Optimizers, oh my!

[Loonook]

I'd go so far as to avoid the first thing and stick with the second, the group being any number of them where it's an option

I actually am a soldier. But here's the thing, even if most soldiers know where their war is, do they all? Okay, the character who traveled the world and didn't pick up anything useful is realistic after all.

Also, I'm sorry if I insulted you at all. That was not my intention. As I said above, I was half curious what people would answer with, hence the misleading wording. I guess that makes me kind of a jerk, but sometimes I get curious how people react to things.

Uhhuh. So you intentionally used inflammatory language to cause an effect?

I kind of figured that after looking through your post history. IF you actually wish to discuss a topic, using that sort of language doesn't really run very well here. It's been a year, so be cognizant of the fact that you're not helping to improve discourse.

Though I think I'm going to bow out on your topics sir. Have a good time here at Enworld.

Slainte,

-Loonook.

 

[delericho]

So?

Imagine you had a broken arm, and a small child kept poking you in the arm asking if it still hurt.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Designing a character that is so poorly balanced against the game's mechanics that the DM has to put effort into making him not die is silly, unless you want to play someone who's going to die. It's not an insult, it's an accurate descriptor.

Just because a character is not optimized for combat does not mean it is "poorly balanced against the games's mechanics."

As for DM's efforts, well, I've never asked for special treatment, so that is on them. Like I said, my PC design is between the DM and me, so he knows what he's getting ahead of time.

Besides, keeping PCs alive isnt the DM's job, its the players'. Optimized or not, PC survival is a self-correcting issue. When my 1/2Orc Ranger tried to to break a door down, and the party's thief successfully unlocked & opened it just as his shoulder hit it, the "2" on the diceroll as he tried to catch the guard rope to avoid falling into the chasm beyond was the end of his story.

 

[CroBob]

Uhhuh. So you intentionally used inflammatory language to cause an effect?

No, it was not intentionally inflammatory. It was to see how people would answer the question if I worded it that way. it being offensive, and my feeling bad after I realized it, was not on my mind at the time of posting, and I apologize for it to anyone it may have offended.

I kind of figured that after looking through your post history. IF you actually wish to discuss a topic, using that sort of language doesn't really run very well here. It's been a year, so be cognizant of the fact that you're not helping to improve discourse.

Wait... what? My post history? What else was inflammatory or anything? What kind of language?

 

[Oryan77]

I've seen an equal share of good/bad optimizing roleplayers and good/bad roleplaying/optimizers. None has really ever been more dominant than the other.

What's really bad is the roleplayer that always hogs the spotlight out of combat, who is also an optimizer that always hogs the spotlight during combat.

 

[CroBob]

Just because a character is not optimized for combat does not mean it is "poorly balanced against the games's mechanics."

I didn't say anything about combat. You can die outside of combat.

As for DM's efforts, well, I've never asked for special treatment, so that is on them. Like I said, my PC design is between the DM and me, so he knows what he's getting ahead of time.

I agree, but this point still stands. If you create a PC who is so atrociously anti-optimized that he's at serious risk of dying when the risk of dying is moderate at best for the other characters, then that thing I just said.

Besides, keeping PCs alive isnt the DM's job, its the players'. Optimized or not, PC survival is a self-correcting issue. When my 1/2Orc Ranger tried to to break a door down, and the party's thief successfully unlocked & opened it just as his shoulder hit it, the "2" on the diceroll as he tried to catch the guard rope to avoid falling into the chasm beyond was the end of his story.

I never said it was the DM's job. Are you arguing against the things I'm saying or just arguing to argue? The point itself is primarily hypothetical, but theoretically possible. Like, say, a Rogue with a 6 Dex who keeps getting injured in attempting to pick trapped locks, but he keeps failing because his Dex is so low, and then failing his reflex saves and not evading, too. That's a silly character, even if his personality is rich, because he's a rogue doing rogue things, but without the stats a rogue should have to do their job effectively.

If you made the character to be a hard hitter and took the rogue levels for the sneak attack and he has a high strength, then that's optimizing for hard hitting, and he should probably not worry about those rogue jobs, but that's not the character in the hypothetical.

 

[Bluenose]

(Emphasis mine.)

OTOH, language like this is also unhelpful & needlessly inflammatory.

When I design a PC, I strive to model his essence as best the mechanics allow me to match the concept in my head: what you see as "horribly ineffective" may be exactly what I was aiming for, and thus, 100% optimized at modeling the concept, such as a mute arcanist.

Do the other players like pulling your weight as well as their own?

That's where I draw the line as a GM, if the other players make it clear to me or you that they don't appreciate playing with your character concept, then you change it. Or leave the group. It's that simple. So no cowardly fighters who have to be chased down and given a good talking to before every fight, because you are not the centre of attention. No pacifist priests who are only on an adventure because there's a particular quest your religion needs you to fulfil, because this game is not about your character's quest. Play something the rest of the group can tolerate, or don't play.

 

[delericho]

I'm sorry, that's my fault. I specified your quote, but was asking a generalized question about it. I should have chosen my words better.

Oh, I should have said in my other post: apology accepted. And thanks.

 

[CroBob]

Do the other players like pulling your weight as well as their own?

That's where I draw the line as a GM, if the other players make it clear to me or you that they don't appreciate playing with your character concept, then you change it. Or leave the group. It's that simple. So no cowardly fighters who have to be chased down and given a good talking to before every fight, because you are not the centre of attention. No pacifist priests who are only on an adventure because there's a particular quest your religion needs you to fulfil, because this game is not about your character's quest. Play something the rest of the group can tolerate, or don't play.

I actually wouldn't mind those, assuming they aren't the extremes I'm sure you intend to imply. A cowardly fighter would be fun, if their cowardice didn't prevent him from taking part in fights, but was, perhaps, specific to situations, and maybe caused him to simply avoid a kind of enemy, rather than not fighting at all.

The cleric could also be fun, so long as he wasn't a preachy SOB who told other people to do what he wants all the time.

 

[Loonook]

Do the other players like pulling your weight as well as their own?

That's where I draw the line as a GM, if the other players make it clear to me or you that they don't appreciate playing with your character concept, then you change it. Or leave the group. It's that simple. So no cowardly fighters who have to be chased down and given a good talking to before every fight, because you are not the centre of attention. No pacifist priests who are only on an adventure because there's a particular quest your religion needs you to fulfil, because this game is not about your character's quest. Play something the rest of the group can tolerate, or don't play.

Lots of cowardly fighters out there? I've seen one done, well, and that's about it. A Paladin taking him under his wing, giving him some guts, and getting him moving. Just basic character development.

And the Pacifist Priest? Between healing, blessings, and protection, and other means a cleric does have the ability to just not need to actually battle... And could again provide for a great type.

If those two characters can't go, and you don't want them? That's fine... People leave your game. But burning too many of the slightly offbeat character types will give you the DM karma that brings about a Cavalcade of Mary Sues.

No one wants that.

Slainte,

-Loonook.