Simplest Truenamer Fixes for list of house rules: Aim for low op

[Albions_Angel]

Hi all

I know you guys love to go high op, and thats great, but I want to set your expectations for this thread LOW.

I usually run 3.5e campaigns for LOW OP or maybe MEDIUM OP players. We are talking a Barbarian Pounce Charger is about as good as it gets (not even an ubercharger, dungeon crasher, just a barbarian with power attack and pounce) maybe a battle cleric dealing major anti-undead damage.

The games RARELY progress beyond level 10, and while I am planning on running one soon that starts at 7, even that I expect not to progress past 12 or so.

As for casters, the best I tend to get are low damage blasters, usually poorly done buffers. They parties typically handle correct CR encounters as per the DMG (which tells you more than anything, I think).

I have a list of house rules, from removing some (but not all) feat taxes (precise shot doesnt require point blank, dodge is a flat +1 vs all, not vs 1 enemy), to adding spells to the Duskblade, Hexblade and Warmage.

My biggest single house rule is for that of monk. And even then, all I did is as follows:

Monks now have Full Base Attack Bonus (as Fighter). Flurry of Blows confers no penalty to attack at any level and can be used as part of a Standard Attack Action. A monk wearing Gauntlets or Spiked Gauntlets instead uses her Unarmed Strike Damage when she makes an Unarmed Strike (including when she Flurries), and gains the benefit of any enchantments or enhancements on the Gauntlets. The Gauntlets are treated as Monk Weapons.

I dont yet use all the books, but I like the binder so Tome of Magic is in there. Given my limited pool of books, I would like a house rule of similar style to the one I constructed for Monk to make the Truenamer playable. I know the table is low op, but I agree, in its current form, you actually cant do ANYTHING as a truenamer.

The issue is, I dont know the class well enough to fix it.

Ive heard of a couple of basic fixes. Truename scales with CR not 2xCR for example, which makes a lot of utterances possible without having to optimize like crazy. Ive also heard the Law of Resistance is very prohibitive and I wonder if the class would suffer from its removal?

So, over to you my friends. I am looking for the MOST BASIC FIX POSSIBLE. Ideally, the fix shouldnt change more than 3 things about the class (for simplicity's sake. This is the most flexible rule), the fix should not add homebrew features to the class (that means no more utterances) and the fix should not fundamentally change the class (no slapping spellcasting onto the class).

So, any ideas?

[Cosi]

The simplest possible fix is just to declare that Truenamers don't need to make the Truespeak check to activate their abilities. At that point, they're probably somewhere in the range of the Warlock or Barbarian, which seems like what you're aiming for.

If you feel they're still under-performing at that point, you could give them some power word spells or some [Sound] spells as SLAs or utterances.

[Jormengand]

Change the DC to be 10+CR for evolving mind, 10+CL for crafted tool, 10+5*(utterance level) for Perfected Map. Halve the DC adjustment for each meta-utterance feat. Change the save DCs to be int-based. The utterances are usually capable of handling themselves in a world where monks are decent with minor fixes.

EDIT: You may also want to remove the Law of Sequence, since the easiest bypass for that normally requires thinking about it.

I would suggest NOT removing the check entirely, otherwise the ability to change the utterance level and ignore spell resistance is either free (infinitely high level utterances gets weird) or has to be removed (truenamer is sad).

[Malimar]

Admittedly I've never seen a Truenamer in play, and I don't know all that much about them myself, but the simplest solution I've heard is: Remove the Truespeak skill entirely. Now when you want to Utter something, it just works, just like everybody else's class features. Most Utterances are so garbage that this still leaves the Truenamer at a fairly low tier, without being completely unplayable anymore.

...ninja'd.

[Albions_Angel]

I dont feel getting rid of the check is the right way to go.

Malimar said that then its like any other classes features, they just work. Except its not. Utterances seem like eldritch blasts or a martial attack. Quite literally. You have to get higher than 10+some small modifier that goes roughly with CR. Its a "to hit" roll, not a "Does it work" roll.

I agree the utterances seem fine to me. They wont fly in a high op game, but they are totally in line with what a level 10 warlock can dish out, both damage and utility.

The DC and Save changes seem good. Not sold on getting rid of sequences, but I can see why it would help.

[Cosi]

I dont feel getting rid of the check is the right way to go.

Malimar said that then its like any other classes features, they just work. Except its not. Utterances seem like eldritch blasts or a martial attack. Quite literally. You have to get higher than 10+some small modifier that goes roughly with CR. Its a "to hit" roll, not a "Does it work" roll.

That's only really true for the blast utterances. The debuff utterances largely do require saves, and while the buff utterances don't, no one's buffs allow saves so you're still behind the curve.

[Jormengand]

Surprisingly few of the utterances (even fairly few of the debuffs - reversed seek the sky and reversed mystic rampart (not that the latter will become relevant at the levels you're playing at) are quite good) allow saves, and those which do would in some cases be exceptionally powerful without them (reversed temporal spiral, say).

And yes, it's like a to hit roll only any competent player should be passing it automatically for at least the first few goes. Allowing for the assumption that your players are not, in fact, competent, reducing it seems worthwhile

[Zancloufer]

Hoenstly the Truenamer skill wasn't that bad, the DCs just scaled funny. Something like this might be more appropriate:

General Rules:

DCs for making truenaming checks:

For a Creature/NPC/Player: 15 + Their ELC or CR.

For an Object:
If Magic 15 + CL
If normal 15, 20 for Masterwork, and 25 for a large object like a building.

To effect an area to DC is 25 by default. Areas effected by a Hallow or similar effect have the DC increased to 35.

Modifiers to the DCs:

+5 to Truespeak DC to ignore SR
+5 to Truespeak "defensively". This is effectively the same as casting defensibly and doesn't provoke AoOs.
+4 to Truespeak DC for every effect spell level the utterance is increased by
+2 if you use the target's personal Truname. Note that this also makes any saving throw the target has to make increase by + 2 as well. In addition the effective CL of the utterance increases by 2 (which includes overcoming SR).

Law of Resistance: You gain a number of "Free" casting of each utterance equal to the Trunamer's effective level. After exceeding this number the utterance gains a +1 to it's DC for an hour. IE: A level 4 Trunamer could use an utterance up to 4 times at the stated DC but every casting afterwards increases the DC by a cumulative +1. The DC and free casting reset after an hour of not using the utterance.

Law of Sequence: Trying to use an Utterance that is still occurring is difficult. For every casting of the utterance that is still happening the DC increases by +2.

Also did some other minor tweaks to number of utterences known (known 2 at level one, up to 7 crafted mind ones and 5 perfect map) so they get more options. Also a bunch of fixes to some of the more broken ones.

Let us be honest: If Truenamer could cast their utterences at will with no chance of failure they would be neat 90% of the time and downright terrifyingly broken the other 10%. There are enough silly ones there that having no cap on would be BAD.

[Cosi]

Let us be honest: If Truenamer could cast their utterences at will with no chance of failure they would be neat 90% of the time and downright terrifyingly broken the other 10%. There are enough silly ones there that having no cap on would be BAD.

Do you have some example of that?

The only thing that springs to mind is rebuild item + Skull Talismans, and that's a pretty dubious combo (you have to convince your DM to let you use the earlier and simultaneously more powerful version), that's not really that crazy. You basically turn into a Wizard who trades daily limits for not being able to cast in consecutive rounds. The fact that you can buy Skull Talismans before the Wizard gets spells might be broken, but is that really more broken than any other use of UMD?

[Starbuck_II]

Change the DC to be 10+CR for evolving mind, 10+CL for crafted tool, 10+5*(utterance level) for Perfected Map. Halve the DC adjustment for each meta-utterance feat. Change the save DCs to be int-based. The utterances are usually capable of handling themselves in a world where monks are decent with minor fixes.

EDIT: You may also want to remove the Law of Sequence, since the easiest bypass for that normally requires thinking about it.

I would suggest NOT removing the check entirely, otherwise the ability to change the utterance level and ignore spell resistance is either free (infinitely high level utterances gets weird) or has to be removed (truenamer is sad).

The simple solution to that is do what Shadowcaster does, no SR for utterances a few levels below highest you can cast (they become supernatural for Shadowcaster).

Keep Truespeak, but nothing but Int/Ranks/that listed magic item/that one Utterances affects it since we lowered the DC to reasonable levels.
Thus no circumstance items/no masterwork/no Item familiar/etc.
Add all Truespeak spells as utterances at appropriate levels.

[Psyren]

Check my sig for Kyeudo's Truenamer fix, it should have everything you need. The CR scaling issues, the Law of Sequence, the poor chassis of the class, the dearth of good utterances and feats - he fixed all of it while staying true to the original.

[Zancloufer]

Do you have some example of that?

The only thing that springs to mind is rebuild item + Skull Talismans, and that's a pretty dubious combo (you have to convince your DM to let you use the earlier and simultaneously more powerful version), that's not really that crazy. You basically turn into a Wizard who trades daily limits for not being able to cast in consecutive rounds. The fact that you can buy Skull Talismans before the Wizard gets spells might be broken, but is that really more broken than any other use of UMD?

There are a few more ones that can be silly if spammed:

-Breath of Cleansing let's one attempt to reroll to negate any effect that allows a saving throw. Take 20 on all the saving throws. Pretty much negates most poisons, diseases, curses and all sorts of other nasty things.

-Caster Lenses might be silly for a few of the things cast during downtime.

-Ether Reforged is Eternal Jaunt (the spell) + some.

-Greater Seek the Sky allows double speed flight. It's bleh mostly due to it's 5 round duration. Also instant NOPE ( no save, no SR if you can Truespeak enough) to stop people from flying.

-Spell Rebirth is silly. Not only can it restore spells that where dispelled, but it functions as a targeted Dispel Magic with +Ni to CL check.

-Also +5 (or +10) to all skills out of combat and infinite healing, though that is probably not too bad. Free Idenifies are nice to, but not really OP.

-FREE METAMAGIC ON ITEMS. Extend ALL THE ITEMS. You could also Empower, or Enlarge and other things, but double duration potions to scoff before battle is pretty nice.

-Gate. GATE. INFINITE GATES. Mind you that is level 20 but you literally become Angel Summoner at that point. Also free travel to any plane. Only gets really silly if you could cast it all day and night though.

[Cosi]

-Breath of Cleansing let's one attempt to reroll to negate any effect that allows a saving throw. Take 20 on all the saving throws. Pretty much negates most poisons, diseases, curses and all sorts of other nasty things.

It specifically lets you save again against a "spell, spell-like ability, or supernatural ability" that doesn't cover diseases or poisons. It also doesn't negate any ability damage or negative levels that are already present. It seems much worse than restoration and it shows up at 10th level.


-Caster Lenses might be silly for a few of the things cast during downtime.

It's +2 caster level. I guess the plan is that you let the Cleric control 8HD more undead? This seems bad.


-Ether Reforged is Eternal Jaunt (the spell) + some.

So you're telling me if I forgo whatever anemic offense a 6th level utterance would ordinarily offer, I can get a better version of a 7th level spell at 18th level? That doesn't seem like any kind of problem.


-Greater Seek the Sky allows double speed flight. It's bleh mostly due to it's 5 round duration. Also instant NOPE ( no save, no SR if you can Truespeak enough) to stop people from flying.

Getting a good fly speed at 14th level in exchange for one action every five rounds seems totally fair. You can only nope flyers if you get within 60ft of them (might be 30ft, I forget the range max).


-Spell Rebirth is silly. Not only can it restore spells that where dispelled, but it functions as a targeted Dispel Magic with +Ni to CL check.

You can restore spells that were dispelled a round ago. If you're spending an action at 10th level to do something that cannot ever kill your target, it seems fair to strip a single spell unconditionally.


-FREE METAMAGIC ON ITEMS. Extend ALL THE ITEMS. You could also Empower, or Enlarge and other things, but double duration potions to scoff before battle is pretty nice.

That seems expensive as a long term strategy.


-Gate. GATE. INFINITE GATES. Mind you that is level 20 but you literally become Angel Summoner at that point. Also free travel to any plane. Only gets really silly if you could cast it all day and night though.

I think you can already do that. The location utterances are fixed DC IIRC.

[Jormengand]

Ether reforged is instantaneous duration anyway, so you shouldn't have to cast it enough times that you'll actually be rolling or it. You also don't usually need enough rounds of flight for GStS to need to roll - extend gives you 10 rounds, and even when you can't extend without rolling you get another 25 rounds of it before the law of resistance makes you roll to utter normally. And gate was dumb either way. Honestly, most of the utterances it's not the truespeak check that's the problem, it's the actions you're using. You're generally better off using your utterances just to do damage to stuff than empower an item.

EDIT: It's 60 feet, and Law of Resistance applies to all utterances including Perfected Map ones.

Either way, the main thing you can do with auto-pass truespeak checks involves effects which care about your spell level, such as bracers of the entangling blast which end up dealing d3+infinity damage to the target, IIRC.

[Venger]

there isn't a quick fix to the truenamer because the class falls down at every level. zaq, the expert in truenaming still can't suggest how to make the class playable.

even if you do ax the truenaming check and give them access to all their known utterances, the problem isn't solely that their main class feature is unusable, it's that even if they have free access to all their utterances, the effects are just underwhelming and not very relevant by the time you gain access to them.

[digiman619]

Well, if you don't mind backporting it from Pathfinder, Interjection Games had in interesting take on it. You can find it here, (http://spheresofpower.wikidot.com/strange-magic) as well as about 5 other subsystems.

[Jormengand]

even if you do ax the truenaming check and give them access to all their known utterances, the problem isn't solely that their main class feature is unusable, it's that even if they have free access to all their utterances, the effects are just underwhelming and not very relevant by the time you gain access to them.

This is pretty much just false at most levels. Their abilities, if nothing else, give you the ability to play as a "Quantum rogue" with high enough bonuses to skills to allow you a chance to attempt many of them with a reasonable chance of success (5+level/3 to a few of the rogue ones, 15 to knowledge and bluff and 5 to everything else), or you can throw these abilities (except the level/3 recitation, which is self-only) on the actual rogue, while the ability to play pretty much every other class's role only less so isn't exactly horrible (The type of party that doesn't buy wands of lesser vigour because seriously I have never seen that occur in a real game probably appreciates the healing, the damage is relevant in low-optimisation games, the buffs are useable and a source of flight that other members of the party might not have, etc.).

They're really not as bad as the memetic hatred of them would have you believe.

[Psyren]

Well, if you don't mind backporting it from Pathfinder, Interjection Games had in interesting take on it. You can find it here, (http://spheresofpower.wikidot.com/strange-magic) as well as about 5 other subsystems.

Dear gods, they ported in the Law of Sequence Flowing Rhetoric completely unaltered. Scratch that, it's even worse now - now you have to keep track of your utterance recitation restriction even if they get resisted or dispelled by the enemy, as if that wasn't bad enough on its own. What were they thinking?


This is pretty much just false at most levels. Their abilities, if nothing else, give you the ability to play as a "Quantum rogue" with high enough bonuses to skills to allow you a chance to attempt many of them with a reasonable chance of success (5+level/3 to a few of the rogue ones, 15 to knowledge and bluff and 5 to everything else), or you can throw these abilities (except the level/3 recitation, which is self-only) on the actual rogue, while the ability to play pretty much every other class's role only less so isn't exactly horrible (The type of party that doesn't buy wands of lesser vigour because seriously I have never seen that occur in a real game probably appreciates the healing, the damage is relevant in low-optimisation games, the buffs are useable and a source of flight that other members of the party might not have, etc.).

They're really not as bad as the memetic hatred of them would have you believe.

Most rogues don't have to loudly announce whatever they're doing to everyone within earshot before they attempt it though, to say nothing of having a horrendous skill list that you need to burn resources overcoming.

[digiman619]

Dear gods, they ported in the Law of Sequence Flowing Rhetoric completely unaltered. Scratch that, it's even worse now - now you have to keep track of your utterance recitation restriction even if they get resisted or dispelled by the enemy, as if that wasn't bad enough on its own. What were they thinking?

Well, Deamscarred Press tried their hand at a Truenamer, but it never got out of playtesting. You can find it here (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_toKZsX-3ht8YnjL2HcBC9AgBfJ-I1tMrMCjUEKUbGQ/edit#heading=h.ilircftuvgw4). They made it a level-based check rather than a skill one (which closed a lot of loopholes) and rather than having the Law of Sequence, you just got a stacking penalty if you spam the same move over and over again. They also had the idea that rather than increasing the DC for added effects, you could subtract from your roll instead, so you had the flexibility to choose how much you wanted to invest into it. It also had a Meso-American theme, which was a pleasant surprise. All in all, if it ever get finished with its polishing, I will no doubt include it in my home games.

[Malroth]

Halve All the Truespeak DC's, Kill the laws of Resistance and Sequence and you'll have something almost as good as an Adept or Scout.

[Albions_Angel]

Given that Scout gets played at my tables to great effect, I am ok with that.

Ok, so what I am drifting towards now is the following:

Truenaming
For a Creature/NPC/Player: 15 + Their ELC or CR.

For an Object:
If Magic 15 + CL
If normal 15, 20 for Masterwork, and 25 for a large object like a building.

To effect an area to DC is 25 by default. Areas effected by a Hallow or similar effect have the DC increased to 35.

Laws:
Modify sequence (perhaps recasting cancels the old ability like a con spell would) but ditch resistance.

Utterances known:
Increase by 1 first time you get them. This gives a bit more flexibility.

Truename DC:
Runs off INT not CHA, making the Truenamer SAD rather than DAD. As I play with 32pt buy, this opens up the potential for melee build Truenamers (sure, D6 sucks, but they get 3/4 BAB which isnt awful).

This will (at my table, not in the tier system) bring the Truenamer up to Bard level I feel. At my tables, Bards seem to forget they have spells other than Inspirational Boost and occasionally Haste. Instead they sit back, do inspire courage, and sometimes poke or whip something.

I see the truenamers at the table mainly using utterances but also not afraid to wander in and smack something. Especially as while they dont have armour prof, truenaming isnt somantic so wont fail.

Thanks for the help, feel free to use this to continue discussing it in higher op games (as so many of you seem to be trying to do!)

[Grod_The_Giant]

I think you have the laws backwards. The Law of Sequence is murderous, and makes it very difficult to cope with multiple-enemy encounters; the Law of Resistance is much easier to deal with. Eliminating the double-speed DC advancement should be enough to make it playable.

I'll second Kyeudo's Book of Words fix (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?217713-A-Book-of-Words-An-Expanded-Truenamer-Fix-PEACH&p=11971747#post11971747), though. The whole thing is just sublimely better and more varied than what's in the ToM, while retaining all of the flavor and mechanical feel.

[Jormengand]

I think you have the laws backwards. The Law of Sequence is murderous, and makes it very difficult to cope with multiple-enemy encounters; the Law of Resistance is much easier to deal with. Eliminating the double-speed DC advancement should be enough to make it playable.

This, basically. Sequence is annoying unless you use the weird wording in the law to get around it, Resistance is necessary to prevent infinite utterance usage. If preventing infinite utterance usage was a thing you wanted to do (in low-OP, you probably did).


I'll second Kyeudo's Book of Words fix (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?217713-A-Book-of-Words-An-Expanded-Truenamer-Fix-PEACH&p=11971747#post11971747), though. The whole thing is just sublimely better and more varied than what's in the ToM, while retaining all of the flavor and mechanical feel.

I'm not convinced that it actually makes the truenamer significantly more powerful, honestly. For every utterance that was buffed, another was "Fixed" in a way that reduces its power (Archer's Eye no longer ignores total concealment, Reversed Spell Rebirth flat out doesn't exist, and some others).

[Grod_The_Giant]

Ehhhh... Truenamer utterances tend to be at their strongest when used in weird ways that take advantage of unintended readings (such as Archer's Eye letting you see/shoot through walls). It's sax to lose some of those, but I think the class' overall health is improved.

[Karl Aegis]

If we're doing super low-op instead of a truename check do the following:

Call a number on your d12
Roll a d12
If you roll your number your truespeak check fails. Otherwise it works.
Every additional time you want to use the same ability on the same target (or whatever law of sequence wording is) roll an additional d12.

That way you don't have to know the rules for calculating how a truespeak skill check works. I just sort of assumed you really didn't know the rules anyways.


That Book of Words thing.... That's the one where you can spam Earthquake earlier, right? Completely shut down anything without spellcasting because you can force them to the ground and they can't do anything to get out of the extended and/or quickened version of it (because of the easier skill check).

[Cosi]

Ehhhh... Truenamer utterances tend to be at their strongest when used in weird ways that take advantage of unintended readings (such as Archer's Eye letting you see/shoot through walls). It's sax to lose some of those, but I think the class' overall health is improved.

That's not how archer's eye works. It negates "penalties" from concealment, of which there are none. It's like a feat that doubles your size bonus to damage or negates your armor check penalty to caster level. It's trying to modify something that doesn't exist.

[Jormengand]

It negates "penalties" from concealment, of which there are none. It's like a feat that doubles your size bonus to damage or negates your armor check penalty to caster level. It's trying to modify something that doesn't exist.

I would assume it's trying to use the common English meaning of "Penalty" with regards to tabletop or video games, that is something untoward which happens to a character, attack, item, or practically anything else. I also assume that no sane DM has actually ruled it as doing absolutely nothing.

[Cosi]

I would assume it's trying to use the common English meaning of "Penalty" with regards to tabletop or video games, that is something untoward which happens to a character, attack, item, or practically anything else. I also assume that no sane DM has actually ruled it as doing absolutely nothing.

Penalty is a RAW defined term:


The modifier is the number you apply to the die roll when your character tries to do something related to that ability. You also use the modifier with some numbers that aren’t die rolls. A positive modifier is called a bonus, and a negative modifier is called a penalty.
Emphasis mine.

I understand what was intended, but they said something specific. If you assign a word a specific meaning, you can't use the common meaning of that word anymore. I know what you're trying to do when you name an object in a Java program "new", but it's still a syntax error. It's probably true that no DM has ruled it to do nothing, but if you're invoking DM adjudication, you're not going to be allowed to shoot through walls either.

[Psyren]

I'm not convinced that it actually makes the truenamer significantly more powerful, honestly. For every utterance that was buffed, another was "Fixed" in a way that reduces its power (Archer's Eye no longer ignores total concealment, Reversed Spell Rebirth flat out doesn't exist, and some others).

Clearing up those poorly-worded utterances is a feature, not a bug.

It doesn't need to be all that powerful - just be able to get to T3/T4 without a level of skills optimization that would allow a rogue to strip a giant naked mid-combat, then hide inside their codpiece.

[Jormengand]

I understand what was intended, but they said something specific. If you assign a word a specific meaning, you can't use the common meaning of that word anymore. I know what you're trying to do when you name an object in a Java program "new", but it's still a syntax error. It's probably true that no DM has ruled it to do nothing, but if you're invoking DM adjudication, you're not going to be allowed to shoot through walls either.

I mean, there's a reason that the D&D rules aren't written in the near-pseudocode that MAGIC is written in. They expect you to be able to work these things out as humans, rather than as machines.

And being able to ignore the... detrimental effects... of total concealment is useful for reasons other than walls.



EDIT: Reversed spell rebirth wasn't really badly worded, and the "Fix" could easily have written a version where it still existed but just used the spell DC rather than the creature DC if that was really so bad an issue.

[Beheld]

I don't...... Under no possible reading can you shoot someone through a wall with that utterance.

Even if you can ignore total concealment, you can't make an attack roll.

"Total Cover
If you don’t have line of effect to your target he is considered to have total cover from you. You can’t make an attack against a target that has total cover."

[Psyren]

I mean, there's a reason that the D&D rules aren't written in the near-pseudocode that MAGIC is written in. They expect you to be able to work these things out as humans, rather than as machines.

This is correct, though sometimes I wish D&D was written that exactingly. Certainly I wish it were errataed that exactingly. But I think we won't be able to truly code D&D (rules-heavy D&D anyway) until we have access to AI. (4e might be code-able right now but, eh...)



And being able to ignore the... detrimental effects... of total concealment is useful for reasons other than walls.

Eh? Walls don't grant concealment, they grant cover :smallconfused:



EDIT: Reversed spell rebirth wasn't really badly worded, and the "Fix" could easily have written a version where it still existed but just used the spell DC rather than the creature DC if that was really so bad an issue.

He made that a separate, lower-level utterance (Terminate Spell) while also reducing the level of Rebirth itself by one. The logic was most likely to make it so you don't have to wait until 15th level to get your first dispel ability. It costs you an extra utterance known to get both abilities, sure, but given that you have 4 extra LCT over the regular Truenamer, you still come out ahead.

Not to mention Terminate Spell can end or suppress supernatural abilities.

[Pex]

Remove the 2x multiplier for the DC.

[Sagetim]

Hi all

I know you guys love to go high op, and thats great, but I want to set your expectations for this thread LOW.

I usually run 3.5e campaigns for LOW OP or maybe MEDIUM OP players. We are talking a Barbarian Pounce Charger is about as good as it gets (not even an ubercharger, dungeon crasher, just a barbarian with power attack and pounce) maybe a battle cleric dealing major anti-undead damage.

The games RARELY progress beyond level 10, and while I am planning on running one soon that starts at 7, even that I expect not to progress past 12 or so.

As for casters, the best I tend to get are low damage blasters, usually poorly done buffers. They parties typically handle correct CR encounters as per the DMG (which tells you more than anything, I think).

I have a list of house rules, from removing some (but not all) feat taxes (precise shot doesnt require point blank, dodge is a flat +1 vs all, not vs 1 enemy), to adding spells to the Duskblade, Hexblade and Warmage.

My biggest single house rule is for that of monk. And even then, all I did is as follows:

Monks now have Full Base Attack Bonus (as Fighter). Flurry of Blows confers no penalty to attack at any level and can be used as part of a Standard Attack Action. A monk wearing Gauntlets or Spiked Gauntlets instead uses her Unarmed Strike Damage when she makes an Unarmed Strike (including when she Flurries), and gains the benefit of any enchantments or enhancements on the Gauntlets. The Gauntlets are treated as Monk Weapons.

I dont yet use all the books, but I like the binder so Tome of Magic is in there. Given my limited pool of books, I would like a house rule of similar style to the one I constructed for Monk to make the Truenamer playable. I know the table is low op, but I agree, in its current form, you actually cant do ANYTHING as a truenamer.

The issue is, I dont know the class well enough to fix it.

Ive heard of a couple of basic fixes. Truename scales with CR not 2xCR for example, which makes a lot of utterances possible without having to optimize like crazy. Ive also heard the Law of Resistance is very prohibitive and I wonder if the class would suffer from its removal?

So, over to you my friends. I am looking for the MOST BASIC FIX POSSIBLE. Ideally, the fix shouldnt change more than 3 things about the class (for simplicity's sake. This is the most flexible rule), the fix should not add homebrew features to the class (that means no more utterances) and the fix should not fundamentally change the class (no slapping spellcasting onto the class).

So, any ideas?

Well, you don't have the munchkinest players who ever munched (as mentioned) so I would probably have truenaming dcs work off of Hit Die instead of Hit Diex2 (is it CR? I keep thinking it's Hit Die). And then the Law of Resistance would be a +1 per use on that target per day instead of a +2. That way you're still dis-incentivising someone from being cavalier with truenamer-as-healer, and you'll probably still get where you want to be with one.

Let's say they have 15 int to start and full ranks. Level 4 bonus brings int up to 16, so we have a +3 from int bonus and 11 ranks at level 7. The DC of 15+7 (for a foe with CR= to party level) would be 22, requiring someone to get an 8 or better on their d20 roll to affect the target, with progressively 1 higher per repeated use on the same target in a day. That's a pretty easy check to stat with, and if they take skill focus (truespeak) at some point, it becomes a 75% success chance (5 or better on a d20 for the first use of that utterance).

Someone in another thread (I think it was the rules we forget about thread) brought up that only about half of your fights should be against equal CR opponents, with most of the rest being lower CR opponents, and a few against higher or significantly higher threats. If you bear that in mind, the truenamer should be fine with these DC's. Maybe don't let them have an amulet of the silver tongue though, it'd be rather unnecessary unless you're going to have them consistently fighting things at like, 8 CR's over the party level.

Taking the truenaming check out of the equation could also work out, I'm just wary about suggesting it. No really good reason there, since you mentioned that the players don't go for high optimization builds, just some inherent caution.

oh, and one of the fun house rules that my group favored when we used 3.5 was that player characters had a number of extra permanent class skills equal to their int mod. Which meant that no matter what your class was, the skills picked for that would always be class skills. It didn't turn anyone without trapfinding into a rogue or anything terrible, and mostly meant we could have more flavorful characters that didn't suck at something just because their class isn't traditionally trained in it.

[Cosi]

This is correct, though sometimes I wish D&D was written that exactingly. Certainly I wish it were errataed that exactingly. But I think we won't be able to truly code D&D (rules-heavy D&D anyway) until we have access to AI. (4e might be code-able right now but, eh...)

I think there's a quantitative difference between "the system must be formally specified" and "don't use reserved words as if they were common terms".


Well, you don't have the munchkinest players who ever munched (as mentioned) so I would probably have truenaming dcs work off of Hit Die instead of Hit Diex2 (is it CR? I keep thinking it's Hit Die).

It's CR. Nothing should ever scale of HD, because HD has no real relation to CR or level appropriateness at all. There are CR 18 creatures with 12 HD and there are CR 12 creatures with 40 HD. You should never ever plug "some random monster's HD" into an equation and expect to get a level appropriate result.

Seriously, don't do it. It's bad.

[Sagetim]

All this talk of archer's eye reminds me of how the Truenamer I ran helped to kill the party's Doppleganger/Necromancer/Tainted Scholar. One part of it involved teleporting a simulacrum of the party's monk/assassin/janitor into the necromancer's base, to have it start running through the entire place to set off all the traps (most especially the ones in the landing zone). Next up involved the party's broken, homebrew-that-he-refused-to-admit-was-homebrew dndwiki gunslinger entering along with the Truenamer. Before they entered, the shooter got buffed with archer's eye and had his bullets transformed into....mmm, T...something. It's a metal that soul traps if it delivers the killing blow. Then, while the Truenamer shut down the necromancer's ability to exit the scene (I can't recall what utterance it was exactly, save that it stopped the necromancer for going 'peace, I'm out'. The Gunslinger opened up with a full attack from the front door, through multiple walls because he could see the target using archer's eye, and shoot through walls because of some kind of BS class ability. And I think he killed the necromancer in all of one or two shots, stopping any of the contingencies he had in place from triggering. Then a few rounds later the bullets reverted to regular whatever they were made of, and the necromancer's soul was shunted into the realm of being a vestige. Because it was now soul trapped in a material that no longer existed.

Mind, that took some serious BS, but to be fair, the necromancer had been BSing a lot of stuff with the GM since earlier in the game, like no counting his racial hit dice or ECL modifier properly, and thinking that tainted scholar could break the spell level limit by having a higher enough casting stat to get bonus spells of those levels. Which is why the opening scene for my Truenamer in that game was needing to survive an incoming maximized fell animate fireball (which I did, because spellfire is awesome and if he was going to BS that hard I was going to BS to survive an opening scene). Oh, and the resulting zombies that used to be commoners were good xp, too.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I think there's a quantitative difference between "the system must be formally specified" and "don't use reserved words as if they were common terms".[quote]
I think the problems come because 3.5 is, like, 70% technically precise. If the whole thing was presented colloquially and more loosely, you'd probably see a different sort of culture emerge around it, but the current form is just technical enough to encourage close reading while still being loose enough to fall apart if you try to do that too much.

[quote]It's CR. Nothing should ever scale of HD, because HD has no real relation to CR or level appropriateness at all. There are CR 18 creatures with 12 HD and there are CR 12 creatures with 40 HD. You should never ever plug "some random monster's HD" into an equation and expect to get a level appropriate result.

Seriously, don't do it. It's bad.
It's a real shame so many core spells key off HD, yeah.

[Lans]

I feel like the truespeak check should be really low, and you add the number you beat it by to the effect in some way. Like if you beat word of nurturing's DC by 3 you add 3 rounds to the duration, or add 1/4 what you beat random attack buffs DC by to attack rolls.

[Sagetim]

I feel like the truespeak check should be really low, and you add the number you beat it by to the effect in some way. Like if you beat word of nurturing's DC by 3 you add 3 rounds to the duration, or add 1/4 what you beat random attack buffs DC by to attack rolls.

Don't Utterances have a limit on how many copies of the same one you can have at once? I'm pretty sure if you got a long duration on least word of nurturing, you couldn't, say, reverse it to slap an enemy with some damage for that much longer. It's kind of a double edged sword, in that manner. A longer duration is generally desirable, but in this case it would also lockout the power that much longer.

[Lans]

Don't Utterances have a limit on how many copies of the same one you can have at once? I'm pretty sure if you got a long duration on least word of nurturing, you couldn't, say, reverse it to slap an enemy with some damage for that much longer. It's kind of a double edged sword, in that manner. A longer duration is generally desirable, but in this case it would also lockout the power that much longer.

True, maybe do the x/y approach so it heals more per round and you fly faster when using a flying power. Or scrap the law of sequence, I don't know. I kind of like the idea of having 3 laws to go with truenaming.

Edit- Actually why not apply a penalty for each power you have going at once, as well as when you affect more than one opponent. So I'm thinking DC=CR+LR+LS+other modifiers. Then you get additional power based on how much you beat the DC by.

So a first level truenamer could do reversed nurturing on a bunch of goblins by making a truenamer check of 1+4 for each goblin beyond the first.

[Cosi]

I feel like the truespeak check should be really low, and you add the number you beat it by to the effect in some way. Like if you beat word of nurturing's DC by 3 you add 3 rounds to the duration, or add 1/4 what you beat random attack buffs DC by to attack rolls.

This is one of those things that sounds good, but then turns out to be horribly imbalanced. Skills checks in 3e vary a lot by optimization, but very little by level. The difference between being 10th level and 11th level is a +1 bonus to your check. The difference between buying a +10 item and not doing that is +10. That means that if you try to plug a skill check into some equation to turn it into a level appropriate combat action, things are inevitably and immediately broken. Because two character who are 10th level can have checks that vary by more than the entire range of the RNG, while a 1st level character and a 20th character can have bonuses that are closer than that.

[Gandariel]

Simplest fix is probably:

- Make DCs scale with CR and not 2xCR.
Player should keep up by just using skill points, and using other obtained bonuses (like magic items) to use stuff like extend or quicken, or use it longer through Law of Resistance.
- Nerf (you can have both a regular and a reverse version of an utterance active at the same time) or remove the Law of sequence. Or move "Speak unto the masses" at an earlier level
- Save DCs go on Int

[ComaVision]

My house rules on Truenamer basically amount to:
-DC scales by 1xHD instead of 2xCR. I think it's ridiculous that it scales off CR at all.
-Truenamer gets an untyped bonus to Truespeech checks equal to the class level. Basically just lifts the floor a lot.
-Truenamers have access to all utterances of the level available to them, rather than selecting a few.

[Cosi]

-DC scales by 1xHD instead of 2xCR. I think it's ridiculous that it scales off CR at all.

But why? Now Truenamers are mostly better, but randomly way worse against e.g. Vermin and way better against e.g. Kelvezus. Scaling by CR (which consistently tracks level) rather than HD (which does not) was one of the few good things about Truenamers.

[Grod_The_Giant]

-DC scales by 1xHD instead of 2xCR. I think it's ridiculous that it scales off CR at all.
-Truenamer gets an untyped bonus to Truespeech checks equal to the class level. Basically just lifts the floor a lot.
I don't think you need both of these. Either one puts you on track without having to scrounge for bonuses.

Speaking of, one suggestion I'm not seeing here: Skill Focus (Truespeak) as a bonus feat at 1st level. 100% of Truenamers will take it, it's a pure, boring feat tax; why not allow it for free?

[Lans]

This is one of those things that sounds good, but then turns out to be horribly imbalanced. Skills checks in 3e vary a lot by optimization, but very little by level. The difference between being 10th level and 11th level is a +1 bonus to your check. The difference between buying a +10 item and not doing that is +10. That means that if you try to plug a skill check into some equation to turn it into a level appropriate combat action, things are inevitably and immediately broken. Because two character who are 10th level can have checks that vary by more than the entire range of the RNG, while a 1st level character and a 20th character can have bonuses that are closer than that.

I'm not sure how big of a deal that will be, already we can have a wizard that does 12d6 with a spell at 12th and we have wizards that can deal 36d6 with a spell. Not to mention the difference between a rogue with blink throwing flasks and a scout getting 1 hit a turn.

Or a normal bard and one that has all the works when it comes to inspire courage

[Cosi]

I'm not sure how big of a deal that will be, already we can have a wizard that does 12d6 with a spell at 12th and we have wizards that can deal 36d6 with a spell. Not to mention the difference between a rogue with blink throwing flasks and a scout getting 1 hit a turn.

Or a normal bard and one that has all the works when it comes to inspire courage

That seems like a very bad attitude to have when writing new content. You should write things for the level you expect people to be playing at, rather than trying to write something that fits at all the levels. Also, this doesn't mitigate the problem of slow natural scaling at all.

[ComaVision]

But why? Now Truenamers are mostly better, but randomly way worse against e.g. Vermin and way better against e.g. Kelvezus. Scaling by CR (which consistently tracks level) rather than HD (which does not) was one of the few good things about Truenamers.

There's a fair amount of precedence for spells to be capped by or otherwise affected by HD but not much for CR (at least as far as I'm aware). I don't have a problem with the idea that a Truenamer will likely need to shift their strategy versus certain opponent types and I think it would give the Truenamer a unique feel to play versus another class.

Fluff wise, I kind of like the concept of dumb creatures being less bound by their truename than intelligent creatures.

EDIT:

I don't think you need both of these. Either one puts you on track without having to scrounge for bonuses.

Speaking of, one suggestion I'm not seeing here: Skill Focus (Truespeak) as a bonus feat at 1st level. 100% of Truenamers will take it, it's a pure, boring feat tax; why not allow it for free?

You're probably right. I didn't want Item Familiar to feel like a required for anyone playing a Truenamer though. Originally, I just gave Item Familiar as a bonus feat but I'd rather leave it as an option.

[prufock]

My idea was to get rid of Truespeak as a skill and make it a class ability instead.
You make a check at 1d20 + your truenamer level + your Int bonus.
DC for creatures is = 15 + CR.
Auto failures and successes apply on natural 1s and 20s, respectively.

If you invest in high enough INT, you'll only be failing on natural 1s at high levels. However, you can spread your stats around a bit more without sacrificing your truespeaking too much.

[Grod_The_Giant]

My idea was to get rid of Truespeak as a skill and make it a class ability instead.
You make a check at 1d20 + your truenamer level + your Int bonus.
DC for creatures is = 15 + CR.
Auto failures and successes apply on natural 1s and 20s, respectively.

If you invest in high enough INT, you'll only be failing on natural 1s at high levels. However, you can spread your stats around a bit more without sacrificing your truespeaking too much.
So for an on-CR foe, you'll need to roll 15-Int? Kind of rough at low levels, better at high, and in both cases the Law of Resistance will kill you pretty quickly-- it's not enough to hit the DCs on your first check of the day; you need to be able to make ~3-5 reliably.

[Lans]

That seems like a very bad attitude to have when writing new content. You should write things for the level you expect people to be playing at, rather than trying to write something that fits at all the levels. Also, this doesn't mitigate the problem of slow natural scaling at all.

I think it can be done in a way where its not any more of a variance than other things in DND. Expecially when I am doing it in an x/y format. Say the difference between 10 on checks is 2 more fast healing or another +2 to hit and damage, do you think thats going to make much of a difference? As is the truenamers effects are pretty weak, and doing it this way keeps the truenamers schtick while keeping them relevant.

[prufock]

So for an on-CR foe, you'll need to roll 15-Int? Kind of rough at low levels, better at high, and in both cases the Law of Resistance will kill you pretty quickly-- it's not enough to hit the DCs on your first check of the day; you need to be able to make ~3-5 reliably.
The law of resistance would need to go away or be changed in some way, for sure. As for the DCs, if you're facing an even-leveled enemy at level 1, you probably need a d20 roll of 12-ish. That goes down as level increases until you're very nearly automatically succeeding.

[Grod_The_Giant]

The law of resistance would need to go away or be changed in some way, for sure. As for the DCs, if you're facing an even-leveled enemy at level 1, you probably need a d20 roll of 12-ish. That goes down as level increases until you're very nearly automatically succeeding.
You'd need a +15 Int bonus to hit an even-leveled enemy. That's not exactly simple to do.

[Psyren]

I'd say reasonably-optimized characters at level 20 generally end up with the following to their key stat:

18 start
+2 race
+5 levels (1/4 * 20)
+6 enhancement
+5 inherent (wish/manual)

=36 Int

(36-10)/2 = 26/2 = +13 bonus. (Bounded accuracy?)

You can probably add more of an edge with things like luck rerolls and ioun stones but realistically, +13 is what you're working with at max level. And that's assuming a perfect start (the first two lines) to your career, both of which can easily get you killed at low levels too if the point buy isn't high enough.

[prufock]

You'd need a +15 Int bonus to hit an even-leveled enemy. That's not exactly simple to do.
Huh? CR 1 would be DC 16 truespeak check. Your level (1) + Int bonus (maybe 3?) is +4, so you'd need to roll a 12 for it to work.

[Jormengand]

Huh? CR 1 would be DC 16 truespeak check. Your level (1) + Int bonus (maybe 3?) is +4, so you'd need to roll a 12 for it to work.

Yes, and that's terrible.

[Psyren]

A 50-60% spell failure on your first utterance of the day is indeed pretty brutal. That kind of wasted action chance can easily get you killed.

Compare to Kyeudo's system - the DC at 1st-level is 18 (15 + CR + [2*Utterance level]) but it's a skill check rather than a level check, so you're getting 1d20 + 4 (ranks) + 4 (Int) + 3 (Skill Focus) to succeed on a 7 rather than a 12. Throw in a masterwork tool (50gp) with your starting gold (4d4*10gp) and you're failing only on a 4 or lower.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Huh? CR 1 would be DC 16 truespeak check. Your level (1) + Int bonus (maybe 3?) is +4, so you'd need to roll a 12 for it to work.
I meant to auto-hit, sorry. As Psyren pointed out, that requires a non-trivial amount of work to hit before very very high levels. And as Jormengand pointed out, it's quite brutal at low levels. 10+CR would be a decent base; in that case you're talking about needing to roll a 7 first time around, or a 5 to affect yourself-- rather more reasonable, and leaves you space to include the LoR.

(And maybe LoS too; +1 or +2 DC for every active iteration of the utterance isn't bad.)

[Jormengand]

See, if you're playing a normal truenamer, you should be able to make your truespeak checks automatically without having to roll from second level, and how quickly you can use quicken utterance without needing a roll largely depends on whether the Paragnostic Assembly, Tools of Legend, Traits, Item Familiars and Competence Items of +truespeak exist in your game (Assuming no/no/no/yes/yes, I got level 2 as +1 no roll, level 4 as +14 no roll - which is 4 more than extend or empower no roll - and level 7 as +23 no roll - which is 3 more than quicken or extend+empower no roll - and stopped calculating after level 10 with +28 no roll, all without doing anything overtly cheesy or really out of the ordinary). Being a skill check, rather than anything else it could have been, is more of the truenamer's saving grace than anything else: you get access to a subsystem that allows you to use two abilities a round at no real cost (adding 20 to your truespeak check isn't a cost when you can't fail either way), and most of the ways of stopping casters don't apply to truenamers (uttering defensively isn't stopped by mage slayer because it's not casting defensively, silence is 80% likely to fail, tying up is 100% likely to fail, spell resistance can be bypassed, utterances can be heightened past spell turning or GoI).

The weird and wonderful way that utterances work actually makes them a lot more powerful in the right hands. "Fixes" that try to stop the truespeak check being anything other than a skill check make me a little sad, because they often make the poor 'namer less effective by stripping off some of their neat abilities that they get just for putting resources into the one skill they'll ever need.

[Psyren]

(And maybe LoS too; +1 or +2 DC for every active iteration of the utterance isn't bad.)

I don't think this is necessary - the Law of Resistance is already piling up the penalties if you're using the same utterance on multiple people, adding another from the Law of Sequence unless you do so painfully slowly is just going to be even more onerous.


and most of the ways of stopping casters don't apply to truenamers (uttering defensively isn't stopped by mage slayer because it's not casting defensively, silence is 80% likely to fail, tying up is 100% likely to fail, spell resistance can be bypassed, utterances can be heightened past spell turning or GoI).

Utterances are SLAs so I'd say Mage Slayer should still work.


The weird and wonderful way that utterances work actually makes them a lot more powerful in the right hands. "Fixes" that try to stop the truespeak check being anything other than a skill check make me a little sad, because they often make the poor 'namer less effective by stripping off some of their neat abilities that they get just for putting resources into the one skill they'll ever need.

For the record I prefer it as a skill check too. Just with better scaling/math so that you can occasionally Quicken without needing Paragostic Assembly, Item Familiars, and all that other jazz that just feels cheesy.

[Beheld]

See, if you're playing a normal truenamer, you should be able to make your truespeak checks automatically without having to roll from second level,

To effect a CR 2 enemy without rolling you need to have a +18 bonus at level 2.

+4 Int, +5 Ranks, +3 Skill Focus, +1-2 from being Illumian, still gets you 4 short, and that is so very much not a "normal" truenamer such that anything you can add on top of that is just further underming your continued super weird claim that a "normal" Truenamer is literally every single thing ever written in any book all on one character.

[Cosi]

The weird and wonderful way that utterances work actually makes them a lot more powerful in the right hands. "Fixes" that try to stop the truespeak check being anything other than a skill check make me a little sad, because they often make the poor 'namer less effective by stripping off some of their neat abilities that they get just for putting resources into the one skill they'll ever need.

Magic based on D&D's skill system is fundamentally broken before you write any mechanics at all. The only way to meaningfully fix the Truenamer is to remove the idea that skill based magic is a thing you will ever do in D&D as it stands today. You can write other tricks for the Truenamer to do. You can't make magic that works off a skill check balanced.

[prufock]

Yes, and that's terrible.


A 50-60% spell failure on your first utterance of the day is indeed pretty brutal. That kind of wasted action chance can easily get you killed.

My thought process is that it's similar to an attack roll. Class level in place of full BAB, Intelligence in place of Strength. The DC is 15+ instead of 10+ that AC uses because there are no ways to boost CR like there are for AC (armor, shield, dexterity, natural armor, deflection, etc).


See, if you're playing a normal truenamer, you should be able to make your truespeak checks automatically without having to roll from second level


Compare to Kyeudo's system - the DC at 1st-level is 18 (15 + CR + [2*Utterance level]) but it's a skill check rather than a level check, so you're getting 1d20 + 4 (ranks) + 4 (Int) + 3 (Skill Focus) to succeed on a 7 rather than a 12. Throw in a masterwork tool (50gp) with your starting gold (4d4*10gp) and you're failing only on a 4 or lower.
This sort of speaks to my point, though: why have a check at all if the goal is the make the check that easily overcome? Skill checks are easy to buff, and it's pretty easy to get to the point where you pass on a 1, but it's also more dependent on rules savvy and book-diving. It's just as well to remove the check altogether if you're going to have no chance of failure.


I meant to auto-hit, sorry. As Psyren pointed out, that requires a non-trivial amount of work to hit before very very high levels. And as Jormengand pointed out, it's quite brutal at low levels. 10+CR would be a decent base; in that case you're talking about needing to roll a 7 first time around, or a 5 to affect yourself-- rather more reasonable, and leaves you space to include the LoR.
It's non-trivial, but I expect a 20th level character to have between +10 (fairly easy to do) and +15 (requires more resources) to their primary stat. But getting to the auto-succeed level isn't my goal. But I'm not married to the idea either. A DC of 10+CR+Wis modifier might work better.

[Cosi]

My thought process is that it's similar to an attack roll. Class level in place of full BAB, Intelligence in place of Strength. The DC is 15+ instead of 10+ that AC uses because there are no ways to boost CR like there are for AC (armor, shield, dexterity, natural armor, deflection, etc).

Truenamer utterances are nowhere near good enough if they work for that to be reasonable. The damaging ones are weak, the other offensive ones give saves, and the buffs are buffs and wouldn't give saves anyway.

Not saying you couldn't do something like that, but if you did, you'd have to rewrite all the utterances.

[Jormengand]

To effect a CR 2 enemy without rolling you need to have a +18 bonus at level 2.

+4 Int, +5 Ranks, +3 Skill Focus, +1-2 from being Illumian, still gets you 4 short, and that is so very much not a "normal" truenamer such that anything you can add on top of that is just further underming your continued super weird claim that a "normal" Truenamer is literally every single thing ever written in any book all on one character.

If you're not taking full int, maximum ranks, skill focus and a masterwork tool - you know, the four blindingly obvious things that buff skills, then I don't know what you're doing. If you're not thinking about that one race which is obsessed with words and gets skill bonuses as a class which is all about words and needs skill bonuses then you have no imagination when it comes to either flavour or mechanics, and once you're an illumian it's not that weird to pick up Improved Power Sigils, which you can do if your DM allows flaws (or any of the other ways to get bonus feats without spending class levels which I've never really looked into but I'm assured they exist) or at third level with no item familiar or sixth with item familiar (which you should take at 3rd if it's available).

Also, there is no way for a truenamer to effect enemies. They can affect them, but they cannot put them into effect (that is, effect them).

[Beheld]

If you're not taking full int, maximum ranks, skill focus and a masterwork tool - you know, the four blindingly obvious things that buff skills, then I don't know what you're doing. If you're not thinking about that one race which is obsessed with words and gets skill bonuses as a class which is all about words and needs skill bonuses then you have no imagination when it comes to either flavour or mechanics, and once you're an illumian it's not that weird to pick up Improved Power Sigils, which you can do if your DM allows flaws (or any of the other ways to get bonus feats without spending class levels which I've never really looked into but I'm assured they exist) or at third level with no item familiar or sixth with item familiar (which you should take at 3rd if it's available).

...............

"If you don't own a book that most people don't own that has no relation to the book Truenamer is in, then you aren't normal and you are a stupid idiot."

"If you rolled your stats, then you aren't normal, and you are a stupid idiot."

"If you don't somehow have a flaw to have a second feat at level 2 with your Illumian Truenamer with Skill Focus (Truespeak) as their level 1 Feat, you aren't normal and you are stupid idiot."

"If your DM doesn't allow you to demand a masterwork skill item of any skill even though that's not a thing that exists, and is just in the general suggestions of thinks that a DM might consider deciding exists, then you are not normal and you are a stupid idiot."

"In fact, if every single one of those is not true simultaneously, then you are not normal and you are a stupid idiot."

See my point, you literally can't make a "normal" truenamer do the things you claim they can do, to accomplish the specific thing you claimed all normal truenamers can do, you need optional rules about skill items, optional rules about free feats, access to an obscure book that doesn't even relate to true namers, and optional rules about PB and probably a pretty high PB, since +1 to your skill, even if it defines your class, probably isn't worth the difference between 8 and 14 in Con or Dex or Cha (since that's what your saves are based off of).

I have played in many games, in maybe one of them ever, would I have been able to do all the things you need to have a Truenamer succeed on a 1 at level 2.

[Cosi]

If you're not taking full int, maximum ranks, skill focus and a masterwork tool - you know, the four blindingly obvious things that buff skills, then I don't know what you're doing.

He has full INT, full ranks, and skill focus. Even granting the masterwork tool (which I do not think is something most people will notice), he's still two points short if he gets to be an Illumain (though it looks like the Illumain bonus is the same as just getting +2 INT so I don't think you care).


If you're not thinking about that one race which is obsessed with words and gets skill bonuses as a class which is all about words and needs skill bonuses then you have no imagination when it comes to either flavour or mechanics,

Wait why is playing the world's most obvious race/class combo something you do if you have an imagination? That sounds totally backwards to me. Also, already in the calc.

In any case, you're spending 50 GP, your race, and a feat to get your abilities to always activate. You know what the Wizard pays for that? Nothing, because Wizard is a real class and gets abilities you can actually use.


third level with no item familiar or sixth with item familiar (which you should take at 3rd if it's available).

Item Familiar is from a book of variant rules. It has precisely as much bearing on the power of the Truenamer as Recharge Magic has on the Warmage.

[Psyren]

If you're not taking full int, maximum ranks, skill focus and a masterwork tool - you know, the four blindingly obvious things that buff skills, then I don't know what you're doing.

I agree with this part, every Truenamer worth his salt should be doing these.


If you're not thinking about that one race which is obsessed with words and gets skill bonuses as a class which is all about words and needs skill bonuses then you have no imagination when it comes to either flavour or mechanics, and once you're an illumian it's not that weird to pick up Improved Power Sigils, which you can do if your DM allows flaws (or any of the other ways to get bonus feats without spending class levels which I've never really looked into but I'm assured they exist) or at third level with no item familiar or sixth with item familiar (which you should take at 3rd if it's available).

I don't agree with this. It has nothing to do with imagination; there simply may be no illumians in the DM's world. Similarly, both item familiars and flaws are variant rules. You can't simply assume these things are available the way you can things like Skill Focus.

[Grod_The_Giant]

See, if you're playing a normal truenamer, you should be able to make your truespeak checks automatically without having to roll from second level,
Nonononono, you can optimize to make your checks automatically from second level. Optimize. Common sense is full ranks, ~18 Int, and Skill Focus. Going much beyond that, as Cosi and Beheld have noted in their admittedly abrasive fashion, is not necessarily normal. A character that draws from 5+ different books and uses one of the most widely-recognized-as-broken feats out there is not, by most definitions, normal.

You're not wrong so much as you're applying a higher level of optimization than many tables (especially the one in this thread) might be comfortable with. The result is fine, because Truenamers are weak; the process is what's in question.


My thought process is that it's similar to an attack roll. Class level in place of full BAB, Intelligence in place of Strength. The DC is 15+ instead of 10+ that AC uses because there are no ways to boost CR like there are for AC (armor, shield, dexterity, natural armor, deflection, etc).
Poor comparison; there are a lot more ways to boost to-hit than there are to boost a unique level-plus-stat roll. And AC scaling is kind of screwy anyway; for some reason it's "level-based bonus + misc" vs "static bonus + misc."


This sort of speaks to my point, though: why have a check at all if the goal is the make the check that easily overcome? Skill checks are easy to buff, and it's pretty easy to get to the point where you pass on a 1, but it's also more dependent on rules savvy and book-diving. It's just as well to remove the check altogether if you're going to have no chance of failure.
It's a difficult point, to be sure. I think the best example of a skill-based combat ability in the game is Knowledge Devotion. It functions with very little andwith a lot of investment, it has a cap so you can't break the game wide open with it, and... I'm kind of struggling to put this into words, but my thought is that the investment:reward ratio is sort of equal across all optimization levels. At low op, getting a +1 or maybe a +2 to attack and damage is a fine use of a feat; at high op, +4 or +5 is more like what you'd want to get out of the investment.


It's non-trivial, but I expect a 20th level character to have between +10 (fairly easy to do) and +15 (requires more resources) to their primary stat. But getting to the auto-succeed level isn't my goal. But I'm not married to the idea either. A DC of 10+CR+Wis modifier might work better.
Fair enough.

[Psyren]

Common sense is full ranks, ~18 Int, and Skill Focus. Going much beyond that, as Cosi and Beheld have noted in their admittedly abrasive fashion, is not necessarily normal.

This amused me :smallbiggrin:



This sort of speaks to my point, though: why have a check at all if the goal is the make the check that easily overcome? Skill checks are easy to buff, and it's pretty easy to get to the point where you pass on a 1, but it's also more dependent on rules savvy and book-diving. It's just as well to remove the check altogether if you're going to have no chance of failure.

For your first Utterance of the day you SHOULDN'T fail. Or at the very least it should be low (less than 30%.) And that Utterance should be Universal Aptitude using your personal truename.

Your comparison to attack rolls is closer than you realize. I liken the first utterance of the day to be akin to a martial character's highest iterative while charging - there's really no reason it should miss. What you're really rolling for are the later utterances, which in this analogy are fishing for high rolls/crits on your lower iteratives. If you have a significant failure chance on Utterance #1, then you have nowhere near the longevity that the warlock-like power of the class (read: low, at least until Gate) demands.

[digiman619]

Yes, and that's terrible.

But is it as bad as stealing forty pies?

[Jormengand]

But is it as bad as stealing forty pies?

Well, the truenamer's chance of stealing forty pies successfully might be higher, because at least cross-class skill ranks are optimisable to some extent. Plus, univeral aptitude and recitation of the whichever state it is I don't remember these things why do they have such dumb names anyway can combine to give you +5+level/3 on the check.

Yes I get the reference.