Is there a way to get someone to power-up their character?

[WarKitty]

Inspired by another thread on this board.

I was thinking back to my last campaign. The problem was that we had one character (fighter/barbarian gestalt) that was simply badly built. When confronted with CR-appropriate encounters, he couldn't hit them unless he rolled a 20. Took Toughness for as many of his feat choices as he could. Needless to say he started feeling useless. I thought about dropping appropriate loot, but with a party with 3 heavy hitters that's kind of difficult.

[Tyndmyr]

The first thing you should do when someone looks at toughness is to suggest improved toughness. Even a non-optimizer will see that it's clearly better.

Gotta start em off small, can't take em straight to the deep end of the pool all at once.

Typically, new characters are also given build advice by one or more experienced players. Had a warmage join my party last night. He hadn't played much before, and it's not a top tier class, but he immediately started out with a ridiculous amount of spellpoints and 9d6 fireballs in E6, and a +9 unbuffed to ranged touch attacks. He's a blaster, sure, since that's what he wanted, but he's good at it.

[ArcanistSupreme]

Maybe allow feat retraining as per PHB II?

[Psyx]

Maybe don't use those whacky gestalt rules in games with players who only have a basis rules knowledge?

Or sit in and help them gen.

[WarKitty]

Maybe don't use those whacky gestalt rules in games with players who only have a basis rules knowledge?

Or sit in and help them gen.

Gestalt's not that bad here, considering we had a no multi-classing rule. I was basically handing him a sheet that said "you have fighter skill points and bonus feats, but you get a d12 hit die and rage." And he had our more experienced fighter sitting over his shoulder offering good feat choices. That and he wasn't any less experienced than most of the rest of our group, who did fine.

Maybe allow feat retraining as per PHB II?

I did.

[Pika...]

I have to ask, are they level appropriate or group appropriate?

I had an issue, well two actually, very similar.

In one there was a group of powergamers who kept telling me to "make a better character". I ended up doubting myself and the game became miserable.

In the second we had a great group for years, then one player was invited from the previously mentioned group. Suddenly he won every encounter single-handedly and people started to get bored. At one point they got mad at ME for not participating in encounters and saying "What? I will take part in the next one the DM has to throw at us when Jordon wastes his 'big shots'".


Basically, a sole rolepalyer is not meant for a powergamer group, and a sole powergamer is not meant for a roleplaying group.

[JaxGaret]

First of all, the character would be a lot more powerful if it were a gestalt between Barbarian and Feat Rogue. Basically, it would be the same character, but with much better skills, a lot more class features, and a good Reflex save.

Secondly, if the guy took Toughness, let alone taking Toughness multiple times, you failed in your role as assistants in helping him create his character. Failed miserably.

[Yuki Akuma]

...Who would take Toughness if they have d12 hit dice?

...Oh wait I remember someone who did that. That was an annoying argument. -_-

[Dark_Juggernaut]

Have a lvl 15 wizard appear, whisk him away, and chaos shuffle(pair of 8th lvl fiend folio spells) his feats around to end up with better feats. I don't know why he'd do it off hand but if you can't think of a plot reasoning for it, I'm sure we can help there to.

Frankly though, I don't see how he's missing so much...a single classed Barb USUALLY doesn't have feats that improve his hit chance (maybe reckless rage, but that's +1 tops). Make sure he has a lvl appropriate strength item, a +1 weapon with another +1 per 4 lvls, and he shouldn't need friggin 20s to hit.

It SOUNDS like someone dropped the ball somewhere...I mean even without all that, unless he's at 16 without a magical weapon AT ALL he should still have a chance to hit on an 18. The AC of the things you're having him fight sounds to high. A sub-optimal average melee should be able to hit average enemies of his CR 50% of the time, really high AC stuff around 25-30% of the time, and huge easy to hit stuff 75% of the time(if not 100%).

Either your enemies are way to hard to hit or someone added up his attack bonus wrong...maybe he's not raging, I dunno.

[WarKitty]

First of all, the character would be a lot more powerful if it were a gestalt between Barbarian and Feat Rogue. Basically, it would be the same character, but with much better skills, a lot more class features, and a good Reflex save.

Secondly, if the guy took Toughness, let alone taking Toughness multiple times, you failed in your role as assistants in helping him create his character. Failed miserably.

Well he was told "feats make your character. Toughness is a bad feat. Please let us give you suggestions for better feats." And said no.

Have a lvl 15 wizard appear, whisk him away, and chaos shuffle(pair of 8th lvl fiend folio spells) his feats around to end up with better feats. I don't know why he'd do it off hand but if you can't think of a plot reasoning for it, I'm sure we can help there to.

Frankly though, I don't see how he's missing so much...a single classed Barb USUALLY doesn't have feats that improve his hit chance (maybe reckless rage, but that's +1 tops). Make sure he has a lvl appropriate strength item, a +1 weapon with another +1 per 4 lvls, and he shouldn't need friggin 20s to hit.

It SOUNDS like someone dropped the ball somewhere...I mean even without all that, unless he's at 16 without a magical weapon AT ALL he should still have a chance to hit on an 18. The AC of the things you're having him fight sounds to high. A sub-optimal average melee should be able to hit average enemies of his CR 50% of the time, really high AC stuff around 25-30% of the time, and huge easy to hit stuff 75% of the time(if not 100%).

Either your enemies are way to hard to hit or someone added up his attack bonus wrong...maybe he's not raging, I dunno.

He has left the group now (moved away). I was just wondering - for all the people who complain about powergaming, what would they do in this situation. The encounters are appropriate for the group at least. My other two fighter-types are hitting fairly often, with them both being TWF types. He's playing two-handed axe and not hitting.

I just don't get it. My other players weren't exactly munchkins, and they loved roleplaying and were good at it. He just didn't seem to want to be bothered with optimization at all.

[pffh]

I would show him the ToB classes. Much harder to screw them up.

[Chipp Zanuff]

Scream really loud in an angry pose for three episodes?

[Yuki Akuma]

I would show him the ToB classes. Much harder to screw them up.

You could still, say, take Toughness for every feat as a Warblade.

[Tyndmyr]

Maybe don't use those whacky gestalt rules in games with players who only have a basis rules knowledge?

Or sit in and help them gen.

Yeah, I don't generally bother with gestalt unless all the players have a solid familiarity. It's not a tough addition if you know the system, but if you dont...it can be awkward.

Be aware that some people aren't fond of math and comparisons. Trying to demonstrate that X is a bad feat to them is...difficult. Now, if they don't complain about their char, no problem. If they complain, and are willing to accept advice, also no problem. If they refuse to accept advice, and are angry that they suck, the irony should be pointed out to them. It's completely their fault at that point.

[Glimbur]

You could still, say, take Toughness for every feat as a Warblade.

You're much better off than a fighter//barbarian who has toughness as every feat.

Now, if they simply don't use maneuvers in combat... that's the only way I can think of to really screw up a single classed ToB character.

[Tengu_temp]

Well he was told "feats make your character. Toughness is a bad feat. Please let us give you suggestions for better feats." And said no.

If someone is feeling inadequate because of his subpar build, and in response you let him rebuild and ask if he wants suggestions, and he rejects all this help, then sucks to be him. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

[fryplink]

You're much better off than a fighter//barbarian who has toughness as every feat.

Now, if they simply don't use maneuvers in combat... that's the only way I can think of to really screw up a single classed ToB character.

It would still probably be stronger than a single class figher (yay d12 hp)

[HunterOfJello]

Kill the character, make a new one.

You failed at helping your friend make a good character. Throw away the trash and help him properly this time.

[firemagehao]

You could kill the PC, then throw in a NPC Cleric who is resurrection happy, and use Heroes of Horror's suggestion that not all resurrections could summon the correct soul, and the soul that now inhabits the body is good at fighting.

[Dr.Epic]

Inspired by another thread on this board.

I was thinking back to my last campaign. The problem was that we had one character (fighter/barbarian gestalt) that was simply badly built. When confronted with CR-appropriate encounters, he couldn't hit them unless he rolled a 20. Took Toughness for as many of his feat choices as he could. Needless to say he started feeling useless. I thought about dropping appropriate loot, but with a party with 3 heavy hitters that's kind of difficult.

Wow! How do you make a fighter/barb gestalt that doesn't slaughter everything? Toughness as every feat? Really? I only use that feat on NPCs I don't want killing all the PCs. Yeah, tell them to ditch the 3 HP upgrades. Weapon focus, weapon specialization, greater of the two former, extended rage, extra rage, monkey grip. All those are good, but the three every barbarian and fighter built like a tank should have are power attack, cleave, great cleave.

[JoshuaZ]

Yeah, I don't generally bother with gestalt unless all the players have a solid familiarity. It's not a tough addition if you know the system, but if you dont...it can be awkward.

Be aware that some people aren't fond of math and comparisons. Trying to demonstrate that X is a bad feat to them is...difficult. Now, if they don't complain about their char, no problem. If they complain, and are willing to accept advice, also no problem. If they refuse to accept advice, and are angry that they suck, the irony should be pointed out to them. It's completely their fault at that point.

I agree. If you gave the guy advice and he didn't listen at all this is his own fault. If someone at that point wants to engage in retraining or start a new character that might be ok. But if they won't there's not much you can do to help them out. If you absolutely need to help them out in a situation like this I suppose they could conveniently find a powerful magical artifact that only worked when someone was raging. But you shouldn't need to do that.

[Yuki Akuma]

It would still probably be stronger than a single class figher (yay d12 hp)

Well, yeah. But not really stronger than a single-class Barbarian, which is the problem.

[JaxGaret]

the three every barbarian and fighter built like a tank should have are power attack, cleave, great cleave.

Great Cleave is kind of sort of a trap, actually - because ~95% of the time you won't have more than 2 combatants within reach, and mook cleanup is generally someone else's job - Cleave though can be useful enough to be worth it.

Also, you spelled "power attack, shock trooper, leap attack" wrong.

[fryplink]

Well, yeah. But not really stronger than a single-class Barbarian, which is the problem.

yea, i thought about mentioning him, but decided that a maneuver-free warblade would get destroyed against a barbarian.

[herrhauptmann]

I just don't get it. My other players weren't exactly munchkins, and they loved roleplaying and were good at it. He just didn't seem to want to be bothered with optimization at all.

It does seem like a bit of mystery, but a question about him and the party.
1)Was he someone who joined in solely for D&D, or already a member of your circle of friends?
2)How was the advice phrased? Particularly if he wasn't already a friend of yours.

For instance, if he sat down at character creation having never met any of you, and the optimizers in the group started in on him with "You shouldn't take toughness and weapon focus, take power attack, ranks in jump, and leap attack." I'd say it's the groups own fault that he ignored their advice, wellmeaning though it may have been. Being correct doesn't excuse being rude.

Not that I'm saying that's what your group did, it's just something I've seen in games where the players have vastly different experiences/expectations.

[WarKitty]

It does seem like a bit of mystery, but a question about him and the party.
1)Was he someone who joined in solely for D&D, or already a member of your circle of friends?
2)How was the advice phrased? Particularly if he wasn't already a friend of yours.

For instance, if he sat down at character creation having never met any of you, and the optimizers in the group started in on him with "You shouldn't take toughness and weapon focus, take power attack, ranks in jump, and leap attack." I'd say it's the groups own fault that he ignored their advice, wellmeaning though it may have been. Being correct doesn't excuse being rude.

Not that I'm saying that's what your group did, it's just something I've seen in games where the players have vastly different experiences/expectations.

He already knew all of us quite well. His girlfriend is our best player. I think it was something like "feats really are the central part of this class, if you don't want feats maybe something else would be better, or we can help you find feats."

[Emmerask]

Inspired by another thread on this board.

I was thinking back to my last campaign. The problem was that we had one character (fighter/barbarian gestalt) that was simply badly built. When confronted with CR-appropriate encounters, he couldn't hit them unless he rolled a 20. Took Toughness for as many of his feat choices as he could. Needless to say he started feeling useless. I thought about dropping appropriate loot, but with a party with 3 heavy hitters that's kind of difficult.

If a Fighter//Barbarian can´t hit things reliably in most battles due to ac it is because of:
-Ability scores suck
-Equipment is not level appropriate
-Monsters are unbalanced selfmade ones with optimized AC

Feat choice should have nothing to do with it. Feats give a fighter a modest amount of battlefield control or increase his damage output, atm I can´t think of any worthwhile feat that increases toHit

/edit Maybe if all three points are not true he did his math wrong and didn´t add str etc to his attack rolls?

[JoshuaZ]

If a Fighter//Barbarian can´t hit things reliably in most battles due to ac it is because of:
-Ability scores suck
-Equipment is not level appropriate
-Monsters are unbalanced selfmade ones with optimized AC

Feat choice should have nothing to do with it. Feats give a fighter a modest amount of battlefield control or increase his damage output, atm I can´t think of any worthwhile feat that increases toHit

Well, if you are playing with two weapons that matters a fair bit. Also, Weapon Specialization and its companion don't do much but they do matter. If you include all three you've got a total of +10 at most, yes?

[WarKitty]

I'm not quite sure *what* he did to be honest. I just know he never seemed to hit anything, while our ranger with a longbow could hit 75% of the time, and our TWF fighter could hit 90% of the time. He would always forget to send me his sheet.

[Emmerask]

Well, if you are playing with two weapons that matters a fair bit. Also, Weapon Specialization and its companion don't do much but they do matter. If you include all three you've got a total of +10 at most, yes?

Yes if you use two weapons then two weapon fighting would help I give you that ^^

But weapon specialization does only increase your damage roll by +2 (afaik) which is pretty pointless at the time you can get the feat.