Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dreaded_beast" data-source="post: 1436663" data-attributes="member: 11185">Once again interesting responses so far from everyone. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I can understand your logic here, but I don't necessarily think it is a bad thing. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />So in you're particular game, creating this type of Diplomat character would be considered min-maxing? If that is the case, you would discourage players from maxing out their ranks at the lower levels, going for synergy bonuses, or putting a high stat to compliment the skills they have selected?Would you also discourage a fighter type from putting an 18 in Strength and getting the Weapon Focus feat?In my opinion, it seems as if you would prefer your characters to be "generalists" instead of "specialists". How do players create characters in your games then, interms of where to place stats, how many ranks of skills to get, etc.? It would seem that if players are not able to put ranks and stats where they want, based on the whatever the house rules are for building characters, then subsequent characters would probably look the same depending on what class would be taken. The rogue for instance, would not be allowed to get 4 in the CHA skills at the same level, so where would he put those skills? All the following rogue characters would face the same dilemma and may end up selecting the same choice of skills, since the options have been somewhat limited. I mean no offense, so I hope this doesn't come accross as rude question.Based on the above statement, then would you say that all characters have to fit a "common mold"? Only the cleric should be good at "knowledge religion"? (I understand the circumstances for you game were not the best, so my questions are just based on that single quote.)In my opinion, I don't think that characters should fall into "common molds". I think the fun of RPGs and with the rules of 3.0/3.5, characters are able to somewhat become what the player envisions their character to be.In general:So in regards to players min-maxing their characters, how would you prefer players to make their characters then? In my opinion, if characters are not able to min-max their characters to a certain extent, then all the characters will be relatively the same, since they may not be allowed to specialize, or focus their abilities in one area suited to their class as a result of the dislike for min-maxing.For instance, if a player cannot be a half-orc barbarian with a 20 STR at 1st level, then how would the player arrange their stats? If I was going to play a fighter type, I would certainly put my highest stats into STR, CON, DEX. And get Weapon Focus and Power Attack. If that is considered min-maxing, then where would the player who wanted to play the fighter type put there stats in your game? What feats would they get? Would they have to put their highest stats in CHA and INT, along with picking Skill Focus and Stealthy? The same could be said for the diplomat character.So in other words, how do players in your games create their characters if they can not make them powerful in the aspect that is suited to their class?I understand that some may say the challenge, the chance to role-play a unique character, I don't need a "power" character to have fun, etc. However, I consider this more a "play-style" choice then.To put in the words of one poster:Hopefully this didn't sound too ranty and no offense to anyone. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

Verification