Looking for Trolly character ideas. lvl1 3.5

[dascarletm]

You shouldn't antagonize people. It's not nice.

If you just want to play something disarmingly weird, though, I'd suggest playing one class, but acting like you're playing a different class. For example, a "Paladin" who is actually a regular Fighter that just happens to be LG, follows the Paladin's code, and occasionally shouts "Smite evil!" when he attacks.

I'm currently doing this as a barbarian. Rage=Smite Evil.

[Deadline]

I'm currently doing this as a barbarian. Rage=Smite Evil.

There was a magnificent post here a while back about someone playing a half-orc "Wizard" who was actually a barbarian who drew funny pictures in his "spellbook" and frequently cast his "Sword" spell. It was glorious.

[Pezofpower]

Why would you join a game just to troll? It seems pointlessly rude

I know over half the group personally. The DM is the only one who is behaving this way and there's a general disagreement about play. Most of us cannot stand house ruling, but if we don't agree to his terms we simply don't have a DM. In my eyes, it's better to play at all than not at all but that doesn't mean I have to enjoy the house rules aspects of play. So, given his general unpreparedness I want to leave myself in a defensible position when I inevitably get house ruled because I'm playing a character that is not broken but has a few hours of reading put into it. When a DM dictates all of your actions, you're better off playing a video game. At least this way, if the dude is gonna be a prude I won't give him any room to be.

[TheIronGolem]

I know over half the group personally. The DM is the only one who is behaving this way and there's a general disagreement about play. Most of us cannot stand house ruling, but if we don't agree to his terms we simply don't have a DM.

Then you need to talk things out with the DM, or get another DM. Passive-aggressive trolling isn't going to fix anything.

In my eyes, it's better to play at all than not at all but that doesn't mean I have to enjoy the house rules aspects of play. So, given his general unpreparedness I want to leave myself in a defensible position when I inevitably get house ruled because I'm playing a character that is not broken but has a few hours of reading put into it.

That's impossible. Any defensibility of your position would rely on the RAW-compliance of your character, which doesn't mean a thing if he's implementing houserules (i.e. definitely not RAW)

When a DM dictates all of your actions, you're better off playing a video game.

True, but note that this contradicts what you just said about whether it's better to play at all or not. In any case, this is exactly the reason why you and the other players need to bring up your concerns to the DM directly, and see if you can work out something you can all agree to. If you can't, then you have a case of incompatible playstyles, and you need a different DM.

[ekarney]

There needs to be a mook workshop put into the back of the monster manual. Tucker kobolds could go there, along with phalanx fighting hobgoblins. Monster tactics make or break the fun of optimized melee fighters

Speaking of phalanx , arming Vrill with reach/trip weapons and giving them Swarmfighting is horrific.

It doesn't matter how good your mods are eventually you're gonna roll a one and be stuck in a trip loop for all eternity, or until you die.

[Zanos]

Anything rules-based won't work, because these sorts of games are full of houserules.

In my experience, the best way to troll a bad DM is through roleplaying. Basically, you need to make a habit of talking to every annoying NPC in the setting and convincing them to act like they would in reality/in a well-written story, rather than the way your DM is making them act. Logically lay out why doing what they're doing isn't in their best interests, why their evil plan couldn't possibly work, and why you're actually on the same side. Most bad DMs really aren't prepared for that sort of thing, though just in case your DM tries to fob off the conversation to a roll you should also have good scores in the various social skills.

My experience with real people seems to indicate that people don't often act in their best interests, and don't react positively towards you when you try to convince them that is so. Likewise, while I won't draw specific examples, megalomania and tremendous egos often lead people to committing to incredibly ambitious plans that anyone else can see are doomed to fail.

Real people aren't very logical. Writing people this way is bad, yeah , because it isn't very entertaining. That doesn't mean it isn't grounded somewhat in reality, however.

[Flickerdart]

Tibbits? ToB? Hell, even touch attacks are too complicated for this guy.

Be a sorcerer. Blow his mind.

[Kelb_Panthera]

That. We need fewer GMs in this camp, not more.



Also that.

Agreed on both counts. If you absolutely must be a troll, pleas don't ignore the former. Noncasters already have enough trouble getting nice things without the ToB is overpowered myth being spread further.

That said, trolling is entirely counterproductive (yes, even when it's hilarious). This is either a communications issue or a conflict of play-style preference.

In the former case, what you need to do is talk this out with the DM about the group's expectations from the game. He needs to know your preferences and expectations if he's going to work with you in meeting them, even partially, and the only way for him to gain that knowledge is for you to give it to him. Don't make demands on it. That tends to rub people the wrong way. Be courteous and explain your position with him and encourage your other friends to do the same. A good DM will want this information and will want to work with you.

Which, of course, leads to talking about his preferences and expectations. If they differ from yours and/ or the other players then a compromise will have to be reached so that everyone can be happy with the game. The point of gaming is to have fun, after all. If his preferences conflict too starkly, however, and no acceptable compromise can be reached then all there is to do is call it quits. There's absolutely no point in everyone gathering together periodically just to make each other miserable. If you're friends outside of this hobby, find something else to do; video games, cards, nattering at how dumb a bad movie is, whatever. Gaming is a great pass-time but it's not worth damaging relationships over. If the DM isn't your friend, decide if you want to be friends with him and go from there. Either find something else you have in common or tell your other friends you'll see 'em around some other time on game nights.

Seriously though, just don't be a troll. Two wrongs don't make a right, eye for an eye makes everyone blind, <insert third, applicable, cliche truism here>, and so on.

[mabriss lethe]

I'm going to suggest something different, play a commoner. Pick some feats that give you some scaling benefits. devotion feats, binder feat chain, draconic aura.... Whatever. Put your skill points in things like handle animal. If you're starting at a high enough level, see if you can't pick up some cheap but useful magic items. Basically be a mundane assistant, and don't worry about mechanics too much. Then , play him to the hilt as the most memorable character in the game.

[Zakerst]

Something that might help us help you and maybe help you help yourself, get/give us a clear list of house rules. If the DM can't/wont what you're playing is not DND 3.5 its Calvin Ball, and as a player you're not Calvin.

Some solutions that have I think show some merit so far are: 1. Talk with problem DM,
2. Switch out who is DMing
3. Don't use anything complex/minimize complexity,
4. don't use a system that is not widely liked/understood as this will perpetuate misconceptions,
5. in general Druids and clerics are going to be your go to answers for having good survivability and versatility, however both get their powers from "somewhere/someone" so the DM might just rule that your god/ideal/nature doesn't give you the spells you want so you only get the ones he wants you to have, if you can swing it play a generic spell caster (UA) [perhaps an arcane one with a high int for skills], or as said a sorcerer, though anything that relies on spells may just encounter rampant AMFs Wild Magic and other things which are for "reasons" immune.
6. If you want to be truly "trolly" play something that you'll have fun with in spite of "DM=god" going on, maybe something derpy who's thing is using sparkly and prismatic spells only to try and become the terrifying "sparkles the lich" at the end game assuming the game even goes that far...

[SangoProduction]

I know over half the group personally. The DM is the only one who is behaving this way and there's a general disagreement about play. Most of us cannot stand house ruling, but if we don't agree to his terms we simply don't have a DM. In my eyes, it's better to play at all than not at all but that doesn't mean I have to enjoy the house rules aspects of play. So, given his general unpreparedness I want to leave myself in a defensible position when I inevitably get house ruled because I'm playing a character that is not broken but has a few hours of reading put into it. When a DM dictates all of your actions, you're better off playing a video game. At least this way, if the dude is gonna be a prude I won't give him any room to be.

So, he's the only one willing to DM, and you want to play... so you're going to troll him for doing it a way you don't like? That's an ...odd thought process. Of course, if half of your group trolls when someone DMs do something you don't like I probably see why he's the only one willing to DM.

Why don't you just DM yourself? Say from the outset that it's going to be a comedic adventure, and then you can troll all you want, and it would probably enhance the experience rather than take away from it.

[daremetoidareyo]

So, he's the only one willing to DM, and you want to play... so you're going to troll him for doing it a way you don't like? That's an ...odd thought process. Of course, if half of your group trolls when someone DMs do something you don't like I probably see why he's the only one willing to DM.

Why don't you just DM yourself? Say from the outset that it's going to be a comedic adventure, and then you can troll all you want, and it would probably enhance the experience rather than take away from it.

I think some of us are forgetting that it is fun to be transgressive of others. It's why we laugh at pranks.
Being outright mean to the DM is different than taking measures to be a bit of a thorn in that DM's shortcomings.
It's a matter of dosage, to be sure.
But assuming OP and DM aren't actively authentically hurting each other, pranking like this can teach more than its own value in frustration.
It sounds mean, but when you talk about applying theory of mind to any endeavor, you wind up sounding sociopathic.

[Deadline]

But assuming OP and DM aren't actively authentically hurting each other, pranking like this can teach more than its own value in frustration.

I've never seen pranking of any sort teach anything other than how to identify who the jerk is. I've seen it be entertaining to those who weren't the subject of the prank, sure (schadenfreude), but never productive. It's, at best, a low form of comedy, not a teaching tool.

[dascarletm]

I've never seen pranking of any sort teach anything other than how to identify who the jerk is. I've seen it be entertaining to those who weren't the subject of the prank, sure (schadenfreude), but never productive. It's, at best, a low form of comedy, not a teaching tool.

You need to experience pranks that are actually witty and not just:

"Ha Ha I hit him in the face when he wasn't looking."

Gnomes would approve of this method of teaching

[Gabrosin]

If your group has a bad DM, and no one else wants to step in and be the DM, you're stuck with a bad DM. You're not going to make him a better DM by trolling him. You might make him a worse DM.

[daremetoidareyo]

If your group has a bad DM, and no one else wants to step in and be the DM, you're stuck with a bad DM. You're not going to make him a better DM by trolling him. You might make him a worse DM.

But you, and your fellow PCs might have a better time. While simultaneously rolling on the gambling wheel of DM personal growth. You're not entirely obligated to fix people, and many people resent the idea that they even need to be fixed. They don't feel suboptimal and they chase what they like.

Generally speaking, you should try to help people to achieve better things, don't get me wrong, but this can easily be pulled off harmlessly. At least amongst adults. And we all know someone who does things the way that they do things, come hell or high water. If you can still interact with a fellow like that who enjoys being DM, and increase your and those around you's enjoyment, I say go for it.

[Deadline]

For those advocating pranking, trolling or whatever the heck "witty" pranks are supposed to be (aside from pretentiously titled), can you please provide me with an example? i.e a "witty" prank designed to teach the subject of the prank a lesson that actually succeeded in doing so.

I've honestly never seen it, and have considerable doubt that it is even possible, let alone easy. I have, however, seen plenty of the opposite.

[LTwerewolf]

Pranks aren't for teaching a lesson, real pranks are for having a bit of fun a little at someone's expense, but said person can appreciate it in the context of the situation. In this situation, it depends on if the dm has a sense of humor. Trying to teach someone a lesson isn't a prank in any respect. What many people call pranks aren't pranks, but just them being a jerk.

[Troacctid]

For those advocating pranking, trolling or whatever the heck "witty" pranks are supposed to be (aside from pretentiously titled), can you please provide me with an example? i.e a "witty" prank designed to teach the subject of the prank a lesson that actually succeeded in doing so.

I've honestly never seen it, and have considerable doubt that it is even possible, let alone easy. I have, however, seen plenty of the opposite.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...armicTrickster

[TheIronGolem]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...armicTrickster

I'll note that that page lacks a "Real Life" subsection.

[daremetoidareyo]

Pranks aren't for teaching a lesson, real pranks are for having a bit of fun a little at someone's expense, but said person can appreciate it in the context of the situation. In this situation, it depends on if the dm has a sense of humor. Trying to teach someone a lesson isn't a prank in any respect. What many people call pranks aren't pranks, but just them being a jerk.

None of ya'll have friends that s**ttalk you? Brutally throwing their perceptions of your flaws at you? That is still the interpersonal dynamic between my old high school buddies and I. None of ya'll have an "unjustifiably entitled" friend? Or a "constantly picks fights with republicans" friend? Or a general "gets pretty sloppy when drunk" friend? All of whom can be mercilessly ribbed for their idiosyncracies.

Maybe that's just a manifestation of my masculine bonding schema, but I don't think so, comedy roasts are a thing. At some point in personal responsibility, we are relinquished from constant duty to change things that are imperfect and aren't going to change, and just accept them as is: comedic cannon fodder. Knowing the boundaries is relatively simple, and apologies exist for a reason.

[LTwerewolf]

It's like you quoted me and didn't read anything I said. I specifically mentioned it depends on the context of the situation. In this case context we don't have. Comedy roasts are also not about trying to teach someone a lesson. They're about having a bit of fun at someone's expense and that someone in the context of said roast being able to appreciate it. Like I said.

[daremetoidareyo]

It's like you quoted me and didn't read anything I said. I specifically mentioned it depends on the context of the situation. In this case context we don't have. Comedy roasts are also not about trying to teach someone a lesson. They're about having a bit of fun at someone's expense and that someone in the context of said roast being able to appreciate it. Like I said.

I was using your point as a jumping off point, seeing as it was one of the few that were conducive to the concept that imperfect behaviors aren't necessarily destructive and can, in some cases, be totally fine.

Transgression is an important ingredient for humor. For all we know, OP is the funniest dude around, and is just brainfarting on a build.

[Ger. Bessa]

Play a human with at least 13 dex.

Pick the feats "Born flyer" (Races of the Wild) and "Hover" (Monster Manual, among others).

You can levitate (well, hover). Never stop reminding everyone how cool it is. (bonus points if it ends up useful)

[Kelb_Panthera]

Play a human with at least 13 dex.

Pick the feats "Born flyer" (Races of the Wild) and "Hover" (Monster Manual, among others).

You can levitate (well, hover). Never stop reminding everyone how cool it is. (bonus points if it ends up useful)

Doesn't work. While you can, indeed, take hover after born flyer without a fly speed, you must already be flying to hover. Since you can't fly, you can't hover.

[SangoProduction]

http://i.imgur.com/l3kTtPW.jpg
I think this is relevant.
As is this:
http://imgur.com/gallery/Lr6Ncvd

[LTwerewolf]

Excellent examples. Those are in fact pranks (not an insult, I actually mean it).

[Thrice Dead Cat]

I truly think the best course of action here is to be a DM yourself to show him and the rest of the group how it's done. Start with a module or two and laugh as he does almost everything wrong due to lack of knowledge.

If everyone else is happy, then he may vote with his feat, benefiting the everyone.

[Deadline]

http://i.imgur.com/l3kTtPW.jpg
I think this is relevant.
As is this:
http://imgur.com/gallery/Lr6Ncvd

Yep, those are some fun pranks. They aren't one of these "teaching" pranks that have been talked about, but fun all the same.

[dascarletm]

For those advocating pranking, trolling or whatever the heck "witty" pranks are supposed to be (aside from pretentiously titled)

Pretentiously titled?
I mean I guess if you think being witty is pretentious? That's seriously strange.

can you please provide me with an example? i.e a "witty" prank designed to teach the subject of the prank a lesson that actually succeeded in doing so.

The thing about wit is that it usually requires you to be quick. This usually means you'll be doing it on-the-spot. Pranks don't need to be planned and thought out. My friends/wife at time-to-time prank me in minor ways that make light of my flaws. It's more effective than a (in my opinion more pretentious) sit-down-and-talk. This is usually more effective for minor character flaws.

I've honestly never seen it, and have considerable doubt that it is even possible, let alone easy. I have, however, seen plenty of the opposite.

This depends on the person some people are better able to accept their faults than others. It takes a certain type of person to be able to take that sort of thing light-heartedly.