Why would somebody play an non-caster?

[jjcrpntr]

Because fun?

Not all games are played at TO levels of optimization.

I don't know about you but the idea of playing the same thing every game bores the hell outta me.

So far in terms of fun my favorite characters have all been poor choices from TO standpoints. Sorcerer/Cleric Mystic Thurge, Weretiger to just hit things, and my Swifthunter.

This

I'm on my second 3.5 dnd character. First was a cleric that just casted spiritual weapon and then ran in to beat on things with his glaive (fun). New character is a Ranger who doesn't use spells. Should have gone the spellless ranger variant but to late now. It's a lot of fun to play and ultimately that's the point of the game right? To have fun.

[Meth In a Mine]

I play a mundane for a number of reasons.
1. It's easier, I don't need to keep track of as much stuff.
2. It's a load of fun taking an arrow in the mouth and then spitting it right out.
3. I guard the casters. One surprise round and a flukey initiative roll, and that wizard gets his head twisted off like a grape by an ogre barbarian. A fighter can hold it off while the casters give their party the edge they need to succeed.
4. I'm always ready. If a rogue comes by and steals the wizard's spell-book while he sleeps what is he? A commoner with a good will save.
5. Most imortant: IT'S FUN! I find climbing up a cliff more fun than just using fly. I find slamming an enemy's face with a shield more fun than casting stinking cloud or glitterdust.

[SiuiS]

That sounds awesome (possibly better even than the abrupt jaunt fiery blast reserve feat wizard)!
Please explain.

Armor.


The actual penalties for wearing armor are ludicrously small. A wizard in +8 armor with a shield spell and high dexterity is almost untouchable. Armor playing amidst caster robes also looks fantastic. A cross class rank in tumble (it's trained only I believe) and gratuitous use of readied actions to avoid charges from nearest guys, then play chess in your mind. You'll find the point where everyone finally gets close enough there is no escape, and they've got you now...

And then you blast them.

And this, I think, beautifully encapsulates one of the biggest answers to the title question. To wit, why would somebody play a non-caster? Concept. And I happen to have great respect for any DM who says, "Put aside class names and mechanics. Tell me your concept, give me the fluff, and we'll find the crunch that fits around it, rather than the reverse."

A good character is like a chocolate truffle with a hazelnut-encrusted shell, in my mind - fluffy on the inside, crunchy on the outside.

Concept, concept, concept. Therein lies the path to enlightenment.

This also causes the issue though. The original concepts for casters are intentionally over powered. Caster concepts are one-man army chess masters who puppeteer everything from the shadows with a well placed finger of death, etc., and are designed with a high risk, high reward suite of abilities that reward precise micromanagement.

Wizards et al are the Lights of the game, who have eight moves planned out with contingencies. I honestly only have a problem with casters being strong when it's not conceptual, but just a mechanical advantage. Khelendros, the austere, lightning wizard who subjugated dragons first by allying with them and then by earning their respect and fear through his brutal applications of force? Cool, go nuts. Wizard with an electric theme who uses feat cheese to get a dragon familiar, dragon cohort and dragon followers? Less cool because why do you want dragons? Just because? Boring. Stop winning, there's no drama.

[Alaris]

Looks like my answer is a bit unusual, but here goes: because I like optimization. As a wizard, winning at D&D is way too easy. You win when you pick wizard as your class and get >16 intelligence. Most casters are similarly boring. As a mundane character, however, you have to carefully pick your abilities and actually put effort into your build. That's more interesting.

Eh... then your DM is doing it wrong.

Sorry, while that sounds rude, it's kinda true. Yeah, Wizards are powerful. But they are NOT an "I Win" button in themselves.

For instance, I played a Generalist Wizard, pretty much straight, in the last campaign I played in. Really powerful. Lots of awesome stuff. But at every turn, my DM still managed to provide a solid challenge. Enemy Wizards/Clerics, unique puzzles/encounters.

That said, when I've played 'Mundane' characters in his campaign (a Ranger, more recently), he was also able to provide adequate challenge, without being too overpowering or crazy.

I'd say a lot of it is about the DM... both Mundanes and Spellcasters are very fun to play.

[Rejusu]

Armor.


The actual penalties for wearing armor are ludicrously small. A wizard in +8 armor with a shield spell and high dexterity is almost untouchable. Armor playing amidst caster robes also looks fantastic. A cross class rank in tumble (it's trained only I believe) and gratuitous use of readied actions to avoid charges from nearest guys, then play chess in your mind. You'll find the point where everyone finally gets close enough there is no escape, and they've got you now...

And then you blast them.

Well since the penalty for being non proficient is equal to the check penalty you can just ignore it for leather and padded. You're still taking a 5-10% arcane spell failure chance and it's not as if you have so many spells at level one that you can afford to gamble with them. And you'd have to have shield up constantly to maintain an AC of 18 or above. To get that high without it at level one you'd incur mobility penalties, a greater ASF, penalties to attack rolls (and skills like tumble), and you'd need a very good dex score. And unless you've got a lot of good rolls con and intelligence should have priority over dexterity.

I'd say a lot of it is about the DM... both Mundanes and Spellcasters are very fun to play.

You're both half right. It's more about party composition than it is anything else. Wizard is an "I win" button if the rest of your group is a CW samurai, a monk, and a paladin. The DM can't throw something too challenging your way as everyone else would at best be unable to contribute and at worst die horribly. However if you're grouped with CoD-zilla or you're playing a humble fighter then the DM can give you something that's the entire parties speed.

[Shining Wrath]

Could you recap them for me? I saw only two valid:
* I don't know how to play casters effectively.
* I want to make character building harder for myself.

And a lot of invalid:
* "Character concept" - every single one I saw in this thread can be done (with more crunch power) as a caster.
... SNIP ....
...

You, sir, do not get to tell me that my character concept should instead be the caster version of it you might prefer, crunch power be damned. Seriously, don't tell a whole bunch of people that they should think more like you or they are "invalid".

Obviously I do have some knowledge and all I wrote fits it pretty well.
Also obviously I'm not going to build Conan for you if I ever watched half an episode of it. If you did bother to give some actual description of "Conan concept" you have I could.



And I never stated that 'not wanting to use magic when building a character is "invalid"'. In fact I did give two reasons one might want to.

And I wrote that other reasons are invalid (which might have been a wrong choice of word... would "boil down to the two above" be better?).

I assumed the "Conan was a gish" argument was sarcasm. Having read everything Robert E Howard ever published, I will assert that this is wrong to the point of deranged insanity. Conan, in D&D terms, never took a single level in any class which at any level gained any ability to cast any sort of magic.

[Der_DWSage]

Obviously I do have some knowledge [of Conan] and all I wrote fits it pretty well.

...You realize his title, right? Conan The Barbarian? The strongman who was stronger than all others due to his ability to focus his sheer primal rage?

I've never read the books or even watched the movies, but even I know that Conan was about as nonmagic as they come. No, Conan was definitely not a gish. If it's sarcasm...for the love of god, adopt blue text. I really can't tell if you're sincere, trolling, or just really don't know anything about him.

[Philistine]

Since this topic is naturally personal anecdote-heavy, here's another one.

I was playing a Rogue//Warblade in a low-level gestalt game, and in one encounter our melee-heavy party got ambushed by snipers firing from the upper story of a nearby building. The Warlock//Bard simply Fell Flighted up to window level and commenced Eldritch Blasting, but we melee types were extremely wary of a trap if we simply charged inside and made our way to the upper floor (a similar situation had resulted in a near-TPK just a few encounters earlier). I looked at the battle map and had an inspiration. So I called the DM aside to explain what I wanted to try; he grinned fiendishly and replied, "Roll for it." Fortunately, I rolled well. So my character got a running start, leaped up onto the shoulders of our biggest bruiser and used her as a springboard to jump even higher, just managing to catch the sniping enemies' window sill (mechanically, cutting her character's height from the required jump brought the bottom of the window within my character's vertical reach). Then the character flipped up and in, tumbled past the foe standing at the window, and finally skidded to a stop inside the room, standing with his sword in low guard and spitting defiance at the ambushers; he spent the next couple of turns Bull Rushing snipers out the window so the rest of the melee could whomp on 'em on the ground.

Now, a couple of points here. The caster got into the action faster: my character's action required both my character and the bruiser character to move into position the previous round, so I didn't start my attempt until the caster had already been at it for a round. The caster got into the action easier: no rolls needed, he just had to say, "I fly up to window level." The caster did it better: he was able to move into position and begin attacking in the same turn, whereas I had to double move (which left me in a very vulnerable position until my Initiative came up again). And the caster did it more reliably: the caster player didn't have to ask the DM for special adjudication just to be allowed to try what he wanted to do, he merely used his abilities exactly as intended. But. The caster's actions, effective as they were, didn't prompt applause from around the table, or inspire another player to describe them as "the coolest thing [he'd] ever seen in D&D," or result in a new memetic touchstone for the campaign. That was a fun day.

[Kelb_Panthera]

4. I'm always ready. If a rogue comes by and steals the wizard's spell-book while he sleeps what is he? A commoner with a good will save.

This just isn't true unless the wizard's burned through his entire repertoire of prepared spells for the day before he rests. Those spells don't just go away 24 hours after they've been prepared and he can scribe any spell he has prepared without fail in a new book. If you steal a wizard's spellbook it certainly hurts him but he's still a freakin' wizard unless you manage to get him to burn out too.

And, of course, that assumes his spellbook can be stolen. CAr offers the option to have your spellbook scribed directly into your skin as tattoos. Good luck stealing that. There's also the eidetic wizard variant that allows them to simply memorize their spellbook and prepare spells from memory.

[eggynack]

This just isn't true unless the wizard's burned through his entire repertoire of prepared spells for the day before he rests. Those spells don't just go away 24 hours after they've been prepared and he can scribe any spell he has prepared without fail in a new book. If you steal a wizard's spellbook it certainly hurts him but he's still a freakin' wizard unless you manage to get him to burn out too.

And, of course, that assumes his spellbook can be stolen. CAr offers the option to have your spellbook scribed directly into your skin as tattoos. Good luck stealing that. There's also the eidetic wizard variant that allows them to simply memorize their spellbook and prepare spells from memory.

Alternatively, you could always make it difficult to steal instead of making it physically impossible. You're a wizard. Wizards are the hardest to steal stuff from, between easy access to extradimensional space to magical traps to random other spells. Wizards are tricky as hell. You steal their spellbook from the demiplane specifically created to house it, and then it turns out that the book is just a pile of explosive runes, and the real book is under the ocean, and then you go under the ocean to get the real thing, and it turns out that the real book is next to the explosive runes one or something. Stealing from a wizard isn't the best plan.

[Rejusu]

3. I guard the casters. One surprise round and a flukey initiative roll, and that wizard gets his head twisted off like a grape by an ogre barbarian. A fighter can hold it off while the casters give their party the edge they need to succeed.
4. I'm always ready. If a rogue comes by and steals the wizard's spell-book while he sleeps what is he? A commoner with a good will save.

Three is only really a thing in the early levels, after a certain point the casters guard themselves. As for four, it's a common misconception that a wizard is rendered useless without their spellbook. Plus the amount of precautions one can take to prevent this pretty much render it a non issue.

[Meth In a Mine]

This just isn't true unless the wizard's burned through his entire repertoire of prepared spells for the day before he rests. Those spells don't just go away 24 hours after they've been prepared and he can scribe any spell he has prepared without fail in a new book. If you steal a wizard's spellbook it certainly hurts him but he's still a freakin' wizard unless you manage to get him to burn out too.
And, of course, that assumes his spellbook can be stolen. CAr offers the option to have your spellbook scribed directly into your skin as tattoos. Good luck stealing that. There's also the eidetic wizard variant that allows them to simply memorize their spellbook and prepare spells from memory.

I'm assuming your average 1st-8th level wizard does not have access to such shenanigans as being able to create his own demiplane...

Three is only really a thing in the early levels, after a certain point the casters guard themselves. As for four, it's a common misconception that a wizard is rendered useless without their spellbook. Plus the amount of precautions one can take to prevent this pretty much render it a non issue.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/o...#ogreBarbarian
Have a look at the Ogre Barbarian stats, just as an example. I can't imagine a 5th-8th level wizard taking that sort of punishment for long...
If I'm missing something, please enlighten me.
Sorry if I come across as an antagonistic jerk, I'm just trying to convey my reasoning, and to understand yours.

EDIT: Surely you agree that it would be better for the baddies to never even have a chance to hit rather than having the wizard take any sort of risk (I.e. which is more effective, a cleric + wizard, or cleric + fighter + wizard?)

[Kelb_Panthera]

I'm assuming your average 1st-8th level wizard does not have access to such shenanigans as being able to create his own demiplane...

What? What do the basic mechanics for spellbooks have to do with demiplanes? I could presume you're making a comment about how long it takes to scribe them into a new book but not all adventures are so time sensitive that you can't spend a couple days replacing a lost spell book. If you were in a position to be robbed by some highwayman like that then you're probably not "on the clock," as it were.

Btw, hoard gullet spell; 1st level, hours per level extradimensional storage. Swallow your book before you go to bed and it simply -can't- be stolen. Works from fourth level onward if you pick up extend spell or a lesser rod of extend. Extended rope-trick comes online at 5th, making it impossible to even attempt to steal anything off of the wizard or his party during the night.

[Seerow]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/o...#ogreBarbarian
Have a look at the Ogre Barbarian stats, just as an example. I can't imagine a 5th-8th level wizard taking that sort of punishment for long...
If I'm missing something, please enlighten me.

Sorry if I come across as an antagonistic jerk, I'm just trying to convey my reasoning, and to understand yours.

To guard himself: Displacement, Mirror Images, Blur, Obscuring Mist, Blink, False Life, or just Fly and/or Invisibility and never be in any danger.
To debuff the enemy: Glitterdust, Hideous Laughter, really any save or suck/lose. (Bonus points: At level 7+ Charm Monster, make it your friend)
To tank for him: Summon Monster, Charm Monster. Add another level and you have Dominate Person and Planar Binding.


And this is just core. Any 1-2 of these is pretty much enough to survive against the Ogre Barbarian long enough to kill it. For actually killing it, take your pick of method, most likely depending on which of the above methods is used.

[olentu]

You know, the whole stealing the spellbook thing has always confused me. Would it not make more sense to just kill the guy and trap his soul instead.

[eggynack]

You know, the whole stealing the spellbook thing has always confused me. Would it not make more sense to just kill the guy and trap his soul instead.

That would probably be easier. It's quite a bit easier to hide a book than it is to hide yourself, and while a spellbook can be pretty valuable, the wizard is probably going to be loaded down with enough magic items that killing him is a better proposition.

[VanIsleKnight]

In 3.5? There's no reason to play anything but a caster. Mundanes are worthless and easily overshadowed and outgunned by casters. If you want to play a mundane fighter for Roleplay reasons, play a Cleric or similar type of caster.

Casters are broken, infinitely so. Anything you want to play as concept wise as a mundane can be done via caster, just refluff the aesthetics.

[Kelb_Panthera]

To guard himself: Displacement, Mirror Images, Blur, Obscuring Mist, Blink, False Life, or just Fly and/or Invisibility and never be in any danger.
To debuff the enemy: Glitterdust, Hideous Laughter, really any save or suck/lose. (Bonus points: At level 7+ Charm Monster, make it your friend)
To tank for him: Summon Monster, Charm Monster. Add another level and you have Dominate Person and Planar Binding.


And this is just core. Any 1-2 of these is pretty much enough to survive against the Ogre Barbarian long enough to kill it. For actually killing it, take your pick of method, most likely depending on which of the above methods is used.

Heck, you could solo that thing at third level. Glitterdust then summon swarm. All you gotta do is stay away from the now blind and moving at half speed barbarian while your swarm of spiders slowly eats him. There's a chance he'll make his save, sure, but if he doesn't he's done.

[Meth In a Mine]

In 3.5? There's no reason to play anything but a caster. Mundanes are worthless and easily overshadowed and outgunned by casters. If you want to play a mundane fighter for Roleplay reasons, play a Cleric or similar type of caster.

Casters are broken, infinitely so. Anything you want to play as concept wise as a mundane can be done via caster, just refluff the aesthetics.

What about in PF? I think mundanes got a real boost in PF (it made fighter much less of a worthless trainwreck class)

[Seerow]

Heck, you could solo that thing at third level. Glitterdust then summon swarm. All you gotta do is stay away from the now blind and moving at half speed barbarian while your swarm of spiders slowly eats him. There's a chance he'll make his save, sure, but if he doesn't he's done.

Fun fact: That encounter (1 wizard vs CR7 monster) the Encounter Calculator lists as unbeatable (as opposed to the ~50% shot that it is), and is worth 3,600 experience points. (aka that one fight is worth a level to the Wizard by itself).

[eggynack]

In 3.5? There's no reason to play anything but a caster. Mundanes are worthless and easily overshadowed and outgunned by casters. If you want to play a mundane fighter for Roleplay reasons, play a Cleric or similar type of caster.

Casters are broken, infinitely so. Anything you want to play as concept wise as a mundane can be done via caster, just refluff the aesthetics.

If every choice must be made based on what overshadows what, then there's no reason to play anything but pun-pun. In a more PO'ish way, there's no reason to play anything but incantatrixes and planar shepherds. There is room in this world for not blowing up the game in a maelstrom of powersplosions.

[BrokenChord]

In 3.5? There's no reason to play anything but a caster. Mundanes are worthless and easily overshadowed and outgunned by casters. If you want to play a mundane fighter for Roleplay reasons, play a Cleric or similar type of caster.

Casters are broken, infinitely so. Anything you want to play as concept wise as a mundane can be done via caster, just refluff the aesthetics.

I agree with you about the concept part (I ONLY play magical characters, though to be fair it's also pretty rare for me to go for a concept that is directly opposed to magic) but I disagree heavily on your other point. Mundaneness in and of itself isn't an instant ticket to worthlessness, and for most people, being godly powerful to the point of trivializing anything that doesn't involve equal-or-greater-level enemy casters just isn't a whole lot of fun. That might be your preference, and I most certainly respect you for it, but contrary to what the forum celebrities might have you believe, you are the minority.

... Still, I like the style of your post, you seem cool. Go team caster!

[Kelb_Panthera]

What about in PF? I think mundanes got a real boost in PF (it made fighter much less of a worthless trainwreck class)

Nope. They did almost nothing to address the core issue that makes such statements partially true.

The comment about mundanes being worthless is overstated by a pretty severe margin but there's no question that casters rule the roost in both games.

[Knaight]

Have a look at the Ogre Barbarian stats, just as an example. I can't imagine a 5th-8th level wizard taking that sort of punishment for long...
If I'm missing something, please enlighten me.
Sorry if I come across as an antagonistic jerk, I'm just trying to convey my reasoning, and to understand yours.

EDIT: Surely you agree that it would be better for the baddies to never even have a chance to hit rather than having the wizard take any sort of risk (I.e. which is more effective, a cleric + wizard, or cleric + fighter + wizard?)

Summon Monster means they don't have to. As for the comparison between cleric+wizard and cleric+fighter+wizard, that's skewed. A better comparison would be 2 clerics and a wizard or two wizards and a cleric in comparison to the group of the cleric, fighter and wizard, and from an effectiveness perspective both of those scenarios win out.

I say this as someone who prefers mundane characters, and who really doesn't like dealing with spells (particularly prepared casters).

[Gwendol]

In 3.5? There's no reason to play anything but a caster. Mundanes are worthless and easily overshadowed and outgunned by casters. If you want to play a mundane fighter for Roleplay reasons, play a Cleric or similar type of caster.

Casters are broken, infinitely so. Anything you want to play as concept wise as a mundane can be done via caster, just refluff the aesthetics.

Oh come on! Enough with the generalizations and hyperboles already!

[ChaoticDitz]

Oh come on! Enough with the generalizations and hyperboles already!

But those are the sole reason these forums exist. Well, that and telling people what they should and shouldn't play.

... An oddly fitting descriptor, given the subject of this thread.

[Vanitas]

But those are the sole reason these forums exist. Well, that and telling people what they should and shouldn't play.

Ouch.

*munches pop corn*

[CrazyYanmega]

This is a Monk I'm playing right now. A feisty, Lawful Good, Stealthy Monk. He's one of the funnest characters I've made. And soon he's gonna be firing off Rocket Punches (oops, Ring the Golden Bell). He's a little terror on the battlefield, and he goes toe-to-toe with the best of them. Absolutely no spells. But fun nonetheless. And that's what I play for.

[Gwendol]

In 3.5? There's no reason to play anything but a caster. Mundanes are worthless and easily overshadowed and outgunned by casters. If you want to play a mundane fighter for Roleplay reasons, play a Cleric or similar type of caster.

Casters are broken, infinitely so. Anything you want to play as concept wise as a mundane can be done via caster, just refluff the aesthetics.

But those are the sole reason these forums exist. Well, that and telling people what they should and shouldn't play.

... An oddly fitting descriptor, given the subject of this thread.

After nine pages, one would have hoped someone had gotten the message...

[Killer Angel]

What about in PF? I think mundanes got a real boost in PF (it made fighter much less of a worthless trainwreck class)

like the changes to the Power Attack feat? or to the Stand Still feat?