Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ccs" data-source="post: 7588237" data-attributes="member: 6803664">With one exception I'll go every wich way, including random, when making a character.Sometimes it'll be concept 1st,  (This is how my warlock got translated into PF as a Summoner - Here's what I want to do, how can I realize that in PF???  I am quite pleased with the result<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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Sometimes it'll be mechanics based,  (honestly this is how my 5e warlock began.  I wanted to give this new not-EB mandatory version of the class a try) Sometimes it'll be story based,  (This is how my barbarian began)In some cases it's a mix of all three & it's hard to define which was primary.Sometimes inspiration will begin with a mini/art/etc.And sometimes I'll just roll Race/Class randomly.... (for ex: Gorgira, the {fire breating} green dragonborn ancients paladin I rolled up this evening.  The DM doesn't care if the color/breath effect match) Over the years I've also found that I tend to alternate between caster/non-caster (or mostly non-caster).  Ex; Tonights paladin replaced a wizard.The exception?  Gap filler.  I am the wrong person to look to for that.  I don't care if the party has some gaping deficiency.  In my xp that'll just be another factor in the story.  Hopefully an interesting one.  My not at all subtle thought on this is: "If you're so damned worried about us not having ____?  Then YOU should play it.  Oh, wait, you rolled up your character however you pleased, didn't pick that - but yet you expect me to limit my choice?  *&^% that."I also do not expect you to limit your choice based upon what I've made.     Now it might just happen that whichever way I'm going yields a character that also manages to fill a gap, but it's not intentional.</blockquote>

Verification