Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Oryan77" data-source="post: 5374766" data-attributes="member: 18701">I mean, if Billy made a good Human Ranger with a bow, and in the next campaign he made a good Elf Ranger with a spear, and then the next time he makes a good Drow Ranger with swords, I don't think any other players are going to notice a distinct difference in the way the player roleplays any of these characters. Maybe he'll come up with some kind of personality quirk or something, but from my experience playing with people, they don't do a whole lot to distinguish their characters from one another. I'm not saying players aren't good at distinguishing characters via roleplaying, but my observations of the type of player that would make a "clone" character is not the type of player that is very creative when it comes to roleplaying. They may even usually be more of the hack-n-slash type.So, nobody is going to see this players roleplaying and think, "This PC is caring, helpful, brave, etc etc just like Drizzt is. He's portraying him exactly like Drizzt." No, I'm saying that people don't accuse a PC of being a Drizzt clone unless he is simply a good aligned Drow Ranger with 2 swords. And I don't believe the good alignment sums up all of Drizzt's traits. Like I said, I can totally make a good aligned Drow 2 weapon fighter and roleplay him nothing like Drizzt. Yet I'd be accused of making a Drizzt clone & people would toss around the term "emo".My whole point (which has probably been lost by now) is that it doesn't matter what kind of character build you make for a PC. Everyone rips off some kind of well established character; which is why I wrote up 10 played out character types to use as examples. But people only seem to ever be critical about the PC when it's a good Drow with 2 weapons. Drizzt always gets a bad wrap. He does many Ranger-like things in his books. He's constantly tracking, moving silently, hiding. He has an animal companion. He spent years living on his own in both the Underdark and on the surface. I'm not sure why you wouldn't think he's a ranger.Like I said, the alignment doesn't define a players roleplaying. My womanizing gambling drunken good aligned Drow example is nothing like Drizzt. But because he's good & Drow he's a clone? I'll say it again, people don't care about the roleplaying. They'll call a PC a clone regardless of how you intend to roleplay the character.I hope my first post with the 10 examples isn't being taken the wrong way. I wrote that purely to point out how people are being hypocritical when they complain about a Drizzt clone when there are many other "played out" character types that people play more often than a good Drow. For me, I honestly don't care what type of a PC someone plays as long as it isn't annoying.I just think it's an old tired complaint when I hear someone whining about Drizzt. I really don't understand why people even care. All I get from that complaint is that the person is trying to feel superior to others and let us know that you're so insanely creative that you know why Drizzt is lame & that only a dimwit would like the character. It comes off as being as obnoxious as the guy that doesn't own a TV and has to remind me every freaking day that he doesn't know anything about the shows we're talking about cause he 'doesn't own a TV' (yeah I get it, you don't watch TV so you're automatically an intellectual & smarter than the rest of us).I agree.See, I'm on your side. Which is why I didn't need to argue about my 10 examples. I wasn't making those examples to show that they are bad (although I expressed my dislike for a couple). I just tried to point out how we all make cliche characters but it's always the "Drizzt clone" that gets all the slack. So I didn't need to hear why my examples aren't cliche from someone that is doing nothing but taking offense to the build as if I'm trashing it. It just seemed like people wanted to tell me I'm wrong 10 times for the sake of telling some they are wrong. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" />You started this sentence off by saying Frank(ly) and then mentioned the entire family being killed by mobsters. Were you subconsciously thinking about Frank Castle (aka the Punisher)? <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" />See, that's what I'm taking offense to. I was actually just being sarcastic about me being less intelligent. I can't stand to hear people criticize any sort of fantasy novel as if it's a bad thing that I read it as an adult. It's not like Salvatore is writing Nancy Drew books. Just because the authors you guys like to read are thought of as more intellectual writers doesn't mean you're in any way more adult or more sophisticated for reading them. It really comes off as being pompous when I hear people belittle a Salvatore book as if it's a childrens book & nothing more. I'm in no way a stupid person. But most of the books you guys are proud of reading are completely boring to me. I can't stand reading that kind of stuff. The over use of a big vocabulary & insanely long descriptions of mundane crap is unnecessary to me when I'm reading a fantasy story. I don't need to stroke my ego and disregard a good story by reading something written by a more obscure or less popular author. I'm not that full of myself.And BTW, I'm 33 years old and just finishing up the last few chapters of the Thousand Orcs book by Salvatore. My gaming friend is going to loan me the next couple books once I finish with this. If me reading these kind of books puts me on the same level as a teenage intelligence, then what's that say about you guys playing D&D? After all, it's a game marketed to teenagers. See? In the big scheme of things, dogging on something like a Salvatore book is pretty pointless. It's an entertaining read, nothing more, nothing less.</blockquote>

Verification