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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7947509" data-attributes="member: 29398">I was using combat as an example, and could just as well have used "being the party face", or "best Wizard on the block", or whatever.In that game I had three significant characters (along with far too many one-hit wonders!).  The first was in fact intended to be the party fighting machine; that went out the window real fast when a) 3e's garbage multiclass rules reared up and bit me (I wanted him to have a tiny bit of Wizard to him for character reasons) and b) when the min-maxed party Cleric started putting me to shame at about 2nd level.The second was intended to be a spinny fluffy attempt to make a 1e Illusionist in 3e; by sheer luck she worked out the best as I blundered into 3e's strong prefernce for hyper-specialization.  She wasn't nearly as effective as many, and had the worst stats in the party (we rolled them all), but boy was she fun to play!The third was a deliberate attempt to build another of my favourite concepts from 1e: a "heavy" warrior Con-based Ranger.  Again the 3e system, which had leaned into the Drizz't style light Dex-based Ranger, fought me tooth and nail; and he ended up being thoroughly sub-optimal.  Later branching into Cleric didn't help matters any.Funny story: when I left that game I was replaced by a player who was a serious hardcore min-maxer; and as the party was in mid-adventure with no way for his PC to come in he was (with my OK) given my Ranger to play until that adventure was done and the characters could swap out.  His reaction on reading through the character sheet, I'm told, was priceless; involving many "wtf?!"s and "what was he thinking?!"s; but on talking to me later and realizing what I'd been trying to do, even he grudgingly admitted I'd done the best I could with it.</blockquote>

Verification