D&D General Requesting permission to have something cool

[ReshiIRE]

Well, not in the specifics, but genre wise, I would argue a game like 5e or Pathfinder 2e are pretty good at doing heroic fantasy... it's just heroic fantasy where 'who are the heroes who make it or not' is not predetermined, and the heroes can get unlucky to the point that it can become very difficult for them to escape.

I would not call Luke a level 1 anything but the events and heroes of Star Wars could be loosely emulated in a high powered game, and one where there are tricky spots but the heroes can succeed with a little luck and guile; where the foes they face are numerous but not as strong or lucky as they are.

Of course, individual systems for individual genres are better, and D&D in general has switched between many styles and genres, and can be further refined without even stepping hard into house rules, to the point that I wouldn't call 5e 'heroic fantasy' overall.

 

[Umbran]

plenty people might try it once and give up in disgust

If we are talking about D&D Beyond numbers, they can track active characters - if you are clicking to take short and long rests, and leveling the character up over time, they can take that as a character that's actively being used. The characters that were made, tried, and then given up would fall out of the "active play" list.

 

[Irlo]

All that said, one thing I'd really like to see happen is a very harsh chop-down of the whole "character build" side of the game. Char-gen in the WotC era has become far too complex; if I can't go from a blank page to something playable in 15 minutes, there's a problem.

One can certainly do that in less than 15 minutes in 5E. Char-gen is very straightforward.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Look, I get it. I don't name every soldier I play in Call of Duty. They don't get backstories or family history and aren't mourned when they die to enemy fire. I curse a bit and respawn my next soldier to go find death and/or glory. I might tell a great tale of a double kill with a sniper rifle or a tale of walking into an ambush, but I don't tell the tale of Srg Lawrence who valiantly defended the flag of his nation for 30 straight minutes and received the admiration of his peers for most kills in the 315th battle of Nuketown.

But I do ask more than that of my D&D games. If you like spawning toons though, have fun. Not my style and I'm glad the game has moved from it.

Your description of the styles of others as "spawning toons" is rather dismissive and not very conducive to conversation.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

How? What does he do that a 1st level PC can't?

Roll a nat 20 on an attack roll when it's actually needed.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Roll a nat 20 on an attack roll when it's actually needed.

Maybe he just cast 3e True Strike. He'd had time to pick up a level of jedi by then.

 

[Remathilis]

Your description of the styles of others as "spawning toons" is rather dismissive and not very conducive to conversation.

What else can it be?

The play style advocated for isn't about creating a character with a backstory, goals or motivation. It's about rolling 3d6 and hoping you get lucky that THIS PC sticks. They might get a name if they make it to 3rd level, and might even develop a personality at 5th.

I don't like the OSR/DDC style of character generation by attrition. Never have, never will. And I'm glad the game has moved away from it, circa Dragonlance. But if you like it, play it. I don't find it superior in any way, shape or form and you cannot convince me otherwise.

 

[Raiztt]

What else can it be?

The play style advocated for isn't about creating a character with a backstory, goals or motivation. It's about rolling 3d6 and hoping you get lucky that THIS PC sticks. They might get a name if they make it to 3rd level, and might even develop a personality at 5th.

I don't like the DDC style of character generation by attrition. Never have, never will. And I'm glad the game has moved away from it, circa Dragonlance. But if you like it, play it. I don't find it superior in any way, shape or form and you cannot convince me otherwise.

There's a really big difference between saying you don't like the "character build" style of character creation and saying you don't like fleshed out characters with backgrounds/motivations/etc. In fact, he's probably saying that worrying about character "builds" gets in the way of playing a fleshed out, fully realized character.

What Lanefan was saying is that he doesn't like people being like "i'm these sets of features from a list" rather than being "I'm Hagthor Stoutfoot, dwarven explorer".

The OSR mantra "the answer is not on your character sheet" comes to mind as being what he's trying to get at. Your character isn't their character sheet/options/etc.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

What else can it be?

The play style advocated for isn't about creating a character with a backstory, goals or motivation. It's about rolling 3d6 and hoping you get lucky that THIS PC sticks. They might get a name if they make it to 3rd level, and might even develop a personality at 5th.

I don't like the OSR/DDC style of character generation by attrition. Never have, never will. And I'm glad the game has moved away from it, circa Dragonlance. But if you like it, play it. I don't find it superior in any way, shape or form and you cannot convince me otherwise.

As a general rule, I operate under the principle that if I can't find any way to understand why someone would do something that they are, in fact, doing ... the fault probably does not lie with them, but it lies in my inability to be charitable or to empathize with another viewpoint. This doesn't mean that I have to agree with the other person, but it does mean that I have probably failed to understand their position.

There are people that are really into creating a "complete character" at chargen, including a multi-page backstory, fully formed personality, and even a plan for their future levels. And that's totally cool!

On the other hand, some people find it interesting to see how a character becomes revealed to them during play- that they start with the sketch of an idea, and that the character's personality, flaws, and overall direction will be a product of the experiences of play. That's also a totally valid way to do it!

Neither approach is better, and the former is certainly more prevalent today than the latter. But both can be fun and interesting.

 

[Reynard]

What else can it be?

The play style advocated for isn't about creating a character with a backstory, goals or motivation. It's about rolling 3d6 and hoping you get lucky that THIS PC sticks. They might get a name if they make it to 3rd level, and might even develop a personality at 5th.

I don't like the OSR/DDC style of character generation by attrition. Never have, never will. And I'm glad the game has moved away from it, circa Dragonlance. But if you like it, play it. I don't find it superior in any way, shape or form and you cannot convince me otherwise.

There is nothing in OD&D or 5E or any edition in between that either requires or precludes a "backstory, goals or motivation" and there never has been.