How to NOT Optimize?

[Gwazi Magnum]

Here's a reverse/odd question for you guys.

How do I not optimize a character?

It seems simple/self-explanatory. But I've been noticing that I've been looking at d&d mechanics and optimizing builds so often now that trying to make a non-optimized build never seems to happen.

My Munchkin/Optimize side always turns on part way and fixes things to make the character better and stronger.

So I guess a more appropriate wording of the question is "How do you make an optimized character and avoid the urge to go back and optimize it?" and "How do you try to enjoy the game without an optimized character when there's so many glaring holes and weaknesses that the DM could simply exploit?

[Craft (Cheese)]

Roll it at random (attributes, class, feats, skill ranks, etc.). Don't think of it as a character you've designed, think of it as a pre-gen character that you happen to be playing.

[Rubik]

Here's a reverse/odd question for you guys.

How do I not optimize a character?

It seems simple/self-explanatory. But I've been noticing that I've been looking at d&d mechanics and optimizing builds so often now that trying to make a non-optimized build never seems to happen.

My Munchkin/Optimize side always turns on part way and fixes things to make the character better and stronger.

So I guess a more appropriate wording of the question is "How do you make an optimized character and avoid the urge to go back and optimize it?" and "How do you try to enjoy the game without an optimized character when there's so many glaring holes and weaknesses that the DM could simply exploit?I optimize for something specific that won't step on everyone else's toes. Having high saves, miss chances, and hp won't hurt anyone (least of all you), and optimizing a low-impact manifester for stamina (focusing on duration powers) means you can go all day at a low level without causing too much fuss. Likewise, optimizing for enabling other characters makes them feel good about themselves, and none of your teammates will complain because they're benefiting from your optimization.

Not too terrible, really.

[Spore]

Compare the worst a WORKING character could be for that class with the best character. Settle in between. Power Up with useful combinations of feats and class skills, power down for flavor.

[Stux]

Pick a theme and stick with it, make it a hard and fast rule of your build.

So you want to play a sorcerer who's theme is fire: only pick fire spells. That is incredibly bad from an optimisation standpoint, but really cool from an RP/theming standpoint!

[Gwazi Magnum]

Roll it at random (attributes, class, feats, skill ranks, etc.). Don't think of it as a character you've designed, think of it as a pre-gen character that you happen to be playing.

How would I roll stuff like feats, class, skills?

Granted I see class if it were core only, but if out core there's a ton of classes to account for.


I optimize for something specific that won't step on everyone else's toes. Having high saves, miss chances, and hp won't hurt anyone (least of all you), and optimizing a low-impact manifester for stamina (focusing on duration powers) means you can go all day at a low level without causing too much fuss. Likewise, optimizing for enabling other characters makes them feel good about themselves, and none of your teammates will complain because they're benefiting from your optimization.

Not too terrible, really.

True. I guess I should also make this a question:

"How can you optimize without it harming the other players experience and/or breaking the balance of the campaign?"

Ex: I made a build that was basically just cashed in the gold and spread it across the party. Obviously the party would love me for it, but it would still destroy campaign balance.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Compare the worst a WORKING character could be for that class with the best character. Settle in between. Power Up with useful combinations of feats and class skills, power down for flavor.

I guess, but then I might find such a high level that even the in between is pretty broken.


Pick a theme and stick with it, make it a hard and fast rule of your build.

So you want to play a sorcerer who's theme is fire: only pick fire spells. That is incredibly bad from an optimisation standpoint, but really cool from an RP/theming standpoint!

Can be, but it still get's broken at times.
Like I once had a character who focused on being a necromancer/undead lord. There was a concept I stayed completely loyal too, but it was still broken as hell.

[Tvtyrant]

Make your character almost invincible but doesn't do much. Wings of Cover Sevenfold Veil Sorcerer who uses Shocking Grasp and other melee touch spells would be fantastic, as you will constantly draw aggro away from your allies due to your DMs frustration with your invincibility, and yet will not overshadow anyone.

[HaikenEdge]

How would I roll stuff like feats, class, skills?

Granted I see class if it were core only, but if out core there's a ton of classes to account for.

Make a numbered list. Then use a random number generator.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Make your character almost invincible but doesn't do much. Wings of Cover Sevenfold Veil Sorcerer who uses Shocking Grasp and other melee touch spells would be fantastic, as you will constantly draw aggro away from your allies due to your DMs frustration with your invincibility, and yet will not overshadow anyone.

True, but at the same time if I made a character that still handle anything that could break the campaign right there.

[HaikenEdge]

True, but at the same time if I made a character that still handle anything that could break the campaign right there.

Not to mention, if your enemies already know they can't hurt you, they wouldn't waste time on you, because it'd be inefficient to target the one target that can't be hurt instead of going after the ones that can be.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Not to mention, if your enemies already know they can't hurt you, they wouldn't waste time on you, because it'd be inefficient to target the one target that can't be hurt instead of going after the ones that can be.

But in that case the other players won't like my guy because he's optimized in a way to not be helpful to the group.

[jaydubs]

Add some goals to your character that aren't related to game mechanics. For instance, maybe your wizard loves telling thrilling ghost stories. So put a bunch of skill points into Performance: Storytelling.

Or if your character has dreams of becoming king, put points into something that would make him a better ruler if he ever succeeded. Knowledge: Economics or Knowledge: Government.

Or, as has been suggested, optimize around something that doesn't step on people's toes. Be the best possible support character. Or be good at everything, but not quite as good as the specialists. That way you get to be extremely active, but people don't mind since you're usually playing second fiddle.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Add some goals to your character that aren't related to game mechanics. For instance, maybe your wizard loves telling thrilling ghost stories. So put a bunch of skill points into Performance: Storytelling.

Or if your character has dreams of becoming king, put points into something that would make him a better ruler if he ever succeeded. Knowledge: Economics or Knowledge: Government.

Or, as has been suggested, optimize around something that doesn't step on people's toes. Be the best possible support character. Or be good at everything, but not quite as good as the specialists. That way you get to be extremely active, but people don't mind since you're usually playing second fiddle.

I like the skill point idea. But I only see that happening with more skill full classes, or those classes with almost no class skills.

As for support. I tried that, but what happened was he was such a good support it destroyed the campaign balance.

[Craft (Cheese)]

Make a numbered list. Then use a random number generator.

Stick the core classes and feats that don't have prerequisites like Toughness or Skill Focus.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Stick the core classes and feats that don't have prerequisites like Toughness or Skill Focus.

That is insanely limited though... All my feats basically become +3 HP or +3 skill points.

[Firechanter]

My advice: set yourself a handicap. Like "must have N levels in crummy class X" or "sacrifice 4 caster levels". Then you can make your character and optimize within these constraints. And maybe even get a char out of it that's awesome in its own right.

For instance, I once played a Ranger/Cleric because we needed a healer/buffer, but a straight Clr would have been too powerful. The Rgr/Clr didn't have gamebreaking spellcasting, but was very stealthy, and that was really cool. Played from levels 2-18 btw. Was one of my favourite characters ever.

[HaikenEdge]

But in that case the other players won't like my guy because he's optimized in a way to not be helpful to the group.

My statement was meant as a followup to your response to tvtyrant's suggestion of making yourself invulnerable in order to draw aggro; that only works in video games, where the enemy AI can be exploited, and not in tabletop, where the enemies are as smart as the DM is.

[Rubik]

Try spreading out your optimization, rather than throwing all of your eggs into one focused push. Make a list of things that are breakable -- Diplomancy, high DC Save or Dies, extreme focus on battlefield control, minionmancy, and so on -- and avoid focusing on any of those. Your character can access elements of them, such as adding ranks to Diplomacy with a decent Charisma, but don't add more than token effort in any of them. If you really need to focus on something, focus on immunities and defensive numbers, then give yourself some mild-but-useful abilities to affect the world around you.

How about focusing on a shaper psion/constructor who focuses entirely on defense and using low-level powers at minimal augmentation (and no more than one fully augmented astral construct at a time) for maximum stamina and utility to replace the party's skillmonkey? Instead of using overpowered options like poison creation, focus on trying to think outside the box with the toolbox of powers at your disposal. No blasting, no novas, no major action economy breakage (other than maybe Linked Power specifically to overcome long manifesting times for your metacreation powers). Have fun, but don't put too much emphasis on any one area.

[Bovine Colonel]

I guess I should also make this a question:

"How can you optimize without it harming the other players experience and/or breaking the balance of the campaign?"

Ex: I made a build that was basically just cashed in the gold and spread it across the party. Obviously the party would love me for it, but it would still destroy campaign balance.

It seems evident to me that if your character doesn't leave the other characters in the dust, it becomes easier for the DM to adjust the difficulty of encounters to compensate.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I'd recommend picking intentionally sup-optimal archetypes. Play an archer, for example, or a sword-and-board guy. Play half-elves and half-orcs. Specialize in evocation and ban conjuration and transmutation. And suchlike.


As for support. I tried that, but what happened was he was such a good support it destroyed the campaign balance.
I'd pin that one more on the GM than on you. For the most part, "balance" only matters between players. If one character is way stronger or way weaker than everyone else, it's a problem. But as long as the party is working at approximately the same level, a GM can just dial the CR of encounters up or down to compensate.

[Rubik]

Go VoP monk. There's nothing to optimize there but skills, skill tricks, feats, race, and ACFs.

[zlefin]

you can always ask someone else for help; or to make a character for you.

It's also possible that there is no happy middle ground for you; that if you make a character weak, and challenges come up which you know you could have dealt with if you'd used your optimization, you will not enjoy the experience. and if you fully use your optimization you will cause different damage to others' experience.
This would just fall into the issue of incompatible gaming groups.
The larger the difference between you and the people you play with, the more likely this is to happen.

[Gwazi Magnum]

My advice: set yourself a handicap. Like "must have N levels in crummy class X" or "sacrifice 4 caster levels". Then you can make your character and optimize within these constraints. And maybe even get a char out of it that's awesome in its own right.

For instance, I once played a Ranger/Cleric because we needed a healer/buffer, but a straight Clr would have been too powerful. The Rgr/Clr didn't have gamebreaking spellcasting, but was very stealthy, and that was really cool. Played from levels 2-18 btw. Was one of my favourite characters ever.

True, it's just matter of what's an appropriate restriction for what kind of character.


Try spreading out your optimization, rather than throwing all of your eggs into one focused push. Make a list of things that are breakable -- Diplomancy, high DC Save or Dies, extreme focus on battlefield control, minionmancy, and so on -- and avoid focusing on any of those. Your character can access elements of them, such as adding ranks to Diplomacy with a decent Charisma, but don't add more than token effort in any of them. If you really need to focus on something, focus on immunities and defensive numbers, then give yourself some mild-but-useful abilities to affect the world around you.

How about focusing on a shaper psion/constructor who focuses entirely on defense and using low-level powers at minimal augmentation (and no more than one fully augmented astral construct at a time) for maximum stamina and utility to replace the party's skillmonkey? Instead of using overpowered options like poison creation, focus on trying to think outside the box with the toolbox of powers at your disposal. No blasting, no novas, no major action economy breakage (other than maybe Linked Power specifically to overcome long manifesting times for your metacreation powers). Have fun, but don't put too much emphasis on any one area.

Sadly I never had much experience with Psionic's so I'm a bit lost on what you're trying to say here.

[Craft (Cheese)]

That is insanely limited though... All my feats basically become +3 HP or +3 skill points.

That's sort of the point.

[Gwazi Magnum]

I'd recommend picking intentionally sup-optimal archetypes. Play an archer, for example, or a sword-and-board guy. Play half-elves and half-orcs. Specialize in evocation and ban conjuration and transmutation. And suchlike.

I'd pin that one more on the GM than on you. For the most part, "balance" only matters between players. If one character is way stronger or way weaker than everyone else, it's a problem. But as long as the party is working at approximately the same level, a GM can just dial the CR of encounters up or down to compensate.

That character never saw play. I just looked at the finished build and realized the destructive power it had.

True though with picking bad archetypes. I know one idea I had in the past was making a mounted archer, which has the problem of mass feat requirements.
The issue is though I don't know of this could actually end up being broken or not though if it was pulled off.


Go VoP monk. There's nothing to optimize there but skills, skill tricks, feats, race, and ACFs.

True :P

But this is a very specific build as well.
It would suck for someone's only way to downgrade to be "Just be ______".


you can always ask someone else for help; or to make a character for you.

It's also possible that there is no happy middle ground for you; that if you make a character weak, and challenges come up which you know you could have dealt with if you'd used your optimization, you will not enjoy the experience. and if you fully use your optimization you will cause different damage to others' experience.
This would just fall into the issue of incompatible gaming groups.
The larger the difference between you and the people you play with, the more likely this is to happen.

To be perfectly honest, the DM welcomes the challenge and my optimizing was never something that annoyed the players. Some are even asking for aid/advice on their characters so they themselves can be just as powerful.

The issue is though that I'm finding I really just lost the ability to make a non-optimized character.

[Zrak]

My statement was meant as a followup to your response to tvtyrant's suggestion of making yourself invulnerable in order to draw aggro; that only works in video games, where the enemy AI can be exploited, and not in tabletop, where the enemies are as smart as the DM is.

So, really, it depends on who the DM is. :smallwink:

Seriously, though, I've survived some fights I shouldn't have not because the DM chose to spare my character, but because he was so focused on killing the stupid druid/summoner/whatever that we all got ignored. I'm sure I've also done this as a DM.

[Rubik]

It's perfectly possible to build a useful and interesting monk (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=15474863#post15474863), though making a VoP one that's anywhere near as useful is much more difficult.

Give yourself a challenge. Start with something extremely suboptimal and optimize the hell out of it using everything at your disposal. That way you can be considerably more powerful than anyone would expect you to be, and yet you're still not all that powerful.

[Red Fel]

Here's a reverse/odd question for you guys.

How do I not optimize a character?

It seems simple/self-explanatory. But I've been noticing that I've been looking at d&d mechanics and optimizing builds so often now that trying to make a non-optimized build never seems to happen.

My Munchkin/Optimize side always turns on part way and fixes things to make the character better and stronger.

So I guess a more appropriate wording of the question is "How do you make an optimized character and avoid the urge to go back and optimize it?" and "How do you try to enjoy the game without an optimized character when there's so many glaring holes and weaknesses that the DM could simply exploit?

Your question presumes that there is a single definition for "optimized." The term, as it's commonly used, refers to building a character around a particular function, usually numeric (i.e. best Sneak Attack damage, highest Caster Level or Manifester Level, most effective use of Pounce or Time Stands Still, etc.). However, the literal definition simply refers to the best way to reach Goal X. X doesn't have to be a good goal to reach. As Grod points out, for example, you could optimize towards a less-than-effective goal, such as the "best archer" or "best monk." Even though these are concepts which can be played quite well, they will rarely be considered "high-op."

Another idea altogether, as others have mentioned, is to optimize around an idea, rather than a mechanic. Come up with something that sounds fun and cool, then simply apply the mechanics to the idea, rather than redesigning the idea to fit the best mechanics.

For example, a Kobold would make an absolutely awful Barbarian. Just awful. Heavy Str penalty, Con penalty, and size penalties. Oh, and Light Sensitivity. But how awesome would it be to play Tiktik the Mad, a frothing, raging, teeny-tiny smash machine? Sure, the mechanics might hurt you, as would everything else because you're puny, but it would be fun.

And then you stop there. Before you start looking at homebrewed feats or classes, ACFs that would make up for your miserable stat penalties, or Dragonwrought (for the love of the Lord Below, avoid Dragonwrought), just stop. Let the character be cool on its own, without mechanical assistance. Step back and enjoy the image of a small lizardthing wielding a warhammer twice his size, roaring with berserk fury as he charges headlong into certain death.

That's an extreme example, but that's the idea. Optimize around the image, not the mechanics. It's a form of optimizing which, if done carefully, keeps you from overshadowing the party, and makes for a fun time.

[Gwazi Magnum]

It's perfectly possible to build a useful and interesting monk (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=15474863#post15474863), though making a VoP one that's anywhere near as useful is much more difficult.

Give yourself a challenge. Start with something extremely suboptimal and optimize the hell out of it using everything at your disposal. That way you can be considerably more powerful than anyone would expect you to be, and yet you're still not all that powerful.

Very true.

There's three classes like that off the top of my head: Monk, Fighter, Commoner.

Though Commoner... that gives me nothing at all... :/
If I were to do this I'd probably do Monk and/or Fighter.

Any other low tier classes you think might work for a suboptiminal concept?


Your question presumes that there is a single definition for "optimized." The term, as it's commonly used, refers to building a character around a particular function, usually numeric (i.e. best Sneak Attack damage, highest Caster Level or Manifester Level, most effective use of Pounce or Time Stands Still, etc.). However, the literal definition simply refers to the best way to reach Goal X. X doesn't have to be a good goal to reach. As Grod points out, for example, you could optimize towards a less-than-effective goal, such as the "best archer" or "best monk." Even though these are concepts which can be played quite well, they will rarely be considered "high-op."

Another idea altogether, as others have mentioned, is to optimize around an idea, rather than a mechanic. Come up with something that sounds fun and cool, then simply apply the mechanics to the idea, rather than redesigning the idea to fit the best mechanics.

For example, a Kobold would make an absolutely awful Barbarian. Just awful. Heavy Str penalty, Con penalty, and size penalties. Oh, and Light Sensitivity. But how awesome would it be to play Tiktik the Mad, a frothing, raging, teeny-tiny smash machine? Sure, the mechanics might hurt you, as would everything else because you're puny, but it would be fun.

And then you stop there. Before you start looking at homebrewed feats or classes, ACFs that would make up for your miserable stat penalties, or Dragonwrought (for the love of the Lord Below, avoid Dragonwrought), just stop. Let the character be cool on its own, without mechanical assistance. Step back and enjoy the image of a small lizardthing wielding a warhammer twice his size, roaring with berserk fury as he charges headlong into certain death.

That's an extreme example, but that's the idea. Optimize around the image, not the mechanics. It's a form of optimizing which, if done carefully, keeps you from overshadowing the party, and makes for a fun time.

I get what you're saying, and such concepts are fun.
But if you simply do something like Barbarian + Kobold = Go.

You're most likely going to be taken back to the drawing boards when said character dies.
I personally feel some work might be wanted to make it at least viable, but this could easily just be the optimizer of me trying too hard again.

[CIDE]

My least optimized characters were almost always the ones that I built fluff-first entirely for the purpose of having fun or accomplishing a role or purpose in a story. Or something for the "cool" factor with little regard for how I might somehow best the other people. I understand this method may not work for everyone since sometimes optimized=fun to some people whereas others the two terms aren't exactly synonymous in most cases.

For example I was in a game playing as a Ninja. The DM's world operates similarly to how ninja's were in 2e AD&D with clans and such and it was generally acknowledged that once you were in the only way out was death. And I was using a ninja that flaked on the clan. That said while playing a ninja the character would not allow themselves to be seen as a ninja and tried to act like a rogue to try to fool everyone. Even by the end of that campaign the other characters never knew that they had a ninja/assassin in the group instead of a really ****ty rogue and it was fun as hell; even if the story ended prematurely and we didn't get to play out the cat-and-mouse part of the game.

In that case the lack of optimization was on some level even explained by the in-character situation. Character wasn't getting any additional training but instead learned from the outside world. No extra funds from the clan either nor any spiffy magic items like other clans members might have; just what the party earned and such (no one crafted).

[Rubik]

ToB classes have a reasonably high floor, but a low ceiling. They're optimizable, but not by much. Why not try that?

[HaikenEdge]

Have you considered just stretching the character too thin? Say, optimize a character who can fight and sneak around competently without the help of magic, but can also use magic, but will not use magic to sneak around or fight?

[ericgrau]

It's a game and games are supposed to be a challenge, so I say continue to optimize but do it within limits. Make sticking to your theme a priority and optimize in a way that makes the theme happen well. Also limit how strong your options are; don't use anything individual option that's stronger than what's typical for your group. Even if it's only a little stronger many such options can add up fast.

If you don't optimize at all you aren't really playing an adventure game anymore. If you overoptimize it can likewise be too much of a cake walk and tick of the people you overshadow. Setting your power at whatever you feel like isn't a much better challenge either. Rather, only use the options on par with what others are using and fight to survive.

From there I think having lots of fun roleplaying options come naturally, because there tends to be a top 2% that's much stronger than the rest, 10% that's nearly useless most of the time and now you suddenly went from 2% to opening up the other 88%.

[Phelix-Mu]

Here's my strategy. I'll try to fit it in three steps.

1.) Pick something unoptimal as a base concept. Usually this involves some terrible combo of low-tiers, maybe with a dash of magic or initiating to salvage some combat effectiveness or utility.

2.) Rule out some max-level of cheese or apply some kind of self-nerf. Even if the DM isn't ruling stuff out, good rules are things like "I won't use Dragon Magz" or "let's use only two or less ACFs" or "no Unearthed Arcana" or "no Battle Jump" or "no spells higher than 6th level." These can be effective nerfs or just a random challenge to work with less than the whole set of resources available.

3.) Now with some arbitrary restrictions to a less than optimal concept, OPTIMIZE AWAY. You've significantly lowered your op-ceiling, so you can probably go all gangbusters and still not be snapping the game into tiny twiglets. It all depends on how severe you were with your restrictions, though; if I limit myself to "Dread Necro" and "no Libris Mortis," then I can probably still get a pretty crazy build online with little difficulty. On the other hand, if I take 15 levels of monk, I can probably cap it off with 5 level of just about anything, and still end up looking relatively balanced (exception given to the participants of Tippy's Terribly Terrific Trial, of course).

[Raven777]

List everything you would do to optimize your given build, then willingly choose to not do some of it.

[Oncoming Storm]

Start from a character idea which interests you. tie it into the story, and choose your options accordingly. Don't take power over flavor. It's really that simple.

Failing that, play a gish. Gish are good, solid characters, but rarely OP. optimize to your hearts content.

[Vhaidara]

Play a Knight from PH2. Get a reach weapon and spiked armor. Be the tank. Yes, you can actually be a tank if you're a knight, because you actually get a taunt at level 4.

My understanding is that knight is a terrible class, but it is awesome. You basically walk up to the army of enemies, yell "Come at me, brothers!" and take it like a man while they beat themselves to death on you.

[The Insanity]

IIRC, Knight's taunt ability works only on enemies that are at least near equal to you in CR (your level -2, i think). It won't work on mooks.

[danzibr]

Or take some crap combination and try to optimize the hell out of it. If it's crappy enough, you might end up just on par with everyone else. Soulknife is notoriously bad. As is Soulborn. Now pick a terrible race to go with it and try to overcome your obstacles.

[Red Fel]

Here's my strategy. I'll try to fit it in three steps.

1.) Pick something unoptimal as a base concept. Usually this involves some terrible combo of low-tiers, maybe with a dash of magic or initiating to salvage some combat effectiveness or utility.

2.) Rule out some max-level of cheese or apply some kind of self-nerf. Even if the DM isn't ruling stuff out, good rules are things like "I won't use Dragon Magz" or "let's use only two or less ACFs" or "no Unearthed Arcana" or "no Battle Jump" or "no spells higher than 6th level." These can be effective nerfs or just a random challenge to work with less than the whole set of resources available.

3.) Now with some arbitrary restrictions to a less than optimal concept, OPTIMIZE AWAY. You've significantly lowered your op-ceiling, so you can probably go all gangbusters and still not be snapping the game into tiny twiglets. It all depends on how severe you were with your restrictions, though; if I limit myself to "Dread Necro" and "no Libris Mortis," then I can probably still get a pretty crazy build online with little difficulty. On the other hand, if I take 15 levels of monk, I can probably cap it off with 5 level of just about anything, and still end up looking relatively balanced (exception given to the participants of Tippy's Terribly Terrific Trial, of course).

I think this combination is perfect, although I would replace #1 (pick something horrible) with "pick something that sounds fun, but is mechanically unsound" (not because the original language was wrong, but because the mind more readily embraces positively-charged language).

If you instinctively look at something (such as the Kobold Barbarian) and think, "Sure, it sounds cool, but it will die horribly because it lacks viability," then yes, optimizing has become second nature for you. But by first picking a non-optimized base, then by deliberately excluding certain overpowering factors from consideration... As Phelix mentioned, there is a limit to how high you can go with a low floor and a lowered ceiling. Even if you freely optimize within those restrictions.

[Dr Rabbit]

Focus on the Character, not the numbers.

If the goal is to win every battle and do more damage than anyone, then you'll be thinking about optimization.

Start with Who the person is, and what would make sense for them. Pick the feats and weapons and classes they would pick.

Play the character/theme/flavor. You won't do the most damage, but it's fun.

[SethoMarkus]

If you are having difficulty holding back in character creation, it may be helpful to take a step back and really think about why you optimize. Aside from wanting to build a playable character, there are plenty of reasons to optimize, and it might help to identify just why you do it.

Do you optimize to feel useful within the group? That you are afraid of not generating a character with any utility (mechanically)? If so, perhaps take a look at ways that you can contribute to the group without overshadowing the other players. Others have suggested that you find and fill a niche within the group- choose one or two tasks that your character can do well, but that is all they can do. Maybe build a scout character that is nearly impossible to detect, but has very little, if any, combat ability; you can sneak in and out and report back to the other players, but you completely rely on them to actually deal with the enemy.

Do you optimize for the challenge of the optimization? That you get enjoyment from seeing just how far you can push a character, not just in theory but in play? If so, as others have suggested, maybe you can handicap yourself in the character creation process by limited the resources you have to work with, the caster levels you'll allow yourself, the number of dips and cross-class that you will allow, etc. Give yourself some restrictions and work within those parameters, that way you'll be playing catch-up to the other players rather than starting ahead of them.

Do you optimize because character creation is what you really enjoy? That you have fun playing the game, but you have more fun creating characters? If so, maybe you can help the other characters create their characters? You have already stated that they have asked for you to help optimize their characters to make them as strong as your own, so why not do that? If the DM can keep up (and enjoys the arms race) of challenging your optimization, why not help the other players have equally optimized characters? That way, no one gets left behind (as long as you explain what the characters can do to each player).

Do you optimize because you want your character to be the best (at what he/she does)? That you see optimization as a race that needs to be won? If so, you might want to see if you can get your thrill of optimization through optimization challenges such as the Iron Chef challenges and the Tippy Trials. This way, you can get the optimization out of your system and focus on one of the other aspects of the game when you play with friends.


And, finally, I'd say that if everyone at the gaming table is having fun, and no one else is complaining about your level of optimization, maybe just keep the course and continue as always? If everyone is having fun, that is what is really important. Some people like to be the hero, some people like to be the comic relief, and some people like to be the underdog. Don't feel like you need to sell yourself short if no one else has said anything to indicate that.

[jedipotter]

To NOT optimize you just need to do a couple things.

1.Roll for ability scores. Do not use any type of point buy. Ignore that rule about re-rolling. If you roll 3,9,11,4,10,11 then use that.

2.Don't use any friendly house rules like ''max hit points every level'' or ''sorcerers ger eschew materials for free''. So you can have a 10th level fighter with like 13 hit points or sorcerer that can't cast a spell as they don't have a handful of dirt.

3.When it comes to ''rule interpretations'', use the opposite of what you would normally think. That one line in an ability that says something like ''you can always act first on the round'', that you would normally say applies to everything the character does, like say spellcasting, and apply it to only that ability. Then you have a character that has a level in the Gambler prestige class that can only draw a card first in a round and not cast 9th level spells first in a round.

[Gamereaper]

Maybe this will work for you.

I have a text document showing what exactly I will do at each level and I stick with it no matter what. If the character has spells, I copy and paste them down AND the description. I copy and paste the feats and descriptions, I figure out by BAB, my saving throws, and other items to go up with leveling.
I then present all the information via printed copy or digital information to my DM/GM/ST to ensure whatever optimized build will in fact be possible.

This is great for a few reasons:

1) Makes character creation and leveling up seamless.

2) It shows the DM/GM/ST what exactly you are doing and makes things VERY clear between the two of you so no discrepancies show up later. This helps prevents you from having any "holes" or flaws in characters.

3) You take pride in putting the effort into the document in the first place, so you are less likely to deviate.


Hope this helps. ^_^

[DruidAlanon]

Just RP the character. Choose prestige/feats/spells/skills according to your character, his history, his emotions and his psychology. Create a theme for you character and then each option made, should be according to this theme.
Ok, an evocer/blaster mage sucks but, if that's what your story is all about, go for it. If you spend some time with another evocer ask your DM about his feats or some spells he uses and take some research alongside him. If you are near a war academy go for a related prestige, etc.

RP is the answer for me.

[BWR]

You can do what a friend of mine does.

1. Come up with a concept, build a character. Throw build out the window.
2. Make a similar one that's not quite so good. Throw build out the window.
3. Make a similar one, but worse than the previous. Throw it out the window.
4. Make a similar one that's less powerful than the previous, hand to DM, argue that it's not too bad, end up being disliked by everyone else in the group for being too weird and powerful.
Get nerfed a bit in play.

Play.

[Augmental]

2.Don't use any friendly house rules like ''max hit points every level'' or ''sorcerers ger eschew materials for free''. So you can have a 10th level fighter with like 13 hit points or sorcerer that can't cast a spell as they don't have a handful of dirt.[/I]

The chance of a fighter rolling the lowest possible HP 10 levels in a row is one in a billion.

[jedipotter]

The chance of a fighter rolling the lowest possible HP 10 levels in a row is one in a billion.

It is not that rare as it might sound. Go ahead and roll some real dice.

A friend of mine, Andy, had the amazing ability to roll a one, every time he rolled for more hit points. No matter what level character, he always had less then 20 hit points.

[Grod_The_Giant]

3.When it comes to ''rule interpretations'', use the opposite of what you would normally think. That one line in an ability that says something like ''you can always act first on the round'', that you would normally say applies to everything the character does, like say spellcasting, and apply it to only that ability. Then you have a character that has a level in the Gambler prestige class that can only draw a card first in a round and not cast 9th level spells first in a round.
So... don't cheat/stretch RAW stupidly thin? Isn't that how practical optimization usually works?


Just RP the character. Choose prestige/feats/spells/skills according to your character, his history, his emotions and his psychology.
Building for thematics is one thing, but things like feat choice tend to be so tied up in the mechanics that it's impossible to know what a character would "think" about them. I mean, how does my wizard feel about Empower Spell verses Maximize Spell, since both do exactly the same thing (making blasty spells blastier) in his eyes?


As I said before, beyond avoiding obvious cheese (no Dragonwrought kobolds! No Nightstick stacking!), the most important thing is to make sure everyone in the party is on the same page-- and if given the option, it's better to help others with their builds than nerf yourself. Very few people like playing (unintentionally) weak characters, so everyone will probably have more fun if you can steer them towards the good stuff. If, as is the case here, your partymates are asking for help navigating the eternal morass that is 3.5...

[Augmental]

It is not that rare as it might sound. Go ahead and roll some real dice.

A friend of mine, Andy, had the amazing ability to roll a one, every time he rolled for more hit points. No matter what level character, he always had less then 20 hit points.

Did he ever try using a different set of dice? There may have been some physical defect in his dice.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Did he ever try using a different set of dice? There may have been some physical defect in his dice.
Truth. The probability of rolling ten 1s in a row on a d10 is (1/10)^10, which is something like .000000001%.

[AzureKnight]

Non optimization can be hard if you are so used to it that it becomes second nature. However try sticking to base race class etc from the players handbook and forgo any presige classes. If all available feats are limited by one source optimizing is possible, but not as well as if you had several sources at your disposal.

[The Insanity]

It is not that rare as it might sound. Go ahead and roll some real dice.
http://invisiblecastle.com/roller/search/1348373/

[Vhaidara]

Another fun idea that I've wanted to try for a while (and that is significanylt unoptimized) is to build a Fortune's Friend from Complete Scoundrel. The prestige class is built on Luck feats, which let you reroll from your daily luck pool. Each luck feat gives you an expanded set of things you can reroll, including skill checks, saves, attack rolls, damage, and (I believe) enemy attack rolls directed at you.

Also, the "capstone" luck feats are pretty awesome. There are 2 off them, one that, 1/day, lets you treat a nat 1 on a save as a nat 20. The other one, "Better Lucky than Good", is the same thing for attack rolls. Yes, you can turn a natural 1 on an attack roll into a natural 20 once a day.

This is actually my advice. Use feat paths that have looked interesting and stick with them. If there's a class you've ever been curious about how it would actually play, play it and stick with it.

Or, play a bard. Then your optimization does little more than upgrade you allies. Also, since your job is making everyone else better at their jobs, you can't fail your job. There is actually no pressure for you to do anything.

[Particle_Man]

I think DMG II has rules for "rolling character backgrounds" that effectively chooses your feats, etc., and even class levels for you. So that could give you a random character.

Another option is look at the high tier character classes (tier 5 or tier 6) and play one of those without multiclassing. Try the Samurai for a spin?

[Gwazi Magnum]

Have you considered just stretching the character too thin? Say, optimize a character who can fight and sneak around competently without the help of magic, but can also use magic, but will not use magic to sneak around or fight?

Isn't that basically a rogue/skill monkey?


Or take some crap combination and try to optimize the hell out of it. If it's crappy enough, you might end up just on par with everyone else. Soulknife is notoriously bad. As is Soulborn. Now pick a terrible race to go with it and try to overcome your obstacles.

Maybe. Seems fun.


I think this combination is perfect, although I would replace #1 (pick something horrible) with "pick something that sounds fun, but is mechanically unsound" (not because the original language was wrong, but because the mind more readily embraces positively-charged language).

If you instinctively look at something (such as the Kobold Barbarian) and think, "Sure, it sounds cool, but it will die horribly because it lacks viability," then yes, optimizing has become second nature for you. But by first picking a non-optimized base, then by deliberately excluding certain overpowering factors from consideration... As Phelix mentioned, there is a limit to how high you can go with a low floor and a lowered ceiling. Even if you freely optimize within those restrictions.

*Tries to find image response but failed*

Basically imagine a picture where someone promises to look at every day with a new light and then yell in rainbow colored text "I'm Depressed!".

Anyways. As for the Kobold Barbarian, I never denied optimizing was second nature to me


Focus on the Character, not the numbers.

If the goal is to win every battle and do more damage than anyone, then you'll be thinking about optimization.

Start with Who the person is, and what would make sense for them. Pick the feats and weapons and classes they would pick.

Play the character/theme/flavor. You won't do the most damage, but it's fun.

Kind of hard to do with most feats being pure numerical bonuses.


Do you optimize because character creation is what you really enjoy? That you have fun playing the game, but you have more fun creating characters? If so, maybe you can help the other characters create their characters? You have already stated that they have asked for you to help optimize their characters to make them as strong as your own, so why not do that? If the DM can keep up (and enjoys the arms race) of challenging your optimization, why not help the other players have equally optimized characters? That way, no one gets left behind (as long as you explain what the characters can do to each player).

This.

A lot of my fun comes from making characters.


To NOT optimize you just need to do a couple things.

1.Roll for ability scores. Do not use any type of point buy. Ignore that rule about re-rolling. If you roll 3,9,11,4,10,11 then use that.

2.Don't use any friendly house rules like ''max hit points every level'' or ''sorcerers ger eschew materials for free''. So you can have a 10th level fighter with like 13 hit points or sorcerer that can't cast a spell as they don't have a handful of dirt.

3.When it comes to ''rule interpretations'', use the opposite of what you would normally think. That one line in an ability that says something like ''you can always act first on the round'', that you would normally say applies to everything the character does, like say spellcasting, and apply it to only that ability. Then you have a character that has a level in the Gambler prestige class that can only draw a card first in a round and not cast 9th level spells first in a round.

1. True, that may help.

2. Our rule is strike even/half. If I roll I run the risk of getting above the norm.

3. That's how I already read the rules.


Maybe this will work for you.

I have a text document showing what exactly I will do at each level and I stick with it no matter what. If the character has spells, I copy and paste them down AND the description. I copy and paste the feats and descriptions, I figure out by BAB, my saving throws, and other items to go up with leveling.
I then present all the information via printed copy or digital information to my DM/GM/ST to ensure whatever optimized build will in fact be possible.

This is great for a few reasons:

1) Makes character creation and leveling up seamless.

2) It shows the DM/GM/ST what exactly you are doing and makes things VERY clear between the two of you so no discrepancies show up later. This helps prevents you from having any "holes" or flaws in characters.

3) You take pride in putting the effort into the document in the first place, so you are less likely to deviate.


Hope this helps. ^_^

Digital copies can be fun, I'll admit.

I'll probably try that again.


You can do what a friend of mine does.

1. Come up with a concept, build a character. Throw build out the window.
2. Make a similar one that's not quite so good. Throw build out the window.
3. Make a similar one, but worse than the previous. Throw it out the window.
4. Make a similar one that's less powerful than the previous, hand to DM, argue that it's not too bad, end up being disliked by everyone else in the group for being too weird and powerful.
Get nerfed a bit in play.

Play.

I do that, but reverse. :/


Another fun idea that I've wanted to try for a while (and that is significanylt unoptimized) is to build a Fortune's Friend from Complete Scoundrel. The prestige class is built on Luck feats, which let you reroll from your daily luck pool. Each luck feat gives you an expanded set of things you can reroll, including skill checks, saves, attack rolls, damage, and (I believe) enemy attack rolls directed at you.

Also, the "capstone" luck feats are pretty awesome. There are 2 off them, one that, 1/day, lets you treat a nat 1 on a save as a nat 20. The other one, "Better Lucky than Good", is the same thing for attack rolls. Yes, you can turn a natural 1 on an attack roll into a natural 20 once a day.

This is actually my advice. Use feat paths that have looked interesting and stick with them. If there's a class you've ever been curious about how it would actually play, play it and stick with it.

Or, play a bard. Then your optimization does little more than upgrade you allies. Also, since your job is making everyone else better at their jobs, you can't fail your job. There is actually no pressure for you to do anything.

I made such a character before.

Scrapped it because it had no strength of focus. It was mainly a commoner that could re-roll.


I think DMG II has rules for "rolling character backgrounds" that effectively chooses your feats, etc., and even class levels for you. So that could give you a random character.

Another option is look at the high tier character classes (tier 5 or tier 6) and play one of those without multiclassing. Try the Samurai for a spin?

I'd have to give it a look. Thanks. :)

[SciChronic]

I always optimize, i just optimize for non-combat purposes, such as being a skillmonkey. that way i get to be an optimized character, but not outshine the other party members. that way everyone gets to be happy.

consider "challenge" optimization builds where you specifically put yourself into a difficult position character-wise and optimize from there.

another option is a themed build where you go for a specific character design i.e.: captain america, crossbow theif, etc., etc.

[Particle_Man]

Actually, what if you optimized for crazy stuff like:

The character most associated with the Colour Blue (maybe start with a half Blue Dragon/Blue (goblin) Incarnate?

A character that as much as possible takes feats, spells, etc., that begin with the letter "E"?

A character that cannot cast the same spell twice until they have cast every other spell they know at least once?

[ShneekeyTheLost]

The problem is that optimization is entirely within the realm of intent, rather than output. In other words, it doesn't matter what you strive to do, whatever goal you are attempting to achieve, you are employing some level of optimization to get there.

Even if your goal was to create the most ineffectual character, that would again be an exercise in optimization.

The only way to not optimize, to some degree, is to simply throw stuff together haphazardly without regard to what it might make.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Dr Rabbit
Start with Who the person is, and what would make sense for them. Pick the feats and weapons and classes they would pick.

Play the character/theme/flavor. You won't do the most damage, but it's fun.

This is advice that I would follow. Think about what makes sense for the character, and develop the build from their perspective, letting them guide the choices that make sense at particular points in their life. Let the build unfold as a result of the personality and decisions of the character, rather than being designed for a specific goal or set of structural targets.


Originally Posted by Phelix-Mu
*3-Step Program for Optimizers Anonymous*

This is more of a mechanics-based approach, but still should be very effective, if you can discipline yourself.

:smalltongue:

[Kennisiou]

Usually I just pick a low-power or support archetype and let my optimizer's instinct run free within the restraints I've set up (like, for example, no incredibly strong prestiges, no spellcasting beyond 4th level, etc). I usually either wind up with a character that's not overpoweringly strong or a character that's super strong but nobody notices because everything he does is making everyone else strong. They think it's the no-optimization barbarian or fighter that's doing all the work when it's really me holding the enemies still and then buffing the **** out of them that makes it work.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Usually I just pick a low-power or support archetype and let my optimizer's instinct run free within the restraints I've set up (like, for example, no incredibly strong prestiges, no spellcasting beyond 4th level, etc). I usually either wind up with a character that's not overpoweringly strong or a character that's super strong but nobody notices because everything he does is making everyone else strong. They think it's the no-optimization barbarian or fighter that's doing all the work when it's really me holding the enemies still and then buffing the **** out of them that makes it work.

Personally I find I don't like being the back seat buffer though.
I like being in the action somehow.

[Kennisiou]

Personally I find I don't like being the back seat buffer though.
I like being in the action somehow.

Pick a low-power archetype. Optimize samurai or swashbuckler or unfixed hexblade (yeah, the complete warrior classes kinda suck) without taking levels in anything that gives maneuvers or improved casting. You'll find that you get an interesting optimizer challenge while also being a front-line fighter and not really risking overpowering the group in any significant way.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Pick a low-power archetype. Optimize samurai or swashbuckler or unfixed hexblade (yeah, the complete warrior classes kinda suck) without taking levels in anything that gives maneuvers or improved casting. You'll find that you get an interesting optimizer challenge while also being a front-line fighter and not really risking overpowering the group in any significant way.

This might just be due to the DM's inexperience.

But the last campaign I made the DM cringe just by ramping up my strength high as a fighter and killing all the big guys he sent at me in one turn.

[Kennisiou]

It's probably a DM inexperience thing, or due to template stacking cheese occasionally adding a ton of bull**** to early level encounters. Generally I disallow having more than one +0 template in my campaigns just to keep people from stacking multiple of them to accomplish crazy bull****.

If your DM has trouble dealing with an optimized fighter, though... jeezus. Like I dunno. Show him some more effective ways to run combats and some tougher enemies? Like an optimized fighter that isn't doing silly size-increased spiked chain bull**** is generally pretty easy to handle, and spiked chain bull**** usually doesn't make them much harder.

[Gwazi Magnum]

It's probably a DM inexperience thing, or due to template stacking cheese occasionally adding a ton of bull**** to early level encounters. Generally I disallow having more than one +0 template in my campaigns just to keep people from stacking multiple of them to accomplish crazy bull****.

If your DM has trouble dealing with an optimized fighter, though... jeezus. Like I dunno. Show him some more effective ways to run combats and some tougher enemies? Like an optimized fighter that isn't doing silly size-increased spiked chain bull**** is generally pretty easy to handle, and spiked chain bull**** usually doesn't make them much harder.

Originally he started with a Strength of 23 and used a double bladed sword.

Granted, I mis-read both the two-weapon fighting rules with dual weapons and the two-weapon multi-attack things then.

(I thought double weapons added 1 1/2 STR bonus to each end and that I could attack with both ends in a standard attack).

But even after fixing that he was a big handful for him.

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

Character took a temporary leave to make it easier on the DM.
When he came back he had a long axe and a Strength close to 30 (He was around Level 10-12 at the time by now) so he had 10ft reach.

Nothing close to what I see some of the fighter builds get too in terms of ridiculous. But he still packed a big punch, expecially compared to any other player. To the point we had a guest DM who was very experienced in d&d (though in 4th) lose his breath when saw me calculate the damage in a round to be 200 something.

[Twilightwyrm]

I do say, I kind of sympathize with your point. It is not so much that you are incapable of unoptimized play, the issue is that you take an tinkerer's approach to character creation: how can I make it better? How can I shore up this weakness or that? How can I prepare in case X happens? I also empathize with the tendency to not want to make a character that they DM can easily exploit (especially if you have a DM that you don't entirely trust not to exploit* said weakness). With this in mind then, there are a few ways you can go about doing things: first, do as others here say and be optimized, but unobtrusive. So long as you aren't drawing the DM's, or other PC's, frustration, you should generally be fine.
Alternatively, don't just pick a character concept that is limiting, pick a character class that is limited in power and utility. Ever tried playing a straight Swashbuckler? No, not Daring Outlaw Swashbuckler/Rogue, no not crossed with the Disciple of Dispater for crit optimization. Just Swashbuckler. Yeah, those first couple levels are good, but even with arcane stunt and insightful strike, you just aren't going to have the kind of non-social capabilities to break the game. Of course, if you really want to go with this, play a Complete Warrior Samurai. Or if you want to be less horrible, be something cool, but crappy like a Soulknife, or the Knight. Or, if you really want casting, a single class Spellthief. In general, doing these things will limit the power plateau you can achieve, allowing you more room to optimize to your hearts content without worrying overmuch about becoming too powerful, or indeed breaking the game. This would be my general suggestion.
Finally, you could also simply play a focused shapeshifter. This way, you can pick several forms that are serviceable, but do not break the game, while leaving back your slightly more powerful forms for when the DM tries getting uppity and exploiting your generous nature. I would not advise escalating to severely broken forms, but in general this lets you be sure your weaknesses are covered, while also being able to adjust your relative level of power from situation to situation as you deem necessary.

*By exploit, I do not mean cause an enemies yo take advantage of on a few occasions, as natural, thereby making things challenging. I mean use as a means to shut you down entirely, which is not challenging, but frustrating.

[Vhaidara]

If the problem is boss monsters dying to quickly, I would give your DM the same advice I've given both of my current ones: Don't go for damage when making the boss, just give them a ****-ton of hit points.

Admittedly, my group is mostly a bunch of glass cannons, especially since our tank (the druid) wasn't present for the last dungeon, but he managed to make a really satisfying boss fight by putting us up against a sorcerer at level 12 and had 170 HP. It did just fine, but the DM regrets not giving him 300 because we still managed to bring him down very quickly.

[Gwazi Magnum]

I do say, I kind of sympathize with your point. It is not so much that you are incapable of unoptimized play, the issue is that you take an tinkerer's approach to character creation: how can I make it better? How can I shore up this weakness or that? How can I prepare in case X happens? I also empathize with the tendency to not want to make a character that they DM can easily exploit (especially if you have a DM that you don't entirely trust not to exploit* said weakness). With this in mind then, there are a few ways you can go about doing things: first, do as others here say and be optimized, but unobtrusive. So long as you aren't drawing the DM's, or other PC's, frustration, you should generally be fine.
Alternatively, don't just pick a character concept that is limiting, pick a character class that is limited in power and utility. Ever tried playing a straight Swashbuckler? No, not Daring Outlaw Swashbuckler/Rogue, no not crossed with the Disciple of Dispater for crit optimization. Just Swashbuckler. Yeah, those first couple levels are good, but even with arcane stunt and insightful strike, you just aren't going to have the kind of non-social capabilities to break the game. Of course, if you really want to go with this, play a Complete Warrior Samurai. Or if you want to be less horrible, be something cool, but crappy like a Soulknife, or the Knight. Or, if you really want casting, a single class Spellthief. In general, doing these things will limit the power plateau you can achieve, allowing you more room to optimize to your hearts content without worrying overmuch about becoming too powerful, or indeed breaking the game. This would be my general suggestion.
Finally, you could also simply play a focused shapeshifter. This way, you can pick several forms that are serviceable, but do not break the game, while leaving back your slightly more powerful forms for when the DM tries getting uppity and exploiting your generous nature. I would not advise escalating to severely broken forms, but in general this lets you be sure your weaknesses are covered, while also being able to adjust your relative level of power from situation to situation as you deem necessary.

*By exploit, I do not mean cause an enemies yo take advantage of on a few occasions, as natural, thereby making things challenging. I mean use as a means to shut you down entirely, which is not challenging, but frustrating.

Sticking to one low tier class will probably help a lot in this regard.

I'll give a look at a number of them and see what strikes my fancy.
Currently I'm considering Fighter or Barbarian though for a Strength based brawler.


If the problem is boss monsters dying to quickly, I would give your DM the same advice I've given both of my current ones: Don't go for damage when making the boss, just give them a ****-ton of hit points.

Admittedly, my group is mostly a bunch of glass cannons, especially since our tank (the druid) wasn't present for the last dungeon, but he managed to make a really satisfying boss fight by putting us up against a sorcerer at level 12 and had 170 HP. It did just fine, but the DM regrets not giving him 300 because we still managed to bring him down very quickly.

True. Though I think his concern there is that he can't do much else well which makes the boss long but easy pickings.

Though do you know of any good monsters with high HP I can point the DM towards?

[Fates]

Play a low-tiered class and optimize away. It's what I do in the group I play with IRL. Mind you, it only works if the rest of the party is higher-tiered. If they're not, I'd suggest doing what many people have suggested and simply playing to a theme.

[MonochromeTiger]

play for the RP: sounds simple sure but I mean really think about your character, find some weaknesses that are fitting for them and avoid feats that fix them (your wisdom is low you say? the character is impulsive, if something requires patience or prolonged work don't take a feat or skill for it). if they think something is interesting use it no matter how impractical it is (really like the ocean? get a ton of water travel related potions and scrolls...middle of the desert you say? sokay you can hold on to them till you reach water).

be giving: if something really nice shows up in the campaign, be it from treasure in a dungeon or an item in the shop, take the other characters into account first. maybe your character is a bit overconfident or a bit too worried for their friends, either way offer the item or gold to someone who could use it. if you can use it too just ask for their old item as a trade, they won't need it, they have better now.

[Honest Tiefling]

I assume you are choosing not to optimize for RP reasons. If so, look at your character sheet and see if everything makes sense for a person of their race, profession and background. If something is wonky, consider not doing it, even if it means taking a more flavorful but crappier choice. (And I don't mean options that file off the serial numbers)

Then, go through the character and decide what you have chosen to be fun for you, what is optimization, and what is fun for your party. Keep the latter and the former, ditch the middle.

Hope that helps.

[Particle_Man]

Try a CW Samurai/Warmage/Arcane Archer (with 10 levels in the latter). Now *that* would be hard to make over-powered. :smallsmile:

[pwykersotz]

One method I use to not optimize when playing extremely low powered games or when creating NPC's for newbie players to battle is to ignore what a feat does and pay attention to what it is named.

Is the barbarian tough? He should have Toughness.
Can the fighter go for miles? He should have Endurance.
Is the rogue fast? He should have Run.

Also, from what you posted earlier, you worry overmuch about survivability and usefulness. Optimization is about being the best within whatever confines you choose to work in, and it generally leads to characters with a very high survival rate. Not optimizing is about not caring how survivable you are, or any numbers for that matter. The Kobold Barbarian that was mentioned is a great idea in that regard. He doesn't know that a shortsword is suboptimal, he just knows it's light and doesn't strain his arm, while still giving a wicked cut.

If you're looking for ideas on how that could be any fun at all, try googling and reading up on Joe Wood the Commoner.

[Prince Zahn]

Hi I should begin by stating that I may have the exact opposite of your problem, where I play lots of Wizards and high-tier classes and don't bother optimizing them. And that has pretty much become second nature to me, so perhaps my 2 cents will come in handy?

What I recommend is if you play a low-op spellcaster - pick spells that are cool or handy instead of awesome - Baleful polymorph and Dominate person are awesome, Wall of Stone and Shadow Evocation are cool. I have no doubt you can grasp what I mean by "cool and fun" compared to "awesome and powerful", and once you have a firm grasp of the difference you can go back to using awesome spells - but more responsibly.

Specializing your spell-list, as mentioned earlier in this thread, is a great system, but I also add by saying that your spell repertoire is at it's best when it reflects whom your character is! an enchanter may focus on convincing NPCs to do things his way and relying on a charm spell when there is no other way to make the NPC cooperate.

Abandon that fear of your character dying! Or, at least - don't be afraid to play a lesser character just because he MIGHT die. By the very fact that you're playing there's always a chance that you die in game, that doesn't change whether you play a half-orc bard or a human barbarian/Frenzied Berzerker/bear warrior or what have you. If you have a cool idea that would be fun to play, it would be silly not to play it - even if it is weak.

Advice for non-op characters in general:

K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple, Stupid) applies very well here - a heavy hitting fighter(perhaps with a signature move at best) or a rogue who's best at sweet-talking. Having less options makes the job easier on everyone - your DM knows what you're likely to use and your party can know very well what you can do help them.
aid the party! You don't need to be super powerful if you help others shine - regardless of who's at fault for it not working for you the first time, you should consider the buffs(or debuffs) based on what's cool - going back to the enchanter: using hold monster to freeze the giant in place is awesome, but wouldn't it be more memorable to make it burst into crying with torrent of tears? You don't even need to go too far in optimizing DCs either - Fox's cunning and G./spell focus is enough to make your point while not breaking the game.
try not to think so much what you can do for your character - it won't be easy but take comfort in the fact that you'll make a competent character who isn't a bloody commoner! Fireball and/or whirlwind attack+disarm are fine, but when either of those start getting much more complex then that - save it for when that sort of role is called for.
STUDY YOUR FELLOW PLAYERS. When making a character, examine at what kinds of damage, skill modifiers, etc. the rest of the party is reaching, depending on your character your numbers should be +- that range, with regards of course to what you should be better or worse at, but try not to get too far above or below the majority's ballpark. If it helps you can set yourself a rule of thumb like "If my character is dealing on average more weapon damage than x2 than the fighter of the party, I must've gone too far."
C.O.P - Coolness Over Power - a gaming motto you should play by: you can make quite the awesome show even without optimizing!
Look at some feats,skills/tricks, spells class features etc. and as a thought exercise think what you can use to impress your peers, like a flaming sphere you can run with to block incoming arrows, or that warlock invocation that separates your hand from your body and making it your scout for you all Addams Family style. This stuff doesn't break the game but it makes your character very impressive. The C.O.P's job is to help you keep yourself in check while still having a good time.

[Gwazi Magnum]

So largely play as the character, simplify the build and look at feats and stuff for their theme and not so much their function?

[SowZ]

I like to pick an unoptimized concept, (dual wielding pistol crossbows, drunken master, damage reduction,) and optimize within that. You can also impose restrictions on yourself like two books only. Or pick bad race/class combos and don't start any stat above 15. Stuff like that.

[TETanglebrooke]

Multi-class Bard/Monk/Paladin.

[Twilightwyrm]

Sticking to one low tier class will probably help a lot in this regard.

I'll give a look at a number of them and see what strikes my fancy.
Currently I'm considering Fighter or Barbarian though for a Strength based brawler.


I'd say alright, but Barbarian and Fighter can actually get pretty destructive when properly optimized (which I gather you want the latitude to do). Barbarian's damage can quickly escalate into the hundreds, as can the Fighter's with proper feat selection, and the wide variety of feats, while inferior to actual class features, should not be taken lightly. You'll have the spare feats to fly, short-range teleport, and fear-cripple just by 6th level, (in addition to a couple basic damage feats), and these options only continue to expand as you can levels (considerably if you dip even 1 level of cleric*). This is because, while even a lowly commoner can do most any one or two of these things, you have enough extra feats that you have little reason not to.
By comparison, classes like the Swashbuckler needs a few more feats to be effective, and therefore cannot afford to invest in nice things like flying and teleportation.
Might I suggest if you want to play a Fighter, that you try the Sneak Attack Thug variant from UA. You lose bonus feats, so you'll have an excuse not to go out of your want to gain lots of utility feats, and you'll have both Sneak Attack, and an expanded skill list and pool, without getting into UMD or other such areas that a Rogue would make tempting to invest in. And you'll have high Life, AC, and the (surprising to your enemies) ability to suddenly deal out damaging strikes to their vitals they wouldn't see coming, all with a full BAB, with the ability to track down marks in Urban environments to boot, so you can have fun as a tough bounty-hunter type character.

[Telok]

Truenamer. By the book and without an Item Familiar.

[Aotrs Commander]

Pick a base caster, not a specialist (i.e. basic wizard, cleric, druid, sorcerer and NOT something like Warmage) and then pick nothing apart from blasting spells. No metamagic and no feats that increase spell damage (apart from maybe Suddens), no buffs, no utilities, just lots and lots and lots of blasting spells. Spend your feats on, I dunno, the standard PBS+Precise Shot plus save -boosters or weapons feats or something - maybe play an Elf and use archery as your feat sink. Single class, no PrCs.

That, I'm given to understand, is fairly sub-optimal, so it might be worth a shot.


(Admittedly, this describes most of my casters, wizard especially...! but to an extreme even I've gone to.)

[Faily]

These days, I usually pick a prestige class or a feat-chain because I thought it looked interested, or I liked the flavor of it, and wanted to try it. Go for flavor, rather than "zomg this is so powerful!". Read the fluff to the prestige classes, and find one that makes you think "that sounds kinda fun".

I once played a Druid prestige-classed into Swanmay (and with Vow of Purity, there aren't many choices on Druid-armor)... basically giving up one caster level, Wild Shape and further progress of Animal Companion. Was it low-powered (as much as a Druid can get)? Yes. But it was a fun concept. :)

[Talya]

Here's a reverse/odd question for you guys.

How do I not optimize a character?

It seems simple/self-explanatory. But I've been noticing that I've been looking at d&d mechanics and optimizing builds so often now that trying to make a non-optimized build never seems to happen.

My Munchkin/Optimize side always turns on part way and fixes things to make the character better and stronger.

So I guess a more appropriate wording of the question is "How do you make an optimized character and avoid the urge to go back and optimize it?" and "How do you try to enjoy the game without an optimized character when there's so many glaring holes and weaknesses that the DM could simply exploit?



I don't understand this.

There's no line you can draw between simply making good mechanical choices and optimizing...they're the same thing. A wizard putting his highest ability score in Intelligence is optimizing. A fighter putting his highest ability score in Strength, and picking a greatsword and power attack? That's optimizing. There's no difference in substance or goal between these obvious choices and building an uber-charger or the mailman or trying to play a batman wizard with your spell selection.

NOT optimizing is picking mechanical choices that do not work or have no synergy.

Anybody who ever complains about optimizing being somehow distasteful who hasn't selected metamagic on their fighter or played a wizard with 8 INT is being hypocritical.

What IS problematic is stealing the spotlight from the rest of the party in every fight. You have to know the appropriate power level for the group you're playing in.

[BWR]

False dichotomy.

There is a big spectrum of choice or how well something works, it's not either/or. Everyone else understood that. You also ignored that not all DMs are as good at building as some players, and keeping in line with the DM is at least as important as the other players.

[Talya]

False dichotomy.

There is a big spectrum of choice or how well something works, it's not either/or. Everyone else understood that. You also ignored that not all DMs are as good at building as some players, and keeping in line with the DM is at least as important as the other players.


it's not a false dichotomy at all. Keeping your power level in line with the other players (or even the DM's campaign, although I'd dispute that... trivializing encounters is your job as players -- you're not supposed to hold back to make the fight look harder than it is and maybe cause a player death) is actually a form of optimization in and of itself.

NOT optimizing is simply ignoring mechanical elements of the game in their entirety, and making an idiot wizard, or a clumsy weakling fighter. NOT optimizing is designing your character with a blindfold and a dartboard. If you choose all your feats based on the fluff description and ignore the mechanical effect altogether, this basically will approximate the blindfold/dartboard method.

Optimizing is building a character to fit a specific concept, niche, and/or role. Optimizing well requires understanding the game mechanics. It does not mean you're trying to break the game, utilizing "cheese", or overpowering anybody else. Oh, if that's your goal, a good optimizer certainly can do so. The question is not "How do I not optimize?" The question is "How do I best optimize this character concept to fit into this party?" Building a druid that never steals the spotlight from a party of a fighter, rogue, and monk, and yet can fill their role effectively and assist in winning battles, requires more optimization skill than building The Mailman.

[The Oni]

Make a character that's *not* an adventurer. Be optimized...at something that isn't dungeoneering. Pick someone with Perform who's not a bard. Take the Run and Antagonize feats. Take potentially devastating flaws. Once you've been sufficiently disadvantaged, THEN you can start optimizing to compensate. You'll basically handicap yourself so when you start optimizing you won't overtake the group.

In my current game I'm playing a Barbarian with one arm, it's kinda neat.

[Talya]

Make a character that's *not* an adventurer. Be optimized...at something that isn't dungeoneering. Pick someone with Perform who's not a bard. Take the Run and Antagonize feats. Take potentially devastating flaws. Once you've been sufficiently disadvantaged, THEN you can start optimizing to compensate. You'll basically handicap yourself so when you start optimizing you won't overtake the group.


I'm not sure this is a good method of fitting into a specific power level. Once you set the disadvantage you've given yourself as something to overcome, you can easily surpass the target range, and outclass everything again. Conversely, if you set the disadvantages too severely, you might never actually overcome them, and remain ineffective/a drain on party resources.


Which isn't to say it's not a fun challenge on its own -- but it is a sloppy way to limit your power level if you're targeting a specific range.

[The Oni]

Well he's already said he can't help himself as an optimizer.

[Particle_Man]

Multi-class Bard/Monk/Paladin.

There are two feats in Complete Adventurer (Ascetic Knight, Devoted Performer) that would help with that, I think.

Now try Samurai/Warmage/Arcane Archer without using Iaijutsu Focus. :smallsmile:

[Particle_Man]

I don't understand this.

I do. You and the OP are using different definitions for "optimize". The OP is worried about getting too powerful for the other players to have enjoyment, which you call "stealing the spotlight" but which the OP considers "optimizing".

[Karoht]

Great way to build a non-optimized character.
Build your character around pranking, jokes, and other 'fun' things.

For example, I built a Sorcerer who disguised as much of his spellcasting as possible, and tried only to prank people, rather than kill them. Take spells not because they are effective, take spells because they have excellent effective prank material. Since he took Trickery Devotion, I worked the idea of trickery and deception and pranking into the character concept as much as possible.
The sorcerer was a gnome. Every morning he would regain spells, then take 20 disguising himself as a Dwarf Cleric/Paladin. Using scrolls and the False Priest archetype, he had the party convinced that he was indeed a Dwarf Cleric, up until they day they made a spellcraft check to see me Arcane Fusion something to death.

A Bard would fit in a pinch. You're already built to be the jester of the group, and worst comes to worst you can start using Joker-Bard tactics.

Feats, spells, abilities, if it has the potential for a good joke or a good prank, or looks like it might just be fun all around, take it.

[Talya]

I do. You and the OP are using different definitions for "optimize". The OP is worried about getting too powerful for the other players to have enjoyment, which you call "stealing the spotlight" but which the OP considers "optimizing".

That, itself, is problematic.

That paints anyone who enjoys the mechanical part of character-building (by definition, someone who optimizes) as someone who will make the rest of the party irrelevant. That leads to people making arguments like the Stormwind fallacy, or who somehow believe optimizing is wrong, because they mistakenly equate the mechanical aspect of the game with munchkinry and cheese.

[OldTrees1]

That, itself, is problematic.

That paints anyone who enjoys the mechanical part of character-building (by definition, someone who optimizes) as someone who will make the rest of the party irrelevant. That leads to people making arguments like the Stormwind fallacy, or who somehow believe optimizing is wrong, because they mistakenly equate the mechanical aspect of the game with munchkinry and cheese.

That painting only happens when someone combines the 2 separate and distinct definitions being used here.

[Brookshw]

So largely play as the character, simplify the build and look at feats and stuff for their theme and not so much their function?

Good stuff right there. I rarely am a player but when I am I start by thinking of who the character is and start developing from there. My aim isn't to maximize everything, its to pick things that go with the concept. Sure I want the character to survive but I'm not aiming to build something unkillable, risk is fun at time and creates interesting tension. If the character dies, oh well, I'll gain the fun of sitting down and coming up with some new concept.

[The Insanity]

Optimizing is just a means to an end, be it good (buffing other PCs, playing a suboptimal class/concept, preventing TPKs, etc.) or bad (overshadowing, stealing spotlight, breaking the game, etc.). It doesn't mean "Always make your character the most powerful, even at the cost of flavor". What the OP is talking about is Powergaming - trying to optimize your character to your best ability, often at the cost of fluff.
If you pick a fluff concept and make it good, it's just optimizing.
If you pick a fluff concept, but then change some part of it for a better mechanical benefit, it's Powergaming.
Neither is inherently bad or good. It just is. The OP simply doesn't like that he chooses mechanical benefits over fluff. But as long as you don't spoil anyones fun and have fun yourself, what's the problem?

[Balyano]

I havn't read all the pages, but you could make up your characters backstory step by step and select feats and assign skill ranks based on that backstory. This works better if you are starting at a higher level, but still works at level one. If the character had a profession of some kind maybe base the feats and skills around what would be useful for that kind of work rather than combat/trap bypassing/reality rewriting, ect.

An officer of the law may have Run, Weapon Proficiency: Bolas, and a limited number of skill points spread thin among Knowledge: Local, Search, Diplomacy (good cop), Intimidate (bad cop), ect.

Or if hes a former cattle rancher Weapon Proficiency: Lasso, Mounted Combat, Ride, Use Rope, Preform: Rope Tricks, Preform: Bullriding, Profession: Rancher, ect. Both have their uses, especially with restraining enemies at low level, and with the feat Ranged Trip could be real fun, but they are hardly going to stomp the guts out of the enemy or turn carefully crafted dungeons to a mcdonalds playroom.

Another option, especially if the other players are inexperienced, play an npc class and optimize away. If you play and aristocrat, expert, or warrior you will probably be too far behind the curve after a few levels and could start grabbing prestige classes to close the gap, with your lack of early class features leaving you enough levels behind on power to not outshine the party. If you play an adept or less likely a magewright you can play straight through fully optimized and have lots of fun, but this works less if their is a full caster in the party.

[Scow2]

My advice for counteroptimization is to check out cool prestige classes that are mechanically inferior, and play them as intended. Or go with playstyles that aren't fully supported by the rules, like Spring Attackers and Mounted Archers.

When making a character with spellcasting ability, look at their abilities in terms of specific spells you want, not overall casting ability. Especially PrCs that don't fully or partially advance casting, and are more gishy. Arcane archer? All the spells you want to put into an arrow are 3rd level or lower anyway. Master of the Unseen Hand? Who cares if you don't get Miracle or Wish - The only spells you need are Mage Hand and Telekinesis. Rage Mage? You're just as much a barbarian as a caster. Go Theurge!

Optimize survivability on a melee character, and go into battle with subpar damage output.

Shave points off "Primary Stats" to invest in secondary stats. Try to make your character self-sufficient. Spread skill points around. If you go Tome of Battle, make a Desert Wind warblade.

Stop looking at rules, and instead the character concept. Frankly, if the game allows powerful options (High point buy, max HP/level, freedom to suggest houserules), use those to relieve pressure to be a powerhouse, and use them to shore up weaknesses in case you find yourself without the party member that normally covers that role - Jumping is merely limited flight, after all.

[Brookshw]

I saw a few allusions early as to why you're trying to avoid optimization but could you please identify the reason you're interested in this exercise? Sorry if you've already said it and I missed it. Is it something with the dm not being able to keep up? The other players? Or is this just a general exercise?

[Gwazi Magnum]

I'd say alright, but Barbarian and Fighter can actually get pretty destructive when properly optimized (which I gather you want the latitude to do). Barbarian's damage can quickly escalate into the hundreds, as can the Fighter's with proper feat selection, and the wide variety of feats, while inferior to actual class features, should not be taken lightly. You'll have the spare feats to fly, short-range teleport, and fear-cripple just by 6th level, (in addition to a couple basic damage feats), and these options only continue to expand as you can levels (considerably if you dip even 1 level of cleric*). This is because, while even a lowly commoner can do most any one or two of these things, you have enough extra feats that you have little reason not to.
By comparison, classes like the Swashbuckler needs a few more feats to be effective, and therefore cannot afford to invest in nice things like flying and teleportation.
Might I suggest if you want to play a Fighter, that you try the Sneak Attack Thug variant from UA. You lose bonus feats, so you'll have an excuse not to go out of your want to gain lots of utility feats, and you'll have both Sneak Attack, and an expanded skill list and pool, without getting into UMD or other such areas that a Rogue would make tempting to invest in. And you'll have high Life, AC, and the (surprising to your enemies) ability to suddenly deal out damaging strikes to their vitals they wouldn't see coming, all with a full BAB, with the ability to track down marks in Urban environments to boot, so you can have fun as a tough bounty-hunter type character.

Good catch with those, I hadn't considered that. :/

Sneak Attack Fighter seems fun.
But my main concern is how the concept is killed on some enemies.
If his main gloating right is sneak attack, he's screwed whenever he can't or is fighting a foe immune to them. I have a dislike for playing as characters where part of their main idea can be stripped away so easily.


Make a character that's *not* an adventurer. Be optimized...at something that isn't dungeoneering. Pick someone with Perform who's not a bard. Take the Run and Antagonize feats. Take potentially devastating flaws. Once you've been sufficiently disadvantaged, THEN you can start optimizing to compensate. You'll basically handicap yourself so when you start optimizing you won't overtake the group.

In my current game I'm playing a Barbarian with one arm, it's kinda neat.

Basically play a civilian and/or a cripple? :P

Sounds interesting, I'd have to find such a cripple feature I'd enjoy first though.


I havn't read all the pages, but you could make up your characters backstory step by step and select feats and assign skill ranks based on that backstory. This works better if you are starting at a higher level, but still works at level one. If the character had a profession of some kind maybe base the feats and skills around what would be useful for that kind of work rather than combat/trap bypassing/reality rewriting, ect.

An officer of the law may have Run, Weapon Proficiency: Bolas, and a limited number of skill points spread thin among Knowledge: Local, Search, Diplomacy (good cop), Intimidate (bad cop), ect.

Or if hes a former cattle rancher Weapon Proficiency: Lasso, Mounted Combat, Ride, Use Rope, Preform: Rope Tricks, Preform: Bullriding, Profession: Rancher, ect. Both have their uses, especially with restraining enemies at low level, and with the feat Ranged Trip could be real fun, but they are hardly going to stomp the guts out of the enemy or turn carefully crafted dungeons to a mcdonalds playroom.

Another option, especially if the other players are inexperienced, play an npc class and optimize away. If you play and aristocrat, expert, or warrior you will probably be too far behind the curve after a few levels and could start grabbing prestige classes to close the gap, with your lack of early class features leaving you enough levels behind on power to not outshine the party. If you play an adept or less likely a magewright you can play straight through fully optimized and have lots of fun, but this works less if their is a full caster in the party.

I like this... a lot :)

I want to see if I can find a guide or pre-made system for this.
Such as "Invest X skill points in career, X into hobbies" etc.

NPC Classes... Maybe, but there is really nothing in those classes that appeal to me from any perspective that I can think of.


My advice for counteroptimization is to check out cool prestige classes that are mechanically inferior, and play them as intended. Or go with playstyles that aren't fully supported by the rules, like Spring Attackers and Mounted Archers.

When making a character with spellcasting ability, look at their abilities in terms of specific spells you want, not overall casting ability. Especially PrCs that don't fully or partially advance casting, and are more gishy. Arcane archer? All the spells you want to put into an arrow are 3rd level or lower anyway. Master of the Unseen Hand? Who cares if you don't get Miracle or Wish - The only spells you need are Mage Hand and Telekinesis. Rage Mage? You're just as much a barbarian as a caster. Go Theurge!

Optimize survivability on a melee character, and go into battle with subpar damage output.

Shave points off "Primary Stats" to invest in secondary stats. Try to make your character self-sufficient. Spread skill points around. If you go Tome of Battle, make a Desert Wind warblade.

Stop looking at rules, and instead the character concept. Frankly, if the game allows powerful options (High point buy, max HP/level, freedom to suggest houserules), use those to relieve pressure to be a powerhouse, and use them to shore up weaknesses in case you find yourself without the party member that normally covers that role - Jumping is merely limited flight, after all.

Mounted Archer is actually a concept I've been thinking of.
But I'm unsure about continuing or not because I'm worried about it becoming too strong from range benefits and enhanced speed.

I'll try to look into more mediocre concepts though.


I saw a few allusions early as to why you're trying to avoid optimization but could you please identify the reason you're interested in this exercise? Sorry if you've already said it and I missed it. Is it something with the dm not being able to keep up? The other players? Or is this just a general exercise?

Partly to be an exercise.
My group (Outside of one ex-player. But he was glory hog to the extent of throwing tantrums from stuff like bad rolls or getting cause when using 'Hide' in then open. And no he didn't have Hide in plain sight) has shown no ill-will or disliking of my builds and play style.

But the DM does get stressed at times when trying to handle my characters, and the other players usually don't get many chances to do their own stuff or have some spot light.

[Kalrany]

I may be reiterating other ideas with different words here, but I felt that I wanted to add a few bits.

A way to do this is to first write out a fictional character for a story. Don't worry about skills and feats, and such, just create a personality. Then write a backstory. Then, once you have a clear description of the person in your mind, start to stat at first level.

I had a wonderful, first level mage, that came from a small town with a father as a baker, a mother who did some seamstress work, and a little brother who loved to fish. Consequently, I had skills and knowledge that included sewing, fishing, and cooking, and items that reflected that (I had fish tackle and net, laundry soap, oil, matches, even measuring cups, sewing kits, etc). I had a small handful of spells (kinda related to the above life she had already lead, like figuring out how to lock her diary magically to keep her brother out of it, or a spell to lift a hot pie out of the oven without risking burning her hands) and a spell book that the DM kindly allowed me to make (I would get a *real one* later), and spare knapsack for spell components. I even had small spice/flour/sugar containers to keep things in, since I didn't have glass vials yet! Finding and buying the basic adventuring kit can be a fun roleplaying process for the party (esp when the other characters were created with similar conventions -- I would expect that, in the end, we were banded from a couple of marketplaces, and at least one city... our DM was creative with our encounters).

If you have more levels to add, create the levels backstory. I would sit and talk with the GM on this, but sketch out what the character might do in the world he/she has built to be able to level up. This will give you and the GM a chance to flesh the character out, and give a bit of backstory to the overall campaign. Did the priest spend his first 4 levels in a temple, learning from others in his order? Then he will likely be older, and might have had a few interesting encounters during his first adventure that a novice (1st level) cleric might have avoided, not expecting things to be a certain way (can be roleplay fun here). Was the rogue a child of wealth that had tutors for fencing and various arts? Maybe picking up a level or two from masters of the crafts? Did the fighter start out in the army, learning weaponry for large scale combat?

A good GM will help you if you are really stuck, and would be glad to know if you have any surprises in store for him. He/she should also know about the rest of the characters and should be able to help you balance with them, maybe filling in any holes he has seen come up so far. Other players *may* want advice to fill in some gaps as well, if you are all creating together.

And besides, even if there is some overpowered aspect to your character, it doesn't mean you have to play it to the hilt. Maybe your nobleman’s son was trained in mounted archery but hates riding horses. Or your ex-soldier is tired of warfare and is looking for a change in vocation (fighter/cleric makes a nice combat medic). Maybe the a party rogue was a stellar pickpocket in her youth only to be caught and now focuses on a better use of her skills...

There are a number of ways to play it, and it doesn't have to break a gaming session. You can have a skill you resent and don't want to ever use again(awesome roleplay fodder). It might be something that only pops up when the BBEG is killing your party and you can give them the last second breather (*most* players don't mind a back-box-gambit if it avoid a TPK, but you would know your gaming group better). It might be a small thing where you train others in the skill/feat/etc so that you never really even need to use it... This is also something that you can discuss a bit with your GM, and explain why you think you should play it that way.

You know your gaming group and GM better, so some or all of this may not apply, but that's my 2¢...

[Icewraith]

I'd say build something completely tricked out and then start bringing it back down to earth. You should preserve the ability to do whatever it was you wanted to do reasonably well, and if you have leftover resources just focus on stuff that looks or sounds cool or isn't necessarily always useful but might be nifty to have.

Alternatively, build your character to do something in a completely tricked out fashion and then focus on avoiding having to do that as much as possible in game. If the DM mis-calculates the EL or you run into a truly bad and appropriately dramatic situation, THEN you bust out a can of whoopass. You may have arcane fusioned twinned searing spell orbs of fire ready to go at a moment's notice, but you usually spend the first round of combat on a rushed diplomacy check or you turn invisible and try to hide somewhere. Basically, even if you're Superman, try to play as Clark Kent for as long as you possibly can. Blow locate object on finding the nearest good restaurant.

The other thing is even if you're starting at high level, build something as if you were having to play it through low levels without retraining.

[Renegade Paladin]

Here's a reverse/odd question for you guys.

How do I not optimize a character?
Well, the obvious answer is "Take Prone Shooter and Weapon Specialization (net)." :smalltongue:

[pwykersotz]

it's not a false dichotomy at all. Keeping your power level in line with the other players (or even the DM's campaign, although I'd dispute that... trivializing encounters is your job as players -- you're not supposed to hold back to make the fight look harder than it is and maybe cause a player death) is actually a form of optimization in and of itself.

NOT optimizing is simply ignoring mechanical elements of the game in their entirety, and making an idiot wizard, or a clumsy weakling fighter. NOT optimizing is designing your character with a blindfold and a dartboard. If you choose all your feats based on the fluff description and ignore the mechanical effect altogether, this basically will approximate the blindfold/dartboard method.

Optimizing is building a character to fit a specific concept, niche, and/or role. Optimizing well requires understanding the game mechanics. It does not mean you're trying to break the game, utilizing "cheese", or overpowering anybody else. Oh, if that's your goal, a good optimizer certainly can do so. The question is not "How do I not optimize?" The question is "How do I best optimize this character concept to fit into this party?" Building a druid that never steals the spotlight from a party of a fighter, rogue, and monk, and yet can fill their role effectively and assist in winning battles, requires more optimization skill than building The Mailman.

I view it just a little differently.

I see non-optimization as building the Elminster. The guy has a wasted a ton of levels, but it all made sense for him at the time. He didn't begin his life with a dream and then press for it with all his might, nor did he hold back on what he thought his potential was at any given point. He isn't exactly who he originally wanted to be, he is the sum of his choices and experiences as he went through life.

Basically, it's not building with a blindfold or a dartboard, it's building with the flow of the game. It does not require ignoring mechanical aspects, it merely assumes that your choices are based on the mechanics as they are known from your characters perspective. Now, if the Wizard Tower has spent the time and effort to do a correlation in the raw power output of Wizards who Empower their spells and Wizards who Maximize them, then your average high intelligence Wizard is going to follow that guidance. But he's not going to have a Rules Compendium handy to be able to judge all that on his own.

Just my musings.

[Evandar]

I tend to optimize to fulfill a very, very specialized role in the party. I played a Marksman, which is a Homebrew class, and just constantly took up a position far, far away from the party and helped coordinate them/pick off key targets. I dug through lots of books looking for every possible bonus to my hide check (without using invisibility). I had stuff like camouflage kits, +2, Skill Focus (Hide), a Robe of Blending, so on, so forth.

I was useless in a straight up fight, so the rest of the party got to have tons of glory, I got to do my own thing at a distance, and no one felt overshadowed.

Although I'm much worse at optimizing than most people on these forums.

[Harlot]

isn't a simple solution is to make a newbie build the character?
Thus the build will be very basic, no splatbook, no weird items, just the corest of the core.

Or, you know, be a monk.

[Slipperychicken]

I made a wolf-riding halfling cavalier who uses a sling-staff in Pathfinder (He kind of sucks at 2nd level). It's not hard if you become attached to a character concept before thinking up mechanics for it.

[Prince Zahn]

So largely play as the character, simplify the build and look at feats and stuff for their theme and not so much their function?


:vaarsuvius: If you must phrase it so limitedly, yes.

:smalltongue: Seriously you have many options at your disposal that don't involve optimization, with all the optimization threads you can find it's hard to believe that just about everything in the books that can be cheesed, doesn't have to be so to be played well.

I have another suggestion for you - I like to call it a combo-budget.
A combo budget basically says that you have a certain "budget" of power to spend on awesome capabilities, not too big, but not crippling either, to spend on whatever you like. The budget takes form as what you establish what you can and cannot do during build creation - such as "I will not form powerful feat chains", or "No statistic on my character sheet will be enhanced/augmented by more than 2 sources” or "I'll only pick my character from races with 0 LA". These and more like them are all good depending on how exactly you tend to optimize your characters.

On paper this method says that if you can keep in check the parts you often overachieve in, while not giving up on them completely, and sooner or later you should find your Character creation sweet spot.
I hope this helps!