So this might be a bit petty of me, but I'm the usually GM for my group and one of my players wanted to give it a try and since I don't play that often I thought why not. So he got the Skull and Shackles module and played it and we all agreed that were were going to be a questionably moral party not straight up evil, but not good ether.
I however went all in playing an Anti-Paladin because hey when else are you going to get to play an Anti-Paladin like ever. Knowing that I went with a build that not a lot of people use I think, mainly because so many things can ignore it. I went with an intimidate build because an anti-paladin it's a guarantee I'm not wasting my time.
He has come to the conclusion that it is the most over powered thing ever because my aura allows me to use my feats that would be useless against these things and gives them negitives to resist it. I call BS on it since the -2 that I debuff them for never seems to harm them. So I wanted some advice on that regard so I can bring the most overpowered character that I can possible make to the table. Granted were only at level 5. I like my paladin more for the other stuff... but I feel a lesson needs to be learned or maybe I'm just cruel... most likely cruel but I still think it needs to be done.
In anycase here's what I have set up so far. Also if you can recommend an over powered anti-paladin build that is better then this. That would also be great. Oh yes he's also complaing that I'm overpowered at level 5 and only a 15 point buy.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ra7tpmf85bjf05s/Fia.pdf?dl=0
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
we all agreed that were were going to be a questionably moral party not straight up evil, but not good ether.
I however went all in playing an Anti-Paladin
Wat
I went with a build that not a lot of people use I think, mainly because so many things can ignore it. I went with an intimidate build
Wat
So I wanted some advice on that regard so I can bring the most overpowered character that I can possible make to the table.
Stop
I feel a lesson needs to be learned
Wat r u doing
or maybe I'm just cruel... most likely cruel but I still think it needs to be done.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you do anything that makes it less fun for others at the table the rule of thumb is you dont do it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you are usually the GM then you should know a very basic thing:
If you make it a competition with the GM , the players can never win.
There are plenty of builds on the forums that will deliver what you are looking for , if there is one thing this game doesnt lack is broken builds.
The trick here is to play something vanilla and unoptimised, but vasty better than what you were going for before.
Like a crb summon focused sorcerer or a generalist druid.
After you summon a few water elementals in a ship fight that Paladin is going to look REAL tame.
Also since it's crb stuff, you aren't technically being an ass and you can still subtly make your point. But your GM will probably just channel his/her inner Paizo dev and just be grateful you aren't breaking the game with them crazy op martials.
EDIT: No Wizards. Everyone knows they are OP. Stick to clerics, druids, sorcerers, or bards. Leave all non crb material off the character sheet.
EDIT 2: No planar binding, simulacrum, magic jar, or any other known busted spell either.
Is there a specific reason you don't try to talk it out with your Dm? Take you sheet, ask him why he think it's overpowered, tell him why you think it isn't and find the middleground. Yes, you might end up weaker. (Which probably doesn't feel nice) But the playing will be more fun.
What you're planning to do now is: "Do you think i'm mean? I'll show you mean!" In the hope that he'll stop thinking the first one wasn't. If you'd do this to me I'd only get angrier and you'd never get what you want.
Also, proving that somethings are even stronger than you doesn't say you aren't OP. Maybe the other players have characters that aren't as strong, which creates an imbalance in the group.
So this might be a bit petty of me, but I'm the usually GM for my group and one of my players wanted to give it a try and since I don't play that often I thought why not. So he got the Skull and Shackles module and played it and we all agreed that were were going to be a questionably moral party not straight up evil, but not good ether.
You deliberately suborned the group guidelines to create an Anti-Paladin. Anti-Paladins aren't of "questionable morality" they're the worst of the worst, because that is the classes mission statement.
And now you want to compound your malfeasance with some petty revenge and you're looking for help in this enterprise. Pray that your GM does not read these boards becaue if I were him or her, and saw this, I'd bounce...
If you read that closely I said the party. My AP is defintly the worst of the worst. Just because someone is Chaoitic evil does not mean they will not hang out with people of questionable morality. If anything they make much more easily controlable minions by bribes and plunder and such. Besides in Skull and Shackles your shanghaied.
I mean when it was decided we all thought evil party, so I went all into that but the party seemed to end up just at that questionable morality as a whole instead of straight up evil.
Okay, perhaps I should make myself a little bit more clear in this regard then. The point I'm trying to make to my GM is that I want him to take a firm stand in this. None of the other players think my AP is overpowered but the inexpericed DM keep complaining about it. He keeps nagging me about it, he keeps telling me how it's over powered. BUT HE WON'T TAKE A FIRM STAND!
I offer to remake my character if he doesn't like it, he doesn't respond. I offer to play a different character, he's like meh about it. All he says is it's overpowered and keeps complaining about it. I want to bring a character to really drive home the point that no it's not over powered. That really just having the ability to negate something so that a build works isn't over powered in my opinion.
What I'm trying to show him is that as a DM since he doesn't seem to get it. Is if there's a problem with your game, something truely game breaking in it. Then you need to step up and say something to that player besides just complain about it. That's my real reason for trying to do this... Though I was trying to get that point across by saying that perhaps it's just me and that I'm being petty because he keeps complaining about it. Maybe that's just me.
Honestly I just want to make the point once so that he gets it. I've talked to him like 3-4 times before and he just won't give me an answer. I mean I've also done other things to make it easeier for him since we have a big group, by not picking summons of any kind since that bogs combat time as well.
I mean he complains about it so much I am at the point that I just want to bring someone else to get him to be quiet about it. I hope that helps to see my point. His complaining is making it less fun to me and that's something a DM shouldn't do in my opinion. And I mean that constantly if he just did it once and put his foot down yeah it crushes the fun once for some people, but at least it's over. This just goes on and on every session and anytime we talk about it.
Once the point is made I'd want to give up the OP character.
I at least thank Ryden and My Self for some advice in this regard.
I offer to remake my character if he doesn't like it, he doesn't respond. I offer to play a different character, he's like meh about it. All he says is it's overpowered and keeps complaining about it. I want to bring a character to really drive home the point that no it's not over powered.
He is being annoyingly passive-aggressive about this, but then so are you.
It really doesn't take a genius to figure out that the GM does not, in fact, like your character. I could be wrong, but it seems pretty likely that the reason is not because it's overpowered, but because you agreed to a certain set of character concepts beforehand and then went and deliberately blew off that agreement, and now you're pretending that it's his problem, not yours.
You say several times that you want your GM to "take a firm stand," but I don't really understand what that means. What is it you want him to do? Do you want him to make it clear that he's unhappy with your character? He's already done that. This "firm stand" business is just being deliberately obtuse.
When you offer to remake your character, are you making that offer in good faith? If so, then just remake your character. If you just want to keep your character and don't care what he thinks about it, then you need to tell him that, explicitly.
Constructing elaborate schemes to "teach someone a lesson" is something that only works in sitcoms and cartoons, not in real life. It is childish. It will not make your GM suddenly see things your way. It will just make you look dumb and him more upset.
Ask the other players, maybe, if they think your character is too strong/OP/disruptive/doesn't fit/whatever, and how they feel about the GM "complaining" so much. Ask them when the GM isn't there (individually via email or something if you have to) because otherwise it'll probably feel like he's being ganged up on.
In any case, you'd want to approach him nicely to make sure he doesn't feel victimized, and come to some kind of agreement as a group so you can all have fun going forward.
I offer to remake my character if he doesn't like it, he doesn't respond. I offer to play a different character, he's like meh about it. All he says is it's overpowered and keeps complaining about it. I want to bring a character to really drive home the point that no it's not over powered.He is being annoyingly passive-aggressive about this, but then so are you.
It really doesn't take a genius to figure out that the GM does not, in fact, like your character. I could be wrong, but it seems pretty likely that the reason is not because it's overpowered, but because you agreed to a certain set of character concepts beforehand and then went and deliberately blew off that agreement, and now you're pretending that it's his problem, not yours.
You say several times that you want your GM to "take a firm stand," but I don't really understand what that means. What is it you want him to do? Do you want him to make it clear that he's unhappy with your character? He's already done that. This "firm stand" business is just being deliberately obtuse.
When you offer to remake your character, are you making that offer in good faith? If so, then just remake your character. If you just want to keep your character and don't care what he thinks about it, then you need to tell him that, explicitly.
Constructing elaborate schemes to "teach someone a lesson" is something that only works in sitcoms and cartoons, not in real life. It is childish. It will not make your GM suddenly see things your way. It will just make you look dumb and him more upset.
Firm stance. Your character is breaking the game please do something about it. There that is it that is what I want him to say, to do, to do something like that. I am making that offer in good faith and how did I break character concept before hand. It was supposed to be an evil party! What character class is more evil then an Anti-Paladin!
So let me rephrase this... perhaps I should make a new post on the thread so people stop saying this.
-takes a deep breath-
Was about to go on a rant. Okay, my point is, that I keep trying to make I suppose is. That I'm not trying to get back at him and you know sometimes using an extreme just once is a good way to teach someone a lesson.
I just thought that might work, so here's my real question. If you guys were in this postion. What would you do about this then? Your DM is constantly complaining about your character being over powered. Should I ignore it, remake my character, or try to do something to show him it's not over powered, or other. I have tried talking to the guy several times about it, but he won't take a firm stance. He won't give an opinion other then he thinks it's over powered simply because I can use Intim. all the time. I mean maybe I'm crazy is that a valid compliant?
I'm just going to toss this onto the pot - just remake your character in a way that fits in with the group.
I'm just going to toss this onto the pot - just remake your character in a way that fits in with the group.
Okay I'll say it again. My AP doesn't clash with the group, as of so far they have taken slaves, attacked Marines and slaughtered them. The only reason I put them as Moral Questionable is that sometimes the group decides to help out people too even though it seems like something a truely evil group shouldn't do.
But I'll just put that as a vote to remake the damn character. -sighs-
Are you using some of the tricks to send creatures fleeing from the fight regularly? Is the GM running intimidate properly (a -2 to certain rolls is hardly OP), or is he inadvertently making it stronger by having enemies run or surrender too easily?
Don't bring a crazy-OP character to the table to make a point. The most you should do is explain/show examples of OP builds to give context, but even that is worse than just talking it out as a group, and it probably wouldn't make him like your character any more anyway.
There are GMs and GMs.
Did you tell him you find annoying how he keeps complaining about your PC?
Personally i would not change my PC until he told me to , i would ofc talk to the GM , try to explain how my PC works...
Often in my case nothing changes for my current PC , on the next run the GM may decide to not allow a certain build.
The only time I feel "brokenly OP" characters work in actual play is as support characters. You can have awesome action economy, buff like crazy, prevent incoming damage and then heal - but if you're not breaking faces, tossing Fireballs or forcing nasty saves then people tend to be okay with it.
Making a heavily optimised support character could work well if that is your goal.
Firm stance. Your character is breaking the game please do something about it. There that is it that is what I want him to say, to do, to do something like that. I am making that offer in good faith and how did I break character concept before hand. It was supposed to be an evil party! What character class is more evil then an Anti-Paladin!
You wrote:
we all agreed that were were going to be a questionably moral party not straight up evil, but not good ether ... I however went all in playing an Anti-Paladin
(emphasis mine)
Unless I drastically misunderstood what you wrote, or unless you wrote something other than what you meant, the group (including you, and your GM) agreed to play morally questionable PCs that were not straight-up evil, but not entirely good, either. You, however, decided to roll up an anti-paladin, which I think by any reasonable definition would be considered straight-up evil. I think it's clear from your wording that you understood that your choice was contrary to the intent of the group agreement.
Let me be clear: I agree that your GM should be more up-front with you about not liking your character, and about why he doesn't like it.
But I also think it's actually pretty obvious what his feelings are. You don't need him to say a special magic sequence of words out loud to you, and sitting around waiting for him to do so just makes you petty. You could try to be the bigger person in this situation; instead you seem wed to the idea of just being the more passive-aggressive person.
If you know that remaking your character would patch things up, then do that. If you don't care and intend to keep your character regardless of how your GM feels, then say that.
Are you using some of the tricks to send creatures fleeing from the fight regularly? Is the GM running intimidate properly (a -2 to certain rolls is hardly OP), or is he inadvertently making it stronger by having enemies run or surrender too easily?
Don't bring a crazy-OP character to the table to make a point. The most you should do is explain/show examples of OP builds to give context, but even that is worse than just talking it out as a group, and it probably wouldn't make him like your character any more anyway.
He doesn't complain about that at all, but yes as an AP I can do that. I demoralize to apply shaken and then I can use a touch of corruption to apply shaken again. Since fear stacks like this.
Becoming Even More Fearful: Fear effects are cumulative.
A shaken character who is made shaken again becomes
frightened, and a shaken character who is made frightened
becomes panicked instead. A frightened character who is
made shaken or frightened becomes panicked instead.
The description of stacking fear effects from the core rule book.
Of course that's only one target. I'm sure any caster can do a better control job then that.
Let me be clear: I agree that your GM should be more up-front with you about not liking your character, and about why he doesn't like it.But I also think it's actually pretty obvious what his feelings are. You don't need him to say a special magic sequence of words out loud to you, and sitting around waiting for him to do so just makes you petty. You could try to be the bigger person in this situation; instead you seem wed to the idea of just being the more passive-aggressive person.
If you know that remaking your character would patch things up, then do that. If you don't care and intend to keep your character regardless of how your GM feels, then say that.
That was a slight miscommunication on my part. We all agreed to be evil, but it slide into more MQ area for most of the party. My bad on that.
My feelings specifically. I'm willing to change my character. However when else can I make an Intimdate build? Honestly it just more irks me since I don't think it's an OP build at all.
I guess that was my original mind set that if you want to see OP well I can show you when I first made that post.
I also feel it's a bad thing to do without him clearly saying it. I mean as a gm he needs to learn to make it clear and not just complain about it. Like I said he's new, if he can't even do that it will make it harder in the future when I freely offer him the chance to say I will change my character and he can't even say yes please do that. He can't even say that. That's kinda my point if just do it. Then he got his way with complaints instead of actually taking me up on my generious offer. How would other players react in the long run since some might not even give him the offer.