| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
The best way to deal with percieved cheese (because it is a perception issue) is form a social contract with your players.
One key thing to remember is a crb wizard at 15 pt buy is stronger than anything you might ban.
I think that this needs to be repeated and bolded for emphasis.
If you have a player that you are worried is going to break your game and you just lay out character creation guidelines, then that player is going to see the guidelines as a challenge. They'll come in with a wizard / sorcerer / Oracle / whatever that depends on one stat and they'll break your game in half.
If you address the table like they're a bunch of adults and actually lay out what type of game you want to play and what type of characters you want to see then you are at least justified in being disappointed when that doesn't happen. You've ground to stand on when you approach said power gamer and tell him or her that they've broken that social contract and you'd like them to try again with a second character or consider playing at a different table.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The one thing I do recommend is that you should be able to understand and prepare for whatever builds the players want to make. Banning books is a perfectly viable option, if it makes it easier to wrap your head around what is possible.
What I've found working well, too, is, as discussed earlier, getting everyone on board regarding the social contract for the game. If everyone feels comfortable describing what they're doing and planning with their characters, and the players are willing to help each other make viable characters, then there won't be an issue.
That said, the "cheese" that I'm most familiar with is the player who wants to play the character that you, as DM, are not prepared for. They want to surprise you with a trick or loophole or loose interpretation. Yes, they will scour through every book looking for the one thing that gets them the upper hand, and that's what you're trying to prevent via banning books. The problem, ultimately, though, is not the books, but the player.
I can't tell you how many conversations I've had that have gone like this:
"Can I play an ABC?"
"Yes, but be aware that the A, B, and C powers don't stack."
"Oh, uh... how about a HPdX?"
"You're thinking that will net you a +11, but because the d cannot be used with X, it'll only be a +6."
"Okay... Maybe... Let me look through more books."
"Do you have a character concept? I'll help you build a powerful whatever."
"I will, I will... I haven't found the sneaky combo concept I like yet..."
What 'cheese' is worth cutting off the vast majority of books?Psionics might be some of the more balanced and less cheesey of the lot too.
Which Psionics? There are many systems, none from Paizo, and they range from OK to Dangerously Cheesy.
The OP limitations are reasonable. I'd add "25 pt build but no points back from taking a dump stat". This also stops a lot of cheese.
I think really the only classes I'd look out for is maybe the summoner for the new players. Contrary to what a lot of people say, I don't think it's an overpowered class (Wizard beats it out any day of the week if you're clever enough), though the bookwork for one can be overwhelming for a new guy.
Summoner needs to be banned for two reasons:
It's a HUGE spotlight hog
and
The math is ALWAYS wrong.
You could also see that your game makes use of whatever the min-maxers in your group are planning to dump. For example, if most of your players dump charisma as low as possible, you could set up situations where social skills are important for all characters, not just the party "face". Similarly, if you are worried about wizards dominating the game, ensure that there will be situations where the characters will be required to engage in physical combat or perform other physical tasks without using magic.
Most importantly, inform the players that you will be doing these things. Players of characters who ignore this warning will be subjected to a great deal of social humiliation in-game.
There seem to be two situations where players min-max their characters in "cheesy" ways -- (1) They are new to your gaming group and are used to combat heavy games and plan accordingly, not knowing that you play things differently, or, conversely (2) they are very familiar with your GMing style and know that, despite your complaints about dumping mental stats, you don't actually make characters do anything with them in game so the logical approach is to dump those stats as low as they can without you thinking they are dumping. The first situation requires you to communicate the nature of your game, while the second requires you to modify the way you run your game to reflect your preference for more well rounded player characters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could also see that your game makes use of whatever the min-maxers in your group are planning to dump. For example, if most of your players dump charisma as low as possible, you could set up situations where social skills are important for all characters, not just the party "face".
He's giving 25pts, easier to just say that dumping stats gets no points back. Simple solution to dumping.
And if you really want to play a Low CHA character "for roleplaying reasons" then you still can.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, orc barbarians are well-known to be the most grossly overpowered combo in the game.
I have a technique guaranteed to stop every single cheeser in their tracks. I mean it. This is my patented, satisfaction 100% guaranteed solution:
Say no.
Was that so hard?
This is true.What 'cheese' is worth cutting off the vast majority of books?Psionics might be some of the more balanced and less cheesey of the lot too.
While this might be, and by might be I mean probably is, true most people have the bad taste of 3.5 psionics in their mouth whenever it comes up, thereby making a flat ban seem reasonable without doing any research.
*shrugs*
|
I will be honest just ask the player who stinks of cheese to take a bath and tone down the smell slightly.
I myself tend to lean toward min-maxer "power gamer" as I take optimal feats. But that doesn't mean everyone else in the game is. In PFS now my typically group has some newer players who have less then efficient characters. I feel without my presence they would die or not accomplish everything or have players dropped every combat.
Your just going to have to limit the Stronger player. If they are a charger...limit the charging abilities...if its a smart enemy that knows the PCs then make there strat to avoid providing charging lanes or creatures that stick to the charger not allowing them to charge.
If they are a caster drop a swarm on them or something...you are the DM if you want to kill them you can...if you want it difficult for them you can do that too.
I just think the OP is upset that he is too inexperienced to deal with a good player that they want to ban everything under the sun to try and level out the power for the newer players....But like it was said in previous posts...Core rule book can still provide enough cheese for good gamers to abuse. Wizards/Clerics/Druids are all Core rule books. My PFS character is Core, Advanced Players, Advance races (still halfling), and Animal Archive. I use 4 books and can Min-max to a point you think I smell of cheese but its totally not.
Yes, orc barbarians are well-known to be the most grossly overpowered combo in the game.
I have a technique guaranteed to stop every single cheeser in their tracks. I mean it. This is my patented, satisfaction 100% guaranteed solution:
Say no.
Was that so hard?
Here's one problem with that. If you tell group of people that "here are the campaign guidelines" no one takes it amiss. But if you tell one player "Your build it too cheesy- NO!" feelings can be hurt.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why do people game with people they know they have a large style clash with? Rather than get bogged down in a debate (or flame war) about narritivist vs. gamist philosophy, why can't we be civil and realize that calling someone a cheeser is an insult with a "shifting the goalposts" definition.
cheese "cheez"noun
1.
the curd of milk separated from the whey and prepared in many ways as a food.
2.
a definite mass of this substance, often in the shape of a wheel or cylinder.
3.
something of similar shape or consistency, as a mass of pomace in cider-making.
4.
Informal. partly digested milk curds sometimes spit up by infants.
5.
cheeses, any of several mallows, especially Malva neglecta, a sprawling,weedy plant having small lavender or white flowers and round, flat, segmented fruits thought to resemble little wheels of cheese.
[Addendum by Taku Ooka Nin
6.
An exploitative use of a system that is slightly questionable while otherwise being legal.]
The simple reality is that the majority of the SAD classes are in CRB, and all of the "super powerful stuff" is already there.
An Evoker Wizard with a 1 level dip in Crossblooded Sorcerer (Draconic + Orcish) is FAR more deadly than anything found in the later books.A power-attacking Fighter1/Wizard (Scryer 1)/EK10/Something is leagues ahead of a normal fighter in terms of sheer deadliness.
Hell a Rogue1/Cleric 19 will find every trap in existence while also being a full healer.
If anything the later books introduced classes that were so spread out that they became, on the whole, weaker than the core classes. An Evoker Wizard ALWAYS has a way to deal damage since he adds his Wizard level to all damage spells, including cantrips. So that Ray of Frost turns into 1d3+10 at level 10. Not much, but it is almost an assured hit every time, not to mention that a wand of magic missiles or just casting the spell would be far more useful.
Being "defeated" by cheese is really just a sign that you are running premade modules, or that you refuse to adapt your monsters to fit the party's composition.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I know it is a bit of a derail, but "cheesers" is my favorite word.
The vision of some cane-wielding neckbeard, praising the word of Gygax, and casting down the "cheeser" heretics.
This gives light to a vision of Cheeto dust covered ghoulish wretches, shooting up Mountain Dew, and hanging out on old guys' lawns.
You know what is nice cheesing?
Everyone playing reincarnated druids, and after level 5 just wrecklessly brute forcing EVERYTHING.
Once a week you get a free reincarnate in a safe area. So long as you hide after dying you literally cannot be killed. Though, you do lose all your gear but that is what summons are for.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's one problem with that. If you tell group of people that "here are the campaign guidelines" no one takes it amiss. But if you tell one player "Your build it too cheesy- NO!" feelings can be hurt.Yes, orc barbarians are well-known to be the most grossly overpowered combo in the game.
I have a technique guaranteed to stop every single cheeser in their tracks. I mean it. This is my patented, satisfaction 100% guaranteed solution:
Say no.
Was that so hard?
It's definitely a lot more likely to start an argument. I have never had an issue with a GM putting down a few guidelines/rules during character creation. Everything's clearly lined out, and it's easy to make a character that fits the rules.
"No cheese" is a much murkier requirement. The main issue is that "cheese" as a term is, highly subjective, incredibly vague, and usually comes across as a bit of an insult. In my experience, the dividing line between "cheese" and "competency in the character's chosen role" is almost entirely a matter of opinion. Just look at the forums, where we regularly see things like GMs complaining that a bog standard fighter with a greatsword and Power Attack is cheese because it's doing too much damage.
If a GM said that my build was cheesy, I would probably at least make a token effort to prove that is wasn't. By the time I've finished building a character, I'm at least a little invested in the current setup, and probably have a rough plan for his future development from that point. Obviously I don't think the build is too cheesy, or I wouldn't have made the character in the first place.
You want cheesy?
Wizard Scryer 1/Fighter 1/Eldritch Knight 5/ Arcane Archer 2
You are effectively a full BAB (-1) archer (you get 1 bonus feat from fighter and 2 from EK, which is enough to get the feats you want/need) that can cast Anti-Magic Field on an arrow. This allows you to shut down enemy magical defenses (i.e. damn near everything) and then take advantage of your archery's range and you full BAB to pelt them full of arrows.
Best part about this? You can do it all in CRB and APG. Heck, they only thing not in CRB if I remember right is the Scryer Sub school....
Oh and if you want to get even more cheese:
Aasimar Sorcerer 1/Paladin 2/ EK 4/AA 2
Cha to saves sounds kinda nice... AND smite sounds good to after a Anti-Magic Field
I know it is a bit of a derail, but "cheesers" is my favorite word.
The vision of some cane-wielding neckbeard, praising the word of Gygax, and casting down the "cheeser" heretics.
This gives light to a vision of Cheeto dust covered ghoulish wretches, shooting up Mountain Dew, and hanging out on old guys' lawns.
You've described the plans I have for my retirement to a t.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Having played at least a dozen different game systems for both RPGs and table top miniatures I have to say there is nothing more odious than the cheese crying neck-beard.
Its usually cried from the heavens like a divine and irrefutable proclamation that "X is Cheese, Ban it despite strong argument Y proving that the cheesiness isn't nearly as bad as 'acceptable' Z"
Its childish and tiresome to hear after all these years. The very invocation of the word gets me to look closely at the person crying over it. If his lassitude and lack of perspective is without redemption (and it usually is in the case of advanced neck-beard cheese criers) I will refuse to either play with or even associate with said player. I even encourage other players I game with to avoid the infected individual. Because crying cheese is an infectious meme. It leads to tournament organizers banning special characters in 40k(including ones required to run fun theme forces that aren't remotely good). It leads to developers strangling promising advanced game design space after bowing to a vocal minority (primarily video games, but also in mini and rp games). It leads to distorted local meta-games so wrapped up in their own house-rules that they can no longer play with outsiders. In fact it got so bad that the "other" game store in town often is incompatible in terms of how various games are played solely because of an inner circle of friends creating houserules (with various levels of since it beat me or my friend, its cheese, time to ban it/appeal to TO which is also part of the circle).
But mostly I'm just sick of it like the villagers in the "boy who cried wolf". 99 percent of the time I hear it called out, its simply not true. In this threads example we have the gunslinger banned. Really? GM is so lazy they can't properly challenge a 1 trick-shot pony with a low power level cap? Sure it does tons of reliable damage. What else? Its still effectively a fighter. Power level isn't measured in HP damage for people who know the secrets of 3.x based gaming. A fully cheesed out gunslinger has nothing on a 25 point buy equally optimized cleric or druid.
Now if a GM wants to just say, PF, Core only, Final destination... Sure go ahead. Its a completely valid way of playing. But for the love of the game don't call equally valid ways of playing only for "cheesers"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is true.What 'cheese' is worth cutting off the vast majority of books?Psionics might be some of the more balanced and less cheesey of the lot too.While this might be, and by might be I mean probably is, true most people have the bad taste of 3.5 psionics in their mouth whenever it comes up, thereby making a flat ban seem reasonable without doing any research.
*shrugs*
Yeah, I've noticed. But I've no idea why, really.
I mean, I expereinced something similar in my own old 3.5 group:
Group: "Woah, the psion did exactly one amazing thing in the entire game! Compared to the Barbarian, Cleric, Sorcerer, Wizard, and even Swashbuckler who have never stopped doing earth-shattering things! Psionics is so OP!"
Me: "???? ... you guys realize that the psion can't even-"
Group: "SO OP!!!!"
Me: "...? So I'll take that as a 'no' then?"
The 3.5 was the basis for all current psionic balance - it was the single best sub-system in 3.5 at all - even the most broken combos of psionics-exclusive don't compare to those of the other 3.5 magical subsystems, including the Player's Handbook. This is solidly true in PF as well.
The 3.0 Psionics on the other hand was both incredibly brilliant and tremendously stupid simultaneously; pretty much everything was broken, painful, and harsh in a really unique and clever way.
Older editions were... interesting. And imbalanced. And acknowledged that.
Anyway, off-topic. Sorry.
|
You want cheesy?
Wizard Scryer 1/Fighter 1/Eldritch Knight 5/ Arcane Archer 2
Is that using the Scryer Send Senses SLA to qualify for EK? I can't find a FAQ for it but a quick browse found someone saying no, SLAs aren't spells. So Send Senses doesn't meet the "Able to cast 3rd-level arcane spells" requirement.
What am I missing?
This FAQ/rules clarification.
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9qow
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wiktionary has a very hilarious definition of "cheeser".
Seriously, this will likely keep me laughing most of the day.
Thanks. My rules-fu is weak.
So Send Senses doesn't meet the "Able to cast 3rd-level arcane spells" requirement.
What am I missing?
This FAQ/rules clarification.
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9qow
Pretty much what Suthainn said.
You use Scryer for early entry into EK. You then abuse the EKs near full casting and full BAB to work into Arcane Archer so that when you enter AA, you will be full caster-2 and have a full BAB -1. Normally this would be bad, but you can abuse Anti-Magic Field so that most enemies become cake walks (since alot of mid to high level enemies depend on magic)since you strip them of their defenses and then abuse your full BAB and abilities to rain hell on your enemies from afar.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Define cheese?Yeah. I'm curious myself.
Off the majority discussion here but I thought I'd interject with the most consistently appliable definition of cheese I ever encountered (from a poster on here actually):
Cheese is using something in the game in a way that cleaves to RAW but not intent.And you know what, I'd like to press for it to be treated as the definition, if only to stop it being an amorphous word for "I don't like it!"
Fine. Let me rephrase. What would I call cheesing? Dismissively saying grognard and essentially "whatever old man" and then trying to argue a loophole that you can use bludgeoning with Vorpal weapons.
I over and over see people saying things like "Well my way is RAW so clearly you can't read English", when there is no RAW and you're assuming that since it isn't over-abundantly, gratuitously, explicitly stated that there is no actual rule and you just automatically get to do it.
Rule on page 5: 1+1 = 2
Rule on Page 12: 1+2 = 3
Cheeser: Well hold on now! It never said 1+1+1 = 3! RAW it doesn't state that so if I want 1+1+1 to = 12 then it does! You clearly don't understand the rules as written!
*sniff-sniff*
Nope.
*walks away, amused*
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Define cheese?Yeah. I'm curious myself.Off the majority discussion here but I thought I'd interject with the most consistently appliable definition of cheese I ever encountered (from a poster on here actually):
Cheese is using something in the game in a way that cleaves to RAW but not intent.And you know what, I'd like to press for it to be treated as the definition, if only to stop it being an amorphous word for "I don't like it!"
While I really like this principle, I disagree (though it's painful to do so) with the final conclusion.
Sometimes it's very difficult to know the intent. And sometimes the intent isn't present in the finished product at all. And sometimes the intent doesn't make for a good gaming experience or story, while the RAW does.
To me, there are just too many cases in which the intent is either unknown or doesn't function as what's best for a game, GM, group, player, some combination thereof, or some other facet that I'm not thinking of for that to be definitive and comprehensive. At least in my own opinion.
|
There are numerous ways to be very potent using just the core book. Regardless of the restrictions you'll find a curve of characters. So, when I DM PFS I ask the following questions to separate the builds.
1. AC, Init, Damage bonus, To Hit, # of attacks.
2. What is your intended optimization chain.
3. Class
From that you can determine how broken something is and whether or not its legal. Most of the time, I learn new things. Sometimes I find a little error...(plus or minus) and can help someone out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Restricting to Core doesn't really help balance the game. The CRB is the most unbalanced book in the whole game. It has Clerics, Druids and Wizards right next to Fighters, vanilla Monks and Rogues.
Casters still have all sorts of broken spells, which masrtials have even less options.
Want to make the game more balanced? Limit spell selection, not feats and options for martial classes. As things are right now, mundane classes pretty much need some power creep. Especially Fighters, Cavaliers and Rogues.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of posters here are arguing cheese doesn't exist...
Cheese definitely does exist, I'm eating it right now. I think someone asked for a definition of cheese.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let me make it clear that as a DM, I don't have a problem with super-powered optimized builds. But when it's only one guy doing it and his character is a glory hog, it's sort of a dick move IMO
Then your best bet is probably to chat about it. Communication goes a long way. "Hey jeff, I know your having fun, but your character isn't really leaving much for the other players. Can you cut it down some? Maybe throw out some buffs during the first round to help other players feel like they're a part of the game".
Mass bans don't do much to help. Especially without a lot of knowledge of the game. Then again talking doesn't do much unless your great at communication.