Talk:Perryn (3.5e NPC)
From D&D Wiki
I HAVE READ THE ULTIMATE MONK THREAD AND WAS INSPIRED TO START MY TALK PAGE BEFORE SOMEONE ELSE DOES. ENJOY.
For those who are reading this page, know this: Perryn was intended to be a munchkin character, and I believe I may have failed. Here's what I mean:
I previously ran the Golden Tower campaign and had a guy who was notorious for power-gaming. He would rather have his PC run about almost naked and spend all his money on a magic weapon. The character he wanted to play in my campaign was Aybarra, a battle dancer (DRAGON Compendium vol. 1., pg. 26.) His thing was to trip bad guys and get an attack of opportunity every time they tried to get up. He brought that character into the Golden Tower campaign (my allowance) and he ended up fighting an enemy he could no longer trip and took damage every time he tried to trip that specific enemy (NOTE: not a boss monster.) As per the usual ass-hattery with power gamers, he decided to let that character die and wanted to make a new one. I allowed it; my mistake.
This time, he was going to be Perryn, a vigilante (Complete Adventurer, p. 85.) I told him that the campaign world is a desert world and most of what he was suggesting would not be possible (striking from the shadowy alleys, leaping from rooftops, etc.) He insisted on using the vigilante prestige class with a fullblade(Arms & Equipment Guide, p. 7)––go figure. So when he wanted to get into the group immediately, he was informed that the group was still traveling from a temple in the desert. He chose not to listen, and immediately balked at having to be stuck in the desert where he couldn't do anything. He soon left the game after that. I asked if I could use his PC in the game and asked him to update the character to level 10 and add dwarven pistols. He never got back to me, so I did it in a balanced way.
So much effort was put into this character to convey the idea of an overpowered fighter, while trying to make a balance. For instance, there are some people reading this that think with certain feats like Monkey Grip(Complete Warrior, p.103) or Wield Oversized Weapon(Complete Warrior, p. 153), Perryn could wield the fullblade one-handed...JUST LIKE GATTSU FROM BERSERUKU! !!! (NOTE: you have no idea how many times I have heard this as a player and DM/GM. It never works out for the person who says it. Sometimes they talk about Cloud or Sephiroth instead, but...) Unfortunately, you need two things to use the feat Wield Oversize Weapon(an EPIC feat): epic levels and the feat Monkey Grip (a prerequisite feat.) Perryn is not or was not any point an epic character (he's ECL 10), so he may not take the feat Wield Oversize Weapon.
On to the Monkey Grip feat. The feat clearly states you may use a weapon ONE size category larger than you with a -2 penalty to melee attacks with such a weapon. Perryn is a Medium-sized character. A fullblade from Arms & Equipment Guide is a Huge-sized weapon(which is TWO size categories larger than Medium). Thus, Perryn could not use the feat Monkey Grip to wield a fullblade one-handed at all. This is a common misconception I am making an effort to dispel. Hence, the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (fullblade) feat.
Substitute feats aside, I want everyone who reads this to do the requisite reading and follow the letter of the law not to advantage but to restriction. Because that's what rules do; they restrict. One more thing you should consider if you're thinking about using a fullblade to be just like GATTSU: a Large-sized greatsword deals 3d6 damage (compared to the fullblade's 2d8 damage) and a Medium-sized character can take the feat Monkey Grip to wield a Large-sized greatsword two-handed––not one-handed––without penalty. Now I'm guessing here, but a character can probably wield a Large-sized greatsword one-handed with a -6 total penalty (-4 proficiency, -2 Monkey Grip) to melee attacks made with that weapon. The evidence of the preceding paragraphs proves a fullblade is not the same as a Large-sized greatsword. The converse holds true: the evidence of the preceding paragraphs does not prove a fullblade is the same as a Large-sized greatsword, a common mistake made when reading the flavor text for the fullblade, which reads:
- A fullblade is also called an ogre's greatsword.
That alone would make--and has made--any interested parties think that a fullblade is a Large-sized greatsword, because it's named after a Large-sized creature (ogre) and Large-sized creatures tend to wield weapons made for them. This is not necessarily true; hence the special name fullblade for a different type of weapon.
I hope I could clear up any misconceptions and dissuade any power-gamers or munchkins from picking up a fullblade. I would also like to make clear that DM/GM understanding and/or rulings override how the rules go at times (see Dungeon Master's Guide, p. 18--at the top left), including the previous explanation.
--Gedren56 14:13, 26 January 2009 (MST)
Further clarification on wielding over-size weapons
Dear Reader: I initially started this thread to address the overemphasis on over-sized weapons from D&D 3.5 edition players and the misuse of the Monkey Grip feat. I have since decided to expand upon this thread because no one seems to take the hint. I bring you the story of a PC called Krogan Ganz, and his player "Flapjacks".
Krogan Ganz (N male goliath fighter 6) wields a greataxe two-handed. He has plans to improve his combat ability by learning how to use a greataxe in each hand. In other words, his player Flapjacks wants to take either Monkey Grip or Two-Weapon Fighting as soon as he can (optimally as a fighter feat at 8th level or as a character feat at 9th level.) With his Powerful Build racial ability (Races of Stone, p. 56), he can wield a weapon one size category larger without penalty. Flapjacks had hypothesized that if he can wield a greataxe in one hand with no problems as a goliath, he should be able to wield a greataxe in each hand without penalty. The problem lies in the penalties for Two Weapon Fighting (found on page 160 of the Player's Handbook.)
If Krogan wanted to use Two Weapon Fighting to achieve the effect of attacking with a greataxe in each hand, he would take -4 to attack to his primary hand and his off hand. A greataxe is not a light weapon for a Medium creature with the Powerful Build ability (it's a one-handed weapon), thus he will never get his two weapon fighting penalties to -2 when using greataxes UNLESS he also takes Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting (Complete Adventurer, p. 111). Flapjacks asked if it would be OK if he used Large-sized battle axes instead. I had to inform him that a Large battle axe [a one-handed weapon for a Large creature] is a greataxe to a Medium creature. Yes, anyone could do it with the Powerful Build ability, but there's an additional problem, specific to Flapjacks, which is why I told him that he would not be allowed to do it...
Flapjacks can't play D&D. He told us when he joined the game that he had been playing for 10 years (when he joined our group, he was 26, making him 16 when he started playing D&D.) Imagine my surprise when he could not figure out a fighter's base attack bonus. I later found out this 10-year veteran of the game hadn't really read the Player's Handbook. Strangely enough, we haven't kicked him out. Group fault, I admit.
My point about not allowing him to make the move from a single weapon fighter to a two-weapon fighter is his lack of retention concerning almost every single aspect of D&D; from social interaction with NPCs and other party members, to concepts such as integers and why one should be quiet while the DM speaks. He might have ADD, he might have Asperger's; he might be a mentally handicapped person in disguise. Since he cannot balance a single weapon fighting style, imagine the madness his character sheet will be once he starts two-weapon fighting, let alone with dissimilar magic bonuses on each individual weapon (i.e., a +2 greatsword and a +1 greataxe.) You may look at that example and say, "well that's EASY", and I would reply "yeah...FOR YOU" because of what may be a learning disability or him just being a dumbass.
--Gedren56 22:06, 7 December 2009 (MST)