Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;598381Akali - the mithril armour is a bit expensive; if you say trade down to a +1 chain shirt (1250) you lose 1 AC but gain about 4000 GP, enough to grab a +1 ring of protection (buying back the AC) and a +1 weapon, say.


Soraka's -  I'd suggest maybe buying a rank in Tumble cross-class, since you're lightly armoured and have a Decent enough Dex, and it can't be used untrained.

I'm not sure about the exotic weapon proficiency - the damage output is negligible at d8+1, and since you only have a single attack each round anyway, its not that much better than your basic Small light crossbow at d6+1.

The healer no shields limitation is a bit harsh, if you could figure out some way to add on a shield bonus to AC would be good - maybe UMD and a Shield wand, or a couple of potions.

Or if you did have a spare feat, you could throw in Leadership and pick up a fighter bodyguard for the healer with a tower shield and Shieldmate/Improved Shieldmate from Miniatures' handbook for a +2 or +3 to AC (I forget) - this might bolster damage for the party slightly as well, though a cohort would be squishier than a real party member.

Victor - as far as warlocks go, have you seen the Eldritch Glaive power in Dragon Magic? Reach weapon that lets you full attack with your eldritch blast.

Good point about Akali. I'll do that.
What I like about the repeating crossbow is that she doesn't have to reload it, as she would a normal crossbow (unless I took a feat for that). Tumble seems okay though.
I am assuming leadership is banned. Otherwise my plan goes back to four warlocks storming the dungeon with literally dozens and dozens of cannon fodder troops.
Full attacking with EB is only useful if you have +6 or more BAB Plus, Victor is way too squishy for real combat. He's probably going to spend all his time either hiding in Poppy's shadow or on the ceiling shooting down.

Quote from: greyknight;598268I'm a bit unclear on the flamewar myself (and have little desire to educate myself on the matter), but I think the term "basketweaver" implies your characters are supposed to have abilities that don't directly relate to combat, such as Craft(basketweaving) or somesuch.  Even if his majesty hasn't mentioned it yet, he certainly will in the event of your guys surviving. ;-)

"basketweavers" is Mr. Gimpycock's made-up word for anyone who doesn't rollplay the way he does, because "badwrongfun". See also the thread of the same name, where GC got his stupidity pointed out to him continuously until he ran away crying.

Right, so ignoring the useless posters and their laughable claims that having a horde of angels do the daily for the gimps isn't a concession of gimpitude...

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;598381I'm not sure about the exotic weapon proficiency - the damage output is negligible at d8+1, and since you only have a single attack each round anyway, its not that much better than your basic Small light crossbow at d6+1.

The healer no shields limitation is a bit harsh, if you could figure out some way to add on a shield bonus to AC would be good - maybe UMD and a Shield wand, or a couple of potions.

Or if you did have a spare feat, you could throw in Leadership and pick up a fighter bodyguard for the healer with a tower shield and Shieldmate/Improved Shieldmate from Miniatures' handbook for a +2 or +3 to AC (I forget) - this might bolster damage for the party slightly as well, though a cohort would be squishier than a real party member.

Victor - as far as warlocks go, have you seen the Eldritch Glaive power in Dragon Magic? Reach weapon that lets you full attack with your eldritch blast.

What is it with gimps and tower shield fetishes anyways? Is that one of those things that goes hand in hand with suicide scouting or what?

That being said let me know when you've picked everything.

I am done with Akali and Poppy except for all the mundane junk Poppy will carry.
Quick questions though.
1) Can I use the Cityscape web enhancement, specifically for swapping class skills a bit?
2).....Leadership IS banned, right?

Quote from: The Noobiest Noobie;598468I am done with Akali and Poppy except for all the mundane junk Poppy will carry.
Quick questions though.
1) Can I use the Cityscape web enhancement, specifically for swapping class skills a bit?
2).....Leadership IS banned, right?

No and yes. Getting an army to do the adventure for you doesn't prove anything either (it also probably wouldn't work, but gives me a bunch of junk to track in the meanwhile).

Quote from: greyknight;598249For example, if your team wins then "oh, that's only because of all the optimisation you did to make the characters survivable" (i.e. what you're looking for suggestions on just now) "you were supposed to make unoptimised characters", and contrariwise it doesn't matter if he wins because he set up the rules and is refereeing it (designing a scenario and asking an objective third party to GM it would make more sense).

If I understand GC's argument properly, he believes that a party without any characters optimized for combat doesn't really stand a chance unless their GM consistently lobs 'softball' encounters at them.  I got the impression that his definition of such characters is fairly narrow: "Tier 1" or "Tier 2" classes built to maximize their strengths.

I don't think any of these characters could be described as 'optimized' except by the most broad use of the term.  When I think of a combat-optimized character, I picture wizards with their spell DCs pushed through the roof, charging barbarians doing 140 points of damage in a round, pouncing lion druidzillas, AC 42 clerical 'corks', and the like.  Those characters don't require intelligent play, they just require a lot of splatbooks and the patience to comb through optimization threads and cherry-pick the most absurd combos.  

Unfortunately, when building a character for a 'one-shot' such as this, it's easy to overlook weak points that would have become apparent if the character had been played for several levels.  My suggestions were meant to bring them up to the level one would commonly see from a character that had seen campaign play.

Given that GC is banned, I think this thread is dead.

Quote from: Imperator;598501Given that GC is banned, I think this thread is dead.

A little disappointed.  I thought about making a group up, but I realized that catching his inconsistent rulings was what I really wanted to do.  I couldn't do that while playing through.

I'll not fault his playstyle, if that's what his group likes, who am I to say otherwise.  It's when he forgets that others also are able to have their own playstyle and shouldn't be judged guilty for having it.

Sadface, I didn't even get excoriated for liking commoners.

If there is any interest I could maybe run a nice tasteful DCC XL0 deathtrap instead? :-)

Quote from: Imperator;598501Given that GC is banned, I think this thread is dead.

?  

Didn't even notice that.  Do you know what the final thing was that caused it?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;598532?  

Didn't even notice that.  Do you know what the final thing was that caused it?

He didn't pass the Turing test, and he does not play roleplaying games because he cannot pretend to have meaningful human interactions.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;598532Didn't even notice that.  Do you know what the final thing was that caused it?

Here's the banning post.

He'd been warned in several threads not to post about "basketweaving" outside of this "Team Gimp vs. Standard adventuring day" thread. I know of at least one thread that got closed because of it.

Over in the thread on magic item shops he was specifically warned to stop making the thread about basketweaving. Then he did it again. Then RPGPundit gave him a chance to prove his claim that he'd been baited into it. He did that by pointing to people responding directly to his initial basketweaving post in an attempt to claim that they somehow retroactively provoked him into posting the message they were responding to.

I could see it coming last night and actually felt like he had been baited in that thread. But then I went back to find evidence of that (because I figured he'd be too stupid to do it for himself) and discovered that, nope, he initiated every exchange.

With that being said, I don't think this banning was a good idea. I think the guy's a moron, but that's not why he was banned: He was banned for having a personal ethos towards gaming and filtering his conversation of gaming through the lens of that ethos.

It's as if I had been told that I could only discuss open tables in a single thread; or if Benoist had been told he could only discuss megadungeons in a single thread; or if RPGPundit was told he could only use the term "swine" in a single thread.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;598553With that being said, I don't think this banning was a good idea. I think the guy's a moron, but that's not why he was banned: He was banned for having a personal ethos towards gaming and filtering his conversation of gaming through the lens of that ethos.

Except that his ethos had absolutely nothing to do with roleplaying games.

Quote from: TristramEvans;598560Except that his ethos had absolutely nothing to do with roleplaying games.

To roleplay, you have to pretend to have an actual personality.

Quote from: TristramEvans;598560Except that his ethos had absolutely nothing to do with roleplaying games.

That isn't true.
His ethos is in direct conflict with your concept of roleplaying games.

Not that I would want to play in a session of his either, but he can play make believe however he wants.