"What" you are versus "who" you are.

[Thurbane]

I was flipping through some WoTC books today, filled with the requisite prestige classes, feats, and all the other crunchy bits we've come to expect from those books.

And it struck me - the game has become more about "What" the PC is, versus "Who" the PC is. I had to beat this into the head of a former player of mine. When it came time to make a character, he'd instantly blurt out things like "ooh, I want to make a Warlock", or "I've got it! A whispergnome scout!" or "Can I play a stone child?"

"Wait a minute", I'd say, "you're going about this all wrong. Think about *who* you want to make first, and then figure out which class best represents that. Not the other way around."

Am I just a grognard, or have others encountered this phenomenon?

At the risk of flying in the face of prevailing opinion, I think there is a lot of truth to your statement.

It is something that has always existed in D&D, but I find that the newest ruleset seem to somehow encourage this more. Which is funny, because the relative flexibility and wider range of newer rules compared to older editions means that it should actually be easier to make a character mechanically conform with an imagined ideal of what the character should be like.

I think that is the powergamer/videogame mindset that has crept into pen and paper RPGs of recent times. Not that there weren't always powergamers, just the the newest ruleset seems to more readily cater for them.

Naturally, all of these things are just my personal opinions, rather than immutable facts - feel free to take them or leave them as you see fit.

 

[pawsplay]

I think the thing that has crept into games is that since you aren't stuck with "3d6, six times, in order," it's far less odious to draft someone to be The Cleric. Clerics are handy, and it's always nice to have one. And so on and so forth. A party of all rogues is going to have a heck of a time against wights, that's for sure.

There is nothing powergamerish about wanting to start with an archetype ("swordsman") rather than trying to figure out what village your character grew up in.

 

[Crothian]

There is nothing powergamerish about wanting to start with an archetype ("swordsman") rather than trying to figure out what village your character grew up in.

Why can't we have both?

 

[pawsplay]

Why can't we have both?

I don't know. Why can't we?

 

[Thurbane]

Why can't we have both?

Indeed.

I actively encourage my players to come up with a backstory and persona for their characters. I generally reward them for this by trying to write in tidbits to adventures that tie in with their backgrounds and/or persona.

There is no "right or wrong" way to play D&D, but for speaking for myself, I always try to play characters with a firm mental image of persona, background, appearance etc in mind, as this is the part of the game I enjoy the most. I do the same for my major NPCs. If people see their characters as a purely mechanical device and thrive on combat, there is also nothing wrong with that - it's simply a different style of game play.

I have had players of both extremes at times - players who don't even bother to name their characters and adopt the "wake me up when combat starts" attitude; to those who take truly bizarre (and often inffectual) characters in the name of roleplaying. Generally, though, most people I have gamed with find a balance of both aspects.

 

[Crothian]

I don't know. Why can't we?

I think we can. It was your post that presented it as an either or situation so that's why I asked you.

 

[pawsplay]

I think we can. It was your post that presented it as an either or situation so that's why I asked you.

My point was simply that a backstory does not absolve you of the need for a concept that will be dynamic and interesting once the game begins.

 

[Crothian]

My point was simply that a backstory does not absolve you of the need for a concept that will be dynamic and interesting once the game begins.

I didn't even realize anyone was argueing the other side of that.

 

[pawsplay]

I didn't even realize anyone was argueing the other side of that.

Some people have claimed they have the right to play absolutely anything they want, apparently up to and including halfling commoner serial killers.

 

[LostSoul]

Some people have claimed they have the right to play absolutely anything they want, apparently up to and including halfling commoner serial killers.

And now I have a concept for my next PC.

Shorty McStabstab.