Introducing Better Tactics As a DM...

[Amphetryon]

...without leading to a TPK or obviously "letting off the gas" at a certain point.

How do folks here do it? Take a stereotypical 5-person party of new players and 1st level characters, with access to all the books. Despite generous access and gentle prodding from the DM, the party is:
1. High Elf Sword and Board Fighter. 1st level feats: Toughness, WF: Longsword.
2. Dwarf Cleric, with Good and Healing Domains, played as healbot.
3. High Elf Wizard, with Burning Hands, Magic Missile, and Shield, continually played as a Warmage.
4. Halfling Rogue with a Short Sword, who took Improved Initiative. Talks about the Spring Attack line as a goal.
5. Half-Orc Ranger with a Long Bow, who took Athletic as his feat.

As a DM, how do you, personally, introduce better tactics and build theory to the group without lecturing them or putting them over their head with enemies who play more 'intelligently' from a metagame perspective?

[Hiro Protagonest]

For the fighter, try to get him to switch from toughness to improved toughness.

For the cleric, make sure he knows that he can spontaneously cast healing spells and doesn't have to prepare them.

For the rogue, improved initiative is good (flat-footed untill takes in combat action allows him to sneak attack anyone he beats in initiative during the first round of combat), but try to show him how much more damage he could be dealing with the TWF line instead of the ring attack line.

Try to get the ranger to switch from athletic to point blank shot, for precise, shot later.

[Amphetryon]

For the fighter, try to get him to switch from toughness to improved toughness.

For the cleric, make sure he knows that he can spontaneously cast healing spells and doesn't have to prepare them.

For the rogue, improved initiative is good (flat-footed untill takes in combat action allows him to sneak attack anyone he beats in initiative during the first round of combat), but try to show him how much more damage he could be dealing with the TWF line instead of the ring attack line.

Try to get the ranger to switch from athletic to point blank shot, for precise, shot later.
Sounds - from my perspective - like lecturing them. Sorry.

[Graha013]

Wow. You've got your work cut out for you.

My best learning experience was having material and data available for them, give them ideas and show them how it comes together on paper. If they've got these great ideas of the classic figures/heroes that they want to emulate, show them the feat lines and progressions to make it happen. Try to stay away from examples of multiple multi-class builds, as I think that is the hardest thing to learn - and I try my best to optimize as much as I can but have turned to the vast experience and knowledge here and just been amazed.

We have two players like that in our group and they said "We want to be like Legolas" (roll eyes). So TWF Rangers it is! But we taught them and gave them the books and materials and explained the rules so they could decide.

[SilverLeaf167]

Wow... this party is seriously reminding me of my first character: a Paladin with CHA 10 and the Negotiator feat.

Kinda hard to say... the people I play with are fairly low-op, but not nearly that bad. One of them uses the Playground and message boards in general, but his questions are mostly just about some stupid little stuff. One of them has some common sense, asks me openly and reads forums a little. One of them the party simply helps with his build, and the fourth player somehow manages to play tier 4-5 classes effectively without any huge optimization.

So, basically, you might try introducing them to the Playground. It's kind of hard to nudge them towards improving their build without teaching them about it or sending stronger enemies at them. If their current tactics and builds work, why would they bother changing them? One method might be sending some optional, minor challenges at them that could have been solved with slightly more varying spells and then simply pointing out that "you could have reached the side chamber if you just were smaller. There's a spell for that, it's called Reduce Person." This might motivate the wizard to get at least something else than blasting spells.

This is of course more difficult to apply to the non-caster characters, but the best to show a fighter how bad his build is showing him some better alternatives.

[myancey]

Sounds - from my perspective - like lecturing them. Sorry.

If that's the case, wouldn't just talking to them about their characters, period, be lecturing?

The only other option is TPKing them till they learn to design more optimized characters.

[Alabenson]

My advice would be to use better tactics when making enemy NPC's to showcase what a reasonable amout of optimization can achieve. The trick is to pull your punches just enough to avoid actually killing the PC's, while still putting them in real danger.

For example, build a few quasi-ubercharging kobold or goblin mooks and send them against the party. What you want here is for the mooks to be able to deal significant damage to the PC's, while being too small and weak to realistically one-shot them.

Or, you could run a fight where the PC's are pitted against a battlefield control spellcaster with a few mooks who want to capture the PC's without killing them. If the PC's win, they see how grease can be more useful than magic missile. If they lose, the PC's survive to learn the lesson anyway.

[Undercroft]

I tend to use helpful NPCs who help them occasionally in combat.
NPC wizard who they were escorting, with grease and some sleep spells memorised. Combat starts and he dropsa couple spells then hides like a sissy. Players then mop up and learn how to use those spells.

I try to bring in a new concept each session. Last one was grappling to disable casters (Assassin vines attacking the players and the caster being almost useless till freed). Before that it was trip attacks and bull rushes (wolves do lots of tripping. fight on an airship where the warforged captain npc bull rushed a pirate boarder overboard).

Next week it'll be readied actions (and possibly subdual damage). They've already started using trip attacks after seeing the wolves in action a while back. I explained most of the combat actions and tactics already, but they were pretty new so showing them it in action works better.

[Urpriest]

Instead of lecturing, be Socratic. For example: "oh, Athletics, interesting choice. What are you getting out of that?"

[AmberVael]

Anyone who has seen me around knows I'm hardly the non-optimizing type myself, but the party as you've stated it (while admittedly low power) seems to be at a relatively balanced level. Given that they're new players, I'm not sure how advantageous it is to even bother at this point.

So... let them play a bit, learn the system, what they can do with it. Demonstrate options and a few tactics in fights, one piece at a time. And then, if they're interested in taking things to the next level, try and help them out from there. Have mentors, magic items, books, and whatever lead them towards greater powers not only IC, but OOC (for example, a mentor wizard demonstrating the power of a more broadly capable wizard with finesse and carefully chosen spells, or a scroll that details Maneuvers to the fighter, and so on. Allow retraining as desired/necessary). But if not... well, maybe they just don't care about optimized play, and that's fine. This is about entertainment after all, and optimizing is not a requirement to have fun. (Now if you have some people optimizing and some not, then it might lead to problems, but that's another thing).

[Infernalbargain]

I have to take the "don't bother" side. They seem relatively balanced against each other. It could be risky trying to introduce more advanced tactics at this point because if you don't do it right, you could have 1-2 people catch on and leave the others in the dust. So I suggest that you wait for one of them to figure it out on their own and then build up the rest.

In game, I suggest that you have them fight a single on-level character that's more optimized. Effectively pull out the linear guild. Now this doesn't work well for non-com things.

[Amphetryon]

Disclaimer: The party is hypothetical, but typical of the level of power most of my players tend to aim for, whether intentionally or otherwise.

For using NPCs to introduce new tactics, that's normally a sound choice. For my particular case, it has two issues. The first is that I typically have 9 players or more, so another NPC creates some headaches for balancing encounters. The second is personal bad experiences where it ends up looking like the DM is playing the game against himself, because only the NPCs actions are effective.

For the Socratic method, the response to my inquiry regarding a feat analogous to Athletic (Acrobatic) was "it's a bonus to TWO of the skills I want to use a lot for this guy. That's so much better than Skill Focus!"

[graeylin]

My advice would be to use better tactics when making enemy NPC's to showcase what a reasonable amout of optimization can achieve. The trick is to pull your punches just enough to avoid actually killing the PC's, while still putting them in real danger.

For example, build a few quasi-ubercharging kobold or goblin mooks and send them against the party. What you want here is for the mooks to be able to deal significant damage to the PC's, while being too small and weak to realistically one-shot them.

Or, you could run a fight where the PC's are pitted against a battlefield control spellcaster with a few mooks who want to capture the PC's without killing them. If the PC's win, they see how grease can be more useful than magic missile. If they lose, the PC's survive to learn the lesson anyway.

You stole the ideas from my own games, and said them all before i could!
i agree 100%... set up encounters with enemies the party should sneer at, and have the guys get trounced by "those guys?", and they may look at what the others are doing, and learn. Have the kobolds use a cleric as a buffer, and then switch to spont heal. Have the other guys use good tactics (ranged attacks, close with shields, fight and retreat, draw into traps, etc.) until the guys pick it up. Just use weaker enemies, so the fight is tough, but not deadly.

And then, there's always the mirror of opposition, where you create doppelgangers, and show them what they COULD be doing.

[Piggy Knowles]

I once DM'd a game with all players that were new to the system, who were not big on optimizing, and let everybody know that every 5 levels or so, I would be giving them a chance to rebuild (provided they kept the same "characters", so that there was continuity). This gave them the chance to try things out and discover first hand what did and did not work, instead of getting lectured by me on the art of character building.

I wouldn't do it for every group, but it worked very well for me with that group.

So, I would recommend letting it go for a while, and letting them play up a few levels to get used to their characters. As you gradually challenge them more and more, they'll start bumping into the limits of what their characters can do. Whenever anyone can't do something, without being preachy, just mention other options.

Then, somewhere around level 5-ish, offer the characters a chance to rebuild. You can do this within the game (find a reason to introduce them to someone capable of Psychic Reformation or something similar), or out of game.

[herrhauptmann]

They're only level 1? Don't bother for now. Monster AC and HP are so low that weapon focus and weapon spec actually seem like good choices. As does sword and board.

In a few levels, introduce them to a low level kobold warband that uses whatever you would deem 'good tactics.' Lots of trips, disarms, and the like. Once they realize that a group they should've steamrolled is instead kicking their butts, they might start changing things.
Still, it seems for the most part that you dislike their character builds, and want to hide that dislike behind the phrase "bad tactics."

[Amphetryon]

I don't believe I'm the first person here at GitP - or even the only one in this thread - to express the opinion that the build choices indicated in the OP are sub-par. Any particular reason this became 'you're hiding behind', indicating I'm just wrong to hold this opinion?

[WinWin]

I suggest options to my players, let them know of the advantages of taking certain skills/feats/spell, I may even make them aware of the pitfalls of a character build if I can see some potential issues. I only do it once (or twice), that's it.

The current game I am running has a Monk in it...with +2LA. Alongside 2 core casters and a moderately optimized rogue.

I use the occasional NPC encounter to show some variations in tactics, but I try and avoid using an NPC who can perform a particular player's desired role...only better. It is patronising and the guys I play with don't deserve that. I do optimize occassionally, but only for important encounters. I also roll my dice out in the open unless there is a reason for concealment (traps, sense motive, surprise, etc.). This means that character fatalies are fairly regular, especially since the group has hit mid levels.

I try and make sure convenient items are either available or received as loot in order to get the player comfortable with their character and have some distinct strengths. I include a few puzzle encounters now and then to encourage lateral thinking (could be combat, social, traps or a mix). Finally I make rebuilds avaiable, either though quests, PsiRef or via some other method.

One advantage I have is that some members of my group a fairly experienced with the system. This means they can coach some of the novice players in a few things.

[Vladislav]

Wow, you're getting a lot of bad advice here. Most of this will lead you to (passively-agressively) doing what you didn't want to do - preach. Worse, it can lead to what the players are very likely to perceive as "haha, I optimize better than you" moments. I sense a lot of frustration down this avenue, and all for a very questionable, or nonexistant, gain.

Best advice that was given so far - leave well enough alone. Don't meddle with their characters, and just run a game for them. Crazy, I know ... but just crazy enough to work.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

I know it sounds weird, but at low levels I find it easier to DM for an optimized party. Since they can handle such a wider variety of encounters, you as a DM don't have to tailor as much to their particular skills. Of course, this capability starts becoming its own problem at later levels, but an unoptimized group's incapability is a problem all the way through.

Thing is, it's even harder to properly challenge an unbalanced group without unintentionally culling the weaker characters. Your group looks like the inter-party balance is just fine; the power level is low, but it's all the same. I wouldn't mess with that. What if half the party takes your advice and the other half doesn't? You have an even bigger problem on your hands. I understand that you're going to cringe at some 'new' build choices, but there's really not much you can do without risking resentment or even worse party power problems.

Edit: You could houserule some stuff such that bad choices aren't as bad. Toughness becomes PF's toughness. Flaming sphere becomes PF's flaming sphere. But that's a lot of work.

[NineThePuma]

I don't believe I'm the first person here at GitP - or even the only one in this thread - to express the opinion that the build choices indicated in the OP are sub-par. Any particular reason this became 'you're hiding behind', indicating I'm just wrong to hold this opinion?

I think what he means is, have the players played enough to know those tactics are bad? If not, let them find out on their own. Throw them up against a 'rival' party that's actually kinda optimized later, see how they react.

Don't FORCE optimization on them, just have fun with it.

[navar100]

Have the bad guys use them. Have bad guys do something instead of attacking for damage that helps them the following round.

[big teej]

...without leading to a TPK or obviously "letting off the gas" at a certain point.

How do folks here do it? Take a stereotypical 5-person party of new players and 1st level characters, with access to all the books. Despite generous access and gentle prodding from the DM, the party is:
1. High Elf Sword and Board Fighter. 1st level feats: Toughness, WF: Longsword.
2. Dwarf Cleric, with Good and Healing Domains, played as healbot.
3. High Elf Wizard, with Burning Hands, Magic Missile, and Shield, continually played as a Warmage.
4. Halfling Rogue with a Short Sword, who took Improved Initiative. Talks about the Spring Attack line as a goal.
5. Half-Orc Ranger with a Long Bow, who took Athletic as his feat.

As a DM, how do you, personally, introduce better tactics and build theory to the group without lecturing them or putting them over their head with enemies who play more 'intelligently' from a metagame perspective?

at the risk of splitting hairs, I believe you may actually be after "how to introduce optimization" not tactics.

but I digress.

in my case, since I walked through character creation with each individual, I told them up front "do not take Toughness" "do not, so help me, DO NOT prepare healing spells as a cleric" etc etc etc.

when asked why you explain.
for example.
I had a player say they wanted to take toughness, I told them "I won't let you do that to yourself" and then explained why a flat + 3 hit points is not worth a feat.

as for the cleric, I explained spontaneous conversion to them until they got it and understood I would smack them with a PHB if they ever prepared a cure spell :smallbiggrin:

that said, I'm a big fan of self discovery, so I only really interfere if it's something REALLY bad....

[Hiro Protagonest]

In a few levels, introduce them to a low level kobold warband that uses whatever you would deem 'good tactics.' Lots of trips, disarms, and the like. Once they realize that a group they should've steamrolled is instead kicking their butts, they might start changing things.
Still, it seems for the most part that you dislike their character builds, and want to hide that dislike behind the phrase "bad tactics."

It's the little brother of Tucker's kobolds!

[herrhauptmann]

It's the little brother of Tucker's kobolds!

Yeah, but the lesson is just intended to show them how tactics work. Not how to die.:smallwink:

[Taelas]

Sounds - from my perspective - like lecturing them. Sorry.

Think of it as educating them instead of lecturing them, and perhaps you will feel better. There really isn't much else you can do. Well, you can teach them through experience, but that could easily be seen as lecturing also, so what do you have to lose?

Just don't be a jerk about it. Don't treat them like fools, but walk them through what is good and what is bad.

Explain to them what a good feat is. Compare good feats and bad feats and show them the difference. Toughness and Improved Toughness is easy -- it's right there in the name!

Show them the math behind the optimization. If they understand math, it's relatively easy to introduce optimization, because it's easy to see that a bastard sword only deals 1 point of damage more than a longsword, on average -- and it costs a feat to use, comparatively.

Spell choice, etc. is more difficult, but the same principle applies. Show them that spells are better off used for other purposes than damage, for example. A good example is sleep vs. magic missile. Magic missile is actually a good damage spell for its level, but sleep is a save-or-lose spell -- at least until you start encountering creatures with more than 4 HD.

[Captain Caveman]

Try sprinkling in NPCs throughout the game that either have interesting fun and unique combos or are silly optimized. Like the fighter who has specialized in TWF just tear through people in the middle of the battle while the party's fighter is still in combat with his first opponent. Maybe another adventuring group that randomly pops up and uses combos between the NPCs. Something for them to look at and go "man I wish I could do something that cool" and then they will start looking through rules and thinking up combos and builds of their own rather than just something that looks promising right as they level up. I remember the first time I encountered another adventuring group in a game. They showed up and said, "Plan beta." To which I yell to the rest of the party "They have plans!? We need plans!" after that we devised different strategies that we could yell for during combat so as to not meta game the ultimate strategy.

EDIT: I just went back and read that you already received this advice. Oops. Well rather than just throwing monsters at them try throwing things with class levels at them. That way it doesn't look so much like you are playing yourself. If they complain about encounters being too tough just claim that they are within the CR they have just specialized.

[Divide by Zero]

Or, you could run a fight where the PC's are pitted against a battlefield control spellcaster with a few mooks who want to capture the PC's without killing them. If the PC's win, they see how grease can be more useful than magic missile. If they lose, the PC's survive to learn the lesson anyway.

Seconding this. Plus, getting captured is always an easy plot hook.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

at the risk of splitting hairs, I believe you may actually be after "how to introduce optimization" not tactics.Of course, if the characters can only do one thing in combat, their build choices define their tactics.

[potatocubed]

1. Are the characters more or less on the same power level?
2. Are the players having fun?

If the answer to both questions is 'yes' then why do you care what build choices/tactical choices they make?

[Urpriest]

1. Are the characters more or less on the same power level?
2. Are the players having fun?

If the answer to both questions is 'yes' then why do you care what build choices/tactical choices they make?

If the part of D&D he enjoys is playing with its mechanical flexibility, and his players' choices make him unable to do that, then he is not having fun. Since the players would have the same amount of fun with optimized characters, the total sum of fun is increased if they change their playstyle.

[Hunter Killer]

The game's all about fun, sure, but I find optimized builds are more fun than unoptimized ones because they can just do more or do it better. Almost everyone I've played with over the years likes to be extremely versatile or extremely skilled at something.

I explain to my players what's a good choice and what is a bad choice, I do lecture, and I work with them on optimization from 1-20 (if they want my help). If someone falls behind, I allow character rebuilds. It's a lot of work, but it's worth it, and why make them stick with something ineffective that they don't like (as long as it's not a 180 degree turn in concept)?

My typical first session of any game is the "Spit-Ball-and-Throw-Spaghetti-at-the-Wall" session. We play for maybe 10% of the first session. in the other 90%, I ask things like this to each player and respond accordingly:

1. What is your character concept and have you thought of what classes would work? Oh, well, you know I think flavor and mechanics might work better with X or Y. What do you think?

2. What feats are you going to take? Hmm... I'm not sure that is the best choice for what you're trying to do. You might want to consider Z instead because of [blah].

3. Have you considered your skills? Ah, that one is good, but how about A and B? Those might be something you want to look into because they will help you when you try to do [blah].

I think the game is all about working with your players, working out the best options on paper, slowing your pace down and discussing things before, after, and even during play so everyone understands things better.

Just my $0.02... Could be the wrong way to handle certain people.

[DonEsteban]

As a DM, how do you, personally, introduce better tactics and build theory to the group without lecturing them or putting them over their head with enemies who play more 'intelligently' from a metagame perspective?
I don't. Why would I? If they're having fun, why leading them towards the dark side of character optimization? Unless they ask me "How can I make a more powerful character?" Perhaps I would introduce a "cool" character every now and then and if they ask "How did you do that?", well...

[LaughingRogue]

I'd be frustrated enough to run the game as I was normally going to run it and they would all die like any adventurer who thinks toughness is the greatest feat ever

Fun story I once had a player who thought toughness was so great he would take it every level

And then he died, and he died again and he died again and he realized "hey maybe toughness isn't that great" ---- wipe them and explain why afterwards.


My advice is why I don't run games for new players anymore --- i'm just way too cynical.