Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5337045" data-attributes="member: 22779">If I could take a stab at this.This has been debated forever.&nbsp; The idea that &quot;true&quot; roleplaying only occurs from a position of weakness or disadvantage, is hardly a new one.&nbsp; People poo poo a mechanically strong character as being munchkin or powergaming and the player often gets tarred with that brush as well.&nbsp; While, otoh, if I come to the table with a &quot;one armed peasant with a drinking problem&quot;, I'm suddenly a role player and not a &quot;roll player&quot;.And, I think most people get that that's not true.&nbsp; You can roleplay an effective character just as well as a weak one.&nbsp; And, like Demetrius, I've certainly seen people point to their mechanically hopeless character and tell me how great their role playing is.&nbsp; Had a DM once in 3e who insisted that everyone make 15 point characters because anything higher was just playing super heroes.Then, suddenly, the 8 Cha, 9 Int characters were spouting long, articulate speaches, coming up with intricate plans and generally acting like James Bond wrapped up with Sawyer from Lost.&nbsp; Completely ignoring the stats in favour of &quot;role&quot; playing.Great role play, but, really, really out of character for what was on the paper in front of them.&nbsp; I made the mistake of pointing this out and pretty much the entire table called me a munchkin powergamer.So, yeah, I can totally see where Deme is coming from with this.&nbsp; There is a pretty vocal segment of the hobby that insists that any sort of mechanical element in the game is equal to &quot;ROLL&quot; playing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 5337045, member: 22779"] If I could take a stab at this. This has been debated forever. The idea that "true" roleplaying only occurs from a position of weakness or disadvantage, is hardly a new one. People poo poo a mechanically strong character as being munchkin or powergaming and the player often gets tarred with that brush as well. While, otoh, if I come to the table with a "one armed peasant with a drinking problem", I'm suddenly a role player and not a "roll player". And, I think most people get that that's not true. You can roleplay an effective character just as well as a weak one. And, like Demetrius, I've certainly seen people point to their mechanically hopeless character and tell me how great their role playing is. Had a DM once in 3e who insisted that everyone make 15 point characters because anything higher was just playing super heroes. Then, suddenly, the 8 Cha, 9 Int characters were spouting long, articulate speaches, coming up with intricate plans and generally acting like James Bond wrapped up with Sawyer from Lost. Completely ignoring the stats in favour of "role" playing. Great role play, but, really, really out of character for what was on the paper in front of them. I made the mistake of pointing this out and pretty much the entire table called me a munchkin powergamer. So, yeah, I can totally see where Deme is coming from with this. There is a pretty vocal segment of the hobby that insists that any sort of mechanical element in the game is equal to "ROLL" playing. [/QUOTE]

Verification