Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 6963316" data-attributes="member: 29398">As you've interpreted my words, anyway.&nbsp; Maybe I need to be clearer...&nbsp;&nbsp; Which seems to reverse your earlier position where you complain that non-optimized characters (your term was &quot;gimps&quot;, I think) just get other characters killed and thus are not fun at all.Again, the mirror view: an optimizer who then complains about having one or more non-optimized charaters (gimps) in the party.You're right.&nbsp; It's not.&nbsp; I don't consider discussing character roles before puck drop a &quot;dirty power gamer trick&quot; at all; but I do find it sometimes leads to people playing a role they might not have wanted to play, just because it needs filling.&nbsp; Personally, my preference is to have players roll up their characters independently; and if a role really needs filling once the game begins they can always go find an NPC adventurer for it.&nbsp; And here your bias shows up, as your &quot;random loser&quot; might be someone else's gleefully accepted roleplaying challenge.&nbsp; Abilities aside, personality is (almost) completely independent of any dice rolls...one can play a haughty noble's daughter or a down-on-his-luck mercenary soldier in character no matter what their mechanical abilities (or even class or race, for that matter) might be; as mechanics aren't necessary for that and sometimes even get in the way.IMO an optimizer/power gamer is someone who focuses more on the numbers (and what advantages may be gained from them) than the personality.&nbsp; Me, I'd rather focus on the personality; and I don't at all mind saying I'd prefer others at the table mostly do likewise.&nbsp; Is that so bad?That said, I think you and I playing at the same table could be...interesting. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Lan-&quot;as you've left these sign-offs to me I'd better not disappoint&quot;-efan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 6963316, member: 29398"] As you've interpreted my words, anyway. Maybe I need to be clearer... Which seems to reverse your earlier position where you complain that non-optimized characters (your term was "gimps", I think) just get other characters killed and thus are not fun at all. Again, the mirror view: an optimizer who then complains about having one or more non-optimized charaters (gimps) in the party. You're right. It's not. I don't consider discussing character roles before puck drop a "dirty power gamer trick" at all; but I do find it sometimes leads to people playing a role they might not have wanted to play, just because it needs filling. Personally, my preference is to have players roll up their characters independently; and if a role really needs filling once the game begins they can always go find an NPC adventurer for it. And here your bias shows up, as your "random loser" might be someone else's gleefully accepted roleplaying challenge. Abilities aside, personality is (almost) completely independent of any dice rolls...one can play a haughty noble's daughter or a down-on-his-luck mercenary soldier in character no matter what their mechanical abilities (or even class or race, for that matter) might be; as mechanics aren't necessary for that and sometimes even get in the way. IMO an optimizer/power gamer is someone who focuses more on the numbers (and what advantages may be gained from them) than the personality. Me, I'd rather focus on the personality; and I don't at all mind saying I'd prefer others at the table mostly do likewise. Is that so bad? That said, I think you and I playing at the same table could be...interesting. :) Lan-"as you've left these sign-offs to me I'd better not disappoint"-efan [/QUOTE]

Verification