|
Have him create a character from the gound up, not just at a higher level...
ie
Have him create a first level character with the same method the original players did. Then tell him how much gold he got between 1st and 2nd and what equipment he found...(use the modules as a guide..maybe giving him items from what they didnt find)
then tell him raise to 2nd level and show me the new character.
rinse repeat.
I find that characters just created at certain levels tend to be unrealistic for what is created over time...
this is always a good balancing method to me.
Now as for everyone saying dont let him play etc...
I hate to disagree, but a powergamer is just as fun to have around as a total role player...let him have his moments in the sun, but provide enough challenges where he cant shine as there are when he can....
This normally stops the intent to 'break the game' (or really what hes saying is Im going to make an unstoppable character..which just cannot be done. Any good DM can always challenge a player. Remember the game isnt always about combat.)
Still, as much as one could make a great assassin/shadowdancer, I really don't think it would be game-breaking unless the GM really let it.
I would be much more concerned about a 10th level Ninja, personally
A level 10 ninja will most likely be under greater invisibility and attack 4 times per turn (or more) for +5d6 sneak attack. should finish most enemies a lot quicker than the 4 rounds Death Attack requires.
|
|
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.
After reading so far I think he will break your game, but in a different way from what he intended.
"Alt! I should spend 3 round watching this guy to use my death attack. Do nothing!"
"Alt! I will send my shadow double ahead to scout. Do nothing!"
"Alt! I will kill the guard using my shadow double. Do nothing!"
and so on.
After a few sessions of "Do nothing, I will ...." the other players will be decidedly unhappy.
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).
....
He has asked for a couple of artefacts to round out its powers?He can be friend with the other players but it seem really a jerk.
In soviet russia, game breaks YOU!
seriously, if i had a player who set out to break the game then i wouldn't put up with it. players seem to forget that the DM can flat out say "no".
the real problem was never the build, it was always the attitude. if you must have him along, keep an eye on him.
|
Have him create a character from the gound up, not just at a higher level...
ie
Have him create a first level character with the same method the original players did. Then tell him how much gold he got between 1st and 2nd and what equipment he found...(use the modules as a guide..maybe giving him items from what they didnt find)
then tell him raise to 2nd level and show me the new character.
rinse repeat.
I think maybe doing a full-out character sheet for each level, along with gold / equipment is a bit extreme. I'd probably settle for a fully statted-out level 1 character, then a list of what advancements were made at each level, and a final fully-statted character at the target level (sans ANY gear). Then he gets the final level WBL in gold, and gets to spend it on whatever gear (mundane and magical) that you allow.
|
|
Kthulhu---well the character sheet he makes at 1st level will be the same he uses at higher level. He will just upgrade the character as every other player has done in the game.
Part of the whole point behind building a character from the ground up, without any background and history and sense of how he got there...is to collect items as he goes.
Players who build characters from the ground up, hardly ever have EVERY item they would desire. They find a magic weapon that works for them, but its not the perfect one..but other things take priority when purchase time comes...etc.
I have run games where characters just created characters at higher levels..and Ive run them from the start..and there is a notable difference in the feel of the characters.
Anyway, as I said, hes not doing a NEW sheet at every level..who does that? Everyone I know creates one character sheet..and updates it with the appropriate changes.
While people are saying that Death attack takes 3 rounds, but wouldn't something like that be exploited before combat? I can imagine the player would go ahead and wait three rounds to get one off as a surprise attack then say that they HIP to go for another death attack. I'm sure that he'll argue that since he's nearly 'invisible', there's nothing that could be done about him.
He's coming by tonight supposedly, he'll likely get afar as a sheet but I don't think he'll be taking part (I'm close to wrapping up book 2 of Carrion Crown and it's late to join in).
I really want to meet this regular GM of his, he must be extremely jaded or something.
Once the other enemies see him, they "recognize him as an enemy" and he can't get off anymore for that encounter. At most that's once per encounter, even then they might "succeed" on their fort save ;).
Be sure to let us know what happened.
I am still very curious how he plans on getting something powerful out of that build.
|
Okay so very little seems to make any sense. All he seems to have said at the start was a basic class list and you seemed to somehow get I'm gonna break your game out of that. Now did he specifically say I'm gonna break your game or just say a bunch of classes and bragged a bit that made you scared? If the former, then yeah leave him outside...if the latter, then you need to buck up. It's on par for this game for people to be proud of their characters.
Okay, then you have split levels. You originally said that level 8 was one above the highest and the lowest was 4...that is a 3 level spread and WAY too much. Then you amend to 6/6/5/4...which is only two levels...but how far along are the 4 and 6? If you do get the 4-7 spread it's gonna be an issue. In 3.5, lower level characters got more exp then higher level ones so being lower level stabilized out. This was to account for the lost level on death and exp cost to crafting. Now that both of those things are out, in PF, everyone gets the same exp and as such, you really should not have different levels unless you just like to have more of a headache then you need. Then again you said yes to an evil game so maybe your a masochist. Seriously, just make everyone level 6.
Your rules lawyering player from what you recounted does not sound like a rules lawyer but a flat out munchkin who is cheating...but that comes with a heavy caveat since your recounting itself has some holes and inconsistencies. Either he needs to come here for his side or show his character sheet before we can make up that choice. Rules lawyers can be dealt with reasonably...the only answer to a muchkin is the hammer gun.
The game can't be broken...only GMs. I always ask my players at the start if they want anything...you know story wise, backgrounds or any heirlooms of importance they may wish for their story. I had a player at level 1 ask for a holy avenger for his paladin. I smiled and said yes while all the other players screamed no. There are plenty of rules in place to deal with almost any adjustments you may have to make...and for those few that aren't...well that's what rule zero and house rules are for.
And shadowdancer/assassin?!? Seriously? If that bothers you, wait til you see a properly played caster.
I require all my players to turn over a character sheet before they can join the group.
It helps with looking for cheats, it lets me get to know the player so I can incorporate them into the story, and it helps balance items and wealth.
This thread has gotten far too many responses. DOWN WITH THEE! DOWN TO THE ARCHIVES!!
While people are saying that Death attack takes 3 rounds, but wouldn't something like that be exploited before combat? I can imagine the player would go ahead and wait three rounds to get one off as a surprise attack then say that they HIP to go for another death attack. I'm sure that he'll argue that since he's nearly 'invisible', there's nothing that could be done about him.
He's coming by tonight supposedly, he'll likely get afar as a sheet but I don't think he'll be taking part (I'm close to wrapping up book 2 of Carrion Crown and it's late to join in).
I really want to meet this regular GM of his, he must be extremely jaded or something.
Give us the results of the session, please. :)
Cold Naplam is cold. He merely declared level 8 since he assumed it was a level 8 game when it was really a level 6 game, which he then argued level 7. The situation is still up in the air as he hasn't played yet to made a character. Having played this game recently (but played much AD&D in the past), I was merely concerned if this was some broken combination that I have not heard of. I suppose most answers around here say no, it's only if the GM allows it to be.
Talking briefly to him last night on the phone, he claims that you can get to assassin at level 3 which then I reminded him of the skill rules. He relented to "well, that rule is open to interpretation..." but settled to make a rogue, for now. I still haven't seen his sheet yet but will obvious work backwards once his sheet is present given his understanding of the 'rules'.
No, that rule isn't open to interpretation.
I would highly recommend posting his build, as I would not expect it to be error-free.
That is not open to interpretation. He must have come from 3.5, and is still getting use to PF rules.
Ranks for a skill and a modifier to the skill are not the same thing.
AvalonXQ's idea to check his sheet should be done. It seems that he does not know the rules too well.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm all for "open to interpretation," and even have a reputation for it, but even I don't think this is one of those times.
Is this guy your friend?
In soviet russia, game breaks YOU!
Damn you FuelDrop, I almost posted that as the 2nd post in the thread, but was already late for work, and skipped it. Glad someone got it in here.
I find that if someone is bragging about making a character that "breaks the game", they are probably missing some important part of the rules.
If you really do find a rule that is clearly unbalanced - leadership feat for example - you just kind of shake your head, and don't include the thing when playing the game.
Not many broken rules in Pathfinder, or I should say, specific to Pathfinder.
PS - Why the name "FuelDrop"?
Well, if I had a character in my game that was breaking the game in some way that enabled him to be far too overpowered, I would send down a Solar Angel, accompanied by two Shield Archon's to get rid of him. :)
Reason being:
The watchful eyes of the Gods sensed trouble in Golarion. At the centre of this was a human (or whatever race this guy plans to play), more powerful than those who came before him. His power upset the world balance and so the Gods decided something had to be done. As a result, one of the Gods (your choice, but most likely a Lawful Good one) sent down three of his finest warriors to put a stop to this madness and bring balance back to the world once more.
A level 10 ninja will most likely be under greater invisibility and attack 4 times per turn (or more) for +5d6 sneak attack. should finish most enemies a lot quicker than the 4 rounds Death Attack requires.
Still, as much as one could make a great assassin/shadowdancer, I really don't think it would be game-breaking unless the GM really let it.
I would be much more concerned about a 10th level Ninja, personally
Exactly. Also, at level 12 you can have the greater invisibility for 2 mins as a swift action + the Assassinate ability that the Ninja gets which is just sick. (its like the assassin one, only the DC is based on a more relevant stat and it only requires 1 round of study)
I have a Halfling Ninja with tons of Charisma who uses this, with the Go Unnoticed feat, and really high initiative, generally using a Shortbow.Throw in Sniper's Goggles and wow....
Well, if I had a character in my game that was breaking the game in some way that enabled him to be far too overpowered, I would send down a Solar Angel, accompanied by two Shield Archon's to get rid of him. :)
Reason being:
The watchful eyes of the Gods sensed trouble in Golarion. At the centre of this was a human (or whatever race this guy plans to play), more powerful than those who came before him. His power upset the world balance and so the Gods decided something had to be done. As a result, one of the Gods (your choice, but most likely a Lawful Good one) sent down three of his finest warriors to put a stop to this madness and bring balance back to the world once more.
You could just talk to him outside of the game, and ask him to tone it back. By your reasoning the PC's would have nothing to do because the solars would have taken out any high level baddies a before they got to be a real issue. Then you have to explain to the player why people who are more powerful and evil than he is are not dead.
You could just talk to him outside of the game, and ask him to tone it back. By your reasoning the PC's would have nothing to do because the solars would have taken out any high level baddies a before they got to be a real issue. Then you have to explain to the player why people who are more powerful and evil than he is are not dead.
Well, I would have waited for a certain point where he was alone, with no enemies to be seen and no playable characters about/awake, before sending them in.
Think of it as a sneak mission. They'd go in, corner him, question him and then depending on what happens and who GM's it, they'd either decimate him or give him a thorough warning.
It wouldn't effect the other PC's or challenges later on, if their characters weren't aware of the encounter. In fact, I don't see how it would effect challenge at all. It'd be one very swift encounter and wouldn't effect story progression.
The GM has power to decide what the in game Gods desire and this is simply an easier option than just outright banning the guy from playing. It at least gives him a chance and if you go out of your way to break a game, expect consequences.
It seems fair to me.
I am just saying the logic was faulty, and the player would have an easy time asking questions that would prove you are trying to solve an OOC problem in game. People who do this only come back with more powerful characters the next time. You either have to get him to cooperate OOC or kick them out of the group. Killing all their characters with ______ really solves nothing.
Just to be clear I said the player, not the character would be asking the questions in my previous post.
Just to be clear I said the player, not the character would be asking the questions in my previous post.
I know, I was just explaining how you could get away with it and how it shouldn't effect the other players characters in any way at all.
The logic being faulty is all dependent on how you perceive things. Everyone sees things differently.
A lot of the time players who are set in their way cannot be reasoned with, so you have to think of ways to deal with them in game.
The argument is that he may see it as unfair for you to outright kill his character, but you as a GM may see it as unfair on the group if he has an incredibly broken character that wipes the floor with everything and ruins it for everyone else.
My way of dealing with it was assuming he couldn't be reasoned with and is one of possibly an unlimited amount of ways to deal with this. Everything I've stated is enough to justify the actions, but people deal with things differently, so I respect that you don't agree with me. :)
You don't understand me. I was saying that as a player, not a PC, who is investing in the verisimilitude of your world how is the PC reasonably dead while there are much greater evils out there? That is why it does not matter if the the PC's saw it or not. Luke(the real life person) is the one questioning you not his character who probably deserved to die.
I did not say it was unfair to kill the character. I said it solves nothing. Either the player cooperates, you boot him, or he gets so frustrated that he can't have his way and he quits. If he continues to bring broken characters to the table he is still causing grief. He is just doing it in a different way every time. Another options is to look at his character sheet before he is allowed to play it, and at every level up, which is still an OOC solution.
PS:Ok, so maybe if he quits you did solve something. :)
You don't understand me. I was saying that as a player, not a PC, who is investing in the verisimilitude of your world how is the PC reasonably dead while there are much greater evils out there?
PS:Ok, so maybe if he quits you did solve something. :)
I know what you were saying, but I was trying to explain to you that it can be explained either way. It makes little sense to explain the death to his character because.....his character is dead and therefore cannot even think. It would be meta-gaming if such a thing happened and not to mention, completely weird.
Like I said in the above post, he would want to know why his character was killed off, so you can either tell him the truth or make something up on the spot, still emphasising that it was because the Gods saw him to be too powerful in comparison to the rest of his race, which upset the balance between every single races advantages and disadvantages, making his character have no disadvantages what so ever.
Obviously you'd speak to him before he began playing, but everything I have said is assuming you've already gotten past that stage and he's not taking no for an answer.
Then, hopefully when he realises his character was killed off due to balancing the game in his favour (with his broken character), it should hopefully prevent him from doing the same again in the future.
If it doesn't, then ban him. There are multiples way of solving something and there's a good list above for doing as such.
The whole point in my posts was to say that if he insists on playing, cannot be reasoned with OOC, but isn't prepared to play with an unbroken character, you as a GM have free reign to make up any scenario you so desire, to kill off his character/s, if his character poses a problem.
You don't always need to justify your actions if you're dealing with someone who fails to see logic and refuses to do anything that means he can't have his own way.
Such a person is inconsiderate of the other players feelings.
That's my two cents anyway. I have nothing more to say on the matter. Instead, I just hope our little debate has given the original poster some more ideas to play around with. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
PS - Why the name "FuelDrop"?
it's actually a pun on my real sirname, Colecliffe. i'll try to explain the logic: Colecliffe = coalcliff. coal = fuel, cliff = drop.
Well, he's right about the rule being "open to interpretation". Technically all rules are. However, his "interpretation" doesn't enter into it ever. The DM's interpretation is the only one that matters. (If the DM is the one wrongly interpreting the rules, I'll generally explain the correction, but if they say there way is the way it is, then that's that. It's their game.)
Go ahead and let him break it.
Duct tape and WD-40, and you can fix anything.
Well, he's right about the rule being "open to interpretation". Technically all rules are. However, his "interpretation" doesn't enter into it ever. The DM's interpretation is the only one that matters. (If the DM is the one wrongly interpreting the rules, I'll generally explain the correction, but if they say there way is the way it is, then that's that. It's their game.)
He might be honestly confused by the conversion rules about how to incorporate D&D material into pathfinder. It is mentioned there that in order to meet the requirements of feats, prestige classes etc. from D&D you are allowed to add the trained bonus to your ranks, thus enabling you to fulfill requirements at the same level you could in D&D.
Example: You require 8 ranks in spellcraft to enter a D&D prestige class. If it was a class skill, you could enter it at level 6, since you are allowed to put level+3 ranks in a class skill in D&D 3.5. In pathfinder you could only enter such a class at level 9, since your max. number of ranks is set by your levels. However, by adding the trained bonus to it, you can still enter it at level 6 since you will have 5 ranks +3 trained = 8 "ranks" for the purpose of meeting those requirements.
This illustrates why it is extremely important to distinguish between pathfinder material, where the trained bonus must not be added to fulfill requirements, and D&D material. So my advice there: Be careful and stick to pathfinder material whereever possible, i.e. do not allow him to take the D&D 3.5 assassin class and thus use those requirements etc.
For only pathfinder the rules are absolutely clear, he cannot enter those classes at level 3. And I would not worry about his class combination either. I would more worry about the scenario of him trying to steal the show with his shadow as someone else pointed out. But then again there are more enough counters to that :-)
it's actually a pun on my real sirname, Colecliffe. i'll try to explain the logic: Colecliffe = coalcliff. coal = fuel, cliff = drop.
PS - Why the name "FuelDrop"?
Yknow, my friend does that with his last name. His is Conway and he goes by Badpath
Yknow, my friend does that with his last name. His is Conway and he goes by Badpathit's actually a pun on my real sirname, Colecliffe. i'll try to explain the logic: Colecliffe = coalcliff. coal = fuel, cliff = drop.
PS - Why the name "FuelDrop"?
it's all the rage at the moment. all of the cool people are doing it ;)
I guess that makes me Paddle Badger... I'm okay with that.
Note that two of my DM's do the thing where skill focus give you three RANKS in a 3.5 skill, thus allowing entry into many PrC's early. But that is clearly a house rule.
I admit, this house rule does mean that folks will now take a otherwise never used feat.
I take that feat all the time.
ditto. skill focus is excelent for any skill you plan to use a lot
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
ditto. skill focus is excelent for any skill you plan to use a lot
A +3 untyped bonus that increases to +6 at 10th level, that stacks with everything? Not terrible. :)
Three skills to always consider it for: Perception, Stealth, Use Magic Device.
Talking briefly to him last night on the phone, he claims that you can get to assassin at level 3 which then I reminded him of the skill rules. He relented to "well, that rule is open to interpretation..." but settled to make a rogue, for now. I still haven't seen his sheet yet but will obvious work backwards once his sheet is present given his understanding of the 'rules'.
Something else open for interpretation is whether or not he gets a seat at the table.
Here's how I handle players like that: I tell them the rules we will be following. If they want to debate a clearly defined rule, they can find another group. I don't have the time nor inclination for debates on clearly defined rules. If the rule isn't clearly defined, once I have made my ruling, it stands. If that's a problem, then find another group. I still don't have the time nor inclination for debates on rulings I have made.
ditto. skill focus is excelent for any skill you plan to use a lotA +3 untyped bonus that increases to +6 at 10th level, that stacks with everything? Not terrible. :)
Three skills to always consider it for: Perception, Stealth, Use Magic Device.
Yep, it's not so bad in PF, but it's not so good in 3.5. Note I said 3.5 DMs, not PF. In 3.5 you can only apply it to half of stealth or perception, and there's no addl bene @ 10th level.
Well, if I had a character in my game that was breaking the game in some way that enabled him to be far too overpowered, I would send down a Solar Angel, accompanied by two Shield Archon's to get rid of him. :)
Reason being:
The watchful eyes of the Gods sensed trouble in Golarion. At the centre of this was a human (or whatever race this guy plans to play), more powerful than those who came before him. His power upset the world balance and so the Gods decided something had to be done. As a result, one of the Gods (your choice, but most likely a Lawful Good one) sent down three of his finest warriors to put a stop to this madness and bring balance back to the world once more.
That's the worst idea I've ever heard, even if you said that this is only after having tried everything else.
Really, just look at him and tell him that he will not play at your table until he has changed his character in a way that's it's compatible with your game. I really don't think that a God would care if joe the overpowered 8th level fighter killed with no sweat 2 CR 14.
Well, if I had a character in my game that was breaking the game in some way that enabled him to be far too overpowered, I would send down a Solar Angel, accompanied by two Shield Archon's to get rid of him. :)
Reason being:
The watchful eyes of the Gods sensed trouble in Golarion. At the centre of this was a human (or whatever race this guy plans to play), more powerful than those who came before him. His power upset the world balance and so the Gods decided something had to be done. As a result, one of the Gods (your choice, but most likely a Lawful Good one) sent down three of his finest warriors to put a stop to this madness and bring balance back to the world once more.
That's the worst idea I've ever heard, even if you said that this is only after having tried everything else.
Really, just look at him and tell him that he will not play at your table until he has changed his character in a way that's it's compatible with your game. I really don't think that a God would care if joe the overpowered 8th level fighter killed with no sweat 2 CR 14.
+1
Yep, it's not so bad in PF, but it's not so good in 3.5. Note I said 3.5 DMs, not PF. In 3.5 you can only apply it to half of stealth or perception, and there's no addl bene @ 10th level.ditto. skill focus is excelent for any skill you plan to use a lotA +3 untyped bonus that increases to +6 at 10th level, that stacks with everything? Not terrible. :)
Three skills to always consider it for: Perception, Stealth, Use Magic Device.
Ah, yes, it was bad in 3.x. You used 1/7th of your feats for a +3, which was more often negligible with all the +competence and +synergy and +dayoftheweek bonuses going around. :P
So what happened?
|
|
Had a GM once who dealt with this problem sooooooo well. He let the guy max out his character with all sorts of things, showed him new tweaks and how to really really mini-max out. He then encouraged each of us to develop a background linking us only to this guys character, but not to one another. Then the GM gave him all kinds of obscure loot and a keep and a crap ton of money and more or less made him the local lord... all before the game actually starts mind... then to kick off the game, has this guys character assassinated and each of us are called in to investigate the murder with the promise of a share of his estate if we solve it. Told the guy he could hang around as a ghost if he wanted to, but he couldn't interact with the players in anyway. He could however give the GM notes to pass along as dreams to the NPC's....
Best GM ever....
I wouldn't call this approach well.
Cold Naplam is cold. He merely declared level 8 since he assumed it was a level 8 game when it was really a level 6 game, which he then argued level 7. The situation is still up in the air as he hasn't played yet to made a character. Having played this game recently (but played much AD&D in the past), I was merely concerned if this was some broken combination that I have not heard of. I suppose most answers around here say no, it's only if the GM allows it to be.
Talking briefly to him last night on the phone, he claims that you can get to assassin at level 3 which then I reminded him of the skill rules. He relented to "well, that rule is open to interpretation..." but settled to make a rogue, for now. I still haven't seen his sheet yet but will obvious work backwards once his sheet is present given his understanding of the 'rules'.
I follow Avalon's suggestion.
Frankly, I would've been a less-than-understanding GM given the flippant nature of the player and the idea of the rules.
This is one of those, writen in my standards from a long time ago, not been in there since (I've not needed it in there, but for three campaigns):
"If your intent is to break the game, or to actively break the rules, the GM has the right to decomission your character and remove the player from the game. We're all here to have fun, don't be a jerk."
I, frankly, would have told the player "You are the weakest link. Goodbye." And I would've moved on with the game.
I run tables sitting at six to eight players consistently, I have no need of someone being a jerk at my table (including myself). I have some real combat monsters, and a bunch of fun skill monkeys at my table, I have to move sessions to RP/Combat/then a mix/then back. Actively trying to break the game, rather than "break the GM" (running gag at my table) would get you thrown out. I generally put it up to a vote if it gets to that point, after approaching the player and being unsuccessful.
If he's doing the assassin build, is it an evil game? If not, then no assassin (one assassin's requirement=evil). "Open to interpretation" is BS, and should be treated as such.
Hope it helps, and I hope that you DO post the build because there's going to be problems here. Break the problems, keep the rules tight, and run with the player if you dare. Put in your campaign standards the right to remove a player if necessary, that should help to remove any jerk behavior. And write it down for all.
/d