Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cap'n Kobold" data-source="post: 9605847" data-attributes="member: 6802951">I would say that people decide on a character concept (such as &quot;Ice-mage&quot;, &quot;Warrior with huge axe&quot;, &quot;Bounty hunter with crossbow and wolfhound companion&quot;)&nbsp; first.Very few decide on the level of character power they want, ;come up with a concept. Even optimisers will often come up with a concept to optimise first.Character power should be independent of concept, and ideally there should be very little variation in overall power and engagement level between characters. (Although obviously there should be a lot of variation on the actual situations and manifestations of the capabilities of each.)Did you just make this up yourself and attribute it to those you are disagreeing with, or do I have someone on ignore? Who is asking for non-casters to get &quot;supernatural powers&quot;?You can give non-casters additional interesting and effective non-combat capabilities without them having to be supernatural.As mentioned before, I think very few adult players decide they &quot;want to play characters that are extremely powerful&quot;. They want to play a character, not a point on a power scale.I do not believe that it is good game design, or particularly intended, to have &quot;classes that are designed and intended&quot; to be more powerful than other classes. The only game where that even partially worked might have been Ars Magica, and that was designed to regularly swap around the powerful role between players. Even the Buffy roleplaying game had mechanics to help balance between Slayers/supernatural characters and mere mortals.No adult with whom I would wish to play consciously decides that &quot;being top dog&quot; is what is important to them. &quot;Being good at these things&quot; is a worthy goal. &quot;Overshadowing everyone at almost everyone&quot; is not, and should never be what any class is for.The entire point of this side discussion is that we do not think that the game design should &quot;make it so those classes can be overshadowed&quot;.I think that in this day and age, there is a strong narrative concept in the hero who perseveres and trains to become powerful, rather than just being born special. They didn't win the genetic lottery and have the ability to use magic, but through grit, skill, and determination can contribute to the success of a party just as much as those who did get the arcane spark.I do not think that there is much traction with having a demographic that is not only inherently superior to others, but that it is right and proper that they be so, in modern times.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cap'n Kobold, post: 9605847, member: 6802951"] I would say that people decide on a character [I]concept [/I](such as "Ice-mage", "Warrior with huge axe", "Bounty hunter with crossbow and wolfhound companion") first. Very few decide on the level of character power they want, ;come up with a concept. Even optimisers will often come up with a concept to optimise first. Character power should be independent of concept, and ideally there should be very little variation in overall power and engagement level between characters. (Although obviously there should be a lot of variation on the actual situations and manifestations of the capabilities of each.) Did you just make this up yourself and attribute it to those you are disagreeing with, or do I have someone on ignore? Who is asking for non-casters to get "supernatural powers"? You can give non-casters additional interesting and effective non-combat capabilities without them having to be supernatural. As mentioned before, I think very few adult players decide they "want to play characters that are extremely powerful". They want to play a [B][I]character[/I][/B], not a point on a power scale. I do not believe that it is good game design, or particularly intended, to have "classes that are designed and intended" to be more powerful than other classes. The only game where that even partially worked might have been Ars Magica, and that was designed to regularly swap around the powerful role between players. Even the Buffy roleplaying game had mechanics to help balance between Slayers/supernatural characters and mere mortals. No adult with whom I would wish to play consciously decides that "being top dog" is what is important to them. "Being good at these things" is a worthy goal. "Overshadowing everyone at almost everyone" is not, and should never be what any class is [I]for[/I]. The entire point of this side discussion is that we do not think that the game design should "make it so those classes can be overshadowed". I think that in this day and age, there is a strong narrative concept in the hero who perseveres and trains to become powerful, rather than just being born special. They didn't win the genetic lottery and have the ability to use magic, but through grit, skill, and determination can contribute to the success of a party just as much as those who did get the arcane spark. I do not think that there is much traction with having a demographic that is not only inherently superior to others, but that it is right and proper that they be so, in modern times. [/QUOTE]

Verification