Frustrated's page

Exactly what it says in the title. I chose this bloodline because it has several of my got to have spells already (like every one of them). I have permission from my DM (after I gave up trying to DM PF one of my players stepped up) to exchange my Favorited class bonus for the extra spell known of second highest level (level 3 in this case). My charisma will be 22 as well if that matters.

Tangent: I'm not particularly keen on Touch of Agony or Bloodline Arcana. To be honest I don't think I'll ever use them, how could you even get away with using the Bloodline Arcana anyway? I mean if I am already casting a compulsion spell I'm getting what I want from a npc anyway or in the case of a charm spell they specifically mention using opposed Charisma checks to convince targets to act against their nature not Bluff, Diplomacy or Intimidate. If I was already trying to get them to do something in their nature I wouldn't need to blow a spell on it. I mean if you are supposed to benefit from because you can use the bonus on other people in a group after targeting one with a spell... I just don't see it ever coming up, it's hard enough not to get caught using charm magic in most social situations, if you are at any event/court/office/temple/guild important enough to be part of the plot at mid to high levels then there will be other high level magic users with good spellcraft modifiers nearby anyway. I mean if the power is meant to be weak because other features of the Bloodline are good then I get that but I'm just trying to figure it out, I'd never choose this bloodline if starting at level 1.

I think the problem here is the OP see there are solutions but doesn't think any of them are cost-effective enough. The game is about taking risks, take one.

The thread can end now. The more I read what I will have to do to make this work the more I stand by what I said in the original post: I should not have trusted this group to play Pathfinder. I would rather GM a game I don't have to bend over backwards to make work with my s@$%ty group.

Random encournters are fun. Make them do more per a day, plot advances the same....It might take more sessions.

Its the more sessions that are the issue, not the in game time. We don't get to actually sit down and play often enough to be that frivolous with our time. We can all get the same day free a little less than once every other week.

If you don't run more the spellcasters will pull even more ahead of the melee. How many do you typically have per day?

Anywhere from 0 to 6, it's entirely dependant on what wont break suspension of disbelief in whatever situation the party is in. During overland travel its less than once per day. In a dungeon usually 2 or 3. In the middle of a base that belongs to intelligent Humanoids they are attacked until the defence breaks or the party flees which could be anywhere from 3 large to 7 smaller encounters worth.

Everyone keeps saying increase encounters per day and if that is really the best way to solve the problem I would rather not DM Pathfinder. I have no interest in running that combat heavy a campaign, that much combat will just bog down the speed at which the plot advance.

One thing I have to say overall though is that I do not want to increase encounters per day. I know the game is balanced around it but it really does not fit with the story most of the time and if combat was not going as quickly as it was it will take to long to actually get through an adventure. One of the reason I prefer DMing 4e is we can actually get through 4 encounters a session if we need to, with Pathfinder combat takes almost twice as long even if its ends on turn 4.

Read the mounted combat rules.

If the gnome is riding a war pony, then (a) is he making his Ride checks to control the mount in battle? Not very difficult, but if he fails all he can do is control the thing; and (b) if the mount moves, is he making his concentration checks to cast at all? And some enemy really ought to target the mount.

I have been using the mounted combat rules correctly. The character is question was built from the ground up to be good at what they do.

Thanks for the advice guys. I am going to try and steer the story in a direction to allow for larger battle fields so archers and other ranged enemies can be more effective. Currently most of the action takes place two city-states and the dungeons surrounding them. The outdoor sections are typically two and from but we have had one bounty hunter adventure that was entirely outdoors that the Cavalier and Ranger did very well in. I'll will also go through with letting them rebuild if they want, which two of them are willing to.

I should note that the Wizard has been spending a lot of his money on scrolls, he may only have so many spells per day but his spells known list is pretty damn large, he knows 12 level 3 spells already (partially my fault for having them fight a wizard, he decoded the spell books and almost doubled his list in one go).

So far they have been fighting a lot of Humanoids because they have been involved in a lot of political missions, as many a dungeons and in the field mission combined. Its one of the reasons I find it difficult to shoe horn in so many enemies immune to their spells.

TBH though this campaign feels like a disaster waiting to happen if it isn't already. I am not really enjoying DMing it drama aside, PF looks fun to play but the Burden on the DM is higher than every other game I've played besides 3.5.

All systems favor some concepts over other concepts. When the group is of the same creative agenda, this is not much of an issue. However, when you have optimizers mixed with non-optimizers, it becomes a problem.

Discussing the issues with everyone should help. Are the non-optimizers not optimizing because they do not know the system well enough? Ask the others to help them out. Do they have specific concepts in mind? Again, ask the others to help them meet their concept and stay relevant. Do they have some other reason for not wanting to optimize? See if all of you can find some common ground where everyone can enjoy the game.

We have had this problem before more than once and we have talked about it ad nauseum. The one of the players sucks at optimization and never budges on character concepts, two are OK and have played 3.5 for years but b!~@% easily when out shined. They have both played casters before and don't care when they are doing it but if they have a non-caster concept they want to play they expect other people to tone down their casters for them when they wont do it for others. The last two are just too good at character optimization, they do it without even trying, I've seen them make extremely powerful characters in 5 different systems within a few hours of picking up the books for the first time and tbh I am with them in terms of skill level.

TBH The only reason myself and the two optimizers play with the others is because we have tried 2 player 1 GM campaigns in a few systems and it always sucks. The two hypocrits are our friends and generally don't suck as bad as they have in this campaign, in Vampire, Eclipse Phase and 4e we don't have any of these problems. The Ranger's player has been kicked out of the group several times for his attitude but eventually we let him back when short on people.

The wizard shouldn't be such a problem at those levels, where did he find the undead...Anyway have those players played DnD before?

They were enemies I used because they were immune to the Oracles spells.

Yes. 4 out of 5 played D&D 3.5 for 5 years.

...

And any only else who mentions range.

Its called War Pony for the Gnome, Expeditious Retreat for the Wizard or they are inside the distances are not very long. The War Pony often comes inside places anyway due to being medium.

...

Ok I know what you mean by #1. I have mentioned it but they feel they are being punished for just being better at the game than the others. As far as I am concerned they are not breaking the world at all, I thin kits perfectly find from the story;s perfective, its the b@*#+y other players who I am trying to placate.

#2 I have mentioned to them. The ranger player is just a manchild who expects other people to conform to his power level because he only wants to play that exact concept but the Rogue and Cavalier are trying make their character better. I think I will allow them to rebuild them from the ground up.

#4 I will likely do this at some point in the near future.

#3 and #5 bad design and bad Gming, you should be ashamed. I already said I have done some of those things. You should know that by reading what I wrote and that they are to low a level for fighting Golem-like enemies without a TPK. Anti-magic fields hurt everyone because their equipment becomes useless.

What curse did the Oracle take? Is he/she playing it?

Tongues: Celestial. The Wizard and Half-Elf also speaks Celestial so its a moot point.

What can you tell us about the capabilities of the cavalier, rogue, and ranger?

Also, why is having the oracle and wizard dominating okay, but the cavalier dominating is cause for concern among your players?

A) It is not OK having them dominating (hence this thread), they will b*$*$ like this any time one player is noticeable more important to the party than others. Two of the player and to a lesser extent a third b+*#% like this any time they feel less important than other party members.

B) The Rogue is the vanilla type and has high AC and has good perception. I've let him find some poisons to boost his power already. He uses a short sword and short bow. He has Boots and Cloak of Elvenkind so his sneak is very high. Trapfinding wise he's not as good as he could be.

The Ranger is a Guide and is actually surprisingly useful out of combat despite his b+&+#ing. He has a high perception, buff the group by sharing his favoured terrain bonus for Plains with them. He has the highest perception, OK stealth and is a good tracker. Several adventures have hinged on his tracking but he forgets this when its time to b*~~+.

The Cavalier is just an outdoor combat monster. Great Ride skill for mounted combat goodness, Lance and heavy shield on barded horse back and he has the best magic weapon in the party a +1 Shocking Flail and it along with Improved trip when on foot.

I am a GM of 10 years and numerous systems. A while ago my group ask me if I would run a Pathfinder campaign and I said I would look into it. I read the rules and said no, the game isn't balanced and you have already proven I can't trust you guys to not to have a campaign degenerate into interpersonal conflict when a game isn't balanced.

Well I did a different campaign instead, the plot lasted for 5 months and ended over the holidays. They bugged me to start a new campaign and ask to play pathfinder again and I caved.

The players made the following party and all are now level 5:

Gnome Oracle (Heavens)
Human Wizard (Necromancer)
Human Cavalier
Half Elf Rogue
Human Ranger(Guide)

The Gnome Oracle and Human Wizard are the problem. Not just in combat but I will start with that.

Firstly the Gnome Oracle has Charisma 22, Awesome Display, Eschew Materials and Improved Initiative. The majority of encounters effectively end when he casts his DC 18 -6 effective HD on the targets Colour Spray. Sure its not technically over, there are usually a few enemies not caught in its radius if the encounter is outdoors but this takes the sense of urgency out of any fight. Before you even start on the subject of using enemies that are blind or immune to mind-affecting, I already am and there are only so many of those that can be shoe horned into an adventure they don't thematic belong in. Its at the point other players have commented on only being their to knife the throats the a unconscious seizureing enemies so the Gnome doesn't need to get his hands dirty.

Secondly the Human Wizard, generally anticipates what he needs prepared in terms of utility spells but more on out of combat later. He is currently in command of several Undead that made up the "immune to mind-affect" enemies the party has fought. Diamond Spray, Scorching Ray and Ray of Exhaust are the only combat spells he ever bothers with. Rarely has more than 2 Prepared because of how effective they are. There has been 3 instances of encounters ending on turn 2 because helpless creatures with Dex 0 can't pass Reflex Saves worth a damn due to a Colour Spray + Diamond Spray combo.

Out of combat the Gnome Oracle dominates social encounters given their maxed out diplomacy modifier. Both the Oracle and Wizard also dominate in the problem solving department between their spells and tbh being smarter than the other three players IRL. The Gnome Oracle is also the best roleplayer and knows all of the best questions to ask of npcs, the Rogue really feel useless sharing it. The rogue is still getting the opportunity to RP but it feels redundant.

The other players are asking me to do something about them being useless in combat but for the life of me I can't think of anything I have already done. Every solution to the Oracle and Wizard either makes them totally useless and/or hampers the entire party (anti-magic fields turn off the other players equipment as much as the casters spells). Having more outdoor encounters than we already have to kept AoE from beign as strong will just make people b!!@~ about the Cavalier being give to much of an advantage. Taking away the Wizard's ability to have undead minions both invalidates his character concept and taking away colour spray goes against the intended design of the Oracle class (given Awesome Display was intentionally meant to go with this spell).

Seriously how do you people play this game with players of differing skill levels? If I just arbitrarily come down on these players I am just being a s%&~ty GM to them as much as letting it go unhindered is beign a s%&!ty GM to the others.