Hey all, I have a problem (a minor one) with my rp group. They are doing the Scarwall part of the CotCT adventure path and one of the players has basically min/maxed his character, an inquisitor (ranged) and is the main damage dealer. So far I was able to fix this by creating a lot of social encounters.
The other two characters are a cleric of Desna with a few rogue levels, and a full rogue based on social skills and diplomacy. By focusing on combat AND social events, all characters have seen the spotlights equally and everyone is happy.
Now, however, with the dungeoncrawl nature of Scarwall, the rogue of the party finds herself to be useless. There are few social encounters in the dungeon and she can't use her sneak attack most of the time due to incorporeal creatures, small rooms, or other factors.
So far I have focused enemies on the inquisitor trying to get him out of combat as often as I can, so the rogue can come to the rescue. But I feel that to become unfair to the player of the inquisitor.
Any advice?
Does the Rogue in question have absolutely no combat ability?
I'm fuzzy on the Inquisitor, but I'm guessing he/she fights from range. If that's true, then the Rogue and the multi-classer are the melee guys...
I dunno, sometimes players just have to work through these things and learn to be more creative.
If you think the situation is critical, perhaps you could introduce a Fighter NPC to travel with the group. Fighters really lend themselves to this kind of role.
You could try adding in some traps in tactical places. As in, group enters a room only to have it seal behind them, needing one of the rogues to disarm/open it in the midst of combat to prevent a possible rout of the group. Could be especially handy if the cleric gets stuck on the outside of the room.
You could even make a trap intelligent, requiring some diplomacy to convince it to open or distract it while the real work goes into disarming it.
Hey all, I have a problem (a minor one) with my rp group. They are doing the Scarwall part of the CotCT adventure path and one of the players has basically min/maxed his character, an inquisitor (ranged) and is the main damage dealer. So far I was able to fix this by creating a lot of social encounters.
The other two characters are a cleric of Desna with a few rogue levels, and a full rogue based on social skills and diplomacy. By focusing on combat AND social events, all characters have seen the spotlights equally and everyone is happy.
Now, however, with the dungeoncrawl nature of Scarwall, the rogue of the party finds herself to be useless. There are few social encounters in the dungeon and she can't use her sneak attack most of the time due to incorporeal creatures, small rooms, or other factors.
So far I have focused enemies on the inquisitor trying to get him out of combat as often as I can, so the rogue can come to the rescue. But I feel that to become unfair to the player of the inquisitor.
Any advice?
D&D is a combat based game, and even if you wish to be the social butterfly you should take steps to give your character some combat prowess. I would explain this to the rogue. There is probably a way to increase his combat ability without losing too much social grace.
I don't think it is fair to the inquisitor. He should not suffer because someone make a weaker character intentionally.I would allow changes to the rogue so they are more combat ready. Taking out the main damage dealer is not going to make the party any stronger, and if they(the rogue) are weak they may not be able to save anyone.
As far as the small rooms the flank should still be possible even if it takes longer to set up as long as the rogue has acrobatics. The rogue being a social build, should have a high check bluff. Taking improved feint should help get sneak attacks in also.
If the rogue is unwilling to change the build they just have to accept that they will not be useful in certain situation.
PS:Since your group seems to only have 3 players would allowing the rogue to control a 2nd character go over well. It helps the party with an extra member, and the rogue player gets to fight in combat.
I would allow changes to the rogue so they are more combat ready.
This is always a good option, as long as the other players don't object. We've used it in our group, early on.
It is unreasonable to assume that every character is going to excel in every aspect of the game. Let the Inquisitor have fun by doing his job and being good at it. The rogue shines when dealing with NPCs. As long as you have mature players at the table it should not be a problem.
I'm presuming the Rogue made decisions based on preference and not ignorance.
If ignorance of the rules is in fact the problem, they should have a chance to correct it, retrain any feats, reapportion abilities so they have the character that they want. If they made the character that they want, and the adventure just doesn't support that mode of play, you need to think about adding to the adventure so that it contains the elements that player thinks are fun. Still you must challenge them in these areas, but you should challenege them in ways the player enjoys*.
You can inject a social encounter, or create a way to sneak attack the opposition. But perhaps more important than this is, learn to distract the overbearing PC and give the rogue a useful task to perform while that PC is busy.
In mixed groups, it is important to manage the attention of individual characters. Try having a lower EL encounter 'spill in' to another encounter while the archer is busy. If you present enough problems that the high level PC lacks the actions to handle it all on his own, even if some of the enemies are lesser threats, there will be more for the other PCs to do.
I'd need to know more about the weaker player's motivation in order to offer more specific advice.
* the GM, of all players, needs to be able to support different styles-of-play at the same table. People who only like a combat-heavy style of play might contest this, but I run for players of at least three different "types" and learning to give each player the game they want in a fashion that overlaps with the others is a really great skill for any GM.
Ghost touch weapon?
I mean, not everyone is going to be awesome against every encounter but allowing the rogue to snag one of those should help alot.
without a 'character rewrite" or whatever.
-S
Combo encounters.
The inquisitor gets separated from the group and dropped into an escalating fight situation(IE, the fight gets progressively tougher until there is no chance of him surviving). He has to fight for his life.
Meanwhile, the rest of the group tries to figure out how to get him out. They are faced with a sphinx riddle, or some similar non-combat challenge to get him out. Preferable something that requires the rest of the party working together to figure out.
The better the inquisitor fights, the longer his friends have to save him.
|
Adding a ghost touch weapon, making a non-combat method of defeating some of the monsters. If they're undead then usually they have unfinished business, if you put a non-combat goal between a pair of undead then those monsters get 'defeated'.
Skeletons is problematic, and an adventure I'll probably skip in my CotCT game when it comes back from Hiatus.
|
Hey all, I have a problem (a minor one) with my rp group. They are doing the Scarwall part of the CotCT adventure path and one of the players has basically min/maxed his character, an inquisitor (ranged) and is the main damage dealer. So far I was able to fix this by creating a lot of social encounters.
The other two characters are a cleric of Desna with a few rogue levels, and a full rogue based on social skills and diplomacy. By focusing on combat AND social events, all characters have seen the spotlights equally and everyone is happy.
Now, however, with the dungeoncrawl nature of Scarwall, the rogue of the party finds herself to be useless. There are few social encounters in the dungeon and she can't use her sneak attack most of the time due to incorporeal creatures, small rooms, or other factors.
So far I have focused enemies on the inquisitor trying to get him out of combat as often as I can, so the rogue can come to the rescue. But I feel that to become unfair to the player of the inquisitor.
Any advice?
I am not certain that the problem is not that the rogue was built poorly for combat, but that it is hard to build a rogue that is effective against incorporeal undead. Incorporeal undead are immune to sneak attack, which often means your damage output drops by 80-90%.
I think you are about 10th level when you get to Scarwall. My halfling rogue went from doing 1d4+5d6+1 2-3 times a round (TWF, +1 short sword) to (1d4+2d6+3)/2 1-2 times a round (+1 undead bane short sword vs incorporeal undead) (and possibly half of 1d4+1 with the off-hand).
I spent most of that working on alternate ways to be effective. I had a good UMD, so sometimes I was wielding wands of Lesser Restoration or Cure spells. The rogue can also be good at scouting. If you know the next room has 5 nasty undead, you can cast your round/level spells before you enter combat and end it a lot quicker. Or avoid it entirely.
|
Perhaps one little perk from 3.5 is in order.
Magic Item Compendium 3.5 Wizards of the Coast
Ghost Strike
[synergy]
Price: +1
Property: Melee weapon
Caster Level: 11th
Aura: Moderate; (DC 20) conjuration
Activation: -
Synergy Prerequisite: Ghost Touch
A ghost strike weapon functions as a ghost touch weapon (DMG 224). In addition, sneak attacks and critical hits made with a ghost strike weapon against an undead creature affect it as if it were a living creature.
Prerequisites: Craft Magic Arms and Armor, undeath to death
Cost to Create: Varies
If the rogue has UMD, a wand of cure serious would be very nice against any kind of undead, and give the rogue a chance to heal now and again. He won't be at his best, but at least he will be doing a different shtick, and won't suffer the 50% reduction in damage a weapon would.
Getting the cleric/rogue into the action could be done with a few decent magic items (allow her to use items for general buffing), and plot additions. Throw in a few things specif to Desna throughout the dungeon. Maybe a few fairly weak cultists with information or something to allow everyone in the party a chance to whack some mooks around, and feel all tough.
Now, however, with the dungeoncrawl nature of Scarwall, the rogue of the party finds herself to be useless. There are few social encounters in the dungeon and she can't use her sneak attack most of the time due to incorporeal creatures, small rooms, or other factors.
Any advice?
Sneak attack is one of the rogue's major schticks. It seems fair to me that the rogue ought have the chance to sneak attack in about 50% of combats. Change some of those factors to facilitate. Make some small rooms bigger. Trade out some incorporeal creatures for corporeal ones. Et cetera.
Thanks for the advice, people. I'm going to use some of it. In general, there is not a power problem, just now during this adventure. If it would take one or two sessions, it would be no problem, but I think it will take 4 to 5 sessions to sift through the story.
I'm indeed going to throw in some social encounters with some of the incorporeal undead, and traps and make rooms slightly bigger.
"D&D is a combat based game,"
Nope, it is a role playing game. And one of the key problem with modules is that they are all combat based. It takes a homebrew game to give player the opportunity to excel in social situations.
"D&D is a combat based game,"
Nope, it is a role playing game. And one of the key problem with modules is that they are all combat based. It takes a homebrew game to give player the opportunity to excel in social situations.
It is a combat based game with RP'ing in it. If I were wrong you could do well with a badly made combat character if you RP'ed well enough most of the time. The truth however is that you can ignore RP to a large extent if you are combat capable in many games.
PS: The game being combat based does not mean there is no RP, but I think it makes sense that the essential element is what defines the game.
It is a combat based game with RP'ing in it.
Only if the DM and players play it that way.
It is a combat based game with RP'ing in it.Only if the DM and players play it that way.
You guys know at it's core that is what the game is, just the same way the White Wolf/WoD/etc games are more RP oriented at the core. I never said it could not be played differently, and I hope everyone has enough common sense to know that. Like any game, how you play it and how it was designed to be played are two different things. Notice the game gives you XP by the book for beating up monsters. The DM can give you XP for a social encounter, but it is not really supported.
It is a combat based game with RP'ing in it.Only if the DM and players play it that way.
You guys know at it's core that is what the game is, just the same way the White Wolf/WoD/etc games are more RP oriented at the core. I never said it could not be played differently, and I hope everyone has enough common sense to know that. Like any game, how you play it and how it was designed to be played are two different things. Notice the game gives you XP by the book for beating up monsters. The DM can give you XP for a social encounter, but it is not really supported.
Pure roleplaying encounters generally have a CR equal to the average level of the party (although particularly easy or difficult roleplaying encounters might be one higher or lower).
I think this works very well.
It is a combat based game with RP'ing in it.Only if the DM and players play it that way.
You guys know at it's core that is what the game is, just the same way the White Wolf/WoD/etc games are more RP oriented at the core. I never said it could not be played differently, and I hope everyone has enough common sense to know that. Like any game, how you play it and how it was designed to be played are two different things. Notice the game gives you XP by the book for beating up monsters. The DM can give you XP for a social encounter, but it is not really supported.
Pure roleplaying encounters generally have a CR equal to the average level of the party (although particularly easy or difficult roleplaying encounters might be one higher or lower).I think this works very well.
One or two sentences supports my stance of not really supported.
The base of the game is built around combat. There is no argument that can be made to change that. Now if you want to say RP can take up a larger part of the game if that is what the group wants then I agree.I believe my statements are being taken as you should play a mostly combat game, but that is not even close to what I said.
The "Designing Encoutners" section alone has several paragraphs telling you how to build combats.
Hey all, I have a problem (a minor one) with my rp group. They are doing the Scarwall part of the CotCT adventure path and one of the players has basically min/maxed his character, an inquisitor (ranged) and is the main damage dealer. So far I was able to fix this by creating a lot of social encounters.
<snip>
Any advice?
One option (depending on *player* skill level is have the players each get 2 characters. With 3 players that gives you a party of 6 characters. Easily "DMable". Plus each player then can have 2 very different characters - which also makes it easy to "split the party" when you need to.
Just a thought...
JohnBear
|
One or two sentences supports my stance of not really supported.
The base of the game is built around combat. There is no argument that can be made to change that. Now if you want to say RP can take up a larger part of the game if that is what the group wants then I agree.
I believe my statements are being taken as you should play a mostly combat game, but that is not even close to what I said.
The "Designing Encoutners" section alone has several paragraphs telling you how to build combats.
Yeah, the rules are mostly built around combat ... since combat is deadly and you need fair rules for that. You don't need rules for RP to the same extent, so you (mostly) don't need to write them.
Yeah, the rules are mostly built around combat ... since combat is deadly and you need fair rules for that. You don't need rules for RP to the same extent, so you (mostly) don't need to write them.One or two sentences supports my stance of not really supported.
The base of the game is built around combat. There is no argument that can be made to change that. Now if you want to say RP can take up a larger part of the game if that is what the group wants then I agree.
I believe my statements are being taken as you should play a mostly combat game, but that is not even close to what I said.
The "Designing Encoutners" section alone has several paragraphs telling you how to build combats.
Exactly.
The rules of a game system, any game system, represent the Physical Laws of that game's universe. They are the physics. Think of them as the String Theory + Newtonian Physics + Relativity + Freud + Jung + etc all rolled up into one big thick book.
Now, most game systems spend WAY more words on Conflict Resolution than they do on Roleplaying rules. Why? Because conflict is conflict, and you need specific rules to hammer it out so everyone knows what's going to happen and how to adjudicate it. Roleplaying, on the other hand, is social interaction. You can't put rules on social interaction, just on game mechanics.
Skill sections, powers, class abilities, combat, all these require strict rules. Social interaction, not so much. I think most people here would agree that White Wolf's WoD is a very roleplay oriented system (GMs are Storytellers, lots of angst, etc). However, if you read the books, you'll see that even though it's heavily story oriented, a good 70% of the book is dedicated to conflict resolution (be it combat or powers) and about 30% fluff. I'd say that D&D and PF are about 80% conflict resolution rules, and about 20% fluff. Note that for the most part, Fluff is RP stuff.
So no, I don't agree that D&D or PF is designed primarily as a combat system. I will agree that back in the day, older editions were. I'll also agree that most modules reduced it to dungeon delves and little or no roleplay, but the modern PF and D&D are a well rounded Roleplay & Rollplay game.