What is your favourite character type, (prof, class etc) And why?

[Dannyalcatraz]

From a roleplaying view, how does Knight and rogue go together? Knights, at least in my system are honourable, where as rogue like types are not?

Knowledge is knowledge; skills are skills.

There’s a guy out there right now known as The LockPicking Lawyer. He does videos:

 

[dbm]

I prefer playing flexible characters. I don’t need to be the best at anything as long as I can contribute meaningfully. And by creating a character who is second best at many things it means you can participate in any encounter the party find themselves in. One trick ponies / specialists can find they have zero options in some kinds of encounters and I strongly dislike being in that position.

In D&D that often means playing a wizard or, most likely, a bard. Currently I am playing a Druid who is pretty strong on everything except social encounters.

In games which aren’t class based it is usually easier to make a rounded character, and these are the kinds of systems I normally gravitate towards.

 

[1QD]

It doesn't really, thematically speaking. Rules-wise, however, it's 100% fine. As I recall, he started off as a Fighter, dipped a few levels of Rogue, then became a Rune Knight. Also, read up on actual, historical, knights (many of them were right bastards, not the shining paradigms of righteousness that fiction portrays them as).

The character in question was originally created as a one-off character for a special event (a "one night" Strahd thing at a local mini-convention) and then made some sporadic appearances in AL, too, so he didn't exactly have a long, detailed, history.

Finally, how you play may not be how my friends and I play. Yadda, yadda.

Fair point. The system in which I play focuses mostly on the fantasy version of knights, though I do have one named, Godmere, Knight of questionable morals.

 

[1QD]

I prefer playing flexible characters. I don’t need to be the best at anything as long as I can contribute meaningfully. And by creating a character who is second best at many things it means you can participate in any encounter the party find themselves in. One trick ponies / specialists can find they have zero options in some kinds of encounters and I strongly dislike being in that position.

In D&D that often means playing a wizard or, most likely, a bard. Currently I am playing a Druid who is pretty strong on everything except social encounters.

In games which aren’t class based it is usually easier to make a rounded character, and these are the kinds of systems I normally gravitate towards.

You would love the mystic, thieving magic, chi and weapon arts and even runes. Their access is low however. They come with a wide variety of skills as well. The system I use has a wide skill base, and prof based so you can have both. That said, story wise I can see the path your character took to evolve to that point. I will also agree with you about historically accurate knights not exactly being the best of ppl.

 

[overgeeked]

Fantasy where you’re stuck with limited archetypes: death knight, necromancer, druid, shaman, artificer, and swordmage.

Fantasy where you’re not limited like that: golem, changeling, and mimic.

Investigative games: washed-up PI, reporter, or librarian.

Pulp games: two-fisted pilot.

Superhero games: brick, archer, or stretchy guy.