Some players don’t want to build characters…

[RFisher]

Sticking with the core 3e rules, I haven't seen this to be too much of a problem because a simple, single-classed PC--IME--doesn't get too overshadowed by a good build. It's the people who make the more complex PC who are more likely to be overshadowed.

In more general terms, however, I know exactly what you mean. I discovered this when playing Gurps & Rolemaster & Hero & others. There were people in the group who never complained, but I started to notice that their eyes glazed over when the three or so of us who enjoyed rules complexity got going. I didn't like that. I also came to realize that I can enjoy the game just as much with a simpler system. Plus, more of the group got more engaged, which made it even better. So, that's become my goal when taking the judge's seat: Use a system that is simple enough that everyone at the table will be willing master it.

Edit...

Yes, I tried that. The weird thing is, the players worst at character building are the ones most strongly opposed. It really goes up from there. The builders are all for it, the ones in the middle are like so-so.

Yeah. For the person who isn't interested in rules, learning different rules doesn't sound fun, even if there's the promise that overall things will be simpler. I think it's worth trying to convince them.

But this may not be the right solution for your group anyway...

 

[Wraith-Hunter]

If the language barrier is a serious reason for not posting, if you include that you are not a native english speaker, most people are very forgiving. Most of the problems I have seen are kids typing with laguage grammer someone over 18 can't comprehend. Any of the posts I have seen where a person appologizes for poor english at least a few people will comment that their english is more than good enough, and as long as they are not rude these threads tend to stay very polite.

And for the most part the character optinization boards have FAQ's and links to character classes and different builds. It took me about 20 minutes to find some good Gish and sorcerer builds and ideas on the wizard boards. If they can handle the english rules books they should do fine on the boards.

 

[Mallus]

In our group, we have a simple problem, which lacks a simple solution. While some of us invest a lot of time into character building, other do not.

Like other people have said, its a playstyle issue. People wanting different things out of the game. Par for the course for a game with as many varied play elements as D&D.

There are a number of simple solutions. In fact, I can see you have them already.

Than there are those gamers who do not have a long term plan for their characters. They choose feats when they get them.

Which illustrates what I call the Stupid Paradox of 3.0+ Multiclassing... it's very flexible, but it punishes players for not planning out a 20 level advancement path and locking themselves into it. Having a character grow in response to in-game events usually comes at the cost of effectiveness. Lovely design, that.

The problem is, we all like to play characters that can contribute to the game, and while the gap between type 1 and 2 is can be filled with allowing an occasional rebuild, I rebuilt or built the characters of the two players in the third group while I was DMing.

This is an elegant solution. Simple. Coincidentally, I do much the same thing in my campaign.

Another elegant solution is using your magical DM powers to equalize the 'effectiveness level' of the party. By giving out personalized magic item, powering up familiar's and cohort's, endowing characters w/special powers. Bend the rules a little. This was all but required in previous editions if you cared one whit about balance.

One of the others complained about that, because he felt cheated. He thinks that you should invest your own time to get a good character.

Have a talk with this guy. Explain very carefully that different players enjoy different aspects of the game, and that reasonable people can find ways to accommodate different playstyles at the same table.

Ask why another player's enjoyment of game takes away from his.

After all, RPG's are usually cooperative games. Why shouldn't the cooperation extend to the metagame parts as well?

I am at the moment thinking about allowing Gestalt Characters with an XP Penalty that will equal a +4 ECL at level 20... snip

Needlessly complicated. Just talk with the player that thinks it's cheating to give out character building help.

 

[Odysseus]

I've experience some of what Obergnom is talking about. And I think its only a problem at higher levels. An example that comes to mind. Was a four character party that got as high as 16th level.
Shadow wizard, saint/cleric , rogue and a drow chaos paladin. The wizard and cleric we're fairly good builds. The rogues player was fairly new to 3.5 , and the rogue was only effective against things he could sneak attack at. The drow chaos paladins player didn't have time to spend on the game. And it was a terrible build, he died and was ressurected some often he was losing levels as fast as we were gaining them!
How we dealt with the problem , was we knew we wern't good in certain areas. So we avoided certain types of combats. Constructs for example. With a Golem I'd cast grease and we'd try and run around it with out fighting it.
In RL any team isn't full of equal strength players. Every one has strengths and weaknesses. You just work with them.
At lower levels I don't believe the character builds are that much different.
So my suggested solutions.
Stick more to lower level games. if you do higher level stuff , work with the strengths of the party.

 

[Particle_Man]

There are some character classes that do quite well as single-classed characters, sans prestige classes. Why not steer the players towards those classes?

The PHB II Knight is pretty fun, for example.

 

[kolikeos]

while i like making characters just for fun even if i never play them, i find that many new players find character creation very boring. we usually dont think about background or personality during character creation.

 

[sniffles]

The problem is not the excess of choices. The problem is a difference in play style. Obergnom likes to spend a lot of time designing characters, the other players don't.

The other players' character are not "worse" than yours, Obergnom. They're just different. Give them some helpful suggestions, but if they don't take them, too bad. They are presumably getting what they want out of the game. Don't spoil their fun.

If they're spoiling your fun, then maybe you should look for a different group.

 

[Greg K]

The problem is different play styles. For instance, in any game that I run trying to preplan a twenty level build would almost assuredly be futile as anything other than a mental excercise . You have no way of knowing where your character will be in the campaign world at various levels. Therefore, you have no idea if the character will have access to the necessary requirements (slay particular monster, trainer, knowledge of the PrC etc.) to qualify for the PrC. Then, there are my additional houserules on training in a new base class...

 

[thedungeondelver]

Hand them pregens. When they get tired of playing gimped 1st level gnome commoners with one level of warrior, then they'll wise up.

 

[Skyscraper]

Difference in playstyle has been thoroughly touched on here, and i couldn't agree more.

For me, buliding a Monk2/fighter4/Kensai2/Exotic Weapon Master2/KensaiX or anything remotely similar is unthinkable It's not that i do not understand the math, i'm quite confident that i would (i have no splat book, but i've played numerous RPGs, strategy games and computer games). But i don't want the game to be about that.

We play with core books only. I think it works well. The purpose of our game is not to optimize characters, but to advance a storyline that includes advancing the personality of the PCs. That's the game we play. Not better or worse than yours, different.

Then, with sub-optimal PCs, the DM can tone down the encounters for a given level. It changes nothing really, as long as everyone plays the same game so that the PCs can all shine equally.

If your sub-optimizers don't want/can't optimize, how about the optimizers creating sub-optimal PCs? I mean, try creating the worse PCs of the party. Not the worse you can do, mind you. Just the worse of the party. And then, with your knowledge of the game, try to help as best you can.

Sky