For the last few years, I've been playing sporadic games of Dungeons and
Dragons (DnD) with some friends from work. Lately I've even been bothering to
read enough to know what I'm doing, including asking questions
on an internet forum. Today
(2009/Nov/22) I stumbled on
a link to an on-line test
that purports to map one's real-world characteristics onto DnD's model of
reality. The first time I did it, I aimed to be as faithful to truth as I
could; later, I threw in some wilful humility and tried again. The results
were largely similar, aside from the ability scores (see below, second column
of score values). Naturally, all such tests (and their results) should be
read with tongue in cheek, but it's still amusing to see what it makes of me:
so here's the results it gave for me (with the HTML cleaned up – the
original is of the school of web-writing that thinks it makes sense to specify
font and where to break lines, rather than semantic mark-up):
I am a
True
Neutral Human Wizard/Sorcerer (4th/3rd Level)
A true neutral character does what seems to be a good
idea. He doesn't feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good
vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most true neutral characters exhibit a lack of
conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character
thinks of good as better than evil – after all, he would rather have
good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, he's not personally
committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way.
Some true neutral characters, on the other hand, commit themselves
philosophically to neutrality. They see good, evil, law, and chaos as
prejudices and dangerous extremes. They advocate the middle way of neutrality
as the best, most balanced road in the long run.
True neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you act
naturally, without prejudice or compulsion. However, true neutral can be a
dangerous alignment because it represents apathy, indifference, and a lack of
conviction.
Humans are the most adaptable of the common races. Short generations and a
penchant for migration and conquest have made them physically diverse as
well. Humans are often unorthodox in their dress, sporting unusual
hairstyles, fanciful clothes, tattoos, and the like.
Wizards are arcane spellcasters who depend on intensive study to create their
magic. To wizards, magic is not a talent but a difficult, rewarding
art. When they are prepared for battle, wizards can use their spells to
devastating effect. When caught by surprise, they are vulnerable. The
wizard's strength is her spells, everything else is secondary. She learns new
spells as she experiments and grows in experience, and she can also learn them
from other wizards. In addition, over time a wizard learns to manipulate her
spells so they go farther, work better, or are improved in some other way. A
wizard can call a familiar – a small, magical, animal companion that
serves her. With a high Intelligence, wizards are capable of casting very
high levels of spells.
Sorcerers are arcane spellcasters who manipulate magic energy with imagination
and talent rather than studious discipline. They have no books, no mentors,
no theories – just raw power that they direct at will. Sorcerers know
fewer spells than wizards do and acquire them more slowly, but they can cast
individual spells more often and have no need to prepare their incantations
ahead of time. Also unlike wizards, sorcerers cannot specialize in a school
of magic. Since sorcerers gain their powers without undergoing the years of
rigorous study that wizards go through, they have more time to learn fighting
skills and are proficient with simple weapons. Charisma is very important for
sorcerers; the higher their value in this ability, the higher the spell level
they can cast.
within the Neutral alignment, a discernible bias towards Law (my
scores for Law equalled those for Neutral, with Chaos trailing only three
points behind) and a strong bias for Good (one point behind Neutral) over Evil
(zero points on its own, fifteen behind Neutral otherwise); but the Law
vs. Chaos bias dropped away when I forced some humility;
on race, halfling and elf (at 12) were just one point behind human (at
13); extra humility dropped elf down by two more points, but still left
halfling a close second;
on class (which wasn't affected by humility), Druid and Fighter were
the only other classes with positive scores, at half the score (four) of
Sorcerer and Wizard; aside from Ranger (score zero), all others were negative
– I am emphatically not a Paladin !
This puts me at seventh level,
which Justin
Alexander's analysis puts beyond the range (up to level five) of
real-world actual level advancement; then again, many dispute Justin's
level-analysis as being too narrow. I'd also fall well outside the norm on my
ability scores (even when erring on the side of humility), on which Justin's
analysis is relatively orthodox. Oddly enough, though, it's the strength and
constitution that I'd consider most flagrantly high: I doubt I'm above average
(ten) – and wouldn't be at all surprised if I'm below – on
either. After all, I'm middle-aged: that incurs a −1 penalty to
Strength, Dexterity and Constitution (while granting a +1 bonus to the other
three). Still, I suppose the given ability scores include whatever
ability score bonus I chose to take at level four; so, presumably, I took that
bonus in strength or constitution. Anyway, remember not to take this too
seriously !
Post Script: as noted above, a little wilful
humility made a significant difference to the results; and I've tried the test
several times since then, with diverse results. It's quite noticeable that my
character class is relatively highly variable, and my ability scores
moderately variable, while my alignment (evenly distributed on the law-chaos
axis, usually neutral; emphatically non-evil but evenly split between neutral
and good) is fairly constant. I've now (2011/August)
moved the results of sporadic
repeats of the test to a page of their own, as it's subject to on-going
updates and this page is meant to be a record of a though of a (now long-past)
moment, albeit I've sporadically filled in further details of it. The
following focuses on the Wizard 4 / Sorcerer 3 I first found, as described
above.
Implications
One simple result is that, as both sorcerer and wizard, with a mediocre
constitution, I gain hit points very slowly: 1d4 per level. At seventh level
I can expect that to have clocked up 19 hit points, give or take about
three.
Convention: ability scores are normally referred to by their
Capitalized name truncated to three letters, thus Int for intelligence; I use
the lower-case equivalent for the associated modifier, obtained by subtracting
ten from the score and halving the result, rounding down (so a score of 9
would give modifier (9−10)/2 = −1); thus int for (15−10)/2
giving int = 2 or, in the humble analysis, int = 1; then again, with only
minor variation in my answers, int = 3 also came up.
I likewise only gain skill ranks slowly, at 3+int = 5 ranks per level,
including the bonus one I get for being human. Still, five ranks per level is
better than a slap in the face with a wet fish. If drawn from the lists for
Wizard and Sorcerer, I'd get those as full ranks; for any other skill I'd have
to spend two ranks to get one. Both Wizard and Sorcerer give me Concentration
(Con), Craft (Int), Profession (Wis) and Spellcraft (Int). For Wizard levels,
I also get Decipher Script (Int), and any flavour of Knowledge (Int); for
Sorcerer levels, Bluff (Cha) and Knowledge (arcana) (Int). Any way I approach
that, I'm surely geeky ! At seventh level, with int=2, I've had 50 skill
ranks to spend, no more than ten of which can be in any class skill, nor five
in any cross-class skill.
The combined effects of both classes give me a base attack bonus (BAB) of
+3, along with base save bonuses of +2 for Fortitude and Reflex saves and +7
for Will saves. My relevant ability scores adjust those to Fortitude +2+con =
+2, Reflex +2+dex= +5 and Will +7+wis = +9. I gained an ability score point
at level four, which I presume to have been included in the scores above; I'll
gain another at level eight. My initial int = 2 gave me two bonus languages,
on top of Common; as a human, I have free choice of (non-secret) languages for
these. Perhaps Elven and Halfling; maybe substitute Draconic or Sylvan for
one of those.
Either class gives
me a
familiar; and I'm only allowed one. Both classes are poor on Fortitude
and Reflex saves, making rat and weasel good candidates. They're both species
I can feel comfortable around, although I'd generally have preferred cat
– but moving silently really isn't something I see myself caring so much
about, as compared to coping with nasty experiences in combat. Fortitude
saves are helped by my poor con = 0, whereas Reflex saves are helped by my
excellent dex = 3; so a
rat is the better choice, as it grants me a +2 bonus to my Fortitude
checks. It'll have about nine hit points (half mine; far better than the one
it has naturally) and an intelligence of nine (two plus my seven relevant
levels); I have an empathic link to it (granting some sense of what it's
experiencing and enabling me to direct its actions), can share spells with it
(I can make spells I cast on myself affect the rat, too) and am more alert
(gain a +2 bonus on Listen and Spot checks) whenever it's within arm's reach
of me. For its saving throws, my rat gets base bonus +2 on Fortitude and
Reflex (its natural bonus or, equally, mine) and +7 on Will saves (shared from
me) and has Improved Evasion, meaning it gets off lightly from trouble that
would need a Reflex save (and its got dex = 2 helping it make those saves
anyway). It can deliver touch spells on my behalf; can converse (to the
extent feasible with each party's intelligence) both with me and with other
rodents; and gains a +4 bonus to natural armour – all thanks to being my
familiar.
Neither class gives me proficiency with shields or armour; and using
either would impede my ability to cast spells. Sorcerer gives me proficiency
with all simple weapons; this category includes every weapon with which
Wizards are proficient. Starting out as a long-boned Wizard, without much
strength, I'd likely chose dagger and quarterstaff; I'd at least have some
practice with a light crossbow, and might even own one. As Sorcerer, I'd
likely have taken the time to practice with darts and javelins, and might even
own some darts, but probably no (relatively heavy) javelins. My dexterity is
good, so ranged attacks would make sense; and it may be worth my while to take
the Weapon
Finesse feat for use with the dagger (and possibly some other light
weapon, or a rapier, if I can afford to spend a feat on proficiency with
it). The quarterstaff is a double-ended weapon, making
the Two-Weapon
Fighting feat possibly worth having. Still, there are probably better
feats for an arcane caster to take.
Speaking of feats,
at first level a Wizard
gets Scribe
Scroll as a bonus feat and being human gets me another bonus feat. I also
get one feat in the normal course of events at each of levels three and six,
with another to come at level nine; and my next Wizard level (fifth) will get
me another bonus feat. So I've got three feats to chose, on top of Scribe
Scroll, and shall need to chose another two reasonably soon.
For further details of what feats, skills and spells might make sense,
I've now (2011/August) created a
separate page, so that this one can settle into obscurity as a record of
the thoughts of the moment of its origin.
True
Neutral Human Wizard/Sorcerer (4th/3rd Level)
