There is when you're running an AP. The AP doesn't magically get easier or harder based on the power levels of the characters in the game, just how easy or hard of a time they have handling it.
APs are designed against a certain power level, that doesn't mean that every party has to hit that power level. Nor does it mean that if a PC is under that power level that they are doing something wrong.
His character is so weak (and the others even weaker, apparently) that I'm surprised they managed to survive to level 12 in Carrion Crown.
But that's not the point. They could all be playing terribly unoptimized characters, and he could be playing a slightly less terribly optimized character. If the other players are having fun except for the part where the one PC is dominating everything, then why not simply address that one point?
You seem to be in favor of protecting this one player's character from any kind of alterations, but don't seem to mind telling the other five that they designed their characters wrong. Why is this one player's fun more important than the other players' fun?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd match him with something on his level and fudge the threat so it went after him. The rest of the encounter could be filled with foes on level with the rest of the party.
Even just a set of enemies with mirror images would be enough to stop him from cleaving to the next target though.
Or hit him in the resistances. Like a glitterdust spell or something to blind him.
Bait him into situations too by placing enemies clustered and reveal something on another plane or that was invisible attacking him with 10-15 foot reach once he predictably walks into range.
Also grappling enemies might be a good idea. Give an enemy a scroll of summon monster V and throw multiple octopuses at him. You can't cleave if you can't move.
Metagaming the bad guys to target a single player is a great way to suck all the fun out of the game.
There is when you're running an AP. The AP doesn't magically get easier or harder based on the power levels of the characters in the game, just how easy or hard of a time they have handling it.APs are designed against a certain power level, that doesn't mean that every party has to hit that power level. Nor does it mean that if a PC is under that power level that they are doing something wrong.
His character is so weak (and the others even weaker, apparently) that I'm surprised they managed to survive to level 12 in Carrion Crown.But that's not the point. They could all be playing terribly unoptimized characters, and he could be playing a slightly less terribly optimized character. If the other players are having fun except for the part where the one PC is dominating everything, then why not simply address that one point?
You seem to be in favor of protecting this one player's character from any kind of alterations, but don't seem to mind telling the other five that they designed their characters wrong. Why is this one player's fun more important than the other players' fun?
I suggested SEVERAL alterations throughout the thread.
None of them, however, fit your hamfisted way of randomly changing how the game works for just one player like "Every time he hits an enemy he does half damage".
I suggested SEVERAL alterations throughout the thread.
We'll have to chalk this up to a difference of opinion - your changes seem to, intentionally or not, label unoptimized characters as being undesirable. This implies to me that players don't have the freedom to create the kind of character they want to create.
None of them, however, fit your hamfisted way of randomly changing how the game works for just one player like "Every time he hits an enemy he does half damage".
Funny - you put the text in quotes, but you're clearly not quoting me. I said "Reduce the effectiveness of the warpriest's attacks at certain times." That hardly equates to "Every time he hits an enemy he does half damage."
An unfair game is always an unfun game.So you tell someone, "Since you made an average character I'll punish you by nerfing him, because everyone else made crappy ones, so you must be crappy, too! Make your character crappy or I'll nerf you!" That's flatly unfair.Regardless if the player created a suboptimal character, an average character, an optimized character, or a super-optimized character, if the rest of the group is not having fun because of it, it needs to be addressed.
Short version, if you have six players, and one is causing the problem, address the one, rather than trying to get the five to create more powerful characters to compensate.
which I reply with, so?
the goal of pathfinder is to make a fun game not a fair game. If asymmetry makes the game funner then you have accomplished this goal.
with the number of asymmetrical PvP games out there that are enjoyable, this is entirely untrue. there's even many asymmetrical PvE games, like survival game modes, horror games, games with out opponents.
World of Warcraft(i dislike this game) even has a threat mechanic to determine who keeps agro
Like in dark souls, the handmaidens ladle is the weakest weapon in the game, that still doesn't stop people from using it in PvP. some people enjoy the Asymmetry.
TLDR
Some players really like the optimizing part of character building. To them, that is almost a whole other game to enjoy. Sometimes you can make the suggestion that the player optimize a less powerful concept. Uses concealable or non-weapon looking weapons. Club, shovel, kitchen knife, staff, etc... Or less powerful class combinations like an arcane trickster.
Sometimes this suggestions will work, sometimes they will not.
.
.
...
*Player and character is important distinction here. NPCs reacting to actions in the game is justified. If the wizard is the biggest threath and they have opportunity to meaningfully target them, of coarse the wizard should be targeted, provided the npcs in question have the mental faculties to make such tactical choices.
An intelligent enemy that has some forewarning, could legitimately specifically target the war priest. But that should be a rare event.
..
...His response is that I should include more skill base role playing solve it situation that he won't have the skills for, use the hostage situations where the bad guys threaten with innocent hostages to make his character back down from violence to beat them and other similar situations. He isn't seeing anything wrong with his characters being superman like when they get to 7th level or higher. And, when I countered after a session saying I should use warpriest said to offset his power, he balked saying he might survive, but the other characters won't. ...
The bolded part here kinda bothers me. As presented, it sounds like he knows he's causing a problem and doesn't care.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Funny - you put the text in quotes, but you're clearly not quoting me. I said "Reduce the effectiveness of the warpriest's attacks at certain times." That hardly equates to "Every time he hits an enemy he does half damage."
Oh, sorry, guess that only makes your advice bad, and not terrible.
My mistake
*snip*
Metagaming the bad guys to target a single player is a great way to suck all the fun out of the game.
That's like your opinion man. It's not like I said no one else would be getting a free pass on combat, but you're free to spin the narrative.
That's not the only suggestion that was in there either. Displacement or mirror image enemies work for the whole party as well as the OP character.
Grapplers work for the whole party.