The "Build"

Thanee · Feb 26, 2007

Goldmoon said:
Has anyone else noticed a severe lack of character personality and an almost complete reliance on "builds" as a substitute for role-playing?

No, not at all. "Builds" enhance role-playing, since they give you the mechanics to allow you to do what your concept is meant to be able to.

Few things are more annoying than characters that are role-played as this or that and cannot even remotely do these things.

Bye
Thanee

Drowbane · Feb 26, 2007

Thanee said:
No, not at all. "Builds" enhance role-playing, since they give you the mechanics to allow you to do what your concept is meant to be able to.

Few things are more annoying than characters that are role-played as this or that and cannot even remotely do these things.

Bye
Thanee

QFT

For me, the Build is simply part of the character creation process. Personality happens at the table with interaction.

Engilbrand · Feb 26, 2007

I was going to be in a new game. 1st level. The DM sent us background information on it all. I've only recently started getting into truly roleplaying. I looked at it all and came up with the idea of a roguish guy who infiltrates thief and spellcaster guilds and takes them out. First, I made a Rogue. Then, I made a Spellthief. Then, I made a Lurk. After looking at all of the abilities and the way that things worked in his world, I decided on the Lurk. I realized that I was going to be missing some necessary skills to adequately do what I wanted to do, so I went through and found the feat that I needed.
The recent that people hit the boards looking for build help is because they don't know where everything is to make something viable. If your Fighter has a Charisma of 8 and no ranks in Diplomacy, he's not going to be doing any Diplomacizing (you like that?). The build doesn't work with the concept. That's why the questions constantly pop up for a build. People aren't sure of what to use to make themselves decent at what they do. The best? No. But worthwhile. City Slicker and Urban Tracking aren't exactly power feats, but they're what I needed to take to make my concept work.

Cam Banks · Feb 26, 2007

What I find bizarre is the people who plot the whole character out from 1st through 20th levels and then expect to play that out.

I haven't had a single campaign of D&D in which the players have followed such a pre-determined recipe, even if they came up with it to start off. I like the organic approach, which while not always "optimized" at least feels as if the character exists within the game setting and not as some pre-programmed entity hanging out with the other player characters.

Cheers,
Cam

el-remmen · Feb 26, 2007

Well, I for one usually come up with my character concept first, and then choose the class, feats, skills, etc. .. that go along with that (even if they don't necessarily work together) - sometimes in making these choices the original concept ends up being tweaked by those choices - and that is fine, too. . .

But yeah, generally, I cringe when I hear the term "build" - luckily no one in my group of players uses that terminology.

Agamemnon · Feb 26, 2007

Corinth said:
Build, as with gear, trumps role-playing because what you do is more important than who you are. We're playing an adventure game, and adventure is all about what you do with the situation you're in- who you are decidedly secondary in priority.

I intensely disagree. In a story, who the characters are is always the main point. Without it, you end up with bland, featureless puppets doing everything, i.e. the D&D equivalent of a Chuck Norris movie.

Fifth Element · Feb 26, 2007

The term "build" does make me cringe, but I see most "builds" as a way of executing a character concept in the game mechanics, as has been pointed out already in the thread. If you want your character to be a great archer, it's nice to be able to actually have your character be great at archery, relative to other characters.

Goldmoon · Feb 26, 2007

Engilbrand said:
If your Fighter has a Charisma of 8 and no ranks in Diplomacy, he's not going to be doing any Diplomacizing (you like that?).

God, I have a bad mental image of Richard Simmons in Plate mail shouting "C'mon everybody.....Diplomacize!"

hexgrid · Feb 26, 2007

Robin's Laws of Good Game Mastering said:
The Power Gamer wants to make his character bigger, tougher, buffer, and richer. However success is defined by the rules system you're using, this player wants more of it. He tends to see his PC as an abstraction, as a collection of super powers optimized for the acquisition of still more super powers. He pays close attention to the rules, with a special eye to finding quirks and breakpoints he can exploit to get large benefits at comparatively low costs. He wants you to put the "game" back in the term "roleplaying game", and to give him good opportunities to add shiny new abilities to his character sheet.

This style of play is just as valid as any other.

Goldmoon · Feb 27, 2007

Good points so far. I never thought about the fact that people may just not need help with role-playing concepts on a messageboard.

The "Build"

Thanee

First Post

Drowbane

First Post

Engilbrand

First Post

Cam Banks

Adventurer

el-remmen

Moderator Emeritus

Agamemnon

First Post

Fifth Element

Legend

Goldmoon

First Post

hexgrid

Explorer

Goldmoon

First Post

Similar Threads