Opinions on an encounter? (3.PF)

[WarKitty]

Our party is in a room. There are two doors on opposite walls, plus a 3rd locked door (unpickable, requires an object from one of the other rooms). Both doors open to reveal a group of enemies behind each door.

The druid casts briar web on the one group of enemies. Note that they are all adjacent to the doorway, and thus in range of our melee. 2 are caught, one is not but can't get out of the area of effect. Our barbarians hack away. The alchemist and ranger knock out the other group, which causes a door to open and another set of them to appear, with slightly greater numbers and a recognizable boss. This group is wielding guns, a weapon which experience has taught us to be wary of.

Next round: The druid tosses a wall of vermin in front of the gun-wielders. The alchemist and one of our fighters proceed to get into a battle with them, during which the fighter is rather ineffective due to not having very good dex and them having cover from the wall. They do get taken out, primarily by the alchemist's damage.

After the battle, the fighter's player maintained that the druid spells were overpowered and making her useless. Druid maintained that she's just trying to be useful due to not having a lot of direct damage options. Your opinions, playground?

[Synapse]

Fighter is just realizing fighters don't compare to casters.
Druid is just being a druid...without even bringing the nastier spells.

The immediate feeling that comes from what you said is that the fighter won't be satisfied until the druid is reduced to a glorified wand of call lightning or something like that. Is anyone else bothered or overshadowed by the druid? Fighters lag behind most other classes so adjusting around the fighter will be a big impediment.

"the druid's spells are overpowered" can be simplified to "spells are overpowered".

[true_shinken]

I just have to say that 'unpickable locks' are silly.

[Frenchy147]

In reality, this was just not a situation where the fighter and druid can work well together. There's plenty of other environments where they can.

[Valameer]

The druid did nothing wrong, and played intelligently.

I expect to be ninja'd a few times before I finish this post, but I feel like the already cramped fighting space was what really limited the fighter. If the barbarian charged up to the door first, well, how much room was there for everyone else to crowd into the bottleneck?

The druid controlling the battlefield may have contributed to the cramped fighting space, but you can't blame them. Maybe the fighter should pick up a ranged weapon (like a gun, with exotic weapon proficiency) and precise shot for situations like this where they can't move around?

Basically: The druid is playing up her strengths, which is good (since she'll want to contribute and not just stand around doing nothing or slinging stones). The fighter, with her feats, should really adopt a fighting style that works well with the druid's crowd controlling abilities. Bull rushing enemies back into ensnarement, ranged attacks for trapped enemies, and providing a wall of cover for the druid in case enemies target her.

Or, you know, she could stand around and be bitter that the badguys couldn't swarm in, firing barrages of bullets and destroying the party.

[WarKitty]

I just have to say that 'unpickable locks' are silly.

Meh, it worked in the game. DM's way of making us actually go get the key

In general: I should say that the druid in this situation is my character, so I'm not entirely unbiased. Although this was one of the first battles I've really managed to feel useful. I had originally build the character as a controller; before this session I had combed books looking for control spells. Before I kept ending up casting produce flame over and over, which gets boring fast.

[Kaww]

Well, your fighter just figured out that his role is that of an animal companion, just weaker?
I think that the battle was fought intelligently, without druid stealing the spotlight...

[WarKitty]

Well, your fighter just figured out that his role is that of an animal companion, just weaker?
I think that the battle was fought intelligently, without druid stealing the spotlight...

I have a feeling this is going to come up again...there's a big difference in optimization levels in the party as well. We're not super optimized, but the fighter is much farther on the "my character wouldn't do that" line than any of the rest of the party.

[true_shinken]

I have a feeling this is going to come up again...there's a big difference in optimization levels in the party as well. We're not super optimized, but the fighter is much farther on the "my character wouldn't do that" line than any of the rest of the party.

Well, then his character also 'wouldn't become very powerful'.
DM should just give him extra magical trinkets and call it a day.

[WarKitty]

Well, then his character also 'wouldn't become very powerful'.
DM should just give him extra magical trinkets and call it a day.

I think it's more a case of "has watched too much anime but thinks ToB is too much of a hassle." She's playing a fighter as if it were a warblade.

[true_shinken]

I think it's more a case of "has watched too much anime but thinks ToB is too much of a hassle." She's playing a fighter as if it were a warblade.

Point him to the Combat Focus feat line. Works surprisingly well for this, erm, concept.

Bind Vestige and Shape Soulmeld, as usual, could help... but if he thinks ToB is too much trouble, meldshaping will give him a heart attack.

[WarKitty]

Point him to the Combat Focus feat line. Works surprisingly well for this, erm, concept.

Bind Vestige and Shape Soulmeld, as usual, could help... but if he thinks ToB is too much trouble, meldshaping will give him a heart attack.

She's trying to combine a mobile warrior with a crit monster, as far as I can tell. And suffering from not enough feats yet to make both of them work at once. Does have a Keen weapon, helpfully.

[true_shinken]

She's trying to combine a mobile warrior with a crit monster, as far as I can tell. And suffering from not enough feats yet to make both of them work at once. Does have a Keen weapon, helpfully.

That does not sound so hard, really. Maybe you could get him to post his build here or post the build yourself so we can help him achieve this concept?

[WarKitty]

Edit: Nevermind link was incorrect

No comments on the NG drow please, it's a world feature not a Drizzt knockoff.

[Kaww]

That does not sound so hard, really. Maybe you could get him to post his build here or post the build yourself so we can help him achieve this concept?

She said the player is a woman. Guys around here don't play with girls/women?

@ OP: No matter how much she tried she wont match the CoDzilas. That's why tier system is out there, to help players/DMs lessen these differences.

[WarKitty]

She said the player is a woman. Guys around here don't play with girls/women? No matter how much she tried she wont match the CoDzilas. That's why tier system is out there, to help players/DMs lessen these differences.

Actually our group is 50/50 split along gender lines (or roughly so depending on how you count gendervariant individuals).

Myself and the alchemist are probably the only top-tier classes out there. Party composition:

Druid (myself)
Ranger, archery style but really focused on power attack with a greatsword
Alchemist, mostly throws bombs for a fair bit of damage
Fighter/Sorc going for spellsword/eldritch knight (hasn't decided)
Fighter (the unoptimized one)
2 barbarians, will probably not last long

I've been trying not to overwhelm encounters and leave stuff for the melee to do. I just don't want to be relegated to dealing straight damage instead of running tactics. It's sort of feeling like I either outclass them or become totally ineffectual.

[true_shinken]

This drow... is weird.
She is level 4 Fighter with base attack 3?
She only chose her Fighter bonus feats; she is missing her standard levelling feats from level 1 and 3.
Also, she could have chosen one of the fighter archetypes. Two-handed Fighter seems fitting.
EDIT: Also, I believe there is no CR adjustment for non-noble drow.

[WarKitty]

This drow... is weird.
She is level 4 Fighter with base attack 3?
She only chose her Fighter bonus feats; she is missing her standard levelling feats from level 1 and 3.
Also, she could have chosen one of the fighter archetypes. Two-handed Fighter seems fitting.
EDIT: Also, I believe there is no CR adjustment for non-noble drow.

Hmmm I wonder if that is an old sheet? It seems likely, looking at it. I don't think she's been updating it.

[herrhauptmann]

What shinken said. The only explanation I can think of, is that the drow is trying to accomodate LA, having 3 levels, but 4 levels worth of xp. In which case, her saves are wrong, (3rd level: 3,1,1; 4th: 4,1,1)

Also, when rolling attacks with her scythe, is the fighter using her actual attack bonus, or forgetting and using just the +1 listed next to do the scythe itself.

I'm unfamiliar with pathfinder, what is this Combat maneuver defense and bonus? And why is CMD so much higher than CMB? If that was a player choice, perhaps raising CMB will make her more effective in combat?

[WarKitty]

What shinken said. The only explanation I can think of, is that the drow is trying to accomodate LA, having 3 levels, but 4 levels worth of xp. In which case, her saves are wrong, (3rd level: 3,1,1; 4th: 4,1,1)

Also, when rolling attacks with her scythe, is the fighter using her actual attack bonus, or forgetting and using just the +1 listed next to do the scythe itself.

I'm unfamiliar with pathfinder, what is this Combat maneuver defense and bonus? And why is CMD so much higher than CMB? If that was a player choice, perhaps raising CMB will make her more effective in combat?

CMD is supposed to be higher than CMB. It's kind of like AC versus BAB. Combat Maneuver Bonus is what you add to your d20 roll when trying to perform a special maneuver like a trip or grapple. Combat Maneuver Defense is your AC for the same.

I'm guessing that's an old draft sheet, because I know she's at level 5.

[Starbuck_II]

Scythe = good. Not sure on why no bow though.
It is always useful to have a ranged weapon (Starknife kind of works).

[huttj509]

It is kinda amusing to see what might be an example of a fighter 'doing it wrong' where that actually refers to the math involved, rather than specific feat selection and such.

[Last Laugh]

Fighter/Sorc going for spellsword/eldritch knight (hasn't decided)

if it helps the decision making process point out Abjurant Champion (which is like 10x better than Eldritch Knight) you're a regular so you probably know this but.... (d10 hitdie, full BA, high will and those wonderful class features.)

[AslanCross]

She's trying to combine a mobile warrior with a crit monster, as far as I can tell. And suffering from not enough feats yet to make both of them work at once. Does have a Keen weapon, helpfully.

Don't you gain feats more often in Pathfinder?

[Arutema]

She forgot to add her BAB to her CMB. Very important if she's going to use that scythe to trip things.

[Coidzor]

Meh, it worked in the game. DM's way of making us actually go get the key.

Yeah, the railroading worked, big accomplishment.

I should say that the druid in this situation is my character, so I'm not entirely unbiased. Although this was one of the first battles I've really managed to feel useful. I had originally build the character as a controller; before this session I had combed books looking for control spells. Before I kept ending up casting produce flame over and over, which gets boring fast.

You're really that strapped for control? I guess most of it does depend upon the terrain.

But if you had set the wall just 5 feet back and put a narrow channel there, they would've had to expose themselves by entering the room to get a clear shot and would've had barbarians, fighter, ranger, and gish to deal with from melee, since you mentioned that they had already dispatched their mooks. Seems like that would have both allowed you to get your melee in play and take out their tactical advantage of having a clear shot with guns.

"not entirely unbiased" Long way of saying you're biased in the situation due to being involved with it.

Wait. How/Why did you build it as a controller and then not have already picked out some favored control spells during the building process?

The druid controlling the battlefield may have contributed to the cramped fighting space, but you can't blame them. Maybe the fighter should pick up a ranged weapon (like a gun, with exotic weapon proficiency) and precise shot for situations like this where they can't move around?

Fighter, spending its feats on something other than maximizing its favored stupid fighter trick?

Basically: The druid is playing up her strengths, which is good (since she'll want to contribute and not just stand around doing nothing or slinging stones). The fighter, with her feats, should really adopt a fighting style that works well with the druid's crowd controlling abilities. Bull rushing enemies back into ensnarement, ranged attacks for trapped enemies, and providing a wall of cover for the druid in case enemies target her.

It sounds more like this particular spell prevented melee attacks from being delivered to the enemy. Which is what fighters do. 5 of the party members are apparently built on the premise of killing things with metal sticks. Warkitty eliminated most of the party from the fight and didn't really contribute much herself afterwards so it was only the Alchemist doing damage to eliminate the foes behind the wall. Which must have been very boring for the rest of the group, heightening the potential for frustration from the situation. And if melee attacks couldn't be delivered, the fighter couldn't well bull-rush the mooks either. Unless they're archery fighters, in which case they have to specialize and sink most of their wealth into that instead of melee... or split their focus so they are bad at both melee and ranged.

So it's a situation born of A. less than optimal spell selection and application or B. the DM deciding to screw the party with the terrain, in which case...

And apparently C. the fighter doing the being a fighter wrong.

She said the player is a woman. Guys around here don't play with girls/women?

Hard to tell sometimes which is being referred to. And of course, you know, bothering to read and remember pronouns.

[WarKitty]

Yeah, the railroading worked, big accomplishment.



You're really that strapped for control? I guess most of it does depend upon the terrain.

But if you had set the wall just 5 feet back and put a narrow channel there, they would've had to expose themselves by entering the room to get a clear shot and would've had barbarians, fighter, ranger, and gish to deal with from melee, since you mentioned that they had already dispatched their mooks. Seems like that would have both allowed you to get your melee in play and take out their tactical advantage of having a clear shot with guns.

We were fighting a pretty heavy melee battle on the other side of the field. I didn't think we wanted to sacrifice melee on that side too. Particularly since we'd already had a door open once we killed the mooks, to reveal more mooks and this boss guy. And there were more doors that could potentially open.

"not entirely unbiased" Long way of saying you're biased in the situation due to being involved with it.

Yup.

Wait. How/Why did you build it as a controller and then not have already picked out some favored control spells during the building process?

Well originally it was meant to be a summoner because we didn't have enough melee. Then like 3 people switched and I had to redo my build. Then half my control spells ended up not working because our melee complained.

It sounds more like this particular spell prevented melee attacks from being delivered to the enemy. Which is what fighters do. 5 of the party members are apparently built on the premise of killing things with metal sticks. Warkitty eliminated most of the party from the fight and didn't really contribute much herself afterwards so it was only the Alchemist doing damage to eliminate the foes behind the wall. Which must have been very boring for the rest of the group, heightening the potential for frustration from the situation. And if melee attacks couldn't be delivered, the fighter couldn't well bull-rush the mooks either. Unless they're archery fighters, in which case they have to specialize and sink most of their wealth into that instead of melee... or split their focus so they are bad at both melee and ranged.

I had only contained about a third of the foes. And we only have 3 true melee people. Our ranger and our sorc/fighter are both quite competent at range. I don't know about the barbarians because they're new and haven't been properly outfitted. They were on the other side of the field.

So it's a situation born of A. less than optimal spell selection and application or B. the DM deciding to screw the party with the terrain, in which case...

And apparently C. the fighter doing the being a fighter wrong.

I'm not sure what spells *to* pick at this point. Control? Sorry you've messed up the melee. Summoning? Gets in the way more than helps. Damage? Makes me way less effective than the rest of the party. Starting to feel like I should just roll a new character if all my spells are going to either cause problems or just not contribute.

[Coidzor]

We were fighting a pretty heavy melee battle on the other side of the field. I didn't think we wanted to sacrifice melee on that side too. Particularly since we'd already had a door open once we killed the mooks, to reveal more mooks and this boss guy. And there were more doors that could potentially open.

Ahh, kinda silly of the Fighter to go to a place where Melee was useless when there were places he could've contributed to the existing melee. I'd gotten the impression from what you said earlier that your party had either mopped up the melee guys on those two fronts or was about to finish mopping them up.

Well originally it was meant to be a summoner because we didn't have enough melee. Then like 3 people switched and I had to redo my build. Then half my control spells ended up not working because our melee complained.

With that much melee... that's a big issue. Actually, hell, with that much melee the paradigm of the party is pretty heavily inclined that way. So it kinda seems like a real possibility that either your DM is trying to mow them down with things stacked against melee or wants to limit your effectiveness by limiting your ability to control in a way that synergizes with the party.

I had only contained about a third of the foes. And we only have 3 true melee people. Our ranger and our sorc/fighter are both quite competent at range. I don't know about the barbarians because they're new and haven't been properly outfitted. They were on the other side of the field.

Ah, improperly equipped PCs... I'm a bit worried that it might not just be the barbarians that are so, given what I saw of the fighter's char sheet.

I'm not sure what spells *to* pick at this point. Control? Sorry you've messed up the melee. Summoning? Gets in the way more than helps. Damage? Makes me way less effective than the rest of the party. Starting to feel like I should just roll a new character if all my spells are going to either cause problems or just not contribute.

I'm not an expert on druid spells, but... it does seem like there should be some control you can do that limits the enemy while allowing your guys to contribute. And how did summons get in the way? throw 'em on the other side of the enemy for flanking or covering a part of the battlefield that opened up (or take care of mopping up an area where the mooks are about dead anyway) so you can concentrate your melee forces more optimally to achieve your desired effect.

Of course, that wouldn't work if your group is stubborn(suggested by the one girl who loves to always argue about what path to take whenever you hit a fork in the road) or not tactically inclined...

In which case I'm coming up mostly empty on what to suggest to you. I mean, if you can convince the meleers to all have at least some reach backup weapons so they can maximize their ability to reach the enemy in, y'know, hallways and in places where the enemy is entangled and only a few of them can hit one at a time....

[WarKitty]

Same girl, btw. Yeah most of the problems are around 1 player. Sucks sometimes, but...well there's more going on than just the game, we're trying to help her deal with some stuff as a group of friends. I just end up venting here sometimes because it does get frustrating.

I had smacked the guys on the other side with a briar web, which entangles and does a rather pitiful amount of damage. They were still within reach of the melee. The barbarians are ill equipped because we rescued them from a slavedriver the session before, so they have whatever items our party could spare. Although in retrospect I should have given one of them my sling, since I don't ever use it.

I'm pretty sure I linked to the wrong sheet. I'm thinking I will suggest reach weapons though. Can you use a reach weapon if there's someone between you and the target?

I should mention the reason I walled of those guys is that guns are *nasty* on mooks. The things have a nasty crit, and when you've got a bunch of mooks with them...I actually saved our alchemist from dying with that wall. DM rolled a 20. Needed an 18 or higher to confirm, and rolled a 15. The cover from the wall was providing a +4 AC.

[Susano-wo]

it defintiely seems like there was just too much melee for not enough space in that fight. without other fights to judge on, I'm not sure what else you could really do (of course I'm not a druid expert.)

Would the ranged combatants be able to shoot at the party members if the fighter and alchemist weren't right there at the doorway?

Does the wall provide cover for them if the fighter is next to it?