Balancing power between party members

[hobbitkniver]

So I have been DMing a game that has gone pretty well in the sense that everyone is enjoying it, but as the DM, I find myself bothered by the difference in power between my players. The party is made up of a kobold scout, human bard, and human ranger (TWF). Everyone is level 8 and we used a fairly kind point buy, 32 I think. The party is completed by combat focused npc party members which have integrated well into the party. The treasure I have given them is also far better than the RAW for their level, but it has not been a problem at all.

The problems lie in the character that my players made. There is hardly any optimization, so that is not an issue. The ranger is the most veteran player, but he doesn't seem to have optimized very much at all. His character is the only mechanically competent character, but is limited to pretty much just fighting. The scout pulls horrible damage even though I've continuously bent the rules to give him advantages or reduce his penalties. His skills are mostly the same as the ranger otherwise. The bard is a new player and his character was built by the veteran player while he gave input. I've never made him show his sheet, but he does not contribute at all in fights. He is an archer with a +2 bow, but never does more than 5 damage and rarely even hits. His spells also never come to any sort of use besides the occasional heal. I offer to help him improve his character, but he is not interested. That's fine, but he gets bored and slows down combat by being indifferent to the flow of the battle and distracting everyone. I have been overly generous with allowing people to swap feats or change their characters at any point, but they would rather play pitifully weak characters.

It's very hard to design encounters because it's like I'm writing them for the ranger and npcs and I'm writing the story for the other two. Every session, I get complaints about the difficulty of the battles despite the game breaking boons I've given them. Most often, the weak members hide in the back and don't come to harm anyway while the ranger fights the battle.

You might think I should just not have combat, but they also can be really stubborn about story. Often, they need a serious amount of hand holding and won't do anything until given a clue. They sometimes refuse to do what they have been advised and then complain that they don't know what to do. More time is spent making fun of the npcs than listening to what they say and they bumble through everything without thinking about it as more than a fetch quest.

Being the DM for this group is enjoyable, yet frustrating. If I can't find some kind of resolution, I think I'll end the campaign. I put a lot of work into a game that's ruined by the apathy of my players who enjoy the game significantly more than I do. Though the players are nice people and are fun to play with, the whole process takes only my time, effort, and money. When my players totally don't care, it really makes it hard to be motivated.

Ranting aside, what do you suppose is the least offensive to make my players change their sheets or fix the problem some other way? Thanks for your answers, I'm interesting in hearing from the experienced DM's who have had many more parties than myself.

[Zirconia]

First of all I'd suggest familiarizing yourself with their character sheets, it is not a sign of distrust or anything but you really DO need to know as a DM what the characters can and can't do if you are going to design scenarios for them. That alone won't solve your problem, though, it is at least partly about poor play, not poor character design.

Next, I'd be careful with having "combat focused npcs" in the group. The game can easily turn into you having a combat with yourself, which will only encourage the two poor combatants to stand back and watch, because you will handle it SO much more efficiently than they will. Find some way to get them out of the group, and adjust encounters accordingly. The spotlight has to be on the players, if you are rotating to someone every third action it keeps them more involved than every 5th or 6th action.

Finally, I'd suggest some 1-on-1 tutoring in game mechanics for the two weak players. Just you and one of them at a time, not a regular game session. They don't necessarily need to optimize their characters, but learn how to play more tactically with what they have. The new person, especially, may not think to cast spells because they have never seen it done and don't really appreciate what they can do. If they have a MMO background, they may not be used to spells being dramatically more powerful than hitting things, since MMOs tend to be better balanced that way than D&D. Run an example combat with them, just them, one npc meat shield, and half a dozen gnolls or something appropriate, first letting them just heal or do whatever they normally do until they both drop, then with them casting a Glitterdust or something similar, so they can understand both the mechanics and the effectiveness.

Here we are used to reading a spell in a book and understanding the mechanics well enough to pretty quickly say "awesome spell, I'll use it in THIS situation" or "eh, useless". That is not nearly as obvious to someone not accustomed to D&D or even tabletop rpgs. Some people learn much better by example.

Don't worry too much, by the way, about "game breaking" bonuses and rule changes. I've played with a group of friends for years in multiple games, and a couple of them are fun players and good roleplayers but terrible at the mechanics of character design and play. We routinely give them game breaking items and such to keep them even power-wise with the rest of the group, and it works out fine. We just don't rub their noses in it, and they don't really "get" the mechanics enough to see how out of line the items are, so we all have fun. That is a much easier problem to handle than the Ruthless Optimizer mixed with a group who otherwise doesn't. Just make sure the items are perfect for just that character and not so much for the rest of the group, so they don't go to the wrong person, or have them gifted "in person" as rewards for a quest or something.

You can also "fix" classes by giving them better mechanics, for example full BAB for monks, making more buff swift cast for a paladin, etc. and focus the fixes on the characters who need it. Use caution with that, though, if an optimizer dies and wants to make that class next it is harder to reverse yourself then.

[ComaVision]

This may not be appropriate for you but I couldn't run that game. If I can't make progressively more powerful baddies with better tactics then I'm not going to have any fun. I do have a hand in all the characters created for my game though (this isn't a rule, it has just happened as I'm the most knowledgeable) so I have a very good idea of what characters can do and their relative power. I advise against very poor choices.

I do have one player with a poor character (she's a factotum and has only cast one spell ever, does not put any effort in to spell choice and barely participates) and I basically do not consider her character when planning encounters. She would not be in my game if her boyfriend was not a good player that I quite enjoy having there.

I've added an NPC to their group once but it was actually a temporary PC. I had a friend come in to fill in a role for one sesssion. Otherwise, I expect the group to grow and adapt to the challenges.

[prufock]

I would:

1) Ditch the NPCs, unless there is one to whom they are attached. Since you say they like to make fun of them, I don't think they like them very much.

2) Adjust the enemy CRs to match your underpowered PCs. This can mean assuming your party's ECL is one lower than it should be (or more, depending on how bad they are). Also use multiple weaker enemies that can split up and focus on each member of the party, so that they are forced to do something.

3) Keep combat short, or interesting, or both. Players getting bored by combat probably aren't engaged or interested in "all that math." Have tasks during an encounter that are important, but don't require fighting. Have some flying enemies that the melee ranger can't effectively defeat on his own.

4) Change the type of story you're putting in front of them. If they can't reason well enough to pick up on things they should do, either they aren't that quick or you are making a classic DM mistake - assuming your players will see what to you is an obvious path. You have information they don't, therefore their decisions and reasoning won't match yours. So do something where they don't have to investigate. Do something less important. Give them straightforward missions from an organization they get involved in. Improvise. Don't worry if they don't solve the problem. Do less prep. Prepare 3 or 4 things per game, and improvise the rest.

5) ASK THEM. Ask them why aren't interested in the fights, or why the story is frustrating. Ask them what THEY want out of the game, what THEY want to do. Both players and characters should have motivations.

[Dysart]

I've never ran a campaign where I didn't know the characters enough to be able to pick one up and play a game with it.

For me that's really integral, I need to know their power level and options so I can plan ways to truly challenge them.

Sounds like the Bard probably hasn't built his character right and may need some help!
them

[Hiro Quester]

It sounds like the players might just need a bit of coaching on how to have fun using their character's abilities, and how to adjust their character's abilities so they are fun to play.

Talk to the players about what they most enjoy about the game, or what they would like to do more of. I've been very happy when the DM has talked to the group, out of character, about what we wanted to do. And when he talked to me one-on-one about my character, my vision for what the character wanted to do, etc.

For instance, one thing that really helps a bard is being able to take advantage of the action economy.

At level 8 the bard can cast a Harmonize spell (RoS, 2 level spell), for instance, that lasts minutes per level enables them to start a bardic music as a move action. Bards also have lots of good swift action spells and interrupts.

With that suggestion the bard might see more options than just singing a song. You can both sing a song and cast a spell. Sometimes you can cast a swift action spell, sing inspire whatever as a move action, and cast another spell as a standard action.

Looking at their spell and feat selections and talking about why they made those choices, and what other options might be useful (fun for them, good for the group's ability to achieve their mission), will help a lot.

Conversations like that sure can't hurt.

Edit:
I just re-read the OP where you said that bard wasn't interested in talking about how to improve the character.

Maybe it would help to talk about your need, as DM, to balance the encounters, to make sure they are fun for everyone. You want to get a better sense of what the player most wants to do, and is able to do. etc. Make it about your responsibility as DM to help everyone work and play well together.

[mvpmack]

How does the bard not contribute? Every time the ranger hits, he deals some damage. Every time animal companion hits, he deals some damage. Every time someone hits because his bonus to hit allowed it, he deals a lot of damage.

Playing bard is subtle, and a lot of the skill in the class is using your out of combat powers and/or using shenanigans with UMD.

Probably the thing that made me feel really strong playing a bard is using a familiar + copious levels of UMD + Magic Savant (2nd level spell) shared with the familiar to handle firing off all sorts of useful wands and scrolls (using Unseen Servant to retrieve the items for the familiar), but if the bard player isn't clever, he'll never really reach the level where bard is really useful.

You should really sit down the guy and ask him what he wants to do, then let him do that. Honestly, I'd just give him something like crusader, so he can fight up front while supporting the team too (since I assume he picked bard to be a team player).

[jedipotter]

You need to change the game a bit.

You really, really, really need to change the story. If the players don't like the story, it must be changed. There is no point running a game where you just hold their hands the whole time. The story needs to be exciting to the players so they want to play.

You will see a huge difference in game play of players that want to play vs. players that are present. You just need to give them what they want.


Remember D&D is not just all about the damage. There are other things that can be done to stop a foe. Have some goblins with whips, don't just have every goblin have a greatsword...

You might want to tailor things a bit more for the group too. Let the ranger track, let the bard sing and so on.

[big teej]

I know this is not, by any stretch, a particularly helpful answer. BUT


based on the information given, I believe your best course of action is to kill the campaign and have a heart-to-heart with your players. figure out where their heads are at.


if the bard and the scout just aren't that into the game, there is *nothing* you can do about it. and it's time to move on to new players/new system/whatever.


not suggesting you make a confrontation about it or anything, just a direct honesty.

sorry I couldn't be more help.


you also made repeated references to the lack of optimization (or any build skills at all) of the same two players. obviously I have an extremely small amount of information to go off of, but still.

not everyone enjoys worrying about their build. to quote one of my regulars (and best players) "I'm here to play Dungeons and Dragons, not be a *explitive* accountant"

I enjoy digging through a stack of rulebooks to find feats/items/classes/etc. that I find fun and interesting, I enjoy the search and the process. *none* of my players do, however, and I do everything in my power to minimize that aspect of the game.

[endur]

Next, I'd be careful with having "combat focused npcs" in the group. The game can easily turn into you having a combat with yourself, which will only encourage the two poor combatants to stand back and watch, because you will handle it SO much more efficiently than they will. Find some way to get them out of the group, and adjust encounters accordingly. The spotlight has to be on the players, if you are rotating to someone every third action it keeps them more involved than every 5th or 6th action.

Finally, I'd suggest some 1-on-1 tutoring in game mechanics for the two weak players.


Lots of good advice in the quoted response. My comments.

1. Definitely get rid of the combat NPCs in the group. Make the party resolve combats. If the difficulty is too much, then reduce the difficulty (4 hobgoblins becomes 2 goblins, etc.). Give solutions that do not require combat (Bilbo and Gandalf delaying the 3 Mountain trolls until they are turned into stone; fleeing from combat; etc.).

2. For the 1 on 1, I wouldn't call it tutoring. I'd call it a special quest. The end result of the special quest will be that the character will receive a special magic item or some other ability.

3. Story: When a party is cynical and doesn't pay attention and just bumbles through things... Some people like to role play this way ... either they are into the humor aspect ... or it doesn't require as much investment ... or they are just tired. My recommendation: Find out what they care about, and send the story in that direction. If they want to play a campaign similar to the bumbling inspector Clouseau from the Pink Panther, then expect their behavior when you design the story.