Talk:Dragoman

I thought sneak attack was a weird class ability for a diplomat/translator. Here are some other suggestions from the complete adventurer:

Skill Mastery - So confident in the use of certain skills that he can take 10 even stress or distraction would normally present it. This feature is pretty popular, and is usually around 3 skills, although some give much more. I might suggest diplomacy and sense motive, with maybe one of: listen, bluff, intimidate.

Sustaining Presence - Can call upon his force of personality to stay alive in tense or dangerous situations, adding charisma bonus to concentration checks and fortitude saves. Other variants follow this forumula: apply stat bonus to 1 save and 1 skill.

Bardic Lore - Can call upon extensive background knowledge of history and culture gleaned from travel, study, and socializing to recall legends or information regarding various topics. Based on Dragoman level, and stacks with any previous version of the skill.

Inspire Competence - An ally within 30 feet who can see and hear Dragoman get a +2/3 bonus to skill checks using a specific skill. Like a bard ability, but lets the Dragoman strengthen his allies diplomacy skills.

---

Bardic Lore is already there! 75.64.111.120 19:26, 1 February 2009 (EST)

Matt: Does Skill Mastery taking a 10 still require 10 times as long? 75.64.111.120 19:39, 1 February 2009 (EST)

---

Taking 10 doesn't take extra time--its just settling for the average in a low-stress situation. Taking 20 takes 20 times as long as a normal skill check, and assumes you are trying over and over until you roll a 20.

You should add Knowledge (Geography) to the list of class skills. Do hide, move silently, slight of hand, and use rope have a flavor reason for being there? Or are they just there so this class isn't a complete wash on combat skills? Jump, swim, craft, and profession I know are almost gimmies for all classes, but these others seem a little odd.

--Msallen 18:47, 2 February 2009 (EST)

---

That sounds about right, but they're not organs of state, so an indivudal dragoman can be honest or rather shady and sly. Detarame 19:04, 6 February 2009 (EST)

• Ahh, good to know! Ok, glad that clears up taking a 10. Hide, Slight of Hand, and Move Silently are very much urban based skills. After all, not ALL Dragomen are upstanding and honest guides, many are frauds and hucksters who use their knowledge of the cities to defraud people. Knowledge Geo was a definite oversight. 96.4.191.21 13:51, 6 February 2009 (EST)
• Oh, and as any sailor or boy scout ought to be able to tell you, the ability to tie knots is super useful, like for tying down pack animals and such, but I'll go ahead and excise it anyway. The snares and such it is commonly associated with don't make much sense, I agree. 96.4.191.21 13:52, 6 February 2009 (EST)

---

Got it. I didn't really know what a Dragoman was, so I was just going on the wikipedia article that describes it as a translator and mediator. With the huckster bit it makes a lot more sense --Msallen 15:04, 6 February 2009 (EST)

Given these skills, do we think disguise should be there? I ask mostly for completely selfish reasons, of course. --Msallen

No, we do not. -gm

---

Re: The Level 5 abilities, do the targets know if someone attempted to Charm or Confuse them if the Dragoman fails? Also, does it make sense for the DC not to be modified by Will Save, or similarly, should the DC be shifted over to the target and made into a Will Save modified by the pertinent ability? -Slitherrr

I read it as a Charm Person spell with the DC and duration specified by the special ability. Which would involve a will save, right? --Msallen

Yeah, you're right, that's a brain fart on my part. -Slitherrr

Is the 1st level ability intentionally untyped? Would it stack with, say, a breastplate of command? --Msallen

Seems like that would make it pretty dad-gum powerful. Of course, it's already pretty dad-gum powerful. In fact, as it's worded, it might make an insane synergy for Sorcerers/Wizards--I'd have to check the Reference, though. -Slitherrr

What sort of synergy bonuses are you thinking? It only applies to skill checks as its worded now... not any sort of class feature like spell DCs, or even animal empathy checks. --Msallen

"Grants a +3 on charisma checks and charisma-based skill checks" doesn't sound like just skills to me. I just don't know what else uses Charisma that is considered a check--it certainly wouldn't add to things like base spells, but I'm thinking that there are spell effects that would get a boost from this (not sure, though). Either way, the way it is currently worded very explicitly states that more than just skill checks are affected, but in a non-specific way. Whether or not that is a game-breaking super-synergy situation would take some crawling through docs to determine.

Also, just to note, even if it were just skills, Animal Empathy would be included because it "functions just like a Diplomacy check".

-Slitherrr

Duh. Shows my attention to detail. I had this chat with GM a while back. I guess the next question is *should* it only be skill checks. Natually, I would be happy to have it apply to my animal empathy checks, but is that broken? Breastplate of command is only skill checks, I believe. --Msallen

Oh, also... I read that animal empathy comment as "uses the diplomacy table", but not that it was considered a skill. If we read it that it does, would that set animal empathy apart from something like Legend Lore (bard/dragoman ability).

Yeah, I don't mind it being on animal empathy checks. I'm far more concerned with it being used for UMD checks. -gm

That throws another wrench into the works. Dunno when I'll get some time to crawl through and look for more stuff, but this is worth looking into, OR worth ignoring completely and hoping it never comes up (either one works). -Slitherrr

Are you also OK on it potentially applying to other class features? I don't have the rules in front of me at work, but wouldn't it affect the Legend Lore ability, and some others as well? --Msallen

Good point and good question. I'd have to do a case by case basis, but as written it says "skill checks and ability checks," both of which have pretty delineated definitions in the SRD. Legend Lore, although your ability score factors in, is not an "ability check." It is a "Legend Lore Check" which = Relevant Stat + Bard (Or Dragoman, or Both, since they would stack for LL). Similarly, even though a cleric's turning check involves Charisma, it is not a "charisma check." This game should be called JD&D. -gm

Well, I don't really mind it being universally stacking because it is, quite literally, a completely hopeless class in combat, which is - let's face it - almost the entire measure of advancement for a class. That's worth quite a lot of points in my book, almost - maybe - enough to overlook the issues with UMD. I must admit, however, that I love UMD, and I'm almost always inclined in its favor. I don't think the skills the class boosts are unbalancing enough to a campaign to really fret over. Until it happens, of course, but I'm pretty confident the ceiling on diplomancer in my world is reasonable enough that dragomancer won't be the straw. If it did get epic too soon, well, then people start treating you like saurmon : kill him before he has a chance to speak. At that point, any budding diplomancer *coughcough* is itching for a reroll anyway. -gm

I haven't used diplomacy in combat once! Usually because, if they haven't heeded my wisdom and avoided the fight, I want them all to end up dead anyways ;) --Msallen

heh, also, it takes one minute of conversation to trigger a diplomacy check. That's ten rounds. Now, while it's a fair bet that your opponents are going to ignore the guy doing nothing but running his mouth in the middle of a conflict, after ten rounds of combat, it's is probably decided anyway.

The one big itch that D&D has never been able to fully scratch is the one that comes from its origins as a tactical minis game. It's my major beef with the system. -Slitherrr

Very, very true, but I do think the 3.5e skills system was kind of a godsend. -gm

Did you want it to be more tactical minis, or less? I assume the former, since its not much of a tactics game. 4e is must more about tactics/minis--you should look at it --Msallen

Less! It is so much of a tactics game, since, like Jonesy mentioned above, all the advancement is based around battle. The hardest guidelines in the game for treasure and XP game all center around defeating opponents--there are some recommendations for other things, but they're not nearly as clearly delineated. D&D 3.5e was basically D&D trying to back off from the mini thing--D&D 4e was them deciding they weren't fooling anyone, so they might as well focus on what they've always been good at. If it weren't for the large number of 3.5e players who were/are also my friends (and the fact that almost all White Wolf players are furries, no offense to any anthropomorphs who may inhabit this wiki), I'd be knee-deep in something (anything!) else, where the mechanics are better at supporting more of the "OK, you do this" mentality, rather than encouraging (even requiring, for the sake of survival) me to sit and cross-reference every decision for balance and mechanics compatibility. -Slitherrr

Oooo... I see. Yeah, you should be playing Call of Cthulhu/Gumshoe/World of Darkness, you damn furry hippie. I always felt 3.5 was some sort of weak hybrid... a skill system made for a tactics game, and a combat system that lacked tactical options :| Its really my favorite game just because it tries to do both, and doesn't totally fail at either! --Msallen

All that said, though, I don't think 3.5 was any less of a mini/tactics game than 2, it just added a lot more flexibility to the skill/class system so you can more effective "do anything". I actually think 3.5 was also better defined in terms of rules for tactics/mini gaming than 2 was, wasn't it? --Msallen

Probably right, I'm just prejudiced. And I like 3.5e fine, as is evidenced by my obsession, it would just be nice to have a Shadowrun game every once in a while.

Also, to be perfectly clear, I am not a furry. Since anthropomorph is another word for furry, the "apologies to any...", was aimed at placating any furries who might be around. Because you never know.

By way of explanation, I offer that a group I hung out with in college had a lot of furry crossover. It was... strange. -70.188.40.37

That's exactly what a closeted furry would say!

My grad school roommates were obsessed with furries. When I first moved in, I told all my friends that they were furries. After a while, I started to introduce them to everyone, and they started to make friends with my friends. Years later, we learned, much to my roommates' horror, that many of them still thought they were furries.

That is my furry story. --Msallen

Wow, you finally got a new story! I'm proud of you! -gm

I get tons of new stories! Its just if they are not better than the old stories, I just tell the old ones again ;) --Msallen