[PF]Optimization. Optimization never changes.

[Selpharia]

Hi everyone. One of my fellow players in a Kingmaker campaign holds two things as axiomatically true. One: Optimization, or in her words, min-maxing always produces boring characters with no weaknesses. Two: A cleric's primary job should be buffing and reactive healing only, with no offensive role. I was trying to persuade her that point two is false, and somehow this became a question of who would win in an arena match, a 10th level cleric or a 10th fighter, pathfinder only, no 3.5, no archetypes. I'm confident that as a cleric I could win with relative ease, but I want to demonstrate conclusively that a fighter's single ability to do damage doesn't hold up against a T1 caster, without truly deific luck for the fighter. So, there are a few additional stipulations.

One: Minimal random variance. So, a way to win that offers no save and no opportunity to counter is vastly preferable over anything with a DC or anything with attack rolls.

Two: Assume the fighter wins initiative, and is clever enough to ready actions to disrupt spell casting with something like a mighty composite longbow.

Three:The closer to core the better, and nothing 3rd party. No Leadership, as that negates the point of the exercise.

The rules are: 25 point buy, starting wealth of 62,000 GP, with no more than 15k spent on a single aspect of the character.

The cleric and fighter begin the combat in an arena with 100 feet between them and with any hour/level buffs active.

Again, I'm aware this is a fairly simple and pedestrian challenge, but the reason I've appealed to the Playground on this is that I'm going for the most decisive possible victory.

So far, I've been thinking of using the Trickery and Darkness domains to hide and summon a few (1d3) shadows with the domain spell Summon Monster V, command the shadows to move through the floor, popping up 5 next to the fighter and draining it of 2d6 strength with no save, while I sling a few SoL spells like Terrible Remorse or Blindness from behind a Wind wall. Worst comes to worst, I figure I can always use buff spells to get decent combat ability, but that's needlessly messy.

[Bacchus]

It's generally accepted that the "arena duel" is never a good basis for comparison

[Segev]

Honestly, I'd politely suggest to her that she build and play her character her way, and leave you to do the same with yours. If she feels she is being outshone by your character's "over-optimization" or what-have-you, offer to help her get her character to do the things she wants her character to be able to do.

If she remains belligerent, ask her politely what she suggests. Remind her that you are entitled to have fun, too.

Generally, focus on playing the game, rather than arguing over what "optimization" means. And ask that she do the same.

[Gazzien]

Wind Wall works against the longbow. If you can go ethereal/incorporeal and hide inside the ground while your summons do the work, even better. Hm...

Animate Dead some Hydras. -nod- Zombie Hydras are stupidly powerful, IIRC.

[Squirrel_Dude]

Your going to get into an arena battle: Which is mostly about doing as much damage as quickly as possible, to prove that damage isn't the most important thing? This is probably a bad plan.

[Red Rubber Band]

My 2c: I'd think a rather decisive victory would be to become better than the Fighter at his/her main schtick.

Edit:

Which is mostly about doing as much damage as quickly as possible
I believe that's incorrect. There is more than one way to skin a cat. Clerics are the cat skinning masters and have whole towns dedicated to finding out new ways, whereas Fighters have their knife and cutting board.


to prove that damage isn't the most important thing?

That wasn't the point of it at all...

[Erik Vale]

You should be flying, and race should be kept the same, make sure the other guy doesn't grab strix. Prices mean flight+windwall=win since you should be able to out-wait any of the fighters temporary means of flight by staying away from him.

Then, chery tap with cantrips, because seriously -_-.

[Selpharia]

Your going to get into an arena battle: Which is mostly about doing as much damage as quickly as possible, to prove that damage isn't the most important thing? This is probably a bad plan.

This is a response to a number of posts, but I only quoted this one. My apologies to others.

No, the point of this arena duel is to show that the damage you can do in melee doesn't matter whwn you're enchanted or gibbering, or a withered husk with strength 1 who can't lift their own fullplate. I know arena duels aren't generally good modes of comparison, she wanted this challenge, I tried to use the more common defense of the tier and suggest multiple scenarios where the cleric's versatility shows through, or to have us compete in fighting against level-appropriate foes, but somehow we ended up with an arena match. Honestly, I think this is a worse choice for her, but, c'est la vie. I realize I should probably let this go, but she's also giving bad advice to our newer players that's gimping them something fierce. Also, I am often excessively stubborn

Re; the suggestion to fly and snipe: How would I fly on any more reliable a basis than the fighter? I don't think Cleric gets fly IIRC. Also, I wouldn't be incorporeal at level 10, but shadows are, and I can use the Darkness domain to summon 1d3 of them a pop.

ETA: I'd like to stay away from Animate Dead. Otherwise I'll just get the complaint that necromancy is dumb and relies on the GM, or something

[Squirrel_Dude]

Re; the suggestion to fly and snipe: How would I fly on any more reliable a basis than the fighter? I don't think Cleric gets fly IIRC. Also, I wouldn't be incorporeal at level 10, but shadows are, and I can use the Darkness domain to summon 1d3 of them a pop.Air Walk is a level 4 spell.

Even if you don't want to use undead, there are some very nice creatures available at summon monster V. Bralani Azata, Babau Demon, Dire Lions, Woolly Rhinoceros, or 1d3 Deinonychus

[Erik Vale]

No it doesn't. Animals can be purchased and you can cast Animate Undead using False Focus to make it near on free. Necromancy is a staple. If a 'evil' staple.

As for more reliable, purchase maximum time worth of flight items, and grab Sky Swim [you can treat air as water for the purpose of swimming], each instance is a 3rd level spell lasting 10mins.

[Segev]

I suppose my question is: why do you need to "prove" that the cleric is "better," to her? I'm guessing it's tied to the second point, that clerics should heal and only heal, but why do you need to "prove" anything to her in that regard? Just play the game how you want. If your cleric heals, heal. If he fights, fight. If he buffs, buff. If your cleric really is more effective doing something other than what she thinks your cleric should be doing, it will show in game far better than it would show in an arena match.

[Captnq]

Take Heighten spell
memorize Hold Person at max level
Take multiple feats to boost your save DC.
Take magic items to maximize your wisdom
Cast a DC 40 hold person.
Slit the fighter's throat in the name of your god.
Seriously. You are so over thinking this.

Ranged attacks? I dunno, Tank up your armor. A shield.

make sure to have dispel magic ready to turn off any buffs the fighter has.

I think fly is an option at that level. Fly up and away. Hover. Windwall or something. Have some fun. Get a sack of holy symbols. Throw them at the fighter until he dies because he can't hit you as you fly behind a windwall.

Stick to the basics.

[Drachasor]

Well, I say use an Eversmoking Bottle and cast Blindsight. Ranged or melee attacks from there. Really it isn't so much can you beat the Fighter, but how you decide to beat him.

Btw, "ready an action to interrupt casting" is easily dealt with. Just cast Updraft or some other 1st level spell with a swift casting time. If it gets disrupted, no big deal. Then you cast whatever you REALLY want to cast.

[OldTrees1]

You might want to consider making this arena cleric into a more interesting character than the arena fighter. You know, to make 2 points at the same time.

[The Trickster]

The second point about clerics bother me. There are clerics who don't heal at all, ya know. :smalltongue::smallconfused: Those poor evil/rebuking clerics.

[T.G. Oskar]

Trope senses tingling!

Your player is dropping a Morton's Fork. If you optimize enough to win the duel, you're basically proving your player that her idea about optimization is correct, because you're focusing too much of your efforts to win against a Fighter, who might probably NEED to optimize; she will claim the arena isn't exactly like real play, and thus dismiss the win. If you lose, then you'll "prove" her other point, even if you claim an arena battle proves nothing, because the Fighter is supposed to be good at combat. So basically, it's a win-win situation for her; the only winning move is to not play...

...or rather, not to play HER game. There's ways to prove the might of Clerics, even, unfortunately, at their own turf. The plan is to focus on being a better "warrior-priest" than the Warpriest, probably by choosing a Cleric with the War domain for starters (with all the nice things they get from PF domains). Then, work a character with a lot of flavor from it: maybe a Lawful Neutral Cleric of an evil deity of war, focused on being a strategist who happens to be a Combat Pragmatist ("win at all costs!") If you wish to win the arena, you can still have a character that can defeat the Fighter, If she invokes the other side of the Morton's Fork...you can just drop a single "we'll see about that...", potentially by arranging with your DM to replace your existing character with your new one, if only to prove the point further. Ideally, by proving how you can be better than a Fighter, proving your undead creatures are better than the Fighter, AND that the Fighter could be better than it could ever be (and then both outpacing the Rogue and making him better, just in case), you can prove that Clerics work for just more than being nannies (make sure you mention her that if a Fighter feels offended to be called a "meat shield", so does a Cleric feel offended by being called a "nanny"). By deliberately choosing the ability to channel negative energy, you're being less "optimal" towards healing, so you can say you're not even "optimizing", so you put her in a position where she has to accept. Not only that, you have a character who's gonna be interesting in terms of roleplaying, considering the nature of the campaign and specifically disproving the Stormwind Fallacy.

Still: I'd consider thinking it carefully before doing this. I have the feeling she's not gonna accept your position with said victory, and arena battles are usually never the solution.

[Selpharia]

I suppose my question is: why do you need to "prove" that the cleric is "better," to her? I'm guessing it's tied to the second point, that clerics should heal and only heal, but why do you need to "prove" anything to her in that regard? Just play the game how you want. If your cleric heals, heal. If he fights, fight. If he buffs, buff. If your cleric really is more effective doing something other than what she thinks your cleric should be doing, it will show in game far better than it would show in an arena match.

This is actually a fair point. I'm currently playing a pretty standard battlefield control sorceress, but a cleric focusing on touch attacks and with decent domain choices wouldn't be bad if she happens to die. My annoyance is mostly related to her insistence that we fill all the party roles exactly as written: Fighter, Rogue, Arcanist, Cleric(healer). I suppose it's my fault too, in the sense that I finally don't have to DM, and so hoped that I could finally play a reasonably optimized caster without worrying about slaughtering the players. Of course, I guess it's just as destructive when applied to the DM's scenario and overshadowing other players. I guess I've just spent so much time making characters and fine tuning them that it's annoying to see someone who's just not got as good a hold on the theorycrafting persuading others away from effectiveness and survival in the name of some false dichotomy between optimization and roleplay. Sort of like if you went to an equestrian show and you were expecting thoroughbred stallions and someone came out on a shaggy little riding pony, then told you that thoroughbred stallions were stuffy and inimical to the joy of riding.

I missed air walk, silly me. The idea of using a swift action cast time spell to trigger the attack is quite clever too, even if I'm fairly sure Updraft is 3.5

EDIT: Oskar, I think you're completely correct, and your insight is as clever as your Paladin rewrite. I suppose, even if I was going to be Queen in our Kingmaker game, I could switch out for a cleric, though I'd probably not be able to get it past the Party Roles test. Unfortunately, our DM is new, and doesn't like doing a lot of prep work, so she pretty much goes with what the Morton's Forker suggests as ideal. Although, that's a social problem beyond the scope of the Playground to solve, I expect. *Sigh*

[OldTrees1]

Trope senses tingling!

Your player is dropping a Morton's Fork. -snip- So basically, it's a win-win situation for her; the only winning move is to not play...

...or rather, not to play HER game.

You are absolutely correct about how to win this contest.

As far as flavor, I think a less direct route might feel more flavorful. A cleric of a goddess of corruption would wade into battle emanating corrupting debuffs. The point of combat is not to win but rather to glorify the goddess though corrupting and corroding opponents. You will get a thick dark magic flavor that will explain why you engage in combat while not looking like the direct "combat cleric that worships combat because it is combat".

[Drachasor]

This is actually a fair point. I'm currently playing a pretty standard battlefield control sorceress, but a cleric focusing on touch attacks and with decent domain choices wouldn't be bad if she happens to die. My annoyance is mostly related to her insistence that we fill all the party roles exactly as written: Fighter, Rogue, Arcanist, Cleric(healer). I suppose it's my fault too, in the sense that I finally don't have to DM, and so hoped that I could finally play a reasonably optimized caster without worrying about slaughtering the players. Of course, I guess it's just as destructive when applied to the DM's scenario and overshadowing other players. I guess I've just spent so much time making characters and fine tuning them that it's annoying to see someone who's just not got as good a hold on the theorycrafting persuading others away from effectiveness and survival in the name of some false dichotomy between optimization and roleplay. Sort of like if you went to an equestrian show and you were expecting thoroughbred stallions and someone came out on a shaggy little riding pony, then told you that thoroughbred stallions were stuffy and inimical to the joy of riding.

This is why I hate people that say game balance isn't important....because you run into problems like this. Then you spend 50%+ of the time trying to figure out if something you came up with that's perfectly rules legal and RAI is ok or not. It really hampers creativity and fun.


I missed air walk, silly me. The idea of using a swift action cast time spell to trigger the attack is quite clever too, even if I'm fairly sure Updraft is 3.5

Sorry, I forgot it was PF. Stone Shield or Liberating Command will work.

Hmm, Clerics don't get Echolocation in PF, so you can't get Blindsight I don't think. Unless there is a domain ability that grants it.

[Selpharia]

You are absolutely correct about how to win this contest.

As far as flavor, I think a less direct route might feel more flavorful. A cleric of a goddess of corruption would wade into battle emanating corrupting debuffs. The point of combat is not to win but rather to glorify the goddess though corrupting and corroding opponents. You will get a thick dark magic flavor that will explain why you engage in combat while not looking like the direct "combat cleric that worships combat because it is combat".

That sounds magnificent! If I can get that past the Party Role Police, I'd love to play it.

[MadGreenSon]

EDIT: Oskar, I think you're completely correct, and your insight is as clever as your Paladin rewrite. I suppose, even if I was going to be Queen in our Kingmaker game, I could switch out for a cleric, though I'd probably not be able to get it past the Party Roles test.

Party Roles Test? Yer kiddin, right?



Unfortunately, our DM is new, and doesn't like doing a lot of prep work, so she pretty much goes with what the Morton's Forker suggests as ideal. Although, that's a social problem beyond the scope of the Playground to solve, I expect. *Sigh*

:confused: You're not kidding... You actually have a player in the game who gets to dictate who does what and how to the DM?!?

Your DM rolls over and accepts the dictates of one of his players on how the game should be run? Seriously? Where do you play? I want in on some of this!

Is the game that good? Is that how you put up with it? That'd have to be some awesome gaming for me not to just walk away.


That sounds magnificent! If I can get that past the Party Role Police, I'd love to play it.

Party Role Police... I am so blessed to have players that trust me to run my own freakin game and know enough to know that I'd come down like the spiky fist of an angry CE god on them if they tried that kind of nonsense on one another.

You have my sincerest sympathies and best wishes.


I also think you should Cleric up and whup that Fighter just to do it.:smallcool:

[Drachasor]

That sounds magnificent! If I can get that past the Party Role Police, I'd love to play it.

They aren't really going to give you a problem for playing the character you want, are they?

Just pack some wands of CLW and you guys should be good.

[Belial_the_Leveler]

1) The fighter has an eversmoking bottle to go with his blindfight. You can't target him with any targeted spells or effects unless you got blindsight.


2) The fighter waits for the cleric's wind walk and other buffs to run out of duration while running around the arena. It's not as if his eversmoking bottle will run out of smoke or that the cleric has enough area effect non-targeted spells to take him out. Then he curbstomps the cleric in melee.

[Sith_Happens]

That sounds magnificent! If I can get that past the Party Role Police, I'd love to play it.

get that past the Party Role Police

Party Role Police

You know what? Screw it. Just make a Character That's the Best at EverythingTM and rub it in her stupid Stormwinding face.

[khachaturian]

1) The fighter has an eversmoking bottle to go with his blindfight. You can't target him with any targeted spells or effects unless you got blindsight.


2) The fighter waits for the cleric's wind walk and other buffs to run out of duration while running around the arena. It's not as if his eversmoking bottle will run out of smoke or that the cleric has enough area effect non-targeted spells to take him out. Then he curbstomps the cleric in melee.

1. summon monster, which at level 10 includes the ability to summon a large air elemental or bralani azata to take care of the smoke. or alternately, you get a dire lion which has scent and simply doesn't care about the smoke as it full attacks the fighter
2. wind walk is hours/level

even without any particular attention to build with feats, archetypes, equipment, the cleric can auto-win with spell selection alone

[Selpharia]

Belial: Perhaps this is true, but I don't think this is likely to occur, as my opponent cordially disdains this sort of taqctic, as, to be frank, do I. I'm not saying it's not valid or clever, just that it won't come up. Also, I'm unclear how the fighter expects to know which square to attack through the smoke, since Perception is not a class skill for fighters, but Stealth is for Trickery clerics, who can also be invisible. Worst comes to worst, a dispel check will work.

We're all friends in my gaming group, so I'd prefer to not ruin things for the sake of correct roleplaying. If there were another game in town, I'd jump ship, but I don't feel like DMing again, and the only way there'd be one is if I made it.

Also, I'm already playing a battlefield control sorc, and that's as close as I care to get to "Does Everything." Also, I wish Kingmaker I had more plot, so that I could demonstrate that you can roleplay such a character, but as of now, it's just exploration and one or two wilderness combats per day.

[DrDeth]

It's generally accepted that the "arena duel" is never a good basis for comparison

Yes. And here's the thing- since the Cleric can choose any divine spell in existence, and knows exactly who his foe is gonna be and when the combat is gonna start and how many combats there will be that day (thus NOVA!!)- the comparo is completely unfair & bogus.

Let's do it this way. The DM rolls a D6, secretly. On that number encounter the cleric meets the fighter. On the previous encounters the DM sends in a random monster of appropriate CR. Between combats the Dm rolls D20- that many minutes pass.

Perception can easily be a class skill, since there are at least two traits that give it.

[Hurnn]

Yes. And here's the thing- since the Cleric can choose any divine spell in existence, and knows exactly who his foe is gonna be and when the combat is gonna start and how many combats there will be that day (thus NOVA!!)- the comparo is completely unfair & bogus.

Let's do it this way. The DM rolls a D6, secretly. On that number encounter the cleric meets the fighter. On the previous encounters the DM sends in a random monster of appropriate CR. Between combats the Dm rolls D20- that many minutes pass.

Perception can easily be a class skill, since there are at least two traits that give it.

thats fair as long as the fighter has to jump through the same hoops.

[Segev]

I'm currently playing a pretty standard battlefield control sorceress, but a cleric focusing on touch attacks and with decent domain choices wouldn't be bad if she happens to die. My annoyance is mostly related to her insistence that we fill all the party roles exactly as written: Fighter, Rogue, Arcanist, Cleric(healer).Okay. I am, perhaps, missing something here. What is her insistence actually doing to the game? What is she telling you you must or must not do, and what happens if you tell her (as politely as possible) that it's your character and you'll play her how you wish?


I suppose it's my fault too, in the sense that I finally don't have to DM, and so hoped that I could finally play a reasonably optimized caster without worrying about slaughtering the players. Of course, I guess it's just as destructive when applied to the DM's scenario and overshadowing other players. I guess I've just spent so much time making characters and fine tuning them that it's annoying to see someone who's just not got as good a hold on the theorycrafting persuading others away from effectiveness and survival in the name of some false dichotomy between optimization and roleplay.Is it that the other players are not listening to your advice and only to hers? Is it just that she's being the loudest, squeakiest wheel?

I'd build my character as I wished, and discuss with the others what options they have to build the characters they want. Explain that the idea that optimization and roleplaying are antithetical to one another is a silly notion, because one can optimize with a goal of being the best representation of the character one wishes to play. Ask them what they want to be, then offer to help them find ways to make their characters be that.

What dis-optimal build choices is she forcing on people?

I missed air walk, silly me. The idea of using a swift action cast time spell to trigger the attack is quite clever too, even if I'm fairly sure Updraft is 3.5


I suppose, even if I was going to be Queen in our Kingmaker game, I could switch out for a cleric, though I'd probably not be able to get it past the Party Roles test. Unfortunately, our DM is new, and doesn't like doing a lot of prep work, so she pretty much goes with what the Morton's Forker suggests as ideal. Although, that's a social problem beyond the scope of the Playground to solve, I expect. *Sigh*Does this have something to do with the roles the DM assigns the PCs after they set up their "kingdom?" What role is your "opponent" seeking, and what role do you want? Is it just to dictate that role that she is trying to force these things?

[T.G. Oskar]

My annoyance is mostly related to her insistence that we fill all the party roles exactly as written: Fighter, Rogue, Arcanist, Cleric(healer). I suppose it's my fault too, in the sense that I finally don't have to DM, and so hoped that I could finally play a reasonably optimized caster without worrying about slaughtering the players. Of course, I guess it's just as destructive when applied to the DM's scenario and overshadowing other players. I guess I've just spent so much time making characters and fine tuning them that it's annoying to see someone who's just not got as good a hold on the theorycrafting persuading others away from effectiveness and survival in the name of some false dichotomy between optimization and roleplay.

-snip-

[...]I suppose, even if I was going to be Queen in our Kingmaker game, I could switch out for a cleric, though I'd probably not be able to get it past the Party Roles test. Unfortunately, our DM is new, and doesn't like doing a lot of prep work, so she pretty much goes with what the Morton's Forker suggests as ideal. Although, that's a social problem beyond the scope of the Playground to solve, I expect. *Sigh*

Ouch. So your fellow player isn't just going with the Stormwind Fallacy like a drill pierces the heavens, but actually ENFORCES Party Roles (Meat Shield, Boomstick, Nanny and Skillmonkey)?

I wonder what she considers the Bard, then... Or the Magus. Or the Inquisitor. Or the new Warpriest that's soon to come. Or the Investigator, while at it. I mean, what does she consider Mystic Theurges and Eldritch Knights?

There's a glimpse of hope, though. You mentioned something so important, I felt I had to boldface it: you're a DM. You're usually the party's DM. Being a newbie DM can be daunting, particularly if the job was dropped on you without previous warning. I speak out of experience on that one: the first thing I did was to speak with another of the DMs I played with, and who wasn't playing on the game (though he eventually did), and decided to make up a quick dungeon to run them off, but with clever traps rather than actual battles (falling rock trap, collapsing floor trap, acid fog trap, a trio of Kobolds with a Sorcerer willing to Fireball itself to win, a Phasm disguised as a Kobold, random falling rock traps, and a boss battle comprised of Basilisks. Good times!). It was interesting to be behind the DM screen while at that, and challenging the usual preconceptions of my fellow players, and a good rest out of it. I even tried it on another one-shot with other players, and the run was entirely different.

However, I got two things from it. The first is that, whenever you have a question, a fellow DM is usually the best helper. There's two things I can suspect; your Morton's Forker is another DM (and potentially one that prizes story over character's skill) and your newbie DM wants to follow her advice rather than yours, or she hasn't any DM experience and simply complains the loudest. You're in a unique position as you're also a DM, and one that has to balance story with character skill (you're worried about not slaughtering your opponents, but I'm sure that you gave them a pretty tough challenge every now and then), so if there's opinion that the newbie should hear, is from an actual DM and not a player who thinks story trumps character (balance is the spice of life, after all). Second is that your DM style is based on your first experiences and the methods of your DMs. I love light-hearted stories where my players simply laugh off at every occasion, with ridiculous NPCs that are still memorable, acting as best as I can. I love when my players use their real-life studies (Chemical Engineering and Music Composition) in-game, whether by helping me with physics or bringing the story to life with a 5-minute song. Yet, I also love to add some shocks every now and then, and tweak battles to make them difficult; make gimmick battles followed by song, blend improvisation with preparation, and so on. About half of that (improvising on the go, light-hearted stories with the usual dark turn, ridiculous NPCs) I got it from one DM, while the other half (careful preparation, difficult battles) I got it from the other. Rest assured, part of what your newbie DM friend will do, somehow, will be influenced by you. Perhaps your DM friend will adopt some of your houserules, or you'll do something that you'll recognize when playing. If the Morton's Forker is also a DM, then rest assured that perhaps your newbie DM friend is better inclined to her kind of stories rather than yours, but something of your DM style will rub on your friend and will surprise her eventually; alternatively, if MF is not a DM and is just a player, she might be trying to coax your friend into playing her favored style because she has problems with yours, but there will be ONE moment where your friend will ask you, because SOMEONE has the experience.

Newbie DM is playing a pre-made campaign, but that doesn't mean you don't need prep work. I usually improvise at times, but I do some prep work myself, particularly on making random encounter tables or creating the sessions' NPCs. Playing the module, or the campaign, as intended won't get too far, specifically if the other players are accustomed to surprises. Note that she's having too much influence on your newbie DM friend, and might be using that to her advantage (if the idea is that you end up as a King, maybe she's using that to undermine the efforts of everyone and become King/Queen herself, therefore "winning" the game); a counter-influence might be necessary. On the other hand, there's a reason why a human is the DM and not a computer; your friend will eventually leave its mark on the campaign, even if attempting to play the module exactly as-is. I presume the module itself contains ways to alter the content to suit the needs of players, so that choice is always present. It's your responsibility, to an extent, to mention your DM friend that; it's HIS campaign, not yours nor hers, and it's up to him to leave the mark. And, also, all DMs must do their homework; improvisation can only take you so far, and sometimes, you might not have the brainpower to deal with what your friends throw at you (and that's whether you improvise, play a module exactly as-is, combine both to any degree, and any option you might think wouldn't be ever covered).

Still: with all the influence she commands (you being the group's usual DM), and her insistence that some things are enforced, and the lack of info...I think the problem lies on a difference of views, one difference where she wants to desperately take the advantage. Think about this question; where it another of your friends, would she do the same thing? Do you think she would do the same thing, or perhaps another of your friends would rein her in? My hunch is that she has problems with your DM style but doesn't want to be too direct on it (probably because you balance things out), but she doesn't want to be the DM because she's deadly afraid that you'll ruin her game. Thus, she does it indirectly; she's goading you to ruin your DM friend's game OR play with her rules, being the indirect DM.

Again: the winning move is not to play...HER game.

[Selpharia]

Ouch. So your fellow player isn't just going with the Stormwind Fallacy like a drill pierces the heavens, but actually ENFORCES Party Roles (Meat Shield, Boomstick, Nanny and Skillmonkey)?

I wonder what she considers the Bard, then... Or the Magus. Or the Inquisitor. Or the new Warpriest that's soon to come. Or the Investigator, while at it. I mean, what does she consider Mystic Theurges and Eldritch Knights?

There's a glimpse of hope, though. You mentioned something so important, I felt I had to boldface it: you're a DM. You're usually the party's DM. Being a newbie DM can be daunting, particularly if the job was dropped on you without previous warning. I speak out of experience on that one: the first thing I did was to speak with another of the DMs I played with, and who wasn't playing on the game (though he eventually did), and decided to make up a quick dungeon to run them off, but with clever traps rather than actual battles (falling rock trap, collapsing floor trap, acid fog trap, a trio of Kobolds with a Sorcerer willing to Fireball itself to win, a Phasm disguised as a Kobold, random falling rock traps, and a boss battle comprised of Basilisks. Good times!). It was interesting to be behind the DM screen while at that, and challenging the usual preconceptions of my fellow players, and a good rest out of it. I even tried it on another one-shot with other players, and the run was entirely different.

However, I got two things from it. The first is that, whenever you have a question, a fellow DM is usually the best helper. There's two things I can suspect; your Morton's Forker is another DM (and potentially one that prizes story over character's skill) and your newbie DM wants to follow her advice rather than yours, or she hasn't any DM experience and simply complains the loudest. You're in a unique position as you're also a DM, and one that has to balance story with character skill (you're worried about not slaughtering your opponents, but I'm sure that you gave them a pretty tough challenge every now and then), so if there's opinion that the newbie should hear, is from an actual DM and not a player who thinks story trumps character (balance is the spice of life, after all). Second is that your DM style is based on your first experiences and the methods of your DMs. I love light-hearted stories where my players simply laugh off at every occasion, with ridiculous NPCs that are still memorable, acting as best as I can. I love when my players use their real-life studies (Chemical Engineering and Music Composition) in-game, whether by helping me with physics or bringing the story to life with a 5-minute song. Yet, I also love to add some shocks every now and then, and tweak battles to make them difficult; make gimmick battles followed by song, blend improvisation with preparation, and so on. About half of that (improvising on the go, light-hearted stories with the usual dark turn, ridiculous NPCs) I got it from one DM, while the other half (careful preparation, difficult battles) I got it from the other. Rest assured, part of what your newbie DM friend will do, somehow, will be influenced by you. Perhaps your DM friend will adopt some of your houserules, or you'll do something that you'll recognize when playing. If the Morton's Forker is also a DM, then rest assured that perhaps your newbie DM friend is better inclined to her kind of stories rather than yours, but something of your DM style will rub on your friend and will surprise her eventually; alternatively, if MF is not a DM and is just a player, she might be trying to coax your friend into playing her favored style because she has problems with yours, but there will be ONE moment where your friend will ask you, because SOMEONE has the experience.

Newbie DM is playing a pre-made campaign, but that doesn't mean you don't need prep work. I usually improvise at times, but I do some prep work myself, particularly on making random encounter tables or creating the sessions' NPCs. Playing the module, or the campaign, as intended won't get too far, specifically if the other players are accustomed to surprises. Note that she's having too much influence on your newbie DM friend, and might be using that to her advantage (if the idea is that you end up as a King, maybe she's using that to undermine the efforts of everyone and become King/Queen herself, therefore "winning" the game); a counter-influence might be necessary. On the other hand, there's a reason why a human is the DM and not a computer; your friend will eventually leave its mark on the campaign, even if attempting to play the module exactly as-is. I presume the module itself contains ways to alter the content to suit the needs of players, so that choice is always present. It's your responsibility, to an extent, to mention your DM friend that; it's HIS campaign, not yours nor hers, and it's up to him to leave the mark. And, also, all DMs must do their homework; improvisation can only take you so far, and sometimes, you might not have the brainpower to deal with what your friends throw at you (and that's whether you improvise, play a module exactly as-is, combine both to any degree, and any option you might think wouldn't be ever covered).

Still: with all the influence she commands (you being the group's usual DM), and her insistence that some things are enforced, and the lack of info...I think the problem lies on a difference of views, one difference where she wants to desperately take the advantage. Think about this question; where it another of your friends, would she do the same thing? Do you think she would do the same thing, or perhaps another of your friends would rein her in? My hunch is that she has problems with your DM style but doesn't want to be too direct on it (probably because you balance things out), but she doesn't want to be the DM because she's deadly afraid that you'll ruin her game. Thus, she does it indirectly; she's goading you to ruin your DM friend's game OR play with her rules, being the indirect DM.

Again: the winning move is not to play...HER game.

Thank you for this, it's once again excellent advice. One clarification: This is our first game as a group, we're a group of 5 , but two players and the DM have no gaming experience at all. All of the experience that myself and my friend with whom I have this philosophical quarrel have is with other groups, and we're both suffering from a bit of DM fatigue. I've never played in one of her games, nor has anyone else at the table. As for the "half" classes, she basically acknowledges their abilities to bridge roles, but doesn't really know much about them, and we have none in the party, except, I suppose, a Paladin. I don't think she actually wants to be King/Queen (which, according to the module, is to be decided by the players), but I do know she finds my optimization a little annoying at least. My goal is to be the party's guardian angel, so that there's no level of trouble that a combination of new DM and players can get us in that my character can't dig us out from with some judiciously applied conjuration. The cleric/fighter question is largely an abstract dispute brought on by our divergent styles. Thois is why, after calming down a bit, I'm actually hesitant to do this "challenge" because it can only lead to hurt feelings and bitterness for one of us, and arrogance for the other. The reason I don't immediately want to switch to playing a cleric to prove my point is that the kingdom's ruler in the module gets huge bonuses for a high charisma, and I just generally prefer the sorcerer's spontaneous casting and better spell list.

[Firechanter]

Well, I guess in that 1-on-1 scenario, you could write up a character that defeats both her claims. Let's say an "Apostle of Peace" -- not the crappy 3.5 PrC, but a cleric who takes the will to fight out of anyone and makes them gentle as lambs. Your character will not even touch a weapon. The Fighter will simply fall in love with her. Encounter over.

Edit:
As for your Kingmaker character, I suggest a Bard. High Cha, great roleplaying opportunities, and their JOB is to bring out the best in people. What could be a better leader?