Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Delta" data-source="post: 4062996" data-attributes="member: 40269">You know, I find this particular notion to be curious, novel, and disagreeable. As an old-time gamer (I guess), I'm used to coming to a ruleset, reading it, seeing what tools can be put together for a character or gameplay experience. I'm used to filling in the character's abilities first, and letting that tell me what his location, history, name, personality should be after that. (For example, see any PHB steplist for creating a character.)Yeah, I've absolutely had frustrating road blocks with a few GM's over this issue in recent years. &quot;GM: Tell me what kind of character you want -- Me: Well, tell me what options I have -- GM: Whatever concept you want, I'll make up rules to fit your idea -- Me: ???&quot; Not the kind of game I want, but obviously it's out there in parts of the community.Usually I find that I wind up &quot;roleplaying&quot; more than other folks at the table, but I refuse to write big advance backstories like other people want. To me, the roleplaying stuff in my head (the PC's desires, actions, where he chooses to go and who he interacts with) are certainly separate and disconnected from the mechanical rules. But who the character is comes out of the rule options first; the personality comes secondarily as a reaction to his place and abilities in the world.So at any rate, the idea of an RPG character that is fundamentally unrelated and transcends the gaming system itself is not something I can philosophically agree with. Like a bunch of other stuff around 4E. For whatever that's worth.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Delta, post: 4062996, member: 40269"] You know, I find this particular notion to be curious, novel, and disagreeable. As an old-time gamer (I guess), I'm used to coming to a ruleset, reading it, seeing what tools can be put together for a character or gameplay experience. I'm used to filling in the character's abilities first, and letting that tell me what his location, history, name, personality should be after that. (For example, see any PHB steplist for creating a character.) Yeah, I've absolutely had frustrating road blocks with a few GM's over this issue in recent years. "GM: Tell me what kind of character you want -- Me: Well, tell me what options I have -- GM: Whatever concept you want, I'll make up rules to fit your idea -- Me: ???" Not the kind of game I want, but obviously it's out there in parts of the community. Usually I find that I wind up "roleplaying" more than other folks at the table, but I refuse to write big advance backstories like other people want. To me, the roleplaying stuff in my head (the PC's desires, actions, where he chooses to go and who he interacts with) are certainly separate and disconnected from the mechanical rules. But who the character [i]is[/i] comes out of the rule options first; the personality comes secondarily as a reaction to his place and abilities in the world. So at any rate, the idea of an RPG character that is fundamentally unrelated and transcends the gaming system itself is not something I can philosophically agree with. Like a bunch of other stuff around 4E. For whatever that's worth. [/QUOTE]

Verification