Pathfinder 1E Anyone else view this character broken?

[Flamestrike]

So I just had a first session of Pathfinder, and have been advised that my character is 'too OP'. I'm a little bewildered by this accusation.

The character in question is a Magus (Blade bound Kensai) 1/ Swashbuckler 1. Feats: EWP: Aldori dueling sword, Weapon focus aldori dueling sword, swashbucklers [weapon] finesse, and slashing grace.

Dex 18, 3 points of panache. AC 17 (lamellar, dex and canny defence). 5 percent ASF. HP 15. +6 to hit, 1d8+4 damage. Traits: Reactionary, Magic knack: Magus, Pride and Rich parents. (note - not even ML: Shocking grasp).

He's an exile from Cheliax (a noble house - his father dealt with Daemons and not Devils) who fled with his tiefling witch companion (another player). The witch was a former servant, and I now owe him my life. The character still worships Aroden and firmly believes that one day he will restore the Azalnti empire to its former glory. He's both a scholar, and a swordsman. Think one part Elric of Melinbone and one part Madmartigan.

To be fair, I rolled well with the parry attempts (only getting one off per round thanks to no combat reflexes) and hit with every riposte attempt, so was very hard to hit, and so did a bit of damage in turns it wasn't mine.

I really don't see the above as broken? Am I missing something? The DM hasnt seen the ability before, and I did roll well. I tried to explain the opportunity cost, but he was explicit that its way OP.

I should mention the campaign also contained a ranged Gnome rogue (DM's idea for the player) whose core shtick was to throw smoke sticks, attempt to hide in the smoke, then attack foes from the concealment (wasting three rounds for a dubious use of the Stealth skill, to inflict 1d4+1d6 damage should he hit a target within 30'; which he of course couldn't hit anyways seeing as he has neither precise or point blank shot, so would generally be shooting at -8).

Perhaps this should have been my clue as to where the bar for optimization was set.

Am I a power gamer objectively, or is it just relative to this group? What are everyone elses experiences with this?

 

[Crothian]

Really, the only important opinion is the DM. If he things it is broken then go with that and ask him what crossed the line.

I do like the idea of the gnome character. Sure, it is not the most efficient character but it is hard to quantify fun in these games.

 

[Ramaster]

Your character is not broken, it's just optimized.

The important thing here what do the other players think. Your PC is clearly MUCH more powerful than theirs. If this is a problem for them and the DM, consider scaling back a little bit. Otherwise, have fun with your magus, I hear they are a hoot to play!

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Am I a power gamer objectively, or is it just relative to this group? What are everyone elses experiences with this?

It's just relative. Any idiot Fighter with at least one score of 18 could match or exceed you in terms of AC and/or damage.

It only looks like you're overpowered, since the other character is suicidally incompetent. I would recommend that your character tell the other character to stop goofing off and get into the fight. You should do your best to accommodate by setting up a flanking position.

 

[Flamestrike]

It's just relative. Any idiot Fighter with at least one score of 18 could match or exceed you in terms of AC and/or damage.

It only looks like you're overpowered, since the other character is suicidally incompetent. I would recommend that your character tell the other character to stop goofing off and get into the fight. You should do your best to accommodate by setting up a flanking position.

It was the DM's suggestion; his system mastery is poor.

Imagine if I went straight Magus and pulled a (spell focus, spell specialisation, magical lineage: shocking grasp) spell strike/ spell combat hit on him.

He'd lose his .

 

[Lwaxy]

Seriously, the char is fine. It is not even as optimized as it might have been.

I agree with solving this in game and getting on the gnome's case for him to improve.

 

[Jester David]

Okay, not to critique the build but:

Feats: EWP: Aldori dueling sword

You don't need this.
An aldori sword is basically a specialized longsword. If you spend the feat you can use it as a finesse weapon, but if you don't it's a regular martial weapon. So you just need Slashing Grace to make it work with your swashbuckler.

You're not overly broken but your character is pretty potent; the ACG has some shaky balance elements and the swashbuckler can be pretty potent in terms of damage, especially at low levels. However, the 18 Dex and choosing of two magus archetypes also pushes you into "optimized" territory.

Am I a power gamer objectively, or is it just relative to this group? What are everyone elses experiences with this?

I'd say it's a bit of both. You made a very effective character in a group that might favour character concepts or have more casual players. This emphasises the disparity between the characters.

So you have a couple options.
You can hold back and not be 100% effective. Maybe take some less optimized options or feats or generally making poor tactical choices. Perhaps he says a prayer to Aroden at the start of each combat while ostentatiously drawing his sword, delaying your entrance into combat and allowing the other characters to position themselves. Perhaps your character doesn't like killing and switches to non-lethal halfway through a fight, or fights with his offhand (Dread Pirate Roberts style) to give himself a challenge. Roleplaying stuff like that emphasises the character while also not seeming like you're not taking the fight seriously (or holding back for the sake of the other characters).
You could also focus on farther away opponents, slowly tumbling around foes and positioning yourself while allowing allies to deal with the easier targets. Try using the Aid Other action whenever possible, as it increases the chances of everyone else feeling useful.

You can also try and help boost the effectiveness of the rest of the players, suggesting feats or options that work with their character. This is much trickier, as you do not want to be seen as playing their character for them. And you cannot be pushy or condescending, or suggest that they're making poor choices.
It helps is you make it about yourself and not them, such as "I like building characters, and I'd be great if you'd let me offer suggestions for your character, giving me an excuse to look through my books."

 

[GMMichael]

To be fair, I rolled well with the parry attempts (only getting one off per round thanks to no combat reflexes) and hit with every riposte attempt, so was very hard to hit, and so did a bit of damage in turns it wasn't mine.

Soooo....your DM says your character is OP because you rolled well?

Did you have any non-combat encounters during the session? Did your character dominate those as well?

OP is when your character performs at a level higher than his actual level. Min/maxed is when your character does one thing well to the detriment of others. If your character dominates every encounter, the DM is within his rights to tone your character down, so the other players can have some fun - OP or not.

 

[meien]

Doesn't seem overly powered to me but my GM got frustrated with the parry/riposte when I played a swashbuckler too. It gets pretty nasty, especially with combat reflexes. I also understood his frustration with it and we all agreed from then on the riposte part would be removed from future swashbucklers since it screwed up the action economy pretty badly. I think I made it to 10th level with him before the campaign ended and we swapped to something else so we got to see how gross a swashbuckler can get. Love the class from an rp perspective though too.

I do have a question as to how you have slashing grace already though? I'm assuming you're playing a human. That would give you a bonus feat plus your 1st level feat. Then weapon finesse bonus from swashbuckler. You seem to have 1 too many feats or a typo.

 

[Dog Moon]

I do have a question as to how you have slashing grace already though? I'm assuming you're playing a human. That would give you a bonus feat plus your 1st level feat. Then weapon finesse bonus from swashbuckler. You seem to have 1 too many feats or a typo.

I would assume something like this:
Magus Kensai - Weapon Focus [Bonus Feat in chosen weapon] and Weapon Proficiency [Automatically gains 1 weapon proficiency in a chosen weapon]
Swashbuckler - Weapon Finesse [Bonus Feat]
Level 1 - Slashing Grace

So it doesn't matter what race he is. If he WAS Human, he would have an extra feat.

I know at level 3 I'm playing a Magus [Kensai] 2 with Swashbuckler [Inspiring Blade] 1. I'm a Samsaran and took Mage Armor as a spell added to my spell list. So my character's AC [22 - +4 dex, +4 mage armor, +2 Int, +1 nat, +1 buckler] is better than yours, though I deal the same amount of damage.

I know the parry and riposte thing annoys the DM a little bit, but in my group I'm not even the strongest character. The Druid wielding his two handed weapon deals more damage than me, though lower AC and the Monk has about the same AC and though deals less damage, but gets an extra attack. So my character is closer to about average, I would say. It all just depends on exactly what you're comparing it to. In your case, I would say optimized, but not broken. The other character is simply suboptimal.