How Can You Politely Say, "Your Character Sucks?"

[Vartan]

You should tell the guy that he's doing it wrong and insist upon making it right. Your guy is putting his life in this other guy's hands, and that imposes the obligation to do all that he can to make his guy the best possible at his job. The team trumps the individuals that comprise it, as it does in any other team sport or similar group-focused pursuit, and if that guy won't pull his weight either bench his guy or use him as cannon fodder until that guy gets it.

1. Every good Defender longs to be known as cannon-fodder. There are intricacies to the role, but I've never met a good Defender whose layer wouldn't jump at the chance to be the target of every enemy resource for the duration of combat.

2. IMO the interests of the D&D team don't trump the individuals who comprise it. If a player character is disruptive to the game (as opposed to merely lacking in some areas of refinement) then they are denying the other players the opportunity to have fun, and should be dealt with; if a PC just doesn't fit the idea of what other players think is optimal then they should be left to their own devices.

I could wax poli-sci on this topic, but my final thought is that the D&D table is large enough for multiple types of fun and multiple character choices. This isn't a team sport where there is one clear objective (to outscore another team) or a real-life military situation where lives will be lost unless the will of the one is subjugated to the needs of the many. If this were like a real-life sport then the DM would automatically be cast as "the opposing team." This has been recognized as bad form since at least 1990 and it sells short the aspects of tabletop RPGs which set them apart from their digital descendants.

 

[outsider]

The disconnect some people are having about why a 16 is typically considered good but this 14 int is considered to be pretty bad by optimizers is because of the nature of the Int attribute(as well as the Dex attribute) in 4e. Int(and Dex) is so good that if you attack with it, you should probably consider putting a 20 in it.

Most powergamers will turn a blind eye to a -1 difference, and will bite their tongue about a -2 difference. A -3 difference though is pretty substantial, and when you're talking about Int, that's -3 to hit, -3 to damage, -3 to AC, and -3 to reflex compared to an optimized character. Since we are talking about an Assault Swordmage here, odds are all he's getting in return for that is +3 to his fort defence and a free feat(as he wouldn't pick up Intelligent Blademaster). The trade is terrible, and the character is far weaker than it should be.

As for those insinuating that this is a MMO mindset, the first time I was in a group that got rid of a character because it was weak/useless was 14 years ago, 5 years before the release of Everquest, the first serious raiding mmo. Powergamers have always existed, it's just considered to be less of a sin these days.

 

[Gimby]

As for those insinuating that this is a MMO mindset, the first time I was in a group that got rid of a character because it was weak/useless was 14 years ago, 5 years before the release of Everquest, the first serious raiding mmo. Powergamers have always existed, it's just considered to be less of a sin these days.

Also this. I've seen this kind of thing for about as long as I've been online.

Even then, the character isn't (or shouldn't be) that ineffective. We're not talking a Bard1/Monk1/Rogue1/Hexblade1/Soulknife1/Truenamer1 in a party of proto-CoDzillas here.

 

[Kinneus]

To provide more information: we used the standard point buy, as per the Character Builder, so 'bad rolls' can't be blamed for his stats. Also, the reason I see the issue as pressing is because stats are the one thing you can't 'fix' in 4e along the way. I fear that the longer it goes unsaid, the less likely the DM will be willing to permit changes, when and if the player decides he wants to shift things around. Since the player of the swordmage is obviously new, I'm hoping he'll be lenient. He seems like a reasonable DM.

I've decided on a course of action. When we played the other night, a couple of the players didn't have macros set up for their characters, the swordmage included. I think I'll send out a mass email to all the players, offering to make macros for any player who needs help. This will give me a pretext to view the swordmage's character sheet, and a reason to engage him in polite, non-judgemental conversation about his build.

Please see my previous post in this thread for more information; people are re-hashing some points I've already clarified. Although, I recognize that this thread has grown beyond me and my group, here. I seem to have hit on a nerve, which I fully understand. As I said before, I've been chased away from games due to other players "helpful hints," so I'm looking to be as tactful as possible.

With that said, I think I'll just back away from this thread slowly.

 

[outsider]

As I said before, I've been chased away from games due to other players "helpful hints," so I'm looking to be as tactful as possible.

Yeah, it can be a touchy subject. Sometimes powergamers can be rude and/or pushy when bringing it up. On the other hand, some players tend to put "mechanics" and "role playing" on opposite ends of an axis, and unjustifiably flip out and start screaming "ROLLPLAY!" if you suggest a way for their character to become a bit more powerful. The best ways to approach it is to make a blanket offer to the group for tips and hope the player in question takes you up on it, or discuss character building techniques with one of the other powergamers in the group and try to bring the player into the conversation somehow. Just don't make them feel targetted, or they'll get defensive.

 

[FireLance]

This is why 4E needed so much modification to be enjoyable. Screw being on a damn treadmill where your choices are dictated to you if you want to keep up with or exceed your meager 50% hit rate. By 10th level or so if I am still only succeeding 50% of the time how in the hell can I claim that I have gained ANY experience whatsoever since level 1.

Um, because you're dealing with tougher challenges now? I mean, if you're playing in a sandbox game, or if you can get your DM to agree, you can always go look for level 1 monsters to fight when you're 10th level and be guaranteed to hit with almost every attack. But is that how you really want to spend your game time?

 

[Gimby]

To provide more information: we used the standard point buy, as per the Character Builder, so 'bad rolls' can't be blamed for his stats. Also, the reason I see the issue as pressing is because stats are the one thing you can't 'fix' in 4e along the way. I fear that the longer it goes unsaid, the less likely the DM will be willing to permit changes, when and if the player decides he wants to shift things around. Since the player of the swordmage is obviously new, I'm hoping he'll be lenient. He seems like a reasonable DM.

I've decided on a course of action. When we played the other night, a couple of the players didn't have macros set up for their characters, the swordmage included. I think I'll send out a mass email to all the players, offering to make macros for any player who needs help. This will give me a pretext to view the swordmage's character sheet, and a reason to engage him in polite, non-judgemental conversation about his build.

Please see my previous post in this thread for more information; people are re-hashing some points I've already clarified. Although, I recognize that this thread has grown beyond me and my group, here. I seem to have hit on a nerve, which I fully understand. As I said before, I've been chased away from games due to other players "helpful hints," so I'm looking to be as tactful as possible.

With that said, I think I'll just back away from this thread slowly.

Righto, sounds like you've got a good handle on how to deal with it, good luck!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Um, because you're dealing with tougher challenges now? I mean, if you're playing in a sandbox game, or if you can get your DM to agree, you can always go look for level 1 monsters to fight when you're 10th level and be guaranteed to hit with almost every attack. But is that how you really want to spend your game time?

my middle ground is having more and more of the same monsters show up at diffrent points in the same campaign...

example... trolls are level 9 brutes... throw one at a party of 4th or 5th level PCs, then throw 3-4 against a level 7-8 party... then around level 11 throw like 10 or 11 at the party...

a much better example is mymain NPC/BBEG that is like a level 9 elite controler (leader) who shows up alone at level 4-5, but who flees when he hits bloodied... then he show up again with a few monsters but runs again... when the PCs fight him at level 9 his 'minons' (not mechanic but in game) are higher level then him...

 

[Mr. Wilson]

A -3 difference though is pretty substantial, and when you're talking about Int, that's -3 to hit, -3 to damage, -3 to AC, and -3 to reflex compared to an optimized character. Since we are talking about an Assault Swordmage here, odds are all he's getting in return for that is +3 to his fort defence and a free feat(as he wouldn't pick up Intelligent Blademaster). The trade is terrible, and the character is far weaker than it should be.

This.

I have starter classes* that I start people new to 4E off with, where they can make mistakes and be ok as they learn the system. Assault Swordmages are about as far away from a starter class as I can imagine. By placing a 14 in his Int, the character is much weaker in multiple areas important to a defender, especially one already focused more towards the offensive side of the defender role.

As the player is new, I would talk to him and explain why a 14 is bad for this class.

(Strikers are my favorite starter roles, especially artful dodger rogues who can spam Sly Flourish, rangers from the first PHB, and non-chaos sorcs.)

 

[N0Man]

I have seen this attitude before. We were discussing talent points in Goldshire.....................

That is great. The funny thing about all the comments is that IMO these all came from the MMO crowd. It may be only me and the people I hung around, but no one talked like that before EQ.

It is the worst thing to bleed over into RPGs in general, IMO.

Honestly guys, is there any reason to start bashing other forms of gamers? I played AD&D, 2E, 3E, 3.5, 4E, the old silver and gold boxed TSR D&D PC games, UO, EQ, WoW, and tons of other games (RPGs, CRPGs, CCGs, MMOs, board games, etc etc).

In my opinion, taking shots at other editions and games stoops to a similar level of elitism as someone telling another their character sucks and should be optimized more.

For the record, as someone with an active WoW account, I completely think he's fine with a 14. He might struggle more with ultra-high AC enemies, but luckily there are other people in the party that would likely would have to be relied on to hit it anyway, even if he had another +1 or +2 to hit.

Besides a feat, or a magic item, or good use of tactics and gaining combat advantage often, team synergies, and many other things can easily offset the small difference anyway.

There's no way to win D&D aside from having fun and enjoying the journey. That can be done with an optimized or unoptimized character.