Immortals Handbook - Ascension Discussion

[Upper_Krust]

completely the GM's fault, not the player's.

Exactly...the GM's fault for allowing a certain PC build that unbalances the game.

Also, why didn't the other players build optimized characters if this player did? again, not that player's fault.

I think there is a difference between optimized and game breaking/unbalancing.

Alter Reality power is the "infinite" part. And having wish as a spell-like ability 12/day is all fine and dandy, but if they use XP for it I'm pretty darn sure they would never use their ability 12 times in one day (just an example, i know not all of them have it that much). So, this would be an example of "wasted ECL bump" since the character would technically delevel using his abilities over time, instead of gainging levels. With faerun deity rules, only a few of the better deities had Alter Reality power, and it had drawbacks to using it but didn't cost them resources that help them advance... what I'm saying is that if you have a deific power, IMO using it shouldn't make you go backwards.

With great power comes great responsibility.

21 / 60 monsters in the epic level handbook are outsiders or undead, but not all of them are evil.

...and if we factor in all the statted Demon Princes, Archdevils and so forth that figure starts to look more lopsided.

 

[Nezkrul]

...and if we factor in all the statted Demon Princes, Archdevils and so forth that figure starts to look more lopsided.

And factor in all the non-evil statted outsiders such as angels, archons, guardinals, etc... and the figure still looks the same.

After all, this game was originally intended to be good heroes vs the evil bad guys, and now you're telling me that that is a problem with the game?

If I build an optimized character, whether he is focused on himself, or he is focused on buffing the party, if my character (not how I play him) makes you not have fun while playing your character (the one you CHOSE not to optimize because YOU wanted him to be "gimpled" for the sake of roleplaying) and then you ask me to stop playing my character an make a new one because you aren't in the spotlight; that makes me feel like I really should find someone else to game with. It's a game. You need to learn to have fun no matter who's in the party. Just because my character is built strong in some way doesn't mean I can't roleplay, and judging a player by his character's build before you even play the game with them is wrong... and you are the one that should stop playing D&D.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Howdy Nezkrul!

And factor in all the non-evil statted outsiders such as angels, archons, guardinals, etc... and the figure still looks the same.

After all, this game was originally intended to be good heroes vs the evil bad guys, and now you're telling me that that is a problem with the game?

Thats not what I am saying at all. I'm simply illustrating that your turning works on the majority of epic monsters thus your defence of "it only works on outsiders and undead" doesn't really limit it to any great degree.

If I build an optimized character, whether he is focused on himself, or he is focused on buffing the party, if my character (not how I play him) makes you not have fun while playing your character (the one you CHOSE not to optimize because YOU wanted him to be "gimpled" for the sake of roleplaying) and then you ask me to stop playing my character an make a new one because you aren't in the spotlight; that makes me feel like I really should find someone else to game with. It's a game. You need to learn to have fun no matter who's in the party. Just because my character is built strong in some way doesn't mean I can't roleplay, and judging a player by his character's build before you even play the game with them is wrong... and you are the one that should stop playing D&D.

I am not your DM so I am not asking or telling you to do anything. I can only advise and give my opinion, which is that your character build is too strong.

Designers cannot playtest every conceivable option in a game as expansive as Dungeons & Dragons. Loopholes in the game are inevitable. What you have done is found one that lets you insta-kill Outsiders and Undead even more personally powerful than your own character.

If the GM allows it, then two things are likely to happen.

1. Your character will dominate play at the table.
2. The GM will struggle to challenge the party and thus be forced to up the power of the monsters to compensate. This will have a knock on effect of making each challenging encounter a potential total party kill (tpk) since the GM needs to up the threat beyond your insta-kill power. Anything above that is liable to be a proverbial 'brick wall' for the PCs.

 

[Alzrius]

If I build an optimized character, whether he is focused on himself, or he is focused on buffing the party, if my character (not how I play him) makes you not have fun while playing your character (the one you CHOSE not to optimize because YOU wanted him to be "gimpled" for the sake of roleplaying) and then you ask me to stop playing my character an make a new one because you aren't in the spotlight; that makes me feel like I really should find someone else to game with. It's a game. You need to learn to have fun no matter who's in the party. Just because my character is built strong in some way doesn't mean I can't roleplay, and judging a player by his character's build before you even play the game with them is wrong... and you are the one that should stop playing D&D.

The goal of the game is to have fun; if other people tell you that you are ruining theirs, then you are by definition the problem.

When your character impacts on the other characters in the party, then your character has become an obstacle to them enjoying themselves. You may not have intended to do so, but that doesn't change the fact that you have done so.

Saying "well, everybody's character should have been as cool as mine, instead of being all 'gimpled'" is a good way to make everybody else also think that you should find another group to play with, too. Being in a team means doing what's best for the team, not yourself (ideally, you can do what's best for the team and yourself).

Just because your character is built strongly in some fashion doesn't mean you can't role-play, but that's not the issue. The issue is that if your character is causing a problem, the fact that it's inadvertent doesn't make it any less of a problem.

Likewise, that's not judging the player by his build; it's judging the player by how incredibly defensive he becomes in claiming that everybody else is wrong for not optimizing the way he did. Hence, that player is the one who should stop playing D&D, because he hasn't mastered the most important part of it - playing well with others.

 

[Nezkrul]

The goal of the game is to have fun; if other people tell you that you are ruining theirs, then you are by definition the object of their own problem.

FIXED

Saying "well, everybody's character should have been as cool as mine, instead of being all 'gimpled'" is a good way to make everybody else also think that you should find another group to play with, too. Being in a team means doing what's best for the team, not yourself (ideally, you can do what's best for the team and yourself).

I did do what's best for the team. The other players all built gimped characters on purpose, so I built one to compensate for the fact that 3 of the 4 people in the party suck.

Just because your character is built strongly in some fashion doesn't mean you can't role-play, but that's not the issue. The issue is that if your character is causing a problem, the fact that it's inadvertent doesn't make it any less of a problem.

I'm talking in general, sounds like you're trying to be specific here. In general, I try to build around what the party is lacking, if everyone in the party I'm going to be in sucks at one or more things, I try to build a character to fill that niche. In the case of 3 characters sucking at almost all dice rolling for the sake of being "cool to roleplay" I'm forced to fill in the gap with as strong a character as I can make. The game is based on the party working together, as you said, but when 75% of the party can't pull their weight, that 25% must make up for it.

Likewise, that's not judging the player by his build; it's judging the player by how incredibly defensive he becomes in claiming that everybody else is wrong for not optimizing the way he did. Hence, that player is the one who should stop playing D&D, because he hasn't mastered the most important part of it - playing well with others.

I'm not being defensive about anything, I'm debating with you. And you're literally being the pot calling the kettle black here. Those "others" should be able to play well with the player who has an optimized character. If the only problem in the game is that the players playing the gimped characters aren't in the spotlight when the rolling gets involved and that last player with the good character is (whether or not that player can roleplay well) and they complain about it makes me think THOSE players need to find a different gaming system to play because they haven't learned one of the most basic elements of the world: not everyone is the same and not everyone has the same tastes for gaming.

Like I said before, I build to fill in gaps. When 75% of the party is lacking, I HAVE to build strong to fill in the gaps.

 

[eduar]

hey Nezkrul

I completely understand you something similar happened to me more than once

 

[Alzrius]

FIXED

"Fixed it for you" posts are pretty childish, particularly for someone who claims that they're trying to have a debate. As such, I'm going to go with a response of proportional maturity:

I did do what's best for the team. The other players all built gimped characters on purpose, so I built one to compensate for the fact that 3 of the 4 people in the party suck.

I'm speaking in generalities, not about your specific group (since I've never met them and don't know what your game is like).

I'm talking in general, sounds like you're trying to be specific here.

See above.

In general, I try to build around what the party is lacking, if everyone in the party I'm going to be in sucks at one or more things, I try to build a character to fill that niche. In the case of 3 characters sucking at almost all dice rolling for the sake of being "cool to roleplay" I'm forced to fill in the gap with as strong a character as I can make. The game is based on the party working together, as you said, but when 75% of the party can't pull their weight, that 25% must make up for it.

Again, if that's how it is in your group, that's your business. But as a more general application, not making a munchkin character isn't "sucking" at what they do.

I'm not being defensive about anything, I'm debating with you. And you're literally being the pot calling the kettle black here.

I'm "literally" being the pot?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk]I do not think it means what you think it means.[/ame]

Those "others" should be able to play well with the player who has an optimized character.

And that player should be able to play well with them. But someone with a disruptive character is still being disruptive. It's like the person who plays a character with an alignment opposite to that of the rest of the party - maybe he's doing his own thing, but it's likely to cause problems.

If the only problem in the game is that the players playing the gimped characters aren't in the spotlight when the rolling gets involved and that last player with the good character is (whether or not that player can roleplay well) and they complain about it makes me think THOSE players need to find a different gaming system to play because they haven't learned one of the most basic elements of the world: not everyone is the same and not everyone has the same tastes for gaming.

I didn't say everyone was the same, or had the same tastes for gaming. I'm pointing out that when you're part of the group, what's best for the group's fun has to come first, rather than what's best for you. If your character is built under the assumption that everyone else is bad, and you have to make up for their badness, it's likely that they won't like that message - I can't say I'd blame them.

Like I said before, I build to fill in gaps. When 75% of the party is lacking, I HAVE to build strong to fill in the gaps.

See above.