Why does the True Believer feat exist?

[MopKnight]

I look at it the other way, Thids. My view is that I take feats that represent my character and either reinforce or enhance their roleplay. I don't take "Leadership" and assume that anyone will acknowledge it. I take Leadership as an enhancement of their roleplay and as a method of flagging to multiple DMs the direction that the character has taken. I mean, for example, Reine is a character that came onto the server and spent most of her first month and a half mopping the floors of a temple. I did write her as a militaristic character of sorts, but it has become her major, rather than her minor quality.

Similarly, I have built a mage pyromaniac around being able to explode things and having a brutal, cold intelligence.

I hope that explains my view

[Ithilan]

I hate that this seemingly devolved into an argument about powerbuilding and find that rather unfortunate.

Well isnt that the essence of it? All ive read so far is people ranting over they had spend a feat for the purpose of obtaining a PrC and it gave them no baseline benefit. That to me seems extremely focussed on your characters actual abbilities and not so much on the concept it self.

Now im no saint, I got plenty of powerbuild characters. But I preffer building a character concept and then figuring out what build is ideal to portray this concept. So the character dictates the build and it is not the build that dictates the character. And this feat is actually attractive to several such concepts since we are told to play our character sheets, I put thought into the feats I take not only for the purpose of my characters strength, but also that it supports the identity of my roleplaying concept and therefor with my latest character it is extremely dictated by that how I allocate both feats and skill points.

If people didnt have that "power gaming" thought poking at the back of their head, that this feat is redundant and does nothing for their character that they couldnt portray through roleplay, I think its fairly obvious powerbuilding is a rather obvious or subconscious factor.

[Lag]

Silly me, I seemed to have forgotten that disagreeing with something lumps be in with the chaff. Carry on. I have nothing more to say. My subconscious powergaming self is getting the better of me.

[mrm3ntalist]

How is it powergaming when you say that a feat does nothing - and it actually does nothing ?
How would it mess with your RP, your concept, if instead of doing nothing it was changed to provide some mechanics in accordance to its description?
If people are fine with feats that do nothing lets have more... Lets stop wasting any QC/Dev time and implement Solar Channeler, Monk of the Long Death etc as PRCs that do nothing... Lets forget mechanics and only RP

[thids]

I look at it the other way, Thids. My view is that I take feats that represent my character and either reinforce or enhance their roleplay. I don't take "Leadership" and assume that anyone will acknowledge it. I take Leadership as an enhancement of their roleplay and as a method of flagging to multiple DMs the direction that the character has taken. I mean, for example, Reine is a character that came onto the server and spent most of her first month and a half mopping the floors of a temple. I did write her as a militaristic character of sorts, but it has become her major, rather than her minor quality.

Similarly, I have built a mage pyromaniac around being able to explode things and having a brutal, cold intelligence.

I hope that explains my view

I understood your side very well, I was pointing you to view the situation from a different perspective And even though I was sarcastic in my post, I know perfectly well that there are people who would take "flawless grammar" feat if it was available I just find that going to the extremes. Attributes should define your character primarily, skills should do it somewhat as well. But the rest should be up to the roleplay of the player and the boundaries that they set for themselves in their character concept (character biography). If picking feats like Leadership and True Believer makes someone happy, then by all means they should pick them. As long as it's not impacting the roleplay of other people. Similar example would be the imp quest. If people don't want to do that quest because they think it solidifies their good aligned character concept, who am I to force them to do it because they are missing out on 750 free xp every week? However they also have no right to judge others who do that quest.

If people didnt have that "power gaming" thought poking at the back of their head, that this feat is redundant and does nothing for their character that they couldnt portray through roleplay, I think its fairly obvious powerbuilding is a rather obvious or subconscious factor.

That is not true, and it's a cheap deflection method instead of counter arguments. If people were concerned about powerbuilding and pvp so much, you would see threads about all those "useless" skills that do nothing mechanically.

[Ithilan]

Either im misinterped or came across wrongly, I didnt mean to accuse you or anyone else of power building in general, which for the record I dont see anything wrong in.

But I just dont see an issue with a feat such as this, which to me empowers a roleplaying concept and from what I can read people want a baseline profit from it. Im not opposed to the idea, I just dont understand what is wrong with commiting to a feat that empowers your RP concept through the character sheet.

Someone said earlier in this thread that you could easilly roleplay this aspect of your character without taking the feat and though that is right, shouldnt we also be cautious with that stance? We can roleplay pretty much anything imaginable but theres also the point of roleplaying things correctly. I could go on to roleplay an aristocrat with absolutely hopeless intelligence and wisdom modifiers and noone would know, but it would be wrong.

So its a fine line if you ask me and I dont see an issue with a feat such as this.

If there were alternatives to the background feats (as is discussed elsewhere) that would also empower the character concept, id chose that too. Not for statlines to be better, skills or any such things, but to more accurately have my character sheet give an indication of who my character is, if that makes any sense.

Sorry for any offense given.

[MopKnight]

I've got some other thoughts for you to consider.

There is a justification implicit to DnD which is that when you set up your character, your stats represent the character you intend on playing. That is why, very deliberately, a character with 10 intelligence is assumed to be the average. Now, how you interpret that average is entirely up to you, but for me, a character with 10s in everything is good at something they put their mind to, but not naturally capable of anything exceptional except in extreme occasions or as a result of training they have achieved.

It is therefore implicit in the rules of DnD that character power derived from charisma or intelligence should be represented in those stats and then roleplayed as a result of the choices made in the characters. Which means a character with 10 intelligence probably won't derive Maxwells equations. This breaks down when you start to get into the 20s and 30s - there simply aren't that many clever people around. More importantly, they are the interface through which the DM and their avatars interact with your character.

The problem with this is of course very simple. Firstly, rolls of 20 bias characters far too much on low scores. Yes, there are moments when profoundly stupid people have great ideas, but the numerical bias towards the roll is too great. The first works well for combat - subtle biases occur on a frequent enough basis that the randomness in the system is effectively washed out. However, intelligence, charisma and wisdom checks are rare enough that the outliers become an issue.

Secondly, the system becomes unstable when high scores overly dominate the field. There is no one on this server capable of playing a character with 40 intelligence. 40 intelligence is bordering on omniscient. It makes difficulty checks meaningless.

So how then do we interpret these values? Do we bother? Are they just a function of class design? If so, do we ignore 6 intelligence warriors speaking with precise elocution while using magical devices?

I don't really ask this as a closed question. I'd like others opinions on it. Despite the problems I have mentioned, I still believe in roleplaying my character sheet.

[Ithilan]

So how then do we interpret these values? Do we bother? Are they just a function of class design? If so, do we ignore 6 intelligence warriors speaking with precise elocution while using magical devices?

I don't really ask this as a closed question. I'd like others opinions on it. Despite the problems I have mentioned, I still believe in roleplaying my character sheet.

Well thats what im concerned about, suddenly people stop playing their character sheets because they'd rather want Expose Weakness than True Beliver, but they are the protege of their diety in RP meanwhile

But it seems to make people really sensitive when I ask why there has to be a raw benefit to this feat, other than the obvious requirement for PrCs that I think heavilly rely on roleplay and thus rightfully would demand this feat tax. I do agree with the fact that it would gain a lot value from having a specific effect that could better be incorporated in roleplaying scenarios, such a cast bless X times per rest or similiar effects as Lag brought up a few times.

[thids]

MopKnight What you describe is a perfect example of why D&D 3rd edition (3.5) is not a very good system and is completely unfit for epic levels. Put that together with a wizard who goes from 18 intelligence to 40 in the matter of months on the server and the ridiculousness grows exponentially. Best answer is probably, find a way to compromise and work with the players you roleplay with?


I mean, here's an example:
Two players are roleplaying. Player A is playing a character with 40 intelligence (basically godhood in terms of attributes) and player B is playing a character with 16 intelligence (a quite intelligent character). Player A can't roleplay their 40 intelligence, best they can pull off with their roleplay comes out as moderately intelligent character. Player B can roleplay their 16 intelligence well enough though. Should Player B be forced to dumb down their character in order to accommodate Player A?


To put it in True Believer feat terms:

Player A and Player B roleplay their devout characters of the same god. Player A roleplays a moderately devout character, to the best of their ability, and has taken True Believer feat. Player B roleplays a zealot of the most devout kind, delivering roleplay fit for such a character but has not taken True Believer feat. Should Player B tone down their roleplay to accommodate Player A? Is Player A's character more devout than Player B's character just because they took a feat?

[Ithilan]

Well of course theres some mechanical issues and you do make two very good examples Thids. I think theres an individual self-criticism process that should occur some time in the process of character development as well, though that might come of rather elitist, dont get me wrong.

I think people should be entitled to play what they think is fun so long as its within the rules and not necesarilly dependant on their abbilities as a roleplayer. Personally ive avoided playing certain character concepts though I find them extremely fun, because I think id lack imagination and a comprehensible concept for others in such roles. But lets not go down that road, sorry .

[grymhild]

I just wanted to voice my support of a few things things that I strongly agree with (and if something you said didn't make this list, it doesn't mean than I disagree, its just that I'm on my phone and am running out of time.)

Everyone should be expected to RP the classes they take, not just Red Wizards or Shadow Adepts.

+1

I get what you're saying, it's just that every class & race has an impact on lore and can be very immersion breaking if done poorly.

Hidden: show

There is no reason Red Wizard should be app only and not Stormlord/Silverstar/Morninglord/Harper Agent or even Paladin/Druid/Favored Soul, all of which have heavy RP and lore implications.

Ever run into a Paladin of the Torm knowingly traveling with a Banite on a regular basis? I have and that is just as damaging to lore as a clueless Red Wizard. Even making a Good Drow/Grey Orc or Evil Aasimar should be app only if we are talking about caretaking lore.

Or instead we could simply expect everyone to RP the classes/races they take and DM's can hand out alignment adjustments or even suggestions/warnings as appropriate. And just because most take the optimal path does NOT mean we should get a free pass to ignore the RP attached to that path.

Hidden: show

Random shadowdancer levels? Better have an explanation. 7 Dragonslayer in your wizard build? You better have dragon killing urges! Etc. You don't have to RP a full blown shadowdancer just because you're Wizard 27/shadowdancer 3 but you can't pretend those 3 levels don't exist either

+1

Personally I think that it goes both way. This isn't a one way street.

If I have a character with a low charisma, I should RP it.
But if I want a suave and well liked character, I should invest in charisma.


If I want to have a character that's really a True Believer, and nigh unshakable in their faith, then I pick the feat True Believer. That doesn't mean a paladin or cleric without the feat, is somehow less powerful or worthy of their class. Both paladins and clerics do have doubts and can fall from grace, - I'd even go as far as to say that it's only a very select fanatical few that are almost impossible to shake that are almost unheard of.

Our charactersheet helps define our character. But we, the player, define our charactersheet. So pick the feats and abilities you want, and that make sense to you and your concept.

If someone wants to pick True Believer, then that's their business. If someone would rather pick Luck of Heroes, then that's their business too.

I won't deny that I would love if feats like Leadership and True Believer made an impact on the roleplaying aspect of the game -

Hidden: show

and mayby they do or will. But for my part, I picked True Believer because it made sense for my character, and more importantly, because it made me feel happy about it.


I don't have any PRC's that requires it, it was picked after a DM plot where it made sense... But I don't mean to polish my halo here. I got at least one build that's so blatantly a powerbuild I can't hide it even if I tried. Some times I enjoy playing one, other times another.

At the end of the day that's what's important to me, that I enjoy it, and that's why I play - I think there should be room for both playstyles

+1

[
99 out of 100 players do this because there is no perceived or real benefit to doing otherwise.

Make that benefit apparent and you will find a lot of people taking feats that allow them to do things with DMs.

Hidden: show

I am a very rigid stat RPer - I play my characters charisma and intelligence to the letter in particular, as well as their range of interests. As an example, I considered RCRing Reine to take "Leadership" as well as True Believer purely to justify the advance of her particular type of roleplay.

However, if neither are taken seriously by the DMs in roleplay, it seems pointless to do so.

Then again I am in the minority on these kind of gaming issues. I am in favour of extensive build restriction and the nerfing of significant numbers of classes.

+1

---

are these rules"'laws" or "suggestions"?

GENERAL SERVER RULES (MUST READ)

– You are required to play what is on your Character Sheet. For example, no role-playing of another Race if it does not appear on your Character Sheet. In-character (IC) lying and misinformation about your Character's skills, profession and morality is fair and acceptable, but Role-play which does not reflect the Abilities, Feats and Skills that exist on your Character Sheet, is not acceptable.

[Rasael]

Its been explained before that you dont have to possess the feat in order to be a devoted believer. Its not a requirement for paladins and clerics after all.

It represents an extra degree or steadfastness of faith. And faith is its own reward, hence why it sucks mechanically. As it does in pnp dnd.

You could argue that true believer characters are zealots in their own fashion.

[metaquad4]

If you don't have the dodge feat, does that mean you are not permitted to RP dodging? Probably not.

If you don't have the toughness feat, does that mean you are not permitted to RP being physically tough even if you had a high CON? Probably not.

If you don't have the wild child feat, are you now allowed to RP having been a wild child? Probably not.

Can a bard without the artist feat not RP being an artist? Probably not.

Foreigner. Devout. Flirt. Bully. Bullheaded. Thug.

Heck, even not having knockdown but still rolling STR to knock someone over in RP is feasible.

Perhaps the RP your character sheet rule needs amending. But regardless of that, I don't think this is anything new, in terms of feats and "RP your character sheet". Its a fairly common sense rule, that was worded a little poorly. Probably put in to stop the "influx" of ice-demon-possessing-children-whilst-using-elf-as-a-race character types

(Another) Visible Edit: Oh! And worth bearing in mind...gender is not on the character sheet

[grunts]

Many good points in this thread! I agree with PrC's requiring pointless feats, my problem is the True Believer feats existence in general. True Believer & Leadership implies a greater degree of roleplay that the player did not actually earn through roleplay. If anything DM's should give these types of feats out for free as a reward to players who already RP a True Believer.

To have those feats as they are now is pointless because now you have to add a blank feat for every RP concept in the interest of fairness. Why only those two and not: Juggler, Gambler, Comedian, Spy, False Believer, Grand Janitor, Attractive Bar maid, Debater, Shoe Shiner, Marriage Counseler, etc, etc. Lol you get my point.

That said, I would totally be in favor of DM's having a huge list of feats like these and giving them out for notable roleplay.

[NeOmega]

That's exactly the thing. People are responding like those who hate the idea of this feat are part of this sub class of undesirables.

Let's stop the hyperbole.

There is no one on this server capable of playing a character with 40 intelligence.

Ahem... you mean besides NeOmega?

However they also have no right to judge others who do that quest.

If I see a paladin helping Grixen, or a druid stealing wyvern eggs... ..imma gonna judge. Jus sayin.