Who would want to play a non-caster?

[Particle_Man]

I don't like keeping track of things. I prefer fighter-types. I like the Warlock though, but that is because I don't have to keep track of things like I would with a wizard.

Oh, this is all 3.5, mind.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Me.

Even though most of my multiclassed PCs over the years have involved spellcasting, most of my non-multiclassed PCs are not spellcasters or are not full-casters. I have almost no pure casters in my stable of PCs. (And even those are usually multiclassed.)

Why?

Because I design my PCs based on the character concept floating in my head. And if didn't involve casting, I wouldn't add it.

 

[Borthos]

I love fighter-types because I'm a weapons kind of guy. Sure I could use Spiritual Hammer or the wizard equivalent knife, but to me and my characters, there's not better feeling than taking down the bad guy and pulling your blade from his beat-less heart.

 

[kitcik]

The question is based on logic, and Greg K's response is a seemingly plausuble logical response. However, I don't buy it for a minute.

The truth is, people don't apply logic (or at least the logic implied by the question) to selecting a class.

I think the answer is much closer to the on above which basically said "I don't want to keep track of that stuff." A lot of people just want to throw dice and bash stuff, or sneak up behind stuff and bash it, and not have to worry about selecting spells or having a spell book or material components or any of that jazz. Most particularly, they don't want to take the time to learn how every spell of their class works, and they don't want to be the chump who holds up the game for 20 minutes referring to the books every time their inititative comes up.

 

[Greg K]

The question is based on logic, and Greg K's response is a seemingly plausuble logical response. However, I don't buy it for a minute.

You would be wrong. If you have been around here longer, you would know from various threads over the years that I believe no gaming is better than bad gaming. You would also know that I am very selective about the games in which I will play.
1. The DM needs to have done work on the setting and set its races, its cultures, its deities (and tailored their domains and spell lists), established house rules etc. before the game starts
2. No kitchen sink games, no Ebberon, no Planescape, no Spelljamer, no evil campaigns for starters
3. No games above level 10-12
4. No powergamers or butt kickers (by this this, I mean rate mid to high on a scale of 1-100 respectively) or the DM must be capable of reining them in
5. No char ops, min/maxers or rules rapists. The DM needs to be willing to put RAI and the good of the campaign as a whole above abuses
6. Limited use of WOTC players supplements (with the DM tailoring any available PrC choices to the campaign) and no XPH, Bo9s, ToM, MoI. I will go for some Unearthed Arcana options. I will go for the use of Green Ronin Master Class books and some other third party material (This is mostly, because I don't think highly of most WOTC player oriented material or alternative mechanics in general)
7. Few if any dungeon crawls
8. Must be a long term campaign. No one shots
9. Must be sandbox that allows the party to go off and follow their own pursuits
10. If something RAW is disrupting the game, the DM needs to be willing to take control and change it or set limits

and, if there are any doubts, I just turned down a game run by one of my friends for violating 2,3,5, 6 and 10. 5, in this case, just happens to be another friend whom will powergame and attempt to Char Op under this DM just to annoy him and see what he can get away with (and much of his char op attempt is not understanding the rules, stretching the rules and the DM not knowing better or caring to stop it).

Edit: As for my favorite classes they include the following;
WOTC
1. Rogue
2. Rogue w/ the Martial Rogue variant (Unearthed Arcana)
3. Rogue w/ the Wilderness and Martial Rogue variants (Unearthed Arcana)
4. Ranger w/ the Complete Champion spellless variant
5. Barbarian w/ the Hunter variant and Favored Environment variants (Unearthed Arcana)
6. Fighter
7. Sorcerer
8. Cleric: using the cloistered cleric variant (as a start to make less martial) and spontaneous divine casting variants (Unearthed arcana). Plus I am willing to limit my spell choices further based on my deity's list of domains and a handful of other spells (e.g., augury, bless, remove curse). Why? Because I am fan of 2e's Specialty Priests and think Clerics should have been more specialized in spell choices and some class features to reflect the deity.
9. Oriental Adventure's Shaman (tailored to be a divine caster)

Non WOTC
1. Green Ronin's Psychic
2. Green Ronin's Shaman
3. Green Ronin's Witch
4. Hong's Knight ( a tailored OA Samurai) combined with the options from Green Ronin's Caviler's Handbook

Which class I will choose depends upon the campaign, its culture and both my character concept and mood.

 

[Alexander123]

A few questions:

1. What is a kitchen sink game?

2. Why no Eberron?

3. Why no evil campaigns?

 

[Greg K]

A few questions:

1. What is a kitchen sink game?

A kitchen sink game is one that allows all or most of the PC options (races, classes, spells, magic items) published.

2. Why no Eberron?

I don't like the setting elements (changelings, dino-riding halflings, lightning rails, the influences that setting was based upon, etc.) and it is a kitchen sink setting designed to incorporate whatever races and classes WOTC published.

3. Why no evil campaigns?

I don't consider it heroic.

 

[Alexander123]

What influences was Eberron based on?

 

[Celebrim]

What influences was Eberron based on?

Overall, to me the setting has a strong early Industrial age tone. I get alot of vibes of Dickens, H. Rider Haggard, Robert Howard, Sir Arthur Conan Dole, Edgar Rice Burroughs, and H.G. Wells. The setting seems to me to be a magical take on the last age of exploration, when brave and hardy explorers went out to the edge of civilization to see what really lay under the sign "Here be dragons." The setting has also featured quite a bit of Sherlock Holmes style investigation in published modules. It's a setting were vampire ladies with parasols and wizards in lab coats fit right in.

 

[Greg K]

What influences was Eberron based on?

From the designers: Lord of the Rings + Pulp (Indiana Jones, Mummy) + Noir (Maltese Falcon) and a desire to capture the feel of Hollywood blockbusters (which I, generally, dislike).

I like Lord of the Rings. I like Indiana Jones. I like the Maltese Falcon. The Mummy is not bad. However, I like them individually rather than mixed.

Now, on top of those influences, the designers deliberately made the world to accomodate anything published in the D&D books. That's kitchen sink which I hate.

They also played up the impact of D&D magic upon the setting. This does not interest in it. I prefer to reduce the magic in the world and remove spells to accomodate it.

When you take the influences and the impact of magic on the setting, I get the early industrial feel similar to Celebrim (not necessarily the same authors except for Sir Arthur Conan Doyle for The Lost World due to the dinosaurs). Its interesting, but not something that interests me to play in. Add the kitchen sink element and I, definitely, don't want to play in it and find it uninteresting.