Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pickin_grinnin" data-source="post: 6297400" data-attributes="member: 6697674">You're making a lot of assumptions.I played the dirt farmer in ways that didn't interfere with what the rest of the group was doing, and didn't pull all (or most of) the focus on me.  In fact, he was pretty well integrated with the group as a whole.  I was perfectly fine with the dirt farmer dying if that's the way the game went, and the DM knew it.  I wouldn't have even played a character like that without the full approval of the DM.  As I said, I did it as an experiment to see if I could pull it off.  Not in the sense of pulling one over on the DM or the players, but in the sense of seeing if I could set aside my common way of thinking about goals in D&D (and similar games) and come up with a sustainable, viable character who was a good party member and who didn't care about wealth, weapons, power, etc.  At no point did the character object to the party going after those things.  He was happy to tag along with whatever they did.  We didn't do little side vignettes that were focused on him.  The DM liked the idea of putting a character that confused the other players into the campaign, because that was something he hadn't tried before, and was curious to see what would happen.  He was also curious to see if I could actually roleplay the character and stick to the concept.Once they got past their confusion, the other players liked having my  character around, because he turned out to be useful in a lot of  unexpected ways, and didn't want any of the treasure.  I played him as a sort of idiot savant type.The DM saw an opportunity to play off one of the things the character did, which ended up becoming important in the campaign.  He wasn't throwing in a Deux Ex Machina or trying to keep me from being bored, or anything like that.  My character did something very minor that was odd, and the DM got an idea from it.  His idea took on a life of it's own.  He didn't plan for it to become a big thing in the campaign, and we were both surprised when it did.  It just worked out that way.I am a very experienced roleplayer (been doing this since the 70s) who is the last one to ever try to derail a game, or take it over in any other way.  Since I have done as much DM/GMing as playing over the decades, I am very cognizant of the importance of keeping a game flowing and making sure that everyone is having fun.  I can see how inexperienced or immature roleplayers would be problematic in similar situations, but that wasn't the case for me, the DM, or the other players. When Champions came out, I used to make characters for fun and see how powerful I could get them to be within the 100-point limit.  Over time I figured out some loopholes in the rules and found ways to create characters that were just about unstoppable and unkillable.  I never played them, though, because they would have unbalanced the campaign.  I always made sure my characters matched the power level of the campaign, even when I could have easily done otherwise.  The game as a whole is important.  It's not all about having the most powerful character.</blockquote>

Verification