Ok so i talked with 3 of the members of the group talked Bout in the original post. As it turns out the group has asked the ranger to leave the group because he in the session that started this thread and one that I missed he continued to criticize the entire group. A similar dynamic occurred with him single handedly bad mouthing the group.
I asked their perspective on what happened in MY session and it turns out that most of the folks who posted here were correct about the Players. 1) they were dealing with the jerk ranger, 2) they were surprised a my turn of character, 3) they felt the inquisitor was always more valuae than the monk. 4) one felt embarrassed that I made a few rolls that he did not when he should have (Murphy struck him hard that night). On the whole all of liked my idea but the group situation was ugly and it changed even more with a departure. The chief "criticism" was that knowledge skills were being covered on the whole with the wizard. In other words the issues got aired in a good way.
I asked about how to proceed from here. With the GM also in attendance we realized something, I never signed off on my paperwork that night. The record keeping of that session for my character was not done becAuse I did not wait that night. So the GM said to me that if I forfeit that nights experience and rewards (which technincally I already did) then I could show up with a fresh LV 2 character. Obviously this is good news. I e begun to dive in to building a character. Will build a front line guy of some kind. Not sure what. The group was happy with an Inquisitor before and with no ranger we la k a stealth scout so it seems appealing for now. Got 48 hours to make one. If someone wants to make a suggestion ill read it.
Tiefli g magus and human dervish infiltrator inquisitor are my fave ATM.
I'm very happy for you that only one guy there was a jerk, and every one else was reasonable. I'm also glad you get a mulligan on your character. Hey, maybe name him "Mulligan."
Your idea have having a character with usefulness both in and out of combat is great. Now just design him with the flavor you like best. You've probably already read the inquisitor's guide. If not, here it is: Inquisitor's Guide
I would look thru the description of domain abilities and then choose your deity and archetypes accordingly.
I'm very happy that everything turned out well for you!
I suggest you start a new thread if you want to ask for advice on building an inquisitor.
Your joking right? In a REAL sports team, the weakest links are eliminated until you win. And until you DO get rid of weakest link...oh yeah, they are belittled and mocked to no ends (if not by their team-mates, then the coach...and then there are the fans...). Not a great analogy there.
PFS is a team game. When you're on a REAL team, (baseball, soccer, basketball) you don't belittle the weakest link, you find a way to win given the weakest link, and if you lose you don't b~%## about it.
Sounds like someone had a problem in Tee Ball.
Once someone starts paying you to play PFS professionally, then extreme optimization should rule the day. Anything short of being paid to play is by definition amateur, a pick up game, played with friends for fun.
If someone comes in suboptimal when you're in a GenCon tournament, feel free to complain.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, let's talk about fun for the player vs deadweight for the group.
So a lot of players I know have a great time thinking up sub-optimal characters (armorless fighters, generalists, pretty much any rogue, improv weaponers). And they sit down, excited about picking up logs (or belts) and whacking enemies down.
Then they actually get into the combats, and their sub-optimization actually shows. They try to do their tricks, and keep missing. They didn't build their skill monkeys with enough int because they wanted a high charisma; so are less charming than that 7 charisma optimized skillmonkey somehow. In and out of character, they feel weak. Eventaully they withdrawl and either quit the game or ask for another character sheet.
It's fine if the table is ALL sub-optimal, btw; then it's just the GMs burden to lower the power of the encounters. But if everyone else is specialized in a job and does it well, and you don't have job you do well, that's a problem; not for them, but for you.
It's more fun if you feel comptent at your speciality; and as PF is at least 75% geared towards combat, you should be good at that (as an added bonus you should be good out as well, but a lot of that comes from just "good roleplaying").
With all of that said, I don't believe you should be picked on; but you have to understand that the party having to use buffing/healing/give lots of magic items just to make you feel semi-useful can't be exciting for them either. And you probably won't have fun with it either; cool of a concept as it might be.
There is still a lack of connection here in some of this discussion.
Some people are talking about a suboptimal build. The word suboptimal is not very precise, but for most people indicates something along the lines of ‘pretty good but not great.’ So this build could be better, but it still functions. these people are saying that a ‘suboptimal’ build is perfectly acceptable.
Some people are talking about dead weight build. This term for most people is much worse. It indicates that not only is something not helpful, it is actually a hindrance. So this build does not function (rarely manages to hit, hurt, save, etc…). These people are saying that a ‘dead weight’ build is no fun for the others at the table.
I have no problems sitting playing with one or more ‘suboptimal builds. However, after a while I would get tired of constantly playing with ‘dead weight’ builds very often.
Note: Technically, a ‘dead weight’ is also ‘suboptimal.’ But most people will not use both terms to mean the same thing.
In this case, I would say this was very clearly a case of a possible ‘suboptimal’ build not a ‘dead weight’ build. Even though many people are acting like the PC is ‘dead weight,’ the single time it was used, it appeared to function reasonably well. As far as we can tell, It did hit. It did damage. It made some skill checks. Did not use up the rest of the parties resources. Etc… Remember, this is PFS not a home group. It is unreasonable to lambaste someone because the build might be worse later. You don’t know who or what will be at the table with you in the future.
I have a 5th level sorc that will probably not gain many more levels. He did just fine at lower levels, but he was my first PFS char and I made so not so great choices. I am now finding that he doesn’t work as well as I’d hoped. I’m not sure he could ever classify as a ‘dead weight’ but I will stop playing him long before that becomes an issue.
I have 3 other PFS characters. I would bet very few people would call any of them perfect optimal combat machines. Many would call them ‘suboptimal.’ I don’t think anyone could fairly call them ‘dead weight.’ I don’t think anyone has any problem sitting at a PFS table with any of the four. I pull my own weight, I am not a drain on others resources, I have contributed decently to every single scenario in and out of combat, and I’m having fun. Again, they are all suboptimal and none are dead weight.
|
Your joking right? In a REAL sports team, the weakest links are eliminated until you win. And until you DO get rid of weakest link...oh yeah, they are belittled and mocked to no ends (if not by their team-mates, then the coach...and then there are the fans...). Not a great analogy there.
PFS is a team game. When you're on a REAL team, (baseball, soccer, basketball) you don't belittle the weakest link, you find a way to win given the weakest link, and if you lose you don't b~%## about it.
Sounds like someone had a problem in Tee Ball.
Once someone starts paying you to play PFS professionally, then extreme optimization should rule the day. Anything short of being paid to play is by definition amateur, a pick up game, played with friends for fun.
If someone comes in suboptimal when you're in a GenCon tournament, feel free to complain.
Wow...either your team is on the bottom of your league and you all don't care because you have given up, or you REALLY haven't played any amateur league games. If your playing a PUG or with friends, that isn't really a sports team now is it (it's a bunch of friends...which is actually a better analogy to a PFS game in all honesty)? Even in an amateur league, your not performing well and dragging the team down, yeah people who are watching WILL mock you. Hell some of those fans are worse then pro sports fans. Your team will cut you for somebody else as well if your dragging them down.
|
|
It's fine if the table is ALL sub-optimal, btw; then it's just the GMs burden to lower the power of the encounters. But if everyone else is specialized in a job and does it well, and you don't have job you do well, that's a problem; not for them, but for you.It's more fun if you feel comptent at your speciality; and as PF is at least 75% geared towards combat, you should be good at that (as an added bonus you should be good out as well, but a lot of that comes from just "good roleplaying").
The first part doesn't work in PFS. Your have to run as written so the party will just TPK at that point. Also for the second part, PFS is written mostly as about half RP and half combat. They generally have 3-4 combat which should take about 2 hours to run by a decent GM which leaves 2 hours for RP.
|
|
Some people are talking about a suboptimal build. The word suboptimal is not very precise, but for most people indicates something along the lines of ‘pretty good but not great.’ So this build could be better, but it still functions. these people are saying that a ‘suboptimal’ build is perfectly acceptable.
Just a side note to this...I have a build that at level 6 is capable of doing 120 damage. It is SUBOPTIMAL because I am not using the absolute BEST option for this type of a build. There comes a point in optimization where good enough happens and everything else is overkill.