Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8384017" data-attributes="member: 7032025">Neither do I...And this is where you are 100% absolutely wrong, especially with D&D, most collaborative game ever if played in the right way. I've already said here that for me, as a DM, my fun is when my PLAYERS are having fun. And when I'm a player, it's when the other players are having fun, and I go out of my way to make this happen.But honestly, with the kind of view that you express, I'm not surprised of the rant below.And my point of view is that it is, with good proof and long experience. When I build a character, I first check what the DM expects of the game in terms of story, relationships, background, what type of characters the others want to play. But when you want to play "your build", it's forcing it down the throat of everyone else at the table, just for the pride of having "the build". And to be effective at the table, technically, more than the others.And again, I don't disagree with that. And I don't write huge backstories, I'm more a fan of having simple elements and really using what's happening at the table to rebound and retroactively create story elements that I know will fit with what's happening with the game.Of course I do, and in that kind of case I'm very careful not to step on their toes or to show them how powerful my build is.Yes, it's possible. Have you ever done that for pure story reasons ? Please answer honestly. And show me the character.Only it's not what is happening. Actually, you know what, when I'm a player I don't even know the archetype of my fellow players, and sometimes I don't even know their class.You have not been reading what I've written. I'm not saying that powergamers do not roleplay, they are usually clever people and nothing prevents then from enjoying other aspects of the game. But their characters are not created for story reason or to explore race/class combinations. They are created to be powerful, which restricts them to a few acceptable combinations.Pray tell, let us know about the characters that you have played, I'm interested.Because, to come back to the subject of this thread, anyone telling me that he NEEDS floating ASIs to explore new race/class combinations is not out there to explore them in terms of role, sorry.You are the one making this binary here, my friend, not I.It's interesting that I, at least, have quotes from the designers that prove their intent when designing the game when you have NOTHING from them mentioning powergaming, crating builds, etc. as the intent of the game. I've asked this question 10 pages ago, and still nothing.Maybe because none are needed ? Because for people who read the books in the light of these introductions it's enough to imagine the characters that they want to play ?Actually they do, but just as the social part of the game, few rules (if any) are needed.And again, you are so focussed on proving me wrong that you are not even reading what I say. I've said from the start that I know all that, and that I accept all ways of playing as good as long as the table is having fun.At the same time, like everyone, I'm entitled to exactly the same respect for the way we play, which is by the way exactly the same way I played in the states, in the UK, in Australia and in Singapore, with many different people of many different origins.And the only thing I'm telling you here is that the most annoying players that I've encountered are powergamers who, not only content with promoting competition at tables, also sneer down at people who are obviously not as clever as they are for having "inferior" characters.And that, to limit the impact of technical gaming, there are some options that we do not allow, and in particular Floating ASIs, which are absolutely not needed to play the game as designed and explore all race/class combinations. That's all.You have not read all my posts. I've been a hardcore powergamer, and I've been a hardcore roleplayer. What this has taught me is that I was much more of a jerk when trying to "win" a game which is by definition not winnable (just read the introduction of the PH).No, they are not, but their interest in technical options is:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Preventing them from enjoying other aspects of the game</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Preventing them from exploring many parts of the game because they are deemed inferior.</li> </ul>If you think that I have said this, then prove it. I'll be waiting.Forcing is never good. just enjoy the game the way you like to play it, unless it's to help someone else at the table or be nice to them.I'm not doing any such thing, but honestly stop putting words in my mouth, you are the one being extremely binary here.</blockquote>

Verification