Is it rude to aim at your players obvious weak areas?

JacktheRabbit · Sep 9, 2018

I will start this by saying I am not a fan of min-max players. You can play that way but you will not be happy in my game.

So here is my question. You have the annoying min-max melee character of some sort, imagine some sort of barbarian build that deals insane damage. He dump stated all his mental stats and has no social skills, opting instead for athletics and other skills that benefit during battle.

Outside of combat said player generally hangs back letting the face players do all the interacting including trying to have the party bard buy all his gear for him because hey, the bard has the skills and can get him the best deal.

But to me that is wrong. You built a raging barbarian with dump stats for intelligence and wisdom. Your 6 or 8 wisdom means you are too damn stupid to know the wisdom of letting the silver tongue bard speak to merchants for you. You are arrogant and blustering, you never ask you make demands and you do all the things annoying jocks do when they feel entitled but times that by 10.

It also means that when the party kills the dragon, and the barbarian lands the killing blow he lets EVERYONE know. So I wonder, would it be wrong for a crafty noble or king to interrupt the party bard who is telling him how they killed dragon and ask that the warrior who landed the killing blow please step forward. Now the barbarians lack of social skills and his single focus character design becomes a huge weight around his neck and the party loses out on tons of potential rewards as the king decides to negotiate with the barbarian instead of the bard.

Is this wrong as a DM or is it reality. You create a dumb powerful character, you created someone so socially dumb that he doesnt even realize how dumb he is and that means he doesnt let others speak for him because damn it he is Flash Thompson and everyone should automatically fawn over him when he tells them all how cool he is.

Eltab · Sep 9, 2018

As DM, you don't have time to play the Barbarian too. You have every single NPC in the world to worry about.

In-game, only long-term enemies are going to gain experience with the PCs and figure out their weaknesses. Foe du jours should take the group at face value.

Morrus · Sep 10, 2018

Eltab said:
In-game, only long-term enemies are going to gain experience with the PCs and figure out their weaknesses.

Or supra-genius enemies. It's a great way to run a mega-intelligent foe which has insight and perception beyond normal people.

hawkeyefan · Sep 10, 2018

I don’t think there’s anything weong with this if itmakes sense for it to happen. Having the king call outthe one who landed the killing blow and then dealing only with him is a clever twist. I wouldn’t hesitate to do that at all.

Having it happen all the time would be tedious and transparent, and it would also punish the player of the bard by taking away his moments to shine.

JacktheRabbit · Sep 10, 2018

hawkeyefan said:
I don’t think there’s anything weong with this if itmakes sense for it to happen. Having the king call outthe one who landed the killing blow and then dealing only with him is a clever twist. I wouldn’t hesitate to do that at all.

Having it happen all the time would be tedious and transparent, and it would also punish the player of the bard by taking away his moments to shine.

Agreed, it would certainly not be a regular occurrence as it would punish the Bard as much as it punishes the Barbarian.

It is not even an attempt to get at someone specifically. It is more of an intent to show that life even pretend roleplay life is not one-dimensional so if you create something that is one-dimensional then this is how the world is going to treat you.

Maxperson · Sep 10, 2018

JacktheRabbit said:
I will start this by saying I am not a fan of min-max players. You can play that way but you will not be happy in my game.

So here is my question. You have the annoying min-max melee character of some sort, imagine some sort of barbarian build that deals insane damage. He dump stated all his mental stats and has no social skills, opting instead for athletics and other skills that benefit during battle.

Outside of combat said player generally hangs back letting the face players do all the interacting including trying to have the party bard buy all his gear for him because hey, the bard has the skills and can get him the best deal.

But to me that is wrong. You built a raging barbarian with dump stats for intelligence and wisdom. Your 6 or 8 wisdom means you are too damn stupid to know the wisdom of letting the silver tongue bard speak to merchants for you. You are arrogant and blustering, you never ask you make demands and you do all the things annoying jocks do when they feel entitled but times that by 10.

It also means that when the party kills the dragon, and the barbarian lands the killing blow he lets EVERYONE know. So I wonder, would it be wrong for a crafty noble or king to interrupt the party bard who is telling him how they killed dragon and ask that the warrior who landed the killing blow please step forward. Now the barbarians lack of social skills and his single focus character design becomes a huge weight around his neck and the party loses out on tons of potential rewards as the king decides to negotiate with the barbarian instead of the bard.

Is this wrong as a DM or is it reality. You create a dumb powerful character, you created someone so socially dumb that he doesnt even realize how dumb he is and that means he doesnt let others speak for him because damn it he is Flash Thompson and everyone should automatically fawn over him when he tells them all how cool he is.

My advice is to play the world as it would reasonably occur. A king WOULD want to hear the story from the guy who landed the killing blow. Perhaps not the whole story, but at least that moment. If playing the world reasonably means you hit a PC's weakness, so be it. If it means you hit his strength, so be it. If you are fair and impartial about it, the players will pick up on that. If you aren't, they will pick up on that, too.

pemerton · Sep 10, 2018

JacktheRabbit said:
It also means that when the party kills the dragon, and the barbarian lands the killing blow he lets EVERYONE know. So I wonder, would it be wrong for a crafty noble or king to interrupt the party bard who is telling him how they killed dragon and ask that the warrior who landed the killing blow please step forward. Now the barbarians lack of social skills and his single focus character design becomes a huge weight around his neck and the party loses out on tons of potential rewards as the king decides to negotiate with the barbarian instead of the bard.

I don't think there's anything wrong with setting up situations in which fighter-types have to engage in social interaction which they're not maximally statted for.

But I don't see that it should cause the party to "lose out on tons of potential rewards". Anymore than the bard being a mediocre melee fighter, or the wizard being optimised only for spell casting, will cause the party to "lose out on tons of potential rewards". It's just another episode in the game, and there's no reason I can see why the stakes should be atypically high.

Jhaelen · Sep 10, 2018

I wouldn't specifically create an incident like this. I think you should also be careful not to enter into the player's domain: the player's portrayal of the character is his alone. Never dictate what the character's going to do or say.

Even if someone has low wisdom and intelligence doesn't mean he cannot be quite charming and tell an entertaining story. This actually reminds me of several sport stars in real life...

Anyway, any dump stats can be dangerous in the 'right' circumstances, especially sources of ability damage or drain. Just don't overdo it. Imho, every encounter should challenge something different, regardless whether it's something the characters are good or bad at. It's only realistic that some encounters are easier for them than others.
It's easy to fall into this kind of trap: E.g. after the party's fighter acquires an adamantine longsword, they mysteriously no longer encounter any constructs. Don't do that. Be impartial. This also means, that sometimes the party will have an encounter that will likely be too hard for them. E.g. flying enemies vs. a party without ranged weapons or spells. Don't tailor encounters specifically for the pcs. Just use a healthy and varied mix.

JacktheRabbit · Sep 10, 2018

Jhaelen said:
I wouldn't specifically create an incident like this. I think you should also be careful not to enter into the player's domain: the player's portrayal of the character is his alone. Never dictate what the character's going to do or say.

Even if someone has low wisdom and intelligence doesn't mean he cannot be quite charming and tell an entertaining story. This actually reminds me of several sport stars in real life...

Anyway, any dump stats can be dangerous in the 'right' circumstances, especially sources of ability damage or drain. Just don't overdo it. Imho, every encounter should challenge something different, regardless whether it's something the characters are good or bad at. It's only realistic that some encounters are easier for them than others.
It's easy to fall into this kind of trap: E.g. after the party's fighter acquires an adamantine longsword, they mysteriously no longer encounter any constructs. Don't do that. Be impartial. This also means, that sometimes the party will have an encounter that will likely be too hard for them. E.g. flying enemies vs. a party without ranged weapons or spells. Don't tailor encounters specifically for the pcs. Just use a healthy and varied mix.

You are misunderstanding what low charisma is or you are mistaking someone doing some sort of staged interview in your example of a charming sports star.

Your example also poops all over players who make balanced characters. If you let a player role play around blatant holes in their min maxed characters are you going to let players with characters weather in const talk their way into more damage as a balance?

pemerton · Sep 10, 2018

Jhaelen said:
Don't tailor encounters specifically for the pcs. Just use a healthy and varied mix.

Personally, I always tailor encounters to the PCs. I want to (do my best to) make sure they'll be interesting and engaging!

JacktheRabbit said:
Your example also poops all over players who make balanced characters. If you let a player role play around blatant holes in their min maxed characters are you going to let players with characters weather in const talk their way into more damage as a balance?

What penalties/consequences doyou envisage a low-STR wizard suffering?

Is it rude to aim at your players obvious weak areas?

JacktheRabbit

Explorer

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer

Morrus

Well, that was fun

hawkeyefan

Legend

JacktheRabbit

Explorer

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus

pemerton

Legend

Jhaelen

First Post

JacktheRabbit

Explorer

pemerton

Legend

Similar Threads