Would you rather... (Game Style)

[Dannyalcatraz]

Again, no preference; both sound cool to me.

 

[Dandu]

Would you rather play a Good vs. Evil setting? (Paladins out smiting everything in sight)

Will there be villains twirling mustaches and tying princesses to railroad tracks?

 

[Axel]

The two options presented are a false dichotomy. I think the game works best when there is a continuum and flow from one end to the other. And, rather than a "good" DM I think the system works best when you have "mature" players who don't just jump at silly things.

The onus really should be on the player to justify why (and how) his character learnt to steal the power of the Gods, to take a level of Ur-Priest. Personally, I get annoyed and have difficulty suspending my disbelief when people choose feats or take class levels that don't really fit with the character or campaign, simply to increase the power level of their character relative to the rest of the party.

That's not to say that feat and class choices need to be discussed up front (it is your character after all). A bit if thought for the other characters (and players - including the DM) in the group is all I ask. To take the pirate campaign above for example - creating a character that wears light (or no) armour, fights one handed, has ranks in Profession (sailor/carpenter/sail maker), Knowledge (navigation) etc "fits" better (in my mind) than someone building a Knight that wears full plate, waves a long sword and has a heavy metal shield. If you do choose to build a Knight, there had better be a good character story or I'll probably blurt out "wtf?!" when you introduce yourself.

 

[Jhaelen]

Would you rather play a Good vs. Evil setting? (Paladins out smiting everything in sight)

OR

Would you rather play a very dark 'grey' setting? (Mystery, evil never shows its face, or when it does its not very...how does one say...evil?)


AND

would you rather brave a ghoul infested city as a 1st level

OR

would you rather charge head first into a regiment of fire giants at 8th level?

Neither to both. I prefer 'light-grey' settings, dislike ghouls and would never charge giants.

 

[Summer-Knight925]

Will there be villains twirling mustaches and tying princesses to railroad tracks?

are there any other kind?

 

[Ogrehatescomputers]

I would choose good vs evil. Because of the aforementioned mustache twirling villains.

 

[GoldDragon]

Off-the-cuff I'd say my preference is #1 but, as was mentioned earlier, a good DM can make either option viable.

 

[Alexander123]

I definitely like having freedom to create my character. Generally I don't bother to have RP reasons for why a specific feat, class etc. etc. fits with my character concept since the two are separate from each other although as a DM I may require some sort of explanation for certain thing such as where the player found a UR-priest to learn from.

I like playing a game where my character has long-term goals, (such as wealth and power.) although how my character reaches to that goal is a different thing, whether through a long-term adventure with recurring villains (as long as it doesn't become a railroad) or through dungeon-crawling and mission-hopping. Of course, it is up to the DM to create a world with which the players can interact and immerse themselves into.

I do agree that alot depends on the ability of the DM. Also, it's important to discuss with the players to see what type of campaign they would like to be in and what their goals for their character is. If you can figure out what type of campaign/adventure the players want to be in it can definitely help make the game run much more smoothly and be fun for everyone.

 

[kitcik]

Neither.

I would rather play "a dungeon-crawling, mission-hopping campaign" with multiple "specific foc with reacurring plot themes and where characters" have at least some "character build freedom."

The problem with #1 is the "no plot" limitation. The problem with #2 is that players shouldn't have to be forced to play specific characters - it's not really role-playing if they are.
Of course, I pretty much design my worlds around my PCs so ...

That about says it all. Even when the original poster said he did not want to present option #1 negatively, he said there would be "no connection between the modules." Why not? A good DM can create recurring plot themes without plot hammering the characters.

Also, option 2 sounded pretty good, until we found out that it meant you were totally character hammered. Someone HAS to play the quartermaster? Why? If you have someone who wants to be the captain, someone a stowaway, someone a sailor / gunner, someone the ship's mage (I could go on but you get the idea), why can't the quartermaster be an NPC?

It's like saying "would you like a peanut butter and jelly sandwich with stale bread served on a dirty plate or be force fed grilled cheese until you puke?"

 

[Lord Ipplepop]

I would rather play a campaign where I can develop my character story, regardless of what class he might be.
If I were to be in the basically free-form where I am able to role play my way through it, and develop the character, and not just the numbers, I am all there...
If I am in the second type and I am basically just rolling numbers... not interested.