; 3;
B-but the NPC's existed peacefully until the GM decided that the PC's needed an adventure!
If that is the case, instead of blaming the PC, whose nature is to be heroic, and then enemy NPCs, whose nature is to be villainous, why should we not instead blame the one who made them in that mold to begin with?
I was explaining it to Baka Nikujaga, not you! ;_;
I'm joshing you. I haven't been offended at any point. The only other Batman stuff I see on these forums is the Batman Alignment Chart (and I'd say it is an appropriate post for most alignment threads).
In any case, Ravingdork, how does your party fair in the absence of a BC character? Does someone else take the role? Does the DM change how combat plays out? etc.
If I'm not playing it, no one generally does. Occasionally, we get a full caster, such as a druid, but typically it's a blaster or wildshaper or something like that.
I meant it more in "Does RD's superior defense draw out enemies that can threaten him (and thus are able to stomp his party, which had only mediocre defense)?"
I think it would be more accurate to say that the aforementioned brutal GMs will eventually stomp the party regardless of what I do or play.
In all honesty though, I just find it odd that many GM's take to "brute force" in retaliation instead of finding interesting ways to circumvent a character's defenses.
Totally agree.
I GM'd for these guys for YEARS before I took a back seat and let them do it in a half-hazard rotations (each running a different campaign).
I am currently running Skull and Shackles for them at their insistence. It is unlike anything they've run. They seem to be loving it. Before that, I ran a homebrew campaign, which they also seemed to love. Prior to that I didn't host anything for a few years.
None of their attitudes seem to have changed. At best, they respect me as a GM, just not as a player.
|
So, I'll assume you tried preparing enemies that function as "more coherent" parties than their own? ><"
Hmm...I'm not sure what else to say then? There's always the brute force method of asking the current GM if you'd be allowed to buff the enemies and debuff the rest of the table for an encounter (with deaths not being in anyway binding)...but I wouldn't recommend that method...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As of late, I've been getting on-again off-again flack from my gaming groupies. Why?
For optimizing for survival.
Your profession involves fighting monsters of nightmares and regularly going places no one returns from. What the hell else would you do?
One of the other players even went so far as to say "you always play cowards."
Have said, "You always play brainless fools", yet?
Most of the time I'm playing a spellcaster, usually one with spells like mirror image, false life (or greater false life), and a high dexterity and lots of hit points. I also have a tendency to stay in the back row and lay down battlefield control, mind-affecting effects, and illusions to great effect. Occasionally, I even blast something.
Sounds good.
It is a rare battle in which something can escape my battlefield control areas, close into melee with me, is lucky enough to bypass my mirror images or invisibility/flight, and then do enough damage to get past my temporary hit points. I am generally the last man standing, occasionally being the lone survivor in a string of near-TPKs.
Sounds like your enemies aren't coordinated enough, or you are doing a good job. Possibly both.
When I do eventually take REAL hit point damage... well... when that happens, the GM rejoices. Right. In. Front. Of. Me. While the other players congratulate him.
I think the dictionary definition is "jackass". They are using the verb "being a jackass". What sort of players congratulate the GM on harming other PCs? Do you guys pass around beers when someone's PC eats a save or die? O.o
When I made a manipulator-type character (shown here) that I thought would be fun to roleplay, the GM mentioned above simply said "This is just like your last one"--to say nothing of the amazing background that makes the character completely different (not to mention the many plot hooks and character development/story telling opportunities I've handed him on a golden platter).
Part of the charm of D&D/PF is the diversity of different classes. Some people naturally gravitate towards certain classes and play-styles because they make them happy. I've had some PCs who refuse to play any prepared spellcaster, hate spellcasters, hate martials, or always want to play X (where X is the class they seem to enjoy the most). That's fine. It would irritate me if you were recycling the same character biography over and over again, but you're clearly not doing so.
I could only complain that you're not gaming at my table.
Also, just for icing on the cake, by direct comparison your group has also deemed every...
Police officer wearing a bullet vest, every soldier wearing armor, every driver of a tank, every person with a reach weapon, every person who lays a trap, and anyone who wears a seat belt, helmet, or other protective device "cowards". Using your resources to avoid suffering harm is the same as every thing listed here. Exact same motivations, and exact same effects. Avoid dying.
Apparently, in your party's eyes, the only way to not be a "coward" would be to strip down naked and run headfirst into the fray, screaming aloud to alert all nearby enemies to your presence, while your dangley parts sway blissfully in the wind before being cleaved from your core by the weapons of all those cowardly folks wearing armor and not being morons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't mean to be judgemental but...it sounds like you game with goons/douchebags. This is not the group for you. Move on.
|
Same here except I don't drink anymore, I liked it too much and it betrayed me in the end! To Each His Own.Whoa whoa whoa, count me out. I'd be paying every time.
I prefer to settle differences the old fashioned way, competitive shot consumption. First to say uncle pays the tab.
Bong rips at twenty paces?
... lots of stuff accepting RD's descriptions at face value and voicing general solidarity with the concept of optimizing being the right way to play the game...
Ashiel, I suspect if you talked to other players in RD's group, you might get a significantly different story about their games. I also suspect that they would insist their characters are well built and played well according to their ideas of what their goals are.
Also, RD has regaled us all with wonderful stories of his gaming group as they have accomplished awesome feats and has described them in great detail. In those descriptions his group does not come across as a bunch of incompetents, although on occasion they do some questionable things.
Based on the totality of RD's comments on the dynamics and success of his gaming group, I take him at his own word that he games with some pretty competent gamers.
So that's why I don't accept the notion here that the problem is that RD is playing with a bunch of idiots.
|
|
To Gnomersy
Again, the amount of time spent self-buffing to the amount of time group buffing or debuffing enemies is relatively small (and can typically be captured in a single round). The problem tends to be that other players - especially those who aren't inclined towards the optimization arms race - will be less likely to notice the bonuses or penalties accrued by the Wizard. As an example, if a Wizard casts Haste (an often used group buff), is the party Fighter more or less likely to factor in the Wizard's provided bonus to hit, AC, and the additional attack per round, or view it as the capabilities of his or her own character? If a Wizard casts Glitterdust and blinds a group of enemies, unless the enemies were aggravatingly accurate, would the Fighter think that it was the Wizard making the enemies blind that contributed to the damage done (in both directions)?
For some players, it's difficult for them to understand the quantitative benefits provided by the presence of a primary Caster (who isn't blasting or a heal-bot) because it isn't directly reflected in HP damage.
That isn't to say that they're "incompetent," only that they don't view another approach as "viable" because they don't see the numerical return.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That isn't to say that they're "incompetent," only that they don't view another approach as "viable" because they don't see the numerical return.
Well they do but I get you're point: it's a secondary-effect, displaced.
For example, the extra attack from Haste. It's easy for PCs to then have the mindset that it's them doing the extra damage - after all, they're making the attack, hitting (or not), and rolling damage.
The fact that they would have fewer attacks and thus do less damage (perhaps considerably less damage, depending on how many members of the party are conducting hasted attacks) without the spell tends to become secondary in their minds.
They also naturally see themselves as taking the risks - after all, they're the ones in the monster's reach. But that's a function of the builds they chose as much as the build the control-caster chose.
The caster, in this case, is a combat multiplier; but the people on the front line might be thinking that if RD brought another front-line DDer to the table, he'd be "contributing as much as he is now, but also sharing the risk." However the party would lose a lot of flexibility if he "joined their style" (it seems everyone else at the table - who indeed might be very capable players - prefers to build characters that are "in the thick of things").
That last part perhaps being key: it may very well be that neither is RD being some kind of jerk, as some have inferred, nor are the rest of the players especially incompetent. It really is a styalistic difference but one where the others lack respect for the contributions of a character who isn't "out up front with us." Taking what RD said at face value, if he doesn't bring this different (for this group) character to the table, no one will. Doesn't at all mean their builds are bad for the roles they choose, or they don't know how to play those characters.
But it does then seem to be that they don't have a lot of respect for a character that's not "up-and-at-them, cutting and being cut" instead of staying in the back and contributing-by-casting.
We have had our fair share of problems as well as a few amazing games (see below), but I don't think they're idiots.
For those of you not yet familiar with my group, perhaps one or more of these threads will help. For the most part they are quite an enjoyable read.
Another example of GM brutality (Carrion Crown #2 spoilers)
An example of a GM's hosting ability
An amazing solo game by yours truly
An example of my GMing abilities
An example of my fellow players' recklessness
And also of their...er...interesting play style
The types of characters I'm often surrounded by
Their idea of character building
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Didn't one f your casters take on an entire army alone?
My friend says your group doesn't deserve spellcasters.
All the psychological analysis and psycho-babble about RD and his gaming group aside....
I think most games would benefit from a healthy dose of cowardice once in a while.
I've weighed in on some of RD's descriptions of his party's exploits in the past. I'm sure RD's eyes don't light up with pleasant anticipation when he sees my name and icon pop up on his threads.
There's an interesting theme running through most of RD's posts about his games, both as a GM and as a player. The situations he describes seem to swim in adversarial activities, both between the GM and the players and among the players themselves. There are lots of "discussions" about the rules and how to interpret them, usually with RD proposing an extremely generous interpretation in his own favor. Many situations involve "outside of the box" situations where the GM has to go by his own inner compass, and whether the GM is RD or someone else, there seems to be a general lack of acceptance from the players on the ruling, ending up with RD posting numerous requests for opinions on those situations from these boards.
Again, I am not reacting to RD's latest specific request for a "ruling" or "opinion" so that he can gain ammunition in his attempts to further his own agenda with his group. I am reacting to the totality of RD's comments and discussions over the past year or so.
By now it should be clear that there is a very unhealthy dynamic going on in that group. Whether RD is the nexus of the conflict or is just one of the people caught up in a general negative vibe is really impossible to tell, but I can infer from his posts that RD is in the middle of the maelstrom more than most in his group.
I just don't get the point of playing in that sort of environment. It's gotta be exhausting. There has to be significant time wasted at the table as these "debates" and appeals for rulings play out in real time. There has to be emotional baggage after many, if not most, sessions they play.
I just don't get the point. RD wants to be "right" and there is no doubt that he can get plenty of support from people on these boards who are not reacting to the whole picture, or who simply like RD because he's such a prolific and interesting member of the community.
I just don't know why you keep doing the same thing over and over again RD. Either adapt your style so that it doesn't grate so obviously with the other players, or find another group to play in. Since you say the group enjoys your GM efforts, it should be fine to keep running campaigns for that group, and maybe in a year or so you can get back on the players' side of the table.
But man, just look at the sheer volume of these things you bring to these boards! You gotta look at root cause RD, and root cause is absolutely NOT that you buff the other players and build really solid optimized characters.
That is all. Good luck on this.
I think most games would benefit from a healthy dose of cowardice once in a while.
Totally.
I've weighed in on some of RD's descriptions of his party's exploits in the past. I'm sure RD's eyes don't light up with pleasant anticipation when he sees my name and icon pop up on his threads.
Who are you again? :P
There's an interesting theme running through most of RD's posts about his games, both as a GM and as a player. The situations he describes seem to swim in adversarial activities, both between the GM and the players and among the players themselves. There are lots of "discussions" about the rules and how to interpret them, usually with RD proposing an extremely generous interpretation in his own favor. Many situations involve "outside of the box" situations where the GM has to go by his own inner compass, and whether the GM is RD or someone else, there seems to be a general lack of acceptance from the players on the ruling, ending up with RD posting numerous requests for opinions on those situations from these boards.
I don't stall the game or get into a big rules debate with my friends hoping to gain an edge. It's not to gain an edge, so much as to right a wrong (such as preventing a character death from a misunderstood rule).
I do post overly much on these boards about our group's challenges. (Whether or not we are able to resolve them as a group.)
Again, I am not reacting to RD's latest specific request for a "ruling" or "opinion" so that he can gain ammunition in his attempts to further his own agenda with his group. I am reacting to the totality of RD's comments and discussions over the past year or so.
I almost never share these thread discussions with my friends, and certainly don't use them to further any kind of agenda.
By now it should be clear that there is a very unhealthy dynamic going on in that group. Whether RD is the nexus of the conflict or is just one of the people caught up in a general negative vibe is really impossible to tell, but I can infer from his posts that RD is in the middle of the maelstrom more than most in his group.
That's hard to say. Most of my friends aren't as vocal about their problems as they are. If they were more communicative, we might have resolved all our problems long ago.
I just don't get the point of playing in that sort of environment. It's gotta be exhausting. There has to be significant time wasted at the table as these "debates" and appeals for rulings play out in real time. There has to be emotional baggage after many, if not most, sessions they play.
It can be, but most of the time the fun and good memories/stories we make together is more than worthwhile.
RD wants to be "right"...
Doesn't everybody? :)
|
|
Something about your personality or playstyle seems to alienate your gaming buddies RD. Maybe you brag too much. Maybe you nag too much. Maybe you simply intimidate them. I don't know what the actual party dynamic is, but it's not good.
How old are the members of your group? Are you friends outside of gaming? Do you all live in the same dorm or apartment building?
Brag? I take pride in most of my characters, and do like to show off a creative concept or good build. I wouldn't go so far as to call it bragging though, and I never do it AT the table as it would disrupt the game.
Nag? Only when I know a rule is being broken and that myself or another player is negatively effected as a consequence.
Intimidate them? Hama certainly did. They were all terrified she would achieve her goal of lichdom.
Party dynamic? Best I can figure, they like some roleplaying and a whole lot of rushing/action, whereas I like deeply involved interactions (such as manipulating enemies into destroying one another rather than attacking them head on).
I turned 28 a few days ago. Most everyone else is 25-27.
All of us are friends outside of gaming. Have known most of them since grade school. We don't see much of each other outside of gaming these days, however.
Two players are roommates in the same apartment, two more are married and just bought a house, and the rest of us take care of our families. I live with my twin brother. (Yes, Ravingdork is an evil twin!)
Does that help to shed some light?
happy belated birthday RD
What pray tell have I done wrong exactly? What is this "bad behavior" you speak of? A difference of play styles is a problem, but it is not necessarily the same as bad behavior. (Just so you don't misunderstand the tone of my post, I'm not upset. Just curious.)
I think you are trying to play in a smart and original way.
I think your group think that you are constantly trying to be clever rather than just getting on with it. Your fighter's constantly do anything other than hitting the enemy with their weapons, your wizards self-buff and use battlefield control while - as they see it - their characters get stuck in and do all the hard work.
It may noit be a real perception, but it seems to me you are playing subtle where their idea of subtle is using an 8lb hammer. If you don't want friction, you need to play a little more their way or teach them to play your way.
As of late, I've been getting on-again off-again flack from my gaming groupies. Why?
For optimizing for survival.
Most of the time I'm playing a spellcaster, usually one with spells like mirror image, false life (or greater false life), and a high dexterity and lots of hit points. I also have a tendency to stay in the back row and lay down battlefield control, mind-affecting effects, and illusions to great effect. Occasionally, I even blast something.
I haven't carefully examined the entirety of the thread because of the penis-measuring going on a few pages in, so I'm not sure how much this has been touched upon:
How serious is the flack? Do they think they're teasing you or are they really serious? Wizards and players who play mostly wizards (or other casters) tend to get into patterns of behavior that are easy targets for teasing. We do this a lot to the wizard player in my group who will often cast fly but not fly (so it's ready to go, but he's not an immediate target) and who hangs in the back of the party. I was just teasing him on Thursday for the D&D Next play test because, as the dwarven fighter, we finally got him to the front of the marching order for a change. We had a good laugh about it.
When I do eventually take REAL hit point damage... well... when that happens, the GM rejoices. Right. In. Front. Of. Me. While the other players congratulate him.
When a PC is optimized for defense or avoids fights, we sometimes do this too. Again, we're teasing. We're not really criticizing.
What do you think? Are they cookie-cutter characters? Could my builds/play style be considered cowardly? Or is this common sense for a spellcaster?In short, I'm hoping to get impartial outside opinions on the matter.
As I said above, common sense for a caster can still lead to being chided for not paying the same amount of blood as everyone else. How serious are they when they do it is the important question. I'll admit that too much teasing on a topic gets old, but is it possible that you're taking what they are saying too personally.
To be honest it sounds as if Ravingdork you need to find a different group. If the GM has to ramp up the difficulty to ensure that there is a challenge for you, thus meaning that all the other players die. Then there will be resentment and other players cheering if you take damage - because in some ways you have managed to get their PC's killed. (Of course this is assuming a level-appropriate world an not a sand-box where you meet way above average CR encounters. In which case, remind the other players to run, although they should know this after TPK's)
This is obviously not a criticism of your play-style, of course you should create a character whom wish to survive. How about next time you try to ensure that the party survive, create a buffer or healer, even if it is not optimal for the standard encounter?
For no good reason I feel the need to comment on this thread, with the high-level campaign & summons nerf.
I think it is part of a theme that touches on this topic, too. Not criticizing RD's playstyle, I think perhaps his expectations - and that of his fellow players (I note that in that campaign, pretty much every player had similar expectations and got thrown a curve-ball) might be what throws things for a kilter.
1) His experience in the high-level one-off is why, as a player, when I make casters, I don't like Sorcerers. Particularly for high-level stuff (as a DM though, I love Sorcerers - they're great NPC builds). Wizard means you can swap out things that don't work, but Sorcerer (and similar casters) means being shackled to spells that, woops, may not be as useful as you think because. . .
2) IMO the DM in that occasion did nothing wrong. Indeed, a lot of the tropes go back to the early days of gaming at high levels. Q1, say: visit the Demonweb Pits as high-level PCs and all the sudden your summon spells are wack, Divinations only return the results the Demonqueen wants them to return (*bwahahahahaha*), a bunch of other spells don't work right/have unexpected results, and some things/critters are immune to things they normally aren't. Likewise, WG6, Isle of the Ape. Likewise The Dragon #63, the Baba Yaga's Hut adventure (3K year old lich is a functional equivalent of a Baba Yaga); no doubt Paizo's upcoming version will have something similar - entire lists of spells/categories of spells and magic that do not function normally in the hut for anyone but Baba Yaga herself and maybe her minions. (Watch out if you are suddenly stamped with invisible chickentrack marks on your forehead! Trust me, I know!)
You need a new group.
Will you get one? That's up to you. If you don't take a break from these guys and try a new group, you're just going to keep on posting these topics and having the same people tell you the same things we are now.
Be a man. Grow a pair and change something dammit.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I GM'd for these guys for YEARS before I took a back seat and let them do it in a half-hazard rotations (each running a different campaign).
I am currently running Skull and Shackles for them at their insistence. It is unlike anything they've run. They seem to be loving it. Before that, I ran a homebrew campaign, which they also seemed to love. Prior to that I didn't host anything for a few years.
None of their attitudes seem to have changed. At best, they respect me as a GM, just not as a player.
That might be part of the problem, in their heads you are "the enemy", the guy they think they have to beat, the guy working against them. Playing manipulators that don't give a damn doesn't really help that mindset i imagine.....
Building for survival isn't a horrible idea and anyone who builds to get their character killed, ought to go and play what they really want to play, since they obviously don't want to play that character.
Personally, I think you should just find a better group.
|
|
Also, just for icing on the cake, by direct comparison your group has also deemed every...
Police officer wearing a bullet vest, every soldier wearing armor, every driver of a tank, every person with a reach weapon, every person who lays a trap, and anyone who wears a seat belt, helmet, or other protective device "cowards". Using your resources to avoid suffering harm is the same as every thing listed here. Exact same motivations, and exact same effects. Avoid dying.
Apparently, in your party's eyes, the only way to not be a "coward" would be to strip down naked and run headfirst into the fray, screaming aloud to alert all nearby enemies to your presence, while your dangley parts sway blissfully in the wind before being cleaved from your core by the weapons of all those cowardly folks wearing armor and not being morons.
It is about degree and usefulness. Is the officer wearing a vest a coward? no more than anyone in the fantasy world having some protection. is officer bob who will not go in the door standing with both hands on his riot shield Because he will not risk fighting back helping anyone? Not that RD was that bad but I have played with THAT type before.
|
|
Building for survival isn't a horrible idea and anyone who builds to get their character killed, ought to go and play what they really want to play, since they obviously don't want to play that character.
Personally, I think you should just find a better group.
Its all about how far you take it. If you max your defense until that is really all you are it is a problem for the group. Fun example, i once played in a group with a monk that literally could not hit most enemies except on a nat 20, for a 1d6-1 or 2 at level 8. His AC was nearly 40, his saves ridiculous but did NOTHING to help the party win a fight. At BEST a monster would go for him first once in a while and waste a round missing.
It is about degree and usefulness. Is the officer wearing a vest a coward? no more than anyone in the fantasy world having some protection. is officer bob who will not go in the door standing with both hands on his riot shield Because he will not risk fighting back helping anyone? Not that RD was that bad but I have played with THAT type before.Also, just for icing on the cake, by direct comparison your group has also deemed every...
Police officer wearing a bullet vest, every soldier wearing armor, every driver of a tank, every person with a reach weapon, every person who lays a trap, and anyone who wears a seat belt, helmet, or other protective device "cowards". Using your resources to avoid suffering harm is the same as every thing listed here. Exact same motivations, and exact same effects. Avoid dying.
Apparently, in your party's eyes, the only way to not be a "coward" would be to strip down naked and run headfirst into the fray, screaming aloud to alert all nearby enemies to your presence, while your dangley parts sway blissfully in the wind before being cleaved from your core by the weapons of all those cowardly folks wearing armor and not being morons.
Since Ravingdork clearly noted he uses party buffs and even direct damage spells, we can assume that's not the case. If the officer buys his own Kevlar suit and wears it in addition to his vest, and tosses tear-gas and fires off shots when it seems practical, that just means the officer is being both smart and helpful.
I know in my games (whether GM or PC) I prefer that wizards (PC or NPC) are not suicidal or stupid.
|
|
It is about degree and usefulness. Is the officer wearing a vest a coward? no more than anyone in the fantasy world having some protection. is officer bob who will not go in the door standing with both hands on his riot shield Because he will not risk fighting back helping anyone? Not that RD was that bad but I have played with THAT type before.Also, just for icing on the cake, by direct comparison your group has also deemed every...
Police officer wearing a bullet vest, every soldier wearing armor, every driver of a tank, every person with a reach weapon, every person who lays a trap, and anyone who wears a seat belt, helmet, or other protective device "cowards". Using your resources to avoid suffering harm is the same as every thing listed here. Exact same motivations, and exact same effects. Avoid dying.
Apparently, in your party's eyes, the only way to not be a "coward" would be to strip down naked and run headfirst into the fray, screaming aloud to alert all nearby enemies to your presence, while your dangley parts sway blissfully in the wind before being cleaved from your core by the weapons of all those cowardly folks wearing armor and not being morons.
Since Ravingdork clearly noted he uses party buffs and even direct damage spells, we can assume that's not the case. If the officer buys his own Kevlar suit and wears it in addition to his vest, and tosses tear-gas and fires off shots when it seems practical, that just means the officer is being both smart and helpful.
I know in my games (whether GM or PC) I prefer that wizards (PC or NPC) are not suicidal or stupid.
As i already said, it is about how far you take the optimization......
But what does optimization have to do with it? There are inbuilt limits to how far you can take something. Being "optimized" does not equate to being overpowered. Quite the opposite. It means you're going to be good at what you want to do. Nothing is infallible.
I haven't seen anything that Ravingdork is doing that seems "too far". Or even doing anything that isn't just textbook tactics. What do you define as "too far" in Optimization? Saying being much higher at something than the average of the party is not going to cut it. Classes and builds are supposed to sport aspects that make them shine. You don't blame a Fighter for having a to-hit and damage modifier that's "too high". You don't blame a tank for having an AC that's "too high". You certainly don't rev up the monsters to invalidate the strengths of a character. That's GMing 101.
|
|
But what does optimization have to do with it? There are inbuilt limits to how far you can take something. Being "optimized" does not equate to being overpowered. Quite the opposite. It means you're going to be good at what you want to do. Nothing is infallible.
I haven't seen anything that Ravingdork is doing that seems "too far". Or even doing anything that isn't just textbook tactics. What do you define as "too far" in Optimization? Saying being much higher at something than the average of the party is not going to cut it. Classes and builds are supposed to sport aspects that make them shine. You don't blame a Fighter for having a to-hit and damage modifier that's "too high". You don't blame a tank for having an AC that's "too high". You certainly don't rev up the monsters to invalidate the strengths of a character. That's GMing 101.
Putting all of your resources into defense so as to useless at other things. As long as he is contributing effectively then he is not going too far. i have seen others do so though
|
|
I can't believe this. People are actually advocating deliberately letting enemies hit the wizard? That's like an infantryman tossing the artillery spotter or forward air controller out of his cover. It's not the wizard's job to take hits. It's the wizard's job to keep the enemy from doing whatever they want.
Although I have seen some folks advocating this, I think the general opinion seems to be that all players need to curb their desires in one area or another to ensure they have a character other people want to tolerate. This is the reason I have problems playing a Neutral character at times.
A cowardly wizard who screams and runs from any enemy who gets within 10 feet but otherwise helps the group and has hopefully been the difference between life and death at least once is a quirky character, if played right. A strong independent wizard who is open about the fact that if things get rough he will bail and safe his own skin is also a quirky character if played right.
The difference between the two is that people may want to stay in a group with first one and would likely not choose to group again with the second one.
You as a player have some measure of obligation to the rest of the group to bring a character others want to be around, coward or not.
But what does optimization have to do with it? There are inbuilt limits to how far you can take something. Being "optimized" does not equate to being overpowered. Quite the opposite. It means you're going to be good at what you want to do. Nothing is infallible.
And if you want to stay out of danger and let everyone else do the fighting and dying? Not saying this is how it is, Ashiel, but how it may appear to be.
Put it this way:
You and I have participated in monk threads where we have agreed the monk is very effective defensively with great saves, spell resistance and a brilliant AC, but is poor offensively and hence has difficulty contributing in a party environment, and that this is a problem. Now consider somebody making a character like this deliberately. Optimised for 'survival' they have great AC, hit points, saves, defensive options, such that they are untouchable. Now imagine that as a consequence of this, they don't actually help the party much. See the problem? This is how RD's fellow players perceive his character.
I'm not saying RD's fellow players are right, just that this is how they see it.
Or you could bring to bear the full might of an Eldritch Knight who casts all his spells in armour and in combat with maximum jank!
I really have no idea why I can't connect to that site where your characters sheets are.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or you could bring to bear the full might of an Eldritch Knight who casts all his spells in armour and in combat with maximum jank!
I really have no idea why I can't connect to that site where your characters sheets are.
Then they would be complaining that he is stealing the show by crushing all the enemies under the might of his awesomeness. I mean, he could comfortably hit BAB +15/+10/+5, wear mithral celestial armor, enjoy all his normal buffs, and conjure legions of powerful outsiders to assist him in his deeds.
I get the feeling that if he just completely schooled them at their own job while playing a spellcaster they might get even more butt-hurt than they are right now.
He could be cute and count the number of attacks that land each round due to his haste spell and then declare at the end of the combat that his character's DPS is in the hundreds.
EDIT: For example, if it's him + 3 martials, and he has a planar bound elemental (just for example), he can haste the elemental and all three martials. If each martial hits for 20 damage per hit, and all three hit during the round, then he has 60 damage that round plus all the damage his hasted elemental deals (3 slam attacks), which could very well give him the highest DPR of any character in the group. In fact, the more critters he has to haste, the more his DPR increases.
He could also be cute and count every enemy that doesn't hit an ally due to one of his spells as HP healed. I mean, if you slow an entire team of enemies, then they will get fewer than 1 attack per round (they can't move and attack, so in many rounds they will not make even a single attack). He could declare every attack they don't make healing for that amount. So if you have a group of 8 enemies who will all deal 10 damage per hit, and he slows all of them, then he's effectively healing the entire party for about 40-80 HP worth of damage every round.
If he provides a character with a means to harm something it couldn't have otherwise hurt (such as dispelling anti-arrow effects, casting fly on a melee warrior, or stopping an enemy from teleporting with dimensional anchor so the party melee can catch it, or casting some spell such as align weapon to bypass DR) then he can declare that all damage dealt to the creature for that reason as his damage, because it's damage that would not be dealt if not for his actions.
His group is just too stupid to realize that he has the highest DPR of any member of the party, and calls him a coward while he's winning fights for them. The fact he is the last one standing in a battle is a testament to his Intelligence and shows he didn't simply leave the party when the chips were down (and believe me, when you can just dimension door or teleport, you can easily say "Screw you guys, I'm going home"). If anything, I'd be thankful that the caster in the group was the last guy standing, since he might even be able to reach the nearest ally-corpse or two and teleport away with it to be raised.
A cowardly wizard who screams and runs from any enemy who gets within 10 feet but otherwise helps the group and has hopefully been the difference between life and death at least once is a quirky character, if played right. A strong independent wizard who is open about the fact that if things get rough he will bail and safe his own skin is also a quirky character if played right.
The difference between the two is that people may want to stay in a group with first one and would likely not choose to group again with the second one.
You as a player have some measure of obligation to the rest of the group to bring a character others want to be around, coward or not.
I can't recall a time where I fled an encounter before the rest of the party had perished, or already fled themselves.
I really have no idea why I can't connect to that site where your characters sheets are.
Many of the above linked threads are really old, and many of the links may be no longer active. Nowadays, I keep public sheets on my server, The Fools' Court (it allows me to update the characters at any time without having to change links).
You can find many of the aforementioned campaigns as well as many of our PC characters on our web site here.
To find any of the characters I have linked to on this forum, type in http://thefoolscourt.zxq.net/other/[charactername].pdf whereas [charactername] is the first name of the character.
So, if you wanted to look up Hama, for example, you would type in http://thefoolscourt.zxq.net/other/hama.pdf into your URL bar.
For other characters (mostly PCs that I have NOT posted on these boards), you will have to use the links provided on my site.
If anything, I'd be thankful that the caster in the group was the last guy standing, since he might even be able to reach the nearest ally-corpse or two and teleport away with it to be raised.
First, I don't appreciate people calling the other players/GMs stupid. They are still my friends, even if we don't make the best of gaming companions.
Second, remember my red dragon thread, where the GM had an ancient red dragon hunting down our tenth level party? Where he near-TPK'd the party no less than THREE times? And we were forced to use cheese like green slime and dust of choking and sneezing? My spellcaster personally saved at least one person each time.
I think during the first encounter with the dragon, I teleported away with the druid, and some ashen remains of the party ranger. The druid reincarnated the ranger and we continued onward.
During the second ambush, we didn't even try to fight. We used hero points to act out of turn, jumped off a cliff (granting us total cover due to the angle), and I caste feather fall before teleporting everyone to safety.
The third attack took place at night, out on the open plane. The ranger and many of the replacement characters died instantly. Those who survived the surprise round fell back with my wizard and attempted to teleport, but the dragon was quick to keep on top of us with its antimagic field. Thinking the dragon might be weakened by its own antimagic field, the fighter got himself killed in mere moments. Only my wizard (with a newly crafted ring of evasion) and a replacement monk (with evasion) survived the initial attack. The monk ran off into the brush never to be seen again. The dragon ignored her and came after me as I was the last remaining original survivor who orchestrated the death of his rider.
I hit it with non-magical green slime, which I had collected from a dungeon a few games back. I was hoping he'd have no counter, particularly during the night. I escaped while he spent his actions dispelling his antimagic field and then casting limited wish to remove the slime.
And that's not even counting the times I helped to save the party from multiple lesser dragons in no less than three other occasions.
My wizard, Haylannar, not only survived the longest, he saved more characters than anyone else (literally snatching them from the jaws of death, breaking them out of draconian prison camps, etc.) AND played a major role in the death of nearly ten dragons and one dragon rider.
First, I don't appreciate people calling the other players/GMs stupid. They are still my friends, even if we don't make the best of gaming companions.
You have my apologies, with the caveat of "if the shoe fits, wear it". They're probably not stupid people, but non-stupid people do stupid things. Based on what you've described, I could not in good conscience call such activity or commentary anything higher than stupid (but I could probably go lower).
Even though as people they are probably not stupid at all, I do believe they lack your intelligence. You seem to be operating on another level than they are, because they can't see the obvious benefit that you are bringing to your group, and calling you names like Coward for not failing. I mean, this is the nerd equivalent to kids being mean to some other kid for getting better grades than them; at least by the sound of it. Most here have told you to dump them entirely, but I believe in reeducation.
Second, remember my red dragon thread, where the GM had an ancient red dragon hunting down our tenth level party? Where he near-TPK'd the party no less than THREE times? And we were forced to use cheese like green slime and dust of choking and sneezing? My spellcaster personally saved at least one person each time.
I think during the first encounter with the dragon, I teleported away with the druid, and some ashen remains of the party ranger. The druid reincarnated the ranger and we continued onward.
During the second ambush, we didn't even try to fight. We used hero points to act out of turn, jumped off a cliff (granting us total cover due to the angle), and I caste feather fall before teleporting everyone to safety.
The third attack took place at night, out on the open plane. The ranger and many of the replacement characters died instantly. Those who survived the surprise round fell back with my wizard and attempted to teleport, but the dragon was quick to keep on top of us with its antimagic field. Thinking the dragon might be weakened by its own antimagic field, the fighter got himself killed in mere moments. Only my wizard (with a newly crafted ring of evasion) and a replacement monk (with evasion) survived the initial attack. The monk ran off into the brush never to be seen again. The dragon ignored her and came after me as I was the last remaining original survivor who orchestrated the death of his rider.
I hit it with non-magical green slime, which I had collected from a dungeon a few games back. I was hoping he'd have no counter, particularly during the night. I escaped while he spent his actions dispelling his antimagic field and then casting limited wish to remove the slime.
And that's not even counting the times I helped to save the party from multiple lesser dragons in no less than three other occasions.
My wizard, Haylannar, not only survived the longest, he saved more characters than anyone else (literally snatching them from the jaws of death, breaking them out of draconian prison camps, etc.) AND played a major role in the death of nearly ten dragons and one dragon rider.
And this is why I called them stupid, or at least non-stupid people doing stupid things (consider this a correction from my previous post, since it seems to have a need to be more specific). Calling your characters cowardly, implying you are not contributing, and cheering for your failure is not only stupid but it's downright blind.
My heart aches for you, because I think you deserve to be treated better.
Yanno RD:
It sounds like your character is far more effective than the group at the given role you choose to be.
I mean, just going off some of your last few comments- you saved them from X you saved them from Y you saved them from Z.
This either means they /suck/ hard core or that things go sour and you are *always* the guy to pull the fat out of the fire. Now you get very defensive when told your buddies suck- and I can appreciate that.
But the point is rather- if your guys are really that incredibly effective and the rest of the table *isn't* playing up to that level of incredible effectiveness then you've really found the source of your problem.
As an example: while the Rp you do sounds great and I'd love to be part of it, I don't think your characters would fit in with the group I'm currently hanging out with. We just don't optimize to that level and you'd quickly be set on a level above us and it'd be clear within a combat or two. and that could quite possibly be the root of the problem you are experiencing here.
The group cheers when you get hit- the DM cheers that he finally hit you and all that.. its just a symptom of the larger issue that your characters are built better than theirs. and better than they really have the desire to be.
Now I dunno if its because they don't care, or if its just because they like to be relaxed, or because they just view the game differently than others do. (I know I myself fall into that last category.. my witch refuses to have Slumber or Ice Tomb hex because I just don't think they belong in the game.)
Try doing things differently with your current character. Cast fewer self buffs, be a little bit less "in the back", don't be quite so quick to be the savior of the group. Not a "well I'll show you guys!" but rather "well the group prefers style X and while I prefer Y, I need to adjust to X to make this fun again and to fit in".
Look at how you play and make some changes to be more in line with the rest of the group. I'd imagine that as odd as its going to sound- the group might actually prefer to die memorably than to once again be saved by their own personal optimizer.
Saved once like that is awesome. Saved all the time like that begins to feel very deux ex machina and I could see where it would lead to some of the issues you seem to be having.
-S
Yanno RD:
It sounds like your character is far more effective than the group at the given role you choose to be.
I mean, just going off some of your last few comments- you saved them from X you saved them from Y you saved them from Z.
This either means they /suck/ hard core or that things go sour and you are *always* the guy to pull the fat out of the fire. Now you get very defensive when told your buddies suck- and I can appreciate that.
But the point is rather- if your guys are really that incredibly effective and the rest of the table *isn't* playing up to that level of incredible effectiveness then you've really found the source of your problem.
As an example: while the Rp you do sounds great and I'd love to be part of it, I don't think your characters would fit in with the group I'm currently hanging out with. We just don't optimize to that level and you'd quickly be set on a level above us and it'd be clear within a combat or two. and that could quite possibly be the root of the problem you are experiencing here.
The group cheers when you get hit- the DM cheers that he finally hit you and all that.. its just a symptom of the larger issue that your characters are built better than theirs. and better than they really have the desire to be.
Now I dunno if its because they don't care, or if its just because they like to be relaxed, or because they just view the game differently than others do. (I know I myself fall into that last category.. my witch refuses to have Slumber or Ice Tomb hex because I just don't think they belong in the game.)Try doing things differently with your current character. Cast fewer self buffs, be a little bit less "in the back", don't be quite so quick to be the savior of the group. Not a "well I'll show you guys!" but rather "well the group prefers style X and while I prefer Y, I need to adjust to X to make this fun again and to fit in".
Look at how you play and make some changes to be more in line with the rest of the group. I'd imagine that as odd as...
Pretty much this. I guess you could either try and get them to improve, or at least stop being jerks to you, or you could make characters just as badly as they do and enjoy getting TPKed more often. I mean, Ravingdork, buddy, you mentioned that you have two GMs who are brutal. One who likes killing players (GM vs PC mindset) and the other who is just brutal. You're the guy pulling everyone else out of the fire. So if you take a vacation? Everyone burns. Maybe just let them burn for a while, or play like you were actually cowardly, or otherwise make them see the error of their ways.
It seems like you're playing smart enough to actually run the course that your GMs are placing you in, and everyone else is being bitter because they aren't.
You know, RD, I think I may know at least part of the problem here. You see these other threads where people are talking about things like "help me get as high of AC as the Monk has so I can compete with the challenges the DM throws at us" sort of thing? Well, you are that Monk. The difference is that for spell casters, manipulator types and the generally "not in the meat of things" type characters you tend to play you are measured by a different stick. There isn't a hard number like AC to put you up against.
The DM may feel challenged to provide your character with a challenge yet having to pull punches for the others in your party if he does challenge you. The problem is that to get to you he typically has to cut through the rest of the party so they tend to resent that. I can understand that but do not necessarily blame that on you.
This is all evidenced by the fact that the other players congratulated the DM for managing to damage your character and the DM felt accomplished to be able to do so as well. It kinda is a form of tribute. You know the proper response to that? Congratulate the DM As well.
While I know you are a great character builder and from everything I have heard you are also an excellent role player you may need a lesson in humility. I do not mean that as a put down but rather a constructive suggestion. My suggestion would be to sit down with the other players and discuss the issue with them. Let them know you don't like being looked down upon as a coward either OOC or IC and would like to work towards a solution. Also point out that while you are not opposed to change that you also recognize that you are not the only contributing cause to the issue and ask for their open minds as well. Then... share your wisdom with them.
Help them improve in their roles, and explain how you can contribute to their shared success. By the same token be open to their input. You don't have to do exactly as they say but finding creative ways to work towards what they would like to see you accomplish can be an enjoying challenge as well. Think of the challenge they are giving just as you would as one your DM is throwing at you.
Anyway, just my advice. I could be way off and failed at my trolling check.
...Yanno RD:
It sounds like your character is far more effective than the group at the given role you choose to be.
I mean, just going off some of your last few comments- you saved them from X you saved them from Y you saved them from Z.
This either means they /suck/ hard core or that things go sour and you are *always* the guy to pull the fat out of the fire. Now you get very defensive when told your buddies suck- and I can appreciate that.
But the point is rather- if your guys are really that incredibly effective and the rest of the table *isn't* playing up to that level of incredible effectiveness then you've really found the source of your problem.
As an example: while the Rp you do sounds great and I'd love to be part of it, I don't think your characters would fit in with the group I'm currently hanging out with. We just don't optimize to that level and you'd quickly be set on a level above us and it'd be clear within a combat or two. and that could quite possibly be the root of the problem you are experiencing here.
The group cheers when you get hit- the DM cheers that he finally hit you and all that.. its just a symptom of the larger issue that your characters are built better than theirs. and better than they really have the desire to be.
Now I dunno if its because they don't care, or if its just because they like to be relaxed, or because they just view the game differently than others do. (I know I myself fall into that last category.. my witch refuses to have Slumber or Ice Tomb hex because I just don't think they belong in the game.)Try doing things differently with your current character. Cast fewer self buffs, be a little bit less "in the back", don't be quite so quick to be the savior of the group. Not a "well I'll show you guys!" but rather "well the group prefers style X and while I prefer Y, I need to adjust to X to make this fun again and to fit in".
Look at how you play and make some changes to be more in line with the rest of the group. I'd
There's also the possibility that the "brutal DM's" are actually just trying to get at RD, and that if he tones it back abit they'll become more reasonable since the group *as a whole* won't be as effective.
One "solution" to +10 AC to everyone else is a monster who has +10 to hit than it should.So if he's really a god at battle field control and self defense, the DM could ramp it up to get at him (leading to TPK's for the group) while he squeaks by.
Solving the one problem could solve the other- if its actually an issue of cause and effect. (rather than some DM's just enjoying murder characters.. which isn't really something RD can "solve" moreso than just, play with them and try to enjoy it or find somewhere else to be for those campaigns)
-S
There's also the possibility that the "brutal DM's" are actually just trying to get at RD, and that if he tones it back abit they'll become more reasonable since the group *as a whole* won't be as effective.
Well RD already noted that at least one of the GMs believes in the philosophy of GM vs PCs, and believes its his duty to try and kill them within the confines of the rules. The other one is just heavy handed, or so I understood. So I had little reason to believe they would ease up regardless of the party.
I know I wouldn't. I want the PCs in my games to succeed. I cheer them on. I congratulate them when they overcome difficult things. I compliment them on their good ideas and bravery. But they get what they get. I don't dumb down the games I run. The world doesn't become nicer just because you're incompetent. There is no welfare for crippled PCs. If you are fighting a dragon, then by god you're fighting a dragon, and you'd best be prepared either to win or have your next of kin in line to collect their inheritance.
One "solution" to +10 AC to everyone else is a monster who has +10 to hit than it should.
This is only the "solution" of a poor/bad GM. That's basic GMing 101 right there. Such people should pick up the 3.x DMG (3.0 or 3.5, doesn't really matter) and read them to learn how to actually GM.
So if he's really a god at battle field control and self defense, the DM could ramp it up to get at him (leading to TPK's for the group) while he squeaks by.
Or the GM could, I dunno, just not care? I'm a big proponent of god-wizards and such, but they are not infallible. It's entirely easy to at least keep them busy while you're mopping the floor with the rest of the party with entirely fair and not overpowered enemies. I use very simple enemies more often than not (sometimes I will tweak for themes, but most of the time basic stuff will work).
I'm not sure how the encounters his GMs use are built, but honestly I have a hard time imagining it being that difficult to challenge the party -- the whole party -- with mundane stuff.
Solving the one problem could solve the other- if its actually an issue of cause and effect. (rather than some DM's just enjoying murder characters.. which isn't really something RD can "solve" moreso than just, play with them and try to enjoy it or find somewhere else to be for those campaigns)
-S
Just callin' 'em as I see 'em. It might be cloudy out though. *squints*
