Single Spellcaster in a Party

[wulfire]

Calling all Playgrounders… I’m in dire need of your help and knowledge.

My playing group has been disseminated by various things and has left us with three regular players (including myself) and a DM, so we are about to embark on a brand new adventure. An evil campaign.

Now, I must admit the situation I find myself in is entirely my own fault, as I took too much time in creating a character, and have been told that the party is in need of a spellcaster as it has two close quarter melee fighters (rogue and Bar-bar). I have never played a spellcaster before, and seeing the previous spellcasters of the group always asking to sleep in between battles does not appeal to me! :sigh: Nevertheless…

The campaign will start from level 1, and each character will have their own agenda (i.e. world domination). The DM will play an evil Demon Overlord’s Beguiler in order to stop the party from killing each other and push us in certain directions if needed.

And so to the crux of the problem. I have no idea what to use. I always go flavour and fun over anything else, and was looking into a character to prestige to Spellwarp Sniper but in order for the group to function I’m toying with the idea of using a Factotum to fill all the holes of such a small group. Is there anyone out there that can either help me with either? Pros and Cons? Or maybe to nudge me gently to look at something else entirely?

As always, any and all ideas are welcome here!

[AvatarVecna]

Basically, unless you're actually trying to be terrible, you'll be better than your allies; spells are just too versatile. Any full caster will be sufficiently powerful. Even if you avoid the "5 minute adventuring day" thing you mentioned before, it shouldn't be a problem. Just build something thematic and fun and you'll have a blast.

[evangaline]

Basically, unless you're actually trying to be terrible, you'll be better than your allies; spells are just too versatile. Any full caster will be sufficiently powerful. Even if you avoid the "5 minute adventuring day" thing you mentioned before, it shouldn't be a problem. Just build something thematic and fun and you'll have a blast.


I agree with this, however if you need some advice:


This a guide for a wizard (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?104002-3-5e-The-Logic-Ninja-s-Guide-to-Wizards-Being-Batman), this is another guide for a wizard (http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1146876) and this is a guide for a cleric (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=420.0).

Now, what kind of spellcaster do you want to play. There are numerous options out there.

If you want to be a teamplayer wizard (see the god wizard guide), you should consider becoming an human (or another race) conjuration specialist who has traded his familiar for abrubt jaunt. Abrubt jaunt allows you to teleport at any moment, as long as you are not flatfooded, with an immediate action. This means that you can tp on the rounds of the enemy. Just before they are going to hit your squishy face. Wich is nice. I would recommend taking some flaws if possible to get spell mastery (conjuration) Improved initiative, and another feat. The most important question is: What do you want to do though.

[Andezzar]

This a guide for a wizard (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?104002-3-5e-The-Logic-Ninja-s-Guide-to-Wizards-Being-Batman), this is another guide for a wizard (http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1146876) and this is a guide for a cleric (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=420.0).Those are good guides, but the batman wizard can easily outshine the Barbarian and the rogue.

Now, what kind of spellcaster do you want to play. There are numerous options out there.

I would recommend taking some flaws if possible to get spell mastery (conjuration) Improved initiative, and another feat.[/quote]you cannot take Spell Mastery (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#spellMasterySpecial) for a whole school. Are you sure you are not thinking about a different Feat?


The most important question is: What do you want to do though.Exactly. Clerics tend to be better at Buffing than wizards, but wizards are better at debuffing and SoL/D.

[wulfire]

Thanks for taking the time to help out.

After I spoke to the DM, he made it clear each character must be self sustaining. Therefore, no team buffs, no healing etc. This is keeping to the 'evil' part of the character as why would he help anyone weaker than themselves. My arguement of I might need them as minions later fell on deaf ears...

I've had a lot of different ideas to be honest. I liked the spellwarp sniper and all the ranged touch attacks, but in order to make that work I would have to dip into several different classes and I wouldn't be anywhere near being stronger enough to last on my own as I would be getting hardly any XP and would quickly fall behind the rest. I toyed with the idea of making a character along the lines of one of the four horseman (Famine), but it just isn't feasible, although a generalised De-buffer is the next best thing.

So basically I have no idea what I want to be... I was just looking (and hoping for) ideas for me to go away and look into and make something happen

[evangaline]

Thanks for taking the time to help out.

After I spoke to the DM, he made it clear each character must be self sustaining. Therefore, no team buffs, no healing etc. This is keeping to the 'evil' part of the character as why would he help anyone weaker than themselves. My arguement of I might need them as minions later fell on deaf ears...

I've had a lot of different ideas to be honest. I liked the spellwarp sniper and all the ranged touch attacks, but in order to make that work I would have to dip into several different classes and I wouldn't be anywhere near being stronger enough to last on my own as I would be getting hardly any XP and would quickly fall behind the rest. I toyed with the idea of making a character along the lines of one of the four horseman (Famine), but it just isn't feasible, although a generalised De-buffer is the next best thing.

So basically I have no idea what I want to be... I was just looking (and hoping for) ideas for me to go away and look into and make something happen

I understand that multiclassing is no option, and you want to be self dependant aswell.

If you wish to be totally self reliant you can go Cleric with divine metemagic (it's a feat from the complete divine that allows you to pay for metamagic feats with turning attempts) and use persised buffs on yourself to become a melee monster. You will outshine your teammates if you go this route.

The other alternative is going a conjurer specialist wizard focussed on crowd control that I mentioned before.
If you are intending world domination you might want to consider becoming a psion with the telepath dicipline or the aforementioned conjuration specialist with enhancement spells. You must realise however that at higher levels nearly everyone is immune to those.
An beguiler might do the trick if you want to solve/enslave things peacefully, but with your party setup that probably wont happen.

[Amphetryon]

Thanks for taking the time to help out.

After I spoke to the DM, he made it clear each character must be self sustaining. Therefore, no team buffs, no healing etc. This is keeping to the 'evil' part of the character as why would he help anyone weaker than themselves. My arguement of I might need them as minions later fell on deaf ears...

I've had a lot of different ideas to be honest. I liked the spellwarp sniper and all the ranged touch attacks, but in order to make that work I would have to dip into several different classes and I wouldn't be anywhere near being stronger enough to last on my own as I would be getting hardly any XP and would quickly fall behind the rest. I toyed with the idea of making a character along the lines of one of the four horseman (Famine), but it just isn't feasible, although a generalised De-buffer is the next best thing.

So basically I have no idea what I want to be... I was just looking (and hoping for) ideas for me to go away and look into and make something happen

For generalized debuffing with a Famine concept, you might consider a mounted Druid, or a Dread Necromancer (Heroes of Horror, using Libris Mortis for additional resources). Both are self-sustaining and - while they can buff their 'teams' - they also generally create their own teams.

[Andezzar]

If the PCs are not supposed to cooperate, why are they forming a group at all? Is it expected that they take each other out, for XP and loot?

DMM Cleric is a good choice. You can be the selfbuffing melee monster one day, and more party friendly group buffer as soon as the DM realizes how nonsensical his restrictions are.

Especially non-casters cannot deal with all problems themselves. Just ask him what the rogue will do against undead or other creatures immune to critical hits or how the barbarian deals with problems that cannot be solved with axe to the face.

[wulfire]

If the PCs are not supposed to cooperate, why are they forming a group at all? Is it expected that they take each other out, for XP and loot?

The DM had a 'great' idea of doing an evil campaign for a change, the most information I have managed to get out of him is that the material plane is in the same place as the demon plane, and is over-run and being run by Demons. The Demon Overlord has got his Beguiler to put together a group for some reason.

Each Character will be looking towards their own goals, and have solo quests etc but still be expected to work as a group.

Confused? Join the club!

[Red Fel]

Confused? Join the club!

This makes me mad. Really, really mad. Here's why.

Player: "I want to cast Cure Light Wounds on my party member."
DM: "You're not allowed. You're a Barbarian, you have no spells."

Player: "I want to cast Cure Light Wounds on my party member."
DM: "You're not allowed. You're Evil."

What we seem to have here is a DM who has little or no idea of what it means to play Evil, and he's taking it out on you. I think he entirely expects you to kill each other over the course of the game; in the alternative, I'm sure he plans for his DMPC to do it for you.

Beat him to the punch.

Here's what you're going to do. You're going to talk to the other players, not the DM, and come up with some very synergistic team builds. You're going to be like the Evil Power Rangers - strong individually, awesome combo moves as a team. And the first thing you're going to do, as a team, is murder the Beguiler who thinks he can boss you around.

At that point, one of several things will happen. The DM will allow it. I don't see this happening. The DM will tell you you're not able to do the team-based things you do (e.g. buffing, flanking, team tactics). Laugh in his face. The DMPC will be conveniently immune to your attack, but won't kill you. Remind the DM that this flies in the face of his instructions. (I.e. why should the DMPC, who is clearly stronger than you, want to work with or help weaklings like yourselves, instead of killing you?) The DMPC will kill your PCs. Reroll and do it again.
I loathe it, truly hate it when a DM with no idea of how a given type of character should be played tells the players how they're supposed to play their characters. That's crossing the line in several ways, and it really grinds my gears.

I realize that this kind of conduct is detrimental to the table, and discouraged. If you care about this DM, if he's a friend or a good DM, you probably shouldn't do this. But if he pulls this kind of junk regularly, if you've tried to speak with him but he doesn't listen, or if you're just halfway as peeved as I am hearing about it, consider it.

He can't tell you how to play your character. At the very least, if you want to play a team-oriented character, you can, and - short of fiating your character - there's not a damned thing he can do about it.

[LTwerewolf]

I agree with Red Fel. Evil doesn't mean no teamwork. Stupid Evil means no teamwork. How do you think Lawful evil exists? In history Tyrants don't rise to power on their own, they're helped. And even from the most selfish point of view, if you have the opportunity to keep an ally alive then 1)they will save you later and 2)you have collectively more power.

That being said, I would take an archivist or cleric with initiate of mystra feat or spell domain. Lots of tools at your disposal.

[Buufreak]

Here's what you're going to do. You're going to talk to the other players, not the DM, and come up with some very synergistic team builds. You're going to be like the Evil Power Rangers - strong individually, awesome combo moves as a team. And the first thing you're going to do, as a team, is murder the Beguiler who thinks he can boss you around.



I believe they were called the Psycho Rangers, but I digress. Red is absolutely right on this one. You can want domination. You can want destruction. You can want a ridiculous amount of terrible things, but at no point does that mean you can't use synergy or teamwork. That's kinda the entire point of this game, I thought. And just by being evil doesn't mean the part need to constantly stab each other in the back! There are plenty of real world evil groups that operate just like good groups, just with evil intents for endgame goals.

edit: swordsage'd

[Red Fel]

I believe they were called the Psycho Rangers, but I digress. Red is absolutely right on this one. You can want domination. You can want destruction. You can want a ridiculous amount of terrible things, but at no point does that mean you can't use synergy or teamwork. That's kinda the entire point of this game, I thought. And just by being evil doesn't mean the part need to constantly stab each other in the back! There are plenty of real world evil groups that operate just like good groups, just with evil intents for endgame goals.

Wait, the American version actually had evil Rangers? Huh.

I mean, in the original franchises, the (arguably) evil characters eventually joined forces with the good ones. The Gouraigers joined the Hurricangers; Rio and Mele joined the Gekirangers. Even Abare Killer, who is a complete bloodthirsty psycho, briefly joins up with the Abarangers.

What I'm saying is that Evil characters can join Good ones if it suits their needs. Joining other Evil ones shouldn't even be an issue.

[Runeclaw]

Druid would be another good option.

To help deal with wanting to rest and recover spells all the time, look into at least one good reserve feat.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Two -MASSIVE- red flags have presented themselves here.

Problem; the first: Any half-way decent DM will never tell the players that any particular class, or even class archetype, is needed.

Problem; the second: there are extremely few circumstances where it's acceptable for a DM to dictate the actions of a PC; i.e. the PC in question is compelled, magically or by some extraordinary ability of an NPC, to perform or refrain from performing some particular action.

There's also a third, albeit much lesser, problem. While a DM -does- have the right to restrict players from using materials he doesn't want in his game, it's a bit of a faux pas to make those options available to NPC's and it behooves him to have a fairly solid reason to remove them in the first place. "Evil doesn't cooperate" is a terrible reason and utter bunk besides.

You would do well to resolve these issues before you even consider making a character of any kind for this game.

After that, a sword of the arcane order ranger can be a fun way to dip your toes into the spellcasting pool instead of jumping into a wizard, cleric, etc with both feet.

[AvatarVecna]

Wait, the American version actually had evil Rangers? Huh.

I mean, in the original franchises, the (arguably) evil characters eventually joined forces with the good ones. The Gouraigers joined the Hurricangers; Rio and Mele joined the Gekirangers. Even Abare Killer, who is a complete bloodthirsty psycho, briefly joins up with the Abarangers.

What I'm saying is that Evil characters can join Good ones if it suits their needs. Joining other Evil ones shouldn't even be an issue.

Generally, when you're quoting Power Rangers as your source of roleplaying expertise, there's a problem. And seeing as I'm bored, I'm gonna put on my Devil's Advocate hat and argue that "Team Evil" doesn't work as a realistic concept.

To be clear, I'm not saying there can't be a team made of evil people; I'm saying they can't be equal in power. If they are, the team with break down when long-term goals begin conflicting. This is generally more of a problem when said long-term goals grow so large in scale, that there's no longer any room for the entire team to get what they want; once they have to decide who's getting the shaft, the civility and teamwork that's held together Team Evil will crumble, since none of them want to be the one taking one for the team.

Your point about the Rangers teaming up with evil-doers is a good example: Evil can play nice with anyone in the short term, so long as goals align. Inevitably, though, they will reach a point where not everyone on Team Evil can be satisfied, and the person getting the shaft is up for debate. These things happen in life, since not everyone can get what they want all the time. Even on Team Good, when these problems come up, they generally cause a lot of problems for the team. What ultimately holds the good team together is that, for each of them, the end goal is the betterment of society as a whole; they can put aside petty differences for the greater good. Rare are the villains willing to put aside personal conflict for the sake of the greater evil; in fact, such an attitude is generally referred to as "Stupid Evil", especially when it goes too far.

The only reason it's not Stupid Good for Team Good is because making a personal sacrifice for the greater good is one of the definitions of Good Behavior. A willingness to put yourself on the line for the sake of another, or a group of others, is an inherently Good Action with a Good Motivation. I'm not saying an Evil person couldn't do it, but if they're doing it for Team Evil, it's because they're not on the same level as the rest of the team.

In LotR, Saruman doesn't work with Sauron, he works for him. In the Batman canon, Harley Quinn is usuallynsafe from the Joker because she's his 2nd in command; that said, he's still in charge, and every once in a while, he makes sure to remind her of that when she crosses the line where her authority ends. In Kim Possible, Dr. Drakken and Shego work together well, but they generally have a "Mastermind" and "2nd in command" relationship as well, even if it switches on occasion. In Young Justice, the Injustice League barely holds together. In Avengers, Loki only has such great power because it was given to him by an even Bigger Baddie. In Order of the Stick, Xykon and Redcloak are the closest Team Evil has to equals; that said, Xykon is far more powerful in terms of raw magic compared to Redcloak, but Redcloak's been using Xykon since day one, lying about the purpose of the ritual for his own ends; both are using the other, and probably have plans to eliminate the other once the ritual has succeeded.

Can a team of powerful, evil people work together towards a common goal without their personal goals conflicting enough to make the "Team of Evil" more of a temporary alliance? Sure, but it has to be done very, very, very carefully.

EDIT: this post comes with a reminder that I'm taking up a contrary stance against Red Fel on the subject of Evil Characterization, so please take everything I've said here with a grain of salt.

[Red Fel]

Can a team of powerful, evil people work together towards a common goal without their personal goals conflicting enough to make the "Team of Evil" more of a temporary alliance? Sure, but it has to be done very, very, very carefully.

EDIT: this post comes with a reminder that I'm taking up a contrary stance against Red Fel on the subject of Evil Characterization, so please take everything I've said here with a grain of salt.

Oh, no, no disclaimer needed. You're free to take a contrary position to mine. Everyone is free to make their own choices. Whether those choices are beneficial to you in the long run... Well...

It's a very good point. Evil teamups do generally work better in the short run than the long run. The classic Legion of Doom was too cartoony to succeed in a better-written scenario; the Sinister Six inevitably disintegrates once the common foe appears to be out of the way. You do have to be careful about it.

One of the best ways, in my opinion, was expressed by the Giant (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/XbsQgS9YYu9g3HZBAGE.html):
Consider the following example: In an old campaign, I had introduced two completely evil villains. Both had plans to conquer the world, and I had let the PCs know that they had known each other a century earlier. When the players discovered that they were working together, they couldn't understand it. "Why help each other?" they asked themselves, "It would make more sense to go it alone."

"Wait," said one player, "I bet that one is planning on helping the other up to a point, and then turning on him." They all agreed that this must be the reason for their alliance, and even formulated a plan to "warn" the lesser of the two evils about the other's presumed treachery. This was a solution that was arrived at by a fairly logical process, but it was completely and utterly incorrect. What the players had failed to consider was that the two villains were simply friends. They had grown up together, and trusted each other implicitly despite having every logical reason to not trust one another at all. The fact was that the villains were letting their emotional attachment to each other override strict logic; they had made an agreement to share control of the world, and both were intending to follow through. Further, by contacting the "lesser" villain, the PCs had accidentally tipped their hand that they knew the two were working together, allowing the villains to set up an ambush for the players in a future session. By relying on logic and logic alone, the players had gravely miscalculated their foes.

This is a major factor. Being Evil doesn't mean being friendless. If you're Lawful Evil, you may see people as human-shaped tools, but you may still see your friends as something more. If you're Chaotic Evil, you may have no respect for life whatsoever, but you might also like the world better with your friends still in it. Whatever the case, you may genuinely enjoy working with your allies, Evil though you may all be.

Look at Dirty Rotten Scoundrels (the movie or the musical).In both the movie and the musical, the two con artist protagonists are competing over who can deceive the innocent young tourist and swindle her blind, only to be triple-crossed at the last moment, leading up to the big reveal that she is the infamous con artist, The Jackal. She makes her escape with their ill-gotten loot, and the two commiserate. This scene is expressed very nicely in the musical, in the penultimate number, Dirty Rotten Number, in which the two chat amiably about the fun life of a con artist.

Then, in the final scene, The Jackal returns, revealing that she made substantially more money during the rest of her criminal year than the paltry ($50,000) sum she took from them - but theirs was the most fun she ever had. The three then team up to swindle even more people in the finale. Again, the musical expresses it well, with each of them trying to pickpocket the others as they laugh their way offstage.
Friendship is, as certain people have observed, the magic here. If you can have Evil PCs who are friendly, who have respect or appreciation for one another, then it doesn't matter that they have different aims. What matters is that they will have tons of fun stealing, murdering, and committing abominations together.

And in the end, isn't that what life is all about? Genocide with friends?

[AvatarVecna]

Ooh, purple text, how scary...

You make a good point: pre-existing relationships can totally override logic, even for major villains. As I stated before, however, for it to be a long-term solution, the bond between them must be stronger than their desire to do evil. This depends largely on what motivates them to do evil, and can easily lead to a different conflict: they reach a point where the evil they're doing is too much for one, but isn't enough to satisfy the other's motivation.

This brings us to the sad nature of relationships in media: stable relationships, no matter how ideal they are for both the audience and the participants, are boring to watch. People didn't watch Jerry Springer to watch couple calmly talk through their problems with the help of a professional, they watched Jerry Springer to see a doomed relationship violently explode on live television. Sure, it's not what we want for ourselves, but it's entertaining. Everyone knows that reality tv is heavily scripted, no matter how much the show itself may insist on it being reality; real life just isn't very constantly interesting, at least not as interesting as your typical TV RL drama show makes it out to be.

That's why, while such a relationship between villains is totally believable IRL, making it work in a fictional setting can be difficult without the proper setup. Honestly, I mention Xykon and Redcloak as evidence against the "Team Evil" concept, but the Linear Guild is the exact opposite: it's obvious Nale and Sabine are in love, and Thog just loves being part of the team, to the point that Nale and Sabine are glad to have him around.

Long story short, I still think making Team Evil work is more difficult than you're suggesting, but it's not impossible, especially in cases where, like in the OP's case, the evil characters are the protagonists: when Team Evil is supposed to win, it's easier for the storyteller to leave their relationships unharmed.

[nedz]

I'm going to ignore the play-style stuff, because that's not what the OP asked for.

You liked Spellwarp Sniper.

Try
Halfling Rogue 1 / Druid 5 / Spellwarp Sniper 5
or
Halfling Rogue 1 / Sorcerer 5 / Spellwarp Sniper 5

There is a Halfling Rogue ACF (Races of the Wild p160) which gives you +1d6 ranged and -1d6 melee — so you can qualify for Spellwarp Sniper with just one level, oh and Spellwarped stuff is all ranged - of course.

You lose one caster level but you should still outshine the rest of your party.