| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But yes he didn't much like me but because we were where playing at a local hobby shop, he didn't have any way to through me out.
...Playing in a group where people don't actually want to include you just sounds like an all-around terrible idea for everyone. I'm not surprised it went badly. What did you expect?
I tried to talk it out with him a few times, and when he refused to let me try and fix the problem he seamed to find in my character, I took it as he was OK with it, then when he killed my character I said that's it I'm done, I'm not going back as long as he is the GM.
I'm admittedly a little dubious about this. Sounds like maybe something wasn't communicated effectively about it.
At one point I had a player who consistently "nonseriously" (but expecting answers every time) asked for overpowered options (and knew it), and nearly every time I responded with no, they would either just shrug it off as "of course, I was just joking around, that would be OP". And yet they still asked me to answer the questions, so every single one DID mean I had to take the time to answer no, and often enough go look up "okay, what's a Trox and why should I be allowing it when I said core races only", or read up on a third-party option... it got tiresome fast. And it felt a lot like the "joking" was just an excuse to fish for me underestimating something and letting it slip past.
Whatever happened in this specific case... really, as a rule of thumb, just don't ask for things you yourself wouldn't allow. If you know better than the GM what's balanced, you should care about not breaking the game for other players, even if the GM doesn't stop you. Having "warned" them doesn't change that you knew better.
(If you'd err on the side of disallowing things yourself, and asking for stuff above your preferred power level is necessary to keep up with other players at a different table, sure. But that does not sound like the case here.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From what I have seen here we have players who are seeking weird and none standard options in some sort of munchking power game race, combined with a novice Gm who cannot cope with all the weirdness but lacks the confidence to tell the players what they can do with their silly ideas. Then as he can't cope with all the weirdness he has allowed into the game makes random and arbitary rulings to deal with it.
Until all concerned have grown up and or aquired more experience I suggest playing PFS(maybe even core PFS) were the strict rules on what is allowed will help both the GM and the players. Alternatively all concerned should walk away from gaming with each other until they find a mature and competent GM to properly control the game.
I find it almost impossible to have sympathy for the OP or the GM if the situation is as he describes it. I would not have tolerated his approach or the GM
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow. This entire debacle sounds like a train wreck that you just can't look away from. So many things have gone wrong over these sessions.
Yes, Pathfinder says it is 3.5 compatible. It is more in a sense that those rules were the foundation to the house Paizo built. Not really "grab any 3.5 book and have at it". The point of the Pathfinder system is balancing out all the b*%*&#%# power balance issues that 257+ 3.5 books created. There's a reason the Prestige Classes took a backseat to Archetypes, and that Alternate Racial Traits were expanded on: they let you create that combination of abilities you want by simply making some tit-for-tat swaps. That's also why level adjustment shenanigans like Templates are practically gone. That's why there's so many fewer splat books.
I'm looking at my 3.5 shelf and I have 6 Complete books in sight. Flipping through them all, I'd wager there's at least 80 classes added. Probably more. Most contain the same combinations of "unique" abilities that I can reasonably emulate in Pathfinder with a simple Archetype or two, and maybe a few Racial traits. And still level a single class all the way to 20. (or at worst, dip a few levels of a basic dual class setup). Especially with the introduction of Hybrid classes.
But I'm seeing other issues too. You said that your Storyteller is 10 years younger than you? Did I read that right? As in, he's 10 and you're 20? Or he's 20 and you're 30? The lack of overall knowledge from all sides, coupled with poor grammer and the inability to concede mistakes on your own part impart a sense that everyone here is young and completely inexperienced. Having repeatedly defended your stance towards your character with "I've also Dm'd and it seems fine to me" tells me:
*You haven't Dm'd over a character as broken as yours
*You haven't Dm'd over a player as difficult as you
*You haven't played in any games where the DM had a firm enough grasp on the situations at hand
*Nobody at your table has a firm grasp on why Pathfinder is PATHFINDER and not 3.5
One of the first things you guys need to learn as both a new Storyteller and a new player is that limitations have to be set until the rules are understood. It's the "walk before you run" scenarios that are crucial to enjoying the game in the future, years down the road. If you're a new player or DM, you should be limiting yourself to things that you can handle, like basic races and core classes until you understand why they are designed the ways they are; why the changes were made in the transition from 3.5 to Pathfinder.
If you're either an experienced player or DM, (as you seem to fancy yourself) you should be addressing brand new players and DMs with the same approach. Build a simple character your young DM can understand, so they can learn why things are designed the way they are. You should be helping them "learn to walk" instead of throwing terribly designed, complicated, errata-designed homebrews at them when they don't know better to say no, and likely are trusting your proclaimed "experience" to mean you can police yourself. Which clearly hasn't yet been the case. Complaining they aren't sticking "within the rules" that they clearly lack understanding in isn't going to win you any cases, if you can't first identify the problem of why they so desperately need to resort to breaking those rules to begin with.
Your enjoyment really should be in your time with the people around you, not with imaginary numbers on a sheet of paper. If your sole measurements of entertainment are that you have the most overpowered character at the table to impress everyone, you're both in the wrong game, and at the wrong table my friend. If you aren't interested in playing something basic for the sake of the entire group, and the development of a new Storyteller, you're at the wrong table. All it can take is a single player to completely remove the desire to ever be a Storyteller again, ruining not only your current campaign, but the enjoyment of everyone who likes playing under them, and anyone who could potentially play with them in the future.
This entire thread has done nothing but make you all sound inexperienced, immature, short sighted and selfish. Hopefully you can take something from this and adjust your attitudes.
Your rebuttal simply highlights my points; you quoted my entire post when maybe you should have just BOLDED the points you're choosing to ignore.
|
...But yes he didn't much like me but because we were where playing at a local hobby shop, he didn't have any way to through me out....Playing in a group where people don't actually want to include you just sounds like an all-around terrible idea for everyone. I'm not surprised it went badly. What did you expect?
I tried to talk it out with him a few times, and when he refused to let me try and fix the problem he seamed to find in my character, I took it as he was OK with it, then when he killed my character I said that's it I'm done, I'm not going back as long as he is the GM.I'm admittedly a little dubious about this. Sounds like maybe something wasn't communicated effectively about it.
At one point I had a player who consistently "nonseriously" (but expecting answers every time) asked for overpowered options (and knew it), and nearly every time I responded with no, they would either just shrug it off as "of course, I was just joking around, that would be OP". And yet they still asked me to answer the questions, so every single one DID mean I had to take the time to answer no, and often enough go look up "okay, what's a Trox and why should I be allowing it when I said core races only", or read up on a third-party option... it got tiresome fast. And it felt a lot like the "joking" was just an excuse to fish for me underestimating something and letting it slip past.
Whatever happened in this specific case... really, as a rule of thumb, just don't ask for things you yourself wouldn't allow. If you know better than the GM what's balanced, you should care about not breaking the game for other players, even if the GM doesn't stop you. Having "warned" them doesn't change that you knew better.
(If you'd err on the side of disallowing things yourself, and asking for stuff above your preferred power level is necessary to keep up with other players at a different table, sure. But that does not
here's a thought - for your next character if you want to keep the concept.
the feat "Multigenerational Shadow Plane Dweller"
go to d20pfsrd, type it in, and take a look see. it's even third party!
you can keep your weird dragon man, and throw that on at character creation. boom! you get your cake, eat it too, and don't bust the game.
This sounds like a 3.5 cluster-eff. It's best to run Pathfinder without the 3.5 classes and races for game balance purposes. That said, it sounds like the GM and players have agreed that game balance is not an issue.
I never said 3.5 and Pathfinder were not compatible I said the power level is vastly different.
I feel like there was a telling version of this when the OP earlier in the thread said something to the effect "The 3.5 feat is so much stronger", as feats in Pathfinder are generally weaker on purpose since you get 50% more of them.
Mixing Pathfinder and 3.5 if you don't know what you're doing is kind of a "worst of both worlds" thing since a core design principle of Pathfinder was to do away with "dead levels" by giving people feats, class features, etc. at every single level, whereas 3.5 meted them out more slowly because they were powerful (leading to the aforementioned "dead level" thing.)
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
How would you guys deal with a player playing a shadow creature dvati race as rogues.
Don't let them.
Dvati is 3.5, so right out with prejudice (aka don't bring it up again.)Shadow creature template isn't designed for PC, so right out of the question also.
Your GM needed to say no to you, and you need to not ask for unreasonable requests.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Can I ask you a question, would you ever allow the 3.5 vows in to your campaign,
If you'd allow me, I can answer that, for my own campaign, wintersrage.
No. When I was running 3.5 campaigns, I didn't allow the vows, and I certainly wouldn't allow them in a Pathfinder game.
"Why not?"
Because they provide much more than the character trades away, and the designers disguise this as a character fluff thing. And because the vows of Non-violence and Peace wreck the rest of the party.
--
The very fact you asked tells me a lot about what kinds of characters you want to play, and what kind of campaign you want: the kind where the players and GM take off the kid gloves and ruthlessly compete for power. So, don't complain when your GM runs that kind of encounter.
|
Sigh, I was really trying to stay out of this thread.
The way this is worded a titan mauler could take colossal maul of the titans from the titan they just knocked down and attempt to use it. it is worded so that it only works for two-handed weapons meant for creatures one size category larger, but the penalty for doing so is increased by 4. So pathfinder is not immune to brokenness.
Well you got one part right. Pathfinder is not immune to brokeness. You can always play an optimized Wizard :)
Semi-jokes aside, it was errata'd pretty soon after it came out as you said, and as such doesn't really support your claim?
At 3rd level, a titan mauler becomes skilled in the use of massive weapons looted from her titanic foes.
She can use two-handed weapons meant for creatures one size category larger, but the penalty for doing so is increased by 4. However, the attack roll penalty for using weapons too large for her size is reduced by 1, and this reduction increases by 1 for every three levels beyond 3rd (to a minimum of 0).
This ability replaces trap sense.
Considering it was such a fast erratta I'd say it actually hurts your point. Paizo fixed a brokenly powerful option very quickly, unlike that other company with alot of 3.5 material.
As has been said befor, mixing 3.5 material with Pathfinder is Risky Business (Hi Tom Cruise!). I'd say your GM was definitely more in the wrong here than you, but try not to make brokenly powerful stuff by crossing editions if you can. It justs works out best for everyone.
Anyways, sounds like the situation is resolved on your end. Glad you came to the conclusion that the game wasn't right for you.
|
I think that by the time you were asking for permission to re-do the PC the DM had enough of you, and then the easiest way to deal with it was to just kill the PC off. Then he doesn't have to allow you back into the group.
Seems more like a personality issue than just a PC/mechanics issue. I am fairly lenient as a DM, but from what I have seen of you I would boot you also.
Remember the the DM gets to determine the rules, and that makes it harder for him to disregard the rules.
You're blowing what he said out of proportion, all means is that the DM decides upon the initial set of rules and then balances them to provide a fun experience and it sounds like your DM figured out that allowing someone that doesn't have the decency to not make a purposely over powered character despite the fact that that player "warned" him was a bad idea now didn't he
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That is exactly what I am talking about, you seem to want to argue with any that disagree with you.
but ok.
Page 9 CRB. You will find the first instance of the "GM is final arbiter of the rules" phrase.
Jump to the Gamemastering Chapter. Page 396.
What is a GM? Check the Judge paragraph. Mentions about how the rulebooks are his tools, but "his word is law".
The best one is the last paragraph in the section. Player. He is a player also and his fun is as important. I just get the feeling that he wasn't having fun with you.
Go to 402. GM Fiat. First sentence. GM is law of the game.
I would have slapped you back and then booted you.
|
|
You're blowing what he said out of proportion, all means is that the DM decides upon the initial set of rules and then balances them to provide a fun experience and it sounds like your DM figured out that allowing someone that doesn't have the decency to not make a purposely over powered character despite the fact that that player "warned" him was a bad idea now didn't he
I don't think the DM should willy nilly change rules each and every game session. There is no consistency in that.
A rules set should be adapted at the beginning of the campaign, and then during the campaign if adjustments need to happen then the DM need to advise the group on changes he wishes to make. It should then be worked out to everyone's acceptance.
This guy doesn't seem to be like that...to the contrary of what he says.
In the end I really think there was just a personality conflict between the GM and the player. I believe that the rest of the players were neutral in it, agreeing to both what the GM and the player were saying.
I don't think the DM should willy nilly change rules each and every game session. There is no consistency in that.
A rules set should be adapted at the beginning of the campaign, and then during the campaign if adjustments need to happen then the DM need to advise the group on changes he wishes to make. It should then be worked out to everyone's acceptance.
This guy doesn't seem to be like that...to the contrary of what he says.
In the end I really think there was just a personality conflict between the GM and the player. I believe that the rest of the players were neutral in it, agreeing to both what the GM and the player were saying.
I don't think the DM should either, of course consistency is important, in fact I agree with everything you've just said. I'm sure you understand the point of my post. I'm sorry if I possibly worded it a bit iffy
|
|
I don't think the DM should either, of course consistency is important, in fact I agree with everything you've just said. I'm sure you understand the point of my post. I'm sorry if I possibly worded it a bit iffy
I don't think the DM should willy nilly change rules each and every game session. There is no consistency in that.
A rules set should be adapted at the beginning of the campaign, and then during the campaign if adjustments need to happen then the DM need to advise the group on changes he wishes to make. It should then be worked out to everyone's acceptance.
This guy doesn't seem to be like that...to the contrary of what he says.
In the end I really think there was just a personality conflict between the GM and the player. I believe that the rest of the players were neutral in it, agreeing to both what the GM and the player were saying.
I understood you, I just wanted to clarify myself before the OP took it the wrong way.
Ahh gotcha, sorry
Unfortunately I can't give proper judgment without all three sides of this story, assuming everything you said is true then it sounds like you took advantage of an inexperienced DM and he felt kinda bad about that and handled it wrong because he is inexperienced. But I can't say without hearing from everyone else involved
I am away of that but he had 6 racial hit dice as well.a character with a level adjustment of 2 and 8 class levels is a 10th level characterIt is just that the GM was allowing the other players to do things, like casting 2 spells around without having quicken meta-magic, and these were not immediate action spells, making to attacks after a charge because they have 2 weapons and have two-weapon fighting, allowing them to take a monster race with player stats but the race still have racial Hit dice, a 2 LA race with 6 racial hit dice, and we where level 10 and they still have 8 class levels, saying the person was only level 10.
Then you are probably also aware that most characters that take level adjustment and racial hot dice end up weaker then others because of the flawed system, that unfortunately does not apply to templates which only sometimes have a level adjustments
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm curious, wintersrage. Is your opinion on "dealing with DMs" any different now than when you made the OP?
I have no problem with vent threads, but dressing them up as requests for advice if you're really just looking for affirmation seems counter productive, to me.
Yes I will not be asking any GM's in the future of the power level of the group and the campaign, if the game is going to be high powered i will make a high powered character otherwise i will build a less powerful character.I'm curious, wintersrage. Is your opinion on "dealing with DMs" any different now than when you made the OP?
I have no problem with vent threads, but dressing them up as requests for advice if you're really just looking for affirmation seems counter productive, to me.
I presume you meant to say you WILL be asking the power level?
No, not true, focusing on something does not make it inherently over powered, one of the weakest characters I ever played was a fighter that focused on bullrushes, it was not OP, heck it wasn't even decent. You can make trip based characters without cheese and being broken, you can make shadow based stealth guys without abusing the rules too
But i have to say this, if you pick 1 thing for your character to focus on as a character concept, you end up making an over powered character.
Fwiw, I don't think this is true. I think it's a matter of degrees - you can focus without being hyperspecialised, in my view.
I presume you meant to say you WILL be asking the power level?yes i miss typed, sorry for that.
No problem, of course. I just wanted to be sure (you and I play very differently, so I figured it was worth checking!) :p