Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving the

Stories about games that you run and/or have played in.

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Cynic
Prince
Posts: 2776
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving the

Post by Cynic »

This is something of a rant/dialogue I suppose. So be forewarned.


I'll admit it, upfront even. I love playing powerful characters. I do minmax/optimize/build generally better characters than many others I play with/whatever you wanna call it. But the way I realize the potential of any character's power per say usually comes as being a party face.

Primarily, I have always chosen to play a charismatic character who relies on his ability to talk his way out of a situation. Whether d&d, m&m, CoC, wuxia, hell paranoia, I have always relished being the party face.

When 3.5 came out, my gaming group of that time converted to 3.5 and I found two or three people who wanted to be the face and the charismatic one and they did not want me even being a backup face or an alternative face of any sort. They wanted to hold that end for a little bit and they said, rather nicely and not at all in a pointed way, that they would appreciate it if I didn't use Diplo/bluff/intimidate/innuendo etc... At this point, probably in my slight-inherent smugness, I pointed out that innuendo was no longer a skill in 3.5 and they glared at me and suggested I pick another class.

I agreed, a little annoyed at this point, and decided I'd go for a class that does not have to be the face.

I started 3.0 with a monk and decided to check up on the 3.5 monk. The 3.0 monk wasn't great but it wasn't bad either. But the 3.5 monk, whoo, he seemed worse than before. He had potential but he was also a one-trick pony. While face, I enjoyed the multitasking ability of the face who invariably was good at least one other set of abilities. But the monk was seriously a single tricker. Compared to other single trickers, he didn't compare.

So, I picked up my laptop and read that badly scanned 3.5 PDF. If I remember right, it didn't even have pictures.

I went through and weighed the classes and decided on the druid. Powerful, if necessary reclusive and charisma could easily be a dump stat. I remembered noting then that I would then be spending points in constitution even though the then pre-errata wild shape would let me have new hp totals each time I wild shaped into something with a different con score (usually higher).

I loved it. I didn't even look at augment summoning at that time. The group had just said no to using the 3.0 splat books and we decided on a core-only 3.5 game. I then learned how much the druid rocked. I mean, reading stat blocks and descriptions and knowing it rocks and playing a druid and experiencing that same rock-n-roll state of nirvana are two completely different matters. I learned though about two to three sessions into the game that I had to tone it down. We started level 1 and my wolf animal companion (I didn't know the efficiency of a riding dog at that point) dominated in battlefield control. I buffed a little bit and I didn't run out of spells with my ungodly venerable-age-induced wisdom. This just increased. The DM wasn't the best of DMs. His was the classic case of a monte-haller.

The other players were showing a few signs of malcontent so I focused on one role and I excelled at it. I would shift this role every once in a while. Whether it was being a summoner this moment or being a wild-shaped tank with my animal companion-tank the next or just buffing and battlefield control, I did it and, all humility aside, I did it very efficiently. Granted this could just be the ridiculous power of the druid. The others were okay with this. It was still more than what most of them could do but I wasn't showing off. I don't remember what happened to that game but it probably just fizzled off as most of my games in that gaming group usually did after a month or two. Granted we played all the time at that time.

Later on, I would find myself going back to playing party face or at least a damnably charismatic bastard in one way or another.

I was the n'er do well alcoholic card player in the western "Deadlands" who taunted monolingual Mexicans with a few words of Spanish. I played a binder in Sigil and I played a playboy ninja in "m&m" and recently played the jester in "F&K." I had a few wizards and a paladin or two here or there as well. Mostly the party face or similar.

But every so often I would go back to playing a druid. I liked the damage potential, the skill potential (nothing compared to other classes but still the druid doesn't have a bad list), the utility potential and at times I'd use items and feats to be a diplomancer of sorts.

It was good.

Then I quit gaming for almost a year. I got married, had a kid, got a full-time job, moved away from my gaming group of that time. I didn't have enough time to invest in both gaming and family. I made a choice. After that one year hiatus, I moved to a college town where my old gaming group had in essence shifted to.

I still couldn't play with them because of my odd hours at work. Finally I was able to join a game that virgileso was part of. It was a large game with 3 groups in one world with each dm handling about 4-6 people. I didn't know what kind of character to make so I opted to my easy default of a druid.
~

I decided on a summoner-druid with little use of wild shape. But my fellow players (virgileso aside) were the kind of players who found my use of strategy or my knowledge of game mechanics/rules annoying.

It boiled to a head about 3-4 sessions into the game when I had to leave on an emergency and virgileso played my character as well. One of the other players took this as the time to kill off virgileso's wizard (detailed elsewhere on this board) based on some shaky reference to him being chaotic and the wizard being lawful. Unable to handle the situation, my character fled the site. I came back in the next session and, probably in a very retarded fashion, killed him in the middle of the night with a few summoned griffons. The party fled and at the end of the session I talked the entire group into staying with an assurance that I could resurrect both the wizard and the recently-deceased barbarian.

The group had apparently been mulling over this sort of mutiny based on our (mine and virgileso's) ability to play the game in a fashion that involved some level of strategy in the use of battlefield control spells and this conflicted with the rest of the group's blindly charging into the middle of a swampy morass filled with Assassin vines and other crazy horrors.

I was annoyed but I decided to even cut back on my old tactic of playing a facet of the druid at a time and switching every few sessions or however else I'd plan that switch. I talked it over with the group and from their vague answers, I decided not to use any of my environment-changing spells and for a few games I was okay with this.

But then the annoyance started to set in. The druid summoner is no doubt one of the better summoners but I didn't just want to be able to do that. I wouldn't have minded the ability to wild shape and at least do a little damage but apparently this sort of versatility (not in one session but a versatility that basically melded into me playing a few different characters every few sessions, in essence) was also frowned upon. It was something that I had never encountered in a group before.

I toyed with the idea of dropping the druid and playing something else but in a party this size I would be stepping on a lot of toes if tried something. The only thing that I could possibly be was a rogue and I just didn't want to play a rogue.

I gritted and moaned and after a while it became a little better when those players were moved into a different group and I was moved into another group. I rejoiced a little bit and decided that I'd drop the summoning shtick for a little bit as that group lacked a pure-combat role, I decided to play a wild shaped front liner with an occasional buff here or there. This worked well. I recognized that I was still outperforming almost everyone else in several fields of combat. I kept myself purposefully rustic in my role playing and as the campaign was described as an EPIC campaign in its plot and material and its expansive range, I was pretty much not at all useful if we were in any social environment (mostly courts and such.) It was good. We were slowly reaching what our characters perceived as the end of our adventure. We were going to the island to fight the illithid cult and finally save the worlds as we knew them.

So, last session was that session. The now remaining two groups joined together as one massive group and we headed out.

To our characters, I had hoped that this was a major battle against a major foe. We had tried going to fight this battle sooner but our method of travel, a ship, was demolished by a Kraken they sent our way and in essence we ran to fight another day.

Virgileso's wizard had planar bound some powerful allies and I was hoping to take in some awakened trees with us. But the trees were too large for transport so I abandoned it and decided to focus on summons.

I assumed the rest of the party might have a level of preparedness that wasn't just donning their armor and heading out. Whether this might be buying some new equipment or deciding on tactics, it could have been something. But I assumed wrong.

We were now in an underground series of tubes/tunnels that lead to the illithid city. I pulled out the stops and summoned a few giant eagles to stop the strength draining mutated Ropers from getting to the players and in essence there were quite a few large minis on the mat controlled by three PCs -- two druids and the wizard with some of his creatures. One of the others, the barbarian, grumbled about how I was summoning too much even though this was my first summon and incidentally only summon for the session. Once again, I decided to stop summoning just for party unity and wild shaped and decided to cast a few spells with the chance to go into melee if needed. The rest of the night was pretty uneventful except for the grumblings tossed by the barbarian and maybe one other about how any sort of battlefield control or pulling out the stops was...something. I'm still not sure what the end point was.

In the end, I've started to hate playing a druid who I originally enjoyed for the flavor and the utility. But now even the flavor has started to disgust me.

There are three choices that I have.

One, leave the gaming group as they don't mesh well with my playing style.

Two, Grit my teeth and play a druid who doesn't do anything but one thing and that too in a deliberately poor fashion (to suit the others.)

Three, Toss Tamarask the druid into the played pile and make a new character.

The first choice isn't really doable as this has become my only source of social interaction these days aside from work and the family life. I don't have enough time to sink into alternate social interactions that are often more of a time-sink than a single 5-hour evening game a week.

The second choice is doable but I don't think I, as a player, would like to do it much based on multiple factors the least of which would not be my pride and ego and not to mention the fact that I don't like deliberately fail/lie to appease a party.

The third is both doable and not. If I do go this way, I would step on toes but as we are now a 12th level party and many of them have, in essence, spread their wings and diversified into different prcs and multiple classes; I could play a character without stepping on anyone's toes too much.
But, then, there is the factor that as a character, the druid wouldn't want to leave the game if he knew that the world is possibly not yet saved.
~

it is a murky situation because much of my argument is thrown to the dogs by the single fact that I do play the most powerful class in the normal d&d system and also a class that would probably be just as efficient if not a little more efficient than the rest of the Tome-verse classes. I feel like someone crying that others find his awesome toy to be too awesome and he is being forced into getting another toy. It is a rather odd situation that probably is more my fault than the other players. Maybe, I just don't know how to adapt myself to a purely hack-n-slash group that refuses to use strategy or see that there might be more than one way to do something. Maybe, I should become more constrained by their way of playing rather than expect them to at least accommodate a little towards my style.

But, in the end, I find myself not knowing what the optimal solution is and that is possibly, to my cocksure personality, one of the worst parts of this situation.


~~~

Edit: taking out some weird formatting errors and other things that got into the document mistakenly due to copy-pasting.
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
User avatar
virgil
King
Posts: 6339
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by virgil »

Yeah, I can vouch for the concerns he's been having. I've been 'safe' because I'm both socially oblivious at times and I chose from the beginning to focus on a tactic (wall-mancer) that the moron players can't even begin to try to mimic. Granted, I'm not actually that safe, because I was killed in my sleep by the barbarian because I was soo powerful; but I've learned my lesson and that situation won't happen again (pit fiend skeleton is a great bodyguard).

Unfortunately, when the druid and I both whip out battlefield control, they start grumbling because at that point they're unable to charge blindly without having to think.

A good chunk of the whole problem here is that we're trying to play the game with players that chose to play fighters (and are uninterested/unable to plan as casters) and hold serious grudges when they see what casters can do. And these aren't even very good fighters (that pit fiend skeleton can easily do twice the damage of either of them).

I personally think that so long as your replacement character doesn't step on the barbarian & bard's toes (and doesn't use minions), you wouldn't have much trouble because they're the ones that are causing the social unrest. Besides, I would hope we don't have to run alongside them now that we can split back up again.

In fact, now that I think about it, that's probably how I'm dealing with their bullcrap. I ignore their grumblings for the most part, refrain from going crazy with my potential, and keep myself tough enough that if they attempt to stab me in the middle of the night again they'll be crushed like bugs. I myself am not in the mood to deal with such a small ego that illusions & webs completely ruin their ability to enjoy the game, especially when I actively avoid dealing damage or using true SoDs.

It's that attitude, combined with their method of dealing with any disagreements, that makes me callous to any other complaints they might have (no matter the justification).

The real question is this: do any of the other players have issue with our power?
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
SphereOfFeetMan
Knight-Baron
Posts: 562
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by SphereOfFeetMan »

There may be no ideal solution, but I'll put my two cents in. I had a similar problem, though it was not as bad as you seem to have it. I have also played with people who did not play either to optimize their characters or their strategies.

A solution that worked for me was to deliberately gimp my character's combat potential for RP reasons, and that brought me down to their level. The important part of this is that you must still enjoy playing the character. If you can do it, part of the fun can be playing a heavily optimized character that chooses to operate under self-imposed restrictions that make you get along with the party power-wise.

The other part of your problem is that your specific tactics are pissing them off for some reason. This is a much more difficult problem, and is only solvable inasmuch as you can find a compromise with your fellow players.

In your case, I would either ask them how they want to play the game, or mix up my tactics and try different things. For example, I might give a summoned Giant Eagle to the party Barbarian/Bard to ride. You could even let them control/roll the dice for some of your summons. This could potentially make them both like your characters tactics a lot more, and make them feel dependant upon you (which I always like to do). This may or may not be fun for you.
There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity.
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
cthulhu
Duke
Posts: 2162
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by cthulhu »

I'm not sure you'll be able to change the core group dynamic of the power gamers vs everyone else, and I'd suggest finding another group (easier said than done I know).

But yeah the right plan is to mitigate the issue by not making it obvious. I'd suggest adding 'buffing' to your list of tricks, because that will make the retards feel better and let you contribute as you'd like.

SunTzuWarmaster
Knight-Baron
Posts: 948
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by SunTzuWarmaster »

Usually people aren't that pissed when you apply some of the team-tactics such as:
buffing (as mentioned above)
Summoning (as mentioned above, for mounts)
Summoning (for rogue flanking)
Summoning (for grappling, don't do any/much damage, just let the barb/rogue PA/SA it to dust)
Save or Disable (barbarians usually have little problem annihilating a blind/dazed foe)
Single-target the major monsters
Keep monsters busy (just provide decent enough targets until someone else can kill the monster)
Social Klutz - make an obvious social mistake and fail to RP out of it (have another character come to the rescue)
Take hits - Don't buff AC/Miss chance and allow another character to 'save' you (or not, then roleplay why they don't save you when you are in trouble and you have an excuse to leave the party ;) )

Let the barb use your animal companion as a mount, he can deflect attacks that head towards it, it can put him in good position for a full attack after a charge, and it can do a solid bite or two to complement his full attack (or grapple!).

Also, your character can leave the group and fight the good fight by himself only to be encountered by your new character later ;).
User avatar
Cynic
Prince
Posts: 2776
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by Cynic »

Hmm, having them controlling the summons is something that i can try. That'd work.

the rest, I do buff the parties but that is often just ignored. For example, if the barbarian is in the party, he often gets his physical stats bumped up. I've offered buffs to some of the others and they shrug it off at times.

The animal companion mount for the barbarian is useful except he's probably going to be be in another group and also that he seems to get serious about what others would consider inane/silly propositions. For example: he stubbornly refused to budge on wanting to tunnel under a hobgoblin camp to bring them down with his 1 rank (profession mining) & his tool -- the adamantine glaive. He only relented when one of the two DMs put his foot down and said that such an action would be a fade to black for his character and he might as well make another character.

I already play a social klutz to a degree but the campaign really isn't rp heavy enough but I can emphasize the rustic farmer background a lot more, I suppose.

Tactical summoning is an option that I'll look into as well.

For reasons to leave the party, I have a few. Since for all intents and purposes, the character thinks the world is saved , the character could just move on attributing the move to wanderlust now that the responsibility is off his shoulders.
Another reason would be that he's retiring. He's had his fun and he's got enough money to retire and start farming.

~

I'll figure out what I want to do probably sometime today.

But in the meantime, any suggestions for a character?

I'm leaning towards a single class bard or bard/bard-prc combo and work the inspire courage optimization. but I'd love to hear other suggestions.

Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
User avatar
CatharzGodfoot
King
Posts: 5668
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by CatharzGodfoot »

How about a rogue? If you already have a bard, a barbarian, and a wizard, maybe bard isn't the best choice. You'll be a non-caster which is apparently a plus. As a rogue you could even keep up the healing work if the DM lets you have some wands. Then you just do the classic TWFing with alchemist's fire and acid in combat.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France

Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.

-Josh Kablack

User avatar
Cynic
Prince
Posts: 2776
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by Cynic »

CatharzGodfoot at [unixtime wrote:1203294287[/unixtime]]How about a rogue? If you already have a bard, a barbarian, and a wizard, maybe bard isn't the best choice. You'll be a non-caster which is apparently a plus. As a rogue you could even keep up the healing work if the DM lets you have some wands. Then you just do the classic TWFing with alchemist's fire and acid in combat.


I suppose I should have clarified as to who the other PCs are before making such a request.

Originally gray elf - now half-elf (reincarnate) crafter wizard
Half-elf barbarian (also reincarnated can't remember into what)
Half-elf Bard
half-elf cleric with some weird 3rd party useless LA-2 template
Aasimar Paladin
human druid
human? Monk
TWF halfling Rogue
My druid/ex-druid
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
SunTzuWarmaster
Knight-Baron
Posts: 948
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by SunTzuWarmaster »

lol, that party needs the following roles filled:

Summoner
Battlefield Controller
Secondary melee
Cleric/dispatcher (Dismissal/Rebuker cleric style)

Needs a solid druid, heh. At any rate a decent ranged attacker is a very good move in this instant. Maybe a Zen Archery Cleric, Warmage, or Rapid Shot Ranger? They can't really object to those roles, can they?
User avatar
virgil
King
Posts: 6339
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by virgil »

Oh sure, marginalize my role. Battlefield control has been my schtick from the beginning as a wizard. I have a couple constructs and a skeleton that's flat-out better than our party barbarian in melee; if we actually need the effect of summons and secondary melee. I would like to keep him in the back as a bodyguard to make sure the other melee-ists get their licks in first.

But that's been part of the problem. The barbarian/bard get grumbly from me putting up walls to stop deadly chargers, and they're apparently smart enough to realize how much you're actually doing when you cast haste, which makes them disgruntled eventually.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
User avatar
Cynic
Prince
Posts: 2776
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by Cynic »

SunTzuWarmaster at [unixtime wrote:1203304176[/unixtime]]lol, that party needs the following roles filled:

Summoner
Battlefield Controller
Secondary melee
Cleric/dispatcher (Dismissal/Rebuker cleric style)

Needs a solid druid, heh. At any rate a decent ranged attacker is a very good move in this instant. Maybe a Zen Archery Cleric, Warmage, or Rapid Shot Ranger? They can't really object to those roles, can they?


Summoner -- already has two (one when I leave)

battlefield control -- again the other druid and also the wizard can handle the role well.

secondary melee is really not necessary in my opinion. I think it was just invented to occupy roles in large parties. casters can handle primary or secondary damage and in essence take care of that. hell if the caster become the primary damage dealers as usual, the melee fighters are often the secondary damage dealers and in practice become secondary melee, even if this isn't the original definition of the term.

yeah, we do need a good dismisser/rebuker as our party cleric probably wouldn't be able to handle this role efficiently. I am paranoid that any step I take towards this sort of role would be frowned down upon from the basis of the cleric. The more efficient way might be just steering her towards this role. Although the campaign doesn't seem as rebuke heavy.

The need for a solid druid is noted but as your "heh" suggested, it is obviously not a choice. :-P

I'll probably go for a ranged character or try to work it into a build that I've been thinking of. I'm sacrificing optimization, the usual sort anyway, and I think I'm going to see if i can optimize party makeup and see if i can at least slightly influence party actions while being subtle.
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
User avatar
Cynic
Prince
Posts: 2776
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by Cynic »

virgileso at [unixtime wrote:1203308990[/unixtime]]Oh sure, marginalize my role. Battlefield control has been my schtick from the beginning as a wizard. I have a couple constructs and a skeleton that's flat-out better than our party barbarian in melee; if we actually need the effect of summons and secondary melee. I would like to keep him in the back as a bodyguard to make sure the other melee-ists get their licks in first.

But that's been part of the problem. The barbarian/bard get grumbly from me putting up walls to stop deadly chargers, and they're apparently smart enough to realize how much you're actually doing when you cast haste, which makes them disgruntled eventually.


I've been thinking -- an ideal system for this set of players would be a very low-magic setting a la Cook&Mearls' "Iron Heroes." of course, this is also discouraging in that to pander to their way of play, you completely remove interesting tactics that might be viable to other players.

Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
SunTzuWarmaster
Knight-Baron
Posts: 948
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by SunTzuWarmaster »

Hey, I thought that the summoning was frowned on so the other druid didn't do it for some reason.

Also, the wizard was specified as a 'crafter wizard', so I thought that there should be some room in there for the standard wizard role.

I would recommend Beguiler to anyone, but I imagine this party has enough skill monkeys and facial people, and would furthermore frown on someone who cast Confusion every round.

My optimal party alignment is:

Enemies
Primary melee (paladin, barbarian, <maybe cleric> charge builds, anyone with Cleave or Power Attack)
--------
secondary damage dealers (Acid flask rogue, blaster, mounted Knight, Zen Archery cleric)
--------
Artillery, preferably airborne/invisible/unreachable (battlefield controllers, cleric, wizard, druid, beguiler, etc. Essentially anyone that can cast Grease, Sleetstorm, Wall spells, illusions, Grappling Tentacles, Glitterdust, Haste, Slow, Prayer, and all the other mass-effect battle-changing spells)

As a side note, many of the battlefield spells should deny an opponent their dex to AC so the secondary damage dealers can get a foothold.

The party seems light on the "secondary damage dealer" class, appears to need a solid "blow shit up" option, and can use a secondary "deny opponents dex to AC" strategy. For that, I suggest either a warmage or a straight rogue with a staff of:
Sculpted Grease, Scorching Ray, and Fireball.

For the warmage, strategy is simple and joyful (maybe take Arcane Thesis and some Easy Metamagic?), for the rogue, the strategy would be fairly simple:
Cast Grease to deny opponents their dex and prevent charging.
Cast Scorching Ray on any opponents denied their dex (sneak attack!)
Cast Fireball to finish anything up.

Sidenote: where does the healing for all of these people come in? The cleric is next to worthless...
User avatar
virgil
King
Posts: 6339
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by virgil »

For healing, we got our DM to allow me to make a magic item that casts cure light wounds at will (following the formula to, so only 1800gp).
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
User avatar
Cynic
Prince
Posts: 2776
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by Cynic »

SunTzuWarmaster at [unixtime wrote:1203348592[/unixtime]]Hey, I thought that the summoning was frowned on so the other druid didn't do it for some reason.

Also, the wizard was specified as a 'crafter wizard', so I thought that there should be some room in there for the standard wizard role.

I would recommend Beguiler to anyone, but I imagine this party has enough skill monkeys and facial people, and would furthermore frown on someone who cast Confusion every round.

My optimal party alignment is:

Enemies
Primary melee (paladin, barbarian, <maybe cleric> charge builds, anyone with Cleave or Power Attack)
--------
secondary damage dealers (Acid flask rogue, blaster, mounted Knight, Zen Archery cleric)
--------
Artillery, preferably airborne/invisible/unreachable (battlefield controllers, cleric, wizard, druid, beguiler, etc. Essentially anyone that can cast Grease, Sleetstorm, Wall spells, illusions, Grappling Tentacles, Glitterdust, Haste, Slow, Prayer, and all the other mass-effect battle-changing spells)

As a side note, many of the battlefield spells should deny an opponent their dex to AC so the secondary damage dealers can get a foothold.

The party seems light on the "secondary damage dealer" class, appears to need a solid "blow shit up" option, and can use a secondary "deny opponents dex to AC" strategy. For that, I suggest either a warmage or a straight rogue with a staff of:
Sculpted Grease, Scorching Ray, and Fireball.

For the warmage, strategy is simple and joyful (maybe take Arcane Thesis and some Easy Metamagic?), for the rogue, the strategy would be fairly simple:
Cast Grease to deny opponents their dex and prevent charging.
Cast Scorching Ray on any opponents denied their dex (sneak attack!)
Cast Fireball to finish anything up.

Sidenote: where does the healing for all of these people come in? The cleric is next to worthless...


Well: I went with a different character concept from the ones everyone suggested but it looks like it'll work just to keep the party's appeasement level up.

The build is an exalted bard1/Pal3/bard-X who focused on heavy inspire courage optimization. While not the best way to achieve a pseudo-gish/buffer result, it seemed simple enough that he probably shouldn't (here I set myself to fail with trust in my party ;-) ) enrage anyone. I've taken care of secondary damage with a large crossbow, strongarm bracers and Point-blank shot. It's not completely taken care of, but I doubt it'll really be needed that much.

Virgileso pulls of a good crafter/normal wizard pretty well so that's taken care of. I can take care of the deny dex role to a degree and I'll probably start doing that with the next session.

I played the character in last night's game and it went pretty well.

Had to control my impulses from killing the, now, CE barbarian upside the head. I had assumed that since we had no evil in the party, I could finagle most of exalted RP-ness. But apparently the dms had decided that based upon his recent/ongoing actions, he was chaotic Evil in both act and character-sheet legality. But, thankfully I just restrained myself rather than cause him to be killed.

as he is not goign to interact with my character every week, I will probably have to ignore him until he does something egregious (and the countdown has started)

We operate on the usual rule of healing is out of combat so a custom amulet of fast healing 1 for 10 rounds (unlimited use) has worked fine so far.
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
User avatar
Judging__Eagle
Prince
Posts: 4671
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by Judging__Eagle »

Me?

I'd say fuck them and make a barbarian. A character that works with the PCs b/c he wants to fight some of the most powerful challenges around and this group of adventurers does so in his opinion.

One way of introducing him would be for you to write the character up; then have the DM introduce him as an NPC that challenges your current character for his place in this adventuring party (the 'npc' wants to join, and to do so he'll prove that he's more than a match for one of the party members; if 'your' character kills the 'npc', then the 'npc' doesn't care if his body is looted).

Make him so fucking savage and vicious that the "grumblers" wet their fucking pants if your brute so much as looks at them with even partly lidded eyes. An extremely cynical barbarian of Erythnuul is an idea; he's killed for fun for so long that he's become philosophical about it.

The best way to 'mask' the fact that he's such a number and damage-whore would be to do the following:

Describe what he does, his actions, the way he looks at his opponent before turning them into a pile to gore and bone.

Eat part of your kills: Emphasize that your character loves to shed blood and glories and basks in killing. Do this sometimes in the middle of battle; it will make you less 'efficient', it will emphasize that your character doesn't give a shit about the people they are with.
Other things to do would be to take prisoners, to kill later so you can daub yourself in fresh war-paint and growl and threaten anyone who attacks your targets with your wrath for not getting their own kills.
Taking Attacks of Opportunity on other PCs as they move past you is also an option; just show how much your guy likes to kill, if you do hit, pull your punches and deal minimum damage or intentionally botch your attack rolls. You give your comrades much more leniancy when you swing at them or something of the sort is your excuse. Mostly since you want them to live and fight an other day.

Don't call out total numbers: Give the DM your bonuses on a small sheet of paper and give only call out your rolls; you don't want people knowing that you hit an average AC of say.... 50, when most people swing at AC 30.

Explain that your character is a 'filler' character that the DM is having you role-play; so you don't know mos of your actual stats (make 2 sheets, one with 'vauge' stats and one with actual stats; so while he may have 28 con on the 'real sheet, it says....tough as a "monster X").

Yes, basically, you're stamping all over an other player's toes. But you know what? FUCK. HIM. He's playing a casual shittily weak character with probably no roleplay potential or value. Here's your chance to make him look like he's wasted his role as the party barbarian.

The thing is that they might not notice that your guy can do until you've challenged Virigleso's Pit Fiend skeleton, "because I wanted to see if I could break it" and maybe even broken it (unfortunately this would force Virg to get a new one, but you don't need to kill the 2nd one, you've proven that you can kill one to begin with; maybe offer to help him get a 'new' skeleton).

There's always the Cleric 1/Pal 2/Fighter 2/Chamelon 10/Witchhunter 5 "Roland, Bear of the North" build.

It's rickoculously effective as a 'rogue'; but does combat against mages and gishes like it's nobodies business.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.

While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
User avatar
virgil
King
Posts: 6339
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by virgil »

Dude, *I* am tempted to do that build now, and I already have the barbarian & bard fully aware that I can crush them if I ever 'go crazy' and go on a rampage. It was as an 'effin close fight between the barbarian and I when he killed me the first time in my sleep.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
User avatar
Judging__Eagle
Prince
Posts: 4671
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by Judging__Eagle »

Sorry, yeah, I was getting some angry out.

I'd build the character as the Roland Bear of the North build, since it's awesome and very flexible.

Explain your spellcasting as "I am SOOO fucking pissed that I spray boiling hot blood out of my EYES!" (shoots fireballs) or "Fuck it, I shout at the top of my lungs and Warp-Spasm" (casts righteous might + divine power) or "I shout with such insane fury that my enemies DIE!" (cast _any_ SoD).

Plus, your group also gets a 'barbarian' who's full of "animal cunning" and can find any sort of piddling trap (rogue-form).

Of course, I'm a person who really like flexible characters with lots of solid options.

When I made a lvl 7 RoW 'fighter' I used a lvl of Dungenomicon monk to be able to deal con damage with my weapon attacks; grabbed silk-steel armour to be able to hide and move silently; and maxed my move silently and hide ranks.

Being a melee tank that actively can back-up the rogues on a 'scouting' mission and make sure that they're safe if shit goes down is very handy.

I maxed the character's int to get a +14 (+8 ranks, +7 int) in all of my Knowledge checks to be able to ID monsters in character.

Ah, heck, who am I kidding, out of character as well. I really don't read monster entries even though I DM the most in my group or really memorize them; that's what the book is for.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.

While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
User avatar
virgil
King
Posts: 6339
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by virgil »

Don't apologize too deeply, as I have even more angry in me at the whole situation. The events that resulted in A_Cynic ditching his druid in favour of this new character are just as frustrating to me, possibly even more so because I spend time with one of the DMs between games and I get to hear some of his opinions...

He considers the warlock to be grossly overpowered (at-will ranged touch sneak attack that ignores all DR?!). He considers psions to be grossly overpowered with more 'tricks' to break the game than any core caster. He considers proper evocation specialists to be grossly overpowered (proper combination of Arcane Thesis: Fireball, Metamagic School Focus: Evocation, and Empower/Maximize/Quicken to toss two in a round). He even considers the core wizard to be plain vanilla overpowered, but easily fixable by sticking to the core PHB and removing the small number of 'problem spells' (grease, glitterdust, solid fog, acid fog, web, gate, simulacrum, otto's irresistable dance, holy/unholy word) and 'appropriate' adjucation of borderline spells (read: stealth nerfs on planar binding/ally, silent/minor/major/etc image, and so on), and the removal of any and every meta-metamagic feat & reserve feat.

And he is truly dumbfounded by how challenged this one party is by the things he throws at them; the party being a barbarian, bard/fighter, cohort cleric (cleric with a crappy +2 LA template), and just now a generic rogue (sans acid flasks/alchemist's fire).

I wonder if there's even a one-word term for that kind of gamer, one who feels that only the fighter/barbarian/ranger/paladin are balanced (and the fighter is the cream of the crop), and anything better than that is overpowered and should be brought down to their level.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
User avatar
the_taken
Knight-Baron
Posts: 830
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Lost in the Sea of Awesome

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by the_taken »

virgileso at [unixtime wrote:1204068802[/unixtime]]I wonder if there's even a one-word term for that kind of gamer,


Special.
I had a signature here once but I've since lost it.

My current project: http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=56456
User avatar
angelfromanotherpin
Overlord
Posts: 9745
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by angelfromanotherpin »

Crab-bucket.

Okay, technically, that's two words.
User avatar
Judging__Eagle
Prince
Posts: 4671
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by Judging__Eagle »

....

A fucking retard that can't do math.

er...

Can't do math. They somehow think that 1 + 1 = 4 and that all of the PhB classes are balanced.

You should show how the ranger and rogue are balanced; while the fighter and monk aren't.

The lvl 10 PC vs CR 10 encounter's tests.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.

While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
User avatar
Maxus
Overlord
Posts: 7645
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by Maxus »

virgileso wrote:He even considers the core wizard to be plain vanilla overpowered, but easily fixable by sticking to the core PHB and removing the small number of 'problem spells' (grease, glitterdust, solid fog, acid fog, web, gate, simulacrum, otto's irresistable dance, holy/unholy word) and 'appropriate' adjucation of borderline spells (read: stealth nerfs on planar binding/ally, silent/minor/major/etc image, and so on),


So if someone tries an illusion on a group of NPCs, they all go, "HA! That puny illusion can't hurt me! Why you not use that spellcasting time to cast something good like Fireball at us? You are pathetic wizard!"?
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.

--The horror of Mario

Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
User avatar
virgil
King
Posts: 6339
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by virgil »

That's the short of it, yes.

In fact, he pulled something close to that when I used an illusion of exploding lights in their faces (all six of them) one time in an earlier session. I knew they would get a save initially, and while I was shooting for blindness, I told him I could understand possible balance concerns and said concealment worked fine too. He went ahead and chose the blindness option, and I discovered that apparently all but one of the monsters had tremorsense (five plant thingies, one ogre).

I found out, months after the fact, that he more-or-less ad-hocced the tremorsense onto those monsters specifically to counter the illusion.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
User avatar
Maxus
Overlord
Posts: 7645
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Tamarask -- or why I started worrying and stopped loving

Post by Maxus »

virgileso at [unixtime wrote:1204120623[/unixtime]]That's the short of it, yes.

In fact, he pulled something close to that when I used an illusion of exploding lights in their faces (all six of them) one time in an earlier session. I knew they would get a save initially, and while I was shooting for blindness, I told him I could understand possible balance concerns and said concealment worked fine too. He went ahead and chose the blindness option, and I discovered that apparently all but one of the monsters had tremorsense (five plant thingies, one ogre).

I found out, months after the fact, that he more-or-less ad-hocced the tremorsense onto those monsters specifically to counter the illusion.


::does the hand-waving, knee-slapping, head-shaking pantomime done to express that one cannot believe someone is so damn stupid::

Actually, that sounds a little like my old DM. I think I put up a thread about him when I first came here ("Worst. DMs. Ever." was the title, I think)

Except Mark refused to do melee, and always did some kind of caster when he had his own character. Usually a druid, wizard, or if he were running his frequent gestalt games, both at the same time.

But he would actively screw up characters to preserve the rails on which his story ran.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.

--The horror of Mario

Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Post Reply