Greenfield
Adventurer
This is a semi-gripe about a player in my game group, and his character design choices.
Let me preface this by saying that we take turns as the DM, so while I am sometimes the DM, I don't have actual veto power over anything.
This player, who I'll call "M" since he isn't here to speak in his own defense, is one of those who plans twenty levels of development from level one. In practice he has about five characters who he recreates over and over again.
Now there's nothing wrong with planning ahead, but if you have a set-in-stone build in mind you have to be prepared for the possibility that your "ideal character" isn't going to work well in the game as it develops. A simple example: You decide to build a heavy fighter, full plate melee monster, then discover that half of the campaign is going o be swashbuckling adventure on the high seas, and that your full-plated character is good for little more than a boat anchor. Combat is frequently ranged, and agility/mobility are more valuable.
Another problem is that, according to the rules, prestige classes are at the discretion of the DM. You may flat out find that a key part of your "perfect character" isn't possible.
Now, getting back to specifics: This player loves PRCs with the Mettle class feature. His goal is always to combine that with Evasion, and a Feat that allows him to substitute one Save for all others. His goal, obviously, is to become immune to just about all savable spells.
His most recent foray into this is a Cleric advancing to Pious Templar.
Mechanically, the character meets the prerequisites. Story wise, not really. The class is described as those who are called to guard the temple, or in some cases to go and fieght the deity's enemies on their own turf.
His character is female and preportedly comes from a society where women aren't allowed to advance. Her deity is a mono-theistic one called Taiia who is true Neutral, with sects that worship her creator aspect, her destroyer aspect, her good aspect and her evil one. He wanted this deity because she has both War and Magic on her domain lists. Note I said "lists", as in plural. She has two separate domain lists, depending on which aspect the PC worships. War and Magic aren't on the same list.
So I asked how his character, who has never visited the temple (she'd be condemned for being a woman warrior) gained this appointment? He smiled semi-stupidly and shrugged.
I said that I presumed she was chosen by the deity, and that she was of the "Fight god's enemies on their own turf" type, and the player agreed. So I asked, in all innocence, who the goddess' enemies were?
He said, "All evil, of course." At which I pointed out that half of her worshipping clerics were Evil, and that she herself wasn't Good at all, but Neutral.
So the player said her enemies were the advancing army of evil we were supposed to be preparing for. (Main plot line in campaign.) I asked why, since their goals of destruction were very much what several of her sects were promoting?
I pointed out that, having read the write up of the goddess, her only "enemies" were the "false gods" and their followers. As in, any other power "falsely" claiming to be a deity (i.e. every other god from every other pantheon), and their clerics and champions.
I then pointed out that we had a Paladin of The Dagda (king of the Celtic deities) in our party, that we (including her) had received visions of Moregan (Celtic deity of war and death), received a visitation from the Thunderbird (the American Indian "god" of war and death), and had carried out missions for them.
In game, the Cleric has admired the strength and dedication of Sir Arthur (the Paladin), and has tried to model herself after him. (She can't actually go Lawful Good, since she has to have a Neutral in there someplace.)
So now, to live up to the duties of the new PRC, she should try to discredit her role model, and ultimately either convert or destroy him. She should also be outright hostile towards every Divine caster she meets, since there are no other followers of her deity outside of her section of Africa.
Again the player just smiles stupidly and shrugs. Not his problem. Only cares about the mechanics.
Our current DM was inclined to swat the character flat and make the player start from scratch, but he'd just build something else with the same mentality, and the next one would be worse, since it could be brought into existence at level, without any of the hurdles normally encountered in development.
You can't cure a power gamer by outpowering them. All you do is convince them that they need even more power, so they can face that "outpower" next time.
The next time the DM's hat comes to me, I plan to press these story issues with the player. If a character doesn't live up to the duties of a PRC I think they should face expulsion from it.
Comments welcome, of course.
Let me preface this by saying that we take turns as the DM, so while I am sometimes the DM, I don't have actual veto power over anything.
This player, who I'll call "M" since he isn't here to speak in his own defense, is one of those who plans twenty levels of development from level one. In practice he has about five characters who he recreates over and over again.
Now there's nothing wrong with planning ahead, but if you have a set-in-stone build in mind you have to be prepared for the possibility that your "ideal character" isn't going to work well in the game as it develops. A simple example: You decide to build a heavy fighter, full plate melee monster, then discover that half of the campaign is going o be swashbuckling adventure on the high seas, and that your full-plated character is good for little more than a boat anchor. Combat is frequently ranged, and agility/mobility are more valuable.
Another problem is that, according to the rules, prestige classes are at the discretion of the DM. You may flat out find that a key part of your "perfect character" isn't possible.
Now, getting back to specifics: This player loves PRCs with the Mettle class feature. His goal is always to combine that with Evasion, and a Feat that allows him to substitute one Save for all others. His goal, obviously, is to become immune to just about all savable spells.
His most recent foray into this is a Cleric advancing to Pious Templar.
Mechanically, the character meets the prerequisites. Story wise, not really. The class is described as those who are called to guard the temple, or in some cases to go and fieght the deity's enemies on their own turf.
His character is female and preportedly comes from a society where women aren't allowed to advance. Her deity is a mono-theistic one called Taiia who is true Neutral, with sects that worship her creator aspect, her destroyer aspect, her good aspect and her evil one. He wanted this deity because she has both War and Magic on her domain lists. Note I said "lists", as in plural. She has two separate domain lists, depending on which aspect the PC worships. War and Magic aren't on the same list.
So I asked how his character, who has never visited the temple (she'd be condemned for being a woman warrior) gained this appointment? He smiled semi-stupidly and shrugged.
I said that I presumed she was chosen by the deity, and that she was of the "Fight god's enemies on their own turf" type, and the player agreed. So I asked, in all innocence, who the goddess' enemies were?
He said, "All evil, of course." At which I pointed out that half of her worshipping clerics were Evil, and that she herself wasn't Good at all, but Neutral.
So the player said her enemies were the advancing army of evil we were supposed to be preparing for. (Main plot line in campaign.) I asked why, since their goals of destruction were very much what several of her sects were promoting?
I pointed out that, having read the write up of the goddess, her only "enemies" were the "false gods" and their followers. As in, any other power "falsely" claiming to be a deity (i.e. every other god from every other pantheon), and their clerics and champions.
I then pointed out that we had a Paladin of The Dagda (king of the Celtic deities) in our party, that we (including her) had received visions of Moregan (Celtic deity of war and death), received a visitation from the Thunderbird (the American Indian "god" of war and death), and had carried out missions for them.
In game, the Cleric has admired the strength and dedication of Sir Arthur (the Paladin), and has tried to model herself after him. (She can't actually go Lawful Good, since she has to have a Neutral in there someplace.)
So now, to live up to the duties of the new PRC, she should try to discredit her role model, and ultimately either convert or destroy him. She should also be outright hostile towards every Divine caster she meets, since there are no other followers of her deity outside of her section of Africa.
Again the player just smiles stupidly and shrugs. Not his problem. Only cares about the mechanics.
Our current DM was inclined to swat the character flat and make the player start from scratch, but he'd just build something else with the same mentality, and the next one would be worse, since it could be brought into existence at level, without any of the hurdles normally encountered in development.
You can't cure a power gamer by outpowering them. All you do is convince them that they need even more power, so they can face that "outpower" next time.
The next time the DM's hat comes to me, I plan to press these story issues with the player. If a character doesn't live up to the duties of a PRC I think they should face expulsion from it.
Comments welcome, of course.