Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 6936680" data-attributes="member: 6785785">@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=42582" target="_blank">pemerton</a> I'm not going to quote your post because yikes. But let me address each area a bit. Rufus was an example of a suboptimal build, no? That's what I took it to be. Is there any character that would absolutely suck at everything? I suppose. Must we address such an extreme? Or do we talk about what probably actually happens...someone makes a high INT or CHA Fighter and someone else in the group gets annoyed at the "suboptimal build". My suggestions were designed to address that. As for Burning Wheel, I am not at all familiar with it. It sounds interesting, and I'm glad you seem to enjoy it (and perhaps work there? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />)  but the problem you're describing isn't an issue for my group, so I'll stick with D&D. In the Fellowship example with Sam and Frodo...I feel you are downplaying Sam's role, and also mixing up the analogy. You say the players won't need Sam's encouragement....of course not. But Frodo and other characters may. Perhaps Frodo gets advantage in corruption saves when in Sam's presence? And let's also not forget the "help" action, which is available to all characters. Regarding Gygax and the "addition" of character, I think we are pretty much in agreement. I say that added that element quickly because the game started off as a simulation like the war games. But yes, the individual aspect, and also enjoyment of fantasy literature, made that element quickly become an important part of the game. Semantics of "quickly" versus "immediately" seems like splitting hairs...I think we agree on this overall.  My comment about the tactical minis game is because there are indeed some folks who prefer to play that way. To them, Arnak the Angry is the fighter and he gets in front and keeps the other party members from harm and that's his role and that's how they win. I believe I was responding to @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=54380" target="_blank">shoak1</a> who has made his preferred style of play known and that is it. He and his group don't really worry about character and their motives beyond killing monsters and taking loot and maybe occasionally saving a pronceaa or what have you. I was commenting that any approach o play is valid, and usually isn't a problem at all as long as everyone at the table is on the same page. For the last bit, I think you misinterpreted my assumption about game mechanics. And sure there are other games, but we're talking about D&D. But now I'm thinking you just wanted to sneak in another plug for Burning Wheel.....<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

Verification