The only way to truly break the game is by being a jerk, so if someone wants to be a jerk, tell them they have broke the game, and as others have said, don't game with them.
What does he mean by saying he is going to break the game?
Also, why would you as the GM allow evil characters in your game?
So I had a potential player approach me the other day telling me that he was going to roll a level 8 Shadow Dancer/Assassin/and something else, thus breaking the game. I know he comes from a mechanic breaking heavy background, apparently.
What do I do about this? From a GMing pre and during game stand point?
Find out exactly what he means by "break the game" and let him know that his language implies a certain amount of disruptiveness and if that's his intent then it wont be tolerated. and by wont be tolerated you mean he wont have a group to play in.
Next look at the build, if you're fine with what it can do and how it's going to effect your game then let him play.
Personally, the use of language is important and often telling. If I had a perspective player come at me like that I'd shut him/her down pretty quickly. Even if he had come to me with "I have this build I want to try" or "I think this build is AWESOME! I want to play it" I'd be fine with it unless it was seriously game breaking. But stepping up the plate with "I'm gonna break the game"? my first impression would be "Not MY game."
Frankly, I wouldn't play with him. Life's too short, and (for me, at least) gaming time is too precious to have to spend dealing with an idiot whose stated goal is to break the game.
If he plays, he's going to make your life difficult, and ruin your other players' experiences.
Exactly. I wouldn't even indulge him. Why waste the time?
|
I think you should post the full character and make certain it is legal...
many times such a character concept needs to be reviewed.
Here is one problem that is often over-looked
starting a character at level 1 and rising through levels, the skill points and feats have to be viable....at each levelMaking a character at level X
results in an abundance of points and the hand-waving requirements to enter a class..He's been playing far longer than I have but there was I noticed. His claim is that you can start being an assassin from level 3, not true as you need a stealth of 5, making the earliest at 6?
I can only guess that his intention was to spam death attack.
A Light elemental will be hard to put in since it's Carrion Crown, but I think a lot of things have dark vision. But better yet, reevaluate his build and admission.
Death Elements, just like fire elements, but do negative energy damage, immune to precision damage, and have lifesight/sense. Can hide if you have a pulse...
But to chime in with the rest, if your players goal is to break the game mechanically, he is playing a game of "my fun at the expense of everyone's fun." That just isn't welcome.
If it was me, personally... I would just run the game by the book and not worry about it. From what I have read his build (if designed in a legal way) doesn't seem overpowered at all, and only would be if you make false assumptions/ignore certain rules/think that nobody else in the party will be doing anything. Shadow dancer is by no means anywhere near broken, and neither is Assassin (there are many other classes I would take over either any day). Run it by the book, and don't let him try to argue over any rules that he has misinterpreted. But then, not everyone has the same mindset as me, and if you don't want to have to deal with that type of thing then the best would be to just not allow him in the group.
|
So I had a potential player approach me the other day telling me that he was going to roll a level 8 Shadow Dancer/Assassin/and something else, thus breaking the game. I know he comes from a mechanic breaking heavy background, apparently.
What do I do about this? From a GMing pre and during game stand point?
1)If he is stating he wants to "break" the game, I would seriously consider not playing with him
2) If he is trying to break the game with a shadowdancer/assassin, he's already failed. The best he can do is hide in plain sight for 3 rounds and death attack, which is a subpar tactic. If he really wanted to break the game, he would go with a wizard, summoner, or barbarian.
|
Being a jerk or disrupting the game for revenge does no good for anybody.See, no one is disrupting the game, because the disruptive person never arrives at the game.
I agree, I don't see a lot of reason to allow someone into your group who is going to deliberately take the game off the rails.
"Sorry, I don't think your play style matches our group."
Is not being a jerk, it's being practical. No reason to destroy 4-5 people's fun for one person's lulz.
I think you should post the full character and make certain it is legal...
many times such a character concept needs to be reviewed.
Here is one problem that is often over-looked
starting a character at level 1 and rising through levels, the skill points and feats have to be viable....at each levelMaking a character at level X
results in an abundance of points and the hand-waving requirements to enter a class..He's been playing far longer than I have but there was I noticed. His claim is that you can start being an assassin from level 3, not true as you need a stealth of 5, making the earliest at 6?
I can only guess that his intention was to spam death attack.
A Light elemental will be hard to put in since it's Carrion Crown, but I think a lot of things have dark vision. But better yet, reevaluate his build and admission.
You can't really spam death attack. The ability sucks anyway for reasons mentioned in various threads. Unless you have houserules we don't know about he is not breaking anything with that combo.
Before we kick the guy out, why don’t we see if the guy was just doing a bit of psyching himself up and bravado pre-game, rather than being a jerk? Mind you, jerk is certainly a possibility. If the DM here knows her rules, esp about HiPS & SA, and how Death attack works, etc, and make sure HE knows what the rules are, then there may be no real problem.
It would be more work for the GM, but the GM could compensate for any legal build.
GMing can be a lot of work. Just tell the truth... you don't want the extra work. You don't have to make up excuses.
"I'm sorry, but i don't get the impression that your playstyle will mesh well with our existing group. I will notify you if that changes."
Simple, polite, to the point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe he's thinking his shadow companion will kill everything? It being incorporeal and having an at will ability damage attack makes it quite formidable in many (but not all) circumstances.
I've had a shadowdancer in a game or two, and I'll tell you this: most Paizo modules are wholly unprepared for shadowdancers, or more specifically, their companions. I've had entire dungeons cleared out by a single shadow that went ahead of the party, avoiding all the traps and killing enemy monsters with impunity.
I have to admit that a shadow can break some modules, if the DM is not careful. But I really think the guy thinks he gets unlimited Sneak attack due to HiPS. Common misconception, as that was true in 3.5.
Unlimited sneak attack, even when it works, is hardly game breaking. I hesitate to say it's even terribly powerful.
They probably don't have a fundamental understanding of pathfinder if they think they will break the game with two prestige classes.
Maybe he's thinking his shadow companion will kill everything? It being incorporeal and having an at will ability damage attack makes it quite formidable in many (but not all) circumstances.
I've had a shadowdancer in a game or two, and I'll tell you this: most Paizo modules are wholly unprepared for shadowdancers, or more specifically, their companions. I've had entire dungeons cleared out by a single shadow that went ahead of the party, avoiding all the traps and killing enemy monsters with impunity.
Similarly, in fact probably even better:
Casting Shadow Projection on your familiar... carry around a comatose familiar in a bag and you have a free pet shadow (and as a full caster instead of a sub-par melee sneaker)
Maybe he's thinking his shadow companion will kill everything? It being incorporeal and having an at will ability damage attack makes it quite formidable in many (but not all) circumstances.
I've had a shadowdancer in a game or two, and I'll tell you this: most Paizo modules are wholly unprepared for shadowdancers, or more specifically, their companions. I've had entire dungeons cleared out by a single shadow that went ahead of the party, avoiding all the traps and killing enemy monsters with impunity.
Similarly, in fact probably even better:
Casting Shadow Projection on your familiar... carry around a comatose familiar in a bag and you have a free pet shadow (and as a full caster instead of a sub-par melee sneaker)
I WAS going to say this was illegal, but then I realized it wasn't. I thought share spells said that any spell you cast on yourself can also effect your familiar provided it was, and stayed withing, 5 feet. When was this errata'd?
I believe you are thinking of the Improved Share Spells feat:
You can share spells with those you have a magical connection with.
Prerequisites: Spellcraft 10 ranks, ability to acquire an animal companion, eidolon, familiar, or special mount.
Benefit: Any non-instantaneous spell (but not any spell-like ability) you cast on yourself can also affect a creature bonded to you (such as an animal companion, eidolon, familiar, or special mount). The creature must be within 5 feet of you at the time of casting to receive the benefit. The spell's duration is halved between you and your bonded creature (for example, a spell with a duration of 1 hour has a duration of 30 minutes for both you and your bonded creature).
If the spell or effect has a duration other than instantaneous, it stops affecting the creature if it moves farther than 5 feet away from you. It does not affect the creature again if it returns before the duration expir
You may share spells in this fashion even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of that type.
This feat only applies to animal companions, eidolons, familiars, or special mounts gained through a class feature.
Although if you used Imp. Share spells to turn you BOTH into shadows.. would it count as being within 5ft if your bodies are both comatose beside each other, or would your shadows have to stay adjacent? Hmm...
/end threadjack
I find it interesting that a lot of people IMMEDIATELY jump to "Don't even let him play." Is this still AD&D? Is the GM the mortal enemy of the players, and no back talk will be tolerated, all wrenches in the DM machine will be instantly met with character death? Easy way to deal with this, make him show you the character. It should take a lot of work to blind side the GM, it should be a clever maneuver done IN GAME. If you don't even look at characters before a campaign starts or you allow a new player, quite frankly that's on you. The GM's job becomes harder when they don't even know what characters are going to be in the story. Have him explain the character out, before the game, and if you feel it's not appropriate, tell them no. If they don't like it and don't want to play, meh. Don't let the door hit you on the way out. Most players (at least ones I've met) will take your explanation as to why you're not going to allow it, and move on with a new character, or to something else if they are that childish about it. I think disallowing multi-classes or prestige is like using an atom bomb to handle a traffic ticket.
As I see it, it has nothing to do with the actual character ar this point - it's about the attitude. I don't have to tolerate someone actually and openly trying to break the game. I've got enough on my plate, thank you, without bringing in a disruptive player.
If he's just idly talking smack, I'd let it slide. If he's serious, he's gone.
I am with almost everyone else here...if you say to me as a potential player "I am going to break the game." My response is "Sorry but find another group." Heck even if I was a player I would give the GM a heads up about the potential player.
People who set out to 'break the game' tend to be just as disruptive as those who want to break the game via RPing. Heck I'll even say even more so as I have seen these players cause more strife out of game.
This is made even worse by the fact this guy does not even know the rules...which eans it will be one endless rules arguement.
If I I was nice I would give a warning to this player.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Every time a potential player I have thinks they have a game breaking build one of the following usually happens:
A) A misunderstanding or misuse of the rules (I am looking at you Synthesist)
B) The build is actually not game breaking because the player didn't understand what the average power level of a character is to an encounter and grossly overestimated just how good there were going to be
C) Is using "Compatible" material from another source or 3rd party material
Reactions usually go somewhere along these lines:
A) "No it isn't against the rules look here!" Then I show the the errata, then they get mad. Another fairly common reaction is for the player to just leave after a few sessions or just never show up, blaming me or whoever is GMing for "Being a loser".
B) As soon as the player realizes they didn't do anything spectacular they ask, "Can I rebuild my character?" or "Can I make a new character?" If you do not let them, they will usually try to find a way to retire or kill the current character, cycle starts again at B.
C) "What do you mean 'X' isn't allowed?" Begs furiously to get material approved, pouts then quits if it isn't.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You could always just ask him - why?
Thought I should give a heads up many say that dark vision and light will solve the stealth problem but shadow dancers can hide in plain sight Idk if this was mentioned yet but I think his idea is to power stealth and just hid in front of ppl in plain sight then do his thing
Also the shadowDancer can split his shadow and duplicat himself he has something to worry about just kill his shadow and he gets neg Lvls I believe.
He splits off enemy uses banishing powder neg Lvls for u Mr. Shadow/ass
Prob need to limit the poisons he can purchase
Hope my input helps.
Maybe he's thinking his shadow companion will kill everything? It being incorporeal and having an at will ability damage attack makes it quite formidable in many (but not all) circumstances.
I've had a shadowdancer in a game or two, and I'll tell you this: most Paizo modules are wholly unprepared for shadowdancers, or more specifically, their companions. I've had entire dungeons cleared out by a single shadow that went ahead of the party, avoiding all the traps and killing enemy monsters with impunity.
Maybe you've stumbled on the true plan. That would be perhaps FAR more annoying than an assassin sitting about for three rounds per death strike...
I wouldn't know what to do if that happened, other than penalize the party for doing NOTHING but that seems wrong.
Shadows take energy damage easily enough -- and the shadow has half of the hit points of your double prestige classed character. I'm thinking that's not going to be a lot.
Also channeling still is effective against it so that can be of use too.
Losing that shadow hurts.
Player: I am going to break the game.
GM: Well, don't, do something else.Does this person have no self control? I mean, I could go out my way to ruin my friends fun, but I don't.
He has his own Pathfinder group that has been RPGing 3.5 for a while, who apparently are wholly made out of twinkers and it's the norm there. It's a habit and personality. That said I know my table doesn't have to be that way.
Losing that shadow hurts.
Especially in an AP where you can't sit around and wait to replace it in 30 days.
Every time a potential player I have thinks they have a game breaking build one of the following usually happens:
A) A misunderstanding or misuse of the rules (I am looking at you Synthesist)
B) The build is actually not game breaking because the player didn't understand what the average power level of a character is to an encounter and grossly overestimated just how good there were going to be
C) Is using "Compatible" material from another source or 3rd party material
Reactions usually go somewhere along these lines:
A) "No it isn't against the rules look here!" Then I show the the errata, then they get mad. Another fairly common reaction is for the player to just leave after a few sessions or just never show up, blaming me or whoever is GMing for "Being a loser".
B) As soon as the player realizes they didn't do anything spectacular they ask, "Can I rebuild my character?" or "Can I make a new character?" If you do not let them, they will usually try to find a way to retire or kill the current character, cycle starts again at B.
C) "What do you mean 'X' isn't allowed?" Begs furiously to get material approved, pouts then quits if it isn't.
I had a player that was like that.
Every time a potential player I have thinks they have a game breaking build one of the following usually happens:
A) A misunderstanding or misuse of the rules (I am looking at you Synthesist)
B) The build is actually not game breaking because the player didn't understand what the average power level of a character is to an encounter and grossly overestimated just how good there were going to be
C) Is using "Compatible" material from another source or 3rd party material
Reactions usually go somewhere along these lines:
A) "No it isn't against the rules look here!" Then I show the the errata, then they get mad. Another fairly common reaction is for the player to just leave after a few sessions or just never show up, blaming me or whoever is GMing for "Being a loser".
B) As soon as the player realizes they didn't do anything spectacular they ask, "Can I rebuild my character?" or "Can I make a new character?" If you do not let them, they will usually try to find a way to retire or kill the current character, cycle starts again at B.
C) "What do you mean 'X' isn't allowed?" Begs furiously to get material approved, pouts then quits if it isn't.
Thank you for that. I think you've gone through most situations, except I don't think the quitting part would be so easy.
Some additional details I have to bring up, I'm in a slight pickle
1) The banning evil NPCs are out as a majority of the players are evil. They were adamant that it would create more RP opportunities, and thus I've allowed it.
2) The player is friends with everyone and they want him in. However, they know of his shenanigans and suggest that he start at the same level as the lowest level player (being level 4)...rather than one level -higher- than the highest level (as HE wanted).
Maybe he's thinking his shadow companion will kill everything? It being incorporeal and having an at will ability damage attack makes it quite formidable in many (but not all) circumstances.
I've had a shadowdancer in a game or two, and I'll tell you this: most Paizo modules are wholly unprepared for shadowdancers, or more specifically, their companions. I've had entire dungeons cleared out by a single shadow that went ahead of the party, avoiding all the traps and killing enemy monsters with impunity.
Maybe you've stumbled on the true plan. That would be perhaps FAR more annoying than an assassin sitting about for three rounds per death strike...
I wouldn't know what to do if that happened, other than penalize the party for doing NOTHING but that seems wrong.
Personally, easy fix for me GMing that situation:
"Sure, it was awesome for you to use your shadow to kill everything! Bravo! Okay, your PC (or each PC) gains 0 XP for those encounters."After all, why should a PC (or all the PCs) gain any XP for something they didn't do on their own? It might seem wrong, as you say, but to me, it is MORE wrong to reward the PC (or PCs) for doing nothing and to learn nothing from such (an abstract way of looking at the reward of XP to begin with). Using your companion (or familiar, animal comapanion, cohort, etc.) to help you in a battle, or with a situation, is one thing and completely acceptable. To have a companion (or familiar, animal comapanion, cohort, etc.) do everything for you, even when you may not even be present, is an entirely different piece of "cheese" (unless the game revolves around such a concept). To me, that really defeats the whole point of playing the game to begin with.
Yes, it could be argued the PCs still gain all the loot from such a situation described above, and that's still a reward and potential problem. For me, that's fine. But then, they have no one to blame but themselves when the next few adventures are "lean" since the average party wealth is above the curve.
Player's need to understand that a game is a two-way street. If they abuse it in one direction, the GM is fully justified to adjust it the other way to balance things out. If you are honest with your players with this kind of reasoning, my experience shows that players don't go too crazy in the big picture since they know the GM is keeping tabs.
That's not to say though that a GM cannot also occasionally reward PCs for creative ways of bypassing situations and coming up with clever ways around things or sections of a module or adventure. That's why the GM role is a balancing act to begin with.
After all, why should a PC (or all the PCs) gain any XP for something they didn't do on their own?
.
They used a class feature to overcome an encounter, no different than a Druid neutering an encounter with say... Wall of Thorns or a similar effect.
The fact that the encounters are not well enough designed to provide a challenge is not the players fault, after all.
After all, why should a PC (or all the PCs) gain any XP for something they didn't do on their own?.
They used a class feature to overcome an encounter, no different than a Druid neutering an encounter with say... Wall of Thorns or a similar effect.
The fact that the encounters are not well enough designed to provide a challenge is not the players fault, after all.
Hence why I said a GM can also occasionally reward PCs for creative ways of bypassing situations and coming up with clever ways around things.
However, having said that, if it is a constant thing and being abused, such as the example of having a shadow clear out a whole dungeon, ahead of the PCs, that goes beyond "a clever way around things". The PCs got the result they were looking for (no risk, a cleared out dungeon, and potential free loot), but shouldn't gain the XP for such encounters. Why be adventuring in the first place and not sitting at home while your minion adventures for you then.
Using a class feature is one thing, and completely fine. Abusing a class-feature is entirely different and a responsible GM should address such issues, especially if it is on the boundary of game-breaking (as the example mentioned).
As for the comment about encounters not being designed to provide a challenge - again why I implied the GM's role is a balancing act and things are a two-way street to begin with.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some additional details I have to bring up, I'm in a slight pickle
1) The banning evil NPCs are out as a majority of the players are evil. They were adamant that it would create more RP opportunities, and thus I've allowed it.
2) The player is friends with everyone and they want him in. However, they know of his shenanigans and suggest that he start at the same level as the lower level player (being level 4)...rather than one level -higher- than the highest level (as HE wanted).
“More RPing opportunities” generally means, in this case, more chances to act out puerile teenboy fantasies learned by playing too much Grand Theft Auto- killing innocents, raping, torture, stealing randomly and generally being jackasses.
Starting him @ 4th is a good idea. Shadowdancer doesn’t start until 6th.