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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Stormonu" data-source="post: 5261895" data-attributes="member: 52734">This is not an attempt to espouse that one is greater than the other, this is, more or less to find out what you prefer, and perhaps insight to why.When you are either running the game, or running a character in the game, do you tend to assume that your character was an "ordinary" person thrust into extraordinary circumstances or that the character was always, in some way, extraordinary and is simply coming to terms with his extraordinary abilities?  Or do you mix and match based on system, class, background or other factors?An example of the two might be comparing the characters of John H. Miller (Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan) and Luke Skywalker.  Luke is certainly extraordinary - being the son of Darth Vader and strong in the force like his father.  Though he starts from humble beginnings and is thrust into a larger arena somewhat unwillingly, it very much seems Luke has a date with destiny and his successes are in no small part aided by the force and supernatural help from Ben and others.  The things he does (blow up the Death Star, become a jedi knight) are things no other individual could hope to achieve no matter how much skill and practice they put into their efforts.On the other hand, John Miller is very much an "ordinary joe" forced into unusual circumstances (World War II).  His heroics are a mix of luck, skill and daring.  There is no greater cosmic force controlling (beyond the script writers) directing his ultimate fate or secret powers upon which he can or will draw. So, with those two (likely flawed) examples - how do you tend to see starting characters?  Are they "average joes" who become notorious through skill and luck or are they demigods of sort - with skills and abilities beyond the normal man but not yet versed in their use?I think this is an important question to ask, and it helps to drive how you play and see the game.  Older D&D versions often tended to allow for mixed approaches; 1E/2E warriors and theives could very well be "average joes", but it was fairly clear that wizards & priests were a little something more.  3E seemed to allow approach from either direction for all character types.  4E seems to be built on the idea that you must be "above the curve" of everyone  else (there's something that makes you stand out from the commoner on the sidewalk) and does not seem to support the "ordinary person in extraordinary circumstances" model very well at all.</blockquote>

Verification