Wildfire Heart's page

Ifrits: I love playing as them, being the pyromaniac with a chip on his shoulder, or as a bard.

Pixies: I know this is a BS race, but I just love the idea of playing as an annoying little tinkerbell with invisibility. Seriously, it's hard to take a pixie druid seriously, even when her buddy is a freaking elephant.

Ogres: Yes, they're OP stat-wise, but they allow some nice, nonoptimal caster builds. An Ogre Witch with massive reach and a poleaxe? Hilarious. Especially when he just uses it to push melee enemies back so he can put them to sleep

Changelings: Fun. So much fun. Being a sexy changeling Amazoness and then going "Yeah, that's my mother" when the party confronts a hag? The look on everyone's faces is just great.

Bob_Loblaw wrote:

@Wildfire Heart, I love creating over-the-top characters that toe the line when it comes to character creation. I tend to make very powerful characters once I understand how a system works. What I've learned to do is to tone it down a bit so that I'm not stealing the limelight from the rest of the group. I have been banned from playing summoners and conjurers because my turns have been known to last considerably longer than the rest of the players combined. That only happened once, but now that it has happened I have been told that I am simply not allowed to play them. That's ok with me. These are my friends and I want them to also enjoy the game. I've changed my perspective about winning at RPGs over time. It used to be that I wanted the most powerful character I could have. Now it's all about making sure we all have fun. To me, that's winning.

Completely agreed. I am significantly better than all of my friends at mastery of the Pathfinder system and I can beat any one of them in powergaming blind and drunk. But instead of showing off, I just don't build my character until I've seen the general power level of the rest of the party, and build my character accordingly. If I'm in a bunch of powergamers, I'll bring a character to be reckoned with. If I'm with a bunch of new players, I might play a vanilla bard without any special abilities, only using core material. And every variation in between.

Being a powergamer can be fun as hell at times, but you have to know when to reign it in to not ruin other player's fun.

Bioboy and I had a talk after yesterday's session, and I think we've made a breakthrough. Part of the issue that Bioboy had (as of recent sessions) is the fact that he plays a technical character (Like an Inspector who's not built for combat, or an arcanist) and the group in general seems to just rush into encounters. He doesn't have time to set up his MacGyver style traps and such, and is left frustrated.

@Bobloblaw when Bioboy was GM, he had the same rule regarding evil or CN characters. While I didn't like it (My personal alignment is somewhere between CN and CG), I accepted it, making CG or TN characters.

@Campincarl I think I've learned a lot from you guys. thanks for the input.

*SIGH*. Yes, it's sad. DM_Blake has an ungodly number of favorites for his post, and everyone's piling on the GMNPC when I see only two fundamental issues with it:

(1) It's an optimized GMNPC
(2) The party is big enough not to need one.

We've had a fantastic time going through CotCT, RotRL, and now WotR and JR with active GMNPCs.

However:
(1) The GMNPC is *always* a supporting role (cleric, front-line fighter, rogue, whatever) and *never* does anything without the party asking, "Hey, xxx, can't you do this?"
(2) The GMNPC is *never* the "GM's Pet". As I think Jiggy said, I run GMNPCs, but if the players say, "Hey, xxx, take off!" then xxx will dutifully take off.

I'm a firm believer in GMNPCs, but that's because I run most of my campaigns with 3 players, so they need a 4th to "round them out". But my GMNPCs *never" steal the thunder from the PCs, nor dominate fights. It's funny -- we actively won't play with one guy because he always creates the "I can do everything better than you" GMNPC.

So GMNPCs are NOT always bad, as some would lead you to believe. But:
- If there are 4+ players, you shouldn't have a GMNPC.
- The GMNPC should -never- do anything unless asked to do so by the PCs.
- The GMNPC should immediately leave should the PCs ask him/her to do so.
- The GMNPC should -never- be so optimized that he/she outshines the PCs at ANYTHING except for his/her designated niche, where the players have previously admitted they have a lack, and are not planning on filling it.

I really don't like absolutes. "GMNPCs suck!" is such an absolute. "I always run a GMNPC" is another.

As always, we have found happiness in the middle.

the funny part is, I Favorited GM_Blake's post as well, even though it kinda ripped on me a bit.

kestral287 wrote:

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Anyone else wanna bet that this is not the general response that the OP was expecting? :P

Do you really think you'd get any takers on that?

A better wager might be whether the OP even comes back after all this. And if he does, what his attitude will be (anger or receptive).

lol. Thanks for the advice, guys. I'm new to the game, as many of you have expected, and my homebrew dungeon was WAY too long, almost as long as an entire campaign in its' own right. I dungoofed as a GM, and last session we decided to move on. I have decided that unless my group wants me to continue, I will step down as GM and let someone else in our group have a turn. We're running an emerald spire module, and so far, it's been very enjoyable.

Thanks again, particularly GM_Blake, but all of you, for the help on this one. Many suggestions have been made, and I agree with most of what you said.

Wildfire heart

Hey, I'm the previously mentioned Bard.

First of all, the campaign itself isn't construct-focused, just the current dungeon, although the dungeon is...well...

Ever played Skyrim?
Remember that giant cavern with the Dwarven ruins with the glowing mushrooms and Falmer?

It's almost literally that.

I was somewhat aware of the upcoming heavy focus on constructs, but was not aware of the specifics. Essentially, the GM told me that the dungeon after the one we were currently in would have a heavy construct theme.
Alright, I can deal with that. Just sell some treasure, get some stuff, prepare for constructs.
What I did not know was that the entrance to that next dungeon was a one-way teleportation altar to a cavern miles below the surface.
Even that isn't too bad.
Except as soon as we entered the room, the entire dungeon started shaking as if collapse was imminent, essentially putting the entire party in "Anywhere is better than being trapped under rubble, get on the teleporter!" mode.

In addition, the GM keeps pointing out that both running and sneaking are options, but both are relatively impractical.

Running is difficult mainly due to the fact that either the enemy will have equal movement seed to us, or (as a construct) it will not have to rest, making the encounter nothing but a race to outrun the Terminator.

Sneaking might work, if the party Fighter wasn't in heavy armor and constantly drunk. Plus, the GM is noticeably fond of ambushes and ignoring the rules for surprise rounds unless it's in the enemy's favor.
Funnily enough, his previous GMPC (!) didn't have that problem when he snuck into a group of 50+ enemies and took out their leaders without being detected...

I do have to admit, the GM usually makes a point of giving us personalized magic items, and since last session we are...well above WPL.

And by "Well above", I mean we have successfully obtained about 300 lbs of adamantine, worth a metric crapton of money. Immediately after a gas trap that almost killed my Bard and...

you forgot the 50 000 gp diamond, bro

Warning: the following is blunt.

I spent an hour typing this up. My opinions are backed up by 4 decades of GMing RPGs since the 70's, but they're still opinions. Nevertheless, I am fairly sure these answers will help the OP find a better balance in his games and resolve his players' issues.

Hopefully the OP (and anyone else) can benefit from what I have to say.

Wildfire Heart wrote:

ok, my party bard was complaining to me. His character is a one trick pony, and he was annoyed for a few reasons.

This should be your first red flag. And that flag is telling you that YOU are the one screwing up here.

It's the job of everyone at the table to make sure you're all having fun, but the GM is way more influential in this role than any player. If a player is "complaining" then he's not having fun.

Fix it.

Specifically, YOU fix it. Not him.

Wildfire Heart wrote:

1) that his character is basically useless. we're running a construct themed dungeon of my own creation, which basically means he can't use his mind manipulation spells. Considering that his bard is mainly built for manipulation, he's understandably annoyed at his own uselessness.

His uselessness is YOUR fault. You let him build a useless character and/or you designed a campaign where his character is useless. Either way, it's YOUR fault.

Stop putting the blame on your player.

But, that being said, you're not expected to throw your whole campaign out the window to please one player. Alter some encounters. Don't make everything a construct. Better yet, have the PCs start finding cyborg constructs where the enemy has been building smarter constructs that actually have living brains (General Grievous). Make them cool and dangerous but, good news for the bard player, they are no longer immune to mind affecting magic.

Wind down the construct part of the story and move on to something that is not construct-oriented. If you want, you could have the big bad boss in the next room; they kill him and they're done...

Wow. I love you man. (no homo). Thanks for the advice. You sound like a very experienced DM/GM, and I'll try and do as you say.

I have been running a combat heavy type of campaign, and...the funny thing is, the story kind of did "magically" become mostly about constructs.

The PCs were exploring a dungeon, but then something very big started smashing the place to get at the PCs, who then jumped through an ancient magical teleporter.

Think Ronka ruins from FF5

Okay, so as a new group to pathfinder, a bunch of guys decided to make a pathfinder group, GMed by my buddy bioboygamer. Well, most people made some pretty generic characters. We had our elf ranger, our drunken dwarf fighter, our gnome wizard, and...me.

Being me, I couldn't have a generic character. I dislike anything to do with generics, so I decided to make a character with a killer backstory, pulling out everything I could.

So I made an Ifrit sorcerer with the elemental (primal fire) bloodline, with a high stealth and...a baby phoenix on his shoulder constantly.

My GM allowed this, as the only mechanical purpose that Nix (her name) served was the occasional bit of healing (1/day tears, 1D6) and sometimes lighting the occasional arrow on fire. We worked out that Nix would level up at half the normal party rate, and would gain some small abilities like phoenii as she did so...

What my GM didn't realize at the time was that while the Ifrit didn't appear particularly powerful on paper, he quickly became our party's rough equiv of a "send in the deus ex machina". He burned through encounters like nothing (although that WAS partially our GMs fault), had an ungodly initiative, and largely was overshadowing everyone. After a few hours of tinkering, we realized that I'd goofed during creation, breaking the rules accidentally more than once, but even after the rebuild, he still blasted through everything.

Eventually our GM stepped aside because he felt he wasn't doing a good job, especially when people did things he wasn't expecting, and I took over for a campaign. After that campaign, Daijhunna (by popular request) was retired as a character.

Anyways, tell me about your outrageous characters that snuck past your GM. Preferably without breaking the rules like I inadvertently did, but all are welcome. Tell me about your broken characters, the ones that made your GMs cry.

The tears taste so sweet

Wildfire

Okay, so I just came up with an idea for a character, not sure if it'd work, who is a tinker who specializes in light siege weaponry. My idea for his "kill move" is thus:

Tinker has microphone in Alpha's compartment, Alpha can be a siege engine with a modification designed to throw small boxes...

but when he yells a word twice into the mic, that small box turns into a massive honkin' ship that then falls and crushes whatever's beneath it.

The tinker just launched a freakin' folding boat at you...from a seige engine...

That's gravity bow on steroids! I'd like to see the (non deific) enemy stand up to that!

In the description, it doesn't specify what happens when the ship hits something hard, so...technically speaking I could just say the command word again and have it fold up??

enough about MY weird ideas, let's here YOURS! tell me if mine was feasable, please. I GM a pathfinder group right now, but when someone else GMs, I want to see the look on the GMs face when I drop a 2000 lb ship onto the enemy's face.

Submit strange kill ideas to me please!

Nobodyshome, thanks. You've cleared the air for me. I'm kind of new to pathfinder in general, and all of us are as well (The OP, my friend, and our disruptive player.) you probably already guessed that.

I must admit, the first post you made annoyed me at first, but looking at it, showed admirable restraint. Now that you realize the situation, you have been most helpful. Thank you very much for your advice. I plan on implementing the "1 minute" rule as soon as we go to our next session.

love the avatar :)

I am the GM in this scenario. You were right. To some extent, I DID want to kill the PC. The summoner in question has been disruptive due to sheer impotency. I had my friend the oracle tell me that the compassionate ally spell did what he said it would. I also increased the damage of the leech, owing to the fact that giants use it for healing, and he tried to use it on a halfling. Even so, I gave him 4 rolls, any one of which would have saved him.

1. The giant rolled a 19 on the heal check, which meant that he knew how to apply said leech to a giant, -2 for circumstance penalty due to it being applied to a halfling .

2. A CMD check to avoid having the leech used on him. The character got a 1 on the check, instant fail

3. The damage roll, which normally would have been lower, was a D8 due to the fact that halflings have much, MUCH less blood than a giant. I could have dome a D2+(circumstance bonus), but instead I gave him a chance. instead of applying a large bonus to damage, I rolled a D8. I rolled an 8 for damage, +2, for a 10 con dmg.

4. A fortitude save, for half damage, that he failed miserably.

The PC in question was a summoner with an eidolon that could only do a D6 in combat and did nothing but fly him around. His other (thankfully gone) character was a wizard that was in the same position.

I may or may not have made a bad decision here. I know this.

Hey everyone, I'm the guy playing with the OP here, and I can clarify a few things.

1: I DID have my character sheet with me. I'm not a complete idiot, nor a cheater.
2: I fully admit that I goofed up on a few things. This was my first time playing the game, and every change that my GM has made was taken in stride.
3: My character isn't particularly powerful, merely streamlined, with above average stats.
4: Our encounters to start have been laughably easy for the most part, and many enemies have been weak to magic, or resistant to melee, meaning my char has been front and center for almost every encounter.

for example, 6 skeletons, with regen 1 and 6 hp. The first turn, I hit the 3 bunched together with a cone of fire, killing all of them. I then took out 2 on the next turn, slightly damaging a teammate in the process. Meanwhile, our dwarf and our werewolf fought 1, damaging it slightly. Our dwarf realized their resistance, and so used the blunt end of his axe. Our wizard killed the final one with acid splash (lolwut) and our werewolf almost got knocked unconscious before I killed the two that were near him.

5: I seem to have the luck of the bloody devil on initiative rolls. Seriously, my worst roll on init in 6 sessions was an 8.
6: I am well aware of my knack for scavenging, and have since toned it down.

Hopefully this will shed some light on the scenario.