Support the GITP forums on Patreon
Help support GITP's forums (and ongoing server maintenance) via Patreon
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Gender
    Male

    Default [3.5/PF] Build challenge: the unluckiest character ever

    I've been rolling around ideas for this character, but I know that nothing with which I could come up would compare to the min/maxing skills of this collective community, so I shall challenge you all to build this character:

    Every single die they roll will always be the minimum result.

    That means that every attack roll, skill check, ability check, and save are natural 1's, and every damage roll is minimum.

    For the sake of sanity, I'll assume point-buy stat generation and average hit point rolls, but every other check will be a 1. I also considered what would happen if their bad luck was also reflected on their opponents (who always roll 20's when rolling against the character, max damage, etc.) but I suggest sticking for now with the character's rolls.

    Is it possible to play a character such as this to any degree of effectiveness? Even if taken to Pun-punian levels of optimization?

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: [3.5/PF] Build challenge: the unluckiest character ever

    1.How would this be effected by feats such as Maximize Spell or others which specifically override rolls?

    2.I'm assuming that his poor luck is not something we have to provide for mechanically(I know of no way to do that). Just try to compensate for it?

    3.By "Natural 1", do you mean complete with "auto-fail saves" and "fumbles on nat 1"? Or just that he's getting the minimum possible die value?(The latter option would allow him to hit something if he could hit on a 1)
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Retired Mod in the Playground Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [3.5/PF] Build challenge: the unluckiest character ever

    Quote Originally Posted by GoatBoy View Post
    That means that every attack roll, skill check, ability check, and save are natural 1's, and every damage roll is minimum.
    If all your attack rolls are Natural 1's you'll never make a damage roll because you'll miss every time. Just sayin.
    "We have sent many to Hell, to smooth our way," said I, "and we are standing yet and holding blades. What more?"

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Troll in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [3.5/PF] Build challenge: the unluckiest character ever

    Pun-Pun would still be godly. Virtually unkillable, with every concievable defense and lots of ways to alter things around him that would flatten most non-deities.

    Honestly, even a lot of basic tier 1s would still be effective. Enemies can still fail their saves. They can do damage through things like summons where the caster just doesn't do any rolling himself. They can still cover themselves with magical defenses and contingencies. I mean, a wizard with a spell list full of walls of stone or force is still pretty cool, even if he never rolls a dice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chambers View Post
    If all your attack rolls are Natural 1's you'll never make a damage roll because you'll miss every time. Just sayin.
    Some things don't roll to hit. Fireball for example.
    Last edited by Gnaeus; 2011-01-07 at 04:41 PM.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Librarian in the Playground Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [3.5/PF] Build challenge: the unluckiest character ever

    Quote Originally Posted by Gnaeus View Post
    Honestly, even a lot of basic tier 1s would still be effective.
    Wizards would not, since they could not learn more than 2 spells/level until well past their optimum level. Sorcerers would do OK, however.
    The Cranky Gamer
    *It isn't realism, it's verisimilitude; the appearance of truth within the framework of the game.
    *Picard management tip: Debate honestly. The goal is to arrive at the truth, not at your preconception.
    *Two Tales of Tellene, available from DriveThruFiction
    *The One Deck Engine: Gaming on a budget
    Avatar is from local user Mehangel
    Written by Me on DriveThru RPG
    If you need me to address a thread as a moderator, include a link.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Godskook's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: [3.5/PF] Build challenge: the unluckiest character ever

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Hall View Post
    Wizards would not, since they could not learn more than 2 spells/level until well past their optimum level. Sorcerers would do OK, however.
    Wizards wouldn't be in any problems from a lack of new spells. You'll note they know just as many as a Sorcerer at almost all spell levels, get them sooner, and if they're focused specialists, have just as many slots. And with a 1 level dip into master specialist, they get skill focus(spellcraft).

    By level 5, they'll have 8 ranks, +3 from skill focus, +4 from int(conservative), +2 from MWK tool, and +1 from a min die roll.

    That's 8+3+4+2+1 = 18. That's enough to learn level 3 spells at level 5, when they become available, without doing anything more excessive than jumping into a common prestige class and buying a 50gp Mwk tool. And that's not counting the +4 worth of synergies, +2 from specialist school, or anything else you could do to optimize the check.
    Avatar by Assassin89
    I started my first campaign around a campfire, having pancakes. They were blueberry.
    My homebrew(updated 6/17):

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Troll in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: [3.5/PF] Build challenge: the unluckiest character ever

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Hall View Post
    Wizards would not, since they could not learn more than 2 spells/level until well past their optimum level. Sorcerers would do OK, however.
    1s don't autofail, and you could pimp your spellcraft to a point where you could still learn spells. Things like Skill Focus or MW spellcraft items might come into play, but I think it would be doable.

    Edit: Swordsaged.
    Last edited by Gnaeus; 2011-01-07 at 05:08 PM.

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    HalfOrcPirate

    Join Date
    Nov 2008

    Default Re: [3.5/PF] Build challenge: the unluckiest character ever

    Human Artificer. Eventually you'll have a UMD check too high to fail.

    Magical aptitude
    skill focus (UMD)
    masterwork tool
    +4 charisma
    +4 ranks
    =
    +15

    that's level 1, you will fail at everything at level 1.

    Level 2 is 5 ranks, with the +2 synergy bonus from your 5 ranks in spellcraft and decipher script, meaning that you automatically succeed on crafting scrolls of first level spells.

    By third level you can afford an item of +5 competence bonus to use magic device and then you're basically just a normal artificer from then on :D.
    Last edited by woodenbandman; 2011-01-07 at 06:48 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •