The problem is choice

[Dwimmerlied]

That seems a bit out of line. No one is saying his players suck or that optimizing is the only way to play the game. He is simply pointing out that what the PC is doing is not out of line for a typical 3.5 game. The OP either needs to adjust his expectations about what his players can do, even without tons of splatbooks and lots of magic, and adjust the encounters accordingly, or play something different. As we pointed out, even just using core only, a simple half-orc barbarian with good strength and a two handed weapon plus power attack can easily do more damage than the "problem" character in question. It's not like we are just saying him and his players are doing it wrong. We have offered suggestions (like using E6) which he seemed to appreciate. Of course even with E6 a half-orc barbarian can still do a lot of damage but at least it won't keep escalating and the casters won't become such a dominating force like at higher levels.

Yeah, maybe. Just to clarify;

I strongly disagree with the attitude that there is one true way to game. I think a lot of folk seem to not only believe there is only one true way, but they will argue to everyone else that its the case. But I have an open mind, and I'm not closed to debates or exchanges of ideas.

Much of my point in the post you have quoted is responding to what I honestly feel is a lot of unnecessary rudeness and sarcasm, which is simply antagonistic. I suspect I'm not the only one who feels this way.

 

[Dwimmerlied]

I've already decided to go with the E6 game rules. I really think that will fit nicely with the kind of campaign I want.

I've never played E6, but I'm intrigued;- it looks good! Let us know how it goes.

 

[Cyclone_Joker]

Only if you disregard parts of the system. The system advises that it is wise to choose what to allow in your game. Your arguments only work if you completely disregard this.

Okay. I now officially rule that nobody can play anything with intelligence above three and any attack action that has an average damage different from 11.5 is prohibitted.

Is that right? Does the system agree with that sort of play? Of course not. Your line of reasoning is inane.

No, but you may be. Here's why;

Oh, a "no u." Nice try, but it isn't gonna fly with me.

Why not? There was a point in bring it up, after all.

Because it doesn't seem like it'll make a difference. Would you try to explain differential calculus to someone still learning basic geometry?

I'll disregard this, but quote it to highlight why some people might think you have an attitude problem.

Given I was being actively insulted there, I really have trouble caring.

I already made clear my motivations. If you read my post, you will see that I don't believe its unrelated at all.

Funny, you were the only one to go anywhere near it.

Which leaves the question. Whats your point? Whats your motivation?

Right now? Calling out your crap for what it is.

If you disagree with my assessment, would you rather ignore it? Understand where I'm coming from? Try to change my mind? Or use hostile, provocative and emotive language that looks like a veiled attempt to rile and insult?

How about leave what's correct with proof out for observers to see, at least once I've determined certain other posters are inherently unreasonable.

Why do you use so much sarcasm?

Because there comes a point when a statement is so downright wrong on such a fundamental level that any other type of response is insufficient. It's especially useful because it does a good job of highlighting exactly why it's wrong without giving an absurd argument the dignity of being taken seriously

Or I just feel like it. Take your pick.

What?

Poe's Law

Wow, I guess that's a lot of sarcasm; maybe you think that that's what I expect you to be thinking? Hmm. If it helps you to understand, I don't consider myself, or anyone else much more intelligent than any other person.

Nonsense! You are obviously a genius beyond the ability of the English language to describe! Of course such minor things like "reason" fall before your brilliance! You obviously need no such minor thing to be inherently right!

If you think I have a problem with being disagreed with, well, I'll suggest that's because you've spent more energy being sarcastic and rude than trying to understand what I'm trying to communicate. Why is that?

Why do you think sarcasm takes any effort at all?

Also, as I've stated, you are being unreasonable. I have made a case, supported by facts and completely sound. You have done nothing to counter it beyond "Nuh-uh!" and "ROOL ZERO, MAN!"

I have a different opinion than you. I'll not claim that I'm absolutely right. That IS ridiculous. The system can support many genres.

Not really, at least not mechanically.

I've found this, and so have others. The system advises to be careful what additional stuff you allow in your game, so it is part of the system to weigh up each new class, feat, whatever for your game.

And I've already established that additional stuff is unnecessary to reach levels of damage he finds problematic.

If you think it will break your game, RAW, don'tuse it. That's a part of the system many people seem to disregard.

It doesn't matter. The game doesn't support what he's trying. As I've proven an NPC with one simple feat that any barbarian can expect to get in core is more than capable of reaching that damage, and can do more than one attack. His expectation and desires for the system don't match up with the system.

I understand the arguments against this, but I don't think that they are the end of the story.

Then you're wrong. The system simply does not work the way he wants it to work.

I don't think its that helpful to tell someone that they are "doing it wrong" as if it were, to use your language "the one way", "your build is weak, anyone with any intelligence will build like this because it is stupid to do otherwise, and against the system."

Behold, the grand genius of Dwimmer! Let all bow before his brilliance! Making false claims using fabricated quotes is truly the shining pinnacle of a well-formed argument! Let his inherent rightness lead the way!

My use of the words "pissing contest' is too antagonistic. But what I intend to articulate is an annoyance at this attitude. "they, and you are wrong". "I can make a better build that will do more damage, so you are wrong", "sorry, but your build, philosophy and way of playing are not only stupid but incorrect by the system" "barage of sarcastic, passive aggresive comments". Maybe not pissing contest, I guess people can substitute words for themselves that reflect the attitude behind these statements.

I have done no such thing. I have used nothing but facts and reason to prove my case and you have done nothing but ignore it or just dismiss it out of hand because I'm obviously engaged in some "pissing contest" or am out to prove that anyone who goes against the "One True Way" is "stupid." It's bullcrap, and I will call you on it every time. Now either refute my argument or concede. This has grown tiresome.

I strongly disagree with the attitude that there is one true way to game. I think a lot of folk seem to not only believe there is only one true way, but they will argue to everyone else that its the case.

Then it's a shame how you're the only one arguing that.

But I have an open mind, and I'm not closed to debates or exchanges of ideas.

Could have fooled me.

Much of my point in the post you have quoted is responding to what I honestly feel is a lot of unnecessary rudeness and sarcasm, which is simply antagonistic. I suspect I'm not the only one who feels this way.

>Objecting to supposed antagonism
>Entered the thread by dismissing those he disagrees with by claiming they're engaged in a massive pissing contest
>...

 

[Weather Report]

Okay. I now officially rule that nobody can play anything with intelligence above three and any attack action that has an average damage different from 11.5 is prohibitted.

Is that right? Does the system agree with that sort of play? Of course not. Your line of reasoning is inane.
Oh, a "no u." Nice try, but it isn't gonna fly with me.
Because it doesn't seem like it'll make a difference. Would you try to explain differential calculus to someone still learning basic geometry?
Given I was being actively insulted there, I really have trouble caring.
Funny, you were the only one to go anywhere near it.
Right now? Calling out your crap for what it is.
How about leave what's correct with proof out for observers to see, at least once I've determined certain other posters are inherently unreasonable.
Because there comes a point when a statement is so downright wrong on such a fundamental level that any other type of response is insufficient. It's especially useful because it does a good job of highlighting exactly why it's wrong without giving an absurd argument the dignity of being taken seriously

Or I just feel like it. Take your pick.
Poe's Law
Nonsense! You are obviously a genius beyond the ability of the English language to describe! Of course such minor things like "reason" fall before your brilliance! You obviously need no such minor thing to be inherently right!
Why do you think sarcasm takes any effort at all?

Also, as I've stated, you are being unreasonable. I have made a case, supported by facts and completely sound. You have done nothing to counter it beyond "Nuh-uh!" and "ROOL ZERO, MAN!"
Not really, at least not mechanically.
And I've already established that additional stuff is unnecessary to reach levels of damage he finds problematic.
It doesn't matter. The game doesn't support what he's trying. As I've proven an NPC with one simple feat that any barbarian can expect to get in core is more than capable of reaching that damage, and can do more than one attack. His expectation and desires for the system don't match up with the system.
Then you're wrong. The system simply does not work the way he wants it to work.
Behold, the grand genius of Dwimmer! Let all bow before his brilliance! Making false claims using fabricated quotes is truly the shining pinnacle of a well-formed argument! Let his inherent rightness lead the way!
I have done no such thing. I have used nothing but facts and reason to prove my case and you have done nothing but ignore it or just dismiss it out of hand because I'm obviously engaged in some "pissing contest" or am out to prove that anyone who goes against the "One True Way" is "stupid." It's bullcrap, and I will call you on it every time. Now either refute my argument or concede. This has grown tiresome.
Then it's a shame how you're the only one arguing that.
Could have fooled me.
>Objecting to supposed antagonism
>Entered the thread by dismissing those he disagrees with by claiming they're engaged in a massive pissing contest
>...

...wow...

...and not in the good taking the universe in deal...

 

[Dwimmerlied]

Okay. I now officially rule that nobody can play anything with intelligence above three and any attack action that has an average damage different from 11.5 is prohibitted.

Is that right? Does the system agree with that sort of play? Of course not. Your line of reasoning is inane.

It appears you are using an extreme example in an attempt to discredit my argument, that seems like weak reasoning. But to answer your argument, the system would support this, as well as any less extreme example between this and complete acceptance of every piece of material published, which I've also seen argued as inane. If someone has a different opinion on how to have fun, you are free to say the system doesnt support that and that they are wrong, but it doesn't make you right no matter how many numbers you post.

Oh, a "no u." Nice try, but it isn't gonna fly with me.

You didn't adress my point. Interesting.

Because it doesn't seem like it'll make a difference. Would you try to explain differential calculus to someone still learning basic geometry?

It also seems a reasonable assumption that you got nothing.

Given I was being actively insulted there, I really have trouble caring.

I'll make this clear; I didn't intend to insult you. The words I used were too strong I guess.

Funny, you were the only one to go anywhere near it.

So?

Or I just feel like it. Take your pick.

I think this is a disntinct possibility.

Why do you think sarcasm takes any effort at all?

Less effort than trying to understand where someone is coming from, I guess. And has proportional value in a mature and civil debate.

Behold, the grand genius of Dwimmer! Let all bow before his brilliance! Let his inherent rightness lead the way! You are obviously a genius beyond the ability of the English language to describe!

I think you go too far, but I do admit I'm blushing just a little

 

[Cyclone_Joker]

It appears you are using an extreme example in an attempt to discredit my argument, that seems like weak reasoning.

Nope. I'm using precisely your reasoning, for lack of a better word.

But to answer your argument, the system would support this,

Except it wouldn't.

as well as any less extreme example between this and complete acceptance of every piece of material published,

So you're saying that the system isn't capable of using material created for the system? That totally makes perfect sense.

And I really need a rolleyes smiley.

which I've also seen argued as inane.

And whoever has argued that is wrong. Hardly my problem.

If someone has a different opinion on how to have fun, you are free to say the system doesnt support that and that they are wrong, but it doesn't make you right no matter how many numbers you post.

They're free to have fun however they want, and if they have a blast at the level they're talking about, more power to them. However, they are not, because the OP's expectations for the system and the system are clashing.

You didn't adress my point. Interesting.

No, I didn't, because it's really hard to address something that doesn't exist.

It also seems a reasonable assumption that you got nothing.

Given how I'm the only one backing up my statements with fact and reason, no, it really isn't.

I'll make this clear; I didn't intend to insult you. The words I used were too strong I guess.

...So "pissing contest" and constant explicit statements referring to sound, fact-based arguments as stupid isn't an attempt at insulting? Wow, and people say I'm clueless.

So?

You were complaining about something that had nothing to do with the thread and managed to throw a bunch of insults while doing so.

Less effort than trying to understand where someone is coming from, I guess.

Oh, nice! That would be a brilliant comeback, should you actually have somewhere you're coming from. Sadly, that isn't the case. Your arguments appear completely divorced from any facts or reason I can see, based solely on either your desire to one-up the horrible, evil munchkins engaged in a pissing contest or just what you feel like, facts be damned, and honestly, I can't tell either which it is or which is worse.

And has proportional value in a mature and civil debate.

Again, that might work should you be participating in anything resembling a debate. A debate requires reason from all parties, and reason is something you've been avoiding like the plague.

I'll say it again: Facts. Reason. Use them. You're free to have any opinions you want, you'd just better back them up.

 

[Dwimmerlied]

Nope. I'm using precisely your reasoning, for lack of a better word.

Kinda. You are using my reasoning in regards to an extreme situation. That's the problem. My reasoning covers a lot more ground than your extreme example represents. If you can aknowledge that, it will help you to understand my point. I'm not trying to be condescending, but if you are debating with me, I'll strive to show you my point.

So you're saying that the system isn't capable of using material created for the system?

No. Where did you get that? I'm saying I feel many genres and styles can be supported by the system.

Except it wouldn't.

And whoever has argued that is wrong. Hardly my problem.

because the OP's expectations for the system and the system are clashing.

You were complaining about something that had nothing to do with the thread

Given how I'm the only one backing up my statements with fact and reason

The last quote doesn't doesn't reflect the other ones. Mostly you are making absolute statements with no back up. Often "you are wrong, fullstop" (with nothing to qualify it). Sometimes you refer to earlier posts you've made for evidence of your reasoning, but none of it proves an absolute point at all. You repeatedly disregard reasons others give, deflecting with cheap jabs at people's intelligence or ability to reason, or argue that no reason was ever given, though from what I can see, largely, reasons have been given.

I have given reasons. The fact that you simply disparage and attempt to characterise them in a poor light means you aknowledge I have, indeed given reasons. So why then say you are the only one giving reasons?

 

[Morrus]

Another thread, another fight, one common denominator. This is starting to become work. @Cyclone_Joker , knock it the hell off, please. I don't actually enjoy having my phone spammed with post reports about you from multiple threads. If you need some clarification, please drop me an email. In the meantime, please stop posting in this thread. Everyone else - especially [MENTION=6706967]Dwimmerlied[/MENTION] - please do not respond to the problematic posts, no matter how angry they make you feel.

 

[Chase A.]

Yeah, maybe. Just to clarify;

I strongly disagree with the attitude that there is one true way to game. I think a lot of folk seem to not only believe there is only one true way, but they will argue to everyone else that its the case. But I have an open mind, and I'm not closed to debates or exchanges of ideas.

Much of my point in the post you have quoted is responding to what I honestly feel is a lot of unnecessary rudeness and sarcasm, which is simply antagonistic. I suspect I'm not the only one who feels this way.

Dwimmerlied, while I know that it is wrong, I feel D&D is only meant to be played one way. I think that powergaming, min-maxing, munchkining, whatever you want to call them are all wrong. I have been playing D&D in one edition or another for 25 years. In that time I have been lucky enough (in my opinion) to have rarely played with those type of people. I feel that there is a big difference between playing a "concept" and a "build". I also believe (although I know the RAW does not always support this) in character roles. If there was a Barbarian power attacking for the same damage as my rogue I would be fine with that because I think that's his role in the game. I also think that the tier system us utter if you know how to role play. ANY class can be valuable if you bother to role play or think outside the box. I realize that my opinions on D&D put me at odds with about half of the gaming world but they are my opinions.

I've never played E6, but I'm intrigued;- it looks good! Let us know how it goes.

Absolutely! I suspect that my powergaming member will strongly object but I'm fairly certain he will be the only one. If he decided not to play because of it, its no big loss as far as I'm concerned given his style of "play"

 

[Ragmon]

Hmm,Chase your post (#79: I did not want to quote the whole thing), is interesting to say the least.
- You have been playing D&D for ~25 years and you can't handle such a minor issue (I do not mean to berate to belittle. This might have been your first encounter with such a problem, I just find this extremely interesting (cause I have seen all kinds of play styles and problems over the past ~9 years of playing tabletop RPGs)).
- I agree with the tier system comment, tho you cannot ignore the fact that per RAW the casters are at a significant advantage most of the time (I don't like the idea of it its just how it is).
-----------
"I have seriously considered going PHB only but then he would refuse to play. Then the other players would insist that I loosen my rules so he will play." - you, post #8.

"I seriously doubt that anyone but him would not play a core only game. My other players would be fine with it."- you, post #20
"If he decided not to play because of it, its no big loss as far as I'm concerned given his style of "play"- you said in post #79.

And now you chose to play E6, whether the problematic player accepts or not. Could have done this at the start, no compromising, but you did anyway, cause your a nice guy. Just kick the player at this point, cause as I see he is really frustrating you.
You went from, "Oh fine let him have his way" to "F*** this, we are playing my way", just reflect on it.

------------

​

​

PS: if you haven't read my previous post, (#50) then please do, its so damn long it would be a shame to not read it (I put some effort into it).