Playing games with lots of options like pathfinder is fun. It's exciting to constantly try to formulate new ways and strategies to excel in them. The rush and high of discovering a previously unnoticed combination of items, feats, or abilities that give you that extra edge is invigorating. I can sympathize with my players for enjoying the game their way and powergaming their characters to get every advantage they can.
But seriously, they're all big stinky cheaterfaces!
Cracked: This stone stores one spell level, as a ring of spell storing (minor). Price: 2,000 gp.
Plus
Wand of Shield and Mirror Image (either through UMD or party caster)
When the monk player with already 60+AC in my game showed me this my first reaction was to say "No, this smells of gorgonzola. We finally reached the point in the adventure path where monsters don't need 20s to hit you."
But I don't wanna be that GM.
I wanna be the cool GM.
The guy who lets players do whatever they want and still provides a challenging experience.
But this doesn't seem consistent with the way the game prices AC bonuses on characters. What I mean by that, is characters who do not have access to 1st level spells typically have to have proficiency with shields, spend 4000gp+ to enchant one, and use a hand slot to gain a +4 shield bonus to AC. Wizards, sorcerers, etc. don't have to worry about that and take care of that by casting it. But being able to gain that shield bonus on any character for 2000 gp, regardless of class and hand slot usage, seems too good.
Yes, I know dispel magic is great to add to encounters.
Yes, I know I'm a whiny GM for complaining about player optimization.
But running games where monsters can only hit a player on 20s isn't exciting for me. It might be exciting for players who have fun "beating" Pathfinder, but it takes away the excitement for me.
Is that wrong? Am I being a funkiller? Let me know what you think. I'm also curious to hear if you have any similar experiences.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
AC is far far being the only thing you can target in Pathfinder. Also while 60+ AC is certainly possible, that probably needs another look, or his resources should be significantly invested in that and thus away from offense. Monster that are reasonably intelligent can simply ignore him and deal with him last. What level is this at?
There's always the option of targeting something else than AC on the monk. I know it's hard to do because it's a monk, but target saves, use enemies in environments that are very beneficial to them, etc...
I would also like to see how he has 60 AC, there might be something wonky going on there, I've made monks before with high AC like this, but it was usually at a cost (fighting defensively, only vs single targets, loss of actions etc...) make sure that the trade offs are being followed (like -a whole bunch to hit for fighting defensively with combat expertise)
Well, the monk can negate a lot of the minuses to hit through feat trees, but 60+ AC probably still deserves another look, particularly if they are not really high level.
It also helps if the monk has gone the weapon finesse or guided weapon route, meaning that he can largely ignore Str and thus, focus primarily on Wis and Dex (both of which help his defense).
That said, yeah a spell vs. Fort is likely to ruin his day -- particularly if you have it cast by an enemy a few levels higher than the party.
All that said, I totally understand where the OP is coming from. Generally speaking, the more options there are in the game, the more powerful the PCs will become simply because there are greater chances for synergistic combos of feats, abilities, spells, and items, etc. This is one of the things that I think ultimately hurt D&D over the course of the last two editions. The supplements were coming out so fast that there was no way they could be adequately play tested. Next thing you knew, encounters were largely being decided by who won initiative.
To the OP: As a long-time GM, I too much prefer to say "Yes" rather than "No". That being said though, sometimes you do need to say "Hey, for the sake of the campaign, do you mind perhaps reigning it in a bit? The way this is going, if I am going to challenge your character, its almost guaranteed to wipe out the rest of the party. Nobody has fun in a situation like that." With regard to the monk, odds are that at 60+, he's still going to be missed a majority of the time anyway, so he can still do the cool things like use his Fast Movement to charge across the encounter area to snatch the virgin sacrifice off the altar while all the bad guys flail uselessly at him.
AC is far far being the only thing you can target in Pathfinder. Also while 60+ AC is certainly possible, that probably needs another look, or his resources should be significantly invested in that and thus away from offense. Monster that are reasonably intelligent can simply ignore him and deal with him last. What level is this at?
It's level 15. His AC is legit. The frontliner is enlarged and has a 15 ft. reach. 20 with lunge. When fights go indoors, he's the doorplug of doom. While hard to ignore, its not impossible. I do just kill the other players when the opportunity presents itself as well >:D
The appropriate response to this is simply, NO. An unslotted item that costs 2K that emulates a slotted item that costs 18K is simply ludicrous. That ioun stone should cost a minimum of 36K.
Also According to the item you must be a caster to use it. You can use scrolls to charge it, but wands were omitted.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But this doesn't seem consistent with the way the game prices AC bonuses on characters. What I mean by that, is characters who do not have access to 1st level spells typically have to have proficiency with shields, spend 4000gp+ to enchant one, and use a hand slot to gain a +4 shield bonus to AC. Wizards, sorcerers, etc. don't have to worry about that and take care of that by casting it. But being able to gain that shield bonus on any character for 2000 gp, regardless of class and hand slot usage, seems too good.
It only lasts 1 minute. And it still takes a standard action to activate it.
(Even if you let players cast the spell into the stone at their own caster level instead of just the minimum, Shield only lasts 1 minute per level, so 15 minutes.)
Yes, I know I'm a whiny GM for complaining about player optimization.
But running games where monsters can only hit a player on 20s isn't exciting for me. It might be exciting for players who have fun "beating" Pathfinder, but it takes away the excitement for me.
Is that wrong? Am I being a funkiller? Let me know what you think. I'm also curious to hear if you have any similar experiences.
This hobby of ours is called role playing games, we create and play, challenge and explore characters and stories. We study ourselves and human nature through axe wielding androids and orcs with plasma rifles, and we take the occasional figurative fireball to the face in the process.
Your job as a GM is not to set up a line of straw filled training dummies, your job is to challenge your players and their characters. And let optimizers know that there is no perfect build against an no-maximum challenge system.
The danger of optimizing is that where the strengths of the optimized character lets him/her overcome a 'level appropriate challenge' with ease, the areas where he/she has a normal(or reduced) power level will be a devastating weakness against a 'power appropriate challenge'. And in that moment, we will learn the true nature of a protected character who has never met a real challenge. And stories will be created that last through multiple games.
... Or what may be considered a whiny GM complaining about player optimization will meet the whiny optimizing player complaining about the lack of straw dummies in the lamest epic ever...
RPGs are a collaborative effort; GMs challenge and support players, and players challenge and support GMs. And stories happen.
Unless you play PFS, then tough cookies...
(that last part was a joke, PFS is an excellent initiative to introduce two groups to eachother: People, meet Pathfinder RPG. Pathfinder RPG, meet people, they want to partake is this hobby of ours...)
Playing games with lots of options like pathfinder is fun. It's exciting to constantly try to formulate new ways and strategies to excel in them. The rush and high of discovering a previously unnoticed combination of items, feats, or abilities that give you that extra edge is invigorating. I can sympathize with my players for enjoying the game their way and powergaming their characters to get every advantage they can.
But seriously, they're all big stinky cheaterfaces!
** spoiler omitted **
When the monk player with already 60+AC in my game showed me this my first reaction was to say "No, this smells of gorgonzola. We finally reached the point in the adventure path where monsters don't need 20s to hit you."
But I don't wanna be that GM.
I wanna be the cool GM.
The guy who lets players do whatever they want and still provides a challenging experience.
But this doesn't seem consistent with the way the game prices AC bonuses on characters. What I mean by that, is characters who do not have access to 1st level spells typically have to have proficiency with shields, spend 4000gp+ to enchant one, and use a hand slot to gain a +4 shield bonus to AC. Wizards, sorcerers, etc. don't have to worry about that and take care of that by casting it. But being able to gain that shield bonus on any character for 2000 gp, regardless of class and hand slot usage, seems too good.
Yes, I know dispel magic is great to add to encounters.
Yes, I know I'm a whiny GM for complaining about player optimization.
But running games where monsters can only hit a player on 20s isn't exciting for me. It might be exciting for players who have fun "beating" Pathfinder, but it takes away the excitement for me.
Is that wrong? Am I being a funkiller? Let me know what you think. I'm also curious to...
There is a difference between being a cool GM that allows options and creativity while also being challenging, and a lax GM that allows anything, regardless of how unbalancing it can be (and it throws your game under the bus to be ran over by the cheese your players create).
Being the "always cool" GM will only lead you to always say Yes to the players, even though No is a much better answer, and for the betterment of the game being played.
Compare levels to AC. Always check the math, because sometimes players add in bonuses that aren't actually there to make the GM second-guess. If you catch players with cheese, either say something in-game, and/or out of game (the latter is more preferable), that while you enjoy players min-maxing and playing their strengths, you also don't want to play with a bunch of cheaters. Just tell them to play by the rules set in the game (and by yourself, should you come across some exploitable cheese), and everyone will have fun. If that fails to work, or they ask why you're opposed, say you don't have fun when you play with cheaters.
We've had a player who would always throw in some unknown bonus just to make sure he succeeded at whatever task lay before him, even though the actual result is a failure/miss. He no longer plays with us and we don't have any hard feelings for the guy; he left on good terms. But not a session goes by where we joke about our players (even myself) playing like that guy.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're hitting the inevitable conclusion of optimization: an unplayable game.
At this point you've only got a couple options.
A) Nerf the optimized characters or ask them to nerf themselves.
B) Just run the game as you were before and let the players steamroll everything.
Anything else is likely to end in hurt feelings and frustration on one side of the table (or both).
The first step is to level with your players and find out what they want from the game. "Sorry guys but I don't think I can offer you a challenging experience if things continue like this. Do you want me to reign things in a bit or just continue as we have been?"
If I may chip in? A 15th level monk has many strengths. High CMD, High saves, Spell Resistance, and in this case a high AC. Also, improved evasion.
How to keep it challenging?
Well odds on our monk here is going to have a good CMD, but not a fantastic one. Grapple him.
Dispel the shield, then pummel him with tripping piercing magic missiles.
If your guys are really steamrolling your high end encounters... break out Tucker's Kobolds. Sure you're only hitting on 20's, but when you have 100 guys with crossbows firing at you that's still an average of 5 hits. Add a few barrels with abundant ammunition, greater magic weapon and flame arrows on them and suddenly those 5 hits are actually making a difference.
Also, this spell should help out a lot. it gives your monsters a chance to hit regardless of AC without being ridiculous. Combine with massed fire and low end foes become scary again.
|
Well, you're right about players being big stinky cheaterfaces, but you have to remember that your job, first and foremost as a GM, is to make sure the game is fun. If the players are having fun, and you're having fun, then all is good.
We all want to be the cool GM, but when a player comes up and insists that Spellstrike hits touch AC, or that their 200+ damage character at level 10 is totally reasonable, you have to put your foot down for the group.
The appropriate response to this is simply, NO. An unslotted item that costs 2K that emulates a slotted item that costs 18K is simply ludicrous. That ioun stone should cost a minimum of 36K.
Also According to the item you must be a caster to use it. You can use scrolls to charge it, but wands were omitted.
Wands were omitted? That's important to know. I saw somewhere that noncasters could cast the item once it was charged, though. Are you sure a monk wouldn't be able to use Mirror Image or Shield?
You're hitting the inevitable conclusion of optimization: an unplayable game.
At this point you've only got a couple options.
A) Nerf the optimized characters or ask them to nerf themselves.
B) Just run the game as you were before and let the players steamroll everything.
Anything else is likely to end in hurt feelings and frustration on one side of the table (or both).
The first step is to level with your players and find out what they want from the game. "Sorry guys but I don't think I can offer you a challenging experience if things continue like this. Do you want me to reign things in a bit or just continue as we have been?"
There is absolutely an option C, by which my friends and I have played for years (starting with a 3.5 gestalt game).
C) Buff encounters to the player's level.
It's a ton of fun if everyone is on the same page. It's understandable that if not everyone is up for it, it can be challenging to DM for without the proper experience.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just really for my own curiosity could you give a break down of the 60 AC for the Monk in question?
Yeah, power creep just creates an arms race with optimizers in the group. Where should I draw the line on what's cheese or too good? Is this Ioun Stone trick TOO good?
I feel like you guys didn't read the OP.
He wants to challenge his optimized players. His optimized players cry foul when something appears to challenge them. He doesn't like this.
Making things X% harder isn't going to address his problem.
I don't see anything in the OP about the party complaining when they face a challenge.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Playing games with lots of options like pathfinder is fun. It's exciting to constantly try to formulate new ways and strategies to excel in them. The rush and high of discovering a previously unnoticed combination of items, feats, or abilities that give you that extra edge is invigorating. I can sympathize with my players for enjoying the game their way and powergaming their characters to get every advantage they can.
But seriously, they're all big stinky cheaterfaces!
** spoiler omitted **
When the monk player with already 60+AC in my game showed me this my first reaction was to say "No, this smells of gorgonzola. We finally reached the point in the adventure path where monsters don't need 20s to hit you."
But I don't wanna be that GM.
I wanna be the cool GM.
The guy who lets players do whatever they want and still provides a challenging experience.
But this doesn't seem consistent with the way the game prices AC bonuses on characters. What I mean by that, is characters who do not have access to 1st level spells typically have to have proficiency with shields, spend 4000gp+ to enchant one, and use a hand slot to gain a +4 shield bonus to AC. Wizards, sorcerers, etc. don't have to worry about that and take care of that by casting it. But being able to gain that shield bonus on any character for 2000 gp, regardless of class and hand slot usage, seems too good.
Yes, I know dispel magic is great to add to encounters.
Yes, I know I'm a whiny GM for complaining about player optimization.
But running games where monsters can only hit a player on 20s isn't exciting for me. It might be exciting for players who have fun "beating" Pathfinder, but it takes away the excitement for me.
Is that wrong? Am I being a funkiller? Let me know what you think. I'm also curious to...
I'm living a similar experience: I have a power-gamer in my group. He's the kind of guy that take things from a lot of manuals and spends a lot of time in combining feats, equip, abilities and so on. At first it wasn't too much a problem, because it was just one among a party of 6 people, but then you can have a "snowfall" effect. As the other players saw that he's able to make hundreds of damages, they wanted to obtain similar results so they asked him for advices and started to build their characters using a combat-driven mentality.
This is not bad per se, but it moved the focus of the game from roleplaying to combat. I had to work hard to mitigate this mentality and still there are some bad effects in my campaign. I had an argument with this guy three days ago and I don't know if he'll come back and play again with us, but sure in my next game (I usually play yearly campaigns) I will try to run a different campaign.
The advice I can give are the following one:
- Study the weaknesses of you power-gamer. He has some, because everyone has some weak points, you have to learn to use them. Maybe they can be saving throws, or touch AC, or flat-footed. If you cannot find them lurk for spells that has no saving throws among the manuals (maybe the online reference can help you), or for spells that divide the party and let you control the battlefield (like walls or fly spells). It' fun when you see their highly-optimized characters unable to hit the bad guy because they can't fly.
- Don't abuse of the knowledge you have about your power-gamer weaknesses. It's tempting to have your "revenge", but it's bad because you make him feel picked on. Just remember his weaknesses, memorize them and use them in very important encounters to reduce his power.
- NEVER let this mentality to spread in your game. Try to reward the other players for good roleplaying, let them feel that you are more generous with people who don't try to break your game. Maybe it's unfair, but it's just.
- Study hard. I know it's bad, because it's just a game and we GM don't always have time to read hundreds of pages, but you have to understand WELL the power you PCs are using because sometimes they don't understand well their powers and they use things in a wrong way, but also because you can learn a lot of counter-effects.
That's pretty all, tl;dr adapt your game.
|
The appropriate response to this is simply, NO. An unslotted item that costs 2K that emulates a slotted item that costs 18K is simply ludicrous. That ioun stone should cost a minimum of 36K.
Actually, the appropriate response is "Yes."
Later that day....
GM: "Due to your rockin' Sense Motive, I'll let you know that this guy seems kinda shifty, all smart-like. Almost as if, how shall I put it, maybe a little bird told him something. ...something about *you*. Because of that, you get to act in the surprise round. Roll init to see if you beat him."
"Too bad. BBEG wins. He quickdraws a rather vicious-looking axe and wings it over your head, really putting some oomph into the throw. You'd think he does this for a living..." <rolls not-a-1> "Since your Perception score is so awesome, even over the sounds of impeding battle as your companions shout and draw steel, you're distinctly able to hear the faint tink! of an Ioun stone being split."
* * * * *
That PC may have an AC of 60, but unless he's one of those wizards who beats rocks into his forehead, his Ioun stone has an AC of 24 and 15hp damage trashes it. Sure, there's many things the player can do to mitigate -- but did they?
Maybe it's unfair, but it's just.
Sorry mate but I think you need to recheck the definition for just.
"based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair.
"a just and democratic society"
synonyms: fair"I think a more accurate statement would be "It's not fair, but it makes the game more fun for the other players." or "It's not fair, but it enhances game balance for the players who put in less effort in character creation."
But most certainly it is neither just nor fair. It is in fact punishing a player for putting effort into the game/knowing the rules.
Of course your interpretation it's what I meant, but I don't side with your conclusions. I'm not punishing a player for knowing the rules, I'm punishing a player because he contributes to the game just quoting the rules. I would never punish a player who has a strong character but who roleplays a lot as well, I was talking about power-gamers
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a GROUP game. Seriously, it really is.
So, optimization is really about getting your character to balance against the other characters. If that can be done, then you're good. It's not like the GM's going to run out of monsters.
On the other hand, if that monk is far better than the other characters, then he's potentially spotlight hogging. That's not playing nice.
Furthermore, it really cripples the GM's ability to deal, because challenging to the optimized character is really dangerous to the rest of the group.
That's a social contract issue, and needs to be discussed with the other players. So, +1 for talking. While you're there, find out if they WANT to steamroll the enemies, or if they want more of a challenge.
It's a handicap system, like in golf. I've used these before, they're even better when they're made explicit.
That way, everyone has bragging rights. I did X! Yeah, well I did Y with a 10% handicap!
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe I'm just a disgruntled old-school gamer, but one thing I always wondered about these kinds of posts is how the characters know that these items are available in-game? How does the monk character have this obscure lore about the functions and interactions of various magical items? Does he have a high degree of skill in Knowledge (Arcana) and Spellcraft? Does he even have ANY?
Magic item creation is kind of a cottage industry. There are now ioun stone factories churning out a vast quantity of the exact kind of stone the player wants. How is the item just readily available because the player decided that he wants it?
WBL is a great tool for balancing the game. . . For the DM. It should never be used as a tool for the players to inform you of what items they have. Even if the character has the necessary skills to know about these things, how are the items automatically available? Does he start putting out feelers among merchants to find them? Do they sense how badly he wants the items and jack up the price accordingly?
In short, call BS when people try to meta-game like this. Bare minimum, make getting the items a serious challenge for them.
The answer is rule number one of the forums and probably should be rule 0.1 in the book. Dont be a jerk. Play the game with people you like and who like you. Optimization can and is a good thing, if like everything else its done in moderation, and with the goal of having fun. By all means make your character good at the thing you want him to be good at (the basic definition of optimization). Just dont overdo it. An antagonistic mindset either by players or gms is exclusively destructive.
Talk to your player. Say hey, I'm really having difficulty hitting that crazy high ac of yours. Either we can work something out where we alter your character, but you get to gain abilities in other areas, or I can have super dm fiated ninjas come murder you in the night. One of these options proceeds to a hopefully fun continued game for all. The other leads to an ever escalating and resentful arms race between us.
If you are playing with your friends, you should be able to work things out like reasonable people.
|
I both play and GM a lot of Pathfinder Society. There will always be "extreme" power gamers, and the vast majority of them simply don't get why they're not fun for both the other players and the GM.
I get min/maxing, I really do. I've made powerful characters before in PFS, but never one that could solo through the combat encounters of an adventure.
P.S. - Try using the Maze spell on that monk. When you get that one overpowered player, Maze is a wonderful way of shutting them up.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is one reason why I hate the "ye old magic shop" mentality and I flat out don't allow it in my games. The CRB list of magic items is not the Sears Mail-order Catalogue of Adventurer goodies in my games. It leads to focusing on getting specific items instead of on RPing.
Virtually every past game I've played in that allowed the purchase of magic items, with what is essentially meta-game player-knowledge of what is available, turns into an orgy of greed and nonsense.
Power gamers can and often do have strong roleplaying. They invest vastly more time into their characters than most other players, sometimes weeks or months of preparation into a single character. They want him to feel lifelike and fun.
I disagree, again, one thing is expand your character's background, its personality, its relationships and the way it interact with the setting, while another thing is to deeply study feats, spells and abilities to let it become more powerful.
It's true that sometimes even a well-prepared player can be interested in this roleplaying aspect, but I thought we were talking about players who don't care anything else but their character's strength in the game (or, at least this is my definition of power-gamer), players who just do optimization for optimization's sake.
I prefer to reward players who invest weeks or months in developing the personality or the background of their characters, instead that rewarding players who invest the same time in wondering how they can get another +2 to their AC.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe I'm just a disgruntled old-school gamer, but one thing I always wondered about these kinds of posts is how the characters know that these items are available in-game? How does the monk character have this obscure lore about the functions and interactions of various magical items? Does he have a high degree of skill in Knowledge (Arcana) and Spellcraft? Does he even have ANY?
Spot on. This is meta-gaming/player knowledge.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Power gamers can and often do have strong roleplaying. They invest vastly more time into their characters than most other players, sometimes weeks or months of preparation into a single character. They want him to feel lifelike and fun.Of course your interpretation it's what I meant, but I don't side with your conclusions. I'm not punishing a player for knowing the rules, I'm punishing a player because he contributes to the game just quoting the rules. I would never punish a player who has a strong character but who roleplays a lot as well, I was talking about power-gamersMaybe it's unfair, but it's just.
Sorry mate but I think you need to recheck the definition for just.
"based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair.
"a just and democratic society"
synonyms: fair"I think a more accurate statement would be "It's not fair, but it makes the game more fun for the other players." or "It's not fair, but it enhances game balance for the players who put in less effort in character creation."
But most certainly it is neither just nor fair. It is in fact punishing a player for putting effort into the game/knowing the rules.
It works both ways actually. Ive had several powergamers who know the system very well that they can come up with a concept and have the character started and already ahve the first 10 levels in their head planned out the same amount of time if not quicker than someone who just casuallys rolls up a character.
i have spents weeks and months fine tuning characters that were not OP at all where most of the time they were in the middle ground, just to get the idea in my head down on paper right. Hell i spend alot of time on my creations to make a balanced character whos good in spot, average in several, and have a weakness. I hate powerful characters who autosucceed at most things, playing those i mean and ill admit gming for those types as well, but me and the powergamers can roleplay our socks off.So time works both ways, can work for powergamers, min/maxers, etc so doesnt hold well for an excuse why the character is soo important to be that way and gives an escuse for everyone at the table to sit back and let them shine simply because they put more time in it than they did. Time doesnt make one character more important than another.
To the OP, talk with ur group and see what they want. If they are having fun and u are having fun letting them steamroll, then dont change anything. If they having fun and ur not, talk with them to come to angreement so that u are having fun again. If its just one person ur having problems with, then talk with group and see how they feel about it. Are they shaking their heads when said person rolls the dice at the high numbers being called out or are they in positions where they naturally hang back to let said pwrson take care of it or do they try to swarm to get some kind of spotlight in on something only to have that drive go away when said person steps up to said situation....those are some good signs that they arent having as much fun and could be having more.
Group makeups is a slippery slope trying to form that perfect group and i wish u the best of luck.
This is one reason why I hate the "ye old magic shop" mentality and I flat out don't allow it in my games. The CRB list of magic items is not the Sears Mail-order Catalogue of Adventurer goodies in my games. It leads to focusing on getting specific items instead of on RPing.
Virtually every past game I've played in that allowed the purchase of magic items, with what is essentially meta-game player-knowledge of what is available, turns into an orgy of greed and nonsense.
May I ask you which kind of solutions you adopted? I'm interested because I tried to fight this mentality, but I found no solutions unless I change the setting to a low magic one (with all the problems related to this)
This is one reason why I hate the "ye old magic shop" mentality and I flat out don't allow it in my games. The CRB list of magic items is not the Sears Mail-order Catalogue of Adventurer goodies in my games. It leads to focusing on getting specific items instead of on RPing.
Virtually every past game I've played in that allowed the purchase of magic items, with what is essentially meta-game player-knowledge of what is available, turns into an orgy of greed and nonsense.
Walmart is envious of Ye Old Magic Shop's distribution system.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
May I ask you which kind of solutions you adopted? I'm interested because I tried to fight this mentality, but I found no solutions unless I change the setting to a low magic one (with all the problems related to this)
I don't have magic shops. The retail model of business applied to commodities does not work. Magic Items are the real currency of Pathfinder. When I run, the only ways to get magic items are to make them yourself, commission someone else to make them for you, private sales, or finding them. I think I am in the minority on this one though, as posters complaining about the crafting rules seem to outnumber those complaining about buying items.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
May I ask you which kind of solutions you adopted? I'm interested because I tried to fight this mentality, but I found no solutions unless I change the setting to a low magic one (with all the problems related to this)
Low magic is an option, but like you said it comes with its own issues.
I had a frank talk with my players and said the GP value and WPL charts are tools for me as the GM (and for players if they want to create items) and for them not to focus on "stuff". I said flat out you are not going to find NPCs sitting around waiting to make stuff for you. If you want something made, we can build an adventure around it or arrange special circumstances with a special NPC who could be persuaded to craft something for you.
After that was said, I told them I understand how much fun it is to find magic items, and promised I would provide them with shiny pretty things for them to enjoy. It's not that I'm anti-magic item, it's that I'm anti-meta gaming.
My players understood and have since thanked me for it. I have yet to receive complaints that they're not geared enough.
I'm big on flavor changes, so I tend to give out loot that I made up myself, or is different from the book's lists.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel I should point out that I had this "frank conversation" (see above post) with my group of new players, who've only ever gamed with me. I was hoping to shape them early and help curb bad habits(or at least, what are bad habits in my opinion) before they get entrenched.
These are just my feelings on how loot should be distributed. Each to their own.
There are guys I've played with that would put up resistance if I told them not to expect to be able to Catalogue Shop for their WPL.
I cut my teeth on role playing with 1st edition, where finding a magic item was always awesome. Magic items were unique and inspired a certain degree of excitement from the player.
That said, I don't think the setting has to be low magic to counteract this mentality. Players adventure to discover things; ancient ruins, lost lore, and treasure. The DM determines what treasure the players get. WBL doesn't mean they get what they want, it means they find treasure roughly worth a certain amount. If they want to sell it for gold and buy what they want, they necessarily take a loss in wealth due to resale costs. They can try to make the item work for them, or sell it and get an item that is more in line. The point is, WBL shouldn't be treated like a character's salary.
If you are going to have a magic shop in your game, it has whatever it has in it. If you're looking for a specific item, there's no guarantee you'll be able to find it. The purveyor may just be a salesman, so he may not even be able to make the item the character wants. Even if he has the ability to make an item, what if he doesn't have the requisite spell knowledge? Not having that makes the chance of success lower, which should drive the price up.
Also, keep in mind who the character is what they are about. A monk is the ultimate model of fighting through self-investment. If they just wanted to utilize tools to be the best warrior they could, they would have been a fighter. A player should keep this in mind.
It reminds me of Drizzt and the Mask of Disguise he had in The Halfling's Gem. He could have kept the mask that made him look like a normal elf, but discarded it because he felt it was wrong to effectively lie about who he was. Most gamers would never approach their character this way, but maybe that's part of the problem. Maybe there should be more concern about the development of the character and less about loot they have.
I'm not saying that everyone should play the way I play, but it's obvious to me that you are not happy with the way you are playing. Maybe that needs to be adjusted to something that is fun for everyone? Technically, you're a player too.
|
|
*Tomb of Horrors* could bring some humble at your table. Not everything is about good save/AC, not high skills/hit chances. Some times is only decisions.
Anti-Magic Zone. Legendaries Vilains. It's time to bring some serious threat to them: The Half-Fiend Awakened Adamantium-Gollem Tarrasque!
If everything fails: put them against themselves, and let them search her owns flaws. The real villain is watching to see those flaws and use it afterwards against it.
-----
Sometimes they must play RPG not Dungeon Crawl, try some intriguing, some political issues, some adventure where combat turns things worst.
But, look, if the players are having fun, you shouldn't be so frustrated. Have fun with them...
Maybe, but unless the GM hands out Hero Points or something to compensate for actions that are in-character but give up a mechanical advantage, it's not likely to happen. Sadly.
There are a lot of ways to reward players. A monk that eschews certain items may gain a degree of respect from the order he belongs to or he may gain a higher degree of loyalty from his followers. There are any number of rewards a DM can hand out.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree that an easier way to limit abuse of magic items is to limit their availability (in terms of what merchants actually carry). This doesn't mean that it has to be a low magic campaign, just that not every merchant carries every magic item conceivable.
To put it another way, have you ever gone looking for a particular item in a store only to find that it is out of stock? Asked to order said item only to find that it is currently unavailable/on back order? Same set of circumstances applies in an RPG world. Heck, even if the party finds a crafter willing to make items for them for a price, there's nothing to say that the PCs are the only people in the world wanting this NPC to make them something, so keep in mind the crafting rules and realize that it may take a bit of time for even a dedicated NPC crafter to make the item the PC is looking for -- unless of course the PC is willing to pay the fee necessary to move his order to the top of the list.
As for how to run the merchant shops, it can be tedious to roll the random tables, but the good thing is that once you get it done, updating it takes less time. When the PCs return to town in three months, check to see what was sold. Anything not sold is still available, then just fill out the rest of the stock with randoms.
As to power-gaming vs. roleplaying, I agree that the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. However, in the few games where I was a player, I really did enjoy the idea of making the random loot work for me. It gives a more powerful connection to the items I think as opposed to simply running down to Home Depot and picking up a Garden Weasel +2. My current character is in the process of changing his planned progression due to what has happened in game, including being gifted a weapon he never intended to use at the outset. For me, there is a lot of fun to be had with that. I will say though, if you are going to go this route, it is good to let the players know ahead of time so that they don't end up trying to build around a certain set of items only to find out that they cannot locate a couple of key pieces.