I'm involved in a twice-monthly 4e game; we have 2nd-level characters, and are just starting the Scepter Tower of Spellgard. My earthsoul genasi fighter Terrik (wielding a greatsword and multiclassed into warlord) just died. The group had been through four encounters during the day, and I was out of healing surges. We attempted to rest in an unsafe location, over my objections, and were surprised by a group of badguys. We were rather predictably routed, and my fighter was caught in a crossfire between spitting drakes.
Before Terrik's untimely death, I took a lot of criticism from the party's other defender, a stormsoul genasi shielding swordmage. Four or five times a night, the swordmage's player, Kyle, would make comments about how awful my AC was (18 vs. his 21), the way I was sucked up all the healing (the cleric faithfully doled out one healing word to each of us per encounter), and how I should re-roll a dwarf with the battlerager class feature.
This isn't really new behavior. Kyle is actually a relatively nice guy--generous, and often astonishingly kind--but he likes his own opinions so much that he feels duty-bound to share them as widely as possible. In this case, he honestly seems to feel that I would be much more satisfied with a different character than the one I had, and doesn't understand why I put up with such a "bad" AC.
Most of the other players have known Kyle for 10+ years, and pretty much accept his behavior. I've been playing with him for a couple of years now, and until now had never really had a problem. In 3.x play, I had the best system mastery of our group, and built very strong, well-rounded characters. But since 4e character construction is now more about trade-offs than overall optimization, there are now nits for Kyle to pick.
Here's my problem: how do I handle this guy? In this particular case, I'm certain I wasn't doing anything really wrong. My fighter's AC was definitely on the low end for a defender, but I hit far more often and did much more damage than Kyle's swordmage. Furthermore, with daily access to both comeback strike and inspiring word, I was fairly self-sufficient on the healing front.
But, sometime over the past few weeks, he got into my head. I've been obsessing for a week about what character I'm going to bring in next, and worrying about how to make it criticism-proof. Should I treat Kyle's concerns as legitimate, ignore them entirely, or something in between? I kind of like the dwarven battlerager (among a couple of other defender builds), but if I play one will it look like I'm giving into Kyle's suggestion? Should I avoid a fun, flavorful build just because I'm worried about how it will look?
What the heck do I do here?
I've been obsessing for a week about what character I'm going to bring in next, and worrying about how to make it criticism-proof.
There is no such thing as a Criticism-proof character. No matter what you build, someone will find a fault with it or with the way you play it.
Should I treat Kyle's concerns as legitimate, ignore them entirely, or something in between?
A little of both. Your character was a touch low on AC, but balanced it with above average damage. He built a Guardian Fighter, you built a Great Weapon Fighter. I prefer to have one of each in my groups but encourage everyone to play the character type that they want and will enjoy.
I kind of like the dwarven battlerager (among a couple of other defender builds), but if I play one will it look like I'm giving into Kyle's suggestion? Should I avoid a fun, flavorful build just because I'm worried about how it will look?
Only if you have some real problems with insecurity and self-doubt. There will always be players like Kyle that think they have a better idea of what and how you should play. Ignore them for the most part, but keep a open mind as they sometimes stumble across a good idea. Give the Dwarven Battlerager a try if you want and if you enjoy it, more power to you. If not, then he wanders off to rejoin his people and you bring a new character into the adventure.
So go play whatever race/class you think you'll like within whatever guidelines your DM sets.
If Kyle doesn't like it? If he feels the need to offer critiscism? So what.
BTW, there's no "wrong" way to play D&D, build characters, etc.
18 isn't really that horrible for a great weapon fighter, you make a character that puts more focus on being a Striker, which usually have less AC, in place of more focus on a Defender. That's fine since you already had a dedicated Defender apparently.
If you always played recklessly I might suggest you work on your AC also for your new character but I don't think I would go as far as tell you what to play. Characters can certainly absorb too much of the healing resources regardless of their class. If you marked creatures for no reason just to make them attack you over the Swordmage, or ran off on your own and got flanked repeatedly, or if you frequently provoked OAs from movement, that would be cause for concern. If it wasn't really a choice for you to get hit though, it should be perfectly reasonable that the second melee character takes a lot of damage. You are still a Defender as well.
Interpersonal problems that brew like that can usually be handled best by calming down and trying to understand the other person's point of view (right or wrong, because everyone always thinks they're right). Then talk to them about it maturely one-on-one, and the weight will be lifted from you (unless they are total jackasses about everything).
Make the character you want first of all. Then ask Kyle to please stop commenting on your character's stats multiple times, because you built a character different than his own, for a different purpose and he is starting to annoy you. Tell him you can appreciate his advice, but you don't always make characters for the same mechanical advantages that he thinks you should.
By the way, Swordmages also can have high AC pretty easily because their main stat also boosts AC, and they have a class feature that's stronger than a Heavy Shield in terms of AC. It's actually not hard at all to make a Swordmage with a higher AC than any kind of Fighter, because the absolute best a Fighter could do at level 2 is only about 21, assuming they use both a Heavy Shield and take the feat for Plate armor.
Obviously it's not so substandard to have an 18 when that's only 3 points lower than his without using a shield or plate armor (I assume). That's pretty much the best a great weapon fighter can manage without magic items at level 2, so that shouldn't really be a concern unless he just doesn't understand the options the game actually gives a Fighter, or if he just likes to gloat. If you were a playtest Barbarian, you might have AC around 14-16 depending on what abilities you were using.
EDIT: And for resource management, you guys shouldn't forget about Second Winds and Heal checks to trigger their healing (no defense bonuses though). The Cleric doesn't always have to use his Healing Words on you -- a Cleric has a lot of powers that can heal or give Temporary HP (should they choose to take them, it's a group game after all) and they have Heal on their class list, which with a simple DC 10 check can trigger the healing of your Second Wind if you don't have the time or tactical situation to use it yourself.
I confess to having developed a bit of a sharp attitude (which I think I keep from expressing) toward people who spend time telling other people how they should build or run their characters. It doesn't happen too much in our group, but it happens enough that I notice. So my first instinct would be to tell this guy to back the $@*& off, but, since that is rarely a constructive approach, the most I try to do is explain that my approach is different from his, with a different goal and a different view of my role in combat. Even two all-but-identical characters will function differently on the field depending on the actions (and luck) of the individual players, so character build advice, beyond a certain point, is conditional at best. All characters have their tradeoffs and limitations and advantages.
You should quit that group and start your own!! Oh wait......
Someone said above that you can't compare a Shielding Swordmage with a Greatweapon Fighter. I have an LFR lvl 3 Swordmage (Voreliss) and with a set of +2 Leather he already has an AC of 22 or 23...something like that.
A Greatweapon fighter sacrifices defense for damage, nothing wrong with that.
Anway, my motto is "Character Concept Reigns Supreme".
Take an idea for your character, and mold the mechanics around that.
I knew a guy who played a fighter type character and wielded 2 daggers. Hardly optomised, but it was the idea he had for his charcter. He had fun and so did we.
So what should you do? Ignore him, if he continues to nit pick tell him to knock it off (I preferr public humiliation).
As far as a new character, make a dwarven Assault Swordmage and use a 2 handed weapon /snicker.
Want to make yourself criticism-proof? It's not really possible, but you can make yourself less open to criticism. Since he's complaining about doing your job as a defender -- your "low" AC, and "sucking up the healing" -- change your role with your next character. If he still berates you about your choices, it's probably a personal alpha-male kind of thing.
Another possibility: ask him for input. You don't need to take his suggestions, obviously, but maybe if you make him feel like his opinion matters, he'll feel validated and lay off you in-game a bit.
Of course, the best choice you have is to talk to him about it. Tell him you're playing the game the way you enjoy playing it, and ask if he feels like you're somehow stepping on his toes with your less than optimized character. Don't let it turn into insult-slinging; corny as it sounds, prefacing your complaints with "I feel" really works to keep things civilized.
Still, sounds to me like Kyle has something to prove. If you acknowledge his grasp of the rules and skill at making an optimized character, he may well back down a bit. Good luck!
The most helpful thing anyone's said--and the most obvious, I suppose--is just to talk to Kyle, and ask him to knock it off. I probably am stepping on his toes a little by playing a "competing" defender, thereby contributing to his need to be acknowledged.
On the other hand, the party rogue needs a flanker, and Kyle's swordmage is going to see an abrupt drop in efficiency without someone sticky nearby. I think I'll bring in another fighter (plate and shield, this time), and just lean on Kyle if he continues to be obnoxious.
Again, thanks. :D
I appreciate all the thoughtful replies. Part of my frustration is that I understand exactly what the trade-offs are when you go with a two-handed weapon in this edition, and I went for it anyway (with the understanding that I wasn't going to be the group's primary defender).
The most helpful thing anyone's said--and the most obvious, I suppose--is just to talk to Kyle, and ask him to knock it off. I probably am stepping on his toes a little by playing a "competing" defender, thereby contributing to his need to be acknowledged.
On the other hand, the party rogue needs a flanker, and Kyle's swordmage is going to see an abrupt drop in efficiency without someone sticky nearby. I think I'll bring in another fighter (plate and shield, this time), and just lean on Kyle if he continues to be obnoxious.
Again, thanks. :D
Probably a good idea. If you really wanted to be annoying, however, hit up the CO boards and build a better swordmage :D (I do not recommend this tactic no matter how amusing it might be)
I appreciate all the thoughtful replies. Part of my frustration is that I understand exactly what the trade-offs are when you go with a two-handed weapon in this edition, and I went for it anyway (with the understanding that I wasn't going to be the group's primary defender).
The most helpful thing anyone's said--and the most obvious, I suppose--is just to talk to Kyle, and ask him to knock it off. I probably am stepping on his toes a little by playing a "competing" defender, thereby contributing to his need to be acknowledged.
On the other hand, the party rogue needs a flanker, and Kyle's swordmage is going to see an abrupt drop in efficiency without someone sticky nearby. I think I'll bring in another fighter (plate and shield, this time), and just lean on Kyle if he continues to be obnoxious.
Again, thanks. :D
Remember that it's important to make a character that you want to play, not just one that the party "needs". Otherwise you run the risk of becoming bored with the character, and thus bored with the game.
Probably a good idea. If you really wanted to be annoying, however, hit up the CO boards and build a better swordmage :D (I do not recommend this tactic no matter how amusing it might be)
I used to lurk over there every day. I still visit every week or so, but honestly, the window for optimization is a lot smaller in 4e. In 3.x, a carefully-built character was 2-3 times better than a bad one. In the new system, though, an indifferently-constructed character isn't much less effective than a well-constructed character, and in my experience smart play can more than make up the difference between the two.
...I probably shouldn't admit this, and it's way OT, but the way I know my system mastery was better than Kyle's is that I almost single-handedly broke our last 3.5 campaign. I had a 10th-level character (the rest of the party was 11th and 12th) when we ran into a magic trap containing a CL 15 blasphemy. I was paralyzed, which meant the party was shorthanded in the next round when two hezrous and a glabrezu came out to see who set off the alarm.
All the other PCs eventually escaped the encounter, but I needed a new character--preferably one who matched power levels with party members two and three levels above him, and preferably one that didn't have to worry about pesky things like saving throws. I went all-out on character design for the first (and last) time ever, and am both proud and ashamed to admit that I came up with the character without reference to any CO posts other than my own. I ended up with a shapeshifting dwarven berserker that, with the assistance of the party's druid, had an AC of 50+. He also had a Fort save in the mid-30s, a Will save in the high 20s, and well over 200 hp. The only time I came even close to dying after that was in extended toe-to-toe combat with a half-fiend fire giant cleric, and then only because the fiend's buddy (with whom the rest of the party dealt while I blocked the door) managed a natural 20 on his touch attack to hit me with harm.
So that's the other reason why I don't really optimize, any more: it gets boring to be unkillable. That's also one more small reason Kyle is bugging me at the moment: I could have built a maxed-AC genasi swordmage, or a cookie-cutter elven ranger, or any number of other things, but I wanted to try to make a character that was interesting rather than spectacular. It didn't meet the criteria he'd set for it, but no one appointed him judge of my characters--and honestly, I don't (didn't, anyway) feel that I had a lot left to prove optimization-wise.
Grr.
So I'll ratchet up my optimization-fu just one small notch for the new fighter (which I do enjoy playing, for those that are concerned), and match him a little better to the role I've ended up occupying. I also took the board's advice and solicted some input from Kyle via e-mail, and that should put us on a better footing going forward. Should be smooth sailing from here on out.
I'm concerned that if you directly compete with him on all fronts you perhaps won't have as friendly games.
I'm concerned that if you directly compete with him on all fronts you perhaps won't have as friendly games.
Guess it won't be a problem after tonight. We got in a little over our heads, and lost two PCs this time out of five--one of which was Kyle. He's bringing in a wizard.
Guess it won't be a problem after tonight. We got in a little over our heads, and lost two PCs this time out of five--one of which was Kyle. He's bringing in a wizard.
Damnation.
Well, if you guys ever decide to rewind, my advice would be "Roll a pure warlord, forced move him all the time until he learns to shut up, if he complains, play it off in character, and move him some more."
Damnation.
Well, if you guys ever decide to rewind, my advice would be "Roll a pure warlord, forced move him all the time until he learns to shut up, if he complains, play it off in character, and move him some more."
LOL! In a 3.5 FR Campaign I was in my Ranger was a complete and utter ass, (I enjoyed playing it and, though at the time many of the people disliked me, they look back with fondness on the stupid situations I caused). However the Sorcerer would always use Charm on me to get me to do the Parties wishes rather than being an ass. Was good times.
Here's my problem: how do I handle this guy? In this particular case, I'm certain I wasn't doing anything really wrong. My fighter's AC was definitely on the low end for a defender, but I hit far more often and did much more damage than Kyle's swordmage. Furthermore, with daily access to both comeback strike and inspiring word, I was fairly self-sufficient on the healing front.
Sounds like you were plenty durable, with boundless endurance available and second wind, you'd be quite hard to kill. It's more important to be able to take a hit than to avoid being hit, because you will inevitably be struck.
Just play your way, or politely tell him to back off. There's no "right" way to make a character, the right way is whatever you think is fun.
If it is lingering it might be helpful just to take it with a grain of salt. Something along the lines of saying
"Wow your right your character is (this much better than mine) how will he survive to next level.
"Perhaps we should worship your character as he is sooo obviously superior"
"I thought the enemy would be so busy trying to hit you and missing you with your immesurably higher ac"
"At least i know your character will look out for me and come to my rescue"
"i didn't know that 18 was lower than 21. I better do a complete character remake "
Something a little on the silly side but a tad condesending. Then laugh a little and shake your head as if at his pettyness. I'm sure a couple laughs at him will curb his irritating behaviour.
I wouldn't let this guy step on me.
Tell him something along the lines of: "It's numbers on a sheet of paper. If all you bring to the table is how you get a sense of self worth out of having a more uber character with bigger numbers than me, I can't help you. I'm here to play. Don't step on me, again."
What the heck do I do here?
Two little words.
"That's nice." Use them (or a close variant) whenever he criticizes you or tells you how much better than your character his is.
"My to hit bonus is +11, yours is only +8!" "That's nice."
"I can deal XX damage every round!" "That's nice."
"That's nice", said with the proper inflection, is the more polite way of saying "I don't care." It comes in quite handy.
I'm going to talk about WoW, don't flame me. In WoW tanks need to up their dps (damage per second) as well as their defenses, because even if you're a solid fort of steel, if you can't fight your way out of a paper bag you're going to die first.
18 AC is perfectly fine. You're not using a shield and you're not using plate (I think). But you out damage him, so killing foes faster might be a form of damage mitigation "Kyle" isn't taking into consideration.
I'm going to talk about WoW, don't flame me. In WoW tanks need to up their dps (damage per second) as well as their defenses, because even if you're a solid fort of steel, if you can't fight your way out of a paper bag you're going to die first.
Well, I was outdamaging him more because of class choice than construction; I hadn't taken Weapon Proficiency yet, and was stuck with a greatsword. And for the role I ended up playing--primary tankey defender, rather than secondary DPS-ey defender--I probably was too easy to hit.
In our session last Friday, it wasn't a problem. My new dwarven guardian fighter can both take and deal much more damage (primarily due to feat choice), and Kyle's swordmage departed to the Shadowfell in a rather permanent fashion. He's apparently happier with a wizard, although we'll see whether that continues, and that may take away some of the pressure to compete.
I'm now wondering what happened to the "revolving door" afterlife...
1) The party's broke. If we spent every copper piece we had and took a 100gp loan out from a friendly merchant, we could just about afford to have Raise Dead cast.
2) Kyle prefers introducing new characters to resurrecting dead ones anyway (and, truth be told, so do I).