[3.5] Core only with stingy DM... need advice

[Flickerdart]

Why in the seven hells would you go Rogue 2/Fighter 5 over Rogue 3/Fighter 4?

I thought maybe saves, but not even that - Rogue 3 grants +1 to Fort and Will, and Fighter 5 grants literally nothing.

[Âmesang]

I don't know what feat that is, but you need 11 levels of paladin to trade them out. So at minimum you must be Ex-Paladin 1/Blackguard 10 with 9 class levels left over.

Or you go Paladin of Tyranny 10/Blackguard 10 and get the paladin level benefits without losing your paladin abilities. Noice.

Nightmare Steed lets you replace your regular fiendish servant with a nightmare which subsequently receives all of the perks of a fiendish servant.

I had my plan built around taking advantage of the thug's extra skills/skill points and adding the ACF's sneak attack to the blackguard's.

Aside from that one last extra smite good I can't really see any benefit of going paladin 11 as opposed to paladin 10 when it comes to trading in levels (since, as far as I can tell, you can trade as little or as many levels as you want at any time). Still, I suppose that's where retraining comes in; simply swap out the dead "ex-paladin" level for a level in thug.

(I've never really been big on taking two spellcasting classes aside from unifying them with a prestige class like mystic theurge; just seems a hassle to keep track of 'em. )

[Flickerdart]

Aside from that one last extra smite good I can't really see any benefit of going paladin 11 as opposed to paladin 10 when it comes to trading in levels (since, as far as I can tell, you can trade as little or as many levels as you want at any time).

Nope.

"11 or more
A fallen paladin of this stature immediately gains a blackguard level for each level of paladin he trades in."

You can't trade in any levels unless you were originally a paladin of 11th level or higher

Still, I suppose that's where retraining comes in; simply swap out the dead "ex-paladin" level for a level in thug.

You need to undertake a rebuild quest when changing class levels, and your build needs to have been legal at all times. So you can't do this.

[Troacctid]

You can't trade in any levels unless you were originally a paladin of 11th level or higher

Well, not in core, anyway.

[Flickerdart]

Well, not in core, anyway.

There are non-core options that change the way paladins trade in levels for blackguard?

[Troacctid]

Yeah, Gray Guard and Shadowbane Inquisitor can be used in place of paladin levels. I believe Uncanny Trickster would technically count as well.

[tsj]

I think every party needs a druid and a cleric.

I played a game once where we were a 2 man party. I was a Druid and a friend of mine was a Cleric.
And we were extremely awesome... We faced challenges and monsters that were designed for a 4 man party
but we owned it all... even monsters with too high CR's ... and with spells to spare... it was... awesome :-)

And we had the most amazing synergy.

I of course had natural spell and some other metamagic like silent spell and possibly others :-)
I were both tank, 'god', buffer, hunter and rogue...

The cleric was tank, healer, buffer, 'controller' and party face

[Âmesang]

I was basing it on this particular line:

"Blackguards who have levels in the paladin class (that is to say, are now ex-paladins) gain extra abilities the more levels of paladin they have. Those who have tasted the light of goodness and justice and turned away make the foulest villains.
A fallen paladin who becomes a blackguard gains all of the following abilities that apply, according to the number of paladin levels the character has."

Otherwise what would have been the point of breaking up each benefit into different levels? Why not just lump all of the benefits into a single paragraph?

EDIT: Alright, alright, I think I get it now. After rereading the section I'm leading myself to believe that the extra abilities are obtained not by trading in levels, but simply having them, i.e. an ex-paladin 5/blackguard 6 gains extra abilities due to those five levels of paladin; the blackguard levels just grant regular blackguard stuff. So in order to receive full benefit, I take it you would have to be at least an ex-paladin 9/blackguard 10 (or, I suppose, an epic level ex-paladin 11/blackguard 10 to get that extra smite good).

[GreyBlack]

You guys all make a valid point about my build. Consider my idea amended.

Recommended build is now Rogue 3/Fighter 4/Assassin 3/Blackguard 10. Changed progression because it might make more sense from a difficult DM standpoint: you become an assassin, which prompts extraplanar beings to become interested in your activities and offer you the chance to serve the Dark Gods in a bigger way by becoming their champion. Same bonuses, just differently structured and may potentially give easier entrance if your DM is going to be a stickler on PrC entrance. I recommend discussing your plan with him first if you do decide on this route.

[AnachroNinja]

I want to throw my hat in the ring for a doubled druid or cleric. They are very versatile and it's easy to avoid stepping on each other's toes. The synergy is great and it's all around solid.

[P.F.]

I want to throw my hat in the ring for a doubled druid or cleric. They are very versatile and it's easy to avoid stepping on each other's toes. The synergy is great and it's all around solid.

I can also throw in with a second cleric. I really enjoyed playing neutral-negative* cleric in our most recent Pathfinder game. I ended up referring to him as the party's "dark-square bishop."

Spoiler: *

Show

Actually, I played a Schrödinger's cleric for most of the session, as I was a neutral cleric off a neutral deity, had not revealed whether I channeled negative or positive, had not spontaneously converted any spells, had not chosen a Turn/Control feat, and had not written anything on my character sheet indicating one way or the other. I insisted that my character had already chosen, but refused to divulge. Our DM insisted that it had to be one or the other, but sportingly played along until the big reveal.

[Narren]

Doubling up on clerics can also present interesting role playing opportunities, depending on the which god each cleric serves.

[AnachroNinja]

Anyone who has read Another Gaming Comic knows what fun an all cleric party can be. Behold the power of on demand healing

[Âmesang]

…and such a party also knows how frustrating it can be to deal with other "heroes."

[Quertus]

First and foremost, talk to your DM, and see if you can get a more reasonable set of rules. Ask him why he is has these house rules, and explain why they are bad.

If you cannot change his mind, IMO, your best bet is to play a second wizard. You each get 2 automatic spells each level; between the two of you, that's 4 spells per level you can learn from each other. If people take wizard cohorts, that's even more spells in the party pool.

Although, personally, I'd go cleric. Having a spare healer when your healer is down is invaluable - and, with the lack of funds, you can't count on UMD and cleric in a stick being an option. That, and clerics are fun to play, and easily adapt to almost any game - and almost any role in almost any game.

Or, if you want to be evil, go sorcerer - but never take a single spell from the book. Work with the DM to invent custom spells for every single spell known slot you get.

The rest of your post is great!

However, having played in a group where someone did this, it really has the potential to make the other players feel terrible if it comes out and they weren't aware or okay with that, as you've pretty much just pointed out that their characters were superfluous and not truly in danger this whole time. Its like sending DMPC Elminster with your level 2 party, only the DMPC is another party member. Alternately, its like your DM's girlfriend getting plot-level powers that can be used to save the whole party at will. Does it help TPKs? Sure! Will the party hate it? I can't speak for other groups, but mine would hate it.

If you play in a low op group, play low-op, play a party buffer, maybe even toss in some BFC, but don't make a character that invalidates the rest of the group.

Spoiler: Longer Response

Show

For example, in our case, one player had a horrifying strength poison that dealt some ridiculous amount of strength damage, but had never used and the party was not aware that he was anything but a regular power-attacking scythe build. Decently strong, and one of the most consistent damage dealers.
The DM had planned an encounter where a swarm of vicious creatures chased the party, as the swarm dealt little damage but was functionally immune to the party's attacks. The party begins to flee, and the player says "Screw this, I use my strength poison. The swarm is taken down, no save". When the party asked about why he had never used it before, he said that his character had taken a vow not to use it except in some very specific situations.
Now, I don't have any problem with the player having a secret trump card, or with him managing to defeat an encounter the party was supposed to run from. The problem is, the character could have been using this ability EVERY SINGLE ENCOUNTER, meaning that he had functionally been sandbagging everything before this. Every single tough encounter before this had therefore been a joke, basically, because the player could have whipped this out at any time and completely wiped the floor with his superior abilities. In this particular case, he had a vow that he had stuck to, which very slightly mitigated the issue, but it still felt bad to learn that basically every encounter could have been soloed by just this one player.
As something that everyone is aware of and fine with, great! However, it sucks to not be aware of that, seeing yourself as an integral part of the team, and then suddenly being shown that your character, to be honest, was completely superfluous this whole time.

First, that poison was, I'm guessing, expensive, and thus not "solve every encounter", but "solve any one encounter".

Also, there are other ways to play "Hidden God Mode (TM)" than to solo an encounter. My signature character is quite adept at surviving, throwing up walls, teleporting the party to safety, etc. The party lives, but they are the BDH's; Quertus is just a facilitator.

Most people just go buffing and battlefield control so as to not steal the limelight.

Eh. Still the best face in the game and a better skillmonkey than the rogue.

... How is Bard a better skill monkey than Rogue?

10% bonus to hit and damage, times 5 party members... oh look, you're only as useful as half a person. Except not everyone in the party is going to be attacks-based, so you're actually contributing even less.

That's... not how the math works. If you have 5 identical party members, who all hit the monster 50% of the time, a 10% boost turns that to 60% hit, which turns 50 damage to 60... Just like an identical party member would do.

However, against monsters which they hit on a 2, a 10% boost does nothing (barring allowing additional power attack or the like). On the other hand, if the target AC is exactly 20 points higher than the party's attack bonus, a +2 to hit triples their damage output! But at 22 points higher, it does nothing.

Why ? Because he only wants core rules and is a wee bit stingy ?

Once again everyone assumes DM is a douche bag because he only wants core rules to make his life a bit easier .

Yes, that's a good reason. What are the three terrors of the fire swamp... I mean, what are the things that make 3e cool? 1) easy, unified system (that I've taught multiple 7-year-olds to play competently); 2) fantasy play at a variety of "levels"; 3) lots and lots of options to pick from.

If a GM is going to say that 3.5 is his best known system, then ask for a core only game, that throws up some red flags. Aside from some of my personal favorite extra cheese options, the most broken things are in core. Martial characters can't have nice things in core. Being poor hurts mundanes. Not being able to prestige easily hurts mundanes. This... sounds like a noob mistake by someone who claims to know what they're doing - which is, in and of itself, a big red flag.

If these concerns are mentioned to him, and he responds reasonably - provides a compelling reason why he is unbalancing the game or changes his policy - he might be salvageable; personally, with the number of red flags thrown, I'd be tempted to just bail.

Or possibly to build the most broken thing imaginable in core, and later compare that to the characters you had intended to play, and ask him why was it he wanted a core only game, again?

A druid falls for "ceasing to revere nature" which a sufficiently-asinine DM can interpret as anything from "hurting an animal" to "sleeping in a bed" to "not immediately murdering every lumberjack he sees." The worst part is that such a DM may not know (or care) that the player doesn't know where this line is drawn. The same thing applies to clerics and their gods.

Yeah, too many DMs are too horrible for me to think that playing a druid under an unproven DM is advisable.

This isn't aimed at any forum member in particular, but it always makes me sad and disappointed when I see people suggesting things like "Oh, your DM allows core only? Make a Batman Wizard or CoDzilla and break the game! That'll show him! LOL!".

Intentionally trying to make a problematic character within the limits the DM has set is far more likely to make the game (more) unenjoyable for everyone involved, DM and players included.

Best option, IMHO, is to talk with the other players - see if they are struggling with the game restrictions and if they share your concerns. If enough of them do, approach the DM and try to reach a compromise.

Personally? I'd rather walk from a game I'm not enjoying, if the DM can't be reasoned with, than trying to sabotage the game for everyone...

I may be wrong (I'm a little late to the party, and so I may have missed something), but I think I'm the only one suggesting being a ****.

I make that suggestion in the case where the DM obviously needs to be educated. If the DM wants core only because "balance" (not that such was started as this particular DMs reason), then they're an idiot, and need to be told so. If they can't hear when told, they need to be shown so. Otherwise, they will continue to ruin everyone's fun.

But, no, don't take a fun game and ruin it for everyone. Even I, who am conditionally advocating being a ****, am not recommending that.

Also, not everyone who wants to play tier 1 characters wants to do so in order to break the game. In this particular instance, where the DM has already broken the game, tier 1 is almost the only way to have a chance to play the game. To exaggerate slightly, The fighter with his no items will just bounce off the monsters, and, with his no skill points and no non-combat abilities, won't contribute anywhere else, either.

So, my advise is, fix the broken game if you can; if you can't, find something you can enjoy playing in a broken game.

[Calthropstu]

Ask you DM about the Loremaster's abilities and if they stack with Bardic Knowledge. If they do, maybe go Bard/Loremaster?

Otherwise.... how attached are you to being Good? If not, might I recommend Human Rogue 2/Fighter 5/Blackguard 10/Assassin 3? Human offsets the Favored penalty, your stat spread will give you amazing saves from Dark Blessing... basically you'll become the Dark God's Hand of (in)Justice. Your casting will actually be really good when you look at it, your feats are covered from just your Fighter bonus feats freeing you up for whatever else you want (I recommend grabbing Augment Summoning when you can)... what's not to love?

Benefits of this build:
+6d6 sneak attack damage
God-tier saves
Aura of Despair helps control the battlefield and actually might let you get off a death attack
Invisible/Sneak Attack
Smiting Good is never expected
Perfect for world domination and preparing for whatever Dark God you pledge to.
Fiendish Servant and some summoning

Cons:
HUGELY MAD. Seriously, the only stat that isn't tied to something is Dex, but with your stat spread you can manage it.
Assassin and Blackguard cast off different stats (I originally thought they did, but you don't need a lot for either one)
Sort of a long-ish term build
The Assassin is kind of tacked on, so it can be taken off if you want
Won't be on the same tiering as the other Tier 1's, but it isn't meant for that anyway.

Moral of the story? If you want something fun to play that will contribute to your party? Run this.

This being his first foray into the 3.5 universe, I would advise gainst doing the evil thing. A new gm will have a hard enough time trying to play standard monsters, let alone creating npcs to go after the pc for doing something villianous.

[Troacctid]

... How is Bard a better skill monkey than Rogue?

Lose 2–3 skill points per level, gain magic. How is it not better?

[GreyBlack]

This being his first foray into the 3.5 universe, I would advise gainst doing the evil thing. A new gm will have a hard enough time trying to play standard monsters, let alone creating npcs to go after the pc for doing something villianous.

Trial by fire, ne? XD

[VenomTongue]

I didn't read all the posts so sorry but...
I know they don't get lots of love in the playground but I ❤ rangers. Full BAB, a lot of skills, melee or ranged specialization, an animal companion, bonuses against entire kinds of bad guys, and track- sounds like fun to me.
Even if you just take a few levels it makes a nice secondary class. A ranger/ rogue can use its animal companion to flank. Also the weapon proficiencies are very nice.
Higher level Rangers get evasion and other great abilities.

[Flickerdart]

sounds like fun to me

That's the issue - rangers sound like fun, but they don't really do anything. Like monks, they occupy a weird middle ground where they're bad at everything.

Animal companion? Too weak to do anything useful. Spells? Same thing, especially in Core. Fighting? HP is too low, armor is too light, archery and TWF are weak without bonus damage, which rangers only get if they win the "guess what monsters the DM will use" minigame. Their skill list isn't all that good, and they can't afford INT because they already need STR, DEX, CON, and WIS (and CHA if they want to use Wild Empathy).