| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So I'm running a short game for a while, and well my players are so used to sooo much cheese that things were awkward when starting up.
The Stats:
Hearing statements like, "An 8 is pretty bad, but a 7, that's just terrible!" and "A 13 isn't terrible, but it's not good" and seeing a player get all frowny face because she wasn't sure what to do with her stats (None were below 10).
Piecemeal Armor:
One of the players wanted to use piecemeal armor, it turns out when you build a suit of medium armor with piecemeal rules it's much better and incurs no movement penalty. So those rules straight out banned.
Combat:
One player was wielding two weapons to use two combat maneuvers as a full round action, (checked the rules, it doesn't work like that).
The Rolls:
Trying to run Jade Regent with the caravan rules, two of the players both kept rolling and taking the better roll. I had to ask them to please not do that.
They aren't terrible players, but they are so used to cheese and a harsh DM (not me) where if they didn't cheese they would be screwed. They are used to gestalt, and feats that bumped up their stats, and everything stacking, and taking flaws and traits, and getting feats for writing a background, and looking for rule exploitations just to be on par with their campaign (and still being outshined by the DM's OPNPCs), I know because I've played in those campaigns.
But I'm trying to run a game not drenched in such cheese, and so I have to convince them that a 14 is indeed a good number, that a 20 in an ability score at 1st level is amazing, that there are DCs below 25, that I'm not going to set them in a fight with a black pudding at 1st level, that they aren't going to be outshined by every npc that they meet.
Overall, it's going good.
So has anyone else dealt with this situation?
|
Explain to them that you have a playstyle conflict and discuss whether or not they can adjust to your style or if they need to find a new DM.
One player was wielding two weapons to use two combat maneuvers as a full round action, (checked the rules, it doesn't work like that).
However, they can make two CM checks if they have multiple attacks, as long as they apply the appropriate penalties and use the appropriate maneuvers. (Ones that can replace an attack action.)
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.
You can attempt to disarm your opponent in place of a melee attack.
you can attempt to sunder an item held or worn by your opponent as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack.
You can attempt to trip your opponent in place of a melee attack.
Rather feat intensive to get the penalties down to full bonuses -2, but doable.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
unfortunately, we call those "powergamers." even more unfortunately, they're usually spawned by their environment. when they're used to a DM who's playing to kill them off, sure they're gonna squeeze the system for every last bonus. Sounds like somebody was running the wrong kind of tabletop for them. That kind of merciless min-maxing should be reserved for MMO's (and it also sounds like they didn't read the rules very well, in any case.) Just show em the light, reign in the power level, and let em know what its like to chill out and enjoy the adventure!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It fascinates me how differently we can all play--and enjoy--the same game. To me "cheese" is carrying around a sack of puppies to cleave. The things in the OP are...people playing the game?
Except for "the rolls" which just seems like flat out cheating....
You have to tell them that you are not the old GM, and to stop cheating, which is what it sound like they are doing. It is hard to re-educate people who have their minds made up though.
Actually a melee attack is a specific action (multiple attacks such as from high BAB or multiple weapons is separate from a melee attack and is part of a full attack). At this point I'm pretty well versed with the rules.
I pretty much nipped the cheesing while I started the game. I don't blame them for looking for every opportunity to boost stuff considering the games that they usually play where there's a lot of cheesing on both sides of the table. At some point, I even showed them the stats of some the NPCs to show them that they are anything but underpowered. I may be a forgiving GM, but aside from their paranoia and need to be optimized they are generally good roleplayers. As far as the rolls are considered, it was only a few times and it was mostly caused by who was supposed to roll, who was going first etc. It's not like they were being malicious or even really trying to hide it, it was just them asking to take the best of the confusion.
Actually a melee attack is a specific action (multiple attacks such as from high BAB or multiple weapons is separate from a melee attack and is part of a full attack). At this point I'm pretty well versed with the rules.
So uh what do you call those non-ranged attacks made as part of a full-attack?
Not well-versed enough, it seems.
|
|
Actually a melee attack is a specific action (multiple attacks such as from high BAB or multiple weapons is separate from a melee attack and is part of a full attack). At this point I'm pretty well versed with the rules.
Ok, but can you clarify the disarm, sunder, and trip actions?To me it seems to be saying 2 things:
1) they are standard actions
2) but, they can be used as part of a full-attackDo I have this right?
Correct. You can perform them as a standard action, or you can use them in place of an attack during a full-attack action.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Actually a melee attack is a specific action (multiple attacks such as from high BAB or multiple weapons is separate from a melee attack and is part of a full attack). At this point I'm pretty well versed with the rules.
I pretty much nipped the cheesing while I started the game. I don't blame them for looking for every opportunity to boost stuff considering the games that they usually play where there's a lot of cheesing on both sides of the table. At some point, I even showed them the stats of some the NPCs to show them that they are anything but underpowered. I may be a forgiving GM, but aside from their paranoia and need to be optimized they are generally good roleplayers. As far as the rolls are considered, it was only a few times and it was mostly caused by who was supposed to roll, who was going first etc. It's not like they were being malicious or even really trying to hide it, it was just them asking to take the best of the confusion.
You are thinking of an attack action. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can see what these players are coming from. In my first campaign we had a basic team with all the basic party needs (a healer, a swinger, a spell-chucker, a glass cannon). The DM did the basic "You are all togther as a party, because gods say so and you have no reason to object." and then sent us against an adult dragon right out of the gate. So for my first year of gaming I did nothing but power game and find ways to make my character invincible. After over a year of that type of gaming, I was joined another DM and had to be explained that what I was doing, while in the rules (none of us rolled twice or cherry-picked feats from the DM), was not in the spirit of the game. Four years later and a dozen systems learned, I still have a hard time not grabbing a feat or dipping a level into X to prevent myself from headlining in a campaign. Don't get me wrong, sometimes it is great to walk to the table of a one/two shot campaign with a character that can blow away the stars and only have expended a cantrip.
TL;DR: Give them some time to get use to it. The way my second DM got me to relax was to give me a random race and class and make a character based on that while only using the core book (3.5 at the time). I ended up with a dwarf monk. As a rehabilitating powergamer it was a rough campaign for me when I knew all I needed was this feat from book X to make things so much easier. Luckily, the rest of the players in the new group also limited themselves to the core book and remade there characters with with the same rules I was given. The funny thing is, you find out a lot of interesting things about a class when you are not focusing on damage, speed, or something else.
Another way the DM helped kicked me of that crutch was he gave all the base classes a number. We rolled twice, the first number was your first level class, the second was your second level class. for every 3 levels you had in one class, you had to have at least one in the other. You learn to find synergy when you are a level 1 cleric and a level 3 ranger. Now, most people would not like that idea, but for me, it worked and helped kick my urge to power game. Yeah, you are weaker then most other PC's, but creating a back story as to why you are what you are can be even more fun.
Wow, that TL;DR turned out to be longer then the post... Uhh, oh well. TLA;SNR (To Long Again; Still Not Reading), years later, I still have to fight my gaming roots to not power game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Reassure your players that they'll have just as much fun playing the game the way it was intended, and that you're a good GM who will challenge them and reward them all the same.
So I'm running a short game for a while, and well my players are so used to sooo much cheese that things were awkward when starting up.
The Stats:
Hearing statements like, "An 8 is pretty bad, but a 7, that's just terrible!" and "A 13 isn't terrible, but it's not good" and seeing a player get all frowny face because she wasn't sure what to do with her stats (None were below 10).Piecemeal Armor:
One of the players wanted to use piecemeal armor, it turns out when you build a suit of medium armor with piecemeal rules it's much better and incurs no movement penalty. So those rules straight out banned.Combat:
One player was wielding two weapons to use two combat maneuvers as a full round action, (checked the rules, it doesn't work like that).The Rolls:
Trying to run Jade Regent with the caravan rules, two of the players both kept rolling and taking the better roll. I had to ask them to please not do that.They aren't terrible players, but they are so used to cheese and a harsh DM (not me) where if they didn't cheese they would be screwed. They are used to gestalt, and feats that bumped up their stats, and everything stacking, and taking flaws and traits, and getting feats for writing a background, and looking for rule exploitations just to be on par with their campaign (and still being outshined by the DM's OPNPCs), I know because I've played in those campaigns.
But I'm trying to run a game not drenched in such cheese, and so I have to convince them that a 14 is indeed a good number, that a 20 in an ability score at 1st level is amazing, that there are DCs below 25, that I'm not going to set them in a fight with a black pudding at 1st level, that they aren't going to be outshined by every npc that they meet.
Overall, it's going good.
So has anyone else dealt with this situation?
You understand the cheese and the causes, you are trying to run a cleaner ship as it were (no cheese all over the place). I salute you sir, and wish you good luck. I have run into a lot of cheese in my time as a dm.
Reassure your players that they'll have just as much fun playing the game the way it was intended, and that you're a good GM who will challenge them and reward them all the same.
Good guy dm means they don't have to be power-gamers and always focus on beefing stats just to survive.
Start with reading the rules :)
Oh I did (I even double checked to make sure my logic and the rules were getting along), but if but I just don't see the logic in allowing someone to bull rush someone after disarming someone in the same turn just because they have a second weapon. What it is it about the second weapon that allows them to do another action (which doesn't necessarily involve said weapon) they couldn't do without it in their hand?
Getting a dagger so you can bull rush people after disarming them is treading along fuzzy rules logic.
I think they specify melee attack so that people don't start tripping and bull rushing with arrows (which don't specify range or adjacency, now with a feat such things might be possible). I'm all for enabling the players, just as long as it makes sense and is fair.
|
Start with reading the rules :)Oh I did (I even double checked to make sure my logic and the rules were getting along), but if but I just don't see the logic in allowing someone to bull rush someone after disarming someone in the same turn just because they have a second weapon. What it is it about the second weapon that allows them to do another action (which doesn't necessarily involve said weapon) they couldn't do without it in their hand?
Getting a dagger so you can bull rush people after disarming them is treading along fuzzy rules logic.
I think they specify melee attack so that people don't start tripping and bull rushing with arrows (which don't specify range or adjacency). I'm all for enabling the players, just as long as it makes sense and is fair.
disarm, sunder, and trip are attacks and can be used as part of a Full Attack, replacing attacks within the burst on a 1:1 basis. You Can Sunder + Disarm + Trip an opponent (if you have 3 attacks). You can also use a Weapon and its Weapon bonuses in those actions. (And with a Trip weapon, drop the weapon if you blow the Trip).
Bull Rush, Overrun, ... are Standard Actions in their own right and cannot be combined with anything other than a Move Action.
You can't Disarm then Bull Rush in one Full Attack action - Bull Rush can't be part of a Full Attack.
disarm, sunder, and trip are attacks and can be used as part of a Full Attack, replacing attacks within the burst on a 1:1 basis. You Can Sunder + Disarm + Trip an opponent (if you have 3 attacks). You can also use a Weapon and its Weapon bonuses in those actions. (And with a Trip weapon, drop the weapon if you blow the Trip).
Bull Rush, Overrun, ... are Standard Actions in their own right and cannot be combined with anything other than a Move Action.
You can't Disarm then Bull Rush in one Full Attack action - Bull Rush can't be part of a Full Attack.
Well all of those do make sense, I guess I ended up taking a stricter interpretation of the rules because of the silliness I was presented. That and one of the players said that it could be used in place of melee attack (after rereading the rules, I see that they were excluding "as part of a charge") I think I'll take the looser interpretation from now on.
Even so, that strict interpretation is still consistent; strict but not necessarily wrong.
Even so, that strict interpretation is still consistent; strict but not necessarily wrong.
Do you also tell your players that they can't Power Attack on a full-attack because those attacks with melee weapons somehow aren't melee attacks?
It's wrong. It's unambiguously wrong.
Bring on the attacks. I made a misdemeanor in my interpretation of the rules because I didn't want to have half an hour discussion in the middle of the game about how ridiculous it is that having a dagger in your off-hand somehow enables you to bull rush someone that you just disarmed that you wouldn't have been able to do otherwise.
Or maybe take a chill pill. I made a judgement call, not an "official ruling", I'm not running PFS, I'm trying to run a fun but believable game, and I don't know every rule by heart or with absolute certainty; the core rulebook alone is almost 600 pages, so sometimes I might misread something here or there.
And also, the judgement call wasn't wrong (even if the reasoning was off).
|
|
Bring on the attacks. I made a misdemeanor in my interpretation of the rules because I didn't want to have half an hour discussion in the middle of the game about how ridiculous it is that having a dagger in your off-hand somehow enables you to bull rush someone that you just disarmed that you wouldn't have been able to do otherwise.
This is illegal by the rules anyway. You could have just pointed out that bull rushes are standard actions, which preclude the character from taking a full attack action.
All I did was point out that using a dagger in the off-hand does allow a character to make a second CM in a full-attack, as long as it is a disarm, trip, or sunder.
You're well versed with combat maneuvers (at least more than I am), maybe help me figure something out, Penalties for multiple combat maneuvers