Building a character is like designing a magic deck...

[takasi]

My answer is campaign dependent.

If the campaign involves a large number of difficult combat encounters, allows for a moderate to high amount of out of character tactical discussion, has a leniant death penalty (thus term use of a character) or assumes the use of a large range of sourcebooks then yes it's like a 'build' and yes I love it.

If the campaign involves a great deal of roleplaying encounters, discourages any out of character tactical discussions, has a very harsh death penalty (thus the need for quick character generation) or restricts character creation to core or near core then no it's not like a 'build' and yes I love it.

 

[Schmoe]

You need a 5th option:

"5 - It can be like building a Magic deck if you want it to be, but it's not necessary."

 

[werk]

I voted that it is and I hate it, which isn't really true.

I think that it is more and more like building a magic deck, especially with scoundrel and BoNS...or rather, it's always been like building a deck, but it wasn't such a chore until so many expansions were released.

Back when MtG was only unlimited, it was really easy, and building decks wasn't a chore and it really depended greatly on the luck of the draw and simple strategy. Now I think it suffers for 'rich-kid-syndrome' that is, the more you buy, the more powerful your builds are. DMs can limit this, obviously.

I think this is really only a problem when you have passive aggressive rules haters playing dwarf fighters with toughness for every feat combined with rules savvy cheesers...but hasn't that always been a problem?

 

[airwalkrr]

Excellent thread!

A class-based system and a CCG are anathema to each other IMO, but unfortunately, I have seen D&D become more and more like MTG over the years.

 

[SteelDraco]

I don't think it's the same thing. Primarily, the difference is in the cooperative vs competitive nature of the two games - there's just a fundamental difference in the way they're approached.

Of note - I stopped playing Magic years ago, around the Urza's block. Some of what I have to say might be biased by that; I quit playing because Magic at that time felt like two people trying their hardest to play Solitaire.

If you're building a competitive deck, you're going to either planning for all kinds of contingencies, or (more likely) building so much on one plan that you hope to get it off and finish the game with a minimum of interference from the other player. If you're heading to tourneys, you'll keep an eye on the metagame, figure out what your competition is likely to be playing, and figure out a way to stop them. Keeping on the cutting edge requires quite a bit of research on the competition and play trends. If you don't prepare, and know what to expect, you're going to get squashed most of the time.

With D&D, the whole experience is different. For one thing, you're part of a team, not just a single player. It's all right if you don't cover all your bases by yourself - you've got friends who can do that for you, as long as everybody has a job to do. You figure that out as you're making characters, and that starts to set up the dynamic of the group.

Competition is much less important in D&D, too. In most games (and all the ones I'd want to play in, honestly), it's not about the DM vs the Players. That's a short, uninteresting fight, if that's what the DM decides to do. It's about the DM setting up challenges, and then everybody having fun taking them apart together. Most of the time, the metagame prep you'd do for a big tourney in Magic - figuring out what decks you're going to compete with, that kind of thing - is done in a discussion with the DM about what kind of game it's going to be. You might find out it's an undead-heavy game, and so somebody should play an undead killer.

As far as a multitude of options, sure. There are an infinite number of decks, all with varying levels of power, just as there are an infinite number of character combinations. Playing a Magic deck with some style and a theme was always more fun for me than playing one just designed to grind my opponents into the ground, but I've always suspected that was my non-competitve, RP-ing nature coming out.

 

[Technik4]

First, I can see how you can draw a comparison.

But second, I disagree that the game is meant to be played that way. If you begin play at 1st level, it is silly to think you know what your character will take at 12th level for his feat. First, you may not live to 12th level. Second, your character may change or be influenced by the campaign. Third, thats a long way off!

I realize that not all games begin at 1st level, but building a 1st-3rd level character is NOT the same or even all that similar to designing a Magic deck. If you are designing higher-level characters for specific dungeons/modules/challenges then I see how the analogy works, but personally don't like it.

It's not a bad thing to have some ideas for your character's future, but I'm not down with planning a whole future of numbers for a role.

 

[Crothian]

No, it isn't like magic nor do I see it getting closer to that. But my emphasis on the game has never been the stuff that one builds a magic deck from.

 

[prosfilaes]

But second, I disagree that the game is meant to be played that way. If you begin play at 1st level, it is silly to think you know what your character will take at 12th level for his feat. First, you may not live to 12th level. Second, your character may change or be influenced by the campaign. Third, thats a long way off!

The problem is, to get into a prestige class at 10th level, you often have to take the right feat at 4th level. If you wait until 8th level to decide what prestige class to join, you won't be able to join many prestige classes without waiting another five or six levels.

 

[prosfilaes]

In that sense, there are similarities to be sure, but the same can be said of any time you have to make choices. Whether it's building a CCG deck (not just Magic), building a DDM warband, building an RPG character for any system, or even outfitting a single custom mech in battletech.

I think you're missing my point then. If I build a character in GURPS, there's a lot fewer clearly game-mechanically suboptimal choices to be made, and what dependencies there are tend to be obvious and self-evident. If I build a character in AD&D 1e, I roll the dice, pick a race and a class, and buy my equipment. In no other system that I'm familiar with do you have so many options that are so intricately linked that you have to have so much comprehension of the rules not to build a painfully suboptimal character.

Building an optimal CCG deck or DDM warband is part of a competitive game. I think that building a character for a cooperative roleplaying game shouldn't require such detailed complex hard-to-master system.

 

[takasi]

If you begin play at 1st level, it is silly to think you know what your character will take at 12th level for his feat. First, you may not live to 12th level. Second, your character may change or be influenced by the campaign. Third, thats a long way off!

Even without taking PrCs into consideration, IME players will try to plan for their characters all the way up to 20th level.

As I mentioned before though, it's entirely campaign dependent.