Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Reprisal" data-source="post: 773178" data-attributes="member: 1161">Of course, it's not like these same players choose their races out of a need for diversity... It seems that stat-minded people will choose a race to head off a weakness inherent in the stats, or exploit what is already a strength. &quot;Why play a high elven wizard with an intelligence of seventeen when I can play a grey elven wizard?&quot; (Even though playing a high elf in this case makes more &quot;sense&quot; in a campaign sense.)Doing this too often will garner the reputation of having a &quot;weird character schtick.&quot; You may embrace it ideally, but I've seen many a fellow player roll his/her eyes whenever that sort of player brings in his minotaur paladin or bugbear bard... I guess what it is that I'm really against is a sense of extreme change from character to character -- cross-sectionally and longitudinally. By using extreme, I mean disruptively extreme changes that could do damage to the campaign. I dunno, I suppose I've had the campaign boat rocked by some players far too often to really support oddness over character. &quot;Oddness as a crutch,&quot; so to speak...Still, humans are still the way to go -- for me, at least. I don't have to define my character as one that's consciously against the stereotype because, by and large, there is no human stereotype. Diversity is a trait of humanity, it seems that the other races are specializations in the economy of existence.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Reprisal, post: 773178, member: 1161"] Of course, it's not like these same players choose their races out of a need for diversity... It seems that stat-minded people will choose a race to head off a weakness inherent in the stats, or exploit what is already a strength. "Why play a high elven wizard with an intelligence of seventeen when I can play a grey elven wizard?" (Even though playing a high elf in this case makes more "sense" in a campaign sense.) Doing this too often will garner the reputation of having a "weird character schtick." You may embrace it ideally, but I've seen many a fellow player roll his/her eyes whenever that sort of player brings in his minotaur paladin or bugbear bard... I guess what it is that I'm really against is a sense of [i]extreme[/i] change from character to character -- cross-sectionally and longitudinally. By using extreme, I mean disruptively extreme changes that could do damage to the campaign. I dunno, I suppose I've had the campaign boat rocked by some players far too often to really support oddness over character. "Oddness as a crutch," so to speak... Still, humans are still the way to go -- for me, at least. I don't have to define my character as one that's consciously against the stereotype because, by and large, there is no human stereotype. Diversity is a trait of humanity, it seems that the other races are specializations in the economy of existence. [/QUOTE]

Verification