Who would want to play a non-caster?

[Alexander123]

I do not consider it to be a troll thread.

I don't see how discussing this issue is inflammatory.

No, as long as someone has something worthwhile to contribute to this topic we cannot give it a rest.

If you don't like the topic you are free to ignore the thread.

 

[Greg K]

But I personally do consider this a troll thread. The only purpose of this kind of thread is to be inflammatory. Can't we give this topic a rest please?

It is a play style thing. Therefore, I doubt it will happen until you eliminate the power gamers, min/maxers, Char Ops people and the rules rapists.

 

[Alexander123]

...power gamers, min/maxers, Char Ops people and the rules rapists.

Yup, that just about covers it.

 

[Diamond Cross]

Char Ops people

What are char ops people?

???

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Problem being a Cleric is this small thing called...you're expected to be a team player.

Healing is a losing game.

You will very rarely - at least until you get something like Heal - heal for more damage is being dealt. Furthermore, it costs you a standard action to do that healing. It is by all definitions a losing game.

Clerics are best and smashing things with a mace, not healing. Healing is for after the fight - at least, in 3.x.

Your post honestly describes why most people won't want to be a fighter. You say "fighters have freedom to do whatever," I hear "Nobody actually expects the fighter to contribute."

Oh, and at level one, that 1d12+3 axe can kill almost anyone.

 

[kitcik]

Never mind, sorry.

 

[akbearfoot]

"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"

We would totally never be able to play together. To me, that list comes across as so over-the-top patronizing, judgmental, and restricting. Especially the part about your 'friend' that you refuse to play with because he doesn't play the way you want him to. How does that even work. Do you like have an interview with each DM, and run down the list to see what each has to offer you? wow

My rules:
1: Do I like the people I'm playing with, or can I at least tolerate their eccentricities for the sake of having fun?
2: Am I having fun?

I've passed up games b4 because I prefer D&D and they wanted to do something like Exalted and I have none of the resources and dont have time to learn yet another new system. But to diss your buddies over something like 'I really like warforged so they exist in my game world'. ouch.

 

[Greg K]

What are char ops people?

???

The Character Optimization people on the WOTC boards. Some people call them power gamers and min/maxers. However, in my opinion there is a difference. Power gamers play with an emphasis on having a powerful character and/or the accumulation of power. It does not mean they, necessarily, know how to optimize to achieve it.

And to be clear, power gaming, min/maxing, and char ops are valid play styles. However, as with any play style, they are not valid for every group. The exception to this, in my opinion, are rules rapists (who violate the spirit or Rules as Intended) and munchkins (cheaters) which should be banned or shot on site (J/k) .

 

[Greg K]

We would totally never be able to play together. To me, that list comes across as so over-the-top patronizing, judgmental, and restricting. Especially the part about your 'friend' that you refuse to play with because he doesn't play the way you want him to. How does that even work. Do you like have an interview with each DM, and run down the list to see what each has to offer you? wow

The friend admits to trying to stretch the rules and see what he can get away with. I am not interested in that. It leads to arguments between him and the DM and escalation. The DM has also complained about him to me in the past (and wonders why I don't have the problem this when I run), but refuses to do anything about it.

And, yes, as a player, I do, actually, sit and interview the DM (and, as a GM, I look for compatible players). I have played for enough years and in enough games to know what I enjoy, what I don't enjoy and what bores the hell out of me. I have done D&D games that were "pun" games, were "evil campaigns", reskin superheroes into D&D (why would I want to? I have several superhero games), high level games, let's slay gods, etc. I have seen bored "butt kickers" ruin games by sulking, whining when the game moves away from combat to social interaction with NPCs, and attacking NPCs or complain that players were not optimized for combat. I have seen power gamers complain about the starting power level,MAD, or the ineffectual builds of other party members that were not optimized and then get into escalation with the DM (and I am sure that storytellers and method actors cause problems in games with butt kickers etc. At some point, one realizes that not every play style is compatible with every other playstyle depending where people fall on various axis.

My rules:
1: Do I like the people I'm playing with, or can I at least tolerate their eccentricities for the sake of having fun?
2: Am I having fun?

And, here you answered your question. It is a matter of what an individual finds fun.
When it comes to D&D, there are many ways to play and I am looking for certain styles of play that I find fun rather than one where it clashes. I am not going to waste my time playing in a game that does not give me enjoyment rather than stay in the game and bring down everybody else, who might enjoy it.
I don't belittle them for wanting to play that campaign. I am glad they are having fun except that I always get the complaints from the DM and various playersf. It just does not interest me and I prefer to find something else to do and hang with them another time.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Also, "rules rapist?"

Really?