Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 4600387" data-attributes="member: 19675">For me, its all about the character.&nbsp; I try to get inside his head and act as he would.&nbsp; Sometimes, it leads me to take- or refuse to take- actions that may not have been what the DM intended.Example: I was playing a Githzerai Monk with Dex24 and a Wis of 19 or 20.&nbsp; A (dex based) sporting challenge was placed in front of the party that he could have performed with only minimal risk to himself, but with a potentially devastating downside.&nbsp; Given the nature of the challenge and the DM in question, I'm pretty sure that he designed it with my PC's physical capabilities in mind.While clearly the most qualified person in the party to succeed at the challenge, he wasn't the right person for the challenge- it was &quot;unwise&quot; and a bit beneath his dignity as a monk, in his opinion.&nbsp; Instead, the party barbarian took the challenge, and just barely succeeded.Did it change the outcome of the campaign?&nbsp; Perhaps, and for the better.&nbsp; Instead of the cool tempered Monk smoking the local pros at their own game- possibly creating resentment- the Barbarian went in cocky and came out cocky but bruised, making a lot of friends.In cases like investigations, I take a different tack (as player and GM).&nbsp; Since the game is about PC capabilities and not player capabilities, I have less problem with table talk &amp; suggestions about how to run a PC.&nbsp; After all, an &quot;investigator&quot; type personality is likely to be the smartest person in the party (barring the &quot;curious cat&quot; types), and typically, they have intellects far and away beyond what most people have at their command.&nbsp; So letting the game group as a whole act as the PC's brain for purposes of solving a mystery is entirely appropriate.(If I'm playing an idiot, I make it clear when I'm speaking as my PC and when I'm trying to help the genius PC live up to his potential.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dannyalcatraz, post: 4600387, member: 19675"] For me, its all about the character. I try to get inside his head and act as he would. Sometimes, it leads me to take- or refuse to take- actions that may not have been what the DM intended. Example: I was playing a Githzerai Monk with Dex24 and a Wis of 19 or 20. A (dex based) sporting challenge was placed in front of the party that he could have performed with only minimal risk to himself, but with a potentially devastating downside. Given the nature of the challenge and the DM in question, I'm pretty sure that he designed it with my PC's physical capabilities in mind. While clearly the most qualified person in the party to [I]succeed[/I] at the challenge, he wasn't the right [I]person[/I] for the challenge- it was "unwise" and a bit beneath his dignity as a monk, in his opinion. Instead, the party barbarian took the challenge, and just barely succeeded. Did it change the outcome of the campaign? Perhaps, and for the better. Instead of the cool tempered Monk smoking the local pros at their own game- possibly creating resentment- the Barbarian went in cocky and came out cocky but bruised, making a lot of friends. In cases like investigations, I take a different tack (as player and GM). Since the game is about PC capabilities and not player capabilities, I have less problem with table talk & suggestions about how to run a PC. After all, an "investigator" type personality is likely to be the smartest person in the party (barring the "curious cat" types), and typically, they have intellects far and away beyond what most people have at their command. So letting the game group as a whole act as the PC's brain for purposes of solving a mystery is entirely appropriate. (If I'm playing an idiot, I make it clear when I'm speaking as my PC and when I'm trying to help the genius PC live up to his potential.) [/QUOTE]

Verification