How do you 'nudge' your players away from tank mentality? (and high magic games)

[Emirikol]

5.) Include a weapon that grants bonuses to non-tankish things (+1 sword, +3 when using fient)

I really like idea #5 (I've done most of the rest and they do work . We actually hand out a lot of "plussed" weapons and have a house rule that encourages breaking weapons (on a 1 you critical automatically but it breaks the weapon or option #2 is you fling it away with a fumble).

Basically, you introduced house rules that nerfed most of your players' characters far more than they nerfed the barbarian (fighters -- especially light fighters -- and rogues are extremely dependent on magic equipment; casters at 1/2 level can easily slide into irrelevance). And barbarians were already the best PHB class for dealing melee damage.

Hmmm. You're probably very correct. Barbarians with rage, hp's, con, strength, massive weapon damage and massive feats make them 9x as powerful as a rogue and probably 5x as powerful as a fighter.

The Barbarian is basically double overpowered in resistance and triple overpowered in attack (with rage). I consider fighter to be essentially 'neutral' in power because they have more options. I suppose in a regular campaign, a fighter would stack up if he was in heavy armor, however the HP differntial isn't that much..it's the rage that makes the difference.

Even with a couple plussed items, other non-fighter classes are unreasonably weak in ANY CAMPAIGN...so be it

Solution? Hand out more plussed (in our game nothing's magical till +4) lower damage weapons and essentially zero plussed greataxes and greatswords. The same is true then for armor and avoidance of 'buff' potions.

The key will be to balance some kind of "treasure gifts" to the barbarian of the group. What should they be though if I'm avoiding those things above?



jh

..

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

If you're looking for a balanced low-magic option with the least amount of work, you might want to try Iron Heroes. I don't know how much magic you need for AoW, but at least someone can play a charismatic swashbuckler without being a wimp character.

 

[Agent Oracle]

Put the barbarian against a Knight of equal level.

Knight has better AC (Between the fullplate and the shield AC bonus that knights get)

identical hit dice.

Better will save.

and the knight's challenges' give him the bonus to hit and damage without the loss of AC that a barbarian takes when raging.

Plus, Knights have a nifty code which they fight by, which encourages all manner of treachery. My 10th lvl knight build had improved unarmed strike, improved trip, and improved disarm. His basic tactic was to challenge a foe, take his weapon, knock him down, and then kick him inna teef. (Subdural damage, of course.)

Plus, the Bulwark of defense ensured that enemies could not simply crawl away from me once they were down (since it turns all spaces surrounding me into difficult terrain, moving 5' away was the same as moving 10' away, provoking an attack of opportunity.)

Everyone seems to mistake Knights for Paladins, in reality, they can fight just as dirty as any barbarian, If not dirtier.

Now, this IS a grudge NPC. Purely designed for the Barbarian to have to face him down, and remind the barbarian that he's not the only player in the game.

Now, towards getting the rest of the players to join in...

1. More traps. More traps. More traps. you have FIVE rogue-types in your game. for pity's sake... ad-lib some elaborate mechanical encounters wherein the meat shield will never survive. I'm talking about "elaborate" in terms of "The gears are larger than my head" elaborate.

Moving platforms. Ropes over open pits. Sudden reflex saves when pistons rocket out of the walls. Up the tech level dramaticly in this next "dungeon". Skill checks on top of skill checks on top of skill checks. If you want some references: try looking at FPS titles with jumping puzzles. the original Half-life was rife with 'em.

2. Take it out to sea. Two swashbucklers. A Ninja. Have 'em sail off for the oriental adventures.

3. Up the magic content. Poor Spellthief. how often does he actually get a steal in?

4. "This is a sneaking Mission" For pity's sake, give 'em some encounters where the barbarian will OVERTLY get his ass handed to him. a place where discretion would be the better part of valor.

 

[Emirikol]

I don't mean to sound snarky, but how in the world can you run Age of Worms as a low magic adventure without a lot of work retailering the adventure? Personally, I think the problem might be that you placed the highly magically dependent adventure path into a low magic setting.

I don't see AOW as being magically dependent at all actually (see below).

I'm of the philosophy that the D&D game characters were designed to be balanced in the absence of magical items no matter what the level. For example: a 14th level rogue without *anything* should be just as playable as a 14th level fighter without *anything magical" and should be able to fight any non-DR-magic monster toe to toe. If MI's were required, then they would be built into the character class (but in concession note the barbarian discussion).

Next, In retooling adventures, there are three simple rules.
1. Any creature can get a visual makeover without changing it's stats. So, for example, if there is a bugbear or elf, in Hyboria it becomes a neanderthal, savage-tribesman or ape-thing, but I use the same stats. For monsters, this is even easier (just give them a new look and nerf any DR-magic or nerf the SR). How many DM's out there complain that as soon as they describe a monster, their players suddenly blurt out what it is..yea, I don't have that problem.

2. No scenario is dependent upon it's terrain to be an adventure (I learned this when we "INHERITED" the County of Urnst as our LIVING GREYHAWK region when I was on the Triad...the County btw, is ALL PLAINS HEXES.) Now, the new adventure path is set in a city, but all it takes there is a couple simple name changes. I moved AOW from the swamps of the region of Greyhawk City (Diamond Lake) to the DESERT and honestly it took virtually NO WORK. I turned water into oil in the "Sodden Hold" (renamed Sand Hold), which added excitement to the adventure when the PC's BLEW UP THE WAREHOUSE!!!

3. No scenarios are written with magical items or class powers in mind. If anything even resembles that hotion it makes a better sub-adventure than if the party already has said item. Ever had PC's run away from a monster? No? Then they're not challenged to have to figure out a differen't way.

My players certainly arent' spoiled and must not be morons. THey played "Hall of Harsh Reflections" (7th level) at 4th-5th level and with virtually no magic (and no cleric as you can see) Btw, I changed the dopplegangers to the "serpent men" that Robert E Howard loved to describe in the Kull and Conan books and the mirrors were very reminiscent of the CONAN THE DESTROYER movie.

My players have told me how refreshing it is to have to think before they act and that there's no easy "buffing" before moving into a room or dependence on a wizard to solve all their problems.

jh
..

 

[Dracorat]

For the record, I find wizards and sorcerers to be the majority of the spotlight players. Not tanks.

While at lower levels, tanks tend to have more DPS and survivability, it turns around about level 12 or so and then wizards and sorcerers start an uphill curve that neve seems to end. =(

 

[Nonlethal Force]

I'm of the philosophy that the D&D game characters were designed to be balanced in the absence of magical items no matter what the level. For example: a 14th level rogue without *anything* should be just as playable as a 14th level fighter without *anything magical" and should be able to fight any non-DR-magic monster toe to toe. If MI's were required, then they would be built into the character class (but in concession note the barbarian discussion).

This can be largely true as long as you have classed adventurers and classed opponents. Things like CR 15 monsters with no classed levels assume certain things about the party, however. They can be nerfed, of course. But I'd not want to be a level 20 party with weak magical equipment going up against a Balor, for example.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I'm of the philosophy that the D&D game characters were designed to be balanced in the absence of magical items no matter what the level.

Unfortunately, this premise is incorrect, so it is going to throw everything off for you, I'm afraid. Certain classes are more dependant on equipment than others. If you strip magic items from the game, you change the balance between classes dramatically.

 

[DMRob]

I'm of the philosophy that the D&D game characters were designed to be balanced in the absence of magical items no matter what the level.

And unfortunatly, the designers, writers, and folks who made the game have a different viewpoint. exactly opposite yours, to be honest. Adventures are written with the idea that the party will have wealth of a certain ammount. the only adventures that would work as written for low magic games are the lowest level ones. Age of worms is even worse, with what the party ends up facing at the end of the arc.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Hmmm. You're probably very correct. Barbarians with rage, hp's, con, strength, massive weapon damage and massive feats make them 9x as powerful as a rogue and probably 5x as powerful as a fighter.

But, they aren't. They're just different.

The problem isn't that the barbarian PC is overpowered. Well, he is relatively, but really the other PCs are just weak. Ninja spellthief? Rogue swashbuckler? Those are subpar combonation, and they're suffering because of it.

Secondly, the lack of magical items is a huge problem. One of the drawbacks of the barbarian is that its difficult to raise his AC up with the traditional build (no shield, light armor). But, in a low magic setting, everyone will have a low AC. That drawback goes right out the window. Compare the barbarian to a fighter in magical fullplate with a magical shield and you'll see what I'm getting at here. Compare his damage output to a rogue with UMD and a wand of greater invisibility or even a ring of blinking.

Your problems aren't going to go away until you adress the underlying problem that magic is a built in balancing mechanic in the game, and yes an inter-class balancing mechanic. The standard wealth is just assumed into the balance of the game as the PCs go up in levels, and wonky things can happen if you don't compensate in some way.

You don't have to use magical items, but you can give built in class features. Fighters can get built in AC enhancment bonuses, or they can get +1d6 damage with weapons as a class feature, or what have you. I do this kind of thing quite often. But, you need some kind of compensation.

 

[shilsen]

How do you 'nudge' your players away from tank mentality?

Quite simple. Run a campaign that both explicitly and implicitly does not reward such a mentality.

Unfortunately, from both the description of your campaign and your preconceptions about the game (which, as a couple of posters have already remarked, is not shared by the designers of 3e and hence is out of touch with the reality), it seems you're doing the opposite. And it's exacerbated by the fact that you have a set of class choices for the other PCs that are about as well-designed to let the barbarian shine as if that had been the primary intent.

You need to rethink some of your assumptions and add a bunch of house rules to significantly strengthen the other PCs and/or weaken the barbarian. I suggest the former, since that's less likely to irritate the barbarian's player and will also serve to please the other players, since their PCs get better and gain more options.