Making fictional characters in 5th

[Forum Explorer]

So I was wondering, which fictional characters can you model well in 5th edition and how would you do it? Consider it a challenge if you will, and for bonus points, no multiclassing.

First off is Link.

And I was thinking just straight Eldritch Knight. In many Zelda games Link can basically, if not actually cast spells. And many of the equipment shenanigans can actually be modeled using reluffed spells. (Like using a fireball spell to model one off Link's bombs)

Thoughts? Character's you'd like to try and model instead?

[Rogue Shadows]

There's a character I've always wanted to run in D&D which cannot be run in 5th Edition. Sorry, sort of against the theme of this thread, but it's nevertheless weighed heavily on me.

The man: Alsonso Quijana. Also known as, Don Quixote de la Mancha!

See, in 3rd Edition, I'd have just statted him as an Aristocrat. Buy a horse and some armor, place some appropriate skill ranks, and I'm done. I'd have run him as an old man who's trying to act like a young man, and a Paladin at that. The utter epitome of Lawful Good. And also more than a little crazy and scatterbrained, but ultimately he means well even though he's absolutely useless in combat. The crowning moment of the guy's career was to be when he finally has done something so heroic that the Gods actually smiled down on him and let him gain his first level in Paladin.

5th Edition can't do that. Because there are no "lesser" classes in the vein of the Aristocrat in 3rd Edition.

...

...anyway, on topic. Obviously insert the Lord of the Rings characters here. Prince Dastan from Prince of Persia, probably a Battle Master/Open Hand monk, or Battle Master/Thief. Conan the Barbarian could be statted any number of different ways depending on what you want from him; personally I'm a fan of versions that give him only a few levels in Barbarian and the rest in Fighter and Rogue.

[Madfellow]

First off is Link.

Drat, someone beat me to it! :smallbiggrin: That's not how I would do it though.

I'm thinking start with Fey Pact Chain Warlock to get a fairy companion and then switch to Oath of the Ancients Paladin for the rest of your levels. Easy peasy.

[Rfkannen]

Lets see.

Rider from tangled would make a great theif 20. I mean he is a theif. In combat he isnt all that much about sneaking, so I suppose you could also go with a battle master.


don quixote would be a devotion paladin

luke skywalker would be an eldrich knight. Or maybe a monk.

I suppose sir gawain would be a paladin.

Eragon would be an eldrich knight (sure are a lot of eldrich knights in fantasy)

Hulk would be a spirit shaman. The spirits are the radiation

varian jeggar would be a level 6 half-elf wizard (lol)

[Suichimo]

Drat, someone beat me to it! :smallbiggrin: That's not how I would do it though.

I'm thinking start with Fey Pact Chain Warlock to get a fairy companion and then switch to Oath of the Ancients Paladin for the rest of your levels. Easy peasy.

Depends on which Link you go with.

[KhorashIronfist]

I've thought long and hard about it, and I'm pretty sure Aragorn son of Arathorn would be a ranger.

[Rogue Shadows]

I've thought long and hard about it, and I'm pretty sure Aragorn son of Arathorn would be a ranger.

Spells...

Let me clarify. Think of a ranger from folklore or fiction. The 2nd Edition Player's Handbook suggested Robin Hood, Orion, Jack the Giant Killer, and the huntresses of Diana. I'll additionally add (from an internet search) Aragorn son of Arathorn, Hawkeye from Last of the Mohicans, Grizly Adams, Daniel Boone, Davy Crockett, Tonto (the Lone Ranger's companion), and D&D's own Drizzt Do'Urden and Hank the Ranger.

None of them are spellcasters.

Now, you can re-fluff spells for all of these to represent something other than casting a spell. But the problem is that at this point you're re-fluffing the all the inspiration for the Ranger class.

In other words, there's this weird disconnect with regards to the Ranger class wherein we're okay with its exemplars never being spellcasters, and yet expecting when we actually play one to be able to cast spells.

Personally, I'd just as soon as made a spellcasting ranger an archetype and ditched spells from the base ranger itself.

[Forum Explorer]

Spells...

Let me clarify. Think of a ranger from folklore or fiction. The 2nd Edition Player's Handbook suggested Robin Hood, Orion, Jack the Giant Killer, and the huntresses of Diana. I'll additionally add (from an internet search) Aragorn son of Arathorn, Hawkeye from Last of the Mohicans, Grizly Adams, Daniel Boone, Davy Crockett, Tonto (the Lone Ranger's companion), and D&D's own Drizzt Do'Urden and Hank the Ranger.

None of them are spellcasters.

Now, you can re-fluff spells for all of these to represent something other than casting a spell. But the problem is that at this point you're re-fluffing the all the inspiration for the Ranger class.

In other words, there's this weird disconnect with regards to the Ranger class wherein we're okay with its exemplars never being spellcasters, and yet expecting when we actually play one to be able to cast spells.

Personally, I'd just as soon as made a spellcasting ranger an archetype and ditched spells from the base ranger itself.

Rangers casting spells has existed since 3rd by now. And in Baldur's Gate (my total experience with 2nd edition :smalltongue:) they could also cast spells. So that disconnect has simply been there for a very long time. (Also from what I heard Rangers were completely OP in 1st.)

So all that said, yeah you're right (though I think Aragon kinda cast spells or did mystical stuff anyways. The magic in Lord of the Rings is a lot more subtle then D&D)

[Calen]

Actually I don't think Aragorn or Robin Hood would be rangers. Aragorn would maybe have a few levels in ranger but he is more likely a fighter with training in nature and tracking skills. Robin Hood is a thief, the frequency with which he goes around in disguise and his other escapades indicate more of the charisma type fellow. Throw in a feat for longbow if you want, but the time the legends of Robin Hood began there weren't longbows in England IIRC.

[Rogue Shadows]

Rangers casting spells has existed since 3rd by now. And in Baldur's Gate (my total experience with 2nd edition :smalltongue:) they could also cast spells.

They could cast spells in baseline AD&D, too; at least according to my copy of the AD&D PHB (up to 3rd level Priest spells, out to a total of 7th level spells). I can't speak as to 1st Edition, I don't have a copy of the PHB.


So that disconnect has simply been there for a very long time.

I know. It's baffling. I'm not saying it's wrong or bad, just that it doesn't make much sense.


Actually I don't think Aragorn or Robin Hood would be rangers. Aragorn would maybe have a few levels in ranger but he is more likely a fighter with training in nature and tracking skills. Robin Hood is a thief, the frequency with which he goes around in disguise and his other escapades indicate more of the charisma type fellow. Throw in a feat for longbow if you want, but the time the legends of Robin Hood began there weren't longbows in England IIRC.

Oh, I agree. Noble background, a few levels in Fighter (champion), most of his levels in Rogue (thief). But point is, though, that the designers of 2nd Edition saw Robin Hood as an excellent example of a Ranger - Robin Hood well known for being capable casting a small number of cleric spells, of course.

[FadeAssassin]

Throw in a feat for longbow if you want, but the time the legends of Robin Hood began there weren't longbows in England IIRC.

The English Longbow may have been around for a good amount of time during the Crusades (When robin hood takes place)

[Forum Explorer]

I know. It's baffling. I'm not saying it's wrong or bad, just that it doesn't make much sense.


Fair enough.

So what would you use to stimulate Lina Inverse?

[KhorashIronfist]

Spells...

Let me clarify. Think of a ranger from folklore or fiction. The 2nd Edition Player's Handbook suggested Robin Hood, Orion, Jack the Giant Killer, and the huntresses of Diana. I'll additionally add (from an internet search) Aragorn son of Arathorn, Hawkeye from Last of the Mohicans, Grizly Adams, Daniel Boone, Davy Crockett, Tonto (the Lone Ranger's companion), and D&D's own Drizzt Do'Urden and Hank the Ranger.

None of them are spellcasters.

Now, you can re-fluff spells for all of these to represent something other than casting a spell. But the problem is that at this point you're re-fluffing the all the inspiration for the Ranger class.

In other words, there's this weird disconnect with regards to the Ranger class wherein we're okay with its exemplars never being spellcasters, and yet expecting when we actually play one to be able to cast spells.

Personally, I'd just as soon as made a spellcasting ranger an archetype and ditched spells from the base ranger itself.


Rangers casting spells has existed since 3rd by now. And in Baldur's Gate (my total experience with 2nd edition :smalltongue:) they could also cast spells. So that disconnect has simply been there for a very long time. (Also from what I heard Rangers were completely OP in 1st.)

So all that said, yeah you're right (though I think Aragon kinda cast spells or did mystical stuff anyways. The magic in Lord of the Rings is a lot more subtle then D&D)


Actually I don't think Aragorn or Robin Hood would be rangers. Aragorn would maybe have a few levels in ranger but he is more likely a fighter with training in nature and tracking skills. Robin Hood is a thief, the frequency with which he goes around in disguise and his other escapades indicate more of the charisma type fellow. Throw in a feat for longbow if you want, but the time the legends of Robin Hood began there weren't longbows in England IIRC.



Guys.


I was joking.

[Rogue Shadows]

So what would you use to stimulate Lina Inverse?

I'm not all that familiar with The Slayers, but I do know that her high-end blasty spells are too powerful for her to be a mere Eldritch Knight.

[Rfkannen]

Fair enough.

So what would you use to stimulate Lina Inverse?

Lets see if I can remember abilities.

Her focus was black magic, but I am pretty sure I remember her being a bit of a shaman, and using healing magic at least once.
She is described as a magical genius
I remember her having a sword, but for the life of me and can not remember her ever useing it. I don't think it emphasized
Also she is clearly at least level 17, and 15 years old.

Okay, so even though she is called a sorcereres, she does do healing magic, doesnt have a definite bloodline, and can use a sword at least a little bit. So probably not
Wizard, while her magic is learned, I doubt her being a wizard, especialy the healing.

So a bard would probably be the best awnser. Level 9 spells, learned magic, some healing, but able to learn all kinds of magic, and could focus on damaging magic. Is able to use a sword even if not that well. Can learn druid spells.

Yeah bard seams about right.

[Forum Explorer]

Lets see if I can remember abilities.

Her focus was black magic, but I am pretty sure I remember her being a bit of a shaman, and using healing magic at least once.
She is described as a magical genius
I remember her having a sword, but for the life of me and can not remember her ever useing it. I don't think it emphasized
Also she is clearly at least level 17, and 15 years old.

Okay, so even though she is called a sorcereres, she does do healing magic, doesnt have a definite bloodline, and can use a sword at least a little bit. So probably not
Wizard, while her magic is learned, I doubt her being a wizard, especialy the healing.

So a bard would probably be the best awnser. Level 9 spells, learned magic, some healing, but able to learn all kinds of magic, and could focus on damaging magic. Is able to use a sword even if not that well. Can learn druid spells.

Yeah bard seams about right.

She does, technically, use a sword when she fuses spells with the sword of light. But that's a pretty awesome analysis. :smallsmile:

[Rowan Wolf]

Spells...

Let me clarify. Think of a ranger from folklore or fiction. The 2nd Edition Player's Handbook suggested Robin Hood, Orion, Jack the Giant Killer, and the huntresses of Diana. I'll additionally add (from an internet search) Aragorn son of Arathorn, Hawkeye from Last of the Mohicans, Grizly Adams, Daniel Boone, Davy Crockett, Tonto (the Lone Ranger's companion), and D&D's own Drizzt Do'Urden and Hank the Ranger.

None of them are spellcasters.

Now, you can re-fluff spells for all of these to represent something other than casting a spell. But the problem is that at this point you're re-fluffing the all the inspiration for the Ranger class.

In other words, there's this weird disconnect with regards to the Ranger class wherein we're okay with its exemplars never being spellcasters, and yet expecting when we actually play one to be able to cast spells.

Personally, I'd just as soon as made a spellcasting ranger an archetype and ditched spells from the base ranger itself.

If I recall the Player's Option Book made it possible to be a spell less Ranger in 2nd edition, you could select difference 'abilities', if fact you didn't even need to have special enemies or the two-weapon style either

[CrusaderJoe]

There's a character I've always wanted to run in D&D which cannot be run in 5th Edition. Sorry, sort of against the theme of this thread, but it's nevertheless weighed heavily on me.

The man: Alsonso Quijana. Also known as, Don Quixote de la Mancha!

See, in 3rd Edition, I'd have just statted him as an Aristocrat. Buy a horse and some armor, place some appropriate skill ranks, and I'm done. I'd have run him as an old man who's trying to act like a young man, and a Paladin at that. The utter epitome of Lawful Good. And also more than a little crazy and scatterbrained, but ultimately he means well even though he's absolutely useless in combat. The crowning moment of the guy's career was to be when he finally has done something so heroic that the Gods actually smiled down on him and let him gain his first level in Paladin.

5th Edition can't do that. Because there are no "lesser" classes in the vein of the Aristocrat in 3rd Edition.


Level 1 maybe level 2 Ranger with the noble background.

Never raise your level and ride around to on a horse... You are a lesser class that gets squat compared to other classes...

Your favored enemy and terrain is up to you but just don't take training in any relevant skills and you will be fine.

[Rogue Shadows]

If I recall the Player's Option Book made it possible to be a spell less Ranger in 2nd edition, you could select difference 'abilities', if fact you didn't even need to have special enemies or the two-weapon style either

Again, the odd thing to me is that TSR looked at Robin Hood, Orion, Aragorn, Jack the Giant Killer, and so on, and concluded "yeah, that should be a spellcaster."

[T.G. Oskar]

Didn't the AD&D Ranger had the ability to cast Mage and Druid spells, anyways? Rangers in D&D have always been able to cast spells, one way or another. They were also the original "Pet" class, before the Druid got its own pet in 3e (and lost it again in 4th!) Rangers are, one way or another, a very D&D class; not exactly based on Aragorn, but more loosely based, as Aragorn was in many ways more of a Fighter than anything else. Robin Hood was a Thief, though; one very skilled in Archery, but a Thief nonetheless. I'd dare say Ranger 2/Rogue 18 (mwahahaha!!), with Explorer (Sherwood Forest) and Favored Enemy (King John's Minions). Diana's Huntresses could probably have some divine magic from the goddess herself, though; aside from being, y'know, huntresses, they had no other skill (they hunted supernatural game, though).

I'd be interested in seeing who'd be a Champion Fighter. Leonidas? Achilles (the latter could have a Boon of Invulnerability and combine it with the Champion's "capstone" for greater effectiveness)?

[Feldarove]

Fictional Character eh?

Girlfriend

Level 1 human chaos sorcerer, max charisma!

[Knaight]

There's a character I've always wanted to run in D&D which cannot be run in 5th Edition. Sorry, sort of against the theme of this thread, but it's nevertheless weighed heavily on me.

The man: Alsonso Quijana. Also known as, Don Quixote de la Mancha!

See, in 3rd Edition, I'd have just statted him as an Aristocrat. Buy a horse and some armor, place some appropriate skill ranks, and I'm done. I'd have run him as an old man who's trying to act like a young man, and a Paladin at that. The utter epitome of Lawful Good. And also more than a little crazy and scatterbrained, but ultimately he means well even though he's absolutely useless in combat. The crowning moment of the guy's career was to be when he finally has done something so heroic that the Gods actually smiled down on him and let him gain his first level in Paladin.

5th Edition can't do that. Because there are no "lesser" classes in the vein of the Aristocrat in 3rd Edition.

Just having the character lag in levels covers it pretty well. It might not even be necessary, you could go straight Fighter and just have ability scores and skill proficiencies entirely out of line with what the character is trying to do. Don Quixote wasn't exactly known for being strong and tough, he wasn't particularly capable in the relevant skills, but there's no indication that he is completely unskilled in everything. Had he not had the bizarre drive to adventure he did, he could have led a normal life, with the skills that entails.

[CrusaderJoe]

Fictional Character eh?

Girlfriend

Level 1 human chaos sorcerer, max charisma!

With sexism like that it isn't surprising you feel a girlfriend a fictional character.

Edit;

I would love to see a Miroku Monk (cursed monk) that you can kill X number of creatures per day of Y CR by sucking them into your hand hole.

[Suichimo]

If I recall the Player's Option Book made it possible to be a spell less Ranger in 2nd edition, you could select difference 'abilities', if fact you didn't even need to have special enemies or the two-weapon style either

3.5 had this as well.

And Aragorn is totally a straight Champion or Battlemaster. No Ranger needed outside of the title.

[Gwendol]

Aragorn also had some Lay on Hands abilities. However LotR magic is badly represented by D&D spellcasting.

Also:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?386550-Fellowship-of-the-Ring-The-Building

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?384648-Conan-The-5e-Build-Challenge!

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?385169-Building-the-best-swordsmen-of-this-world-or-any-other!-Fafhrd-amp-the-Gray-Mouser

[Rfkannen]

What about finn the human?

Marceline the vampire queen.

Gruncle (From gravity falls)

alice from alife in wonderland

assasmi from legend of korra

wicked witch of the west from wizard of oz?

what about from wiked.

[supergoji18]

So I was wondering, which fictional characters can you model well in 5th edition and how would you do it? Consider it a challenge if you will, and for bonus points, no multiclassing.

First off is Link.

And I was thinking just straight Eldritch Knight. In many Zelda games Link can basically, if not actually cast spells. And many of the equipment shenanigans can actually be modeled using reluffed spells. (Like using a fireball spell to model one off Link's bombs)

Thoughts? Character's you'd like to try and model instead?
I'd say he would be a Wood Elf Ranger with a bit of Bard and EK in there.

Ability scores would probably be this:
Str: 15
Con: 12
Dex: 20
Int: 10
Wis: 16
Cha: 14

[Heartspan]

Marceline is probably a high level sorceror with vampire themed spells. She polymorphs alot. That, or a demon pact of the blade warlock with her axe-bass

[Feldarove]

With sexism like that it isn't surprising you feel a girlfriend a fictional character.



What's sexist about a spontaneous, unpredictable charismatic human girlfriend?

Is it because I said she's level 1?


Regardless,

I'd like to see Kvothe from The Kingkiller chronicles. Though a lot of his actual powers are not known, but assumed, he is a bard/monk/Truenamer*

*This is the tricky part.

If anyone knows the character, I'd be interested in your thoughts.

[Joe the Rat]

Re: Rangers: They have always been spellcasters. They just didn't pick it up as early in the old days (level 9, then 4, now 2). But they also didn't have armor restrictions. And they could heal, and could use a Palantir divination spells and magic items. It's not if Aragorn was a Ranger, but Rangers were Aragorn. Then the class caught a bad case of Drizzts...


Marceline is probably a high level sorceror with vampire themed spells. She polymorphs alot. That, or a demon pact of the blade warlock with her axe-bass
Considering who her father is...

Also, templating is a thing again, so you could actually make her a vampire with class levels. Practically speaking, you can make a fictional character in 5th by simply putting the traits that you need to have together. Now, if we're talking player characters...

For the Man of La Mancha, Take the Noble background. Because that's where you start, as a Gentleman. Now we add a level or so of Bard. One level is probably enough. He knows all of the great stories, and has at least the inclination to share his "wisdom" with others. Maybe not the way he intends, but that's why inspiration dice are the purview of the recipient. Crap physical stats, as he is old and feeble, but high Constitution, as he hasn't gotten himself killed yet, and crap wisdom, as he is crazy. Max out intelligence. This will help all those History rolls you use in place of something more appropriate, and his madness is probably too spicy for Intellect Devourers. Charisma... depends on how you want to play it.

Spells... is where we run into issues. Pick something that would best be fit as mad rambling or inspiration. Possibly something that does psychic damage, or illusions to feed others into his madness. Now outfit him in Plate, which he is not proficient with, and makes 90% of his spellcasting moot. And give him a lance, which he is also not proficient with, and therefore crap in combat. Alternatively, swap out Bard for Warlock. Warlock 1, unable to cast spells thanks to your armor, and... do we strike fear in others with our insanity, or is he telepathic? Don Quixote by way of Lovecraft?

[Rfkannen]

Re: Rangers: They have always been spellcasters. They just didn't pick it up as early in the old days (level 9, then 4, now 2). But they also didn't have armor restrictions. And they could heal, and could use a Palantir divination spells and magic items. It's not if Aragorn was a Ranger, but Rangers were Aragorn. Then the class caught a bad case of Drizzts...


Considering who her father is...

Also, templating is a thing again, so you could actually make her a vampire with class levels. Practically speaking, you can make a fictional character in 5th by simply putting the traits that you need to have together. Now, if we're talking player characters...

For the Man of La Mancha, Take the Noble background. Because that's where you start, as a Gentleman. Now we add a level or so of Bard. One level is probably enough. He knows all of the great stories, and has at least the inclination to share his "wisdom" with others. Maybe not the way he intends, but that's why inspiration dice are the purview of the recipient. Crap physical stats, as he is old and feeble, but high Constitution, as he hasn't gotten himself killed yet, and crap wisdom, as he is crazy. Max out intelligence. This will help all those History rolls you use in place of something more appropriate, and his madness is probably too spicy for Intellect Devourers. Charisma... depends on how you want to play it.

Spells... is where we run into issues. Pick something that would best be fit as mad rambling or inspiration. Possibly something that does psychic damage, or illusions to feed others into his madness. Now outfit him in Plate, which he is not proficient with, and makes 90% of his spellcasting moot. And give him a lance, which he is also not proficient with, and therefore crap in combat. Alternatively, swap out Bard for Warlock. Warlock 1, unable to cast spells thanks to your armor, and... do we strike fear in others with our insanity, or is he telepathic? Don Quixote by way of Lovecraft?

What do you mean charisma,depends on how you play it? Charisma is force of personality, if the ma nof la mancha dasnt have a 20 in charisma ill eat a book!

[Beleriphon]

3.5 had this as well.

And Aragorn is totally a straight Champion or Battlemaster. No Ranger needed outside of the title.

I'd personally go with Champion, and a least a few levels of ranger is only so he can use some the ranger tracking abilities. Anduril is totally a magic longsword as well.

As for the suggetions for Leonidas the actual Spartan king is probably best represented by a battlemaster with the defense style and any feats that apply to spears. The guy from 300 is a barbarian that uses a spear and a shield.

[CrusaderJoe]

I'd personally go with Champion, and a least a few levels of ranger is only so he can use some the ranger tracking abilities. Anduril is totally a magic longsword as well.

As for the suggetions for Leonidas the actual Spartan king is probably best represented by a battlemaster with the defense style and any feats that apply to spears. The guy from 300 is a barbarian that uses a spear and a shield.

In 5e, like 3e, the best way to be a ranger is to not be a ranger.

Ranger 1-2 is not good enough of a dip to warrent it. You might as well go any other class so you get something out of it.

Druid 1 gives you good berry and can trips that make you a better ranger than ranger.

[Rfkannen]

I thought about it, and yeah marceline is probably a variant human vampire bladelock.


Here is a list of characters I thought of and ones I could not.

what about santa?

Gatsby?

The guy from leviathan (The steampunk bioenginer one

the guy from boneshaker

Finn the human

legolas

I am pretty sure howard the duck would be an awakened duck, but not sure what class (Comic version, the movie version would be a horrible horrible bard)


Hellboy.

buffy

ellen ripply

aslan would be an awakened lion cleric

john carter

Conan would be a champion fighter

Asterix and obelex would bolth be barbarians

Wicked witch of the west.

[Joe the Rat]

I am pretty sure howard the duck would be an awakened duck, but not sure what class (Comic version, the movie version would be a horrible horrible bard)Oh that's easy. Monk. Way of the Open Wing.
He's a master of Quack-Fu, remember?

[Beleriphon]

In 5e, like 3e, the best way to be a ranger is to not be a ranger.

Ranger 1-2 is not good enough of a dip to warrent it. You might as well go any other class so you get something out of it.

Druid 1 gives you good berry and can trips that make you a better ranger than ranger.

I don't know, Aragorn has some of the ranger abilities that blow spell slots, those would at least be useful.

[ad_hoc]

Inigo Montoya is a dex based Vengeance Paladin with the Dueling Fighting Style.

Divine Sense - To find the entrance to the Pit of Despair.

Lay on Hands - Heals himself after being stabbed by Count Rugen

Abjure Enemy - Chants to frighten Count Rugen.

Vow of Enmity - Hello, my name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father. Prepare to die.

Fight the Greater Evil - He ignores Humperdinck and doesn't try to save Buttercup so he can go after Count Rugen

No Mercy for the Wicked - Even after offering him all his power and more he still runs Count Rugen through

By Any Means Necessary - He leaves Westley to go after Count Rugen

Restitution - Okay, no real example of this beyond restoring Westley.

[Forum Explorer]

Gatsby is a really rich level 1 Thief Rogue with social skills backgrounds.

Ellen Riply is a lot harder. I also want to say Thief Rogue though, or perhaps Thief Rogue/Champion Fighter multiclass.

Hellboy is Beserker Barbarian and is a Tiefling.

[Knaight]

What's sexist about a spontaneous, unpredictable charismatic human girlfriend?

Nothing. That's also not what was accused of being sexist, what was accused of being sexist was this:


Fictional Character eh?

Girlfriend

Level 1 human chaos sorcerer, max charisma!

In it, you list a "girlfriend" as fictional, then set out a short list of extremely stereotypical traits. You might as well have said "women are really hot, but they're so irrational, particularly about relationships." That doesn't reflect well on the statement.

[CrusaderJoe]

I don't know, Aragorn has some of the ranger abilities that blow spell slots, those would at least be useful.

But 5e ranger 1-2 is just... Horrible.

I would say tack on Nature Cleric and pick your spells specifically for him. Hell, I would say choose Paladin before ranger, Paladin of Ancients is totally ranger-ish but you know, good.

[Rogue Shadows]

But 5e ranger 1-2 is just... Horrible.

It's not horrible, it's just lackluster. It won't ever lack for something to do, at least. Hell, in a different thread I was able to outline how you could take the basic Ranger and turn it into an urban socialite/vigilante with the right spell choices and creative use of class features. You could be like Batman - that is, actual Batman, not the CharOp term.

[Rfkannen]

In it, you list a "girlfriend" as fictional, then set out a short list of extremely stereotypical traits. You might as well have said "women are really hot, but they're so irrational, particularly about relationships." That doesn't reflect well on the statement.
Hey, I am pretty sure that anyone would want the person they are dateing to have 20 charisma!

Also I am pretty sure they did not mean they were irrational with the chaos sorcerer. may be a steryotype but am pretty sure that it was not intentional one. Sorcerers have high charisma, I would rather date someone that sometimes turned blue than had scales.


It's not horrible, it's just lackluster. It won't ever lack for something to do, at least. Hell, in a different thread I was able to outline how you could take the basic Ranger and turn it into an urban socialite/vigilante with the right spell choices and creative use of class features. You could be like Batman - that is, actual Batman, not the CharOp term.

What thread was this? I would love to read it!

[Rogue Shadows]

What thread was this? I would love to read it!

Hang on, I'll just dig it out rather than subjecting you to Yet Another Casters Verses Martials Thread...


Their abilities lend themselves to the wilderness by theme, but an urban ranger is easy to envision: NotAragorn needs to find someone in a city. Using animal friendship he can recruit help from rats or stray dogs to recruit additional help. Hide in Plain Sight requires natural material to make the camouflage but once applied it works in any situation or location; just stop off at the city park before going to break into the castle (gather the materials at the park and them bring them to the castle before applying them). Vanish is just as useful to hide in a crowd as it is to hide behind a tree. Feral senses works in a dark city alley or amongst a crowded ballroom just as well as it works in a cave or jungle. Primeval Awareness works anywhere.

As for spells: animal friendship (outlined above), hunter's mark (tailing someone through a city, and by the way a spell that only the ranger gets), fog cloud (instant spooky atmosphere and stealth), speak with animals ("hey, pigeon that always roosts here, did you see this man go by?"), animal messenger ("I, the well-off Ranger, am throwing a party and want to be really swanky for the VIPs, so the invites will be sent out via white doves"), locate object (this spell has no combat use at all), silence ("SILENCE!" roars the well-off Ranger as some people at his party say mean things about his skill set and imply that he's only useful in a wilderness setting), conjure animals (instant circus), speak with plants ("the treasure for this scavanger hunt is buried somewhere in this park, tree, do you know where it is?"), water breathing ("I need to lie low for a few days. No one will look for me in the bay!"), conjure woodland beings ("spread out and search the city for the best deal on new shoes"), locate creature ("where did my dog wander off to?"), tree stride (a lot of cities have trees all over the place for decoration, never call a cab again!)

I was, specifically, looking for noncombat abilities, as my point was to show off that however "bad" the Ranger is in this Edition, he still via his class features gets more stuff to do when not in combat than a Fighter, who gets almost nothing via his class features. Add in combat abilities and you get tons more options and basically turn yourself into Batman Who Can Talk To Bats (and other animals). Other classes can probably do it better, but you are by no means bad at it, and you'll always have something fun to do with your time.

[(Un)Inspired]

I'm ready for them to publish 5e warforged so I can make:

The Brave Little Toaster from the series of the same name. I'd probably maker her a sorcerer with spells like fireball to represent her convection and radiation powers.

[CrusaderJoe]

Hang on, I'll just dig it out rather than subjecting you to Yet Another Casters Verses Martials Thread...



I was, specifically, looking for noncombat abilities, as my point was to show off that however "bad" the Ranger is in this Edition, he still via his class features gets more stuff to do when not in combat than a Fighter, who gets almost nothing via his class features. Add in combat abilities and you get tons more options and basically turn yourself into Batman Who Can Talk To Bats (and other animals). Other classes can probably do it better, but you are by no means bad at it, and you'll always have something fun to do with your time.

My original remark was ranger 1-2 is bad (talking about adding on to a character). Mid level rangers are good to decent though they still could use a rehaul of their abilities.

Level 1-2 ranger doesn't have the spells or class features to make it a real class compared to other classes that can ranger more than them.

When you finally get a class feature at level 3, the class starts being pretty cool (unless you took the pet...) but level 1 and 2 are a joke.

[Tvtyrant]

They could cast spells in baseline AD&D, too; at least according to my copy of the AD&D PHB (up to 3rd level Priest spells, out to a total of 7th level spells). I can't speak as to 1st Edition, I don't have a copy of the PHB.


Basic Rulebook doesn't have them (classes are fighters, magic users, and thieves.) Also the demi-humans were considered classes.

[Suichimo]

I'd say he would be a Wood Elf Ranger with a bit of Bard and EK in there.

Ability scores would probably be this:
Str: 15
Con: 12
Dex: 20
Int: 10
Wis: 16
Cha: 14

It is odd to see two pieces of the Triforce based off of the same stat, Wisdom and Courage, but saves against fear are definitely Wisdom saves.


I'd personally go with Champion, and a least a few levels of ranger is only so he can use some the ranger tracking abilities. Anduril is totally a magic longsword as well.

As for the suggetions for Leonidas the actual Spartan king is probably best represented by a battlemaster with the defense style and any feats that apply to spears. The guy from 300 is a barbarian that uses a spear and a shield.


I don't know, Aragorn has some of the ranger abilities that blow spell slots, those would at least be useful.

Maybe it is because it has been a while since I have read the books, but I don't remember Aragorn doing anything particularly magical. The closest things I can think of him doing are patching up Frodo's wound from the Nazgul with Athlas and his seemingly instinctual usage of the Palantir. He didn't really have a favored enemy or terrain.

Anduril is definitely a magic longsword, but it doesn't have to be built in to his class.

Champion 20 w/ Great Weapon and Archery fighting styles really seems like Aragorn to me. Most of what he does that isn't combat is skill based or related to his, relative, unbreakableness. For Fighter skills he can take Athletics and Survival. Outlander skills of Medicine and Perception. Variant Human skill of Animal Handling, Insight, or Nature. Variant Human feat would probably be Resilient(Wisdom). Fighters get plenty of ASIs/Feats. One of them should definitely be Skilled to pick up his remaining skills, because he would have a lot. Statwise I think Str=Dex=Con=Wis>Int=Cha.

[Gwendol]

Maybe it is because it has been a while since I have read the books, but I don't remember Aragorn doing anything particularly magical. The closest things I can think of him doing are patching up Frodo's wound from the Nazgul with Athlas and his seemingly instinctual usage of the Palantir. He didn't really have a favored enemy or terrain.

Anduril is definitely a magic longsword, but it doesn't have to be built in to his class.

Champion 20 w/ Great Weapon and Archery fighting styles really seems like Aragorn to me. Most of what he does that isn't combat is skill based or related to his, relative, unbreakableness. For Fighter skills he can take Athletics and Survival. Outlander skills of Medicine and Perception. Variant Human skill of Animal Handling, Insight, or Nature. Variant Human feat would probably be Resilient(Wisdom). Fighters get plenty of ASIs/Feats. One of them should definitely be Skilled to pick up his remaining skills, because he would have a lot. Statwise I think Str=Dex=Con=Wis>Int=Cha.

In D&D terms he can be argued to have both lesser restoration and cure wounds, so Ranger is actually not out of the question. Also, I'm not at all convinced Aragorn needs to be a 20th level character, at all.

[Rogue Shadows]

In D&D terms he can be argued to have both lesser restoration and cure wounds, so Ranger is actually not out of the question. Also, I'm not at all convinced Aragorn needs to be a 20th level character, at all.

In 3rd Edition terms it would take some convincing for me to stat anyone in Middle-Earth as being 5th level, let alone 20th. In 5th Edition...I dunno. The numbers are much smaller. I'm not yet familiar enough with the system to make any calls.

[Gwendol]

I pegged Aragorn as level 10-11, as for the rest: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?386550-Fellowship-of-the-Ring-The-Building


Legolas: Wood elf Ranger 5 (Hunter, Horde breaker), archery fighting style
Gimli: Mountain Dwarf Fighter 5 (Champion), GWF
Boromir: Human Fighter 5 (BM), Protection
Aragorn: Human Ranger 10, Paladin 1 ?
Pippin, Merry: Halfling Rogue 1, multiclassing with fighter eventually (Merry going for mounted combat, Pippin duelist Champion)
Sam, Frodo: Halfling rogue 1,
Gandalf: as usual impossible to peg. Eldritch Knight or a Sorcerer maybe? Blade Pact Warlock

Gandalf being Epic level, of something.

[Maxilian]

I really like to make Fictional characters in DnD, i made:

-Kayle (League of Legends) Paladin 6/ Sorcerer 14

-Peach Monk x / Warlock x

-Morgana (League of Legends) Warlock 6 / Sorcerer 14

[Rfkannen]

I really like to make Fictional characters in DnD, i made:

-Kayle (League of Legends) Paladin 6/ Sorcerer 14

-Peach Monk x / Warlock x

-Morgana (League of Legends) Warlock 6 / Sorcerer 14

Personaly I would peg kayle as a pure paladin, and morgana as a pure warlock. Why the sorcerrer levels? WIngs? That is a race thing not a class thing.

[Feldarove]

Hey, I am pretty sure that anyone would want the person they are dateing to have 20 charisma!

Also I am pretty sure they did not mean they were irrational with the chaos sorcerer. may be a steryotype but am pretty sure that it was not intentional one. Sorcerers have high charisma, I would rather date someone that sometimes turned blue than had scales.


Yep, thanks for the support! I didn't say a bunch of stereotypes, I said a bunch of d&d terms. leve/Race/ Archetype/Class/high stat

If you wanna date a level 6 half-orc totem barbarian with min maxes cha/str (respectively) go right ahead!

Anyone else have an ideal fictional d&d girlfriend?!

[AvatarVecna]

I'm ready for them to publish 5e warforged so I can make:

The Brave Little Toaster from the series of the same name. I'd probably maker her a sorcerer with spells like fireball to represent her convection and radiation powers.

The Brave Little Toaster is female?:smalleek:

:smallbiggrin:I guess my childhood had more inspiring female protagonists than I thought it did!

[(Un)Inspired]

The Brave Little Toaster is female?:smalleek:

:smallbiggrin:I guess my childhood had more inspiring female protagonists than I thought it did!

Isn't she? I could be wrong but it always seemed female to me.

[AvatarVecna]

Isn't she? I could be wrong but it always seemed female to me.

Well, the character's voiced by a woman, but on its own, that doesn't necessarily mean anything; also, my memory and quick google image search doesn't reveal any obviously female characteristics of the character's appearance.

I can only imagine that the character has mannerisms in the movie that I just didn't pick up on as a kid, since I've never exactly been Sherlock Holmes. For instance, I watched the movie version of The Giver last week, and finally realized that a couple of my memories of the book were wrong: for instance, the main character is 18 years old in the book and movie; I recalled them being 14 (probably because I was 14 at the time).

Anyway, it's probably something like that.

[(Un)Inspired]

Well, the character's voiced by a woman, but on its own, that doesn't necessarily mean anything; also, my memory and quick google image search doesn't reveal any obviously female characteristics of the character's appearance.

I can only imagine that the character has mannerisms in the movie that I just didn't pick up on as a kid, since I've never exactly been Sherlock Holmes. For instance, I watched the movie version of The Giver last week, and finally realized that a couple of my memories of the book were wrong: for instance, the main character is 18 years old in the book and movie; I recalled them being 14 (probably because I was 14 at the time).

Anyway, it's probably something like that.

Are you talking about the Mark Hamill guyver? Is there a different guyver movie I need to see?

I want to build a guyver character now; maybe one who forms a romance with my Brave little Toaster character...

[3SecondCultist]

I'd like to see Kvothe from The Kingkiller chronicles. Though a lot of his actual powers are not known, but assumed, he is a bard/monk/Truenamer*

*This is the tricky part.

If anyone knows the character, I'd be interested in your thoughts.

Hmm. Obviously, we're dealing with a Lore Bard chassis. Kvothe as a character is A) inquisitive, delving into stories themselves as an heir to the Edema Ruh legacy and B) quite talented, able to pick up a lot of skills quite quickly such as playing the lute, Sympathy, swordplay and fighting skills from the Ademre, and Naming. Congratulations, you've just described the Jack of All Trades ability.

I'd say as of the end of WMF, Kvothe is actually a straight Lore Bard. The flexibility of Magic Secrets and Additional Magic Secrets allows for Naming as it exists in the Kingkiller verse. Maybe a dip of Wizard, with an emphasis on Transmutation? But his magic isn't based on his intellect, but rather will and force of personality. I'd put his Cha and Wis scores before any Int score. So Lore Bard is looking more likely. Peerless Skill is a fantastic ability, so I'd put him around 14-15th level by the end of the second book.

Str: 10
Dex: 16 (15 +1 racial)
Con: 10
Int: 10
Wis: 14 (13 +1 racial)
Cha: 18 (13 +1 Actor +4 ability increase)

Variant Human, with the War Caster and Actor feats. Obviously, the D&D rules don't really allow for the amount of flexibility of Kvothe's prowess, but I came as close as I could.

[ZenBear]

I immediately saw several excellent examples when I bought the PHB. Here's a couple off the top of my head:

Solaire of Astora, Adherent of the Lord of Sunlight!
Oath of Devotion Paladin for the class abilities, but with the Oath of Ancients words. All about light and hope. Follows Pelor/Lathander/Amaunator, Acolyte background (always optimistic), orphan raised by Father Gwyn who sent him away to "seek his own sun." Channel Divinity = Sunlight Blade, pick up a Javelin of Lightning for Lightning Spear, and last is my favorite part:
At level 20, Devotion capstone power.
"I've found it! I AM my very own sun!"
Praise the Sun!

Peter Pan: Feypact Warlock, Pact of Chains sprite familiar. For funsies: character is a little boy named Peter who runs away into the wilderness because he never wants to grow old, meets The Great God Pan who preserves his youth and innocence but takes over his body whenever he wills. Whenever Peter witnesses anything violent, sexual or otherwise too intense for his innocent sensibilities, Pan takes over.

I'll add more later when I have time.

[Ashrym]

First off is Link.

And I was thinking just straight Eldritch Knight. In many Zelda games Link can basically, if not actually cast spells. And many of the equipment shenanigans can actually be modeled using reluffed spells. (Like using a fireball spell to model one off Link's bombs)

Magic, songs, and an ocarrina while serving royalty sure seems bard to me. The only question is spell selection, and there are several nature themed bard spells. The origins of the class come from nature magic.


Spells...

Let me clarify. Think of a ranger from folklore or fiction. The 2nd Edition Player's Handbook suggested Robin Hood, Orion, Jack the Giant Killer, and the huntresses of Diana. I'll additionally add (from an internet search) Aragorn son of Arathorn, Hawkeye from Last of the Mohicans, Grizly Adams, Daniel Boone, Davy Crockett, Tonto (the Lone Ranger's companion), and D&D's own Drizzt Do'Urden and Hank the Ranger.

None of them are spellcasters.

Orion learned to walk on water and was attributed shamanistic qualities in some stories, which was prominent in Dionysus in 1976. Some tales of his origins parallel druids legends.

Diana's Huntresses were also involved in shamanistic rituals, plus magic was attributed to her.

Basic magic was included in such movies as Sheena and Beastmaster.

Tales around the wild hunt also seem to have some influence.

When all is said and done, only higher level rangers had magic in 1e and 2e to make is easier to separate by level. Magic just came earlier in later editions, but it's traditionally part of D&D.

The nice thing is the spell selection can be chosen for subtle magic, simulation of non-magical abilities, or more overt magic as the player chooses.


Basic Rulebook doesn't have them (classes are fighters, magic users, and thieves.) Also the demi-humans were considered classes.

BECMI was like that, but 1e rangers existed and cast magic-user and druid spells at higher levels, 2e used priest spells from limited spheres at higher levels, 3.x granted spells earlier at 4th level but still limited caster level, 4e skipped spells for the martial power source but had options the were magic-like and reminiscent of spells.

5e required a base class spell progression that could fit into the multiclassing system and it was clear during playtest WotC was embracing the traditional magic ranger again so we ended up with earlier spell access to both the ranger and paladin (which was similar to ranger previous editions).

There was enough back and forth on it that rangers changed from prepared spells to known spells while paladins prepare and have extra known from oaths, plus magical abilities to separate them significantly.

Rangers have got to be the least magical spellcaster in 5e. They have less spells known then any class other than monks and monks with spells plus magical abilities are close. Even eldritch knights and arcane tricksters know more spells and use cantrips.

A bit off topic. I wanted to support the inclusion of the shamanistic hunter archetype as valid for a ranger at this point. I think it could have been done more like other classes where it could have been a subclass and can only assume good intentions based on feedback to appeal to the widest audience. In the meantime, non-magical archetypes are available in fighters and rogues or multiclassing with appropriate skills and feats.

[Tvtyrant]

BECMI was like that, but 1e rangers existed and cast magic-user and druid spells at higher levels.


Which book were they in? I'm also not certain what divides basic, original and/or 1E. I have the Basic Rulebook, the Expert Rulebook, The Book of Marvelous Magic and the D&D Rules Encyclopedia.

[Ashrym]

Which book were they in? I'm also not certain what divides basic, original and/or 1E. I have the Basic Rulebook, the Expert Rulebook, The Book of Marvelous Magic and the D&D Rules Encyclopedia.

BECMI is basic, expert, companion, master, and immortal rules boxed sets for the basic game. Rangers were in the AD&D PHB that was separate from those rules and preceded 2e. The basic rules and advanced rules were both released and running at the same time. AD&D had these classes: assassin, bard, cleric, druid, fighter, illusionist, magic-user, monk, ranger, paladin, and thief. AD&D unearthed arcana added barbarian, cavalier, and thief-acrobat.

The basic boxed set and AD&D PHB both released in 1977.

[Feldarove]

Hmm. Obviously, we're dealing with a Lore Bard chassis. Kvothe as a character is A) inquisitive, delving into stories themselves as an heir to the Edema Ruh legacy and B) quite talented, able to pick up a lot of skills quite quickly such as playing the lute, Sympathy, swordplay and fighting skills from the Ademre, and Naming. Congratulations, you've just described the Jack of All Trades ability.

I'd say as of the end of WMF, Kvothe is actually a straight Lore Bard. The flexibility of Magic Secrets and Additional Magic Secrets allows for Naming as it exists in the Kingkiller verse. Maybe a dip of Wizard, with an emphasis on Transmutation? But his magic isn't based on his intellect, but rather will and force of personality. I'd put his Cha and Wis scores before any Int score. So Lore Bard is looking more likely. Peerless Skill is a fantastic ability, so I'd put him around 14-15th level by the end of the second book.

Str: 10
Dex: 16 (15 +1 racial)
Con: 10
Int: 10
Wis: 14 (13 +1 racial)
Cha: 18 (13 +1 Actor +4 ability increase)

Variant Human, with the War Caster and Actor feats. Obviously, the D&D rules don't really allow for the amount of flexibility of Kvothe's prowess, but I came as close as I could.

Do you feel that his time training with the ademre is represented by the bard's fighting ability? i really thought this warrented a dip in monk .

Kvothe is actually very smart, and a bit of a unwise fool early on. He doesn't understand women (who does at that age?) and often gets himself into trouble by thinking he is terribly clever. I would say he has a high int and low wisdom. He jumped off a building to prove how dedicated he was with no plan!

[Knaight]

Kvothe is actually very smart, and a bit of a unwise fool early on. He doesn't understand women (who does at that age?) and often gets himself into trouble by thinking he is terribly clever. I would say he has a high int and low wisdom. He jumped off a building to prove how dedicated he was with no plan!

I wouldn't necessarily say he has low wisdom. He makes some bad decisions, and he's inexperienced. Those point to it not being all that high, but average wouldn't be out of line, particularly as it also handles perception and he is perceptive.

[Keko]

Do you feel that his time training with the ademre is represented by the bard's fighting ability? i really thought this warrented a dip in monk .

Kvothe is actually very smart, and a bit of a unwise fool early on. He doesn't understand women (who does at that age?) and often gets himself into trouble by thinking he is terribly clever. I would say he has a high int and low wisdom. He jumped off a building to prove how dedicated he was with no plan!
I agree, he's very smart, comes up with clever plans, is (or at least could be) the best student of the academy and has probably eidetic memory but is reckless and often not very intuitive.
But he's mary sue and the standard 27 points buy is not enough (let's say he rolled high stats).
By the end of the second book his stats are probably:

str 12
dex 20 (18 +1 racial, +1 ASI)
con 14
int 20 (18 +1 Linguist, +1 ASI,)
wis 8
cha 20 (18, +1 racial, +1 Actor)

Also I agree, the chassis is the lore bard 12-14 with a dip of monk, probably 3 levels to get the open hand tecnique. He didn't need many ASI because he's mary sue so he took Actor, Linguist, and Magic Initiate for truenaming or Lucky.

[Knaight]

I agree, he's very smart, comes up with clever plans, is (or at least could be) the best student of the academy and has probably eidetic memory but is reckless and often not very intuitive.
But he's mary sue and the standard 27 points buy is not enough (let's say he rolled high stats).
By the end of the second book his stats are probably:

str 12
dex 20 (18 +1 racial, +1 ASI)
con 14
int 20 (18 +1 Linguist, +1 ASI,)
wis 8
cha 20 (18, +1 racial, +1 Actor)

Also I agree, the chassis is the lore bard 12-14 with a dip of monk, probably 3 levels to get the open hand tecnique. He didn't need many ASI because he's mary sue so he took Actor, Linguist, and Magic Initiate for truenaming or Lucky.
There are other people at the academy just as smart as he is. He's a prodigy, but the book is pretty clear that there are a number of geniuses. Plus, there's no indication that he's particularly strong or tough, and while he's charismatic in some ways, 20 seems excessive.

The big issue with modeling is that his flaws aren't in the ability score spectrum. If there was a stat regarding caution, it would be horribly low. Absent a prudence stat, he skews high.

[Zweisteine]

Ooooh I wanna try Kvothe!

He'd have to start as a bard, of course. I feel that the Transmuter abilities would fit well with him, but the rest of the wizard class, no so much.

For abilities... At what point in the story are we starting him?

Column two is a range of abilities for around when he joined the University. Column three is a possible range of growth since then. Numbers in parentheses are possible, but less likely.


Str
9-11
1-4


Dex
10-13
0-3


Con
11-14
0-2


Int
11-15
1-5


Wis
9-11
0-3


Cha
13-15
1-3(-5)



Now, to fit that to a variant human on a 27-point buy, with a feat to up Intelligence or Charisma.

Starting:
Str 10
Dex 13
Con 12
Int 15 (13/14+2/1)
Wis 11
Cha 15 (14/13+1/2)

First set of level-up bonuses goes to Cha/Int, of course, then probably Dexterity (lots of running around and dodging stuff), then a little Strength (sword training).

Skills: (the ones in bold are the ones I would give him)

Level 1 skills (3 bard +1 human +2 background:
Certain: performance, deception
Likely: history
Possible: persuasion, investigation, perception
Unlikely: Survival, Sleight of Hand, Insight
Level 3 lore college skills: (assuming he doesn't have them already)
Certain: arcana
Likely: persuasion, history, investigation
Possible: insight, religion
Unlikely: sleight of hand
Later on: Acrobatics?

Expertise: Performance, ???

Aaaand outa time to type.

[Ashrym]

Kvothe was stronger than he looked at the inn while telling his story to the chronicler.

I would start variant human with the actor feat on a point buy to get 10 STR, 12 DEX, 10 CON, 16 INT, 10 WIS, and 16 CHA, and start there. Kvothe made some rash choices but he was also perceptive and insightful, and adding monk requires increasing his WIS during the storyline, and DEX.

Background would be urchin to give sleight-of-hand and stealth, variant human bonus in perception, bard skills in persuasion, deception, and insight. Lore bard proficiencies at 3rd level in arcana, history, and medicine as learned at the academy. Additional tool proficiency from downtime as an artisan for the artificery.

So far, naming appears to be a method of learning true magic and does things like create wind, fire, and lighting so I would just consider that a part of spells and magical secrets.

Take 8 bard levels, spend 2 ASI's to get 13 in DEX and WIS to qualify for monk training. Kvothe is stronger than he looks per the story told to the chronicler and demonstrated at the inn so another ASI goes to STR. 1 level goes to monk and another goes to warlock for archfey patron with the Felurian and the fey presence ability. This leaves one more ASI for CHA and leaves us with STR 12, DEX 13, CON 10, INT 16, WIS 13, CHA 18 for ending ability scores.

[Feldarove]

Kvothe was stronger than he looked at the inn while telling his story to the chronicler.

I would start variant human with the actor feat on a point buy to get 10 STR, 12 DEX, 10 CON, 16 INT, 10 WIS, and 16 CHA, and start there. Kvothe made some rash choices but he was also perceptive and insightful, and adding monk requires increasing his WIS during the storyline, and DEX.

Background would be urchin to give sleight-of-hand and stealth, variant human bonus in perception, bard skills in persuasion, deception, and insight. Lore bard proficiencies at 3rd level in arcana, history, and medicine as learned at the academy. Additional tool proficiency from downtime as an artisan for the artificery.

So far, naming appears to be a method of learning true magic and does things like create wind, fire, and lighting so I would just consider that a part of spells and magical secrets.

Take 8 bard levels, spend 2 ASI's to get 13 in DEX and WIS to qualify for monk training. Kvothe is stronger than he looks per the story told to the chronicler and demonstrated at the inn so another ASI goes to STR. 1 level goes to monk and another goes to warlock for archfey patron with the Felurian and the fey presence ability. This leaves one more ASI for CHA and leaves us with STR 12, DEX 13, CON 10, INT 16, WIS 13, CHA 18 for ending ability scores.

Nods

Well done

[3SecondCultist]

Take 8 bard levels, spend 2 ASI's to get 13 in DEX and WIS to qualify for monk training. Kvothe is stronger than he looks per the story told to the chronicler and demonstrated at the inn so another ASI goes to STR. 1 level goes to monk and another goes to warlock for archfey patron with the Felurian and the fey presence ability. This leaves one more ASI for CHA and leaves us with STR 12, DEX 13, CON 10, INT 16, WIS 13, CHA 18 for ending ability scores.

Really, a warlock? I never thought of that. It bears thinking about, and I could definitely see it. Lore Bard / Monk makes a lot of sense though, I don't know why I didn't thought of that. I agree with the 'truenaming' being Magical Secrets and spells, it's probably the best you can do within the 5E system.

And by ending ability scores, I would actually put him at Lore Bard 12 / Monk 1 / Warlock 1. He's supposed to be an incredibly famed hero, and powerful at a great many things, reflected in his prowess. I was thinking either bump his Cha up to 20 (because in the frame, he strikes me as someone who could conceivably get whatever he wants just by talking to people), or have his Dex and Wis scores up to 14, increasing his defenses.

I have another thing to think about, at a similar power tier. I wanted to make the MCU Avengers in 5E. Iron Man, Captain America, the Hulk, Thor, Black Widow, Hawkeye. The original six from the 2012 film, to start.

... and go! :smallbiggrin:

[Beleriphon]

Really, a warlock? I never thought of that. It bears thinking about, and I could definitely see it. Lore Bard / Monk makes a lot of sense though, I don't know why I didn't thought of that. I agree with the 'truenaming' being Magical Secrets and spells, it's probably the best you can do within the 5E system.

And by ending ability scores, I would actually put him at Lore Bard 12 / Monk 1 / Warlock 1. He's supposed to be an incredibly famed hero, and powerful at a great many things, reflected in his prowess. I was thinking either bump his Cha up to 20 (because in the frame, he strikes me as someone who could conceivably get whatever he wants just by talking to people), or have his Dex and Wis scores up to 14, increasing his defenses.

I have another thing to think about, at a similar power tier. I wanted to make the MCU Avengers in 5E. Iron Man, Captain America, the Hulk, Thor, Black Widow, Hawkeye. The original six from the 2012 film, to start.

... and go! :smallbiggrin:

I'm pretty sure that The Hulk is a barbarian of some kind, probably totem with a high enough level to get that eagle flight thing that is really just jumping. Cap is going to be a paladin, I'd go with devotion with the defense weapon style and shield mastery feat along with some kind of custom magic item that works as a shield and a weapon. Iron Man is a fighter, wearing a suit of magical full plate amongst other things. Thor is a human fighter with the Thor combo of magic items (gauntlets of ogre power, hammer of thunderbolts and a belt of giant strength). Black Widow is a monk, and Hawkeye is a fighter with the archery style.

[Maxilian]

Personaly I would peg kayle as a pure paladin, and morgana as a pure warlock. Why the sorcerrer levels? WIngs? That is a race thing not a class thing.

Well i mostly like to see how far like a character i can get with RAW before going to modify anything, Kayle goes Sorcerer mainly because of the spells she use (Her sword on fire -Elemental weapon-, extra damage with Sorcerer, i also get the wings, and get the ability to cast the spells that would work as her Q and W), with Morgana... i understand, it was mostly to give something in common with Kayle (i mean they are sisters, it would make sense if they had many things in common, including some of the power they have)

[ZenBear]

I'm pretty sure that The Hulk is a barbarian of some kind, probably totem with a high enough level to get that eagle flight thing that is really just jumping. Cap is going to be a paladin, I'd go with devotion with the defense weapon style and shield mastery feat along with some kind of custom magic item that works as a shield and a weapon. Iron Man is a fighter, wearing a suit of magical full plate amongst other things. Thor is a human fighter with the Thor combo of magic items (gauntlets of ogre power, hammer of thunderbolts and a belt of giant strength). Black Widow is a monk, and Hawkeye is a fighter with the archery style.

Hulk is a Barbarian with Tavern Brawler and Bear/Bear/Eagle Totems. Cap could be a Fighter with Inspiring Leader, Rally, DWS, Shield Mastery, etc (no magic to speak of, just a real solid bro). Iron Man is an Eldritch Knight IMO. Thor I would make a Tempest Cleric, screw healing just big-bada-boom spells. BW and HE you got right too.

Just my two cents. :D

[Ashrym]

Really, a warlock? I never thought of that. It bears thinking about, and I could definitely see it. Lore Bard / Monk makes a lot of sense though, I don't know why I didn't thought of that. I agree with the 'truenaming' being Magical Secrets and spells, it's probably the best you can do within the 5E system.

And by ending ability scores, I would actually put him at Lore Bard 12 / Monk 1 / Warlock 1. He's supposed to be an incredibly famed hero, and powerful at a great many things, reflected in his prowess. I was thinking either bump his Cha up to 20 (because in the frame, he strikes me as someone who could conceivably get whatever he wants just by talking to people), or have his Dex and Wis scores up to 14, increasing his defenses.

I have another thing to think about, at a similar power tier. I wanted to make the MCU Avengers in 5E. Iron Man, Captain America, the Hulk, Thor, Black Widow, Hawkeye. The original six from the 2012 film, to start.

... and go! :smallbiggrin:

Kvothe wouldn't have the ASI's left for the scores you are looking for but that's okay. A hero doesn't need the highest score possible to be that hero.

[Rfkannen]

Considering what website this discusion is on, how would you stat the members of the order of the stick?

[CrusaderJoe]

Considering what website this discusion is on, how would you stat the members of the order of the stick?

Go check out the Order of the Stick comic forum/threads, they used to always have a thread about that kinda stuff.

[Garimeth]

Somewhat reviving this because I'm trying to think of how to do a PC modelled after the character:

Kaladin Stormblessed from the Stormlight Archives.

I'm thinking Pact of the blade Warlock, human, jump invocation, levitate invoaction.

I could also see way of the open hand monk (if the DM lets you use spears as a monk weapon) or maybe tempest cleric, but that seems way too casty.

[Joe the Rat]

I wouldn't necessarily say he has low wisdom. He makes some bad decisions, and he's inexperienced. Those point to it not being all that high, but average wouldn't be out of line, particularly as it also handles perception and he is perceptive.
Indeed, making bad / foolish / incredibly-not-well-thought-through decisions isn't represented by low Wisdom. It's represented by being a player character.

[Knaight]

Indeed, making bad / foolish / incredibly-not-well-thought-through decisions isn't represented by low Wisdom. It's represented by being a player character.

That is undeniably true.

[miner3203]

While I'm here, I might as well do the Fellowship of the Ring (aside from the hobbits. I don't believe that they ought to have class levels, based on their abilities) - my apologies to anyone who's already done one or more of them:

Aragorn: I've looked over the suggestions for Aragorn, and I'm going to say that I see him as more of a Paladin who has a few levels in Ranger. He can heal people, he can hit things hard, and he can strategize. He's also not afraid to die for Frodo if it means saving Middle-Earth.
Legolas: Ranger, definitely. He's handy with a bow, can track, and basically can do everything Rangers can do but cast spells.
Gimli: Barbarian, mostly because of the high health, AC, and rage ability. Nothing is scarier than a dwarf charging into battle raging 'because the elf got 43'.
Boromir: Flat-out fighter - he hits things, and has low wisdom. End of story.
Gandalf: Also a Paladin, but with a few levels of Warlock thrown in. He can swing a sword and heal things, but his main strength is leading others in a charge or on a journey. He certainly can't fling magic around like a D&D wizard, but he does have power when he needs it - on the Bridge of Khazad-Dum, as well as healing Theoden and rescuing Faramir, among other things.