To answer your fundamental question:
No, a second level character is not viable in a fifth level party for any reasonable definition of the word "viable".
That doesn't mean it can't be fun to play, but your abilities will be far outclassed by the rest of the party.
However, if the GM is following the standard XP rules, then you should level up fairly quickly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are you having fun?
I'm just throwing in the opinion that you should probably just find a new game with rules that don't suck.
+1
Seriously.
I'm just throwing in the opinion that you should probably just find a new game with rules that don't suck.
For the record, ^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^
I'm so sick of crappy rules like this and having my opinions on the game ignored.
This, more than anything else you said, is what would bother me and get me to stop playing.
You will eventually level to be just one level behind them (can easily check the charts to see what that will happen.) In the meantime there a plenty of things you can do to help the party, aid another, ectr. I like the idea of being penalized for dying, though I don't like the idea of being penalized so harshly for retiring. In that respect, you took a hit personally to make the group better...that seems quite unfair.
Oh, just for the record, I played a 4e wizard whose main combat approach was to run and hide and sometimes freeze in terror.
She was fun. But to be fair, she contributed plenty to the group and was at the same level, but it was still fun to run and hide all the time.
If you're not having fun, and there's no way that you WILL be having fun, then just point-blank leave. As much as Pathfinder means to people, keep in mind that first and foremost it IS a game. And a game is all about having fun.
On another note, though, I feel like 'just leave' is an all too often spoken sentiment. It's best, in my opinion, to talk one on one with the GM first. Tell them your concerns. Voice it in a reasonable way. If you can't get through to them THEN leave. But you sound like you have a good case. I would really strongly urge you to try talking it out first.
When you say Viable as in comparable in power to the other characters? not likely.
Viable as in, could be fun to play and could give you a whole different perspective on combats. Yes.
BUT it sounds like your GM is a bit of a tool and you are not having much fun anyways so that bit is probably going to get lost.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would make a 5th level character and show up to the game with it.
Haha! You died! Loser! Now you have to suck at everything for as long as you play with us as punishment for your incompetence! And you'll never catch up because now you will most likely keep dying!
^ An exaggeration to be sure, but why anyone would want to endure anything even coming close to a semblance of this attitude in a game that is meant to be fun is beyond me.
|
A front line fighter would not be least likely to be viable.
You might be able to make something work in a caster, scout or archer but you're going to have to be prepared to play as a bit of a sheltered side kick for a while, be very careful about getting exposed and be very risk averse to start.
In reality, your character is going to be somewhere similar in power level to a 5th level Ranger's animal companion. They do survive adventures but they are often quite sheltered.
If you're willing to look at this as a challenge and choose something that works as a sidekick, there are role playing opportunities that could prove enjoyable. You're only 13,000 xp behind so if you can survive the first couple of sessions, you'll end up close pretty quickly and be caught up in levels by the time everyone's at 8th or so.
In my campaign, our current arrangement is to award players who can't make it to the game 1/2 experience. Even with that penalty, the guys who miss a lot of games are only a single level behind the guys who are there every week. The geometric nature of the XP chart means that it is possible to catch up.
|
A front line fighter would not be least likely to be viable.
You might be able to make something work in a caster, scout or archer but you're going to have to be prepared to play as a bit of a sheltered side kick for a while, be very careful about getting exposed and be very risk averse to start.
In reality, your character is going to be somewhere similar in power level to a 5th level Ranger's animal companion. They do survive adventures but they are often quite sheltered.
If you're willing to look at this as a challenge and choose something that works as a sidekick, there are role playing opportunities that could prove enjoyable. You're only 13,000 xp behind so if you can survive the first couple of sessions, you'll end up close pretty quickly and be caught up in levels by the time everyone's at 8th or so.
In my campaign, our current arrangement is to award players who can't make it to the game 1/2 experience. Even with that penalty, the guys who miss a lot of games are only a single level behind the guys who are there every week. The geometric nature of the XP chart means that it is possible to catch up.
It doesn't work like that in Pathfinder. A character behind in levels will never catch up. It was possible to catch up in 3.5, but not anymore.
GMs, don't do this to your players. I don't care about realism when the result of it is a less fun game.
|
It doesn't work like that in Pathfinder. A character behind in levels will never catch up.
Not true.
A 2nd level character in a 5th level party will be 13k XP behind on the Medium track.
The difference between 6th and 7th level is 12k XP. From 7th to 8th is 16K. The 2nd level character will catch up to the 5th level characters before 8th level is reached. They will remain a level behind at times, but the time behind will grow increasingly shorter.
|
|
It doesn't work like that in Pathfinder. A character behind in levels will never catch up.Not true.
A 2nd level character in a 5th level party will be 13k XP behind on the Medium track.
The difference between 6th and 7th level is 12k XP. From 7th to 8th is 16K. The 2nd level character will catch up to the 5th level characters before 8th level is reached. They will remain a level behind at times, but the time behind will grow increasingly shorter.
He'll still always be behind. In 3.5 lower level characters got extra experience to catch them up; not so in Pathfinder.
Eventually the award amounts should outpace the difference in leveling requirements; However, speaking as a fan of XP advancement, it sounds like the OP is dealing with a problem group.
Can we at least agree that it sucks to be constantly playing catch-up with your godling party members?
+1
|
|
Can we at least agree that it sucks to be constantly playing catch-up with your godling party members?
Yes.
But if you'll indulge me, take a 3rd and 4th level character. The first at 3k XP, the second at 6k XP according to 3.5.
After each faces a CR 3 encounter, they are at 3900 and 6800 each. (Giving them full total for the sake of simplicity.) After a CR 4 encounter, 5250 and 8000 each. And finally, after a CR 5 encounter, 7050 and 9600. The level 3 character has caught up to the level 4 character before they hit 5th level.
But now that he has, they get the same reward for encounters, and he will STILL always be behind. Even the odd encounters where he is behind a level won't close that gap.
Pathfinder's XP progression accomplishes the same goal with less math. The trade off is, it can take much longer for the lower level character to catch up, depending on the differences.
But all this is why I don't use XP in the first place, and would probably dump the OPs DM like a bad habit.
Man, I do use XP, and would still probably dump the OPs DM like a bad habit.
|
|
If the GM's a jerk and the game's not fun, then I'd drop it too but if that's not the case, this sounds like the kinds of challenge an old salt like me might like to take on.
In terms of the length of time, the second level guy would be 4th level when the others get 6th and would be at 6th level when his allies are 1000xp into 7th. It would happen fairly quickly if he lived and he would presumably be ahead of wealth by level after the first session or two.
I'm not saying it's easy or that he'd be likely to survive, just that it could work and could provide an interesting roleplaying opportunity to be Robin to the rest of the group's Batman (Short Round/Sallah to Indiana Jones, Percival to King Arthur, Anakin to Obiwan, generic Kung Fu student to generic wizened Master - the tropes are ripe and abundant).
Charaacter ideas where you could maybe survive a level or two:
- Maybe a stealthy illusionist who concentrates on Silent Image, min/lvl buffs and wands
- Maybe a luck/trickery cleric of Calistira who uses true strike and a whip to trip/disarm and uses touch of luck to boost the front liners/archers
- Maybe an uber-stealthy rogue (goblin? halfling? gnome?) that hides a lot and plays the perimeter, looking for ways to manipulate the battlefield (pull rugs, jam doors vs. reinforcements) or sneak around the main fight to steal spell component pouches from wizards.
- Maybe a to-hit-optimized archer (Human Fighter/archer ranger, point blank, rapid, precise, focus)
Really, none of this would be great for a power game(r) in the short run but it could be really rewarding in the long run as you came into your own and grew from being an apprentice to as good as the former masters.
Developer
|
Try having an open conversation with your GM. Let him/her know that you're not having fun because your character is so far behind all the other characters. Ask if there is any way the GM could help catch your character up to the others (a solo game, or maybe a write-up for bonus xp, if the GM refuses to just give you XP "for free" to catch up).
Be open about the fact that it's making you not really want to play any more. If the GM is unwilling to make accommodations for you to have fun in the game, it's a sign you probably should stop playing with this particular GM.
It sounds to me like you have a GM who likes to win. It also sounds like you have a GM who likes to Tbag people he kills while playing halo. The problem is he's letting it carry over into his other gaming habits. Death in games shouldn't always be punished. If everyone agreed to the stipulation before starting the campaign because they were in the mood for a hardcore challenge, then cool. If it's just the GM being a jerk, I'd advise talking to him and if he wont let up on the douchebaggery then look into alternatives.
At least in my games what kills the players is mostly luck. I play with a fairly well rounded and experienced group of guys, so somehting like a horribly timed save or a string of crits is one of the few things that will actually score a kill even at lower levels. The only way I would punish someone like this is if they are literally choosing to powergame in a way that gets them killed.
Asta
PSY