Oh, quite a few come to mind.
- I've seen a 3.5 Ranger that insisted on fighting with Dual Scimitars, while refusing to pick Humans as Favored Enemies. My Cleric wasn't even particularly optimized and still outdamaged him (in addition to everything else that Clerics do).
- or how about the OA Samurai that, at level 10, sported an AC of a whopping 18? Enemies literally couldn't miss him on anything but a 1.
- in Pathfinder, an Oracle that didn't wear armour - I guess the player went only by the illustration and simply didn't bother to read up in the proficiencies.
But who I think takes the cake:
The Gunslinger who fought with Cutlass and Pistol and did 1d6+0 with either attack. Well, so far I can't really blame him, it's just bad design on behalf of Paizo when a class can't do its own shtick before level 5.
However, this being a seagoing campaign, the player refusing to invest a single skill point into either Swim or Prof:Sailor, that I do blame him for. He was so utterly useless both in and out of combat, it was just painful.
|
I played a game once where the char gen rules were you roll all your stats in order and those are the stats you get, period. I got a good Dex and Wis so I played a dual-wielding Warpriest and I just COULD NOT get the hang of it. On paper I thought he'd be a monster in combat but he turned out to be a joke compared to the rest of the group. I wound up spending all my time standing behind the frontline characters buffing and healing them - which was great and did help out, but it wasn't what I had been trying to make the character do at all.
I've just remembered I dm'd a barbarian that wouldn't rage once XD
@Derek Dalton
I've know people who thought along the same lines as the fighter you describe but lucky for me he thought better of it.
@Tiefling Commoner
Did he have a strength score? xD
I had a Kitsune monk in a friend's home game. We rolled for stats, and I don't think I had a single one over 15. Just the same, we played on. I used a rule from one of the later Dragon magazines to give myself Silver knucklecaps (at the expense of -1 HP/level,) and played him up as being mentally locked into his Humanoid form, and hating shapechangers. My skills were.....bad. I was LN, playing him a little closer to LG (in a party full of -E murderhobos.)
I did fairly OK in combat, unless I was trying to use Stunning Fist on an enemy. If I was trying to knock out a teammate though, I was batting 1.000.
Long and short of it, we let him die off to a band of werewolves. The team basically split up my body parts when I shifted into the more upright fox form (the Witch made earmuffs out of my ears, the Ranger kept my hands to break DR/Silver with my knuckles, I think the Slayer ate half of my innards, etc,) and I re-rolled as my hilarious pirate with the laundry list of titles.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
MY brother DMs a campaign where a player brought an archer bloodrager who predominantly used a Great Sword and took cleave twice.
Cleave ... Twice.
My first campaign had a Magus who didn't understand how spellstrike worked, never used his arcane pool to boost his weapons, and never prepared touch spells.
My second had an Inquisitor (played by the same guy) who nearly got the whole party killed on two seperate occasions and was the reason that game disbanded. Well that an a halfling thief who was actively stealing from the party, had 8 strength, and refused to flank for sneak attacks.
My third campaign had Birb, a tengu streets shaman who showed up in a campaign gearing up for a several month journey through the wilderness with 10 Strength, 10 con, and never memorized any combat effective spells. Along with a Magus who didn't learn how spellstrike worked (different player this time, they changed classes eventually), a trip/net stryx fighter who never attempted to trip, throw a net, or fly, and an alchemist who never selected precise bombs and literally killed off one of the party members.
In one game I was in their was a Wizard who refused to learn Magic Missle. Instead relying on True Strike and a Heavy Crossbow. I don't think he realized reloading a Heavy Crossbow takes a full round action. Cast spell, fire crossbow. Reload rinse and repeat. He also had low Dex so at higher levels he began to miss even with True Strike. Refused to even cast protection magic. What a waste of a Wizard.
I played in a 3rd ed game, where the DM wanted a gritty, low magic game, and had us roll our stats, in order, on 3d6. No rerolls. No "drop the lowest" anything.
I got a 17 for Wisdom, so I decided to play a cleric.
The problem was, I rolled a 3 for dex.
I thought, "No problem, I'll just put him in heavy armor. Problem solved".
Yeah, that was a disaster, considering my terrible dex was further modified by Armor Check Penalties.
However, I really had fun, despite falling in every pit trap, slipping on every slippery surface, and failing every Stealth and Balance Check.
I really wish the GM had thought to introduce banana peels in combat. The whole think became very slapstick. I'm kinda glad the campaign was rather short-lived, because that would have gotten old after awhile. But it was fun playing a flawed, Klutzy character for awhile.
I once played with a guy who made a pregnant were-dolphin monk/cleric. Not a pacifist, but a coward. She wouldn't fight, wouldn't cast in combat, was bad at hiding, and not great at healing.
I also played with a guy with horrible luck. HORRIBLE luck!!! I forget what he initially was playing, but I made him a 3.5 warlock that could hit anything on a natural 2+, targeting flat-footed touch AC. He could invoke darkness and see in darkness and turn invisible at will, so that helped.
He eventually made a goliath monk that specialized at grappling. We actually learned the 3.5 grappling rules! Like, learned them-learned them! :-D
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
So many stories....
I've played the 1st level 1e monk. You wanted it to be cool so badly, but it was so hard to do. At least the 10 AC magic-user could lurk behind the party, but the monk is nominally an up front character with his 10 AC. You could use a halberd at level 1 instead of punching, which was about all the class had going for it. I died to a critical fumble by punching myself. @$%$^% Dragon magazine crit charts.
In 2e I once GMed for a player that created a wizard who wore a mask all the time. The problem was, he wanted a different mask for each spell, and he didn't want to change masks in front of the rest of the party. And he didn't have the NWP to create his own, so he would only buy new masks in town, so whenever he found new spells he wouldn't cats them until the party went shopping. So in fights he would just spam whatever spell went with his current mask, often a full spell level or two behind what he could actually cast. Oh, and the character was afraid of holy ground and wouldn't go into temples.
When I was a grad student, our local gaming con ran a character judging panel for a few years. The idea was that you would submit your character to the judges, who were 4 experienced GMs, and they would rate them on things like creativity, backstory, build, ability to handle adventuring, that sort of thing. There were prizes and it was generally pretty fun. We saw some terrible builds. One guy submitted a lv 20 melee attacker in 3.5 who did 1d6 damage a round. We once had a submission of a character whose entire thing was hit points - this guy wasn't going to drop from damage, that was for sure. He couldn't actually do anything, though.
In a 3.5 d20 Rokugan game, we had a player that insisted on playing a shugenja (think elemental focused oracle) and then only cast seplls to save his own skin over and over. He repeatedly let other PCs die while running away and casting defensive spells. He was terrible at playing casters in general, and because he always played them, we just thought he was an unskilled player. But then we got him to play a fighter during a one-shot...what a difference! This guy made his fighter an astounding paragon of effectiveness. The rest of us were just stunned at how well the fighter turned out. We tried to convince him that he had found his true calling, but nope. Right back to terrible casters in the next game.
So many stories....
In a 3.5 d20 Rokugan game, we had a player that insisted on playing a shugenja (think elemental focused oracle) and then only cast seplls to save his own skin over and over. He repeatedly let other PCs die while running away and casting defensive spells. He was terrible at playing casters in general, and because he always played them, we just thought he was an unskilled player. But then we got him to play a fighter during a one-shot...what a difference! This guy made his fighter an astounding paragon of effectiveness. The rest of us were just stunned at how well the fighter turned out. We tried to convince him that he had found his true calling, but nope. Right back to terrible casters in the next game.
Part of this, though, may tie into a 'cultural expectation'... namely 'casters are glass cannons, so I have to protect my cannon FIRST before anything else'.
Unfortunately, if the party was getting handled that way, after the first encounter or two, it becomes a self-perpetuating cycle, as worries about survival take precedence over damage output.
How do I know this?
Because it's one of the problems I have with most casters, because they're too fragile and I've seen them get hit by GM fiat far too many times in the past 'to make it fair for the martials' and 'The monster is more scared of someone waggling their fingers a hundred yards away than the armored porcupine sitting next to them.'
That's hilarious xD
Wei Ji,
Monster survival training manuals clearly state that you maintain distance from Melee martials and you close with casters and archers. It is just stupid to play to your opponent's strengths, and this one is obvious, and usually the best strategy. Take out the range monkeys first, then lead the tanks on a merry chase while peppering them from range.
I feel like whether an opponent follows that strategy should be determined by their intelligence.
An average of ... 6 damage a round at level 15 as a go to...
.-.
Plus whatever damage bard song + Haste was generating.
CD,
Even animal predators avoid the big and strong prey, and go after the weak ones. The strategies are pretty universal, the intelligent ones just implement them better. You know, recognizing that you count that unarmored and unarmed guy bouncing on the balls of his bare feet as one of those you don't close with.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They won't tend to turn their back on something they think will kill them and then go attack something else with said murderous threat still there though.
I can see low int creatures initiating on a squishy or running away from a big scary metal thing.
I can't see them turning their back on a big scary metal thing to move 20ft away and attack a squishy with big scary metal thing still there.
EDIT: anyway this is a derailing a fun thread agree to disagree.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Smilo Dan's second example reminds of one guy playing in Wrath of the Righteous. Created a Rogue I think multi classed as a fighter for a little oomph. He wasn't as experienced as half the group but he had a good idea and had the more experienced players helping him create his character. The character was good he on the other hand never rolled above a ten once session and barely higher another session. Somewhere along the line we started joking he'd probably roll all criticals if he got controlled by the enemy. Turns out he did get control Dominated I think and went to town on the party. Killed our Healer, an Oracle played by the GM. Did some damage to the rest of the party before we stopped him. We all laughed including the players. Fortunately his luck got a bit better afterwards.
That is absolutely myself and one of the other people in my group. I had a night in our Rise of the Runelords campaign where, out of maybe 12-15 d20 rolls in the night, five of them came up 2. There's a reason I'm playing a witch now - on debuffers, they make the dice rolls, not me. ;)
One of my regular players LOVES druids, and finally got to play another one in my last campaign (after a few games where we only half-jokingly insisted she play something else). That campaign started in v.3.5, then after a couple years, we converted it to become my first Pathfinder campaign. It was a pirate setting (Green Ronin's Freeport), so her druid was a 3PP "water planetouched" human in v.3.5, converted to undine in PF. She took high Con and Wis but low Str, and wouldn't wear anything that encumbered her in the water. In v.3.5, that meant she couldn't fight worth crap unless she was wild shaped into something much stronger than she was.
When we converted to PF, the wild shape rules changed dramatically, and it took us all a while to get used to them. I personally loved the PF version, because it was a LOT better defined and balanced, but it torpedoed the way the player had been able to exploit the rules under v.3.5. I gave her plenty of opportunities to rebuild the character to be more combat-effective, but she refused. The experience simply reinforced her dislike of converting characters between editions/systems, because something always messed up what she liked best about her characters.
She's a very old friend who has played in my games for most of two decades now, so despite a lot of griping, she stuck it out. And once she could finally assume Huge forms, she suddenly became one of the party's most effective combatants. Grabbing and pinning things in giant squid form decided many fights, and she loved her character again.
(In the new campaign we started this year, she's making up for a lot of that old frustration by playing a very strong half-orc cavalier who excels at murdering things with a pick.)
In another game, this one run by my wife, one of the players created a dhampir inquisitor with a -2 Con penalty and dangerously low HP. I was playing the party cleric, and had to be careful to keep my distance from him when channeling because I lacked the Cha for Selective Channeling and could easily kill him. I started setting aside one or two slots to prep inflict wounds spells in case he went down (which he did about once an adventure early on).
He had actually chosen this glass cannon build on purpose, and took every feat and spell he could to improve his effectiveness with his repeating heavy crossbow. When he could afford it, he bought and continually improved a Large magical version. The party was large enough--especially after a couple PCs acquired cohorts--that by that point, we could almost always keep enemies from reaching him, so he just stood in the back and mowed things down like a skinny, pasty Rambo. And by the end of the campaign, he also had an amulet of channeled life, which eliminated my worries about channeling.
In another game, this one run by my wife, one of the players created a dhampir inquisitor with a -2 Con penalty and dangerously low HP. I was playing the party cleric, and had to be careful to keep my distance from him when channeling because I lacked the Cha for Selective Channeling and could easily kill him. I started setting aside one or two slots to prep inflict wounds spells in case he went down (which he did about once an adventure early on).
He had actually chosen this glass cannon build on purpose, and took every feat and spell he could to improve his effectiveness with his repeating heavy crossbow. When he could afford it, he bought and continually improved a Large magical version. The party was large enough--especially after a couple PCs acquired cohorts--that by that point, we could almost always keep enemies from reaching him, so he just stood in the back and mowed things down like a skinny, pasty Rambo. And by the end of the campaign, he also had an amulet of channeled life, which eliminated my worries about channeling.
You wouldn't need to keep your distance while channeling. Since he counts as undead when you channel to heal living he'd be excluded. Right?
You wouldn't need to keep your distance while channeling. Since he counts as undead when you channel to heal living he'd be excluded. Right?In another game, this one run by my wife, one of the players created a dhampir inquisitor with a -2 Con penalty and dangerously low HP. I was playing the party cleric, and had to be careful to keep my distance from him when channeling because I lacked the Cha for Selective Channeling and could easily kill him. I started setting aside one or two slots to prep inflict wounds spells in case he went down (which he did about once an adventure early on).
He had actually chosen this glass cannon build on purpose, and took every feat and spell he could to improve his effectiveness with his repeating heavy crossbow. When he could afford it, he bought and continually improved a Large magical version. The party was large enough--especially after a couple PCs acquired cohorts--that by that point, we could almost always keep enemies from reaching him, so he just stood in the back and mowed things down like a skinny, pasty Rambo. And by the end of the campaign, he also had an amulet of channeled life, which eliminated my worries about channeling.
yep - you can't harm and heal at the same time
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Until very recently, a player in my Runelords group was playing an Arcane Trickster built under the 3.5 rules. He is very attached to 3.5, and is the primary reason that the party is still on the 3.5 rule set.
The entry requirements for AT were awful in the 3.5 days. He wound up with four levels of rogue to get the skill points he needed for the skill pre-reqs, and five levels of wizard to get the spell casting, so he didn't actually get to enter his prestige class until level 10, at which point he had 2d6 sneak attack and 3rd level spells when the bad guys were flinging 5th and sometimes 6th level spells around.
Oh, and his CON was 12, so his fort save stunk and his hit points were so low that I killed him twice without actually meaning to.
Eventually I made him rebuild with a bunch of "house rules" that made it a bit easier to get into the class. That is, I made up some house rules that bore a startling resemblance to the Pathfinder version of the Arcane Trickster. I'm pretty sure he didn't notice.
In the same campaign as the useless were-dolphin, we had a human fighter/rogue who dual-wielded daggers and dabbled in magic and eventually went into Arcane Trickster, but we all thought of him as a melee guy. Then one day, he cast improved invisibility (this was 3.5) and spammed a bunch of fireballs and Quickened magic missiles and the whole table looked at him in shock.
**blink blink**
We had forgotten he could cast spells--but he hadn't!!!!
:-D
Warrior type oracles. Friend tried playing a oracle of fitness (role playing Jorgen von strangle). His dice didn't love him to the point that the entice set was burned in at a later date. There was a serious fault in those dice causing him to roll low.
We start a campaign later, we have a psion, wizard, and stalker. Perect time for warrior oracle! We need divine magic and good front line damage/tankiness.
I'm not sure if it was stat allocation or wahy, but both of those oracles did nothing useful.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Played a 3.5 sorcerer at lvl 1. I put a goblin to sleep with the Sleep spell and then tried to coup de grace it, it survived, got up, and stabbed me until I fell down.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
In one game I was in their was a Wizard who refused to learn Magic Missle.
This is not a terrible life choice. Pretty wise in many respects.
Instead relying on True Strike and a Heavy Crossbow.
This, on the other hand...
Me playing a Monk, always.
I tried to play a Monk in 3.5, every session I rolled like s@*$ and almost died.
In Pathfinder I played a drunken master half-orc monk, we were playing the Rise of the Runelords adventure and clearing out the goblin fort, I died about half way through the dungeon. The GM was amazed at how bad awe-full my luck had been with that character.
Played a 3.5 sorcerer at lvl 1. I put a goblin to sleep with the Sleep spell and then tried to coup de grace it, it survived, got up, and stabbed me until I fell down.
I played a 3.5 human rogue 1 in a campaign with multiple gnome and Halfling wizards and sorcerers. We got pinned down by kobolds or goblins, all the PCs were bleeding out, and the familiars killed all our enemies!
Later, I played a 3.5 human sorcerer 1 with some Draconic Splatbook feats that let me spend spell slots for a 2d6 per spell level breath weapon. He was pretty devastating! Against goblins....
So I learned!
I played an Enchanter wizard under 3.5 rules. Because of restrictions of the (Dragonlance) setting I had to choose Transmutation and Abjuration as forbidden schools. Then I added Illusion to that list.
My wizard has a CON score of 9.
It was fun to plan my spells and strategies so my character wouldn't die and remained effective, as she had so many limitations. In the end it played out right but it wasn't easy. When I reached higher levels she was kinda powerful anyway. A very limited wizard is still a wizard after all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The worst character I ever had was for a 1st edition Gamma Word game. I played a mutant that ended up with 5 of his 6 mutations being defects and no stat above 10. You rolled straight 3d6 for stats in order. My DEX was a 4 and a STR of 6. He had epilepsy and took damage from water. So of course the first thing I did was fall of the boat into the water and would have died if not for another party member pulling me out. He did have a mental blast but that was all he could do. He was killed in a bar fight so I was able to roll up a new character.
There is a difference between rolling terrible stats and/or constantly rolling bad at a table. Nothing usually can be done for both. If the DM says "your attributes are what you role no exceptions" then one has to make the best of it. Same thing with bad rolls either have more than one D20 on hand or make the best of it once again.
It's another to play a character in such a way as to be useless at the table. A poster mentioned someone who made a character who specialized in tripping people with nets yet never used the net. Either that's a very convoluted character backstory. Someone unfamiliar with the rules. Or someone just being contrary for the sake of it. Why build the character very good at tripping people then deciding not to.
I build a Fighter who is really good with two handed weapons then decide to go around grappling every opponent. Which can work but I took no feats like Improved Grapple with a low Strength score.
This is not a terrible life choice. Pretty wise in many respects.
No it's not. As the spell gets better at higher levels. It's when the same player complained he was useless at the table. While also refusing to listen to any advice to help him overcome it. Players want to build what they want at the table. Yet also refuse to accept the responsability for poor choices. The example of the Two Handed fighter I gave. I make a character who is good at using two handed weapons. Ignore that in favor of grappling opponents. Without the right feats and attributes. Then blame everyone else but myself for my poor character choices.
This, on the other hand...
He learned the hard way. After his character was killed off by a magic missile wielding opponent.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I played a "Cursed"(Template from a 3.5 splatbook) Human Fighter in a 3.0/3.5 game. He was completely insane and I had to roll percentages to see if he would act normally or do something weird. Kinda like the confusion spell, but less hazardous. He was a fighter, so not great to begin with, and he fought with two longswords(named Law and Order) so he had that going for him. He was a extremely fun character and everyone in the party loved him, even if he wasn't very useful. He ended up dying when he failed his save against a cure/remove curse effect. It was a fitting end though. The highlight of his life was chasing our were-tiger rouge up a cliff because he was convinced she was a "pretty kitty that needed petting."
Poison Dusk I don't think that was a weak character. Though not every group would want to have that character at their tables. If say for example you played him like he could not use his weapons at all times because of his curse then I would say he falls under the criteria of a weak character. Otherwise sound like a fun character.
I imagine everytime you used your longswords you heard this sound: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8lDYrvTILc
The most useless character I ever played was way back in 1e and I played a Fighter while another player tried out the shiny new Cavalier class. Even though I had rolled well on my stats (18/76 for Strength and I may have had a 16 or 17 for Constitution), every aspect of my character was overshadowed by the Cavalier. She was stronger, tougher, hit harder, and had a higher AC. It was pretty disheartening. The DM took pity on me and gave me some boons, but that character still felt really lackluster and I eventually gave him up for another.
My group had a guy play a brawler once. He talked about how much he loved Pummeling Style. His primary attack method turned out to be throwing darts. That character survived a lot longer than it should have.
1st ed Magic User.
2hp random first level spells.
Friends, Nystal's Magic Aura, Push and Read Magic.
I spent the whole session lobbing darts. And missing.
See that person just doesn't make sense xD
EDIT: to be clear I'm referring to Malik the Mighty's pummelling dart buddy xD
1st ed Magic User.
2hp random first level spells.
Friends, Nystal's Magic Aura, Push and Read Magic.
I spent the whole session lobbing darts. And missing.
I had a 1e thief character who rolled 2 hp at level 1. We called him "the sleeping thief" because he was constantly unconscious. I think he literally stubbed his toe once, fell down, and knocked himself out.
See that person just doesn't make sense xD
EDIT: to be clear I'm referring to Malik the Mighty's pummelling dart buddy xD
I sometimes have to wonder if it's a person just trying to be disruptive at the table. Malilk example a person builds a Brawler then does the exact opposite of his build. Makes me wonder if it's done on purpose.
Maybe they feel there's too much risk in sending their characters into combat and have a mind set of 'my character must survive' instead of 'the party must succeed'?