Why would you want to play *that*??

[fusangite]

Well, Planescape doesn't really count. There, it makes *sense* to be a weird character. I'm talking about the games in which bringing in some templated, whatever -doesn't- make any sense.

Well, I assume that players are making characters their DM permits.

 

[Shemeska]

2. D&D grew out of wargaming.

Emphasis on the "grew out of" part. It's no longer the 70's, and while some of us might pine for the nostalgia of that period during the game's earliest days, the game has grown through three editions since then. It has significantly evolved and expanded beyond those original roots.

Like it or not, DnD is no longer that same game, despite the portions of that nostalgia that really came back like the moaning ghost of Jacob Marley in 3.5 to rattle the chains of assumed use of minis and a grid. If you want to play a wargame rather than an RPG, perhaps DDM might be a better outlet.

*braces self*

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Yes, Bravo indeed. Shouldn't people who view a character as nothing more than statistics, attributes, and scores go play a war game? D&D is a role-playing game. It's based around story, plot motives, and -roles-.

Because, surprisingly, some people like BOTH strange and interesting character concepts and playing them as if they were strange and alien. Not everyone does, but then again, that's where YMACWV comes in.

Brad

* - To head off questions, "almost certainly will"

 

[Psion]

Shouldn't people who view a character as nothing more than statistics, attributes, and scores go play a war game? D&D is a role-playing game. It's based around story, plot motives, and -roles-.

Once again, people who play odd characters are not necessarily veiwing their characters as "nothing more than statistics". What makes a human cleric more roleplay worthy than a genasi scout or a lich wizard? I'm not seeing it. If that works for you, then fine. But I think you misaprehend those who don't see it that way.

As fusangite says, you can play the game from either or both angles.

Well, Planescape doesn't really count. There, it makes *sense* to be a weird character.

If a campaign features these intelligent races at all, and there is not some outstanding reason that they could not be adventurers, then why does it not make sense to make a character like this? For example, if tielfings exist in your game at all, they likely live on the fringe of society, it's not at all implausible that they would engage in the risky career of an adventurer to gain power and acceptance. These sort of things make sense in more than just PS.

 

[Razz]

Given the commonality of such things as half-dragon paragon dwarven clerics of whatever, fiendish tiefling rogue/rangers, stonechildren scouts or reticulated yellow-bellied water diggers, I have to ask WHY?


I HAVE to believe that people who play these things have no desire to come at them from a role-playing perspective. When I see something that is the cross between an earth elemental and a mortal, the roleplayer in me dies a little bit. "How would I even approach something like that as a role-playing concept?" "What is the motivation of such an individual?"

I don't even role-play elves very often because they seem so foreign to my mindset. When I play halflings or gnomes, I try hard to not make them stereotypical. I rarely play dwarves because I think it would be too difficult not to play them at least somewhat stereotypical.

But I have to believe that people who play such mind-boggingly bizarre character concepts ONLY approach them as a collection of statistics. For example, do people who play Warlocks choose them because they would make an interesting role-playing challenge, or do people play Warlocks because they have a lot of phat k3wl special abilities?

For my money, I would be content if I could play nothing more than fighter, wizard, rogue or cleric for the rest of my natural life. I can think of an infinite number of possibilities within just those guidelines. Why the need for all the bizarre character concepts?

Have people lost site of the fact that this is a ROLE-playing game?

ONE REASON: Because it's just freaking COOOL!!

Seriously, my friends don't do number-crunching or power gaming at all. We're all FFVII Advent Children, japanese anime, fighting-video game freaks and enjoy cool stuff like Freeza destroying an entire planet with his powers from DBZ.

No, our D&D games aren't like that but we try to within the rules. We very rarely use a house rule, the only one we have is actually one with the Monkey Grip feat and the other house rule is we use the critical hit table from 2E Player's Option: Combat&Tactics and critical strike table from 2E Player's Option: Spells&Magic or something like that.

My friend likes the idea of a half-ogre barbarian who surges with fiery power from the burning rage within his primal spirit, facing off his barbarian half-brother, an ogre who was given a ritualized blessing from the church of Tiamat and granted the blood of the white dragon (making him half-white dragon/half-ogre) and mastering the energies of his own rage with that of the cold (he has the Frostrager prestige class from Frostburn). The plan to eventually square off in the future during one of my cinematic quest climaxes.

That's just AWESOME! That's all the reason I believe people do crazy combos, not to powergame, but because nowadays it's about the "WOW...oooh...ahhh..." fireworks factor.

At least that's what I think cause my group sees it that way. Probably very different to other groups though. Should it matter though? As long as the group is having fun, right!?

 

[Teflon Billy]

Let me tell you about a great mini-campaign I played in. It was a Planescape campaign in which we were only allowed to build weird creatures from outside the PHB races. We were all motivated to make the best possibly use of the level adjustment for different creatures in the process of creating the characters, something our GM actively encouraged. We were all given seven levels to work with.

Teflon Billy made a half-dragon named Meraxes...

I loved that game. I really enjoyed when we talked that group of Githerzai Monks into helping us tune up that Mind Flayer contingent aboard that train on the Plane that tilted in a different direction each day.

 

[nonamazing]

Well, Planescape doesn't really count. There, it makes *sense* to be a weird character. I'm talking about the games in which bringing in some templated, whatever -doesn't- make any sense.

Umm...okay. You are one hundred percent correct, sir. In campaigns where 'weird' characters don't make sense, then...it doesn't make sense to play 'weird' characters. This is what we in the logic business refer to as a 'tautology'.

Since you're defining the terms here, and your whole statement rests on this nice little twist of circular logic, well, then there's not really anything to talk about, is there? I mean, what you just said literally translates to: "X is true because X is true." There is nothing anyone anywhere in the whole freakin' universe could possibly say or do to break that particular chain of logic.

Nevertheless, I suspect this 'discussion' will continue on for, like, six more pages or so. *sigh* Please try not to hurt each other, kids.

 

[Agamon]

I kind of agree with der_kluge. I know in the games I run and play in, the roleplaying is way better in the contemporary games than in fantasy games. I find most non-humans are either played stereotypical or as "strange looking humans", when there should probably be some sort of blend of the two (they should have some range inpersonality, but not just like humans). The rping suffers as a result.

In modern/supers games, the rping is excellent, as everyone is human (or near human) and personality and motivation is easily cultivated in a familiar environment. I assume human-centric fantasy games, such as GoT, are easier to roleplay in, as well.

But I have to admit, the roleplaying in most D&D games I play is rather shallow anyway. Not that this is a bad thing, they're still a lot of fun to play, just in a different way. So I can see someone wanting to play a half-copper dragon, half-aasimar favored soul and the like, just not for the rp opportunity it presents.

 

[The Shaman]

That's all the reason I believe people do crazy combos, not to powergame, but because nowadays it's about the "WOW...oooh...ahhh..." fireworks factor.

I believe there's a great deal of truthiness in this.

Fantasy as a literary and cinematic genre has changed, and fantasy RPGs reflect that change.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I HAVE to believe that people who play these things have no desire to come at them from a role-playing perspective. When I see something that is the cross between an earth elemental and a mortal, the roleplayer in me dies a little bit.

Then I'd have to believe, no disrespect intended, that your horizons are a bit narrow. IME,
while its true that there are players who are just looking for statistical advangages, they tend to do that with EVERY PC concept they have. But not everyone is like that...

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. William Shakespeare, "Hamlet", Act 1 scene 5

I've been an RPGer for 28 years. I've played all of the core races and classes. I've also played more than just D&D. My reading is also not limited to Tolkien, Lieber, Moorcock, Howard and Vance...or even to sci-fi and fantasy. If you read enough, you'll find characters who are part elemental (or demon, or devil, or dragon, or angel, or...).

Sometimes...many times...a player is just looking for something different. Sometimes they ask themselves what it would be like to "flip the script" and play the other side of a classic story.

Take the Beowulf story, for instance. Aside from the original telling, I've read it as a sci-fi story (Niven & Pournelle), a semi-historical story (Creighton), with additional players (Xena TV show), and 2 different stories from Grendel's and his Mother's viewpoints (don't recall who wrote those). Each retelling put a different spin on things.

Some of my PC concepts are sci-fi or superheroic or pulp archetypes ported into fantasy...and vice versa.

I had a human Ranger based on Batman...and another Gnomish one based on the Lone Ranger (down to his Giant Space Hamster steed, "Mithril").

When I played a Minotaur Ftr/MU in 2Ed, it was because I was playing the "Chosen One" archetype from a different angle.

When I played a Drow Druid/Rgr/MU in 1Ed (years before whats-his name), it was because I was playing the "Outsider" archetype.

The background of a 2Ed Drow MU/Th I once played asked the (still unanswered question) whether she was an insane drow or a LARP robot somehow ported into a world in which magic worked.

My current Githzerai Monk/PsiWar/Lucid Cenobite is a "Stranger in a strange land," not unlike Kwai Chang Caine of Kung Fu fame.

My current Human Rgr/Ftr/Diviner/Spellsword is based on Indiana Jones.

In modern/supers games, the rping is excellent, as everyone is human (or near human) and personality and motivation is easily cultivated in a familiar environment.

Then you're missing out on the fun of playing aliens.

Among my past supers PCs, I have a 7' tall silvery humanoid gladiator from a matriarchal society who must consume her body weight in food daily (and not everything on the planet agrees with her digestive system), a 3' diameter disembodied ball of energy contained within its spaceship, and a collective entity that resembles a protean bundle of 6cm diameter metallically coated carbon-fiber coils from a Jovian world (based on something from a Greg Bear novel).