Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Dethro 05-18-07, 03:16 AM	I'm playing in a game, it's not too bad, there are a few restrictions each time but they encourage people to play different things (current restriction is: No arcane spellcasters, only dwarves/elves/gnomes and subraces, alignment chaotic, non-evil). The irritating thing is, myself and one other person in the party are good at making characters. As in, I've got a Gnome Psion/Illithid Slayer at level 17 with AC of 43, and he has a Gnome Cleric/Crusader/Ruby KNight Vindicator. We are the main bashy characters, as well as the tanks (high AC). Now, since we have 'optimised' characters, the DM knows that our AC and attack is usually sufficient to hit most things that he would throw against us. The down side is that most things he throws against us cannot hit either of us 2. If he throws a monster against us that CAN prove a challenge to myself and my friend, the other 4 members of the party suffer since they are not as 'optimised'. The DM has taken to making monsters out of nowhere, changing stats for creatures on the fly and not adjusting the CR of them "since we are more powerful and should be able to handle more powerful creatures." Myself and my friend have stated to the DM that we are more than willing to help other characters when they are building the characters, since they don't quite know the rules and various items as well as we do, but he has been stating that he wants to kill off the party, and start at level 1 or 2, just so the group is more even again. Personally, I think that's a bit unfair to everyone, since the rest of the party is having fun playing their characters (apart from one guy who is compulsive about making characters that suck, then suiciding them and making new characters, that also suck), and it's only because myself and my friend are more powerful than our level that the entire group would get punished. I'm thinking about telling him to impose an xp penalty on the 'optimised' characters if we are so much more powerful than everyone else, since as I've explained to him, we make good characters. We can't sit down and purposely make bad characters just so we are in line with the rest of the party. The funny thing is, he is just as good at making characters as the rest of the party. Any suggestions on what to do?
Cold Napalm 05-18-07, 03:31 AM	Umm start over? No really, learning from level 1 is great way to teach players to be better. Tone down your characters? No really, why can't you gimp yourselves again?!? If your so up on the rules, adjusting yourself to the powerlevel of the rest of your party sould be a breeze. Get a new DM? If this one can't handle the power difference in the party (and this can be hard...especially with a drama queen and powergamer mix) then maybe another is in order. Find a new group? Yeah in general drama queens and powergamers mix like oil and water. Guess what pumpkin, thats you.
Fatalis_902 05-18-07, 06:38 AM	I'd call Storwind Fallacy on you, Napalm, but that's not my concern, and it's not worth my time. Now, for the OP, I like your idea of helping the others optimize their characters. Talk to your DM about the retraining rules, and see what you can do for them. Except for the suicidal one. Don't help him with his characters, but watch his behavioral patterns, and make note of any major changes. If you believe he is becoming increasingly neurotic, talk to someone who can help him. People who suicide characters regularly tend to have problems elsewhere in their lives, and they are symbolcally ending said problems for good by killing characters that they make to represent those problems. Alright, I'm done with my tangent. Talk to your DM, help the others optimize, DON'T LET THE PARTY BE TPK'd BECAUSE THE DM IS TIRED OF IT. That is a knee-jerk reaction, and is bad DMing form. If he wants to start over, he should just talk to the rest of the group, and see what they think about it.
odinsmightytoad 05-18-07, 07:53 AM	First, what is the make up of the rest of the party? Second, are they truly that much lower in power than you two? I would also have your DM come to this thread and have a look at what we are saying and have him/her post their reactions to help better facilitate a welcome solution to this problem. I would have to say also does the rest of the group enjoy a high-powered game or are they just fine with medium or low power? If they don't want a heavy optimization game then you might need to adjust your selves. If they want high power then you get to adjust them! Come back with a bit more and we can then give you mountains of help!
Optimized_Commoner 05-18-07, 08:28 AM	:eek: Well treat this DM nicely. He's using Psionics and TOB, which is pretty rare and cool. Abuse his trust too much and he'll polymorph into a crotchety old man who will shake a stick at you say, "No sunny, you're only using core". True story, it happened to a friend of a friend of mine. Just remember this saying by Sun Tzu: "The true optimizer knows when to optimize and when not optimize." Your builds aren't Pun-pun, but that doesn't matter. Hell, they're not all that broken (except possibly your illithid slayer, that PrC is not balanced). The point is that you've built characters that are more powerful than anything of that level that the DM or other players can build. You can be a little proud of your skills that you can do this, but you should instead be proud of your common sense for not doing this. Why do you want to be more powerful than your friends and the challenges you face? That's just stupid.
Geogoose 05-18-07, 09:10 AM	I, also, think the DM is being fairly reasonable to you guys. He seems to be communicating straight up what the issue is and why it is unbalancing the game. He really is in a tough spot. To challenge the high powered PC's he will trample on the mediocre ones and monsters suited for the low powered guys will get crushed by the optimized characters. If you aren't too keen on starting over at level 1, maybe bargain for 1) reworking your PC's to the power level of the other guys or vice versa 2) start campaign at mid-level 7-10 or so.
Neonsamurai 05-18-07, 10:10 AM	Hmm this got pretty long ... guess I got a little carried away with it. Unbalanced groups were a major problem in our playing group, especially in the higher level ranges. As you already correctly stated, your two characters are quite above the average power level of the rest of the group. This puts the DM in a dilemma. It is horribly difficult and more often than not impossible (I speak from my own experience) to provide challenging encounters that don't kill off the rest of the party in such a situation. Yes there are ways to mitigate armor class but it should not be the DM's way to metagame in that direction. Character optimization is an art and it is a lot of fun, but it also carries a lot of responsibility. Playing an optimized character is not only about power, but also about fitting in the power fabric of the existing group and game world. The DM can't do much about the situation, if he wants to treat all players in a fair way and he then has only two choices. Either he designs encounters to match the upper range of the party's power or the medium range when designing "challenging" encounters. This will result in either the encounter getting stomped over by the two high powered characters (and thus making the encounter rather boring) or in getting the rest of the party killed, maimed and incapacitated (which will cause some objection by the "lower powered" characters' players). To solve such a situation has proven very difficult in our group and in most cases lead us to abandon the campaign and start over after a lot of discussion about how we could prevent such a power imbalance in the next campaign. We tried countless of variants, including restriction of sourcebooks, classes, races, spells and what not but it just did not work. Some day we realized that the player has to take some responsibility in maintaining party balance - the DM alone cannot achieve this. One way is that the experienced players, as it was already suggested, teach inexperienced players to get more for their bang. But this only works to a certain degree due to the inherent power imbalance between casters and mundane characters (and don't tell me there is none). I know how tempting it is to get the last bit of power out of your character since I am myself an avid character optimizer, but eventually it will ruin the game and I came to the conclusion that I have to restrict myself to minimize the threat of a campaign dissolving because of a power unbalance in the party. Just ask yourself: Do I really have to use that broken Venom Fire? Do I need to abuse Split Ray ? Is searching for the most powerful spell, feat or magic item in any obscure source book the right way? Is it really necessary that my character can single handedly defeat an enemy which has a CR of 2 or more higher his character level ? It is possible. No question. And for an experienced optimizer it is easily done. But you don't have to, just because you can. Probably I'll now get beaten with the SW-Fallacy stick, but I don't care. I am of the firm opinion that CO out of party and game world context just ruins the game and is a sign of a player that mainly just wants to be powerful (consciously or not). I don't say that such a player intentionally ruins the game, in fact I believe that such players (and often the DM and the rest of the party, too) don't even realize what they are doing to the game until it is too late. Just think about it. It's a game to play together, not to "be the best".
wonlee76 05-18-07, 10:35 AM	Personally, as a DM, I really hate it when there's a large disparity in power within the group for the exact reasons you identified. If I tailor encounters for the powerful PCs, the less powerful PCs get torn apart. If I tailor encounters for the less powerful PCs, the more powerful PCs just stomp them really really good. Its a "no win" situtation for a DM since some segment of the PCs will be "bored" to some degree. Your idea Dethro is a fair middle ground given the circumstances. Take the equivalent of an XP penalty. It could simply be the DM treats you as 1 or 2 level highers than the non-optimized/less optimized PCs or whatever but its a reasonable middle ground since the non-optimized/less-optimized PCs will eventually become higher level than your optimized PC, which will hopefully balance things out within the group. The other alternative is start from scratch (or use PHB II re-build rules) to tone down the high powered PCs or to power up the low powered PCs.
the_Luggage 05-18-07, 11:35 AM	This happened to me in my first game of D'n'D, except I was in the unenviable position of underpowered newbie with a group who had one or two players bending and breaking the game to achieve near god like power. So I had to learn other ways to be effective. Monster has and AC to high for me to hit/SR too big for me to get at/BAB so high he's auto-hitting me? Then I'll magic jar into something with a bit more survivability and fight harder, or focus on buffing those who can hit, or use my maxed out knowledge skills to figure out weaknesses. Yeah, it is kinda sucky to be relegated like this, but in another way it was a good experience. It showed me that D'n'D can be rewarding on a number of levels, including just trying to survive when massively out of your debt. Plus the multiple character deaths eventually deranged my chaotic good necromancer into a CN necromancer and had the game gone on, he probably would have ended up Evil. In my current game, all the players built their character concept first, and we play it to the hilt, but we also try and squeeze as much power out of our chosen builds as we can- and we help each other. If I see a feat I think my friend should look at, I point him at it. Learn your lessons from this and help new players build their characters, or take the hit for the team and sub optimise just a little bit.
Cold Napalm 05-18-07, 12:19 PM	Yesh, I hate to admit this, but SW fallacy gets thrown around for anything by pro-opt people doesn't it...and I'm pro-optimization. The problem is that nowhere are we talking about roleplaying aspect of the game. Drama queens gimp themselves on purpose. Powergamer optimize...this is a mechanical issue, not a roleplaying one. For all we know, the optimized characters are better roleplayed. So no, SW fallacy has nothing to do with this. As for bring the non-optimized people up to par...well see the problem isn't JUST about build. Sure you up their build this time and they are fine for a short while. If they don't LEARN how to do it themselves however, in a couple levels, you'll have the same issues again. Stating over helps with the learning if the two optimized players take the time to slowly teach optimizing skills. They are at this point too high level at this point. If they were level 1-8 range, it would be okay 8-12 and maybe...anything above then and it's better to start over.
CCS 05-18-07, 02:10 PM	Personally, I think that's a bit unfair to everyone, since the rest of the party is having fun playing their characters ~ and it's only because myself and my friend are more powerful than our level that the entire group would get punished. We can't sit down and purposely make bad characters just so we are in line with the rest of the party. Any suggestions on what to do? You're right. It IS unfare that the others in your group will be penalized because of the two of you are so much more powerfull. And you know what? It's YOUR fault this will happen to them. So what do you purpose to do about it? A mere xp penalty inflicted upon you won't neccecarily prevent the other from being overwhelmed. Why? Because the DM will still feel obligated to throw something challenging enough at the party for the two of you to play with. And on the purely RP side (assuming there is one), at this level you've no doubt attracted the attention of people/gods etc and likely made some powerfull enemies. They won't stop coming just because you aren't getting any points. Or at least they shouldn't.... Essentially your presence in party is creating a gravity well. You've become the axis that things/events around you are operating on. You're a magnet. A lightning rod. You see this happen in comic books alot - a new character is created and as if by magic a cast of unique villains pop up just to fight them.... Now you & your friend might survive it. But the others? They've been reduced (wether they realize it or not) to supporting cast/collateral damage. So what to do? .You're present characters leave the group for awhile until the rest catch up .The rest of the party dithces your characters. .You work with the DM to craft some reasonable ending to this campaign. Then you start over at 1st level, new characters etc. What to do about aproaching how you make characters? You don't have to make BAD characters. All you have to do is simply choose not to optimize them to such a degree that you reach the point you're at currently. Just because a book lists some option doesn't mean it must be used..... And if you really are so much better than the other players? Have the DM impose that xp penalty on you right from the start. Your DM should also not be letting you take every option, have every item etc that you want. The situation you're in right now is largely of your own doing, true. But the DMs not innocent either.
Archtyrant Terevoth 05-18-07, 02:53 PM	Personally, as a DM, I really hate it when there's a large disparity in power within the group for the exact reasons you identified. If I tailor encounters for the powerful PCs, the less powerful PCs get torn apart. If I tailor encounters for the less powerful PCs, the more powerful PCs just stomp them really really good. Its a "no win" situtation for a DM since some segment of the PCs will be "bored" to some degree. This is exactly the situation where nerfs are required.
devinmdp 05-18-07, 06:13 PM	The problem is that nowhere are we talking about roleplaying aspect of the game. Drama queens gimp themselves on purpose. Powergamer optimize...this is a mechanical issue, not a roleplaying one. For all we know, the optimized characters are better roleplayed. So no, SW fallacy has nothing to do with this. I think sometimes people have it a little backwards. Anyone with half a brain can design a fully optimized character and then roleplay the hell out of it. So the issue has absolutely nothing to do with good or bad roleplaying. The problem is really one of priorities. When I play a PC in a home campaign, my desire is to come up with a roleplaying concept and then design the PC to fit that concept. The concept I come up with has nothing whatsoever to do with power level, and I NEVER introduce anything resembling power into my concept. For example, I can definitely decide I want to play a pyromaniac arcane caster. That's a role playing concept (albeit a fairly shallow one used for an example) that speaks nothing about power level. In fact, I can play that concept using straight PHB stuff only. Now maybe I want to throw in a PrC dealing with fire magic. But a concept should never be "I want to be the most powerful pyromaniacal mage ever". When you design a roleplaying concept that is completely divorced from any notion of power level, then it frees you to look for the best fit feat and class wise to your concept. And given the amazing combination of possible feats and classes and PrCs available in the game, the chance that the best fit for your role playing concept is also the most optimized combination power wise should be almost infinitely remote. What a lot of players should realize is that, assuming they have a good DM, then by definition it doesn't matter how much you optimize your PC, since the DM will adjust encounters to fit your power level accordingly. The problem is that too many groups have DMs incapable of doing this, or who slavishly follow the CR guidelines, or who only run canned product where there is not a lot of room for adjustment (or DMs don't feel comfortable making adjustments). But in a well run campaign, the only thing that should matter is the relative power and effectiveness of the PCs with regard to each other. And even then, unless the campaign is so one-dimensional that an optimized combat PC overwhlems the playing, a good DM can mix enough stuff so that other PCs should have a good time. There are so many ways to design an "encounter".....melee combat oriented, ranged combat oriented, trap oriented, diplomacy oriented, etc. Devin
devinmdp 05-18-07, 06:16 PM	One more thing as an example. In my new campaign I am starting, I told the players that they are free to optimize their PCs, but that I will adjust the encounters to accommodate the power level of the party. This caused a lot of worry because one player wanted to play an Arcane Hierophant and at least two other players claim that class is utterly broken. They wanted me to ban the class. I told them no...I won't ban it. I like the class. I don't think it is broken. And I want it available for my NPCs. But, I told them, if you as a group think it is broken, then by all means come to a players' agreement to ban it amongst the PCs. My point is, self-regulation is a wonderful thing. Devin
Cold Napalm 05-18-07, 07:33 PM	I think sometimes people have it a little backwards. Anyone with half a brain can design a fully optimized character and then roleplay the hell out of it. So the issue has absolutely nothing to do with good or bad roleplaying. The problem is really one of priorities. Actually, in this case, the problem isn't even one about priorities. It doesn't matter what order they did thing in character creation. The problem is that there is a MECHANICAL imbalance. The roleplaying aspect has nothing to do with the OP's problem. Mechanically, him and his optimizing friends are just way too powerful compared to the rest of the party. A REALLY good DM can handle a REALLY big difference in power. I can't. I can handle some difference in power. This DM has said he can't deal with the inter party power difference. That's all that matter in the end anyways.
danielinthewolvesden 05-18-07, 09:00 PM	Oh heck, this one is easy. Battles often consist of either BBEG and mooks or just lots of mooks. So, the DM for you should design the battles with BBEG that go for you two and mooks for the others, or if it is just lots of mooks, multiple mooks go for you guys while only one mook goes for the others. Battles are fun for all. Next he should custome design some really cool magic items that just scream "I am for the CN Dwarf rogue" or "I am for the CG cleric", and drop them in sorta subtle-like. They will NOT be for you two. Slight boost for each of "the other guys" and the item should be tailored to that PC's needs or weakness. Finally, he should send an item destroying monster against each of you (with your full knowledge and agreement, it will be a set up) that will destroy an item or two from each of you, nerfing you back down about a CR. Or perhaps he can arrange a encounter where two PC's must each sacrifice a powerful item, and it "just happens" to be you two. Slight nerf for you two. OK?
RainerNader 05-18-07, 09:21 PM	Myself and my friend have stated to the DM that we are more than willing to help other characters when they are building the characters, since they don't quite know the rules and various items as well as we do, but he has been stating that he wants to kill off the party, and start at level 1 or 2, just so the group is more even again. <b>This</b> is your problem. Your DM isn't very happy with the game right now. This happens from time to time with D&D -- with such an organic game with endless permutations and possibilities, sometimes you look around and go, "you know, this just isn't doing it for me, and I'd like to start over." But it seems your DM is handling it in some sort of strange passive-aggressive fashion. Can I ask why you're so opposed to starting over?
kelvinaw273 05-19-07, 05:01 AM	If you are good at optimizing you can generally adjust your game balance by changing the emphasis of the optimization: 1) Over-specialize, so that you are tremendously good at one thing, but not at anything else. If your currently good at fighting, alter your emphasis to make you fantastic at just one type of fighting (the classic one-trick pony tripmeister or grappler are good examples). This means that in any non-applicable situation, you have to rely on the rest of the party, and the DM can fortify foes against you without that power-up effecting everyone else. 2) Over-generalize, so that you are only moderately good at a lot of things rather than very good at one or two. Optimized generalists are nifty because they act as a good reserve, there is no situation they cannot contribute to, yet they don't outshine the rest of the party. However these options don't alter the situation as is, which is that you have a disparity in power between 1/3 of the party and the rest. Now there are some answers to this, but they are not nice to your characters: 1) Destroy your equipment - if you lose a lot of your gear in D&D, it down-powers you. A disjunction or a sundering attacker can do a LOT of damage like this. 2) Destroy your levels - a level-draining attacker can really do some heavy damage too. If it is something that drains permanent levels, it can take you down far enough to even the score.
Neonsamurai 05-19-07, 06:21 AM	Oh heck, this one is easy. [...] So, the DM for you should design the battles with BBEG that go for you two and mooks for the others [...] Next he should custome design some really cool magic items that just scream "I am for the CN Dwarf rogue" [...] Finally, he should send an item destroying monster against each of you [...] Or perhaps he can arrange a encounter where two PC's must each sacrifice a powerful item, and it "just happens" to be you two. Well it is in fact not that easy. Why ? Because it applies artificial barriers and rules to the game which break the game world's innate system of logic. This makes the world the DM creates seem artificial and any good DM wants to create a (within the boundaries of suspension of disbelief) realistic and consistent world, a world with its own working logic. What you do is, you convert a probably atmospheric drama into a cheap TV-show like Hercules. Yeah some people like to play that way, some however don't and for those it is just not acceptable to swing the nerf bat so rigorously and to have double standards on the characters.
Comus 05-19-07, 10:33 AM	I think sometimes people have it a little backwards. Anyone with half a brain can design a fully optimized character and then roleplay the hell out of it. Agreed. If you've got any roleplaying skill at all, then you can roleplay a powerful character just as well as you would a weak one. Perhaps not in the same way, but at the same level of quality. [...] But a concept should never be "I want to be the most powerful pyromaniacal mage ever". [...] Why? That was Raistlin's motivation, basically, and he was certainly an interesting character. Oh, it might be darned shallow, and probably leads down the left-handed path, but it's just as viable a concept as "I recently was kicked out of the army for disobeying an officer because I left my post during battle in order to answer my father's distress call. My greatest hope was to become one of the Knights of Ulthar, though it is now shattered. I spend my days..." and so on. And given the amazing combination of possible feats and classes and PrCs available in the game, the chance that the best fit for your role playing concept is also the most optimized combination power wise should be almost infinitely remote. But, given the amazing combination of possible feats and classes, as well as the option of changing the flavor of classes, there's no reason you can't pull quite a bit of power out of any concept, if you're willing to try.
AtmaWeapon 05-19-07, 01:43 PM	(...) level 17 (...) All I needed to see. Congratulations. You have officially surpassed the level at which D&D stops being fun unless your entire playerbase is extremely well versed in the rules, and is capable and competant of building a character that is not totally, as they say in the vernacular, "teh weaksauce". Level 16 is really the D&D Breaking Point - once the words "fort save or die" and "does a 67 hit?" start getting thrown around as much "I five foot step", the game is basically over. Just tell your DM you'll retire, but you'd appreciate it he'd at least run one adventure every month or two where you get to break out the old broken characters and stomp through some hellhole. And honestly, for the future, don't optimize so much. NOT BECAUSE IT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH ROLEPLAYING OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE, but because with your current group, it sounds like the same thing will happen over again. Realistically speaking, if someone hasn't at least learned the rules in general by level 14+, they're never going to.
danielinthewolvesden 05-19-07, 04:06 PM	Well it is in fact not that easy. Why ? Because it applies artificial barriers and rules to the game which break the game world's innate system of logic. This makes the world the DM creates seem artificial and any good DM wants to create a (within the boundaries of suspension of disbelief) realistic and consistent world, a world with its own working logic. What you do is, you convert a probably atmospheric drama into a cheap TV-show like Hercules. Yeah some people like to play that way, some however don't and for those it is just not acceptable to swing the nerf bat so rigorously and to have double standards on the characters. Well, why would not the BBEG go for the biggest danger first? Makes sense to me. And having the two players volunteer to give up a magic item each in a RP way in order to further game balance is hardly "swinging the nerf bat so rigorously"- it is barely tapping them with it.:rolleyes:
Serrin 05-20-07, 06:48 AM	Alternatively, play a different game. D&D is a game where system mastery is strongly encouraged and rewarded. You can play with super-optimized characters (on both sides), or you can play mediocre characters, or even weaksauce characters (especially with DMs who think "dude, D&D is like a movie, heroes aren't allowed to die"). Mixing optimized and unoptimized characters is like Michael Jordan going down to a court at the park and joining a pickup game. It's fun for a little while, but in the long run, it's no challenge for him, and no fun for anyone else. If you can't enjoy making unoptimized characters, and your friends can't enjoy system mastery, and the power imbalance causes the game not to be fun as-is, you're probably best off splitting the group or finding something else fun to do. Or play something so bizarre that by the time you figure out how to optimize it, the campaign is over.
Optimized_Commoner 05-20-07, 08:46 AM	This caused a lot of worry because one player wanted to play an Arcane Hierophant and at least two other players claim that class is utterly broken. I just noticed this. What the hell? Yeah, they're a wizard/druid who can wear armour, wildshape and cast spells through animals. All nice things and I'm a huge fan of the 2 in one classes. But broken? They're doomed to be 3 levels behind the curve in both of their power-sets. If anything anyone picking this class is going to be weaker than their party mates, if the other players are making optimal choices. The 4 skill points, 3/4 combat progression and d6 hit dice are good features as well. However the golden rule of optimization is never ever give up a caster level. AH is very far away from being broken. I'd still play it in a heartbeat, thematically I love druids and wizards and the chance to play both in a Merlinesque way rules. But not broken. At all. Do they think Mystic Theurge is broken as well? (admitedly AH is more powerful than MT)
Shaftiel 05-20-07, 05:03 PM	Well... first, I agree with Napalm. It's rough to learn the basics at 17th level and you should seriously consider restarting at a very, very low level. Even at 1st level, the person playing a divine caster needs to learn 20+ spells. At 17th level it's insane: there's no way you can reasonably expect them to learn the basic rules, and hundreds of spells (plus powers, as you are using psi), and tons of feats, etc., all at once. So of course they're going to be gimped. Second, I agree with cutting down on the optimization. My group (the players) actually banned one of my characters from reappearing and I am both awesomely proud of myself and very happy to comply. OR... ...because your characters are obviously superior to the others in the group and likely to remain so for the forseeable future I'd give them an LA that increases as they increase in level. From what you're describing I'd peg it at +2 or +3 at 17th level - meaning you'd be running a 14th or 15th level character. Is this unfair? Not at all. The primary goal of D&D is for everyone to have fun, and this would let the less skilled players contribute and the DM not worry so much about "appropriate challenges". If you are the min-maxer you think you are you should not only be able to pull your weight despite the LA, you should still be able to shine. Think of it as a personal challenge that increases the fun for everyone. -Shaftiel
Leo 05-20-07, 07:19 PM	To be honest, starting the campaign at lv 17 was a very bad idea if half the group has newbies. D&D isn't a simple game, even at low levels, and at high lvels, there's so much combinations possible that nobody can grasp it whitout plenty of game experience I agree with your Dm. The group is stuck into a hole, with the party members at diferent power levels and no easy way out or it. But if you restart at low levels things will be much easier to balance.
lordofskulls 05-20-07, 08:50 PM	There are many ways to solve this problem but nerfing the players isn't good form. You should talk this out with the DM and other players. By the time you get to level 17 if you made your character right you could easily be the Ruler of the Universe. Either restart the game at level 1 or power up the weaker characters.
Ace_of_time 05-20-07, 11:41 PM	I have two simple ones. 1. Just go into support mode and if they need you then come to their aid. 2.Sit down with the group and talk about it. This is, most of the time, the last thing said but is most help. Maybe they don't want to start over ether. Maybe after hearing what your DM has planed for the next game you will all want to start over but you will never know without talking about it.
Dethro 05-21-07, 04:01 AM	First off, I want to say that the rest of the group has actually been playing for longer than I have. They were playing together for a year or so before I joined. We've gone through several campaigns in the last 3 or so years, and the current DM's previous campaign was one of the more enjoyable ones. The DM is using ToB but has decided that A) there is no increase in Initiator level for non-related classes (i.e. anything that isn't a ToB core or prestige class), and B) After my friend's current character dies, the DM is going to ban the book, since it is overpowered. Try as I might, I have not been able to stop that, which is irritating, but not much I can do. I'm against starting over, simply because we are on an interesting mission, and I don't really enjoy having to invest a lot of time into breathing life and personality into a new character, all over again. I used to go through characters almost every week, but now, although I constantly come up with new and interesting characters, I prefer to stick with one for as long as possible. The rest of the party is as follows: Cleric/Alienist (specialises in summoning creatures for battlefield control) Druid/Blighter (has no weapon, either wildshapes, uses blightfire, or if he has spells, uses them) Scout (Main weapon: Bow of Slaying, AaEG). Player is an 'old-school' gamer, always wanting to go back to 1st/2nd-edition. and for the main irritation of the group's character, it is currently a dwarf fighter (was a dwarf soulborn/ironsoul forgemaster, then an elf fighter copying 300, then a dwarf fighter) The Druid/Blighter is counted as around the same power level as myself and my friend. ---------- The suicidal character's player has always been like this. I was like him too, constantly making up a character, getting bored of it because I'm not in the spotlight, doing stupid things and sometimes threatening the party until you get yourself killed off by monsters or the party, then creating a new character. His first character we actually tried to roleplay with him, but he plays all of his characters the same: I have things my way, I want whatever I want, and nobody is going to tell me what to do. --------- Whenever someone has a thought or a problem, I encourage them to come to me or the DM, since we are, quite honestly, the most powerful people when creating characters. We would be pointed out straight away as the people who build the best characters. More often than not, everyone does do this, but a few just cannot be bothered. The one-death-a-week player and the old-school gamer most often don't, but the rest do. -------- I always tend to design my characters with a few flaws, I try to include back-story so that he can be involved into the world, I even tell the DM straight out that my character was built for such and such (in this case, myself and my 'brother gnome' [yes, myself and the Ruby Knight Vindicator are both gnomes] had our villages wiped out by mind flayers. We ended up meeting up when we both were attacking lone flayers, and we found we had common cause. We have been adventuring ever since. He's pretty slow-witted but has a good heart, whenever we are in a tavern he'll buy everyone a round. He also borrowed money from me years ago, so whenever he finds money he gives me half to 'pay back' the debt, forgetting that he has paid it off years ago. I let him simply because I see him as a bit of a good-natured fool throwing his money away, and I spend the money he gives me on items that would help him out and give them to him as a present.) Our game is more tilted towards combat/traps at the moment, most people get bored with actual in-game roleplay apart from a bit of joking around. ------- I have pointed out to the DM at the moment that, no matter what level we start out at, myself and others will end up more powerful than other characters, simply by virtue of good knowledge of the system; My previous character before we had a tpk was a barbarian/warblade, who was pretty dumb (mental stats all lower than 8), but wanted to be just like the pit fighter in the group, because he saw him in combat once and he was so good. My character was slightly childlike, as he was thrown into barbarian camp (in-joke) at a young age. He gets frightened of combat and tries to find ways around it, but when it starts and the blood pumps, he gets into it and often forgets what happened. This character was around level 7, and he was overpowered apparently. ------------- I hope all of this helps shed a bit more light on the situation. We've had the old-school player state that he's getting tired and starting to think that he has better things to do on friday nights. Then again, that might just be because the DM ended up quitting the old-schooler's campaign out of frustration over his rules-changing and screwing things around, a point that we all agreed on.
Ace_of_time 05-21-07, 12:51 PM	Maybe It's time for you to DM. It might give you a break and you might grew to like it.
Vrael 05-21-07, 01:16 PM	-snip- I have pointed out to the DM at the moment that, no matter what level we start out at, myself and others will end up more powerful than other characters, simply by virtue of good knowledge of the system; My previous character before we had a tpk was a barbarian/warblade, who was pretty dumb (mental stats all lower than 8), but wanted to be just like the pit fighter in the group, because he saw him in combat once and he was so good. My character was slightly childlike, as he was thrown into barbarian camp (in-joke) at a young age. He gets frightened of combat and tries to find ways around it, but when it starts and the blood pumps, he gets into it and often forgets what happened. This character was around level 7, and he was overpowered apparently. -snip- A warblade without a decent INT mod is nerfing himself, hardly broken. Warblades are supposed to be intelligent fighters.
calvinNhobbes 05-21-07, 03:55 PM	As a DM, when I find a PC falling behind on the power curve I fix it using treasure. Equipment counts for alot of the power balance. A well placed custom magic item can really give a character a good boost and help define their purpose in the group.
john_045412 05-21-07, 04:53 PM	As a DM, when I find a PC falling behind on the power curve I fix it using treasure. Equipment counts for alot of the power balance. A well placed custom magic item can really give a character a good boost and help define their purpose in the group. I was just going to type a response along these lines. If the party is happy with high powered campaigns... then this is the way to go. Magic items could also prove to be part of the problem (like a 43AC). DMs who let players use all books to make characters in my experience are also the kind that let players buy magic items from the DMG and other sources like they are ordering something off ebay. Allowing both will get you into the overpowered territory alot more quickly. Add custom magic items based on DMG pricing and look out!
Ace_of_time 05-21-07, 08:21 PM	I was wondering if you could post what all your useing to your PCs AC. like DEX, NA, and the like.
Dethro 05-21-07, 10:59 PM	I ran a campaign previously, and am booked to run another one after this campaign finishes. My next campaign will have a big plot that will be acheived no matter what the players do. It's one of those things where, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. Blame the parties that went before you for screwing the world up-kinda thing. The last campaign got fired by the players because they didn't like my 'railroading'. Then another one of the players ran a game. He quit running a game soon after. Sure, I used a tidal wave to stop the players heading towards one place, then turning around and going another way at the first sign of anything that looked like a quest (they stated that they did it on purpose too!), but the next guy in line, when we tried to exit a cave we had taken 2 steps into, he threw a 'black wall' behind us. We couldn't teleport out, we couldn't go back, he basically said, no matter what you do you can only go forward. He did this because he didn't have anything planned for us roaming around the outside of the mountain. The warblade was the reason that the DM removed the rule that 1/2 your other character levels goes to your IL, because it was 'too powerful in comparison to spellcasters.' Despite having a low Int, I wanted to take warblade because it was the only one that fit the concept. Plus, later on I was going to shift into Frenzied Berzerker (in about 5 levels or so). I even pointed out to the DM that as soon as I got my +6 BAB, I stopped using maneuvers most of the time, since they weren't worth the trade off of possibly getting in a second attack. Well, out of the entire party, my AC is the highest (at 43). The second-highest is the cleric/alienist at around 37. He has no weapons, only a rod of wonder. He is 'Mad Gerald'. The third-highest is the gnome druid/blighter, and the gnome cleric/crusader/RkV, both at around 33-odd. Everyone else is usually around 30. The problem with using treasure is that people don't bother half the time. The elf scout doesn't have a cloak of resistance at all, he spent most of his money on the bow of the solars from AaEG (each hit, DC20 fort save or die, no matter what you are), and that is what ends up killing most monsters. We play a gruesome game of russian roulette, waiting for some monsters to roll a 1 on a fort save. Strangely enough, that has killed more monsters of a decent challenge rating that we have faced, than anything else. I've managed to kill off about 30-odd level 3 or 4 'pirates' that we faced with a fully-powered energy wave, but apart from that my main attack, apart from either attacking with my sword gauntlet and/or using deep impact, is using my will-save or turn emo for 3 rounds power (it makes you attack yourself and score automatic crits for 3 rounds), my fort-save or take 25-odd d6 of damage (disintegrate), or my ref-save or take energy damage of some sort. I made my character up to be as versatile as possible, and even though his main 'overpoweredness' is his AC, it's whats causing the problem. My highest save is 20 (will), the rest are around 15 (fort) and 12 (ref), so I do tend to fail some saves. I have 150-odd hp, only because I've had to pump up my con every chance I got. My knowledge skills are almost all maxed out (I am the brain of the party after all). That's about all that defines my character mechanically. I always burn 20-odd pp each morning for sustenance and Inertial Armor, and sometimes I also do overland flight. If people want, I will post my character up here, full specifications, for you to look at. I know the two things that the DM is really complaining about though: 1) ANYTHING Tome of Battle; and 2) My AC. I'm seriously thinking of just teleporting off to the home city, finding a replacement member for the party, teleporting him into the party, and leaving. (Replacement at this time would be a totemist/barbarian/fist of the forest/totem rager, who wears no armor).
Dethro 05-25-07, 03:15 AM	Well, I've decided 'for the good of the party', to retire my Gnome. He's going to go off and stop some illithids from overunning a city of gnomes. He'll give the party a few gifts before he goes, and then he'll port in my replacement: a dwarf berzerker called Gotrek Gurnison. Here's hoping that a pure damage machine can help keep the party alive just as much as a healer/blaster/bashie/tank/porter could.
Shade_Damara 05-25-07, 03:23 PM	So you enjoy railroading and stealing characters from published stories? I'll add you to my list of people I'd never play with. While you're at it, have someone play Felix too and if your DM doesn't mind perhaps Sigmar could show up and you can just have a good ole time not being creative in the least.
Downtym 05-25-07, 05:55 PM	As in, I've got a Gnome Psion/Illithid Slayer at level 17 with AC of 43, and he has a Gnome Cleric/Crusader/Ruby KNight Vindicator. We are the main bashy characters, as well as the tanks (high AC). As an aside, a 43 AC at level 17 isn't that high. Level 17 BAB would be +17. Assume a +4 or +5 weapon, +21 or +22. Assume a a +6 to +10 strength, +27 to +32. Add in weapon focuses for +29 to +34. So depending on the type of creature, it's not infeasible for a CR 17 to have an attack bonus in the range of 29-34 (or higher, depending). This is from purely "natural" talents - excepting the +4 to +5 weapon - and is easily subject to increases from spells, supernatural abilities, and extraordinary abilities. Also, AC is easily mitigated through a combination of effects that route around it. First, there is no true "tanking" in D&D. Unlike MMORPG's, melee warriors in D&D have no "taunt" ability or other mechanic which immediately forces an opponent to focus entirely on them - there are some exceptions, but the general rule is that you cannot "taunt". So, the DM's best tactic is to route around the tank immediately. Ignore what you can't hit and go for the squishies. Second, touch spells are the bane of anyone who relies on a high AC. With few exceptions, it is very difficult to get a touch AC higher than 20 to 30. Third, tripping is an effective tactic to reduce a warrior's AC by 4. Disarming a shield can further reduce it. Fourth, there are the spells which ignore conventional AC and go straight for the gut check: Ray of Enfeeblement (Which can force you to check your load and adjust Max AC or be in trouble due to overloading), Waves of Exhaustion (Reduces Dexterity), and the twin threats of Energy Drain and Enervation (Convenient ways to reduce any character's usefulness in combat or kill them). Fourth, grappling is incredibly effective at reducing the utility of high AC. I'm willing to bet that a Cachalot Whale at CR 7 with a grapple check of 33 would have a 50/50 shot of pinning most high AC builds. Once a melee is grabbed and pinned, they are removed from combat. So, yeah, that's what I got so far. And I haven't had to break open anything outside the PHB yet.
Downtym 05-25-07, 05:59 PM	The elf scout doesn't have a cloak of resistance at all, he spent most of his money on the bow of the solars from AaEG (each hit, DC20 fort save or die, no matter what you are), and that is what ends up killing most monsters. We play a gruesome game of russian roulette, waiting for some monsters to roll a 1 on a fort save. I would suggest to your DM that Death Ward may be a spell he needs to look at.
TarlSS 05-27-07, 06:50 AM	Sounds like your DM doesn't use enough casters. A great way to equalize among a party of heavy melee folks is to throw lots of casters at them. It's a perfectly valid tactic; it's the other axis of the...tactics of killing people tree.
albinomonkeyking 05-27-07, 12:26 PM	Your character doesn't seem too strong to me, although the fact that the entire party has an AC of 30 or higher is mind-boggling to me. Almost none of my PC's ever care about AC. Anywho, if you are an optimizer (which I know TOB for multiclassing optimizers is a godsend; not so much for the DM) then my suggestion - if you want to continue to play with this group - is get used to having unfair treatment. If you are given less magic items or treated more harshely that is often the way to balance. Is it unfair? Yeah. Is it to be expected? Yes, if the DM wants balance in party he must unbalance rewards or consequences. (or at least in this situation)
Dethro 05-28-07, 12:39 AM	So you enjoy railroading and stealing characters from published stories? I'll add you to my list of people I'd never play with. While you're at it, have someone play Felix too and if your DM doesn't mind perhaps Sigmar could show up and you can just have a good ole time not being creative in the least. I suggest you never visit this (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=424838) thread then. It's full of people making characters from published stories. As for railroading, the story I have planned isn't railroading. Just like ALL stories, it has a plan. What the PCs do to accomplish that plan is up to them. They will be a group of adventurers who are contracted to a wizard/psion, whose gang was the 'last big thing' to come along. Now they are old and retired, and the demons/devils that they stopped the plans of, are coming back. There are a fair few twists and turns in the story, but the main plan is that an artifact that was shattered by the previous party is capable of removing the taint of evil from... well evil. A Devil that was mistakenly, due to a ritual, created to be not evil along with his sister, has been ruling the level of hell that was razed by the previous groups actions. His sister was imprisoned by a group of sword archons, and as a result, he is planning a war on the heavens to get his sister back. He needs a horde to help him do so, but he doesn't want to inflict such evil on the heavens, so he needs this artefact. Unfortunately, the PCs are in the way. If they manage to stop him (since after all, they are a company under the wizard, so they are used to taking orders), then all good. If they don't manage to stop him (which, knowing my party a fair bit better than you do, I'd say is also likely) then they have another story arc to follow. .... Wow.... what a railroad plot. Personally, I'd have to say that you had no use to post in this thread except add your own pithy two cents to the conversation about how you wouldn't play with me and how I have no imagination. Leave that kind of stuff in the playground mate. As an aside, a 43 AC at level 17 isn't that high. Level 17 BAB would be +17. Assume a +4 or +5 weapon, +21 or +22. Assume a a +6 to +10 strength, +27 to +32. Add in weapon focuses for +29 to +34. So depending on the type of creature, it's not infeasible for a CR 17 to have an attack bonus in the range of 29-34 (or higher, depending). This is from purely "natural" talents - excepting the +4 to +5 weapon - and is easily subject to increases from spells, supernatural abilities, and extraordinary abilities. Also, AC is easily mitigated through a combination of effects that route around it. First, there is no true "tanking" in D&D. Unlike MMORPG's, melee warriors in D&D have no "taunt" ability or other mechanic which immediately forces an opponent to focus entirely on them - there are some exceptions, but the general rule is that you cannot "taunt". So, the DM's best tactic is to route around the tank immediately. Ignore what you can't hit and go for the squishies. Second, touch spells are the bane of anyone who relies on a high AC. With few exceptions, it is very difficult to get a touch AC higher than 20 to 30. Third, tripping is an effective tactic to reduce a warrior's AC by 4. Disarming a shield can further reduce it. Fourth, there are the spells which ignore conventional AC and go straight for the gut check: Ray of Enfeeblement (Which can force you to check your load and adjust Max AC or be in trouble due to overloading), Waves of Exhaustion (Reduces Dexterity), and the twin threats of Energy Drain and Enervation (Convenient ways to reduce any character's usefulness in combat or kill them). Fourth, grappling is incredibly effective at reducing the utility of high AC. I'm willing to bet that a Cachalot Whale at CR 7 with a grapple check of 33 would have a 50/50 shot of pinning most high AC builds. Once a melee is grabbed and pinned, they are removed from combat. So, yeah, that's what I got so far. And I haven't had to break open anything outside the PHB yet. See, here's the thing. I've mentioned all of this (except the Cachalot Whale :D ) to the DM. I'M ACTIVELY TRYING TO HELP HIM TO CHALLENGE ME AND MY FRIEND! He doesn't want to have a bar of it though, which is quite irritating. I would suggest to your DM that Death Ward may be a spell he needs to look at. Mentioned this to him. Being honest, this player was bugging me one time when I was busy, for a good bow. I turned to him and said 'Arms and Equipment Guide, Bow of the Solars. Have fun.' As I said to the DM afterwards, I think it was a mistake. Sounds like your DM doesn't use enough casters. A great way to equalize among a party of heavy melee folks is to throw lots of casters at them. It's a perfectly valid tactic; it's the other axis of the...tactics of killing people tree. You would think so, wouldn't you? We had a brief trip to hell because of a magical portal trap.. As soon as we realised where we were, we managed to reverse the trap (we had a mission that was VERY highly paid, and we wanted to make sure we got the job done first... We did say that we'd be back to that place, go for a romp in the foothills of hell so to speak) We've faced Greater Mummies, golems, and various other constructs and undead by the score, but hardly anything with a decent amount of spell-like abilities or spellcasters. We were in the Arena in the city before we got our job, and the DM got me to make up a hobgoblin druid to be part of the party to face us: There was an Orc barbarian TWF, and another greenskin fighter. We chose 3 people from our group to face them, and the Scout, Cleric/Alienist, and Gnome RKV faced them. The DM and the two remaining players played the 3 bad guys (I played the druid because I made it, at the DM's request). If it wasn't for the fact we got the dispelling rules wrong, the druid would have won the game hands-down (we dispelled an antilife shell because we got the DC wrong). I'm actually going to be talking to him and asking if he wants a few more spellcasters to throw up against us sometime. Your character doesn't seem too strong to me, although the fact that the entire party has an AC of 30 or higher is mind-boggling to me. Almost none of my PC's ever care about AC. Anywho, if you are an optimizer (which I know TOB for multiclassing optimizers is a godsend; not so much for the DM) then my suggestion - if you want to continue to play with this group - is get used to having unfair treatment. If you are given less magic items or treated more harshely that is often the way to balance. Is it unfair? Yeah. Is it to be expected? Yes, if the DM wants balance in party he must unbalance rewards or consequences. (or at least in this situation) The thing about our party is that, although some of us like the roleplay, all of us like the stereotypical 'hitting fings wiv big lumps o' metal'. Accordingly, characters that are built for roleplay but aren't built for combat tend to fall by the wayside. Everyone makes sure to have a good AC because the DM usually tries to play the creatures as intelligent, so if you look like you have no armor, or are very lightly armored, or are a weedy spellcaster or whatever, intelligent monsters will go for you first to get you out of the way. The real only thing that the DM is irritated about with my character is the AC. If I sold some of my armor-boosting items, and spent the money on making myself more powerful in other ways, he wouldn't care less. It's the fact that my armor is high that is irritating.
Ace_of_time 05-28-07, 05:05 PM	How about when you make this PC just make the PC. Don't worry about the best feats, max damage, best spells. Just pick something that would be fun to roleplay. You don't have to have the perfect PC to have fun playing them.
Dethro 05-28-07, 11:52 PM	And then we would die. Problem is, the DM has an overinflated value of how good the party is. A couple of us are better than this (which is causing the problem), and a couple are worse. Even if I wasn't playing the game, we would still have challenges thrown up against us of a few levels higher. To quote something the DM said when first starting this campaign (at level 5): "You guys have been playing for this long, you should be able to take challenges a level or two above your CR. Hell, there's 6 of you, so you should easily be able to do so." That's when we died because he ran us into a troll cave, which had first, a forest troll (no worries!), then a crystalline troll. He thinks we are better than we actually are at low levels, and at higher levels, it's the other way around.
Ace_of_time 05-29-07, 06:01 PM	I say just buy a shock collar. That should change his mind.:devil: