D&D 5E (2014) The woes of the elf and his longsword

[Paraxis]

I do care when it's a playstyle that is trying to make a game conform to those standards. So far, it seems to be a style that actively is hostile to anyone who doesn't adhere to your "optimization or get lost" attitude.

I don't see anyone making any playstyle trying to conform to any standards.
Most of these issues can be fixed by just talking to the person and point out that doing X gives Y benefit, people generally want to be good at their job, or in this case an good adventurer. Those that don't make little sense to me, but even when dealing with them it comes down to in character conversations of why are we traveling with and entrusting our lives with someone who refuses to do something as simple as wear good armor.

There is more to the studded leather story I will go into that in a bit.

But no one is saying get lost, they are saying "Why do you choose to suck?" It is like in an MMO where people would show up to end game raids wearing PvP gear instead of PVE gear. Why? just do what you are supposed to do.

This seems odd to me, but I suppose it just depends on whether you see the game as a group storytelling venture, or an our team vs their team sporting event.

However, getting upset at someone else for they way they play the game is not cool.

It is a group storytelling venture, but it has consequences if you fail, events change, characters die, and so forth. D&D isn't PvP but it is PVE, the characters go against the antagonists of the story and if they fail a character could be killed off and that sorta sucks. So do what you can to prevent that is all I am saying.

I get upset when people preach that wearing subpar armor or using inferior weapons make them a better roleplayer, trust me it doesn't.

Now the full studded leather story.
Character was a rogue, had more than enough gold to purschase studded leather and his weapons because he didn't get a bow, but chose not to. I pointed this out before the game started and he didn't change, said he wanted to save his gold, OK. Then we play for a bit, after a couple game sessions including one combat where he went down at a crucial point and wouldn't have if he was wearing studded leather, my character offers to purchase the armor for him. He refuses, he doesn't like the look of the armor, my character says he will pay extra gold to have the armor custom made to look like however he wants. The player then takes it out of character and tells me to stop trying to min/max his character and he wants to roleplay, I say my character has been doing everything in character he can to get him to switch all "roleplaying" and he says 1 point of AC doesn't matter, I point out it did in that one fight, he says something about "rollplaying" I decide at this point it's not worth the trouble and I am leaving the game, I burn my bridges and go off on the guy.

This guy thinks that wearing leather makes him a better roleplayer, for the record 95% of the time his character said nothing and just kinda was there that doesn't sound like much of a roleplayer to me.

 

[Kaychsea]

So yeah, I dislike people who choose to be weak in a team activity, because they don't just make themselves weak they make the whole team weak.

Hmm, a jock nerd! Who knew?

 

[steeldragons]

I don't see anyone making any playstyle trying to conform to any standards. -snip- Those that don't make little sense to me, but even when dealing with them it comes down to in character conversations of why are we traveling with and entrusting our lives with someone who refuses to do something as simple as wear good armor.

But no one is saying get lost, they are saying "Why do you choose to suck?" -snip- just do what you are supposed to do.

It is a group storytelling venture, but it has consequences if you fail, events change, characters die, and so forth. -snip- So do what you can to prevent that is all I am saying.

I get upset when people preach that wearing subpar armor or using inferior weapons make them a better roleplayer, trust me it doesn't.

Now the full studded leather story.
-snip-.

There is so much obnoxious and insulting and, yeah I'll say it, wrong with this post I don't even know where to start.

The kicker is, what comes across is that you truly don't see how your position/optimization "preference" is any of those things.

I will simply consider myself lucky that I will never, ever, have to attempt to play with you or anyone who thinks remotely like this.

 

[Agamon]

I get upset when people preach that wearing subpar armor or using inferior weapons make them a better roleplayer, trust me it doesn't.

I agree that one doesn't beget the other, but neither should be cause for a problem (unless the player continually just does subpar things to be a passive aggressive d-bag, which is a different problem).

While the other guy in your story probably just should have said "no, thanks" in character (assuming you would let it go after that), rather than escalate a brewing argument, the problem is, you're trying to influence his character decisions, and he feels he needs to defend his own decisions. That never ends well.

Heck, I'm playing Dragon Age: Inquisition right now, and I recently found a helm that anyone can wear that had a better armor rating that what I was currently wearing. Thing is, I'm a mage, and a giant steel helm on my robe-wearing dalish elf looked ridiculous, so I passed. Some may find that strange, others might agree with the choice. But the NPCs in my group shouldn't be provoking me for whatever choice I make.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I don't see anyone making any playstyle trying to conform to any standards..

You don't? Let me refresh you on your own very words in this thread alone:

If you choose to wear leather armor instead of studded leather, use a longsword when your dex is higher than your strength, and other silly "roleplay" things than I say you are not playing your class and filling your role in the party. If I am running a character in the group and his life depends on your abilities and skills and you choose to make horrible optimization choices, my character starts to point out how we should replace you on the team because you obviously don't care about group safety.

….maybe next time they will optimize and think about actions they take.

…if my character is going to fill his role as effectively as he can I expect my allies to atleast try and do the same.

I went off on someone in a 5e game shortly after the PHB came out for not wearing studded leather instead of leather armor, because he didn't like the way studded leather looked.

I have even seen posts where DM's talk about rewarding "roleplayers" over "rollplayers" and it turns my stomach. Don't encourage the people bringing the party down, teach them that if they want to play inept characters than they get to play inept characters.

See having your elf use a rapier over a longsword doesn't affect real roleplaying, just change your background to match the optimal build choices.

These statements are outright hostile and threatening to anyone who doesn't match your preference. Not only that, but it outright treats roleplaying aspects with contempt, and you don't even see it by that last sentence in the quote.

And there's this quote, which shows that you don't seem to even care about the roleplaying/story/immersion part of the game, as all character decisions are made with out of character mechanical implications

If losing an eye only came with penalties, to say perception or ranged attacks I would never volunteer to take that option.
If losing an eye was a purely cosmetic thing with no game implications at all I might consider it.
If losing an eye gave me some benefit say an extra spell slot or something, rip that

So yeah, I worry very much that people with your opinions and playstyle have actively (and still do) tried to turn D&D into a game that caters to that. I don't care if people play a different playstyle than me. I do care when that playstyle is threatening and hostile to people, especially newer players.

 

[Paraxis]

There is so much obnoxious and insulting and, yeah I'll say it, wrong with this post I don't even know where to start.

The kicker is, what comes across is that you truly don't see how your position/optimization "preference" is any of those things.

These statements are outright hostile and threatening to anyone who doesn't match your preference. Not only that, but it outright treats roleplaying aspects with contempt, and you don't even see it by that last sentence in the quote.

I don't see it.
At this point in the conversation, I don't think anything I have to say will make a difference and I feel like I am having to defend my statements, to me that is the first sign that I should remove myself from the conversation.

I leave with what I believe might be a good house rule for the topic at hand.

Elves can treat longswords as either versatile or finesse but not both.

That way it prevents other types of cheesy exploits, but lets elves and only elves be better with their traditional weapon than anyone else.

 

[BigVanVader]

If my elf is a roguish swashbuckling type character then I would likely fight with a rapier. If I'm building a Fighter clad in plate armour then I will be using the traditional longsword. Not only that but I will have the strength to back it up, sure it will have a +2 bonus to hit/damage instead of the +3 that I could get with my dex bonus at level 1 but that isn't going to be a huge deal in the long run or even in the short-term.

Link, the way he should be. Suck it down, Ganondork!

 

[Sacrosanct]

I don't see it.

You don't see how phrases like "we're going to replace you. Next time you'll do it the right way. I had it out with him. [that style] turns my stomach." aren't hostile?

Well I guess that explains quite a bit.

 

[BigVanVader]

I leave with what I believe might be a good house rule for the topic at hand.

Elves can treat longswords as either versatile or finesse but not both.

That way it prevents other types of cheesy exploits, but lets elves and only elves be better with their traditional weapon than anyone else.

You know what...I actually like that rule.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

So far I haven't seen anyone other than me and Paraxis actually make any statements regarding the point at which an inefficient character is too inefficient to be acceptable to the group.

I seriously doubt everyone is thinking, "there is no point; you can have a Strength of 3 and a greatsword in my game, and we're all good with it!"

EDIT: To clarify my intent, I'm proposing that pretty much everyone's point or line is going to be within a few "+"s of each other's.