Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="schnee" data-source="post: 7188729" data-attributes="member: 16728">If the second character is so good the other one doesn't get a chance to do anything, then an entire part of the game - being an effective contributor to the party - is taken away.I've seen it happen. All your theoretical positivism sounds good in forum posts but people come to D&amp;D to play a crunchy RPG. It's based on dice rolls, and probability curves, and a balance of successes and failures to create tension and fun. When your character's successes are taken away, a big dimension of the game as it was designed is nullified. Now, if we were talking a story game, like FATE or Polaris, then sure! The mechanics of the game give equal narrative and event-changing power to Dudley DoEverythingRight and Sadface McScrewup, so you have free reign to explore characters of that type and the game supports it. But D&amp;D isn't like that. The right player can hog the table via rules mastery, and min/maxing can make one character feature - say, 'doing HP damage' - so high that it takes over unless the DM metagames to counter it.--After thinking about it, I'm coming around to the problem being the other player built a monk without talking to the OP first. AND, the DM let it happen without making sure it was cool. That's a table etiquette thing of basic decency. People don't play D&amp;D to 'HTFU' and deal with interpersonal BS gracefully, they play to escape that stuff for a while and have some fun. The only drama instigated at a table should be between the characters, after both players have a good enough relationship to have fun with it. It's a small thing, but personal relationships are build or broken on a collection of small things. OP, I hope you can have a chat with the other player. It's probably unintentional, so my guess is it'll go well.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="schnee, post: 7188729, member: 16728"] If the second character is so good the other one doesn't get a chance to do anything, then an entire part of the game - being an effective contributor to the party - is taken away. I've seen it happen. All your theoretical positivism sounds good in forum posts but people come to D&D to play a [I]crunchy[/I] RPG. It's based on dice rolls, and probability curves, and a balance of successes and failures to create tension and fun. When your character's successes are taken away, a big dimension of the game as it was designed is nullified. Now, if we were talking a story game, like FATE or Polaris, then sure! The mechanics of the game give equal narrative and event-changing power to Dudley DoEverythingRight and Sadface McScrewup, so you have free reign to explore characters of that type and the game supports it. But D&D isn't like that. The right player can hog the table via rules mastery, and min/maxing can make one character feature - say, 'doing HP damage' - so high that it takes over unless the DM metagames to counter it. -- After thinking about it, I'm coming around to the problem being the other player built a monk without talking to the OP first. AND, the DM let it happen without making sure it was cool. That's a table etiquette thing of basic decency. People don't play D&D to 'HTFU' and deal with interpersonal BS gracefully, they play to escape that stuff for a while and have some fun. The only drama instigated at a table should be between the characters, after both players have a good enough relationship to have fun with it. It's a small thing, but personal relationships are build or broken on a collection of small things. OP, I hope you can have a chat with the other player. It's probably unintentional, so my guess is it'll go well. [/QUOTE]

Verification