Day of Discovery (Problem child)

[Greenfield]

Pretty sure that should be for Sorcerer levels only - which is really important for multiclass characters.

Absolutely correct. His first level was Rogue, so instead of getting the max of 4 for Sorcerer, plus 2, he gets a max of 6 for Rogue. Same total in the end, but how he gets there is important. His next dice is a D6, averaging 3.5, rather than a D4 +2, averaging 4.5. It's only one point, on average but again, it's how you get there that's important.

Stalwart Sorcerer also gives Proficiency and Focus in a single Martial melee weapon. I assume this isn't the one he chose?

Agreed. The long spear was good.

Nitpick: he's allowed a one-step difference on each alignment axis. So a Neutral familiar for a Chaotic Good caster is legit.

That's not what it says in the hardcopy DMG. There it says, "May be one point off", not "one on each axis". And though I find the SRD very useful, at the table I use the printed rules.

Not that I particularly want to defend the guy, you understand, but if you're going to apply the rules, you do need to get them right.

Absolutely. I accept that I had a few points wrong, and I plan to use the corrected knowledge.

Oh, and thank you for helping correct me. I really mean that.


Since his old character is probably coming back most o these points are nitpicks. But with some players you need to stay by the rules even in cases like this. They'll later come back and claim that precedent was set. Been burned like that before.

 

[Greenfield]

I think there are three key discussions that need to be had with this player (though whether they will stick is anyone's guess).

First, read the whole ability. Honestly, haven't you been crushed back down enough yet? Talk to someone while building your character to make sure that ability does what you think it does. Someone WILL look at it eventually and correct your misconceptions, so get it done up front and avoid being saddled with a build that isn't what you thought it was.

Second, if you want to build an "optimized" character, they tend to be pretty focused. This fellow branches out all over the place. If you want high hp and tons of skill points, it's not a Sorcerer. If you want massive spell power, sacrificing two levels to get Evasion and reducing access to your most powerful spells to get more hp isn't going to achieve that.

Third, consider your group. Let's assume you DO find that game-breaking combo out of sources accepted by the group. There will be a vote called, and history shows the overpowered combo will be voted out. So your game-breaking genius will be rewarded with a pat on the head, congratulations for breaking the game, and the need to build a new character which is not so unbalanced. Build what you will have fun playing, because anything overpowered will be voted back into line with the power level the group is comfortable with anyway.

Yeah, he probably should have learned this on his own by now, but clearly he has not.

One of the other players is a Facebook friend, which is not exactly the same as a real friend. He says that Problem Child often asks his advice on how to sneak something broken through approval, or to help find something broken that's already approved.

He's trying to exploit.

I hate having to play the bad guy here. But somebody has to.

 

[Grogg of the North]

Does the other player support him in this or tell him to knock it off before it causes problems at the table?

 

[delericho]

One of the other players is a Facebook friend, which is not exactly the same as a real friend. He says that Problem Child often asks his advice on how to sneak something broken through approval, or to help find something broken that's already approved.

He's trying to exploit.

I hate having to play the bad guy here. But somebody has to.

If he's deliberately trying to exploit, you're not the bad guy.

 

[Greenfield]

Does the other player support him in this or tell him to knock it off before it causes problems at the table?

The other player is in favor of ejecting him.

According to him, they're in another game together where Problem Child is constantly being called for blatant cheating. His defense is always the same, "Deny, deny, deny".

I don't mind potent builds. I like them to be legal.

What I hate is the "ambush" thing, where he pulls something out that the DM didn't know about, and there's little time to check whether it's real, unless we want to halt play for 10 minutes or so while we try to decipher his pronunciation of whatever it is, and look it up.

We took the time with "Gearth Armor", and he was not happy.

I have a feeling that, while he's supposed to email a PDF of his character so it can be reviewed, he'll email it next Saturday morning, just before he gets in his car to head for the game.

 

[Dandu]

Unfortunately for him, my next Saturday morning is free.

 

[Celebrim]

Perhaps the longspear can be used as an example of why the rules need to be referenced and read in detail - we all make assumptions that turn out to be incorrect when we read the rules.

The weapon rules are probably complicated by the fact that they changed in significant but subtle ways between 3.0 and 3.5. I don't remember exactly what the 3.0 rules stated, but its possible that Greenfield is remembering 3.0 rules. It seems to me that in 3.0, a longspear was a large weapon and couldn't be wielded by a small sized creature.

 

[Greenfield]

Nope, I just got it wrong. No excuses.

I didn't say anything during play, so I get a chance to wash the egg off my face out of sight of my game group, but I need to be more careful.

 

[N'raac]

Nope, I just got it wrong. No excuses.

I didn't say anything during play, so I get a chance to wash the egg off my face out of sight of my game group, but I need to be more careful.

Simple enough example of "no one is perfect". Where the difference lies is where I've added emphasis above. As opposed to "deny, deny, deny". The "no one is perfect" model justifies the audit without the accusation of deliberately trying to slip a few "errors" past the DM.

If the pdf shows up just before the game, then delaying the game to address any issues may be the only answer. "In the interests of keeping the game rolling", perhaps the appropriate ruling is "give me the book and page reference so I can look it up, or it does not work - email the reference to the DM's between now and next game so we can review it." In other words, it is the player's responsibility to provide the references to the things on his character sheet. If he can't, then the item ceases to function until the reference can be provided and reviewed. Nope, we're not stopping play for 10 minutes to look it up - next time, get the sheet to the GM right after the game when it is requested, not a couple of hours before the next game.

 

[Greenfield]

To my surprise, he sent the character today. For the record (because someone asked) he's using Mythweaver as his character generator.

He corrected the Dex issue, but still spent 34 of his 32 stat buy points (and yes, I accounted for the stat boosts from level bumps).

He had two of the three Lightning spells needed as prerequisites for Elemental Savant. One is the Cantrip called Lightningl Jolt, which may be from a disallowed sourcebook. (I have to check that one).

He's spent 102 of the 90 Skill points a character of his level should have, and I haven't even started to check for cross class penalties.

He still lists Githcrafted armor, even though he was told that was out. The front page of his sheet says Twilight instead, though, which come from Magic Item Compendium, a disallowed source book.

He still lists his rase as Human - Aquatic, while claiming to be brother of an Aventi.

He has his Short Bow marked with the notation "(Ray)". He took Weapon Focus - Ray as his Focus feat from Stalwart Sorcerer, so that's suspicious.

He has two Hooded Lanterns listed, one with Continual Light and one with Continual Darkness, spells that don't exist in D&D 3.5. There is a Continual Flame, so he might have that one, but there is no corresponding Darkness spell.

Oh, and he has no Darkness spell on his spell list, so his "Approach under darkness" wasn't possible.

As a moment of pure fun, I observed that he had listed a skill, "Knowledge - Dung". I guess his character knows a lot of... stuff. Pretty sure he meant Dungeoneering.

So, other than his race, stats, skills, spells, classes, armor, weapons and gear being wrong, I guess he's legal.

I'm pretty sure a real audit will find more. This was the first 5 minutes.