Don't give me that 'It fits my character'! Crap

[fbmf]

3) The person who just wants to play the certain class, even though it is "weaker." As I noted before, the reasons could be the simplicity of the option or just wants to play that class. In this situation, if another player highlighted that there may be other classes that are more powerful, at first I'd appreciate the input. If, after I informed them that I still wanted to play the class, they continue to be fixated on my character's "weak" class, then that's when I ditch the group. If they are going to be dwelling on something like that, then it probably best that I left the group before something else comes to the forefront - it's really more of a symptom of bigger party dynamics issues than that. Really, over the long run, my departure in search of a more like-minded group is going to benefit everyone.

But I have yet to meet anyonw who wants to play a fighter. I've met many people who want play the guy/gal that stabs things with their sword while holding a shield in the other hand or the mounted knight in shining armor or some other warrior archetype. That's all well and good, and I will happily help you make that character. New players may think that fighter is that class, and there may be some levels of fighter involved in the build, but 20 straight levels of fighter is not going to get you there.

And, to follow up with what RC was mentioning, what do you do when another player suffers from permanent level loss? Their lower level is going to "mechanically" impede the group. Do you as a group try to axe the player for the good of the group? Just curious.

Of course not. Let't take the case of level loss due to coming back from the dead.

You didn't choose to die. The dice caught up with you. It happens. If it happens regularly, it may be symptomatic of you not knowing how to play the game, which is a problem, but dying in and of itself is part of the game.

So what? The sooner you level, the quicker the campaign gets to a level where D&D is no longer playable and you're forced to make a new campaign.

I get your point, but...are you honestly arguing that leveling up is bad because the RAW cause the game to fall in the crapper past level 15? Seriously, in your home games do you not take steps to prevent this?

To each his own, but in our game we have houserules to keep the game stable and, more generally, have a "gentleman's agreement" of sorts to not, as a DM or a Player, exploit any of the gaping holes in the rules that cause the game to collapse. We generally play to level 20 or so and then start over. At the rate we play, this generally takes us about two years. I've played through about half-a-dozen campaigns this way since the dawn of 3.x.

YMMV. I understand my experience with playing so many campaigns through levels 1-20 probably isn't anywhere near typical.

Game On,
fbmf

[Imban]

1162148228[/unixtime]]If you have something worse than the light weapon using, dual wielding disarm-based monk I used to play with, that would be pretty interesting.

Back when 3.0 was new, one of my friends had a Cleric/Sorceror/PrC with its own casting going. That didn't work out so well.

On NWN server I play on, there's seriously a Fighter 4 / Druid 24 / something else 2... who doesn't have enough Wisdom to cast 9th level spells. And wields a greataxe, despite having Ambidexterity, Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, and Exotic Weapon Proficiency.

And not having more than like 14 Str.

[power_word_wedgie]

1162146780[/unixtime]]
Having a seriously wrong combination of the latter can make the answer to the former "Someone useless". This makes me want to go digging for a few hilariously bad character builds and post them here.

But you're not going to know unless the player shares his character sheet. As a rule of thumb, most groups that I've gamed with don't usually do that for the reason that I noted. I "Creska the Wanderer", not "Creska the fighter with the feat disarm and ranks in ride" - at least that's what the rest of the group knows.

edit: Ah, I see. Well, I propose that Dungeons and Dragons is not necessarily Neverwinter Nights ...

[Imban]

PWW, maybe I won't know why they're so damn useless unless I look at their character sheet, but it's pretty self-evident that neither of the above characters does anything at all level-appropriate.

If "Creska the Wanderer" is 30th-level and wouldn't make a good PC in a 20th-level party, you know right off the top of your head that he's either fvcking useless or pretending to be fvcking useless, even if you don't have access to his character sheet to determine that he can't even fvcking cast the spells he's entitled to by virtue of character levels and that he seemingly has no clue what the hell he wants to wield.

[power_word_wedgie]

1162157461[/unixtime]]PWW, maybe I won't know why they're so damn useless unless I look at their character sheet, but it's pretty self-evident that neither of the above characters does anything at all level-appropriate.

If "Creska the Wanderer" is 30th-level and wouldn't make a good PC in a 20th-level party, you know right off the top of your head that he's either fvcking useless or pretending to be fvcking useless, even if you don't have access to his character sheet to determine that he can't even fvcking cast the spells he's entitled to by virtue of character levels and that he seemingly has no clue what the hell he wants to wield.

But it's really a circular argument since you really don't know what spells he should be able to cast since you really don't know what class he is ...

edit: and to take it one step further, I may not ever burn my top spells for a long time ... also, scrolls do a good job at delaying this type of detection as well.

[RandomCasualty]

1162152872[/unixtime]]
I get your point, but...are you honestly arguing that leveling up is bad because the RAW cause the game to fall in the crapper past level 15? Seriously, in your home games do you not take steps to prevent this?

In some of my games, I've simply said "everyone gets half normal XP after level 7". Effectively that extends the game through many more levels and keeps it playable. Also, characters tend to min/max anyway which means they can take on challenges above their normal EL. So halving the XP also sort of compensates for that as well.

I've also managed to run high level and even epic games with a virtual mountain of house rules as well, though it's effectively writing my own version of D&D and there are a great many loopholes to plug. Though I try to avoid high level and epic when I can unless the storyline absolutely demands it.

In your typical one world campaign, being a min/maxed 15th level party generally makes you enough of a badass that you can beat any challenge the world can throw at you.

[Crissa]

I rather remember a very long argument over at Nifty about classes being roles rather than mechanics...

-Crissa

(And if I recall, Frank has only a few times actually given out full listed xp for challenges... Usually he gives out a set amount based upon how much of a story arc we can do in a session)

[Imban]

That's why I said you're either useless or pretending to be useless, PWW. If you're a min-maxed Hulking Hurler and you spend all of your time NOT throwing things, even though you're CAPABLE of being useful, you're still pretending to be useless so you're being a real drag on the party.

I might not know just from appearances that the Fighter/Druid I mentioned has that exact set of classes. I certainly wouldn't know that her feats are a horrible waste. You can at least grant me that I have a reasonable knowledge of her level and cannot actually mistake her for a level-16 character; in normal D&D, the party wouldn't be five 30th-level PCs and one 16th-level PC, and in NWN I can look at her and determine generally where her level stands in relation to mine.

Point is, as soon as the fighting breaks out, she's going to be casting spells that everything will pass its save against 95% of the time, or charging straight into melee with far fewer HP, far less AC, and far less attack bonus than everyone else. Because that's seriously what she does.

And that will make it obvious beyond any reasonable doubt that bringing her along is not going to help me out, except by actually crediting me with a tiny bit of extra XP for having a larger party, since that server's system does so.

EDIT: PWW, if you meant "using scrolls to pretend that you're useful", I'd suggest that if you're doing things that appear to be level-appropriate just by throwing money at the problem then you are being useful. I'm talking about people who are glaringly useless. These are the people you complain about after you realize, that in the last eight sessions, have contributed meaningfully in a mechanical way maybe twice, once because they finished off an enemy that the actual fighter only knocked 95% of the HP off of instead of 100%.

[Zherog]

Message Deleted By Moderator.
[/TGFBS]

[power_word_wedgie]

1162152872[/unixtime]]But I have yet to meet anyonw who wants to play a fighter. I've met many people who want play the guy/gal that stabs things with their sword while holding a shield in the other hand or the mounted knight in shining armor or some other warrior archetype. That's all well and good, and I will happily help you make that character. New players may think that fighter is that class, and there may be some levels of fighter involved in the build, but 20 straight levels of fighter is not going to get you there.

Well, it's a minor point, but you know at least one person ... we've met at GenCon.

I'd play a 20th level fighter with no reservations behind it just because I want to play a fighter. I'd play it because:

1) It's easy to keep track of all of the feat/feat trees. LIke I said about the sorcerer, sometimes it's nice to play a fire and forget type of guy.

2) Though it doesn't have power, it has versatility. I can select as many feat combinations as my heart desires. (at least fighter feats ...)

3) Just because you have the most feats/skills/spell combo doesn't mean that you are the best player. I know people that have optimized their character to the hilt only to get killed later because they forgot a feat/combo/spell,a and they're experienced players. Sometimes the KISS principle pays off.

Now do I only play 20th level fighters? Heck no, I may throw in there a 20th level cleric or such, but I have no reservations about playing one.

Also, if you don't think I know the rules, that's fine. However, I just wouldn't say that a person would only play a 20th level fighter for that archetype because they just don't know the rules or are new to them. But that's just me ...

Of course not. Let't take the case of level loss due to coming back from the dead.

You didn't choose to die. The dice caught up with you. It happens. If it happens regularly, it may be symptomatic of you not knowing how to play the game, which is a problem, but dying in and of itself is part of the game.

And that's my point. You put up with people "belaying" your character's advancement due to their death, so I'd imagine that you'd really have to analyze the player and not the character. Heck, there are perfectly optimized characters that I would like to have my character run through just because of the player.

And that somewhat segways into my response to Imban. I have no problem with having issues with a player because they're playing their character just to be annoying. However, I have no problems if a player wants to play a "sub-optimal" class like a fighter, sorcerer, or dragon disciple. If the player is trying to play the classes strong, that's good. It usually is because of the player that I'm gaming with that I may have issues. And if the player says, "No fighter, sorcerers, or dragon disciples" or it's the highway, then I'm taking the highway ... and that has to do with player issues more than anything else.

[fbmf]

The difference to me, PWW, is that by making bad choices you are actively trying to screw your fellows. Dying, in theory, was not your doing. The dice just caught up with you.

Note for the record: Characters min-maxed to the hilt can be just as annoying as poorly designed characters. I'm not suggesting that every character be god-like. I just think that if you're character design doesn't allow your character to take on challenges of your EL then you're doing your fellows a dis-service and I (and they) reserve the right to make fun of behind your back.

Game On,
fbmf

[power_word_wedgie]

1162250474[/unixtime]]I just think that if you're character design doesn't allow your character to take on challenges of your EL then you're doing your fellows a dis-service and I (and they) reserve the right to make fun of behind your back.

If that's a right they want, fine. It's just that if they exercise the right, then the player shouldn't lose a night's sleep ditching that group and finding a group more like-mind to his/her preferences. Life's too short.

edit: And to help clarify that (because it really not meant as a tit-for-tat response) let me explain why: my mind process would be, "Look, if they're going to be freaking out about my character and his power level, maybe the group is a little too intense (I'm not sure about the adjective, but it is the closest one to what I can grasp right now) to Dungeons and Dragons than what I desire: walk away slowly at the end of the night and just don't come back." For example, LARPing and SCA are good activities (I've got a friend that does the SCA and that's cool), but it's not for me.

[fbmf]

Do you honestly think it's fair that your character not carry his/her weight in the campaign?

Game On,
fbmf

[power_word_wedgie]

If my character is playing a trumpet as the traverse down a corridor, that's one thing. If someone is obsessing because I decided to play a fighter, sorcerer, or dragon disciple, please show me the door because that group is just playing a little too intense for my preference. Like LARPing and SCA, those groups are out there. Hey, I hope they enjoy their games. They're just not for me.

[fbmf]

Kewl. To each his own.

Game On,
fbmf

[Imban]

PWW, you probably wouldn't really mind gaming with me, and I probably wouldn't mind gaming with you. I get the feeling that you aren't the sort of person who would make a character who's so goddamn useless that when I think about your contribution to the party, I come up with bugger-all as my answer.

And seriously, when I play RL games, I play a straight Sorceror a lot of the time, and DMs are seriously afraid when I join their game because my core-only Sorceror is Killotron 9000 in their eyes. I'm talking about people who are that useless in a game where a straight Sorceror who fvcking uses Fireball as his main offense is Killotron, here.

[erik]

If I'm playing a caster character that is likely to make the fighter types look like the wet sack of toilet paper that they are, I usually plan on taking craft wonderous items and craft arms and armor in order to make stuff to make their character more effective. Then everybody is quite happy.

[Imban]

I'm usually not allowed to craft items, lamely enough.

[Crissa]

Yeah, the character that can't manage the appropriate EL is annoying - but sometimes it fits into a larger party; there's more room there.

My complaint was more appropriate for the character that can take on the appropriate EL - but gets complaints that the technique, speed, or efficiency is wrong.

-Crissa

[power_word_wedgie]

Actually, my experience is pretty much as Imban has experienced as well. If you have enough downtime, craft items is wonderful. However, the groups I've played in have made it so "we're on the go" quite a bit.

I guess my experience is that whenever I've gamed, I'm actually the one stuck with the spellcaster. Normally, players that I've gamed with gravitate to the rogue and the fighter (or paladin/ranger), and thus I'm stuck playing the cleric to provide instantaneous healing power. Rarely do I see players arcane spellcasters unless it is a large group - I'm more in line to see people playing multiple fighters (or better yet fighting classes) or rogues before a wizard is played.

Just mentioning what I've actually seen at my gaming tables ...

[Crissa]

PWW: Let them try to play D&D without a competent healer or spellcaster, and see how the flavour changes.

-Crissa

[power_word_wedgie]

Well, that's why they do it. They like to play those type of characters and don't mind the new flavor. Most of the time, they don't mind a spellcaster or healing type - it's just that they prefer not playing one.

And, yes, actually I joined a new party of barbarians as a rogue - there was no spellcasters or competant healers. (Well, I had UMD but that isn't that great of a spellcasting option) I have to say it was fun. We pretty much bought out healers of their supply of healing potions, however.

[NineInchNall]

1162152872[/unixtime]]

3) The person who just wants to play the certain class, even though it is "weaker." As I noted before, the reasons could be the simplicity of the option or just wants to play that class. In this situation, if another player highlighted that there may be other classes that are more powerful, at first I'd appreciate the input. If, after I informed them that I still wanted to play the class, they continue to be fixated on my character's "weak" class, then that's when I ditch the group. If they are going to be dwelling on something like that, then it probably best that I left the group before something else comes to the forefront - it's really more of a symptom of bigger party dynamics issues than that. Really, over the long run, my departure in search of a more like-minded group is going to benefit everyone.

But I have yet to meet anyonw who wants to play a fighter. I've met many people who want play the guy/gal that stabs things with their sword while holding a shield in the other hand or the mounted knight in shining armor or some other warrior archetype. That's all well and good, and I will happily help you make that character. New players may think that fighter is that class, and there may be some levels of fighter involved in the build, but 20 straight levels of fighter is not going to get you there.

I am actually playing with a few players who think like that.

Me: "Oh, Arcane Archer, huh? Well, it's not really worth taking all ten levels of that. Why don't you blah blah blah?"

Him: "But then I wouldn't be an Arcane Archer."

Me: "Does that really matter what it says on the character sheet? Isn't how the character plays and what he does really what defines him? Doing it this way makes it so your character doesn't suck donkey testicles, and you still get to use magically enhanced arrows and supplement your archery with magic."

Him: "It doesn't matter if the class sucks; I want to play it. [cue rp-elitism, which is really just a facade for those who suck at all aspects of gaming] Blah blah blah blah the game's not about winning blah blah blah munchkin blah blah powergamer blah blah ..."

Me: "Fine. Whatever."


The point is that people really do think like that, which is why most gamers don't see a problem with balance most of the time and why they are so scandalized when those of us who actually play the game outperform their carefully neutered character builds with all their deliberately ignored options.

[Maj]

cue rp-elitism

No one who goes by what the words say, over what their character actually does, deserves to call themselves a roleplayer.

[power_word_wedgie]

1162418950[/unixtime]]I am actually playing with a few players who think like that.

Me: "Oh, Arcane Archer, huh? Well, it's not really worth taking all ten levels of that. Why don't you blah blah blah?"

Him: "But then I wouldn't be an Arcane Archer."

Me: "Does that really matter what it says on the character sheet? Isn't how the character plays and what he does really what defines him? Doing it this way makes it so your character doesn't suck donkey testicles, and you still get to use magically enhanced arrows and supplement your archery with magic."

Him: "It doesn't matter if the class sucks; I want to play it. [cue rp-elitism, which is really just a facade for those who suck at all aspects of gaming] Blah blah blah blah the game's not about winning blah blah blah munchkin blah blah powergamer blah blah ..."

Me: "Fine. Whatever."


The point is that people really do think like that, which is why most gamers don't see a problem with balance most of the time and why they are so scandalized when those of us who actually play the game outperform their carefully neutered character builds with all their deliberately ignored options.

Well, I'll agree that those who prefer to optimize their character by only selecting the optimum classes should not be villified. All I'm saying is that if a person wants to be a 20th level fighter, and if they're not going to villify you for being "more powerful", then let it be.

Second, it all boils down to that in that situation you have three options:

1) Don't play with those players anymore and find a group that only plays with "optimum" classes or,

2) Play with those players and blend in your character with the "sub-optimum" class characters or,

3) Badger the other characters to play only "optimum" classes until either (a) you convince enough to do so and drive away the minority of players who play sub-optimum classes or (b) you don't convince them and they just kick you out of their group.

Like I said - it's really a question of group dynamics and how players perceive the game. After all, let's say you work out classes. Unless you go with a "let me play my character and you play your character" mentality, the next step is going to be sub-optimum feats, skills, races, strategies, and others until you different views of the game cause you or the others who have differing opinion to leave.