Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lokiare" data-source="post: 6263044" data-attributes="member: 83996">I've seen this from the other side.I once had two players, one played a halfling rogue and the other played a half-orc barbarian in 3.5E. At first everything was fine, but encounter after encounter the half-orc would charge up and slaughter everything before the rogue could even get in position to attack. After about a year of this the halfling player got fed up and threw a fit about it. That campaign ended there because the effectiveness of the halfling rogue in comparison to the half-orc barbarian didn't allow them to participate. It turned into a hero and side kick show. Which many experienced players find unplayable.Now imagine your character is supposed to be the tank/defender of the party. Now you take the worst possible options in order to fit a character concept. Your character is a fine swashbuckler that can sail a ship around the world with one hand tied behind their back, but the first time you get into combat you can't deal enough damage to kill a kobold, you can't distract enemies into attacking you, and even if you could you wouldn't survive their attacks.Now as a team game, D&D has certain expectations. I would certainly point out that your character probably is not a good fit for this group as we expect to see combat at least 1/3 of the time. It doesn't really matter though because even if it was 1/10th of the time, that one time you hit combat means TPK because your character is ineffective.Now wouldn't it be 100 times better if you could make your awesome swashbuckling character while not sacrificing your role in combat? I personally think it would.The problem is without a defined beginning and end you can't award xp properly. You also can't break things down into quests and measure how much money and treasure you've given out to keep it from being too much or too little.</blockquote>

Verification