| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Vigilantia02-16-07, 03:36 AM | Hello, first time post here! Anywho, My DM and I recently had a dispute where I "accidently" killed his boss too quickly. The group was split in 2 (with 5 going one way and 3 going another) and I was grouped with the mage, a PC White dragon, and Me. The mage casted invisibility on all of us and we snuck up on the "high preistess" boss and was able to kill her in 2 turns. What really ticked my GM off was dealing "90 freaking points of damage" in 2 turns. What i'm asking is, for a level 4 fighter/4 Order of the Bow Initiate, am I slightly too powerful for my campaign (or am i miscalculating anything) and should I figure out a way to make myself less powerful? What i basically do each round is go Rapid Shot (with improved Rapid Shot) each turn, doing 3D8 +24 damage a round which throws a pipe into the damage system because I can outdamage most of the other party members with ease. While my other friends seem fine with this, I can tell my DM is running out of patience. (Note, our main mage does around 35-45 damage a turn with our melee fighters doing 30ish a turn if lucky) Stats: Weapon (+2 Composite (4+) Long Bow) 18 Strength 13 Wisdom 18 Dexterity 13 Intelligence 14 Constitution 8 Charisma 57 Hp +17/+12 to hit (+4 dexterity, +2 weapon enhancement, +1 Weapon Specialization, +2 Ring of Accuracy) +8 to damage ( +2 Bow enhancement, +4 strength, +2 weapon Focus) |
| Drag0nUL02-16-07, 04:05 AM | You are making a little confusion. Weapon focus gives +1 to attack and weapon specialization +2 to damage, not the other way around. Nevertheless I don't think 3d8+24 damage a turn is that much for a lvl. 8 character, but rather in the average. Take for example a lvl. 8 human barbarian with 18 Str., armed with a +1 greatsword and with Gaountlets of ogre str.+2. He has +14/+9 to hit(+16/+11 in rage) and deals 4d6+16(or 4d6+22 in rage). If you optimize this barbarian for dmg.(race orc, power attack, leap attack, shock trooper) the number will go up drastically(reaching +18/13 to hit(4d6+60 power attackng full BAB). Will you call a 8th level barbarian overpowered? I think not. |
| draco111902-16-07, 04:09 AM | Sounds pretty petty to me. Of course, were I your DM, I'd be making sure you were checking off your ammo. :D At 8th level, you should all be doing damage, and, to be honest, 3d8+24 only averages out to about 37, so you're not overpowered at all, you just seem to be rolling well. I do have to ask, though: even at max damage both rounds, you could only do 82 points of damage. How'd you manage to do 90+? |
| Cold Napalm02-16-07, 04:11 AM | Umm so you do 36 points of damage on average per round...hardly game breaking at level 8 since I can churn out a 200+ damage a round fighter at that level. Basically it looks like your group is very non optimized if they think this is uber in anyway so you can either help them up to your level or dumb yourself down. |
| Zumarai02-16-07, 07:33 AM | hardly game breaking at level 8 since I can churn out a 200+ damage a round fighter at that level. How? |
| EternalZzyx02-16-07, 07:39 AM | Did I read your post right in that your party has a white dragon PC? |
| darkhunter200702-16-07, 07:48 AM | nice stats:D i give you A++ on your D&D H.W preety neat stretagy and combo. well the DM can blame only him self for giving ypu such high stats and gear. about your post:a white dragon PC????:confused: anyway your fine it's your dm fault. |
| On_the_wings_of_TPK02-16-07, 09:48 AM | Ahh hell another one of these again. Ok well lets at the two indacators of over powered shall we? Are you over shawdoing your party? I don't think that is the issue. You are adventuring with a dragon, and everyone does seem to be contributing. They are all contributing right? Ok well how do you compare to the encounters. Well you, and three other adventures, managed managed to toast a BBEC (big bad evil chick) in two rounds. You were able to surprise her, and lay down the beats. In this case i would say that it was the encounter that was on the low side. Why was the priest by herself? And 90? for 8 8th level adventurers? She didn't stand a chance. I'm assuming you rolled thoughs stats as they equate to 51 point buy. |
| wonlee7602-16-07, 10:42 AM | At a glance, you might be a little too wealthy for your level unless the ring and magical bow is pretty much all your magical items. The ring I've never heard of and the closest item I can think of is bracers of lesser archery (+1 competence bonus to hit with bows, 5000 gold) so following the bonus squared formula, I'm guessing the ring costs 20,000 (2 x 2 x 5000) gold which would definitely make you too wealthy for your level. You got a pretty high point buy or just lucky rolling if these are rolled stats. Using standard MM monsters will definitely be "easier" than expected in general (there are of course a few exceptions to that general rule). You're dishing out 37.5 damage per round if all your attacks hit on average. Your fighter is doing 20ish to low 30ish damage per round and your spellcaster is up there in the 40s-50s. I don't see where the problem is since it looks like everyone in your group is capable of dishing out decent chunks of damage. The advantages you got over the melee guy is the 1 extra attack from Rapid Shot which obviously increases your average damage and the fact that you can start combat with a full attack at range while your melee buddy might need to move forward to engage the bad guy. The one disadvantage you have is your shooting ability relies on having ammunition. Shooting 3 arrows a round quickly diminishes your quiver and the problem gets worst at higher levels when you get even more attacks or benefits of haste/speed/etc. The only "problems" I see is mostly your DM and possibly a little bit of you. I don't believe a level 4 fighter could qualify for the Order of the Bow Initiatie that soon. If your DM permitted you entry into OOTB by waiving or reducing pre-reqs, its his fault (and to be quite frank, OOTB isn't increasing your damage output at this time anyways). Otherwise, you might have made a little goof in creating your PC presuming you could not qualify for OOTB as a level 4 fighter. The "bigger" problem is your DM giving out too many items. Eyeballing things, at the very minimum you got 28,000 worth of magical gear (+2 bow and +2 ring of accuracy). This doesn't even include other magical gear you might have. Those 2 items alone are well above the wealth guidelines for a level 8 PC. Of course its also possible everyone in the group has similar magical gear or are equally wealthy which basically means the DM should not be surprised you can just roll over his encounters. You're more powerful than the standard group of PCs (standard meaning 28-32 point buy with gear that conforms with the wealth guidelines in the DMG). |
| Cainin02-16-07, 10:53 AM | Then I assume that your DM would have a heart attatck if subject to one of the more popular "charging melee" builds that are discussed on these boards. Their damage output would make your look paltry by comparison. The main issue seems to be your DM, not you. More specifically, it is his job to judge the player base's approximately power level. Based of this analysis, he should set a mental bar for what kind of opposition to run. It should be both difficult enough to fun rewarding for the players, just easy enough that they have a decent chance of winning. That is, assuming that the players aren't doing something extremely dumb in the first place. |
| Drag0nUL02-16-07, 11:23 AM | Judging by the designation of 'high priestess' I assume she was some sort of spellcaster. And spellcasters tend to go down pretty fast when exposed to concentrated fire. So your DM shouldn't be too surprised. |
| crowclub02-16-07, 12:06 PM | You are making a little confusion. Weapon focus gives +1 to attack and weapon specialization +2 to damage, not the other way around. Nevertheless I don't think 3d8+24 damage a turn is that much for a lvl. 8 character, but rather in the average. Take for example a lvl. 8 human barbarian with 18 Str., armed with a +1 greatsword and with Gaountlets of ogre str.+2. He has +14/+9 to hit(+16/+11 in rage) and deals 4d6+16(or 4d6+22 in rage). If you optimize this barbarian for dmg.(race orc, power attack, leap attack, shock trooper) the number will go up drastically(reaching +18/13 to hit(4d6+60 power attackng full BAB). Will you call a 8th level barbarian overpowered? I think not. Where is the 4d6 coming from? are you adding the 2 attacks? |
| tiamot02-16-07, 12:50 PM | Sounds to me like you've got a classic case of 'DM gets torked off because he worked sooooo hard on boss and PCs walk all over it'. As a DM you have to EXPECT that sometimes your PC's are going to outsmart you. That's a good thing, it means they're thinking. However in your case, it doesn't seem like you are overpowered at all. More likely, your DM just isn't making the challenges up to par with the party. Yes, it is your responsibility as a player to game creatively and fairly by not showboating. However it is the DM's responsibility to ensure that he's accounting for all of the character's strong points when making a campaign so that it's not too easy all the time. If he tossed a boss at you that was killable in two rounds, he either made that boss too weak, or you guys just outsmarted him. |
| Olskool02-16-07, 12:52 PM | If your DM says you're overpowered, then you're overpowered. End of story. |
| BlinkDOGwrangler02-16-07, 01:29 PM | If your DM says you're overpowered, then you're overpowered. End of story. True that. You need to tone it down some. Your next three levels should be commoner, and your next feat should be skill pro. basket weaving. Not to mention all of your skills will put into basketweaving. I am tired of powergamers raping campaigns to the point where it is the poor DM and others can only sit back in aw of such a broken character. It is to the point where nobody (Higher level CR, epic BBEG(C), or even deities) can do anything about this powerful character. Bump him up to Elder God of all realms (Eberron, Grayhawk, Forgotten Realms...all of them), because he is unstoppable. :D If the other pcs feel bad because they don't know how to make better char. too bad. Dumbing yourself down for something so trivial is rediculous. You can show the DM a non maxamized good char/ maxamized char. to show him what real power is. Then he will have to realize even sudden max. and Fireball are not optomized builds. The DM will really just need to prepare himself better, or just use tougher creatures. |
| Doodle02-16-07, 01:47 PM | My two bits: 1) Overpowered has to do with your relation to other people in the party. If other damage dealers can do similar damage then you are not overpowered, the DM is just no providing powerful enough enemies for your party (would the priestess have died in any less time if the whole party attacked her???) 2) I think you are calculating your damage wrong. The OotBI ranged precision damage ability requires a standard action if I remember right, which means you can't use it with Rapid Shot. if that is how you are getting your 3d8 damage, then you made a mistake. Me. |
| Toloran02-16-07, 02:31 PM | Your DM simply ran the encounter poorly. You out maneuvered him to the extent where the only way the encounter could have gone any other way was by pure DM fiat. Caster BBEGs always go down fast unless A.) Gets a chance to fully buff or B.) Has a a number of guards. Also, as others have said, your character isn't overpowered by most measures of the word. He is, using a minimal amount of proper character building, average for that level. You can easily do more damage by sacrificing something, and you can easily deal less damage by sacrificing it for something else. Also, from what it sounds, you are the main (single target) damager in the party. Nothing is wrong with that. The mage can probably deal more damage to a group of enemies then you, the other PCs probably have more utility then you, and so on. One encounter does not make you overpowered (expecially that encounter). |
| Bruunwald02-16-07, 02:45 PM | If the other pcs feel bad because they don't know how to make better char. too bad. Dumbing yourself down for something so trivial is rediculous. You can show the DM a non maxamized good char/ maxamized char. to show him what real power is. Then he will have to realize even sudden max. and Fireball are not optomized builds. The DM will really just need to prepare himself better, or just use tougher creatures. That ten-year-old attitude is a good way to deserve being kicked out and banned from the group. The others are not up to par with you, so too bad, screw them, who cares if they hate playing the game, right? Wrong. The DM's job is to look at the other players, see they are not having fun, think about whether he is having fun or not, and remove the cause for anybody not having fun. And guess what? Removing problem players = fun, FUN, FREAKING FUN. Note to junior: D&D is a cooperative game. Not a game of "look at me! look at me! I'm better than you!" Now, in this case, the fellow players do not seem too miffed, and the DM seems like maybe he is being a bit pouty. As many have pointed out, the BBEG in question was low on hp given the size of the party, and after all, so long as the player rolled his Move Silently (with armor penalties) fairly, it is the fault of the dice that the PC got the drop on her. I would point the situation out to the DM as the root cause of the calamity. Remind him (calmly and without any advice from our BlinkDog friend here) that it happens sometimes. Show him why your build is Kosher (fix it first, since, as others have pointed out, you have some feats backward), and offer to help build the others up, if they want it. The best thing a good optimizer can do, is exercise humility and make himself helpful. Be humble. Offer to help, don't threaten to overpower. If you make others miserable you deserve whatever repercussions are coming to you. |
| Vigilantia02-16-07, 02:58 PM | Wow, thats alot of posts overnight... I forgot to say: The White Dragon PC is uhh.... tiny. Like think hatchlingish tiny. He's an actual dragon and since we're only level 8... There had to be some adjustments to make him fair. Secondly... WoW, I wasnt even aware my ring and bow was worth that much. Our DM house rules ALOT in this campaign and basically what it came down to was "you have 12000 gp to spend stuff on. Give me an item name+stats and i'll name a price". So considering my ring alone is around 20,000.... I'll have to talk about that with my GM. Also: Doodle. I'm not using the "Ranged Precision" ability at all. From my understanding: Ranged Precision: 1 attack from 30' or less for (1D8 (+8 strength mod) +2D8) whereas if I use Rapidshot I make 3 "Seperate" attacks: (1D8 + 8) + (1D8 + 8) + (1D8 + 8), assuming they all hit. The reason I took OotBI was because of a backstory I created. In reality, the only real use i've taken from the class currently is "close combat shot" which allows me to shoot in melee. I wont be using Ranged precision for a while because my strength modifier with Rapid Shot give me more guaranteed damage then Precision would. Also Drag0nUL: thanks for the barbarian stats. At least I can show the damage between a 8th level Barbarian and I. His insults of "munchkining" and "omg, damn one-shot wonder" really get annoying when that was completely the opposite of what I wanted to do when I created my character. |
| BlinkDOGwrangler02-16-07, 03:42 PM | Brunnwald has some good advice. Having FUN is the most important factor when gaming. Keeping a humble attitde always helps, but I stick to what I said about showing him how you are not munchkining by showing him how you would be as a munchkin, or even the stats of other well-off char...such as the Barb...or anything with Power Atk at level 8. Just be civil. Joke when appropriate, but don't when it's not. From what he posted, I got the impression that he couldn't be further from powergaming. I also get tired of being accused of munchkining for just taking power atk, being a WF, chosing an Artificer, or generally knowing my char and preparing ahead of time. When you go out of your way to not be a munchkin, and do things to roleplay, it taps a nerve to then be accused of doing what you are trying so hard not to do. Character allowing (decent Int and Wis), I like to stratagize ahead of time, buff, or plan as a group to overcome an obsticle. Unfortunatly, my group (no matter what they play at times) like to break the doors open and charge at every opportunity. Having the ability to be great, and holding back so that others can have fun is mighty big. When the excremate hits the fan though, You bet I'll be the first (initative allowing :) ) to power up. If I didn't have that potential our group would probably be long gone. I'm not being snoddy...they just won't peak til midder levels. If giving up your ring makes you/ your DM feal better, that may be what it takes. I have a fealing that others are treated the same with the magic stuff though. Heck, He can't really complain too much if he gave you a 51 pt. equivalency for stats. |
| johnkretzer02-16-07, 06:49 PM | Hello, first time post here! Anywho, My DM and I recently had a dispute where I "accidently" killed his boss too quickly. The group was split in 2 (with 5 going one way and 3 going another) and I was grouped with the mage, a PC White dragon, and Me. The mage casted invisibility on all of us and we snuck up on the "high preistess" boss and was able to kill her in 2 turns. What really ticked my GM off was dealing "90 freaking points of damage" in 2 turns. First no I don't find this character overpowered even compared to the others for serveral reasons 1) The wizard does more damage on average then you do. 2) Just the raw amount of damage is not the only thing I use as a gauge of overpowerness. I am sure the fighter does something better then you... Second If I am reading this right the three of you did 90 points of damage in 2 rounds. For three 8th level characters that is actualy pretty low. Third it actualy seems to me that your DM is just upset that you guys out thought him. Some DMs get that way, hopefuly he'll grow out of it. |
| fatal error02-16-07, 07:49 PM | If the melee guys are doing only a little less than you on average, and the wizard is where he should be with his spells, I don't see why your DM thinks you are overpowered. Sounds like he just needs to work on securing his villains from invisible assaults. |
| On_the_wings_of_TPK02-16-07, 08:32 PM | Brunnwald has some good advice. Having FUN is the most important factor when gaming. Keeping a humble attitde always helps, but I stick to what I said about showing him how you are not munchkining by showing him how you would be as a munchkin, or even the stats of other well-off char...such as the Barb...or anything with Power Atk at level 8. Just be civil. Joke when appropriate, but don't when it's not. "So you see your honor, it's not as bad as you think. I only beat the guy up and stole all his money. Wouldn't be worse if I actually killed him?" Sorry I don't see how the "It could be worse, so there for I'm ok." argument works. As long as the the problem could be worse, then its not a problem? ShockTherapy is balanced, because pun-pun exists? Doesn't fly. If he is over shawdowing his teammates, or the DM is having issues challenging the party, the he is unbalanced for the campaign he is in. I'm not saying he is unbalanced, or that his DM is having difficulty challenging the group. That may or may not be the case, and it remains to be seen. As already stated spells go down hard and fast when the pepper is concentrated on them. However if this the 50th BBEG he's popped, without effort, then there could be an issue. I'd respond to the rest of your post, but it seemed more like a rant stemming from a personal experience then anything else. If you want to discuss specifics about those events feel free to IM me, or start a new post. Cheers. |
| danielinthewolvesden02-16-07, 08:50 PM | An archer gets pretty powerful once he can shoot 3x a round. But the spellcasters will outclass him pretty soon. You seem to be in a pretty high powered game, both stat-wise and loot-wise. Are the other PC's around the same? |
| Serrin02-16-07, 09:02 PM | Except robbing and beating a guy is inherently wrong, and having a character who does damage is not. He's not arguing "it could be worse, therefore it's okay", he's saying "look, with any full BAB class and one lousy, common, PHB feat you can do more damage, so in any sane game this couldn't be considered overpowered". Or is power attack unbalanced? If you overshadow your teammates, or your DM has problems challenging you, the problem is with the DM or the teammates. If a mono-class character with no magic equipment and decent feats is better than your character, you're doing D&D wrong. Single class characters are the simplest baseline of D&D, and if you're weaker than one, you're dragging your team down. I don't really care if your character wants to try all the kinds of magic before picking one, having a bard 1/sorcerer 1/wizard 1/cleric 1 is actively attempting to be useless. Unless everyone agrees before the game that you should all be commoners with skill focus: goat herding, you should probably try to avoid deliberately weakening your character. Bottom line is that you're slightly below average for a melee character, your wizard is normal, and your white dragon sucking pretty hard, on account of being a white dragon. Your DM has set the bar really low, and if you, the wizard, and one other meleer are doing damage just fine, then the other two should smarten up and stop dragging you down. After all, they're wrecking your fun by being weak. |
| snakeman83002-16-07, 09:21 PM | Let's see if I got this right. You, mage, and white dragon are all invisible. If you did what I think you did, the dragon got within range for a full attack, the mage was ready to fling a cone of cold or similar spell, and you all opened up with a full attack. Since you were invisible to start with, that's +2 on all attack rolls for your group, plus the BBEC was flat-footed, so missing is not likely. You do about 37-38 damage, mage does (assuming cone of cold was indeed the selected spell) about 28 damage, and white dragon would do about 6 damage with his attack or (I'm going by MM entry here) for a total of 71-72 damage in one turn. Even on the next round when the dragon probably won't get a full attack in and the mage doesn't get off a spell, you would still probably hit for another 37 damage, making a total of 108-109 damage in two turns, putting the 90hp preistess at -18. yep, she's dead all right. If your DM was surprised that you managed to kill her off so quick, he should have paid more attention to his setup. You aren't powergaming, just being good at the game. |
| Orion Polaris02-16-07, 09:34 PM | Your DM is complaining about overpowered when there is a freaking white dragon in the party? And tell him not to worry, he only has to wait 4 more levels and the spellcasters in your party will quickly overtake your character. |
| Reversefigure402-16-07, 09:58 PM | What i'm asking is, for a level 4 fighter/4 Order of the Bow Initiate, am I slightly too powerful for my campaign (or am i miscalculating anything) Miscalculated: Order of the Bow Initiate requires +5 BAB, amongst other things. You should be Fighter5(or whatever)/OotBI3 at this point instead. |
| On_the_wings_of_TPK02-16-07, 10:05 PM | Except robbing and beating a guy is inherently wrong, and having a character who does damage is not. He's not arguing "it could be worse, therefore it's okay", he's saying "look, with any full BAB class and one lousy, common, PHB feat you can do more damage, so in any sane game this couldn't be considered overpowered". Or is power attack unbalanced?[quote] Is 10 degrees warm? If I'm driving 50km per hour, am I going too fast? [quote] If you overshadow your teammates, or your DM has problems challenging you, the problem is with the DM or the teammates. If a mono-class character with no magic equipment and decent feats is better than your character, you're doing D&D wrong. Single class characters are the simplest baseline of D&D, and if you're weaker than one, you're dragging your team down. I don't really care if your character wants to try all the kinds of magic before picking one, having a bard 1/sorcerer 1/wizard 1/cleric 1 is actively attempting to be useless. Unless everyone agrees before the game that you should all be commoners with skill focus: goat herding, you should probably try to avoid deliberately weakening your character. Thats right folks, we've all been playing D&D wrong. Well those of us who don't balance our game to the standard of the all knowing Serrin. Why s/he even knows how everyone else should have fun, becuase his D&D is just so much better then ours. Please Serrin tell me how I should be having fun. Seriously are you listening to yourself? They all should change the way they have fun to accommodate you? Their fun be damned, it is all about the one person, and if they don't like it, don't want to, or can't do it, its there own problem. That line of thinking is not only arrogant, but it is selfish and rude. It is also why we have problems with DMs complaining about players being whinny prats, and players bemoaning the game because some ******* can't seem to understand that the universe does not revolve around him. D&D is a cooperative game played between friends. i would hope you don't truly treat you friends like that. Seriously though I can't see how anyone would want to play with a player like that. And how would feel if you were the one who was constantly out shined? then told to suck it up because your the one who is defective not being able to make a character up to their standard? If ever one of players went off on a rant like that, or even mentioned that they were special and there for entitled to steal the show, I'd boot them so fast they'd leave skid marks on the way out. Hey I'll let you in on a secrete. I know who to optimize characters. i can make them strong, and durable. heck i can even maximize them. But sometimes i just don't feel like doing that. Sometimes I want to play to a character that isn't perfect, isn't maximized. Hell sometimes I want to play a character that isn't even optimized. You wanna know why? BECAUSE IT IS FREAKING FUN! Not saying that you have fun that way. Hell i frankly do not care how you have fun, so long as it doesn't harm anyone. I'm saying that to me, and I would imagine others too, their is more to this game then simpler making the character with the highest numbers. And we have no right to force that on you, nor do you have the right to force your method of fun on us. Shame on you for even trying to. |
| johnkretzer02-16-07, 11:57 PM | I'm not saying he is unbalanced, or that his DM is having difficulty challenging the group. That may or may not be the case, and it remains to be seen. As already stated spells go down hard and fast when the pepper is concentrated on them. However if this the 50th BBEG he's popped, without effort, then there could be an issue. Though that is the issue here it seems to me he didn't kill this BBEG by himself and they used tactic. Are you going to say that just using tactics is unfair and powergaming? True we do only have his word on this but...unless he is willing to bring his DM or other players in... |
| Serrin02-17-07, 01:27 AM | Is 10 degrees warm? If I'm driving 50km per hour, am I going too fast? Yes, if you're traveling a distance of 5 feet. Thats right folks, we've all been playing D&D wrong. Well those of us who don't balance our game to the standard of the all knowing Serrin. Why s/he even knows how everyone else should have fun, becuase his D&D is just so much better then ours. Please Serrin tell me how I should be having fun. I'll be more than happy to. Every time you post telling someone that they're wrecking the game by being overpowered, you're telling them how they should have fun. I just thought it'd be nice to have a differeing viewpoint in the discussion. He, by the way. Seriously are you listening to yourself? They all should change the way they have fun to accommodate you? Their fun be damned, it is all about the one person, and if they don't like it, don't want to, or can't do it, its there own problem. That line of thinking is not only arrogant, but it is selfish and rude. It is also why we have problems with DMs complaining about players being whinny prats, and players bemoaning the game because some ******* can't seem to understand that the universe does not revolve around him. Are you listening to yourself? Clearly the mage is doing good damage, and he's not too shabby. If even one of the other three party members is performing on a similar level as these two, it means that the two weaksauce PCs are dragging the party down. I never said that the archer is teh win, and gosh darn it, everyone better be as good as him or else they'll suck and the archer will get all the glory. I never said the universe revolves around a single player. But in the likely event that at least three of the players play at a certain level (let's call it "average", just for the sake of convenience, whether or not it's really average), then it's the other two players who are causing problems. The D&D universe may as well revolve around the majority of the players, and the majority of the players are probably playing at "average". From the descriptions given, the archer does not appear to be a significant deviation from the rest of the party, but rather the norm. D&D is a cooperative game played between friends. i would hope you don't truly treat you friends like that. Seriously though I can't see how anyone would want to play with a player like that. And how would feel if you were the one who was constantly out shined? then told to suck it up because your the one who is defective not being able to make a character up to their standard? If ever one of players went off on a rant like that, or even mentioned that they were special and there for entitled to steal the show, I'd boot them so fast they'd leave skid marks on the way out. If I was constantly outshined by the majority of my party, then my disappointment at my inability to contribute to the party would be entirely my responsibility. If one of my players ever insisted on making a "roleplay character" who constantly lagged behind the rest of the party every way and contributed nothing, I wouldn't even kick him out. My other players and I would eat him. Again, if it's so wrong to play a character significantly more powerful than the rest of the party, why don't you have similar problems with people being significantly less powerful? If 3/5ths of my party was strong, and 2/5ths were weak, I wouldn't knock down the number one character to try and balance things out. Hey I'll let you in on a secrete. I know who to optimize characters. i can make them strong, and durable. heck i can even maximize them. But sometimes i just don't feel like doing that. Sometimes I want to play to a character that isn't perfect, isn't maximized. Hell sometimes I want to play a character that isn't even optimized. You wanna know why? BECAUSE IT IS FREAKING FUN! Not saying that you have fun that way. Hell i frankly do not care how you have fun, so long as it doesn't harm anyone. I'm saying that to me, and I would imagine others too, their is more to this game then simpler making the character with the highest numbers. And we have no right to force that on you, nor do you have the right to force your method of fun on us. Shame on you for even trying to. So let me get this straight. Everyone has the right to play however they want and have fun however they want, just as long as they don't optimize better than everyone else at the table? Shame on your hypocrisy. If an overpowerful minority of characters ruins the game for everyone and must be dealt with, so too does an overweak minority of characters ruin the game and require intervention. Or would you be perfectly cool with joining an ECL 15 game with Bard 3/Wizard 3/Sorcerer 3/Cleric 3/Druid 3? |
| kelvinaw27302-17-07, 07:27 AM | So let me get this straight. Everyone has the right to play however they want and have fun however they want, just as long as they don't optimize better than everyone else at the table? Shame on your hypocrisy. If an overpowerful minority of characters ruins the game for everyone and must be dealt with, so too does an overweak minority of characters ruin the game and require intervention. Both of these statements have an element of truth. Every game has it's own 'optimisation level' and it is up to the players to establish and play to that level. If you are the odd one out, you have to tone it down or crank it up. The problem with the OP here is that they have told us what they can do but not what the rest of the party can do. Without context we cannot judge it. |
| On_the_wings_of_TPK02-17-07, 04:14 PM | Yes, if you're traveling a distance of 5 feet. Its the if that I'm getting at. "if" I'm moving only 5ft, I'm going too fast. If Driving down the trans-Canada highway, under ideal conditions I'm going to too slow. It is all relative to its context. In this particular case we do not know what the context of the situation is. Here answer this: Is a 2007 Honda civic fast? I'll be more than happy to. Every time you post telling someone that they're wrecking the game by being overpowered, you're telling them how they should have fun. I just thought it'd be nice to have a differeing viewpoint in the discussion. Did you by chance bother to read my post with your eyes open? I'm not telling anyone how to do anything. I'm saying three things: 1) Everyone is entitled to their own fun. 2) The majority of the group should play the way they want to. If you’re the odd one out, life with it, or find a new group were your not. 3) Balance is relative to the group, not yours, or the boards standard. (We can call it "average" if you like. Are you listening to yourself? Clearly the mage is doing good damage, and he's not too shabby. If even one of the other three party members is performing on a similar level as these two, it means that the two weaksauce PCs are dragging the party down. I never said that the archer is teh win, and gosh darn it, everyone better be as good as him or else they'll suck and the archer will get all the glory. I never said the universe revolves around a single player. But in the likely event that at least three of the players play at a certain level (let's call it "average", just for the sake of convenience, whether or not it's really average), then it's the other two players who are causing problems. The D&D universe may as well revolve around the majority of the players, and the majority of the players are probably playing at "average". From the descriptions given, the archer does not appear to be a significant deviation from the rest of the party, but rather the norm. First lets correct a few things. 1) 8-3=5. 5>3. Thus if 3 players out shine 5 they are in the minority, and the 5 are in the majority. 2) The extend of our knowledge is thus: There are 8 players in the group. 5 of which we know nothing about. One player is a wizard capable of casting invisibility. That means it is at least 3rd level or had a couple of scrolls or a wand. As for what else it can do that is completely unknown. For all we know the wizard could be a wizard3/barbarian X with an Int of 12. Another player is a white dragon. To lower its ECL the DM made it tiny and reduced other abilities. How strong it actually is or not we do not know. The OP is a fighter 4/OBI 4 (cannot meet the prereqecs for this, but thats not the issue.), has more gold then the listing in the DMG and 51 point buy for his states. He deals 3d8+24 if he hits consistently each round, and he has improved rapid shot. We also do not know what level this high priestess was, or how strong she was. Maybe she intended to be a tough encounter for the group of 8, but the other PCs were smart/lucky. Maybe the DM has difficulty judging the power level of his/her campaign. maybe the DM knew that they party would split up like that, and intended her for the other group because they are inherently weaker than the other three, and the party went a way that was unanticipated? We can assume anything we like about the rest of the party to fill in the blanks, but it won't mean much. Lets assume that the wizard is in fact, a wizard 5/incantarix 10, lore master 5. Is the archery over powered now? Or we could assume that the rest of the party are playing level 3 characters, and the wizards is 3rd level as well. Is the archery overpowered in this scenario? What if everyone is 8th level, of relatively equal power, and the encounter was against a high priestess of 4th level? Is it still balanced? Let’s change that priestess to a 16th level cleric, does that change anything? 3) We can't tell what the party average is, as we only have enough knowledge to determine the power level one PC. Saying that the other two PCs are weak, and it is their problem is kind of stupid. We don't know if they are more, or less powerful then the archer, and we have no idea about the other 5. To compare the archery to any of average would be an exercise in futility. If I was constantly outshined by the majority of my party, then my disappointment at my inability to contribute to the party would be entirely my responsibility. If one of my players ever insisted on making a "roleplay character" who constantly lagged behind the rest of the party every way and contributed nothing, I wouldn't even kick him out. My other players and I would eat him. Again, if it's so wrong to play a character significantly more powerful than the rest of the party, why don't you have similar problems with people being significantly less powerful? If 3/5ths of my party was strong, and 2/5ths were weak, I wouldn't knock down the number one character to try and balance things out.Perhaps your unclear on what majority is. Here dictionary.com will help us. ma•jor•i•ty /məˈdʒɔrɪti, -ˈdʒɒr-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[muh-jawr-i-tee, -jor-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun, plural -ties. 1. the greater part or number; the number larger than half the total (opposed to minority): the majority of the population. 2. a number of voters or votes, jurors, or others in agreement, constituting more than half of the total number. 3. the amount by which the greater number, as of votes, surpasses the remainder (distinguished from plurality). 4. the party or faction with the majority vote: The Democratic party is the majority. 5. the state or time of being of full legal age: to attain one's majority. 6. the military rank or office of a major. —Idiom 7. join the majority or the great majority, to die. For example 3/5ths constitute a majority, and thusly 2/5ths is the minority. So getting back to your example, if you’re the weaksuace character, and the rest of the party is maxed, then you should A) Max your character, or B) find a different group. Either way you have no right to insist that they player weaker characters to accommodate you. Similarly you can't insist that a group of players max their character to accommodate you, when you’re in the minority. If 2/5ths of your party is lagging down, then of course you shouldn't punish the majority. You may want to up the power of the 2/5ths though. Again 3/5ths > 2/5ths. So let me get this straight. Everyone has the right to play however they want and have fun however they want, just as long as they don't optimize better than everyone else at the table? Shame on your hypocrisy. Lets rework this: Everyone has the right to play however they want, so long as it doesn't take the fun away form everyone else. If an over powerful minority of characters ruins the game for everyone and must be dealt with, so too does an over weak minority of characters ruin the game and require intervention. That’s exactly my point. Or would you be perfectly cool with joining an ECL 15 game with Bard 3/Wizard 3/Sorcerer 3/Cleric 3/Druid 3? What are the other players playing? And what’s the power level of the DMs campaign? Again I ask, "Is -5 degrees warm?" |
| fatal error02-17-07, 04:50 PM | I'll just chip in here that he says the melee fighters are doing 30ish damage each turn if lucky. If you believe that these characters (2 or more) are in balance with the OP's archer, then the OP is at least tied for majority balance-wise, with him, the wizard, and at least two fighters. Plus, if the White Dragon is balanced with them, or if those are 3 fighter types not 2, then he's in the majority. If, of course, you believe the wizard, archer, and unknown number of fighters are all balanced with each other. Just thought I'd point that out. You may resume your fierce debate over what constitutes a majority, whether -5 (is that C or F, by the way?) is warm, whether 50kmh is fast, and how we can or cannot pass judgment on the OP's balance within his group from the information he has given us so far. |
| On_the_wings_of_TPK02-17-07, 05:37 PM | Lets say the temp is in C if it makes a hole lot of difference. |
| Serrin02-17-07, 07:54 PM | First lets correct a few things. 1) 8-3=5. 5>3. Thus if 3 players out shine 5 they are in the minority, and the 5 are in the majority. You do have basic math skills right? I misread. I'm sure you make stupid mistakes too, being human and all. We also do not know what level this high priestess was, or how strong she was. Maybe she intended to be a tough encounter for the group of 8, but the other PCs were smart/lucky. Maybe the DM has difficulty judging the power level of his/her campaign. maybe the DM knew that they party would split up like that, and intended her for the other group because they are inherently weaker than the other three, and the party went a way that was unanticipated? Yeah, maybe the DM sucks. If my players did something that surprised me and trivialized a difficult encounter, I'd be cheering them on. On the other hand, I would also realize that a single unsupported BBEG is going to get eaten without extraordinary defensive measures. Also, what kind of awful cleric doesn't memorize any cure spells (if a spontaneous harmer)? Or we could assume that the rest of the party are playing level 3 characters, and the wizards is 3rd level as well. Is the archery overpowered in this scenario? No, this would indicate the DM sucks again. What kind of terrible game would have a level 8 PC and a bunch of level 3 PCs? ma•jor•i•ty /məˈdʒɔrɪti, -ˈdʒɒr-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[muh-jawr-i-tee, -jor-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun, plural -ties. 1. the greater part or number; the number larger than half the total (opposed to minority): the majority of the population. 2. a number of voters or votes, jurors, or others in agreement, constituting more than half of the total number. 3. the amount by which the greater number, as of votes, surpasses the remainder (distinguished from plurality). 4. the party or faction with the majority vote: The Democratic party is the majority. 5. the state or time of being of full legal age: to attain one's majority. 6. the military rank or office of a major. —Idiom 7. join the majority or the great majority, to die. Gee, thanks for quoting the entire definition of a majority when it's as clear as crystal from my post that I had wrongly assumed a party of 5, not 8. You do have basic reading comprehension, yes? Lets rework this: Everyone has the right to play however they want, so long as it doesn't take the fun away form everyone else. Shame on your stupidity for not thinking before you open your mouth. At least I don't have to stoop to ad hominem attacks. As a civilized human being, I can disagree with people without violating the CoC. Also, I may have misread the numbers, but I'm the stupid one because your statement was inadequately thought out? Absolutely fantastic. Shame, shame, shame. Shame shame. Shame. What are the other players playing? And what’s the power level of the DMs campaign? Allow me to clarify. You are joining a game with people you have not gamed with before, you have no knowledge of the campaign aside from a summary of the storyline. No knowledge of the relative power levels of the rest of the party, no knowledge of how tough the campaign is so far, nothing. Just a basic idea of the plot up to the present. You've wanted to play this bard 3/sorc 3/wiz3/cleric 3/druid 3 for quite a while, but he wouldn't have fit into any campaigns you became involved with after creating him but before joining this campaign. Do you bring that character? P.S. Shame! |
| Bullshido02-17-07, 08:21 PM | Hello, first time post here! Anywho, My DM and I recently had a dispute where I "accidently" killed his boss too quickly. The group was split in 2 (with 5 going one way and 3 going another) and I was grouped with the mage, a PC White dragon, and Me. The mage casted invisibility on all of us and we snuck up on the "high preistess" boss and was able to kill her in 2 turns. What really ticked my GM off was dealing "90 freaking points of damage" in 2 turns. What i'm asking is, for a level 4 fighter/4 Order of the Bow Initiate, am I slightly too powerful for my campaign (or am i miscalculating anything) and should I figure out a way to make myself less powerful? What i basically do each round is go Rapid Shot (with improved Rapid Shot) each turn, doing 3D8 +24 damage a round which throws a pipe into the damage system because I can outdamage most of the other party members with ease. While my other friends seem fine with this, I can tell my DM is running out of patience. (Note, our main mage does around 35-45 damage a turn with our melee fighters doing 30ish a turn if lucky) Stats: Weapon (+2 Composite (4+) Long Bow) 18 Strength 13 Wisdom 18 Dexterity 13 Intelligence 14 Constitution 8 Charisma 57 Hp +17/+12 to hit (+4 dexterity, +2 weapon enhancement, +1 Weapon Specialization, +2 Ring of Accuracy) +8 to damage ( +2 Bow enhancement, +4 strength, +2 weapon Focus) The only thing that jumps out at me is your two 18s. Your damage per round does not seem unreasonable at your level. |
| perdera02-19-07, 10:19 AM | A poorly defended priestess with no wards, defenses, or guards drops fast...? No surprise there. There are so many easy ways to hose archers...Stoneskin, Wind Wall, Deflect Arrows, whatever...your character seems pretty on target for level 8 to me. The mistake here is a sitting-duck priestess, not the characters. Clerics get all sorts of nasty 'in place' spells they can put down that last forever, she shoulda used some. Also, did she get Listen checks against your Move Silently rolls? You were Invisible, not Silenced. Anyways, poorly played on the DM's part. It happens, he should learn and move on (and lookup all the fun ward/protection/alarm spells). |
| Magrus02-19-07, 10:27 AM | Indeed. I've had fun as a DM when my players saw a girl with a holy symbol wearing robes, and not full plate. They all went "unarmored cleric! Easy pickings!". *snorts* A well prepared cleric doesn't need armor anymore than a wizard does. Then again, one who is an idiot, and doesn't prepare any spells, well then they are near to useless. I mean, with the right setup of spells, your cleric could use Magic Vestment on her robes, Greater Magic Weapon a rock, and do righteous might. She now has a magic improvised weapon, and is full of all sorts of strength, with armor bonuses. Shield of Faith for deflection, and Doom on that pesky archer so she can swat the fighter with her magic rock in the head. All good without equipment. :P |
| On_the_wings_of_TPK02-19-07, 11:49 AM | I misread. I'm sure you make stupid mistakes too, being human and all. We all make them, some more then others it appears. Yeah, maybe the DM sucks. If my players did something that surprised me and trivialized a difficult encounter, I'd be cheering them on. On the other hand, I would also realize that a single unsupported BBEG is going to get eaten without extraordinary defensive measures. Also, what kind of awful cleric doesn't memorize any cure spells (if a spontaneous harmer)? Or maybe it was a fully optmized prietess, with everything she should have in place, and the party got lucky. maybe she had her minions, and maybe they conceptrated on blasting her and then ran. Again we just don't know. But you do seem to be stuck on this DM sucks, becuase he's not up your standard. Little arrogant, don't you think? No, this would indicate the DM sucks again. What kind of terrible game would have a level 8 PC and a bunch of level 3 PCs? Perhaps there is a rule were if you die you come in at level 1. Or maybe this isn't even the case, again we just don't know. I seem to be saying saying this alot, I wonder if I'm not the only one who lacks basic comperhension skills. Gee, thanks for quoting the entire definition of a majority when it's as clear as crystal from my post that I had wrongly assumed a party of 5, not 8. You do have basic reading comprehension, yes? Your the one who implied that 3 out of 8 constituted a majority. My reading skills had nothing to do with what you wrote. Or mistakely assumed. At least I don't have to stoop to ad hominem attacks. As a civilized human being, I can disagree with people without violating the CoC. Also, I may have misread the numbers, but I'm the stupid one because your statement was inadequately thought out? Absolutely fantastic. Shame, shame, shame. Shame shame. Shame. Orly? Shame on your hypocracy. Shame, shame, shame. Shame shame. Shame. P.S. Shame! You do have basic reading comprehension, yes? So what was that about hypocracy? So what was that about Allow me to clarify. You are joining a game with people you have not gamed with before, you have no knowledge of the campaign aside from a summary of the storyline. No knowledge of the relative power levels of the rest of the party, no knowledge of how tough the campaign is so far, nothing. Just a basic idea of the plot up to the present. You've wanted to play this bard 3/sorc 3/wiz3/cleric 3/druid 3 for quite a while, but he wouldn't have fit into any campaigns you became involved with after creating him but before joining this campaign. Do you bring that character? P.S. Shame! I perfer to make chracters in conjunction with the rest of the party. So assuming that that build would work with party while we're making characters, and I wanted to play it, then yes i would. However if it did not work with the party, either too weak or too strong, or it overlapped too much, then I'd make something else. |
| Derren S.02-19-07, 02:55 PM | Your DM is complaining about overpowered when there is a freaking white dragon in the party? Dragon PCs are rather weak, especially white ones. The dragon would be (If ECL is used correctly) be shortly before very young age. That means at lvl 8 it is still tiny and has to enter the enemies square to use a full attack, otherwise it has only one attack. The base damage is 1d4 with BAB 5 or 6. And now tell me again that the dragon is powerful. |
| 3DJutsu02-19-07, 03:11 PM | If your DM says you're overpowered, then you're overpowered. End of story. False, some DMs' can be real hard-asses about these things, also a Melee fighter could easily reach that same amount of dmg True that. You need to tone it down some. Your next three levels should be commoner, and your next feat should be skill pro. basket weaving. Not to mention all of your skills will put into basketweaving. I am tired of powergamers raping campaigns to the point where it is the poor DM and others can only sit back in aw of such a broken character. It is to the point where nobody (Higher level CR, epic BBEG(C), or even deities) can do anything about this powerful character. Bump him up to Elder God of all realms (Eberron, Grayhawk, Forgotten Realms...all of them), because he is unstoppable. :D If the other pcs feel bad because they don't know how to make better char. too bad. Dumbing yourself down for something so trivial is rediculous. You can show the DM a non maxamized good char/ maxamized char. to show him what real power is. Then he will have to realize even sudden max. and Fireball are not optomized builds. The DM will really just need to prepare himself better, or just use tougher creatures. First part: false, Second part: huh? Also if the DM had a 'boss' caster and didn't give her MINIONS then it's appopriate that she died in two rounds, lack of planning on his part doesn't automatically mean OP on your part. Me? Priestess + acolytes for healing |
| Elsydeon02-19-07, 04:44 PM | Err... a lone, unaware spellcaster went down in a 3 on 1 fight where you ambushed them. Big surprise...? DM's just miffed. Or maybe there is an actual problem, though that's unlikely from this story. Perhaps it's not WHAT you can do, but how willing you are to jump into fights all out. I'm playing a game right now where there's perhaps 1 encounter per game (if that) as the only spellcaster (with an insane rolling scheme that makes the max stat at level 1 a 24, which I got). In another I'm one of two Wizards, but the other guy is the 'anti-power gamer' and has 18 int, the rest of his points in Wis. I have 16 con and 16 dex w/ 18 int (high point buy). Am I optimizing? Sure. More powerful than the other characters when I want to be? Yep. But I quickly realized that they don't want to watch me fight: they want to roleplay the encounters (even if it's obvious there's no discussion to be had), reluctantly be forced into battle, not fight as a team (as if each fight is terrifying and unusual. Often they are, really), etc. That's the style of those games. So I'm keeping my fun tricks, and using them discretely. Or holding them back for key moments. There's something to be said for keeping your big guns hidden until the big fight. They get to have their fun, I throw out a trick or two during each fight that keeps them alive, and if we ever did get in deep we might actually live through it because I could Nova for that fight and freak them out. Well, my version of Nova (Save or: Die/Sleep/Work for me/Get stuck/Sit in your Ectoplasmic Coccoon/etc) that lets everyone else have their moments, or I wait for the appropriate time to unleash energy missiles and cones of cold when the characters take personal interests in someone's death. Best of both worlds. Just some advice from someone who's had this problem because we play high-stat games and I play the primary spellcaster. In reality though, I very much so doubt this is a thing in your group. It's just the gamemaster complaining. Create a straight barbarian with power attack and show him the damage rolls for comparison. You're not out of line. |
| snakeman83002-19-07, 04:51 PM | Let's see here, Priestess improvements...:plotting: undead minions of varying types at the very least. proably some warriors to act as minions Glyph of Warding with some destructive spell. If I remember right, invisibility doesn't stop it from activating (though polymorph and the like do). Wind Wall to do a couple things at once: 1. move that little thing your party calls a dragon away and 2. block the archer's attacks. That way, she could focus on the mage. USE DOMAIN POWERS (depending on what they are) |
| BlinkDOGwrangler02-19-07, 10:42 PM | Just put this in the scrap book as a fight gone horribly wrong. IMO, (not worth much) the DM made an ignorant mistake in underestimating the three of you. I also know that when I helped DM, I made a cool BBEG that took several days to conspire and hours to create. So when he fell to a x4 crit, I was a little urked. You as a DM can't take it out on the pcs |
| Serrin02-20-07, 01:12 AM | TPK: That wasn't the question. The game would already be in progress, and everyone already had their characters. You would be creating your character in a vacuum. As far as throwing in "shame" every third word, I'm making fun of our little trope, not harassing anybody. If you choose to take that as a personal attack...well, I can't stop you. I really wish you never stooped to personal attacks in the first place, though. Furthermore, I implied 3 out of 5 implied a majority, not 3 out of 8, I simply hadn't realized the party was in fact 8. If you can't see that, well, there's no helping you. And seriously, do we really have to account for aberrant situations like being level 8 (and slightly "sub-average") in a party full of level 3s? And is it sane to assume that, if you are level 8 in a party full of level 3s, that you should play with the effectiveness as a level 3? At that point, you might as well just assume that the DM has a houserule that any level wizard can cast level 9 spells, because hey, he never said he didn't right? And therefore, you should optimize your meleers to the hilt, because the casters could be all-powerful. No, that simply doesn't make sense. Why don't we act like rational people, and make some basic assumptions until we're told otherwise? Things like the group is within a couple levels of each other, the group is working together, nobody's playing Pun Pun, and the group of adventurers wants to survive and profit or improve as a result of their adventures. Snakeman: Windwall is a great idea, but only if the priestess (I'm assuming she's a female cleric, and not some wonky homebrew class) had it prepared. Windwall doesn't tend to be one of the things I prepare unless I'm planning on having a big fight out in the open. I'm sticking with the "DM sucks" theory, along with most of the other posters. If you have a single caster caught by surprise by multiple adventurers, and the caster isn't optimized to the hilt, the caster is going to go down harder than the Titanic. And even if the priestess was optimized to the nines, and the OP and his fellows got lucky, the DM should recognize the difference between being lucky and being good. When you're a DM, you have to know the capabilities of your PCs, and you have to always take them into consideration. The game is about them after all. If you think you made a tough encounter, and the PCs waltz right over it, you should stop and think for a second before accusing people of being overpowered. Hypothetical situation: You and your friends all play human barbarians, with the same feats, same stats, same skills, same gear. You're like a Paranoia-style six pack. The DM decides the BBEG is going unleash a hydra on your group. Then your group stomps it. Are you overpowered? No, heck no. You're all playing identical barbarians. It's perfect balance. The problem is the DM thought he had a really cool, tough challenge to throw at you, and he was wrong. But rather than admitting he was wrong, he wants to blame the players for being too good. It's the DM's job to balance the game around the players, not the players' job to balance themselves around the game. If the PCs savagely murder the encounters you send at them, all you need to do is send harder encounters. See where I'm going with this? Overpoweredness is a red herring. The DM is just upset that his encounter didn't go as planned, and wants to take it out on the PCs. |
| Drag0nUL02-20-07, 06:56 AM | As far as I an concerned this was a poorly played encounter on the DM's part. In order to be a challenging encounter for a group of 8 character of 8th level, the high priestess should have been at least CR 10. And at this level you should have at your disposal(judging from her designation I assume she was the leader of some sort of cult which must have had some resources)spells like alarm(made permanent), glyphs of warding, some of the lower level symbols; these are forms of defense accessible to any mid level spellcaster and should have been employed in this situation. |
| Willie the Duck02-20-07, 10:16 PM | Thats right folks, we've all been playing D&D wrong. Well those of us who don't balance our game to the standard of the all knowing Serrin. Why s/he even knows how everyone else should have fun, becuase his D&D is just so much better then ours. Please Serrin tell me how I should be having fun. Seriously are you listening to yourself? They all should change the way they have fun to accommodate you? Their fun be damned, it is all about the one person, and if they don't like it, don't want to, or can't do it, its there own problem. That line of thinking is not only arrogant, but it is selfish and rude. It is also why we have problems with DMs complaining about players being whinny prats, and players bemoaning the game because some ******* can't seem to understand that the universe does not revolve around him. No, shame on you sir, for trying to take another forum members reasonable comments and deliberatley misconstrue them to fuel your bombastic, arrogant rant about how other players play that have DMs complaining about players blah blah blah. If you got over yourself for a minute you'd see Serrin's basic point. If your fighter 8 does far less damage than a barbarian 8 with no magic items and only one defined feat, then the DM's complaint that your character is "overpowered" because it does too much damage rings hollow. But thank you so much for dragging a bunch of angst and aggrivation and assumptions about people you know nothing about and dumping it on our laps. Original poster: there are two things that are going on: 1) you probably do the most damage per round. The tiny white dragon is, quite frankly, horribly underpowered. The ECL system applies to dragons horribly. The wizard is using invisibility, which is smart, but means that that is what he's spending his spells on. Since there was no rogue sneak attack action, you did contribute the most of the damage dealt. That's not your fault, though, as the big problems is: 2) the DM set up his big boss encounter in a way that invited calamity. First of all the DM let you sneak up on the boss. Why? Invisibility does not mean "wander through a dungeon unharrassed." you have to move silently, navigate doors that aren't open, yet you can't open them because someone will notice, navigate through uncertain terrain without falling or makind a commotion. Not get trapped in a corridor where a bunch of henchmen are walking down it and one will walk into you, alerting them to your presence, and also beat the high rolling spot checks which can clue guards into an invisible entities presence (not to mention scent, blindsense, etc.). Beyond that, the Big Boss was alone, and out of earshot of guards. Why? A single big bad isn't going to stand up to an adventuring party (or even group of 3) unless they are relatively immune to their attacks. They only get one action a round, no matter how powerful it is. Even if there weren't guards close enough to save their boss, they should have been close enough to ruin your day before you could escape, thus causing you not to attack in the first place, and go back for the rest of the party. Now if there were these obstacles in place, and you evaded them all, killed the BBEG and escaped retribution, well then congratulations, you earned your xp. Otherwise, the DM simply failed to set up his adventure to take into account frankly quite standard PC tactics. As to what to do. No idea. What can you do, say you're sorry and give up your magic items and go back to dealing 3 x 1d8+6? Stop rapid shooting? Maybe you should remind him of the enherent vulnerabilities of archery builds and tell him that you expect them to be exploited by the more cagey enemies more often. Sure, it sucks when your best planning as a DM fails, but he kind of spoon fed you that victory (unless you're omitting some obstacles that you faced). |
| Cold Napalm02-20-07, 11:24 PM | Okay TPK and serrin, you guys are getting caught up in sematics a bit too much. Board stanard 30ish average damage at level 8 is not overpowered. Agreed? Then there is nothing else to discuss since what he is basically asking for is what this comunity thinks if he is overpowered or not. Not if he is overpowered for his group or if he's ruining the fun of somebody or some other nonsense. edit: oh and TPK the answer to your is a 2007 civic fast question...the answer is NO. Not even is it is the Si. Honda are torqueless wonders and if you want a REAL car, go buy a mazdaspeed 3 or cobalt SS. Maybe the caliber SRT-4 when it comes out. Or the sky redline or the solstice GXP if you want sporty looks. Hell I'll even take the saturn Aura over the gutless civics. |
| On_the_wings_of_TPK02-21-07, 01:54 AM | Okay TPK and serrin, you guys are getting caught up in sematics a bit too much. Board stanard 30ish average damage at level 8 is not overpowered. I can agree to that. However we can tell that the game is question is not boards standard. (I explain it later on in the post.) Thus comparing it to board standard isn't particularly useful. edit: oh and TPK the answer to your is a 2007 civic fast question...the answer is NO. Not even is it is the Si. orly? A Honda civic is slow compared to a horse? Sure compared to the other vehicles you mentioned it may well be slow. But I didn't ask if it was slow compared to those vehicles. Is still slow compared to my 108 horse power Toyota echo? Guess speed comparisons can be relative as well. Maybe because the almighty average will change based on the situation it is applied to. For example, the party in question. First lets take review what we do know about it: 1) the ranger is 8th level, fighter 4/OBI 4. (Why are we calling him a ranger?) Said ranger has roughly a 51 PB for states. Has more GP for his level then the guideline in the DMG. And does about 30ish points of damage/ round. (Assuming three attacks hit.) 2) One of the players is playing a white dragon. According to the Draconomicon it is a wrymling white is and ECL +5. The OP mentioned that is was nerfed to be a lower ECL then that. 3) The party wizard is capable of casting invisibility. 4) The three of them is able to dish out 90 points of damge over 2 rounds. 5) The BBEG had approximately 90 hit points, and the archer was able to consistently beat its AC. (We can assume he hit because it dropped, and the DM has a problem with him, and not another players.) 6) There are 5 other players, but we know nothing about them. From that we can extrapolate that: A) The archer dealt approximately 60 points of that damage, or a full two thirds of the BBEG hit point points. Over two rounds. (30ish per round X 2 rounds) B) The other two players then dealt 7.5 points of damage a round. (30ish points of damage remaining, /2 rounds = 15 points a round /2 players = 7.5 /player. Roughly) C) This game is not boards standard. - Boards standard calls for 28 - 32 pb, they are using a higher powered rolling method, or 51 pb. - The archer has substantially more gear then recommended by the DMG, the guideline used by Board standard. - One must be 5th level minimum to qualify for the OBI PrC. The archer reached it at 4th level. Board standard is to use the RAW. Now from what we extrapolated from A and B we can extract the following: D) The archer does 4 X as much damage per round as the other two characters. (30ish/4=7.5) - Also if the other characters had a comparable damage output to the archer then they two would have done approximately 30 points each in the first round of combat as well. If that had been the case then there would have been no need for a second round of combat. E) The party members that we know about are not optimized to board standard. - As pointed out many times 30 points of damage is that much for an arcane spell caster of 8th level. Indeed an 8th level caster with the empower s pell feat and scorching ray should deal an average of 42 points of damage. F) The dragon is not optimized. - again an 8th level character only dealing 7.5 points of damage on average is hardly optimized - it is also generally accepted that high ECL adjustment races, such as the +5 for a wyrmling white dragon, are sub-optimal. E and F leads us to conclude that 2 out of the 3 player we do know about are not optimized at all. In fact they are far below boards average. Returning to A and applying it to point 5 we can predict that the archer would have been able to drop the BBEG single handedly within 3 rounds, 4 if the BBEG had access to healing magic. (30is X 3 rounds = 90. 90 hit points - 90 points of damage = one dead BBEG) Which leads us to the conclusion that when compared to the challenges in this campaign the archer is over powered. Form D we can see that the archer is over shadowing at least 2 other party members. Using basic math we know that 1 out of 3 constitutes a minority, while 2 out of 3 constitutes a majority. (2 > 1) Thus we know that the archer is in fact in the minority. And when compared to the party members we do know about he is overpowered. To summarize, the archer is overpowered compared to both the party, and the challenges faced in the that particular campaign. Which leaves the only logical conclusion that: Based on the knowledge we have on hand the archer character is overpowered for the campaign it is currently being played in. Now since we already concluded that the party is not boards average, or at least the parts of it we have information on isn't. (which includes the character in question) Why are we insisting on comparing it to boards average? That doesn't make much sense to me, as the average we are using as our comparison is not the average of the environment the situation is occurring in. Or should the other 7, 8 if we count the DM, players in the group adjust their play style to suit us? That isn't really a fair expectation on our part, especially seeing as how we are not playing in the group. |
| Cold Napalm02-21-07, 02:00 AM | Actually...since a civic is slower then the mustang GT and the mustang GT is slower then a mustang horse it is in fact slower then a horse. Like I said, get a real car. |
| On_the_wings_of_TPK02-21-07, 02:37 AM | Actually...since a civic is slower then the mustang GT and the mustang GT is slower then a mustang horse it is in fact slower then a horse. Like I said, get a real car. Your kinda missing the point, and a civic is in fact faster then a horse. However you are nicely illistrating mine. In order for a comparison to take place then then two, or more things must be compared. In order for that comparison to be relivant then those two things should be relavant to each other, and logically be able to give the knowledge you are seeking. Thusly if we want to determine if a honda is fast, or slow, then we should compare it to other cars in its class. As you are doing. Like wise if we want to see if a character is over powered or not, we should compare it to it's environment. (the other characters in the group, and the challenges it regularily faces) As you are for some reason appear to be incapable of doing. |
| Cold Napalm02-21-07, 03:10 AM | No the honda is in fact slower then a horse. Top Gear did a test where they raced a mustang GT vs a mustang horse. The horse won. Since the civic is slower then the mustang GT it is in fact slower then a horse. Which goes to show a slow car is a slow car no matter what. |
| On_the_wings_of_TPK02-21-07, 03:25 AM | No the honda is in fact slower then a horse. Top Gear did a test where they raced a mustang GT vs a mustang horse. The horse won. Since the civic is slower then the mustang GT it is in fact slower then a horse. Which goes to show a slow car is a slow car no matter what. My we're feeling obtuse today aren't we. Anyways to quote the ultimate horse sight: Gallop: This depends on the horse's condition and athletic ability. Some horses are not built to run fast an may only do a fast canter at their best; however, the gallop is about 30 mph. Thoroughbreds, which are bred for running distance but not speed, have been clocked at over 40 MPH. Quarter horses, bred and raced for short distances at speed, can reach 50 MPH in short bursts according to the AQHA's website. I am confadent that a honda civic can indeed go a lot faster then 50 mph. Either way this is off topic. My point, which you have somehow managed to not address, is that comparisons are relative to what is being compared. Thus to obtain a useful and accurate comparison one would wnat to make both things being compare relavant to each each other. |
| Cold Napalm02-21-07, 03:41 AM | On the point of being even more abtuse fast isn't just MPH, it's also acceleration and ability to maintain speed while turning (which is why the horse won the race). The point is that there are absolutes (like honda civics are gutless wonders). Now this absolute is something that most car enthusists hold to...but you say that to a honda fanboi and it means nothing that their "sports" car has less torque then most commuter cars. They will yammer on and one about the wonders of v-tec and how they can rev to 9000 rpm. What the point of this? It still doesn't change the fact that the honda is a gutless wonder. By board standard is the OP overpowered? NO. By the standard of enthusists is the honda a fast car? NO Is the OP overpowered by his groups standard? Maybe...most likely yes. IS the honda a fast car with the fanbois? Yes Does the last 2 question matter one wit? HELL NO. If I read his comments so far right he is asking for board standard not this relative crap you and serrin has been going on about. It's like the car guy going to a honda fanboi and discussing about commuter cars. It still doesn't change the fact that the OP isn't overpowered or that the honda is a gutless wonder. |
| Serrin02-21-07, 03:43 AM | Willie the Duck: Thanks, I thought I was the only sane person left. Now some more tedious counterpoints. 5) We don't know that the archer was able to "consistently" beat the AC. We know that he was able to do some non-negligible amount of damage, or else the DM is completely insane. What we don't know is that he hit it more or less always. You ignore the fact that the mage could have started tossing his best level spells for the day. A sane DM could even make a case for the archer being overpowered at 30 damage/round and the mage at 40 damage/round, on the grounds that the mage is using up valuable spell slots, and the ranger is using 3 arrows costing some silver each. This hypothetical DM would be wrong, but not completely insane. Ergo, we can't even conclude that the archer has done the most damage. For instance, perhaps the split is Archer 30: (50% hit rate), mage 50 (2 orbs? an empowered scorching ray and some lucky dice rolling? make up your own favorite blasty combo), and dragon 10. We were following you up to that rather fallacious conclusion that the archer did 60 damage. 6 is also untrue, since we know that he can outdamage "most" of the other characters. This means there is at least one who is more damaging than him. Then he throws out specific numbers on how much damage "[their] melee fighters" do per turn. If the small party is archer, mage, dragon, only the dragon could be counted among their melee fighters, and that's if you stretch it. Thus, we know the approximate damage of at least one of the other members of the larger party. Conclusions A and B are not proven because they rest on point 5. Conclusion C is supported by the information we've been given, but if you want to pick nits, his point buy equivalent and wealth levels should have been their own numbered points. Unfortunately, conclusion C doesn't tell us anything except that one or more parameters of the game (at least 3) are non-standard. D through F are also not proven, because they rest upon A and B, which are not proven. Finally, because the conclusion that the archer is overpowered in comparison to the others rests upon several lettered points that are not proven, this conclusion has not been proven. Cold Napalm: Yes, we agree that nobody in the party is anywhere near overpowered by the board average. We're also not debating that. It's not semantics. Edit: TPK, if you're going to quote me, try to use my actual words instead of paraphrasing and calling it a quote. It's just dishonest and borders on libel. I just spent 30 seconds trying to find where I typed "hypocracy". I didn't. My spelling isn't that bad. |
| Drag0nUL02-21-07, 04:26 AM | 1. You all seem to assume that the archer hit with all his 3 attacks in both combat rounds, which we don't know if it happened. We either don't know if he scored a critical hit or not during the combat. 2. A tiny dragon has 2 claws dealing 1d3 damage and 1 bite dealing 1d4 damage. That's an average of 6.5+3*Str a round, horrible for a level 8 character. 3. The wizard might have had other more useful thing to do instead of dealing damage, like dispel magic or casting some buffs on the archer. So therefore I don't think it should be surprising that the archer did most of the damage in this combat. And also I don't think a character's level of power should not be judged based purely on damage. This way of thinking would assume support characters are horribly underpowered, and it is not the case. |
| On_the_wings_of_TPK02-21-07, 10:37 AM | 5) We don't know that the archer was able to "consistently" beat the AC. We know that he was able to do some non-negligible amount of damage, or else the DM is completely insane. What we don't know is that he hit it more or less always. You ignore the fact that the mage could have started tossing his best level spells for the day. A sane DM could even make a case for the archer being overpowered at 30 damage/round and the mage at 40 damage/round, on the grounds that the mage is using up valuable spell slots, and the ranger is using 3 arrows costing some silver each. This hypothetical DM would be wrong, but not completely insane. Ergo, we can't even conclude that the archer has done the most damage. For instance, perhaps the split is Archer 30: (50% hit rate), mage 50 (2 orbs? an empowered scorching ray and some lucky dice rolling? make up your own favorite blasty combo), and dragon 10. Weren’t you the one who said we should be able to assume certain things, and have to account for aberrant happenstance, such as the DM is insane? We can assume that the thread is about the archer. The OP said as much. We can also assume that the DM is concerned about the archers power. Again the OP said as much. From that we can safely assume that the archer did indeed hit consistently, and that wizard most likely did not deal more damage than the archer. It is also likely that the other characters did not contribute much in a meaningful way, otherwise the OP would have stated that in his own defense. We were following you up to that rather fallacious conclusion that the archer did 60 damage. 6 is also untrue, since we know that he can out damage "most" of the other characters. This means there is at least one who is more damaging than him. Then he throws out specific numbers on how much damage "[their] melee fighters" do per turn. If the small party is archer, mage, dragon, only the dragon could be counted among their melee fighters, and that's if you stretch it. Thus, we know the approximate damage of at least one of the other members of the larger party. Conclusions A and B are not proven because they rest on point 5. Conclusion C is supported by the information we've been given, but if you want to pick nits, his point buy equivalent and wealth levels should have been their own numbered points. Unfortunately, conclusion C doesn't tell us anything except that one or more parameters of the game (at least 3) are non-standard. D through F are also not proven, because they rest upon A and B, which are not proven. Finally, because the conclusion that the archer is overpowered in comparison to the others rests upon several lettered points that are not proven, this conclusion has not been proven. *Sigh* I guess math really isn't your strong point huh? Ok let’s try this together. Firstly: His attacks per round look like so +17 +17 and +12. Refer to the first post for the break down, and then apply rapid shot, and improved rapid shot. Then we take the average result from a d20, (10.5) and add it to his attacks. With the result of 27, 27, and 22 (rounded down, as we usually do in this game). (10.5 + 17 =27.5 and 12+10.5 = 22.5) Not bad, and reasonable enough to assume that at least the first two shot will hit. Secondly: his damage is d8 +8. This does include +2 form weapon focus. Perhaps a house rule, or a rules faux paw. Either way that is how it was calculated during the fight. Now the average for a d8 is 4.5. So we have 4.5 +8 = 12.5 If two attacks hit that is 25 points of damage. (12.5 x 2 = 25) If all three attacks hit on the other hand it would be on average 37.5 points of damage. (12.5 X 3 = 37.5) So we were actually using the lower mean (middle number in a range of number ;)) for the range 25 – 37.5. This was to account for things like him rolling above average and/or him missing his 3rd attack. Now that we have our mean damage from his damage range, 30. We can say that he dealt on average 30 points of damage per round. The OP stated that there were 2 rounds. Thus we have 30 points of average damage a round X 2 rounds = 60 points of damage over two rounds. Now to prove point five: The mage casted invisibility on all of us and we snuck up on the "high preistess" boss and was able to kill her in 2 turns. What really ticked my GM off was dealing "90 freaking points of damage" in 2 turns. Form this we can assume one of two things: A) the BBEG had 90 hit points or less, as it went down after receiving that much damage. Or B the archer was able to turn out 45 points of damage per round for two rounds. (90/2 =45). The OP mentions that there “Main” mage is able to deal 35-45 points a turn. Which is comparable to the archer, however the mage has a certain amount of spell slots per day that are finite. The archer theoretically can shoot all day and all night, given it has enough arrows. And arrows are a mere 20/1gp, or 2sl each. A is more reasonable based on the information we have. Because if B were true it would mean the mage did in fact deal 80 of damage. (The mean between 35 – 45 is 40. 40 X 2 = 80) Thus contributing approximately %50 of the damage dealt that combat. Which would mean that it contributed in a meaningful way. And as that is not stated we cannot assume it to be true. If however A and B were true, then the archer would have contribute solely to the fight, killing the BBEG without the assistance from the other two. A and B may be true if one assumes good rolling, and maybe a critical hit. Thusly we are left with 2 reasonable conclusions, again based on the information we have on hand. A) The archer dealt 60 points of damage to the BBEG. Which accounted for 2/3rd of it hit points. Or B) The Archer dealt 90 points of damage to the BBEG. Which is approximately 100% of it hits points. I ruled out B as it is not as statistically likely as A. Thus Point 5 is sound, and so Conclusions A through B are as well. Which means that D through F are sound as well. Thus we see that the original conclusion of the archer being over powered compared to the other players is sound as well. Dragonul’s points: 1) The average damage of 30/round takes into account that the archer may miss once a round. Already covered above. 2) This supports my conclusions that A the archer is over powered for this campaign, and B ‘boards standard’ really cannot be applied. 3) As stated above it is reasonable to believe that neither Dispel magic, nor another useful spell was cast other then the invisibility. Because the OP did not mention it. If we get into the realm of hypothetically assuming based on what the boards average wizard could have done, then we really aren’t basing our conclusion in the knowledge we have. Instead we playing a game of “what if”. In which case it is also valid to assume that the wizard is not board standard, and is in fact level 3. Edit: TPK, if you're going to quote me, try to use my actual words instead of paraphrasing and calling it a quote. It's just dishonest and borders on libel. I just spent 30 seconds trying to find where I typed "hypocracy". I didn't. My spelling isn't that bad. The ludicrousness of misspelling a quote being libel aside. What was that you mentioned earlier about ad hominem attacks being against the CoC. Perhaps it has something to do with that hypocrisy you keep mentioning. |