PDA

View Full Version : Dear god stop my PC's, i may die.



DericksDM
2010-06-01, 11:56 PM
So, there i was... sitting down to DM some 3.5, then it happens, one of those too-good-to-be-true PC's shows up "Yo, I am Mr. broken, I am here to trash your balance:smallmad:". It was the characters first scenario in the campaign, and i had briefly skimmed the sheet, how i missed the +15 to STR DEX and CON is beyond me.

So, here's what he did> He paid for a wizards services per the hiring NPC's and hired a 15 Wiz, Dragged mr Wizzy to a redcap, and had him polymorph any object his human self into a redcap... now as he was 7 HD <Mr. broken> and we have covered the whole Caster level or subject HD whichever is lower, so now we < Mr. Broken and me > agree he should only have a +7S-D-C, but beyond that the ability type that pumps redcaps physicals 1 per hd is untyped.
So does he get the ability to gain these ability points? can this be done in the first place? Dear goodness help me, this would be as bad a precedence as the summoning an efreeti for wish bonuses to all ability for coppers on the gold.

Rising Phoenix
2010-06-02, 12:01 AM
So, there i was... sitting down to DM some 3.5, then it happens, one of those too-good-to-be-true PC's shows up "Yo, I am Mr. broken, I am here to trash your balance:smallmad:". It was the characters first scenario in the campaign, and i had briefly skimmed the sheet, how i missed the +15 to STR DEX and CON is beyond me.

So, here's what he did> He paid for a wizards services per the hiring NPC's and hired a 15 Wiz, Dragged mr Wizzy to a redcap, and had him polymorph any object his human self into a redcap... now as he was 7 HD <Mr. broken> and we have covered the whole Caster level or subject HD whichever is lower, so now we < Mr. Broken and me > agree he should only have a +7S-D-C, but beyond that the ability type that pumps redcaps physicals 1 per hd is untyped.
So does he get the ability to gain these ability points? can this be done in the first place? Dear goodness help me, this would be as bad a precedence as the summoning an efreeti for wish bonuses to all ability for coppers on the gold.

You're forgetting something very important here. You are the DM. You can say NO. Do that. If he complains you can say:

1) Please be considerate of both me and the others here. You're behavior is ruining our fun and effort
2) Anything you do, I can do better. Are you sure you want this to happen?
3) Please pack your things and leave, your play style isn't suited for this table.

Binks
2010-06-02, 12:02 AM
Yeah, if you don't like it or it seems broken just rule 0 it. You're the DM.

Kylarra
2010-06-02, 12:03 AM
Character levels != RHD

Since he's advancing by character levels, he doesn't gain the advancement bonus of a redcap. Much like how being a monster who gains size by HD advancement doesn't increase in size spontaneously when they gain X character levels.

DericksDM
2010-06-02, 12:05 AM
You're forgetting something very important here. You are the DM. You can say NO. Do that. If he complains you can say:

1) Please be considerate of both me and the others here. You're behavior ruining our fun and effort
2) Anything you do, I can do better. Are you sure you want this to happen?
3) Please pack your things and leave, your play style isn't suited for this table.

But i dont think he was trying to be innappropriate, i think hes gotta be breaking a rule here is all, How the eff can this be allowed in the rules the whole process cost him like 2.5k gp

DericksDM
2010-06-02, 12:06 AM
Character levels != RHD

Since he's advancing by character levels, he doesn't gain the advancement bonus of a redcap. Much like how being a monster who gains size by HD advancement doesn't increase in size spontaneously when they gain X character levels.

OMG! you saved me, u r VERY right

magellan
2010-06-02, 12:09 AM
Because somebody overlooked it?
It happens all the time, everywhere.
I am often suprised why people think RPG rulebooks should be flawless.

Kylarra
2010-06-02, 12:13 AM
PAO cheese should be nipped at the bud anyway.

Rising Phoenix
2010-06-02, 12:17 AM
But i dont think he was trying to be innappropriate, i think hes gotta be breaking a rule here is all, How the eff can this be allowed in the rules the whole process cost him like 2.5k gp

Fair enough. Explaining the rules always helps. But this player sounds like a budding munchkin. You may wanna nip that bud before it grows by showing them that things like this won't fly with you even if they are legal by the rules. It will save you a lot of arguments.

Cheer and glad you got your question answered.

R.P.

DericksDM
2010-06-02, 12:17 AM
Yeah, if you don't like it or it seems broken just rule 0 it. You're the DM.

Sadly when i use rule 0 it can feel like i am penalizing someone for ingenious builds, my main concern was that my rules lawyering reflex was itching when i saw it

Kylarra
2010-06-02, 12:18 AM
Sadly when i use rule 0 it can feel like i am penalizing someone for ingenious builds, my main concern was that my rules lawyering reflex was itching when i saw itNo I don't think Rule 0ing out PAO cheese is in any way bad or penalizing ingenious builds.

Rauthiss
2010-06-02, 12:20 AM
Sadly when i use rule 0 it can feel like i am penalizing someone for ingenious builds, my main concern was that my rules lawyering reflex was itching when i saw it

Don't be afraid to rule 0. This is a game, and as a game, it follows Rule -1: people play to have fun. If this player is messing with game balance, which it sounds like he's doing, do not hesitate to rule 0.

Rising Phoenix
2010-06-02, 12:20 AM
No I don't think Rule 0ing out PAO cheese is in any way bad or penalizing ingenious builds.

+1 to this. If its making your life as GM difficult, try explaining to your players why you wish to ban it.

The Cat Goddess
2010-06-02, 12:22 AM
I've recently gotten to the point where arguments with my players about "this should do that" or "I read somewhere that this is that", etc... I just say "Rule 0".

If someone can't show me the official ruling in 3 minutes or less, I Rule 0 it.

Thrice Dead Cat
2010-06-02, 01:28 AM
I've recently gotten to the point where arguments with my players about "this should do that" or "I read somewhere that this is that", etc... I just say "Rule 0".

If someone can't show me the official ruling in 3 minutes or less, I Rule 0 it.

For in game arguments, this is often an effective strategy. If it still slows down game, I would move to a "I make a ruling here and now, but if you can show me the text from whatever after game, we'll go by that in the future" may be needed if game still devolves into heated arguments.

Kaun
2010-06-02, 03:33 AM
For in game arguments, this is often an effective strategy. If it still slows down game, I would move to a "I make a ruling here and now, but if you can show me the text from whatever after game, we'll go by that in the future" may be needed if game still devolves into heated arguments.

Yeah this is what i do, i find it works well.

Prodan
2010-06-02, 03:36 AM
Sadly when i use rule 0 it can feel like i am penalizing someone for ingenious builds, my main concern was that my rules lawyering reflex was itching when i saw it

Ingenious builds and rules exploits are totally different things. Time to dole out the harshness.

Eldariel
2010-06-02, 07:53 AM
Polymorph Any Object is one of the most broken entities in existence in D&D. It simply should not be, or at least should not be usable as Polymorph. Same applies to other shapechanging magic like Polymorph and Shapechange. Those spells can only be withstood in games with the highest of power levels and even there they're pretty high up there.

That said, hiring a level 15 Wizard is easier said than done. Just because the prices exist in PHB doesn't mean there are level 15 Wizards one can find, let alone ones that are willing to cast PAOs for someone.

Eldan
2010-06-02, 08:18 AM
For in game arguments, this is often an effective strategy. If it still slows down game, I would move to a "I make a ruling here and now, but if you can show me the text from whatever after game, we'll go by that in the future" may be needed if game still devolves into heated arguments.

I'd still add "...if the official ruling is useful."

Just because it's official doesn't mean it's balanced, or makes sense.

Gnaritas
2010-06-02, 08:21 AM
Sadly when i use rule 0 it can feel like i am penalizing someone for ingenious builds, my main concern was that my rules lawyering reflex was itching when i saw it

You have every right to rule 0 this and if you do not follow the steps as Rising Phoenix described you will have these kind of discussions every time.

Besides that, there is nothing ingenious about what he did, just google "broken stuff d&d 3.5" and you can find a list of stupid stuff other ingenious people thought up, but never actually tried to use in a game, since they are ingenious enough to figure out it will not improve their game experience.

lord_khaine
2010-06-02, 09:06 AM
Polymorph Any Object is one of the most broken entities in existence in D&D. It simply should not be, or at least should not be usable as Polymorph. Same applies to other shapechanging magic like Polymorph and Shapechange. Those spells can only be withstood in games with the highest of power levels and even there they're pretty high up there.

This isnt quite true, it can also work fine in medium levels of optimisation, as long as you are only allowed to pull things out of the DMG 1.

Sliver
2010-06-02, 09:28 AM
You have to be able to let yourself use Rule 0 when appropriate. Remember that a lot of the stronger builds are at least inspired from the internet, if not copied outright. If a player is going to bring a Pun-Pun copy to your game, will you say "It's brilliant! Way too powerful and a clear abuse, but since you thought of it and it's RAW, I can't disallow it" or "No"?

aivanther
2010-06-02, 09:33 AM
Using PAO isn't an ingenious build, it's picking up the whole frigging can of cheese-wiz and blasting it over your character sheet, dice, and the gaming table. There's nothing ingenious about using one of the more broken spells in the game to break the game.

Eldariel
2010-06-02, 11:39 AM
This isnt quite true, it can also work fine in medium levels of optimisation, as long as you are only allowed to pull things out of the DMG 1.

Yeah, sure, if you're only allowed to pull things from DMG, which contains nothing to pull, the spells do nothing and are thus fine. If you're only allowed to pull stuff from MM1, it's broken beyond repair; there's 0 reason not to give everyone ~10 points of NA and +10 Str & Con permanently once you get access to it. Individual forms vary, but it's ridiculous with just MM1. And if everyone isn't a caster, those without Polymorph are gonna be...pretty useless.

awa
2010-06-02, 11:49 AM
dose'nt polymorph any object give you the mental stats of what you turn into?
I would rule his character is now gone the party now gets to fight a red cap and he can make a new character.

enigmatime
2010-06-02, 03:20 PM
dose'nt polymorph any object give you the mental stats of what you turn into?
I would rule his character is now gone the party now gets to fight a red cap and he can make a new character.

I think it does. That's also a good idea. Yeah, that character is way overpowered. Either do what awa suggested, rocks fall Mr. Broken dies, or Tarrasque that's in the mood for one Redcap.

Eldariel
2010-06-02, 03:54 PM
dose'nt polymorph any object give you the mental stats of what you turn into?
I would rule his character is now gone the party now gets to fight a red cap and he can make a new character.

Only Intelligence. It only grants Wis and Cha to creatures previously lacking those stats. Heck, why am I explaining this, Polymorph Any Object (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/polymorphAnyObject.htm).

enigmatime
2010-06-02, 04:04 PM
Only Intelligence. It only grants Wis and Cha to creatures previously lacking those stats. Heck, why am I explaining this, Polymorph Any Object (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/polymorphAnyObject.htm).

I died of laughter when I saw manticore to shrew.

DericksDM
2010-06-02, 05:05 PM
Using PAO isn't an ingenious build, it's picking up the whole frigging can of cheese-wiz and blasting it over your character sheet, dice, and the gaming table. There's nothing ingenious about using one of the more broken spells in the game to break the game.

Very well put

Devils_Advocate
2010-06-03, 02:03 PM
But i dont think he was trying to be innappropriate

Sadly when i use rule 0 it can feel like i am penalizing someone for ingenious builds
D&D 3.5 contains several rules-legal, game-breaking options that do not require any special sort of insight to employ. These should be banned or altered purely on verisimilitude grounds unless you want to run a campaign world dominated by creatures with these broken feats/skills/racial traits/spells/magic items/etc. Because they grant such an absurd level of power that those with them will dominate the world. There has to be some sort of catch to any obvious method of gaining infinite wishes in-character, for example. Not because a player can use it without metagaming so much as because some NPC would have already used it, and no remotely normal setting would even be there for the PCs to adventure in. The only plausible alternative to this is something known on these boards as... "the Tippyverse (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5396845#post5396845)".

The assumptions behind the Tippyverse are that (a) human beings in the game world have the same basic motivations and mental capabilities as human beings in real life and (b) the game world functions according to the rules as they are written. And these assumptions require, at the very least, that a typical-ish D&D campaign setting have powerful, possibly secretive, forces actively preserving the status quo. Because that is the only thing that would make a typical-ish D&D campaign setting remotely tenable under those assumptions.

Beyond that, there are also many character options that are gratuitously overpowered, but are far from completely breaking the game such that one of them could conceivably allow a single character with it to rule the world with an iron fist. Some of these (e.g. Divine Metamagic cheese) require just the right combination of various elements to make them truly powerful. Often, a player who uses such a combination got it off of the internet and not as result of personal hard work and ingenuity. Other times, an option (e.g. the shivering touch spell) is pure cheese straight out of the box with no tweaking required, and all that you have to do to make a character stupidly powerful is to give the option to the character and have the character use it in the obvious way.

Those possibilities aside, though... do you want to DM a campaign where a player can legitimately make his imaginary dude way better than the other players' imaginary dudes and the DM's monsters by meticulously searching through piles of splatbooks and analyzing everything that can be done with their contents? Or do you want to discourage that sort of mentality and the sorts of "arms wars" it can lead to?

Prodan
2010-06-03, 02:07 PM
Allow me to play the Devil's Advocate: Why would that be a bad thing?

I'm sorry, I couldn't help myself upon seeing your name. Please ignore me.

Devils_Advocate
2010-06-03, 04:44 PM
Hah! I refuse to comply with your request, and shall proceed to reply to your rhetorical question!

The thing is, many gamers find games to be less fun when they're made very easy for anyone involved, seeing overcoming meaningful challenges as part of the appeal of playing. After all, what's the point of a contest between opponents when it's... well, no contest?

Others, though, approach things from a higher level of abstraction, pursuing not the challenge of overcoming obstacles using a balanced character, but rather the challenge of creating a character for whom things are laughably easy. For these gamers, actually playing is then a test to see whether their builds perform as well as expected. And provided that they're going up against a GM who also optimizes, or are facing another player in an arena battle or similar, there can still be plenty of uncertainty as to how the build really will perform.

If not, though, it's often recognized that there's little point in confirming something that one is already pretty sure of, and possibly pissing off one's gaming group as a result. So a lot of powerful builds are created without being intended for play, since they were made to be capable of pwning everything, and actually pwning everything was just never a goal. This is known as "theoretical optimization".

Addendum: I think that part of the appeal of Magic: the Gathering is that a well-built deck, proper strategy, and sound tactics are all important. I'd recommend it over Dungeons & Dragons to those more interested in player arms wars than narrative.

Barbarian MD
2010-06-03, 07:01 PM
An oft-forgotten point is that, just because he could theoretically hire a wizard to do something, doesn't mean he'll be able to find a wizard in-game who will do it.

In your game world, it might be hard to find a wizard who will waste his time with such nonsense while pondering the meaning of the universe. A wizard might not want to be dragged all over the world. In fact, the SRD states that the costs provided are for a reference point, and that additional expenses might be demanded for more specific spells/requirements/etc.

So the next time he says, I want to find a wizard to cast X spell so I can employ Y cheese, your response can be a simple, "Alright, good luck with that. Where do you want to start?" You can follow that up with, "Oh, I'm so sorry, but I don't have that spell in my spell book. You might try a wizard I heard of on the other end of the continent; he specializes in that sort of esoteric thing. I think his name was Bob."

See how long the other party members put up with that.

Chainsaw Hobbit
2010-06-04, 06:07 PM
Blast the overpowered PC with a spell that does permanent ability damage. *Sadistic Smile*