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)
- Ability Scores
- True Neutral
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.
- Primary Class
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.
- Secondary Class
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.
Find out What Kind of Dungeons and Dragons Character Would You Be?, courtesy of Easydamus (e-mail).
The full gory details of the results also showed:
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.
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.Written by Eddy.