|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Definitely play what you want. It has never been about classes, or races, or broken builds, etc. The real issue has always been with jerk players who try to be the center of the universe for the entire game session or the few who intentionally create conflict or try to ruin other player's (or the GM's) enjoyment. Just don't be that guy/gal and everything will be fine.
Explore! Report! Cooperate!
Depends on your local area. Different people and cliques react differently to things. I know I've seen summoner or alchemist, or gunslinger treated like Frankenstein's monster at some tables I've been to.
|
|
Depends on your local area. Different people and cliques react differently to things. I know I've seen summoner or alchemist, or gunslinger treated like Frankenstein's monster at some tables I've been to.
I have seen some serious hate towards summoners. That has quieted after they banned some of the archetypes.
Honestly as shifty and Mr. Jonquethas stated above jerk players are what are not welcome. Also keep in mind you may be going to a jerks table as well that hates certain things.
|
|
Hi all. About to start back in PFS again and wondered in your personal experience what classes are always welcome and which are not wanted. In MY area monks, rogues, and summoners was not wanted. I'm wanting to be a cleric this go around, think anyone would complain?
Unwanted in an area? Make whatever you want. Unwanted at a specific table? Varies by table. The only time I opt to play a different PC is when the table already has 1 (or more) of those, and has a lack that could be filled by another of my PCs. But even that's a matter of personal choice.
Play want you want. Try to either avoid jerks, or nudge them into non-jerk behavior.
Caveat: If you know your GM is new-ish, warning him or her before bringing a Gunslinger, Alchemist, or Summoner (or any other non-Core, complicated class) is polite.
Caveat: If you know your GM is new-ish, warning him or her before bringing a Gunslinger, Alchemist, or Summoner (or any other non-Core, complicated class) is polite.
Magus was a nightmare for me when I started personally.
|
|
I'm not sure a warning based on class is necessary, but if you have a PC that can take generally unusual actions or breaks the "normal" rules it is a good idea to bring that to the GMs attention before the session starts. In fact, you have a responsibility to give the GM a head's up if you are using anything outside of the core assumptions , i.e. additional resources, so s/he can read about it. However, there are many things that are somewhat considered "normal" at this point that are outside the core assumption so ymmv.
Be careful with necromancers and paladins- especially together! Some misuse these classes, and the knee-jerk reaction can be bad (although these are my two personal favorites)
How did you come to the conclusion that those classes were unwanted?
There are plenty of times I've seen someone groan when something is brought to the table. Rogues and clerics have gotten groans before too, because not everyone loves it when your a meatshield or a healbot or a skillmonkey. Really depends on who you play with.
Hi all. About to start back in PFS again and wondered in your personal experience what classes are always welcome and which are not wanted. In MY area monks, rogues, and summoners was not wanted. I'm wanting to be a cleric this go around, think anyone would complain?
I asked this question a while ago. I got two answers:
Remember, you will be joining a table of people you don't know (and don't know you). So, you need to be prepared to "put your best foot forward."
|
|
I would add a caveat to the general above opinions that you come back to the thread and tell us of your experiences 'playing what you want'. While I've tried to promote that same attitude at the tables I've run, GM's have only so much control about it if the rest of the players don't make a noticable issue with it. (i.e. while the GM is perusing one character or aiding in purchasing items before the run, and the rest quietly browbeat a player into a certain class.)
Hearing your experiences jumping back in would add to my, and everyone's I would think, storehouse to act on in the future, at least.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've only ever once been told how I should be playing my character - a Rogue - people were somehow morally outraged that I wasn't sneaking about waiting for the sneak attacks, but instead simply beating the enemy up and moving into position as opportunity presented. They had really fixed views on how things 'were supposed to be done'.
My buddy who was at the table with me that day and I still laugh about it, and we never saw those dudes again. For a bunch of players who 'knew so much' their minds were as closed as their mouths were open, and their games skill blew harder than the storm that sank the Spanish Armada.
Listen not to peanuts who tell you how or what to play, for they tend to be Muppets with no clue anyhow.
|
I don't think I've heard people in the way you defined.
However, I have advised a rogue player to hit the guys I had pinned because they can't fight back (IE no dex.) vs. non flanked opponents. I didn't say it the first 2 times.
I also advised a Samurai intercepting flanks from my rogue that I was now offering flanks on him (to the enemy)...Yes it was only in jest, but it did help to enlighten him on future rounds.
|
|
Gms can be just as bad about browbeating someone not to play a class.
You are never going to please everyone. Ive taken flak for being a cleric because people said you shouldnt have to heal in combat or because there was another cleric so one of us was redundant, for having the "wrong" domains or spells or feat choices or equipment or stat spread. Any choice I assume some point in the future someone is going to question it for some reason. I find the more versatile the class the worse it is because different people have different preconceptions about what you should be doing that you cant be everything. I guess what Im getting at is that nothing is going to be groan free. If you want to play a cleric play one, they are fun and I heartily recommend the class, but not if its because thats what you feel like you have to play to be accepted.
Heh. I played First STeps, Part 2 with three Clerics in the party, once. They each brought different things to the party. Pharasma, Sarenrae and Zon-Kuthon, were the dieties represented.
I don't think the party was overly disturbed. We had fun. And at least one of the enemy skeletons was controlled by one of the clerics, and served as fodder for the amoeba, saving the party members from some of that damage...
No classes in square dancing. I would find those terribly unwelcome. Advanced Java Programming would be nice, though.
My old Pathfinder troupe botched a mission, and as punishment had to participate in the country's annual gladiatorial games to reclaim our honor. Our GM rolled up several different parties with widely varying composition as other entrants. The ones I remember most were the party of all clerics (SUPER effective!), all monks (pretty damn good, a ghoul party (with class levels), and of course the champion- an ogre with class levels and magic items.
My point is this: unorthodox party construction can be a huge boon in the right situation, and is hella fun to play against in our NPC "simulation"
|
The classes nowadays have so much versatility that the lines between the "four party roles" hardly exist. Pick one thing and do it well, pick another thing and do it passably, and you should be welcome in any party. Redundany can be a good thing. Remember the old saying "Two is one and one is none." When that first cleric drops, they may wish they still had a second.
|
One thing I tell new players is this:
In PFS you do no't want to specialize so much in one thing. Be sure you can bring two aspects to a table. One for combat, one for out of combat. The easiest example if your a rogue is, "Bring your Sneak Attack, and Diplomacy"
A lot of scenarios have little combat and more roleplay and characters who are optimized for combat quickly become bored because they cannot do anything. It is good, for a players own inclusion sake to be sure they can cover a couple RP spectrums "on their character sheets". I say on their character sheets because I have a group with a young woman who has a great deal of social skills on her character but is very shy. She will often make the roles and have her friend do the talking for her. Very nice people, one just is not that good with roleplaying due to shyness.
So as has been said. There is no such thing as a "class you should not play".
People in my lodge call my elven cavalier an ineffective fighter with too few feats until a couple games when my immediate action aid another, my focus on defense and party defense vs. damage dealing, saved several parties members lives over the scenarios.
People will have preconceived notions on any class you play. Just play what you want, and prove them wrong.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's really not classes that aren't welcome so much as certain people aren't welcome. As long as you're bringing something to the table we're glad to have you. If you act the ass or do something stupid you're going to be unwelcome regardless of what you are playing.
|
Hi all. About to start back in PFS again and wondered in your personal experience what classes are always welcome and which are not wanted. In MY area monks, rogues, and summoners was not wanted. I'm wanting to be a cleric this go around, think anyone would complain?
Direct all monk naysayer's to me. I'll set them straight. :p
More seriously, to echo many others, play what you enjoy. Most of the "unwelcome" I have heard of is more from specific player's or builds than classes in general.
|
|
Well there are some classes and combinations that might be looked at a bit condescending, but it´s not as much about those as about the way you play it then. Just like most above said.
What has become a bit unpopular around here are the super damage builds, like two-handers with power attack etc, or summoners and characters overall that draw too much time and attention onto them or make things less exciting for the rest. Whatever you play, giving others a chance to do something meaning full too is always best for a good group experience.
More seriously, to echo many others, play what you enjoy. Most of the "unwelcome" I have heard of is more from specific player's or builds than classes in general.
I can only speak locally, of course, but I find there's a lot of truth to that.
Even more so, one bad character or build can ruin the connotation of a class.
Locally, a handful of us hate the oracle because we're burnt out on the duel-cursed misfortune (frequently one level dip) oracle since we've seen too many of them, and we've seen too many of them played by cocky players who slow-down the game but rarely roleplay.
We've seen too many of the same magus, so while he's not an unwelcome class, few are enthusiastic since shocking-grasp on your keen, extended crit-range spell storing whatever is a little more than overdone and boring.
We have great examples of how people can build good rogues, wizards, monks, alchemists, illusionists, because these classes have characters who are strong and personable but not necessarily cookie-cutter.
I believe, locally again, that unwelcome classes come from player experiences with poor or personality-deficient examples of characters from aforementioned classes. It's all too easy to think "All ninjas suck" because that 5-Con ninja was an absolute coward, and use that mentality to beat-down other people who want to play that class.
If your local chapter doesn't really like rogues, summoners, and monks, why not ask the people about their experiences with the classes. Usually their complaints are valid (in that something about the classes/characters bothered them), but shouldn't stop you from creating a character you enjoy playing. Being sensitive to your compatriots' bad experiences can be a good thing if it leads to more acceptance of classes previously thought to be poor.
|
The shocking grasp magi are crying in their beer in season 5 :) Demons are immune to electricity.
The other thing to consider is that in tier 8-9 and 10-11, you'll generally want NPCs to die quickly, as they can have abilities and/or damage output that your PC group can't suck down for long.
One or two "for fun" PCs can be a real problem in these tiers.
|
|
.
If your local chapter doesn't really like rogues, summoners, and monks, why not ask the people about their experiences with the classes. Usually their complaints are valid (in that something about the classes/characters bothered them), but shouldn't stop you from creating a character you enjoy playing. Being sensitive to your compatriots' bad experiences can be a good thing if it leads to more acceptance of classes previously thought to be poor.
This.
I played a Summoner out of the APG Beta all the way through EotT. I got a lot of mixed reactions and responses; usually when I dug deeper as to why there was resistance to my playing a Summoner it was in response to a bad experience at a table with one.
Any class can be abused and played in a way that is not fun for the rest of the table. Some do lend themselves to it more than others. If you can figure out what it ways the class has been played in a negative way at a PFS table for these players, you'll not only help yourself avoid doing so but likely demonstrate that their issue stemmed from bad experiences with other players versus the class itself.
