Entropi |
My group is periodically degenerating into competing about making the most annoying character - from a gamemaster perspective. It's not about making overpowered characters who can eat any opponent your GM sends your way for dinner, but more about shutting down his thunder in annoying ways. I want to end this by bringing a character so annoying that noone can beat me. So I need your advice. What is the most annoying character you can create. It's PFS, and we're not talking just annoying personality. I was thinking Pugwampi-summoning Witch/summoner with Ill Omen for endless bad luck, but i believe we can do better. Give me your best shot.
lemeres |
Large sized character with a reach weapon and all of the trip feats. It can be quite capable in combat, but the schtick gets old fast.
No, large sized character, with pushing assault. Take a 5' step back, push enemy 5' back, and then wait for AoOs. Trip stuff is optional, but preferred.
I am sure some of you have experienced being kited by trolls before, but that was usually caster/archers, and not literal trolls.
Another suggestion- first world summoner. Focus on pugwampis. This has the problems of summoning (ie- more bodies to keep track of), but they are also all essentially nodes of a no save misfortune hex due to their 20' range unluck auras. So you are encouraged to throw them out and let the party wizard make the GM regret that d20s are used for saving throws (another advantage- he has to roll twice for everything- MORE TIME WASTE!).
The GM can try to have his monsters eat the pugwampis... but even that still works out for you. The enemies are too bush chasing around the annoying little things to attack you, spreading around the battlefield. Easy pickings.
One trick pony that is both good and monotonous. Bonus points if you make your GM turn the entire campaign into a 'gnoll and animal' campaign to avoid this tactic.
Sarvis the Buck |
Well, I'd say the character that annoyed my GM the most was my Beloved Enchantment Wizard. When I first brought up the idea to the GM, he said it sounded absurd. He romanced the Evil warlock who was meant to be the final boss, led him to renounce his evil ways, and eventually retired to a large cottage in the countryside where they adopted three children.
On top of that, I was essentially nullifying any encounters that weren't with mindless creatures. Eventually, most of our encounters had to be oozes or undead just so my wizard didn't charm them too.
Seriously, if annoying is what you're going for, build the character that can settle any fights before they even begin.
lemeres |
On top of that, I was essentially nullifying any encounters that weren't with mindless creatures. Eventually, most of our encounters had to be oozes or undead just so my wizard didn't charm them too.
"Whelp, time to roll up a mesmerist. I shall romance as no man has romanced before!"
MageHunter |
My first instinct was a Dragon Yapper Kobold Bard...
A dedicated blaster wizard can be super annoying to other players. The kind that replaces the fighter and just makes other characters worthless.
Summoning is pretty much the way to go in terms of management. Maybe some sort of uber cheesy build that is super questionable. That also sounds pretty annoying to me.
avr |
avr wrote:Lawful Stupid or Awful Good-aligned paladins can produce some terrible headaches for a GM.What about baby goblins that are on a quest to make the paladin fall, and have the backing of an all powerful, all knowing, all rocks falling being? I am sure they are annoying too.
Oh yes, there's ways for a GM to be annoying as all hell.
Davia D |
Ask the name of every single NPC you interact with. Ask what color hair they have, do they have visible scars, etc. Ask the NPCs questions for the purpose of collecting irrelevant information. Maybe you're a writer, or home invader, or have a peculiar mental condition.
Yeees. I made a villain-squad for my players to fight, and I consider myself fortunate they never asked ^^ I was considering making the ones who escaped reoccurring, but they just hunted down the last demon-worshipping cleric and fireballed them in their tent, so no need!
I also realized I re-used an NPC name recently.
Scythia |
The one that is a constant source of party conflict.
Special props to the rogue who decides the best way to join the party is to steal from them and lead them on a chase into a dangerous area... then continues to steal from other party members even after inexplicably being invited to join. Triple score in a game where PvP is completely banned.
Vidmaster7 |
The one that is a constant source of party conflict.
Special props to the rogue who decides the best way to join the party is to steal from them and lead them on a chase into a dangerous area... then continues to steal from other party members even after inexplicably being invited to join. Triple score in a game where PvP is completely banned.
Kender rogue boom! thread.
CorvusMask |
So can I just say that I find it annoying how opening post mentioned they are talking about character that is mechanically annoying from gm perspective AND that it was Pathfinder Society character?
Like a lot of advice post just one of those points either giving personality/behavior advice or stuff not available in PFS <_<
That said, I find this an evil thing to do in purpose anyway :P Seriously, its easy to be annoyed as gm without people even trying to do it on purpose!
Chyrone |
A friend of mine and i were discussing this sort of thing yesterday.
Of course it depends on how high of a level we're talking about.
PC made of a mix of all caster classes, including the Oracle, for a load of color spray (augmented), so said PC could spam them vs high levels. Includes crossblooded sorcerer.
Barbarian specced on dirty tricks.
Bard focused on augmenting the team like mad, and antagonize to insult/debuff the enemies's attacks.
PC specced on sunder or disarm. Oh hey, that looks like a nasty sword [smacks it out of the hands]
Neat full plate [sunders it]
Do this as a group of 4, and be a band called ["The Trolling Stones"]
Entropi |
So can I just say that I find it annoying how opening post mentioned they are talking about character that is mechanically annoying from gm perspective AND that it was Pathfinder Society character?
Like a lot of advice post just one of those points either giving personality/behavior advice or stuff not available in PFS <
Maybe people are aiming to annoy?
Vidmaster7 |
CorvusMask wrote:Maybe people are aiming to annoy?So can I just say that I find it annoying how opening post mentioned they are talking about character that is mechanically annoying from gm perspective AND that it was Pathfinder Society character?
Like a lot of advice post just one of those points either giving personality/behavior advice or stuff not available in PFS <
I mean it really only does seem fair.
Grom Kranock |
With the inability of a GM to adapt a scenario to the players at the table most optimised characters will walk over most PFS scenarios.
The Pugwampi summoning character sounds interesting but in my experience a grappling focused character is just as bad. Most PFS opponents just cannot handle that crap and it's GG, unless the player rolls a 1 I guess.
P.S. Please link Pugwampi build. I have been meaning to look into it as a couple people in my group have talked about it and I would like to at least be prepared to be deflated if this shows up at a local table.
Entropi |
You can either gain access to summon Pugwampis from the feat Summon Evil Monster (not legal for PFS), or from the First Worlder summoner archetype. Add some Witch lvls for the Misfortune hex. Add on the spell Ill Omen, and the magic item Pugwampi Braid. It's ridiculous, but anyone with a luck bonus ignores it completely.
GhostPepper |
For what i've seen so far, a well-optimized-build Synthetist.
Literally destroys the game.
This. 100% this. Had to put up with this in a game. At level 10. He had 9 attacks, mid-30s AC, +25 on all saves, elemental immunity, flying so he couldn't be tripped... It just went on and on.
YogoZuno |
Most recently, I ran afoul of a PFS Arcanist built to cast Glitterdust with a Save DC of 20 at level 4, through a Persistent Metamagic rod, forcing the victim to succeed at two saves to remove the effect. This effectively shuts down a large number of both melee and caster bad guys.
Scythia |
So can I just say that I find it annoying how opening post mentioned they are talking about character that is mechanically annoying from gm perspective AND that it was Pathfinder Society character?
Like a lot of advice post just one of those points either giving personality/behavior advice or stuff not available in PFS <_<
That said, I find this an evil thing to do in purpose anyway :P Seriously, its easy to be annoyed as gm without people even trying to do it on purpose!
Different mechanics are situationally annoying, varying based on scenario and DM skill. Annoying behaviour is annoying all the time. If you want an annoying character, mechanics don't really matter if the character can be annoying without them.
That's optimizing annoyance.
Ryan Freire |
Arbane the Terrible wrote:Does you GM allow things from D&D? If so, play a Kender.
LMAO haha man I love Kender. Annoying if played by the right person.
I played one for my Dragonlance 5th age game. Was fantabulously awesome
They're an instant no for me, if i sit down at a table and someones playing a kender im out. If people play a halfling or gnome like a kender...out. Fortunately most of the GMS around here are in agreement with that.
Lady-J |
Gnomalypse wrote:This. 100% this. Had to put up with this in a game. At level 10. He had 9 attacks, mid-30s AC, +25 on all saves, elemental immunity, flying so he couldn't be tripped... It just went on and on.For what i've seen so far, a well-optimized-build Synthetist.
Literally destroys the game.
were half of them manufactured weapon attacks? if not he was doing some ilegal stuff as even synth summoners are bound by max natrual attacks
Wrong John Silver |
Really high resistances, combined with a really long self-buffing chain.
I knew a character that was a wizard/ranger/monk, so chosen for extra high saves and AC capabilities. In combat, he'd take three rounds or so to self-buff, and once that was done? He'd draw his net to entangle the opponent. Only once all this was accomplished would the actual attempts to contribute to the party begin - and it was typically over by then.
GhostPepper |
GhostPepper wrote:were half of them manufactured weapon attacks? if not he was doing some ilegal stuff as even synth summoners are bound by max natrual attacksGnomalypse wrote:This. 100% this. Had to put up with this in a game. At level 10. He had 9 attacks, mid-30s AC, +25 on all saves, elemental immunity, flying so he couldn't be tripped... It just went on and on.For what i've seen so far, a well-optimized-build Synthetist.
Literally destroys the game.
Yup, from memory there was a way to dip into Monk to have your natural attacks treated as manufactured attacks that got him around the limit. On the plus side it turns out that all that doesn't protect you from the old "Anti-magic shell + a huge stack of dynamite" trick.
Darksol the Painbringer |
Lady-J wrote:Yup, from memory there was a way to dip into Monk to have your natural attacks treated as manufactured attacks that got him around the limit. On the plus side it turns out that all that doesn't protect you from the old "Anti-magic shell + a huge stack of dynamite" trick.GhostPepper wrote:were half of them manufactured weapon attacks? if not he was doing some ilegal stuff as even synth summoners are bound by max natrual attacksGnomalypse wrote:This. 100% this. Had to put up with this in a game. At level 10. He had 9 attacks, mid-30s AC, +25 on all saves, elemental immunity, flying so he couldn't be tripped... It just went on and on.For what i've seen so far, a well-optimized-build Synthetist.
Literally destroys the game.
That's a bunch of crap. Off the top of my head, here are the "natural attacks" that player could have.
2 Hooves/Talons.
2 Tentacles.
2 Claws.
2 Slams.
1 Bite.
1 Gore.
1 Tail.
1-2 Wing Attack(s).
Unarmed Strikes (limited by BAB, minimum 1, maximum 3).
So, ~13 attacks, when all is said and done. Sure, that's a lot of attacks, but there are some major flaws here.
1. The character is using Unarmed Strikes. This puts all other Natural Weapons as Secondary Attacks, which means they get 0.5x Strength, and a -5 to the roll. This means that for the one extra attack, their other attacks are significantly weaker, and for what they gain (which is at best, 3 attacks), it's not worth it.
2. A lot of those attacks share the same limbs. Most Claws and Slams don't work together, most Bites and Gores don't work together, and so on, because they each occupy a similar limb (such as a hand/arm, or a head). In addition, an Unarmed Strike requires at least one limb (such as a knee, elbow, hand, foot, or even head), which runs into similar issues with the other Natural Weapons. There's also the matter of being able to even take Hoof/Talon attacks, when you're using those limbs to stand up straight, without a valid body form to support using them in the event of a Pounce. A Deinonychus, for example.
3. The Monk rule is that Unarmed Strikes count as Natural Weapons and Manufactured Weapons, and only for the purposes of effects that improve one or the other, and that's it; not the other way around (i.e. Natural Weapons count as Unarmed Strikes). It also only applies to a Monk's Unarmed Strike, and not anyone else's (say, an Unarmed Fighter who gets Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat).
Also, most importantly (and I suspect this is the route he took), the Feral Combat Training feat only applies to one Natural Weapon per selection, and you would have to have Weapon Focus in the Natural Weapon he wanted to enhance with Feral Combat Training in order to select it to apply the benefits.
In other words, the Synthesist player followed the rules by ear, and the GM was too trusting to that player to not verify his claim. (I know that if I did anything like this at the table I play at, the GM and the other players will want to audit the character sheet/rules to make sure that's what it allows; and even then, the GM would adhoc nerf it to balance the game.)
**EDIT**
As a side note, it also doesn't necessarily protect you from the "Toss Helm of Brilliance/Radiance next to creature and Fireball it" tactic.
Kerney |
Just do everything to make the DM work harder.
S!*# ton of Summoning, everyone plays pet classes, and spend lots of time on s&!$ you know is useless.
He will be fuming pretty fast.
If you want do a ton of summoning (like I do with a pfs character) have your stat blocks ready and your dice ready to go (color coordinating is good for that).
But basically, being unprepared in any form is rude.
nosig |
Annoying characters are usually those run by annoying players. ...
this is so true.
Old story time.
Back in LG days the following occurred at a gaming table I was playing at.
5 players start the adventure.
4 are average players and one is a "socially challenged player" (SCP) that plays PCs with ... issues.
The game has hardly started and there is heard the statement "because that's what my character would do". 4 players grit their teeth and game on.
Then the plot takes a twist. The players are instructed to pass their PCs to the player to their left, who would now play that PC during the adventure. "Due to some 'weird magical effect' you are controlling a different PC..."
the result?
While we'd all like to think the SCP would magically become a fun player.
No, the player was STILL a (SCP), but he got to be that way with someone else's (normally fun) PC.
He (the SCP) was such a problem that the actual owner of the PC he was running threatened to kill the PC. (his own PC... the one he owned. He asked the judge if that would still count as PC vs. PC combat - or if it would count as suicide...).
It is worth noting that the SCPs PC, run in the hands of a different player, which was normally very annoying, was a lot of fun to have at the table.