When a GM hates all of your characters you've ever made...

[Caryth Derellis]

So I have been playing these sort of games since I was a kid. A good friend of mine is a generally great DM and has been hosting games for many years now. It's been a blast playing with him, and those games are the only consistent ones I have attended. We always have fun.

That being said, there is a chronic issue that has plagued our games in the background of every session. No matter what class of character or type of character, or the style I play them in, the GM seems to just loathe my characters. I am the type of person that enjoys optimizing my characters. I feel that picking a melee guy for example that can't hit things or kill them with his sword isn't much fun or very useful, so I try to make them as capable as possible.

We use a 20 point buy system, he is somewhat stingy on loot, so I have average wealth or at many times less than average wealth in terms of gold and investments in gear. This is not bad, because it makes it in some ways more fun to find loot. There is nothing that really sets the characters I have made apart from others beyond their customization/optimization. This has not, btw, detracted from role-playing and other aspects of the game...

I used to play fighters a lot as a teenager because I, as many others do, loved hacking and slashing things into tiny pieces with my characters. I would deck them out with a greatsword, max their strength, etc. Their feats would all go towards the single purpose of utterly destroying my enemies. Because of this, I sacrificed saves, HP, armor, etc.

The next character he complained about was a dwarf fighter who utilized full plate and a tower shield to simply not get hit. He would bull-rush with the shield and pin enemies against the wall while his allies killed them. He would railroad them off cliffs, into fiery pits, and all sort of other fun places.

I have since played many more casters. I really enjoy controllers and de-buffers in particular. He now complains almost every session multiple times about my character(s). No matter what I pick, choice I make, action I take, he HATES it because it is GOOD and playing a class to their fullest.

I don't think I should have to stop playing characters the way I enjoy playing them (and thus, in a sense, the game itself) because he can't seem to find ways as a DM to combat them properly. I have operated completely under his rules and expectations and yet he whines.

I am wondering what advice people have for these sort of situations. I really respect him and appreciate his friendship/DMing as mentioned before. Maybe it is a matter of bringing it up with him directly. It is getting really frustrating though, because I haven't done anything wrong, but he sort of treats me that way. I have also felt he unfairly punishes my character because of how he feels about him.

As a final example, I have been playing a witch lately. He hates my witch. Utterly and completely. He often forgets to apply misfortune hexes when he rolls. I try to politely remind him that he must reroll, and apply the evil hex for BOTH rolls. I try to give him the benefit of the doubt, but when I KNOW he has missed the reroll, I say something. I don't do this to be a total jerk, but because he would otherwise deny me the entire purpose of my character! If a fighter didn't get to go/attack in a round it would be the same as my hexes not being properly applied, right? He got really pissed at me for quite politely and patiently reminding him about it.

I am a little lost as to what to do.

[Ryuko]

This is another of the many, many threads that boil down to "someone in my group is being a real Dick, whether intentionally or accidentally." To which I must give a simple and clear response.

Talk to them, privately and outside the game, and inform them that their behavior is making you question if you'd like to continue playing with them. Hope they change their tune, and if they don't then remove yourself or them from the group.

[Charon's Little Helper]

Does everyone else in the party suck at optimizing? It sounds like a case of "We're role-players, not roll-players around here!".

You could help the rest of the group optimize as well so that you're all on similar footing.

[EldonG]

Talk to your GM. Be willing to take his criticisms, but explain your position - all the while, recognizing that your position is not the only legitimate one to take. Are your characters just numbers on paper, or do they have a story? Is there a background there just to justify your numbers, or is it something the GM should be happy with?

Apparently, he's not happy with your characters for a reason, or more than one, so be willing to hear him out. As to helping others optimize, I'd talk to the GM first.

[FamiliarMask]

It seems fairly obvious what the problem is. You are optimizing more than your GM is comfortable with. I think you already know this, though, and just don't want to adjust your play style.

If you really want to solve this, you could try making a character who is not quite so optimized, min-maxed and focused on mastering their "thing".

Try making more of a jack-of-all-trades character who doesn't have to be the best at anything but can contribute to the party's success in multiple ways.

Or even just a bit more well-rounded character. Don't put everything into achieving "utter destruction" level DPS on your fighters. Put some of your resources into other things that fighters want, like those HP and armor you talked about sacrificing.

[Dosgamer]

Characters that are optimized to do a thing/few things very well (to the point of them being almost auto-success every time) are problematic for DMs. Pathfinder makes it very easy to do this. It sounds like you have a history of doing this type of thing. Maybe try to make less focused characters and more well-rounded ones instead? Failing that, talk to your DM about your witch and possibly include him/her in the character creation discussion the next time the situation arises.

As a DM, I like it when players include me in the discussion. It helps us avoid situations that I fear are going to become problematic and eases tensions before they arise. Good luck!

Ninja'd by FamiliarMask by 3 seconds! Doh!

[Serisan]

Build a bard or a skald and see what happens.

Honestly, the first step is to talk to the GM outside of the game and privately about his concerns. It would appear from the outside that you're having an outsized impact in combat and he's frustrated that he doesn't provide a challenge with his encounters. I totally understand that feeling as a GM running modules in PFS. It's not uncommon to see players absolutely steamroll things in some games and maybe he wants to see something other than that happen.

The alternative, of course, is to hyperspecialize in something that isn't combat related...like Diplomacy. Diabolical Negotiator and Oracle of Lore have something there that nobody else does. It rhymes with minimum-Diplomacy-checks-of-thirtyschmoo.

[Gilarius]

I've had a similar situation, but as the DM.

The player was very good at optimising his characters. He was also very good at interpreting every possible phrasing of a rule so it benefited his character.

He came up with very detailed backgrounds, with involved characterisation, and role-played his characters very well. And, because of his in-depth background, etc, he would also ask for a minor dispensation/rule interpretation allowing a particular concept to work better. Many times, I would allow this because it was justified and he would take a compensating weakness.

And then he'd make his next character, incorporating that rule dispensation again whilst asking for another one, specifically for his new character. Cumulatively, each of his characters wanted all of the previous characters' little bonuses, and he would get upset when I said no. 'But you let me have it before, why can't I have it now?'

But that wasn't the only, or even main problem I had with his characters - it was a matter of balance. His characters (even with other players with a lot of system mastery) would generally out-perform the rest of the party. I could either balance a campaign/encounter to his character, or to the rest of the group. Sometimes, they were happy to be his 'hangers-on', but mostly they wanted to have equal power/influence.

This resulted in him believing that I hated his characters and was always trying to nerf them. The former was false; the latter was true.

Eventually, we stopped playing in the same games.

My advice: consider carefully what your own character does to the party balance of power in encounters. Are you the most important, in terms of 'winning' the encounters? Not just in combat, but out of combat too? If you are in a party of 4, you should only be MVP in one out of 4 encounters. Are you?

[Helcack]

I have experienced this before, and mostly you just have to help the others in your party optimize and things end up fine as everyone is good at their own thing. Otherwise, make it an actual challenge and choose a race or class that isn't great for a concept and try to make it good. Those are the two things I have done to overcome said problems.

[Charon's Little Helper]

Helcack wrote:

I have experienced this before, and mostly you just have to help the others in your party optimize and things end up fine as everyone is good at their own thing. Otherwise, make it an actual challenge and choose a race or class that isn't great for a concept and try to make it good. Those are the two things I have done to overcome said problems.

Yeah - it can be fun to optimize a weak concept into viability. Back in late 3.5 I played a blind guy - not inherent advantage to it - I just used the Combat Focus feats (they inspired the combo) to gain Blindsight 5ft and had my Listen skill out the wazoo. It was fun to make work.

[Balgin]

I appear to have a lot in common with your GM. As a Gm I've recently come a lot of characters and players exhibiting similar traits and it's started to rub me up the wrong way. A lot of players are overspecialising or (in a few rare cases) boring one trick ponies. I don't mind if a player does something that's effective. In fact I cheer them on. Well done them. They contributed well to a successful endeavour and everybody had fun. If it happens again that's also great. If it keeps happening and it's the same player every time then the other players don't get to do so much. Also if it's highly effective it can start to make me feel powerless as a gm. What can I do? It's just going to be the same one trick pony one size fits all solution to walk all over my carefully constructed encounter whatever I do. This can feel a lot worse if I'm running a published scenario, module or even a campaign (I'll have a lot more freedom if I'm running something I made up myself).

When such a player brings a new character to the table there's this horrible sense of apprehension. "Great," I'll think, "what horribly broken rediculously overpowered rules exploit are they going to pull out of nowhere this time?" That is probably exactly what your gm feels every time you come up with a new character. To you the character's new. It's great. It's this wonderful new creation you want to play with but to your gm it's another in a long line of problems that he's just going to have to deal with. He doesn't even know the details yet but he knows he's going to hate it. It won't matter if your character has serious flaws and weaknesses if they never come up. Let's take the (problem) example of the much hated Synthesist Summoner. One particular player I know likes to brag that "it's not overpowered because once you get up to about 10th level you can just hit it with a Banish spell and it's gone." He completely ignores how irrelevant such an argument is for those first 9 levels. Sure, there's sleep spells and stuff like that but dealing with such a vastly powerful single dimensional character with a specially tailored encounter that isn't going to be much fun for the rest of the players will not be much fun for the gm either. Do you really want to play in a campaign where every hostile group of npcs has a scroll or wand of banishment just because they know there's one Synthesist Summoner out there who's a real threat? That might not fit the tone of the campaign - the style of game that the gm wants to run.

Now that I've described the problem let's look at a possible solution. I don't mind specialised characters. I do mind over-specialised ones. The kind who are obsessed with killing all the opposition before round 3. Preferably before round 2. As a gm I like to play with my toys as well. If all my monsters get killed before they ever get a turn in virtually every single encounter for sessions on end I'm going to get frustrated. I'm not playing them badly. I just don't get to play. I'd like to take part in a manner that doesn't just boil down to adding up damage and scrubbing monsters off the initiative order before praising players on boring me stiff. I'd like me monsters to hit back.

Let's use some completely made up numbers here. Let's pretend your character is 80% optimised. To my mind, as a gm, that's highly unrealistic. Such an individual should be a very rare breed. Practically incapable of functioning as a survivable individual without serious care and assistance. They should not be the bread and butter of average adventure party members. when all such characters are hyper-specialised it begins to break immersion and I feel like I'm not running the game any more. I'm just watching as a passive audience. I want the heroes to be capable of doing great things but I also want them to be challenged. Want them to feel as if they've earned the rewards of their labours. If they are not challenged then I do not feel they have earned their rewards.

So let's take that (made up number) 80% specialisation and try toning it down to 60% (another made up number). There's nothing wrong with having a specialised character. Just don't overdo it to the point where it might begin to spoil other people's fun.

Another thing I would like to say is make sure the character fits. If your GM wants to run a game about gnomes full of gnomish culture and stuff don't come in saying "well I want to play a (insert name of very un-gnomish thing here - let's say a half elf or hippogriff)." It's fine if one or two players does that but the gm wants most of the characters to be gnomes. If he's already got the hump about the kind of character you're likely to play then make an effort to make it fit into the existing game world setting. He's more likely to accept a powerful optimised character if it fits. It's when people start making excuses to shoe-horn in their latest powerbuild regardless of the actual kind of games being played that I, as a Gm, become uncomfortable and grumpy. If I want to run the Giantslayer advanture path as an all dwarf party (wth a few gnomes for the more sneaky and spellcaster roles) then I'm not going to be happy if three quarters of the players turn up and announce they all want to play half orcs. They clearly want to play a different game to the one that I want to run. I could run a game for half orcs. I totally could, but I'd been preparing notes for complex encounters designed to challenge the dwarven racial hatred of greenskins and make themr econsider their beliefs. Now I need to find ways of making half orcs face up to their orcish past, the reputations they'll have. People shunning them and treating them badly. It's not what I prepared for. And it's players disrespecting my wish as a gm to run a particular kind of game.

So in short, talk to your gm. Tone down the specialisation a bit. Don't try to persuade him that certain weakness or shortcomings will balance it out. If you do intend to have such weaknesses then suggest ways in which they can be used. Give the gm some ideas and please try to avoid being a one trick pony. He's going to hate that.

[Corvino]

If your GM is worried that your very optimised characters overshadow the group, build a support character. The Bards that have been suggested are a good idea, but a support & buffing focused Cleric or Life Oracle could be just as good. Optimise your character to make everyone else shine - your group will love you, and done well you'll multiply the strength of the entire party.

It sounds like many of the OP's characters have been actively combatting the GM controlled foes via damage, control or debuffing. Support characters don't need to do this as much, and can take a more passive combat role in some circumstances. Use your actions to buff and then use a reach weapon and move to create area denial -> no offensive action but still combat effective.

[Jaçinto]

I quit purely optimizing ages ago when I realized, especially with my witch, what is the point in everyone else playing when I am ending every combat and non combat encounter in one round. What was the point in anyone showing up when I could solo everything that happened? It sucked for everyone else and sucked for me because I wanted to play multiplayer. I balance out my characters now to be more like people and co-operative. A game where even one payer's character is essentially useless and does not need to be there due to being overshadowed makes the whole game suck. Not only that, but the DM needs to scale everything to challenge you, which makes it almost unplayable for everyone else. So the game is either a challenge for the others and a cakewalk for you, or a challenge for you and a death sentence for everyone else.

[zeroiris]

Serisan wrote:

Build a bard or a skald and see what happens.

Ugh, i did this once. Now my gm has a fear of bards. >.<

[Rynjin]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Helcack wrote:

I have experienced this before, and mostly you just have to help the others in your party optimize and things end up fine as everyone is good at their own thing. Otherwise, make it an actual challenge and choose a race or class that isn't great for a concept and try to make it good. Those are the two things I have done to overcome said problems.

Yeah - it can be fun to optimize a weak concept into viability.

I would argue that this is the MOST fun...but it doesn't help in this particular case, since on at least one occasion that's what he DID, and the GM still hated it.

Caryth Derellis wrote:

The next character he complained about was a dwarf fighter who utilized full plate and a tower shield to simply not get hit. He would bull-rush with the shield and pin enemies against the wall while his allies killed them. He would railroad them off cliffs, into fiery pits, and all sort of other fun places.

Tower Shields are objectively terrible, and Bull Rush builds are the very definition of situational.

[DM_Blake]

... then the problem is probably you.

I'll suggest this: Paizo has published their iconics in a book. This is their version of what a character *should* be. In that same book they have hundreds of NPC characters. None of them are "optimized". Then Paizo publishes modules and adventure paths. In them you find monsters and bad guys, all statted up, and none of them are "optimized". Those encounters have CRs attached to them to tell us GMs, including your GM, what level you should be when you fight them. If you make your characters the same way Paizo does, these will be fun fights for you and the GM. But if you "optimize" your characters, these fights will be easy and boring and frankly, not story-worthy.

Some people are OK with all of that; all they want to do is kill the monster and loot it's stuff as quickly as possible, then on to the next monster. For these people, "optimizing" is the perfect way to achieve their goals as quickly and efficiently as possible. I'm not criticizing this style of play - if everyone at the table is happy playing this way they it's incredibly fun and fast paced.

But not everyone is OK with that. It sounds like your GM is definitely not. It also sounds like you are not. Your OP mentions roleplaying and being part of the group, so I suspect you are "optimizing" because it's fun for you and you like to do it, but it's not the ONLY thing you want out of the game.

What can be even worse is having an "optimizer" in a group of "non-optimizers". It can be frustrating for everyone.

The best solution that I have found for my table is to tailor the game for the way PAIZO writes their adventures. Completely "non-optimized" but still efficient and successful characters encountering fun and engaging "non-optimized" challenges.

Maybe that will work for you.

Or maybe this is not the right group for you after all - sometimes that's the hardest realization to recognize and admit, but if it's true, moving on to a more suitable group might be the best thing to make you and your current GM happy.

[Davor]

Here's the real question: How does your group feel about it? If your DM is the only one with an issue, then he's likely overattached to his encounters and combatants. The primary goal of the DM is to ensure that the group is having fun, and 9/10 times, if he does this, he'll have fun, too. Talk to him about it, talk to your group members, and if he keeps it up, tell him to SUCK IT UP as you slumber his precious minions into their doom.

[Otherwhere]

I've found myself as GM in the same place as Gilarius and Balgin. I have 1 player out of 7 that tends to do what you do, and I've come to dread each session with him. I don't want to feel that way, nor do I have an issue with him outside of the game. But there's just something about his approach that triggers me, and I can't quite pin it down beyond observing that he "optimizes" at - imo - the expense of character. The mechanics are what drives him, and he'll use every exploit - many of them legal - to do so.

But he's just not fun to GM for. Not when he'll look for ways to minimize or trivialize encounters. The other players don't do that, They try to work within the confines of what I've created, and seem to respect that: a) I am not optimizing my encounters because b) I am not out to kill them.

It's tough. He's a friend, and very generous outside the game. But in it, he's one of the most selfish players I've gamed with.

What can you do? As others have suggested: talk to him; find out what he'd like to see you try. Adopt a different approach on your own - emulate what the others at the table do. Try a different group - maybe you'll find one that fits better. GM yourself. Sometimes being on that side of things makes you understand what you've been doing that can irritate a GM. (I've learned that my "character hopping" can be a pain to plan for.) Good luck to you!

[RDM42]

This isn't a comment on optimization itself, but I rather dislike the attitude that if a character isn't completely optimized he 'can't hit things or kill them with his sword". It's patently not true. Plenty of non optimized character can do these things and finish adventures and campaigns or adventure paths just fine. This isn't saying you are just plain wrong to optimize ... But try to not use the lame 'excuse' of 'I don't want to play an x who can't x with his x" - as usually optimization isn't strictly necessary for that. Unless you have a 'killer gm' at least just be straightforward about what you are really looking for.

[Charon's Little Helper]

Rynjin wrote:

Caryth Derellis wrote:

The next character he complained about was a dwarf fighter who utilized full plate and a tower shield to simply not get hit. He would bull-rush with the shield and pin enemies against the wall while his allies killed them. He would railroad them off cliffs, into fiery pits, and all sort of other fun places.

Tower Shields are objectively terrible, and Bull Rush builds are the very definition of situational.

I'm with you for Pathfinder rules - but back in 3.5 (when the story may have happened) - they had a pretty sweet niche with the whole full cover thing. It was worth walking around with the extra +2AC/-2-to-hit for the times when the full cover was occasionally amazing. Unfortunately - Pathfinder nerfed tower shields. (I'm not sure if it was intentional or if it was done accidentally when simplifying the description.)

[GypsyMischief]

All things said the GM needs to thicken their skin a bit and find a happy median between you feeling held back and their boredom. You should definitely talk about it though, that's the first step. I honestly suggest you try GMing, that might be the feel you want.

[Charon's Little Helper]

All who are on the GM's side - that's fine, he can dislike the character's power level - but cheating to pretend the OP character didn't do anything isn't the answer.

[wraithstrike]

Some GM's expect for players to do a certain thing, but some players are creative, and it throws GM's for a loop especially if the player is tactically better than the GM. The GM needs to man up and address the issue. From there a solution may be reached. If not, and there are other games in town the two can still be friends even if they are not table compatible.

[Darth Grall]

My 2 cp: the DM needs to optimize his encounters to meet your character's power level(which probably won't go well if your allies aren't optimized) and barring that you need to drop from the group(sounds like you don't want to) OR purposely optimize a weaker character class(rogues and monks come to mind). My money's on the last one since the other two don't sound good for you.

Though the thing that I scratch my head at is that the DM dislikes your Witch. They're T1 casters for sure, but they also don't the win fights by themselves, unless you're higher level(in which case see T1 caster) or are using insta-win headed like slumber or ice-tomb(which you didn't mention). Witches are amazing debuffers but debuffing just protects the party by making another guy suck and them look better so I don't get what's to be upset about.

Like I've heard of mythic witches that make non-mythic fights irrelevant too, but just disliking a buffer/debuffer is really weird to me. Does your DM prefer high mortality games and is upset your party isn't dying or something?

[Just a Guess]

I have had similar experiences to the OP. And most of my PCs would be laughed at by the optimizers here on the boards.
Most of the time it is not so much during the game but when handing in characters before play. Mine get nerfed while others get allowed things that are not RAW. It reached a point where I contemplated sending my pc to one of the other players so he can hand in both his pc and mine without telling which is his and which is mine to have my PC treated more fairly.

One of the reasons is: I know what my PCs can do and am often too honest about it while other players just lie to the GM pretending their PC was weak.

Another point is that I see fluff as mutable but one of my GMs sees it as more fixed than rules. He'd rather allow another player special rules than me to play something contrary to the fluff. An example is: I wanted to play a Halfling thundercaller bard but was not allowed because thundercaller is a shoanti archetype and thus only shoanti may take it.

[Arachnofiend]

Guys, he played a tower shield fighter and the GM complained about it. Crazy high optimization is definitely not the problem here.

[Malag]

@Caryth Derellis

People have already given you a lot of solid advice. The only thing I am going to suggest is to post the build of your current or former character if you have time to do so. Perhaps these characters aren't as optimized as GM believes them to be. So far, few posters have made valid concerns about it.

[Riia]

To the OP:

I hear ya and sympathize. Follow Ryuko's advice of talking to the GM.

I have had a similar situation where my GM has outlawed many things in the games we play, all based off characters I have run in his campaigns.

No monks, no slippers of spider climb, no wizards...

We have been playing for over a decade together and most of the stories that are told of the 'old days' center on why the GM banned me from playing certain character classes.

Is it my fault that I knew how to use Ki-points to get all the way across the room, via the ceiling, bypassing all the obstacles between us and the Big bad boss? Nope.

[rknop]

Gilarius wrote:

Eventually, we stopped playing in the same games.

This is the ultimate solution.

If your play style and your GM's play style don't mesh, then you probably shouldn't be playing together. More broadly, if your play style and your group's play style don't mesh, then you're not in the right group.

If you want to play a highly-optimized character, then you need to be either in a group that's happy to be second-fiddle to your one-trick pony who dominates everything by applying that trick, or you need to be in a group of players who similarly optimize and a GM who's happy to raise the challenge to the level the players want.

If you want to play with the group you're playing with, then you're going to have to adjust your play style.

Given that the OP says "I don't think I should have to stop playing characters the way I enjoy playing them (and thus, in a sense, the game itself) because he can't seem to find ways as a DM to combat them properly. I have operated completely under his rules and expectations and yet he whines", I'm pretty sure that the option here is just that the OP is in the wrong group and needs to find different people to play with.

And, honestly, were I the GM, I would find it a relief. As Gilarius and several others from the GM point of view have pointed out, it's painful on both sides when a player really wants to play in a style that a GM does not want to run. You don't have to stop being friends, but you may well have to accept that your play styles simply aren't compatible. If you're unwilling to adapt, and think that all the adapting must come from the GM and the other players, chances are that you just need to find a group of optimizers to play with. They are out there; you see enough threads on the forums with optimizers complaining that their GM or group aren't happy with them. I don't know how easy it will be to find in your area, but they are out there, and your time would probably be better spent trying to find sympatico gamers.

[LazarX]

You and your GM have issues. You two should be talking to each other, not providing fodder for folks who just want to raise your paranoia levels.

[Ciaran Barnes]

It could be that the two of you don't want the same kind of game. I have gamed with people who make me look like an unabashed min-maxer, and I have gamed with people who make me look like I barely know what I'm doing. We all have a way that we like to play the game - what we think is the best, the way the game is the most fun for us.

Judging by what you wrote, he might prefer less effective PCs so he can guide the action with story instead of die rolls, but it could also be that you two are friends and sometimes friends can drive each other crazy and there is nothing logical about it.

Talk with him, of course. But maybe you should look for people whose style meshes better with yours. Being in a different group doesn't mean the end of gaming with your friend or the end of a friendship. But you should do something before it gets to that point. If you have the time and the means, you can be in two groups at once. If you can't manage that, maybe some time spent gaming apart will help things out. He might end up missing your rascally optimization.

I gamed with one of my best friends for several years starting when I was a teenager. We grew up on the same block and have known each other all our lives. There were times we gamed most days of the week. They were great times and some of my best gaming stories are from those adventures. But now, 20 years later I would never join a group he started. I tried for a bit several years ago and I do not enjoy it. Although we both love gaming, we want totally different styles of games. We're still great fiends though and talk about the games we're playing in whenever we see each other. If he joined my group, I could handle it, but he might not enjoy it.

[Caryth Derellis]

Riia wrote:

To the OP:

I hear ya and sympathize. Follow Ryuko's advice of talking to the GM.

I have had a similar situation where my GM has outlawed many things in the games we play, all based off characters I have run in his campaigns.

No monks, no slippers of spider climb, no wizards...

We have been playing for over a decade together and most of the stories that are told of the 'old days' center on why the GM banned me from playing certain character classes.

Is it my fault that I knew how to use Ki-points to get all the way across the room, via the ceiling, bypassing all the obstacles between us and the Big bad boss? Nope.

Exactly - the GM should applaud creative thinking and approaches instead of whining about it, IMO. I get that optimization can be frustrating, but the fact is that those characters only shine sometimes, not all the time. If they are becoming a problem then it is because the situations don't contain enough variety and thus offers too many scenarios where that character outshines everyone because it is their specialty.

[The Factotum]

The problem when you say you like to Optimize is that people assume Pun Pun when you say that. People assume you are looking through every book, every minute detail and trying to exploit every rules folly.

Loads of them presume that is what people mean by optimizing. Some GMs consider optimizing if you build toward a goal that makes you better. I mean if we break down the term picking a Greatsword over a Longsword is optimizing to some small degree.

For this situation yes do go and talk to the GM, explain your problem and ask what his views on.

If things don't get better make it a point to the other players that he is singling YOU out and see if they feel the same. If you bring a completely worthless character to the table and he is still giving you crap about it make it known to them that this is vindictive. Because when you leave he will likely just move on to one of them to vent any frustration out on.

But yes pick up a support class, I love them but I know some people don't like to shine. I can think of several excuses right now for why bards are too OP.

[Caryth Derellis]

Darth Grall wrote:

My 2 cp: the DM needs to optimize his encounters to meet your character's power level(which probably won't go well if your allies aren't optimized) and barring that you need to drop from the group(sounds like you don't want to) OR purposely optimize a weaker character class(rogues and monks come to mind). My money's on the last one since the other two don't sound good for you.

Though the thing that I scratch my head at is that the DM dislikes your Witch. They're T1 casters for sure, but they also don't the win fights by themselves, unless you're higher level(in which case see T1 caster) or are using insta-win headed like slumber or ice-tomb(which you didn't mention). Witches are amazing debuffers but debuffing just protects the party by making another guy suck and them look better so I don't get what's to be upset about.

Like I've heard of mythic witches that make non-mythic fights irrelevant too, but just disliking a buffer/debuffer is really weird to me. Does your DM prefer high mortality games and is upset your party isn't dying or something?

No, he generally throws a good mix of fights at us in terms of difficulty. He seems to target me regardless of whether I have dealt damage to a creature or other. Even though our tank is hacking it to pieces... And he applauds this other guy if he does a lot of damage, doesn't bat an eye - in some ways this bugs me too because if it was me he would whine about "power-gaming" as he calls it.

On the note of the witch - it drives me nuts as well that he doesn't like it. He got sick of me killing everything (which is generally the end goal, is it not?) and so I went to crowd control.

If my CC attempts fail, I am literally left with nothing I can do. I can't attack with my weapons and no armor. I have few offensive spells that deal damage. I have no decent weapon training. My familiar is useless in melee. I am not abusing the witch's abilities, simply using them how they are effective and meant to be used.

I really ought to talk to him. I guess I have been avoiding it.

[Caryth Derellis]

Yes, for clarity - I DO NOT wish to EXPLOIT any unclear rules, rather, I wish simply to use the existing parameters to create an effective character/the best I can given guidelines.

[Caryth Derellis]

Just a Guess wrote:

I have had similar experiences to the OP. And most of my PCs would be laughed at by the optimizers here on the boards.

Most of the time it is not so much during the game but when handing in characters before play. Mine get nerfed while others get allowed things that are not RAW. It reached a point where I contemplated sending my pc to one of the other players so he can hand in both his pc and mine without telling which is his and which is mine to have my PC treated more fairly.

One of the reasons is: I know what my PCs can do and am often too honest about it while other players just lie to the GM pretending their PC was weak.

Another point is that I see fluff as mutable but one of my GMs sees it as more fixed than rules. He'd rather allow another player special rules than me to play something contrary to the fluff. An example is: I wanted to play a Halfling thundercaller bard but was not allowed because thundercaller is a shoanti archetype and thus only shoanti may take it.

YES - he does this too!

All my characters are within the rules of the game. I do not bend or push ANY. Yet, he has given special treatment to others by giving them unique items, allowing them to perform "special" maneuvers, etc. I drives me bonkers.

[Cyrad]

Do you roleplay at all? How does your GM run his games? Does he love roleplaying and story? Give your characters personality. I personally don't enjoy running games for characters with no likable personality.

[Caryth Derellis]

Otherwhere wrote:

I've found myself as GM in the same place as Gilarius and Balgin. I have 1 player out of 7 that tends to do what you do, and I've come to dread each session with him. I don't want to feel that way, nor do I have an issue with him outside of the game. But there's just something about his approach that triggers me, and I can't quite pin it down beyond observing that he "optimizes" at - imo - the expense of character. The mechanics are what drives him, and he'll use every exploit - many of them legal - to do so.

But he's just not fun to GM for. Not when he'll look for ways to minimize or trivialize encounters. The other players don't do that, They try to work within the confines of what I've created, and seem to respect that: a) I am not optimizing my encounters because b) I am not out to kill them.

It's tough. He's a friend, and very generous outside the game. But in it, he's one of the most selfish players I've gamed with.

What can you do? As others have suggested: talk to him; find out what he'd like to see you try. Adopt a different approach on your own - emulate what the others at the table do. Try a different group - maybe you'll find one that fits better. GM yourself. Sometimes being on that side of things makes you understand what you've been doing that can irritate a GM. (I've learned that my "character hopping" can be a pain to plan for.) Good luck to you!

Thanks for the comments and insight. I have run a few games myself, so I also have some insight. I guess for me that if I encountered this myself, I would just switch up the encounters. I honestly feel as though I have not sacrificed back story or role-playing at all with my characters. So, if I encountered characters like my own I would add variety to the adventures to ensure that these characters wouldn't always be presented with times to shine. I might try to get creative with scenarios that challenge their strengths or exploit their weaknesses a bit.

I guess I hope that it what this DM should do, and as everyone has mentioned I will inevitably need to bring this up with him.

[The Factotum]

Caryth Derellis wrote:

Just a Guess wrote:

I have had similar experiences to the OP. And most of my PCs would be laughed at by the optimizers here on the boards.

Most of the time it is not so much during the game but when handing in characters before play. Mine get nerfed while others get allowed things that are not RAW. It reached a point where I contemplated sending my pc to one of the other players so he can hand in both his pc and mine without telling which is his and which is mine to have my PC treated more fairly.

One of the reasons is: I know what my PCs can do and am often too honest about it while other players just lie to the GM pretending their PC was weak.

Another point is that I see fluff as mutable but one of my GMs sees it as more fixed than rules. He'd rather allow another player special rules than me to play something contrary to the fluff. An example is: I wanted to play a Halfling thundercaller bard but was not allowed because thundercaller is a shoanti archetype and thus only shoanti may take it.

YES - he does this too!

All my characters are within the rules of the game. I do not bend or push ANY. Yet, he has given special treatment to others by giving them unique items, allowing them to perform "special" maneuvers, etc. I drives me bonkers.

Yeah if it is as bad as that then you need to quit the group. If he is giving out special perks to everyone else and punishing you. He is being passive aggressive and is trying to make you want to quit. You can quit and call him a dick or make him the dick. Make a character that is a downright copy of a other players former character, down to copying the sheet if they still have it. Let that player know of course and when the GM starts complaining about it just give that player a look like 'See?' it will spread through the group of players that yeah he is indeed singling you out and if you are using someone elses character that is NOT optimized then it shows it even more.

Or you know.. take a nice thick hardback version and slap the shit out of him with it till he learns his lesson lol.

[Caryth Derellis]

Cyrad wrote:

Do you roleplay at all? How does your GM run his games? Does he love roleplaying and story? Give your characters personality. I personally don't enjoy running games for characters with no likable personality.

We do roleplay as much as we can. I am the face of the party in some sense actually. I interact by far the most with NPCs and get into the story as much as I can.

The GM is a big roleplayer, yes. I thought that by getting into this more he would let off of singling my characters out, but it hasn't helped.

[Caryth Derellis]

Davor wrote:

Here's the real question: How does your group feel about it? If your DM is the only one with an issue, then he's likely overattached to his encounters and combatants. The primary goal of the DM is to ensure that the group is having fun, and 9/10 times, if he does this, he'll have fun, too. Talk to him about it, talk to your group members, and if he keeps it up, tell him to SUCK IT UP as you slumber his precious minions into their doom.

So the thing is that the witch in particular has saved the party from a wipe many times. Especially on boss fights the hexes have helped a TON. We would have all died without a few clutch hexes/spells.

The DM has often whined about "not getting to use this guy" or "losing his toys" and even "didn't get to use his stuff" because of crowd control mechanics.

The party has not complained once about my characters. They seem to enjoy the fights. I think you hit something here about him being attached too much to the bad guys in the AP.

[RDM42]

Examples of the 'special perks?'?

[The Factotum]

Caryth Derellis wrote:

Cyrad wrote:

Do you roleplay at all? How does your GM run his games? Does he love roleplaying and story? Give your characters personality. I personally don't enjoy running games for characters with no likable personality.

We do roleplay as much as we can. I am the face of the party in some sense actually. I interact by far the most with NPCs and get into the story as much as I can.

The GM is a big roleplayer, yes. I thought that by getting into this more he would let off of singling my characters out, but it hasn't helped.

Then a bard is gonna piss him off more I think. Sounds like he sees you are trying to take all the fun. All the Damage and all the Talking, why do the others show up to be your backup dancers? I don't see if that way but I can get the viewpoint.

But the way you spoke made me think that you just recently got into the RP as heavily. Just talk to him, explain your not trying to take away everyone else's enjoyment.

But also, be a little firm and make sure if this is gonna be a Witch hunt then have your witch begin falling back when combat hits, don't talk to the NPCs and so forth. Pull your character back and when the PARTY begins to notice the loss explain to them why, the GM is singling you out so you are not gonna do anything to get singled out. Bet the party has words with him about it.

[haremlord]

I enjoy optimizing my characters. I've read many of the guides that I've seen posted here, and even taken some ideas from them.

That said, if I can't find a compelling role-playing hook in the character, I tend to throw them away. I am a min/maxer (well... more maxer... I'm not so good at minimizing weaknesses. my characters tend to have bad ACs or saves, but whatever :D) but I prefer the role-playing over the combat.

I once made a character that was completely min/maxed for his cooking skills. One of the other players expected some big reveal that would show how powerful the character was, despite the fact that I told everyone that he was just a really good cook.

We all seem to have a good time, but it occurs to me, from reading the responses here, maybe I've missed something with my group. They tend to optimize as well, sometimes with characters that overshadow mine, but it never occurred to me that the GMs might not like that too much. It may go to explaining why our games tend to fizzle out after a session or two before a new one is pitched.

But, to be fair, we all play and the GM role gets passed around, so you'd think we would have learned by now.

[Caryth Derellis]

RDM42 wrote:

Examples of the 'special perks?'?

He gave the channeling cleric a set of rings that he can pass out to party members. If they are wearing them, his channel acts as if it were selective. Yes, this one benefits everyone - so this is perhaps a minor one. This would be an INCREDIBLY expensive set of items though, and this was at level 3.

He has awared the tank character with magic armor, weapon, ring(s).

I have NO magic items, and not enough gold to buy the ones I want/need. All the loot value has been wrapped up in what he awards.

He allows people extra reflex saves and d20 rolls of all sorts to avoid danger or perform special attacks that deal extra damage or have extra effects, while he makes me REROLL saves or makes me roll additional saves to avoid dangers. He makes me call "evens/odds" ( and seemingly decides what he wants to happen anyway) all the time to determine whether or not my character does something that I never declared he did... I can't recall everything, but the idea is that this is a chronic issue.

[Caryth Derellis]

The Factotum wrote:

Caryth Derellis wrote:

Cyrad wrote:

Do you roleplay at all? How does your GM run his games? Does he love roleplaying and story? Give your characters personality. I personally don't enjoy running games for characters with no likable personality.

We do roleplay as much as we can. I am the face of the party in some sense actually. I interact by far the most with NPCs and get into the story as much as I can.

The GM is a big roleplayer, yes. I thought that by getting into this more he would let off of singling my characters out, but it hasn't helped.

Then a bard is gonna piss him off more I think. Sounds like he sees you are trying to take all the fun. All the Damage and all the Talking, why do the others show up to be your backup dancers? I don't see if that way but I can get the viewpoint.

But the way you spoke made me think that you just recently got into the RP as heavily. Just talk to him, explain your not trying to take away everyone else's enjoyment.

But also, be a little firm and make sure if this is gonna be a Witch hunt then have your witch begin falling back when combat hits, don't talk to the NPCs and so forth. Pull your character back and when the PARTY begins to notice the loss explain to them why, the GM is singling you out so you are not gonna do anything to get singled out. Bet the party has words with him about it.

Good advice, ty. I got into the RP more because no one else would. I love to get into the story and the reasons for fighting at all, etc. so it was making me bored and annoyed that no one else would engage.

[The Factotum]

Caryth Derellis wrote:

RDM42 wrote:

Examples of the 'special perks?'?

He gave the channeling cleric a set of rings that he can pass out to party members. If they are wearing them, his channel acts as if it were selective. Yes, this one benefits everyone - so this is perhaps a minor one. This would be an INCREDIBLY expensive set of items though, and this was at level 3.

He has awared the tank character with magic armor, weapon, ring(s).

I have NO magic items, and not enough gold to buy the ones I want/need. All the loot value has been wrapped up in what he awards.

He allows people extra reflex saves and d20 rolls of all sorts to avoid danger or perform special attacks that deal extra damage or have extra effects, while he makes me REROLL saves or makes me roll additional saves to avoid dangers. He makes me call "evens/odds" all the time to determine whether or not my character does something that I never declared he did... I can't recall everything, but the idea is that this is a chronic issue.

Yeah consider my advice about the thick book and the side of his head. This is pretty bad (if true)

[Cyrad]

Yeah, just talk to the guy and find out what's up. Who knows, he might not actually hate your characters at all. I single out PCs all the time, but my players know I'm not picking on them.

[bookrat]

I really like the idea of having you play an iconic character for a while. This will test whether the GM hates your characters or just a hates you.

If, while playing an iconic character, he still does all these things to you, then I would ask him why he's still picking on you when you obviously do not have an optimized character. If he still insists on picking on you, then I strongly suggest finding a new GM. Either rotate GMs out within your own group or find a new group to play with.