|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My problem wasn't with the OP himself...it was with his presentation of the other guy.
He came in sounding like the GM needing advice on how to deal with a player. Then, he complains the guy is just doing a TON of damage. Then, we find out the GM let in Advanced Races and used Rolls for stats. Then, we find out the other player is a 2H Falchion Wielding Barbarian focusing on Crits and Damage. Then, we find out his benchmark for doing a TON of damage is his character (the OP) which is an AoO based Phalanx Fighter which is not optimally designed for doing damage. Then, it comes out that all this anger comes from the GM charming that "powergamer" who turns and murders his party (figuratively). Then, it gets crazy when we find out not only is the GM upset that his AP is getting out damaged by the "powergamer", but the GM is secretly working with the other players to find a way to kill off the "powergamer" and refuse his resurection.
Sorry for my use of "then" but it was to display how we didn't get everything all at once...it kind of trickled out slowly as I/we pressed the OP.
I'm not one for telling someone they are having badwrongfun because its a game and do what you want, BUT in this situation I am just feeling the urge to point out that the GM and other players at this table...they are having fun wrong.
Side note: Keep in mind that the "powergamer" in question is a Lizardfolk Barbarian so I am sure his character isn't the group thinker or planner either.
|
In my experience you just have to control them. Look at the party, let them make what they want, and allow the different party members to shine in different areas. If you have a power-gamer that shines in a particular area, make sure that he is not always in his element. cater to everyone, and every once and a while, take him out of the fight with something he cant avoid to let the others shine. if everyone is power gaming, great.
Also, I've seen a few places where you would deny certain feats. I do the same, a lot of the cheliax feats to be honest, snap shot, stuff like that. now, one of the feats i police but dont completely disallow is eldritch heritage. If they are using the bloodlines to make their concept work, great, they can do that. if they are just taking arcane bloodline in order to get more spells and a familiar, nope. for example, a guy playing a kobold wants to use a bloodline to get some sneaky abilities, maybe shadow or some other bloodline, i dont see why he cant.
And overall, if a particular character is head and shoulders above or below the rest, i ask them to remake or alter their character, because he is skewing things too far in either direction. if he's fine being underpowered, then that's fine, if he makes things too hard, i tell him to expect a lot of maze spells in the future. that normally encourages them to keep the same feel and build, and take out some of the really broken stuff. (if they even got it past me in the first place)
just my two cents.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sure, there are some immature people who game the system, trolling for broken combinations. They are in no way the same as the people who select color spray as their 1st level spell because they know full well that burning hands sucks. Both are obviously different from the people who pick unseen servant as their 1st level spell because they believe that baseline competence in combat somehow equates to inferior role-playing.
Lumping both of the first two types of people together as bad players whose "powergaming" has to be "controlled" reveals a lack of comprehension of the potential problems inherent in the third approach.
^ This man knows what he's talking about.
'Power-gaming' and 'munchkin' are just labels meant to dehumanize people that are playing in a way the speaker doesn't like. It makes it easier to cast them as the Other and thus less important to the group.I LoL'd; good one. :p
Both are obviously different from the people who pick unseen servant as their 1st level spell because they believe that baseline competence in combat somehow equates to inferior role-playing.
Lumping both of the first two types of people together as bad players whose "powergaming" has to be "controlled" reveals a lack of comprehension of the potential problems inherent in the third approach.
I've heard of people who deliberately gimp their characters because they think it's somehow better RPing if the rest of the party has to cover them, and they're basically a liability in combat encounters (and out of combat, because - insist upon being annoying and obnoxious to PC and NPC alike because "that's the character's personality trait"), but thankfully I've never had the honour to play with such thespians.
I hear they used to like to play Kender Thieves.
I dk what their favorite race/class combo is these days.
Sure, there are some immature people who game the system, trolling for broken combinations. They are in no way the same as the people who select color spray as their 1st level spell because they know full well that burning hands sucks. Both are obviously different from the people who pick unseen servant as their 1st level spell because they believe that baseline competence in combat somehow equates to inferior role-playing.
Lumping both of the first two types of people together as bad players whose "powergaming" has to be "controlled" reveals a lack of comprehension of the potential problems inherent in the third approach.
Preach it, brother.
They both create balance problems. And it's a freaking nightmare when BOTH are in the same party.
Case in point: My kingmaker party has a Fighter and Cavalier. The fighter is a combat god, having spent a long time allocating his stats, optimizing his gear and feats, and works like a well oiled machine, dealing epic damage. The cavalier doesn't even have Power Attack, playing his character like some manner of aristocrat/bard that spent all his feats on making everyone else better, and obsessing over his will save (3 feats towards it). One does 200-250 damage/round. The other does 40-60. If I were to challenge fighter, I would shatter the cav.
Same with the Jade Regent game I am in. There is a magus that does close to 100/rd at lv7, and a ninja/monk that does 1d8+2(+2d6 SA every once in a while). The GM feels he needs to up the HP of encounters to make them a challenge. Which will make the ninja/monk utterly irrelevant.
|
|
I'd like to point out that the OP essentially created a support type character in the battlefield control sense and is now whining about not out damaging a specialist focused on damage soooo yeah. It's like control wizards whining about not blasting harder than a barb it's pretty darn stupid imo.
This is not about OP characters it's that you made a character which isn't supposed to be doing the same job as another person's and now you're whining about it. Also think about it like this what if that player were to play something completely useless in combat where would your damage be coming from?
Yea we kind of covered that, but he doesn't want to see it. OP still sees it as being outshined by the Barbarian, and it is kind of hard to make a case against that.
I've heard of people who deliberately gimp their characters because they think it's somehow better RPing
This is the Stormwind Fallacy I mentioned upthread: the idea that a well-made mechanically character denotes a poor RPer too focused on the power of his PC to accurately or appropriately apply their personality and thus will be nothing but a pile of numbers cleaving a path of destruction through the plot, and that a well-RPed character will be dramatically weaker and thus be heavily reliant on the DM to award their "superior" roleplaying with easier or more lenient encounters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to point out that the OP essentially created a support type character in the battlefield control sense and is now whining about not out damaging a specialist focused on damage soooo yeah. It's like control wizards whining about not blasting harder than a barb it's pretty darn stupid imo.I pointed that out too on the previous page but a little more. . .gently. As a team OP + PG = really good. If they were to decide to look at it that way
This is not about OP characters it's that you made a character which isn't supposed to be doing the same job as another person's and now you're whining about it. Also think about it like this what if that player were to play something completely useless in combat where would your damage be coming from?
The problem is that apparently the one player really is over-shadowing everyone else, annoying everyone else in the group (including the DM), and not accomodating the general group style.
Lots of the 'solutions' that OP said they're considering (PKing him and leaving his body to rot) IMO are bad ones, which is why I (and others) have proposed a few better ways of going about it.
But it just might be that this one player's gaming style, seen as "power gaming" by the rest of this particular group, while it might be that he'd fit right in with a lot of our groups, just isn't suited to this particular group - and thus his apparent refusal to accommodate his style to the overall campaign may be a real problem.
Like I said if I were in that campaign I'd probably be more laid back than I otherwise would be with my builds. It's a game of teamwork, but what a lot of the people attacking the OP are forgetting is that it's not just a game of teamwork in character but out of character as well, as a social game. There should be give and take by all participants but if you'er in a group or campaign based mainly on one style (they all like "low fantasy/grim and gritty"), it really would be boorish for me to insist upon bringing a "high fantasy/epic hero" style character to their table.
That said - deliberately trying to kill his character, finding a way to kill it and leave it dead, not the kind of solution I'd endorse.
This is the Stormwind Fallacy I mentioned upthread:
Yeah I'm familiar with it ^_^
Like you (and Stormwind) I've never found that having a competent, non-obnoxious character somehow gets in the way of RPing or having fun in social/political/non-combat encounters. In fact it helps me enjoy those type of encounters moar, knowing that if I get jumped, I can still handle myself.|
|
I think its only going to spawn a player full of resentment that obviously knows how to read and make powerful characters. He is going to just turn around and make one heck of a PC killer to get revenge on that table of players...it only takes 1 well made Witch to DESTROY players with Flight, Evil Eye, Sleep, Win...
Yeah I'm familiar with it ^_^
Cool, always helps to be sure you're on the same wavelength as people, I don't mind repeating myself if it helps clear the air =)
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
'Power-gaming' and 'munchkin' are just labels meant to dehumanize people that are playing in a way the speaker doesn't like. It makes it easier to cast them as the Other and thus less important to the group.Cheesemonkey is still ok though, right?
What did you call me?!
This should be a fun story...
So, playing a halfling ninja, comes from a mafia-type background. Took levels of Ninja, took the Stealth of Shadows alternate halfling trait, and optimized a Sniper using the Great Crossbow from Races of Stone. I figured one attack that hurt, quite a bit would auto-balance itself out. Right?
Turns out that isn't the case. At seventh level I picked up Dead Eye, a feat from Dragon Magazine #301. For those that don't know, when using crossbows you get to add your dex modifier to damage. Well, the +1 Great Crossbow does 6d6+11 damage at this point (I also have some Sniper's Goggles. Saved up FOREVER to get these, even with the GMs nerfing these to only give +1 damage per sneak dice, these are too good). Apparently Dead Eye was too powerful.
I shrugged and said alright. I considered things for a bit, went through the SRD. Told him I would go ahead and retrain Dead Eye for Skill Focus: Stealth in anticipation of getting Hellcat Stealth. He agreed.
We get to 10th level, I grab Invisible Blade. Again, I become too powerful as now no enemy can see me...ever. With the bonuses to stealth granted by invisibility, it means I break a 60 on a stealth check regularly.
For the next few levels, we chat about other options. The rest of the group wants me to go melee with two weapon fighting, and I shudder at that thought. The gm and the rest think I do to much damage already...they seen what a two-weapon rogue does? Combine that with a defense focused monk whose AC is close to 40 (We are level 15 now), and it becomes very difficult for anyone else to try and hold there own.
However, I finally decide to go along with everyone...give them enough rope to hang with. I grab a pair of Subtle Shortswords...and now, even with retraining the last five levels to two weapon warrior fighter and losing three dice of sneak attack, if I get sneak attack (And I will except things with fortification or that are just immune), I still do 40-50 points of damage per attack!
I can already hear the complaints incoming...I think its time I retire this character no matter how many plots the GM has depending on this halfling being there. I think my sanity is more important. Maybe I will play a bard...after all, those aren't overpowered...right?
TL;DR: Some people just enjoy complaining. So long as you leave some form of weakness to counteract a strength, have fun. Keeps you happier in the long run.
Good grief, this thread is still blazing? Just as well I suppose, as I had some further thoughts since my last post. Ok, sorry if this offends anyone, but whenever I hear POWERGAMER or something along the lines of "this class is broken because..." what I really infer is "this class or person makes me feel insecure or shakes up my little world. Waaah Waahh Waahh!" Ok there, I said it! Get over it!
Ok, while I don my flame retardant gear, let me share some of my gaming history with you. I started waaaaayyyy back in 1st edition and the group I was asked to join had been playing for awhile. And they had been playing ALOT! (still in school+no job+ no steady gf = lots of free time to be a nerd) Ok, I was extended the priveledge of starting my 1st character out at 3rd level and even had a magic item or two. I still remember him, a human druid named DreadLore. Once I was all written up an dm approved I set out with the party and began my career as the "new guy".
One of our first adventures was part of the G series"Against the Giants". Oh, did I mention that everyone else was level 30+? Oh silly me. Anyway, I huddled in the background and lent a spell or two to help out. Problem was, the level 36 fighter/ level 36 mage that was sort of babysitting me let loose with a chain lightning and failed to count his number of targets. The DM chuckled as he realized I was among potential targets, and well to make it short I died a horrible death. They then reincarnated me instead of rezzing and guffawed with laughter when I came back as a half elf female. Oh, and they renamed me "Dreadlina". Great fun.....
Anyway, I "retired" my druid an brought in a half ogre fighter named Grond, also 3rd level. We then continued through some of the giant series, and Grond even slew some hill giants in some of the big battles (they were only 8 hd in those days) Grond survived those modules, and I think he came out like maybe 5th level (maybe 6th)
The partys' next adventure was taking on Dragotha (of White Plume Mountain fame) and Grond went along, mainly to carry the partiys' luggage, water the horses., etc. While the big guns were engaging the DracoLich, Grond went to work on the minions- mostly skeletal and zombie monsters. I was like 1/2 a mile away from the real fighting, but still having fun. Then Dragotha used one of his alt breath weapons (Death wind I think it was called) and as the dm was figuring the AoE (which was huge) he realized poor Grond was going to get hit too, even a zip code away. Now, I had hps an a good ac, and I did great damage, but saves? At 6th? Ok, dead 1/2 ogre. They rezzed me that time at least and I dusted myself off and went on gaming.
Now I had a rough time of it, alot of the time. 400 lb ogres in plate mail flounder alot in traps and HATE just HATE having to make saving throws or dex checks. And I got my butt whooped pretty regularly too. But I hung in there, and had fun doing it. Now round lvl 9-12 I wasnt the new guy anymore, and maybe even had a little better party rank than the hirelings. I was starting to rival the mightiest fighters the party had, as far as dmg goes, due to wpn specialization and being able to use a BSWD one handed, though they had better saves, hps, gear etc.
I remember eventually going through "Throne of Bloodstone" with the party, though mostly as a big, ugly cheerlader as the PC "gods" interacted with the powers of the multiverse. Even with an amulet that raised my effective levels, I was a small fish in a BIG,BIG pond. BUT, when we went after Tiamat, as we entered her lair and the party was squaring off against her and the ancient dragons of each (chromatic) color with her, different characters were assigned different targets. And to my surprise, it fell to me to take out the ancient white dragon! Yes! I was finally one of the guys! Sure, it was the weakest thing in the encounter, but it was MINE! ALL MINE! (Incidentally, I beat the snot out out that poor dragon......)
Ok, let me step off Geezer mountain, and clarify my point if you havent gotten it yet. I was definitively the weakest, most unimportant, oft abused player in that old campaign. And I sitll loved it! Every minute of it! I wouldnt have kept coming back week after week if I hadnt. Power is relative, and has never mattered one whit to me because of that first exp (as long as everyone is using the same ruleset, mind you)
So? Be who ever you are in the game, do what makes you happy! Your not the toughest? Be the funniest! The sneakiest! The most greedy! (in fun, mind you) Maybe be the biggest coward who ever lived! Find the "magick" of your groups' chemistry and roll with it
|
|
A side note, a long time ago I felt that the best way to control Power Gamers is to assist all of the other players into making characters nearly as strong, and then raising the stats of the NPCs, so that it isn't possible for the Power Gamer to get a statistical advantage.
Sure it changes the nature of the game a little, but I think it is well worth it. Oddly, I've found that it even makes power gamers happy.
just popping back in before running off...
thats kinda funny, I had almost this exact conversation with the DM. it was after he read some 3 page thing from the AP and I got pretty bored with it... a while later I said I was used to a more fluid gamestyle not using APs but where the DM kinda plans out the major encounters but generally makes things up as the party goes along... he said something like "yeah well I wish I could spend 12 hrs a week just planning out encounters but I'm running three PF games a week, and I just dont have time for that, the AP's are awesome though... you'll see"
He was upping the encounter levels though, thats sorta why the 8 armed demon with the pincers both critted and focused all its massive attacks on the PG character, and why when he went down it pretty much would have killed the whole party without the DM bending back its abilities... but there was/is in my mind a huge disparity between the PG character and the other characters in the game.
and basically if your telling me... "the APs are great and well written but they were written before most of the optimization became possible, and they were written for teh vanilla characters, and because most players now optimize, the average party today will breeze through the AP encounters..." then I would say again, there seems to be very large problem with game balance.
The DM cannot achieve it easily, and will have to put a lot of time into "fixing" the APs, the players dont really know where the limits are (and creating your character with no limits clearly leads to problems unless...
As I said before...and it was before you left...
Your GM is the reason the game is what it is...if he followed the guidelines for APs this would have never happened to this extent. 15 point buy...4 players...basic races...
Two guys want to play half ork barbarians, both new players, one writes a colorful backstory, and builds his for that puts a few feats into being able to smell-track people, few feats to justfify skills and languages he would have picked up living in a farm community etc. where the other, just follows the build he read online that allows the mathimatically most superior AC damage and lack of weaknesses.
Generally, in my experience, you'd be describing the SAME player for both descriptions -- call him "Player A." He gets into elaborate character development and backstories, and also puts some work into making sure his PC isn't helpless.
Player "B" would make a half-orc barbarian who is regularly out-damaged by bards and commoners, and who has no feats or languages selected, and no backstory at all.
In other words, some poeple are intested in the game and get into it, and others really aren't, and don't. In 30+ years, I've hardly ever seen someone in person who only did role-playing, or who only did mechanics. It's only when I come to the online fora do I suddenly hear about this huge problem of awesome, noble role-players with their delicate flower characters being oppressed by the evil, personality-less mathemeticians.
Keeping power gamers in check:
1) Point Buy 15 or 20 only.
2) Everybody gets 1 character. No exceptions. If somebody is not there, then his or her character spends that adventure drinking at the tavern.
a) Leadership feat gets you a basic NPC to boss around. It is not a "get a 2nd character" feat.
3) Pathfinder only sources--namely, Core, APG, UM, and UC. No 3rd party and absolutely no 3.5 books.
4) If you use the Golarion/Inner Sea campaign, adopt the Pathfinder Society rules, even if you don't actually run PFS games.
5) Don't be taken in by sophistry supporting ridiculous ideas such as RAGE-LANCE-POUNCE (search for several threads on this subject for more information). They don't work, never have, and only a naive GM would believe otherwise.
6) Use only material that you as the GM are thoroughly familiar with yourself. If you have to, restrict everybody to the Core Rulebook and allow APG, UM, and UC only after you have read them cover-to-cover.
7) The ARG and Bestiaries are for the GM only.
8) Make everybody create a background for their character telling how they came by their abilities.
9) If a player has an odd combination of powers of abilities, first, check the math carefully. Then make him or her describe it working dramatically. If the player is unable to do that, they cannot use it.
10) Powergamers are usually optimized for one particular thing to the detriment of others. If optimized for combat, put them in social situations where their charisma dump state is a liability. (and vice versa).
In other words, some poeple are intested in the game and get into it, and others really aren't, and don't. In 30+ years, I've hardly ever seen someone in person who only did role-playing, or who only did mechanics. It's only when I come to the online fora do I suddenly hear about this huge problem of awesome, noble role-players with their delicate flower characters being oppressed by the evil, personality-less mathemeticians.
Well, they must exist, unless there's a script 'bot out there writing out those posts.
Like I said before, though, I never had the honour of playing with the kind of person who thought bringing a Kender Rogue* to the table would be awesome.
*
What Gnomercy said.
Specifically, if you want to run an AP strictly "as-written" with absolutely zero adjustments, you start at 1st level, use 15 point buy, and only allow core content plus any stuff explicitly mentioned in the AP - if it provides options for a Magus, then it's probably safe to assume Magus is allowed; if there's bonus campaign-specific familiars specifically stated to be for a Witch, safe to assume Witch is allowed; etc.
Anything not explicitly mentioned is not allowed, as are any feats, items, spells, etc. not in core or explicitly tied to the classes allowed by the AP's special options (ex: the Eidolon-curing spells for Summoner if the AP makes concessions for a Summoner).
Then - and this is the hard part - you have to convince your players (or in your case, your fellow players and the GM) to be interested in playing a campaign under those limitations.
And pray nobody gets a string of lucky 20s and blasts through an event (combat, social, or otherwise) that was supposed to be particularly challenging.
and the balance issue... the AP's have a set power level right? I mean, if you have a group of players who all fit within the same power level... you wouldn't need to change any encounter?
If that is a correct statement, thats what I want to know... how do you stop players from going over that power level?
Depends on the AP.
Age of Worms was a meat-grinder. PCs were expected to be pulling all the rules-legal tricks they could get their hands on, and a lot of them would still die regularly if the DM played the NPCs according to their intelligence scores.
Savage Tide and Rise of the Runelords were pretty tough, too. It would be hard to "go over that power level" with four rules-legal PCs -- and that includes the 3.5 edition splats, at that time.
The later Paizo APs seem to be slightly toned down, and non-optimized PCs can still survive, especially if the DM pulls some punches. To keep them from "going over that power level," start with a reasonable point-buy (none of this 25-point stuff), keep an eye out for blatant abuse of ability combinations, and nerf the effects of certain spells like find the path.
Also keep in mind that certain martial characters may seem overpowered at low levels, but later in the AP they'll end up being less and less useful. Casters may start out unimpressive -- but as they gain higher-level spells, and the players get more experience with what they can really do with them -- totally legal, non-powergamer full casters can still totally overbalance an AP just by thinking outside the box a bit.
Age of Worms was a meat-grinder. PCs were expected to be pulling all the rules-legal tricks they could get their hands on, and a lot of them would still die regularly if the DM played the NPCs according to their intelligence scores.
Oh man, do I remember this. We never even got past the beginning of the second chapter and it was still vicious. Luckily never had a character death - between a Crusader/Paladin, a Cleric, a Dragon Shaman with the FH aura, and a Rogue with healing wands we had more than enough active healing going around - but some fights
I should bug the DM who started it and see if he'd be interested in picking it up as a PbP....
Age of Worms was a meat-grinder. PCs were expected to be pulling all the rules-legal tricks they could get their hands on, and a lot of them would still die regularly if the DM played the NPCs according to their intelligence scores.
Savage Tide
True this is or seems to be the caviate to what I said earlier: the pre PF APs from Dungeon Mag era, a lot of the bads were hard to even hit/touch with effects unless you were OP.
High ACs, very high saves, high SR, immunities, mooks and other things to keep the party back (and archery wasn't "pro" in 3.5), and so on. you'd have to be really clever to complete some of them.
But, then, their climactic adventures were with iconic bads who should be tough to bring down.
gnomersy- that means the dm needs to be able to clearly define exactly what is ok and not ok for his game, he needs to be able to limit his players if hes going for "not optimized" and that was the point of this whole thread,
how do you do that? how do you control the powergamers, and stop the powergaming? how do you limit them?
Simply put I run my games without limits, and do very little to control my players. 25 point buy gesalts using the wounds and vitality system for everyone!
On a more serious note. It sounds your DM is simply overwhelmed with 3 games as it is and doesn't have the time to adequately deal with everything that is going on in this one. Really, it sounds like he should cut back on one, and to be honest this one sounds like the one that needs to go. General party divisiveness and plotting against players, even in a joking matter, is generally a sign that the game is already over and in such cases simply runs on the groups individual stubbornness (which in my experience isn't fun for anyone). So, my response to how to deal with such a divisive situation is to simply not deal with it at all, and walk away. Life is too short to have such problems in what is supposed to be an entertaining game.
Edit: Also, the AP your in, which I believe was Rise of the Runelords, isn't balanced for Pathfinder as it is ment to be played with 3.5 (which as I understand it is a little weaker than pathfinder at its core). So, your going to need to up it a little bit so as to keep it in balance with pathfinder characters. Also, standard starting point for an AP is 15 point buy using core classes only starting at level 1. So, if you are working with one of the other APs then that is the assumption you should play at when you run your eventual game.
I disagree making the ARG banned in games
This is my ARG suggestion:
Chapters 3 and 4 (uncommon races and race builder) are OFF LIMITS
Chapter 1 is open to everyone
Chapter 2 is only allowed for races with an RP cost of 11 or lower.
I disagree making the ARG banned in games
This is my ARG suggestion:
Chapters 3 and 4 (uncommon races and race builder) are OFF LIMITS
Chapter 1 is open to everyone
Chapter 2 is only allowed for races with an RP cost of 11 or lower.
What about Vegepigmyies?
speaking of which I never did get an answer to the one golden question of whether they are in there.
it was on the magus opt thread, they were talking about using the magus ability to add vorpal to a keen weapon when your speced for crit range. I took it to mean you back up any 15 and cut the BBEG's head off. sounded pretty damn OP to me...
A magus could only add Vorpal on his weapon at level 17 or later iirc, and that would use all the bonuses he could put on his weapon using his arcana ability, so he couldn't also have keen, a plus, or any other ability he had the option to add using his arcana pool. Vorpal also only does its effect on a natural 20, not a crit so high crit range builds get no benefit. I think an issue is that people sometimes misread or intentionally misread rules to their benefit, which was the case there.
There are no vegepygmies in the Advanced Race Guide. In fact, only in the race builder chapter do you find anything resembling the races with racial hit dice.
Also -- there is an easy fix for rolled stats if the most powerful character indeed has better ability scores than the other players. Figure out what point buy that character is equivalent to, and then let the other players boost their ability scores to an equivalent value. Then give them reasonable rebuilding opportunities if they see better options.
With no indication that the player of the powerful character is doing anything wrong, you should focus on making things more fun for the players of the apparently less powerful characters rather than punishing the player of the powerful character. For example, the brute should be targeted with a Hold Person spell or other effect that takes him out of the combat, not one that turns him against the party -- that lets the other players' characters shine as they work to hold off the enemy while the brute attempts saves to recover from that effect. Occasionally provide challenges that play to the strengths of the other characters and leave the brute in a bit of trouble, for example by using ranged attackers, traps that do not yield easily to brute force, and social challenges. If you work out the right balance of challenges, all of your players should have fun.
There are no vegepygmies in the Advanced Race Guide.
