Dealing with powergamers

[Oryan77]

Pretty much, everyone is saying that I can eliminate a lot of grief by just taking away all the many options I allowed them to use. As much as it dissapoints me, I think you're right and I'm going to have to do that. :\

Here is what I'm thinking...please, as a player, tell me what you'd say if your DM limited options that you were allowed to use before.

1. Nobody can use feats from any other book besides the PHB. Those who already chose feats from other sources can keep those feats.

2. You can pick PrC's from other sources, but if it has a requirement from something other than the PHB or DMG, you cannot use that PrC. (Is this too limiting? Maybe it could be a judgement call.)

3. The only book you can use spells from will be from the Spell Compendium. The limitations will be, no swift or immediate action spells, and you can't stack a spell from the SC with a spell from the PHB in order to boost a particular area (like stacking AC or attack bonuses). Arcane casters can keep the spells they already learned.

4. I'm excempt from these rules. My NPC's can use anything from any book I choose. That will help me make my NPC's different from the PC's since I need the variety to keep encounters different.

I think basically you're annoyed with this guy's personality and how it affects the game. The fact that he's a powergamer aggravates things, but as you noted, you have another powergamer in the group who doesn't annoy you.

You may be right. The other powergamer though makes an effort not to tweak out every little thing about his character. He's also not helping others powergame their PC's. He's built an efficient PC, but he doesn't try to make him invincible and doesn't get upset when he learns he's not invincible. Which brings me to this....

I have a powergamer player. If anything bad happens to his PC, he immediately tears into the books to check and make sure I'm not fudging things.

That describes my powergamer in question to a "T". I didn't even think about it until I read your post. Every single time "I" perform an action that they weren't expecting, he's the first one to grab the books to make sure I can do it. And when his PC gets screwed in combat and can't do anything, he starts to whine & his wife tells him to shutup. That's not surprising though because most players I've gamed with start whining when their PC is screwed

 

[Umbran]

Seriously. These people who have power-gamer problems need to learn how to say...

If you conceal foul language in such a way as we can all tell what you're trying to say, then it isn't actually concealed. That kind of language is not welcome on these boards. Please stop using such here. Thank you.

 

[00Machado]

*Why not ask him to run the game since he likes to spend so much time doing the rulesy stuff?

*Why not ask him to help make well put together NPCs for you so that they aren't such a push over for the group?

*Out of curiousity, is the rest of the group in agreement that he's thwarting your efforts to challenge them? Or do they just feel like they're winning the good fight against the bad guys? Watering down the toughness is a tricky thing. I find that when I get the tendency to do this, I'm mainly interested in "challenging" them more, maybe more to my liking, or so that I don't feel like it was too easy for them. When I've asked the players though, they've responded that they are perfectly happy with the challenge level, don't feel it's a cake walk, and even say that they feel much more would overwhelm them and make it not fun. Essentially, is it just you who sees a problem? I know sometimes when I GM, it's just me who sees a problem, because my inner storyteller gets a little out of control.

 

[atomn]

Is he having fun?

Is his wife having fun?

Is their fun detracting from the entertainment of the rest of the group?

If the first two answers are yes, and the last one is no, then I can't see any problem. Just because his playstyle is different doesn't mean that it's wrong. Let him be a bit more powerful in combat, and let the rest of the group enjoy the roleplaying opportunities.

If his character is substantially more powerful than the rest of the group, then don't nerf him. Rather, give mechanical bonuses (in the form of magical abilities or items, etc) to the rest of the group, and give him a non-mechanical roleplaying boost (favor from some noble, secret knowledge about a major plot point, etc). It's always a pain to see your character nerfed to compensate others - bring everyone up to the same power level, and make him realize that roleplaying has its own form of power in the game. It won't necessarily fix his powergaming, but it's likely to make him more interested in roleplaying.

I think this is the most productive advice that's been given yet.

 

[Thunderfoot]

There are a few things that maybe you ought to think about before re-starting the session, taking away bonuses and other suggestions (not that they are bad, I agree with most of the truly helpful ones that promote good GMing).

There are a few things that you shoudl keep inmind before doing anything:
1) The rules are tules, as suggested earlier that 'what you say goes', is just wrong. Yes, you are the last word, but remember that whatever you do is setting a presedent for future rulings, if you suddenly make 300 ninjas jump out of nowhere, what's to keep you from turning the ninjsa into dragons and as was stated escalation only feeds the flame and eventually loses the players you are trying to keep. Think very carefully before you "Rule 0" just to win, it leads down a steep and slippery slope.

2) As for limiting options, think very hard about your setting, what its flavor is, style, etc. THEN allow and disallow based upon what supports the setting. It gives you a much firmer foundation to disallow in the future and gives your sudden argument a bit of muscle. Suddenly coming out of the blue and saying no after saying yes can lead to a case of the 'who screwed up?" syndrome, with a powergamer that has a bit of an overbearing personality (as it appears he does), it may set off the escalation refered to earlier.

3) As stated before, once new limits are set, don't allow ANYTHING new into your campaign that YOU DON'T INTRODUCE. When I started my recent campaigan with a friend of mine (we DM together to keep things moving) we decided that since there were different levels of monetary income across the players lives, that some would benefit and other would not, therefore, no material is canon unless it recieves the DM/G.O.D. rubber stamp. It is a little slow in implementing some things, but we have never regreted allowing or disallowing anything yet.

Hopefuly this helps, I have been on both sides of the screen on this issue, I am a reformed powergamer and have been an abusive GM, there are ways to approach this that are better than others, direct confrontation will not work, it will cause more problems than it solves.
Be polite, be concise, be thorough with all of the changes and you should have a little more control of the situation.
Happy Gaming.

 

[Oryan77]

Is he having fun?

Is his wife having fun?

Is their fun detracting from the entertainment of the rest of the group?

If the first two answers are yes, and the last one is no, then I can't see any problem.

He seems to have fun as long as I have lots of encounters. He's the type that would enjoy a campaign that just threw random encounters at him every session so he can fight stuff. This next adventure I'm running is very roleplay heavy and light on combat. I don't know what to expect from him. I hope he'll get involved in the overall plot, but I doubt it.

His wife enjoys everything....except for when I made an issue about her arrows
Both of them are always motivated to get together for the next session. From my experience that's rare, so it's great they are and I'm glad to have players that make an effort to be available for another session!

I know one of the other players is getting annoyed by his style of play. They are the exact opposite players, so it's not surprising they butt heads. This player complains that the powergamer doesn't participate with character interaction & always tries to tell players what to do in combat & what spells/feats/ect to pick during level progression. The powergamer complains because that player is terrible in combat and doesn't even use all of the options provided for the PC's class. But it's nothing serious enough that they'd argue with each other. They'll each just get that look of :\ on their face when one of them does something that annoys the other.

The thing is, the roleplayer player fits my style of DM'ing more than the powergamers style. I can deal with the lack of strategic combat but great roleplaying better than I can deal with the lack of roleplaying but great strategic combat.

 

[scourger]

This is why player characers in my game are limited to the PHB. I learned this lesson in 2e, when I had to reduce it to the core. A good min/maxer can find, exploit and enlarge any seemingly small advantage. I was much happier afterward.

Everyone derives enjopyment from different aspects of the game, though. Characters builds are fun. A little min/maxing is actually good--it shows that the player is interested in the character. He should have plenty of material to work with in the PHB.

 

[Asmor]

To be totally honest, I think you really don't have much of a case. Granted, I'm sure there's lots you're not telling us, but from the specific examples you've listed I don't think he's doing anything too disruptive.

An archer who uses lots of arrows trying to find a way to have lots of arrows isn't power gaming... It's just plain sensical.

In the visiting his god case... I don't see what the problem is. You yourself seemed quite happy until you found out why he suggested it. It's analogous to trying something new, raving about how delicious it is, and then trying to puke it up when you find out it had spinach/mushrooms/other veggie you don't like in it.

Unfortunately, the problem of one character being supremely powerful compared to his peers IS an issue... And not one with a simple answer, if one exists at all. Here's something I just thought of... It's simple and elegant, but unfortunately it's also not very fair. Handicap him. Make it so that the other characters are a few levels ahead of him. Ideally, you could just pull him aside and explain to him what you're doing and why you're doing it. With any luck, maybe he'll see it as a challenge. Outshining comrades three levels higher than you a little bit is more impressive than steamrolling your peers.

Of course, I'd also throw him a bone, too... Given that he's inherently handicapped, I'd pretty much give him carte blanche to powergame out the wazoo. Tell him "Look, good news/bad news. I'm bumping you down a few levels. On the bright side, you're free to make your character however you want. Let me know what you're planning, so if your prestige class needs you to save a princess from a tall tower, I can set that up to happen."

Alternatively, you could attack the party with the new BBEG... He's been observing them, identified one of them as a primary threat, and bestows a few permanent negative levels before being beaten off.

 

[Oryan77]

*Why not ask him to run the game since he likes to spend so much time doing the rulesy stuff?

Heh, he can barely roleplay his PC asking a bartender for a drink. I doubt anyone would want to play in a game he runs except just for kicks for 1 session. Actually, I don't think he's ever even purchased a drink. I never thought of that! I'll bet anything it's because he "doesn't want to waste money on something that won't provide him with items to boost his effectiveness in encounters".

is the rest of the group in agreement that he's thwarting your efforts to challenge them? Or do they just feel like they're winning the good fight against the bad guys?

They've told me before that I run good encounters that are just right in power level. That made me feel good. I do what a lot of DM's do and think that my encounters are usually weak when the players probably think they are hard. What I see happening though is, everytime the players finish a combat that they felt was tough, the powergamer realizes he's not as invinsible as he thought. So he reads the books between games to figure out ways to make him feel invinsible again. So the next session, he has a new combo of spells that he figured out can stack together to perform some insane damage output or whatever.

 

[Thotas]

Assuming you go with a restart, you should delineate -- in writing -- what books are in and which are out. It's perfectly okay to start small, or even limit parts. You can say "Core only, plus Spell Compendium, minus the DMG's Arcane Trickster PRC". From there, allow yourself the perogative to add in supplements, like a "Complete X" book, or just some section there of, on a case by case basis, either because you've developed your campaign in that direction or because of player request that you've considered.

If you decide to not do a restart, then you should impose similar limitations, but simply grandfather in any feat, spell, what have you that is already in play. Again, put it in writing and procede from there. The example of the PrC he was looking for is a good case to look at here. It annoyed you because it blindsided you. If he'd needed your review to assume he could take the class, he'd have let you know his plans, you'd have seen what he was up to and it would not have dissapointed you when you got the mistaken idea that he was looking past his own character sheet.