User talk:Spazalicious Chaos/Weaponized Anthropologist (3.5e Prestige Class)

Ratings

	ThunderGod Cid opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	Echoing what others have said as far as what the issues with it are, especially since changes (assuming any could be made, which isn't a sure thing at this juncture) have not been forthcoming.

	Leziad opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	Horrible

Eiji-kun opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.

This is somewhat irrelevant since the author is no longer here, but this class is really something. Something bad. It's less the mechanics (though they need work) but more the fact this is Hitler: The Class. I'm not the most PC person, but damn man. Damn. Anyway, even if you're ok with being a Nazi, the class doesn't work. D&D is a combat based game, and this doesn't help you in any regards with that. A waste of 5 levels to improve social abilities you can RP out yourself.

	MisterSinister opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	You know how they say practice makes perfect? This class demonstrates that this also applies to abject failure, as it manages to get the rules wrong in its very first ability. I'm not even going to read further - I have little enough sanity left. Community Shithole's too good for this piece of crap.

Balance

The only thing about it that's unquantifiable is the cohort. Everything else here is somewhat interesting, if rough, plot abilities. The lack of actual combat abilities makes me sad though, even if it is intentional. It seems like leaving off suggestion, fascinate, or charm monster like abilities is a wasted opportunity to make a class that turns people against each other in every circumstance, not just when it has lots of free time and some sort of end goal. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 22:32, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

This is actually a somewhat fascinating class, although I've got to say that Tokenism, which is probably the centerpiece, suffers by relying on the disappointing Diplomacy rules. Reprogramming is sort of cool, but it doesn't seem likely to ever be important, except maybe for the Decipher Script one. The Cohort is indeed most unquantifiable, and would probably be better off replaced with more followers.

Is there a justification for why the age of the race is important? Do 22 year old Elans really have the genetically superior look about them? --Foxwarrior 23:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

@Tarkis- I wanted this class to have nothing but mundane and infinitely useable abilities precisely so it could do unreapirable damage to the world around it. If I gave it suprnatural or spell-like abilities, then the damage would have quick fixes- remove cure, antimagic, counter spelling, etc. If the abilities are mudane, you have to fix the damage creatively and painstakingly, if it can be fixed at all.

@Foxwarrior- Reprograming was the best way mechanically I could think of to destroy someones cultural identity, which is what that ability is about. Think D&D stockholm syndrome- you get kidnapped by drow, you spend a week being tortured by them, and you come back forgeting what human norms are, how to interact in human society, maybe even forgeting the human language. If there is a better way to do that in a mechanical sense, let me know.

As for race age, yes. The more long lived a race is, the more solid it's culture should be. Could you really say that warping a dragons mind and sense of cultural identity should be as easy as warping an orc? I'd say no.--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 01:33, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I get that. I guess my question is why not both? Why not the quick, but ultimately temporary, social abuse setup in addition to the longer setup and thus harder to correct abilities? Is there some reason it can't or shouldn't have both?

On reprogramming, you should probably add the ability to replace their default attitudes towards others and their default values on top of just deleting things if you want to better represent stockholm. It's not just removal, it's replacement. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 01:46, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

So the cultural identity of a 30 year old (almost keeling over from age) gnoll is generally less developed than that of a 4 year old dragon? Is this some sort of "respect for one's elders" method of determining cultural solidity (in which case one would use the ages of the elders of the society, if one were being overly specific and complicated)?

I'm pretty sure Stockholm syndrome has more to do with developing emotional ties to one's enemies ("capture bonding") than with forgetting things.

If you're looking for a slightly more mundane set of combat talking abilities than suggestion or dominate person, I've done a bit of research on that: The Eloquent Speech Discipline. --Foxwarrior 01:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

@Tarkis- My reason for not wanting both is because magic is so commonin most D&D worlds that magic just isn't scary, and I want this class to be really scary. A BBEG casting compulsion on the party is for the most part expected and rather expected and yawn worthy as a tactic, but having your character gone for a week and coming back with entire sets of stats just gone is terrifying, especially to players who have never experienced that. As for the suggestion, do you think that would be Diplomacy or Intimidate, as I think the doubling up on removing KR is unnessary.

@Fox- Here is how I see it- lets say that you are an elf child, no more than 50 years old. Most of the people you know talk about the rise and fall of kingdoms as an inevitable outcome of lesser creatures trying to be like you, and that your people have history and traditions stretching backto a time when humans were still in trees flinging literal shit at one another. Then some human comes along, ties you up and tells you that your race is inferior. Even if he is doing his job right, it would still take a bit longer for you to break than the orc kid next to you, who comes from such short lived beings that they regularly have to rediscover forging because the last orc to figure it out died in a raid a few years back.--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 05:38, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Play it Straight Hitler

"...This class is an answers to the indisputable fact the D&D played straight is racist. It is a game that encourages the killing of other sentient creatures because they look funny." -- SC. I love this. Can I just say that. It tells me so much about this class and it's author. I was seriously going to sit down and examine this class in detail until I read this. Then I realized how ridiculous that would be given the author's unique perspective and rainbow-mixing cultural bias of the meta-game in general. I would be insane to spend one more moment just looking at the text on the articles page. Instead I will simply shake my head and shun the author from hence forth into oblivion. ...Wow. ...Just, wow. --Jay Freedman 19:09, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

It is also why I never play D&D straight. Straight D&D is a game that cannot sustain it's core ideal- mercenaries going into bunkers and killing the residents that look different. And it's dumb. That is why homebrew, I'd argue, is essential to playing 3.5, otherwise the game falls apart fast.--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 05:27, 27 June 2012 (UTC)