Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5838075" data-attributes="member: 54877">That would be ok if you have to work to break it and get to those worst-case scenarios, while normal people are just picking what sounds good and knowing that it will be roughly ok. But when you have to work hard, to avoid the risk of accidently breaking it, it is royally screwed up. And saying that, "the DM can deal with all your royally screwed up characters if he really wants to," isn't an answer either.  My players can work hard to have such characters. I can work hard to deal with them so they don't need to do that. Thing is, all of us want to play. That others find some of this necessary work sufficiently fruitful or outright entertaining in its own right, is great. I'm happy for them.  We had a player that had a 3E bard for awhile (at launch, well prior to the 3.5 cleanup on aisle 12). She liked the concept just fine, thank you, and wasn't interested in optimizing. Keeping the character worth a flip wasn't worth the hassle it took to keep it that way, for her or me.  Shocking, I know, to certain viewpoints that choose to just fudge out the inconsistencies and pretend the system works as advertised.</blockquote>