Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 6770968" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Other: &quot;concept.&quot;Sometimes &quot;concept&quot; is heavily thematic, like &quot;traditional Merlin archetype, with shapeshifting and subtle magic.&quot; Sometimes it's heavily optimization, like &quot;(nearly) unhittable tank&quot; or &quot;main-healer paladin.&quot; Sometimes it's an axis that I feel gets overlooked far too often in these discussions, &quot;procedural&quot;--that is, thoroughly developing the most entertaining/engaging process of playing the character, even if it's not especially thematic nor especially optimal--e.g. &quot;grapple and support.&quot;Incidentally, all four examples are things I've actually tried to do in at least one TTRPG system, and three of the four were for actual campaigns even if I didn't end up using them (the thematic one was just a personal exercise, to see how close I could get to &quot;Welsh&quot; Merlin in 4e).In the pursuit of a concept, I will weigh each of the three axes above (theme, effectiveness, procedure) until I find the right balance. No matter what the prime nature of the concept, I will (and have) made sacrifices in each area in order to reach that balance. Perhaps &quot;subtle&quot; magic doesn't mesh with &quot;shapeshifting&quot; in the rules; I may settle for &quot;elemental&quot; magic instead. Perhaps being a meaningfully engaging support character means you have to have spells (I'm looking at you, 5e), which is a procedural level I often find excessively intricate but will accept if it is the only path available. Perhaps the &quot;optimal&quot; path for a healer Paladin means dumping Intelligence, which I am loath to do because I don't like playing &quot;dumb&quot; characters. Regardless of the situation, I'll make sacrifices in any one area if the loss is sufficiently compensated in the others--and without careful thought and knowing the context, I can't rule out any particular change.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 6770968, member: 6790260"] Other: "concept." Sometimes "concept" is heavily thematic, like "traditional Merlin archetype, with shapeshifting and subtle magic." Sometimes it's heavily optimization, like "(nearly) unhittable tank" or "main-healer paladin." Sometimes it's an axis that I feel gets overlooked far too often in these discussions, "procedural"--that is, thoroughly developing the most entertaining/engaging [I]process[/I] of playing the character, even if it's not especially thematic nor especially optimal--e.g. "grapple and support." Incidentally, all four examples are things I've [I]actually tried to do[/I] in at least one TTRPG system, and three of the four were for actual campaigns even if I didn't end up using them (the thematic one was just a personal exercise, to see how close I could get to "Welsh" Merlin in 4e). In the pursuit of a concept, I will weigh each of the three axes above (theme, effectiveness, procedure) until I find the right balance. No matter what the prime nature of the concept, I will (and have) made sacrifices in each area in order to reach that balance. Perhaps "subtle" magic doesn't mesh with "shapeshifting" in the rules; I may settle for "elemental" magic instead. Perhaps being a meaningfully engaging support character means you have to have spells (I'm looking at [I]you[/I], 5e), which is a procedural level I often find excessively intricate but will accept if it is the only path available. Perhaps the "optimal" path for a healer Paladin means dumping Intelligence, which I am loath to do because I don't like playing "dumb" characters. Regardless of the situation, I'll make sacrifices in any one area if the loss is sufficiently compensated in the others--and without careful thought and knowing the context, I can't rule out any particular change. [/QUOTE]

Verification