I don't want to tell you that you're doing it wrong, but...


Advice

51 to 100 of 167 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I just dislike the "don't bother showing up unless you're a powergamer" attitude.

If player A enjoys optimizing, great. If player B picks an interesting concept and sticks with it (even if it is underpowered,) also great. There's no reason type B can't play in a game with type A, as long as the GM is willing to make accommodations.

I just consider it stifling when I have a character that I REALLY want to play but it's not combat-oriented, and therefore not welcome in a Pathfinder game.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

One of the things that I'm grateful for is that there are bunch of great players in my PFS area who love playing rogues -- yep, vanilla core rule book rogues -- and they do just fine! I'm really glad that everyone doesn't optimize.

I do think that your Portuguese friend would be a great cavalier, but I've played with some charging gung ho standard fighters and they were okay too. In my local PFS area, there are a number of core-only players who cannot afford the other books and they seem to work out fine. Let him play.

If needed, drop effective loot on him and cool but less combat-oriented loot on the others, so everyone gets loot.

(For example: A featherscale cloak is cool but not combat awesome -- better for spying than for causing death and destruction.)

Using magic items to shift the balance can be done, but it needs a delicate hand to avoid player jealousy.

Of course... there are many ways this can backfire. Sometimes, a player is shy and someone else claims the game-changing item you meant to go to him. In one campaign that we were in, the GM kept trying to drop equipment to the monk, but she was sweet-natured and kept allowing the more powerful fighters to claim it first, "since they did better in combat."

One way around that could be to make some plot element where your fighter's brave heroics impresses an NPC who grants him the item specifically. Or you could start everyone out with a GM gift... an heirloom that matches up with their backstories.

Hmm

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's time to let your friend ride that bike, whether he falls over or not. Perhaps offer him these little nuggets of wisdom from TriOmegaZero's Profile:

The Ten Commandments of Optimization, in English wrote:


I. Thou shalt not give up caster levels.
II. Wieldest thou thy two-handed weapon with alacrity; but two weapons shalt thou not wield, excepting that thou hast a source of bonus damage such as Sneak Attack.

III. Doubt not the power of the Druid, for he is mighty.

IV. Avoid ye the temptation of Gauntlets of True Strike, for they shall lead thee astray down the Path of Non-Rule Cheese.

V. Thou shalt not give up caster levels. Verily, this Commandment is like unto the first; but of such magnitude that it bore mentioning twice.

VI. Makest thou no build with an odd number of fighter levels, for such things are not pleasing to the Spirits of Optimization.

VII. The Rules of 3.5 are paramount; invoke not the rules of 3.0 if a newer version be available.

VIII. When beseeching the Bretheren of Optimization, come thou not empty handed, lest they smite thee; rather, bringest thou thine own build, that they may offer suggestions and guidance.

IX. Invoke not "common sense," for it is not common.

X. Thou shalt call no build "The Ultimate X" unless his name be Pun-Pun, or thou shalt see thine "Ultimate" build topped by the Bretheren within five minutes of posting.

Yea, verily.

-Caelic

Os Dez Mandamentos do Optimization, em Portugeuse wrote:

I. Tu não desista níveis do usuário.

II. Wieldest o teu arma de duas mãos com entusiasmo; mas duas armas, tu não exercer, com exceção de que tens uma fonte de dano de bônus como Sneak Attack.

III. A dúvida não o poder do Druid, porque ele é poderoso.

IV. Evite a tentação de vos Gauntlets de True Strike, porque eles levam-te ao erro no caminho da não-Rule Cheese.

V. Tu não desista níveis do usuário. Em verdade, este mandamento é como as primeiras; mas de tal magnitude que deu mencionar duas vezes.

VI. Fazes não construir com um número ímpar de níveis de caça, para essas coisas não são agradáveis aos Espíritos de Optimization.

VII. As Regras de 3,5 são fundamentais; invocar não as regras de 3,0 se uma nova versão estará disponível.

VIII. Quando suplicando ao bretheren de Optimization, vem tu não de mãos vazias, para que não se ferirá; sim, tu fazes a tua própria criação, que eles podem oferecer sugestões e orientações.

IX. Invocar não "senso comum", pois não é comum.

X. lhe porás nenhuma compilação "The Ultimate X", a menos que seu nome seja Pun-Pun, ou tu verás o teu "Ultimate" Build encimado pela bretheren dentro de cinco minutos de postagem.

Sim, em verdade.

-Caelic


Overall the fighter will generally do more damage than the paladin so I think you’re worrying too much. The paladin does have smite evil, but that is limited in the fact he can only do it so many times per day, and it only works vs evil. As long as there are a lot of minions around that need to be dealt with the fighter will still do better. This is especially true if the minions are not evil. The paladin is going to have to spend some points on CHA so the fighter’s physical stats will probably be better. Once things like weapon and armor training kick in the fighter is going to have a lot different combat style than the paladin.

If the paladin is going for the typical two handed combat style, the fighter could go for a sword and board character, or even two weapon style. Without the need for mental stats he can probably swing the needed DEX and make use of it where the paladin would not. The extra mobility from armor training gives the fighter a distinct advantage. His AC will be higher due to having a better DEX and will be even higher if he goes sword and board. With an AC at least 6 points higher than the paladin he will be able to wade through a lot of minions without any trouble. His job is going to be to deal with the minions so the paladin can deal with the boss.


It's going to be Kingmaker, using the 6 player adjustments found on the KM messageboard, with a few tweaks, but mostly in line. So there will be about half evil and half neutral baddies IIRC. The reason past players have labeled me a deadly GM was my mobs usually fight tactically, my rolls are open and not fudged, my villains often coup de grace if they're given the opportunity, and I usually design brutal boss encounters. Using an AP will eliminate that last factor, obviously, but I don't intend to dumb down my baddies when 4/6 players have stated they're really looking forward to a challenge. (Oh, and I'm a stickler for the rules, and that can really mess with people used to loose play GMs).

The Portuguese link seemed to please him, so I hope he sees some various options and expands his horizons a bit, but if not, not much I can do about it.


And as so many mentioned, cavalier would be great for him, and I hope he looks it over, but I don't know if he will...


thegreenteagamer wrote:


He only has the CRB, and is very VERY (extremely!) hesitant to incorporate outside books, by the way. The other players are not the same. Even our second-newest player is the former GM's girlfriend, and he's a hardcore min-maxer, so she's gonna be coming ready to kill with a vengeance.

Seems a lost cause in the grand scheme of things.

If you have a new player who is NOT an optimizer... playing alongside experienced players and 'hardcore Min-Maxers', then the new guy will always seem to be the sidekick or overshadowed in some way.

It's just a matter of experience. Making the character for him won't be as much fun for him either... so he's really got to learn to play at the level he's comfortable with.

On a separate note, Having that Paladin and Min-maxer in the group will HELP so he doesn't drag anyone down. He CAN make an unoptimized character without having to worry about letting the group down. Someone there will be around to pick up the slack.


phantom1592 wrote:
On a separate note, Having that Paladin and Min-maxer in the group will HELP so he doesn't drag anyone down. He CAN make an unoptimized character without having to worry about letting the group down. Someone there will be around to pick up the slack.

Yeah unfortunately, when Bob does 20 damage to an opponent, he doesn't think "Well thank goodness that Joe does 60 damage!"


You tried to give advice but he seems to be stubborn. Let him learn the hard way.


Pathfinder Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Since you said that you've got a couple of people that are good with rules, I will make two different suggestions.

1. Offer to review his character before play begins. When looking at it, use phrases like "Have you considered..." rather than saying there is a better way. Rather than saying there is something wrong with his build, say something like "Have you considered taking ____ to improve your ____" or "I notice you've got ____, have you looked at ____ as a way to better take advantage of that?"

2. Since you are starting a new game, suggest to the whole group that they work together to create characters. This would allow them to coordinate who can do what and avoid duplication in skill focuses and such.

Only do the second if you trust the people who have good system mastery to give good advice in a helpful way.

You could even do both of these. It would work best if you do it for all the characters, rather than indicate you think some need more help than others.

After that, allow him to try and ride that bike. Watch, and allow him to fall provided it is one you think he can get back up from.


First of all, bless your inexperienced Bard player who doesn't like hitting stuff for playing a class that is extremely useful to the party without ever hitting stuff.

As for the player in question, I have to question if it's wise to incorporate him in this campaign... You have a full party of people who are well optimized and excited for a challenge. What will be fun for everyone else at the table will be way beyond what he can handle at his current experience level, and if you lower the difficulty that'll just make everyone else unhappy. The best solution I think would be to have another, smaller game on the side for him so he can learn but that could be unmanageable for a number of reasons.


Arachnofiend wrote:
First of all, bless your inexperienced Bard player who doesn't like hitting stuff for playing a class that is extremely useful to the party without ever hitting stuff.

I think she actually is moderately experienced in RPGs altogether, and even an okay amount at PF, but she's not thoroughly entranced in the rules, and what makes an effective combatant...but yeah, it's pretty sweet that she digs the role that nobody else seems to.

Grand Lodge

As a side note, maybe suggest having your fighter, if not impressed with his damage output, try to go a route involving Butterfly's Sting. Sure, he may not hit hard, but a confirmed hit turning into an auto crit from the big hitter is a great teamwork feat.

Example: Fighter is fighting with an 18-20 threat weapon, and confirms the critical. Forgoing the crit, the next melee attack that hit the target is granted an auto confirmed crit, as long as it isn't the fighter that activated the critical.


kikidmonkey wrote:
phantom1592 wrote:
On a separate note, Having that Paladin and Min-maxer in the group will HELP so he doesn't drag anyone down. He CAN make an unoptimized character without having to worry about letting the group down. Someone there will be around to pick up the slack.
Yeah unfortunately, when Bob does 20 damage to an opponent, he doesn't think "Well thank goodness that Joe does 60 damage!"

Really??

Usually if I'm having a tough time in combat or if I made my character for RP and less 'mechanically'... then I'm usually just happy we survived the combat...

It's NICE to be the primary damage dealer and kick all kinds of butt... but as long as I'm contributing, I'm never going to be measuring and keeping track of who did what damage each round....

Now if you can't roll over a 4 through the whole combat... YEAH, that's going to be frustrating... but this guy HAS to realize that Optimized will beat unoptimized every time. It's just the nature of the beast.


Has no one asked if you have explained your concerns to him?

Because do that.

Instead of asking all of us if he will be OK playing second fiddle to the paladin: TELL HIM that without build help he is likely to be playing second fiddle because the paladin and the sorcerer know their stuff and are going to be doing a lot more damage than a fighter can.

If he isn't ok with maybe being second fiddle, then you don't have to worry about any of this. Unless the player is super touchy.


phantom1592 wrote:
kikidmonkey wrote:
phantom1592 wrote:
On a separate note, Having that Paladin and Min-maxer in the group will HELP so he doesn't drag anyone down. He CAN make an unoptimized character without having to worry about letting the group down. Someone there will be around to pick up the slack.
Yeah unfortunately, when Bob does 20 damage to an opponent, he doesn't think "Well thank goodness that Joe does 60 damage!"

Really??

Usually if I'm having a tough time in combat or if I made my character for RP and less 'mechanically'... then I'm usually just happy we survived the combat...

It's NICE to be the primary damage dealer and kick all kinds of butt... but as long as I'm contributing, I'm never going to be measuring and keeping track of who did what damage each round....

Now if you can't roll over a 4 through the whole combat... YEAH, that's going to be frustrating... but this guy HAS to realize that Optimized will beat unoptimized every time. It's just the nature of the beast.

It's nice that you play that way. A lot of people clearly don't. We like to feel we're making meaningful contributions. You could see this as us being competitive, but you could also see it as us valuing the game, and the "full experience", over the experience of simply surviving a combat.

Liberty's Edge

I'd like to add a +1 to the players who don't mind playing second fiddle. My first PFS character, who I still play every once in a while since I haven't gotten around to bringing him into retirement is a moderately useful sword and board fighter. Knowing what I know now, I never would have made that character, and in most scenarios I'm happy to have another melee guy around to cause the kind of damage I should have been able to do. A lot of the GMs in the area seem to think the optimized builds are ruining the game for regular players, but I still maintain my favorite first action in combat is to begin the slow clap.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
It's nice that you play that way. A lot of people clearly don't. We like to feel we're making meaningful contributions. You could see this as us being competitive, but you could also see it as us valuing the game, and the "full experience", over the experience of simply surviving a combat.

'Full Experience' may well be unrealistic expectations. I play with a min-maxer who tends to rein himself in so he DOESN'T overshadow everyone... but he still kicks all kinds of major butt with whatever class he plays. I on the other hand have occasionally taken feats that looked awesome... but didn't work as I expected them to.

There are now 32 base classes in the game. I haven't even counted the Archtypes between each class... They will not ALL do the same damage or play the same way. Even creating an optimized archer, two weapon fighter, and two-handed fighter will all play differently and have different damage outputs...

If player A doesn't want advice on his character... but wants it to do the same damage output as Player B who is MUCH more skilled at making characters... It's an unrealistic expectation.

My main concern would be overlap. If the paladin is a sword and board... and the fighter is sword and board... then that will make the comparisons to obvious. There are a LOT of different ways you can go with a fighter though, and it could still be fun playing with a paladin in the group.

Grand Lodge

Say this:

"I know you are new, so I will give you a one time rebuild, if you start to feel your build isn't working for you. If you ever want advice, or need help, just ask. Good luck."

There you go.

Drop a little extra loot for him, maybe something Fighter exclusive, like a Sash of the War Champion, or Manual of War, and you're good.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, you've got a new player excited to make his own character. I struggle to see how this is anything other than a good thing. Certainly offer to help him out if he seems unhappy with the results or just isn't very effective, but learning how the system works is part of the fun.


phantom1592 wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
It's nice that you play that way. A lot of people clearly don't. We like to feel we're making meaningful contributions. You could see this as us being competitive, but you could also see it as us valuing the game, and the "full experience", over the experience of simply surviving a combat.
'Full Experience' may well be unrealistic expectations. I play with a min-maxer who tends to rein himself in so he DOESN'T overshadow everyone... but he still kicks all kinds of major butt with whatever class he plays. I on the other hand have occasionally taken feats that looked awesome... but didn't work as I expected them to.

Sorry, I think I was unclear on what I meant by "full experience". All I meant was we enjoy the game and journey as a whole, rather than fixating on whether we win or lose. The intent was to give a contrast to the other obvious and somewhat unfair generalization that we're just obsessed with being "the best".

We like to contribute in the game. Otherwise a PC starts to feel more like the party mascot, and that's not what everyone enjoys playing. More power to you if you don't mind that, but it's just a different style of play.


RumpinRufus wrote:
I just dislike the "don't bother showing up unless you're a powergamer" attitude.

I would hardly describe the OP's game as "powergamers only". Only 2 out of his 6 players sound like they are heavily into optimizing. The other 2 are apparently "merely" competent, and the bard player doesn't care about optimizing at all.

Note that the OP is NOT complaining about the bard player. She is weak in combat. She is still having fun. She is happy. The rest of the group is doing absolutely fine without her pulling her share of the party's weight in combat. They are having fun. They are happy. The OP (presumably) doesn't need to restructure every encounter so that the bard player can be more useful. He is happy. Everyone is happy.

Now I will make some observations about the rogue/fighter player. I highly doubt he would be saying he has a "better idea" if he is playing something dull but not terrible like a 2 handed fighter. He will probably make something unusual. As the player has already shown he is not competent at creating a character. He is also playing a class with NO class features that can make up for his weak build decisions. This pretty much guarantees that his character will be terrible at his role in combat. And, to top it off, fighters can't do anything BUT combat unless the player building them carefully sculpts their build to allow for it (which he obviously won't).

The OP essentially has 2 options with regards to this player. Either he makes incredibly contrived scenarios occur repeatedly in which the fighter can not feel like the 5th wheel (I would say 6th wheel, but songs+buffs at least make the bard fill a useful niche), or he can ignore the fighter's difficulty in contributing.

The first will make the OP's life harder, and annoy the rest of the group. It might also make the fighter player unhappy due to his success feeling completely worthless because of how blatently the OP will have to make these scenario favor the fighter (oh no, an entire dungeon full of adamantine+ golems with DR 30/-. But wait, they all only have 1 leg, so they get -20 to their CMD against trip attempts and lose their DR when prone because GM fiat. GO HALFLING 2 WEAPON TRIPPER FIGHTEYMAN, YOU CAN BE LESS USELESS DO IT).

The second will probably make the fighter player feel terrible. Because that's what typically happens when someone realises that the arcane caster's has 2 separate class features (AC and casting SM) that each make better party members than the fighter. The OP can mitigate this by straight up telling the player "I don't mind if you feel like rebuilding your character, and if you want help with it just ask", but it will still be a problem.

The whole point of this semi-rant is that the OP is not against people who want to play suboptimal characters instead of half-elf Razmiran sages. The OP is just concerned that either that player won't have fun, or everybody else will have less fun because of the accommodations that are made for that player (If you disagree this this is necessarily true, feel free to be helpful and post ways to let the OP consistently make a badly build fighter feel not terrible inside and outside of combat that don't significantly reduce the fun had by the rest of the group).


How about asking the Paladin player to make another character?
He will have more experience playing something useful without outshining the new player (or fighting for the same spotlight). Or is that an established character in the group?


Well, make a NPC who is a neutral swordsman that is legendary around the local area, same level as the party. Then have it with mithral full plate, +3 dex, +5 strength, +4 con as well as a Falchion. Have the NPC challenge the paladin in a non-magic duel, winner gets something (a girl PC in your party?). If the paladin cheated, he lost all his power. If the paladin seems to be winning, just say you rolled natural 20 and the swordsman critical hit the paladin.

Once the paladin lost, have the party decide what to do. Have the fighter roll for a low will save against fear(DC:5 to 10?). If the fighter beats the DC, his bravery kicks in and feels like needs to challenge the swordsman. The swordsman will accept the challenge and drink a potion which regains full health. Then have a fair fight with the fighter while keep telling the fighter that how strong he feels the swordsman is by seeing his sword play. If the fighter won, the swordsman returns whatever and will be back to challenge the fighter again. If the fighter lost, the swordsman will appraise his bravery as the fighter can tell how much the distance there is between their swordsmanship. He will return whatever he took and ask the fighter to train harder, he will await for his growth and challenge him once again.

Now I think it will be good as the fighter will have something to fight for all the time, to keep improving so he can make sure he will win next time against this swordsman.


In my admittedly limited experience the big problem with single classed Fighters is their low Will save. That could be a problem from time to time in the AP you’ve selected, but there should also be a lot of fights it won’t factor into (unlike in a homebrew where the DM finds your weak spot and keeps hitting it over and over).

Other than that a Fighter seems fairly well positioned for the style of “charge everything and full attack until it dies”. If the Fighter PC uses a different weapon from others you could also probably make a pretty big difference by dropping a bane weapon of the appropriate sort (and perhaps metal) which works against some common type of enemy.

Potential Kingmaker Spoiler:
Later on in the AP there could also be a chance for somebody who isn’t a Paladin to have fun with a magic item and “be a star”. Look towards the end of the AP and you should see an item the Paladin is unlikely to meet the alignment requirements for.

Having played a PC with Paladin levels in Kingmaker I can tell you that there are many, many fights where Smite Evil won’t be a factor and the Paladin might struggle a little to do damage. I’d guess that in those encounters the Fighter’s damage output should look pretty good. It also might be nice if the Fighter decides to be more tactical and go for combat maneuvers since the other PCs aren’t likely to have enough feats to do a lot with them. I guess you could suggest that to the player as something which might be fun. Kingmaker seems like a decent AP for maneuvers.

@SiouL - Forcing the Paladin to lose a “fixed” fight against an NPC swordsman so that the Fighter can try to beat him seems kind of wrong to me. The fact that the swordsman “gets” a “girl PC in your party” makes it a little twisted too. I know that “winner gets the girl” has been a common trope in some stories, but it doesn’t seem like the most enlightened idea, and making “the girl” one of the PCs seems unlikely to go over well (unless maybe that PC’s player likes the idea of some oppression for her PC to break free from - perhaps she’d have a Judith and Holofernes moment…)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I am not screwing over the paladin, nor am I asking her to play another class. She has given me more backstory than anyone, and is more excited to play her class than anyone, and vocally so.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

At this point, if you still don't know what the fighter player wants to do exactly because he wants it to be a "surprise" or some such reasoning (whatever the case may be) I would let him learn via the school of hard knocks. Some people can look at the math and pick things up quickly, others need to fall down a few times before they really GET it.

If that player does end up disappointed with their build, since he's a newbie, let him have a free one-time rebuild with as much support from the other players (including you, you're as much a player as any of the PCs) as he feels comfortable with (this is under the premise that the really optimization happy PCs will be able to be supportive, but considering one of them already helped make another PC's character this isn't much of a stretch), maybe prod him a little to listen to the more experienced players suggestions if he is resistant.

Beyond that, all I can do is wish you good luck and good gaming. You've heard from others who suggested to bring up your concerns to him ahead of time, as well as those who shared my opinion. At the end of the day though, it is ultimately your call on which approach you think will work best with this player since you know them better than any of us do. It isn't always an easy call to make, but as GM that is part of the responsibility of making sure everyone at the table has fun. Again, good luck with whatever approach you take.


Rynjin wrote:
Well, I was going to say you can make some somewhat interesting Fighters (Unbreakable, Mutation Warrior, Lore Warden), but if he's going CRB only...I see him being a very sad panda.

I could also suggest some interesting feat combos. Kinda constrained if CRB only (I like to use Cornugon Smash and Riving Strike to dump a target's saves against spells by bashing them in the head).

But even if you are not doing something unique, you can do something useful if you play something like a well made reach weapon user. Just throwing power attack, combat reflexes, and lunge (used to position yourself so that so that your target has to come at your from outside your range- draws AoO's and forces them to spend a move action), and you get something relatively simple yet able to influence the battle through good positioning. And it can do a lot of full attacks since it can hit anything in a 45' wide circle while using only a 5' step.

But this player is a newbie too....troubling.


Auriea wrote:

As a side note, maybe suggest having your fighter, if not impressed with his damage output, try to go a route involving Butterfly's Sting. Sure, he may not hit hard, but a confirmed hit turning into an auto crit from the big hitter is a great teamwork feat.

Example: Fighter is fighting with an 18-20 threat weapon, and confirms the critical. Forgoing the crit, the next melee attack that hit the target is granted an auto confirmed crit, as long as it isn't the fighter that activated the critical.

I am a huge fan of Butterfly's Sting.

We had a game with a disarming rogue who picked up Butterfly's Sting and a keen rapier. If the bad guy had something he could disarm, he took it away (which saved our butts on several "bad guys who do ability damage with their weapons" occasions). If not, he lined up in flank and passed crits to the two-handed fighter. He also had Gang Up and Improved Feint, so he got sneak attack almost every attack.

Then the three melee fighters picked up Outflank, and fights were over as soon as they got in flank position. The rogue crits, which triggers an AoO from the fighter and the druid's wolf companion. The first one to hit gets an automatic critical, and gods help the poor bad guy if one of those AoOs also crits, because the rogue and the wolf both had Combat Reflexes.


Gwen Smith wrote:

Then the three melee fighters picked up Outflank, and fights were over as soon as they got in flank position. The rogue crits, which triggers an AoO from the fighter and the druid's wolf companion. The first one to hit gets an automatic critical, and gods help the poor bad guy if one of those AoOs also crits, because the rogue and the wolf both had Combat Reflexes.

It takes some pretty precise positioning to get this working, though. And it doesn't work against medium or smaller creatures, since there's no way for all three of you to be flanking the same square, unless you have a fourth flanking partner.


If he's committed to core only, a nice fighter build is reach weapon + Combat Reflexes. Then, at the start of combat, he can ready an action to attack if someone comes into reach. When the bad guys move up to attack, he gets his readied action immediately followed by an AoO. Also, he can attempt trips on bad guys without provoking (because of reach) and without investing in trip feats. He can build a nice battlefield control character who can still dish out quite a bit of damage.

Now, you said the player likes to charge into combat first. If he continues this tactic, vanilla fighter might be the best choice for him. With armor training, he'll have the heaviest armor and normal movement, which means he'll get to close while the paladin is still trucking along at 20 ft.

If that's his chosen tactic, then he's probably better off with a non-reach weapon. I'd also recommend a shield, and maybe Improved Shield Bash. If he's faster than the other melee characters, he'll end up taking full attacks for a round or two before the rest of the party closes. The shield will help his AC, and Improved Shield Bash will let him attack with the shield if he wants to.

The main advantage is that he'll have all the feats he could want, so he can build a pretty versatile character.


RumpinRufus wrote:
Gwen Smith wrote:

Then the three melee fighters picked up Outflank, and fights were over as soon as they got in flank position. The rogue crits, which triggers an AoO from the fighter and the druid's wolf companion. The first one to hit gets an automatic critical, and gods help the poor bad guy if one of those AoOs also crits, because the rogue and the wolf both had Combat Reflexes.

It takes some pretty precise positioning to get this working, though. And it doesn't work against medium or smaller creatures, since there's no way for all three of you to be flanking the same square, unless you have a fourth flanking partner.

That's where Gang Up came in. The fighter and the wolf actually flank, and if the rogue was in any threatening square, Gang Up made him count as flanking.

(We also had an NPC melee fighter and a ranged fighter who threatened and didn't provoke, so he could also could provide flank. By the time we hit 7th level, they had the maneuvers down and could pull it off in every combat.)


thegreenteagamer wrote:
Plus, this player, no matter the situation, inevitably just charges crap and stabs it. Even with me playing a wizard who NOTORIOUSLY throws a LOT of fireballs, he jumps into the middle of a group of enemies, right after I said "I will fireball the crap out of those guys". (Then fails his saves. Then says it's somehow my fault...)

This is literally the only concern.

Look, this is entirely a PICNIC problem (Problem in chair, not in character), if he's happy to be the bumbling and dopey sidekick to everyone else' supergod character that's fine, if he wants help making a character that's fine, if he wants to do something that isn't "standard" but is fun and requires a bit more balancing work in the beginning by the GM that's (mostly) fine (as long as you, the GM, don't mind doing to balancing act). It is only when someone expects everyone else to play THEIR game instead of cooperating to play "our" game that it is a problem. And to be fair, he hasn't done that yet.

And that's the rub, this is a people question. What are they going to do, and if that is a problem how do you convince them to not do it?

Anyway, I'm a blunt a+$$%+*, so I'd just tell him that his fighter's going to be outshined by everyone if all he does is CRB fighter, and if he's okay with that you're okay with running it. Then I'd mention that retraining is an option later and not just DROP the conversation but put it down with a "and that's all I'm saying on the matter, play what you want," bullet. Would that work? Well I'd have my friend tell you but I don't seem to have any. /Rimshot /laugh track

Edit: Further thought, I find myself contemplating the Ifrit fighter who spirals his resistance up as high as possible and likes to "call down the thunder" on his own position, laughing as the flames don't hurt him. Added bonus: anything fire immune is probably made of fire, so he works well as a blocker against that, too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
boring7 wrote:
Well I'd have my friend tell you but I don't seem to have any. /Rimshot /laugh track

"Oh, that boring7!"


It really does sound like a case where a bit of discussion with the player is in order, just be honest with your concern. If the player wants to try it out, let him; he will get the opportunity to see how the class could work better by actually doing it. Giving him the chance to rebuild or make a new character is certainly a possibility especially in Kingmaker (from what I've read about it).

I also like the storytelling opportunities with the "green knight trope" challenging the paladin, but I would suggest talking with the female PC prize and paladin about it to make sure they are on board to do some storytelling rather than roll-playing. Point is to have fun, some players don't mind doing a bit of a show if it enhances the story and fun factor.

Be honest, don't pull punches or do special favoritism unless that is going to be the way you run your world, consistency in DMing is the required stable physics of your campaign, don't be schizophrenic.


I think you need to have a discussion with this player concerning what kind of character he wants to play and his expectations of his character. I think it's important, however, that you go into this discussion with the mindset "Don't be a Power Gamer and just let him play what he wants to play." Help him make his character, but don't pressure him to build a highly optimized character if that's not what he awhnts.

thegreenteagamer wrote:


So you're saying I should play with kid gloves on, despite the fact the other five characters have told me repeatedly they're looking forward to a serious challenge?

Imagine, instead of playing Pathfinder, you are playing a sport. Your other friends and you are all seasoned professional athletes who want to play a match with someone who's never even played the sport before. Do you play with him at a professional level? Of course not! You put the kid gloves on or you don't invite him to play.

RumpinRufus wrote:

If you are the GM, this is no problem at all. Let him build the character he wants, and then drop him extra loot to bring him up to snuff as necessary.

I feel like it's FAR better to give a player extra WBL until they don't feel useless, rather than restricting their character design because everyone else is an optimizer. If he has a concept, let him roll with it. If you want him to be balanced with the party, then drop him a fancy sword, and a nice set of armor. (And/or some cool items that give him a more versatile set of standard actions to choose from.)

OK. This is terrific advice, much better than kid gloves. The difference between an optimized and unoptimized build is just numbers anyway, right?

thegreenteagamer wrote:
Problem with giving him extra loot is I can't make the party unfairly distribute drops. (On phone now, replies will be much more brief)

You can tell them it's either that or kid gloves.

I really think that a group of mature, adult, veteran players can work together to help accommodate the play-style of a new player.


"So there will be about half evil and half neutral baddies IIRC."

So the paladin and fighter should be about on par then...

I'm not sure this is going to be a big problem. Also, if the Paladin chooses a mount who isn't always around, that will dilute his power somewhat as well.

I would suggest working with the players so that the fighter has his niche. If he is a rush into the middle kind of player, how about a tower shield high defenses build? He can be almost un-hit-able, and still deal OK damage, or drop the shield, and do whooping damage. If he uses a high crit weapon, he will be a real threat. I saw a build like this played 1-10 levels, and it worked very well.


Fergie wrote:

"So there will be about half evil and half neutral baddies IIRC."

So the paladin and fighter should be about on par then...

Yeah... no. The Paladin can still buff himself and heal his allies, as well as being overall much sturdier than the Fighter due to having astronomically better saving throws. The Paladin is still a really good class against neutral enemies, he just loses some damage.


Now, let me make this clear...I want the newbie to have fun, and I want him to enjoy himself, but not at the expense of the other players. So, no, I won't put the kid gloves on when the overwhelming majority has declared they would prefer otherwise, I won't be nerfing the other players, and I will not ask them to change classes.

I will most assuredly have a gentle discussion with him when we game tomorrow(the previous game where he's a rogue still has a few more sessions to go), and I may even give him one or at most two items tailored for a fighter, maybe, but anything that speaks of lowering the quality of the game for the others is right off the table for me. That's just not fair to them.


Once you have his character and his general "theme" (Backstory, character tropes) you can also just do a better version and have it sitting for if/when he decides to retrain because he's tired of being the weak sister.

Shadow Lodge

Just a quick question. Does he have a copy of the core rules in Portuguese? That would make it a lot easier for him to research his character. You can also then give him bits of advice on things to look up and he can look them up in his own language, giving him a greater understanding than if he's just following advice or suffering through Google Translate errors. Google Translate is awesome but far from perfect.


I believe his copy of the CRB is in English.

He speaks very well, but it's very clearly his second language, and he said reading and translating the rules is tough enough with one book, let alone multiple (plus, again, he's pretty new).

Yeah, I think it'd be better if he had an actual copy in Portuguese, but what are you gonna do? Our local FLGS doesn't carry them, and I don't even see where they'd have them on Paizo.com to point it out to him.


Devilkiller wrote:


@SiouL - Forcing the Paladin to lose a “fixed” fight against an NPC swordsman so that the Fighter can try to beat him seems kind of wrong to me. The fact that the swordsman “gets” a “girl PC in your party” makes it a little twisted too. I know that “winner gets the girl” has been a common trope in some stories, but it doesn’t seem like the most enlightened idea, and making “the girl” one of the PCs seems unlikely to go over well (unless maybe that PC’s player likes the idea of some...

While I agree the "get the girl" idea is not the most enlightened idea, it was just a concept, anyone can change any point depends on how their party and story is. It's what GM supposed to do with concepts.

I don't believe it is wrong for the paladin to lose a right to a swordsman in a swordfight, it doesn't make sense to have a fighter beat a caster at spell slinging, same idea. Beside, most adventure would be a fixed fight for the paladin to win anyway. Most things the players have to fight are evil, even if they are playing evil characters. So paladin has all the advantage while other martial classes have less? Just one fight to send a message to the party that fighter fights best, what is wrong with that? You can't go around and telling people superman is faster than Flash, no, Flash is always faster no matter what anyone says. That's how to make things fair in the world, it's a GM's job to make sure the world is fair for everyone before the dices are rolling.


You're not making it fair for the Paladin though. You're fudging rolls to make him lose to some jerkoff swordsman NPC. How do you think he's gonna feel when that happens, much less if he finds out you tricked him?


Just run like 25 encounters between rest periods, the fighter will be great.


The Fighter isn't happy when the casters run out of spells either, unless you start throwing worthless fights at them just to make the Fighter feel better.

"See, I told you I can go all day (vs. APL -3)!"


Well, I mean something like: if the players expect 10 encounters a day instead of 2, then the spellcasters and the paladin are going to pace themselves more, and so they will not consistently outdo the fighter. Plus, I sort of find that more fun/more reasonable. You can't always rest for 8 hours between each room in the dungeon, or while the bad guy is getting away, or whatever.


Obviously the fighter is better if the Paladin isn't expending resources all the time, but I honestly don't think the Fighter is so much better that I wouldn't rather have a second Paladin to replace him. More spells, more heals, better saves.


Arachnofiend wrote:
Fergie wrote:

"So there will be about half evil and half neutral baddies IIRC."

So the paladin and fighter should be about on par then...

Yeah... no. The Paladin can still buff himself and heal his allies, as well as being overall much sturdier than the Fighter due to having astronomically better saving throws. The Paladin is still a really good class against neutral enemies, he just loses some damage.

OK, sure the paladin is a little better, but the fighter benefits in many ways by having the paladin around. Also, whenever the paladin isn't smiting, the fighter should be able to do more damage. He also has enough feats to switch between melee and ranged, have a better AC, iron will, improved initiative and some nice stuff like quick draw. The fighter should have a better strength, dex, con and/or wis. He also has class abilities that allow him to boost his AC, attack, and damage, as well as movement.

I just don't see why a decently built fighter can't keep up.


Fergie wrote:

I just don't see why a decently built fighter can't keep up.

Keep up is probably a good choice of words. I do think the paladin pulls away from the fighter more and more, to the point that at higher levels he is obviously better than the fighter against neutral opponents, whereas at lower levels he may just be situationally better against such.

That said, in a party with both a paladin and a fighter, the paladin may be able to help the fighter stay in the game, yeah.

51 to 100 of 167 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / I don't want to tell you that you're doing it wrong, but... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.