PDA

View Full Version : What's the NADest class?



RMS Oceanic
2008-12-04, 03:57 AM
Inspired by the thread with the same name but for one letter, I was wondering: which classes could be effective without any high ability scores (No Ability Dependency)? Two spring to mind.

First, the rogue. He gets enough skill points that he doesn't need a high Int, and the amount of ranks he can put in skills means he doesn't need the appropriate ability modifiers to boost his chances. Strength and Dexterity penalties do hurt him, but his sneak attack damage allows him to remain effective in combat.

Second, the warlock. Yes, he needs charisma to add to his save DC, but that's only if you decide to specialize in save-or-X stuff. As a blaster mage, he can just hang back at 30 feet and snipe his enemies all day long.

Are there any others I've left out?

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-04, 04:19 AM
Bard, IMHO. Build a buffer headed into one of the music-focused classes and no one will notice you don't have any attribute above 3 and can't cast.

starwoof
2008-12-04, 04:20 AM
The druid. Sometimes, and only kinda. While you wont be an effective druid with all tens, in animal form you are at least as effective as a fighter.:smallbiggrin: You can become much better with levels in certain prestige classes.

*COUGH*MASTER OF MANY FORMS.

Tengu_temp
2008-12-04, 04:21 AM
Warlock, as you already mentioned. I'd disagree on the rogue - without either Con and Dex or Int and Cha, he'll be neither good in combat nor a good skill monkey.

Another NAD class is a Wild Shape-focusing druid, probably going into some shapeshift-centric PrC like the Master of Many Forms. His animal companion keeps him alive at low levels.

Ninja-ed with the idea, of course. Bah.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-04, 04:22 AM
The druid. Sometimes, and only kinda. While you wont be an effective druid with all tens, in animal form you are at least as effective as a fighter.:smallbiggrin: You can become much better with levels in certain prestige classes.

*COUGH*MASTER OF MANY FORMS.But at that point you're better off as a Wildshape Ranger. Also, I was assuming the OP was talking about characters that would be effective with all 3s, which even Wildshape won't help with(Con).

Kurald Galain
2008-12-04, 04:27 AM
The monk, because he's going to be equally ineffective regardless of what attributes you use :smallbiggrin:

Seriously though? Definitely warlock.

Tengu_temp
2008-12-04, 04:53 AM
Hmm... what does artificer use intelligence for?
(I don't have the book.)

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-04, 04:57 AM
Hmm... what does artificer use intelligence for?
(I don't have the book.)Good point. As far as I know, only the infusions, which never have a save and only go up to about 6th level. You could build a decent Artificer with straight 10s if that's the case, as his abilities with the items are nearly undiminished.

jcsw
2008-12-04, 05:40 AM
I believe a focused specialist-conjurer-summoner works quite well. You only need to get enough int to reach the minimum requirement to cast the spells, and after that, since all your spells summon, you only need int for bonus spells.

RMS Oceanic
2008-12-04, 05:57 AM
"Enough int to cast the spells" could be as high as 19. Wizards of any flavour are an example of Single Ability Dependency.

JeminiZero
2008-12-04, 05:57 AM
Dragonfire Adept might work, since its essentially a breath weapon warlock.

If you managed to roll 10s, a Chameleon might scrape by as well, relying on Ability Boon to boost Int/Dex for Wizard/Cleric casting.

Bosh
2008-12-04, 06:15 AM
But at that point you're better off as a Wildshape Ranger. Also, I was assuming the OP was talking about characters that would be effective with all 3s, which even Wildshape won't help with(Con).

Not necessarily, with the druid you get a better animal companion.

TengYt
2008-12-04, 06:26 AM
The Commoner! They're good at what they do, no matter what the stats.

Tengu_temp
2008-12-04, 06:28 AM
Profession (Farmer) is wisdom-based.

Zeta Kai
2008-12-04, 06:35 AM
The Commoner! They're good at what they do, no matter what the stats.

By that, I assume that you mean "They already have little intrinsic value over what the plot says they can do, no matter what the stats"?

DementedFellow
2008-12-04, 06:50 AM
A long time ago there was a topic saying which class would still be effective if all the ability scores were 3. It was pretty much agreed that the Druid was still a beast.

He could support allies by flanking and his animal companion could do most the heavy lifting until level 5 which is when he would get shapechange.

TengYt
2008-12-04, 08:19 AM
By that, I assume that you mean "They already have little intrinsic value over what the plot says they can do, no matter what the stats"?

Exactly ;) In all the games I've been in, Commoner is the only NPC class that has had literally no major effect on any of the sessions. Unless you count a level 1 "find my sheep" sidequest.

OverdrivePrime
2008-12-04, 10:19 AM
I'll offer the Binder to the list. Some of its abilities are charisma-dependent, but your ability to bind a vestige doesn't matter if you make a good pact or not. If you've got 10s in all stats, you'll be almost as good a binder as one with a high charisma. Yes, the save DCs will be a little lower, but there are plenty of vestiges to bind that either shore up tha weakness, or don't encounter it at all. Day by day you can switch your bound vestiges to be good at some new aspect of adventuring.

Fostire
2008-12-04, 10:39 AM
I'm not so sure on the dragonfire adept, the breath weapon allows a reflex save so you would need a high con score to make the dc higher.

Coplantor
2008-12-04, 10:46 AM
Monks, it doesnt matter how high your stats are, they always suck.

Actually I think that the warlock is the NAD'est class, Eldritch blast is a touch attack so it doesnt really need a high AB to hit, since it is also a ranged attack you can do well with just a 6d hp and light armor prof.

STR: Of no real use for them
DEX: Probably the most important, it provides AC and improves to-hit chances
CON: Not really important if you have a tank in the party
INT: Nope, warlocks are no skill monkeys, the only skill they need is UMD
WIS: For what? Spot? Nay, they already have a good will save.
CHA: Improves DCs of invocations, but most of the best invocations dont have a DC, other than improving the UMD skill, CHA is of no use.

monty
2008-12-04, 01:45 PM
A gestalt rogue/warlock would be pretty nice, actually.

Strength: Unnecessary. Their damage is all coming from those 19d6 sneak blasts.
Dex: Touch attacks don't need much AB, and their AC is going to suck no matter what. Good Reflex save anyway, so that's not an issue either.
Con: Everyone hurts from low Con, but with invisibility, flight, etc. they can keep from getting hit in the first place better than most other classes. Fort saves are going to be in the toilet, but since most of them are targeted, they shouldn't be getting hit with them in the first place.
Int: Even with a 3, 4/level skill points is enough for the important stuff.
Wis: Has no real use besides will saves, and they have a Good one anyway.
Cha: If they aren't using save-based invocations or blast shapes, it's useless except for UMD, which they're already the best at.

Telonius
2008-12-04, 02:01 PM
Commoner. Nobody would really notice if it sucked just a little bit worse.

SilverClawShift
2008-12-04, 03:05 PM
I came in to say Binder, but since it's allready been mentioned, I'll just second it.

The Binder can get USE out of high stats in anything, but the mechanical difference between a Binder with solid 10s and a Binder with solid 16s is fairly unimportant to the purpose of the class. Sure, you'd rather have the 16s, but a Binder will still do their Binding-goodness regardless of stats.

And roleplaying bad pacts is part of the fun anyway.