Rogue Sneak Attacks

[JustKim]

[snark]Yeah don't allow anything that player knows how to do well. Great idea.[/snark]

Okay. I'm going to come to your game with an ego whip Wilder who does 20 Charisma damage on a successful save, or a metamagic illumian Dread Necromancer who does 32 Strength damage with no save, or a springing, tripping spiked chain goliath Fighter with jotunbrud, kick them while they're down and a weapon that gives me +4 to trip checks.

You don't mind, right?

 

[Crothian]

Okay. I'm going to come to your game with an ego whip Wilder who does 20 Charisma damage on a successful save, or a metamagic illumian Dread Necromancer who does 32 Strength damage with no save, or a springing, tripping spiked chain goliath Fighter with jotunbrud, kick them while they're down and a weapon that gives me +4 to trip checks.

You don't mind, right?

There is nothing there that a good DM cannot handle and make fun in a campaign. Because in the scope of things there is nothing a player can do that a DM can't do better. So, if the PC is going to make a character in hopes of breaking rules and upseting balance they should always lose.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

I don't fear competent players. I think that when someone takes a dangerous combination and willfully builds on it to make it worse, it's a bad thing.

So you only fear very competent players?

Seriously, what you are proposing is a textbook example of Lousy DMing. If you pulled a stunt like that with me, you'd be minus a player on the spot.

 

[Jackelope King]

Okay. I'm going to come to your game with an ego whip Wilder who does 20 Charisma damage on a successful save, or a metamagic illumian Dread Necromancer who does 32 Strength damage with no save, or a springing, tripping spiked chain goliath Fighter with jotunbrud, kick them while they're down and a weapon that gives me +4 to trip checks.

You don't mind, right?

I wouldn't. The wilder sounds like boatloads of fun. You'd probably enjoy slapping some folks into a coma, until you ran across your first undead and found out that your combo doesn't always win the game for you. Same for the other characters.

Of course, rather than outright vetoing your character ideas, I might suggest some modifications to make them fit my game better (no goliaths, but there are half-giants, and the illumians might have to represent a race of spirits rather than modified humans). And if you started whipping/draining/tripping everything in sight, I'd make sure I set up encounters accordingly, so that everyone could get a good whack at it, and every once in awhile, I'd send an encounter to show you the weaknesses your specialization left you open to (a good ghost would take care of any one of these builds very easily, for instance).

 

[JustKim]

Seriously, what you are proposing is a textbook example of Lousy DMing. If you pulled a stunt like that with be, you'd me minus a player on the spot.

What stunt? Asking you not to play something that's above and beyond the power level of the game? I don't know what textbook you could be getting that from, but make sure you take it with you when you leave.

 

[Vocenoctum]

There is nothing there that a good DM cannot handle and make fun in a campaign. Because in the scope of things there is nothing a player can do that a DM can't do better. So, if the PC is going to make a character in hopes of breaking rules and upseting balance they should always lose.

I think that's her point really.
The player makes X, so the DM trumps with X Resistance. No one wins.

The Player says "I want X" the DM says "sorry, I think that wouldn't fit with the campaign, how about Y" and the game progresses.

I've seen some pretty abusive PC's that caused lots of problems which would have been solved by the DM saying "no". A dual whip wielding monstrosity (ended up killing another PC while dominated...) springs to mind, but it works other ways too. One player in a game I ran made a changeling warlock that simply threw rocks in combat. I should have simply said "no" right off the bat, but instead tried to fix it in game.

Fixing a problem before it becomes a hassle for the entire party isn't lousy DMing, though it can be. I've had some pretty dismissive DM's out there who nix idea's without giving it a thought. (One gave me all sorts of trouble about playing a samurai for instance.)

As for the original example, it's a Gestalt, so I doubt it'll matter. But really, that's what Rule 0 is all about, making decisions based on what's best for the game overall.

 

[Crothian]

Fixing a problem before it becomes a hassle for the entire party isn't lousy DMing, though it can be. I've had some pretty dismissive DM's out there who nix idea's without giving it a thought. (One gave me all sorts of trouble about playing a samurai for instance.)

At the same time though a character like these under the right DM can be challenged and interesting. That's assuming the character is more then what has been stated here of course. These are all examples of combat specialist and combat can easily become a small part of the game. That's my point; a good DM combined with a good player can take these supposed Juggernaut characters and make them work.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

Simple Solution: Don't play Gestalt.

The PHB classes weren't balanced with gestalt in mind.
To allow gestalt and then be suprised when ANY full BAB class is combined rogue that you have a PC capable of high damage out put is foolish (which four of the eleven PHB classes have). If he were a fighter or a barbarian or a paladin (admitedly more difficultly as paladin) he could still go the TWF route and be just as lethal possibly more.

 

[CronoDekar]

Another big thing about the rogue which was kind of alluded to is that they typically go down nice and easy. Since they have only d6 HD (typically) and light armor, a big hulking character (such as a giant) would be wise to first knockout the fleshbag that's stabbing him over and over in the neck.

 

[swrushing]

just as a reminder, any enemy can cause problems for this guy just by kmoving in combat. forcing this character to take a 10' move reduces him to a single attack. Even if your move away gives him an AoO, thats not all that bad.

I have never run gestalt campaigns but given the notion of them (fewer but more capable PCs) i don't see this as a problem worth fretting over.