Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="GMMichael" data-source="post: 6260751" data-attributes="member: 6685730">A metagame note: I see D&amp;D classes as having, among others, the function of providing power balance between characters by dictating what features your character can and cannot have.&nbsp; So, for example, a min-maxer can't take all attack bonus and then add several attack bonus-boosting spells to his character.&nbsp; Well,1) Is it so wrong if I want my character to be good at only one thing (attacking)?2) Do I need an invisible hand to guide me away from making an unbalanced/useless character?3) Shouldn't the GM be taking responsibility for these things?This does say a lot.&nbsp; Why are your players so attached to classes?&nbsp; Is it years of training, or something deeper?I was going off this line from the website:&quot;Your type gives a basis for what your stats will be, and what you’re&nbsp;&nbsp; initially trained in and good at. Your type also helps determine your&nbsp;&nbsp; background and starting equipment. &quot;&quot;Basis,&quot; &quot;initially,&quot; and &quot;background&quot; suggested that the types&nbsp; are&nbsp; just there to get you started.&nbsp; Not hang on your back for your&nbsp;&nbsp; adventuring career.&nbsp; Please tell me if I'm wrong.I need you guys to hash this out, and get back to me.You don't see any square wheels rolling around, do you?I'm afraid you're right here.&nbsp; D&amp;D is just stuck with classes.&nbsp; But are we stuck with D&amp;D?Let's not do any stamping.&nbsp; Let's provide the options.&nbsp; Specifically,&nbsp; let's say, &quot;hey gamers!&nbsp; You can stop worrying about how to optimize&nbsp; your fighter/wizard!&nbsp; Now, you can just optimize your character!&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GMMichael, post: 6260751, member: 6685730"] A metagame note: I see D&D classes as having, among others, the function of providing power balance between characters by dictating what features your character can and cannot have. So, for example, a min-maxer can't take all attack bonus and then add several attack bonus-boosting spells to his character. Well, 1) Is it so wrong if I want my character to be good at only one thing (attacking)? 2) Do I need an invisible hand to guide me away from making an unbalanced/useless character? 3) Shouldn't the GM be taking responsibility for these things? This does say a lot. Why are your players so attached to classes? Is it years of training, or something deeper? I was going off this line from the website: "Your type gives a basis for what your stats will be, and what you’re initially trained in and good at. Your type also helps determine your background and starting equipment. " "Basis," "initially," and "background" suggested that the types are just there to get you started. Not hang on your back for your adventuring career. Please tell me if I'm wrong. I need you guys to hash this out, and get back to me. You don't see any square wheels rolling around, do you? I'm afraid you're right here. D&D is just stuck with classes. But are we stuck with D&D? Let's not do any stamping. Let's provide the options. Specifically, let's say, "hey gamers! You can stop worrying about how to optimize your fighter/wizard! Now, you can just optimize [I]your character[/I]!" [/QUOTE]

Verification