The Barbarian Horde (Throughout Editions)

One of my criticisms about Next is the lack of being able to make meaningful decisions both when building a character and during level up, as most levels of most classes have predetermined class features.

Sure at 2nd- or 3rd-level you get to pick a kind of theme (which you may not agree with), but this one choice predetermines everything else you get for the rest of the game. This is not only boring, but limits a class to one interpretation of a concept and makes it needlessly more difficult–if not impossible–for a player to build the character that they want.

To better illustrate my point I decided to compare the barbarian class in 3rd Edition, 4th Edition, 5th Edition, and 13th Age.

3RD EDITION
You get fast movement (+10 ft. speed when not in heavy armor) and can rage once per day (bonus to attack, damage, and Will saves). For some reason you cannot read or write unless you spend two skill points. The only thing you can customize here is how you distribute your skill points and where to spend a feat.

An example of several half-orc barbarians.

4TH EDITION

All barbarians gain a scaling bonus to AC and Reflex when not in heavy armor, rage strike (which lets you keep using daily attacks without losing the benefits of a previously activated one if you do not want to), and Rampage (if you score a critical hit, you get to make a free attack).

From there you choose from one of four Feral Might options: Rageblood is your more straightforward beat ’em up type, Thaneborn is if you want to be a leader, Thunderborn have strong ties to thunder-based primal spirits, and Whirling is for dual-wielders. Each class feature gives you a unique ability, and can potentially grant bonuses to certain thematically appropriate evocations.

You also get to choose four evocations at the start: two can be used at any time, one can be used once per battle, and one–the “rage” powers–can be used each day. Rages tend to deal a lot of damage and grant continuous effects for the remainder of the battle.

Like 3rd Edition you still get to choose skills and a feat. Unlike 3rd Edition feats can give you both skills and limited access to features from another class (further expanding customization).

5TH EDITION

Speaking of 3rd Edition, the 5th Edition version is much the same in that you do not get to choose anything, at least at the start: at 3rd-level you get to choose from one of two features that lock a group of five options for the rest of the game (you cannot pick from both trees). Feats are optional, but can add some much needed customization if you use them, and skills are throttled into two “fields of lore”.

More half-orc barbarians.

13TH AGE
You start with rage, because all barbarians must rage, but get to pick three barbarian talents from a list of six. The amount of talents you know increases as you level, with levels 5 and 8 adding two more to the list. Instead of skills you spend 8 background points on aspects of your character that make the most sense to you (up to a +5 bonus). They are not linked to ability scores. You get to spend a feat, and while there are general ones race and class talents can also be boosted with them, too.

FINAL VERDICT

3rd and 5th Edition come in miles behind 4th Edition and 13th Age, which are both about the same in my book: I love the amount of options and flexibility that 4th Edition gives you, but the sheer number that you start with and the amount you will end up with can make it cumbersome for some players to keep track of. 13th Age slims down character options, while still giving you almost complete control of the reins, making it ideal for players that want control without all the content.

If you wanted to make things even simpler you could take a page from Dungeon World, having most classes start with the same stuff, but you get to pick what you gain as you level up. We just played our first session of Numenera last night, and building characters was a snap despite being able to actually pick some things. I do not think it is as difficult or cumbersome as it sounds. Why not at least give it a shot?

Character Concept: The Voice of the Stars

I love aberrants–especially when I get to unleash them on my players–as well as things generally associated with them, such as the star pact and psionics. I figure, why not have both?

This character could have been a survivor from an illithid colony, a failed ceremorphosis candidate, got too close to the Far Realm, read a tome she should not have (if you want to tap H.P. Lovecraft), or was otherwise exposed to some aberrant force. Perhaps her psionic talents attracted the attention of an otherworldly entity, or perhaps psionics were part of the package deal.

At any rate, you start with a hybrid psion/warlock, with the telepathy focus and star pact respectively. The theme is kind of iffy; if you have a background for what your character was all about before this went down, you could go with that (like guttersnipe or outlaw if you nabbed the book-that-should-not-have-been-opened), though seer is good if you want to focus on the whole fate aspect.

Powers are pretty easy to juggle, you will just want to make sure that your Intelligence and Charisma are both set to 16. The telepathy focus works out well, as it is linked to Charisma. I think the only real flaw here is that some star-pact spells are dependent on Constitution, which might be a problem if your DM won’t let you just pen in “charisma” over the power description.

You will probably want to dump your first feat on Hybrid Talent so you can pick up something extra. After that just nab a rod or orb and you are good to go, though if your DM is cool with it you might want to ask about re-skinning a few more things:

• Tentacle Lash: I like the idea of a servant (or slave?) of the stars being mutated by her “gifts”. The tentacle might always be present, or extend from her hand or even mouth. You could even go so far as to have the character have an entire face of tentacles, complete with a lamprey-like mouth or beak ala the mind flayer. This is just a re-skinned basic melee attack, or even eldritch strike. I would have it otherwise function as a short- or longsword.
• Maddening Drone: More of a warlock power, you have lots of little mouths that whisper secrets and prophecies. This would just deal psychic damage within a close burst. Might not be “balanced”, but is thematic and cool. Could have a push effect. If you went with this as a daily I could see it dazing or even stunning.
• Mind Blast: You could simply reskin thunderwave to deal psychic damage and swap out of the push effect for something like a defense or attack penalty, or prevent targets from making opportunity attacks for a turn. Alternatively, save kickers for the augmented versions, up to and including a one-turn daze effect.
• Thought Shackles: The dominated condition does not start until 5th level, and even then it is for one turn. Still you could deal psychic damage, then have the target make a melee basic attack. Or you could have it so that you can make the target use one until they shake the effect off with a save. Like, they get to take their turn, but on your turn you can take control briefly. Something that seems quasi-mind flayery.

As a fan of homebrew content and sticking to a concept, I would consider my patron star’s goals and theme when picking, altering, or creating new spells, as well as how the character’s psionic powers develop. 

I guess the only bad part about this character is that it is seemingly more suited to a villain, though you could go the route of a kind of grim-dark hero. Depending on the complexity of the star’s machinations, the character’s actions could coincide with the rest of the party. Hell, one star might have the character move against the other one.

Character Concepts: The Thief of Wind

I forgot exactly how and when I came up with this character concept. Maybe it was a character that I would play had I been playing in A Sundered World instead of running it, though it could also be a rad NPC to throw at my party as a part-time antagonist. Like a D&D-based Faye Valentine or Saffron. Basically it is a rogue that managed to swindle a wish from a djinni without it backfiring (or at least, not in an immediately noticeable way), or discovered some kind of item that grants a measure of elemental power, like a could be a djinni’s bottle or air elemental core.

Now I could go with elemental heritage (or even windsoul genasi), but I like the idea of a rogue that managed to actually steal power, as it would ideally give a DM a very definitive adventure hook and a motivation for the character. 

Mechanically you can get away with this by going with a human rogue and multiclassing into wizard for an encounter thunderwave, re-flavoring it to be a gust of wind instead of a thunder clap. The problem is that that gives you one wind-based power, and only on a per-encounter basis at that. I think what I would prefer more is a hybrid rogue/sorcerer. The problem here is that none of the at-wills really have a wind-motif. Well…storm walk is kind of wind-ish, but I would prefer to reskin thunderwave and just make it a Charisma attack instead of Intelligence. 

After that it is a simple matter of divvying up your exploits and spells to taste, and nabbing Hybrid Talent for a sorcerer’s storm soul class feature, artful dodger, or weapon talent if that is your thing. Personally I like storm soul because I imagine the part where you lose your energy resistances as wind shielding you from harm.

Making a Character

I’m going to open with a very simple visual aid.

…and…

Got it?

The mission statement for Dungeons & Dragons characters is very, very straightforward: you’re an adventurer/hero/glorified vagrant that kills things and steals their shit (often in that order). The game doesn’t even try to hide this fact, and so I find it very odd when a player bellies up to the table and wants to play a commoner or “zero-level” character. That’s not what the game is about, or even assumes that you would ever do. If you dont like it, then play something else.

I don’t mean for that to sound asinine, but it’s really as easy as that. I dont jump into a Shadowrun game and get all butthurt that I have to play a cybernetically and/or supernaturally enhanced criminal, a Dragonball Z game and expect there to be plot, or a Rifts game and expect decent mechanics/anything remotely approaching game balance. Good games are made to cater to a specific play-style or genre, and D&D is not about going through a routine existence farming, or meandering around a village chatting it up with NPCs.

Players wanting to play an adventure game with a character barely suited for exterminating rats isn’t the only problem I’ve run across in my gaming experience. I once had a group that was professed an interest in the game, and decided to run Stick in the Mud because I like the cut of Aeryn Rudel’s game. Mostly I wanted to run a short session to get the newbies acclimated to the game and see if the veteran enjoyed my game-style. I told them to roll up a small party (which took awhile since one player kept wanting to fucking play Man-Bear-Pig). 

Once we had the party assembled and were ready to go dungeon crawling, I was hit with the following: 

“Why are we doing this?”

I hate, hate, haaate this fucking question. (＃ﾟДﾟ)

To me it’s valid only insofar as you use it to justify to yourself why you are going to dick around in a dungeon and kill things–especially when put into context of a one-shot session. You’re an adventurer. Think up something conducive to acting like one. To make sure that I’m absolutely clear, motivation is fine. It’s great. It can help a player become more immersed in their character and get them more emotionally invested in the game. The problem is that no one else is likely to give a fuck about your motivation because they’ve got their own shit to worry about.

“Oh, you have an estranged brother that you are trying to find? Well fuck you, I’m trying to avenge my father who was murdered by a mysterious figure cloaked in shadows and shit.”

Often times the question seems to be directed at me, the DM. Why the hell are you asking me? It’s your fucking character, you figure it out. Feel free to bounce reasons off of me to see if its kosher with the plot, but don’t ask me to do more than toss a couple tidbits your way, as all too often it’s never what you wanted in the first place. Now, the provided hooks for the adventure were good (and generic) enough for me: get mud samples, retrieve an old staff, or just bring back heads for a bounty. It’s easy and appeals to multiple player tastes. Dont like ’em, then you give me one that you do like and we’ll talk.

Frankly, I prefer it when my players table that shit and work on it off the clock. Don’t grind the game to a halt so you can play twenty-questions with yourself, roll with the flow and exchange email messages with your DM between game sessions. It’s not a goddamn chicken-egg exercise: you can add to your character retroactively. Dont believe me? In many works of fiction, you start out knowing very little about any given character, and gradually learn more as the story(s) progress. It especially annoys me when I get players that seem to want to psychoanalyze their characters. Like, they can’t make a simple decision without pondering for hours if their character would really do that thing, use that item, blah blah fucking blah. The answer is simple: your character does whatever you want it to, because its your character.

I don’t recall if they ever picked a motivation, despite it being a one-shot intro game. However, once we’d stumbled through that hurdle, we immediately hit another.

“Do we know each other?”

Fucked if I know, figure it out between yourselves. ┐(‘～`；)┌

For some reason, players that think that its taboo to start the game already knowing one or more of the other players. Do they think it will give them any sort of advantage over something aside from being able to dodge the awkward, “get to know each other” phase of some games? There’s been one campaign that I can recall where this wasn’t a torturous trial, but that had two DMs and it still seemed contrived. Personally, I prefer operating under the assumption that the group already knows each other, or at least knows of each other. It makes it much easier to get the game going without having to trudge towards a contrived eventuality.

In closing, I submit the following:

• You’re an adventurer, act like it.
• You don’t have to have your character fully sorted before the game starts. Flesh it out as needed.
• It’s okay to know the party before the dice ever hit the table.

Character Concepts: Revenant Chaladin

I thought of this a few days ago, and forgot what thought process spawned it. One of Pelor’s faithful, gifted perhaps with modest healing powers, is captured by a necromancer and sacrificed in his own temple as part of an “unhallowing” ritual (causing statues to bleed, holy symbols to melt, the foundations crumble, etc). The character might belong to a powerful bloodline, or be “pure of heart”, or maybe the necromancer just needed someone. At any rate, he rises the next dawn, gifted with the powers of a paladin, with instructions from both the Raven Queen and Pelor to stop this person.

• Prayers: Ardent Strike, Virtuous Strike, Valorous Smite, Majestic Halo
• Feat: Human Soul

I figure that destruction of your village, while a RPG cliche, is sufficient to prompt most people to action. However I think that it’s much more personal if they actually kill you. The background should prove easy to work into most campaigns, as evil necromancers are a villainous staple of the genre. It also provides a reasonable explanation as to why a dead person is going about chanting prayers and channeling holy light, which to me is more interesting than another human, dwarf, or deva.

(what follows is just my thoughts on paladins over the ages, and has nothing to do with the above character)

I’ve seen people play paladins, thankfully never in the way commonly–and hopefully satirically–portrayed in other media; an annoying pretty boy (or girl) with armor and teeth that never tarnish, loudly proclaiming his intent to invade an orc camp, or complaining when the party wants to try subterfuge regardless of potential consequences, good or bad. Mostly I remember my players running them like they would any other character, with the occasional warning that they would forfeit their powers if they continued to proceed with an imminent infraction, which might have been due to a looser (read: more fun) interpretation of alignment and the paladin code.

Despite a lack of harrowing experiences, I’ve never really had any desire to play a paladin. In 2nd Edition it was partially because of the alignment restrictions and paladin code, partially because that the odds of me rolling a Charisma of 17, in addition to the other steep requirements, were slim to say the least, especially when you had to record your results in order. Come to think of it, I think that the only reason any of my friends played a paladin was because they rarely legitimately had the stats to do it, and when the opportunity finally arose they just wanted to see what all the fuss was about.

3rd Edition made things a bit easier since you got to roll 4d6, drop the lowest, and place them however you wanted to. Unfortunately 3rd Edition tied ability scores closely to the rest of the mechanics, and paladins wanted Strength, Constitution, Wisdom, and Charisma. It wasn’t unfortunate that they tied ability scores to mechanics, but that the paladin demands so much. You needed Strength for melee attacks, Wisdom to cast spells, Charisma for a few class features such as lay on hands, and Constitution to not die. And if that wasn’t enough, you were still double-teamed by Lawful Good only and the silly paladin code.

Ugh.

4th Edition paladins are much friendlier to everyone at the table. You don’t have a set alignment, and the ability scores you need are Strength or Charisma, and Wisdom helps. Strength and Charisma are used for your attacks, and there are sufficient prayers that you can pick one instead of spreading yourself too thin. Though divine challenge is keyed to Charisma, you can take a feat to link it to Strength instead, allowing you to forgo Charisma almost entirely. Last but not least, there’s no paladin code, so you’re free to act entirely within whatever character traits you desire.

Character Concepts: Peeps

So…huh. Swarm of flying birds. For light armor I’m going to go with a bunch of tiny army bottle cap helmets. Of course, they might drag around a garbage can lid that they hide under. I didn’t roll for Laserbeaks etc gear last time, but I did here. I cannot see a swarm of birds dragging around tents and keelboats, so this will all be left at his (or would it be their?) nest. Well, except for one tent. It’s been modified to be a sack for it to carry loot.

Peeps

Rat Swarm Hawkoid (Bio)

Initiative +5

ABILITY SCORES

Str 13, Con 8, Dex 18, Int 12, Wis 16, Cha 11

AC: 18 Fort: 12 Reflex: 15 Will: 14

HP: 20 Bloodied: 10

TRAITS

Crawling Mass, Flight, Swarm Defense

SKILLS

Nature +8, Perception +8, Stealth +9

POWERS

Swarm!, Terrifying Shriek

EQUIPMENT

Beak (light melee), Light Armor, 3 tents, keelboat, generator, punching bag, socket wrench set

Character Concepts: Laserbeak

My first Gamma World character, I rolled everything and kept all the results. I was pretty lucky getting Perception on the skill roll. I see this going two ways: either a bird-like robot that wields the katana in its talons, or a robotic tengu-looking warrior. Either way, I see the light armor as additional plating. That, or it could be wearing some old, battered samurai armor.

Laserbeak
Hawkoid Android (Bio, Dark)

ABILITY SCORES
Str 12, Con 14, Dex 17, Int 16, Wis 18, Cha 13.

AC: 17 Fort: 15 Reflex: 14 Will: 15
HP: 26 Bloodied: 13

TRAITS
Flight

SKILLS
Perception +13, Science +8

POWERS
Machine Grip, Terrifying Shriek

EQUIPMENT
Katana (light melee), Light Armor, Survivor’s Kit

Janow, Gnome Illusionist

Another pregen, this one is a natural fit and pretty optimized. 

Janow d’Sivis, level 1

Gnome, Wizard

Arcane Implement Mastery: Orb of Deception

Background: Zilargo (+2 to Insight)

FINAL ABILITY SCORES

Str 8, Con 11, Dex 10, Int 18, Wis 13, Cha 18.

STARTING ABILITY SCORES

Str 8, Con 11, Dex 10, Int 16, Wis 13, Cha 16.

AC: 14 Fort: 10 Reflex: 14 Will: 16

HP: 21 Surges: 6 Surge Value: 5

TRAINED SKILLS

Arcana +11, History +9, Insight +8, Diplomacy +11

UNTRAINED SKILLS

Acrobatics, Bluff +4, Dungeoneering +1, Endurance, Heal +1, Intimidate +4, Nature +1, Perception +1, Religion +4, Stealth +2, Streetwise +4, Thievery, Athletics -1

FEATS

Wizard: Ritual Caster

Level 1: Mark of Scribing

POWERS

Wizard at-will 1: Illusory Ambush

Wizard at-will 1: Phantom Bolt

Wizard encounter 1: Grasping Shadows

Wizard daily 1: Horrid Whispers

Wizard daily 1 Spellbook: Sleep

ITEMS

Spellbook, Adventurer’s Kit, Cloth Armor (Basic Clothing), Dagger, Orb Implement, Identification Papers with Portrait, Woodwind, Camouflaged Clothing

RITUALS

Comprehend Language, Glib Limerick, Secret Page

Thok, Half-Orc Artificer

One of the pregen characters for my Eberron adventure-path, I envision Thok as more or less like a Warhammer 40k orc, having a knack for building and manipulating magical gizmos. Just, you know, without the insane bloodlust and stupidity…so maybe not much like one at all…? Mostly I was going for a half-orc out in the backwater region of the Shadow Marches having to make due with what he’s got, and when that fails, he can hit it with his axe.

Now, I did cheat a bit and give him seven extra gps so that he could afford the war axe. A completely legit option is to take Crossbow Caster so that he can use his repeating crossbow as an implement (which I would take anyway), Arcane Fury (when he gets an AoE attack), Furious Concoction (“makin’ it orcy”), and Mark of Finding. Were I to play this character, I would definitely take them all, as it fits the theme.

From an optimization stance, this works better with a dwarf (or really anything that gets an Int and/or Con bonus) and taking static shock syncs better with his high Constitution. I was trying to stick with all Weapon-keyword powers.

Thok, level 1

Half-Orc, Artificer
Background: Tharashk Prospector (+2 to Dungeoneering)

FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 12, Con 16, Dex 13, Int 16, Wis 13, Cha 8.

STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 10, Con 16, Dex 11, Int 16, Wis 13, Cha 8.

AC: 15 Fort: 14 Reflex: 13 Will: 12
HP: 28 Surges: 9 Surge Value: 7

TRAINED SKILLS
Arcana +8, Perception +6, Heal +6, Dungeoneering +8, Thievery +6

UNTRAINED SKILLS
Acrobatics +1, Bluff -1, Diplomacy -1, Endurance +5, History +3, Insight +1, Intimidate +1, Nature +1, Religion +3, Stealth +1, Streetwise -1, Athletics +1

FEATS
Artificer: Ritual Caster
Level 1: Weapon Proficiency (Waraxe)

POWERS
Artificer at-will 1: Magic Weapon
Artificer at-will 1: Aggravating Force
Healing Infusion: Healing Infusion: Resistive Formula
Artificer encounter 1: Burning Weapons
Artificer daily 1: Flameburst Armor

ITEMS
Ritual Book, Leather Armor, Repeating crossbow, Adventurer’s Kit, Magazine, Crossbow Bolts (20), Waraxe
RITUALS
Brew Potion, Disenchant Magic Item, Enchant Magic Item, Make Whole

Playing Monstrous Characters

I don’t get to play D&D as much as I’d like to, so its a good thing that I enjoy running, but when I do sit on the other side of the screen I play a lot of monstrous races. While the other players are rolling humans, shifters, gnomes, and devas, I’m trying to find ways to shoehorn a minotaur or gnoll into the plot. I think its probably due to the fact that I’ve been gaming for a long time, about 15 or so years, and maybe I’ve gotten tired of playing humans and elves and the like. Heh, just kidding. I’ve never played and elf and hadn’t even seriously considered it until recently.

In your typical D&D setting most of these races are the bad guys. This usually means that if no one in the party is aware of each other when the adventure starts, you gotta do that cliche social role-play part where people distrust you, you talk back and forth for a bit, and then they grudgingly allow you to do your adventuring bit until you earn their trust. I hate that part because first of all, it is a cliche. Everyone knows its another player. All you’re doing is making everyone wait while you rummage through dialogue until someone says something halfway plausible to get the game moving (which would be the second thing I hate about it). Actually, makes me glad that monsters generally aren’t trained in a lot of skills…

Frankly, I prefer having that part inherent to the character background in addition to already knowing one or more of the party members for some extra insurance. Really that’s the best advice I can give for anyone playing a monstrous race: build up a background where the character has already dealt with the locals and gotten on their good side. It also can’t hurt to know someone influential in addition to one-or-more party members. While it might not matter in the next town over, at least at the start you can keep the ball rolling. Maybe your exploits and achievements will reach the other town before you do?

I’m not a bad player. If the DM explains that in his or her campaign setting that the monsters are Evil-aligned treasure-hoarding experience parsels that live in dungeons, I’ve got reserves. Tieflings do the trick just fine, and I’ve been known to play a human or two. However, this is one of the reasons I like Eberron so much. Its incredibly easy and consistent with the setting to roll up a monstrous character, because there’s an entire nation of monsters milling about Droaam. Well, two nations if you count all the goblinoids in Darguun, and that’s not counting all the orcs mucking around in the Shadow Marches.