How to check your power

[Trekkin]

In a recent game of D&d 3.5 of which I am voluntarily no longer a part, it came to light that I'd made a character so tremendously overpowered that it was negatively impacting the experience for the rest of the party. Bizarrely, I did so without ever consciously setting out to do so, nor did I ever realize I'd done so before it became a major problem.'

Thus I ask the Playground: what are good ways of checking the potential power of a character? What metrics may be used to place a particular build on a scale to which it may be compared to others?

In short, how do I make sure that I never accidentally make an overpowered character again, while not simply making a level X human commoner? I realize I made the character of my own volition, but how can I gauge the results?

[Starbuck_II]

In a recent game of D&d 3.5 of which I am voluntarily no longer a part, it came to light that I'd made a character so tremendously overpowered that it was negatively impacting the experience for the rest of the party. Bizarrely, I did so without ever consciously setting out to do so, nor did I ever realize I'd done so before it became a major problem.'

Thus I ask the Playground: what are good ways of checking the potential power of a character? What metrics may be used to place a particular build on a scale to which it may be compared to others?

In short, how do I make sure that I never accidentally make an overpowered character again, while not simply making a level X human commoner? I realize I made the character of my own volition, but how can I gauge the results?

Can you give examples of what you did that was the problem.
It is possible you were appropriately powered, but everyone else was under.
End result you seem overpowered. Either way, give us what you claim to have done.

Was everyone a non-magic and you magic? That would make you overpowered by default usually.

[Kylarra]

Talk to the other players and the DM about the expected power level of your campaign. The levels will be different for each group, so it's nearly impossible to find a base guideline that'll work for every situation.

[Trekkin]

Warforged Shaper, with two Green Ronin templates he reached 30 Int at level five and was Fine-sized (i wanted to make a sort that was designed as a scholar rather than a soldier). Both caused significant problems, although only the first ever registered with me as ever being potentially problematic (and even then, most of a shaper's powers don't depend on Int in any way, so it only affected my manifesting stamina). The rest of the party all had some spellcasting capability except for the rogue, who intended to multiclass into wizard at the first opportunity.

Also, i was looking for a way to simply determine with a few metrics as possible how powerful I actually am, so I can take that analysis to my DM.

[Touchy]

Talk to the other players and the DM about the expected power level of your campaign. The levels will be different for each group, so it's nearly impossible to find a base guideline that'll work for every situation.

This won't always work, because some players think monks are good, that wizards are underpowered, and/or that blasting is the best way to spellcast.

[Thrawn183]

Stop and ask yourself if there's something that you can do well in absolutely every situation. If the answer is yes, and nobody else can say the same thing, you've probably got a problem on your hands.

[Kylarra]

This won't always work, because some players think monks are good, or that wizards are underpowered, and/or that blasting is the best way to spellcast.

I... fail to see the relevance of your statement. That does nothing except confirm that you need to know your group's expected power level. Being on the same page is key for any roleplaying game ... well except paranoia.

Warforged Shaper, with two Green Ronin templates he reached 30 Int at level five and was Fine-sized (i wanted to make a sort that was designed as a scholar rather than a soldier). Both caused significant problems, although only the first ever registered with me as ever being potentially problematic (and even then, most of a shaper's powers don't depend on Int in any way, so it only affected my manifesting stamina). The rest of the party all had some spellcasting capability except for the rogue, who intended to multiclass into wizard at the first opportunity.

Also, i was looking for a way to simply determine with a few metrics as possible how powerful I actually am, so I can take that analysis to my DM.

Okay fine.

Do I have an absurdly high stat for my primary ability score?
Am I a nonstandard size consistently that affects either my output or my defenses?
Do I have a laundry list of immunities that most characters won't have?
How hard is it to challenge this character with standard creatures?
Do I need the rest of the party at all?
Am I using [a] template(s)?
Does this template contribute significantly to any of the first 3 questions?

[Tackyhillbillu]

Take a Tier 3 Character (my suggestion would be a Human Warblade.) See how much higher level then you he has to be to beat you.

If the answer is infinity, maybe you should play another class.

[AslanCross]

Warforged Shaper, with two Green Ronin templates he reached 30 Int at level five and was Fine-sized (i wanted to make a sort that was designed as a scholar rather than a soldier).

...and you're saying you didn't optimize? What exactly is your definition of optimization then?

That aside, I'm doubting the practicality of creating a construct the size of a postage stamp, even if it is a scholar. One the size of a human can do all the same work a human scribe or researcher could do without need for sleep or food, so even a garden-variety warforged is pretty suitable to such work. I don't think one would need to make it Fine-sized.

[Trekkin]

Actually, I'd assumed that the high Int score would be primarily a roleplaying thing. As I'd said, most of my powers never looked at it.

It's moot now though. Clearly I have selective blindness at character building.

[AslanCross]

Well, as a shaper, that alone gives you tons of PP for your level. The DCs are affected too. The Lv 10 Kineticist in my current party has only 22 Int.

[Starbuck_II]

Are you positive you applied Level adjustments right?
Were you lv 1 with 2 +2 LA templates?
Remember if the template doesn't say LA (even +0), it means it is not suitable for players.
It will look like this LA -.

Playing a Wilder with 30 Int could be only roleplay, but a Shaper gets a a mechanical boost (that is always important to notice).

[Trekkin]

Everything was mechanically sound from a purely numerical standpoint, absurdity aside.

[Touchy]

Actually, I'd assumed that the high Int score would be primarily a roleplaying thing. As I'd said, most of my powers never looked at it.

It's moot now though. Clearly I have selective blindness at character building.

Alternatively, you're a natural optimizer.

[awa]

being size fine for a character who does not use weapon damage is really quite powerful assuming your speed is not shot to hell you have big bonuses to ac and hide checks not to mention stuff like walking through key holes

[Touchy]

being size fine for a character who does not use weapon damage is really quite powerful assuming your speed is not shot to hell you have big bonuses to ac and hide checks not to mention stuff like walking through key holes

You can also ride a rat for a mount, thats gotta be fun for awhile.

[JaronK]

Thus I ask the Playground: what are good ways of checking the potential power of a character? What metrics may be used to place a particular build on a scale to which it may be compared to others?

Invest your power in the party (via buffs and other augmentations) instead of directing it at the enemy or yourself. This instantly fixes power issues, as it doesn't really matter that it's the Cleric who's buffing the party when the Fighter gets to rock out with his Righteous Wrath of the Faithful and such.

Or you can use roleplay reasons to restrict yourself. For example, our group once made a horribly overpowered group of Dragonwrought Kobolds, and then intentionally played like idiots (kicking open doors and announcing our presence, for example). It was tremendous fun.

JaronK

[AslanCross]

You can also ride a rat for a mount, thats gotta be fun for awhile.

Heck, he can ride in a party member's pocket and have free cover/concealment.

[Dust]

Trekkin, I want to tread lightly around this subject because I just finished reading a thread where the OP was very defensive and don't wish to offend.

That said, you mentioned one of your other players was a rogue planning on multiclassing wizard...and I understood that to mean 'not in a PrC qualifying way,' either.
So I have to ask - I wonder if the problem was less that you're a natural optimizer, and perhaps moreso that several other party members were severely below-par?

I ask this because I personally feel that hostility towards powerful characters isn't because they're powerful, but because the player who is offended feels as though they're rather lackluster.

More to the situation at hand, I generally check for twinkery by running a mock combat between the character and a Zombie with a CR one higher than the character. For example, level five character gets a Grey Render zombie. It's usually a good benchmark to check for any eye-raising situations that may pop up.

[Starbuck_II]

Trekkin, I want to tread lightly around this subject because I just finished reading a thread where the OP was very defensive and don't wish to offend.

That said, you mentioned one of your other players was a rogue planning on multiclassing wizard...and I understood that to mean 'not in a PrC qualifying way,' either.
So I have to ask - I wonder if the problem was less that you're a natural optimizer, and perhaps moreso that several other party members were severely below-par?

I ask this because I personally feel that hostility towards powerful characters isn't because they're powerful, but because the player who is offended feels as though they're rather lackluster.

More to the situation at hand, I generally check for twinkery by running a mock combat between the character and a Zombie with a CR one higher than the character. For example, level five character gets a Grey Render zombie. It's usually a good benchmark to check for any eye-raising situations that may pop up.

But every lv 5 Wizard/lv 6 Warlock can beat that zombie (unless zombie can fly, you can pepper it to death till it is destroyed).

Your test works well vs non-casters, but casters have too much variety in options.

[Trekkin]

Under less specific circumstances I would consider that as a perfectly viable possibility, but here we were told by the DM that he is less than adept at creating powerful encounters and we may find the game rather easy if we made absolutely optimized characters. Thus, my choice was more because "i want to play a really, really brainy character" and less "I want to trivialize the challenges presented"

And the rogue was in fact going to try to PrC into Arcane Archer, but i got the feeling he liked the idea of being able to cast spells. I can't get into his head but I don't think he was feeling underpowered.

And thank you; the zombie test will be most informative. I take it a properly powerful character should expend one fourth of their dairly resources to win by a narrow margin?

[Ixahinon]

Power Gaming is so easy to accomplish, really. I'd consider a person at 5th level having a 30 intelligence to be align with power gaming, but then again, that depends on the type of campaign. If it is an overpowered campaign, where having mid-30 stats at that level is the norm, then you are fine. If, however, you are the only one in the party that has a stat that high...there's a problem.

In the game I am playing. I have a run of the mill Paladin at 5th level (Christof) that the DM thinks is the epitome of power gaming. No magical items, sub par stats, and not even that great of feats.

[Penitent]

If you want to compare a build in the abstract to power level in the abstract, use the Same Game Test.

Basically, you test yourself in isolation by doing some CR math.

A Party of four ECL 6 characters is a party level 6 group.

A Party of two ECL 6 characters is ECL-2, or party level 4.

A Party of one ECL 6 character is ECL-4, or party level 2.

A level 2 Party should have a 50% chance of victory against an EL 6 challenge, if it is the only one that day.

You'll note this is all from the DMG, and conforms perfectly with the fact that an ECL 6 character with PC levels and no LA is CR 6.

Now, arrange a serious of tests against the character, all EL 6. Face each one of them as if it were the only fight that day, and you had all your resources. (If you are prep caster or something, pick a generalized spell list and use it in every encounter, or sacrifice a certain number of slots to divinations, to represent a pattern or spending X spells on divination each night, and then prepare based on the information gleaned from those.)

To be "perfectly balanced" in this model, you should hit 50% in general against all the challenges, running each multiple times.

Your Rogue wins the trapped door every time, but loses to the golem every time? No problem. That works out to 50%.

Now, no method is perfect, so here's a breakdown of what this system does well, and what it doesn't:

Well:

1) Provides a central benchmark, and one that hits pretty near where the "balanced" classes usually hit. Druids usually beat 50%, Monks usually lose much more. But Rogues are right about there.

2) Operates in isolation. You don't need a lot of friends, or to make a balanced cast, or whatever else.

3) Is simple. You make a set up of monsters, and you run each one without any reference to the others. So you don't need to do any math about how well you win an encounter, it's just W or L.

4) Tests a wide variety of situations.

5) Reusuable and applies universally. Use the same tests for a given level against all possible builds.

6) In the RNG. You are fighting enemies of about your competence, so you don't have to worry about "can't hit" or "can't miss" or "can't make a saving throw" unless that's a feature or your character or the encounter. So if that happens, you should know it will probably happen a fair amount.

Not so Well:

1) Not Force Multiplier friendly. If you are a DFA bard, this doesn't really showcase your Strengths. Likewise, giving up a CL for War Weaver in this test isn't valued as highly as it might be normally, unless you are a summoner too.

2) Values Kiting and devalues healers (who don't kite). A Monk with Spring Attack can look like an almost playable character sometimes in this model. And a Warlock looks relatively awesome. But in game, when the monster can't attack you, it can still eat the Wizard, so your 12 damage a round isn't really helping.

3) Other stuff that my brain is failing to recall.

[Starbuck_II]

And the rogue was in fact going to try to PrC into Arcane Archer, but i got the feeling he liked the idea of being able to cast spells. I can't get into his head but I don't think he was feeling underpowered.

Wait, Arcane Archer?
Like "some of my class features are emulated by casting Greater Magic Weapon" Arcane Archer?
That will make him underpowered sadly: it doesn't progress casting so you much split levels to even use the class features. Sad that they messed up the Prc.

[Divide by Zero]

Invest your power in the party (via buffs and other augmentations) instead of directing it at the enemy or yourself. This instantly fixes power issues, as it doesn't really matter that it's the Cleric who's buffing the party when the Fighter gets to rock out with his Righteous Wrath of the Faithful and such.

+1 to this. Most flavors of casters have plenty of battlefield control and buff/debuff spells that will still let the other characters do their part, and other classes can do it too if you build them right. If you consistently outperform the party regardless of your character, try working on more of a support role.

[Dust]

I like Penitent's method. Needlessly complicated, but more thorough.

[Trekkin]

I ended up in a form of support role, using astral constructs to act as fighters to let the rogue and warlock cast and shoot into a grapple with impunity; a player fighter tends to object if you have a 50% chance of hitting him or her, but a construct cannot. My constructs and Minor Created objects also served to save, evacuate, rescue, and otherwise help. Example: creating a flying construct to rescue party members that fell off of a narrow catwalk, and a cowcatcher-shaped one to deflect an oncoming series of falling rocks.

I did at one time grossly overuse my power by creating a cloud of poison to knock out what I assumed was an attacking group of thirty monsters. The DM and I agree that it was overpowered, and it has not been repeated. Since then, I've made ladders, rope, and I believe some flour to act as a cheap Detect Invisibility.

[kamikasei]

In the game I am playing. I have a run of the mill Paladin at 5th level (Christof) that the DM thinks is the epitome of power gaming. No magical items, sub par stats, and not even that great of feats.

Is it a Pathfinder thing that you seem to have taken half-celestial without any LA?

[Starbuck_II]

Maybe everyone in the party gets a free +2 Template?

IDK, that might be why he is considered "epitome of power gaming."

[Anasazi]

I find the one universal way of always being able to tell what range of power you should be in is advancing your own ability to read people. The first meeting, when you all meetup and talk about the campaign and address what you're going to be playing is the best time to analyze the other players in the group. Their understanding and skill of the game will apply alot to how they build their characters, but also their outlook on life (and more specifically the game) will help you analyze how far they will take said character.
For example, a beginning player will go for simple construction. A expert in a group with said beginner will still build a powerful character but they wont optimize their min/max'ing, they'll play something more utility driven so they can pick up the slack with the new player is lacking.

Also, if you can no longer build simple characters, its time to hang your hat up as you're no longer able to play with the majority of people you will run into.
Remember, failing in a task has as much of an effect on the story as success, the difference is how long it takes you to solve the issue you're on, which is never something you should concern yourself with.

To be honest, the GM should never have approved that character.
Besides, a real challenge isnt playing a character thats good, its playing a bad character and making him work through all of his faults. You'll find your favorite roleplaying sessions will be the ones where your character, seemingly incapible of doing anything, accomplishes a task the others failed at.