How do you handle this

[Azoth]

As players and DMs, how do you handle when a character stops holding back their mechanical might?

I am asking because my real life group has over the past few months developed both a dependence on and displeasure with my characters. They understand as players that I am used to playing at a higher optimization level than they are, and that I tend to build weaker characters for the games I play with them.

Now, I also have the habit of designing "Ace in the Hole" features into my builds for situations when an encounter is about to cause a TPK. Since a lot of our DMs are new to DMing the risk of imbalanced encounters is high, so it has come in handy. The issue is when I see it coming and my character reacts by going all out to keep us alive. In game the other characters are outraged that the character has hidden his capabilities so many times before, and tend to just sit back and do nothing in the next few encounters. Out of game the other players refer to it as "God Mode enabled", "Munchkining", and other such witty titles.

I have offered to help them with their builds to get to a higher optimization level and been declined. It seems like they view the level of play that is common on this forum as akin to some form of cheating.

So again, members of the playground, how do you handle it when your players have their characters go all out and reveal they are capable of much more than they have been letting others believe?

[Nifft]

Let me see if I understand the situation...

- You are a player (not the GM).
- You are asking us how we, as GM, would react to you as a player.

It looks to me like you're asking us for approval of your behavior -- which you can have, because it sounds to me like you've done an admirable job of saving an inexperienced party and an inexperienced DM from their own honest mistakes -- but our approval won't actually help your situation.

[Jowgen]

I usually make sure that if I as a player or one of my players has a "THAT technique" that they deliberately don't use for game-balance reasons or whatever, that restriction is a strong element of their character.

For example, I currently have a character capable of mass minionmancer mindrape, and could with relative ease break much of the campaign world simply by going around and building a massive loyal army. So in order to balance that, I made him an exalted stupid idealist who will with some regularity break out into heartfelt speeches about compassion, forgiveness and all that jazz. As a result, the rest of the party knows that he has that capacity in a tight spot, but won't bug him to use it lest they need to listen to another one of his sermons on what comes with great power :smallyuk:

tl;dr: give a decent in character explanation for why your character down-regulates himself.

[Azoth]

I am not so much seeking approval for the behavior, but instead wanting to hear of others stories being in such situations and how it was handled. I am wanting to see if others have had more favorable reactions from the other players or how DMs have reacted in such situations. In essence, I am trying to see if their are other ways I can approach my group to make the situation better between all parties.

No player likes being called a cheating munchkin when their god wizard stops holding back to the party's level in order to save them. No DM likes realizing that they have not been challenging a player the entire time up until a crucial moment. No player likes realizing all of their contributions have been relatively meaningless and unnecessary because someone could have done it better.

All of these things and feelings can arise when a player is forced by circumstance to reveal that they have been holding their build back to enjoy the game at other people's optimization level. I am interested in seeing how others have worked through and resolved these situations. Because, frankly, on this board it is a standard piece of advice offered to high op players when they join a low op game to hide a build's power until you have to use it. We also offer to these players to use Tier 1 classes so they can easily facilitate this advice.

[frogglesmash]

If you want ideas on how to get them to stop whining bout your "god mode" you could have your character leg it next time a TPK is imminent instead of helping out and see if they prefer that, of course that might just make them even more irrate.

[Nifft]

Okay. Out of character, one thing you could say is:

"Yeah, I can do that. But I can't do that all day. The volume of ass that I kick is limited, and I want to keep my biggest baddest boom in reserve for situations just like that one. My character assumes that all of your characters also have secret reserves which you're saving for an emergency. You should consider making that a reality -- all of us should be able to kick disproportionate ass in an emergency."

[Lalliman]

I think your design choice of having a back-up plan is a good one, as long as the other players know about it up front. It sounds like they were pissed because they OOC didn't know you were holding back. As Jowgen said, you'd do best to give your character an IC reason to hold back. Preferably talk to your DM to give some actual consequence to you using your full power as opposed to mere moral qualms. "Sure, i could use this spell to wipe out the orcs, but the energy signature will draw Cthulhu's attention to us, and then we're in deeper **** than before," to name an extreme example. If everyone knows what your char is capable of and agrees that his reason for not using it is legit, they'll probably have no qualms with it.

Edit:

My character assumes that all of your characters also have secret reserves which you're saving for an emergency. You should consider making that a reality -- all of us should be able to kick disproportionate ass in an emergency."
That's asking them to optimize, albeit partially, which they've shown to be unwilling to do.

[Nifft]

That's asking them to optimize, albeit partially, which they've shown to be unwilling to do.

Nope.

They could just buy an expensive and powerful consumable magic item each.

A Fighter who can throw down an Elemental Gem has an emergency option which didn't require making his character not suck. This isn't necessarily rocket science.

[Lalliman]

Except that Azoth can buy such a magic item as well and still end up a step above everyone else. For your idea the DM would have to intervene and grant that extra item/currency to everyone but Azoth. Which isn't a bad idea, but it is required, unless Azoth wants to do more holding back by intentionally spending his money badly.

[Nifft]

Except that Azoth can buy such a magic item as well and still end up a step above everyone else. Of course he can. But that's irrelevant to my point.

You do understand my point, right?

It's not about ~equality~ or ~balance~.

It's about crafting a narrative which shows why a character would KEEP SOME POWER IN RESERVE and encourage everyone else to do the same.

I'm not trying to fix D&D's balance, that's not a practical problem.

I'm trying to give the other people at Azoth's table a reason to STOP RESENTING HIM and START RESEMBLING HIM.

Baby steps, yo.

[Lalliman]

Baby steps, yo.
I get the point, but i'm thinking that if i was in their situation, angry at being outshined by another PC, i would be all too aware of the fact that spending my own money to gain a similar burst of power changes nothing about the power balance of the party.

I'm not likely to be in that situation because i don't mind power differences too much, but these players apparently do, as that's the nature of the conflict. I doubt your approach will work on them now that they're already aware of and bothered by the problem.

[Nifft]

I get the point, but i'm thinking that if i was in their situation, angry at being outshined by another PC, i would be all too aware of the fact that spending my own money to gain a similar burst of power changes nothing about the power balance of the party.

I'm not likely to be in that situation because i don't mind power differences too much, but these players apparently do, as that's the nature of the conflict. I doubt your approach will work on them now that they're already aware of and bothered by the problem.

They were only aware of the issue because it was rubbed in their faces.

This is a way to make them feel like they are also holding back in every fight, so they don't feel bad about their lack of options.

If they were clever enough to NOT PLAY A FIGHTER, then they'd be clever enough for your concerns to be valid -- but also for your concerns to NOT be valid, because they wouldn't have been surprised by the Wizard kicking ass, and they wouldn't be playing a Fighter.

[RolandDeschain]

This gonna sound waaayyyy too harsh, but it is what it is:

If your PC constantly made my PC feel worthless then while you and I may still be friends, my PC and your PC wouldn't. [shrugs]

[Talar]

How do you feel about support classes? Cause that sort of seems ideal. Optimize your character to make everyone else better? I would imagine everyone would be happy with that, except for you depending on how you feel about support characters.

[Lalliman]

If they were clever enough to NOT PLAY A FIGHTER, then they'd be clever enough for your concerns to be valid -- but also for your concerns to NOT be valid, because they wouldn't have been surprised by the Wizard kicking ass, and they wouldn't be playing a Fighter.
Are you saying that someone's class of choice invariably indicates their personality? Besides, nobody mentioned what they were playing. I don't wanna turn this into a thread-swallowing discussion, so let's end it on this: your idea is good, i'm only objecting because you sound so certain it'll work. All you need to be discontent with it is a little cynicism, which they may or may not possess. We don't know.


If your PC constantly made my PC feel worthless then while you and I may still be friends, my PC and your PC wouldn't. [shrugs]
Would they? Realistically, if their lives were really at stake, i'd think very few people would pass up having an overpowered ally that makes battles easy and minimizes their chance of dying. It might not, and certainly should not, affect OOC friendships, but it's certainly an OOC problem.

[Krazzman]

I tried it too some time ago with a warblade. I always had one maneuver I could pull to gain the top hand or try to trip the enemies.

That way I helped the rogue shine somewhat... but one unlucky encounter everyone except rogue and me got hit by a max rolled lightning cloud something. We then proceeded to kill it with nearly no hp left over. It seemed everyone had fun because it was a close encounter.

I personally like the "this isn't even my final form" theme for characters. I believe their reaction is "normal" albeit childish and or not really needed.
The lazy principle is one of the most used decision process my characters go for. "Yes. I could've easily slaughtered the ores back then. But then we wouldn't be alive now and do you know howhat tiring that maneuver is?"
To explain with my warblade. He transformed a hard nearly tpk against multiple orcs into a war of attrition constantly tripping their chieftain. It was a hard fight and the first one I used trip. No one was angry or upset. The dm was a bit mock sad that his chieftain was lying on his back so often.

Hope this helps and is on topic.

[Amphetryon]

This gonna sound waaayyyy too harsh, but it is what it is:

If your PC constantly made my PC feel worthless then while you and I may still be friends, my PC and your PC wouldn't. [shrugs]

And this is exactly why neither Superman nor Batman had any friends in the Justice League.

[Nifft]

Are you saying that someone's class of choice invariably indicates their personality?

Doesn't look like I'm saying anything about their personality. Why would you think that?


Besides, nobody mentioned what they were playing. I don't wanna turn this into a thread-swallowing discussion, so let's end it on this: your idea is good, i'm only objecting because you sound so certain it'll work. All you need to be discontent with it is a little cynicism, which they may or may not possess. We don't know.

We know what made them upset. We also know they've resisted the Azoth's efforts to educate them about building better characters.

IMHO that's enough to judge their mental state, and to formulate a (potential) solution.

Of course I can't guarantee that it'll work, but I think it's likely enough to be worth a try.

[RolandDeschain]

Would they? Realistically, if their lives were really at stake, i'd think very few people would pass up having an overpowered ally that makes battles easy and minimizes their chance of dying. It might not, and certainly should not, affect OOC friendships, but it's certainly an OOC problem.

I said "friends" and you said "allies".

[Earthwalker]

Instead of pretending to be as weak as everyone else would being just as weak as everyone else solve the problem ?

Is this something the OP can live with ?

If you don't have the encountering ending power you won't use it.

[Lalliman]

Doesn't look like I'm saying anything about their personality. Why would you think that?

Of course I can't guarantee that it'll work, but I think it's likely enough to be worth a try.
Maybe personality isn't the word. You implied that playing a fighter is a sign of not being clever, because someone with sufficient knowledge of the game would obviously never play a suboptimal class. Exaggeration mine.

As for the idea, it certainly is, though i'd advice being more covert about it. Have the DM give such items to them as treasure, or what have you. Cause it seems hard to imagine to me that telling them your plan straight-up wouldn't ring a bell.


I said "friends" and you said "allies".
Touché.

[RolandDeschain]

Touché.

LoL....ideally they would be one and the same.

[Kesnit]

Now, I also have the habit of designing "Ace in the Hole" features into my builds for situations when an encounter is about to cause a TPK. Since a lot of our DMs are new to DMing the risk of imbalanced encounters is high, so it has come in handy. The issue is when I see it coming and my character reacts by going all out to keep us alive. In game the other characters are outraged that the character has hidden his capabilities so many times before, and tend to just sit back and do nothing in the next few encounters. Out of game the other players refer to it as "God Mode enabled", "Munchkining", and other such witty titles.


I am not so much seeking approval for the behavior, but instead wanting to hear of others stories being in such situations and how it was handled. I am wanting to see if others have had more favorable reactions from the other players or how DMs have reacted in such situations. In essence, I am trying to see if their are other ways I can approach my group to make the situation better between all parties.

No player likes being called a cheating munchkin when their god wizard stops holding back to the party's level in order to save them. No DM likes realizing that they have not been challenging a player the entire time up until a crucial moment. No player likes realizing all of their contributions have been relatively meaningless and unnecessary because someone could have done it better.

All of these things and feelings can arise when a player is forced by circumstance to reveal that they have been holding their build back to enjoy the game at other people's optimization level. I am interested in seeing how others have worked through and resolved these situations. Because, frankly, on this board it is a standard piece of advice offered to high op players when they join a low op game to hide a build's power until you have to use it. We also offer to these players to use Tier 1 classes so they can easily facilitate this advice.

I think your problem comes from what I highlighted. You were self-nerfing (good), then took off the gloves (bad). You intentionally built in an "escape hatch" to your PC.

I'm playing in a game where it is no secret I'm an optimizer. On the other hand, the other 4 players are not. (Two of them are decent, but, well, let's just say they think Warmage is an awesome, powerful class...) I stumbled across the Eldritch Disciple (Comp. Mage) PrC and decided to see what I could do. It has almost full Cleric casting (it loses 2 levels of Cleric), so I knew I had to do something to weaken myself. So in came VoP (not as horrible on a full caster, but not as good as WBL), Saint template (+2 LA), and a nerfed spell list where I removed any spells that do HP damage (ability damage is OK), all summoning, and most spells that are Self only. The intent is for my PC to stand back and make it easier for the others to fight.

If you are going to weaken yourself - weaken yourself. Then once weakened, stay weakened. If the DM causes a TPK, oops. Handwave that it didn't happen, build new PCs, etc. But don't suddenly turn around and let the other players know you've been holding back by revealing everything. There should be nothing to reveal; if your intent was to self-nerf, your PC should never have had that kind of power to begin with.

[Spore]

Give them a backstory and let THEM build your character. Don't be snarky but supportive. After they are finished you can examine the product (or even post him here). Maybe we can get what mechanically aggravates them so much.

[Flickerdart]

I once had a character like this - a Factotum//Monk built around tripping and fighting defensively. He had a That TechniqueTM: Enlarge + Decisive Strike + Knockdown + Improved Trip on top of various flat damage boosters that would get multiplied.

I had to use That TechniqueTM in the game's second encounter because the DM was super-new and didn't calibrate the monster properly. Without it, we would have all died. Even with it, it was a hell of a fight and two people dropped to negatives.

I categorically disagree that it's only the DM's job to balance encounters and the PCs should just shrug and roll up new guys when the DM's monsters didn't pull their punches enough. "Here is my true power" is a trope that's hardly unknown in the media we all base our characters and games on, consciously or otherwise.

If you must, make sure That TechniqueTM carried a cost of some sort. The example above only worked once a day because of Enlarge's daily limit, and took a turn (or two, if I was out of Travel Devotions that encounter) to set up. Other techniques, like using Overchannel as an Ardent to access a normally too-high-level power, inflict heavy damage on the user. Things like blastificing for epic damage or pulling out a scroll of mordenkainen's problem solving might involve the depletion of valuable consumables. Certain spells like dominate person or baleful teleport are easily countered by a prepared enemy, and if your enemies knew you used them a lot, they would prepare to counter those spells. Basically, just make sure that it's sensible in-game for the character to hold back the full extent of his power until it's actually necessary.

[SangoProduction]

Well, if they wanted a balanced game, they wouldn't be playing D&D...any edition. Why can they not accept their friend's (in or out of game) own "god mode" on the rare occassion - like during a potential TPK. That's supposed to be super stressful and climactic, unless they aren't really caring about their characters. Then someone goes all super-sayin and saves everyone, and, would you know it, it's the guy they've already been traveling with.
In character, my guy would probably seek to become like him - to tap the hidden power he has. Not in an optimization way, but in the "plucky apprentice" type of way. Out of character, I would likely just be relieved my character survived.

[smcmike]

Lots of good advice here, but some specifics might help. Different ace-in-the-hole powers are easier to justify in and out of character than others, and your roll in the story matters too. Conveniently it's way easier to justify holding back on magic than on combat tricks. And while it's nice to have an escape hatch, there are some things that will always come across as pure cheese to low-op players... there's a big difference between revealing you've been holding back a bit and revealing that you are basically a god.

[dascarletm]

I currently am playing in a two player game (gestalt), and I have a character similar to this. My friend (the other player) doesn't optimize too heavily, or at all really.

The build is Zen Archer//Empyreal Sorcerer. I self nerfed by taking the half-celestial template(3.5 version) and put it on the empyreal sorcerer side, hurting my CL significantly. My character can still kick some serious ass, and most of the time I don't even use my bow. Instead I buff my friend, and perform some battlefield control (tripping and some spells).

However, I have That TechniqueTM. It takes 2-3 rounds to self-buff fully, that is the drawback, and you definitely need a drawback to unleashing your power. I've used it once in the campaign, session 5 I believe, and how you use it is the key.

When you do unleash your power, make it something the other players take part in. My character forwent his move actions during his "power-up" time. In character I told the other player "I need about 20 seconds to ready my attack! You need to hold them off for me!" He almost died defending my character, and when we won the attack we both were quite ecstatic.

TLDR:
1. Make sure you have hard nerfs on your character
2. Make sure there is a "cost" to using your ultimate technique
3. When you use it have it involve the players in some way.

EDIT:

If you have build specifics on your character (including you "Ace in the Hole") we might be able to help you adjust it.

[martixy]

I once had a character like this - a Factotum//Monk built around tripping and fighting defensively. He had a That TechniqueTM: Enlarge + Decisive Strike + Knockdown + Improved Trip on top of various flat damage boosters that would get multiplied.

I had to use That TechniqueTM in the game's second encounter because the DM was super-new and didn't calibrate the monster properly. Without it, we would have all died. Even with it, it was a hell of a fight and two people dropped to negatives.

I categorically disagree that it's only the DM's job to balance encounters and the PCs should just shrug and roll up new guys when the DM's monsters didn't pull their punches enough. "Here is my true power" is a trope that's hardly unknown in the media we all base our characters and games on, consciously or otherwise.

If you must, make sure That TechniqueTM carried a cost of some sort. The example above only worked once a day because of Enlarge's daily limit, and took a turn (or two, if I was out of Travel Devotions that encounter) to set up. Other techniques, like using Overchannel as an Ardent to access a normally too-high-level power, inflict heavy damage on the user. Things like blastificing for epic damage or pulling out a scroll of mordenkainen's problem solving might involve the depletion of valuable consumables. Certain spells like dominate person or baleful teleport are easily countered by a prepared enemy, and if your enemies knew you used them a lot, they would prepare to counter those spells. Basically, just make sure that it's sensible in-game for the character to hold back the full extent of his power until it's actually necessary.

I completely and wholly agree.
I see no problem with someone with a mastery of the system stepping in to fix things when someone else goofs.
Even if the person with the mastery is a player and the person goofing is the DM.

Azoth, I would consider what you did awesome and cool.

However I am that kind of player. I have no problem with disbalance as long as it is handled properly.
And there are many ways to do so. Some of which include the OP player not taking the spotlight all the time, the DM creating situations where other's niche talents can shine or just roleplaying it properly.

And therein lies the crux of the issue.

In an unbalanced system. You can build for a wide variety of power levels. But that's okay. That's why it's that much fun.

But this means that the focus of making everything works shifts from the system to a higher level - to the social contract.
It's not the imperative of the gaming system to fix every problem, even mechanical ones.

To what can essentially be boiled down "Let us, as players, and people who want to have fun, just agree to be respectful and not be di**s to each other in or out this shared imaginary space we've come to create."

[Lerondiel]

...Instead I buff my friend, and perform some battlefield control (tripping and some spells).

However, I have That TechniqueTM. It takes 2-3 rounds to self-buff fully, that is the drawback, and you definitely need a drawback to unleashing your power. I've used it once in the campaign, session 5 I believe, and how you use it is the key.

When you do unleash your power, make it something the other players take part in. My character forwent his move actions during his "power-up" time. In character I told the other player "I need about 20 seconds to ready my attack! You need to hold them off for me!" He almost died defending my character, and when we won the attack we both were quite ecstatic.

TLDR:
1. Make sure you have hard nerfs on your character
2. Make sure there is a "cost" to using your ultimate technique
3. When you use it have it involve the players in some way.


Perfect.
The other challenge to give a very experienced player is to create builds where the "Ace in the Hole" is based around the other PCs - not general buffing to help, a mechanism for THEM to solve the big problems.
Eg. ..casting Fly on the party archer to pick off an enemy while the rest of the party is saved by a Wall of Force....casting Polymorph (Sun Giant) and Enlarge Person on the barbarian being crushed in a grapple with the BBEG rather than save him by turning the BBEG to goo...put Ironguard on the fighter in the doorway, then dimension step everyone behind him.

THe thought process generally starts with "what spells/situations would make that PC a game changer?"

- You get to stretch your skills in new and creative ways
- TPKs are stopped
- the other players are getting hero moments

[Red Fel]

As others have said, designing the character in such a way that it can't go turbo-mode (with the exception of That Technique) is a good way to ensure that it won't happen. Building a character who could go into overdrive, and simply declining to do so, can potentially lead to problems; hold back too much and you're letting the party down, unload to much and you're overshadowing them. But a character whose abilities are mechanically limited ensures that you won't be that guy.

Adding a cost is another effective method. Awhile back, I asked for entertaining and highly destructive builds in this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?361628-Collateral-Damage-Man). On the first page, you see a suggestion that uses the Mark of Storms on a Commoner. It's a bit of an extreme, but it illustrates my point; here is a character who has only one ability, and that ability is a three-hour tornado that completely demolishes everything and everyone within its massive, massive radius. He can use it only once (or twice with the right options) a day, but frankly, the kind of situation that would merit its use is the sort of thing that the party prays will never, ever happen. Cost is built into both its usage limit and its highly destructive nature.

Again, an extreme example. But you can build that kind of design (or, indeed, the use of Dragonmarks) onto just about anything. Pick a solidly Tier 3 class that does what you need it to, so that your ceiling is low-to-moderate. Build him to be effective, but not overwhelming. And then add a single powerful trump card with a cost built in. You're now prepared for emergency, but not so prepared that you look like a walking WMD.

[Necroticplague]

With great annoyance. If the PCs are holding back their full capabilities, clearly I'm not challenging them enough. Time to up the challenge until they're all playing at their full potential (or dying and making a character with sufficient ability to survive, if their full potential isn't enough right now).

[smcmike]

With great annoyance. If the PCs are holding back their full capabilities, clearly I'm not challenging them enough. Time to up the challenge until they're all playing at their full potential (or dying and making a character with sufficient ability to survive, if their full potential isn't enough right now).

That's fine if multiple players are holding back, but killing off anyone who isn't interested in being perfectly optimized sounds like a good way to ruin a what could be a perfectly fine low-op game. As a DM, couldn't having an escape hatch could be pretty useful, so long as you make sure there is a cost to it?

[Nifft]

Maybe personality isn't the word. You implied that playing a fighter is a sign of not being clever, because someone with sufficient knowledge of the game would obviously never play a suboptimal class. Exaggeration mine.
You're not reading me right.

Here's the situation, there's someone who:
- Plays a low-Tier character
- Is surprised and upset that their low-Tier character is less powerful than a high-Tier character
- Does not want to learn about high-Tier character options

That person is ignorant and (so far) seems to wish to remain ignorant.

Someone who is well-informed and intentionally plays a low-Tier class will neither be surprised nor upset about the performance of a high-Tier character. That is the distinction which you're missing here. It's not just about their characters, it's about their reactions to Azoth's character.


As for the idea, it certainly is, though i'd advice being more covert about it. Have the DM give such items to them as treasure, or what have you. Cause it seems hard to imagine to me that telling them your plan straight-up wouldn't ring a bell. Go ahead, ring all the bells (whatever that means).

My plan is to reframe the debate in terms of normal, accepted genre conventions: the heroes always have a secret last-resort power.

Help them to also have secret last-resort powers, preferably through simple things like magic items.

[BWR]

How do I handle being 'better' than everyone and pretend to play at their level but secretly staying more powerful and only show off my true powers in a pinch rather than all the time, but still annoy everyone (in game and out) with my deceit?
Easy: I don't.

It may be annoying to play with people who are a lot worse at the raw mechanics and tactics of a game than you but if your playstyle and builds ruin everyone else's fun, then you are the problem, not they. You don't have to like it, you don't have to play with these people, but insisting on doing your own thing to everyone else's annoyance is just you being a jerk.
You can make suggestions and give advice about how to build and play, and they are free to take or ignore it. Trying to get everyone to get 'better' when they have made it clear they don't want to is impolite and unnecessary. Either make an honest effort to play at their level with none of this "I'll be about their power most of the time except when it really matters" stuff or don't bother playing. Don't go ruining the game for other people.

[SangoProduction]

With great annoyance. If the PCs are holding back their full capabilities, clearly I'm not challenging them enough. Time to up the challenge until they're all playing at their full potential (or dying and making a character with sufficient ability to survive, if their full potential isn't enough right now).

D&D is not about being in an arms race with the players. It's also completely trivial to do as a DM. "Oh, look at this. The monster just happened to deal 2 million damage to you with no save."

[dascarletm]

Also, if preventing TPKs are your concern, couldn't your "ace in the hole" be a method of escape? It wouldn't overshadow anyone really.

For example if you had a quickened version of <instert the name of that one spell that brings all your allies together> and teleport on hand every day, you could prevent TPK. If everything is going to Baator, then you can just pull out. Doesn't outshine anyone, and saves the party.

[Necroticplague]

D&D is not about being in an arms race with the players. It's also completely trivial to do as a DM. "Oh, look at this. The monster just happened to deal 2 million damage to you with no save."

I'm not trying to arms race, nor am I trying to TPK (which that second probably would unless they made tanks like I did). I'm trying to challenge the players. Encounters should require a deal of skill and cunning to get through. If its an easy win or complete loss with the maximal use of skill they have, I've failed.

[AvatarVecna]

Some people don't want to optimize, and that's not a bad thing. Their unfamiliarity with optimization techniques doesn't mean making their game less fun is okay. As a cross-genre example, I used to play Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic a lot; after several playthroughs, I came to two conclusions: one, that maximizing saber skill was a far less effective tactic than just using Force Lightning to annihilate everything nearby, and two, that such a playstyle (thinking with your force points) was ****ing boring. Being able to say "I'm only ******* around with a laser sword because I find your pathetic attempts at resistance amusing, and I could just jazz hands you to death whenever I want", was boring to me because there was no challenge, even at the highest difficulty.

Now, that's not an issue if you're the only player, because then you can optimize to whatever level you want, as long as you can adjust the difficulty to suit your level. But some people like using bad tactics on the easy difficulty, whether for unfamiliarity with char-op techniques, or for RP reasons, and you jumping in with your ubercharacter who can bust out a trick like this whenever they please is annoying, because there's no reason for a character that much more powerful than the group to adventure with the group, except perhaps amusement at their party members relative incompetence. In my IRL gaming group, we've played 3.5, 4e, and 5e; during the 3.5 time period our group went through, I was already entrenched in 3.5 char-op; I could've busted out a Mailman who obliterated the competition; I could've played a Thrallherd Cerebremancer who mind-raped everybody in the campaign world into compliance; I could've played Khepri, or Pun-Pun, or some other negative tier build.

But that would ruin the fun. Most people aren't playing the game to win, they're playing to have fun pretending to be someone mroe capable than themselves; while this means that they want to play someone more powerful, playing somebody who can no-sell everything we ever come across has no real challenge; when the blaster wizard can kill a flight of dragons in a single round, why's he ******* around pretending this goblin army is a threat?

If you're going to have some power in reserve, you need to build a weakness or a cost into it, otherwise there's no reason not to use it all the time other than "I didn't want you guys to feel incompetent unless we were about to die"; if you build a weakness into a build, and give that build great power, they're still not invulnerable or unchallengeable, because that weakness is still present. Uberchargers are great at this: against a single large opponent, they can charge in and power-pounce them into oblivion; but if there's more enemies around, all the remaining targets have a much lower AC to hit than normal, and you're in trouble. Things like that are great for getting the party to not despise your stupidly awesome powerful build

[Nifft]

If you're going to have some power in reserve, you need to build a weakness or a cost into it, otherwise there's no reason not to use it all the time

Does a standard Wizard's limited number of spell slots count as a weakness?

Because the ability to kill a dragon once per day seems like the sort of thing that you keep in reserve for the dragon, and you don't spend it on a goblin unless you absolutely positively need that goblin dead yesterday.

[soapdude]

I had a similar situation at a Pathfinder Society game at GenCon this year. The GM seemed a bit miffed that my Summoner was of the APC and not the Unchained variety. The first battle, I ended up solo'ing one of the monsters we were fighting (who had taken out another party member in the surprise round). The players were fine with it (they were relatively new), but the GM gave me a look of "See? That's what I'm talking about". So, for rest of the scenario, I kept making my tactics not quite be as efficient as possible (not that out of character, since my guy has a 7 Int). But, when the S hit the F, my guy came in "guns blazing" and saved the rest of the group from being slaughtered. Everyone enjoyed not dying, the GM appreciated the fact that I let other people try to shine without overpowering every encounter, and everyone went away happy.

I guess YMMV.

[bekeleven]

So basically:


Party is noobs
GM is new
You "Build down" to their level
Except not really
You pretend to build down to their level
But secretly you're not in any danger
And you hide this information from the GM, who is too inexperienced to pick up on it from seeing your sheet
So the GM is balancing based on a party that doesn't exist
Because what actually exists is clark kent
And he's just waiting for an excuse... and a phone booth.

How would I react? Poorly. I'm a new GM and my players are deliberately misleading me about what they're playing. "I probably should have told you this at character creation..."

"You know what? Rocks fall and everyone dies." (http://www.somethingpositive.net/sp05032002.shtml)

If you have an ultimate technique, have a reason why you appear to be risking your party member's lives. And it should be one that they like.

[AvatarVecna]

Does a standard Wizard's limited number of spell slots count as a weakness?

Because the ability to kill a dragon once per day seems like the sort of thing that you keep in reserve for the dragon, and you don't spend it on a goblin unless you absolutely positively need that goblin dead yesterday.

Relative weakness, sure; it makes the wizard less capable than one with more spell slots. But "limited" spell slots when spells are so powerful is hardly a weakness compared to the rest of the party, and that's the problem. A completely by-the-book Core only Wizard 20 was considered as powerful as a completely by-the-book Core only Monk 20, because they had limited spell slots. This is hilariously incorrect.

When you outstrip your "allies" by such a huge margin unless you're just plain not using your reality-altering superpowers, you no longer have any real reason to travel with them, because they're holding you back; it's like Michael Jordan in his prime playing a basketball tournament with a bunch of middle-schoolers, there's no real challenge, the outcome is a guarantee, and if your team is losing despite having MJ on the team, you know it's got to be because MJ's ******* around and not trying, because if he tried, he'd wipe the floor with both teams at once.

My suggestion for if you find yourself in this kind of situation: optimize, but optimize something that isn't going to make the group feel worthless for you being so hilariously OP compared to them. I like using Bards for stuff like this, because unless you're building them in a way where Sorcerer fits the concept and the mechanics better, you're going to be a highly optimized skillmonkey and party buffer, neither of which is likely to make anybody resentful of your character's power level relative to their own.

[Gabrosin]

I feel like the big problem here is how the rest of your party reacted. Rather than being thankful that someone was able to save the day (without needing DM fiat or deus ex machina), they seemed to be upset that you were "better" than them. This sort of intraparty competitiveness is a sure sign of growing dysfunction. Wanting to be relevant makes sense; wanting to be the best is a problem.

I agree with the other suggestions. In situations like this, it's better to have the optimized power not be an encounter-winner, but rather some sort of boost to the rest of the party, so they can feel like they matter. Spells to bring them back from low HP or power up their numbers or tip the battlefield in their favor somehow would probably be better-received. Another way to optimize would be to make yourself really hard to kill, so that when everyone else falls you can keep on fighting and ultimately pull out the victory. Neither of these are as likely to leave a bad taste as "let me drop four maximized fireballs in the center of the enemy formation, oh look, no more army". Once you demonstrate you can land That Technique, your party will wonder why you don't just do it all the time.

Bottom line, though, is that as long as the party views their characters as being in competition with yours for fame and glory, and losing that competition, you're going to have problems.

[Mehangel]

In a 3.P campaign I am participating in our party consists of the following:


o Spheres: Destruction/Divination
o Primary Role: Book-Worm Extraordinaire
o Secondary Role: Blaster

Notes: Graves due to his particular build has ridiculously high knowledge checks and in fact maxes out them all with each level. Because this is a primarily intrigue campaign, there has been little need for his destruction sphere, but it has been used on occasion.

I would probably say that on an optimization/focus scale, I would say that his optimization level is average, whereas his focus is high. If you want to know something, Graves is the person for the job but otherwise physical activities are his downfall.

About the Homebrewed Sphere Investigator:
This particular homebrew, allowed the investigator to gain spheres as a mid-caster. Instead of magic/alchemy however, it uses technology. With a very strict casting tradition that only the investigator could make use of his technology.



o Primary Sphere: Conjuration
o Companion Sphere: Illusion]
o Primary Role: Conjurer
o Secondary Role: Illusionist

Notes: Because of her Tradition Power, she can temporarily gain access to any sphere the party does not have. In addition, her companion (Penny) having the illusion sphere can conjure temporary illusions that assist the party in accomplishing several tasks of intrigue. In addition, Seven is the party crafter and thus makes equipment for everyone in the party.

On an Optimization/Focus scale, I would say that both optimization and focus are probably low, but because of the tradition power, her adaptability to any situation makes her a most valuable asset to the party.



o Primary Sphere: Alteration
o Secondary Sphere: Death
o Primary Role: Melee Tank
o Secondary Role: Meat Shield

Notes: Most known for turning into a Huge Undead Dragon in every combat. She is almost impossible to kill on a one vs one combat due to various points of optimization: (including Share Pain, Regeneration, Damage Reduction, Fast Healing, etc)

On an optimization/focus scale, I would say that her optimization is high and focus is average. But she cannot really adapt to different situations very well (but with various shapes she can usually find a form that is useful one way or another), so unless she can solve the problem by bashing it to pieces she isn't much help, but she is great at what she does.


o Primary Role: Melee Combatant
o Secondary Role: Infiltrator

Notes: Because this particular player joined the game late and did not have access to the book before coming to the game, he decided to roll up a Swashbuckler. He is particularly focused in Acrobatics, AC, and Attacking. But in an Intrigue-focused game, he doesn't see much spot-light. He doesnt really have anything to contribute if put on the spot.

On the optimization/focus scale, I would say that he is indeed very optimized for combat (but absolutely nothing else) and very focused in his build.


o Primary Sphere: War
o Secondary Sphere: Life
o Primary Discipline: Silver Crane
o Secondary Discipline: Golden Lion
o Primary Role: Buffer
o Secondary Role: Healer

Notes: My character is built in such a way that if combat comes around, I spend my rounds maintaning two totems while the rest of the party fights. I save my spell points for Resuscitate should they need it, but with the combination of Buffs from the Warlord class, Golden Lion Boosts, and Totems the party has enough buffs that any combat usually ends within a round or two.

On the optimization/focus scale, I would probably say that my build is not optimal for what it does but it also isnt horrible, I would thus probably give myself an average in that regard, but I would also probably say that I have a highly focused build.


Now that I have explained my party, I would say that each of us has an Ace so to speak (Except Player 4) for particular situations. For example:

The party found ourselves fighting against a huge incorporeal undead, and instead of sitting around buffing the party, I entered Snowflake Wardance (Free Action), Activate Triple Alchemical Weapon Capsule [Filled with x3 Holy Water] (Swift Action), and used Exorcism Strike (Standard Action) with a Ghost-touch Bane (Undead) weapon. Needless to say, this undead that was supposed to be a Boss fight was taken down in a single round. Now yes, it it was anything else, it wouldn't have been at-all effective, but the point is, nearly everyone in the party has little tricks that they can pull off if something goes wrong.

So I suppose what I am saying is that, I dont see a problem if players not showing their true power 95% of the time. But I also believe that every party member should have a chance to show their power aswell.

[SangoProduction]

I feel like the big problem here is how the rest of your party reacted. Rather than being thankful that someone was able to save the day (without needing DM fiat or deus ex machina), they seemed to be upset that you were "better" than them. This sort of intraparty competitiveness is a sure sign of growing dysfunction. Wanting to be relevant makes sense; wanting to be the best is a problem.

I agree with the other suggestions. In situations like this, it's better to have the optimized power not be an encounter-winner, but rather some sort of boost to the rest of the party, so they can feel like they matter. Spells to bring them back from low HP or power up their numbers or tip the battlefield in their favor somehow would probably be better-received. Another way to optimize would be to make yourself really hard to kill, so that when everyone else falls you can keep on fighting and ultimately pull out the victory. Neither of these are as likely to leave a bad taste as "let me drop four maximized fireballs in the center of the enemy formation, oh look, no more army". Once you demonstrate you can land That Technique, your party will wonder why you don't just do it all the time.

Bottom line, though, is that as long as the party views their characters as being in competition with yours for fame and glory, and losing that competition, you're going to have problems.

This was my reaction to the situation the OP presented as well.

[SangoProduction]

A Ghost-touch Bane (Undead) weapon.

What? How long were you guys preparing for this fight? What did your party try to do in this situation? Or did you just whip it out because it's the only chance in your life time for it to be the slightest bit useful?

[Mehangel]

What? How long were you guys preparing for this fight? What did your party try to do in this situation? Or did you just whip it out because it's the only chance in your life time for it to be the slightest bit useful?

We weren't exactly preparing for the fight, but we were told it was an undead, lovecraftian horror, intrigue-heavy campaign. So we knew that we would be dealing with alot of Undead, Abberations, and Specific Oozes and Outsiders. So I made sure that my one weapon was useful against undead. But up until then, I had stayed out of combat the entire time.

[SangoProduction]

We weren't exactly preparing for the fight, but we were told it was an undead, lovecraftian horror, intrigue-heavy campaign. So we knew that we would be dealing with alot of Undead, Abberations, and Specific Oozes and Outsiders. So I made sure that my one weapon was useful against undead. But up until then, I had stayed out of combat the entire time.

Ah, ok, so it was less "you whipped out superman" and more "Oh look. There's a tri-octagonal screw, and I can actually make use of this very strange screwdriver I've been carrying around."
Like what? Did they expect you to be able to have it be as effective against the rest of the monsters? Or did they just not think that a bane weapon would be useful against its bane? (Perhaps the 3 holy water things were a bit much, but I don't know about whatever it is you used.)

[Mehangel]

Ah, ok, so it was less "you whipped out superman" and more "Oh look. There's a tri-octagonal screw, and I can actually make use of this very strange screwdriver I've been carrying around."
Like what? Did they expect you to be able to have it be as effective against the rest of the monsters? Or did they just not think that a bane weapon would be useful against its bane? (Perhaps the 3 holy water things were a bit much, but I don't know about whatever it is you used.)

Well, thing is, nobody knew that I could dish out that sort of damage. What we were looking at was:

1d6+1 (Weapon) + 2d6+2 (Bane) + 6d4 (Holy Water x3) + 6d6 (Exorcising Strike).

[SangoProduction]

Well, thing is, nobody knew that I could dish out that sort of damage. What we were looking at was:

1d6+1 (Weapon) + 2d6+2 (Bane) + 6d4 (Holy Water x3) + 6d6 (Exorcising Strike).

Fairly impressive for not having any pouncing action. I did raise a brow at the exorcising strike, admittedly, due to not knowing jack about the sphere thing that seems to be all the rage.

I still just can't feel that I'd personally want to be carrying that bonus instead of a smaller, if generalized one, so I can't empathize with these guys, even disregarding my previous statements. The triple holy water thing, as I said, could well seem cheesy (to new players), as even if they carried holy water (as you should in such a campaign, if it's within your character's reasoning capabilities), then they couldn't hope to compete with the triple holy water.

[Azoth]

Okay since a few people had asked for specifics. My group is 5 people, and 4 of us rotate DM duty with our own campaigns. Sessions are once a week, so you get a month of prep for the next session you have to run. We also run Pathfinder instead of my beloved 3.5.

The first toon was a Warder, who was Sword and Board. Main disciplines were Iron Tortoise and Silver Crane. Had a few cherry picked maneuvers from Golden Lion and Broken Blade. Primary combat tactic for me was to bullrush via shield bashes and spot heal a bit with strikes. Party was a Druid, an alchemist, and a Monk of the Four Winds. The encounter was 3 elder Water Elementals and a greater water elemental on the deck of a ship at ECL 10. DM had ruled any strike (even ranged) that used my shield was a shield bash for triggering Shield Slam. I switched into an offensive stance, started spamming Broken Blade boosts (Bronze/Iron Knuckle) and shield slammed the elementals off the ship so we never had to fight more than 1 at a time, while they were taking -8's to hit everyone but me. On the rare occasion more than one was on deck to attack I would Extended Defense with Warning Roar and a maxed Diplomacy to negate the hit.

The character was an insanely humble and generous character. I gave up at any moment between 10-25% my WBL to a group of refugees that traveled with us. The character also took his down time to teach the refugees craft skills he had ranks in. This character was a Paladin without a stick up the butt, and no preaching. Just good for goodness sake and lead by example.

The second character was a Crafter Wizard with a bit of an attitude. He hated people, but loved inanimate objects. He made the party's gear and had his Fairy Dragon Familiar play party man servant. I had come across a lesser rod of dazing spell a bit back. This character was primarily BFC and crafting. We gotten ourselves trapped in a hallway between two shield walls with alchemists bombing us and hiding back behind the cover of total defending tower shields. We were losing the war of attrition and bad. I didn't have any more energy resists and the alchemists were cycling their elemental damage to make my buffing useless. Fed up I grabbed the wand and dropped a Selective Stone Call on us that Dazed the shield walls so our melee guys could get past at the alchemists. Next round I shot off a Dazing Heightened Snapdragon Fireworks into an Alchemist's face. I kept shutting down enemies one at a time to let them focus fire them to dead.

The last one was a Tiefling Harbringer. Main Disciplines were Black Seraph(I avoided using most of this discipline infrobt of others) and Cursed Razor. The character was shy and easily pushed around despite being a Black Thorn Knight, which he hid because he didn't want his friends to not trust him or abandon him. I focused on debuffing enemies and going after high priority targets to shut then down. Last session were were getting beat on by some homebrew monsters. We had started turning the tide, when one of them snatched a kid to use as a human shield. This set my character off as he likes kids and makes toys as a hobby. I switched into Black Seraph Glare Stance and used Circle of Razor Feathers to hit all of our enemies in one fell swoop triggering a free action intimidate check on all of them. I have Signature Skill for intimidate and a trait that let's me take 10 during combat as well as a way to bypass fear immunity. So a 53 success for 5 rounds, they fail the DC 21 will save and are Panicked for 1 round, then shaken the rest of the duration. So the drop their gear and haul butt out via Plane Shifts no less. The kid died unfortunately. Immediately on seeing this, my character summons the devil that holds his contract and bargains for the kid's soul to make sure it goes to a good afterlife. My party is calling BS on my character suddenly becoming an avatar of fear itself and also working for DEVILS.