Characters you can't stat in 3.5

[Rakaydos]

So, we're not allow to use what accounts for half of the powers and abilities of most D&D characters? There are other ways to get effectively infinite PP per day for a S2P Erudite. The point is, game wise, the character looks and play mechanically the nearly exact same as Edward Elric.

So you're saying D&D can mimic anything, as long as it's actually the clothes that make the man?

[Seppo87]

So you're saying D&D can mimic anything, as long as it's actually the clothes that make the man?

As long as it "looks and play mechanically nearly exact same as X" it seems very reasonable to be content with it.

[Nilehus]

Think you missed the "plays mechanically" bit of that post. Unless playing like the character is just window dressing.

[Oko and Qailee]

-Cool Stuff-

I mean, I was just giving an easy example off the top of my head. That does sound way cooler though. I don't think you need Endurance if you go frostmage though, don't they get some cold resistance in enviroments? Idk, have to reread.

There's even some relatively straightforward ideas that are hard to do in D&D without gimping them or jumping through hoops - a dwarf wizard who wars armor was an idea I had a while back, discarded because spell failure/using all still spells/burning ALL THE FEATS to wear armor all seemed like bad choices. :-P

Getting back to Frozen, didn't Elsa also have the power to unfreeze the people she's entombed in ice? (Resurrection, only to people she's killed?)

I mean, you can just do a Gish build. I know Duskblades are good at it. And say you're a wizard.

Elsa did not have resurrection, Anna unfreezing at the end was Anna's doing because of her act of love.

You can easily create a build that replicates her abilities, but you can't explain Elsa herself in the framework of that build. The game makes assumptions that aren't borne out in her life. She's close to epic level and she's done zero adventuring.

Man, so many times a party comes across a BBEG with class levels and the DM 100% of the time didn't bother thinking of the BBEG's whole life story as to why they have 19 levels in Warrior (the most obvious BBEG class). The point is, yes, a character can be made in D&D that does what Elsa does. Why does she have that much exp? Because a deity said so. Or the DM.

If you want Elsa to not be in control of her spells? I can do that too.
She's possessed by a Fiend of Possession5/Spell to Power EruditeX. The Fiend, being a psionic, can cast Ice Spells without Elsa ever knowing, and a Fiend of Possession can stay in Elsa indefinitely without her knowing. There, now it once again works mechanically.

[Oko and Qailee]

So you're saying D&D can mimic anything, as long as it's actually the clothes that make the man?

I'm saying that if I want to play Edward Elric. And for 40k I can do everything Ed can (plus a class and spell selection), then it should count. Because what matters is what I play. You're only buying gear, picking feats, etc to make something work and gear is part of a build.

I also did say it's possible to get the same effect without the 40k. Just harder, but tbh there's a lot of flexibility in a S2P Ed build.

[Rakaydos]

What about characters that have awkward mechanics that dont come online till late, but are really only awesome because they're from basically an E6 world?

Is Galdalf the Grey really Gandalf, if you're throwing fireballs and mindrapes around?

[Seppo87]

What about characters that have awkward mechanics that dont come online till late, but are really only awesome because they're from basically an E6 world?

Is Galdalf the Grey really Gandalf, if you're throwing fireballs and mindrapes around?

I think this problem was already addressed.
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/shows...62&postcount=7

Probably, Gandalf could be represented decently with a gish build and a coherent selection of spells.
And this flaw
http://eberronunlimited.wikidot.com/flaw:arcane-fatigue

[Oko and Qailee]

What about characters that have awkward mechanics that dont come online till late, but are really only awesome because they're from basically an E6 world?

Is Galdalf the Grey really Gandalf, if you're throwing fireballs and mindrapes around?

Well, I try to not give them what they wouldn't have. That's why I did Edward as a Spell2P erudite.

Gandalf wouldn't really be a wizard for example. Most fantasy stories don't have wizards in the D&D sense. They have Warlocks and S2P Erudites.

[Graypairofsocks]

I've never heard of spellcasting in 3.5 that isn't intentional, but in Frozen this is a central element of the plot.

Sorcerers are sometimes fluffed as accidentally casting spells when they first discover their powers(or other weird things happening around them).

[Zombimode]

I regard this as a load of hooey, and want to prove it by making a thread of characters that _can't_ be done in D&D without either being epic-level monstrosities, massive houseruling, or having lots of extras irrelevant to the character. Original character ideas, or fictional ones welcome, as are attempts to make the characters in 3.5.

So you have trouble with characters that don't quite fit the classic (european) fantasy mold that D&D 3.5 is all about. I'm not impressed.

[Arbane]

So you have trouble with characters that don't quite fit the classic (european) fantasy mold that D&D 3.5 is all about. I'm not impressed.

Uh, that's sorta the exact opposite of what I meant, in two directions simultaneously.

On one side, I don't think D&D does 'classic European fantasy' very well. No knight in legend was as larded with magic items as a 10th-leve D&D fighter. (Thor comes pretty close, with his magic belt, gauntlets, hammer, chariot, and pig, but he's a god. They're allowed to be excessive.) No wizard in legend is as omnipotent as a high-level D&D wizard. And the only two fantasy writers I've seen using Vancian magic who weren't writing for TSR were Roger Zelazny... and Jack Vance.

Heck, look at all the arguments about what classes Conan should have. He's a big strong guy with a sword, who ALSO happens to be a good thief, leader, etc.

On the other side, I don't think D&D does NON-'classic European fantasy' very well, either. What D&D does well... is D&D.

On the third side, Classic European Fantasy like Monks, Psionics, and Warforged. Got it.

[Zombimode]

Uh, that's sorta the exact opposite of what I meant, in two directions simultaneously.

On one side, I don't think D&D does 'classic European fantasy' very well. No knight in legend was as larded with magic items as a 10th-leve D&D fighter. (Thor comes pretty close, with his magic belt, gauntlets, hammer, chariot, and pig, but he's a god. They're allowed to be excessive.) No wizard in legend is as omnipotent as a high-level D&D wizard. And the only two fantasy writers I've seen using Vancian magic who weren't writing for TSR were Roger Zelazny... and Jack Vance.

Heck, look at all the arguments about what classes Conan should have. He's a big strong guy with a sword, who ALSO happens to be a good thief, leader, etc.

On the other side, I don't think D&D does NON-'classic European fantasy' very well, either. What D&D does well... is D&D.

On the third side, Classic European Fantasy like Monks, Psionics, and Warforged. Got it.

You're right to remark that my wording wasn't the most fitting.

But you're mistakingly reading "classic fantasy" to mean something like mythology. Classic fantasy as a genre developed within the last century. The literature within this genre was a main inspiration for D&D. D&D it self served as an inspiration for many works, especially for other TTRPGs and CRPGs. All those collective works can be seen as part of the classic fantasy genre.
And yes, D&D 3.5 does a very good job for representing characters in this genre.

Characters form outside this genre or from a different medium* are oftentimes not easy to recreate in D&D 3.5. This is not surprising and not a fault of the system.

*characters that are invincible in some occasions and useless in others, omnipotent characters, characters with only one ability etc. don't fit the way D&D is meant to be played, that is they don't fit the medium of D&D. Again, not surprising and perfectly acceptable.

Heck, look at all the arguments about what classes Conan should have. He's a big strong guy with a sword, who ALSO happens to be a good thief, leader, etc.

Those arguments are pretty weak since a character like Conan is easily created in D&D.

[Eldan]

Rincewind? Factotum/Monk. Put all his skill points into Speak Language, UMD, Spellcraft and Knowledge.

Edit: Gandalf is a Planetar or Solar, with some kind of exalted vow that severely limits his power against anything other than undead and evil outsiders.

[draken50]

I'm actually pretty happy with D&D's character creation, and think the whole idea of complaining about a system because it can't make a character that matches [insert pop culture reference here] is dumb.

That being said, I can think of two game characters that could be difficult, and if anyone has some guesses that'd be cool.

1) Man-Bot from Freedom Force.

2) The chosen undead from Dark Souls.

I'm actually really interested in the second, as I think it could be a really cool game to run for someone who hadn't played the video game.

[Snowbluff]

Dark Souls, eh?

The main issue would be the resurrection ability. The bonfires would probably act as phylacteries or traps of true resurrection.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Graypairofsocks
Sorcerers are sometimes fluffed as accidentally casting spells when they first discover their powers(or other weird things happening around them).

Sure--cantrips and the like. Accidentally casting Fimbulwinter is a different thing altogether. Especially given the ten-minute casting time where, presumably, you have to concentrate on casting your eighth-level spell.

I don't really have a dog in this fight, and haven't even looked at the progenitor thread for this one, so not really invested in the argument per se. But most of the responses involving the discrepancy between Elsa's evident level and her lack of XP seem to rely on handwaving, "fluff," or other aspects of DM fiat. To me, that sounds like patching over gaps in a system, rather than evidence of its inbuilt flexibility.

Elsa's abilities are so easy to replicate because 3.5 has an overabundance of options, not to mention an entire sourcebook devoted to her theme. But plentiful options by themselves don't address aspects of character history which don't line up with standard game assumptions. This may be a different approach to developing a character than is generally assumed--and perhaps more holistic than most people in this thread prefer.

.

[Vhaidara]

There are all kinds of ways for characters to come into their power. I have one character who was a savage native of the frostfell, lost in a blizzard. An ice demon of generic description found him and was beginning to possess him when the Winter Witch on the Mountain (an epic NPC the GM had established) refreshed her casting of Fimbulwinter on he region, turning the boy to ice. However, the demon's power interacted with the magic, making him into a creature of ice instead of a statue of ice, with a resemblance of the demon. When he found a cabal of ice mages in a broken tower, he was immune to their magics and tore their throats out with his bare hands. He started a fire using their spellbooks and scrolls, but the fumes made him fall unconscious. Then the party found him.

Mechanically, he was a Draconic Ice Genasi (Air Genasi with Cold subtype instead of Air) Eidetic Wizard 11 at age 14. Instead of the incense and such normal to Eidetic Wizard, he burned spellbooks and scrolls to learn spells. Because his magic came from the demon and from burning the spellbooks of high level frost mages, he had no idea the ful scope of his powers.

Personally, I would be inclined to make Elsa some variant of the Unholy Scion template from Heroes of Horror. Use a creature from the Quasi-Elemental Plane of Ice, and make the SLAs it gives ice themed. You only need about a dozen to cover Elsa.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Finished reading through this last night and lost a post before going to bed. Here's my rapid fire answers to a few un/half answered challenges.

Architecurist - Lyre of building on a tireless character.

Bio character from Mass Effect - Kineticist with an out of combat recharge mechanic.

Iron Man - Synthesist Summoner or Artificer.

Man-bot - Artificer who begins play in a cursed suit or armor. As he levels he dumps his craft reserve into improving the armor but can't remove it.

And here are my rebuttals to some of the main complaints against certain builds.

"That build is too item dependent" - Ancestral Relic + Item Familiar on innocuous items should give most fictional characters any item abilities the need to be them. They may also require some additional items to be competative in world, but that's really a seperate issue.

"This caster build isn't good enough at nonmagical combat" - A level eight d6 hd 1/2 BAB is largely indistinguisable from a level 4 d10 full BAB with tons of magical powers. In fiction characters are much less likely to have 4 +/-1 CR encounters a day.

"Backstory doesn't match/Character doesn't fit D&D's leveling structure." - The only thing that prevents you from bringing a character that just awakened as a level seventeen Sorceror to a game starting at level 17 is DM fiat.

Similarly the DMG has alternate rules for XP that would allow you to run a character through their entire story gaining as many or as few levels as you desire.

[ComaVision]

Elsa's abilities are so easy to replicate because 3.5 has an overabundance of options,

Exactly. The question isn't whether you can model something or not, it's what the best way to do it is because there are so many option. That is the strength of D&D 3.5.

It's already been said but the only limitations on fluff are imposed by the creator.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

"fluff," or other aspects of DM fiat. To me, that sounds like patching over gaps in a system, rather than evidence of its inbuilt flexibility.

The problem I have with this argument is that stories have huge levels of writer fiat and pretty much every videogame or episodic show will suffer from ludonarrative dissonance at some point. A character that just got through a room filled with armed mooks will suddenly have to surrender because one or two mooks have the drop on them. In D&D we could at least justify this by have the character low on HP, but within their own narrative they seemed to come through without breaking a sweat.

Another way of putting it is that even if you can model any character in D&D you can't model every character in the same narrative.

Elsa can only exist is a game in which it's acceptable for a teenage girl to discover incredible untapped power. She can be modeled, but she may not be appropriate to every game. The same can be said for Paladins, anti-Paladins, anime inspired ToB characters that literally yell their manuevers, Pacifist VoP Monks, etc.

[toapat]

Why? There are rules for creating magic items. How about Boots of Flying and Gloves of Disintegration?
And an Adamantine Full Plate with 100% fortification, of course.

the magic item rules are not themselves robust enough to create ironman. As i said, you actually need homebrew to make ironman but ironman himself is not built out of concepts that dont have representation.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

the magic item rules are not themselves robust enough to create ironman. As i said, you actually need homebrew to make ironman but ironman himself is not built out of concepts that dont have representation.

What is Ironman other than a genius that gets defense, flight, blasting and long distance communication from items he crafted himself that are all integrated into a suit? I'd go with either wand gauntlets or wand chambers in the gauntlets or on weapons that are as minimal as possible like blade gauntlets rather than what seppo said.

[ComaVision]

I'd make Iron Man an Artificer with a set of Clockwork Armour.

[dascarletm]

Iron man is actually one of the easier concepts to build. (The early one's especially, perhaps the later versions might be a touch trickier)

What exactly is not able to be represented. Custom item generation is within 3.5's rules, so even though it isn't assumed in most RAW discussions, it is totally on the table for this.

[Threadnaught]

I regard this as a load of hooey, and want to prove it by making a thread of characters that _can't_ be done in D&D without either being epic-level monstrosities, massive houseruling, or having lots of extras irrelevant to the character. Original character ideas, or fictional ones welcome, as are attempts to make the characters in 3.5.

Almost being the operative word.

Edward Elric, from Fullmetal Alchemist. A kid with a mechanical arm and leg, who can transmute matter by touch.

Half-Golem Wizard, obviously he's an NPC.

The Architectomancer: A magician whose magic all involves buildings. They can conjure houses from nowhere, make doors or windows appear or disappear, cause hallways to become impossibly long, and otherwise create or mess with buildings and their internal structures, but don't have any other magic powers.

Wizard with themed Spell list.

The Wicked Witch of the West. Is there a water-soluble hag in D&D?

Asherati or Drylich.

The World's Luckiest Man. (Self-explanatory, I hope.)

Luck Feats. (Self-explanatory, I hope.)

The Super-Adaptoid: Marvel Comics villain who can imitate the powers of anyone it fights.

Wizard (seeing a pattern here?) and Spellthief.

Edit: About Ironman.

Ironman isnt possible without homebrew but the ideas were already there without homebrew.

I didn't realize Artificer was homebrew. And there are rules about combining multiple Magic Items into a single item that aren't homebrew.

Ironman isn't impossible, he is merely very expensive.

[Nilehus]

Ironman isn't impossible, he is merely very expensive.

Which, in view of his backstory, is entirely appropriate.

[Susano-wo]

Not sure if the statement that you can run almost any kind of concept is really true, but there's an almost thread-wide equivocation fallacy here: character=/= character concept. OP breaks down characters into their concepts, but then he and others argue that if you cant model a specific character exactly, then the statement is false. Transmuting guy with artificial limbs is a concept, Edward Elric is a character. if You can simulate the rough feel and key abilities of a character, then you have used Dnd to create that .

And this is PF, not 3.5, but I would do Jotaro as a Monk[or monk hybrid build] with the lunge feat. Any round where you use lunge, you flavor as Star Platinum coming out and "Ora Ora Ora Ora Ora Ora Ora Ora" And for those who think that Seth(the stand that turns you into a little kid) is wierd...just check out some of the stands in later arcs. **** hasn't begun to get weird in Jojo's yet

[CIDE]

Haplo the Patryn. I've seen some attempts though.

[AMFV]

I think that the typical problem is not that there is no perfect way to model a character (there isn't always). But rather that there are many ways to model a character, and since many people are emotionally attached to their ideas of a character the inaccuracies that are inherently present in the model are likely to grate on different people in different ways.

[Hazrond]

Here's a challange: Jack, from Mass effect. Barriers, gravity wells, ad TK manipulation on "multiple times per combat" -level cooldown timers. All day, every day.

Two things.

1. i havent had a good chance to say it before but i absolutely LOVE your avatar, its so cute ^.^

2. i love Jack and would love to see her in 3.5 form, somehow her character just SCREAMS wilder to me though