Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Greg Benage" data-source="post: 6633715" data-attributes="member: 93631">Why does there have to be one right answer? I like the concentration mechanics. A lot. Others don't. So house rule it. If you're stuck in organized play and don't have other options, play a character that doesn't rely on concentration spells.On the subject of &quot;melee characters&quot; and flying creatures, it's my preference, but I cringe when I hear something like &quot;melee character.&quot; I try to optimize my characters, but I try to optimize the cool stuff they can do in the campaign. That means I won't be the best at one thing, but I'll be able to contribute in a fun way in most or all of the situations that come up in play.Even in 5e, where specialization is somewhat limited compared to other editions (or a certain amount of versatility is baked in), you can build a character who is so specialized he won't be fun for a certain kind of player in many situations. Likewise, you can create a character that really isn't good at anything. So don't create characters like that! And the DM should help you with it. It seems that most DMs are willing to help guide players away from the &quot;not good at anything&quot; mistakes; the DM should also point it out if there are likely to be lots of flying monsters.&quot;You seem really optimized for melee combat. That's cool, but give some thought to how you'd contribute to a fight against a harpy or a wyvern.&quot;There seems to be an awful lot of solutions here.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Greg Benage, post: 6633715, member: 93631"] Why does there have to be one right answer? I like the concentration mechanics. A lot. Others don't. So house rule it. If you're stuck in organized play and don't have other options, play a character that doesn't rely on concentration spells. On the subject of "melee characters" and flying creatures, it's my preference, but I cringe when I hear something like "melee character." I try to optimize my characters, but I try to optimize the cool stuff they can do in the campaign. That means I won't be the best at one thing, but I'll be able to contribute in a fun way in most or all of the situations that come up in play. Even in 5e, where specialization is somewhat limited compared to other editions (or a certain amount of versatility is baked in), you [I]can[/I] build a character who is so specialized he won't be fun for a certain kind of player in many situations. Likewise, you can create a character that really isn't good at [I]anything[/I]. So don't create characters like that! And the DM should help you with it. It seems that most DMs are willing to help guide players away from the "not good at anything" mistakes; the DM should also point it out if there are likely to be lots of flying monsters. "You seem really optimized for melee combat. That's cool, but give some thought to how you'd contribute to a fight against a harpy or a wyvern." There seems to be an awful lot of solutions here. [/QUOTE]

Verification