I think all of the responses along the lines of "well, if you think about it realistically, this type of character would be screwed over" to be entirely missing the point. This is not a video game. The purpose of the game is to HAVE FUN. If one of the players isn't having fun as a result of your DMing choices, you have failed, end of story. DMs hold all the cards and as such shoulder the lion's share of responsibility. If a player comes to you with a one trick pony before the campaign that you, using the knowledge exclusive to you as a DM, know will not work, it is your responsibility to warn them. That's why they went to you in the first place.
No, that's going too far.
Sure, I agree, the GM should make the game fun for everybody. But the players cannot be childish about it (unless they actually are children). I'm not trying to say the OP or anyone else is childish, but I am trying to say that some players DO have a childish mentality that goes like this: "I have made a one-trick-pony character that must devastate all encounters and if the GM doesn't let me devastate every encounter then the GM is being a big fat bully and it's no fair!"
That's silly and childish.
Now I'm sure nobody posting here has that kind of mentality, but some of the posts on this thread seem to be suggesting that it's a GM's responsibility to handle every player as if they did have it.
I disagree.
It's also the player's responsibility to know his limitations and expect the game-world to occasionally throw him a curve ball that makes him deal with adverse situations.
I think a lot of players get trapped in a PFS mindset. One of the major advantages of a home game is that you can play that odd character that wouldn't work anywhere else. You can play a one trick pony that normally wouldn't work because you can trust the DM not to dick you over.
If I make a kobold-slayer with favored enemy kobold, bane weapons vs. kobolds, and every trick I can imagine to make me perfect at killing kobolds, that doesn't mean I expect my GM to make sure that every encounter I face has kobolds in it. That would get weird later in the campaign: "Oooh, goody, this is our 27th consecutive encounter with a roving band of kobolds with 18 class levels..."
Worse, what if another player at the table made the same character but specialized in hunting owlbears? And another player specialized in hunting mermaids? Now is the GM forced to make all of our encounters be against aquatic merfolk who are half-kobold and half-owlbears? Which one of us gets to complain when we have a fight against a dragon?
Also if the goal is to close this gate then these enemies shouldn't last forever. lets say this is a 10 arc game, in the first 5 arcs you've had some enemies that are immune to your tactic. Now in arc 6 everything is immune to your tactic. but as long as it goes back in arc 7 to normal I wouldn't worry about it.
|
I think all of the responses along the lines of "well, if you think about it realistically, this type of character would be screwed over" to be entirely missing the point. This is not a video game. The purpose of the game is to HAVE FUN. If one of the players isn't having fun as a result of your DMing choices, you have failed, end of story. DMs hold all the cards and as such shoulder the lion's share of responsibility. If a player comes to you with a one trick pony before the campaign that you, using the knowledge exclusive to you as a DM, know will not work, it is your responsibility to warn them. That's why they went to you in the first place.No, that's going too far.
Sure, I agree, the GM should make the game fun for everybody. But the players cannot be childish about it (unless they actually are children). I'm not trying to say the OP or anyone else is childish, but I am trying to say that some players DO have a childish mentality that goes like this: "I have made a one-trick-pony character that must devastate all encounters and if the GM doesn't let me devastate every encounter then the GM is being a big fat bully and it's no fair!"
That's silly and childish.
Now I'm sure nobody posting here has that kind of mentality, but some of the posts on this thread seem to be suggesting that it's a GM's responsibility to handle every player as if they did have it.
I disagree.
It's also the player's responsibility to know his limitations and expect the game-world to occasionally throw him a curve ball that makes him deal with adverse situations.
I think a lot of players get trapped in a PFS mindset. One of the major advantages of a home game is that you can play that odd character that wouldn't work anywhere else. You can play a one trick pony that normally wouldn't work because you can trust the DM not to dick you over.If I make a kobold-slayer with favored enemy kobold, bane weapons vs. kobolds, and every trick I can imagine to make me...
I disagree with your example because this isn't about being a kobold killer and expecting to only fight kobolds. This is more like kobold killer going up against kobolds who are suddenly immune to his damage. The GM made a race of people that is totally immune to a dude that is supposed to be good at controlling people. He created a race to specifically nullify a character's ability with foreknowledge of the character. He could have said "they all have +4 to enchantment saves" but he didn't, he made them immune. This is more like "well the kobolds in this area of the world actually descended from the heavens and technically aren't kobolds so your favored enemy, bane, and all the anti-kobold stuff you have doesn't work on them.
That's bad GMing whether it was intended or not, and even if not intended it should be something the GM sees going on and corrects it. It's bad form.
|
I could say both but only see your side. Like mentioned before, if you are a wizard, simply buy and learn other spells to be a well rounded spell caster. If a sorcerer, ask to retrain or simply start learning other effective spells when available.
If after you start becoming multidimensional with your spell presentation he keeps being a dick, he is also part of the problem.
I think all of the responses along the lines of "well, if you think about it realistically, this type of character would be screwed over" to be entirely missing the point. This is not a video game. The purpose of the game is to HAVE FUN. If one of the players isn't having fun as a result of your DMing choices, you have failed, end of story. DMs hold all the cards and as such shoulder the lion's share of responsibility. If a player comes to you with a one trick pony before the campaign that you, using the knowledge exclusive to you as a DM, know will not work, it is your responsibility to warn them. That's why they went to you in the first place.No, that's going too far.
Sure, I agree, the GM should make the game fun for everybody. But the players cannot be childish about it (unless they actually are children). I'm not trying to say the OP or anyone else is childish, but I am trying to say that some players DO have a childish mentality that goes like this: "I have made a one-trick-pony character that must devastate all encounters and if the GM doesn't let me devastate every encounter then the GM is being a big fat bully and it's no fair!"
That's silly and childish.
Now I'm sure nobody posting here has that kind of mentality, but some of the posts on this thread seem to be suggesting that it's a GM's responsibility to handle every player as if they did have it.
I disagree.
It's also the player's responsibility to know his limitations and expect the game-world to occasionally throw him a curve ball that makes him deal with adverse situations.
I think a lot of players get trapped in a PFS mindset. One of the major advantages of a home game is that you can play that odd character that wouldn't work anywhere else. You can play a one trick pony that normally wouldn't work because you can trust the DM not to dick you over.If I make a kobold-slayer with favored enemy kobold, bane weapons vs. kobolds, and every trick I can imagine to make me...
The key point here is that the player went to the DM before the campaign started. That is the extent of player responsibility in this case. I completely agree with you outside of that point, but that point is pretty darn important.
This is not akin to a kobold slayer. This is more akin to a boom boom fire sorcerer that a player brought for DM approval, and the DM oked it while failing to mention the campaign takes place on the elemental plane of fire. Seems a little more dick in that context, doesn't it? It's not childish entitlement to have your character be useful. Don't pretend kobold killing specialization is akin to mind affecting specialization. Take a look through the monster manual, you'll see what comes up more often.
To reiterate, the DM approval before the campaign is what makes this the DMs fault. If they had concerns about power level (and seriously, enchantment is not even CLOSE to the nastiest thing in a wizard's bag of tricks) they should have talked it out with the player, not set out to make the character useless.
Also you've played what, 1 maybe 2 sessions with this new race?
If so
Chill out some, see what the GM does with it. Yes it's against your guy for right now, but maybe there's a nice story, or something he has planned to pay off for this new race. If it continues to be a problem then talk about it of why you've been directly countered.
if not and you've played much more with this race
Then see if this race is about to be over. You said the goal was to close the portal, so once it's closed this race shouldn't be common. If the closing of the portal is still months away, then talk saying "Hey, you've made me useless, what was the reason for it?"
But in any case. Find out WHY he did it before you start saying he shouldn't have or that you're useless or whatever else you want to say.
It is you and here's why.
So far you've been happy with the character you have in this campaign. And now you're hung up because you've run into a creature you're one trick pony is useless against.
I don't think there's such a campaign that everyone doesn't have an encounter in which they wind up being useless for. In addition, You went out of your way to make yourself an absolute one trick pony.
Days like this are going to be the occasional consequence. The answer is perhaps considering evolving your character's magic to give it some depth.
And Lazar managed to skip half of the OP again.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having been on the receiving end of a Kitsune Fey Sorcerer in my Rise of the Runelords campaign, I can relate to your GMs desire to create an enemy that isn't instantly killed by you.
It's hard to know who to blame; enchanter sorcerers are a one trick pony, but its one hell of a trick that the GM must always keep in mind. "Is this an encounter I'm content for the Sorcerer to steamroll through?" is a consideration, and hopefully the answer is usually yes, but other times no.
Sometimes the question is "Is this an entire story arch I'm content for the Sorcerer to steamroll through?" and when the answer to that is no, that's when things get rough. You can diversify your spell list, but I'm sure you've sunk a bunch of feats and class features to being good at what you do: enchanting.
Ultimately, I don't think enchanters are good for a long-term level 1 to 20 homebrew campaign. I'm sure your GM wants you to have fun as well as everyone else at the table, but most GMs can't handle both with your build. Very often, either you will enjoy the encounter, or the rest of the party will. It puts your GM in a very difficult position. There's a rare few who might masterfully handle it, but I'd wager most cannot. I'd consider asking your GM if you could roll up another character that's more suitable to your campaign.
Otherwise, take the advise of others: increase your spell versatility to contribute to combat in other ways; buffs, battlefield control or summons might be preferable if only your enchantment DCs are competitive.
I was playing a Rogue/Sorceror/Daggerspell Mage in 3.5 once and it was a homebrew campaign. My DM had a long list of opponents that myself and the party rogue couldn't use sneak attack on. To say nothing of magic resistant foes. We pointed out how ineffective we felt in a lot of fights. The DM thought it was in our head until we put them all on the whiteboard to showcase the problem. Sometimes the DM may not be aware. Although in this case your DM just sounds like a tool.
Have you asked him why he would do this knowing full well your character. I'd just buy a scroll of fireball to make make a point.