Self-explanatory title and discussion.
I understand many players optimize their characters to show their heroics (as the numbers symbolize that), though at the same time the game isn't exactly developed for players to be absolutely optimal.
Wouldn't players who do nothing but optimize their characters lead to trivial encounters in-game? Here are some examples of what probably happens:
"A Horde of Giants charge at you; what do you do?"
"I'll just shoot them with my Intensified Maximized Empowered Fireball of Doom and Sadness for 10D6 + 100 Damage with a DC 30 Reflex Save and kill them all with a boom!" *Dice Rolled* "Total damage to each creature is 135, are they dead?"
"Yup. What a complete waste of time..."
In the above text, the Spellcaster deals so much damage with a single spell a horde of giants are a complete joke. And all it cost him was a 3rd level Spell Slot!
"You head into town, a noble approaches you and credits you on your deeds and wants to hire you for something. Roll for Sense Mo-oh, never mind, you have a +30 to your roll, don't bother. He's actually a demon in disguise. What do you do?"
"I'll just banish him with my Dismissal spell with a DC of 33!"
"And this guy only has a +12 to his Will Save; even rolling a 20 he fails. *sigh*"
In this example, the Cleric has so high of Skills and Save DCs that the creature in question didn't even stand a chance of doing anything worthwhile.
Personally, I would hardly constitute that as fun, which I am of the belief that people playing the game is the sole reason for playing it; to have fun.
What point is there to optimize if it makes the game seem so bland and easy? Sure, not all things should be OH MY GOD IT'S SO DIFFICULT, but it shouldn't be BOOM, HAHAHAHAHA! all the time either.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
I knew this avatar would get a good workout
The DM has UNLIMITED resources.
Define Unlimited. In that he can do whatever he wants? That is even worse than the Optimizers in which the thread discusses.
"Okay Mr. Optimizers, we got a room filled with 20 Dragons, what do you do?"
Not only is that not fun, it's also an abuse of the GM's power, which actually makes the game even less fun; it actually makes it into a PVP sort of game, not a PVE game. The GM runs the Environment, and while in some circumstances a DMPC is a good idea, he is not of himself his own player (and thusly not one to just kill the game like that).
Ever heard of Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies? That's pretty much what you're proposing.
Optimization needn't lead to boring encounters so long as the GM is prepared either ahead of time (having increased challenge for the adventure to compensate) or is good at adjusting things on the fly.
The problem occurs when only some players are optimizing while others at the same table do not. In this case, increasing the challenge for the super powered PCs can threaten the regular PCs with a quick and lopsided death.
To beat the dead horse and repeat was has been said endless times, you need to know who you are playing with and stick with groups that mirror your own playing style. That way everybody can be happy.
|
... The above examples are of high level play and a caster using an intensified, maximized, empowered fireball is hardly optimized. And those metamagics add to his spell's level so it's not a lvl 3 slot and if he's using metamagic rods then that's a hefty pricetag for 3 fireballs of mediocre (at that level) per day. Let him enjoy his fun.
I feel the OP doesn't understand high level play is super heroes not dungeon crawling fantasy. If you want a gritty fantasy campaign play a different system or modified E6.
First of all, a simply answer to op: no.
The DM has UNLIMITED resources.Define Unlimited. In that he can do whatever he wants? That is even worse than the Optimizers in which the thread discusses.
"Okay Mr. Optimizers, we got a room filled with 20 Dragons, what do you do?"
Not only is that not fun, it's also an abuse of the GM's power, which actually makes the game even less fun; it actually makes it into a PVP sort of game, not a PVE game. The GM runs the Environment, and while in some circumstances a DMPC is a good idea, he is not of himself his own player (and thusly not one to just kill the game like that).
Ever heard of Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies? That's pretty much what you're proposing.
Now, aside some obviously exaggerated situation in op, will, you player optimize? Me, the dm, can do it. Go beyond, you don't even need to optimize against players who do. Just make multiple encounters in a single day. Magic users are fine with one or two encounters, even when optimized. So go with 3,4 or 5 encounters in a day.
... The above examples are of high level play and a caster using an intensified, maximized, empowered fireball is hardly optimized. And those metamagics add to his spell's level so it's not a lvl 3 slot and if he's using metamagic rods then that's a hefty pricetag for 3 fireballs of mediocre (at that level) per day. Let him enjoy his fun.
I feel the OP doesn't understand high level play is super heroes not dungeon crawling fantasy. If you want a gritty fantasy campaign play a different system or modified E6.
Spell Perfection says otherwise.
What other Metamagics would you propose he use? With traits invested, he could add in some form of Heighten to increase the DC; perhaps a Burning Metamagic?
We could even propose he add in a Rod's effects to that Fireball, so even then it's technically not "optimized". Even so, it was merely an example. I am sure that the spell in question could instead be a Mass Save or Suck spell, or a Remove You From the Face of the World spell, and it'd still get the same effect; the encounter gets trivialized.
In addition, several known "superheroes" actually have abilities that are stronger than what's listed in the book, in which case they would be as quantifiable as the Pathfinder devs quantify God statistics.
I don't think optimization leads to boring encounters by itself.
Things get boring if the GM has not made the monsters more difficult or strategised to make encounters more interesting.
Things get boring if the PCs aren't around the same power level, which makes the first point extremely difficult.
I have a party that is underoptimized and it can get pretty dull in the sense that they're all lvl 8 and having trouble with CR 5 encounters. When the GM is struggling NOT to kill the PCs you're usually left with characters not resembling heroes but a bunch of nobodies that you're tempted to TPK on a whim so that they can roll up actually interesting characters.
I've been on both sides of the optimized and unoptimized fence and neither is particularly pretty. I am actually thankful that some classes are just plain underpowered so that its easy to adjust to an under optimized group.
An "Intensified Maximized Empowered Fireball of Doom and Sadness" would be a level 9 would only be available to a level 17+ arcane caster, to get 135 damage to each would only apply to Frost Giants which are vulnerable to fire. A level 17+ party would rarely have a problem with CR9 or lower giants anyway (Frost Giants are CR9 and only have an average 133 HPs, Fire Giants are CR 10 and have an average of 142 HPs and immunity to fire). An optimized level 9 wizard (the peak of optimized fireball power, the wizard's fireballs will never get any more powerful) would be able to cast a maximized fireball at spell level 5 to do that amount of damage using a 16,500GP empowered metamagic rod or by casting an empowered fireball at spell level 4 using a 27,000GP maximize metamagic rod, but would be very limited when not casting fireball (needs magical lineage (fireball) and gifted adept(fireball) traits to make it work. Hardly has much to do with optimization though since an unoptimized level 10 wizard with a maximizing meta-magic rod and a prepared empowered fireball of spell level 5 can also do that damage.
What you are complaining about is not optimization but the sheer power magic users, especially when they have free access to all kinds of expensive magic items.
Casters > Martials in all senses, no questions asked. They are practically the pinnacle of optimization, therefore it is more likely that they will be utilized in comparison to Martials.
But if you want to take a Martial standpoint, it all leads to the same solution; hitting things, and hard. Because for optimization purposes, that's all a Martial is designed to do. If anything, it leads to scenarios even more boring than a Caster, so even in the fun department, a Caster is superior. Imagine that! Here's an abstract example as to what an Optimized Martial is good for.
"A Horde of Giants charge you, what do you do?"
"I swing at them with my Colossal Sized Bastard Sword with +30 to Hit for 4D8 + 32 damage per swing. I kill them all in 3 rounds without them even hitting me."
But we can substitute "Horde of Giants" with any creature; Balor, Pit Fiend, etc. All it equates to is the same PC swinging away at an enemy for 1-2 rounds, 3 tops. A fully-optimized Fighter on average slaughters an average joe Balor in 2-3 hits, with some hits to spare against several Balors. This doesn't even include Criticals, which the Fighter if optimized properly, has a statistical 25% chance to inflict (and auto-confirm), and the Fighter is your average joe Martial. We're not even talking other more optimal builds that would one-shot such enemies.
Another thing is that I simply listed an example as to what would generally happen. The details aren't fine-tuned and ipso-facto because it's an abstract example; you have a bunch of guys who get incinerated by a single AoE spell, or a bonus is so high there is no point to rolling, it just happens. Except it's All. The. Time.
That's exactly what I am talking about.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So... is there a point to this thread besides complaining about spellcasters destroying encounters with a CR of only half their level?
If you want to just rehash the same tired old gripes about "munchkins" and "optimizers" and "rollplaying," there are literally dozens of old threads you can look up and browse. You can cheer at the posts you agree with, boo at the ones you disagree with, but most importantly, you won't be cluttering up the forums with arguments we've all heard before.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"And this guy only has a +12 to his Will Save; even rolling a 20 he fails. *sigh*"
Just a note: natural 20's are successes on saves and attack rolls (including CMB checks).
It sounds like you're just burnt out on Pathfinder.
What you describe is essentially what would happen anyway, only in less rounds than non-optimized. So the mage has to fling a few more fireballs, or the cleric has to try Dismissal another time before it works (since after all your scenarios show characters excelling in areas they should be excelling in).
A badass (optimized) PC needs badass challenges. Not "Rocks Fall", but a middle ground.
If that demon in your example had done his research, he would've realized that the priest would give him more than he bargained for. He needs to pass that job on to a superior.
So... is there a point to this thread besides complaining about spellcasters destroying encounters with a CR of only half their level?
If you want to just rehash the same tired old gripes about "munchkins" and "optimizers" and "rollplaying," there are literally dozens of old threads you can look up and browse. You can cheer at the posts you agree with, boo at the ones you disagree with, but most importantly, you won't be cluttering up the forums with arguments we've all heard before.
The thread is in the "General Discussion" forum. If the whole point of the "General Discussion" forum is not to talk about all kinds of things (whether it's complaints or otherwise), the site officiators would've either scrapped it, locked it, or moved it to a thread more appropriate to what it addresses (for your viewpoint, it'd be the Carebear Corner. Also, you ignored the factor that it was an abstract example of optimized PCs making encounters trivial). Since none of these things have been done, its place is valid, ergo your argument of it not being so is invalid. Score 1 for me.
The thread was not created to simply "rehash the same tired old gripes," as I'm sure there aren't very many, if any, of these "same tired old gripes" that involved "spellcasters destroying encounters with a CR of only half their level." In fact, most of them involved a more in-depth view of PC's facing equal or (several) higher level encounters and making a complete joke out of them. Just because I was abstract about my explanation gives you justification to be a jerk about my creation of this thread? Were I more informative about the random situations I placed, you would not be condescending about it? (Good to know for next time.)
Also, that last line sounds exactly like what people on Facebook do. I don't like Facebook for my own reasons, but you don't see me make fun of people who use it. In addition, it's more rude to revive a thread that is dead (in your view, as a beaten horse) than it is to create one. It's not like we're the FBI keeping files on dangerous criminals or organizations or anything...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Without context, this really does just sound like a bunch of griping.
With context we could offer advice.
What are we supposed to say in response?
The Players don't build encounters. That is in the sole purview of the GM. If they're blowing through them....what are you doing?
Without context, this really does just sound like a bunch of griping.
With context we could offer advice.
What are we supposed to say in response?
I do not like pudding! Pudding is bad because it comes in little plastic cups! Commence with Agreement!
Without context, this really does just sound like a bunch of griping.
With context we could offer advice.
What are we supposed to say in response?
The Players don't build encounters. That is in the sole purview of the GM. If they're blowing through them....what are you doing?
Exaggerated? Yes, this was never disputed. Still holds a point? I'd say so, considering that it still means over-optimized characters take the fun out of the game and trivialize it.
Even with a more concise explanation, it's the same thing except not exaggerated, so would your response even be different than what it was? Instead of you saying "I'm exaggerating and griping" you'd just say "I'm griping." Tell me exactly how that would speed along the conversation?
At this rate there might as well not be one. So I'm done with it, as I'm sure you all are.
Without context, this really does just sound like a bunch of griping.
With context we could offer advice.
What are we supposed to say in response?
The Players don't build encounters. That is in the sole purview of the GM. If they're blowing through them....what are you doing?
Exaggerated? Yes, this was never disputed. Still holds a point? I'd say so, considering that it still means over-optimized characters take the fun out of the game and trivialize it.
Even with a more concise explanation, it's the same thing except not exaggerated, so would your response even be different than what it was? Instead of you saying "I'm exaggerating and griping" you'd just say "I'm griping." Tell me exactly how that would speed along the conversation?
At this rate there might as well not be one. So I'm done with it, as I'm sure you all are.
Well there isn't a point that your making. Theres a complete lack of hard facts. Do extremely powerful builds trounce some encounters? Sure. Are there extremely diverse and varied methods of adding many different mechanics to an encounter so that you may challenge your players? Definitely.
Optimizing characters leads to MORE interesting encounters, in my experience.
When the DM can take off the kid gloves and use interesting enemies and powerful enemies, the game is more fun.
A horde of giants is a joke for all but the most gimped characters past a certain level.
A hit squad of enemies with special abilities, spells, and so forth? Much less of a joke.
Our group of level 8 characters murdered a Fiendish Elder Mud Elemental in two rounds. That was less than interesting (though to be fair, luck with saves and such had something to do with that, and if it had gotten its mitts on us it could have been very annoying and taken longer).
The group of 6, individually MUCH weaker, teleporting and spellcasting Hounds of Tindalos on the other hand...
More difficult. More interesting.
*Looks in to thread*
"This thread is proceeding as expected"
Long Answer
My question would be "Fun for who?"
Is the problem that you enjoy DM'ing the game less?
Is there another PC that reduces the fun of playing your PC?
People think different things are fun. Some people really like RP intensive political drama scenarios. Other people like wargame-like tactical combat play. Neither is wrong, they just need to play in games with other PCs and a DM who can help provide the right type of "fun."
A lot of my friends like to optimize. Sometimes its just theorycrafting, others are characters they bring to the table. It doesn't usually reduce anyone else's fun, since we are a group that doesn't mind that kind of play.
Short Answer
No
Some people really like RP intensive political drama scenarios. Other people like wargame-like tactical combat play.
Some people enjoy and achieve both at the same time.
It was not my intention to set up any false dichotomies.