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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BraveSirKevin" data-source="post: 4854858" data-attributes="member: 84231">Just been giving this one some thought. It takes a real bunch of Dice Jocks to groan about someone playing a weak character in their campaign. The whole point of the advancement systems is that people get stronger over time.In the AD&D days your wizards were just pain pitiful until about level 5 or 6. Starting with a measly d4 hit points, your wizard could literally trip on a rock and die... There was no way you'd put him anywhere near combat, and if he didn't take a combat oriented spell like he was almost no help to the party at all. In all the campaigns I've played they've always watched their wizard's back and worked as a group to compensate for the wizard's weakness. Of course later on the wizard picks up some pretty hefty spells and does more damage with a single magical attack than the rest of the group manages in an entire combat.Most groups I've played are more tolerant of badly rolled characters than with lazily played characters. In one campaign I DM'ed I started off by giving the group a potion of resurrection cos I wanted to up the ante and make it more deadly from the get go. As it turns out, the first encounter was really a lot more than they bargained for. The wizard Widdlestyx, with average stats, and the dwarven fighter Axehole, with 18 strength, both kicked the bucket. They could only save one... Axehole (not joking... that's the name the player gave him <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" />) had a short funeral and shallow grave.</blockquote>

Verification