green slime said:Are you suggesting it would be a bad thing if those character concepts were supported by being mechanically equal to other, similar concepts?
No, what I'm saying is that it isn't necessary to have a rules-driven 'reason' for the type of character you want to play. As in:
A: "What reason would you have to play a fighter when you can gain spells by taking a few levels of sorcerer?"
B: "Because I don't want to cast spells. I want to be a fighter with high STR and low INT. My character concept is a big, tough, stupid guy with a big, tough, stupid sword."
A: "But then the other characters will outclass you. They'll be able to do things beyond your abilities, especially at higher levels."
B: "Don't care. Big, tough, stupid guy; big, tough, stupid sword...period."
I simply don't think every character has to be 'balanced.' Real people aren't balanced. There is a popular myth that says, in effect, 'maybe Person X can do Talent Y better than I can, but I can do Talent Z better than he can, so we're balanced out.' This is, quite frankly, a load of rubbish. The truth is, there are people out there who can do Talents A through double-Q better than you can, and there will be nothing whatsoever you can do about it. I think it's far more important that you play a character you personally find interesting than that that character be 'balanced' with other characters.
The player in my campaign who plays the halfling bard/wizard, for example, wanted to play a beautiful, charismatic, magically-talented character who also happened to be physically weak and very gullible. She chose to be a halfling because they were physically the smallest race. (For all I know, she may be working out some issues there, because the lady in question is nearly six feet tall and built like a brick...well, you get the idea...but, I digress.)
If every other character were a spellcaster, she would still have played the character she's playing, because that was what she wanted to play. I would much rather have that character in my game than a fighter/rogue/wizard with carefully balanced feat and skill selections and maxed-out attack options who's been carefully plotted out to take advantage of every conceivable situation. There is very little difference between a character like that and a character in a video game, and players who want to play such a game are better off finding a different group to play with.
Building a character simply for a 'rules-bound' reason is, IMO, boring and pointless. Now if your character concept is, basically, Aragorn from LotR, then I expect a certain amount of building up of stats, bonuses, feats, etc., etc.--but don't expect everyone else to want to charge into battle every two minutes to right some wrong or destroy some silly ring just because you say so. That halfling up on the stage is trying to build influence with the leaders of the local thieves' guild, and the dwarf in the corner is looking for his family's ancient stronghold in the nearby mountains.
Regards,
Darrell
