Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Bill Bisco: Average Adventurer 09-08-06, 12:39 PM	I find it rather ironic that I enjoy visiting Wizards.com very much, and jump for glee when seeing what all the people on the Optimization boards can come up with. I always make interesting , fun, and optimized builds when I'm a player, and I think I generally contribute a lot to the fun :) I also find it ironic that only rarely am I a player, and that most of the time people would rather that I DM. My players don't visit these boards (well one has about 2 times in the past), and they generally use only Core Stuff. I encourage them to look at my many books and try out some new interesting combos, but every time I encourage them to be Half-Ogre Trippers, Warlock/Scouts, or even Orcs instead of Half-Orcs, they usually just roll their eyes :rolleyes: . Haha. But, they're a good bunch of guys, and I like them all, and I would never want to punish them for not creating optimized characters. What's funny though, is when I'm making enemies, I also realize all the fun things that I can't have my PCs fight or else they'd be creamed. For instance, I think a team of Clerics would own my PCs. They'd be fighting great, and all the wounds they'd be doing would be for naught, not to mention the uses of summoned monsters, Divine Favor, Persisting ect. A cadre of Warlocks would own my PCs too. Most of them suck at ranged fighting, :P The warlocks would be flying in the air, and nearly all their attacks would hit. Some warlocks would use obscuring mist or whatever to stop the fight. A Couple of Wizards could do some Serious Harm. Take a Magic Missle Specialist with Arcane Thesis. Add some Fell Drain to the mix. Fireball everyone to death who doesn't have evasion.........and yeah they're toast I think :devil: Even rogues a couple of levels lower, I could make a real pain. Have them camoflaged into treetops and fire. Or, have them be on rooftops hidden, fire once, and then fall down. With my PCs Spot checks, they'd never knew what hit them or where it came from. So generally, I stick to Fighter types, and make challenges from there. Tonight though I'm gonna try something different. I'm gonna send against my Level 7 PCs (in two separate encounters), an ECL7 Thri-Kreen Master Thrower, and a Level 7 Druid pretty well optimized, and see how they both do. There may be some benefit to my players not being optimized, it will allow me to make Single BBEGs at the same numerical levels of the PCs that are a scary challenge. Anywho, does anyone have any similar experiences or situations?
PhaedrusXY 09-08-06, 12:48 PM	Just use lower level enemies, and fewer enemies, but add +1 or +2 to their CR when doling out XP because they're optimized. You'll get to have fun optimizing them, they'll still be a challenge to your PCs, but shouldn't overpower them. When I DM, I have to do the same thing, or I have to give the PCs an advantage somehow, like a defensible position + warning of the coming fight. Also, always try to give the PCs the option of retreating/regrouping, and if the enemy does defeat them, then have the enemy either capture them, or just leave them for dead (instead of finishing them off).
Zherog 09-08-06, 12:57 PM	What's funny though, is when I'm making enemies, I also realize all the fun things that I can't have my PCs fight or else they'd be creamed. I generally have the same problem. I do a few things. 1) Intentionally use "poor" builds. For example, the assassin sucks ass. It sucks even more when his Int mod is negative. Just last session, they were ambushed by a pair of assassins, one of whom had a 9 Int. 2) Design custom classes for them. Rather than having them pick and choose classes and prestige classes, find out what their concept is up front at the beginning of the campaign, then design a prestige class for them to meet that concept. This has worked quite well for my group - they got the flavor of the class they wanted, and I could slip in abilities that I felt were "balanced" for some of the stuff I'd throw at them. 3) As Phaedrus said, under-develop your bad guys. If they're level 10, optimize a CR 9 or even CR 8 baddie, and give them XP for one CR higher. 4) Give them magical goodies to help them out. Since you control what's available for them to acquire, you have a big impact on this one. If you find somebody has a fighter 9 and he's really stinking the joint up, have them fight a bad guy who has a super-cool awesometastic weapon that just happens to be the same type the fighter uses. If there's a wizard in your party, give him a chance to recover spellbooks that contain non-core spells that you think are cool or fun. And so on. I've even seen a DM give out custom magic items to cover up some weaknesses. I recall in one case a DM giving the rogue a pair of gloves that added a bonus to Disable Device and Open Lock, because the rogue wasn't well built and she was having trouble with those. 5) Use NPC levels in place of other classes. Rather than having them face a wizard, have them face an adept. Instead of facing off against a barbarian or whatever, have them face a guy with levels in warrior. You can either go with all NPC levels, or just one or two levels in an NPC class - which works for the given enemy. Now, the key is to mix all those together so your campaign continues to run smooth. Don't rely too heavily on any one fix, but instead blend them until your players really can't tell the difference.
Atirakis 09-08-06, 01:00 PM	Just keep wasting them over and over again till they get the point that they are going to optimize or die!
Solik 09-08-06, 02:19 PM	I'm having the same problem, sort of. The group I'm DMing for right now actually includes people who have powergamed in the past, but somehow, the way it all worked out, pretty much all the characters in this group are below average. What's worse, they don't even cover all the basics. The closest characters to a front-line fighter are the rogue/swashbuckler and the monk, both of whom get wasted by a fighter or a fighter-type monster. There's ONE pure magic user, and he's both arcane and divine; until he hits level 8 or so and has several theurge levels under his belt, he's going to be behind. As a result, the group has been getting mauled by fights that shouldn't be overly difficult. There's 5 of them, and their levels are 5 and 6. I sent four giant lizards at them (CR 4 each) and they got completely destroyed (none of the lizards went down). Yeah, I'm aware that four CR 4 creatures is EL 8, but one CR 4 creature is approximately equivalent to a level 4 character, there were only four of them, and there were 5 PCs all higher level, so it should have at least been a close fight. I also had to fudge die rolls early on in the adventure. I killed one of the PCs completely in two shots (arrow demon vs. wizard... not pretty) a few weeks ago. So yeah, I'm trying hard to tone down and/or customize the fights. I try to keep escape routes available (since this is really a skirmish-based party). I tried offering some tactical advice on playing skirmish groups (we'll see how that goes). I'm reducing the number of "fighter-types" they're pitted against (although it looks like a barbarian will be joining the group soon, which should give them a much-needed boost). I'm also trying to focus a little more on challenges other than combat (room-based multi-tier traps, puzzles, etc). My next step will be to tailor some treasure drops to them to give them boosts where they need it (magic mithral breastplate, etc). In the end, though, it comes down to how smart they're playing. If they know they're playing specialized or underpowered heroes, are their tactics reflecting that? If they're playing kick-in-the-door with weak characters, well. It's really their own fault when they get shredded. Stupid characters die.
Count Arioch the 28th 09-08-06, 04:23 PM	What I do is find out what each player does well, and write adventures taking that into account. Sometimes, that means putting an iron door that only the ogre PC can batter down. Other times, it means allowing the character with max ranks in a craft skill do something worthwhile. In my game, there's no such thing as not optimizing, because I will write encounters where the PCs are optimized to get past.
Tequila_Sunrise 09-08-06, 05:08 PM	Just keep wasting them over and over again till they get the point that they are going to optimize or die! ...because that's what d&d is all about! Seriously though, I hope you're kidding. There's nothing inherently wrong with powergaming but a DM should never punish his/her players for not powergaming to his/her degree. That's only one step removed from claiming that you can win d&d.
Atirakis 09-08-06, 05:10 PM	Of course I was kidding... or was I? ;) :evillaugh
kinjojones 09-08-06, 05:11 PM	As a result, the group has been getting mauled by fights that shouldn't be overly difficult. There's 5 of them, and their levels are 5 and 6. I sent four giant lizards at them (CR 4 each) and they got completely destroyed (none of the lizards went down). Yeah, I'm aware that four CR 4 creatures is EL 8, but one CR 4 creature is approximately equivalent to a level 4 character, there were only four of them, and there were 5 PCs all higher level, so it should have at least been a close fight. I also had to fudge die rolls early on in the adventure. I killed one of the PCs completely in two shots (arrow demon vs. wizard... not pretty) a few weeks ago. Your forgot that a single CR 4 creature should be an appropriate challenge for Four 4th level Characters using up 25% of resources. So a single PC against a single equivalent CR creature only has a 50% chance of suriving by the skin of his teeth. An EL 8 should challenge four 8th level character so it's not surprising that they're getting whooped at only level 5 and 6 even with the extra character
Limousine_Liberal 09-08-06, 05:30 PM	...because that's what d&d is all about! Seriously though, I hope you're kidding. There's nothing inherently wrong with powergaming but a DM should never punish his/her players for not powergaming to his/her degree. That's only one step removed from claiming that you can win d&d. I'm not sure it is punishment. Players are free to make bad decisions...but why should the DM bend the rules to make the game easier for them? If your players decide to try to leap a 40 foot wide bottomless chasm, should you make jumping easier too, just so they can survive? If I make a bad decision, part of the game is living (or perhaps dying) with that. Any rules fudging by the DM is tantamount to cheating, even if it is in my favor. Character decisions have consequences, and babying stupid players sends the wrong message. That said, the DM should make every effort to educate the players about their options, and make suggestions when they plainly are doing something wrong. Suggestions and enforcing consequences are the way people learn and become better.
Always-Late 09-08-06, 05:58 PM	I'm not sure it is punishment. Players are free to make bad decisions...but why should the DM bend the rules to make the game easier for them? If your players decide to try to leap a 40 foot wide bottomless chasm, should you make jumping easier too, just so they can survive?The end result is that the PCs decide not to jump the 40-foot chasm and settle for the 10-foot chasm instead. They have consequences, but they can just go "Yeah, that's CR 10. We're level 10, but we're not really CR 10. Lets find some CR 9 quests to do." Or the DM can do it for them, since he makes the quests.
Fraser1986 09-08-06, 06:11 PM	I'm not sure it is punishment. Players are free to make bad decisions...but why should the DM bend the rules to make the game easier for them? If your players decide to try to leap a 40 foot wide bottomless chasm, should you make jumping easier too, just so they can survive? If I make a bad decision, part of the game is living (or perhaps dying) with that. Any rules fudging by the DM is tantamount to cheating, even if it is in my favor. Character decisions have consequences, and babying stupid players sends the wrong message. That said, the DM should make every effort to educate the players about their options, and make suggestions when they plainly are doing something wrong. Suggestions and enforcing consequences are the way people learn and become better. I would disagree with your diagnosis that not optimising or powergaming to the same extent as the OP is "a bad decision". Clearly the OP enjoys coming up with fiendishly powerful builds and there is nothing wrong with that. However, forcing the players to play in the same way, regardless of wether they enjoy that style, would in my opinion be a much better example of "a bad decision" I noticed an earlier poster recommended using lower level enemies which you have optimised. This seems a good suggestion as you can have fun optimising and your lower level enemies should prove an even match with the PC's thanks to your cunning construction. N.B. I aplogise about any errors with the commas. I know you can use them for parenthesis but too many years studying maths seems to have sapped my grammatical knowledge.
Solik 09-08-06, 06:20 PM	Your forgot that a single CR 4 creature should be an appropriate challenge for Four 4th level Characters using up 25% of resources. So a single PC against a single equivalent CR creature only has a 50% chance of suriving by the skin of his teeth. An EL 8 should challenge four 8th level character so it's not surprising that they're getting whooped at only level 5 and 6 even with the extra character Didn't forget any of that. Hoped that my explanation would cover it, but I guess not. So here goes. A single CR 4 challenge against four ECL 4 characters is a "standard" fight -- that is, one that the PCs should win fairly easily. As long as circumstances aren't bad, it's no real problem. An ECL 4 character is CR 4. So, a mirror image party to a party of 4 level 4 characters is CR 8. If a party battles a mirror image of itself, then it all comes down to tactics and dice rolls -- so, around a 50% chance of victory. Five PCs level 5 and 6 against four CR 4 creatures tips the odds rather strongly in the PCs' favor. Unlucky rolls or bad tactics can still mean a PC or two may fall, but the party should still come out alive -- especially if they go in at full health and resources, as they did here. There shouldn't be a TPK without a single monster falling!
bhu 09-08-06, 06:48 PM	I know how some of you feel. My parties Armor Class SUCKS!!! And I mean sucks. It makes encounters a pain, because I know they're going to get hit a lot. I have a fighter with an AC of 14, but who rarely misses and does 3d6+6 damage (x4 on a crit). Refuses to wear heavier armor because it carries with it a speed penalty. No form of ranged attack. A Hexblade with an AC 16 (the best he can do till he gets better magic items), who is actually the best balanced member of the party, excpt that he has no ranged attack. A Scout who has an AC 13 (refuses to wear armor), and the best ranged fighter of the group. But he uses a short bow, and cant get Precise Shot till next level. A Druid/Wu Jen with an AC of 12 (just found a +2 Ring of Protection), and few offensive spells. All in all they have two high damage monsters (fighter and hexblade) one of whom gets hit easy, a decent fighter in the Scout who gets hit almost at will, and a caster who is only missed when my dice crap out. Average level=5. Try making encounters for that. Every fight that should theoretically use up 25% of their resources does so, except hit points. They lose about 75-85% of their hit points in any fight. Because anything that can stand up to the hits dished out by the Fighter can hit the party at will. Ive at least convinced the hexblade and Scout to start optimizing a little. The Fighter is a Power Gamer, but hes mostly played 2E, and what worked for him then doesnt work so well anymore.
tiercel 09-08-06, 08:56 PM	Here's the way I look at it. You can still have fun optimizing opponents for your party -- just change the focus. Basically, one way of having fun with optimization in this setting is to ask "what is the lowest CR opponent / lowest EL encounter I can design that will still make them sweat to win?" In general, that is the holy grail of DMing after anyway -- after the Big Battle, having your PCs ... triumphant, but *barely*. The powergamer inside can derive some satisfaction by pushing the 8th level party to the edge with what, technically, is an EL 7 encounter. On the flip side, when handing out XP it's probably better to consider opponents in your encounters +1 or +2 CR if they are especially well designed -- or else, just "ad hoc" the XP awards, to an extent, by how difficult the fight actually turned out to be. There is something to be said for the argument that if a fight pushes the PCs to their very limits, threatening TPK, and not just because they made glaring tactical errors or had lousy die rolls, then maybe they deserve something like XP for a CR-party-level-plus-4 encounter, or at least XP closer to that level than to the "official" CR of their foe.
tsuyoshikentsu 09-08-06, 11:38 PM	A single CR 4 challenge against four ECL 4 characters is a "standard" fight -- that is, one that the PCs should win fairly easily. As long as circumstances aren't bad, it's no real problem.Wrong. A CR 4 challenge should consume 1/3 of a party's resources. While this isn't life-threatening, it's certianly no cakewalk. An ECL 4 character is CR 4.NOt automatically wrong, but you can't make that generalization. A creature with class level's CR is based on 1) whether or not the class levels directly add to its primary function, and 2) whether or not (or how many of) the creature's class levels are NPC classes. So, a mirror image party to a party of 4 level 4 characters is CR 8. If a party battles a mirror image of itself, then it all comes down to tactics and dice rolls -- so, around a 50% chance of victory.Again, wrong. The mirror image of a CR 4 party is about halfway between CRs 4 and 5. CR 8 is almost guarenteed to kill the entire part without miraculous happenstance. You don't apply the CR rules to PCs.[/quote] Five PCs level 5 and 6 against four CR 4 creatures tips the odds rather strongly in the PCs' favor. Unlucky rolls or bad tactics can still mean a PC or two may fall, but the party should still come out alive -- especially if they go in at full health and resources, as they did here. There shouldn't be a TPK without a single monster falling!Maybe, but there certainly should be a TPK. With four monsters, the party has these options: --Have all four members fight one monster designed to be a challenge to all four, while three such monsters are allowed to wreak havoc. --Have three members fight one monster designed to be fought by four, while one member takes on three monsters designed to be fought by four people of his level each. --Have two pairs fight one monster each -- half the manpower expected in such a battle -- while the two other monsters remain ignored. --Have each party member take on a monster designed to be fought with four times that many people. These aren't all of the posibilites... merely the better ones. (I didn't bother to include anything with the words "switching/rotating targets.") So tell me, which do you see as a "50/50 chance of winning?"
tiercel 09-09-06, 12:22 AM	Maybe, but there certainly should be a TPK.Er.... if we are really talking about four CR 4 monsters vs a 5-person party of levels 5-6, and everything thing else is equal (no EL-modifying special advantages either way, roughly equal levels of optimization, etc.) what you have is EL 8 versus party-level 6 or so. That's not "should be a TPK" -- sure, it will be a tougher-than-standard-challenge fight, and there is the *chance* that if things are handled poorly or there is really bad luck there could be a disastrous defeat, but PCs should be able to handle the occasional PL+2 fight. "Should be a TPK" says to me EL >= PL+5. +3 and +4 fights are "red zone" fights, the kind you save for climactic BBEG rumbles, where you want the entire party to be in serious jeopardy due to a single fight. A +2 fight, while definitely tough, should be in general do-able. You just can't expect PCs to handle, say, four +2 fights in a day without serious problems (whereas you are supposed to be able to expect them to handle about four +0 fights in a day as a challenge, but not a mortal threat). One place the analysis starts breaking down is when "all else being equal" breaks down -- there really are significant outside variables (e.g. terrain, advance intel, ambush) not factored in, and/or different levels of optimization, and/or different levels of power (if you don't make an adjustment for your PCs having, say, 36 point buy then the CR system will be off for you). Also things get screwy when the number of foes is much different than the number of PCs (e.g. when there is a lone bad guy vs a full party, or when enemies outnumber PCs by, say, more than 2-to-1). Note that in general the CR rules don't *really* cover PCs fighting their mirror images, because generic NPCs assume elite array ability scores / equivalent point buy (and at least some, if not many, games allow better abilities for PCs) and assume NPC wealth (not PC wealth). That is to say, a 5th level wizard (of LA+0 race and no racial HD) with elite array stats and 5th level NPC wealth is CR 5. With PC stats and wealth he's very likely more formidable.
Solik 09-09-06, 11:06 AM	Wrong. A CR 4 challenge should consume 1/3 of a party's resources. I thought it was 1/4? Regardless, I've rarely seen this be true in practice beyond the first couple levels. Take an NPC that's a human fighter 6. He's CR 6. A party of four level 6 characters will walk circles around him. This may be true for some monsters which are under-CR'd, however, such as hydra and clockwork horrors. NOt automatically wrong, but you can't make that generalization. I wasn't intending to. Assume standard races with no LA and standard (non-NPC) classes. Again, wrong. The mirror image of a CR 4 party is about halfway between CRs 4 and 5. This is flat-out incorrect. A level 4 fighter is CR 4. A level 4 wizard is CR 4. A level 4 cleric is CR 4. A level 4 rogue is CR 4. Four CR 4 creatures is CR 8. Four ECL 4 PCs are party level 4. http://www.d20srd.org/encounterCalculator.htm Maybe, but there certainly should be a TPK. Wrong again. First off, four NPCs with standard races and class levels are already four CRs ahead. Second, we know that there is a 50% chance (generally speaking) of the PCs winning such a battle. Third, most "boss fights" in adventures use an encounter that is about 4 CRs ahead of the PCs. Fourth, the party level was 6.1, not 4, so the CR was only 1.9 ahead of them (two level 6's and three level 5's), which means odds are in the PCs' favor (although they can expect to use a good number of resources if they want to avoid a casualty or two, and really bad luck could still bite them).
Muspelheim 09-09-06, 12:16 PM	Take an NPC that's a human fighter 6. He's CR 6. A party of four level 6 characters will walk circles around him. Very true. In my opinion, alot of the time LA+0 NPCs with classlevels (and no racial HD) are actually pretty weak at their suggested CR, unless you construct them quite carefully *and* equip them properly for their level, which is a problem in itself, at least if you want to run alot of 'humanoid' encounters. At higher levels, this definitely becomes less true of the casters who are just naturally stronger and more able to compensate for less gear; few non-casters at high levels are comparable to equal CRs unless you *really* trick them out, I think.
Millennium 09-09-06, 12:45 PM	I thought it was 1/4? Regardless, I've rarely seen this be true in practice beyond the first couple levels. Take an NPC that's a human fighter 6. He's CR 6. A party of four level 6 characters will walk circles around him. That's by design. A single CR6 creature is an even match for one level-6 character. A party of four level 6 characters should be able to take four of them in a day, thus the "four encounters per day" bit that 3.5 tries to balance itself against. Kind of strange logic, but nothing if not consistent. Ahem. If you really like powergaming as a DM, and you really can't give up the powergaming aspect of things, then as others have said, give yourself a handicap and try to overcome the handicap through your powergaming. The eventual goal is to be an even match for the PCs despite the fact that you've got a handicap. This will take some experimentation, because it's a little different for every party, but you'll get a feel for it eventually.
Loto_GoCeraf 09-09-06, 05:57 PM	Being a player in Bill Bisco's campaign, this discussion hits a little closer to home. I don't necessarily think of him as a 'powergamer,' so much as a 'gamer' who makes 'powerful' characters. The fact it, he rarely relies on rules-loopholes in making his PCs and villains. One difficulty in our group's handling of his villains is the fact that there is very little loyalty among all our respective characters. We have one guy who doesn't seem to care about that little 'L' in front of the 'N' by his alignment, and decides to go chaotic on everything. Another guy plays a pragmatic kleptomaniac. Thirdly, one of our group members is a monk who is constantly trying to curb the chaotic tendencies of our LN character (a knight of all things). So, when we come across one of our DMs masterfully crafted characters (in which he invests a great deal of time giving them in-depth dialogue and tendencies), the knight tries to go rambo on it first thing. As he's doing that, my character (one of three good characters in a group of about 7 or 8) is trying to calm him down and stop the unnecessary fighting as the monk tries to grapple the knight (a half-ogre at that). In the end, a lot of the group members decide to go off and do their own thing and pull a complete waste of time, when the DM's villain finally decides to start an attack... against two or three of us. These well-crafted villains were designed to be fought by the group of us, rather than just a couple of people. In this case, it was the Thri-Keen throwing fiend, who could throw enough daggers at me to kill me in a single round if relatively lucky with rolls. The point is, I don't think that any DM truly wants his players to die, so much as he wants his players to have a reasonable challenge and feel good thinking "Hey, I was part of the group that KILLED that Spell-stitched Dracolich Red Dragon", or what have you.
Seerow 09-09-06, 06:16 PM	Loto: What sort of rules loopholes are you referring to? The Thri-Kreen for example isn't a loophole by any means.
Loto_GoCeraf 09-09-06, 06:26 PM	Loto: What sort of rules loopholes are you referring to? The Thri-Kreen for example isn't a loophole by any means. I think you're misunderstanding what I meant. I said the DM almost NEVER uses loopholes, the thri-keen included. Loopholes would be things you find in the posts of people on the optimization board who are bashed with regularity on their unrealistic characters. No, no, I'm not talking about the Average Adventurer.
AesirRaven 09-09-06, 06:30 PM	Being a player in Bill Bisco's campaign, this discussion hits a little closer to home. I don't necessarily think of him as a 'powergamer,' so much as a 'gamer' who makes 'powerful' characters. That does make quite a difference to the situation, and when I read your explanation, I sighed heavily and felt horrible for you, your few team-minded compatriots, and Mr. Bisco himself. Had it just been Bill bowling you all over, I think there was some good advice given earlier in this thread, but if the party are bringing it on themselves with behavior like that... My advice would be for you, your compadres and Bill to go play D&D together, and for the other folks to start their own game where they can be "as crazy as they wanna be". :rolleyes:
Loto_GoCeraf 09-09-06, 06:41 PM	That does make quite a difference to the situation, and when I read your explanation, I sighed heavily and felt horrible for you, your few team-minded compatriots, and Mr. Bisco himself. Had it just been Bill bowling you all over, I think there was some good advice given earlier in this thread, but if the party are bringing it on themselves with behavior like that... My advice would be for you, your compadres and Bill to go play D&D together, and for the other folks to start their own game where they can be "as crazy as they wanna be". :rolleyes: Well said. Needless to say, the term "counter-productive" comes up quite often in our games. It's not so much that the other guys are being jerks, so to speak, though. To be honest, I think everyone in the group is just trying to have fun in their own way. For some of us, that's going along with the story (I was quite alone against that Deep Spawn) and for some of the others, it's stealing the rogue's sandwich after he made a natural 20 on the craft check. And of course, there's also the fun that stems from a half-ogre knight charging his rhino-steed into a group of unsuspecting citizens who are all drunk from a festival. Go chivalry.
AesirRaven 09-09-06, 06:58 PM	It's not so much that the other guys are being jerks, so to speak, though. To be honest, I think everyone in the group is just trying to have fun in their own way. For some of us, that's going along with the story (I was quite alone against that Deep Spawn) and for some of the others, it's stealing the rogue's sandwich after he made a natural 20 on the craft check. And of course, there's also the fun that stems from a half-ogre knight charging his rhino-steed into a group of unsuspecting citizens who are all drunk from a festival. Go chivalry. I wanted to respond to your first sentence, but I wanted to respond to all this first because it was blazingly funny. 1.) The image of the half-ogre knight charging on his rhino steed made me think, "Gives a whole new image to the running of the bulls!" 2.) Bill makes you roll craft checks on sandwiches? That brings to mind Arthur Dent in "Mostly Harmless" -- the Sandwich Maker. 3.) You alone versus the Deep Spawn? *shudder* Well said. Needless to say, the term "counter-productive" comes up quite often in our games. This was what I really needed to respond to, though. I appreciate everyone wanting to have fun, but it seems to me that several people in your group want to have mutually exclusive kinds of fun simultaneously, and that's just bad for business when it comes to an RPG, in my opinion.
Loto_GoCeraf 09-09-06, 08:00 PM	3.) You alone versus the Deep Spawn? *shudder* To be fair, I didn't actually FIGHT the Deep Spawn (even Bill's not THAT mean, lol). In all honesty, though, after looking at its statistics in Monsters of Faerun, I probably actually stood a decent chance against it. The point is, though, that I would have appreciated a little help in that situation. My guy was the only one who could speak Terran, and everyone else was either captured for doing something almost utterly unrelated, or involved in combat against some of the Deep Spawn's minions. Bad situation. Not because of the DM's powerful villains.
tiercel 09-10-06, 07:03 AM	One difficulty in our group's handling of his villains is the fact that there is very little loyalty among all our respective characters. Well... this is a huge difference that can't be accounted for under the CR/EL/XP system. I know in the last campaign I ran, my PCs would face the same foes under similar (not identical, but similar) conditions, and one of the fights would be a PC rout due to utter lack of coordination, and the other, due to good planning and, more to the point, more careful team tactics, they could completely destroy the same EL = PL+3 encounter without breaking a sweat. It's true at all levels (but particularly so, I find, at higher levels where all characters have more options) -- a party which consists of four purely independent individuals can have its behind handed to it by a EL = PL encounter while a party which min/maxes its *group* potential can handle darn near *anything* (or, at the least, manage an orderly withdrawal and handle it the second time around).
Nom 09-10-06, 08:18 AM	Picking up on tiercel's point: If the problem is not character design but tactics, consider in-game "tactics training". Staged fights, with artificial rules about what can and can't be done and little risk of death, designed to help the PCs practice particular manoeuvres that they are notably poor at. Obviously, XP rewards are reduced due to the lack of risk. I've done this on occasion in my game with some success. Quiet chats with players pointing out options they hadn't thought of can work too.
Bill Bisco: Average Adventurer 09-10-06, 11:11 AM	I just wanted to thank everyone for their replies, I have been viewing this topic and thinking. To reiterate some Advice 1. Optimize lower level enemies 2. Consider using flawed builds, perhaps low int assassins, i.e. weaknesses 3. Give them magical stuff that will help them out 4. Practice fights and whatnot Hehe, well I severely underestimated the party when I made my Thri-Kreen. Yes, he can trip everyone and throw 16 daggers, but People can just get back up and move right next to him :blush: so, if he makes his ranged attacks, they'll all get attacks of opportunity against him, and well, he can only move 5 ft. So, in other words he got ganked :D But, it's all good. Next time, I'm going to have decently more opponents and see how things go. I think I neglected to mention the fact that we generally have 5-7 people show up to our games. So really, I'm going to have to assign a few more enemies than I might normally think is appropriate. As far as party power is concerned, I think I bunched people all together. True, the combat usefulness of my Rogue, and Monk Players is debatable. However, My Scout, Psychic Warrior, and Half-Ogre Knight, and Wolf (hehe) are powerful in their own right. My Half-Ogre is fine and powerful the way he is (good AC, Damage), my monk is a problem since he wants to be powerful yet doesn't really understand that monks suck, and that if you want to be a Monk/Wizard, you'd want to be a Monk1/Wizard6, not a Monk6/Wizard1. Ah well, I'll find a way to get him an Amulet of Natural attacks, and maybe a Belt of Magnificence, and we'll see how that goes. There are some tactics ideas that I've been struggling with. I've been wondering for awhile if there's a proper way to implement a Smart Wizard who would have Improved Invisibility and Fly while he unleashed his spells. I probably need to look at the rules again about attacking squares that you can't see as well as guessing where the invisible enemy is.
MerlintheTuna 09-10-06, 01:41 PM	I don't necessarily think of him as a 'powergamer,' so much as a 'gamer' who makes 'powerful' characters. The fact it, he rarely relies on rules-loopholes in making his PCs and villains. That is exactly what a powergamer is. Using loopholes is a munchkin tactic, not a powergamer tactic. Sheesh. Next I'm gonna be told to "Stop by the CO boards sometime" by someone who's never been there himself.
Bill Bisco: Average Adventurer 09-10-06, 01:49 PM	He later corrected himself on that point anyway. I don't use loopholes to create abuse at any rate. Perhaps Powergamer is a bad word to some people (it isn't to me), but perhaps a better word would be "Optimizer" since that's what I try to do ;)
PhaedrusXY 09-10-06, 02:29 PM	This whole thing sounds like it has little to do with your "Powergaming". People are getting bored with your games, and going off and doing random stupid things in character, because you have too many players. Split the group in half and run two games and I am willing to bet things will go much more smoothly. Or just kick out the people who are the most distract(ing/ed). It is very difficult to run a game with 7 people in it and keep them all interested all the time. It takes both exceptional, mature players and an exceptional DM.
Bill Bisco: Average Adventurer 09-10-06, 02:56 PM	Well, people are having fun, but you do bring up a point that I have been discussing with a couple of other players. A split-up is possible, there are some other circumstances there too. Perhaps I should talk to everyone individually and ask what they think about splitting in two, and if so who would would be willing and like to DM. Hmmm..thanks for the response.
Atirakis 09-10-06, 04:05 PM	I optimize my NPCs and encourage my players to do the same with their PCs. Am I a bad DM for doing so? (And oh no look "You know who you are" I referred to them as "my" players... I must think Im better than them...)
tsuyoshikentsu 09-10-06, 11:47 PM	I optimize my NPCs and encourage my players to do the same with their PCs. Am I a bad DM for doing so?No. Next question.
Keevo_Darkwood 09-11-06, 02:55 AM	So, when we come across one of our DMs masterfully crafted characters (in which he invests a great deal of time giving them in-depth dialogue and tendencies), the knight tries to go rambo on it first thing. *ponders this a bit, then shrugs* At least he's got chicken (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeroy_Jenkins). :D