PDA

View Full Version : Player Help Problem DM - Leave or Fix?



Avista
2018-08-27, 07:11 PM
I've been a lurker for awhile, but the issue I am currently facing doesn't seem to have any posts made for it. Perhaps someone out there can lend some sage advice...

A group of friends and I play a homebrew D&D 5e. Our last campaign was okay-ish: the DM was new, but she ran it like a video game with no deviations. Everything was combat or predetermined quests. (she actually took an obscure video game as the core story). Second, she has power-trips and not in a good way. In oneshots she actively informs the group her goal is TPK. I let this slide during oneshots, but our past campaign I ended up not even caring anymore. If a player makes a bad decision, she doesn't warn them so that she can off the character. But with a new campaign she said she'd change her DMing style. More traditional D&D and death would still be impactful, but we could start caring about our characters.

I rolled up a sorcerer, and we get to our first dungeon. We're jumped by enemies and they are focused on the two glass cannons - my sorcerer and the rogue. I go down before I can even lob off a spell, every counter-measure fails, and nearly insta-killed while downed. Even by retreating to the backline the enemies follow \despite trapping themselves behind the fighters, just to score a kill. The boss fight completely ignores the two tanks, our rogue is so scared she can only shoot arrows, our cleric is busy focus healing on us two, and I go 'hell to this' and find myself once again not caring about a character who's unwittingly signed a death contract before reaching level 4. (We're only level 3). The amount of frustration is outweighing the fun, and I've had enough of these power trips just to play in this group.

I've even tried DM rotation and DMed a session. I'll admit I made a mistake in a ruling, and even if I had a backup prepared for it and was ready to wing it if things went south, I could have used a little more prep. She stopped the session to argue the ruling and killed the game synergy. I was so frustrated I couldn't even focus on the rest of the session and screwed up the delivery for the ending.

I've been with this group for a long time, but I'm ready to leave. I know the usual response is 'try to talk to the DM' or see if anyone else is having issues, especially if I've stuck with it for this long. I get the inkling that others are not wholly enjoying themselves either. But what am I supposed to talk about? How do you 'nicely' and patiently tell a DM they are running the game a bit like a jerk?

Or maybe I should just leave.

Wow, I guess I also needed to vent!! Didn't even realize I was this upset. :smallbiggrin:

Rynjin
2018-08-27, 07:13 PM
Bad DMs are like bad SOs. Trying to "fix" them just leads to heartbreak and frustration.

kraitmarais
2018-08-27, 07:44 PM
I rolled up a sorcerer, and we get to our first dungeon. We're jumped by enemies and they are focused on the two glass cannons - my sorcerer and the rogue. I go down before I can even lob off a spell, every counter-measure fails, and nearly insta-killed while downed. Even by retreating to the backline the enemies follow \despite trapping themselves behind the fighters, just to score a kill. The boss fight completely ignores the two tanks, our rogue is so scared she can only shoot arrows, our cleric is busy focus healing on us two, and I go 'hell to this' and find myself once again not caring about a character who's unwittingly signed a death contract before reaching level 4. (We're only level 3). The amount of frustration is outweighing the fun, and I've had enough of these power trips just to play in this group.


I can't really figure out what your objections were to this combat. You feel it was unfair that the enemies used strategies that would maximize their chance of winning? Unless you're fighting something mindless, that's generally what's supposed to happen. It's up to the tanks to convince the enemies to attack them instead of the more fragile characters, and it's up to the more fragile members to come up with strategies to stay unreachable or be an undesirable target.

Is the DM ignoring rules or sound reasoning when determining how the enemies act? If so, I don't see it in your description, but that's definitely an issue that can break a game.

If you just don't like challenging combats, or combat at all, that's fine, but maybe others in your group (the DM, at least) are looking for a different kind of game.

Rynjin
2018-08-27, 07:49 PM
I can't really figure out what your objections were to this combat. You feel it was unfair that the enemies used strategies that would maximize their chance of winning? Unless you're fighting something mindless, that's generally what's supposed to happen. It's up to the tanks to convince the enemies to attack them instead of the more fragile characters, and it's up to the more fragile members to come up with strategies to stay unreachable or be an undesirable target.

Is the DM ignoring rules or sound reasoning when determining how the enemies act? If so, I don't see it in your description, but that's definitely an issue that can break a game.

If you just don't like challenging combats, or combat at all, that's fine, but maybe others in your group (the DM, at least) are looking for a different kind of game.

Tanking does not work in D&D like in an MMO. There is no "draw aggro" mechanic. 5e is especially bad about this since in previous editions the way to draw aggro was to turbo charge your damage (so they can't afford to ignore you) or build into some kind of lockdown build, but 5e has very low damage op capability by comparison and there are few non-caster lockdown options.

Compounded with casters eating a hard nerf stick in regards to buffs that allow them to be unreachable (since you can't maintain, say, Fly and Mirror Image at the same time), it's way easier for the DM to just sya "They mob you. Now you're dead." in every combat.

Nifft
2018-08-27, 08:20 PM
I've been a lurker for awhile, but the issue I am currently facing doesn't seem to have any posts made for it. Perhaps someone out there can lend some sage advice...

A group of friends and I play a homebrew D&D 5e. Our last campaign was okay-ish: the DM was new, but she ran it like a video game with no deviations. Everything was combat or predetermined quests. (she actually took an obscure video game as the core story). Second, she has power-trips and not in a good way. In oneshots she actively informs the group her goal is TPK. I let this slide during oneshots, but our past campaign I ended up not even caring anymore. If a player makes a bad decision, she doesn't warn them so that she can off the character. But with a new campaign she said she'd change her DMing style. More traditional D&D and death would still be impactful, but we could start caring about our characters.

I rolled up a sorcerer, and we get to our first dungeon. We're jumped by enemies and they are focused on the two glass cannons - my sorcerer and the rogue. I go down before I can even lob off a spell, every counter-measure fails, and nearly insta-killed while downed. Even by retreating to the backline the enemies follow \despite trapping themselves behind the fighters, just to score a kill. The boss fight completely ignores the two tanks, our rogue is so scared she can only shoot arrows, our cleric is busy focus healing on us two, and I go 'hell to this' and find myself once again not caring about a character who's unwittingly signed a death contract before reaching level 4. (We're only level 3). The amount of frustration is outweighing the fun, and I've had enough of these power trips just to play in this group.

I've even tried DM rotation and DMed a session. I'll admit I made a mistake in a ruling, and even if I had a backup prepared for it and was ready to wing it if things went south, I could have used a little more prep. She stopped the session to argue the ruling and killed the game synergy. I was so frustrated I couldn't even focus on the rest of the session and screwed up the delivery for the ending.

I've been with this group for a long time, but I'm ready to leave. I know the usual response is 'try to talk to the DM' or see if anyone else is having issues, especially if I've stuck with it for this long. I get the inkling that others are not wholly enjoying themselves either. But what am I supposed to talk about? How do you 'nicely' and patiently tell a DM they are running the game a bit like a jerk?

Or maybe I should just leave.

Wow, I guess I also needed to vent!! Didn't even realize I was this upset. :smallbiggrin:

- You can't change someone else. She will behave as she wants until she decides to change, and that will never be under your control.

- It's my experience that a thoughtful, frustrated player can become a good DM. You sound like you could become a good DM if you either (a) had a way to negate her game-derail argument tactic; or (b) were willing to just to play without her.

Good luck to you.

Malapterus
2018-08-27, 08:55 PM
This is a hard lesson to learn, but try to take it in:

D&D is a game.

Games are supposed to be fun.

If you're not enjoying yourself, there's no point.

Now, you seem to have made your valiant efforts to fix this. I think your DM is just a controlling person who thinks their ideas are better than everyone else's and wants to show off.

If you come back from most or all sessions regretting that you went, then quit. Maybe you leaving will be the spark she needs to realize what she is doing, but once you've tried to let her know, it's her problem, not yours.

Darth Ultron
2018-08-27, 09:09 PM
Well, it does sound like you have a classic Killer DM that plays vs the players.

You could try ''talking" to her. You might explain that you are not having fun and why. She might understand...or she might not care. It is possible she thinks the game ''must" be played this way. She thinks D&D is just ''play to kill the characters". And while it is a valid play style, it is not for everyone.

Though, it's all ways hard to judge a game second hand. You make it sound bad, of course, but we can't know what it was really like. Just a couple weeks ago I had player Bob. He (sigh) scouted ahead and found a cave with 21 goblins. As he was a 1st level fighter, he decided to "runz into the middle of the cave and shoot the leader goblin with an arrow!". This is where I stop the game, re-explain everything and ask Bob what his plan is....and I get the answer of ''killz the goblin leader, then drink my victory Mt.Dew!". Poor Bob's character was killed on round one. Now to hear Bob tell the story, he will make it sound like ''20 goblins came out of nowhere and killed my character!", and that is not even close to what happened.

The easy out is maybe see if someone else wants to DM. Maybe you?

Or just leave the group. You should be able to find another group.

Avista
2018-08-27, 11:21 PM
This is all good advice and puts some things in perspective. I'm still going to bring these up to our DM, but in a way that it doesn't come off as a verbal attack. Even if I do choose to leave, I don't want anyone to be bitter.

No one would happen to have a guideline for DM Confronting, would they?

Aetis
2018-08-28, 12:07 AM
Based on your descriptions, it seems that the DM is doing a good job focusing down the backline high priority targets.

I would try playing a low priority character and see if the DM still mobs you down with everything she has. If so, you might be onto something here.

Nifft
2018-08-28, 12:27 AM
No one would happen to have a guideline for DM Confronting, would they?

Google for advice on discussing concerns with a manager / supervisor / boss.

That's a much better documented area, and the terms & techniques ought to hold constant for ... well, for a lot of human interaction regarding uncomfortable topics.

MrSandman
2018-08-28, 01:04 AM
This is all good advice and puts some things in perspective. I'm still going to bring these up to our DM, but in a way that it doesn't come off as a verbal attack. Even if I do choose to leave, I don't want anyone to be bitter.

No one would happen to have a guideline for DM Confronting, would they?

Don't talk about doing things right or wrong. Talk about different tastes and gaming styles. Don't tell her that she's messing up your character, tell her that you don't enjoy extra hard combat. Try to reach a compromise that you both can enjoy.

Minty
2018-08-28, 03:39 AM
Is the DM ignoring rules or sound reasoning when determining how the enemies act? If so, I don't see it in your description, but that's definitely an issue that can break a game.

It sounds to me, from the OP's description, that the enemies are acting like disposable game pieces and not like living beings with a self preservation instinct, throwing away their own lives so that the DM can score a PC kill.

They're apparently intelligent enough and have the tactical nous to go after the Sorcerer first, but not enough to figure out they're going to get surrounded by the fighters and wiped out. Hence, they appear to be enacting the DM's will and not their own.

Lorsa
2018-08-28, 04:11 AM
Maybe you can try dressing your sorcerer up as a different class? Disguise yourself as something less glass-cannon-y and maybe the enemies won't hit you as much?

Also, some people say that D&D is not like an MMO, that there is no taunt function. That's true, but it is also not an MMO in the sense that you expect everyone to just follow "optimal tactics". If someone is swinging a massive blade at your face, it's hard to think logically and quite often the first thing that comes to your mind is "I'll hit back". I've never thought that D&D should be played as a tactical board game, rather as a role-playing game where you try to put yourself in the mind of another character in a specific situation.

Pleh
2018-08-28, 05:29 AM
Sometimes losing players is the best way to teach a DM.

In these scenarios, the best way to leave is to offer an ultimatum. You explain to the group what isn't fun anymore and tell them you aren't interested in those kinds of games anymore. They can change the game or you walk. It doesn't have to be mean spirited or vindictive, just sincere and heartfelt.

If they keep the game, then you walk. No game us better than bad game.

If they adjust to suit your needs, hopefully they don't slip back into old practices. If they do start crossing the line again, you call it out politely and remind them that the reason we changed these things is so everyone can have fun and we're losing focus again.

But it sounds like you want a cooperative game and this DM wants a competitive game. The two versions of RPGs can be so disparate that I'm not optimistic about the chances of this DM being inclined to acquiesce.

When I see this kind of nearly unsportsmanlike competitiveness in a TTRPG, I am tempted to play into the absurdity of it to make a point (clarification: the following advice is only something I'd do with real friends where we care about each other outside the game). Depending on the scenario, my character might throw the match to spoil the DM's game, or just pull an Obi Wan and take the KO. Then I'd congratulate the DM on countering a PC that was designed for PvE with her encounters tailored to destroy our characters through PvP. Of course a DM tends to win PvP games. They have every resource at their disposal, not the least of which being that they arbitrate the rules in addition to being a player. I'd attack the satisfaction fueling the power trip by utterly discounting all her effort. She's the DM, after all. Winning (if that's somehow become that DM's goal) should be trivially easy, so I'm not sure where she's getting so much satisfaction shooting fish in a barrel.

Lalliman
2018-08-28, 05:45 AM
I can't really figure out what your objections were to this combat. You feel it was unfair that the enemies used strategies that would maximize their chance of winning?


Based on your descriptions, it seems that the DM is doing a good job focusing down the backline high priority targets.

Playing the NPCs well isn't a problem, but it can easily devolve into treating them as hive-minded robots. If a bunch of common bandits run right past the front line, provoking opportunity attacks and getting themselves surrounded just to target down the backliners, they're not working in their own self-interest. And if an ogre can instantly discern that the wizard is the most important target despite having 5 Intelligence and 7 Wisdom, something fishy is going on. These NPCs are acting like units in an RTS game, not like actual people. It not only breaks verisimilitude, but it's unfair because the game is not designed to account for this. If this was a war game without roleplaying elements, there would be more reliable methods of taunting or protecting the vulnerable party members. Those don't exist because the game assumes that enemies act in reasonable ways, thus allowing conventional methods of blocking the way or drawing attention to do their job. A DM who plays this way is facing their players with a challenge that the game offers no potential answer to. It's not hard-but-fair, it's not combat-as-war, it's borderline cheating. (I say this as a DM who loves hard encounters and plays hardball on basically every fight.) It's hard to judge what's going on from a single second-hand report, but it sounds to me like the DM was playing this way.

To answer the OP: Bringing up the problem to the GM is always a good idea. Even if they're not receptive to it now, they'll at least know why they start losing players, and they might better themselves in the future. Do make sure that your problems are clearly-explained. A problem like this (NPCs who act in unreasonable ways to screw the players) can easily be misunderstood as just you thinking the fights are too hard, which is easy to brush off as being your problem and not hers. If she's not receptive, you have little choice left but to leave. Personally I would suggest starting your own campaign and inviting everyone except her. She actively messed up your previous attempt at DMing, that seems like enough reason to say f*ck it. You can allow her back into the ring if she demonstrates a change of heart.

MoiMagnus
2018-08-29, 10:01 AM
I can't really figure out what your objections were to this combat. You feel it was unfair that the enemies used strategies that would maximize their chance of winning? Unless you're fighting something mindless, that's generally what's supposed to happen. It's up to the tanks to convince the enemies to attack them instead of the more fragile characters, and it's up to the more fragile members to come up with strategies to stay unreachable or be an undesirable target.

Really depend what kind of game you want. The first advice I would give to a DM is "absolutely never try to maximize the chance of winning of the enemy".

In my mind, the goal of the DM is to play the enemies in a convincing way, to not break the immersion, but the priority is to make sure that all the player have fun. Not being able to play your character as you want because you're afraid to be focus and die is the most unfun things to happen. If you put your player into a state where they are afraid of doing anything, or no longer care because they don't think there exist a way to win, they you're a bad DM.

You have to put an interesting challenge adapted to your players. If your players are tactician master and like to plan about strategy, traps, and how to protect the weak, of course, you should put in front of them enemies that are worthy of their time. If your players never look ahead more than the current turn, so should their enemies. If one of your player make a build that have a big flaw (like easy to die), and isn't compensate by the remaining of the team, punishing him isn't going to make a fun evening. You should make him feel in danger, so that he does not abuse it, and try to compensate it by leveling up, but your goal as a DM is not the defeat of the players, it is their fun.

Cozzer
2018-08-29, 10:21 AM
Also, RPGs are about choices. The tactical part of tactical RPGs (like fights in D&D) are about tactical choices. If you take reasonable precautions (staying behind front-line fighters and avoiding ambushes) and still get taken out during the first round of combat, before you get to make any choice, it means you're not playing. It's not an hard game, it's just not a game anymore (see also "Reasons why Save or Die/Suck that can get thrown during the first round make the whole game horribly worse, part 323 of 500", but that's just my personal crusade :smalltongue:).

Arbane
2018-08-29, 11:25 AM
Second, she has power-trips and not in a good way. In oneshots she actively informs the group her goal is TPK. I let this slide during oneshots, but our past campaign I ended up not even caring anymore. If a player makes a bad decision, she doesn't warn them so that she can off the character.

Wow, that's a blast from the past - tell her I said all the Killer DMs from 1979 said hello. They were playing a version of D&D that DIDN'T take over an hour to make a character.


But with a new campaign she said she'd change her DMing style. More traditional D&D and death would still be impactful, but we could start caring about our characters.

Your next three characters need to be named Ralph the Disposable, Ralph the Expendable, and Ralph the Doomed. (Assuming you stick with this game, which I'll admit seems like a bad idea. But the other notable feature of typical 1979 Killer GMing was a captive audience.)

(I am starting to get the impression that when GMs say things like 'Death will be impactful', what they mean is 'Death will be unavoidable and frequent.')



The amount of frustration is outweighing the fun, and I've had enough of these power trips just to play in this group.

How do you 'nicely' and patiently tell a DM they are running the game a bit like a jerk?


"I thought you said you were done with the TPKs, could you dial the lethality down a notch?"
(most likely reply) "I'M JUST PLAYING MY NON-PLAYER CHARACTERS."

Semi-seriously, you know this person better than I do.

As has been said, you can GM, just don't invite them. (Don't TELL them that, just don't invite them.)

You COULD try to get the group to optimize for survivability - Fighters take Trip & Combat Reflexes, spellcasters take Mage Armor and Mirror Image, so you can face-tank when the enemies make a beeline for you. But this is as much a player problem as a character problem. (Or whatever works in whichever edition you're playing.)

Rynjin
2018-08-29, 04:05 PM
I've never understood the logic of sneaking around when you make a new group.

Tell them, in very clear words, that the reason they're being excluded is because they aren't fun to play with for [reasons]. Maybe it will help them grow as a person. Maybe it won't. Either way, they have something to act on.

ATHATH
2018-08-29, 04:36 PM
(since you can't maintain, say, Fly and Mirror Image at the same time)
Actually, you can- 5e Mirror Image doesn't require concentration.

Nifft
2018-08-29, 06:58 PM
I've never understood the logic of sneaking around when you make a new group.

Some people are bad at confrontation.

Some people have difficulty saying "no" to a social manipulator.

Our advice is not going to change the OP's agreeable personality trait into one better suited for confrontation.

Avista
2018-08-29, 07:27 PM
Some people are bad at confrontation.

Some people have difficulty saying "no" to a social manipulator.

Our advice is not going to change the OP's agreeable personality trait into one better suited for confrontation.

Oh don't worry. I may be agreeable but I'm not scared to confront someone. :smallbiggrin:

I just need to think this carefully. I don't want to word it in a way that ostracizes someone, or causes a rift in the group.

Rynjin
2018-08-29, 08:41 PM
Actually, you can- 5e Mirror Image doesn't require concentration.

Good to know on the outside chance I ever play 5e again, but it really only changes the details, not my point. =)

SirGraystone
2018-08-31, 12:09 PM
The main problem I see, is a DM vs Group in the DM mentality, instead of working together to make a fun and insteresting story.

Now in a Bond movies the smart move after the villain capture Bond would be to just shoot him in the head make sure Bond is dead, but that make a poor story.

The same is in D&D battle, if you go for the spellcaster specially at low level first, that make the fight easier for the monsters but boring as a story. When you are high level that's a different story the spellcaster are a lot more powerful and you may need to do that.

On top of that in a fight just ignore melee characters to rush past them and kill the wizard is a dumb move, while it let you kill the wizard quickly it's often a suicide move for the rusher. Shooting the wizard with arrows make more sense.

Avista
2018-08-31, 12:32 PM
Update: We've had a talk, and she's agreed to cut it back. She still wants to have intense battles, because she doesn't want 'glob of enemies to witter down'. I pointed out that her tactics don't actually work with D&D mechanics, so we'll see what happens next session.

Nifft
2018-08-31, 03:10 PM
Update: We've had a talk, and she's agreed to cut it back. She still wants to have intense battles, because she doesn't want 'glob of enemies to witter down'. I pointed out that her tactics don't actually work with D&D mechanics, so we'll see what happens next session.

Hope it works out for you.

Metahuman1
2018-09-02, 10:27 PM
Update: We've had a talk, and she's agreed to cut it back. She still wants to have intense battles, because she doesn't want 'glob of enemies to witter down'. I pointed out that her tactics don't actually work with D&D mechanics, so we'll see what happens next session.

Given this, another idea might be to suggest trying a less lethal system for a bit and see what happens.


FATE (or if your into the books The Dresden Files version of the game.) or Mutants and Masterminds 3rd edition might help by changing the expected nature of combats, and both are versatile enough to do more or less as you please with them.

Malifice
2018-09-03, 12:20 PM
This is all good advice and puts some things in perspective. I'm still going to bring these up to our DM, but in a way that it doesn't come off as a verbal attack. Even if I do choose to leave, I don't want anyone to be bitter.

No one would happen to have a guideline for DM Confronting, would they?

This is how you choose to spend your spare time. You're going to die someday IRL; you have limited time to spend.

If you're not having fun, leave.

I dont play games with people who are jerks, or in games where I am not having any fun.

You should have a friendly chat first, but if that doesnt work (and it probably wont); leave.

Marcotix
2018-09-04, 11:01 AM
With 5e, adding in a mark mechanic was one of the first houserules I made. I generally play my monsters with as much savvy as my characters, and that means *avoid* the heavily armed heavily armored and try to slip by to the ones with less of that.

Granted, unless I'm running mindless undead (under the control of an intelligent entity) or fanatics of one stripe or another I wouldn't draw AoO's to do it though.

I would (In 5e) charge the first enemy, then on my next turn circle aground him/ her. then withdraw to meet the squishy.

Edit: unless there was a way around the heavy.

denthor
2018-09-04, 11:43 AM
Two words Min max.
This is why it is a thing.
Or tactics
Pick what you do, be ready to retreat. My first action retreat 30 ft. Monsters ignore fighters! Yes! Fighters take the feat that allows multiple attacks of opportunity. You move back 60 feet. Monsters move 60 feet. Fighters attack of opportunity. Monsters continue to ignore fighter get another attack. That are now about 20 feet from you 10 from fighters player's turn.

Fighters charge. You retreat 30 feet, attack. Monsters move up to you no attack double move to get to you.

Fighters charge.

Arbane
2018-09-04, 02:43 PM
Two words Min max.
This is why it is a thing.
Or tactics
Pick what you do, be ready to retreat. My first action retreat 30 ft. Monsters ignore fighters! Yes! Fighters take the feat that allows multiple attacks of opportunity. You move back 60 feet. Monsters move 60 feet. Fighters attack of opportunity. Monsters continue to ignore fighter get another attack. That are now about 20 feet from you 10 from fighters player's turn.

Fighters charge. You retreat 30 feet, attack. Monsters move up to you no attack double move to get to you.

Fighters charge.

This assumes a lot more maneuvering space than might be available in a typical dungeon-crawl.

denthor
2018-09-04, 04:15 PM
The first post says in the hidden message the monsters ignore the fighters to get to the Rouge or the sorcerer.

So I laid it out

CarpeGuitarrem
2018-09-04, 04:30 PM
Glad to hear about the first bit. I didn't see much addressing this bit, so I wanted to call it out.



I've even tried DM rotation and DMed a session. I'll admit I made a mistake in a ruling, and even if I had a backup prepared for it and was ready to wing it if things went south, I could have used a little more prep. She stopped the session to argue the ruling and killed the game synergy. I was so frustrated I couldn't even focus on the rest of the session and screwed up the delivery for the ending.


That's just objectively bad form, and speaks to the competitive attitude of the player. Especially where a new GM is concerned, getting a thing wrong is fine. If I think the GM is being unfair to me, I'll correct them, but even then, I'll work to let things go if they double down.

Anyhow, this is a definite problem, and if you run again, you should be ready to ask her to save it until after the session, if she disagrees on a rule.

MoiMagnus
2018-09-04, 05:38 PM
Two words Min max.
This is why it is a thing.
Or tactics
Pick what you do, be ready to retreat. My first action retreat 30 ft. Monsters ignore fighters! Yes! Fighters take the feat that allows multiple attacks of opportunity. You move back 60 feet. Monsters move 60 feet. Fighters attack of opportunity. Monsters continue to ignore fighter get another attack. That are now about 20 feet from you 10 from fighters player's turn.

Fighters charge. You retreat 30 feet, attack. Monsters move up to you no attack double move to get to you.

Fighters charge.

(I think he said that they were level 3, so no feat unless humans)

Anyway, the advice "Min Max" is not really an advice. People that like to "Min Max" don't need to be said that they should min-max.

And people that don't like min-max-ing, they will just be frustrated when doing so. If the solution is to play the character in a way you don't like, changing of table is probably better.

Calthropstu
2018-09-04, 06:22 PM
...

To me, this would mean war. Optimize to hell, throw summons at the enemy, have access to numerous abilities, run from melee combatants and shoot just out of charge range and pull every trick in my (rather impressive if I say so myself) arsenal.

I would have her screaming in frustration.

denthor
2018-09-04, 10:53 PM
...

To me, this would mean war. Optimize to hell, throw summons at the enemy, have access to numerous abilities, run from melee combatants and shoot just out of charge range and pull every trick in my (rather impressive if I say so myself) arsenal.

I would have her screaming in frustration.

You said the same thing I did with less words.

I would enjoy the game as well

Calthropstu
2018-09-05, 01:26 AM
You said the same thing I did with less words.

I would enjoy the game as well

You can use tactics without minmaxing. Leading your opponents in a merry chase in a circle outside the building while your fighter and cleric laugh their asses off plinking away at them with arrows is not exactly minmaxng.

denthor
2018-09-05, 09:05 AM
I am amazed I write two lines of text then put an OR and a long post.

This the same playground that notices every word error I see none. Notices what the cat does in any given comic I am vaguely aware there is a cat in the series.

Most of you all focus on the top two lines.

I guess chaos reins

Nifft
2018-09-05, 11:29 AM
I guess chaos reins

... are good for your mount?

Calthropstu
2018-09-05, 02:12 PM
... are good for your mount?

...

I now want to put a saddle on a chaos beast.

denthor
2018-09-05, 10:59 PM
... are good for your mount?


...

I now want to put a saddle on a chaos beast.

Ok those made me laugh and thank you both for something nice before bed