Optimizing for survival a sign of cowardice?

[Ravingdork]

Shalafi2412 wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

Shalafi2412 wrote:

Ravingdork, is there a way that you can email me your character sheets for these two characters? For some reason my home computer will not let me open the links you posted.

Send me you E-mail via private message, and I will send them along.

Thanks! How do I do that?

Click my name and that will take you to my profile. On my profile page, there should be a link that says "Send Private Message" about four lines from the top.

[Caedwyr]

Orthos wrote:

Mordo the Spaz - Forum Troll wrote:

Atarlost wrote:

Dump both con and dex. Show absolutely no self preservation. If he lives through a single session you have failed.

Heh. How about designing a Leadership Cohort character you care about, and expendable "main" PCs who seldom last two game sessions? "Well, so much for Sir Saps-A-Lot. Time to roll up a new PC to watch over the Destined Princess as she searches for her long-lost evil stepmother."

I'll be honest, I think this could have the potential to be interesting.

Yeah, and as a Cohort tends to be several levels behind, and in obvious need of protection (justified to take extra defensive precautions), you can have your cake and eat it too, so long as you don't use the cohort to save the day.

[Shalafi2412]

RD, I think that I did it correctly.

[DrDeth]

Looks like you couldn't resist running this guy, despite our advice and your promises:

http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz675u?Looking-for-a-good-cover-story#11

[Shalafi2412]

In the end, DrDeth, I think that people here are going to do as they please despite what me might like them to do.

[DrDeth]

Yes, but he asked us for advice, and we spent 9 pages giving it to him, just to have him ignore us and break his promise.

[Adamantine Dragon]

DrDeth wrote:

Yes, but he asked us for advice, and we spent 9 pages giving it to him, just to have him ignore us and break his promise.

So I have this running conversation with my daughter. It goes like this:

"Dad, I need some advice."
"Hmm... OK, what's up?"
"Well, [insert some typical young adult relationship problem here]."
"OK, I see... well [insert some fairly typical practical fatherly advice here]."
"But I don't want to do that."
"Well, then don't."
"You're no help at all."

After about the hundredth round of that conversation I realized my daughter rarely, if ever, is actually seeking "advice." All she wants is "affirmation."

[Dabbler]

I think you summed it up quite well, AD. I don't blame RD for playing the character he wants to play, but he needs to realise that if he does this, the flak is going to come his way and he's not really respecting his friends in exactly the same way that he feels that they do not respect him. His group has issues, but the issues are with the 'killer GM' mentality, which he isn't helping by building characters totally focussed on survival - in fact, he's encouraging it.

[Ravingdork]

Yeah, I made a fighter and said I'd give him a go. Then my GM didn't even bother to look at him. After that, what little enthusiasm I had began to wane.

Now the more I look at Nives the more I want to play him, while the inverse is true with the fighter.

[Dabbler]

I can understand that, it's just that you must realise this means that it's all more of the same. You still have killer DMs and complaining players.

[notabot]

To be fair that would still be the case with the trip fighter. A character that is dominating in combat against single opponents that are vulnerable to the point the GM has to use encounter designed to counter that strategy, to the potential downfall of the party if any of them specialized in fighting med sized or smaller humanoids who rely on the ground to walk.

[Shalafi2412]

Does your group know how to develop characters RD? Did you get the email I sent to you?

[Ravingdork]

Shalafi2412 wrote:

Does your group know how to develop characters RD? Did you get the email I sent to you?

No, I suppose I didn't.

[Shalafi2412]

Ravingdork wrote:

Shalafi2412 wrote:

Does your group know how to develop characters RD? Did you get the email I sent to you?

No, I suppose I didn't.

Maybe you could help them learn how to develop characters?

[Shalafi2412]

Hey, RD, do you think that you might be able to send me the template to your character sheet? I really liked it.

[John Kerpan]

Ravingdork, have you tried using a "random NPC character sheet" generator, and still winning everything from superior tactical ability and preparedness, and eschewing any type of build? That could be a fun way to make your point.

[ClintOfTheEasternWood]

To address the original post I can say I've been on both sides of the fence in multiple game systems. I've been the guy who has rolled up multiple front line characters only to have my teeth kicked in while our wimpy wizard was cheating the rules to up his defense. I then had to deal with that same wizard once he became uber powerful being a jackass about running away.

Pathfinder, like D&D before it, has a sliding scale of power throughout the levels. Wizards are usually better end game, fighters are better early, etc. No matter where you are in the game though, you need to prevail in encounters. Tactics change based on importance of certain PC's. Self buffing or casting defensive spells on the only person who can end an encounter in which you must win at all costs would be a smart move. Even if everyone else dies, the goal was to set up that one person.

Your typical encounter isn't a win at all costs encounter. Everyone making it out in one piece is typically more important then winning because it would take more resources then would be gained to mitigate the cost of said player death. Since damage is typically much stronger then healing or mitigation you will often find that the way to best overcome an encounter is to do copious amounts of damage to the enemy. As a caster you may do this by buffing, debuffing, or nuking. Every round not spent causing more damage to go on monsters is a round everyone else is taking damage.

Do some math and find out what needs to happen for a spell to be effective. If anyone b~!~*es then maybe it's time whip out the math and show them what you are doing in black and white. And if even after that they still want fireball only, then you can tell them to play their characters and you'll play yours.

[Lord Pendragon]

Protecting yourself isn't cowardly, it's pragmatic. Spending extra, unnecessary time to protect yourself while others are dying, that's cowardly.

In my group's longest-running campaign, 2 years, levels 1-20, we had a cleric who *consistantly* spent 2-3 rounds buffing himself before he'd do anything else to help the party. Usually most of the fighting was over by the time he felt safe enough to actually engage. This happened even as our barbarian was getting hit for critical damage, leading our druid to memorize far more healing spells than she should have, just to pick up the slack.

That's cowardice.

If you're merely spending a round putting up a Mirror Image or dropping a Black Tentacles between you and the charging hordes before getting down to other things, more power to ya. Wizards are squishy, yo.

And if you *like* playing ranged characters, there's nothing wrong with that. One of our group likes playing halfling rogues. If that's what he enjoys gaming the most, why force him to play something else he'll have less fun with? Not everyone wants or needs to play something different every campaign.

[Dabbler]

Please, this has been covered: RD doesn't want to change the way he plays, he wants a magic bullet that will change everyone else at his table, and there isn't any such. He self-buffs so much because many of the DMs are 'killers' who basically see it as their goal to wipe out the party. Personally, I think he should stop playing to survive, that way they will quickly learn that TPKs are no fun and mature a little, but that's just my opinion.

[Shalafi2412]

I was only asking for a template.