When you are GMing a group do you have a tendency to let your players make characters that are over-powered or under-powered. This could be in terms of point-buy or even the level range that you run your games. I personally like to under-power my characters. However, I have played with people that like to play with characters that are greatly over-powered. They used a 42 point build and allowed their PCs to use templates.
So my question is... Over-powered or Under-powered and why?
Current campaign over-powered as they are a 3-4 person party (periodically one player can't make it) and I am running Rappan Athuk. If it was 5 persons, consistent then I'd just have them slightly over-powered (25 pt buy and some player-supporting house rules).
If I was running an AP I'd do 20 pt buy and be more restrictive in races, and remove most of my player-supportive house rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having somewhat (there is a limit) over-powered characters is easier to adjust for on the fly than under-powered ones. Add extra mooks (even after combat starts if there's an unsearched room or even a broom closet they could reasonably come from. Add more HP to the BBEG on the fly or even (see the other discussion thread) have him be able to save.
It's harder for the mooks or BBEG to pull punches without giving the fact that they're doing so away. When a character fails a save, since the player is the one rolling, they KNOW that they've just failed, especially if last round they needed an 'N' to pass and this round they rolled an 'N' - (big number).
The worst is when you've got a mixed party of under and over powered. It's hard to challenge the one without utterly destroying the other.
Depends on the baseline. I'm more open to rules that let classes like rogue monk and fighter get more powerful because im not afraid theyre going to outshine a diviner wizard anywhere past level 5 to 7. I give new spells and spells chosen from different sourcebooks the side eye and one of the questions i ask before letting a player pick some obscure spell is "what kind of use are you envisioning for this and how does it interact with what you can already do?"
In my campaigns I tend to prefer characters be in the middle of the power bracket. I've had overpowered characters in my campaigns and generally regretted whatever I did that allowed them to become overpowered (because it was almost always my fault). Likewise I've had underpowered characters in my campaigns, and been frustrated at jumping through hoops to keep them alive.
As such, as a GM I tend to be fairly restrictive in my application of the rules. However I will assist my players optimizing their character's for the concept they wish to portray (and tell them honestly when said concept is more or less viable than others).
I also adjust encounters to compensate somewhat for the power level of the party. The easiest way is simply to adjust the HP to mobs in play, add more mobs, have mobs delay, forget to use abilities that would unbalance the encounter (combat being a hectic and erratic thing), or even retreat (even if the mobs are winning, one might not think so, and retreat to save their own skin, leaving their allies to die). But I don't run PFS, so I have the power to do all of these things.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I play with people who are more interested in telling stories than being challenged, so "overpowered enough that you likely won't die, but not so powerful enough you can easily bypass most of the story" is an easy call. Thankfully nobody here likes playing wizards.
I generally let this group just pick their stats based on their conception of their character.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer characters who have lots of tools in their tool boxs, which usually means overpowered in Pathfinder terms. Thats said, I look for consistency in power levels above all, which makes over or underpowered a secondary concern.
I never start at level 1 when I'm running, though. I can't stand it, so everyone starts at level 3 or above usually (which can make setting up an AP a pain).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no such thing as "overpowered" or "under powered" in a vacuum. Let's say you have a Rogue, a Wizard, a Cleric and a Fighter. If I said the Rogue has a 40 DEX, is the rogue overpowered? Answer: You have no idea. What if the Wizard had a 40 INT, the Cleric has a 40 WIS and the Fighter has a 40 STR?
Your player characters can't be more powerful than a GM. I don't care if they have 100's in all their stats, a GM can challenge them.
There can only be overpowered if:
1) Some character are much more powerful than the other characters
or
B) You're using a pre-made adventure that you're not adjusting for the party.
I typically start my players with a 28 point buy and 4 levels. If they have only non caster, or 4th level caster, classes for those four levels they get a bonus feat.
I feel that it opens up MAD character choices much more and, in a way, I play a fast progression game: allowing them to fight stronger enemies, get more experience and better loot faster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Overpowered is subjective.
What I do care about is how good the characters are with regard to the rest of the party. If I had to choose between "too powerful for an AP as written" vs "walking TPK", I would prefer for them to be too powerful. I don't want to have to play the bad guys like they are stupid, and have it be obvious that I am going easy on them. It is easier for me to use more dangerous tactics and/or buff the monster, and still let them feel like heroes.
Lately I used 25 point buy, but for the next game I am going to use an array. I also allow some 3rd party(3.5 included) options, but only if I am asked about them in advance.
When you are GMing a group do you have a tendency to let your players make characters that are over-powered or under-powered. This could be in terms of point-buy or even the level range that you run your games. I personally like to under-power my characters. However, I have played with people that like to play with characters that are greatly over-powered. They used a 42 point build and allowed their PCs to use templates.
So my question is... Over-powered or Under-powered and why?
my group likes to play over power characters. It's all relative though. Just means more work for me as GM. I just increase the monsters power leaving the CR the same. I typically put the advanced template on give them max hitpoints. Add few consumable some times that they use. I might add a class level or two. I just raises the bar and is no different that playing the game with normal powered characters.
I have done under powered and found that even harder till they get higher level. At level 1 it hard because the selection of monsters is less and reducing their power is harder. Once you get to 3rd level it's not too bad so my solution it start at 3rd if players want to play under powered characters.
As GM I'd like to run a game with in normal parameters but no one wants that where I live.
My games to to run on the High powered end.
There is no such thing as "overpowered" or "under powered" in a vacuum. Let's say you have a Rogue, a Wizard, a Cleric and a Fighter. If I said the Rogue has a 40 DEX, is the rogue overpowered? Answer: You have no idea. What if the Wizard had a 40 INT, the Cleric has a 40 WIS and the Fighter has a 40 STR?
Your player characters can't be more powerful than a GM. I don't care if they have 100's in all their stats, a GM can challenge them.
There can only be overpowered if:
1) Some character are much more powerful than the other characters
or
B) You're using a pre-made adventure that you're not adjusting for the party.
Pretty much this. I've been in a campaign where I had three 18s in my stat array and my lowest stat was a 14, and the GM said to reroll because my stats were too low. Most of our characters in that game wound up picking up templates and crazy custom items too, as well as being massively over WBL. I've also done a game at 10 point buy.
Both games were fun, just very different.
I use a stat line up since I think its more fair than rolling, besides players always fudge their rolled stat numbers so I might as well know what I am going up against.
I tend to start games at level 2-4. My line ups are a choice between 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10 (27 point buy), 16, 14, 14, 14, 12, 10 (27 point buy), or 18, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 (27 point buy). So you can take those numbers and arrange them however you want before adding in racial bonuses.
For HP I max out player's initial HP and then they roll for the rest. However, they get to reroll any number = to or below their constitution modifier. There for with a 12 constitution you reroll 1s, with 14 you reroll 1s and 2s, and s on.
I find this makes fairly strong parties and it allows me to throw challenges at them without feeling bad.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Over. Typically by giving a good stat array, helping them optimize, and giving large amounts of gold and items
1. Killing more powerful stuff is more interesting. IE: is an adult or an ancient dragon more interesting? Ancient. More powers, more epic feel, size is closer to what you expect from movies, etc
2. When players accuse me of being a killer dm its nice to be able to point out how powerful they are
3. Easier to balance. I don't have to use kid gloves and can pretty much assume they can overcome anything within a bigger cr range
4. Optimized characters typically focus on a few tricks. This helps me plan encounters, keeps combat going faster, lets me know what item drops they really want, and helps everyone know their character's mechanics better
5. It invests the players in the character. If they have taken the time to optimize a character they have already formed a sort of emotional attachment
6. Makes the players feel better. They may understand that they are still dealing only 25% of the targets hp per round but it is still fun to announce 500 damage. This applies to me as well running the monsters
7. Helps balance classes. I mean this as if I scale the party harder with items than normal the fighters keep up better with the casters both in effectiveness and utility. Meanwhile MAD classes are way more usable and can function as intended with a good point buy
Overpowereds danger becomes boredom for the gm if not necessarily the players.
Underpowereds danger is the swift and sudden end to the campaign based on a run of bad luck with the dice.
Depends on which side of the spectrum you think your gm can manage more successfully really.
|
I like to give my players lots of toys...
Running WotR right now. I gave a big set of bonuses at the end of book 1 when they gain their Mythic abilities. I have designed artifacts for each of them and I am about to give one of them the half-celestial template since they are a progeny of a Deity.
The stronger I let them become the more epic I can make certain encounters to let them show how awesome they are.
I prefer my player to have powerful characters for a couple of reasons. For the most part I am better at tactics and have a lot more system mastery than my player. When my players are underpowered I have to hold back and that is not as fun for me. I can and will adjust the game as needed, but when I have to play every creature and NPC as if they are stupid and have no sense of tactics it gets old. I would rather have a player come up with a tactic I had not thought of totally destroy the encounter I planned than to have to treat the party like delicate china.
Second I like creating NPC’s and interesting monster for the player to fight. With a powerful party I can let loose and not worry about TPC. I find it harder to plan things for underpowered characters than I do to for more powerful characters. I know everything about the characters so can easily come up with ways to counter anything they can do. But there is nothing more frustrating than to have a game come to a stop because the players run into a stone wall. With underpowered characters it is a lot easier for them to run into something they figure out.
Lastly but probably most important is that I prefer stories where the main characters are powerful. I grew up reading a lot of mythology and heroic fiction and that is what I want my game to be like.
|
|
What do you mean by using a template? Do you mean each player can get an extra +2 CR through a combination of templates or a +2 CR template, or that each player can just dive into the wiki and start stacking any template they care to pick up?
I think this is directed at me.
I have not allowed players to start with a template.
I hand the template out if it seems thematically in line with the PC and its history, both before and during the campaign.
I do not worry about a CR adjustment when seeing if the PC is much more powerful than other PCs. I will do something for each PC so it will equal out over all though not all PCs may get templates.
The specific PC that got the 1/2 celestial template is a quiet and mature player. He is not a min-maxer and he, 95% of the time, plays support PCs. This particular PC is a buff/debuff shaman of Shelyn, and it is his goal to create bridges whenever possible.