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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 1217002" data-attributes="member: 2205">It would sound like that if I said I wanted the things you seem to think I want.  Since I didn't say that, I don't see what the point of your post is.In addition, although the discussion has focused heavily on swashbuckling classes and the Unfettered in particular, I'm really talking more generically.  The fact of the matter is, I don't particularly like very many of the core classes at all for flavor reasons.  My point, which has been largely ignored due to squabbling about the details of a class many here obviously have not even read(yet have very strong opinions about, for some unfathomable reason) was that I prefer to work on a concept basis.  Quite often, my concepts do not match up to the 11 or so concepts that WotC says I should use.  I'm not a fan of using multiclassing to build a concept, as I think it leads to suboptimal as well as messy character builds, and it is a badly implemented workaround rather than a real solution.  It doesn't get the concepts I want the same way using a core class does; it approximates the concept without giving you exactly what the concept calls for while simultaneously giving you many things that may be useful but don't fit the concept at all.Apparently, a great deal more people than I expected are fine with the 11 or so concepts WotC gives them, and think the multiclassing method of building any other concept is suitable.  Feel free to continue playing that way, by all means, but I have a few big problems with it:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">What if I don't want to be spoonfed the standard D&D class archetypes?  Many of them are unique to D&D, and feel quite odd to me.  I don't really like the paladin, the ranger, the cleric, the wizard, the sorceror, the druid, the bard or the monk as they are formulated for flavor reasons.  That leaves me the barbarian, the fighter and the rogue unless I either play around with the classes quite a bit or use alternate classes from other print sources.  To be fair, I prefer the latter to the former, but there are many times when my concept isn't too far from a given class and very minor changes will make me happy with the class in regards to the character I want to play.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The mindset also seems to promote the rules over the roll-playing.  The reason I want to mod classes isn't to make them more powerful; in general I think I'm conservative with custom classes and they are probably slightly underpowered.  The reason to do it is to facilitate rollplaying.  If I want to play a woodsy huntsman/guerilla warrior type of guy, and neither two weapon fighting nor spellcasting make any sense with the concept, I don't want to be told to just use the ranger, it's close enough.  I want to nail the concept, not approximate it.  Since it's relatively easy to do with slight modifications (or again, alternate classes) I don't see why a DM wouldn't work with me on this one.  Certainly as a DM I would/do/have.</li> </ul></blockquote>

Verification