Needing some assistance with a 400BP Magician Concept Options

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

The vampire thread did teach me a lot, I was disappointed when it got shot down.

Probably should not have been surprised, however. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[UmaroVI]

Arcane Arrestor. Resist spells at half force? Yes please.

Pssh, the real power of gnomes is being four times as dense and eight times as strong as humans, even after accounting for proportional strength.

[Sinistra]

Probably should not have been surprised, however. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

He said be fine if we were playing 2070s, but since it is an earlier time period I did see it coming. And two PCs have things against Vampires, haha.

[Neraph]

He said be fine if we were playing 2070s, but since it is an earlier time period I did see it coming. And two PCs have things against Vampires, haha.

They don't have to know.

[Irion]

@Neraph
Well, there is no TN given for finding out he is a vampire and the descriptions are not very extensive.
If you go after the pictures given in RC (unfortuantly the only RAW source we have), it seems quite obvious...

[toturi]

The character does not need to appear to be his true self.

He is a mage, yes? Illusion spells, no? Disguise, maybe? Dude of 1K Faces, perhaps if Mystic Adept?

It is not all that difficult to appear other than what he is.

[Elfenlied]

He said be fine if we were playing 2070s, but since it is an earlier time period I did see it coming. And two PCs have things against Vampires, haha.

A hint for the future: discuss character concepts openly with everyone around. That way, you can make sure no builds characters that hate your character. Years of that other game and Paladins have taught me such (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

That said, have you made up your mind yet about the character's tradition?

[Lionhearted]

Most important thing to remember around any table: You're playing with your friends, not against them, applies double if you're a GM.
One of the thing I realised growing from an ugly munchkin bud and blossoming into someone people actually want to be around ^^

[Neraph]

Years of that other game and Paladins have taught me such (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

What do you have against Paladins? And is it Paladins or people who play them Lawful Stupid?

[Lionhearted]

What do you have against Paladins? And is it Paladins or people who play them Lawful Stupid?

From my experience its more often then not the GM forcing people down the path of lawful stupid rather then the players grasping the idiot ball.
Everytime someone mention code of conduct I tend to shove the book of exalted deeds down their throats, tend to resolve the argument... Tis hard to talk with a book in your mouth.

[Neraph]

I'm sorry your experiences were so bad - my Exalted Deeds Paladin was awesome and did not affect the group too terribly much, although the fact we were fighting evil superdragons who were trying to destroy the Material Plane may have helped...

[Lionhearted]

The problem usually stem from the GM not having read the first chapter of BoED, Personally... I have a bad track record of paladin characters.
Let see here...
My Psychic warrior/Holy liberator accidentally killed the other paladin in the group (He was wrestling a Yeti), His constant bickering about me using blood magic to lessen his depatterning made me convinced that he wasn't really concerned with the greater good and I decided to end him, permanently.
Long story short, I made a pact with a horror took over a village of orcs by killing their warchief and gained access to two blood magic artifacts in the process (including an intelligent glove with some rather corrupting influence) and became an in the shadows villain for a great period of time. Holy shit the rest of the group was surprised when they ran into her, DM had me control her for the final battle, knocked half of the party before they took me down and set the paladin on the path towards his fall as he was elected to safeguard the glove while they tried to figure out how to destroy it.
Was a weird campaign had elements of Earthdawn and Zelda in it...

And there was the old republic campaign...
Over the course of six years of in-game time as jedi apprentices he cunningly manipulated my Wookiee jedi knight until there came a time where I invoked my wookiee force fuelled blood rage inadvertently killing the villagers I had been trying to protect... Realising that the old hermit that had aided us was a sith I struck him down... Only to be greeted by his ghost telling me I had performed admirably and my fall was complete... He went on to become the BBEG of the campaign, during the whole process I never realised until it was to late... Can't help but admire just how subtly the GM had coaxed me...

[Neraph]

First story: the real reason you didn't get along with the paladin was that you were evil.

Second story: nothing to do with paladins.

[Elfenlied]

What do you have against Paladins? And is it Paladins or people who play them Lawful Stupid?

Actually, it's nothing against Paladins per se. It's about everyone showing up to a game without discussing characters first, and voila, you've got the Paladin and the Assassin in the same group, and it becomes a dance of metagaming to ensure both get along. I've used the Paladin as an example since it has the most impact on party composition (to date, it and its variant classes are the only base classes with harsh restrictions on who they work with).

[Irion]

@Neraph
Well, the second story explains, why the first story happened...
A lot of GM let you get away with a lot of shit. Licking plutonium does give you terminal cancer but some super power. And stuff like that...
Most are just ignoring the effects of "evil magic". I mean, it is evil for a fucking reason. Like plutonium is dangerous for a fucking reason.
The idea you can use evil for good is realistically looking at it, just hilarious.
It was tried quite often, but it always blew up in the face.
(Afghanistan beeing the latest example of that... And how many people thought they could use Hitler...And here on earth we are talking only about humans... Not some deamons thinking in terms of thousands of years...)
But still, the idea is around... So if you want to believe in the devil, thats a reason. After thousands of years in human history, all telling you the same story, some people still think it works.

And I think a lot of the problem with paladins is, that a lot of GMs treat them as ordenary warriors.
Yeah, a paladin does not break into a house to get evidence. Why should he? He can simply kick in the door. If a paladin really claims what is rightfully his in most worlds, he is the number one character for social interaction.

@Elfenlied
Sorry, but I have a quite different take on that. Most games which have paladins are heroes RPGs. The are pretty much the ideal character for that kind of game.
I hate this democratic approch on player basis. Which is in total defiance to most gaming worlds.
So to take up Neraph example. If you would have played for example a thief in his group, well I probably had to follow the orders of his character. Beeing a player does not mean I can just shit all over the social order of the world. Yeah, I could try to steal some things if he is not watching but I am suggesting A and he is saying B. Well, B it is.

[Sinistra]

I was going with the simple but functional Hermetic.

[Elfenlied]

Sorry, but I have a quite different take on that. Most games which have paladins are heroes RPGs. The are pretty much the ideal character for that kind of game.
I hate this democratic approch on player basis. Which is in total defiance to most gaming worlds.
So to take up Neraph example. If you would have played for example a thief in his group, well I probably had to follow the orders of his character. Beeing a player does not mean I can just shit all over the social order of the world. Yeah, I could try to steal some things if he is not watching but I am suggesting A and he is saying B. Well, B it is.

D&D 3.X is not inherently heroic, nor does it (unlike its successor) presume that you play good-aligned characters. I do not know what kind of gaming world you're playing in, but the ones I play in assume that a group of 3-5 adventures journey together around the world and have adventures together, primarily motivated by finding treasure. Under this premise, a Paladin is not an ideal character, since they are primarily motivated by their desire to fight evil and spread good, which may correlate with the goal of the group. More often than not, I've seen the kind of self-righteous behaviour you describe: the Paladin player believes they are entitled to dictate the actions of the rest of the group, which they may not necessarily be comfortable with. Or, to put in your words: the Paladin shits all over the social order of the world, and expects others to take his crap. Such a scenario is detrimental for all involved.

Hence my recommendation for the players to meet together in advance and discuss what they want to play, to ensure compatibility.

I was going with the simple but functional Hermetic.

In that case, I recommend the gnome. Hardmax Magic and softmax Willpower and Logic at chargen. Get a R3 Cerebral booster as soon as you can.

[Irion]

@Elfenlied
Yeah, the core book has a paladin but no profession which is non-good or even evil.

And I am sorry, but looting some tressure dungeon has just no moral dilemma at all.

[Elfenlied]

@Elfenlied
Yeah, the core book has a paladin but no profession which is non-good or even evil.

Actually, this isn't true. The Player's Handbook has several options which require your character to be evil or non-good, including the Evil Domain (which requires an Evil aligned cleric), various spells with the evil descriptor (which, in turn, cannot be cast by someone good aligned), and various evil gods (remember, deities can only be selected by someone within one step of their alignment, so the character would be non-good/evil).

Note that none of these options are labeled as optional rules, so they are clearly intended to be used by player characters. Trying to take those options away from your fellow players without their prior consent, is quite frankly, a jerk move.

And I am sorry, but looting some tressure dungeon has just no moral dilemma at all.

I agree that it has no moral dilemma in it. And why should it? D&D isn't a game about moral dilemmas, it's a game about a group of adventurers adventuring together. Moral dilemmas are optional, and some might consider them fun, but they are not integral to the D&D experience. Again, I advise talking to the group prior to making characters, and talking about the respective expectations from the game.

[Irion]

@Elfenlied
Shadowrun has also the option to play a pornstar, a TV-preacher or a carsalesman...
That does not mean it is the focus of the game.

If I want to have evil in my world, I need evil in my world.
Of course their will be evil options included for players.
Thats not the point. The point is to which side the written adventueres and the corematerial leans.

In Shadowrun it leans towards runners who have a grey morality. Mages in Shadowrun are more likely to have a neutural or good morality. Most of the "evil" things beeing NPC only.
(DnD it leans towards a neutral-good adventuring party.)
There is a huge difference between what a game allows and what it encourages.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

@Elfenlied
Yeah, the core book has a paladin but no profession which is non-good or even evil.

And I am sorry, but looting some tressure dungeon has just no moral dilemma at all.

Paladins do not exist in my world as the stereotypical Class. What is considered a Paladin in my world is a Zealous Warrior of a Diety of some sort. Thus you have "Paladins" of all religions, not just good ones. As a note: I also do not use the Standard Alignments, I use Motivations as presented in the Black Company rules overlay.

Indeed... I have been running my campaign for over 20 years now, with multiple groups, and have only run about 4 dungeons in that time. Dungeons are pretty boring, in my opinion.

[Dolanar]

I like your view on the Paladin TJ, I agree with it wholeheartedly.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I like your view on the Paladin TJ, I agree with it wholeheartedly.

It is a fun distinction, to be sure. My game really took of, thematically, when I incorporated the rules from the Black Company Campaign Setting. It really was what I had been looking for, as it was pretty much how I ran my games previous to its release, though not as elegantly. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

And for full disclosure: I use the Harnworld SETTING, with DnD 3.5 Rules, overlaid with Black Company ruleset. What a wonderful mix. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Lionhearted]

First story: the real reason you didn't get along with the paladin was that you were evil.

I wasn't though...
I can agree that the decision to "take the shot" in order to save the paladin from the yeti's deadlock was a risky, careless and ultimately stupid decision... But the intent wasn't to kill the paladin and my character was prone to risks, either way the paladin would most likely have died.
My character was regretful over what happened but begged the paladin for his forgiveness, he refused it... Unless I would use life magic (read: blood magic) to lessen the penalties he had received (essentially two points of a score that determined how many more times you can be resurrected) by sacrificing my own life force.
From my point of view, this paladin was more interested in revenge and personal gain then the values that defines a paladin. Like forgiveness!
as time passed I became more and more convinced that the paladin was solely driven by his lust for power...
I couldn't let this great evil waiting to manifest to continue walk in the guise of light.
In her eyes, it was a sacrifice. She sacrificed herself in other to protect the world from a greater evil.

Second story: nothing to do with paladins.

Remove the lightsaber and there's not a huge difference between the two.

@Neraph
Well, the second story explains, why the first story happened...
A lot of GM let you get away with a lot of shit. Licking plutonium does give you terminal cancer but some super power. And stuff like that...
Most are just ignoring the effects of "evil magic". I mean, it is evil for a fucking reason. Like plutonium is dangerous for a fucking reason.

"The road to hell is paved in good intentions"
I was completely clueless that I was being led in that direction until the very end, I was led to believe that the blood rage was natural and safe and channelling the force in it drew on the natural energies in the earth, I was also being kept from advancing my training as a jedi at the same rate as everyone else, being denied a lightsaber and such. As such the impressional teenager I was felt unfairly treated and went along with the hermits "training" because I knew I was as capable and ready as the others.
Leading up to a situation where I was the only thing standing between a big beast and a group of villagers, I invoked the rage to be able to defend them, not realising it drew on their lifeforce.

The GM later explained why the council had acted the way they did, they had felt my conflicting emotion and decided I needed more time.

Suffice to say this was a long time ago and it was one of the first times a GM had challenged me to figure out what was going on my own, rather then telling me everything at face value

I was going with the simple but functional Hermetic.

Makes a lot of sense for a corp mage gone wrong, personally it's one of my favourite traditions but people seem to disregard it for whatever reason... to generic?

[Neraph]

So to take up Neraph example. If you would have played for example a thief in his group, well I probably had to follow the orders of his character.

More often than not, I've seen the kind of self-righteous behaviour you describe: the Paladin player believes they are entitled to dictate the actions of the rest of the group, which they may not necessarily be comfortable with. Or, to put in your words: the Paladin shits all over the social order of the world, and expects others to take his crap. Such a scenario is detrimental for all involved.

That's where I went right: I didn't do this.