Character Synergy

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

I'm curious to hear if you folks have observed any pairings of PC
builds that work together extremely well, boosting each other's
strengths and covering for each others' weaknesses. Teamwork is always
a good idea in this game, but are there any tactical combinations
you've seen that look almost too good?
19
answers
Last reply
More about character synergy
  1. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    emmitsvenson@hotmail.com wrote:

    > I'm curious to hear if you folks have observed any pairings of PC
    > builds that work together extremely well, boosting each other's
    > strengths and covering for each others' weaknesses. Teamwork is always
    > a good idea in this game, but are there any tactical combinations
    > you've seen that look almost too good?

    There's the obvious human member of house Cannith Artificer paired with
    a Warforged fighter.

    Someone mentioned two feytouched rogues both of whom have Nymph's Kiss
    with each other as fey lovers.
  2. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    I've seen a very effective dwarf fighter/elven cleric pair...the cleric
    hides behind the fighter to buff and heal, while the fighter focuses on
    taking/avoiding hits thus wearing down the enamys over time....its
    pretty simple but it works. I don't know about two good however.

    The one group I've seen that seemed TOO good was 5 people that are now
    refered to as the Nuclear Elves of Tusmit. They where at a Living
    Greyhawk convention I went to. Their from Tusmit (real world Quebec,
    Canada) and 4 of them where wood elves focused compleatly on killing
    stuff: Spiked chaines, massive dammage and to hit bonuses, but no
    saving throughs, skills or HP. The final member was a dwarf mage that
    cast bulls streanth and enlarge person on the rest. They where about
    3-4th level, becuse they rarly played that group of characters becuse
    they wheren't that fun to roleplay, and would die from any higher level
    spells, but they just slaghtered evrything at APL 4 (avrage party
    level: 4)
  3. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    One warrior type, once wizard type, one cleric type, and one rogue
    type.

    Gerald Katz
  4. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    emmitsvenson@hotmail.com wrote:
    > I'm curious to hear if you folks have observed any pairings of PC
    > builds that work together extremely well, boosting each other's
    > strengths and covering for each others' weaknesses. Teamwork is always
    > a good idea in this game, but are there any tactical combinations
    > you've seen that look almost too good?

    Monk + Rogue is really excellent. Whether grappling, stunning, or just
    flanking, the Monk can give the Rogue a lot of opportunities to use
    Sneak Attack. Most nasties ust don't last that long when they're locked
    in a grapple and suffering full sneak attacks from a rogue every round.

    Laszlo
  5. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Hadsil <forumite@netzero.com> wrote:
    >One warrior type, once wizard type, one cleric type, and one rogue
    >type.

    You stinkin' munchkins are ruining the game for the rest of us.

    Pete
  6. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Werebat wrote:
    > There's the obvious human member of house Cannith Artificer paired with
    > a Warforged fighter.
    >
    > Someone mentioned two feytouched rogues both of whom have Nymph's Kiss
    > with each other as fey lovers.

    I'm not too familiar with those supplements. Is it an Artificer and any
    Warforged warrior that's especially good, or do all those fighter feats
    make that a special combo? What's the advantage of the feytouched
    rogues?
  7. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    chaoslight@gmail.com wrote:
    > Monk + Rogue is really excellent. Whether grappling, stunning, or just
    > flanking, the Monk can give the Rogue a lot of opportunities to use
    > Sneak Attack. Most nasties ust don't last that long when they're locked
    > in a grapple and suffering full sneak attacks from a rogue every round.

    It sounds like a pair that boosts each other's strengths, but doesn't
    cover each other's weaknesses. Wouldn't they have a big problem with
    damage-resistant constructs, for example? Or with fairly common types
    of undead?
  8. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    emmitsvenson@hotmail.com wrote:
    > Werebat wrote:
    >
    >> There's the obvious human member of house Cannith Artificer paired with
    >> a Warforged fighter.
    >
    > I'm not too familiar with those supplements. Is it an Artificer and any
    > Warforged warrior that's especially good, or do all those fighter feats
    > make that a special combo?

    Any warforged warrior, really. The Artificer's repair damage spells heal a
    warforged fully (they receive only half benefit from healing spells), plus their
    infusions are very helpful.

    --
    Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
    The geek with roots in Hell!
    http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigeclasslist.html
    http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatelist.html

    Who do you blame when your kid is a - brat?
    Pampered and spoiled like a Siamese - cat?
    Blaming the kids is a lie and a - shame!
    You know exactly who's - to - blame:
    The mother and the father!
  9. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    emmitsvenson@hotmail.com wrote:
    > chaoslight@gmail.com wrote:
    > > Monk + Rogue is really excellent. Whether grappling, stunning, or just
    > > flanking, the Monk can give the Rogue a lot of opportunities to use
    > > Sneak Attack. Most nasties ust don't last that long when they're locked
    > > in a grapple and suffering full sneak attacks from a rogue every round.
    >
    > It sounds like a pair that boosts each other's strengths, but doesn't
    > cover each other's weaknesses. Wouldn't they have a big problem with
    > damage-resistant constructs, for example? Or with fairly common types
    > of undead?

    Yes, they would. That's what the rest of the party is for. :)

    For the record, I think a perfect 4-man party would look like this
    (assuming you want the party tzo be workable at all levels from 1-20):

    Monk
    Rogue (possibly multiclassed with Ranger or Barbarian)
    Cleric (high-str build, focusing on buffing and combat)
    Wizard

    You'll note the lack of a full-BAB character. The Monk, Cleric, and
    Rogue together have enough melee capability to make a "tank" largely
    unnecessary.

    Laszlo
  10. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    chaoslight@gmail.com <chaoslight@gmail.com> wrote:
    > Monk + Rogue is really excellent. Whether grappling, stunning, or just
    > flanking, the Monk can give the Rogue a lot of opportunities to use
    > Sneak Attack. Most nasties ust don't last that long when they're locked
    > in a grapple and suffering full sneak attacks from a rogue every round.

    Druid + rogue also works, for similar reasons. Druid uses wild shape to
    grapple foes; rogue uses sneak attack to finish them off.
    --
    Bradd W. Szonye
    http://www.szonye.com/bradd
  11. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    David Alex Lamb wrote:
    > NK requires that your character maintain an intimate relationship with a good
    > fey, many of whom are limited in how far they can move from a designated place
    > e.g dryad, thus making it hard to both adventure and maintain the NK benefits.
    > Feytouched count as fey IIRC and the two are accompanying each other, and
    > presumably maintaining the relationship.
    > --
    > "Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
    > http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)

    Nymph's Kiss does not require you to maintain within a specific
    distance of the fey, nor does it require the fey to travel with you.
    "Intimate" doesn't have to mean sexual, either. Also, there's no
    prerequisite of "must first befriend a fey". The feat can be taken at
    first level, and it just presumes you already have such a fey friend.
    Taken later doesn't mean you have to first befriend a fey. It can jsut
    as easily mean a fey has heard of you, taken a liking to you, and
    initiates the friendship (or more) which you accept by virtue of taking
    the feat.

    Gerald Katz
  12. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    In article <1126016103.164185.80500@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
    <emmitsvenson@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >Werebat wrote:
    >> Someone mentioned two feytouched rogues both of whom have Nymph's Kiss
    >> with each other as fey lovers.
    >
    >I'm not too familiar with those supplements. Is it an Artificer and any
    >Warforged warrior that's especially good, or do all those fighter feats
    >make that a special combo? What's the advantage of the feytouched
    >rogues?

    NK requires that your character maintain an intimate relationship with a good
    fey, many of whom are limited in how far they can move from a designated place
    e.g dryad, thus making it hard to both adventure and maintain the NK benefits.
    Feytouched count as fey IIRC and the two are accompanying each other, and
    presumably maintaining the relationship.
    --
    "Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
    http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
  13. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    In article <1126243245.291205.145590@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
    Hadsil <forumite@netzero.com> wrote:
    >
    >David Alex Lamb wrote:
    >> NK requires that your character maintain an intimate relationship with a good
    >> fey, many of whom are limited in how far they can move from a designated place
    >> e.g dryad, thus making it hard to both adventure and maintain the NK benefits.
    >> Feytouched count as fey IIRC and the two are accompanying each other, and
    >> presumably maintaining the relationship.
    >> --
    >> "Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
    >> http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
    >
    >Nymph's Kiss does not require you to maintain within a specific
    >distance of the fey, nor does it require the fey to travel with you.
    >"Intimate" doesn't have to mean sexual, either. Also, there's no
    >prerequisite of "must first befriend a fey". The feat can be taken at
    >first level, and it just presumes you already have such a fey friend.
    >Taken later doesn't mean you have to first befriend a fey. It can jsut
    >as easily mean a fey has heard of you, taken a liking to you, and
    >initiates the friendship (or more) which you accept by virtue of taking
    >the feat.

    That's certainly one plausible interpretation. I don't agree with it because
    (1) it seems to me that NK is overpowered as a feat even just looking at the
    skill bonus, and the relationship was meant to be a "roleplaying restriction"
    on the character. Your interpretation doesn't seem to be enough of a
    penalty. (2) The two feytouched characters' players seem not to take your
    interpretation.

    Not that roleplaying restrictions are all that great. Several readers here
    have rejected NK for this reason, or that even with the restriction it was too
    powerful for them.
    --
    "Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
    http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
  14. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    marc wrote:

    > For the really exotic encounters, I'd like to team the druid up with a
    > wizard with divination abilities. Or maybe a cleric. Best bet would be a
    > wizard with one or two cleric levels to provide healing wands, and buffs.
    > THe more mundane classes really pale in comparison with the druid, I've
    > found.

    Huh? WTF would the Wizard want a cleric level?!?

    He's teamed with a druid, and you can cooperate on magic item
    construction. Do Druids in your world not only not have access
    to Craft wand at level 6 but ALSO not get CLW at level 1?

    A Wiz5 + a Drd5 can make CLW wands far better than a
    Wiz4/Crc1 + Drd5 (HINT: only one of these two groups can even
    have the craft wand feat, and by Level 6 a Drd can take it).

    DougL
  15. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Bradd W. Szonye" <bradd+news@szonye.com> wrote in
    news:slrndi19c7.vm.bradd+news@szonye.com:

    > chaoslight@gmail.com <chaoslight@gmail.com> wrote:
    >> Monk + Rogue is really excellent. Whether grappling, stunning, or just
    >> flanking, the Monk can give the Rogue a lot of opportunities to use
    >> Sneak Attack. Most nasties ust don't last that long when they're locked
    >> in a grapple and suffering full sneak attacks from a rogue every round.
    >
    > Druid + rogue also works, for similar reasons. Druid uses wild shape to
    > grapple foes; rogue uses sneak attack to finish them off.

    If it's an outside setting, I'd say that a druid could handle pretty much
    anything. Especially if she had the natural spell feat. I found that the
    summon monster spell coupled with the animal growth spell makes fighter
    types irrellevant unless the DM is really into springing surprise
    encounters on the druid. For such times, she has an animal companion
    around to eat whatever stumbles down the deer path.

    For the really exotic encounters, I'd like to team the druid up with a
    wizard with divination abilities. Or maybe a cleric. Best bet would be a
    wizard with one or two cleric levels to provide healing wands, and buffs.
    THe more mundane classes really pale in comparison with the druid, I've
    found.


    oh man, did the dice ever love that druid...
    marc
  16. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    David Alex Lamb wrote:
    > In article <1126243245.291205.145590@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
    > Hadsil <forumite@netzero.com> wrote:
    >
    >>David Alex Lamb wrote:
    >>
    >>>NK requires that your character maintain an intimate relationship with a good
    >>>fey, many of whom are limited in how far they can move from a designated place
    >>>e.g dryad, thus making it hard to both adventure and maintain the NK benefits.
    >>>Feytouched count as fey IIRC and the two are accompanying each other, and
    >>>presumably maintaining the relationship.
    >>>--
    >>>"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
    >>>http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
    >>
    >>Nymph's Kiss does not require you to maintain within a specific
    >>distance of the fey, nor does it require the fey to travel with you.
    >>"Intimate" doesn't have to mean sexual, either. Also, there's no
    >>prerequisite of "must first befriend a fey". The feat can be taken at
    >>first level, and it just presumes you already have such a fey friend.
    >>Taken later doesn't mean you have to first befriend a fey. It can jsut
    >>as easily mean a fey has heard of you, taken a liking to you, and
    >>initiates the friendship (or more) which you accept by virtue of taking
    >>the feat.
    >
    >
    > That's certainly one plausible interpretation. I don't agree with it because
    > (1) it seems to me that NK is overpowered as a feat even just looking at the
    > skill bonus, and the relationship was meant to be a "roleplaying restriction"
    > on the character. Your interpretation doesn't seem to be enough of a
    > penalty. (2) The two feytouched characters' players seem not to take your
    > interpretation.
    >
    > Not that roleplaying restrictions are all that great. Several readers here
    > have rejected NK for this reason, or that even with the restriction it was too
    > powerful for them.

    Yep. It's a borked feat, and such an obviously borked feat that someone
    was clearly asleep at the wheel when BoED was published.

    - Ron ^*^
  17. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "DougL" <lampert.doug@gmail.com> wrote in
    news:1126378101.886468.33500@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

    > marc wrote:
    >
    >> For the really exotic encounters, I'd like to team the druid up with
    >> a wizard with divination abilities. Or maybe a cleric. Best bet
    >> would be a wizard with one or two cleric levels to provide healing
    >> wands, and buffs. THe more mundane classes really pale in comparison
    >> with the druid, I've found.
    >
    > Huh? WTF would the Wizard want a cleric level?!?
    >
    > He's teamed with a druid, and you can cooperate on magic item
    > construction. Do Druids in your world not only not have access
    > to Craft wand at level 6 but ALSO not get CLW at level 1?
    >
    > A Wiz5 + a Drd5 can make CLW wands far better than a
    > Wiz4/Crc1 + Drd5 (HINT: only one of these two groups can even
    > have the craft wand feat, and by Level 6 a Drd can take it).
    >
    > DougL
    >
    >

    I didn't know you could use someone else's feats to create magic items.
    We've never played that way, so item creation never really factored in.
    The wiz would take some cleric levels to better relate to his divine
    friend, and get some really sweet domain powers along with another
    spell which would allow the group to use almost any scroll or wand they
    picked up as loot.

    anyways, with the druid focusing on summonning, she almost never enters
    combat herself, I think it'd be better to buy the CLW wand rather than
    spend a feat on it which could be better used on something like
    augmented summoning, or scribing scrolls (though if you can combine item
    creation feats between characters, the druid could just dictate to the
    wizard/cleric who would make them.) So the druid might take some of the
    other nifty feats out there.
  18. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    marc wrote:

    >
    > I didn't know you could use someone else's feats to create magic items.
    > We've never played that way, so item creation never really factored in.
    > The wiz would take some cleric levels to better relate to his divine
    > friend, and get some really sweet domain powers along with another
    > spell which would allow the group to use almost any scroll or wand they
    > picked up as loot.
    >
    >

    Indeed. The creation of a magic item doesn't care where the spell
    requisites come from, only that they be provided. Anyone can also pay
    the gp cost. The XP cot, however, must come from the character who has
    the feat. If a wizard and cleric both have the appropriate feat in a
    cooperative magic item creation, one of them must be declared the
    "creator" of the item to spend the XP.

    Gerald Katz
  19. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Hadsil <forumite@netzero.com> wrote:
    > The creation of a magic item doesn't care where the spell requisites
    > come from, only that they be provided. Anyone can also pay the gp
    > cost. The XP cot, however, must come from the character who has the
    > feat.

    Incorrect; the XP can come from anyone who supplies a prerequisite.
    --
    Bradd W. Szonye
    http://www.szonye.com/bradd
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Video Games