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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7452899" data-attributes="member: 996">Perfection is, of course impossible.  You can take that as meaning there's no point in trying so just let everything be awful, or that there's always room for improvement so never stop trying to make things better.  Perfect shouldn't be the enemy of good enough, but neither should good enough be the enemy of better.  In other words, you don't give a flying fiendish dire fig* for balance.  <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=";)" />  Which is fine.  But there's nothing forced or immersion-breaking or concept-limiting about alterntive choices among character options being mechanically blanced:  if you do find yourself dealing with the horror of a remotely balanced RPG, but still want an inferior character, just don't use all your build resources:  take a lesser array or use fewer build points, stay at 3rd level while everyone else levels to 8, play a standard-issue kobold out of the MM, roll d12s to hit, whatever it takes...  As long as everyone's OK with it, and the DM adjusts accordingly, you're playing what you want and everyone knows what they're getting into.But, sometimes, IM(jaded)X, the 'weird build for RP reasons in spite of it being, like totally sub-optimal' character is really a wolf in sheep's clothing...*(Now D&D needs a Fiendish Dire Fig... should be about CR 3, I'd guess...  ... they're summoned inadvertently when conjuration textbooks abreviate 'figure' when captioning an illustration of a conjuring circle and leave out the dot...  ...save the rest for the Ecology of ______ article.)</blockquote>

Verification