NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5433322" data-attributes="member: 4937">I didn't find it very amusing either.  I'm not sure what to say.  Dandu asked for someone's honest opinion, and now Dandu is unhappy with the honest opinion.  What would you rather, a dishonest opinion?  Seriously, any artist knows that when he presents his work, some people are going to trash it.  No body likes all of my work either.  So what?  I understand the hurt you feel when your art is rejected, but I'd rather some one say, "This is junk", than try to protect my feelings.Personally, I find the character to be juvenile to the point of infantile.  Frankly, I'd hope that outside of a humerous one shot that even junior high players are a little more serious and a little less lame than that.  It's not even really a character.  It's instead a great example of mechanical class substituting for character and of the idea that you are what you can do.  It's pretty much everything that drove players from D&D since way back in the 1970's - juvenile, purile, lame, and just a bit wacko. It's also got other even more significant problems.  For one thing, it's not a class built on backstory.  It's a class built on forestory.   In otherwords, this character isn't the 'character' when he's a 1st level ranger.  This character is an amalgam of abilities, not of personality traits, beliefs, and attitudes.  He doesn't have a history.  No fundamental or intruiging questions are raised by this character.  No interesting conflicts suggest themselves from this character, and especially no conflicts that have any sort of resonance with anything anyone experiences in the real world.  He has a 'theme song', and he's a couple of levels less deep in his conception than 'George of the Jungle' or 'Roger Ramjet'.  This is the 'SNL Skit' of player character creation - wierd, tolerable only in small doses, requiring more talent to pull of than the comedian playing the part has, and hasn't been funny since the '70's.Like I said, this is ok for a beer and pretzels one shot, but after about 4 or 8 hours of play this very shallow schtick is going to get really old, and the player is probably going to be trying to keep gnawing that old bone for humor long after any of the meat is gone.  As an exercise in mechanical creativity, I guess the 'I bite you' and 'My constitution is a god-stat' parts of it are ok (except that all the creativity there is really in the people who did the class write ups), but as an exercise in creative character building it just leaves me completely cold.  Sufficiently so, that if someone proposed this as a character in my game, that I'd have to ask them whether they were really sure my game was right for them.  I don't mind there being a certain amount of goofy behavior and inhibition relaxing in the game.  But I get the feeling that the creator of this character wants that to be the entire game.   That to me suggests 'problem player' and 'munchkin' every bit as much as a powered up twink in the hands of someone who seems to have his ego invested in 'winning'.</blockquote>

Verification