Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Shaman" data-source="post: 2790820" data-attributes="member: 26473">Absolutely - it's incumbent on the GM to give the players some idea of what the world is like before character generation begins, if for no other reason than to give the players an opportunity to tie their characters' backgrounds into the game-world. However, that may include the example I presented above: mountain peaks and dark caverns, cloud castles and ocean deeps, and so on and so on - in other words, if you create a character optimized for fighting in heavy armor and you encounter a situation where heavy armor isn't optimal, save your griping 'cause I aint interested in hearing it. The life of an adventurer is supposed to be hard - not impossible, not always stacked against you, but genuinely difficult much of the time. That's why you get paid the big, big bucks.Optimizing a character to do one thing really well, and then expecting most everything you encounter to play to that strength, is boring as <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> to me, and in the games I run, it will get you killed or maimed, or sometimes leave you whining on the shore while everyone else goes after the fortune and glory.Remember, it's not my plan: it's the players. I present the situation, and leave it to them to figure out how to handle it. When a player creates a character that is gimped by being overly specialized or because of some 'charming personality quirk' that in fact steals the thunder of the rest of the party, that's disruptive IMHO - it means the rest of the party is left holding the bag because the knight in shining armor is too much of a pantywaist to get on a <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />ing boat, or because a player decided on some eccentricity that brings the game to a screeching halt.Not some - all of it is on the players to adapt to the circumstances with which their characters are faced, rather than expect the world to serve up encounters tailored to their abilities.In my humble opinion.Is that 'unfun?' Maybe for some players. They're welcome to look for a different GM - my experience tells me their seat at the table won't grow cold.And how exactly would you interpret something like, "If I am a full plate kind of warrior, I am not goign to accept a job sailing the seven seas hunting down pirates, I will step aside for the faster more lightly amred adventurers, or ask for a crap load of cash to re-buy my gear that more appropriate," or "I dont tihnk so, so if I am on the wrong job, I quit it, and get a character more suitable to the task," or "Many poeple can design adpative characters, but a lot of us do put a focus somewhere, you have the choice of being Jack of all trades, master of none, or having a viable use in a party," or my favorite so far, "And as for min maxing, what are you expecting in D&D?"Seems pretty explicit to me. What am I missing here?While I don't necessarily agree that a rogue is "useless" in that circumstance, I agree with what you're saying - in fact, I agreed without several hours ago, too.The GM should let the players know in advance what the game-world is like. Got it. You've achieved buy-in. Let's move on.I agree that characters should be effective in order to pull their share of the party's load - again, no disagreement.What I take exception to is the repeated suggestion that if a...hrrrmmm...let's call it a "series of adventures" to make sure that there's no confusion regarding terminology...if a series of adventures includes elements for which a character is not 100% optimized, or is gimped by poor roleplaying choices, then the player should be able to (1) bring in another character or (2) bow out of the adventure because, "S/he wouldn't do that."To me, in my experience with players like this over the years (a mercifully small number, thank goodness), this is just selfish behavior that disrupts play while everyone caters to this one player's idea of not only how his character should be played, but how the rest of the party should choose what adventures to pursue and how the game-world is supposed to work.That is, again, disruptive, IMHO.Go back and reread the sentence I highlighted.This "roleplaying angle" can bring the entire game to an abrupt stop. In the course of exploring the tomb of a long-dead king, the characters find a map leading to a shipwreck off a tropical island - the map alludes the fabulous wealth in the ship's hold. After leaving the tomb, the rest of the characters decide to hire a ship and head for the island.And at that point, you say, "No, my character won't do that."Your "roleplaying angle" in this case becomes an obstacle to the other players and the gamemaster. It's a selfish choice, IMHO.It's one thing to say, "My character doesn't like water, will avoid it if he can, and will complain about it quite a bit if he can't" - it's another thing entirely if you use this aspect of the character's personality to bring the game to a crashing halt.What I read in your posts, over and over again, is not minmaxing to create an effective character, but rather minmaxing to play a character that is good in one dimension and refuses to participate in an adventure in that doesn't cater to that strength.Please forgive my trimming the excess from your quotes above.I hope by now I've made clear that what I'm talking about has nothing to do with playing to class strengths, but rather gimping the party and being a royal pain in the ass to the GM.</blockquote>

Verification