Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Player Problem, need advice
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 1573074" data-attributes="member: 19675"><p><strong>Sorry this is long-winded, but...</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>A player's style has nothing to do with damage dealt. 2 PCs with the same stats, equivalent weapons and the same feats would still be dealing similar combat damage, regardless of the player's style or "wisdom"-its how the math of those feats affects the game. The player wasn't errant- the DM didn't tell him what the campaign's limits were, as you can see below.</p><p></p><p>In 27 years of gaming, I've constructed all kinds of PCs: min/maxed, suboptimal, high-concept, campaign wreckers, etc. And yes, you're absolutely correct to state that the outlier should adjust to the campaign in general. But if the player isn't aware of the boundaries, he's almost certainly going to violate them.</p><p></p><p>If the campaign is not supposed to be combat intensive, the <strong>DM</strong> must set rules that make this obvious. For example, in a campaign in which the PCs were all part of the nobility of an "Eastern" culture, all PCs were required to be skilled in things like poetry or music- even the most warlike character had raised his weaponsmithing skills into an art form. At first, several players chafed- but the PCs in that campaign were well rounded and enjoyable. Many other campaigns in which I have participated (as a player) didn't permit Paladins, and most didn't permit Psionic PCs because of the issues they raise in a campaign. Many have had a rule of no evil PCs for similar reasons. But the rules were always specific and clear.</p><p></p><p>Dragonlancer's FIRST statement was:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And he subsequently posted:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>(That's like complaining that Jaya Ballard, Embermage, throws too many fire spells, or Fineous Fingers is stealing too many things from the NPCs. Combat characters tend to be optimized for combat!)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>(In a <strong>Dragonlance</strong> campaign! What do YOU think a Dragonslayer is going to do in Krynn?)</p><p></p><p></p><p><em>All emphasis mine.</em></p><p></p><p>(If the DM doesn't want to have PCs that can do what this particular PC can do, how did it get in the campaign? DM inaction.)</p><p></p><p>As BardStephenFox pointed out:</p><p></p><p></p><p>We can't look inside the player's mind. Perhaps Likudice saw no combat specialists and thought "They need some serious muscle!" not realizing that the lack of tankage was intentional.</p><p></p><p>However, I can tell by that Dragonlancer has lost control of his campaign. He may have envisioned a high-fantasy campaign rich in texture and flavor, yet he let a <strong>Minotaur Fighter/Psion/DragonSlayer</strong> be created in his <strong>Dragonlance</strong> campaign and is now complaining that it does too much damage in combat!</p><p></p><p>Unless implied campaign limits are made explicit, there is no reason whatsoever (beyond a particular player's character concept) to design a suboptimal character. Likuidice cannot be expected to limit his PC's potential if there is no explicit rule to make him do so. Why shouldn't Likuidice select a particular feat that would make his Dragonslayer a better slayer of dragons? Why, if his PC has taken Power Attack and Cleave, wouldn't he take Great Cleave?</p><p></p><p>By the rules, any multiclassing must be approved by the DM, and just because a feat is in print doesn't mean it fits the campaign. It is amazing what "You can't do that." can do for a campaign. If Dragonlancer had simply said- "I think that this (prestige class/feat) would be too unbalancing in this campaign-maybe next time." the problem might never have arisen. Personally, Dragonslayer is one PrCl I'd NEVER allow in Krynn, and psionic PCs in a campaign where psionic NPCs/monsters are rare/nonexistent can be VERY unbalancing.</p><p></p><p>That said, I offer this suggestion if they don't want to kick this guy out of the group due to the friction that has thus far been generated:</p><p></p><p>Let the PC die in a blaze of glory against his chosen enemy- a dragon of some kind- leaving behind only some bit of his equipment (that has become enchanted through his use for great deeds). Have someone inspired by him and his actions acquire that equipment, and decide to "take up his mantle," but make sure that the PC thus introduced has a more "political" (or however you define it, Dragonlancer) feel. Make it ABSOLUTELY clear what kind of PC fits the campaign. Proceed to game from there.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dannyalcatraz, post: 1573074, member: 19675"] [b]Sorry this is long-winded, but...[/b] A player's style has nothing to do with damage dealt. 2 PCs with the same stats, equivalent weapons and the same feats would still be dealing similar combat damage, regardless of the player's style or "wisdom"-its how the math of those feats affects the game. The player wasn't errant- the DM didn't tell him what the campaign's limits were, as you can see below. In 27 years of gaming, I've constructed all kinds of PCs: min/maxed, suboptimal, high-concept, campaign wreckers, etc. And yes, you're absolutely correct to state that the outlier should adjust to the campaign in general. But if the player isn't aware of the boundaries, he's almost certainly going to violate them. If the campaign is not supposed to be combat intensive, the [B]DM[/B] must set rules that make this obvious. For example, in a campaign in which the PCs were all part of the nobility of an "Eastern" culture, all PCs were required to be skilled in things like poetry or music- even the most warlike character had raised his weaponsmithing skills into an art form. At first, several players chafed- but the PCs in that campaign were well rounded and enjoyable. Many other campaigns in which I have participated (as a player) didn't permit Paladins, and most didn't permit Psionic PCs because of the issues they raise in a campaign. Many have had a rule of no evil PCs for similar reasons. But the rules were always specific and clear. Dragonlancer's FIRST statement was: And he subsequently posted: (That's like complaining that Jaya Ballard, Embermage, throws too many fire spells, or Fineous Fingers is stealing too many things from the NPCs. Combat characters tend to be optimized for combat!) (In a [B]Dragonlance[/B] campaign! What do YOU think a Dragonslayer is going to do in Krynn?) [I]All emphasis mine.[/I] (If the DM doesn't want to have PCs that can do what this particular PC can do, how did it get in the campaign? DM inaction.) As BardStephenFox pointed out: We can't look inside the player's mind. Perhaps Likudice saw no combat specialists and thought "They need some serious muscle!" not realizing that the lack of tankage was intentional. However, I can tell by that Dragonlancer has lost control of his campaign. He may have envisioned a high-fantasy campaign rich in texture and flavor, yet he let a [B]Minotaur Fighter/Psion/DragonSlayer[/B] be created in his [B]Dragonlance[/B] campaign and is now complaining that it does too much damage in combat! Unless implied campaign limits are made explicit, there is no reason whatsoever (beyond a particular player's character concept) to design a suboptimal character. Likuidice cannot be expected to limit his PC's potential if there is no explicit rule to make him do so. Why shouldn't Likuidice select a particular feat that would make his Dragonslayer a better slayer of dragons? Why, if his PC has taken Power Attack and Cleave, wouldn't he take Great Cleave? By the rules, any multiclassing must be approved by the DM, and just because a feat is in print doesn't mean it fits the campaign. It is amazing what "You can't do that." can do for a campaign. If Dragonlancer had simply said- "I think that this (prestige class/feat) would be too unbalancing in this campaign-maybe next time." the problem might never have arisen. Personally, Dragonslayer is one PrCl I'd NEVER allow in Krynn, and psionic PCs in a campaign where psionic NPCs/monsters are rare/nonexistent can be VERY unbalancing. That said, I offer this suggestion if they don't want to kick this guy out of the group due to the friction that has thus far been generated: Let the PC die in a blaze of glory against his chosen enemy- a dragon of some kind- leaving behind only some bit of his equipment (that has become enchanted through his use for great deeds). Have someone inspired by him and his actions acquire that equipment, and decide to "take up his mantle," but make sure that the PC thus introduced has a more "political" (or however you define it, Dragonlancer) feel. Make it ABSOLUTELY clear what kind of PC fits the campaign. Proceed to game from there. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Player Problem, need advice
Top