Powergaming and being a whiny GM


Advice

51 to 100 of 132 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Gargs454 wrote:
Generally speaking, the more options there are in the game, the more powerful the PCs will become simply because there are greater chances for synergistic combos of feats, abilities, spells, and items, etc. This is one of the things that I think ultimately hurt D&D over the course of the last two editions. The supplements were coming out so fast that there was no way they could be adequately play tested. Next thing you knew, encounters were largely being decided by who won initiative.

This is in the core game without any supplements, depending on what level it is and how the spellcasters are being played.


Spastic Puma wrote:
thorin001 wrote:

The appropriate response to this is simply, NO. An unslotted item that costs 2K that emulates a slotted item that costs 18K is simply ludicrous. That ioun stone should cost a minimum of 36K.

Also According to the item you must be a caster to use it. You can use scrolls to charge it, but wands were omitted.

Wands were omitted? That's important to know. I saw somewhere that noncasters could cast the item once it was charged, though. Are you sure a monk wouldn't be able to use Mirror Image or Shield?

Certainly not mirror image. The cracked version can only hold 1 spell level, Mirror Image is 2 spell levels.


Pandamonium1987 wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:


Power gamers can and often do have strong roleplaying. They invest vastly more time into their characters than most other players, sometimes weeks or months of preparation into a single character. They want him to feel lifelike and fun.

I disagree, again, one thing is expand your character's background, its personality, its relationships and the way it interact with the setting, while another thing is to deeply study feats, spells and abilities to let it become more powerful.

It's true that sometimes even a well-prepared player can be interested in this roleplaying aspect, but I thought we were talking about players who don't care anything else but their character's strength in the game (or, at least this is my definition of power-gamer), players who just do optimization for optimization's sake.

I prefer to reward players who invest weeks or months in developing the personality or the background of their characters, instead that rewarding players who invest the same time in wondering how they can get another +2 to their AC.

Coming up with a way to get that +2 AC is almost never hard. Statting out an "op" character equipment and all, even at level 20 takes hours at worst.

Powergaming in and of itself has absolutely zip to do with how much a person cares about setting and roleplay. They're completely independent. I often find lump characters, ones who don't roll the dice unless asked to and never say anything, have the worst optimized characters of anyone in the group.

You can of course get the occasional theatrics major, lord knows I've met them, who is crappy at optimization and think they're gods gift to roleplaying, but this is an uncommon thing and they tend to be spotlight hogs who only care about "showing off" despite how weak they really are.

I do optimization for optimizations sake, because its fun. Alot of people do. Its fun. Basically you're saying you enjoy punishing people for a perceived connection between 2 totally unrelated things because you don't like how they get enjoyment out of the game.

I say this not to be mean or accusatory but so that you might take a little deeper look into the people that you dismiss so freely and into your preconceived notions about them.


Pandamonium1987 wrote:

I'm living a similar experience: I have a power-gamer in my group. He's the kind of guy that take things from a lot of manuals and spends a lot of time in combining feats, equip, abilities and so on. At first it wasn't too much a problem, because it was just one among a party of 6 people, but then you can have a "snowfall" effect. As the other players saw that he's able to make hundreds of damages, they wanted to obtain similar results so they asked him for advices and started to build their characters using a combat-driven mentality.

This is not bad per se, but it moved the focus of the game from roleplaying to combat. I had to work hard to mitigate this mentality and still there are some bad effects in my campaign. I had an argument with this guy three days ago and I don't know if he'll come back and play again with us, but sure in my next game (I usually play yearly campaigns) I will try to run a different campaign.

This part (especially the bolded phrase) makes no sense to me.

If your campaigns are roleplaying focused, then continue to run roleplaying focused campaigns. What does it matter if combats are easy? The easier the combats are, the less time they burn up and the more roleplaying you can do.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It 'matters' because the GM isn't happy and (at least) one of his players are not happy. Generally somebody who optimized for combat will get frustrated if combats are rare or unimportant to the story. It makes the optimizer feel like his efforts were wasted. And a GM who's designed a story in which combats are rare or unimportant gets frustrated when a player seems interested in nothing else, because it makes the GM feel like his efforts are unappreciated.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well if they are constantly trying to break/ destroy encounters, overshadow fellow players, find loop holes in ruling and complete every challenge and dilema alone...

I would close the books, fold up the GM Screen and simply say..

"congratulations, you have won Pathfinder, what should we do now/ next?"


I didn't necessarily say to make combats less frequent than they had been when the campaign began, only that he had no need to reshape the campaign just because the characters are more powerful than expected.


chaoseffect wrote:
Just really for my own curiosity could you give a break down of the 60 AC for the Monk in question?

I am also curious about this one.

Either your monk player is one cunning player( or at least more so than me;)) or there is a few bad calculations in there.


I think Gargs raises good points. Character optimization starts with the idea that at 20th level I want to be able to X, Y, and Z, so I'll lay out a plan on how to achieve this result. There's nothing inherently wrong with this. It's similar to real life thinking, where a person decides they want to be a doctor, so they plan out how to get into the school they want, how to get the residency they want, what kind of practice they want, etc. . . While their plan to be a doctor might work out, life has a way of derailing things. Even if they become a doctor, I'd be willing to bet it didn't work out exactly how they thought it would.

The path to becoming a doctor or accountant has obstacles, but the decision to do so is a fairly stable decision with a somewhat predictable pay-off. The decision to become a daring adventurer, plunging into abandoned ruins and facing deadly unknown monsters is probably less predictable.

Anyone who's read Gygax's Gord the Rogue stories knows that most of time, he and Chert were often just hoping to survive the encounter with a few coins to rub together. They still find items that are useful and become stronger, but their best schemes rarely have the pay-off they want; which sucks for them, but is still better than them having to get a job. lol

Scarab Sages

The problem with reduced magic item availability is that the system math assumes those items are there. If you account for that by running an E6 game, reducing the stats of all foes, or giving inherent bonuses to characters as they level, fine.

However, if you don't allow items, and you don't adjust your encounters, then the game breaks and PCs die.


The idea that the DM may have to modulate the encounter to provide a reasonable challenge to the players isn't beyond the pale. As far I can see, no one is saying not to give them items. They're saying don't give them everything they want simply because they have an idea how to become uber-powerful.

Believe it or not, every adventurer in the world doesn't have a Handy Haversack. Some people just have to carry their stuff in a normal backpack.

When I see statements like, "Here's my list of items I will require for my build.", from the players, I call BS.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

When I see statements like, "Here's my list of items I will require for my build.", from the players, I smile and start deciding how hard to make them work for it, but will do my level best to provide it all to them in a timely manner.


Saying no to inferior Ioun Stones is ok i think.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
The problem with reduced magic item availability is that the system math assumes those items are there...

The system math assumes certain basic items are there, sure. But I feel the rot doesn't set in until the PCs operate under the assumption that every item is available everywhere at any time, and that money is the only limiting factor.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
When I see statements like, "Here's my list of items I will require for my build.", from the players, I smile and start deciding how hard to make them work for it, but will do my level best to provide it all to them in a timely manner.

All well and good, but the problem the OP seems to be facing is that they don't seem to be able to do this. They've fallen into the trap of thinking that they don't have the power to do so.


If you want to hurt this Monk and get him out of the way, there are options. If he has been angering any somewhat powerful NPCs, think wether or not they would hire an assassin to take the monk out while they sleep. One of my players was spreading slanderous insults and rumours about a pirate captain in one game after stealing one of that captain's extra ships. He had enough (I gave him plenty of chances to cover his tracks and gave warnings) so at night he had a wizard scry on the ship's cabin, saw that he was in there asleep, and they both teleported in and executed him. When you're asleep, your AC is zero.

So yeah if you want to hurt this monk, you gotta think outside the numbers and be clever. You have to be tactful and strategic. Don't do a straight up fight. Ambushes, pick pockets, etc... There are things you can do. And then for his next character, supervise his build. I have a rule with my players. If it is outside the core rule book OR a magic item, you have to confirm it with me first. You always need to supervise player shopping.


Jaçinto wrote:

If you want to hurt this Monk and get him out of the way, there are options. If he has been angering any somewhat powerful NPCs, think wether or not they would hire an assassin to take the monk out while they sleep. One of my players was spreading slanderous insults and rumours about a pirate captain in one game after stealing one of that captain's extra ships. He had enough (I gave him plenty of chances to cover his tracks and gave warnings) so at night he had a wizard scry on the ship's cabin, saw that he was in there asleep, and they both teleported in and executed him. When you're asleep, your AC is zero.

So yeah if you want to hurt this monk, you gotta think outside the numbers and be clever. You have to be tactful and strategic. Don't do a straight up fight. Ambushes, pick pockets, etc... There are things you can do. And then for his next character, supervise his build. I have a rule with my players. If it is outside the core rule book OR a magic item, you have to confirm it with me first. You always need to supervise player shopping.

This is another version of "rocks fall..."

I am not crying Bad Wrong Fun, but almost;)

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cap. Darling wrote:
Saying no to inferior Ioun Stones is ok i think.

Saying no to all Ioun Stones is ok in my book. Little pieces of levitating rock orbiting your head was always too much overt magic for me.


I don't think the OP wants to kill the character, just move him to a more manageable level that allows for all of the players (including their self) to have fun.

If it was just a matter of killing him, it wouldn't be so difficult. I'm pretty sure his touch AC isn't 60 either. A brutal encounter in a haunted dungeon with multiple ghosts could show him his weakness.

Scarab Sages

Back to the OP, remember AC is only one of many defenses. Touch AC, Fort, Reflex, Will, and CMD are all things that can be attacked as well.

Monks have good saves, but if they worked this hard to boost AC, chances are CMD isn't as high. Grapple, Trip, Bull Rush, Reposition, and Dirty Tricks can wither deny the monk actions or limit his options.

Even if you can't reliably hit the Monk vs any of those defenses, there are ways to isolate the monk via Difficult Terrain, wall spells, and so on.


Cap. Darling, I never have fun killing a PC. I just make sure there are always consequences. My group though tells me I have a mind like Machiovelli when it comes to how smarter enemies react to the PCs. I also try to never cheat and just do a rocks fall or blue lightning thing.


Imbicatus wrote:

Back to the OP, remember AC is only one of many defenses. Touch AC, Fort, Reflex, Will, and CMD are all things that can be attacked as well.

Monks have good saves, but if they worked this hard to boost AC, chances are CMD isn't as high. Grapple, Trip, Bull Rush, Reposition, and Dirty Tricks can wither deny the monk actions or limit his options.

Even if you can't reliably hit the Monk vs any of those defenses, there are ways to isolate the monk via Difficult Terrain, wall spells, and so on.

If a monk's AC is this good, it's reasonable to assume that his CMD is also really high, as are his Reflex and Will saves. Combine this with a monk's immunity to poison and disease, and that leaves a lot less vulnerability than you might think. High jump also allows for bypassing difficult terrain.


Imbicatus wrote:
The problem with reduced magic item availability is that the system math assumes those items are there.

This is a design flaw.


Without getting into rocks fall, you die territory, there are some things in the game that will make him lose, legit. Some enemies will destroy some characters without bothering others. How does he like swarms? How about armies? How about smart villains, the kind who try to stay at least 500 miles away from you at all times?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jaçinto wrote:
Cap. Darling, I never have fun killing a PC. I just make sure there are always consequences. My group though tells me I have a mind like Machiovelli when it comes to how smarter enemies react to the PCs. I also try to never cheat and just do a rocks fall or blue lightning thing.

I am sure it works fine for your group. And that is what is important. That is why i ditent cry. Your story was a ingame reaction to a ingame thing. But looking for a guy to hire an assasin because the player want to use a cracked Ioun stone is close to rocks fall IMOP.


That's why I asked if his character has been making somewhat powerful enemies at all. If you can't justify it in game, you don't do it.

A possible fix that can be done is to let him have whatever magic item he wants. Just don't tell him it is cursed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:

The problem with reduced magic item availability is that the system math assumes those items are there. If you account for that by running an E6 game, reducing the stats of all foes, or giving inherent bonuses to characters as they level, fine.

However, if you don't allow items, and you don't adjust your encounters, then the game breaks and PCs die.

To be clear, I am not advocating less magic items per se, just that it might not be "All Items All the Time!"

For Example: "The merchant thinks for a minute and then starts rummaging through his shelves. After a few minutes he comes back and says 'Sorry, I don't have that special, magical, trip-aiding weapon you are looking for, but I do have this fine magical hammer!"

or:

The monastery doesn't have any Amulets of Might Fists available, but they do have a really nice magical quarterstaff.

etc., etc.

The idea is that in the end, the party still has the right WBL, but it just might not necessarily be in the form that the players had initially anticipated. Now, I will agree that it does require a bit more planning than simply random rolls in order to ensure that said items that are available are in fact usable by the party, but I don't think that it needs to specifically be the items that the party wants.

Or in the spirit of the Daily Earworm: You can't always get what you want, but just might find that you get what you need.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gargs454 wrote:
...I don't think that it needs to specifically be the items that the party wants...

Neither do I; but that's one of the fundamental differences between GMs. You and I figure that making the best of the world they're given, and using whatever's found, and maybe even (Gozreh save us!) having to go on an adventure specifically to find a magic item that's just right for your character, add realism to the world and give the character adversity to overcome. Other GMs, and I'm not saying they're entirely wrong, feel that the player won't be truly content until he has that perfect item, so why not let him turn in a wheelbarrow-load of treasure and get it now so the player can enjoy it?

It's not necessarily "player entitlement", just a different view of the GM's role.

Scarab Sages

If as a GM you are going to do this, then please tell you players they they may not get a magic Glaive before they put the weapon focus and specialization feats into a weapon.

If someone builds their character around having a particular weapon, then giving them a different one is making them a NPC class by effectively taking away those feats.


Lincoln Hills wrote:
Gargs454 wrote:
...I don't think that it needs to specifically be the items that the party wants...

Neither do I; but that's one of the fundamental differences between GMs. You and I figure that making the best of the world they're given, and using whatever's found, and maybe even (Gozreh save us!) having to go on an adventure specifically to find a magic item that's just right for your character, add realism to the world and give the character adversity to overcome. Other GMs, and I'm not saying they're entirely wrong, feel that the player won't be truly content until he has that perfect item, so why not let him turn in a wheelbarrow-load of treasure and get it now so the player can enjoy it?

It's not necessarily "player entitlement", just a different view of the GM's role.

Oh I agree with you wholeheartedly. It's also why I suggest that if you are going to go the route out I laid out, that you make sure that your players understand that at the outset. That way they can build their characters accordingly.

I think in particular, its perhaps even easier for me to enjoy (as a player) the style of game where you learn to work with what you find, as opposed to simply getting everything you want. However, this is largely because I am almost always the GM, so when I do get the chance to be a "player", I can have loads of fun with just about anything. I'm currently playing a monk that had initially intended to be a straight up Unarmed Strike monk. However, along the way he picked up a particular weapon and was taught how to use it as part of an adventure. The monk was really impacted by the events of said adventure and has since decided to use the weapon (a nanigata) as much as he can. This will definitely require a rethinking of the character progression for a variety of reasons, but its far more fun for me (as a player) this way.

That said, others would rather just have their plan and stick to it and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that approach. Both styles of play can be fun. Just as there really isn't anything wrong with players that just want to bash heads as effectively as possible and could care less about "roleplay". Its just a good idea to make sure that everyone is on the same page when the group gets together.


Imbicatus wrote:

If as a GM you are going to do this, then please tell you players they they may not get a magic Glaive before they put the weapon focus and specialization feats into a weapon.

If someone builds their character around having a particular weapon, then giving them a different one is making them a NPC class by effectively taking away those feats.

Oh absolutely. As I said, its always important to make sure that everyone is on the same page from the beginning. The same would go if you wanted to run a low magic campaign, gladiator arena campaign (i.e. where the entire campaign takes place in the arena), urban only campaign, etc., etc.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Imbicatus wrote:
...please tell you players they they may not get a magic Glaive before they put the weapon focus and specialization feats into a weapon... giving them a different [weapon] is making them a NPC class by effectively taking away those feats.

Well, yeah! Common courtesy. And I also generally assume that if a character has spent feats on, say, the orc double-axe, he's always going to have an ear out for any rumors about magical orc double-axes. In the long run - in the long run - we still want the players to end up with their toys!


To answer your question about the ioun stone.
.
.
Yes. its too good.
.
.
.
The effect in question is "Spell storing" for 2000 gold.
.
.
.
For reference: Spell storing on a weapon costs a +1 enhancement, stacting with at least 1 other +1 enhancement, ergo at its cheapest 8000-2000= 6000 gold if you discount the underliing weapon, then consider that spell storing weapons have set limits to the spells allowed inside and how they are triggered.

Second reference: Spell storing on armor is similar to on weapons, save that the least expensive instance of it is cheaper (3000) yet even more limited.
.

This means that just paying 2000 to have acess to any spell is wildly imbalanced and it should be banned.


Yeah, I should add that even when doing a more or less random magic item shop, I would still allow, and even encourage, the PCs to let the merchant(s) know if there are any particular items that they are on the hunt for. Perhaps the PC even drops some extra gold on the merchant in order to really get him to keep his ear to ground so to speak.

Doing that, I would then increase the likelihood that the desired item is available the next time the PCs come to town. Eventually, it may even become an auto "success" so to speak. In the meantime though the players get the opportunity to learn how to make their characters work with other items.

Obviously, this style isn't for everyone, but hopefully in the long run, it ends up being really enjoyable.

Scarab Sages

Spell storing on a weapon or armor allows for up to 3rd level spells. The cracked violet purple prism allows only a first level spell. Spell Storing weapons and armor are also activated as free actions, vs the standard action required by an ioun stone.

The higher prices on spell storing weapons and armor reflect the much larger range of spells available and the improved action economy.

The monk can pay 2000 gp for an ioun stone that stores Shield and requires a standard action, or pay 4000 gp for bracers that store Mirror Image or Displacement and casts as a free action. Which is more powerful when used by a character that already has a high AC?


for those with a ye old magic shop mentality use the settlement stat blocks provided they have a base value that determines what you can find in a city, anything equal to or below that amount there is a 75% chance of it being in said settlement. If that seems too high for you it can always be changed as you see fit.


I'm just gonna spitball his AC bonuses because I don't have his character sheet right meow.

10 Base
5 Monk AC Bonus (Monk's Robe brings this to a 20th level monk's bonus)
7 Dex
6 Wisdom
4 Mage Armor
4 Shield Ioun Stone
4 Nat Armor Amulet
5 Ring of Protection
6 Crane Wing/Rod of Balance/Fighting defensively
1 Jingasa of the fortunate soldier
=53?

This is far off 60 so perhaps it was a miscommunication on his and I's part, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were more bonuses I'm missing. Targeting Ioun stones feels dirty to me. But any intelligent foe with magic item knowledge would do it if their foe was immune to their attacks otherwise. Right?

Also, this player is the best roleplayer at the table. This is a good example of a powergamer that can roleplay.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Bracers of Armor are cost as Armor Enhancements (Bonus squared * 1,000) so he might have a pair of those. Plus 8 Armor would cost him 64,000 gold

It wouldn't stack with the mage armor though, which is already providing him +4.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Bracers of Armor are cost as Armor Enhancements (Bonus squared * 1,000) so he might have a pair of those. Plus 8 Armor would cost him 64,000 gold
It wouldn't stack with the mage armor though, which is already providing him +4.

Indeed, I noticed that one second too late and tried to delete, but it turns out I was too slow on that as well.


tsuruki wrote:

To answer your question about the ioun stone.

.
.
Yes. its too good.
.
.
.
The effect in question is "Spell storing" for 2000 gold.
.
.
.
For reference: Spell storing on a weapon costs a +1 enhancement, stacting with at least 1 other +1 enhancement, ergo at its cheapest 8000-2000= 6000 gold if you discount the underliing weapon, then consider that spell storing weapons have set limits to the spells allowed inside and how they are triggered.

Second reference: Spell storing on armor is similar to on weapons, save that the least expensive instance of it is cheaper (3000) yet even more limited.
.

This means that just paying 2000 to have acess to any spell is wildly imbalanced and it should be banned.

A better comparison is Cloak of the Hedge Wizard: cast 2 first level spells once per day, plus 2 cantrips as often as you want (all are standard actions). A different cloak for each magic school lets you get most of the spells you want. Total cost: 2500 gp.

How can this rock be considered wildly imbalanced?

First, I have to have someone who can cast the spell I want and who is willing to cast it into the stone (which I might have to pay for). Second, it can be targeted by any attack. Third, I still have to spend a standard action to activate it.

My 10th level cleric picked up a couple of these to pass out 1st-level, self-only buffs to the party (Divine favor, Longstrider, etc.). Most of the time, they came back to her at the end of the day, unused. Far from being "unbalanced", our group was wondering whether they were even worth the price.

Are people maybe confusing the "cracked" version of this Ioun stone (1 first level spell cast at first level) with the "flawless" version (3 levels of spells) that goes for 36,000 gp?


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Bracers of Armor are cost as Armor Enhancements (Bonus squared * 1,000) so he might have a pair of those. Plus 8 Armor would cost him 64,000 gold
It wouldn't stack with the mage armor though, which is already providing him +4.
Indeed, I noticed that one second too late and tried to delete, but it turns out I was too slow on that as well.

FEAR MY EPIC RESPONSE TIME


I'm discussing the cracked version that offers first level spells to characters who can't cast spells. While it only lasts 1 minute, it's not hard to know ahead of time as a 15th level party (scrying, 30+ perception, see invisibility, gamer trope sense) when s%$*'s about to go down. 2000g for 4 shield to any character is ludicrous. As I said before, targtting ioun stones seems like the best option here. It's just super mean lol.


Spastic Puma wrote:
I'm discussing the cracked version that offers first level spells to characters who can't cast spells. While it only lasts 1 minute, it's not hard to know ahead of time as a 15th level party (scrying, 30+ perception, see invisibility, gamer trope sense) when s+!%'s about to go down. 2000g for 4 shield to any character is ludicrous. As I said before, targtting ioun stones seems like the best option here. It's just super mean lol.

Any character can do it for 750 with a wand and a single point in UMD. And they can do it 50 times without a caster to recharge it.


For what its worth, the stone does have a fair advantage in that you can get an actual caster to cast it in and give you the full 15 minute duration and CL:15 dispel resistance.

Granted at this point the Monk is consuming at least two first level spells from the Mage (Shield and Mage Armor.)

Scarab Sages

The Stone functions as a ring of spell storing, and per the PRD, The ring is stuck with CL 1. "Each spell has a caster level equal to the minimum level needed to cast that spell."


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Spastic Puma wrote:
I'm discussing the cracked version that offers first level spells to characters who can't cast spells. While it only lasts 1 minute, it's not hard to know ahead of time as a 15th level party (scrying, 30+ perception, see invisibility, gamer trope sense) when s+!%'s about to go down. 2000g for 4 shield to any character is ludicrous. As I said before, targtting ioun stones seems like the best option here. It's just super mean lol.
Any character can do it for 750 with a wand and a single point in UMD. And they can do it 50 times without a caster to recharge it.

This is a fair point I did not consider.


Spastic Puma wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Spastic Puma wrote:
I'm discussing the cracked version that offers first level spells to characters who can't cast spells. While it only lasts 1 minute, it's not hard to know ahead of time as a 15th level party (scrying, 30+ perception, see invisibility, gamer trope sense) when s+!%'s about to go down. 2000g for 4 shield to any character is ludicrous. As I said before, targtting ioun stones seems like the best option here. It's just super mean lol.
Any character can do it for 750 with a wand and a single point in UMD. And they can do it 50 times without a caster to recharge it.
This is a fair point I did not consider.

If anything it should make you happier because:

"Guys I have a +2 in UMD. Lets everyone just sit here outside the bosses' front door while I try to roll an 18. 14 Dangit, 9 Dangit, oh thank god its a 2 not a 1, 7 dangit..."

"Seriously dude, can you speed this up a bit, I'd like to kill a boss monster, not watch you wave your wand as ineffectively as ron weasely in the chamber of secrets."


colemcm wrote:
I think Gargs raises good points. Character optimization starts with the idea that at 20th level I want to be able to X, Y, and Z, so I'll lay out a plan on how to achieve this result. There's nothing inherently wrong with this. It's similar to real life thinking, where a person decides they want to be a doctor, so they plan out how to get into the school they want, how to get the residency they want, what kind of practice they want, etc. . .

So, pre-med students are powergaming real life?


Imbicatus wrote:
The Stone functions as a ring of spell storing, and per the PRD, The ring is stuck with CL 1. "Each spell has a caster level equal to the minimum level needed to cast that spell."

Ok, that's one I didn't actually know... and it gives me a little less appreciation for Spell Storing than I used to.

51 to 100 of 132 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Powergaming and being a whiny GM All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.