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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 6098248" data-attributes="member: 6688937">Sorry, what sort of dramatic premise is implied by "stern, no-nonsense but dependable do-gooder"? Should I confront  him with frivolous clowns? Does that trump "I want to fight in dark tunnels" or "I like beard jokes" as signals I should pick up on? I'm really unsure what to glean from someone choosing to play a human fighter....the game should have... fights?<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused    :confused:"  data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" />  Even if a chaos sorcerer wants to go wild, does that mean he wants to be challenged on it? "I want to cast magic spells" doesn't really do much to narrow down the campaign for the wizard's DM. Even the 4e PHB recommends you choose races for such profound dramatic reasons as "you want to play a guy who looks like a dragon." "Paladin" is the one choice that I suspect may actually do some useful signalling...but I think "I want to pick a fight with the thief's player" is fairly common motivation as well. More practically, they may be choosing paladin to be the moral leader and take the moral high ground rather than face tests of faith.Now, that doesn't mean that you can't or shouldn't have such conversations and exchange that information. Its a good idea for everybody's entertainment if they happen, especially if the group is going off the standard D&D reservation. I just don't think the party roster is generally an effective place to discover all that. I have always found the thief to be an odd standout, because it seems like so much of the implied fluff for such a character is opposed to so much of what an adventuring life is about. Yet, they are vital to many old-school adventures. I think its interesting that by the time 4e rolled around, the "thief" concept had changed so much. I'm still not sure the game has figured out how they should fit in as a class.I'd prefer it, and think it would work better if it was a matter of player agency, so the motivations could be broader. That is, something that a player could invoke for almost any purpose. I would also think it needs a little more bite in the consequences. Maybe something like this:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A player may stake a claim for his character at any time. The claim must be framed as a clear "success/fail" task or condition: "The Duke will die by my hand." "They shall not leave the Castle alive." or "I will find the princess." A given character can only have one claim at a time. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A player may draw (some kind of plot points or tokens) from this claim (limit 5?). </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The tokens may be spent to:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">get advantage(?) on a d20 roll (save, attack, or check) </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">heal 2d6 hp </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">deal an additional 2d6 damage on an attack </li> </ul>  </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Success or Failure<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">If the character succeeds at the task or condition, then the claim is fulfilled, and the player is free to make another claim as they feel inclined. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">If the character fails at the task or condition, the character loses <some number> of HP from their maximum for each PP they spent on the claim. The player is free to make another claim as they feel inclined. </li> </ul>   </li> </ul></blockquote>

Verification