PDA

View Full Version : How would you tell someone (as the DM) that their build is lackluster or pointless?



Douche
2017-08-03, 07:48 AM
Let me pre-empt this by saying that roleplaying or narrative-focused abilities/builds are super cool, and the game (5e, btw) is a lot of roleplaying, with little combat.

But, lets say that someone wants to pick an ability that is just not going to pay off for them, or you just know it's never going to come up. For instance, what if someone wanted to take the linguist feat (allows you to learn 3 additional languages) and language isn't really a "mechanic" in your game.

I'm not saying that you should encourage the players to minmax, or that they shouldn't try to be creative, but in a situation where you know it's just not going to pay off.

Broken Twin
2017-08-03, 07:55 AM
Personally, if it's something the player wants to invest resources in, then it's something that you should make relevant as a GM. Players communicate what they want to do via what they build. If a player builds a social powerhouse, then they want to be in situations where they can feel like a social powerhouse. Same for combat monsters, or explorers, or what have you.

Granted, it's not something that meshes well with every playstyle, but it's the way I'd handle it. And if you have reasons for not wanting to make languages relevant in your game, then just tell them that they can pick it if they really want to, but you don't think they'll get any use out of it.

Altair_the_Vexed
2017-08-03, 08:00 AM
In the example you give - linguist feat in DnD5e, but you're not using multiple languages in your game - I'd say let them have it for free and make another choice. "You know, we're not going to use much language stuff in this game, so I'll let you have that for free. Take another choice!"
This lets the player feel you're not stomping on their choices, but lets you keep them up with the others in the group.

This would probably work in other cases, too. Let them have their choice for flavour, but if it really won't matter, then give them another choice. Or modify what they're choosing to make it more useful - back to the linguist example, maybe you let them speak all sapients' languages, or something?

S@tanicoaldo
2017-08-03, 08:06 AM
Let me pre-empt this by saying that roleplaying or narrative-focused abilities/builds are super cool, and the game (5e, btw) is a lot of roleplaying, with little combat.

But, lets say that someone wants to pick an ability that is just not going to pay off for them, or you just know it's never going to come up. For instance, what if someone wanted to take the linguist feat (allows you to learn 3 additional languages) and language isn't really a "mechanic" in your game.

I'm not saying that you should encourage the players to minmax, or that they shouldn't try to be creative, but in a situation where you know it's just not going to pay off.

If you are the DM make it pay off? You control the story, make them go on a mission on a foregin bation and that player us the only one who can act as a traslator. Be creative, make the game fun for that player.

Grod_The_Giant
2017-08-03, 08:19 AM
But also yes, there's no real shame in a gentle "hey, just a heads up, <thing X> isn't really going to be a big part of my game, you might be disappointed with the <build choice Y>." I'd rather my GM let me know ahead of time than stumble into something mid-game.

Jay R
2017-08-03, 08:23 AM
First, to tell them that their character build is lackluster, I'd need to know everything they want to do with it, and why. I read a story about a fighter PC with average charisma who wanted to become a paladin. The point of the character was a lackluster approach that would prevent his personal goal, but be fun to play.

I've been wrong about how interesting somebody's character would be many times. A great player with an average build will produce a shiny, exciting character despite, and sometimes because of, the build's mechanical deficiencies.

Since I never know in advance what the player will do with the character, I could never have enough knowledge to say that the character is lackluster.

Also, I have one friend who wants to play a basic fighter. His characters are lackluster by my approach, but are exactly what he wants to play. Who am I to complain?

Picking a specific feat or skill that's pointless? A good DM will simply tell him, "There's only one language spoken on this continent. That one won't help you." A great GM will pick two obscure tribes that they meet and give them different languages, or have the bad guys speak a different language to each other, believing that they are keeping secrets from the party, or invent a scroll in another language, or otherwise make the skill matter.

This is similar to slipping in a few enemies on two feet, if somebody took Improved Trip and they're going to a land of quadrupeds.

Douche
2017-08-03, 08:32 AM
In the example you give - linguist feat in DnD5e, but you're not using multiple languages in your game - I'd say let them have it for free and make another choice. "You know, we're not going to use much language stuff in this game, so I'll let you have that for free. Take another choice!"
This lets the player feel you're not stomping on their choices, but lets you keep them up with the others in the group.

This would probably work in other cases, too. Let them have their choice for flavour, but if it really won't matter, then give them another choice. Or modify what they're choosing to make it more useful - back to the linguist example, maybe you let them speak all sapients' languages, or something?

Yeah I think I'll do that.


If you are the DM make it pay off? You control the story, make them go on a mission on a foregin bation and that player us the only one who can act as a traslator. Be creative, make the game fun for that player.

Here's the thing... I don't think that using language to exclude all the other players at the table from a conversation should be a goal for the player. Especially if everyone is just going to be speaking English anyway.

Now, if I spoke Spanish, and the linguist also spoke Spanish, we could both speak Spanish & say that it's Dwarven, then the linguist could translate for the other players, and that would make for an interesting scene. But if everyone is speaking English, regardless, then it is not. It's just a way for one player to assert control of the conversation, which I would have to tailor specifically to him, according to you.

Vitruviansquid
2017-08-03, 08:44 AM
Just say to change Linguist to something else because languages won't come up.

Broken Twin
2017-08-03, 09:10 AM
Now, if I spoke Spanish, and the linguist also spoke Spanish, we could both speak Spanish & say that it's Dwarven, then the linguist could translate for the other players, and that would make for an interesting scene. But if everyone is speaking English, regardless, then it is not. It's just a way for one player to assert control of the conversation, which I would have to tailor specifically to him, according to you.

But there's other uses to having languages than just normal conversation. Maybe they find a letter written in a foreign tongue, or knowing orcish lets them overhear their enemy's battle plans. Not saying you have to validate every choice they make with massive amounts of customized content, but you can throw them a bone every once and a while.

And honestly, even if they're just picking it entirely for fluff, and it never comes up... you're not going to be uselessly underpowered for burning a feat in 5E. Yeah, you're going to be less powerful than the min-maxer, but the smaller range between the build floor and build ceiling is one of the highlights of 5E, in comparison to 3.5/Pathfinder.

johnbragg
2017-08-03, 09:21 AM
Agree about making it a free flavor feat.

Suggestion: small diplomacy bonus. Character knows Elvish, Kobold and Gnoll. Even if everybody with an Int score speaks Common, when he runs across Elves/Kobolds/Gnolls he can open a conversation with a phrase in their language.

Sometimes you do that, and you end up being this guy. Even if "Hello my name is Bert it's nice to meet you I work ***** (**** women)" becomes "I am the Machine. I have sex with cats."
Bert Kreischer and the Russian Mafia (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paG1-lPtIXA)

GungHo
2017-08-03, 09:22 AM
Kind of.

I will tell folks "this is the type of game we're going for in this kind of world" along with a basic executive summary of the world (assuming this isn't a campaign in progress). If someone brings something that just doesn't fit to the table I will say "I'll be honest, I wasn't going to go that route and it's going to be a bit of a break in, but we can give it a shot if you're set on this guy" unless doing so means that everyone else is going to be sitting on their hands to entertain the break in, in which case I'll say "this really won't be fair to everyone else if I try to give you all the same attention".

Geddy2112
2017-08-03, 09:24 AM
You have two separate issues: lackluster and pointless.

Telling somebody their build is lackluster or less than optimal is easy. I would never stop a player from doing so, I would just inform them that if they want to do this, it might not be that effective, or difficult to play, or fall behind other party members. However, as long as they are not a detriment to the enjoyment of the other players, and they are enjoying their build, then let them.

Pointless means that you didn't communicate the game setting clearly enough. If something like the 5E linguist feat is pointless in your game because there is only one language, then there is no harm in telling them(if they choose it blind) that they won't need it and letting them pick another feat. If they ask, just let them know that it is not needed. It can be more complicated when an entire build is focused around something that you know won't come up, in which case it is important to communicate this before the player builds said character.

Anonymouswizard
2017-08-03, 09:34 AM
Linguist, IIRC, gives you the ability to construct codes in addition to the 3 extra languages (it's really the 'meat' of the feat, as you can learn a language in downtime). I'd say in this scenario the player wants to take the feat even though the ability to speak and read another language might come up twice in a year of playing because they want to use the 'create codes' ability to leave hidden messages (either to other PCs or NPC allies).

Now, if you just came across a spaceship, that's a different story. Nothing says your linguist languages can't be JavaScript, HTML5, and C++ (okay, I'm munchkinning really poorly here, and it's so not RAI).

In all case communication is the key. I agree that if something is lacklustre you should tell the player but don't force them to change, while if it's pointless just give it to them for free (if it's genuinely pointless it won't matter).

ExLibrisMortis
2017-08-03, 10:49 AM
I second the "give for free/cheap" solution. If it's worth less mechanically, make it cost less mechanically. You can make it worth more, too, but if you have to go out of your way to change your prepared story arc to make things useful, it's easier to just make it cost less.

souridealist
2017-08-04, 06:30 PM
If it's really one choice, not a whole build, then I agree that you can just say 'hey, that's not really going to be relevant this campaign, I'm not planning to use that mechanic much!' That's how I've solved a couple of things like this in the past, actually. Sometimes it doesn't need to be any more complicated than that.

I do like the 'make it useful' option, although I definitely see your point about how it won't work in every circumstance. Still, I'd give it some thought before discarding it; sometimes you might end up with something cool.

If it's really and truly the entire build that's just lackluster, not just one poorly-optimized feat or skill, I think it would come down to: is the player having fun? If they're bopping along and don't seem to care, I think I'd just try to remember that they're a little below the usual power levels, maybe tweak the encounters a little lower so it's not a huge issue. If they seem to be feeling unhappy or useless, you can probably say 'hey, you seem to be feeling kind of frustrated, want me to help you tweak some things with your build?' and work it out from there. But if it's working for them, I think you can probably just let it go.

Slipperychicken
2017-08-04, 08:49 PM
As a player, I'd prefer my GM to just tell me bluntly that the ability is not likely to see enough use to justify it.

I don't pick options to force my GM to bend over backwards to make it worthwhile, nor would I want to make him do that. I'm not trying to make him do all that work when I can just pick something more fitting to the game.

Quertus
2017-08-04, 09:01 PM
Much like someone trying to take a (3e) sneak attack rogue into an undead module, I'd tell them straight up that their build may not work too well with the planned adventure, and suggest that they change it if they care about being able to contribute.

If it's not spoilers, I'd tell them what won't work, and why.

mephnick
2017-08-04, 09:10 PM
It's too bad the whole language thing has apparently died a quick death in modern games. I never see them used effectively anymore. I remember languages being very important "back in the day" but maybe my groups were odd. I think having a bunch of languages adds a lot of depth to the games

Darth Ultron
2017-08-04, 10:08 PM
I would not tell someone anything.

Should a player pick a lackluster or pointless whatever, it's their character and I feel they are free to pick whatever they want.

If a player asks, I will give my option, but otherwise I don't say anything.

goto124
2017-08-04, 11:46 PM
It's too bad the whole language thing has apparently died a quick death in modern games. I never see them used effectively anymore. I remember languages being very important "back in the day" but maybe my groups were odd. I think having a bunch of languages adds a lot of depth to the games

Curious, how did you make languages important without bogging down the game or leaving out characters for not sharing a language?

Hackulator
2017-08-05, 08:17 AM
The answer to almost any question that starts with "how would you tell someone" is to just come out and straight tell them. Just say to the player almost exactly what you wrote in your first post. Explain to them that the power they are choosing may NEVER come up in the game because it deals with something you don't use much. If they still want to take it, then it's just their choice.

Quertus
2017-08-05, 09:13 AM
Curious, how did you make languages important without bogging down the game or leaving out characters for not sharing a language?

"You see an ancient script in a language that you don't recognize." ... "Showing it to everyone else, the wizard recognizes that some of the symbols resemble a few of the characters in their spellbook."

"Normally, the entire party speaking Gnoll allows them to communicate in their own private language. However, having been captured by gnolls, what languages do you share, and can you get a message to everyone without the gnolls understanding it?"

Decipher script? Hmmm... "The vodka is good, but the meat is rotten." "Scaglea one paper from your grimoire to your cemetery." "All your base are belong to us."

It's a question of what your players enjoy as to whether that's "bogging the game down", or whether that is the game.

goto124
2017-08-05, 09:20 AM
"All your base are belong to us."

My hovercraft is full of eels.

Guizonde
2017-08-05, 09:37 AM
"You see an ancient script in a language that you don't recognize." ... "Showing it to everyone else, the wizard recognizes that some of the symbols resemble a few of the characters in their spellbook."

"Normally, the entire party speaking Gnoll allows them to communicate in their own private language. However, having been captured by gnolls, what languages do you share, and can you get a message to everyone without the gnolls understanding it?"

Decipher script? Hmmm... "The vodka is good, but the meat is rotten." "Scaglea one paper from your grimoire to your cemetery." "All your base are belong to us."

It's a question of what your players enjoy as to whether that's "bogging the game down", or whether that is the game.

gnoll, huh? my team uses either divine or drunk to communicate. we tried sign language, but it's too much of a hassle and costs too much in paint and placards. *rimshot*

more seriously, we talked about it and when the paladin said "why not orcish?" (three of the team speak orc, and 4 of us speak divine), we pointed out that "orc" was spoken by pretty much all greenskins, and going into the hills would be kinda deadly for us. on the other hand, evil people rarely speak divine.

scalyfreak
2017-08-05, 10:34 AM
"All your base are belong to us."


My hovercraft is full of eels.

A certain Monty Python sketch comes to mind.

souridealist
2017-08-05, 01:02 PM
Re: the use of language to talk smack about people in front of them strategize without being overheard - I recently had a game where I'd make a suggestion to the rogue in Halfling, the rogue would translate it into Celestial for the paladin, and then repeat the same thing in Terran for the monk.

This was also the game where the rogue and I got into a meticulous debate about what kind of anvil would be required to work mithril, and whether a relatively portable (with extradimensional space) gold-and-silversmith's anvil would be adequate, despite the DM protesting that he did not care and wasn't going to inflict any lack-of-anvil penalties and wasn't really tracking encumbrance and especially wasn't enforcing the encumbrance caps within an extradimensional space.

Some people's distractions are other people's important and interesting details, I guess.

Quertus
2017-08-05, 02:03 PM
gnoll, huh? my team uses either divine or drunk to communicate. we tried sign language, but it's too much of a hassle and costs too much in paint and placards. *rimshot*

I refer to my best friend's home as the house of pun, and that even made me groan.

Guizonde
2017-08-05, 03:34 PM
I refer to my best friend's home as the house of pun, and that even made me groan.

*happy dance*

despite popular opinion, flattery will get you anywhere.

Anonymouswizard
2017-08-05, 04:52 PM
Some people's distractions are other people's important and interesting details, I guess.

I once had a GM monologue about how the dwarven public transport system was awesome for ten to fifteen minutes (didn't time it, was too enthralled). He found this bit of worldbuilding incredibly interesting but didn't think we'd enjoy it.

I had another GM who got annoyed at people trying to use engineering principles to build useful items because we weren't bashing zombies. He set the game in the town we all lived in and told us our goal was to survive, and because he'd established the town was abandoned we raided the supermarket for canned food and then immediately tried to head to the industrial park to set up defences and make gear. Apparently this isn't how you're supposed to survive a zombie apocalypse. He especially hated my research lab and attempts to train zombies.

Hooligan
2017-08-05, 05:14 PM
OP:
1. Repeatedly target the character's weakness(es) until you break them.
2. Have them fall down a portable hole that immediately closes.
3. Run them over with a sled piloted by goblins.
4. Stash an assassin in the rafters of an inn and when the party walks in, have the killer crit the character in the face with a hand crossbow, killing them instantly; preferably followed by someone screaming "you killed my waifu!"
5. My personal favorite is to have an invisible wizard teleport in and lightning bolt the target into a smoking ruin; invariably good at getting rid of all but the most powerful characters. Unfortunately it usually gets rid of the player too.