D&D 5E When making decisions for your character in 5E, which is your top priority? RP or G?

[schneeland]

In D&D5 (and other trad/neo-trad games), I start with a role concept and a few rough ideas of what the character is capable of, then look at the mechanics and maybe iterate once or twice until I arrive at the version that enters play. I don't need the most optimized character, but I like it when they are mechanically competent in the areas that align with the concept, so I will consider relevant gameplay factors for that.
So w.r.t. to the poll, RP takes the lead, but G is not completely.

In DCC and other OSR games, I just roll my stats and see what I end up with. And I'm generally also open to play pre-gens.

 

[Gimby]

One way of looking at this that erases the distinction is whether we are playing a character that is fully defined or whether we are playing and discovering facts about the characters - in a way we are always playing our characters "correctly" - the actions they take are what defines them, their character and their ongoing story - how could it be otherwise?

So by taking the mechanically optimal action, we may instead discover that the character is different to the way that we originally envisioned them. Perhaps they are more opportunistic, or more craven, or maybe braver than we originally thought. After all, when do we tend to invoke mechanics? When there is uncertainty about an outcome - typically in some form of stressful situation or where emotions would be running high. When do we discover things about a personality? Those exact situations.

So in this case there's no difference between an "mechanically optimal" and "character driven" action - we discover what the character would do by them acting. All that's important for characters is that they recognise these differences and that the players are willing to deal with the fallout of it.

 

[Ixal]

Which is why you don't need to do that anymore, I imagine.

Actually that is now the default as WotC works hard to ensure that you can always optimize numbers and expects you to do that.

 

[Burnside]

Roleplaying first, but as loads of people have already pointed out, it's not really an either/or.

I like to roleplay characters that are very active socially, and I can sometimes get frustrated if I'm playing a character who is mechanically bad at social skills. So I tend to gravitate towards characters that mechanically support being gregarious. Fortunately for me, 5E has mechanically diverse charisma-driven characters than can fill almost any "role" in a party. In Tasha's, they even introduced a ranger subclass that has good social skills, Fey Wanderer.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Can we pick 'P' for Playing, as in 'I'm trying to have fun, not take part in high drama, or cold mechanical analysis?

I want R and G to play nice. I want the mechanics to support my roleplay and I in turn won't try to roleplay to break the mechanics. And all that is in service of having a good time even if that means I need to bend character or rules at time to make that happen.

 

[Malmuria]

In my experience with new players, class and race thematization seems to guide the way that people conceive of their characters. Actually, I'd argue this is what 5e does best. In other words, if you just presented mechanics without thematization (e.g. "rage," "divine smite," "sneak attack," etc), players might have trouble deriving a character concept from them. So the thematization does the heavy lifting.

Wait...didn't we already talk about this?

D&D General - Styles of Roleplaying and Characters

I recently came across a video from Matt Colville and wanted to talk about it. It's a longer D&D video at 45 minutes, but it's mostly worth the watch. I'll summarize the relevant points for those who want the TL;DR. It's important to note that Colville isn't judging or putting people down for...

www.enworld.org

 

[jgsugden]

99% of the time this isn't an issue. There is usually no conflict between the two, but here are areas where mechanicals are less important than RP:

1.) When we enter negotiations, we have the PC that is most at center in the issue doing the talking. Someone more experienced may grant them advantage by assisting, but the 8 Charisma PC will usually be the one negotiating with their grandfather, not the charismatic sorcerer from distant lands.

2.) I don't worry if there are mechanics for something my PC wants to do - I worry if it makes sense. If my PC is on the roof of a five story building and wants to get to the ground quickly and there is a pole that runs all the way down to the ground, I tell the DM I intend to slide down the pole. Then the DM can tell me the DC and check I need to make to do it correctly.

3.) When my PC is suffering from fear, I worry about the mechanics and the RP. My character isn't trying to figure out how they can circle around the beast without coming closer and still get at another enemy to melee attack - they're afraid and trying to put distance between them and the monster.

4.) I've gotten very good at ignoring player knowledge in order to focus on PC knowledge only. This means I often move into range where area of effect stuff will nail me, or I waste an attack on a creature that is immune to my chosen attack method. I've lost PCs - cringing because my lack of character knowledge is absolutely dooming them - and considered it a fun way for the PC to have died.