I actually had a discussion with a GM this morning about this. I tend to make a lot of concepts that come off as horribly cheesy, but tend to put them towards the goal of making things that are not traditionally viable, viable. Current character is a slayer pirate who has the archery combat style in order to...dual wield a pistol and a boarding axe. That's the main gist, but it involves a lot of additional feats and tweaks, and finding ways around feat taxes, etc. The end result had the GM very nervous so I basically just sat down with him and explained not only how everything fit together, but what it would look like in a fight. In many ways, that's the best way to keep a GM with less rules knowledge than yourself from freaking out-though thankfully mine has no such problems.
Do people actually walk to the table without discussing their character with the GM first? I always clear my sheet with the GM before the day of the game. It just seems like such a huge inconvenience for everyone if I were to get there and to find something wrong/unacceptable with my sheet.
Do people actually walk to the table without discussing their character with the GM first?
Yes. I had people argue that that was the better way to get straight into the game without wasting time on useless things like team building and linked backgrounds.
There are people who really aren't all that interested in the other players or what their characters can do. They just want to play their special concept.
There are people who really aren't all that interested in the other players or what their characters can do. They just want to play their special concept.
Also, if someone really is interested in playing this absurd loophole-abusing mechanical nightmare, they're probably going to try to hide it from the GM as best they can until it's too late to do anything about it.
That's why clearing your character sheet and working with the GM in advance is a sign of good faith.
OP-
You might want to ask the GM about how you come across. That can usually give you the biggest idea of what to do next.
There are people who really aren't all that interested in the other players or what their characters can do. They just want to play their special concept.Also, if someone really is interested in playing this absurd loophole-abusing mechanical nightmare, they're probably going to try to hide it from the GM as best they can until it's too late to do anything about it.
That's why clearing your character sheet and working with the GM in advance is a sign of good faith.
My GM, circa 3.0:
DM: "You want to play a great cleave character with a bag of rats? Odd, but approved."
Me: "Yay!"
DM: "You spot a group of adventurers off in the distance. They look the sort you want to join! As they get close, a shadow falls over you. Before you can react, a horse hands on you, killing you instantly."
DM: *to rest of group* "It looks like that roc that has been stalking you found you again. Roll initiative."
There has been a ton of good advice in the thread so far.
I GM a lot more than I get to play, as a result I have had the chance to see a lot of builds that people use from the extremely cheesey, to the horribly subpar, to the accidentally amazing.
The nice thing about pathfinder is that the builds don't really allow for super powerful builds. They can be good, but not the same broken cheese as 3.5 with all these strange wacky bits of equipment that interacted bizarrely with other unsupported books.
I have only ever had to talk with a player about his crazy build one time. It was in PFS and the guy changed his build week to week to deal with the scenario. We had enough GM's running that he didn't get caught for a while.
So other than cheating, I don't think there is anything that I would not be willing to handle as a GM.
If you want your GM to trust you, do something that builds his trust. If you met someone and they screamed at you and shouted that they were a super trust worthy guy, but kept looking over their shoulder and laughing uncomfortably it would be hard to believe them. However if you approach as a pretty normal guy and smile and make eye contact, its easier to trust you.
So, make a straightforward character - mechanically - but have an interesting story to back it up. Or, give him just one little mechanical quirk that comes from feets or something like that, rather than strange class combo's. If you show up as a rogue with an interesting take on rogue talents or who fights with a whip and trips dudes or whatever, then he is more likely to see that you are not being a mad man. Let your actions speak for themselves.
If you come in as a crazy dervish dancing, soulknife using, fire scarf swinging, rake dancer-bard-minstrel-troubadour-combo then the GM is going to look at a you askance.
|
I wouldn't allow a character like that at my table unless I was a friend of the player, and I trusted them to reign themselves in if I said they were being mechanically abusive. A fresh acquaintance would require a preliminary play - just a short session with me and him/her, where I could see first hand how they intend to run their character. If I see something troubling I'll just say no, or steer them towards a character I think will have more success in the campaign.
Some players have no interest in the setting, or seeing their characters grow in unexpected directions because of the story pressures placed upon them. I'm not saying the OP is one of them; he sounds very earnest and eager. But I'm suspicious of any player who has plotted their character's development from lvl 1 to 20 before they game even starts.
My advice to the OP is to allow the campaign to affect and change your character. Have plans, sure, but if those plans require a very specific class combo to enjoy, then make a more flexible character.
As others have stated, acknowledging a willingness to catalog a reference to all your abilities will surely gain you brownie points. A great way to catalog material used for your characters, that I have found, is to take pictures on your phone and save or back them up. Obviously the right technology must be available, but I am able to snap a picture of the books (or screenshot if using a pdf), then place them all in a folder with properly titled images and you can now pull up every ability, trait, feat etc that you need. Most smart phones are able to create photo albums, either built in or with the use of an app, which you can dedicate to specific characters and their abilities. I have my players do this, most of whom use pdf's, and have them email me the folder for their character for quick look-up during play.
As someone who has almost exclusively occupied the GM position, I would stress the fact that you are placing a great deal of trust in the GM to know the rules, be prepared and put in a appreciable amount of effort and that you would hope he could reciprocate an equal amount of trust that you will have everything perfect to a tee.
Not all GM's will be as receptive to new ideas as other. Some may not even wish to allow material from anything but the Core Rulebook, so it is a matter of finding the right GM. It is unfortunate, but just as GM's may not want certain players, you are most certainly able to want a more open minded GM. If they do not seem keen on your method of character creation, and don't seem willing to give you a chance, then you are more than likely better off finding a different GM because ultimately your differences will clash.
The main reason GM's will decline those sorts of characters will either be because they are looking for a traditional game, in which case you most likely won't be able to change their mind, or they feel like they are going to have to hold your hand and double check everything. If you can convince them that you can manage your character properly without constant scrutiny and supervision, then I think you will have their acceptance.
Goodluck with your search!
One thing you could do is ask the GM if there is any type of character he thinks would be good before the campaign begins. You might end up with something that is particularly suited to the challenges of the campaign this way.
As an example, I am running RotRL right now and we are near the end of burnt offerings. We have a group of four players, but the first three games one of the players couldn't make it (and had not made a character yet). I created a GMPC to fill the void and it was a pretty straight forward half-orc fighter. Most of the characters were poorly optimized so I didn't do anything fancy with him, just a straight-up tough guy. But I gave him Keen Scent as a feat, anticipating the slog against Erylium, the 2nd level BBEG with invisibility at-will.
I had decided to use the PFS rule that you could change your character details at any time before you played at 2nd level, to give people a chance to get a feel for Pathfinder (they were mostly 3.5 players).
As a result the player ended up switching feats around to make a more complex build, got rid of the Keen Scent and went for a sword and board fighter. But the loss of the Ken Scent feat basically turned that fight into a grind and one of the characters ended up dying.
So be aware that your GM may in fact throw you a bone once in a while if you let him.
Peet
To add to what the people talking about style differences have said; It can vary based on the game. Right now I'm running a game set in Golarion where the PCs all met in a tavern after being rejected by the Pathfinder Society. I would have let you bring in any character that doesn't use 3pp material, only a brief math double check and game on. In my previous campaign you would have got a hard no, no questions asked. That game was set in a homebrew setting with Wizard, Cleric, Magus, Inquisitor, Paladin and Monk banned for an in setting reason. There was custom content for 14 land nations and 5 undersea ones. No races from the core rules existed unmodified, only Humans and Gnomes existed at all, Samsarans and Merfolk were playable, and I used the race builder to create 3 custom races. Bringing a character you made at home without the GM into a heavily custom setting is not going to work, and it will lose you points for trying in most cases.
^ that PFS rejects is a great idea:)
Yes. Those are the people who need a full-body sandpaper massage followed by a refreshing dip in an over-chlorinated pool, drying off with a rock-salt rubdown.Do people actually walk to the table without discussing their character with the GM first?Yes. I had people argue that that was the better way to get straight into the game without wasting time on useless things like team building and linked backgrounds.
There are people who really aren't all that interested in the other players or what their characters can do. They just want to play their special concept.
Exact opposite. I try to go over my characters with the GM before the game. He isn't interested in seeing them. Yet he has also been known to get upset about PC's that are too effective and wreck things too fast.
..
... But I'm suspicious of any player who has plotted their character's development from lvl 1 to 20 before they game even starts...
Please don't be. That makes much more sense than no plans. Every one of my PC's is planned as far out as the campaign is expected to go. (Most of ours quit around level 15-16.) But yes, if something isn't working or something else is needed, it might not follow the plan.
I had my whole future mapped coming out of high school. College, degree, major, lab, field, etc... By halfway through college it wasn't even that close. But it was a place to start and modify from. The people that have no plans and just kinda drift rarely seem to make much progress or get anyplace.
I can't see these heroes that are driven to become the most powerful people in the land being the type that just drifts along and picks whatever seems like a decent idea at that time. To me, that doesn't make sense.