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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="StGabe" data-source="post: 3371508" data-attributes="member: 49275">At this point I'm wondering if you're even reading what I'm writing because I clearly laid out this character concept: he was a character whose family had been haunted by and aided by cat spirits for some time.  The result was not only a familiar but a number of "cattish" spell-casting abilities such as feather fall and expeditious retreat.  He mixed rogue with sorceror for the first 4 levels and then switched to full rogue.  Overall he was probably the best roleplayed character in the group and slightly below the average power level of the group.It was a great use of 3e's multiclassing and something that your system doesn't allow for.  This is the sort of roleplaying and character expression you can get if you let the system work.First of all, that's fine, and you seem to be doing exactly what I'm suggesting: talking with your players about their class choices.Secondly, the character didn't "have it all".  Like I said, he was slightly below average powerwise in the group.He traded:2 levels of sneak attack progression+1/2 BAB2 levels of 1d6 hit dieLight Armor12 skill pointsFor:A familiarA number of low power spells with situational usefulnessAnd that's a great sort of trade-off and exactly the sort of thing that the 3d rules are great for.  Far from being powergamerish he actually sacrificed a bit of power overall in order to get a great character concept rolling.I don't get this.  First of all, you can express your intent to the players off the bat and use the same intent in judging all of their characters.  Secondly, how can you DM without making individual judgements?  Every time a player wants to use a skill in a slightly non-standard way, every time a player tries to roleplay a conversation, you have to make a judgement.  This is no different.  Using the crappy 2e rules because you don't want to have to make judgement calls about the more flexible 3e rules is, IMO, like saying that no one can ever use a skill in a way that isn't explicitly described in the book or never roleplaying encounters and just using straight up diplomacy rolls to determine everything.  In the end you are just closing off a lot of the game and a lot of roleplaying possibilities.Yeah, I just don't get this statement in combination with your expressed wish for increased roleplay.  Having a level of wizard just means that you have certain abilities and if you have an interesting, well-roleplayed character concept that includes these abilities then I fail to see what the problem is.</blockquote>

Verification