Six attacks at level 12?


3.5/d20/OGL


I am too slow to keep up with all the plustas the characters pile onto a character sheet. Much less memorize them all. However one player called me up and told me about his character the other night. He is new so there was no backstory, just a stack of plustas. But when he concluded I heard him say "six attacks at next level" (the character is currently level eleven due to a recent PC death).
I hate arguing with people about their plustas. So I waited until I got off the phone and looked up the feat he was using. Sure enough ,it seems you can make a fighter with six attacks at level twelve. No other character has passed two or three yet. So what kind of monsters or encounters will challenge this geryonish fighter? I'm worried if this character starts becoming too effective everybody is going to reroll and take these feats then it will slow down the game (at least until we devise a KFC bucket to roll all the dice). I hate when one guy has a combo that kicks serious butt and everyone else copies.

Liberty's Edge

I have a character like this. It's really not as awesome as it looks on paper. See, the character has a major flaw, while he gets 6 attacks, he can't pile on damage. So send him against any creature with DR and his effectiveness is seriously reduced. We were in Maure Castle (our first mistake) and I was doing no damage to some demon down there due to his DR 10.

So send the party against a horde and this character will shine, but send it against something big and nasty... and his 6 attacks are for naught.


One rule I am unclear about (and bracing myself for when it comes up) is the crit range when a higher number is needed for a hit. I know this guy takes a to-hit penalty but the character it is replacing was one of those improved crit+keen rapier types. What I'm thinking the player is going to do is combine those two ideas and have a crit range close to 20% with six attacks should give him a crit every round.
If you need a 19 or even a 20 to hit, and roll a 17 that is within crit range do you try to confirm the crit or let it miss?


Only natural 20 is an autohit. If your crit range is 17-20 and you need a 19 to hit your opponent, rolling a 17 or a 18 is a miss : no hit, no confirmation !!

Don't forget that Improved Critical and a Keen weapon don't stack !!


Noir le Lotus wrote:

Only natural 20 is an autohit. If your crit range is 17-20 and you need a 19 to hit your opponent, rolling a 17 or a 18 is a miss : no hit, no confirmation !!

Don't forget that Improved Critical and a Keen weapon don't stack !!

Ah, thanks. =)

Liberty's Edge

Out of curiosity, what feat is he using to gain 6 attacks/round?

Liberty's Edge

Another way to counter this sort of character is with mobile opponents. He can only get the six attacks if he can take a full attack so an opponent who requires ten feet or more of movement to reach is going to slow him down somewhat.

Liberty's Edge

Forgottenprince wrote:
Out of curiosity, what feat is he using to gain 6 attacks/round?

The only way to do this I can think of would be 2 weapon fighting, followed by improved and superior. I cannot think of another approach that would get you six.


Robert Maughan wrote:
Forgottenprince wrote:
Out of curiosity, what feat is he using to gain 6 attacks/round?
The only way to do this I can think of would be 2 weapon fighting, followed by improved and superior. I cannot think of another approach that would get you six.

That is exactly the feat he is using. Along with a dwarven waraxe (I think ?) or paired dwarven waraxes, maybe. It has a base attack requirement, but this is a replacement character so is jumping into the level with no predevelopement (or I would have seen this coming a long time ago).

Liberty's Edge

In that case, as previous posters have stated above he will be effective against hordes of mooks, but weak against BBEG. I've DM'd a TWF Ranger from 4th-35th level and I can already tell you that when the BBEG shows up, that second weapon will quickly get sheathed/stowed.

Not as bad as you might fear, especially that even with the TW Defense feats the PC's AC won't be as high as a sword & board,

Just make sure he's correctly applying all his penalties!


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

This is a fighter specializing in the Two-Weapon Fighting feat chain?

The usefulness of this feat chain is limited by 1) the required 19 Dex to gain all three feats (preventing the PC from increasing Str), 2) the penalty to attack rolls (-2 or -4), 3) the low probability of landing hits with the successive attacks with each weapon. Also, Power Attack does not add damage to light weapons, so unless the PC is taking -4 on attack rolls (which can be reduced to -2 with Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting from Complete Adventurer) for two one-handed weapons, on top of whatever penalty is chosen for Power Attack, the extra damage only applies to one weapon, although the attack penalty applies to both.

The fighter will probably end up missing with at least half of the attacks and the damage output will likely be lower than a two-handed weapon fighter.

As far as the criticals go, remember that a critical threat needs to be confirmed.


One other aspect I thought might get tried; using this combo with combat expertise. If he is penalised to such a degree that he needs a 20, then why not pull off some of his BAB to AC?
I don't have a problem with him being too powerful. I play with another guy that has absolute grand luck with rolling dice and can't help but hit a 20 about one in five throws. He is always going to be a dominant player in combat.
The main concern I have is if this character appears powerful enough some of the other players are going to jump on this TWF bandwagon (like when one guy rolled a half-dragon, next thing I knew half the party wanted to be half-dragons. Never mind that they are not the end-all be-all template, it looked awesome rolling all those dice for breath weapon and away they went to reroll their characters).
I guess a bad guy with spring attack (or fly-by attack) would be a good foil to this combo. Hit, move, walk to me and lose your full attack. Maybe a few disarmers or grapplers to keep things interesting.

On a side note (warning:rant), this is one of the aspects I hate about D&D3. When the players do something dumb (and last adventure where we had a PC death and two near deaths there was plenty lame-brained manuevers getting tried) and die; do they stop and question their tactics? NO! Obviously the problem was that their character didn't use the right feats or what-have-you and they come back with some wierd assed Centaur/crippling grappler character that piles more and more plustas onto my poor brain and then they go and pull another bad call (to put things mildly) and die again.
I talk to them and tell them "Hey, when you are a Dex heavy meleer don't go tumbling into the midst of four bad guys to get one sneak attack knowing your going to get it next round. And what were you trying to do with that anyway when you do more damage ranged attacking in the first place."
What do I get for all this? "Well, my next character is going to get six attacks with plusta plusta plusta".


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
CharlieRock wrote:
Along with a dwarven waraxe (I think ?) or paired dwarven waraxes, maybe. It has a base attack requirement, but this is a replacement character so is jumping into the level with no predevelopement (or I would have seen this coming a long time ago).

First, make sure that the player meets the Dex requirement for the feats. Depending on what ability score generation method you use, this can result in a serious hit in other scores. To take the feats, the character would need 16 Dex at 1st level and increase Dex at 4th, 8th, and 12th (or start with an even higher Dex to use the increases on some other ability).

If the character is using a dwarven urgosh, remember that the second attack with a dual weapon is considered a light weapon (1/2 Str bonus on damage and no Power Attack benefit). If the character is using two dwarven waraxes, make sure the penalty for using two one-handed weapons is enforced. Also, remember that attacking with two weapons is a full-attack action, which means the caracter can only take a 5 ft step or be limited to a single attack with one weapon.

See my post above for the other limits to two-weapon fighting.

The Exchange

CharlieRock wrote:

One other aspect I thought might get tried; using this combo with combat expertise. If he is penalised to such a degree that he needs a 20, then why not pull off some of his BAB to AC?

I don't have a problem with him being too powerful. I play with another guy that has absolute grand luck with rolling dice and can't help but hit a 20 about one in five throws. He is always going to be a dominant player in combat.
The main concern I have is if this character appears powerful enough some of the other players are going to jump on this TWF bandwagon (like when one guy rolled a half-dragon, next thing I knew half the party wanted to be half-dragons. Never mind that they are not the end-all be-all template, it looked awesome rolling all those dice for breath weapon and away they went to reroll their characters).
I guess a bad guy with spring attack (or fly-by attack) would be a good foil to this combo. Hit, move, walk to me and lose your full attack. Maybe a few disarmers or grapplers to keep things interesting.

On a side note (warning:rant), this is one of the aspects I hate about D&D3. When the players do something dumb (and last adventure where we had a PC death and two near deaths there was plenty lame-brained manuevers getting tried) and die; do they stop and question their tactics? NO! Obviously the problem was that their character didn't use the right feats or what-have-you and they come back with some wierd assed Centaur/crippling grappler character that piles more and more plustas onto my poor brain and then they go and pull another bad call (to put things mildly) and die again.
I talk to them and tell them "Hey, when you are a Dex heavy meleer don't go tumbling into the midst of four bad guys to get one sneak attack knowing your going to get it next round. And what were you trying to do with that anyway when you do more damage ranged attacking in the first place."
What do I get for all this? "Well, my next character is going to get six attacks with plusta plusta plusta".

Yeah, it seems like the players who min/max and optimize the most always have the crappiest tactics. They become a one-PC wrecking crew which, even if they are personally effective, leads to the rest of the party not having a full team for tactics, and lessens the party's effectiveness as a whole.

*edit* this reminds me...I still need to get some of my PCs to send me their char sheets so I can review how some have 35+ grapple checks at 9th level and other ridiculousness. Wrestled the mummified dragon from Entombed with the Pharoahs into submission, even though it had a huge grapple modifier.

Liberty's Edge

CR,

Not sure where you're going with that last post. I understand the DM's complaint for "Cool I want to play one too!" mentality and I definately understand that plusta+ problem, but from everything I've seen this won't be alleviated in the next edition where plusta's will be added/subtracted often during combat.

Anyway, 0th rule of DMing: Everyone at the table is here to have fun, even the DM. If you've stopped having fun something needs to change. Its hard to get the point across to players sometimes, but I think you're best bet is to just sit down and have a nice long discussion about what makes your DMing job more diffcult.

As for unwise tactical movements... no cure for that but PC death....

The Exchange

Forgottenprince wrote:

CR,

As for unwise tactical movements... no cure for that but PC death....

Yeah but unfortunately the ones who end up dying are usually the casual non-optimized PC.


I can't really say I'm familiar with the term plusta, but I believe I understand what you mean by it. However, your problem sounds more like a player issue than a game design issue. The TWF chains are in the PHB. They are pretty common, but hardly game breaking. As has been said before, there are some big liabilities that come with this option. It's actually inferior to a THF (two-handed fighting) build. The two-hander only has to hit once and can pour a bit of BAB into Power Attack for a tremendous bonus. You can see average damages in the 30-40 range easily by mid levels. It just gets more and more grotesque from there. :)

TWF actually requires many successful hits to achieve about the same level of effectiveness (maybe a bit less, actually- depends on the build). Granted, you're more likely to hit with something, but the damage of the individual strikes is often so low as to be near negligible if you don't have several other hits backing it up each round. Plus, as has been said, you can only do this on a full attack. A THF can charge 40+ feet and smack someone for ~50 damage.


Dragonchess Player wrote:


See my post above for the other limits to two-weapon fighting.

Oh, I'm taking notes. That's for sure. The last thing I need is for next adventure to see this character times six (six players).


Fake Healer wrote:
Forgottenprince wrote:

CR,

As for unwise tactical movements... no cure for that but PC death....

Yeah but unfortunately the ones who end up dying are usually the casual non-optimized PC.

Actually, from our table, it is the min/maxed guy who takes unnecessary risks or poorly considers his actions that lead to his own death. The only drawback to the casual player is that they have to withdraw and await reinforcements from time to time.

The longest lived character is still the Bard with a high 16 stat. She always seem well positioned enough to see the other players die and go "Wow, I better run."


Forgottenprince wrote:

CR,

Not sure where you're going with that last post. I understand the DM's complaint for "Cool I want to play one too!" mentality and I definately understand that plusta+ problem, but from everything I've seen this won't be alleviated in the next edition where plusta's will be added/subtracted often during combat.

Anyway, 0th rule of DMing: Everyone at the table is here to have fun, even the DM. If you've stopped having fun something needs to change. Its hard to get the point across to players sometimes, but I think you're best bet is to just sit down and have a nice long discussion about what makes your DMing job more diffcult.

As for unwise tactical movements... no cure for that but PC death....

Well, as I was thinking about this new character it occured to me that the reason it was even brought into existance was a series of bad choices that led to two PC deaths ,each successively more extravagent in build. I'm not exactly holding my breath for the next edition. At first I read "We're making this easier for DMs" then I read the previews and wonder what DMs they made it easier for.

D&D3 is turning into a chore for me. But it is the players desire to find as many plustas as they can and bring them forth to their character sheet. This makes me have to go over a massive amount of rules quickly, since they still havn't figured out the primary keys to survival are not what your character can do but how well you think through your actions.
I get to relax the night after D&D night because I play a character in C&C so I put up with their shenanigans in D&D3 for the time being. Of course three of the players in our D&D group do not play C&C, and only one because of schedule concerns. The other two feel somehow mentally naked without a stack of plustas on thier sheets.
Until certain players come to this fundamental conclusion regarding their tactics I will continue to learn more ins and outs of the D&D3 system.
Personally I feel that is why those players shy away from other RPGs. They can't get by on rules know-how like in D&D and have to face this core issue with their play style.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
CharlieRock wrote:
Dragonchess Player wrote:


See my post above for the other limits to two-weapon fighting.
Oh, I'm taking notes. That's for sure. The last thing I need is for next adventure to see this character times six (six players).

There are ways to build an effective two-weapon fighter, but they require an awareness of the limitations the style has. A lot of players just look at "Six attacks? Bonus!"

If the players have access to certain classes and feats in Complete Adventurer (scout, tempest, Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting), Complete Warrior (swashbuckler, dervish, Greater Two-Weapon Defense, Improved Two-Weapon Defense, Weapon Style feats), and Player's Handbook II (Shield of Blades alternate swashbuckler class feature, Two-Weapon Pounce, Two Weapon Rend), then some of those limits can be mitigated. However, two-weapon fighting is not necessarily as powerful as it seems.


Dragonchess Player wrote:
CharlieRock wrote:
Dragonchess Player wrote:


See my post above for the other limits to two-weapon fighting.
Oh, I'm taking notes. That's for sure. The last thing I need is for next adventure to see this character times six (six players).

There are ways to build an effective two-weapon fighter, but they require an awareness of the limitations the style has. A lot of players just look at "Six attacks? Bonus!"

If the players have access to certain classes and feats in Complete Adventurer (scout, tempest, Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting), Complete Warrior (swashbuckler, dervish, Greater Two-Weapon Defense, Improved Two-Weapon Defense, Weapon Style feats), and Player's Handbook II (Shield of Blades alternate swashbuckler class feature, Two-Weapon Pounce, Two Weapon Rend), then some of those limits can be mitigated. However, two-weapon fighting is not necessarily as powerful as it seems.

I'm thinking the spell slow is going to be a bane for this build, too.

Liberty's Edge

CharlieRock wrote:
] D&D3 is turning into a chore for me. But it is the players desire to find as many plustas as they can and bring them forth to their character sheet. This makes me have to go over a massive amount of rules quickly, since they still havn't figured out the primary keys to survival are not what your character can do but how well you think through your actions.

This is exactly what I was talking about. I still think that if you explain to them that having solid characters using good tactics can be a lot more fun in the long run than a "kewl" character who dies in a quick blaze of glory.

Dark Archive

CharlieRock wrote:
I'm thinking the spell slow is going to be a bane for this build, too.

Along with tons of other options that will prevent the character from getting his full-attack goodness in, such as mobs using difficult terrain, or fighting in ranks.

A nice plate-wearing Troglodyte cleric with an AC through the roof is also going to laugh at all those secondary, tertiary, etc. attacks with their penalties.

Eleventy-billion attacks at -10 to hit equals a fat stack of jack.


Forgottenprince wrote:
As for unwise tactical movements... no cure for that but PC death....

I disagree. PC death just keeps ‘em coming back with more munchkined builds.


CourtFool wrote:
Forgottenprince wrote:
As for unwise tactical movements... no cure for that but PC death....
I disagree. PC death just keeps ‘em coming back with more munchkined builds.

And until they decide to make that change for themselves I can only keep up the arms race. I'm thinking they will give before me. Besides, an old friend of mine rejoined the group last adventure, and seeing them in action called them on it. A lot less tactfully then I had been trying to do. But maybe they need to be shamed out of dumb manuevers. We'll see.

Edit: Like, here is an example of the stuff they pull on me. We're in a flying boat going after another flying boat full of Drow airpirates. As they close in on the pirates I'm thinking they are going to go for grapple lines, try ranged attacks for a bit, or even go above them and try dropping lil nasties down on top of the pirates.
What do they do? They fly under the pirate boat! Then they have one of the spellcasting characters dang near deplete themselves casting spiderwalk and jump on the entire crew so they could hop up to the underside of the pirates' boat and run over the edge to the deck.
Lo and behold they were surprised that the Drow (and their bugbear minions) were waiting poised by the railings and bashed them each as the scrambled over the side.
They were not flying in any kind of stealth mode, or using cloud cover. Just whizzed on up to them and underneath. Why?! What were they thinking. I asked them if they had thought this through and they were pretty confident in the plan. Lost our Duskblade that battle, as well as some pretty nifty NPC crew members. That flying boat is still down as the PCs patron is training replacement air sailors.

Dark Archive

CharlieRock wrote:
And until they decide to make that change for themselves I can only keep up the arms race. I'm thinking they will give before me.

The game should never be a pissing match / cold war between player and DM, IMO. Everyone, and that most definitely includes the DM, should be having fun. (Barring some sort of Iron DM event, where killing off player characters is the goal, and everyone sits down at the table with full knowledge of this. Or Paranoia, or Call of Cthulhu, obviously...)

If you have players who insist on munchkinizing, consider tweaking the premise of the game to revolve entirely around Story Awards for exp, with none at all for combat 'challenges.' Tell them upfront that combat challenges in the adventure you're running are no challenge at all for characters of their level of optimization, and so they will only get exp for completing story events, such as rescuing the hostage, figuring out the puzzle, saving the city, negotiating the cease-fire, etc.

Different players come to the table with different assumptions.

Some like to tweak out optimized builds out of the same sort of mentality that leads other people to strap a jet engine to the top of their car, more because they enjoy the fiddly parts of playing with the system and seeing what it can do, and not because they were really thinking about firing that puppy up and blowing up your game. This kind is easy to deal with. Look at their over-the-top character, admire the craftsmanship, admit that you didn't think the game could do that, and ask them for something that *isn't* a logic exercise and looks more like a character one would see in a fantasy novel, with a backstory and some strengths and some flaws. Less Wolverine and more Kitty Pryde.

Others really, really want to show up other people, and make the optimal ubergoober just to 'show Jack that his fighter isn't all that.' Breaking them of whatever chip-on-the-shoulder / insecurity is causing this sort of attitude isn't your job. If their play is disruptive and interfering with the fun of others (or putting *them* into the 'arms race' mentality of constantly trying to make uber-goobers), and you can't just eject them from the game, make sure to split their character off, or design scenarios where one person can 'hold the line' while the others complete some central objective. (Oh, a horde of Squamous Greebles is coming down the hall! We have to get to the central chamber and put the magic dingus into the glowing circle, in a manner that is not at all suggestive! Can you hold them off for a few rounds, Mr. Cuisinart?) Mr Cuisinart gets to Power Cleave through reams of Greebles until he's hip-deep in their plush stuffin's, while the rest of the party gets to enter the Inner Sanctum and deal with the actual plot point.

I used this option once when faced with an Orc-hatin' Ranger. The rest of the party moved into the hidden temple and dealt with the challenges there, while the Ranger killed an entire tribe worth of Orcs. A most impressive 'holding of the line' that the player still remembers fondly.

Sovereign Court

You could just tell them that you're bored of being a rules-monkey and so from now on it's PHB only for PCs.


Remember that to get all those attacks, he can't move any further than a five-foot step. So throw some enemies at him that have Spring Attack, and he'll only get one attack per round against them. Problem solved:).

Liberty's Edge

I don't see what the problem is here. The player is using feats from the PHB to create a reasonably effective and pretty commonplace TWF lawnmower. Now, if he were using some seriously broken splatbooks or something, I could see your issue.

You will find that the TWF will be okay against those bands of goons, but foes with DR, movement advantages (flight, spring attack, size etc...) or a high AC will still be a challenge.

The trick is to find a balance in your encounter building. Give him enough opportunity to shine against his multiple foes or ones with low AC, but make sure that there a plenty of fights where his build is not the most effective, but still fun to play.


1. You are the GM. You are the all seeing eye. You know everything.
2. You are the GM. Your likes, dislikes and prejudices color everything within the world.

What appears to be ‘stupid’ tactics from your perspective may seem perfectly reasonable from the other side of the screen. Punishing players for such ‘stupid’ tactics only frustrates both of you. You still do not understand their actions and they fail to see the error of their ways and therefore try to be ‘better’ through all the wrong avenues which will lead to more failures.

You need to talk to your player(s) and find out why they are doing ‘stupid’ things. If the characters have a sufficient INT or WIS, tell them that they know this is a bad tactic and suggest a better one. If after that, they continue to do ‘stupid’ things, eject them.

Neither side wins the arms race.


Set wrote:
CharlieRock wrote:
And until they decide to make that change for themselves I can only keep up the arms race. I'm thinking they will give before me.
The game should never be a pissing match / cold war between player and DM, IMO. Everyone, and that most definitely includes the DM, should be having fun. (Barring some sort of Iron DM event, where killing off player characters is the goal, and everyone sits down at the table with full knowledge of this. Or Paranoia, or Call of Cthulhu, obviously...)

Yeah, maybe I shouldn't try to compete with the players. And your logic is quite sound. But this is not one but three players (out of five) who seem to enjoy doing this. The other two players: one lets me make her character for her and just tells me her story. And seperating all three from the group seems ... well, I could try that. But how many times can you pull that trick before it becomes blatant.

If this incarnation of the munchkin of the month isn't quite that uber it isn't from any lack of trying. I may have to pattycake the bad guys fighting him so as to not knock him off and start this up all over again. (this is the players fourth PC, so it's not like I'm reading qualities into the guy that aren't there.)
The next DM (this campaign is almost over with, we are level 12 and agreed way back at 1 to try for all 20) has already said she is only going to allow PHB. I must say I did indulge a chuckle watching their reactions. This may be due to a player making up a character and then forgetting what book that class was in. Maybe not. Maybe it's because the DM doesn't want to have to deal with all sorts of things at once (D&D3 can be rather daunting to new DMs or people with little game experience).
That wouldn't stop the human (or was it dwarven) waste disposal machine. But would stop that one necromancer we had that animated exploding sucidal-bomber zombies.


CharlieRock wrote:
I play with another guy that has absolute grand luck with rolling dice and can't help but hit a 20 about one in five throws.

How many 20s are on his d20?

Sczarni

CharlieRock wrote:
I'm thinking the spell slow is going to be a bane for this build, too.

I've used Grease in a similar fashion - as the evil wizard saw the first 1/2 of his minions mowed down, he greased the floor in front of his second 1/2, as the front line of this second half readied to grapple/disarm the two weapon fighter.


CourtFool wrote:

1. You are the GM. You are the all seeing eye. You know everything.

2. You are the GM. Your likes, dislikes and prejudices color everything within the world.

What appears to be ‘stupid’ tactics from your perspective may seem perfectly reasonable from the other side of the screen. Punishing players for such ‘stupid’ tactics only frustrates both of you. You still do not understand their actions and they fail to see the error of their ways and therefore try to be ‘better’ through all the wrong avenues which will lead to more failures.

You need to talk to your player(s) and find out why they are doing ‘stupid’ things. If the characters have a sufficient INT or WIS, tell them that they know this is a bad tactic and suggest a better one. If after that, they continue to do ‘stupid’ things, eject them.

Neither side wins the arms race.

I know what gets in their heads sometimes. They let their characters plustas blind them to trouble.

For example, the team rogue. Here is a guy that has a wild plusta (plusta damage on sneak attack). He will tumble past multiple bad guys to try and angle up a sneak attack. Then he'll get into a spot of trouble (surrounded by bad guys) and the rest of the team gets strung out trying to reach him and help. I could see the little cloud forming over his head as he was studying the map trying to see where he could tumble to somebody and backstab them. Another player even told him not to go so far across the map. But he needed that plusta. This character actually still lives but last week a character died trying to rush across and save him.
We'll see if that sinks in. I started to tell him that I didn't think it would be a bad thing to not get a sneak attack in all the time, but all I heard was how he was going to try and buy some kind of magical plusta AC.


Xuttah wrote:

I don't see what the problem is here. The player is using feats from the PHB to create a reasonably effective and pretty commonplace TWF lawnmower. Now, if he were using some seriously broken splatbooks or something, I could see your issue.

It actually sounds like they are using the PHB and PHB II but in either case your right. Personally as a DM I can care less if they walk through a monster. If that's fun for them then whatever. But that's just me.


Cpt_kirstov wrote:
CharlieRock wrote:
I'm thinking the spell slow is going to be a bane for this build, too.
I've used Grease in a similar fashion - as the evil wizard saw the first 1/2 of his minions mowed down, he greased the floor in front of his second 1/2, as the front line of this second half readied to grapple/disarm the two weapon fighter.

Nice!

WelbyBumpus,
That player actually borrows my loaner dice set. He is just lucky. I think he siphons it out of another player who rolls just about as many 1s. Amusingly enough the whole team thought he was cheating when he first gamed with us. We made him sit right up next to me and another fairminded player and we both watched him. It's just luck. =/

The Exchange

I am with the "what's the problem" crowd. With respect to the OP, he has done the classic thing of looking at a character without seeing it in action and has decided that the build is OTT. You don't really know that yet. Two Weapon Fighting has been around for years, and the issues pro and anti are listed above. It isn't game breaking, but it is visually (in the mind's eye) quite cool and people like it.

You play with power-gamers. Get over it. You really have two choices - accommodate their style of play, or play with someone else. It is very hard to change someone's gaming style preference, and it debatable if it is worthwhile and necessary. After all, you may have a different preference, but is it more legitimate than their's? If they are playing within the rules (and so far this sounds VERY mainstream) then I fail to see the problem. Some people really get a buzz thinking up an effective build - who are you to say that is an illegitimate passtime?

I am a strong proponent of giving the players what they want. I don't believe a DM has the right to say "You are not playing right" over stylistic issues. The players are entitled to enjoy themselves. If you really don't like it, don't DM for them. If you don't mind that much, I can see no basis for complaint.


Good points. I have at least one gamer at my table who loves tinker with builds to try to make really effective characters. He prides himself of doing it within the letter of the rules if not the spirit. I pride myself on finding devious ways to kill off his characters. We all have fun. However, I have noticed that the fighter with a twohanded weapon, lots of strength and power attack, will do better than the two weapon fighter.

Today I get to run a session of All Flesh Must be Eaten, which will be a nice change from the min/maxing of 3E.

Aubrey the Malformed wrote:

I am with the "what's the problem" crowd. With respect to the OP, he has done the classic thing of looking at a character without seeing it in action and has decided that the build is OTT. You don't really know that yet. Two Weapon Fighting has been around for years, and the issues pro and anti are listed above. It isn't game breaking, but it is visually (in the mind's eye) quite cool and people like it.

You play with power-gamers. Get over it. You really have two choices - accommodate their style of play, or play with someone else. It is very hard to change someone's gaming style preference, and it debatable if it is worthwhile and necessary. After all, you may have a different preference, but is it more legitimate than their's? If they are playing within the rules (and so far this sounds VERY mainstream) then I fail to see the problem. Some people really get a buzz thinking up an effective build - who are you to say that is an illegitimate passtime?

I am a strong proponent of giving the players what they want. I don't believe a DM has the right to say "You are not playing right" over stylistic issues. The players are entitled to enjoy themselves. If you really don't like it, don't DM for them. If you don't mind that much, I can see no basis for complaint.


CharlieRock wrote:
I know what gets in their heads sometimes. They let their characters plustas blind them to trouble.

Maybe they only feel useful when they achieve the bonus. If every encounter is combat, how are the players to know when and when not to run away? And how fun is it to constantly run away? And why should I run away when I can just make another character?

The Exchange

Also, how experienced are they as players? The example of the rogue simply smacks as tactical naivety to me. Maybe they like a heroic style of play. Are they having fun? Are you? Ask yourself what it is you object about their PC builds - you are assuming that character optimisation is a bad thing as a central tenet of you argument. Why? Thinking about this might illustrate the real points of divergence between you and your players.


Aubrey the Malformed wrote:

I am with the "what's the problem" crowd. With respect to the OP, he has done the classic thing of looking at a character without seeing it in action and has decided that the build is OTT. You don't really know that yet. Two Weapon Fighting has been around for years, and the issues pro and anti are listed above. It isn't game breaking, but it is visually (in the mind's eye) quite cool and people like it.

You play with power-gamers. Get over it. You really have two choices - accommodate their style of play, or play with someone else. It is very hard to change someone's gaming style preference, and it debatable if it is worthwhile and necessary. After all, you may have a different preference, but is it more legitimate than their's? If they are playing within the rules (and so far this sounds VERY mainstream) then I fail to see the problem. Some people really get a buzz thinking up an effective build - who are you to say that is an illegitimate passtime?

I am a strong proponent of giving the players what they want. I don't believe a DM has the right to say "You are not playing right" over stylistic issues. The players are entitled to enjoy themselves. If you really don't like it, don't DM for them. If you don't mind that much, I can see no basis for complaint.

Where did I say this was broken or OTT (whatever that is)? I wanted to know what can challenge it enough that everyone else wouldn't think it was the niftiest thing since polyhedrons and want one.

Then I went on a rant about powergamers. But that was because I was mulling the effects of them in the game (high PC mortality rate) and went into how we even needed a new character (powerbuilt or not) in the first place.
I didn't ask if it should be banned. I asked (since no one else has that number of attacks) what kind of bad guys would be appropriate to stop him from walking all over the map (which I feel would lead to problems down the road). I'd never seen so many attacks coming from one character before. You guys have. So, apparently you would be the right ones to ask.
Maybe my ranting was misplaced. Maybe all the fun in the game is in min/maxing characters and I just can't see it. I can say with a certainty that when a character dies the players' first reaction is to try and build a tougher character instead of looking at what they did prior to getting deaded. If that is just how they have fun then I will learn more and more about the d20 system as we go along.
I can see that this build is a one trick (or two, maybe) pony. And that there is sufficient means without cranking up a CR to keep them challenged. I like monsters to be a little bit dangerous without mudstomping the PCs, if not why even roll dice. Just tell the players "Oh, you win again. Lookit that, all bad guys dead." or play "DM is God" and can the heroes around.

Dark Archive RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

You really shouldn't be too concerned. As Aubrey can attest, this character of mine had three attacks at level one.

Scarab Sages RPG Superstar 2013

I can't imagine myself, as a restaurant manager, choosing to use less effective equipment, teaching inefficient techniques for preparing produce or solving customer problems. Similarly, I would hope our soldiers are not being taught ineffectual techniques for self-defense (let's not start some sort of partisan discussion about the military) or for finding and killing enemy combatants.

Why should characters determined to risk their lives take anything but the most effective developmental choices? A fighter that takes three of his 15 feats for two weapon fighting is probably just smart. Throw encounters of smallers dudes so he can have a few memorable rounds of two-weapon/great cleave nonsense. It's fun for them, and you should be rooting for every player. At 12th level, he should have to fight big crunchy stuff, high AC stuff, and stuff with DR,let him figure that stuff out. With a few exceptions, I don't want to be the DM telling a player how he can and can't have fun.

Also, I have played with guys who optimize every character and are still fun and dramatic in character. It's not just possible to do both, it's preferable. I don't like to see 'powergamers' treated as limited in fun or sportsmanship. I think that's an easy cliche that we saddle people with, but then when we look for enthusiasm for the game, or someone wants to sell a book, they are the first people we think of.

I'd rather encourage high-end play across the spectrum of the game. That builds excitement and loyalty and might bring in new players/customers.


ancientsensei wrote:
I don't like to see 'powergamers' treated as limited in fun or sportsmanship.

…but racial profiling works.


Aubrey the Malformed wrote:
Also, how experienced are they as players? The example of the rogue simply smacks as tactical naivety to me. Maybe they like a heroic style of play. Are they having fun? Are you? Ask yourself what it is you object about their PC builds - you are assuming that character optimisation is a bad thing as a central tenet of you argument. Why? Thinking about this might illustrate the real points of divergence between you and your players.

This is also a reply to CourtFool. They seem to be having a lot of fun. Because they keep telling their friends to come over and play, too. My team has grown by three players in the last month and a half.

Their experience ranges wildly:
Ace, plays D&D3 in two or three other groups. He is 22 and started playing 3e when it first came out (the so-called 3.0 edition). Lives, breaths, and sleeps D20 and M:tG.
Buzz, is also 22 and just started playing with us last year. He's played 1,000s of CRPGs and MMORPGs but likes tabletop better.
Me (Charlie), I'm 31/32-this year, but I've been playing RPGs since I was 9 (longer then Buzz and Ace have been alive).
Dice-Girl, 24 and beat all the Final Fantasy games and plays MMORPGs. Just started last year around March with tabletop. Wants to DM someday.
Easy, 33 and playing for as long as I have. His grandma played OD&D back in the day.
Fox, 21(?) and just started about a month or so ago. Gameboys GF.
Gameboy, 19(?) and played a lot of AD&D2 before he joined our team about two months ago.
And Hater, 35, who actually quit two or three months ago due to his van breaking down and jobloss. Sucks because he was quite good and fun to hang out with. He'll be back once he gets situated.
Ace and Fox don't show up all the time. I'd say about 2 out of 5 sessions they miss.

Whenever I make a character I make the whole thing. Story, personality, motives, etc. Having to redo that process because of PC death is annoying enough to try not to let it happen. That, and D&D3 has one of the more time consuming and complicated character generation systems I have seen. Right up there with I.C.E. games.

Liberty's Edge

The biggest challenge for any DM is building encounters that fit the style of the their players. If you just boost the CR to make a fight tougher, it can (as you said) have adverse effects on the party (wealth and xp sprial out of control, frequent death of weaker characters etc).

Some ways to make a combat encounter tougher/more interesting without significantly altering the CR:

1)Increase the number of low-level goons to replace a few high-level ones.
2)Summoned Monsters -enemy casters can bring in extra support without them counting towards CR.
3)Interesting terrain features/weather -something as simple as marshy ground and/or a fog bank can make combat more fun and challenging for both DM and players. This one is a lot of fun to explore!
4)Templates that don't significantly affect CR but provide a neat twist
5)Custom-build BBEG's that are just as munchkinned as the PC's. WARNING! DO NOT OVER-USE! This can be game-breaking if you overdo it, but can be fun to bring a wake-up call to the players.
6)Change the objective of the fight. Maybe the PC's shouldn't want to kill their enemy in a given encounter. Dominated loved ones, hostages, "wanted alive" bad guys etc...
7) Enemies that use tactics the PC's don't expect. Foes that grapple, trip, sunder, bull rush or overrun keep PC's on their toes.


ancientsensei wrote:
I can't imagine myself, as a restaurant manager, choosing to use less effective equipment, teaching inefficient techniques for preparing produce or solving customer problems. Similarly, I would hope our soldiers are not being taught ineffectual techniques for self-defense (let's not start some sort of partisan discussion about the military) or for finding and killing enemy combatants.

Fatespinner, nice. What is whirling fury from?

Ancientsensei, imagine having to memorize all the abilities of all the characters. Every other one coming from Complete This or Races of That. Then on top of that they reroll from a third book altogether. I've had in the last two months alone a Dragon Shaman, a Favored Soul, a Thug (variant fighter), a Duskblade, a Goliath Barbarian, three half-dragons (Monk, Fighter, Paladin), a Warlock, a Kobold Sorc, A Tiefling Sorc, two Gnolls (ranger, and fighter), a Necromancer (using feats from Libris Mortis), a Warblade/Bard,a Ninja, a Kensai/Samurai, and a Dracolyte/Cleric. All using a range of feats or spells from every book they have. And all trying to start with magical items found from wherever. Edit: And two of them have leadership and one wants to take Dragon Cohort and another has six attacks come next level.
Then, while still trying to grok all this have them ask you how their abilities and/or items work because it is new to them. (Thank Gyat for the Rules Compendium). Remind yourself that this is fun for them and go ask someone on Paizo what is up and how to meet these characters with challenging monsters, fun maps, and puzzling plot devices.
Then try and figure out why somebody thinks you are forcing people to play your way.


CharlieRock wrote:
That, and D&D3 has one of the more time consuming and...

As much as I love me some Hero, I have to disagree with you there. Character creation in Hero is far more complicated. I would argue rewarding too.

I really think communication is the best option. Find out what your players want, tell them what you want. See if you can all find some common ground and go for that. If you can not find common ground, walk. Walk now while things are still on good terms before it spirals into a feud.


For Whirling Fury, check out www.d20srd.org, class feature variants.

Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 3.5/d20/OGL / Six attacks at level 12? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in 3.5/d20/OGL