Unoptimized party -- am I over-stressing this?

[Dalebert]

Most of my party seem like fairly casual players. I envy them to some extent, just not worrying about whether we are prepared for potentialities and just having fun role-playing and doing their best. We have a gunslinger (Wow, they sure seem to suck. Extremely specialized at damage-dealing and not even very good at that.), a ninja (not bad), an inquisitor (not bad but still kind of specialized), and a gravewalker witch (me-yay!), and maaaaybe a bard (not bad). She's a new player and she didn't show up for the 2nd game so I kind of think she didn't have fun and may not return. For her first game, we were being attacked by invulnerable insta-regenerating god tentacles and all we could do really was use some weird magic water to delay them and run away in desperation. I'm far and away the most versatile and powerful character in the group but my spell list is still pretty limited.

The most glaring thing missing is a cleric. (It was actually my 2nd choice. I even completely made up the character. Instead, I followed my heart and played what I thought was more fun and interesting and a little different. I'd just played a cleric in another game.) How can SOMEONE not want to play arguably the best class in the game? The first time I really felt it was when we were attacked by assassins with poisoned blades and it set us back a lot of money to go to a church and pay for a LOT of lesser restorations. It occurred to me there are so many things that deal ability damage. I failed at encouraging our inquisitor to learn the spell but I can't blame her for taking more interesting things because her spells known are SO limited. The next time will likely be out in the wilderness and we'll just be SoL and have to wait to recover and hope we don't get attacked. We're on a limited timeframe for the campaign, essentially rushing toward the BBEG, so a multi-day setback is painful.

I keep finding myself trying to broaden my capabilities even further to fill in for how lacking the overall party is, but I get very frustrated. Why should I have to do that? Like I said, I'm already the only tier 1 and the most versatile already. It also gets expensive, often to the point of realizing it will be many levels before I can even afford it. A decent staff to broaden my spellcasting a bit is really expensive. I kind of just want to do what I do best but the pressure is there to be more due to the rest of my party's lack of foresight. A wand of lesser restoration to kind of make up for our lack of a cleric will cost us as much as the most powerful item we have and I don't even think we have enough for it right now. Meanwhile, we'll later on start needing Restoration which will be even more expensive. I'm looking into Leadership to flesh out the party a bit but the DM is strongly discouraging of it. It makes me kind of angry at the rest of the players for not considering party needs at all when making their choices. I find myself seriously considering switching to my 2nd choice of cleric, arguably more powerful and versatile, but I REALLY like this character for his flavor and story and I'd be even more resentful of the rest of my party.

Our DM throws very challenging things at us that are probably powered appropriately for a reasonably well-balanced party. We've nearly wiped on many occasions and I can't help but think he maybe fudged a few rolls to keep that from happening. We survive a lot of encounters by blowing through a lot of our best resources leaving us somewhat vulnerable if we continue. Maybe a wipe or at least a death or two would be a good thing at this point to get folks to be a little less casual about our survival.

Am I over-reacting? Are we not as ill-equipped as I think? Should I just go with the flow and make the best of things?

[Vogonjeltz]

Most of my party seem like fairly casual players. I envy them to some extent, just not worrying about whether we are prepared for potentialities and just having fun role-playing and doing their best. We have a gunslinger (Wow, they sure seem to suck. Extremely specialized at damage-dealing and not even very good at that.), a ninja (not bad), an inquisitor (not bad but still kind of specialized), and a gravewalker witch (me-yay!), and maaaaybe a bard (not bad). She's a new player and she didn't show up for the 2nd game so I kind of think she didn't have fun and may not return. For her first game, we were being attacked by invulnerable insta-regenerating god tentacles and all we could do really was use some weird magic water to delay them and run away in desperation. I'm far and away the most versatile and powerful character in the group but my spell list is still pretty limited.

The most glaring thing missing is a cleric. (It was actually my 2nd choice. I even completely made up the character. Instead, I followed my heart and played what I thought was more fun and interesting and a little different. I'd just played a cleric in another game.) How can SOMEONE not want to play arguably the best class in the game? The first time I really felt it was when we were attacked by assassins with poisoned blades and it set us back a lot of money to go to a church and pay for a LOT of lesser restorations. It occurred to me there are so many things that deal ability damage. I failed at encouraging our inquisitor to learn the spell but I can't blame her for taking more interesting things because her spells known are SO limited. The next time will likely be out in the wilderness and we'll just be SoL and have to wait to recover and hope we don't get attacked. We're on a limited timeframe for the campaign, essentially rushing toward the BBEG, so a multi-day setback is painful.

I keep finding myself trying to broaden my capabilities even further to fill in for how lacking the overall party is, but I get very frustrated. Why should I have to do that? Like I said, I'm already the only tier 1 and the most versatile already. It also gets expensive, often to the point of realizing it will be many levels before I can even afford it. A decent staff to broaden my spellcasting a bit is really expensive. I kind of just want to do what I do best but the pressure is there to be more due to the rest of my party's lack of foresight. A wand of lesser restoration to kind of make up for our lack of a cleric will cost us as much as the most powerful item we have and I don't even think we have enough for it right now. Meanwhile, we'll later on start needing Restoration which will be even more expensive. I'm looking into Leadership to flesh out the party a bit but the DM is strongly discouraging of it. It makes me kind of angry at the rest of the players for not considering party needs at all when making their choices. I find myself seriously considering switching to my 2nd choice of cleric, arguably more powerful and versatile, but I REALLY like this character for his flavor and story and I'd be even more resentful of the rest of my party.

Our DM throws very challenging things at us that are probably powered appropriately for a reasonably well-balanced party. We've nearly wiped on many occasions and I can't help but think he maybe fudged a few rolls to keep that from happening. We survive a lot of encounters by blowing through a lot of our best resources leaving us somewhat vulnerable if we continue. Maybe a wipe or at least a death or two would be a good thing at this point to get folks to be a little less casual about our survival.

Am I over-reacting? Are we not as ill-equipped as I think? Should I just go with the flow and make the best of things?

If I could just post yes, I would have.

[Extra Anchovies]

The goal of the DM isn't to send "level-appropriate encounters" (see: that damn crab) at the party four times per day; it's to provide the players with a reasonable challenge tailored to the party's skills, CR be damned. If you don't have a cleric, he'll likely become aware of that soon and adjust challenges appropriately. It's his job to be worried about what the party'll face, not yours :smallbiggrin:

[DarkOne-Rob]

There isn't a simple answer to this (set of) question(s), but I would suggest you consider a couple of things:

1. Are you having fun? If yes, then carry on and don't worry about it. If no (which your post seems to suggest), then it is a concern and needs to be addressed. How you address it will vary greatly on how you want to see things go. Asking the other players to change how they are playing may not go too well if they are having fun, so be cautious with this. You could also consider playing a witch-healer instead of a witch-necromancer if you don't want to completely change characters (use the retraining rules perhaps).

2. Is the DM putting too optimized a campaign in front of your party? The oft-hated Tier List is there to enable DMs and players to match their play styles and power levels so that everyone is roughly equally capable of helping and making the campaign successful. From the list you presented (the lowest tier is the ninja or gunslinger, though both if built correctly can dish out some damage) you have a capable party in most respects but the healing is a real concern. If the DM decides to throw things at your PCs that they simply cannot handle (ability damage), then perhaps the correct approach is to talk this over outside of game time and see if perhaps things could be toned down.

I hope these thoughts help.

[Dalebert]

You could also consider playing a witch-healer instead of a witch-necromancer if you don't want to completely change characters (use the retraining rules perhaps).

It is possible to give up gravewalker to get access to some restoration spells by changing patrons, but that would be trading out everything that makes this character so interesting just to be a half-assed cleric. If I were going to do that, I'd just go ahead and play my cleric I already built who was actually a decidedly better necromancer in almost every way and would have access to the full list of cleric spells to boot. Really the only advantage the gravewalker has (albeit a potentially fun one but with complications) is being able to posses my minions. In several other key respects, a necro cleric is decidedly better at it.


2. Is the DM putting too optimized a campaign in front of your party? ... If the DM decides to throw things at your PCs that they simply cannot handle (ability damage), then perhaps the correct approach is to talk this over outside of game time and see if perhaps things could be toned down.

Ability damage seems rather common though. It's hard to blame the DM for that. Is he supposed to avoid anything poisonous? That's a lot of things. I guess it's going to come down to just buying a wand of lesser restoration and later shelling out for restoration scrolls or something. What sucks is he has banned most item crafting feats and what that feels like is that we just have less wealth/magic items than a typical party would so those things mean shelling out what little cash we have just to fill necessities. For now, that means scrounging every penny to buy one, assuming I can talk the party into it, and then having no new magic items for quite a while.

I think what's bugging me is I'm the only one who's worried about these things. Everyone else just seems so carefree as we blaze through our resources every encounter and have near wipes regularly. I don't think they're giving any thought to the game outside of game night.

[Blackhawk748]

They probably aren't, i would bring up your concerns to the DM. Maybe he doesnt realize that you feel you arent getting enough loot. Hell ive done this a few times too where i forget to just through in some random items for the party

[Vhaidara]

Explain to your GM that you only want leadership to keep the party moving.

I've played in about 6 IRL campaigns in the last few years, and there hasn't been a single cleric. A lot of people don't like the idea of playing a highly religious character, and if they do, Paladin, Inquisitor, and the new Warpriest class are usually more appealing, since cleric = priest and priest = boring.

[Dalebert]

A lot of people don't like the idea of playing a highly religious character, and if they do, Paladin, Inquisitor, and the new Warpriest class are usually more appealing, since cleric = priest and priest = boring.

That seems like an attitude founded in ignorance. Clerics have incredible variety and potential depending on their domains, archetypes, etc. Mine had enhanced movement speed and duplicates of himself and could command undead minions and heal them with channeling. They can all wear armor and fight reasonably well and they have access to the entire cleric spell list without having to find spells or keep a spell book to boot. Their spell list is incredibly broad and versatile. They're awesome! There's hardly any downside. It's almost as if you took wizards and said "let's leave all that spellcasting ability but with full access to all spell possible and toss in a few extra spells known and per day and some special abilities (domain powers) and add armor and better fighting and better hitpoints." What were they thinking?

[Blackhawk748]

What were they thinking smoking?

Fixed that for you, and to be honest im not sure, maybe its because divine magic doesnt have as many, or as good, blasting spells they thought it was ok. Except that the Cleric is about 2 buffs away from hitting as hard as a Dungeuoncrasher Fighter

[Dalebert]

Oops. I left out better saves.

[Blackhawk748]

I think the answer to "what they were smoking" is the cheap crap.

[Vogonjeltz]

That seems like an attitude founded in ignorance. Clerics have incredible variety and potential depending on their domains, archetypes, etc. Mine had enhanced movement speed and duplicates of himself and could command undead minions and heal them with channeling. They can all wear armor and fight reasonably well and they have access to the entire cleric spell list without having to find spells or keep a spell book to boot. Their spell list is incredibly broad and versatile. They're awesome! There's hardly any downside. It's almost as if you took wizards and said "let's leave all that spellcasting ability but with full access to all spell possible and toss in a few extra spells known and per day and some special abilities (domain powers) and add armor and better fighting and better hitpoints." What were they thinking?

It's not ignorance, it's disinterest in what the Cleric has to offer. The cleric is simply too middle of the road. Other classes make better melee, other casters make for better magic users.

The cleric casting list is fairly light on offensive material, it's mostly buffs.

[Dalebert]

The cleric casting list is fairly light on offensive material, it's mostly buffs.

Maybe that's the perception but it seems inaccurate. Wizards are better spellcasters in some ways, but not by leaps and bounds. Clerics have a lot of DD spells and then two domains that can potentially add even more. Fire domain includes fireballs and wall of fire. Destruction includes disintegrate. Point is, domains give extra abilities and extra spells to tailor a cleric to fit your desires. Meanwhile they have almost no weaknesses despite all those perks. A wizard can't wear armor, has crappy hit points, has to find new spells and keep up with a spellbook, has crappier saves, all presumably to pay for his superior spellcasting, but a cleric's spellcasting is almost as good in many ways and decidedly better in several ways. They buff better than anyone, can fracking resurrect people and crap, and they can still blast things. They have more spells per day. They're simply ridiculous. And that's why they're probably my favorite class.

I better stop. I'm about to talk myself into switching characters. :)

[Theomniadept]

It's not ignorance, it's disinterest in what the Cleric has to offer. The cleric is simply too middle of the road. Other classes make better melee, other casters make for better magic users.

The cleric casting list is fairly light on offensive material, it's mostly buffs.

Middle of the road? Did I misread Righteous Might, Divine Power, and Divine Favor? Three spells that make you better than most melee? Or was it the lack of offensive spells like Hold Person or Summon Monster or Greater Magic Weapon or Divine Metamagic Persistent Greater Consumptive Field?

Honestly, ability damage fixes over time and if the party is spending all its money on lesser restorations then the party is being rushed. Cleric should not be a necessity but with a party of unoptimized characters the DM needs to look at what their tiers can and cannot do and determine exactly what should and should not fly. Worst case scenario is a party of fighters ends up in a Fire Emblem style campaign where they fight waves of humanoid fighters.

[Dalebert]

Well, someone seems to be doing something wrong. Aren't we supposed to be able to handle about four encounters a day on average? We seem to be averaging about one, maybe two, before we need to stop and recover. And if an encounter results in ability damage, we may very well be severely debilitated for several days easily. My character almost died from CON damage and he only has 10 CON to start with so you can imagine how vulnerable he is until he gets it all back. Each hit with a poison dagger made him more likely to fail his save on the next hit. It was pretty devastating then, and we were in town at the time and near a church. Next time we almost certainly won't be.

[Reogan]

I think you ought to ask yourself if the group is right for you.

The source of the problem, like so many problems, seems to be that there are different expectations. Your party expects to play the characters that they find 'cool' or 'fun' or whatever, and you have the additional desire to be 'useful' and expect them to have that too. Both are equally valid. I'm the type of player who would rather play a cerebremancer for flavor than a straight-class tier 1. One of my best friends and co-players will optimize his character to the point where only Thor might out power him. Might. Our party got along fine, though, because of the tier differential making my low-op high tier character no better than his fighty guy. Mind, I had all the potential, but I didn't care enough to use it.

Your co-players don't seem to care enough to use their potential. They want to play their characters as they are interesting to them, not as they could be most useful. Use doesn't enter into their equations. It's a valid style, and apparently the dominant style. Your style is also valid and, based on the forums, more popular on the whole. But it's not the majority.

When in Rome, do as the Romans do. If that isn't to your taste, perhaps found a new Rome. Antony tried to remake Rome, and it didn't end well for him.

[Vhaidara]

That seems like an attitude founded in ignorance. Clerics have incredible variety and potential depending on their domains, archetypes, etc. Mine had enhanced movement speed and duplicates of himself and could command undead minions and heal them with channeling. They can all wear armor and fight reasonably well and they have access to the entire cleric spell list without having to find spells or keep a spell book to boot. Their spell list is incredibly broad and versatile. They're awesome! There's hardly any downside. It's almost as if you took wizards and said "let's leave all that spellcasting ability but with full access to all spell possible and toss in a few extra spells known and per day and some special abilities (domain powers) and add armor and better fighting and better hitpoints." What were they thinking?

It isn't a mechanical objection, it's a flavor objection. The other three have much stronger built in flavor. Paladin = righteous warrior, Warpriest = holy warrior (yes, Paladin+), Inquisitor = ...well, Inquisitor. The guy who does what the church doesn't want to admit needs to be done.

Meanwhile, Cleric is left to fill the other parts of the clergy, which generally leaves priests. Yes, you can pretty easily build them to fill any role, but the role that they have by default is priest, which doesn't compete with the Holy Warrior or the Hunter of Corruption.

Further, building a Cleric to fill other roles requires a moderate degree of system mastery. You said your group is pretty casual. This seems logical to me: They want to build a holy warrior, they make a paladin. Could it be better as a cleric? Of course. Do they know that? Maybe (especially if you told them). Do they really care? No.

[Blackhawk748]

You could also bring up your concerns about the Ability Damage, i mean you Character only lived because of your proximity to a church and while you are savy enough to find a solution for your characters, the other players may not and they may lose their character.

[Dalebert]

I think you ought to ask yourself if the group is right for you.

I'm usually the first to say play what is fun for you. I'm certainly not expecting anyone to give that up. I guess I'm looking for a little compromise for the sake of our survival. I certainly don't expect anyone (else) to change classes or anything that drastic. It might come down to picking a less than your favorite feat or spell now and then. It might also be nice if the DM would stop throwing really difficult encounters while at the same time forcing us into situations where our resources are limited, e.g. banning item creation feats, not giving much treasure, designing a campaign where we spend much of the time out in the wilderness and far from civilization combined with banning any sort of long-term flight or teleportation...

Also, I don't have the luxury of picking a different group to play with. This one took long enough to happen.

[Kesnit]

From the look of things, your main concern seems to be ability damage. Before you do something drastic (like change characters), talk to the DM about your concerns. Lay out why you believe the party is struggling. You want Wand of Lesser Restoration? Ask the DM to include some of those in treasure, or quest rewards. Or ask the DM to stop using ability damage attacks, or use ones with lower DC (so it can be beaten).

The role of the DM (as someone said above) is to work with the party's strengths and not their weaknesses. (The exception is when the game is intended to the brutal and deadly, which does not seem to be the case here.) The other players seem more interested in a low-op game, which is perfectly valid. The DM seems to be running something higher-op, which goes against the wishes of the players. The easy solution is to get the DM on the same page as the majority of the players.

[Reogan]

I see. Valid.

I second Kesnit's comments, but have a question: do you know if the DM is good at the game? That is, I've up until recently been bad at D&D, and am still not great. This led to me sometimes giving the party encounters above their abilities. Is your DM skilled enough to recognize well-balanced encounters for the party?

[Dalebert]

I second Kesnit's comments, but have a question: do you know if the DM is good at the game?

I'm inclined to say that he is despite a few minor beefs with what appears to be a slight tendency to make sweeping house rules without considering the ramifications, like banning most item crafting. I'd say out of all of us, he's the only other one with any notion of optimization and potential exploitation of rules. I think that's partly why he's a little ban-happy and seems a little stingy with treasure and access to other resources. Another thing he did recently--when I was casually talking about plans for an undead mount and figuring out how to get my hands on some animal corpses, he said there were no animals around--none. Something weird is happening in the world. He swears it's just something to do with the plot of the game and not punishment for my character, but it really sucks. Things keep sucking for my build--no undead since first level, certainly no decent intelligent ones. Nothing to animate into something decent. We finally ran into humanoids bigger than kobolds and their crappy strength, which makes my two bloody skeletons all but useless in combat (-2 to-hit and dmg), but I'm still one level short of having animate dead. To his credit, an event happened recently where we got to pick out some magic items. I think that was because he realized he was starving us, treasure-wise, and trying to catch us up in a hurry.

[Blackhawk748]

Well talk to him and point out some of your difficulties, maybe he just had a problem with a couple of them? Honestly ive never seen anyone have a problem with Craft Wands and Brew Potion. Craft Wondrous Item i can see because that is just so many freakin items it isnt even funny.

[Dalebert]

Honestly ive never seen anyone have a problem with Craft Wands and Brew Potion. Craft Wondrous Item i can see because that is just so many freakin items it isnt even funny.

We're allowed to craft spell trigger items which unfortunately is still tricky considering most of the ones I need are for spells I can't cast. Also, it appears we will be in the wilderness a lot with no access to civilization so I doubt crafting is going to be much of an option anyway. I'm not even sure how we're supposed to buy any items if we don't just happen upon them.

I admit CWI seems like a lot for a 3rd level feat. He said he banned them because he wants us to at least consider keeping and using items we find instead of swapping everything out for the ideal items. His POV is when crafting is half price, it's essentially an even swap so there's no point in keeping anything you don't absolutely want.

[Blackhawk748]

I can understand that, he probably had a group that did it to everything so they didnt even look at the "cool-shiny-custom-bauble-thingy" and since PF doesnt make you use xp to craft (woohoo) crafting actually becomes a great option.

Like we've said a few times id at least ask to get a Wand of Lesser Restoration, kinda necessary for your party.

[BWR]

Well, someone seems to be doing something wrong. Aren't we supposed to be able to handle about four encounters a day on average? We seem to be averaging about one, maybe two, before we need to stop and recover.

I'd say the only thing you are supposed to do is have fun. IIRC the idea is that a party of 4 should be able to handle about 4 CR=level encounters a day, a CR=lvl encounter being designed to take about roughly 1/4 of the party's daily resources. I can't remember anything saying that a party was supposed to meet this in a day, only that they should be able to handle that in a day. If fights are challenging but the party survives and everyone has fun, mission accomplished. If the DM is fudging to keep people alive this is less good but so long as everyone is ok with it, there really isn't anything to complain about. If you really feel this is making things less fun for you you can talk to the DM and suggest he tone down the encounters so he doesn't have to fudge to keep people alive. If that's not good enough, suggest that he start playing a bit more ruthlessly, while warning the other players that he's been a bit too kind in the past and they wiill actually lose characters if they don't shape up.
Beware of becoming the problem player in this! If everyone else is fine with the way things are and you make too much of a fuss about it, then you are the problem, not them. Sometimes, maximizing everybody's fun means playing in a way you aren't too fond of.

[Vogonjeltz]

Middle of the road? Did I misread Righteous Might, Divine Power, and Divine Favor? Three spells that make you better than most melee? Or was it the lack of offensive spells like Hold Person or Summon Monster or Greater Magic Weapon or Divine Metamagic Persistent Greater Consumptive Field?

Honestly, ability damage fixes over time and if the party is spending all its money on lesser restorations then the party is being rushed. Cleric should not be a necessity but with a party of unoptimized characters the DM needs to look at what their tiers can and cannot do and determine exactly what should and should not fly. Worst case scenario is a party of fighters ends up in a Fire Emblem style campaign where they fight waves of humanoid fighters.

This is probably a discussion for another thread. 3/4 BAB is middle of the road. It's not be best, and it's not the worst. Spells can be dispelled quite easily. It's inferior to innate ability.

Divine spellcasting is mechanically bound to deal less damage per die than Arcane spellcasting. Better than nothing, but not the top option.

They get simple weapons, but nothing martial, so again, better than nothing, but not the best. Seeing the pattern yet?

[Theomniadept]

This is probably a discussion for another thread. 3/4 BAB is middle of the road. It's not be best, and it's not the worst. Spells can be dispelled quite easily. It's inferior to innate ability.

Divine spellcasting is mechanically bound to deal less damage per die than Arcane spellcasting. Better than nothing, but not the top option.

They get simple weapons, but nothing martial, so again, better than nothing, but not the best. Seeing the pattern yet?

Spells cannot be dispelled easily, that's why you have to roll for Dispel Magic. Also, 3/4 BAB? I specifically mentioned Divine Power which gives you full BAB and a +6 enhancement to strength. The ability to increase your own size through Righteous Might far outclasses any innate ability sans Tome of Battle. Also, damage per die? Nobody blaster casts, comparing cleric blasters to wizard blasters is like debating whether Barbarian or Fighter is better at disarming traps; it's something that, fully specialized in, they would suck at.

[snailgosh]

Spells cannot be dispelled easily, that's why you have to roll for Dispel Magic. Also, 3/4 BAB? I specifically mentioned Divine Power which gives you full BAB and a +6 enhancement to strength. The ability to increase your own size through Righteous Might far outclasses any innate ability sans Tome of Battle. Also, damage per die? Nobody blaster casts, comparing cleric blasters to wizard blasters is like debating whether Barbarian or Fighter is better at disarming traps; it's something that, fully specialized in, they would suck at.

Yeah, but you can't read those facts simply from the tables. New players tend to just look at the tables and read the fluff and don't have every spell memorized.