* Can they just lift up a ship 24/7 without exhaustion.

At least in Star Wars Saga, they had a limited number of Force Powers per encounter that could be recharged between encounters by a minute-long rest. Star Wars 3.5 had a trade-health-for-Force system. No idea about EotE.

[Snowbluff]

Superman is DC's Pun Pun. :smalltongue:

[Seppo87]

Biggest example I could think of would be Superman, simply because he can do nearly anything.
Asking for a non-epic superman is an unfair request and hardly an indicator of a supposed lack in D&D flexibility

The same goes for people expecting infinite uses of everything.
Just because D&D puts a limit on daily uses it does not mean it's not doing a good job at translating fluff into crunch.
On the other hand, the infinite PP trick is a bug, not a quality.
I think people are missing the bigger picture here.

[Pyromancer999]

I mean, you can just do SorcererX/FrostMageY. In Frostburn spells there are tons of spells that match what else does. It's just the high level that's off putting... but Elsa IS powerful.

Actually, I stat up Elsa as Favored Soul 5/Sorcerer 1/ Rimefire Witch 10/ Frost Mage 4.

Why? Because of a theory one of my friends has, where the icy mountain nearby plus reverence of the royal family, has granted the royal family powers over cold, as dictated by the spirit of the mountain, thrusting the power upon the one meant to rule. This spirit is a refluffed Rimefire Eidolon. Use all 10 levels of Rimefire Witch to capitalize on that bond, give icy blasts, and to also affect the physical change that Elsa has(White Hair and skin). Also use Frost Mage to make all casting cold, and actually have immunity to cold damage. Use all spellcasting advancement to advance Favored Soul. Take Endurance at some point("The cold never bothered me anyway") and the Snowcasting line for upping spellcasting ability in cold.

Also spend skill points on maxing out things like Concentration(she has to keep control of her powers) and Knowledge(Architecture and Engineering) (for stuff like being able to build a solid castle with layout), invest a couple skill points in Intimidate(scares people away, although not necessarily the best at it), few to no ranks in other Charisma-based skills(she is awkward despite some natural charisma she has), and there you have Elsa.

[maximus25]

Any character (& their Stand) from Jojo's Bizarre Adventure.


You could easily make Part 1 Jonathan.

Jonathan is a Paladin with Improved Unarmed Strike, and eventually he gets the Sword of Pluck and Luck, a +1 Holy Long sword. Smite Evil is Hamon (hurts vampires and other undead nastys) and the code of conduct is his gentlemanly actions.


I suppose if you were willing to go Pathfinder you could do Jotaro as a Synthesist Summoner whose Eidolon is fluffed to be Star Platinum. The only problem is the Time Stop ability and his multi-punches. Might be able to get away with some Monk levels for Flurry of Blows, but that's iffy.

[(Un)Inspired]

Biggest example I could think of would be Superman, simply because he can do nearly anything. Green Lantern would be an interesting one, though... Some form of Psion would be my guess. Definitely seems doable, though.

Elsa though? She seems like a textbook Sorcerer focused on cryomancy.

Nah Elsa's a druid with all the righteous druid snow and ice spells. Fimbulwinter, snow shape, call avalache, flashfrost, you get the picture. That horrid little snowman she creates is her animal companion and she has aberration wildshape and turns into a sultry elan when she runs away from home and changes clothes.

[Nilehus]

So Superman is just a munchkin with an extremely lenient DM. :smalltongue: Sounds about right.

There aren't exact builds that can exactly replicate what every single fictional character can do, but there are a lot of builds to get a good approximation. Ed Elric can't be started to 3.5 perfectly, but there have been a number of builds that would get a good feel for him.


Asking for a non-epic superman is an unfair request and hardly an indicator of a supposed lack in D&D flexibility

The same goes for people expecting infinite uses of everything.
Just because D&D puts a limit on daily uses it does not mean it's not doing a good job at translating fluff into crunch.
On the other hand, the infinite PP trick is a bug, not a quality.
I think people are missing the bigger picture here.

I never said that Superman being unstattable was a failure of 3.5. Some characters are just too ludicrously powerful for ANY system to properly portray. Silver Age Superman used entire suns as dumbbells, there is no way to make that mesh with, say, Batman in the same system. At least not without STR scores in the thousands.

[Knaight]

See? A moving goalpost outside the scope of thread.

Read the thread this spun off of. The original context has to do with the superiority of 3.5 as concerns new players, and that was explicitly listed. The actual practicality is relevant.

Moreover, my point stands regarding both of those builds failing.

[Seppo87]

I suppose if you were willing to go Pathfinder you could do Jotaro as a Synthesist Summoner whose Eidolon is fluffed to be Star Platinum. The only problem is the Time Stop ability and his multi-punches. Might be able to get away with some Monk levels for Flurry of Blows, but that's iffy.Could Star Platinum be a cohort, maybe? They wear a ring of friend shield. Star Platinum could be some kind of ghost. Unbodied? Is there anything better around?
Time stop could be obtained in numerous ways, but a time stop a la Dio Brando can also be replicated via extra actions (factotum? heroic surge?) and short teleportations (swordsage?).
Compared to actual Time Stop, it allows the user to attack.

Ora Ora is just a Full Attack enhanced by extra attacks.


Ed Elric can't be started to 3.5 perfectly, but there have been a number of builds that would get a good feel for him. this has been my point the entire time

[Snowbluff]

Read the thread this spun off of. The original context has to do with the superiority of 3.5 as concerns new players, and that was explicitly listed. The actual practicality is relevant.

Moreover, my point stands regarding both of those builds failing.

It's common knowledge that you can refresh your power points really easily. Use one of those tricks, no items required. Done and done.

This system isn't for new players. It's what, a decade old now? This thread asks if we can stat these, and we did. Too bad they considered balance (you're pretty much telling them to replicate high level abilities at will) and decided not to bring out the trick that would chase your goalpost.

[Story]

I'm not sure how this would be done in D&D.

Rincewind is easy. The memorized spell thing is just fluff since it never actually comes into play. Rincewind shouldn't have any levels in Wizard.

Rincewind's notable abilities are A) High Speak Language, B) Fast movement, and C) being really lucky (in fact, he is the personal champion of the personification of Luck, though he doesn't know this)

The first two are trivial to get, while the third has several methods, though I'm not sure which one fits best.

[Arbane]

Superman is DC's Pun Pun. :smalltongue:

No, DC's Pun-Pun would be someone like The Spectre, at least when he's being written at the high end of his power. (He can do anything... except kill off the Joker.)


D&D 3.5 has a very broad breadth of things that it can model, but there are several systems every bit as broad, and in a lot of them it's a lot easier modeling things.

Yeah, that's pretty much my complaint. If you want to model oddball characters, give me a system like GURPS, FATE, or Mutants and Masterminds any day.

There's even some relatively straightforward ideas that are hard to do in D&D without gimping them or jumping through hoops - a dwarf wizard who wars armor was an idea I had a while back, discarded because spell failure/using all still spells/burning ALL THE FEATS to wear armor all seemed like bad choices. :-P


I suppose if you were willing to go Pathfinder you could do Jotaro as a Synthesist Summoner whose Eidolon is fluffed to be Star Platinum. The only problem is the Time Stop ability and his multi-punches. Might be able to get away with some Monk levels for Flurry of Blows, but that's iffy.

Some of the Stands are really weird - like the guy whose Stand turns anyone it touches into children.


Rincewind's notable abilities are A) High Speak Language, B) Fast movement, and C) being really lucky (in fact, he is the personal champion of the personification of Luck, though he doesn't know this)

The first two are trivial to get, while the third has several methods, though I'm not sure which one fits best.

Thing is, Rincewind's luck only works to keep him alive. At everything else, he's a disaster-magnet.

Getting back to Frozen, didn't Elsa also have the power to unfreeze the people she's entombed in ice? (Resurrection, only to people she's killed?)

[Snowbluff]

There's even some relatively straightforward ideas that are hard to do in D&D without gimping them or jumping through hoops - a dwarf wizard who wars armor was an idea I had a while back, discarded because spell failure/using all still spells/burning ALL THE FEATS to wear armor all seemed like bad choices. :-P


If I tell you that this is called a Runesmith, would you reconsider your thoughts on the matter?

This is the third time I've done this today. "Hey bro, make me Guts." Done.
"Hey bro, can he have a crossbow arm." Mighty Arms and Armbow. "Thanks bro."
I'm on a roll.

[maximus25]

Some of the Stands are really weird - like the guy whose Stand turns anyone it touches into children.

That's just a Bestow curse that also gives you temporary negative levels. Probably.

Where it gets really weird is something like King crimson or Tusk or Ballbreaker.

Don't even get me started on Gold Experience Requiem or Made in Heaven.

[Hazrond]

Without getting into the broader argument, I'd just say that Elsa is a little difficult to present as a coherent 3.5 character. She casts Fimbulwinter without even meaning to, but where did she get 120,000 XP when she's spent most of her life reading in her bedroom?

Doesnt need to be Fimbulwinter, i remember reading other spells in Frostburn that had a similar affect (alongside fimbulwinter)

[Rakaydos]

At least in Star Wars Saga, they had a limited number of Force Powers per encounter that could be recharged between encounters by a minute-long rest. Star Wars 3.5 had a trade-health-for-Force system. No idea about EotE.

The FF Starwars system (EoE, AoR, and soon F&D) has force users know powers, and they can spend actions attempting to use them. They have to roll enough successes in a special dice pool that (so far) is fairly difficult to advance- You can use "destiny points" to affect pivotal rolls, but anything you can reliably do with just your dice, you can do all day long. (but is hard enough to get that the non force users are equally badass by that point)

[Arbane]

If I tell you that this is called a Runesmith, would you reconsider your thoughts on the matter?

(Googles it)

Oh, nifty. I'd never heard of that one. (The fact I've never heard of it, on a board devoted to minmaxing, makes me suspect it's got some awful drawback.)

I still stand by my general misstatement: there are some character concepts in D&D that are DOIN IT WRONG, and if you try them the game will punish you, especially if you're playing with the kind of powergamers on this board :smallamused: . Something as trivial as 'fighter who uses a longsword and no shield', for example.

[Snowbluff]

You can hold a longsword in 2 hands with the double PA bonus.

If you're willing to cheese it enough, anything is possible. Most of the stuff I do around here is actually overkill, and that's when I am toning it down.

As for Runesmith, you might lose a CL for heavy armor. However, it's a good option for a gish build. I usually just cast Luminous Armor instead, or have a decent dex with a chain shirt modded down to 0% ASF.

[Zanos]

(Googles it)

Oh, nifty. I'd never heard of that one. (The fact I've never heard of it, on a board devoted to minmaxing, makes me suspect it's got some awful drawback.)

I still stand by my general misstatement: there are some character concepts in D&D that are DOIN IT WRONG, and if you try them the game will punish you, especially if you're playing with the kind of powergamers on this board :smallamused: . Something as trivial as 'fighter who uses a longsword and no shield', for example.
Well, there are definitely concepts that don't hold up as well as "mighty wizard" or "really strong greatsword guy", but I think you can make the majority of concepts serviceable, if not necessarily good.

[Seppo87]

Something as trivial as 'fighter who uses a longsword and no shield', for example.You can use a Rapier. Swashbuckler3/Fighter2/Warblade1/Duelist7/warblade7.
Maximize Dexterity, with INT as your second stat.
Take Deadly Defense and Power Attack.
Take Robilar's Gambit, also get Improved and Greater Combat Reflexes from Dragon Magazine.

And at any point of your career you could suddenly decide to use a Sunblade instead of a Rapier and it would have the same effect.

You AC is skyhigh (easily 60+) and whenever they attack you, wether they hit or miss, you get 3 attacks in response.

Use Deadly Defense + Punishing Stance + Precise Strike
You deal 4d6+Str+Int+10+power attack damage with a succesful basic attack (around 40) but it gets much higher including maneuvers

[Story]

Rincewind's luck only works to keep him alive. At everything else, he's a disaster-magnet.

Rincewind just wants a normal life but is constantly being railroaded into adventure by forces beyond his understanding. In other words, he's a PC.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Oko and Qailee
I mean, you can just do SorcererX/FrostMageY.


Originally Posted by Nilehus
Elsa though? She seems like a textbook Sorcerer focused on cryomancy.


Originally Posted by (Un)Inspired
...Elsa's a druid with all the righteous druid snow and ice spells.


You can easily create a build that replicates her abilities, but you can't explain Elsa herself in the framework of that build. The game makes assumptions that aren't borne out in her life. She's close to epic level and she's done zero adventuring.

And I can't think of a spellcasting mechanic in 3.5, Vancian or otherwise, that allows a character to cast a spell without realizing it's been cast. Elsa creates conditions very much like a Fimbulwinter, but she has no idea she's even done this. I've never heard of spellcasting in 3.5 that isn't intentional, but in Frozen this is a central element of the plot.

.

[Nilehus]

... Those goal posts just keep getting farther away.

First, the system couldn't simulate specific abilities or prosthetics. Then it was the system couldn't perfectly simulate specific abilities. Now it's the system can't justify Elsa's back story.

[Arbane]

And I can't think of a spellcasting mechanic in 3.5, Vancian or otherwise, that allows a character to cast a spell without realizing it's been cast. Elsa creates conditions very much like a Fimbulwinter, but she has no idea she's even done this. I've never heard of spellcasting in 3.5 that isn't intentional, but in Frozen this is a central element of the plot.

Good point. Similarly, "side effect" powers. There's probably a way in D&D to do a character who (for example) causes milk to sour, mirrors to crack, and holy symbols to tarnish for miles around as a side-effect using their powers, but I don't know what it is.

[Seppo87]

[QUOTE=Palanan;17845624]You can easily create a build that replicates her abilities, but you can't explain Elsa herself in the framework of that build. The game makes assumptions that aren't borne out in her life. She's close to epic level and she's That's not the part of the concept people want to play. That's not the kind of ability I was talking about (leveling without doing anything or the likes) and it is, by no means, a good indicator of how flexible D&D 3.5 is.
Guys seriously, you're missing the big picture.

Let's make it clear: as long as your character has the capabilities of Elsa, D&D has done a great job at being flexible.

[Gnome Alone]

Wicked Witch of the West is a Dry Lich, who take damage from water. A hammy one could die if they stood in a bucket's worth of water.

"Who would've thought a small amount of liquid would ever fall on meeeee?!"

[Arbane]

That's not the part of the concept people want to play. That's not the kind of ability I was talking about (leveling without doing anything or the likes) and it is, by no means, a good indicator of how flexible D&D 3.5 is.
Guys seriously, you're missing the big picture.

I'd argue that given D&D's zero-to-hero system, with it's all-importance of levels, leveling actually is kind of a big deal. This is not true in a lot of the source material for fantasy - The chapters of the Epic of Gilgamesh the superstrong demigod-king spends killing rats seem to be lost to history. :smallamused:

[Seppo87]

I'd argue that given D&D's zero-to-hero system, with it's all-importance of levels, leveling actually is kind of a big deal. This is not true in a lot of the source material for fantasy - The chapters of the Epic of Gilgamesh the superstrong demigod-king spends killing rats seem to be lost to history. :smallamused:
Elsa having great powers without training is NOT a feature. It's a plot point born out of narrative needs. It's fluff.
Plot points are by definition under the ruling of the DM. The DM can hence decide your character was born at 18th level.
It's not "house ruling". It's a normal DM doing his normal job with the normal tools provided normally by the game system - the power to adapt fluff.

Can D&D crunch out Elsa's abilities as portrayed in the movie? Yes it can.
Will this satisfy players who want to play a character that is capable of doing what Elsa does? Yes it will.
Was D&D flexible enough? Yes it was.

[Vhaidara]

Good point. Similarly, "side effect" powers. There's probably a way in D&D to do a character who (for example) causes milk to sour, mirrors to crack, and holy symbols to tarnish for miles around as a side-effect using their powers, but I don't know what it is.

You know, this is the magical thing called "fluff". I've actually run characters who were entirely ignorant of their own powers before.

What stops your character from acting in ignorance? You. What allows your character to act in ignorance? You.

[Rakaydos]

Here's a challange: Jack, from Mass effect. Barriers, gravity wells, ad TK manipulation on "multiple times per combat" -level cooldown timers. All day, every day.

[toapat]

Superman is DC's Pun Pun. :smalltongue:

honestly Batman is harder to model, although Factotum is basically him from the era of Adam West.

Ironman isnt possible without homebrew but the ideas were already there without homebrew.

Luke is a Psi-war//Soulknife

the Diablo 3 characters just dont work without being really unreasonable singular concepts, although like ironman the problem is not that the mechanics are impossible, just not represented enough.

[Seppo87]

Ironman isnt possible without homebrew but the ideas were already there without homebrew
Why? There are rules for creating magic items. How about Boots of Flying and Gloves of Disintegration?
And an Adamantine Full Plate with 100% fortification, of course.

[Arbane]

Why? There are rules for creating magic items. How about Boots of Flying and Gloves of Disintegration?
And an Adamantine Full Plate with 100% fortification, of course.

As long as we're doing Marvel characters, how about Speedball (http://www.comicvine.com/speedball/4005-2104/)?

[Oko and Qailee]

The first of these misses the infinite alchemy, the second one involves heavy magic item dependance.

So, we're not allow to use what accounts for half of the powers and abilities of most D&D characters? There are other ways to get effectively infinite PP per day for a S2P Erudite. The point is, game wise, the character looks and play mechanically the nearly exact same as Edward Elric.

[Seppo87]

As long as we're doing Marvel characters, how about Speedball (http://www.comicvine.com/speedball/4005-2104/)?
I admit I have no idea here, honestly.
Maybe a telekinetic specialist, like an Elocater or a Master of the Unseen Hand could partially do the job, but it feels like it's lacking the whole "bouncing" property.
Maybe it's just me who's not capable of doing this, or maybe it's one of the few concepts that D&D 3.5 have a hard time replicating.

[Rakaydos]

So, we're not allow to use what accounts for half of the powers and abilities of most D&D characters? There are other ways to get effectively infinite PP per day for a S2P Erudite. The point is, game wise, the character looks and play mechanically the nearly exact same as Edward Elric.

So you're saying D&D can mimic anything, as long as it's actually the clothes that make the man?

[Seppo87]

So you're saying D&D can mimic anything, as long as it's actually the clothes that make the man?
As long as it "looks and play mechanically nearly exact same as X" it seems very reasonable to be content with it.

[Nilehus]

Think you missed the "plays mechanically" bit of that post. Unless playing like the character is just window dressing.

[Oko and Qailee]

-Cool Stuff-

I mean, I was just giving an easy example off the top of my head. That does sound way cooler though. I don't think you need Endurance if you go frostmage though, don't they get some cold resistance in enviroments? Idk, have to reread.




There's even some relatively straightforward ideas that are hard to do in D&D without gimping them or jumping through hoops - a dwarf wizard who wars armor was an idea I had a while back, discarded because spell failure/using all still spells/burning ALL THE FEATS to wear armor all seemed like bad choices. :-P

Getting back to Frozen, didn't Elsa also have the power to unfreeze the people she's entombed in ice? (Resurrection, only to people she's killed?)

I mean, you can just do a Gish build. I know Duskblades are good at it. And say you're a wizard.

Elsa did not have resurrection, Anna unfreezing at the end was Anna's doing because of her act of love.


You can easily create a build that replicates her abilities, but you can't explain Elsa herself in the framework of that build. The game makes assumptions that aren't borne out in her life. She's close to epic level and she's done zero adventuring.


Man, so many times a party comes across a BBEG with class levels and the DM 100% of the time didn't bother thinking of the BBEG's whole life story as to why they have 19 levels in Warrior (the most obvious BBEG class). The point is, yes, a character can be made in D&D that does what Elsa does. Why does she have that much exp? Because a deity said so. Or the DM.

If you want Elsa to not be in control of her spells? I can do that too.
She's possessed by a Fiend of Possession5/Spell to Power EruditeX. The Fiend, being a psionic, can cast Ice Spells without Elsa ever knowing, and a Fiend of Possession can stay in Elsa indefinitely without her knowing. There, now it once again works mechanically.

[Oko and Qailee]

So you're saying D&D can mimic anything, as long as it's actually the clothes that make the man?

I'm saying that if I want to play Edward Elric. And for 40k I can do everything Ed can (plus a class and spell selection), then it should count. Because what matters is what I play. You're only buying gear, picking feats, etc to make something work and gear is part of a build.

I also did say it's possible to get the same effect without the 40k. Just harder, but tbh there's a lot of flexibility in a S2P Ed build.

[Rakaydos]

What about characters that have awkward mechanics that dont come online till late, but are really only awesome because they're from basically an E6 world?

Is Galdalf the Grey really Gandalf, if you're throwing fireballs and mindrapes around?

[Seppo87]

What about characters that have awkward mechanics that dont come online till late, but are really only awesome because they're from basically an E6 world?

Is Galdalf the Grey really Gandalf, if you're throwing fireballs and mindrapes around?
I think this problem was already addressed.
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=17845062&postcount=7

Probably, Gandalf could be represented decently with a gish build and a coherent selection of spells.
And this flaw
http://eberronunlimited.wikidot.com/flaw:arcane-fatigue

[Oko and Qailee]

What about characters that have awkward mechanics that dont come online till late, but are really only awesome because they're from basically an E6 world?

Is Galdalf the Grey really Gandalf, if you're throwing fireballs and mindrapes around?

Well, I try to not give them what they wouldn't have. That's why I did Edward as a Spell2P erudite.

Gandalf wouldn't really be a wizard for example. Most fantasy stories don't have wizards in the D&D sense. They have Warlocks and S2P Erudites.

[Graypairofsocks]

I've never heard of spellcasting in 3.5 that isn't intentional, but in Frozen this is a central element of the plot.

Sorcerers are sometimes fluffed as accidentally casting spells when they first discover their powers(or other weird things happening around them).

[Zombimode]

I regard this as a load of hooey, and want to prove it by making a thread of characters that _can't_ be done in D&D without either being epic-level monstrosities, massive houseruling, or having lots of extras irrelevant to the character. Original character ideas, or fictional ones welcome, as are attempts to make the characters in 3.5.

So you have trouble with characters that don't quite fit the classic (european) fantasy mold that D&D 3.5 is all about. I'm not impressed.

[Arbane]

So you have trouble with characters that don't quite fit the classic (european) fantasy mold that D&D 3.5 is all about. I'm not impressed.

Uh, that's sorta the exact opposite of what I meant, in two directions simultaneously.

On one side, I don't think D&D does 'classic European fantasy' very well. No knight in legend was as larded with magic items as a 10th-leve D&D fighter. (Thor comes pretty close, with his magic belt, gauntlets, hammer, chariot, and pig, but he's a god. They're allowed to be excessive.) No wizard in legend is as omnipotent as a high-level D&D wizard. And the only two fantasy writers I've seen using Vancian magic who weren't writing for TSR were Roger Zelazny... and Jack Vance.

Heck, look at all the arguments about what classes Conan should have. He's a big strong guy with a sword, who ALSO happens to be a good thief, leader, etc.

On the other side, I don't think D&D does NON-'classic European fantasy' very well, either. What D&D does well... is D&D.

On the third side, Classic European Fantasy like Monks, Psionics, and Warforged. Got it.

[Zombimode]

Uh, that's sorta the exact opposite of what I meant, in two directions simultaneously.

On one side, I don't think D&D does 'classic European fantasy' very well. No knight in legend was as larded with magic items as a 10th-leve D&D fighter. (Thor comes pretty close, with his magic belt, gauntlets, hammer, chariot, and pig, but he's a god. They're allowed to be excessive.) No wizard in legend is as omnipotent as a high-level D&D wizard. And the only two fantasy writers I've seen using Vancian magic who weren't writing for TSR were Roger Zelazny... and Jack Vance.

Heck, look at all the arguments about what classes Conan should have. He's a big strong guy with a sword, who ALSO happens to be a good thief, leader, etc.

On the other side, I don't think D&D does NON-'classic European fantasy' very well, either. What D&D does well... is D&D.

On the third side, Classic European Fantasy like Monks, Psionics, and Warforged. Got it.

You're right to remark that my wording wasn't the most fitting.

But you're mistakingly reading "classic fantasy" to mean something like mythology. Classic fantasy as a genre developed within the last century. The literature within this genre was a main inspiration for D&D. D&D it self served as an inspiration for many works, especially for other TTRPGs and CRPGs. All those collective works can be seen as part of the classic fantasy genre.
And yes, D&D 3.5 does a very good job for representing characters in this genre.

Characters form outside this genre or from a different medium* are oftentimes not easy to recreate in D&D 3.5. This is not surprising and not a fault of the system.

*characters that are invincible in some occasions and useless in others, omnipotent characters, characters with only one ability etc. don't fit the way D&D is meant to be played, that is they don't fit the medium of D&D. Again, not surprising and perfectly acceptable.


Heck, look at all the arguments about what classes Conan should have. He's a big strong guy with a sword, who ALSO happens to be a good thief, leader, etc.

Those arguments are pretty weak since a character like Conan is easily created in D&D.

[Eldan]

Rincewind? Factotum/Monk. Put all his skill points into Speak Language, UMD, Spellcraft and Knowledge.

Edit: Gandalf is a Planetar or Solar, with some kind of exalted vow that severely limits his power against anything other than undead and evil outsiders.

[draken50]

I'm actually pretty happy with D&D's character creation, and think the whole idea of complaining about a system because it can't make a character that matches [insert pop culture reference here] is dumb.

That being said, I can think of two game characters that could be difficult, and if anyone has some guesses that'd be cool.

1) Man-Bot from Freedom Force.

2) The chosen undead from Dark Souls.

I'm actually really interested in the second, as I think it could be a really cool game to run for someone who hadn't played the video game.

[Snowbluff]

Dark Souls, eh?

The main issue would be the resurrection ability. The bonfires would probably act as phylacteries or traps of true resurrection.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Graypairofsocks
Sorcerers are sometimes fluffed as accidentally casting spells when they first discover their powers(or other weird things happening around them).

Sure--cantrips and the like. Accidentally casting Fimbulwinter is a different thing altogether. Especially given the ten-minute casting time where, presumably, you have to concentrate on casting your eighth-level spell.

I don't really have a dog in this fight, and haven't even looked at the progenitor thread for this one, so not really invested in the argument per se. But most of the responses involving the discrepancy between Elsa's evident level and her lack of XP seem to rely on handwaving, "fluff," or other aspects of DM fiat. To me, that sounds like patching over gaps in a system, rather than evidence of its inbuilt flexibility.

Elsa's abilities are so easy to replicate because 3.5 has an overabundance of options, not to mention an entire sourcebook devoted to her theme. But plentiful options by themselves don't address aspects of character history which don't line up with standard game assumptions. This may be a different approach to developing a character than is generally assumed--and perhaps more holistic than most people in this thread prefer.

.

[Vhaidara]

There are all kinds of ways for characters to come into their power. I have one character who was a savage native of the frostfell, lost in a blizzard. An ice demon of generic description found him and was beginning to possess him when the Winter Witch on the Mountain (an epic NPC the GM had established) refreshed her casting of Fimbulwinter on he region, turning the boy to ice. However, the demon's power interacted with the magic, making him into a creature of ice instead of a statue of ice, with a resemblance of the demon. When he found a cabal of ice mages in a broken tower, he was immune to their magics and tore their throats out with his bare hands. He started a fire using their spellbooks and scrolls, but the fumes made him fall unconscious. Then the party found him.

Mechanically, he was a Draconic Ice Genasi (Air Genasi with Cold subtype instead of Air) Eidetic Wizard 11 at age 14. Instead of the incense and such normal to Eidetic Wizard, he burned spellbooks and scrolls to learn spells. Because his magic came from the demon and from burning the spellbooks of high level frost mages, he had no idea the ful scope of his powers.

Personally, I would be inclined to make Elsa some variant of the Unholy Scion template from Heroes of Horror. Use a creature from the Quasi-Elemental Plane of Ice, and make the SLAs it gives ice themed. You only need about a dozen to cover Elsa.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Finished reading through this last night and lost a post before going to bed. Here's my rapid fire answers to a few un/half answered challenges.

Architecurist - Lyre of building on a tireless character.

Bio character from Mass Effect - Kineticist with an out of combat recharge mechanic.

Iron Man - Synthesist Summoner or Artificer.

Man-bot - Artificer who begins play in a cursed suit or armor. As he levels he dumps his craft reserve into improving the armor but can't remove it.

And here are my rebuttals to some of the main complaints against certain builds.

"That build is too item dependent" - Ancestral Relic + Item Familiar on innocuous items should give most fictional characters any item abilities the need to be them. They may also require some additional items to be competative in world, but that's really a seperate issue.

"This caster build isn't good enough at nonmagical combat" - A level eight d6 hd 1/2 BAB is largely indistinguisable from a level 4 d10 full BAB with tons of magical powers. In fiction characters are much less likely to have 4 +/-1 CR encounters a day.

"Backstory doesn't match/Character doesn't fit D&D's leveling structure." - The only thing that prevents you from bringing a character that just awakened as a level seventeen Sorceror to a game starting at level 17 is DM fiat.

Similarly the DMG has alternate rules for XP that would allow you to run a character through their entire story gaining as many or as few levels as you desire.

[ComaVision]

Elsa's abilities are so easy to replicate because 3.5 has an overabundance of options,

Exactly. The question isn't whether you can model something or not, it's what the best way to do it is because there are so many option. That is the strength of D&D 3.5.

It's already been said but the only limitations on fluff are imposed by the creator.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

"fluff," or other aspects of DM fiat. To me, that sounds like patching over gaps in a system, rather than evidence of its inbuilt flexibility.


The problem I have with this argument is that stories have huge levels of writer fiat and pretty much every videogame or episodic show will suffer from ludonarrative dissonance at some point. A character that just got through a room filled with armed mooks will suddenly have to surrender because one or two mooks have the drop on them. In D&D we could at least justify this by have the character low on HP, but within their own narrative they seemed to come through without breaking a sweat.

Another way of putting it is that even if you can model any character in D&D you can't model every character in the same narrative.

Elsa can only exist is a game in which it's acceptable for a teenage girl to discover incredible untapped power. She can be modeled, but she may not be appropriate to every game. The same can be said for Paladins, anti-Paladins, anime inspired ToB characters that literally yell their manuevers, Pacifist VoP Monks, etc.

[toapat]

Why? There are rules for creating magic items. How about Boots of Flying and Gloves of Disintegration?
And an Adamantine Full Plate with 100% fortification, of course.

the magic item rules are not themselves robust enough to create ironman. As i said, you actually need homebrew to make ironman but ironman himself is not built out of concepts that dont have representation.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

the magic item rules are not themselves robust enough to create ironman. As i said, you actually need homebrew to make ironman but ironman himself is not built out of concepts that dont have representation.

What is Ironman other than a genius that gets defense, flight, blasting and long distance communication from items he crafted himself that are all integrated into a suit? I'd go with either wand gauntlets or wand chambers in the gauntlets or on weapons that are as minimal as possible like blade gauntlets rather than what seppo said.

[ComaVision]

I'd make Iron Man an Artificer with a set of Clockwork Armour.

[dascarletm]

Iron man is actually one of the easier concepts to build. (The early one's especially, perhaps the later versions might be a touch trickier)

What exactly is not able to be represented. Custom item generation is within 3.5's rules, so even though it isn't assumed in most RAW discussions, it is totally on the table for this.

[Threadnaught]

I regard this as a load of hooey, and want to prove it by making a thread of characters that _can't_ be done in D&D without either being epic-level monstrosities, massive houseruling, or having lots of extras irrelevant to the character. Original character ideas, or fictional ones welcome, as are attempts to make the characters in 3.5.

Almost being the operative word.


Edward Elric, from Fullmetal Alchemist. A kid with a mechanical arm and leg, who can transmute matter by touch.

Half-Golem Wizard, obviously he's an NPC.


The Architectomancer: A magician whose magic all involves buildings. They can conjure houses from nowhere, make doors or windows appear or disappear, cause hallways to become impossibly long, and otherwise create or mess with buildings and their internal structures, but don't have any other magic powers.

Wizard with themed Spell list.


The Wicked Witch of the West. Is there a water-soluble hag in D&D?

Asherati or Drylich.


The World's Luckiest Man. (Self-explanatory, I hope.)

Luck Feats. (Self-explanatory, I hope.)


The Super-Adaptoid: Marvel Comics villain who can imitate the powers of anyone it fights.

Wizard (seeing a pattern here?) and Spellthief.

Edit: About Ironman.


Ironman isnt possible without homebrew but the ideas were already there without homebrew.

I didn't realize Artificer was homebrew. And there are rules about combining multiple Magic Items into a single item that aren't homebrew.

Ironman isn't impossible, he is merely very expensive.

[Nilehus]

Ironman isn't impossible, he is merely very expensive.

Which, in view of his backstory, is entirely appropriate. :smalltongue:

[Susano-wo]

Not sure if the statement that you can run almost any kind of concept is really true, but there's an almost thread-wide equivocation fallacy here: character=/= character concept. OP breaks down characters into their concepts, but then he and others argue that if you cant model a specific character exactly, then the statement is false. Transmuting guy with artificial limbs is a concept, Edward Elric is a character. if You can simulate the rough feel and key abilities of a character, then you have used Dnd to create that .

And this is PF, not 3.5, but I would do Jotaro as a Monk[or monk hybrid build] with the lunge feat. Any round where you use lunge, you flavor as Star Platinum coming out and "Ora Ora Ora Ora Ora Ora Ora Ora" And for those who think that Seth(the stand that turns you into a little kid) is wierd...just check out some of the stands in later arcs. **** hasn't begun to get weird in Jojo's yet :smallbiggrin:

[CIDE]

Haplo the Patryn. I've seen some attempts though.

[AMFV]

I think that the typical problem is not that there is no perfect way to model a character (there isn't always). But rather that there are many ways to model a character, and since many people are emotionally attached to their ideas of a character the inaccuracies that are inherently present in the model are likely to grate on different people in different ways.

[Hazrond]

Here's a challange: Jack, from Mass effect. Barriers, gravity wells, ad TK manipulation on "multiple times per combat" -level cooldown timers. All day, every day.

Two things.

1. i havent had a good chance to say it before but i absolutely LOVE your avatar, its so cute ^.^

2. i love Jack and would love to see her in 3.5 form, somehow her character just SCREAMS wilder to me though

[DeltaEmil]

Rincewind is a wizard with 9 int. If I remember The Colour of Magic well enough, he didn't so much memorize the spell as the spell hid in his mind.

World's Luckiest Man sounds easily represented by a bunch of luck feats, plus fortunes friend.Actually, Rincewind was quite smart, he just didn't have any talent for magic (it was theorized that if he should die, the amount of magic in the discworld would increase). And there was the problem with the superuberepic creation spells that were sentient and hid in his mind as you wrote, filling all his magic slots, forbidding him from even casting the lowliest of spells. When Coin the Saucerer increased the magic level in the entire discworld, Rincewind did shoot disintegrating beams from his hands.

Although it must also be noted that the earliest discworld novels had a somewhat different magic system than the later ones since Mustrum Ridcully became the archwizard, and that it changes from novel to novel anyway. In the discworld novel that first starred Granny Weatherwax with the female wizard Eskarina Smith, Granny battled the archwizard of the Unseen University by shapechanging around like in the battle between Mim and Merlin (but with a lot more sexual innuendo), throwing spells around as if they were marbles. In the novel where Coin makes his appearance, spells suddenly were a lot more Vancian, and it took years to memorize them and be able to cast them only once. In the later novels, the wizards all use magic a lot more liberally again, polymorphing bandits into talking pumpkins (with still their hats and boots on) and other things.

[SimonMoon6]

I am puzzled as to why you'd have such contempt for the statement. D&D is the iconic fantasy roleplaying precisely because it is a great vehicle for creating fantasy characters, and 3.5 is hands-down the most flexible edition of the game when it comes to character creation. Further, we're talking about the kind of game in which you can easily stat up the x-men, even though the system wasn't intended as a comic book superhero game.

It really depends how accurate you want characters to be.

Someone might say, "You can make Colossus. Sorcerer with Iron Body. Done. (Maybe add Still & Silent Spell)."

Someone else might say, "Colossus' powers aren't magical; his powers should work in an anti-magic field. He should be able to change back and forth at will, with no limit on number of times he can change. His superhuman strength allows him to lift 75 tons, so he needs to be able to do that. He needs to gain that strength at precisely the same time that he gains a body of iron." And then on top of that, Colossus doesn't have *any* other powers, so if he's a sorcerer, he's doing it wrong, since a sorcerer would have tons of other superpowers (well, spells actually).

And I'd agree with the latter statement. D&D is a terrible game for simulating a wide variety of characters. That doesn't mean it's a bad system. Rather, it only does the few very limited things that it can do. Some people are happy with very vague approximations, but that's not really the same thing as actually statting up a character with any accuracy.

Superman is a great example of someone you can't make. But if you think he's too powerful, try "just" making the Silver Age Flash. He can travel faster than the speed of light. (But, no, he doesn't have any Monk or Barbarian powers, in case you're thinking "start with fast movement...".) He can travel through time under his own power (again, this is not a spell or a magic item or even a supernatural ability; it's science). He can vibrate through walls or other objects (no, he's not casting Passwall). He can even travel to alternate Earths under his own power. Can you do that without magic in D&D?

Or, let's try Firestorm. Oh, you're probably thinking "Flight + Polymorph Any Object. Done". But that's not Firestorm. First of all, he's two different ordinary humans who merge into one superhero, one's a stupid kid, the other's a brainy professor. And when they merge, the kid's in control, though the professor can give advice. And then they can split again, but the professor doesn't have any memory of what happened while they were merged. I can't think of any standard D&D abilities that let you make a character *exactly* like that. (He's *not* a psion using Fusion because he doesn't have tons of other psionic abilities.) They can merge regardless of distance or line of fire (unlike Fusion's touch range).

Plus, there are all the limitations on what he can transform with his powers, since his powers don't work on anything organic, so it can't just be Polymorph Any Object. And again, his powers are science, not magic, so they'd work fine in an anti-magic field. And there's more, but that's enough.

There *are* games that can make characters like these (even Silver Age Superman), but D&D isn't one of them. D&D doesn't do that sort of thing. It's not a very versatile game compared to a decent superhero game. That's not necessarily a flaw of D&D... but it's also not a strength.

[toapat]

I didn't realize Artificer was homebrew. And there are rules about combining multiple Magic Items into a single item that aren't homebrew.

Ironman isn't impossible, he is merely very expensive.

Golem armor is homebrew.

[ryu]

Golem armor is homebrew.

Who said anything about golems? It's just heavily enchanted into a large combined item.

[Hazrond]

Who said anything about golems? It's just heavily enchanted into a large combined item.

Question: when making a magic item are you allowed to use metamagic (like say a gauntlet with at-will X spell that is enhanced with reach?)

[ryu]

Question: when making a magic item are you allowed to use metamagic (like say a gauntlet with at-will X spell that is enhanced with reach?)

From what I've read you can. Also artificer features will come in handy if you don't want every use of say a wand to be metamagiced. Fun isn't it?

[facelessminion]

You can easily create a build that replicates her abilities, but you can't explain Elsa herself in the framework of that build. The game makes assumptions that aren't borne out in her life. She's close to epic level and she's done zero adventuring.

And I can't think of a spellcasting mechanic in 3.5, Vancian or otherwise, that allows a character to cast a spell without realizing it's been cast. Elsa creates conditions very much like a Fimbulwinter, but she has no idea she's even done this. I've never heard of spellcasting in 3.5 that isn't intentional, but in Frozen this is a central element of the plot.

.


Yeaaah, the high level thing is very simple in the context of Dungeons and Dragons: Elsa starts out high level because the campaign starts out high level. You don't need to try and justify backstory for a high-level campaign with x number of kobolds killed.

[facelessminion]

Another thought on Elsa, since her accidental uses of powers was brought up as a problem: Throughout the movie, Elsa is a villain, causing a crisis. One portion of the party attempts to resolve the crisis via social encounters. Another party member, the secretly evil rogue, goes for straight combat. :p

[3WhiteFox3]

One thing I'm not seeing in the arguments against 3.5 being a flexible system is any definition of what flexible means? Flexible compared to what. I know of few systems with as much versatility without DM intervention or fiat. Even the systems best known for their flexibility.

Fate (and other narrative-focused games)- Seeing as how Fate is really more of a toolkit for a GM in the first place, it basically runs entirely on GM fiat to model characters.

Hero System/Gurps (and other 'universal' point-based systems) - Both systems have their issues with modeling characters (several characters have abilities that explicitly require the GM to ok, custom advantages or disadvantages especially). Not to mention that both might have strong flexibility, they both have issues with balance and with high complexity (even worse than 3.5 in some cases).

Mutants and Masterminds - I haven't played with this system enough to really say, but seeing as how it's a d20 system in the first place, means that a lot of it's flexibility is shared with 3.5 anyway.

Genre-focused RPGs (Marvel Heroic System, Call of Cthulhu, etc...) Usually these systems are really good at modeling the characters for their genre, but as for others.

And let's say you disagree with a few of my stated systems, that only means that 3.5 isn't the only flexible system or most flexible system. Not that it isn't flexible.

From my experience, D&D works really well to model characters without having to rely too much on fiat. Also, don't confuse character with character concept. Naruto is a character; loud, brash supposedly sneaky guy with clones and lots of power is a concept.

[Arbane]

Hero System/Gurps (and other 'universal' point-based systems) - Both systems have their issues with modeling characters (several characters have abilities that explicitly require the GM to ok, custom advantages or disadvantages especially). Not to mention that both might have strong flexibility, they both have issues with balance and with high complexity (even worse than 3.5 in some cases).

...As opposed to D&D, where Pun-pun is PERFECTLY OKAY because rules.


Mutants and Masterminds - I haven't played with this system enough to really say, but seeing as how it's a d20 system in the first place, means that a lot of it's flexibility is shared with 3.5 anyway.

You might want to look at it a little harder. It's basically a point-buy game with feats and saving throws, but other than that, it REALLY doesn't have much in common with 3.5.

[3WhiteFox3]

...As opposed to D&D, where Pun-pun is PERFECTLY OKAY because rules.

You might want to look at it a little harder. It's basically a point-buy game with feats and saving throws, but other than that, it REALLY doesn't have much in common with 3.5.

Fine, let's say I agree with both of those (not saying I do). That only proves that D&D isn't the only flexible system, or even the most flexible system. Not that it isn't flexible (I edited this in my comment, but you probably posted so quickly as to miss it).

Actually, making Pun-pun is completely doable using Hero System (there are powers that let you create your own powers at will, it's actually not hard to do with a bit of system mastery) and it can actually get worse (yes, things worse than pun-pun because pun-pun at least requires a specific set of events to happen). In fact almost anything that a D&D character can do can be done in Hero System. Besides I notice that you ignore the fact that it explicitly needs GM adjudication (the rulebooks themselves state this outright) thus negating the point. Because 3.5 can be just as flexible with if the GM allows third party or homebrew.

M&M - So you take the three things that are the most important backbones of 3.5 (the d20 resolution mechanic, feats and scaling spell defenses; remember 3.5 invented these, without 3.5 M&M could not possibly exist without inventing them on it's own) and you claim it isn't similar to 3.5? What's your basis for that?

[squiggit]

M&M - So you take the three things that are the most important backbones of 3.5 (the d20 resolution mechanic, feats and scaling spell defenses; remember 3.5 invented these, without 3.5 M&M could not possibly exist without inventing them on it's own) and you claim it isn't similar to 3.5? What's your basis for that?

Largely because the mechanics and style tend to be different. Yeah, you roll the same type of die, but that's largely where the similarities end (at least when you're considering 3.5 specific things).

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Where is Golem armor for Ironman coming from? Please give a full list of what you feel Ironman needs to be able to do and we'll give you items that can do it. They might use item stacking rules, but they won't involve any true homebrew.

Colossus- Use template/races like half ogre mineral warrior with an item that can put him in human form, or a human with a magic item that can be toggled on and off that grant Iron Body and Enlarge Person, or be a Synthesist Summoner. This will let you qualify and disqualify yourself from Warhulk and Hulking Hurler at will. He might not hit a 75 ton lift, but he will be in neighborhood. Two versions fail the "works in an antimagic field" test, but I don't feel that's a fair test since his world has anti mutant power fields.

Superman is too epic.

Silverage flash could be a Nomad/Elocater with time travel spells converted to Powers by an StP Erudite with all his teleporting fluffed as speed. As with numerous characters already discussed he'll need a PP recharge trick.

[ryu]

Where is Golem armor for Ironman coming from? Please give a full list of what you feel Ironman needs to be able to do and we'll give you items that can do it. They might use item stacking rules, but they won't involve any true homebrew.

Colossus- Use template/races like half ogre mineral warrior with an item that can put him in human form, or a human with a magic item that can be toggled on and off that grant Iron Body and Enlarge Person, or be a Synthesist Summoner. This will let you qualify and disqualify yourself from Warhulk and Hulking Hurler at will. He might not hit a 75 ton lift, but he will be in neighborhood. Two versions fail the "works in an antimagic field" test, but I don't feel that's a fair test since his world has anti mutant power fields.

Superman is too epic.

Silverage flash could be a Nomad/Elocater with time travel spells converted to Powers by an StP Erudite with all his teleporting fluffed as speed. As with numerous characters already discussed he'll need a PP recharge trick.

Also one hell of a strength score obtained with Cheese. When moving fast enough flash hits like a goddamn truck and that's by league standards.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Also one hell of a strength score obtained with Cheese. When moving fast enough flash hits like a goddamn truck and that's by league standards.

Honestly, I'm not very familiar with silver age flash specifically. I just gave a character with the abilities SimonMoon listed . A typless damage power could also be fluffed as speed. Whatever damage you want should be achievable with enough levels/optimization.

I might have taken a whack at a few of the other characters nobody else has that I'm not familiar with if the challengers had actually listed abilities.

[Harrow]

While 3.5 may not be able to perfectly simulate any character from fiction, I'd say it can do well enough with just about any character that you could place them as an NPC in your game and a player familiar with the source material would say "Hey, is that X from y?"

There are a couple things I find D&D has trouble doing 'accurately'. Precise, freeform types of magic, like Allomancy from the Mistborn Trilogy or Bending from Avatar. You can make some loose approximations, psions for much of the former and Shugenja for the latter, but recognizability drops off fast.

Another one is super lucky characters. "But just use luck feats-" No. Just, please, stop. They've hurt me enough already. I was so excited when I found out about luck feats, because I absolutely love luck-based characters. But, the feats don't make you astoundingly lucky. Instead of The World's Luckiest Man, you end up as Slightly Luckier Than Average, Oh Wait, Nevermind, That Was The Barbarian That Got 3 Criticals In A Row, You Still Missed After Burning Both Of Your Rerolls, which doesn't roll off the tongue quit as well. And I even understand why that is : Luck is messed up in D&D in general. You can't have billion to one odds falling in your favor left and right when everyone rolls a single d20 for everything. Again, you could approximate this. Factotum with Font of Inspiration, enough luck feats to ward off natural 1's, then fluff all his bonuses (up to and including his armor if you feel it necessary) as just being twists of fate instead of magic items and special training. Again, possible, but you start drifting far enough away that it may be difficult for others to spot the reference.

[Feralventas]

Any caster with a non-vancian magic system. How many times did Luke skywalker have to memorize Mage's Hand to get his lightsaber unstuck from the ice? How long does it take an asari commando to run out of "psi points?"

That's why you go for Ghost Hand, Improved Ghost Hand and Poltergeist Hand feats from Ghostwalk. Take say....ranger5 with desert fluff for Luke's upbringing, then Master of the Unseen Hand for proper telekinetic powers. Might want to leave it early or delay the later levels of the PrC as it Is more powerful than Luke was in SW 4-6. Dip Swordsage or Warblade for some more stylistic options in combat that can speak well of his growing wisdom, and round it out with a bit of Heartfire Fanner or Bard for the later influential/jedi-mind-trick type talents.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

@Harrow

Control element X characters can be tough, but I think a large portion of stuff most of them do that isn't wall of X, Yds damage to Z targets or A area, or summoning X elementals can be covered by thematic use of Prestidifitation and Telekinesis. Admitidly this is a bit of a cop out answer since it requires player fiat to not do more with these spells than the characters their emulating.

Is luckiest man alive a specific character or just a concept? To me the concept reeks of fluff. I once played a high level character named "Lucky" who told ludicrous stories and was missing one of just about every bodypart people have two of and there was a running gag of people not knowing whether he was incredibly competant and unlucky or incompetant and lucky. Without more information I'd go with something like Lord of the Dance; Perform to Concentration via undersong, Concentration or Perform to everything via ToB and other sources. Give him either Perform:Buffonery or Perform:Weapon Drill depending on the theme you want.

@FeralVentas

That's very elegant, much better than a PP recharge mechanic both for level of cheese and because Luke is a Guardian.

[Crazysaneman]

The Lady of Pain.
Just because... you know. :smalleek:

[ryu]

The Lady of Pain.
Just because... you know. :smalleek:

But D&D already has one of those. In fact that's where it originated. Well with that specific title, position, and such anyway. Not saying it wasn't inspired by something else.

[Oko and Qailee]

Superman is too epic.


Keep in mind for characters like this, they can be stated with 3.5. Superman isn't really that hard to build. He just has a strength score of "yes" for example and a Con of "definitely" with a Fort save of "lolmadeit".

Is it playable? Not really
Is it statted? Yes

[Hazrond]

Keep in mind for characters like this, they can be stated with 3.5. Superman isn't really that hard to build. He just has a strength score of "yes" for example and a Con of "definitely" with a Fort save of "lolmadeit".

Is it playable? Not really
Is it statted? Yes

Paragon Elan maybe?

[Anlashok]

Character you can't stat?

A martial who can beat wizards.

[ryu]

Character you can't stat?

A martial who can beat wizards.

Do they have to be competent wizards?

[Oko and Qailee]

Character you can't stat?

A martial who can beat wizards.

Because wizards in nearly everything else are woefully UP.

[Crazysaneman]

But D&D already has one of those. In fact that's where it originated. Well with that specific title, position, and such anyway. Not saying it wasn't inspired by something else.


"I regard this as a load of hooey, and want to prove it by making a thread of characters that _can't_ be done in D&D without either being epic-level monstrosities, massive houseruling, or having lots of extras irrelevant to the character. Original character ideas, or fictional ones welcome, as are attempts to make the characters in 3.5."

Doesn't say that it *can't* already exist, only that it *can't* be statted.:smallbiggrin:

[Nilehus]

"I regard this as a load of hooey, and want to prove it by making a thread of characters that _can't_ be done in D&D without either being epic-level monstrosities, massive houseruling, or having lots of extras irrelevant to the character. Original character ideas, or fictional ones welcome, as are attempts to make the characters in 3.5."

Doesn't say that it *can't* already exist, only that it *can't* be statted.:smallbiggrin:

Well, you...

...

:smallconfused: Huh. Sonuvagun.

[ryu]

"I regard this as a load of hooey, and want to prove it by making a thread of characters that _can't_ be done in D&D without either being epic-level monstrosities, massive houseruling, or having lots of extras irrelevant to the character. Original character ideas, or fictional ones welcome, as are attempts to make the characters in 3.5."

Doesn't say that it *can't* already exist, only that it *can't* be statted.:smallbiggrin:

Oh she can be statted. The developers just haven't done it because they have a fairly decent idea of what I, and every like-minded individual would do immediately upon that being an official thing.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Keep in mind for characters like this, they can be stated with 3.5. Superman isn't really that hard to build. He just has a strength score of "yes" for example and a Con of "definitely" with a Fort save of "lolmadeit".

Is it playable? Not really
Is it statted? Yes

The OP asked for characters to not be "epic monstrousities", the big boy scout is close to a definition of those words.

@crazysaneman

Tell me what you want your Lady to be capable and incapable of. I'd say I'll stat something that fulfills your parameters, but I'm sure someone will popin to contradict you before I finish. edit:also again literal "epic monstrousity" if anyone answering challenges is to follow the OP's guidlines challengers should have the respect to not put forth clearly epic concepts. You may well give level 40 Wizard as a concept and call us on statting it as a level 40 Wizard.

@Mundane magekiller

Entirely doable, the world just needs to be accomidating by not having equally optimized wizards.


Elsa can only exist in a game in which it's acceptable for a teenage girl to discover incredible untapped power. She can be modeled, but she may not be appropriate to every game. The same can be said for Paladins, anti-Paladins, anime inspired ToB characters that literally yell their manuevers, Pacifist VoP Monks, etc.

Any number of mundane builds can model mage-killers, but they'll only function in worlds with optimization ceilings for Wizards.

[Threadnaught]

Not sure if the statement that you can run almost any kind of concept is really true, but there's an almost thread-wide equivocation fallacy here: character=/= character concept.

Exactly and the statement that is being debated is about concepts, not characters.


Transmuting guy with artificial limbs is a concept, Edward Elric is a character. if You can simulate the rough feel and key abilities of a character, then you have used Dnd to create that .

Awesome, what we have here is exactly the reason the OP's premise is severely flawed.

Too many people in this thread are wanting their favourite fictional characters to be completely replicated in D&D 3.5, but the statement this entire discussion is based on, is about the ability to make characters that can do things that look like these fictional characters.
It's been bugging me since I read the OP.


Golem armor is homebrew.

Okay, ignoring the talking intelligent armour and just replicating the rest of Ironman's abilities... Full Plate enhanced with a fortune of Magic. Done.


The OP asked for characters to not be "epic monstrousities", the big boy scout is close to a definition of those words.

Umm, we're not allowed to go Epic for Superman? As in, the guy who can punch so hard he can cause a supernova sized explosion? The guy who can move several times the speed of light? The guy who can incinerate entire planets by staring at them? The guy who can survive being hit by multiple supernovas? The guy who can hear sounds millions of miles away? The guy who can create hurricane force winds by blowing hard? The guy who can freeze anything by blowing gently? The guy who can move planets?

[Actana]

As far as the flexibility of 3.5 is concerned, the biggest problem with it is (IMO) that while you might technically be able to emulate the abilities of a certain characters in 3.5, you have to do so in an extremely roundabout manner that often 1) adds a huge ton of baggage from other class features that aren't relevant to the character, 2) makes the character far more powerful than they normally would be, and 3) makes them downright useless in actual play.

D&D fantasy is kind of its own genre, where magic items are extremely common, assumed and magic itself is about as common, not to mention the aspects inherent in the mechanics themselves like classes and levels. Not many stories/settings work on that premise, and even fewer characters. D&D can do a lot of things, but for emulating existing characters and stories I'd look elsewhere. That's not to say you can't create existing characters with the system, but more that the characters need to work on D&D's premises which rarely align with the premises of the character's origin.

[Pan151]

3.5 is really, really bad at trying to emulate intellectual people. Due to having skills and feats tied to Hit Dice, along with BAB, Saves etc, being an award-winning researcher automatically means you have enough combat stats to also casually beat up a dragon or two in your leisure time.

[Eldan]

3.5 is really, really bad at trying to emulate intellectual people. Due to having skills and feats tied to Hit Dice, along with BAB, Saves etc, being an award-winning researcher automatically means you have enough combat stats to also casually beat up a dragon or two in your leisure time.

Not really. 20 to 30 on Knowledge is "really tough questions."

Meett Professor Doctor Genius von Chemistry:

Human Expert 3, elite array, except for genius intelligence (18, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8)
Base stats:
STR 8 (not very active physically), DEX 12 (bit above average, from juggling test tubes, maybe), CON 10 (average), INT 18 (genius), WIS 14 (smart, remember?), CHA 13 (and a very nice guy, too).
Skills: Knowledge Chemistry 6 ranks, Profession: chemist (gives a synergy bonus) 6 ranks, craft: alchemy 6 ranks, Knowledge: Physics 6 ranks, any other knowledge he likes.
Feats: Skill focus: knowledge (chemistry), any other two he likes.
Equipment: laboratory (+2 bonus on profession: chemist and craft: alchemy), library access (+2 equipment bonus on knowledge skills)

As a young man fresh from college:
Von Chemistry has a +16 bonus on knowledge chemistry (6 ranks, 3 skill focus, 4 intelligence, 2 synergy bonus, 2 equipment bonus).
Taking 10, he can answer tough questions of a DC up to 26 trivially. He has a more than 25% chance of answering the toughest questions out there (DC 30). Taking 20 (say, a doctoral thesis) and with some help from a college (+2 aid another), we're looking at a DC 38. 40 if we can find some feat somewhere that gives another +2. If he has something like a bard (a really nice, helpful wife), a marshall (lab supervisor) or anything else that gives more? He'll probably push the boundaries of knowledge all by himself. If someone bumps into him on the street and asks him a question, so he is without his equipment, he can casually (take 10) answer questions of a DC up to 22. Anything harder, he might stumble.
But give him a club and how is he in combat? +1 base attack, -1 str, means +0 to attack. His AC is 11. His damage is a pitiful 1d6. I wouldn't give him good chances against a single goblin.

As an old man, he has another +2 on his mental stats, and another -3 on his physical stats.

[Seppo87]

SimonMoon6, your post sounds like
"there is fluff that is tied to mechanics in 3.5, so its mechanics are not flexible and can't reproduce powers"
This is illogical.

Mechanics ARE flexible and they CAN reproduce a wide array of effects.

I get fast movement with a level of Barbarian. Cool. I also get a temporary increase in Strength and speed (whirling frenzy). I will call this ability "plot armor" or "emergency reserves of force of will". Cool. I also get skill points, I will invest skill points in skills that make sense.
Character sheet says I'm proficient with armor. Who cares, I don't wear one.

"barbarian powers"? Where? I only see mechanics that can and should be refluffed.

Fluff will be changed.
Excess powers will be ignored.
The character will play mechanics that closely resemble source material.

Which is why D&D 3.5 is extremely flexible when it comes to combining stuff to reproduce effects mechanically (i.e. being fast).
A strength of the system indeed.

[Mystia]

2) The chosen undead from Dark Souls.

I think that you are more interested in bonfires and the constant resurrection aspect, given that the Chosen Undead has no "canon" build, right?

The bonfires strike me as being PAO'd Psicrystals (or other entities), that are all mind-linked and constantly in a Forced Dream, some sort of augmented Save Game Trick.

Other than that, I think it's pretty safe to say that all Undeads in Dark Souls are Cursts.
"Cursts are unfortunate undead humanoids, trapped under a curse that will not let them die."

[Psyren]

You can stat anything in d20. Using only official D&D 3.5 material is harder, but with homebrew/3rd party you can do just about anything.

[Rakaydos]

A 4e fighter.

[OldTrees1]

A 4e fighter.

Gestalt of 2 ToB classes?

[ImNotTrevor]

As far as the flexibility of 3.5 is concerned, the biggest problem with it is (IMO) that while you might technically be able to emulate the abilities of a certain characters in 3.5, you have to do so in an extremely roundabout manner that often 1) adds a huge ton of baggage from other class features that aren't relevant to the character, 2) makes the character far more powerful than they normally would be, and 3) makes them downright useless in actual play.

D&D fantasy is kind of its own genre, where magic items are extremely common, assumed and magic itself is about as common, not to mention the aspects inherent in the mechanics themselves like classes and levels. Not many stories/settings work on that premise, and even fewer characters. D&D can do a lot of things, but for emulating existing characters and stories I'd look elsewhere. That's not to say you can't create existing characters with the system, but more that the characters need to work on D&D's premises which rarely align with the premises of the character's origin.

I think part of the problem is we have two different sets of criteria for "Creating a Character in D&D."

The stance of OP and a lot of the naysayers is: "It won't match thematically with the character's backstory and won't be an accurate representation of their abilities as presented in the canon of the show, and won't match their personal storyline."
ie: I want to play EXACTLY THIS CHARACTER.

The other one is: "A character in D&D is little more than an amalgam of abilities with fluff tacked on. Ensure that all the desired abilities are there, and tack on the appropriate fluff at your leisure."
ie: I want to play something that HAS ALL THE ABILITIES OF THE CHARACTER IN QUESTION.

I will openly admit not being much of a fan of Group A. I don't really get the need to play as something that exists in a different canon and try to shove it into the throat of D&D. Mechanically, more things can be done than not. It takes some truly outrageous stuff for it not to be covered under the blanket of possibilities. However to want Naruto The Bright Orange Ninja to be part of your D&D adventures, which are primarily designed with Krunch the Goblin-eater and Sir Reginald Maxwell, Paladin of Pelor in mind...you strike me as being a wee bit silly.

Group B, I can understand. The desire to be a close approximation of a set of abilities you've seen before, but with your own creativity on top of it, makes sense to me. I have wanted for a long time to be able to play a character based on Nautilus from League of Legends. (He's my personal favorite character.) I have a build plan in mind. It won't be the most effective plan, I wager, but it will be really fun. Probably a warforged with Adi body, weilding a Greatpick refluffed to be an Anchor. Psionic warrior to pick up Stomp and some other similar abilities. I don't really care if he has more abilities than actual Nautilus does (Dude only has like...5,) because he's not meant to be Nautilus. He's meant to be NautilESQUE. Will I have successfully made "Nautilus" in D&D? Most people would say "Yeah. Close enough approximation. Probably more powerful in the long run. Congrats, and have fun."

TL;DR
Can D&D make an exact photocopy of your favorite ridiculous main character? No.
Can D&D make something that can do all the same things as ridiculous main character and possibly more things besides? 99% of the time, yes. Yes it can.

[SimonMoon6]

TL;DR
Can D&D make an exact photocopy of your favorite ridiculous main character? No.

And that to me is a big problem, as the game systems I prefer to use to model characters from fiction are the ones that *can* do this. So, it seems peculiar to me to think of a game system that *can't* do this as being *great* at making all sorts of characters.



Can D&D make something that can do all the same things as ridiculous main character and possibly more things besides? 99% of the time, yes. Yes it can.

Even if you could make certain characters, they generally wouldn't really have the feel of the characters, their optimal tactics would rarely be the same as in whatever fiction they come from, they generally would be expected to run around with magic items that they'd never usually need, they generally would have magic-based powers (or psionic, which in default D&D is the "same") even if they aren't the least big magical, they'd generally have extra powers that might even overshadow their known abilities so they'd have no reason to use the abilities that they're know to use, and so forth.

It just wouldn't be the same, and if it's not the same, what's the point?

I mean, I know Superman's off limits, but he's the sort of person that D&D can't do, someone with vast non-magical powers who is particularly weak against magic but great against everything else (well, except kryptonite, red sun radiation, high gravity, and a few other miscellaneous things). Even forgetting his epic power levels, you *can't* give nonmagical powers and you *can't* give him a particular weakness to magic... and if you did and played him with other superheroic characters in a D&D game, he would just crumple up and die because *everything's* magic in D&D.

And that's without taking into account the epic levels of his powers (talking Silver Age version here), where he can run and fly faster than the speed of light, can travel through time under his power with ease, can push planets around with ease (even being able to *blow* the Earth around with superbreath, back when he was only a boy) thanks to his nearly immeasurable strength (which still, oddly, has limits), who can fly into the sun just for the purpose of cleaning his costume (not because he's immune to fire or powered by the sun but just because he's that immune to injury), able to resist any physical injury from any terrestrial source (including atomic bombs) and most extra-terrestrial ones (the only nonmagical things that have any chance to hurt him are other Kryptonians and people of that power level), and so forth. D&D just isn't a good game for modelling anything like this.

Sure, you can make Aquaman as a druid focusing on water stuff, but he'd still be able to cast Fire Seeds and he could wildshape into an elephant, and that's not Aquaman.

[georgie_leech]

And that to me is a big problem, as the game systems I prefer to use to model characters from fiction are the ones that *can* do this. So, it seems peculiar to me to think of a game system that *can't* do this as being *great* at making all sorts of characters.


Not that I disagree with worrying about extraneous abilities, but I've yet to find a game that excels at modeling characters not intended for the specific system. Which games are you playing?

[Knaight]

Not that I disagree with worrying about extraneous abilities, but I've yet to find a game that excels at modeling characters not intended for the specific system. Which games are you playing?

The generics can often handle this. GURPS, HERO, Fudge. Mutants and Masterminds has a wider range than D&D. So on and so forth.

[OldTrees1]

The generics can often handle this. GURPS, HERO, Fudge. Mutants and Masterminds has a wider range than D&D. So on and so forth.

True, the fewer rules, the harder it is for the rules to get in the way of accuracy.
So, a RPG with no rules would be the most accurate model system.

However an RPG used for modeling can have rules if we are willing to settle for a "good enough" model. Personally I find D&D to be "good enough" with player-DM cooperation (but not "good enough" by RAW).

[Knaight]

True, the fewer rules, the harder it is for the rules to get in the way of accuracy.
So, a RPG with no rules would be the most accurate model system.

However an RPG used for modeling can have rules if we are willing to settle for a "good enough" model. Personally I find D&D to be "good enough" with player-DM cooperation (but not "good enough" by RAW).

GURPS and HERO are hardly games with "fewer rules". HERO in particular is among the most complex systems I'm familiar with.

[OldTrees1]

GURPS and HERO are hardly games with "fewer rules". HERO in particular is among the most complex systems I'm familiar with.

I was under the impression that GURPS had fewer rules (and more content) than 3.5 D&D.

If HERO is more complex than D&D, wouldn't that complexity exclude characters or is the complexity reducible(aka de facto less rules)?

However I have not played either and have only read the GURPS rule book.

[toapat]

I was under the impression that GURPS had fewer rules (and more content) than 3.5 D&D.

If HERO is more complex than D&D, wouldn't that complexity exclude characters or is the complexity reducible(aka de facto less rules)?

However I have not played either and have only read the GURPS rule book.

Complexity isnt the barrier to creation. Modularity and a system's comprehensiveness are. GURPS, as far as i understand, is almost as modular as lego products. HERO i havent looked into

[Arbane]

Complexity isnt the barrier to creation. Modularity and a system's comprehensiveness are. GURPS, as far as i understand, is almost as modular as lego products. HERO i havent looked into

HERO is extremely modular, but fairly complex. Characters' powers pretty much have to be made 'from scratch' from base power like Mind Control, Energy Blast, Teleport and so on, then have modifiers attached. (A D&Dish spellcaster might have limitations: Gestures and Invocations, a psionic might take Needs Concentration, an Energy Blast might have Area of effect added for a fireball, etc.)

HERO fans brag you can model ANY power or device in their system, and they admittedly do come pretty close.

[OldTrees1]

HERO is extremely modular, but fairly complex. Characters' powers pretty much have to be made 'from scratch' from base power like Mind Control, Energy Blast, Teleport and so on, then have modifiers attached. (A D&Dish spellcaster might have limitations: Gestures and Invocations, a psionic might take Needs Concentration, an Energy Blast might have Area of effect added for a fireball, etc.)

HERO fans brag you can model ANY power or device in their system, and they admittedly do come pretty close.

Wait, is that complexity or merely content? Honestly it sounds like HERO is only as complex as Epic Spellcasting (with more content and balance).

[TypoNinja]

Umm, we're not allowed to go Epic for Superman? As in, the guy who can punch so hard he can cause a supernova sized explosion? The guy who can move several times the speed of light? The guy who can incinerate entire planets by staring at them? The guy who can survive being hit by multiple supernovas? The guy who can hear sounds millions of miles away? The guy who can create hurricane force winds by blowing hard? The guy who can freeze anything by blowing gently? The guy who can move planets?

This is my main problem with the thread so far, "don't use epic characters" followed by "Strongest most amazing concepts I can think of".

Some of these heros are Epic, that's why they are the hero of that setting. Some settings are more high powered than others. DBZ characters can break planets, but Cowboy Beebop Hero's lack any supernatural powers at all. Some marvel superheros (And villains) have literally reality warping powers, up to and including literal omnipotence. Meanwhile SG-1 manages to overthrow entire evil alien empires with only bullets and brainpower.

Don't say no epic characters to explain a powerset if you are going to throw an epic superpower set up as your example, because all we get at that point is "D&D can't model Epic characters without resorting to its Epic rules". At that point my rebuttal would be "duh".

[Jeff the Green]

Here's a challange: Jack, from Mass effect. Barriers, gravity wells, ad TK manipulation on "multiple times per combat" -level cooldown timers. All day, every day.

Sorcerer with the recharge magic variant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/rechargeMagic.htm#generalRechargeSpells). Infinite spells with a recharge time between 0 and 1d4+1 rounds, depending on the spell level and your maximum spell level. Barriers are abjurations and most of her other powers are telekinesis, though I'm not sure about the black hole thing.

[Arbane]

Wait, is that complexity or merely content? Honestly it sounds like HERO is only as complex as Epic Spellcasting (with more content and balance).

I'm not that familiar with epic spellcasting, so I couldn't say or sure. But I believe it's similar - as a general rule, you take a basic power and add modifiers to it until it 'works like the concept'. For example, here's a writeup of Wonder Woman (http://surbrook.devermore.net/adaptationscomic/dc/wonderwoman.html).

[1pwny]

Okay, playground, how about this?

Shirou Emiya, from Fate/Stay Night.

He basically creates infinite copies of obscenely powerful weapons from memory, has the ability to use them all proficiently, can materialize them mid-air to shoot at people, and finally, can transport everyone in a limited area into an alternate dimension with every single sword he has ever seen lying around, waiting to be used.

Not to mention the fact that he can "reinforce" things temporarily; such as a weapon to be more sturdy, clothing to be more durable, or himself to be faster and stronger.\

:smallsmile: Have fun! :smallsmile:

[TypoNinja]

Okay, playground, how about this?

Shirou Emiya, from Fate/Stay Night.

He basically creates infinite copies of obscenely powerful weapons from memory, has the ability to use them all proficiently, can materialize them mid-air to shoot at people, and finally, can transport everyone in a limited area into an alternate dimension with every single sword he has ever seen lying around, waiting to be used.


Sounds like pure money solves this most of this. A pocket dimension and a crapton of called weapons. Methods of travel to the pocket dimension exist in great numbers, so take your pick. Plane shift as an SLA to one location only would be my first choice.



Not to mention the fact that he can "reinforce" things temporarily; such as a weapon to be more sturdy, clothing to be more durable, or himself to be faster and stronger.\

:smallsmile: Have fun! :smallsmile:

Augment object spell covers reinforcing, and lacking more details on "faster and stronger" lets go with "haste" and "bulls strength." So any 5th level caster with all three spells on their list fits the bill.

Somebody might care to get more elegant than I have, but that's my contribution.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

And maybe something like Master of Masks or Chameleon to get the floating EWP feat.

[Vhaidara]

And maybe something like Master of Masks or Chameleon to get the floating EWP feat.

Or, you know, Warblade 1 to use Weapon Aptitude with EWP.

[OldTrees1]

I'm not that familiar with epic spellcasting, so I couldn't say or sure. But I believe it's similar - as a general rule, you take a basic power and add modifiers to it until it 'works like the concept'. For example, here's a writeup of Wonder Woman (http://surbrook.devermore.net/adaptationscomic/dc/wonderwoman.html).

Yeah, that looks like the same complexity/type of system as Epic Spellcasting (except done better). Although the writeup shows that HERO shares the advantage/skill/disadvantage system with GURPS as well.

So it does seem to support my general "fewer rules => more modeling accuracy" claim. (In this case by removing the level based system rules in favor of the point buy rule.) However I have only seen skin-deep into GURPS and HERO.

[AMFV]

Yeah, that looks like the same complexity/type of system as Epic Spellcasting (except done better). Although the writeup shows that HERO shares the advantage/skill/disadvantage system with GURPS as well.

So it does seem to support my general "fewer rules => more modeling accuracy" claim. (In this case by removing the level based system rules in favor of the point buy rule.) However I have only seen skin-deep into GURPS and HERO.

Well I would argue that fewer rules makes it harder to see the issues with a particular model of a character. In something more rules dense it may be easier to model something, or possible to model something with great accuracy (increasing accuracy as the complexity of the rules increase actually). It's like comparing a physics model of the moon's orbit to a poem describing the phases of the moon. A physics model is more likely to have errors since it is attempting a greater mechanical consistency (and because it can be evaluated more accurately), whereas the poem, being not literal, is less likely to have observable error since it cannot be evaluated objectively.

An infinitely complex system could theoretically model anything, accurately. However, a rules-light system doesn't have to. So the less rules you have the less accurate you need to be since there are less checks to preserve accuracy.

[OldTrees1]

Well I would argue that fewer rules makes it harder to see the issues with a particular model of a character. In something more rules dense it may be easier to model something, or possible to model something with great accuracy (increasing accuracy as the complexity of the rules increase actually). It's like comparing a physics model of the moon's orbit to a poem describing the phases of the moon. A physics model is more likely to have errors since it is attempting a greater mechanical consistency (and because it can be evaluated more accurately), whereas the poem, being not literal, is less likely to have observable error since it cannot be evaluated objectively.

An infinitely complex system could theoretically model anything, accurately. However, a rules-light system doesn't have to. So the less rules you have the less accurate you need to be since there are less checks to preserve accuracy.

Is that accuracy or precision? A rules light system can model characters accurately/less stray bits but a rules dense system can model characters more precisely/high resolution?

That is one of the reasons I prefer rules dense systems.

[Shining Wrath]

Eventually, Rincewind cast his spell. It allowed the World Turtle to hatch hits eggs.

After that it became possible for him to learn lesser spells.

EDIT:

One answer to OP question is Conan the Barbarian. Conan defeated high level wizards without any level casters on his side more than once.

Show me a Barbarian build that can defeat high level casters with no backup - and, for that matter, no magical weapons.

[AMFV]

Is that accuracy or precision? A rules light system can model characters accurately/less stray bits but a rules dense system can model characters more precisely/high resolution?

That is one of the reasons I prefer rules dense systems.

Depending on how you're using the terms, I think I agree. It's worth noting that the higher resolution are more likely to have what I'd call transcription errors.

[OldTrees1]

Eventually, Rincewind cast his spell. It allowed the World Turtle to hatch hits eggs.

After that it became possible for him to learn lesser spells.

EDIT:

One answer to OP question is Conan the Barbarian. Conan defeated high level wizards without any level casters on his side more than once.

Show me a Barbarian build that can defeat high level casters with no backup - and, for that matter, no magical weapons.

Can we assume the Wizard spell selection was as fair as it was in Canon? If so then look no further than ok Wisdom + Rage + Steadfast Determination.

[Thealtruistorc]

Hashirama Senju from Naruto. To my knowledge, there is no mechanical equivalent to Sage Mode (absorbing nigh-infinite amounts of energy from your surroundings) or many of his wood techniques (As awesome as would be to wield six greatswords at once using trees as your arms).

[ryu]

Hashirama Senju from Naruto. To my knowledge, there is no mechanical equivalent to Sage Mode (absorbing nigh-infinite amounts of energy from your surroundings) or many of his wood techniques (As awesome as would be to wield six greatswords at once using trees as your arms).

Considering all sage modes are different in various important ways and we don't know what animal he summon contracts with to my knowledge we can't accurate state the full scope of his sage mode. Not to mention his summon animals in general. Too many unknowns to make an accurate concept let alone a model.

[AMFV]

Eventually, Rincewind cast his spell. It allowed the World Turtle to hatch hits eggs.

After that it became possible for him to learn lesser spells.

EDIT:

One answer to OP question is Conan the Barbarian. Conan defeated high level wizards without any level casters on his side more than once.

Show me a Barbarian build that can defeat high level casters with no backup - and, for that matter, no magical weapons.

The Casters he defeated were typically sub-optimal, and they often had their powers from demonic entities, which sounds a lot like warlocks. Furthermore this was typically after they attempted to mess with his mind (blowing their first round) and then he'd use Mad Foam Rager to overcome the effect and kill the suboptimal wizard.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

One answer to OP question is Conan the Barbarian. Conan defeated high level wizards without any level casters on his side more than once.

Show me a Barbarian build that can defeat high level casters with no backup - and, for that matter, no magical weapons.

A fairly stock Barbarian can defeat characters built to model what Conan's enemies were capable of. Non of his enemies were mid-OP tier 1 or 2 characters.


Hashirama Senju from Naruto. To my knowledge, there is no mechanical equivalent to Sage Mode (absorbing nigh-infinite amounts of energy from your surroundings) or many of his wood techniques (As awesome as would be to wield six greatswords at once using trees as your arms).

1. Naruto Ninjas are generally agreed to be full casters or near full casting gishes; there are spells that can be fluffed as that.

2. I think Sage mode is around when that show hits epic.

3. We don't need an ability that "draws energy from your surroundings" we just need a way to empower casting which is easily found.

[TypoNinja]

Eventually, Rincewind cast his spell. It allowed the World Turtle to hatch hits eggs.

After that it became possible for him to learn lesser spells.

EDIT:

One answer to OP question is Conan the Barbarian. Conan defeated high level wizards without any level casters on his side more than once.

Show me a Barbarian build that can defeat high level casters with no backup - and, for that matter, no magical weapons.

Isn't there a barbarian PrC specifically about bitchslapping casters around? They hated magic so much you actually have to destroy magic items regularly to keep your class features. The name escapes me, so do most of its details. Might be a good candidate.

[3WhiteFox3]

A fairly stock Barbarian can defeat characters built to model what Conan's enemies were capable of. Non of his enemies were mid-OP tier 1 or 2 characters.



1. Naruto Ninjas are generally agreed to be full casters or near full casting gishes; there are spells that can be fluffed as that.

2. I think Sage mode is around when that show hits epic.

3. We don't need an ability that "draws energy from your surroundings" we just need a way to empower casting which is easily found.

Somewhere on Boardgamegeek, there was a thread that used Psionics to accurately depict most of the Naruto characters. Note: The thread used a third party book, and was made around early Shippuden so the characters don't aren't quite as over the top yet.

[Vhaidara]

Isn't there a barbarian PrC specifically about bitchslapping casters around? They hated magic so much you actually have to destroy magic items regularly to keep your class features. The name escapes me, so do most of its details. Might be a good candidate.

Forsaker. It is the best and the worst of class features. Ends up costing you (IIRC) somewhere around 5000gp a day to keep your fast healing.

[TypoNinja]

Forsaker. It is the best and the worst of class features. Ends up costing you (IIRC) somewhere around 5000gp a day to keep your fast healing.

That's the one, thanks.

[SaintRidley]

I never said that Superman being unstattable was a failure of 3.5. Some characters are just too ludicrously powerful for ANY system to properly portray. Silver Age Superman used entire suns as dumbbells, there is no way to make that mesh with, say, Batman in the same system. At least not without STR scores in the thousands.

I'm starting to think Cancer Mage for Superman, with Kryptonite providing chemotherapy which negates the powers because of this post.

[jedipotter]

I regard this as a load of hooey, and want to prove it by making a thread of characters that _can't_ be done in D&D without either being epic-level monstrosities, massive houseruling, or having lots of extras irrelevant to the character. Original character ideas, or fictional ones welcome, as are attempts to make the characters in 3.5.



D&D can't do handicapped characters well. You can't have a powerful character that is also weak because of some limitation. The rules don't support weak, powerful characters. You can't, for example, make an archmage that shudders and miscasts spells into all sorts of random magical effects. You can't have a scatter brained wizard that forgets his spells. Clumsy characters don't work. You can have a low dexterity, but there are no game clumsy effects.

Dexterity as it is tied to both ranged attacks and dodging attacks and acrobatics, you can't make a character with only one of them. You can't make a giant archer that is also not an acrobat. Same way you can't have an acrobat that is a terrible ranged shot.

D&D does not support giving a character a single powerful ability, without also making them high level and giving them tons of other abilities. You can't make a 1st level character that has the ability to use Energy Drain or Foresight or Gate at will.

D&D does not support mundane characters that are experts at more then two or three things. You can't be a great melee fighter, ranged fighter, mounted combat fighter and a stealthy assassin. Even just to make a ship captain that is a great pilot and is a great marksman is a stretch....as any character with just one of them will be at least twice as powerful.

D&D has only a couple vague social rules. So making any ''the pen is mightier then the sword'' diplomat or such is difficult. Unless you use magic mind control, you can't change someones mind or have them agree to a new idea.

[toapat]

*lots of wrong*

every single example has mechanical representation. Wild Mage, Erudite, and Wu-jen are the bumbling mages, Zen archery allows archery off wisdom. flaws can easily make you incompetent with bows while not hindering your agility

DnD is probably the best system for frail but immensely powerful and specialized characters. A wizard able to permanently incapacitate the Tarrasque at 3rd level cant do much more then spam necromancy spells, the same goes with basically any focused specialist wizard or narrowly focused sorcerers.

Hell, Ubercharger doesnt do much more then impale enemies extremely effectively.

[Vhaidara]

D&D has only a couple vague social rules. So making any ''the pen is mightier then the sword'' diplomat or such is difficult. Unless you use magic mind control, you can't change someones mind or have them agree to a new idea.

You're kidding, right? Social skills are better at changing people's minds than magic mind control. Significantly. Mostly because NOTHING makes you immune to it.

[eggynack]

D&D does not support mundane characters that are experts at more then two or three things. You can't be a great melee fighter, ranged fighter, mounted combat fighter and a stealthy assassin. Even just to make a ship captain that is a great pilot and is a great marksman is a stretch....as any character with just one of them will be at least twice as powerful.
Yes it does, with tome of battle. You just dislike the way it's done for some reason.

[ryu]

You're kidding, right? Social skills are better at changing people's minds than magic mind control. Significantly. Mostly because NOTHING makes you immune to it.

Being a PC.

[Jeff the Green]

Yes it does, with tome of battle. You just dislike the way it's done for some reason.

And even without, it's possible. The captain could be a Rogue or even a Fighter, since Profession (sailor) is a class skill for just about everyone. For the switch hitter, I'd go with Halfling Fighter 2/Rogue 4/Silverwood Outrider 5/yadda yadda. Maybe throw in Knight, Assassin, or Master Thrower, depending on the exact mix you want. And depending on your definition of 'mundane', Incarnate and Totemist are more than capable of doing all of those.

[toapat]

Yes it does, with tome of battle. You just dislike the way it's done for some reason.

what ive taken from Jedipotter's opinions on DMing is that he would rather just be running CoC. Well, not CoC because thats still about having some investment in your character. Something with a more DMcentric focus and where character creation is minimal. the best match i can think of is CoC

[TypoNinja]

what ive taken from Jedipotter's opinions on DMing is that he would rather just be running CoC. Well, not CoC because thats still about having some investment in your character. Something with a more DMcentric focus and where character creation is minimal. the best match i can think of is CoC

I suggested in another thread that he'd make a fantastic Paranoia GM.

[Arbane]

I suggested in another thread that he'd make a fantastic Paranoia GM.

Or Gnomemurdered.

"To take any action, roll a die. On a 1-3, you succeed. On a 4-6, you are murdered by gnomes."

[Gavinfoxx]

Conan?

Spirit Lion Totem, Bear Totem, Whirling Frenzy Barbarian 2 / Wilderness, Penetrating Strike Rogue 3 / Strong-Arm, Skilled City Dweller (trade Ride for Tumble) Ranger 3 / Zhentarim Soldier, Thug, Dungeon Crusher, Physical Prowess, Skilled City Dweller (trade Ride for Tumble) Fighter 3 / Warblade #

He's also a relatively high level character in a world without that many high level characters... and the spellcasters he went after were low level warlocks, with the occasional sorcerer with badly chosen spells.

[Psyren]

Yes it does, with tome of battle. You just dislike the way it's done for some reason.

To be fair, this really depends on your definition of "mundane." We can all agree that initiators aren't spellcasters, and most of them aren't magic-users either, but whether they are mundane is a much thornier issue.

(No, I won't re-open the "Blade Magic" debate...)

[georgie_leech]

To be fair, this really depends on your definition of "mundane." We can all agree that initiators aren't spellcasters, and most of them aren't magic-users either, but whether they are mundane is a much thornier issue.



Just a reiteration that by the definition of a Warblade not being mundane, neither are Fighters or Rogues or what have you, what with them having capabilities far beyond normal humans in real life. If not being mundane disqualifies a class, everything above level 5-ish is automatically out.

[eggynack]

To be fair, this really depends on your definition of "mundane." We can all agree that initiators aren't spellcasters, and most of them aren't magic-users either, but whether they are mundane is a much thornier issue.

(No, I won't re-open the "Blade Magic" debate...)
The way I figure it, it's still pretty much as I figured it the last time this stuff came up. If monks are mundane, and they are usually classified as being so, then swordsages should be considered in that manner as well, along with crusaders and especially warblades, because they're even less magical.

[Anlashok]

Because in the context of this discussion "mundane" doesn't actually mean mundane. It just refers to someone who doesn't have spells. Otherwise, as said, basically anything mid level or higher stops counting. Being able to punch out an elephant isn't particularly mundane in the literal sense either after all.

[Psyren]

Just a reiteration that by the definition of a Warblade not being mundane, neither are Fighters or Rogues or what have you, what with them having capabilities far beyond normal humans in real life. If not being mundane disqualifies a class, everything above level 5-ish is automatically out.

And see, I'm 100% fine with this. No class should be mundane past level 5 or so. In fact, I would be happy with Rogues actually gaining supernatural abilities at high levels.

I've often said that, rather than being PrCs - Assassin, Shadowdancer and Chameleon should just be paths high level Rogues can automatically choose between at level 11+, and all three should continue advancing sneak attack and talents.


The way I figure it, it's still pretty much as I figured it the last time this stuff came up. If monks are mundane, and they are usually classified as being so, then swordsages should be considered in that manner as well, along with crusaders and especially warblades, because they're even less magical.

Agreed, if you consider one mundane you should do so to the other, and if not, not.

[AMFV]

every single example has mechanical representation. Wild Mage, Erudite, and Wu-jen are the bumbling mages, Zen archery allows archery off wisdom. flaws can easily make you incompetent with bows while not hindering your agility


I actually agree with Jedipotter here, all of those are either so hyper competent as to make their flaws unnoticeable (Wu-Jen and Eruidite), or so horribly crippled as to make their use unlikely (Wild Mage). D&D is not the best thing for modelling hyper focused characters, as could be seen from the difficulty in modeling Einstein without giving him the ability to outfight soldiers. It's certainly possible, but on the other hand, it is very, very difficult to model. On the other hand a point buy system tends to be exceptional at that particular brand of modeling, since it doesn't increase one thing without increasing the other.

The problem is that because of the nature of D&D spending lots of resources on something that's useless generally doesn't pan out ever, you don't have characters that are successful and quirky. A wizard is still going to be a powerhouse chassis, as is an Erudite, or a Wu-Jen. A Wild Mage is going to be very difficult to play.

I find the best solution here is a little bit Oberoni'd, fluff, for example if I wanted to play a blind character who sees through tremorsense, I would be more likely to find a way to get Tremorsense, then not even worry about actually making the character blind, and just roleplay him as such. If I want to play a wizard that's scatterbrained and never memorizes the right spell, except when it counts, I'd roll up a wizard, use my lower level slots for weaker spells that are comical, and save the higher level slots for necessary spells. Basically to be a hamstrung D&D character without being hamstrung to the point of actual uselessness, it's best to consider a roleplay or fluff solution over a mechanical model that effectively does what you want.

I came to this conclusion when I was trying to model a blind character for the first time, and I discovered that it was almost impossible. There was literally no way to effectively build that character, so I chose to build a character that was technically able to see and fluff it the other way, which works just fine.

[Threadnaught]

D&D is not the best thing for modelling hyper focused characters, as could be seen from the difficulty in modeling Einstein without giving him the ability to outfight soldiers.

5th level Venerable Human Expert with 18 starting Intelligence and +1 Intelligence at 4th level. 8 Ranks in Knowledge (Physics), +6 from Intelligence and Skill Focus: Knowledge (Physics). That gives +17 to Knowledge (Physics) checks and he can't fight all that well being an old man and only level 5.

You were saying?

[Seppo87]

5th level Venerable Human Expert with 18 starting Intelligence and +1 Intelligence at 4th level. 8 Ranks in Knowledge (Physics), +6 from Intelligence and Skill Focus: Knowledge (Physics). That gives +17 to Knowledge (Physics) checks and he can't fight all that well being an old man and only level 5
Add the flaws Frail + Noncombatant. This way Einstein only gets minimum HP and +1 to hit. Hardly a threat for soldiers.

[toapat]

I suggested in another thread that he'd make a fantastic Paranoia GM.

as did i, but paranoia, like CoC, is still a Player-centric story. i think he should try FATE (http://www.evilhat.com/home/fate-core/). I havent read the system but i know the character sheet is very minimalist.


I came to this conclusion when I was trying to model a blind character for the first time, and I discovered that it was almost impossible. There was literally no way to effectively build that character, so I chose to build a character that was technically able to see and fluff it the other way, which works just fine.

The problem with making a blind character is not that it doesnt have ways to mechanically allow representation in certain ways. its that there simply isnt an option to take blindness. Anywhere.

[tadkins]

Goku seems like a challenge to properly portray in D&D 3.5.

[Seppo87]

Goku seems like a challenge to properly portray in D&D 3.5.
Kid Goku is no problem. Adult Goku needs epic stats.
Post-cell base Goku says 40'000 tons are a heavy load, but they become light load as soon as he transforms in SSJ1. How much strength would this be in D&D?

[Jormengand]

Most of your favourite characters are fifth level, and that's why you think D&D can't do them because you give them too high levels. (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/587/roleplaying-games/dd-calibrating-your-expectations-2)

[Shpadoinkle]

Biggest example I could think of would be Superman, simply because he can do nearly anything. Green Lantern would be an interesting one, though... Some form of Psion would be my guess. Definitely seems doable, though.

Superman's probably a low to mid-low level Expert (level 3 maybe,) like most people would be. His race, however, would give him a ton of racial HD and all his iconic abilities (at will Fly, Scorching Ray, Cone of Cold, whatever other powers the writers decide he has that month, huge bonuses to physical stats, etc.) Probably a hefty LA too.

[Alleran]

Anybody mentioned the Mistborn, Feruchemists, Returned, Awakeners, Elantrians or Knights Radiant from Sanderson's Cosmere yet?

I'm just curious because I've been re-reading the Mistborn trilogy for the past week, and was puzzling over how exactly to simulate things like Allomancy. In terms of a magic system it's very creative, but it's also very different from Vancian magic. Or even psionics, to an extent.

[AMFV]

Most of your favourite characters are fifth level, and that's why you think D&D can't do them because you give them too high levels. (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/587/roleplaying-games/dd-calibrating-your-expectations-2)

No... most of your characters can be modeled at fifth level, Aragorn has no level, he's not a D&D character he's a literary character. He can also be modeled at much higher level, as can Gandalf. It's just a question of developing a model for the characters. Just because you could model something at a lower level does not mean you could not model something equally well at a higher level.

Edit: Again, Aragorn has no level; he could be modeled by so many different builds at different level ranges as to be completely different D&D characters regardless of the fact that they model the same thing. Aragorn in Eberron would likely be level 4-6, since that's close to the apex for that setting. Aragorn in FR would likely be levels 15-18, or somewhere thereabouts. Since his power is controlled by his importance to the narrative, not the rules of D&D.

[awa]

superman silver age flash and goku are easy do do with d&d in fact the same build can do all three it's called punpun just give yourself exactly the powers you need then and then get rid of manipulate form.

[Jormengand]

No... most of your characters can be modeled at fifth level, Aragorn has no level, he's not a D&D character he's a literary character. He can also be modeled at much higher level, as can Gandalf. It's just a question of developing a model for the characters. Just because you could model something at a lower level does not mean you could not model something equally well at a higher level.

Edit: Again, Aragorn has no level; he could be modeled by so many different builds at different level ranges as to be completely different D&D characters regardless of the fact that they model the same thing. Aragorn in Eberron would likely be level 4-6, since that's close to the apex for that setting. Aragorn in FR would likely be levels 15-18, or somewhere thereabouts. Since his power is controlled by his importance to the narrative, not the rules of D&D.

No, his power is controlled by what he can actually do.

Like the article says:

The problem with having false expectations about what “Strength 20” or “15th level” really means is that it creates a dissonance between what the rules allow characters to do and what you think characters should be able to do. For example, if you think that Conan should be modeled as a 25th level character, then you’re going to be constantly frustrated when the system treats him as a demigod and allows him to do all sorts of insanely powerful things that the literary Conan was never capable of. From there it’s a pretty short step to making pronouncements like “D&D can’t do Conan” (or Lankhmar or Elric or whatever).

And about Aragorn specifically:

Take Aragorn, for example. He’s clearly described as one of the best warriors in Middle Earth. But what do we actually see him do? Let’s take The Fellowship of the Rings as an example:

He leads the hobbits through the wilderness with great skill. (The highest Survival DC in the core rules is DC 15. A 1st level character can master the skill for non-tracking purposes. Aragorn, as a master tracker, would need to be 5th level, have at least one level of ranger, and have spent one of his feats on Skill Focus (Survival) to achieve all of this.)

He drives off the ringwraiths at Weathertop. (It’s difficult to conclude anything from this because it’s one of the more problematic passages in the book when subjected to analysis. If the ringwraiths are truly impervious to harm from any mortal man, why are they scared off by a guy waving two “flaming brands of wood”? Are they vulnerable to fire in a way that they’re not vulnerable to mortal weapons? The point is, the true strength of the ringwraiths is obscure, so it’s impossible to know how tough Aragorn would need to be in order to accomplish this.)

Aragorn treats Frodo’s wound, unsuccessfully. (The highest Heal DC is 15. As with Survival, Aragorn could have mastered this skill at 1st level.

In Moria (fighting orcs): “Legolas shot two through the throat. Gimli hewed the legs from under another that had sprung up on Balin’s tomb. Boromir and Aragorn slew many. When thirteen had fallen the rest fled shrieking, leaving the defenders unharmed, except for Sam who had a scratch along the scalp. A quick duck had saved him; and he had felled his orc: a sturdy thrust with his Barrow-blade. A fire was smouldering in his brown eyes that would have made Ted Sandyman step backwards, if he had seen it. (Aragorn slays no more than six or seven CR 1/2 orcs in this encounter. A trivial accomplishment for a 5th level character.)

Even if you follow Aragorn all the way through The Two Towers and The Return of the King, you’ll find that this is fairly representative of what he accomplishes. The only other notable ping on the radar is his ability to use athelas, and even if we don’t assume that’s merely an example of him knowing athelas’ properties (with a Knowledge (nature) check), it’s still just one ability.

So what can we conclude form this? Aragorn is about 5th level.

And since Aragorn is one of the most remarkable individuals in all of Middle Earth, this would imply that Middle Earth is a place largely like our own world: People who achieve 5th level are uniquely gifted and come along but once in a generation.

Does that seem like a proper description of Middle Earth? It does. Tolkien was crafting a false mythology – a forgotten epoch of our own world. Thus the people in it are much like the people we know, although they live in a world of heroes and magic.

[AMFV]

No, his power is controlled by what he can actually do.



And what he can actually do is controlled entirely by the narrative. I've read the article, and argued about it with people before, I'm not restarting that argument. But the Orcs could just as easily be 20th level and Aragorn could be modeled as a 24th level Spellless ranger as the Orcs could be 1st level and Aragorn could be a 5th level Ranger.

The point of the Article (if you'll find where the author talks about it later) was to show that low level characters can have exciting adventures, something I agree with. What I disagree with is the shift towards acting as though level is a realistic determination of how things work in your world.

Aragorn is as powerful as the narrative needs him to be. Gandalf kills something that is notionally the equivalent of a Balor, Gandalf experiences True Resurrection (even better because he is resurrected from the dead improved).

Aragorn is explicitly referred to as one of the most dangerous people in Middle Earth. So that means that whatever the standard level is for Middle Earth, Aragorn's near the top. If it's like FR and it tops out in the 30s, Aragorn is in the 30s, if it's like Eberron and it tops out at level 5, then Aragorn is around there.

Power is completely relative. Gandalf can be a 5th level magic-user, or Gandalf can be a 20th Level Sword of the Arcane Order Paladin. The only difference is in relative power, not absolute power.

[Anlashok]

Unless of course you're referring to the character's actual capabilities as a character rather than drivel like "he's as powerful as I want him to be".

[Jormengand]

And what he can actually do is controlled entirely by the narrative. I've read the article, and argued about it with people before, I'm not restarting that argument. But the Orcs could just as easily be 20th level and Aragorn could be modeled as a 24th level Spellless ranger as the Orcs could be 1st level and Aragorn could be a 5th level Ranger.
"Finally, you’ll get into an arms race of expectations which just reinforces the whole thing: Aragorn must be 20th level. So the orcs who posed such a challenge to him must be 15th level or higher. And since those were elite 15th level orcs, Aragorn must have been 20th level in order to face them."


Aragorn is explicitly referred to as one of the most dangerous people in Middle Earth. So that means that whatever the standard level is for Middle Earth, Aragorn's near the top. If it's like FR and it tops out in the 30s, Aragorn is in the 30s, if it's like Eberron and it tops out at level 5, then Aragorn is around there.
"And since Aragorn is one of the most remarkable individuals in all of Middle Earth, this would imply that Middle Earth is a place largely like our own world: People who achieve 5th level are uniquely gifted and come along but once in a generation."


Aragorn is as powerful as the narrative needs him to be. Gandalf kills something that is notionally the equivalent of a Balor, Gandalf experiences True Resurrection (even better because he is resurrected from the dead improved).

"Well, no. Authors don’t design their characters around the class progressions of the core D&D classes. Take, for example, a character who can assume an ethereal state without casting a spell. The only way to do that in D&D, using only the core classes, is to be a 19th level monk. But if that’s the only special ability the character in question has, it would be completely nonsensical to model them as a 19th level monk – they don’t have any of the plethora of other abilities such a monk possesses. What you’re looking at is a character with a unique class progression or possibly a prestige class. Or maybe a racial ability."


Power is completely relative. Gandalf can be a 5th level magic-user, or Gandalf can be a 20th Level Sword of the Arcane Order Paladin. The only difference is in relative power, not absolute power.

Okay, okay, let's imagine that at one point, Aragorn kicked open the Black Gate. He obviously didn't, but if he had, we'd have gone "Ah, well he must have been pretty high level to do that." The fact that he fails to treat Frodo's wound makes it obvious that he's not very high-level: he's a ranger and knows a lot about healing people, so if he were epic level and had specialised in healing and K (nature) then he'd have been able to treat it. It's not just about what a character can do in combat, it's also what their skills and, in Gandalf's case, spells can do - if he were a 20th-level spellcaster, then he should be capable of utterly world-shaking power.

The ability to cast Fireball is clearly not relative. When magi fight (both Sauron and Saruman seem to be able to cast telekinesis), watch for signs of them blowing up the building they're standing in with their ultimate arcane might. If they'd been epic casters using epic equivalents to telekinesis then one of them should have smashed Orthanc by ramming the other into it.

[AMFV]

Unless of course you're referring to the character's actual capabilities as a character rather than drivel like "he's as powerful as I want him to be".

And his actual capabilities are not that well known to begin with. He's capable of curing what can only be referred to as level drain (or is best modeled that way). Furthermore his capabilities depend entirely on how potent his opponents are. He kills many orcs (we can assume since Legolas and Gimli were in the 90s that he may have killed hundred). So if they are standard Orcs, level 5 is workable, but if they're templated or have class levels it's not. Actual capabilities aren't easy to model in D&D.

I'm not saying that Aragorn can't be modeled at level 5. I'm just saying that introduces errors of a different sort into the model than if he were much higher level. It's not going to be a perfect model. The problem again is that Aragorn's abilities depend on the DCs and the circumstances, which we don't know. It's possible that many circumstances made the survival DCs much higher, we don't know. It's possible that the average Uruk Hai was level 12, certainly it's likely that they were higher than level 1, since they're explicitly tougher than the standard Orcs. The problem is that we don't know how much tougher they are.

We know that Aragorn bests Sauron in a duel of wills, something that's very hard to model with a fifth level ranger, in fact that would likely require that that encounter was almost entirely fluff, which is possible but it's an error in the model if so.



The ability to cast Fireball is clearly not relative. When magi fight (both Sauron and Saruman seem to be able to cast telekinesis), watch for signs of them blowing up the building they're standing in with their ultimate arcane might. If they'd been epic casters using epic equivalents to telekinesis then one of them should have smashed Orthanc by ramming the other into it.

You should read the books for your example, not the movies. They don't use Telekenesis in the books, and Orthanc is explicitly indestructable, even the Ents who can destroy rock and stone and metal can't break it.

We can set a lower bound for their abilities, ergo Gandalf uses something like Fireball (although I don't believe he does), so the lowest level you can model him at would require that. But you can't set a higher bound without knowing more explicit details of the world than we do.

Furthermore in response to the "Middle Earth is like our world where nobody can advance beyond fifth level"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tls-Jli6eQE

Model me a D&D character at fifth level or below who can Pull/Drag that amount of weight.

[Vhaidara]

The ability to cast Fireball is clearly not relative. When magi fight (both Sauron and Saruman seem to be able to cast telekinesis), watch for signs of them blowing up the building they're standing in with their ultimate arcane might. If they'd been epic casters using epic equivalents to telekinesis then one of them should have smashed Orthanc by ramming the other into it.

I think you mean ramming Orthanc into the other

[squiggit]

I think it's a bit pointless to quibble over some of these details. Ultimately a fictional character isn't going to play by game rules even if they're in a similar setting. Salvatore isn't going to write about how 36 of the enemy wizard 342 crafted contingencies go off and instantly kill that drow and dwarf dude, because it's not an interesting story.

Add on top of that that D&D is awful at modeling martial characters. A level 10 monk can punch out an elephant and yet even without being particularly strong I can carry around about as much as this monk can. A level 20 fighter is dueling demigods yet somehow cannot perform techniques that even untrained combatants can, or have only recently gained access to some fairly straight forward tricks.

So even if you do agree on a level they're either going to be woefully over or under competent in areas they shouldn't be because the scaling is so silly.

[Seppo87]

A level 10 monk can punch out an elephant and yet even without being particularly strong I can carry around about as much as this monk can
Monk's damage comes from training and Ki, not from brute strength

[squiggit]

Monk's damage comes from training and Ki, not from brute strength

To an extent, you can't play a low-str monk and still expect to punch things effectively in D&D though... but swap monk for fighter and the argument doesn't really change (since you're only adding a couple points of strength anyways).

[Seppo87]

To an extent, you can't play a low-str monk and still expect to punch things effectively in D&D though...
I usually play my monks Dex or Wis based, and they are effective.
How much effective? It depends on the level of optimization involved.

[AMFV]

Monk's damage comes from training and Ki, not from brute strength

It's also worth noting that it doesn't work that way in real life. The way that fighters train to hit harder is that they train to get stronger so that they will hit harder.

[georgie_leech]

It's also worth noting that it doesn't work that way in real life. The way that fighters train to hit harder is that they train to get stronger so that they will hit harder.

To an extent. There's also a great deal of training to hit precisely and quickly with proper form. A bodybuilder could probably lift a lot more weight than a martial artist, but barring other training, I'd be willing to bet the advanced martial artist could hit harder. So long as the difference isn't extreme, at least.

[AMFV]

To an extent. There's also a great deal of training to hit precisely and quickly with proper form. A bodybuilder could probably lift a lot more weight than a martial artist, but barring other training, I'd be willing to bet the advanced martial artist could hit harder. So long as the difference isn't extreme, at least.

It's not the same thing, because bodybuilders train for different type of strength, which already isn't modeled well in D&D. Bodybuilders generally don't train for the same sort of explosive strength that boxers train for. Or martial artists for that matter. A bodybuilder might be able to lift more than a boxer, but they aren't likely to be able to punch harder regardless of the difference in the amount they can lift.

[georgie_leech]

It's not the same thing, because bodybuilders train for different type of strength, which already isn't modeled well in D&D. Bodybuilders generally don't train for the same sort of explosive strength that boxers train for. Or martial artists for that matter. A bodybuilder might be able to lift more than a boxer, but they aren't likely to be able to punch harder regardless of the difference in the amount they can lift.

Right; my point was that it wasn't just "training to get stronger."

[AMFV]

Right; my point was that it wasn't just "training to get stronger."

Well it is training to get stronger, but it's a different kind of stronger. Which isn't well modeled in D&D to be fair..

[CIDE]

Considering all sage modes are different in various important ways and we don't know what animal he summon contracts with to my knowledge we can't accurate state the full scope of his sage mode. Not to mention his summon animals in general. Too many unknowns to make an accurate concept let alone a model.

His Sage Mode isn't from animals. It's from the wood stuff.



3. We don't need an ability that "draws energy from your surroundings" we just need a way to empower casting which is easily found.

That doesn't thematically or mechanically match Sage Mode at all. TOB recovery and such has more in common with Sage Mode than your suggestion and even that obviously falls flat on its face.



Goku seems like a challenge to properly portray in D&D 3.5.


I've seen him built before using Psionics. I think it was a Wilder build.



Superman's probably a low to mid-low level Expert (level 3 maybe,) like most people would be. His race, however, would give him a ton of racial HD and all his iconic abilities (at will Fly, Scorching Ray, Cone of Cold, whatever other powers the writers decide he has that month, huge bonuses to physical stats, etc.) Probably a hefty LA too.

And completely unplayable.

[TypoNinja]

People always seem to take it personally when its suggested their favorite heros are low level, I've never figured out why. Nobody is criticizing your fandom, D&D's powerscale is really just that high. At 1st level you are already on the cusp of superhuman. Olympic Champions are 1st level characters. You can beat the world record for longjump on a 1st level character. If your heros are essentially mundane they are going to be level 5, tops.

But here's the important bit, that still makes them spectacularly powerful for a non-magical mortal.

You don't see it when you play D&D because things get stronger with you, but CR 5 enemies are freaking strong, like "bullets won't kill these things" strong, by CR 5 DR is common. Natural magical abilities appear. On a mundane scale these things are terrifying opponents.

Mummy, Weretiger, phase spider, pixie, a goodamn wraith. Don't think about killing these thing as a D&D character, imagine what your average mortal would do when confronted with these things?

[AMFV]

People always seem to take it personally when its suggested their favorite heros are low level, I've never figured out why. Nobody is criticizing your fandom, D&D's powerscale is really just that high. At 1st level you are already on the cusp of superhuman. Olympic Champions are 1st level characters. You can beat the world record for longjump on a 1st level character. If your heros are essentially mundane they are going to be level 5, tops.

But here's the important bit, that still makes them spectacularly powerful for a non-magical mortal.

You don't see it when you play D&D because things get stronger with you, but CR 5 enemies are freaking strong, like "bullets won't kill these things" strong, by CR 5 DR is common. Natural magical abilities appear. On a mundane scale these things are terrifying opponents.

Mummy, Weretiger, phase spider, pixie, a goodamn wraith. Don't think about killing these thing as a D&D character, imagine what your average mortal would do when confronted with these things?

The problem is that there really is no equivalent powerscale as far as literature goes. I'm not criticizing the idea that Aragon could be modeled at level five, because I'm some terrible fanboy who's hero Aragon's honor was imperiled. I'm saying that it's a model, you can set a lower bound. A level 50 ranger would be able to all of the things a level five ranger could, fairly easily. And furthermore I'm saying that there's nothing wrong with modeling things at whatever level is most convenient or useful.

Again, I repeat my challenge, model me a character who can pull a 747 at a lower level than fifth.

Edit: Again the thing is that Aragorn doesn't have a level, his level depends on the level of the enemies he's facing. If the Orcs are higher level, then so is Aragorn. He certainly doesn't become less competent at higher level, and at higher level you'll have more options for modeling people.

[Arbane]

A level 20 fighter is dueling demigods yet somehow cannot perform techniques that even untrained combatants can, or have only recently gained access to some fairly straight forward tricks.


Oh, there's one: Moe, the school bully from Calvin and Hobbes. He can punch Calvin in a way that not only hurts, it knocks Calvin over! :smallamused:

[Vhaidara]

Oh, there's one: Moe, the school bully from Calvin and Hobbes. He can punch Calvin in a way that not only hurts, it knocks Calvin over! :smallamused:

Knockdown feat. Power Attack hit and you get to knock an enemy prone.

[Arbane]

Knockdown feat. Power Attack hit and you get to knock an enemy prone.

Can you take that at first level?

[Seppo87]

Again, I repeat my challenge, model me a character who can pull a 747 at a lower level than fifth
There are no rules for pushing or pulling a weight on wheels.

[AMFV]

There are no rules for pushing or pulling a weight on wheels.

So you admit it's unmodelable? By RAW it doesn't really matter if the weight is on wheels. I could probably figure out the actual force required to do it, but I'm fairly that's still significantly beyond a D&D character's Push/Drag. In any case the point is that there are points where the model is going to break down. Building an academic with no combat skill is one of the most frequently posited cases.

The problem is that it is a model, and it's not even trying to model real life, it's trying to model fantasy literature, which it can do fairly well. But level is a pretty arbitrary thing, and so saying Aragorn is fifth level is disingenuous, saying Aragorn can be modeled as low as fifth level, is not. Although it may be possible to model him even lower than that, with sufficient optimization.


Knockdown feat. Power Attack hit and you get to knock an enemy prone.


As a note this would require that Mo (a child) has a strength above average for an adult. Which seems unlikely.

Although it's worth noting that this is probably how I would model it, but it is important to note the inaccuracies in the model.

[Vhaidara]

Can you take that at first level?

Yes. Martial Monk from Dragon Magazine, also fits with Moe being a fist fighter.

EDIT: It could also simply be that Moe made an intimidate check following the punch and Calvin has a flaw that causes him to go to cowering if feared after physical violence.

[Knaight]

There are no rules for pushing or pulling a weight on wheels.

There are rules for pulling weights on surfaces that make it easier to pull them, though rubber wheels full of air on modern tarmac are a lot more convenient than anything likely to show up.

[ryu]

So you admit it's unmodelable? By RAW it doesn't really matter if the weight is on wheels. I could probably figure out the actual force required to do it, but I'm fairly that's still significantly beyond a D&D character's Push/Drag. In any case the point is that there are points where the model is going to break down. Building an academic with no combat skill is one of the most frequently posited cases.

The problem is that it is a model, and it's not even trying to model real life, it's trying to model fantasy literature, which it can do fairly well. But level is a pretty arbitrary thing, and so saying Aragorn is fifth level is disingenuous, saying Aragorn can be modeled as low as fifth level, is not. Although it may be possible to model him even lower than that, with sufficient optimization.




As a note this would require that Mo (a child) has a strength above average for an adult. Which seems unlikely.

Although it's worth noting that this is probably how I would model it, but it is important to note the inaccuracies in the model.

Not as much as you think. Averages are averages not limits. By definition of average large sections of the population surpass said average, and some by pretty noticeable amounts at that. I've known scores of kids capable of feats of strength that put 10 or 11 average to shame.

[AMFV]

Not as much as you think. Averages are averages not limits. By definition of average large sections of the population surpass said average, and some by pretty noticeable amounts at that. I've known scores of kids capable of feats of strength that put 10 or 11 average to shame.

But Mo is a nine year old, and our average 10 strength comes from commoners who do physical labor. Furthermore 10 Strength doesn't really mean anything in a real world context. It doesn't factor in things like how much you, yourself weigh (which is incredibly significant in figuring how much you can lift in the real world). It puts explosive force, and ability to hold in the same exact bin. It's just not the best model, although I don't mind it, but I'm just aware that trying to get accurate real world strength into D&D context isn't exactly efficient.

[georgie_leech]

Not as much as you think. Averages are averages not limits. By definition of average large sections of the population surpass said average, and some by pretty noticeable amounts at that. I've known scores of kids capable of feats of strength that put 10 or 11 average to shame.

Moe is in Grade 1. I would find it exceedingly unlikely he has that great of a Strength score.

[Seppo87]

Anyway, my quote in the first post hasn't yet been disproved.
I never said D&D3.5 was accurate to the point that you never get excess powers, and I never said that changing fluff wasn't allowed.
I said D&D covers a wide array of possibilities and allows you to pick powers from different sources with a high degree of freedom, allowing you to model the gameplay of your character after a concept with good results.
You want to be able to do A? 90% of the time there is a very good approximation of that somewhere in the books.
Your character will reasonably approximate the act of performing "A" where reasonably means other player that know the source can recognize it from the mechanics.
And was the point.

I tried to explain this several time in this thread but apparently it's no longer about what I said, goals keep moving on their own now.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

5th level Venerable Human Expert with 18 starting Intelligence and +1 Intelligence at 4th level. 8 Ranks in Knowledge (Physics), +6 from Intelligence and Skill Focus: Knowledge (Physics). That gives +17 to Knowledge (Physics) checks and he can't fight all that well being an old man and only level 5.

You were saying?

You should dip Commoner 1 for -1 to BAB and all saves.

[Vhaidara]

Moe is in Grade 1. I would find it exceedingly unlikely he has that great of a Strength score.

Also remember that everything we see is through Calvin's eye. As far as Calvin is concerned, that's how hard Moe punched him. The entire series is viewed through the lens of Calvin's imagination.

[ryu]

But Mo is a nine year old, and our average 10 strength comes from commoners who do physical labor. Furthermore 10 Strength doesn't really mean anything in a real world context. It doesn't factor in things like how much you, yourself weigh (which is incredibly significant in figuring how much you can lift in the real world). It puts explosive force, and ability to hold in the same exact bin. It's just not the best model, although I don't mind it, but I'm just aware that trying to get accurate real world strength into D&D context isn't exactly efficient.

Your point? Many of those kids I was talking about were actually under ten while surpassing the average. They grew up to be truly ridiculous examples of the human specimen I'll grant, but it does happen.

[AMFV]

Anyway, my quote in the first post hasn't yet been disproved.
I never said D&D3.5 was accurate to the point that you never get excess powers, and I never said that changing fluff wasn't allowed.
I said D&D covers a wide array of possibilities and allows you to pick powers from different sources with a high degree of freedom, allowing you to model the gameplay of your character after a concept with very good results.
You want to be able to do A? 90% of the time there is a very good approximation of that somewhere in the books.
And that's the point.

Definitely but you're not going to be able to say "This is the only way you can model this character", which was what was being said with regards to Aragorn. You can certainly model Aragorn, or Mo, or any character practically, but there's likely to be more than one way to model a character. Furthermore you can set lower bounds based on observable abilities you don't want to do without, certain things become much more difficult at lower level.

I'm not arguing that you can't model most concepts in D&D, rather I'm arguing that to assign a "level" to real life is at best a spurious exercise, levels are arbitrary (for the DM and the worldbuilder) and they can make any level, an average level, or even have huge inconsistencies in levels without necessarily breaking verisimilitude.

Edit: And it's not that the goals moved, it's that you came in when the discussion had shifted and then posted on a point that was at best tangential. I was never arguing that you couldn't model most concepts. I was arguing that saying "I can model Aragorn at level 5" does not equate to "Level five is the highest level a person could model him and nobody could ever model him any higher because that would somehow be wrong, since all characters are always as low level as they possibly could be."

For the fifth level Aragorn to work, we have to assume that the goal in modeling Aragorn is producing him at the lowest level possible, and that may not be a DM's goal, a DM may want to model Aragorn at a higher level so that he can be an impressive NPC to his now 12th level Party, and that's fine, it's not going to be a worse model because the arbitrary level number changes, as a matter of fact, a higher level model opens up many many more options.

[Jormengand]

Edit: Again the thing is that Aragorn doesn't have a level, his level depends on the level of the enemies he's facing.

But Aragorn does things other than fight orcs, and we can tell his level from that.

Which is exactly what the article I cited does.

[AMFV]

But Aragorn does things other than fight orcs, and we can tell his level from that.

Which is exactly what the article I cited does.

Yes, but a 50th level Ranger CAN STILL DO ALL OF THOSE THINGS. That model only works if the goal of modelling a character is to introduce them to the campaign world at the lowest level possible, rather than to have them fit whatever narrative role the DM needs. A 50th level Spellless ranger with no AC isn't functionally that much different than a 5th level ranger with no AC, they both have woodsy skills and can hit things.

You are assuming that all characters exist at the lowest level possible to model them, and that simply isn't accurate to what a DM may need.

Edit: Again if I need Aragorn to be a powerful NPC in a campaign that starts at level 10, I can't model him at level 5, because he'd be a laughing stock, if I need Aragorn to be a powerful NPC in a campaign that starts at level 1, then modelling him at level 5 is fine. It's more based around why the DM needs to model the character than anything else.

And again, Aragorn can be modeled many more ways. I actually wouldn't use ranger for Aragorn, I would probably make him a Bard/Warblade mix, since that fits better with his demonstrated abilities (mostly leadership related), and then figure out some way to get the survival skills on him, since we see him mostly as a leader in war rather than as a stalker in the wilderness.

Edit 2: So you're again setting a lower bound. You're saying Aragorn has to be at least fifth level or Aragorn could be no more than fifth level. But you aren't saying (and the article really shouldn't) be saying: Aragorn can be no more than fifth level.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

So stating anything from Cavlin and Hobbes feels kinda wrong since as has already been pointed out the strip happens largely in Calvin's imagination. If Moe can put Calvin through walls then Calvin has to be able to survive getting put through walls on numerous occaisions.

That being said.

Moe
Human Child
Fighter 1 (Dungeon Crasher/Zhentarim Soldier)
Str 10
Martial Study (Charging Minotaur)
His other feat is something that makes him medium.

[AMFV]

So stating anything from Cavlin and Hobbes feels kinda wrong since as has already been pointed out the strip happens largely in Calvin's imagination. If Moe can put Calvin through walls then Calvin has to be able to survive getting put through walls on numerous occaisions.

That being said.

Moe
Human Child
Fighter 1 (Dungeon Crasher/Zhentarim Soldier)
Str 10
Martial Study (Charging Minotaur)
His other feat is something that makes him medium.

His Teacher would probably be a witch with the Slumber Hex... Hobbes is an Animal Companion of some kind, meaning that he'd have to have a class that granted animal companions (there are more options in Pathfinder than in 3.5 at first level). I actually kind of want to run a Calvin and Hobbes based game at some point now... that would be awesome.

[Vhaidara]

Susie is a ghoul.

EDIT: And Hobbes is an OP familiar granted for badass purposes.

[Arbane]

His Teacher would probably be a witch with the Slumber Hex... Hobbes is an Animal Companion of some kind, meaning that he'd have to have a class that granted animal companions (there are more options in Pathfinder than in 3.5 at first level). I actually kind of want to run a Calvin and Hobbes based game at some point now... that would be awesome.

Monsters and Other Childish Things (http://www.arcdream.com/zencart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=6&products_id=15) might be a better fit.

[AMFV]

Monsters and Other Childish Things (http://www.arcdream.com/zencart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=6&products_id=15) might be a better fit.

Probably, but we're trying to make things fit in 3.5, that's the game here isn't it?

Edit: I'd actually be pretty tempted to model Calvin and Hobbes at a fairly high level, since his imaginary flights of fancy tend to be quite high powered: Teleporting Through Time, Shapechanging, that sort of thing. I'd make his parents unstatted entities like the Lady of Pain. But that would just be to preserve the kind of ridiculous feel, it'd certainly be possible to model it lower.

Edit 2: Although almost all of that comes from an item. So I'm thinking something like a Factotutum (that would account for his bizarre array of skills), with a high UMD score to use the item of Shapechange (the Transmogrifer), Cloning (The Duplicator) or Teleport Through Time (the Time Machine) then he'd take Improved Familiar and Obtain Familiar for Hobbes.

We could probably also model him with a Pathfinder Summoner, which would be the most awesome Pathfinder Summoner Concept ever... and I mean ever.

[Jormengand]

Yes, but a 50th level Ranger CAN STILL DO ALL OF THOSE THINGS. That model only works if the goal of modelling a character is to introduce them to the campaign world at the lowest level possible, rather than to have them fit whatever narrative role the DM needs. A 50th level Spellless ranger with no AC isn't functionally that much different than a 5th level ranger with no AC, they both have woodsy skills and can hit things.

You are assuming that all characters exist at the lowest level possible to model them, and that simply isn't accurate to what a DM may need.

Edit: Again if I need Aragorn to be a powerful NPC in a campaign that starts at level 10, I can't model him at level 5, because he'd be a laughing stock, if I need Aragorn to be a powerful NPC in a campaign that starts at level 1, then modelling him at level 5 is fine. It's more based around why the DM needs to model the character than anything else.

And again, Aragorn can be modeled many more ways. I actually wouldn't use ranger for Aragorn, I would probably make him a Bard/Warblade mix, since that fits better with his demonstrated abilities (mostly leadership related), and then figure out some way to get the survival skills on him, since we see him mostly as a leader in war rather than as a stalker in the wilderness.

Edit 2: So you're again setting a lower bound. You're saying Aragorn has to be at least fifth level or Aragorn could be no more than fifth level. But you aren't saying (and the article really shouldn't) be saying: Aragorn can be no more than fifth level.

And here, we go back to what the article has to say about Conan.

"The problem with having false expectations about what “Strength 20” or “15th level” really means is that it creates a dissonance between what the rules allow characters to do and what you think characters should be able to do. For example, if you think that Conan should be modeled as a 25th level character, then you’re going to be constantly frustrated when the system treats him as a demigod and allows him to do all sorts of insanely powerful things that the literary Conan was never capable of. From there it’s a pretty short step to making pronouncements like “D&D can’t do Conan” (or Lankhmar or Elric or whatever)."

Replace all instances of Conan with Aragorn, and you'll see what I mean. At 50th level, you're going to have 17 feats, most of them epic, most of them completely unnecessary, and most of them representing things that Aragorn either specifically couldn't do or would clearly have done if he'd been capable of it.

I mean, saying "You can stat Aragorn as 50th level if you stat orcs at 40th" is like saying "You can stat Jormengand as a 50th-level character if you stat other humans as 40th." Yes, but you're going to be consistently disappointed by D&D's handling of Jormengand where putting even half as many skill points as she's allowed to in Heal makes her go from being "Qualified First Aider" to "God of healing." You're going to be disappointed when the system gives her a metric boopton of feats that it makes no sense that she could have, when the system means that she knows utterly everything there is to know. Jormengand is clearly a 1st-level or possibly 2nd-level character and you have no business statting her up as an epic character because you will be forced to make her capable of things that she's not capable of. You'll take away her ability to fail.

The same goes for Aragorn. A 50th-level character would easily have passed the relatively trivial check to stabilise the dying Boromir. A 5th-level character could not necessarily (though it's quite possible that a 5th-level character built to optimise heal could) and that's precisely why Aragorn fails.

You can tell what skills he must have ranks in to succeed, and also how many ranks he must not have to fail. And because we know that Aragorn isn't skilled at UMD, or tumble, or Knowledge (Arcana), and he also isn't a god of healing, we have to ask where those skill points went. Of course, they didn't go anywhere because Aragorn never had those skills.

[AMFV]

The same goes for Aragorn. A 50th-level character would easily have passed the relatively trivial check to stabilise the dying Boromir. A 5th-level character could not necessarily (though it's quite possible that a 5th-level character built to optimise heal could) and that's precisely why Aragorn fails.

You can tell what skills he must have ranks in to succeed, and also how many ranks he must not have to fail. And because we know that Aragorn isn't skilled at UMD, or tumble, or Knowledge (Arcana), and he also isn't a god of healing, we have to ask where those skill points went. Of course, they didn't go anywhere because Aragorn never had those skills.

Well we don't know what happened to Boromir, the Orcs could have poisoned arrows (in fact this is mentioned several times). Aragorn meets Boromirafter he's already effectively dead. The point is that we don't know the circumstances. Furthermore a model is going to have some breaks with reality. Death and dying is one thing that D&D models horribly in comparison with reality. Maybe Aragorn put a lot of skill points into knowledge skills that aren't related. Maybe he has maxed ride. After all he might not necessarily be a Ranger.

The problem is that the article is insisting that only one model for a character is acceptable. If you'd search for the Author's later discussion of it, as I suggested. You'd see that what he had intended was to inspire people to have more epic adventures at lower level. Which is entirely reasonable.

Lastly, we don't know if Aragorn can tumble, or Use Magic Devices, or if he has knowledge of Magic, for all we know he could do all three, we've never seen him attempt them. Aragorn did not as far as we know even attempt to stabilize Boromir, in fact I've just read the book, and Aragorn didn't attempt it, so he could have had the heal check, and (for story reasons) not made the attempt.

PS: Just reread the Chapter, Aragorn talked to Boromir and made no attempt to heal him, that we observe.

Edit: What I'm saying is that the author of the Alexandrian was trying to say (in my opinion terribly and poorly), that the story should not be a slave to levels, but that the levels should be a slave to narrative. It's possible to run a campaign of gritty intrigue at level 6, I've seen it done, and probably even much higher than that, if you can optimize your enemies correctly. It's possible to run high fantasy as low as level 5.

The problem with all of this modeling argument is that Aragorn is not a D&D character, LoTR is not D&D, we're constructing a model, and we should construct said model however it is most beneficial for us to do so. There should not be arbitrary limit on levels for any particular experience, because D&D can model many similar experiences at different levels.

Edit 2: I'm saying that Aragorn could be modeled at 50th level, if there was a need for it, if that fit what I was looking for with Aragorn in the narrative, that's what should decide character's level, the narrative of the DM. It's the same reason I'd want Calvin and Hobbes at high level, because I think that'd be more fun for them narratively even though it'd be absurd since it's not realistic, but then again neither is Calvin and Hobbes.

We could certainly model Aragorn at level 5, or we could model him at level 20, if the only inconsistency you can find is that he didn't make a heal check, then we have issues. In fact, if we suppose that Athelas is a magic plant, then it is quite possible that he used UMD rather than heal, and since he had no magic plants about, that's why he was unable to heal Boromir.

Edit 3: And for the final issue, we could model Aragorn as a fighter (makes sense since he has no AC and never casts spells), he has cross-class ranks in Knowledge (Nature) to find Athelas, but no cross-class ranks in heal.

[Jormengand]

Edit 2: I'm saying that Aragorn could be modeled at 50th level, if there was a need for it, if that fit what I was looking for with Aragorn in the narrative, that's what should decide character's level, the narrative of the DM.

Again, what I'm saying is that the end result of that is that you could have Aragorn being capable of things that the literary...

Hey, I have an idea! If Aragorn is 50th level, then we can assume that Denethor is too, right? Or, he's at least 40th. Whatever.

Aragorn falls a short distance, into water. It's possible he's taking, like, 7d6, 8d6 damage? You can imagine a 5th-level character surviving that (I didn't take the time to measure the cliff he falls off, but it's a case of "Legolas sees a river at the bottom of it" not "Legolas can't actually see the bottom of it because it's so far down", and we get some idea of how big the cliff is).

Denethor jumps off Minas Tirith, while on fire. We're not sure how many rounds he's on fire, but let's say 5. That's half a minute, we're probably taking a high estimate.

After falling 200 feet (if he even falls that far - again, I didn't measure Minas Tirith), Denethor hits terminal velocity, so he's only taking 20d6 bludgeoning and 5d6 fire damage. However, he still dies. RIP.

How many hit points does Denethor have? Well, it's entirely possible that he has low hit points, but he's not pictured as being frail exactly. I'm going to say that Denethor is an Aristocrat 40. (I'd probably make him Aristocrat 2, or perhaps 3, but that's kind of the point). Even with 8 CON, he's got 120 hit points and would have to be really, really unlucky (taking pretty much maximum damage from the fire and the fall, on every die) to get killed by that. Gandalf would certainly be unable to proclaim "So passes Denethor, son of Exellion" before he even hits the ground.

If Denethor is on fire for 5 rounds, that means he's taking about 17-18 damage, so... well, it's possible that he rolled low, that he's not on fire for quite as long, he's actually got a CON bonus, or that he's a bit higher level than I said I thought he was, but I'd say that it's entirely possible that he'd survive long enough to fall off the edge, and entirely certain that Gandalf would be able to make smug comments in the knowledge that no-one could survive that fall.

Also, before you mention Moria, Gandalf is a wiz... well, probably more like sorcerer, but it's entirely possible that he has, I dunno, Feather Fall? And as for the Balrog, it's entirely possible that it's actually the Balrog who is lower lever than the Balor stats that 3.5 gives us, rather than Gandalf who is stronger. Or maybe it was badly damaged from the fall and Gandalf wasn't. In any case, it's clear that Gandalf doesn't have all his cards on the table, so we don't even know what level he actually is.

Like I said, if you're going to stat them up at high levels, you're going to have to be prepared for them to do things they just couldn't do in the film (Yes, I'm using the film because it's been over 10 years since I read the book, but the point stands).

[AMFV]

Again, what I'm saying is that the end result of that is that you could have Aragorn being capable of things that the literary...

Hey, I have an idea! If Aragorn is 50th level, then we can assume that Denethor is too, right? Or, he's at least 40th. Whatever.

Aragorn falls a short distance, into water. It's possible he's taking, like, 7d6, 8d6 damage? You can imagine a 5th-level character surviving that (I didn't take the time to measure the cliff he falls off, but it's a case of "Legolas sees a river at the bottom of it" not "Legolas can't actually see the bottom of it because it's so far down", and we get some idea of how big the cliff is).

Denethor jumps off Minas Tirith, while on fire. We're not sure how many rounds he's on fire, but let's say 5. That's half a minute, we're probably taking a high estimate.

After falling 200 feet (if he even falls that far - again, I didn't measure Minas Tirith), Denethor hits terminal velocity, so he's only taking 20d6 bludgeoning and 5d6 fire damage. However, he still dies. RIP.

How many hit points does Denethor have? Well, it's entirely possible that he has low hit points, but he's not pictured as being frail exactly. I'm going to say that Denethor is an Aristocrat 40. (I'd probably make him Aristocrat 2, or perhaps 3, but that's kind of the point). Even with 8 CON, he's got 120 hit points and would have to be really, really unlucky (taking pretty much maximum damage from the fire and the fall, on every die) to get killed by that. Gandalf would certainly be unable to proclaim "So passes Denethor, son of Exellion" before he even hits the ground.

If Denethor is on fire for 5 rounds, that means he's taking about 17-18 damage, so... well, it's possible that he rolled low, that he's not on fire for quite as long, he's actually got a CON bonus, or that he's a bit higher level than I said I thought he was, but I'd say that it's entirely possible that he'd survive long enough to fall off the edge, and entirely certain that Gandalf would be able to make smug comments in the knowledge that no-one could survive that fall.

He doused himself in oil, possibly magical oil, we have no idea what the effects of that oil would be. Certainly there are many alchemical substances in D&D that increase the damage fire does to a character. So it's possible that the extra damage was done as a result of the oil rather than of the fire itself. Lastly Denethor was struggling with Sauron over the Palintir, which is something that may very well have had Con drain involved, as messing about with Dark Entities tends to in LoTR.



Also, before you mention Moria, Gandalf is a wiz... well, probably more like sorcerer, but it's entirely possible that he has, I dunno, Feather Fall? And as for the Balrog, it's entirely possible that it's actually the Balrog who is lower lever than the Balor stats that 3.5 gives us, rather than Gandalf who is stronger. Or maybe it was badly damaged from the fall and Gandalf wasn't. In any case, it's clear that Gandalf doesn't have all his cards on the table, so we don't even know what level he actually is.

Like I said, if you're going to stat them up at high levels, you're going to have to be prepared for them to do things they just couldn't do in the film (Yes, I'm using the film because it's been over 10 years since I read the book, but the point stands).

The point is that you can't base a model on "I didn't see him do this" because that gets absurd. I've never seen Aragorn with an Animal Companion, so he can't be a level 5 ranger. I've never seen him detect evil (so no more levels of Paladin, silly Alexandrian Author). I've never seen him Smite Evil for that matter. So we can't use any levels of Paladin.

So if we're going by, "He can't do anything not observed" we already can't even use the build the guy in the Alexandrian Article showed. A model is going to necessarily have issues, but these aren't major issues, and could be overcome by very slight handwaving.

As I said, let's stat him as a 10th level fighter. He has cross-class ranks in Survival, and in Knowledge (Nature). So most of his abilities consist of him being able to fight better, theoretically we could make him a very high level fighter without us ever expecting him to have any ranks in heal (since fighters have few skill points). And he wouldn't be capable of anything we didn't see.

Again, the model isn't going to work every time, but a low level model breaks down as well. Beorn for example was able to turn into a Bear that is pretty clearly described as larger than Huge (the limit for Polymorph) and that takes some shapechanging abuse. So we're looking at an ability that wouldn't come online till the mid-low teens (with Bear Warrior). The problem is that players rarely ask about missing abilities, there are lots of ways to avoid having a particular skill.

Edit: The lower level model also breaks down pretty catastrophically when trying to model Smaug being killed in a single shot. Typically the way that can be done is with Maiming strike and Charisma damage, but that's not really all that attainable by level 5.

[Jormengand]

The point is that you can't base a model on "I didn't see him do this" because that gets absurd. I've never seen Aragorn with an Animal Companion, so he can't be a level 5 ranger.

More "Aragorn would be bloody stupid not to be using some of these abilities if he had them."

And anyway, the point isn't even about Aragorn and Denethor specifically (Magic oil is kind of a cop-out, and I think you know it). How many times in films do people die by getting burned (by non-magical fire), falling off cliffs, getting hit by lightning, having something fall on them, or other things which don't scale with level because they don't have levels? Yeah, quite a lot. Any time any of those things happens, they provide an indicator of what level everyone is. Every time "The best [X] in the world" performs a skill check, it provides an indicator of what level everyone is. As I've said countless times, you're going to end up with them being capable of things that they are categorically not capable of doing.

Also, Gandalf didn't see Denethor pour oil on himself, IIRC, so his smug "So passes Denethor" statement is still unfounded if Denethor isn't a sensible level. He can't know that Denethor used +10 oil of burniness, but what he does know is that Denethor jumped hundreds of feet to his death, and he knows that because Denethor isn't a nigh-on deity.

[AMFV]

More "Aragorn would be bloody stupid not to be using some of these abilities if he had them."

And anyway, the point isn't even about Aragorn and Denethor specifically (Magic oil is kind of a cop-out, and I think you know it). How many times in films do people die by getting burned (by non-magical fire), falling off cliffs, getting hit by lightning, having something fall on them, or other things which don't scale with level because they don't have levels? Yeah, quite a lot. Any time any of those things happens, they provide an indicator of what level everyone is. Every time "The best [X] in the world" performs a skill check, it provides an indicator of what level everyone is. As I've said countless times, you're going to end up with them being capable of things that they are categorically not capable of doing.

Also, Gandalf didn't see Denethor pour oil on himself, IIRC, so his smug "So passes Denethor" statement is still unfounded if Denethor isn't a sensible level. He can't know that Denethor used +10 oil of burniness, but what he does know is that Denethor jumped hundreds of feet to his death, and he knows that because Denethor isn't a nigh-on deity.

Gandalf made the spellcraft check to ID the flames... also of note, in the book he watched Denethor burn.

And Aragorn, the fighter wouldn't have those abilities either. And you still haven't demonstrated when he used detect evil, that would have burn really handy for wormtongue.

Nor have you addressed how a fifth level Bard could kill Smaug in a single shot. Nor how Beorn could change into a gigantic bear, or how Gandalf self resurrected...

See your model is equally inaccurate

[Pan151]

5th level Venerable Human Expert with 18 starting Intelligence and +1 Intelligence at 4th level. 8 Ranks in Knowledge (Physics), +6 from Intelligence and Skill Focus: Knowledge (Physics). That gives +17 to Knowledge (Physics) checks and he can't fight all that well being an old man and only level 5.

You were saying?

And he still has at least 150% more HP than the average 18 year old commoner (assuming the minimum Constitution score of 1), and makes attacks as if he was still 18 years old (+3 BAB negates the -6 to Str/Dex). He might not be able to wrestle with a bear anytime soon, but he can at the very least pick fights with street thugs somewhat comfortably.

You were saying?

[Jormengand]

Gandalf made the spellcraft check to ID the flames... also of note, in the book he watched Denethor burn.

And Aragorn, the fighter wouldn't have those abilities either. And you still haven't demonstrated when he used detect evil, that would have burn really handy for wormtongue.

Nor have you addressed how a fifth level Bard could kill Smaug in a single shot. Nor how Beorn could change into a gigantic bear, or how Gandalf self resurrected...

See your model US also not perfect and. isn't even more accurate it's equally inaccurate

Of course not every model is perfect. The author of the article addresses that with his bit about 19th-level monks. The trouble is, the higher level you go, the more effort you're putting in to restrict your character's versatility. You're deliberately attempting to stop Aragorn from being able to do things because he couldn't do them in the film.

I'm not sure Aragorn got close enough to Grima to Detect his Evil anyway, and in any case because a third of random people are technically evil anyway, it wouldn't necessarily tell him that Grima was evil, only that he was capital-E Evil that doesn't necessarily mean he has an ulterior motive (most evil people are lawful or neutral evil anyway).

Also, Gandalf didn't resurrect? He fought the balrog a while, and finally "Cast his remains upon the mountainside," had a make-over and got a new staff, and appeared in front of Aragorn and co while using Light and Protection From Arrows.

Beorn can't. Bilbo can't. Why? Because D&D is the wrong system. I'm not saying D&D can do everything. I'm saying that you shouldn't try to do D&D by turning exceptional humans into near-enough deities, because then the way the game will play out is nothing like how the film plays out, unless you go to great lengths to reduce your character's capabilities.

[AMFV]

Of course not every model is perfect. The author of the article addresses that with his bit about 19th-level monks. The trouble is, the higher level you go, the more effort you're putting in to restrict your character's versatility. You're deliberately attempting to stop Aragorn from being able to do things because he couldn't do them in the film.

I'm not sure Aragorn got close enough to Grima to Detect his Evil anyway, and in any case because a third of random people are technically evil anyway, it wouldn't necessarily tell him that Grima was evil, only that he was capital-E Evil that doesn't necessarily mean he has an ulterior motive (most evil people are lawful or neutral evil anyway).

Also, Gandalf didn't resurrect? He fought the balrog a while, and finally "Cast his remains upon the mountainside," had a make-over and got a new staff, and appeared in front of Aragorn and co while using Light and Protection From Arrows.

Beorn can't. Bilbo can't. Why? Because D&D is the wrong system. I'm not saying D&D can do everything. I'm saying that you shouldn't try to do D&D by turning exceptional humans into near-enough deities, because then the way the game will play out is nothing like how the film plays out, unless you go to great lengths to reduce your character's capabilities.

Reread the books, Gandalf went to the undying shores and returned, he died. The issue is that the Alexandrian Author doesn't know how to challenge high level parties. As the world grows more dangerous higher level characters are threatened equally.

Also where do you get off criticising my model for inaccuracy when you admit your model is also inaccurate. D&D is not LoTR ans any translation of character or concept is going to have inaccuracies, so use whatever model works with your narrative. You can challenge a high level character as well ad a low level character, that's why you . can advance enemies

[Jormengand]

Reread the books, Gandalf went to the undying shores and returned, he died. The issue is that the Alexandrian Author doesn't know how to challenge high level parties. As the world grows more dangerous higher level characters are threatened equally.

Also where do you get off criticising my model for inaccuracy when you admit your model is also inaccurate. D&D is not LoTR ans any translation of character or concept is going to have inaccuracies, so use whatever model works with your narrative. You can challenge a high level character as well ad a low level character, that's why you . can advance enemies

I imagine the Alexandrian author knows perfectly how to challenge high-level parties, he just also knows how to deal with lower-level parties.

Re-read what I wrote. Your model isn't being criticised because it's a lot more inaccurate than my model. Why? Because in D&D, low levels are designed to emulate realistic people, and epic levels are meant to emulate people who are, or can challenge, gods themselves. Sure, you can use one to emulate the other, but just as if you use D20 modern to emulate one of the D&D settings, it's going to be a lot more inaccurate than it needs to be.

Of course not all models are 100% accurate, but whether a model is 90% accurate or 10% accurate is important, because if it's only 10% accurate it's not a very good model.

[Lord Raziere]

a character you can't stat in DnD 3.5? easy.

a guy with an assault rifle.

3.5 is inherently medieval. it can't do modern tech.

you can't refluff the bow or the crossbow, because DnD 3.5 is too simulationist for that, there are different stats for a short sword and a long sword, something as different as a crossbow and an assault rifle just isn't viable.

while anything from d20 modern is not DnD 3.5 and therefore also not viable. not even in Pathfinder counts, because its technically a separate system, no matter how similar, and only stats out older firearms anyways.

:smallbiggrin:

[Vhaidara]

a character you can't stat in DnD 3.5? easy.

a guy with an assault rifle.

3.5 is inherently medieval. it can't do modern tech.

you can't refluff the bow or the crossbow, because DnD 3.5 is too simulationist for that, there are different stats for a short sword and a long sword, something as different as a crossbow and an assault rifle just isn't viable.

while anything from d20 modern is not DnD 3.5 and therefore also not viable. not even in Pathfinder counts, because its technically a separate system, no matter how similar, and only stats out older firearms anyways.

:smallbiggrin:

DMG 146, Automatic Rifle.

[AMFV]

I imagine the Alexandrian author knows perfectly how to challenge high-level parties, he just also knows how to deal with lower-level parties.

Re-read what I wrote. Your model isn't being criticised because it's a lot more inaccurate than my model. Why? Because in D&D, low levels are designed to emulate realistic people, and epic levels are meant to emulate people who are, or can challenge, gods themselves. Sure, you can use one to emulate the other, but just as if you use D20 modern to emulate one of the D&D settings, it's going to be a lot more inaccurate than it needs to be.

Of course not all models are 100% accurate, but whether a model is 90% accurate or 10% accurate is important, because if it's only 10% accurate it's not a very good model.

I don't believe it is more inaccurate after all a level 20 fighter Aragorn would work just as well and all of your complaints are easy to address at higher level, while mine, well you didn't address them at all outside of hemming and hawing. Both models work just fine but neither is really superior it just depends on the needs of the DM as I pointed out Aragorn the fighter has no unexplained abilities and Gandalf the Sword of the Arcane Order Paladin can only use fourth level spells and he now has a mount, so more accurate there.

[Qwertystop]

(Googles it)

Oh, nifty. I'd never heard of that one. (The fact I've never heard of it, on a board devoted to minmaxing, makes me suspect it's got some awful drawback.)

I still stand by my general misstatement: there are some character concepts in D&D that are DOIN IT WRONG, and if you try them the game will punish you, especially if you're playing with the kind of powergamers on this board :smallamused: . Something as trivial as 'fighter who uses a longsword and no shield', for example.

The drawback is mostly that there are better ways to get most things that armor can get you. It's not that taking Runesmith is a bad way to get an armored caster - it's that armored casters aren't a high-op idea. Spells and magic items get plenty of AC, and if you really need one of the special abilities you can get the lightest possible armor and add a couple of things (Mithril, Twilight, Feycraft...) to drop the penalty down to zero. I think most of those could also be applied to heavy armor if you wanted to do a Heavy Armor caster without Runesmith, but it'd get a lot more expensive because you'd have to stack more things to bring the penalty down enough, and the non-proficiency penalty would get too big.

But if you can fit in the requirements for Runesmith (the big difficulty is getting the proficieny - probably easiest to just take a level in a gish class that gives it), it's fine.

[Lord Raziere]

DMG 146, Automatic Rifle.

Ok then. that was stupid of me.

lets try something more challenging eh?

a 10,000 year old dragon inventor who can wield magic, with complete control over an element he himself made known as Icefire, another element known as Trueflame which he can use to burn away lies and complete illusion mastery, who lives in a flying magical laboratory that can teleport across the universe, and possesses a gun that can only kill shapeshifters.

if you somehow do that, here are some other ones to challenge you:
a guy who can only manipulate copper with his mind. any capability or potential capability of choosing to manipulate something other than that, does not work, as its not a choice for him.

Vandal Savage from the DC Universe.

god tier John Egbert.

a man who can eat hope, not some god of hope or hope energy, but the abstract idea of hope.

R2-D2.

The Flash.

a living shadow

a person who can make 2+2=5 in physical reality

a person who can transform a sword into a shield for however he wants then turn it back into a sword again.

a man who can kill spellcasters with only a sword, without using magic of any kind.

a man with a black hole in his hand.

any sufficiently transhuman character in Eclipse Phase.

[TypoNinja]

The problem is that there really is no equivalent powerscale as far as literature goes. I'm not criticizing the idea that Aragon could be modeled at level five, because I'm some terrible fanboy who's hero Aragon's honor was imperiled. I'm saying that it's a model, you can set a lower bound. A level 50 ranger would be able to all of the things a level five ranger could, fairly easily. And furthermore I'm saying that there's nothing wrong with modeling things at whatever level is most convenient or useful.

Again, I repeat my challenge, model me a character who can pull a 747 at a lower level than fifth.

Edit: Again the thing is that Aragorn doesn't have a level, his level depends on the level of the enemies he's facing. If the Orcs are higher level, then so is Aragorn. He certainly doesn't become less competent at higher level, and at higher level you'll have more options for modeling people.

I'm not even sure what to call the particular failing of critical thought you've descended into here, I've seen you do it before in the actual thread about this ages ago, but you are so many kinds of wrong its hard to cover it all. Let me just hit the high points.

Aragorn is modeled at 5(ish) because that is the logical extent of his powers. You are trying to say "a 50 character can do everything a 5 character can do" as if that's some form of insight, or justification of why it'd be 50 and not 5. You've fed us a meaningless statement. Of course a higher level character can duplicate a lower level characters abilities, what else did you expect? You still don't justify why it'd be that level as opposed to any other, meanwhile everyone around you is using examples of demonstrated abilities, and failures to show why hes got to be in the range he is.

What feats of 50th level characters does our famous ranger display?

A relatively small fall off a cliff renders him unconscious so he clearly doesn't have 50d8 worth of HP.

We see him fail as several tasks, tasks that would be trivial to somebody with 50 ranger levels worth of skill points (and feats).

We don't see him mowing down entire armies single handedly like one would expect of a martially inclined character of that level.

He's competent, skilled, impressive even to a bunch of first level hobbits who have never left home before, but in no way does he ever display supernatural abilities or skills, nor do any of his companions who seem to possess roughly equivalent skill sets, further the majority of their enemies go down with a single sold blow (or arrow), indicating their typical opponents are very low HP.

Could I take Aragorns concept and plot him out to a much higher level if I wanted an Aragorn like NPC in my campaign? Why yes yes I could, but at that point I wouldn't be stating Aragorn, I'd be stating up my adaption of him.

[AMFV]

I'm not even sure what to call the particular failing of critical thought you've descended into here, I've seen you do it before in the actual thread about this ages ago, but you are so many kinds of wrong its hard to cover it all. Let me just hit the high points.

Aragorn is modeled at 5(ish) because that is the logical extent of his powers. You are trying to say "a 50 character can do everything a 5 character can do" as if that's some form of insight, or justification of why it'd be 50 and not 5. You've fed us a meaningless statement. Of course a higher level character can duplicate a lower level characters abilities, what else did you expect? You still don't justify why it'd be that level as opposed to any other, meanwhile everyone around you is using examples of demonstrated abilities, and failures to show why hes got to be in the range he is.

What feats of 50th level characters does our famous ranger display?

A relatively small fall off a cliff renders him unconscious so he clearly doesn't have 50d8 worth of HP.

We see him fail as several tasks, tasks that would be trivial to somebody with 50 ranger levels worth of skill points (and feats).

We don't see him mowing down entire armies single handedly like one would expect of a martially inclined character of that level.

He's competent, skilled, impressive even to a bunch of first level hobbits who have never left home before, but in no way does he ever display supernatural abilities or skills, nor do any of his companions who seem to possess roughly equivalent skill sets, further the majority of their enemies go down with a single sold blow (or arrow), indicating their typical opponents are very low HP.

Could I take Aragorns concept and plot him out to a much higher level if I wanted an Aragorn like NPC in my campaign? Why yes yes I could, but at that point I wouldn't be stating Aragorn, I'd be stating up my adaption of him.

We see him fall in the movies. IN THE MOVIES, NOT IN THE BOOKS. THE ALEXANDRIAN ARTICLE IS BASED ON THE BOOKS, SO IF YOU ARE GOING TO REFERENCE THE MOVIES YOU NEED TO DRAW UP YOUR OWN MODEL AND THEN I'LL ADDRESS THAT THEN.

Furthermore, we don't see him mow down armies of unknown level, they could be conceivably much higher level than first level. Seriously you can set a lower bound but not a higher bound, it's quite possible that his adversaries where higher level, and that would invalidate the whole single blow thing,.

[TypoNinja]

Doing some checking on the pulling a 747 thing.

Carrying capacity says you can drag 10x your heavy load under favorable conditions, 975,000lbs is the weight of a 747 according to google.

So we need a heavy load of 97,500lbs

MIC has belt of wide earth which doubles your carrying capacity, and natural heavyweight is a feat that also doubles. Two doubles is a triple, so we need a heavy load of 32,500.

Fiend Foli has a graft that lets you count as a quadruped, and large size quadrupeds get 3x base, so were looking for a heavy load of 10,833 by the table.

That works out to roughly 44 Str.

Anybody know any more ways to up strength or carrying capacity on this?

[georgie_leech]

We see him fall in the movies. IN THE MOVIES, NOT IN THE BOOKS. THE ALEXANDRIAN ARTICLE IS BASED ON THE BOOKS, SO IF YOU ARE GOING TO REFERENCE THE MOVIES YOU NEED TO DRAW UP YOUR OWN MODEL AND THEN I'LL ADDRESS THAT THEN.

Furthermore, we don't see him mow down armies of unknown level, they could be conceivably much higher level than first level. Seriously you can set a lower bound but not a higher bound, it's quite possible that his adversaries where higher level, and that would invalidate the whole single blow thing,.

It's also possible he could fly at supersonic speeds. We have no evidence of that though, so it's generally not assumed.

[TypoNinja]

We do set a higher bound.

Things he's observed to do, and tasks he fails. If he failed at something, its a really short logical leap that he can't be powerful enough that he wouldn't have failed.

[AMFV]

We do set a higher bound.

Things he's observed to do, and tasks he fails. If he failed at something, its a really short logical leap that he can't be powerful enough that he wouldn't have failed.

Well what have you seen him fail at in the books? The movies aren't necessarily a good source, since they are significantly less consistent.

[1pwny]

Just reading this entire thread. The ONE thing that was said here and will stick with me forever:

...as she's allowed...gives her a metric...that she could have...means that she knows...statting her up...to make her capable...that she's not...away her ability to fail.
Holy crap on a stick! Sorry for my language. But...

Jormengand's a girl? What? MY ENTIRE LIFE IS A LIE!

Yup, that's all I have to say about this thread.

[georgie_leech]

Well what have you seen him fail at in the books? The movies aren't necessarily a good source, since they are significantly less consistent.

Stabilise a dying man.

[aleucard]

Stabilise a dying man.

To be perfectly fair here, Nat. 1's are a thing in 3.5.

Really, this topic is starting to get out of 'discussion' territory and into 'argument'. Toning it down before a mod comes along seems like a good idea.

To be on topic; assuming that fluff is as mutable as it's considered in higher-op boards like this, the vast majority of characters out there ARE translatable to 3.5. This is, of course, assuming that the criteria for success is that the majority of players who are knowledgeable about whatever it is you're emulating will be able to recognize it within a single session of active play. Does this allow for additional abilities? Yes. However, the mere fact that we're talking about people here means that it's entirely possible that the source character DOES have abilities that are either not mentioned in the slightest or at least not explicitly demonstrated, thus having additional abilities is not nearly as much of a dealbreaker as some of the nit-picking crowd is screeching about.

Is 3.5 a perfect system? Of course not, that's why the word 'majority' was used in the previous paragraph. However, just because it's not a carbon copy does not make an outline of a circle any less recognizable as a circle.