My regular gaming group seems pretty laze when it comes to putting a party together and they don't quit seem to understand that spells overshadow attacks at higher levels which we play at all the time.
I'm trying to rebalance the group because we usually end up with one guy always playing barbarian and not quite understanding high damage, one guy always playing rogue because no one else plays it, a guy who constantly switches between frontline classes, a constant alchemist, and a constant gunslinger.
Can anyone give a good argument as to why we need to actually have catsers when something like a wizard or cleric could solve so many problems, they also seem to belive clerics are nothing but HEALING as opposed to godly buffer/debuffer death machines.
Offer the druid as a possible class for the guy who swaps around a lot. It'll give you the spells you need and he'll have fun bashing face as a bear or something later on.
There are many ways to play a "rogue", in many cases a Sandman, Archaeologist, or other build for a bard are better rogues than Rogues are.
The guy who plays barbarians should look at these boards and read about some of the damage dealing tactics on here.
The game can depend a lot on the GM. If there's no Rogue, then traps shouldn't likely be a prevalent thing in game. If there is a NEED for spell casters, or nature type, etc, push for that in game. Make situations where a Knock spell is needed to get the door open, or track is needed for pursuit of an enemy! If everyone plays a melee character, have them get ambushed by ranged types or fliers, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Play what you enjoy playing. The DM should find a way to challenge your party no matter what composition, without sticking them into a dead-end, no-way-out-because-you-didn't-play-a-full-caster scenario.
Sure, magic is awesome at high levels. But it's the RPG equivalent of the easy button. Maybe people are tired of having the easy button there all the time.
|
Our actual party since 13 levels :
- S&B Fighter/Paladin 1
- TH destruction Fighter
- TWF Ranger
- Musket Sniper Gunslinger
- Qinggong Drunken Monk of the Lotus (Retired)
- Hexcrafter Magus (Retired)
- Mindchemist Bomber (Betrayer)
- Switch-hitter fighter (Dead)
- TWFing fighter (Dead)
- Vivisectionist/Master Chymist (Dead)
- Barbarian (Corrupted by Evil BBEGod)
- Archer ranger (Corrupted by Evil BBEGod)
Yoy may see a common trait on this group. (Hint : something to do with magic. Or the lack of it.)
Yet, best campaign ever. Let the guys play what they want to play.
My regular gaming group seems pretty laze when it comes to putting a party together and they don't quit seem to understand that spells overshadow attacks at higher levels which we play at all the time.
I'm trying to rebalance the group because we usually end up with one guy always playing barbarian and not quite understanding high damage, one guy always playing rogue because no one else plays it, a guy who constantly switches between frontline classes, a constant alchemist, and a constant gunslinger.
Can anyone give a good argument as to why we need to actually have catsers when something like a wizard or cleric could solve so many problems, they also seem to belive clerics are nothing but HEALING as opposed to godly buffer/debuffer death machines.
They're making things more difficult for themselves, not so much in the healing department (the alchememist can provide cheap potions and use wands), but in battlefield control; there seems to be a pretty good mix of melee, ranged, and utility (via skills, at a minimum). My suggestion is to take the training wheels off, pitting them against a weaker group (NPC rivals led by a cleric?) a couple levels behind APL that uses effective tactics/teamwork, battlefield control, and buffing/debuffing to disable (not kill) the party; alternately, put them against a large group (6 or 8) of weaker foes (CR of APL - 5 or APL - 6 each for an Average or Challenging encounter) using hit and run, wolf-pack, or other tactics.
Basically, demonstrate the party's weakness when they can't prevent their opponents from using mobility, position, and terrain or when their opponents prevent them from using mobility, position, and terrain. In higher level play, especially, you should be mixing up encounters and stretching the party's versatility.
|
Play what you enjoy playing. The DM should find a way to challenge your party no matter what composition, without sticking them into a dead-end, no-way-out-because-you-didn't-play-a-full-caster scenario.
Sure, magic is awesome at high levels. But it's the RPG equivalent of the easy button. Maybe people are tired of having the easy button there all the time.
I agree. Play what you enjoy and let the dice and let the dice roll. DM should be able to tailor the module or homebrew to the group. Nothing worse then being told you have to play a certain class to fill a slot... Not a lot of fun.
There are 22 core/base/alternate classes... and most APs are designed for 4 players.
The game really has grown beyond the 'needs a caster, healer, meatshield, faceman. concept. Trying to limit the group to 'prescribed roles' doesn't do anyone any favors.
Play the character you think you'll enjoy playing. Not EVERY party will OR SHOULD look exactly the same.
|
|
There are 22 core/base/alternate classes... and most APs are designed for 4 players.
The game really has grown beyond the 'needs a caster, healer, meatshield, faceman. concept. Trying to limit the group to 'prescribed roles' doesn't do anyone any favors.
Play the character you think you'll enjoy playing. Not EVERY party will OR SHOULD look exactly the same.
True that. We did Carrion Crown with every PC an Inquisitor w/ different archetypes. We followed the same god and each took a different domain. For a 2nd tier character it went pretty well.
True that. We did Carrion Crown with every PC an Inquisitor w/ different archetypes. We followed the same god and each took a different domain. For a 2nd tier character it went pretty well.There are 22 core/base/alternate classes... and most APs are designed for 4 players.
The game really has grown beyond the 'needs a caster, healer, meatshield, faceman. concept. Trying to limit the group to 'prescribed roles' doesn't do anyone any favors.
Play the character you think you'll enjoy playing. Not EVERY party will OR SHOULD look exactly the same.
To be fair, inquisitors can be "a caster, healer, meatshield, faceman" by themselves; they also get some decent battlefield control, buffing/debuffing, and direct damage options. In short, they can fill most of the "prescribed roles."
That's a completely different situation than the OP, who has a party with one (possibly two, if the rogue has invested in Use Magic Device) healer and no battlefield controller or party buffer/debuffer (alchemists are pretty much only self-buffers; although they may also brew buffing potions for the rest of the party). An alchemist with the preservationist archetype (and the Planar Preservationist feat) could be decent at battlefield control, but from the tone of the first post it's more likely that the alchemist is a beastform vivisectionist concentrating on melee.
I know players can be any race/class combination but when we never have any caster in any campaign. They've been playing nearly 2 years now and still have yet to figure out things like battlefield control or there are classes beyond fighter/barbarian and I almost instantly know the party composition, first campaign I ran we had a pretty solid group; fighter, wizard, cleric, sorcerer, ranger, bard but now its become more like; fighter, barbarian, rogue, ranger, gunslinger every time. I generally put undead, demons and devils as larger antagonists in my campaigns yet I never see things like bane weapons, paladins, clerics and such that would be really useful especially when i tell them at the beginning of the campaign what the enemies will likely be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let them go as they will. They'll either make their combo work, or acheive wisdom via the Darwin method.
I like this idea, just put a flying wizard with greater invisibility up and they're screwed because they have yet to figure out a good combo because they don't tell each other what they are planning to do most of the time.
Let them go as they will. They'll either make their combo work, or acheive wisdom via the Darwin method.I like this idea, just put a flying wizard with greater invisibility up and they're screwed because they have yet to figure out a good combo because they don't tell each other what they are planning to do most of the time.
I don't really see a huge problem, it is fairly easy to make encounters challenging for the GM but how often does a GM that likes a decent storyline use a flying, invisible wizard if the GM can not really describe encounters beyond 'a fireball explodes on your face and you start killing eachother for no apparent reason' it is a crappy encounter.
I know players can be any race/class combination but when we never have any caster in any campaign. They've been playing nearly 2 years now and still have yet to figure out things like battlefield control or there are classes beyond fighter/barbarian and I almost instantly know the party composition, first campaign I ran we had a pretty solid group; fighter, wizard, cleric, sorcerer, ranger, bard but now its become more like; fighter, barbarian, rogue, ranger, gunslinger every time. I generally put undead, demons and devils as larger antagonists in my campaigns yet I never see things like bane weapons, paladins, clerics and such that would be really useful especially when i tell them at the beginning of the campaign what the enemies will likely be.
Sounds like these players prefer the more 'realistic' type of play... Like LOTR and Conan.. Seriously, The Fellowship of the Ring consisted of what? 8 fighters and a mage.... and the mage dies?
Let them go as they will. They'll either make their combo work, or acheive wisdom via the Darwin method.I like this idea, just put a flying wizard with greater invisibility up and they're screwed because they have yet to figure out a good combo because they don't tell each other what they are planning to do most of the time.I don't really see a huge problem, it is fairly easy to make encounters challenging for the GM but how often does a GM that likes a decent storyline use a flying, invisible wizard if the GM can not really describe encounters beyond 'a fireball explodes on your face and you start killing eachother for no apparent reason' it is a crappy encounter.
But what if an important plot villain is a wizard. They begin fight, mr.wizard having more than 5 intelligence will realize he's going to get butchered uses fly and greater invisibility to try and live.
I know players can be any race/class combination but when we never have any caster in any campaign. They've been playing nearly 2 years now and still have yet to figure out things like battlefield control or there are classes beyond fighter/barbarian and I almost instantly know the party composition, first campaign I ran we had a pretty solid group; fighter, wizard, cleric, sorcerer, ranger, bard but now its become more like; fighter, barbarian, rogue, ranger, gunslinger every time. I generally put undead, demons and devils as larger antagonists in my campaigns yet I never see things like bane weapons, paladins, clerics and such that would be really useful especially when i tell them at the beginning of the campaign what the enemies will likely be.Sounds like these players prefer the more 'realistic' type of play... Like LOTR and Conan.. Seriously, The Fellowship of the Ring consisted of what? 8 fighters and a mage.... and the mage dies?
But the mage comes back, and I think legolas is more ranger than fighter.
|
|
But what if an important plot villain is a wizard. They begin fight, mr.wizard having more than 5 intelligence will realize he's going to get butchered uses fly and greater invisibility to try and live.
Mr.DM with more than 5 Intelligence would not make a BBEG wizard flying and invisible, without providing the party with some ways to win the encounter.
Roll up a caster and let somebody else take over as GM?
But what if an important plot villain is a wizard. They begin fight, mr.wizard having more than 5 intelligence will realize he's going to get butchered uses fly and greater invisibility to try and live.
This assumes that the wizard with an intelligence over 5 HAS greater invisibility and fly.
Not all spells are standard to every wizard. They are restricted to A) what spells they own.... B) What spells they have IN their book... and C) what Spells they PREPARED that day.
Now... I don't know what the BBEG's plans for the day were... But unless he had PLANNED on having an encounter that day... those slots could have been needed for OTHER stuff.
Also, as wizards are typically arrogant and all powerful... The battle SHOULD be going poorly before he decides "Ok... maybe my killing them SHOULDN"T be the last thing they see..."
Invisible flying is a great 'go-to' combo... but it is by no means the ONLY combo out there that EVERY wizard MUST have ready.
But the mage comes back, and I think legolas is more ranger than fighter.
Mehh... Until they start casting spells, They're a fighter class ;) If anything Aragorn CALLS himself a ranger... but really they both act like fighters.
Actually... a lot of the time gandalf asks like a fighter too :P
Roll up a caster and let somebody else take over as GM?
This. I can honestly say, I don't think I'd want to play in a game where the DM 'forced' one of us to play a character we didn't want to play...
add another player - one that likes casters. Where you at? maybe you can advertise here for a caster to add to your group.
+1.
If you're near me, I might even roll up a cleric (which I've never done) just to try it out.
add another player - one that likes casters. Where you at? maybe you can advertise here for a caster to add to your group.+1.
If you're near me, I might even roll up a cleric (which I've never done) just to try it out.
I'm one of the people running the roleplaying club at our high school.
I don't want to force people to play casters but I DO want them to play a different character or build at least so we don't run the same thing over and over again. One couple guys did paly good casters but they graduated last year, my first time GMing we had a great party and a lot of fun with a pretty good adventure, we had plenty of casters and such to. The roup however has now gut nothing but frontliners every campaign and I want new players to try out whatever class they want and then have the more veteran people try to fill in other roles for the group.
Why not just build encounters that they can handle while still being challenged? I am not saying you are, but in my opinion it is not good DMing to exploit their weaknesses constantly. The trick is to challenge their weaknesses instead. The game is supposed to be fun.
Now if you start a game and explicitly tell the players that it is high magic and that the main antagonists are a cult of evil powerful wizards and the like, and they still choose to go with no casters? Well then I suggest one of them plays RAGELANCEPOUNCE! :P JK But it can still be done. It'll just be challenging.
|
|
Sounds like you have the exact opposite problem I have. The group I'm DMing for made there group then made characters. Last game season they did over 300 points of damage in 1 1/2 rounds at level 7. It has become a challenge to find things they don't tare tho in a round. There hitting 30 + AC with only needing a 10.
Party is:
Bard (Combat Focused)
Oracle of Battle
Warlord (Tome of Secrets: Modified by typing the bonuses)
Ranger
Rogue
Sounds like you have the exact opposite problem I have. The group I'm DMing for made there group then made characters. Last game season they did over 300 points of damage in 1 1/2 rounds at level 7. It has become a challenge to find things they don't tare tho in a round. There hitting 30 + AC with only needing a 10.
Party is:
Bard (Combat Focused)
Oracle of Battle
Warlord (Tome of Secrets: Modified by typing the bonuses)
Ranger
Rogue
Post their builds and let's see if their builds are legal.
The roup however has now gut nothing but frontliners every campaign and I want new players to try out whatever class they want and then have the more veteran people try to fill in other roles for the group.
To each their own, I'm right now running a campaign with an Unbreakable Fighter, Sohei, Qionng Drunke Monk, Preacher of Gorum, and Mysterious Stranger/Pistlero, and I'm having a blast throwing monsters at them.
It's the GM's job to communicate to the players how they want to run a campaign. If you want to see every traditional role filled by the party, let them know what you perceive to be crucial jobs that must be filled, and then let them build their characters together. Whenever I play or GM, there is always a "session 0" where the players and GM discuss their characters and the campaign. Characters are built during this session, and the GM provides input on what would be good directions to go in.
Thanks all for the advice, I still would like to have my players give a casting class a shot, I politely convinced one to make a wizard and he loved it. The others are still enamored with brawn over brain. I still find it frustrating when I plan out an tough boss fight and see them blow through it like it was nothing more than a goblin. Honest to god I had a 10th level party take out an ancient black dragon in two rounds without it getting to even get off the ground.
They typically build around getting so much AC that nothing can ever hit them without rolling a natural 20. I try to get enemy casters into enemy groups or as bosses and when they cast a spell on anyone the group complains a lot even though It is perfectly legal for a wizard to cast a spell when he has all his spell slots left.
But what if an important plot villain is a wizard. They begin fight, mr.wizard having more than 5 intelligence will realize he's going to get butchered uses fly and greater invisibility to try and live.Mr.DM with more than 5 Intelligence would not make a BBEG wizard flying and invisible, without providing the party with some ways to win the encounter.
I'd like to point out how much I disagree with this statement.
That's all, though.
Honest to god I had a 10th level party take out an ancient black dragon in two rounds without it getting to even get off the ground.
That' way too cool for school.
Start throwing gunslingers at them.
|
|
But what if an important plot villain is a wizard. They begin fight, mr.wizard having more than 5 intelligence will realize he's going to get butchered uses fly and greater invisibility to try and live.Mr.DM with more than 5 Intelligence would not make a BBEG wizard flying and invisible, without providing the party with some ways to win the encounter.I'd like to point out how much I disagree with this statement.
That's all, though.
Your BBEG will be so memorable when it will be known as "this damn invisible bastard responsible of a ridiculous TPK we had no chance to get out of", when he could be known as "Merune the evil wizard, which we had to collect several magical artifacts beforehand to deal with on an almost equal ground despite it's numerous trickeries and sorceries".
Your BBEG will be so memorable when it will be known as "this damn invisible bastard responsible of a ridiculous TPK we had no chance to get out of", when he could be known as "Merune the evil wizard, which we had to collect several magical artifacts beforehand to deal with on an almost equal ground despite it's numerous trickeries and sorceries".But what if an important plot villain is a wizard. They begin fight, mr.wizard having more than 5 intelligence will realize he's going to get butchered uses fly and greater invisibility to try and live.Mr.DM with more than 5 Intelligence would not make a BBEG wizard flying and invisible, without providing the party with some ways to win the encounter.I'd like to point out how much I disagree with this statement.
That's all, though.
Actually I was planning to have the wizard use fly and invis to get away so he can return to have is vengeance, again.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually I was planning to have the wizard use fly and invis to get away so he can return to have is vengeance, again.Living to come back is nice. What Ice Titan seemed to disapprove with is that giving an impossible to win encounter to players without a serious backup roleplay plan is bad GMing.
I wouldn't do something dumb like that, I would have given them a magic item of some sort to help them out like dust of appearance, winged boots, or a magic weapon that can see invisibility.
The players would just need to hunt the wizard down again.|
|
Post their builds and let's see if their builds are legal.Sounds like you have the exact opposite problem I have. The group I'm DMing for made there group then made characters. Last game season they did over 300 points of damage in 1 1/2 rounds at level 7. It has become a challenge to find things they don't tare tho in a round. There hitting 30 + AC with only needing a 10.
Party is:
Bard (Combat Focused)
Oracle of Battle
Warlord (Tome of Secrets: Modified by typing the bonuses)
Ranger
Rogue
I know they are I go over them every two levels to make sure.
|
|
I know they are I go over them every two levels to make sure.
Without handwaving your knowledge of the rules, there still is something fishy about the 300 damage in 1 1/2 rounds (not counting the Warlord, as the TOS isn't considered as the most balanced 3PP content ever published *COUGHARTIFICERCOUGH*).
Builds would be much appreciated, if only to satiate our own curiosity.
Roll up a caster and let somebody else take over as GM?
That does sound reasonable until you see the ridiculous stuff that ends up happening when the other members of my group end up GMing.
Like for example being well over 11th level character wealth at level 6, having to fight CR 20 monsters at 12th level, they don't plan much either so I still pretty much have to GM for them anyway.
|
|
I know they are I go over them every two levels to make sure.Without handwaving your knowledge of the rules, there still is something fishy about the 300 damage in 1 1/2 rounds (not counting the Warlord, as the TOS isn't considered as the most balanced 3PP content ever published *COUGHARTIFICERCOUGH*).
Builds would be much appreciated, if only to satiate our own curiosity.
Posted on the other thread you started.
Warlord : Got a over hall by me mostly typeing the bonus he gives. Mostly making them moral to not stack with spells.
I don't want to force people to play casters but I DO want them to play a different character or build at least so we don't run the same thing over and over again.
Personally, I would get tired having all my characters look the same. Each new one diminishes the awesomeness of the one before... So I have a habit of mixing it up quite a bit.
Though.... I DO feel compelled to point out that Salvatore has written like 20+ books dealing with the exact same party (without casters)... and I personally am biting at the bit for each new one that comes out!!!
Sooooo having the types of characters SHOULDN'T mean that the game is the same... Sounds like they just need the next adventure to be DRASTICALLY different then the one before.
Mix up the goals, and the games will feel completley different! :)
I don't want to force people to play casters but I DO want them to play a different character or build at least so we don't run the same thing over and over again.Personally, I would get tired having all my characters look the same. Each new one diminishes the awesomeness of the one before... So I have a habit of mixing it up quite a bit.
Though.... I DO feel compelled to point out that Salvatore has written like 20+ books dealing with the exact same party (without casters)... and I personally am biting at the bit for each new one that comes out!!!
Sooooo having the types of characters SHOULDN'T mean that the game is the same... Sounds like they just need the next adventure to be DRASTICALLY different then the one before.
Mix up the goals, and the games will feel completley different! :)
Yeah it does get a bit boring, and it does seem laze when they do just use the same sheet as before which makes it look like they learned nothing of the mistakes they amde last time.
One way to mix up the game, introduce spanish colonization (Gunslingers)
All of a sudden some foreigners speaking gibberish start vomiting thunder from their staves, talking about their one true God and stuff. That'll throw them for a loop, especially since they're so used to not getting hit, that the damage will start feeling refreshing.