13 Strength Fighter HELP


Advice

1 to 50 of 154 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

I am a player in a campaign with several new players. We are second level and the difference in skill is apparent. The biggest issue is we have a fighter who religiously won't "minmax"

To him "minmaxing" apparently means having stats above 13. He has a twelve or thirteen in every stat. He is two handing a greataxe. He has power attack and furious focus. He has no armor but enough gold to buy armor.

Our party composition is a rogue with dervish dance a blaster witch and me a fey sorcerer with false focus. Is there any way we can help him? As it stands he has only a +3 to hit. His damage is 1d12+4 since he is always power attacking.

The rogue is already trying to flank as much as possible.

Is there anything the rest of us can do to make him not so terrible?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Let's think about this for a moment. We'll use a wolf pack analogy.

What happens when one wolf doesn't try as hard as the rest? Is slower, weaker, but still expects as much of the kill as the rest of the pack?

They die. It's the player's choice to play a weak wolf character. He's barely better than a commoner in terms of stats, and you don't see commoners striking down Runelords or Snake Gods or even little Kobold Chiefs(very often).


Well, first can you get him to use a greatsword instead of greataxe? It is a superior choice unless he already has something like weapon focus for the greataxe.

Next he obviously needs to buy armor. This isn't about min-maxing, that is about staying alive. Depending on how much money you actually have suggest anything from 15gp hide armor, 50gp scale mail, up to fullplate.

Level 4+str belt will help out fairly considerably. That being said, quite honestly his damage isn't even that bad at level 2. Obviously not what you would expect out of a fighter, but I've seen less helpful party members.

Still... I'd expect a fighter to have at least 14 strength on a point buy. I'd aim for 16 myself. Can you convince him to multiclass? A level of barb or something will help out considerably when he really needs it.


Just let him be. I admit that this would be frustrating for me too, but trying to let him be AND fix the problem isn't really fixing the problem. Its a patch. Let him go along and do poorly. He will have to make the decision to change.


What is the problem?

Is he complaining about being low damage / not being able to hit anything?

Or is the issue you/the party don't feel like he's pulling his own weight?

If it's neither then there's no problem. If he is complaining then he's just being rude. And if it's the later then that sounds like something you should discuss with him.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

No worries! He'll be fine.

You really don't have to maximize everything to have fun playing PF. Sure, he's less of a murderhobo than if he'd given himself an 18+ STR like most martials, but he'll get along just fine, especially in an AP.

I played a 13 STR fighter for 4 years in a DD3.5 campaign. In fact, my guy was the only one who never got killed once in the entire campaign. Probably in part because I was a little less gung-ho than the other guys. But I still pulled my weight.

When this guy hits 4th, try to get him to raiuse his STR to 14. Also try to get him potions of bull's strengtb often, until the day when he can get a belt of strength. If you've got any buffing guys in your group (bards, clerics, wizards) look into what sorts of bonuses you can slap on him. You could even work with the DM behind his back to get him some gear to raise his combat effectiveness.

And if he does die in combat... well, Azten wasn't all wrong.

Dark Archive

Leitner wrote:

Well, first can you get him to use a greatsword instead of greataxe? It is a superior choice unless he already has something like weapon focus for the greataxe.

Next he obviously needs to buy armor. This isn't about min-maxing, that is about staying alive. Depending on how much money you actually have suggest anything from 15gp hide armor, 50gp scale mail, up to fullplate.

Level 4+str belt will help out fairly considerably. That being said, quite honestly his damage isn't even that bad at level 2. Obviously not what you would expect out of a fighter, but I've seen less helpful party members.

Still... I'd expect a fighter to have at least 14 strength on a point buy. I'd aim for 16 myself. Can you convince him to multiclass? A level of barb or something will help out considerably when he really needs it.

Cant get him to use a greatsword. He says it is better since it has a x3 crit multiplier. We tried to explain how math works. Didnt work.

He will probably buy armor next session so that is semi covered. He probably get something like a chain shirt just to make it more difficult but whatever.


If he's participating, doing decent damage in a fight, and having fun, his lack of optimization shouldn't bother you.


It sounds like this player will object to any suggestion, so just drop it. How old is he?


Ciaran Barnes wrote:
Just let him be. I admit that this would be frustrating for me too, but trying to let him be AND fix the problem isn't really fixing the problem. Its a patch. Let him go along and do poorly. He will have to make the decision to change.

Yeah, this is the best advice. While it's going to be frustrating for you, chalk this up as a learning experience for him. Let him see that he's not effectual, and if he doesn't survive, then maybe that will drive the lesson home. (And if he is effectual, then kudos to him.)

The big risk is that he's an unfair drain on the party's healing resources. If that happens, try to split the resources evenly among the party, and he'll most likely go through his faster than the others.

If he needs help realizing what's wrong, tell him something like this: Most people in life choose vocations based on their strengths, or at least develop their strengths to complement their vocations. A fighter with a high strength attribute isn't minmaxing. A person who wants to fight with heavy melee weapons probably already is pretty strong, and then practising with those weapons would make them even stronger. As a player who wants to run a fighter, it's realistic that their fighter would have high strength, even at low levels. They don't need to start the character as someone who is still developing that attribute.

Dark Archive

Wheldrake wrote:

No worries! He'll be fine.

You really don't have to maximize everything to have fun playing PF. Sure, he's less of a murderhobo than if he'd given himself an 18+ STR like most martials, but he'll get along just fine, especially in an AP.

I played a 13 STR fighter for 4 years in a DD3.5 campaign. In fact, my guy was the only one who never got killed once in the entire campaign. Probably in part because I was a little less gung-ho than the other guys. But I still pulled my weight.

When this guy hits 4th, try to get him to raiuse his STR to 14. Also try to get him potions of bull's strengtb often, until the day when he can get a belt of strength. If you've got any buffing guys in your group (bards, clerics, wizards) look into what sorts of bonuses you can slap on him. You could even work with the DM behind his back to get him some gear to raise his combat effectiveness.

And if he does die in combat... well, Azten wasn't all wrong.

This isnt an AP. He misses more than he hits. Normal AC is 15 for our DM. The rest of us can hit that at least half the time or in the case of the witch don't care about it. He is worse at dealing damage compared to everyone else in the party and can do nothing besides that.

Also he won't carry any ranged weapon so when we faced an enemy on a balcony he spent three rounds running towards him along stairs triggering traps and doing nothing. We had killed him before he got there.

Dark Archive

Ciaran Barnes wrote:
It sounds like this player will object to any suggestion, so just drop it. How old is he?

If he was a small child that would be tolerable. He is 20. Small children would be better.

Dark Archive

Firewarrior44 wrote:

What is the problem?

Is he complaining about being low damage / not being able to hit anything?

Or is the issue you/the party don't feel like he's pulling his own weight?

If it's neither then there's no problem. If he is complaining then he's just being rude. And if it's the later then that sounds like something you should discuss with him.

He isn't pulling his weight. He stands and takes hits. I know the mount spell. It can do that job better.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

whats everyone's alignment?


What i havent seen yet about this scenario is this, is he having fun playing his character? Is anyone actually upset by how he plays?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'll drop in my 2 cents:
Contributing isn't just battle, it's roleplaying his character's personality, its being a fun person around the table, its talking out party ideas and strategies, its talking to NPCs and solving puzzles.

He wants to play a weak fighter, some people want to play ugly bards and dumb mages. It happens.

In nearly all games there are one or two characters who can't contribute much to combat and people don't complain because their class isn't called "fighter". You've got a fighter who isn't a melee powerhouse because he clearly doesn't want to be. Combat is typically a big part of Pathfinder, but not this players main focus, or he'd care to build for it. He isn't "terrible", he isn't "low-skill". This game isn't supposed to be a spreadsheet of character combat efficiency. However, he isn't a good fit for your group. This isn't a small problem as the disparity has caused you to have a pretty clear feeling of contempt for him. This can be patched, but ultimately someone isn't going to be having fun and it will affect the whole table/game.

The question is, a. can this player have fun playing "your" way? and b. is everyone else as bothered by this character as you are.

Depending on the answer to these questions, you can figure out whether the best way forward is to re-build his character, leave him alone, remove him politely from the game, or remove yourself.

Respectfully,
Paul


It sounds to me like you have some personal problems here too, while having an underperforming party member is difficult there is no reason to take it personally. The reason he may not be accepting your suggestions could entirely be that you are coming off as hostile. Or he could just be a twit, regardless Pathfinder is a game so try to enjoy it.

Given his current behavior, over time he will get himself killed, whether to traps, enemies, wandering off alone, or what have you. In the meantime, talk to your GM about tuning encounters for (current party # -1) and let him feel like he is helping. If the encounters are built without taking him into consideration then he can only be a benefit, whether its taking hits for the rest of the party, providing flanking opportunities, face tanking traps, or etc.


Halek wrote:

The biggest issue is we have a fighter who religiously won't "minmax"

To him "minmaxing" apparently means having stats above 13. He has a twelve or thirteen in every stat.

Part of the problem is that you expect a prototypical fighter, with high Str, a big weapon, good armor and nothing else. This PC is something else - bad by 'prototypical fighter' standards, but that's also true for enchanter wizards or flowing monks.

Check out the strengths. With Int, Wis and Cha of 12 or 13 primarily he can be solid at skills. Depending on what the rogue does skill-wise, he could cover his gaps or support him with his rolls. This needs some communication to not step on rogue's toes, but can be done.

Beside this mundane advantage, a lot of fancy feats are unlocked by 13s in mental scores:

Int 13:
Fast Learner (if human or half-human)
Improvisation & Greater Improvisation (if human or half-human)
Amateur Investigator
Moonlight Stalker
Quick Study

Wis 13:
Wolf Style
Pantheistic Blessing
Believer's Boon

Cha 13:
Improved Bravery & Inspiring Bravery (if human or half-human)
But A Scratch
Draconic Heritage
Eldritch Heritage & Raging Blood


Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

If he's keen on the greataxe, maybe he'd be amenable to carrying a couple throwing axes. Either buy him one, or plant a couple in the dead bodies after your next battle. Maybe he'll be thrilled to find this cool loot.

Whatever you do, just go with the flow. Don't make a huge issue about his lack of effectiveness. A bumbling braggart whose mouth is bigger than his chosen weapon is a common fantasy trope. Let him do what he can until fate catches up with him.


Halek wrote:
Cant get him to use a greatsword. He says it is better since it has a x3 crit multiplier. We tried to explain how math works. Didnt work.

I don't see the problem here - wasted overkill damage should rarely be relevant with such a low damage bonus, and the 0.5 less average damage per hit isn't game breaking.

If the player isn't bothered with being nigh useless, let him be. If the game is too diffucult for what's effectively a three-player-party, talk to the GM. If the player is bother, tell him to go make an adventurer instead of a peasant.


dont spend any party resources on him like buffs or other spells use them on the people that can carry more weight in combat than him i can understand a character that cant pull their weight in combat because they are speced into something else i have a rogue like that in a campaign im in next to no combat ability but i have a +13 minimum to like 90% of the skills in the game and we a re level 4 im also the partyies trap finder and disabler among otherthings so while i only have +11 to hit and deal 1d3+6 damage with one attack a round in combat i can still pull my weight in other aspects of the game having a character with no ability over a 13 cant really pull weight in any aspect of the game especially as a fighter.


People are going to figure out what works or doesn't work by trying things and seeing what happens.

Some people also are going to entrench themselves deeper in a decision if people try to talk them out of it.

Everybody's first character dies some ignominious death sooner or later (my human fighter was eaten by an Umber Hulk, her strength was 14.)


PossibleCabbage wrote:

People are going to figure out what works or doesn't work by trying things and seeing what happens.

Some people also are going to entrench themselves deeper in a decision if people try to talk them out of it.

Everybody's first character dies some ignominious death sooner or later (my human fighter was eaten by an Umber Hulk, her strength was 14.)

Not a Grue?


PossibleCabbage wrote:

People are going to figure out what works or doesn't work by trying things and seeing what happens.

Some people also are going to entrench themselves deeper in a decision if people try to talk them out of it.

Everybody's first character dies some ignominious death sooner or later (my human fighter was eaten by an Umber Hulk, her strength was 14.)

Not a Grue?


Halek wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
It sounds like this player will object to any suggestion, so just drop it. How old is he?
If he was a small child that would be tolerable. He is 20. Small children would be better.

Still a kid then. ;)

Dark Archive

Ciaran Barnes wrote:
Halek wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
It sounds like this player will object to any suggestion, so just drop it. How old is he?
If he was a small child that would be tolerable. He is 20. Small children would be better.
Still a kid then. ;)

Yes but not small enough that this is cute.

New goal what can we do to replace his role as meat shield with spells?


Do you mean:
1: He is taking a level in a spellcasting class and needs spell suggestions?
2: You are a spellcaster and wish to replace his role with your spells?
Or 3: You are a spellcaster and wish to buff him into competence?

Dark Archive

ShroudedInLight wrote:

Do you mean:

1: He is taking a level in a spellcasting class and needs spell suggestions?
2: You are a spellcaster and wish to replace his role with your spells?
Or 3: You are a spellcaster and wish to buff him into competence?

2 and 3. We have me a sorcerer and a witch. Replacing him would be best.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm with the others who say leave him alone. This is how he wants to play the game.

I would say try to cooperate so you can all play the characters you want, him included. Not everyone gets the same things out of playing a game.

Dark Archive

nennafir wrote:

I'm with the others who say leave him alone. This is how he wants to play the game.

I would say try to cooperate so you can all play the characters you want, him included. Not everyone gets the same things out of playing a game.

He doesnt have the skill points to be a skill monkey. He doesnt have the stats or the skills to be party face. He has to low stats to use combat manauvers so he cant be battlefield control. His damage is awful and literally everyone else is more accurate. What can he do that anyone else couldnt do better?

Essentially he is just draining healing charges from our wand and taking a share of treasure while not hitting anything and standing there.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Azten wrote:

Let's think about this for a moment. We'll use a wolf pack analogy.

What happens when one wolf doesn't try as hard as the rest? Is slower, weaker, but still expects as much of the kill as the rest of the pack?

They die. It's the player's choice to play a weak wolf character. He's barely better than a commoner in terms of stats, and you don't see commoners striking down Runelords or Snake Gods or even little Kobold Chiefs(very often).

Nah, a good chunk of the reason for a pack is that the alpha male and female catch so much food at one go that they can't eat it all themselves before something comes along and snatches it , so the best use for it is investing it in their kids before it becomes grizzly lunch.

(as if wolves weren't hated enough already, they're pretty socialist)


Halek wrote:
nennafir wrote:

I'm with the others who say leave him alone. This is how he wants to play the game.

I would say try to cooperate so you can all play the characters you want, him included. Not everyone gets the same things out of playing a game.

He doesnt have the skill points to be a skill monkey. He doesnt have the stats or the skills to be party face. He has to low stats to use combat manauvers so he cant be battlefield control. His damage is awful and literally everyone else is more accurate. What can he do that anyone else couldnt do better?

Essentially he is just draining healing charges from our wand and taking a share of treasure while not hitting anything and standing there.

He's draining healing charges and taking treasure. There's three ways to remedy this:

The in-game approach. The other PCs can renegotiate the "party contract", add a clause that only members who contribute to the success of the party gets help and a share of the loot. However, this is likely a dick move. To the player in question, this will likely feel like an assault on him self rather than his PC, wrapped in the veil of in-game rational to make it seem like an acceptable way of dealing with your friends.

The social conflict resolution. I don't get why this player is playing such a low-optimized character. Find out. Maybe there's a good reason (in which case, see next section). If not, remind him that Pathfinder is supposed to be a cooperative game - that the encounters are meant to be fun in the challenging, problem-solving way and that his play style intrudes on your fun because instead of solving problems cooperatively with him, you and the other players have to pick up his slack.

The play-around, which I recommend. If he's having fun and the only thing stopping your and the other player's fun is wand charges and treasure, ask the GM to compensate. If you found more loot, then there would be no problem, right?


Halek wrote:
nennafir wrote:

I'm with the others who say leave him alone. This is how he wants to play the game.

I would say try to cooperate so you can all play the characters you want, him included. Not everyone gets the same things out of playing a game.

He doesnt have the skill points to be a skill monkey. He doesnt have the stats or the skills to be party face. He has to low stats to use combat manauvers so he cant be battlefield control. His damage is awful and literally everyone else is more accurate. What can he do that anyone else couldnt do better?

Essentially he is just draining healing charges from our wand and taking a share of treasure while not hitting anything and standing there.

The problem is him being a pain in your butt. You doings things to help his chatacter won't fix that. You'll be accommodating it. His changing will help.


Halek wrote:

I am a player in a campaign with several new players. We are second level and the difference in skill is apparent. The biggest issue is we have a fighter who religiously won't "minmax"

To him "minmaxing" apparently means having stats above 13. He has a twelve or thirteen in every stat. He is two handing a greataxe. He has power attack and furious focus. He has no armor but enough gold to buy armor.

Our party composition is a rogue with dervish dance a blaster witch and me a fey sorcerer with false focus. Is there any way we can help him? As it stands he has only a +3 to hit. His damage is 1d12+4 since he is always power attacking.

The rogue is already trying to flank as much as possible.

Is there anything the rest of us can do to make him not so terrible?

Yes, I'm late to the party, but I'm going to echo a different approach: Let him play the way he wants.

If he thinks it's fun to play a more "well-rounded" character (with as big of character deficiencies as having no armor), then that's his choice, as a player, to live with. If he complains that he can't reasonably contribute to any of the combats, or that the combats are too difficult for him, then point out that he chose to not contribute to the combats with his character build and player choices, that the game assumes some modicum of competence, and that "modicum" is simply better than what his current build is.

In general, the game allows for flawed but functional characters, no "min-maxing" is required. He is certainly a lot of the former (practically too much), and none of the latter. All that needs to happen is to point out that the character is unfunctional (especially in the higher levels of play), and he will either leave the table due to the game not being to his liking (which in this case, isn't unreasonable), or his character will die (or cause the death of other characters), and he will realize his character isn't fit for such a game, and will adjust his playstyle accordingly.

Either way, the problem is with him (and is his problem, really), and how his character is constructed. Letting the problem persist is perhaps the most "natural" way to let the player understand what that problem is, and gives him the choice to either fix it, or leave for a table that more suits his general playstyle.

I am curious as to how he values an attribute above 13 as "min-maxing," when most every creature in the game has one or more stats above 13? That's not min-maxing; quite frankly, considering how much of a pattern it is, across most every Paizo-published creature or option, it's more of a purposeful design choice and assumption of the game.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Azten wrote:

Let's think about this for a moment. We'll use a wolf pack analogy.

What happens when one wolf doesn't try as hard as the rest? Is slower, weaker, but still expects as much of the kill as the rest of the pack?

They die. It's the player's choice to play a weak wolf character. He's barely better than a commoner in terms of stats, and you don't see commoners striking down Runelords or Snake Gods or even little Kobold Chiefs(very often).

Nah, a good chunk of the reason for a pack is that the alpha male and female catch so much food at one go that they can't eat it all themselves before something comes along and snatches it , so the best use for it is investing it in their kids before it becomes grizzly lunch.

(as if wolves weren't hated enough already, they're pretty socialist

A-HEM.

*Puts on nerd glasses*

The alpha male / alpha female hypothesis of wolf behavior was actually disproven later by the exact same guy that wrote the book that popularized the terms Alpha and Beta. The long story made short is the author came to realize that "Alpha" behavior only applies to wolves in captivity, and the leader of the pack outside of wolves in captivity is just the mother/father figure. Only in captivity do wolves fight for dominance - probably because they are with a number of other strange wolves they have no relation to and are afraid and confused.

Now, excuse me as I ride my scooter down to the local den of dice and engage in a thrilling, escapist round of dungeon delving.

*Rides away on scooter with a 'MEEP MEEP'*


Its certainly exaggerated in captive wolves, but is by no means absent in the wild. As pointed out above, they're usually the parents and the rest of the pack are their kids.


Yes, but typically people use 'Alpha Male / Female' to refer to wolves that are dominant by means of being, well, the biggest and meanest of their kind around. And that's simply not how wolves operate: the pack is a family. That's very different from the usual interpretation.

Moving on...

Quote:

In general, the game allows for flawed but functional characters, no "min-maxing" is required. He is certainly a lot of the former (practically too much), and none of the latter. All that needs to happen is to point out that the character is unfunctional (especially in the higher levels of play), and he will either leave the table due to the game not being to his liking (which in this case, isn't unreasonable), or his character will die (or cause the death of other characters), and he will realize his character isn't fit for such a game, and will adjust his playstyle accordingly.

Either way, the problem is with him (and is his problem, really), and how his character is constructed. Letting the problem persist is perhaps the most "natural" way to let the player understand what that problem is, and gives him the choice to either fix it, or leave for a table that more suits his general playstyle.

Yeah, this is pretty spot on.

As an aside: I've known people with the same sort of attitude the player in your game has - and not just in tabletop RPGs either. Heck, I know a subsect of roleplayers on a World of Warcraft server that believe REAL roleplayers should only play smelly peasants that can't actually be effective at fighting or anything, because it's not like they live in a World of WAR or anything, is it?

The thing is, the tabletop game we're playing assumes a certain level of optimization. It expects you to bring a functional character to the table. Now, as others have noted, he'll do fine for now - even if he way underperforms everyone else - but eventually his character will die or underperform REALLY badly in an obvious way, and he'll have to sit down and say "Huh, what am I doing wrong?"

An honest idea as to how to convince him to work with you? Show him the Iconic NPCs. Yeah, they're by no means the best characters for optimization, but I'm willing to bet the Iconic Fighter is miles ahead of his character in combat performance.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The lightbulb has to want to change


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My tip would be: try to role-play better than him. If he's one of those "I don't minmax because I'm a roleplayer" people, then you need to prove that a character can be both effective and interesting.

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Let him play the way he wants...

If he complains that he can't reasonably contribute to any of the combats, or that the combats are too difficult for him, then point out that he chose to not contribute to the combats with his character build

"Player getting frustrated with his weak character" isn't the main problem here unless the GM is reducing the opposition to compensate. In an AP, a weak ally can get you killed.


On reflection, I think "a player doesn't want to play a character with any bad stats" is someone who is probably hurt more by a point buy system than some sort of (probably generous) rolling stats system.

I mean, if you roll a character with two sevens then that's what the dice goddess gave you, so you'll tough it out. But if that player lucked out with, say, a 15,14,12,16,14,12 roll they would not only be a lot more effective but also a lot happier.

One of the issues with PB is that you're really hurting yourself if you put any points into stats that aren't really relevant to your core functionality (CHA and INT on a fighter, say.) In reflection, I would say to just give new players a choice of stat arrays which are generally better than what the point buy system would give them, but those "extra points" going into tertiary stats (so they're 12s not 7s). The above "lucky roll" would be a 19 point buy if the 12s were 7s or 21 if one were a 7 and one were an 8.


This does bring the question of, what is the worst possible character you can design on a point buy. Hell, a generous point-buy.

PFS is 20 points right? That could be a fun topic.


ShroudedInLight wrote:

This does bring the question of, what is the worst possible character you can design on a point buy. Hell, a generous point-buy.

PFS is 20 points right? That could be a fun topic.

Weeeell...

TN Kobold Siege Mage 1

Stat array after 20 point buy and race mods:

14/7/5/11/10/16

Max HP at level 1: 1d6=6, CON of 5 = -3, so 6-3=3 HP at level 1.

Spell save DC: 10 for cantrips, 11 for 1st. No Arcane Bond, no ability to get 2nd level spells, and you have to forsake 3 schools of magic. I guess you could man a cannon?

You also get no cantrips except Read Magic and Detect Magic. But you can sacrifice spells to boost siege weapons! Totally awesome, right?

And your 3 HP and -2 to AC will make you very survivable in melee, where you can bring your 14 STR to bear.

Also, you're True Neutral, so no Antipaladin or Paladin levels in the future for you, and no Charisma-to-attack-and-damage-with-starknives for you either!

________________________________

Actually, why not a Fighter. And let's pick a really juicy, flavorful archetype. Like... like...

Oh, Tactician! Everyone loves Tacticians. You're brainsy.

LN Kobold Tactician 1

14/7/5/11/10/16 as before. But this time, you don't get spells. Oh, and because you're a Tactician, you can't wear heavy armor or tower shields, and you're not getting a bonus feat at first level. But hey, 4 skill points a level. Time to bring your wicked good array of class skills to bear! You can train... Diplomacy! Yes, you'll talk your way out of problems.

Wait. Kobolds don't start with Common. They have to pick it as a bonus language.

CRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA--


In general? The "worst" character you could make would probably be one that's ineffective at your role(s), and good at things the class isn't meant to be good at. A Witch with high Strength and Constitution but an INT of 9 is going to be pretty awful, for example.

As for the player that OP is discussing, I feel like their understanding of min-maxing might be a little off. Myself, I see starting scores of 16-18 in a primary stat (after racial) to be 'normal' for a character's main role. Maybe it would help if someone showed him some official pre-gens? Valeros (the Fighter) has a Strength of 16 at Level 1, for example, and I think it would be pretty hard to argue that the sample characters are too min-maxed...

Dark Archive

ShroudedInLight wrote:

This does bring the question of, what is the worst possible character you can design on a point buy. Hell, a generous point-buy.

PFS is 20 points right? That could be a fun topic.

A wizard with

7 str
7 dex
7 con
8 int
16 wis
18 cha

Put all your feats into things like elephant stomp and metamagic feats.
Put your one rank per level into perform(act)

You have no spells. You have 1 skill rank per level. Your hitpoints are trash. You cant use any class features you get. You have a good will save. That is it.

I can't think of a worse character.


I always assumed that you're required to have 11 in a casting stat if you choose to be a casting class. I never imagined you could be allowed to take a class without being able to use ANY of its core features.


In character: I'd keep outshining him, keep mocking him for sucking, and call him the team mascot because he's so useless. Offer to help or give suggestions.

If he doesn't listen, buy him a chicken suit, cast sleep, and dress him up in it as a prank. Attack his ego and goad him into improving on his own terms (since he won't listen to yours).

Even if you're all good aligned, good doesn't have to be wishy washy and polite, or worry about someone's feelings more than the truth. He's supposed to handle monsters and serial killers, and people trying to chop him up with axes, so a little verbal abuse should be nothing.

Sometimes a little tough love is in order. After all, if you help him you'll probably be saving his life, your life, and the life of your comrades as a result. If a little humiliation will save his life, then do it. Don't let his weakness cost your party their lives.

Dark Archive

Inlaa wrote:
I always assumed that you're required to have 11 in a casting stat if you choose to be a casting class. I never imagined you could be allowed to take a class without being able to use ANY of its core features.

I can't find anything in the guide saying that.

Would anyone enjoy playing with someone who showed up to a game with that character? A character who can't use their class features is not contributing.


Halek wrote:
Inlaa wrote:
I always assumed that you're required to have 11 in a casting stat if you choose to be a casting class. I never imagined you could be allowed to take a class without being able to use ANY of its core features.

I can't find anything in the guide saying that.

Would anyone enjoy playing with someone who showed up to a game with that character? A character who can't use their class features is not contributing.

Maybe if they brought 20 character sheets of the exact same character and used them as sacrificial lambs?

I'm just imagining 3 HP kobold wizards with 8 intelligence charging into the fray with medium-sized clubs. No, no; improvised medium-sized Nunchaku for a -2 size penalty and -4 non-proficiency penalty AND -4 improvised weapon penalty. Two-handing them, of course.

His stats: 3/9/5/8/18/18. He COULD use diplomacy or something, but he only speaks Draconic.

Siege Mage, obviously, for maximum uselessness.


Another thing you guys could do is save his life...

... by abandoning him in town, or some other safe place.

Imagine you're a soldier on a operation, and a 9 year old boy tries to follow you. Would you just let him come along and let him die? Would you try to find a way to make him contribute? Or would you do what is needed to keep him faaaaar out of harms way (like at home), because you know he'll just get in the way and get everyone killed including himself?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malignor wrote:

In character: I'd keep outshining him, keep mocking him for sucking, and call him the team mascot because he's so useless. Offer to help or give suggestions.

If he doesn't listen, buy him a chicken suit, cast sleep, and dress him up in it as a prank. Attack his ego and goad him into improving on his own terms (since he won't listen to yours).

I think this sort of thing is far more likely to make this person try to find something else to do that's not playing RPGs with "friends" than to get him to make a better character.

But YMMV.

1 to 50 of 154 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / 13 Strength Fighter HELP All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.