How does a GM stop level dipping?


Advice

51 to 100 of 316 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

Pixel Cube wrote:
InVinoVeritas wrote:
One other idea: Ban monks.
How do you roleplay that?

No monks. The ancient martial arts haven't shown up in this part of the world yet. It isn't like Europe has had kung fu since the beginning of time. It is the same idea as Dark Sun's wonderful "gods are dead; no divine, deal with it" (or Ravenloft's "gods aren't dead, they just know better than to show up here; no divine, deal with it" heh)

Silver Crusade

What did the monk/druid look like ? Because you can't flurry with natural weapons, just in case, since that's the first thing I thought about.

Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
Maybe I'm just completely useless as a GM, because this happens with pretty much all my tabletop groups.

I only ever played with friends, which are sympathetic and intelligent people, so I can't say about the rest of gaming groups, but it looks like you just are being "unlucky" ; not "bad".

I don't know how you introduce yourself or else, but I think you should first explain your views of the game before anything else so the players know you will be :

- comprehensive
- working WITH the players, not as an opposite entity
- ... but also will follow the rules so that no one is biased, and one of these rules is that anything must be accepted by you beforehand (with possible discussion to make it work), including during the game, where there will be no rules discussion if it would take too much time.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:

I think I should point out that this isn't the same RP group as the one in my last thread. It's a whole different set of players.

Maybe I'm just completely useless as a GM, because this happens with pretty much all my tabletop groups.

You certainly aren't useless Kelsey. Do you tend to have a difficult time asserting yourself in social situations? A GM has to know when and how to put their foot down, and for some people that's not easy (especially since we all want our players to have fun and enjoy our game.)

I got discharged from the Navy for having this issue. I find it really hard to be assertive without feeling like a fascist b&!*%.

To clarify for everybody, I have two reasons to want to can level dipping. It never makes sense (at least the dips I see from my players), and every dip I get from my players is overpowered. It's a constant pain in my ass.


This problem is actually quite easily handled, many fine folks have already posted the answer.

Just don't allow it.

Now I have read about how your players want this and want that. Well that's nice and they have all of that when they run the game.

As my current GM says; If you don't like my rules calls, and you don't like my rules, I can understand that, and if you want to run the game I'm up for that. Just in case you are going to run I'm thinking about a Oracle/Inquisitor/Alchemist/Rage Prophet, or maybe a Summoner/barbarian focusing on mounted combat???

The point is that you are running the game for the enjoyment of others. Being the GM is not a fun job, it is rarely a job that you get thanked for, and you don't get paid. Being GM is being part of the group.

Just be frank and honest with your players. Say, Look guys this is the game that I'm running and these is how I'm running this story. I understand that you may not like my rules or rules calls, but there mind and if someone else wants to run that great, I'm all in..

If they can not respect that, just start gaming online because they are not worth it.


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
Detect Magic wrote:
GM: Stop that. Problem solved.
Oh, how I wish I could get away with that.

Thing is, if you can't get away with that, then the group is beyond fixing and banning this or that isn't going to solve anything. It's pretty much established that the social contract between rpg gamers states that the one on GM duty can do that and always get away with it.

If your group doesn't respect this rule, it bloody should be.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
My tabletop groups won't let me do anything without a three page legalese essay about what it is I'm doing.

In the players' defense, they have every right to expect you to make the rules clear before they inadvertently break them. A GM can get away with fudging things during play, but should never make contradictory rulings mid-session. Having the houserules written down prevents you from making this GM no-no.

I have literally hundreds of pages of house rules for my home game. All of them are provided to the players in writing. All of them are subject to discussion and a vote.

Kirth - She has had multiple issues with her group over an extended period of time over things like enforcing RAW or in some cases players stopping the game to argue a spell effect, look it up, etc. They have talked and argued about the core of the problems already.

The problem is pretty complex here, and does not seem to be getting better - yet the solution is simple: Kelsey, for the sake of your friendship or continued friendship with these people, find another group. This game is supposed to be fun for everyone involved - including the DM. There is enmity and animosity between you and your friends. In a previous thread you wanted to kill the party off for their behavior as players. The dynamic here is not healthy - cut your losses - save your friendships and either form another group or just use the PBP function as you mentioned earlier. Your gaming should relieve stress not cause it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I have to ask... are you married to the concept of class=character? Because personally speaking, I view my characters as their own people within the world. They aren't a 'monk' or a 'sorcerer' or a 'ranger' or whatnot. They are who they are, with the abilities that they have, whatever those may be. When viewed through this framework, a level of monk or sorcerer or anything else is a non-issue, because it's simply the character growing and developing. Rather than 'taking classes' they are 'becoming stronger/more powerful/more versatile.'

Also please try to keep in mind the sacrifices dipping produces. Classes- ESPECIALLY the aforementioned Wizards, Druids, and Sorcerers- tend to get weaker from dips, not stronger, because they aren't progressing in their primary class.


kyrt-ryder wrote:


I have to ask... are you married to the concept of class=character? Because personally speaking, I view my characters as their own people within the world. They aren't a 'monk' or a 'sorcerer' or a 'ranger' or whatnot. They are who they are, with the abilities that they have, whatever those may be. When viewed through this framework, a level of monk or sorcerer or anything else is a non-issue, because it's simply the character growing and developing. Rather than 'taking classes' they are 'becoming stronger/more powerful/more versatile.'

Also please try to keep in mind the sacrifices dipping produces. Classes- ESPECIALLY the aforementioned Wizards, Druids, and Sorcerers- tend to get weaker from dips, not stronger, because they aren't progressing in their primary class.

I'm not married to the idea, and I don't have an issue with multiclassing. The issue is with taking only a couple levels of a class to get the abilities, because my players always use it to make overpowered stuff (the Monk dipped Druid and Sorcerer were absolutely terrifying).


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:

I think I should point out that this isn't the same RP group as the one in my last thread. It's a whole different set of players.

Maybe I'm just completely useless as a GM, because this happens with pretty much all my tabletop groups.

You certainly aren't useless Kelsey. Do you tend to have a difficult time asserting yourself in social situations? A GM has to know when and how to put their foot down, and for some people that's not easy (especially since we all want our players to have fun and enjoy our game.)

I got discharged from the Navy for having this issue. I find it really hard to be assertive without feeling like a fascist b*~#%.

To clarify for everybody, I have two reasons to want to can level dipping. It never makes sense (at least the dips I see from my players), and every dip I get from my players is overpowered. It's a constant pain in my ass.

That is troublesome. Pretty much the only way around it I can see would be to draft an explicit social contract before agreeing to DM and holding the party to it lest you walk away.

I do have to ask though... can you tell us which dips you've seen that you felt were overpowered? Because personally speaking I've yet to see a multi-class of any sort that was more powerful than a straight classed character of at least one of the two classes involved.

EDIT: what was overpowered about Monk dipped with Druid and Sorcerer exactly?


What pixel cube said is completely true. The game is cooperative, not competitive. Your players are not playing AGAINST you and you need to explain this. Powergaming doesnt help anyone.

They want to dip into monk, fine, treat the party's effective level as +2 and make the fights harder so it remains a challenge.

Same goes for you. What is it about the overpowered players that upsets you? Ignoring story for the moment, why do you care if the druid has 43 AC at level 5? Hit him with some wisdom draining poison or throw a metal net over him (actually, heh, capture him and lock him in a steel breastplate - that'll teach'em!)

If they are just burning through content, make content harder. Do more RP skill challenges. AC 43 doesn't help during a formal ball or sneaking into the Chancellor's office while the rest of the party runs distraction.


Lex Talinis wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
My tabletop groups won't let me do anything without a three page legalese essay about what it is I'm doing.

In the players' defense, they have every right to expect you to make the rules clear before they inadvertently break them. A GM can get away with fudging things during play, but should never make contradictory rulings mid-session. Having the houserules written down prevents you from making this GM no-no.

I have literally hundreds of pages of house rules for my home game. All of them are provided to the players in writing. All of them are subject to discussion and a vote.

Kirth - She has had multiple issues with her group over an extended period of time over things like enforcing RAW or in some cases players stopping the game to argue a spell effect, look it up, etc. They have talked and argued about the core of the problems already.

The problem is pretty complex here, and does not seem to be getting better - yet the solution is simple: Kelsey, for the sake of your friendship or continued friendship with these people, find another group. This game is supposed to be fun for everyone involved - including the DM. There is enmity and animosity between you and your friends. In a previous thread you wanted to kill the party off for their behavior as players. The dynamic here is not healthy - cut your losses - save your friendships and either form another group or just use the PBP function as you mentioned earlier. Your gaming should relieve stress not cause it.

I did find a new group. The problem is, all the bad stuff is happening again. Personally, I'm starting to think this is probably with me, not them, because it's happening with multiple groups.

Silver Crusade

kyrt-ryder wrote:

That is troublesome. Pretty much the only way around it I can see would be to draft an explicit social contract before agreeing to DM and holding the party to it lest you walk away.

I do have to ask though... can you tell us which dips you've seen that you felt were overpowered? Because personally speaking I've yet to see a multi-class of any sort that was more powerful than a straight classed character of at least one of the two classes involved.

EDIT: what was overpowered about Monk dipped with Druid and Sorcerer exactly?

1. Indeed, you should never indulge in the job of DMing without knowing your players expectations, and them knowing your stance on who is wearing the pants.

2. Oh, it's easy to do something more powerful with a multiclassing, but you're pretty much a one/two-tricks pony. Like blaster crossblooded sorcerers.


I'm not married to the idea, and I don't have an issue with multiclassing. The issue is with taking only a couple levels of a class to get the abilities, because my players always use it to make overpowered stuff (the Monk dipped Druid and Sorcerer were absolutely terrifying).

Well, what is the difference between dipping a few levels and broader multiclassing?
Because at some point, even a Fighter10/Wizard10 will just have 1 level in either of those classes.
What is the conceptual problem with a dude who is at one with nature, cultivates his ki,
and studies martial arts as well as the ways of animals and plants?
As it happens, you can make very overpowered stuff staying single classed...
A Monk/Druid/Sorceror who has lowered casting in all those classes (probably meaning no effects which can't be achieved in cheap potions/UMD-able scrolls, not to mention low level slots of allied casters), can't cast in Wildshape without a Feat, can't Flurry with Natural Attacks (a Feat lets you Flurry using the Nat Attacks, but not in addition to), gets WIS to AC but can't use armor when doing so (bye bye Wild Armor) just doesn't seem too far off... Especially considering PRPG's single-class abilities that they would be getting around this time.

One other thing to consider: lower point buy. I get the impression that lots of groups play with high point buy. 15 point buy is more than enough. You can play with 10 or 13 if you want. This is way more of a pain for such multi-stat dependent characters, although it also means the typical INT-maxed Wizard will actually have other stats in the dump, rather than being fairly well above average.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

NO LEVEL DIPPY'S!


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:

I think I should point out that this isn't the same RP group as the one in my last thread. It's a whole different set of players.

Maybe I'm just completely useless as a GM, because this happens with pretty much all my tabletop groups.

You certainly aren't useless Kelsey. Do you tend to have a difficult time asserting yourself in social situations? A GM has to know when and how to put their foot down, and for some people that's not easy (especially since we all want our players to have fun and enjoy our game.)

I got discharged from the Navy for having this issue. I find it really hard to be assertive without feeling like a fascist b*~#%.

To clarify for everybody, I have two reasons to want to can level dipping. It never makes sense (at least the dips I see from my players), and every dip I get from my players is overpowered. It's a constant pain in my ass.

That is troublesome. Pretty much the only way around it I can see would be to draft an explicit social contract before agreeing to DM and holding the party to it lest you walk away.

I do have to ask though... can you tell us which dips you've seen that you felt were overpowered? Because personally speaking I've yet to see a multi-class of any sort that was more powerful than a straight classed character of at least one of the two classes involved.

EDIT: what was overpowered about Monk dipped with Druid and Sorcerer exactly?

The Sorcerer's had the Zen Archer archetype and the bloodline that allows Wisdom casting, and took levels in Arcane Archer. The Druid loved to wildshape and unleash the most horrid flurry of blows ever.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

One possible house-rule you might consider is a return or adaptation of the old Training rules from earlier editions, with an added stipulation of reasonable explanation for multiclassing into key classes. If you set bare minimum requirements for certain Classes (such as apprenticing to a Wizard, studying at a Monastery to become a Cleric or Monk), or proving themselves to the local Thieve's Guild by robbing a bank (for the Rogue), you're realistically providing the "why" and the "how" of the PC in question multiclassing, and possibly giving extra adventure opportunities ("Ah my apprentice" the Wizard sighs, "I am in desperate need of a Roc's egg - won't you be a dear and go fetch me one?").

Some classes (like Barbarian, Sorcerer or Oracle) arguably don't even need training, just the right background/montage explanation.

The challenge here is setting stipulations that don't pull them unduly out of play (why I'm against training times in a new class longer than a few weeks, though that's more an issue for the speed of game between adventures - in something like Kingmaker time isn't as important as the more traditional questing plot-line).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
I did find a new group. The problem is, all the bad stuff is happening again. Personally, I'm starting to think this is probably with me, not them, because it's happening with multiple groups.

Rule of thumb: when entering a new group, never be the first to GM. You need some time to adjust yourself to the group's favoured playstyle. I bet a lot of the problems you are facing right now would have been expected if you saw someone else DM before you.

Silver Crusade

Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
Personally, I'm starting to think this is probably with me, not them, because it's happening with multiple groups.

The fact that you are here asking for advice, and not on the other extremity of a punch in a player's face shows that you are wrong when writting this.


OK, so what is this most horrid flurry of blows ever?
You can't Flurry with Natural Weapons. I think there is a Feat that allows using Nat Weapons to deliver Flurry attacks, but it isn't combined Iteratives + Nat Weapns (@-5), it's just the number of Flurry attacks at their normal BAB (so, mostly useful for earlier damage increases depending on the natural weapon, or special abilities like wolf trip). So I don't see what's so horrid here except horridly BAD. They aren't progressing stunning fist usage or anything else.

You lose WIS to AC if you wear Armor, including melded Wild Armor, not to mention additional Monk boosts to AC.

Shadow Lodge

Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
I did find a new group. The problem is, all the bad stuff is happening again. Personally, I'm starting to think this is probably with me, not them, because it's happening with multiple groups.

How do you choose players?


There is always some mix blame - weather the majority lays with you or the players - well - you're here trying to find a solution.

There is good news then Kelsey - we can always fix ourselves and hope what we fix helps others to fix themselves :)

You were in the Navy, do you remember those things called SOPs? Every gaming table should have something similar. It is effectively a contract between DM and player as to how you run your game. It can and should include any table rules (variations from RAW/RAI) and things like how to arbitrate a rules issue (e.g. after the session has ended - if they are ultimately correct you will reward them in game somehow - xp - gp - [insert anything]).

If you are unfamiliar with writing an SOP (I don't know how long you were in) then I am willing to help you outline one so that you can sit down and hand a copy to each player and go over it. You also must adress any questions and concerns they may have before moving forward. But this gives you a good way to communicate what you expect and what they should expect.


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
The Sorcerer's had the Zen Archer archetype and the bloodline that allows Wisdom casting, and took levels in Arcane Archer. The Druid loved to wildshape and unleash the most horrid flurry of blows ever.

Restrain the game content to core book ONLY. No more archetypes. This is purely the GM's choice, as much so as deciding if it is a slow/med/fast game, if it is high/med/low magic, what kinds of monsters there are, what races are allowed, etc.

Flurry says "A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks." Your monk/druid player was wrong.


Quandary wrote:
A Monk/Druid/Sorceror who has lowered casting in all those classes (probably meaning no effects which can't be achieved in cheap potions/UMD-able scrolls, not to mention low level slots of allied casters), can't cast in Wildshape without a Feat, can't Flurry with Natural Attacks (a Feat lets you Flurry using the Nat Attacks, but not in addition to), gets WIS to AC but can't use armor when doing so (bye bye Wild Armor) just doesn't seem too far off... Especially considering PRPG's single-class abilities that they would be getting around this time.

The Monk/Sor was a Wisdom caster with three levels of the Zen Archer archetype and an Arcane Archer who could cast spells through the bow (deadliest flurry of blows ever), and the Monk/Druid got the unarmed damage bonus to all natural attacks (I lost the rules argument over that one).


You do realize that the one level of Zen Archer could be perfectly replicated with the Rapidshot feat right? Without sacrificing a precious caster level.

As for the Druid, flurry of blows can't be combined with natural attacks, so was your problem him wildshaping into something big and using unarmed strikes?

EDIT: whups, ok, 3 levels of Zen Archer. It's still nice, but that caster level hit is huge. Keep in mind though, that Imbue Arrow is a standard action.

Silver Crusade

Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
The Sorcerer's had the Zen Archer archetype and the bloodline that allows Wisdom casting, and took levels in Arcane Archer. The Druid loved to wildshape and unleash the most horrid flurry of blows ever.

I honestly can't see how this could have been impossible to deal with, since I only see the holes in these builds. The Zen Archer should have almost no attacks per round with a sucking spellcasting. The druid could not flurry with natural weapons.

Liberty's Edge

My general thing has always been as such:

1) Does it fit with the concept you have been going for with your character? Go for it. Some concepts require weird multi-classing to do right (to wit, I'm currently playing a fencer with a Barbarian 4/Rogue 2/Monk 1, and almost every class ability contributes something that fits with the concept).

2) It doesn't fit with your concept? Okay, then you have to find someone to train you in that or spend several sessions role-playing an attitude shift because it represents a shift in your character's approach. The bigger the shift, the more training and/or time. Not usually a huge deal.

If something like the above gets abused, then you need to talk to your players, because at that point it isn't a rules issue but a play-style one. Those don't get fixed with ground rules.


MurphysParadox wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
The Sorcerer's had the Zen Archer archetype and the bloodline that allows Wisdom casting, and took levels in Arcane Archer. The Druid loved to wildshape and unleash the most horrid flurry of blows ever.

Restrain the game content to core book ONLY. No more archetypes. This is purely the GM's choice, as much so as deciding if it is a slow/med/fast game, if it is high/med/low magic, what kinds of monsters there are, what races are allowed, etc.

Flurry says "A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks." Your monk/druid player was wrong.

I don't want to eliminate archetypes. I love them too much. Same with the Witch, Inquisitor, and Alchemist classes.

As for the flurry of blows thing, I was soundly beaten in the rules argument we had over that. They can yell longer and louder than I can.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
and the Monk/Druid got the unarmed damage bonus to all natural attacks (I lost the rules argument over that one).

Say what now?

Ok, let's cut to the chase: your problem isn't class dipping, or overpowered stuff, or akward personal relationship. The problem is that your players are munchkins.


Well, sounds like you should try re-reading the actual rules.
As it happens, there is no 'unarmed damage bonus', Monks change (swap out) their UAS damage.
Normally, you can't use Natural Weapons when Flurrying PERIOD, as several posters already mentioned before.
There is a Feat somewhere that lets you use Nat Weapons, I'm not sure what the Pre-Reqs are, I'm not sure if it lets you use UAS damage for those: if it doesn't say so, you only use normal listed damage for that Nat Weapon. This is just the basic rules.


Maxximilius wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:

I asked, and they said that the rules do not obligate them to explain it (I seriously HATE having my so little ability to house rule stuff in my tabletop games).

This is why I love Paizo's PBP function. My tabletop groups won't let me do anything without a three page legalese essay about what it is I'm doing.

1. You don't give a s+~% about what rules don't say.

2. You don't begin your DMing by letting your players belittle you by pretty much saying "f%@! you and mind your own business, now take your time to entertain us, monkey buffon".

3. Next time they come with their 3-pages essay, come with your two-lines quote from the Gold Core Original Official Rulebook(tm) saying something about the DM being king and last decider at the table. Someone will probably be able to give you the exact page and quotation.

I Give this a +100

And I had 2 double words of power:
House Rules, and Ad-Hoc.

You as the DM can say, "I set the rules in stone,"
If your the non-religious type, tell your players this equation
"GM = The Game's GOD."


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
As for the flurry of blows thing, I was roundly beaten in the rules argument we had over that. They can yell longer and louder than I can.

Yelling louder and longer does not make one right.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
The Monk/Sor was a Wisdom caster with three levels of the Zen Archer archetype and an Arcane Archer who could cast spells through the bow (deadliest flurry of blows ever), and the Monk/Druid got the unarmed damage bonus to all natural attacks (I lost the rules argument over that one).

... casting during a flurry ?

... unarmed damage bonus increasing with natural weapons, in a flurry ?

I honestly have the need to punch my screen sometimes. Nerdrage for the damsel in distress, against all those f@%#ing cheaters that have the nerve to tell the DM to go f#+* himself over rules arguments while their characters are the farthest you can get from "legal" and "raw".


kyrt-ryder wrote:

You do realize that the one level of Zen Archer could be perfectly replicated with the Rapidshot feat right? Without sacrificing a precious caster level.

As for the Druid, flurry of blows can't be combined with natural attacks, so was your problem him wildshaping into something big and using unarmed strikes?

The problem was with him turning into something big and using natural attacks (which got the unarmed damage bonus) with flurry of blows.

He had three Monk levels, so he got Wis to ranged attacks.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Since when is a single monk level game breaking?

Shadow Lodge

Pixel Cube wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
and the Monk/Druid got the unarmed damage bonus to all natural attacks (I lost the rules argument over that one).

Say what now?

Ok, let's cut to the chase: your problem isn't class dipping, or overpowered stuff, or akward personal relationship. The problem is that your players are munchkins.

And breaking the rules.

Seriously, they aren't playing RAW, so they can't use RAW to back up their arguments. Get that in writing.


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:

1. The Sorcerers had the Zen Archer archetype and the bloodline that allows Wisdom casting, and took levels in Arcane Archer.

2. The Druid loved to wildshape and unleash the most horrid flurry of blows ever.

1. This will always be weaker than a straight sorcerer unless the player's skill/mastery of the game is extremely low.

2. As noted by just about everyone else here, you have to flurry with unarmed strikes or monk weapons: you can't flurry with natural weapons. The problem isn't in multiclassing druid/monk, it's in allowing things that aren't allowed.

PRD wrote:
Flurry of Blows (Ex): Starting at 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action. When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon

By RAW, natural weapons =/= unarmed strikes.


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
As for the flurry of blows thing, I was roundly beaten in the rules argument we had over that. They can yell longer and louder than I can.

But no... the game says no. The rules clearly say no. This isn't a debate or ambiguous wording.

Your players take advantage of you to play the game they want. You need a different gaming community, not just players or start seriously cheesing out the enemies, which really just builds up the animosity without helping the harmony.


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
As for the flurry of blows thing, I was soundly beaten in the rules argument we had over that. They can yell longer and louder than I can.

Well, it sounds like your players are idiots or bulliers without compunctions, since everybody in this thread is just repeating how those rules don't work that way. If your players are yelling at you about rules (in game/out of game?), you shouldn't be playing with them... That issue is WAY before anything else, and trying to fix it passive-aggressive-style will NOT help you, believe me.

re: Arcane Archer, they can't fire more than 1 spell arrow per round unless they can pay for Quicken themselves (rods can't be wielded at the same time as bow) which of course massively cuts against multiclass characters who can't cast as high of spell levels. If you use all Paizo rules, a Full Caster is better off just using Reach spell (I don't use most of those new Metamagic Feats, personally).

Shadow Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pixel Cube wrote:
The problem is that your players are munchkins.

No, the problem is that they have no respect for her.


As has been said before Kelsey, there is no unarmed damage bonus. There is a flat unarmed damage value which ONLY counts on Unarmed Strikes. There is a feat that 'could' conceivably (though the rules are ambiguous) allow the Monk Unarmed Damage on Natural Attacks, but it's a feat they would have to take and get your explicit permission to use that way.

He lost 3 levels of sorcerer, 3 levels of spellcasting progression, and could not Full Attack with Imbue Arrow because the spellcasting takes the normal action and you shoot the arrow as part of that. (So if he was willing to eat the +4 spell levels he could Quicken a second Imbued Arrow)


*Sigh* I feel really stupid now. Reading this thread, I'm beginning to realize how bad of a job I've been doing. You guys are pointing out a lot of stuff that I should have put a stop to.

Shadow Lodge

Kelsey:

Find new players. These aren't working for you. They won't work for you. Like a bad relationship, you just have to get out.

The next question: How do you go about finding players? There are methods that lead to finding good players, and methods that lead to finding bad players. Not all methods are available to everyone, so it's possible you're out of luck, but the issue of finding good players is really the problem you're having.

Dark Archive

Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

You do realize that the one level of Zen Archer could be perfectly replicated with the Rapidshot feat right? Without sacrificing a precious caster level.

As for the Druid, flurry of blows can't be combined with natural attacks, so was your problem him wildshaping into something big and using unarmed strikes?

The problem was with him turning into something big and using natural attacks (which got the unarmed damage bonus) with flurry of blows.

He had three Monk levels, so he got Wis to ranged attacks.

what were they turning into out of curiosity.

personally i love the Sorc/monk zen archer build. mainly because i'm not really a fighter or ranger fan


TOZ wrote:
Pixel Cube wrote:
The problem is that your players are munchkins.
No, the problem is that they have no respect for her.

Precisely.


Quandary wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
As for the flurry of blows thing, I was soundly beaten in the rules argument we had over that. They can yell longer and louder than I can.
Well, it sounds like your players are idiots or bulliers without compunctions, since everybody in this thread is just repeating how those rules don't work that way. If your players are yelling at you about rules (in game/out of game?), you shouldn't be playing with them... That issue is WAY before anything else, and trying to fix it passive-aggressive-style will NOT help you, believe me.

Sadly this is true. No matter what you forbid a priori, they will find a new cheese tactic and then claim you can retroactively change the rules to prevent it because derp derp derp.

They are the 120 pound five year olds screaming in walmart for a box of ice cream.

They don't want a fair game focused on the story, they want a power trip to show how smart they are at beating the system.

Silver Crusade

Pixel Cube wrote:
The problem is that your players are munchkins.

F!@~ing this, a hundred times. The problem isn't you, though I could see how some players could be annoyed by a lack of rules knowledge since you let their builds pass.

You know what ? Find a new group, explain that you asked for advice online about how to make the game funnier for everyone and people where laughing over their cheated builds and kiddy behaviours. POST THEM THIS THREAD.

Next time you have a group of, you know, MATURE players, first see how they play. If you have to DM, make everything clear from the beginning, including a rule that says that "your build must be approved on the Paizo boards".

It's like the Matrix, only there are a lot of brains knowing the rules here, and able to detect any weakness or cheese attempt.


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
*Sigh* I feel really stupid now. Reading this thread, I'm beginning to realize how bad of a job I've been doing. You guys are pointing out a lot of stuff that I should have put a stop to.

That's the hardest part of being a DM -- you're not only expected to prep and run games, but you're also expected to have a better grasp of the rules than the players. That's one reason why I like house rules so much -- it gives me a head start!


kyrt-ryder wrote:
As has been said before Kelsey, there is no unarmed damage bonus. There is a flat unarmed damage value which ONLY counts on Unarmed Strikes. There is a feat that 'could' conceivably (though the rules are ambiguous) allow the Monk Unarmed Damage on Natural Attacks, but it's a feat they would have to take and get your explicit permission to use that way.

That's another rules argument I lost.

Quote:
He lost 3 levels of sorcerer, 3 levels of spellcasting progression, and could not Full Attack with Imbue Arrow because the spellcasting takes the normal action and you shoot the arrow as part of that. (So if he was willing to eat the +4 spell levels he could Quicken a second Imbued Arrow)

Nope, the spells were all free actions, and only the first one per round counted against his spells per day.

...Gods, I'm an idiot.


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
*Sigh* I feel really stupid now. Reading this thread, I'm beginning to realize how bad of a job I've been doing. You guys are pointing out a lot of stuff that I should have put a stop to.

Don't feel bad; they are a#&~!#@s.

The problem is not these individual events, it is the culture at the table. They don't want to play a cooperative game, then they can go play Diablo (perfectly fine game that will let them cheese out all they want).


InVinoVeritas wrote:

Kelsey:

Find new players. These aren't working for you. They won't work for you. Like a bad relationship, you just have to get out.

The next question: How do you go about finding players? There are methods that lead to finding good players, and methods that lead to finding bad players. Not all methods are available to everyone, so it's possible you're out of luck, but the issue of finding good players is really the problem you're having.

I go to the game store and ask around.

51 to 100 of 316 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / How does a GM stop level dipping? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.