Signup
Welcome to... Canonfire! World of GreyhawK
Features
Postcards from the Flanaess
Adventures
in Greyhawk
Cities of
Oerth
Deadly
Denizens
Jason Zavoda Presents
The Gord Novels
Greyhawk Wiki
#greytalk
JOIN THE CHAT
ON DISCORD
    Canonfire :: View topic - Character Class Selection
    Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion
    Character Class Selection
    Author Message
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 17, 2004
    Posts: 924
    From: Computer Desk

    Send private message
    Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:45 pm  
    Character Class Selection

    Rather then hijack a thread; curious about class selection.

    1ed: Roll character according to stats; limited choice but it did force the player to consider a range of classes. Random rolls encouraged the player to try different character classes.

    2ed: Move stats around to customize character; gave player more control but I found players tended to play the same class.

    3ed: More stat customization and class choices; haven't played much but while some liked the freedom - I found it unappealing - everybody had multiple slashes.

    4ed: Haven't played but it probably increase the classes and feats.

    Originally within the setting to become proficent encouraged single class characters. Multi-classes were possible but rare. As the editions have continued this decision has been lost as most players concern themselves with building a character not playing it.

    Call me a dinosaur but perhaps too much character freedom has simply created a system where players don't make choices anymore.

    Your thoughts - Its all good. Wink


    Last edited by Crag on Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:15 pm; edited 3 times in total
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 13, 2008
    Posts: 563
    From: brazil

    Send private message
    Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:56 pm  
    Re: Character Class Selection

    Crag wrote:


    Call me a dinosaur but perhaps too much character freedom has simply created a system where players don't make choices anymore.

    Your thoughts - Its all good. Wink


    amen!
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: May 22, 2006
    Posts: 64
    From: Here

    Send private message
    Tue Oct 07, 2008 3:46 pm  

    And there was a great hosannah...

    Heck yeah. One of the best times I ever had was when I rolled for stats such that a thief was the only logical choice. Initially bent about it, I eventially had a blast discovering my inner klepto. In Ravenloft Castle.

    I didn't live, but man, I died clutching a lot of shiny things.
    _________________
    The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed, in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a wide-spread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible. - Bertrand Russell
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 13, 2002
    Posts: 1077
    From: Orlane, Gran March

    Send private message
    Tue Oct 07, 2008 4:35 pm  

    Well, allowed another.

    I have to disagree with your assesment of the problem. There is plenty of flexabilty available to a 3.5 DM and players. However the DM still has to be a DM. In 1st ED we often asked the DM to flex the rules and allow something new and different. He/I often did. I play in a game now where we are restricted to how the die fell (i.e. roll 4d6 six times, drop the lowest, and play them in order). We also cannot use any book other than the Players Handbook unitl 5th level. At 5th we are allowed one other source book. At 10th we will be able to use another. Multiclassing requires a solid story.

    If you dont like it then restrict it. Your still the DM.
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Feb 07, 2007
    Posts: 64
    From: The Kingdom of Nyrond (LA County, CA)

    Send private message
    Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:36 pm  
    Re: Character Class Selection

    Crag wrote:

    Originally within the setting to become proficent encouraged single class characters. Multi-classes were possible but rare. As the editions have continued this decision as been lost as most players concern themselves with building a character not playing it.

    Call me a dinosaur but perhaps too much character freedom has simply created a system where players don't make choices anymore.

    Your thoughts - Its all good. Wink


    Completely agree. The problem was lampshaded for me when in a 3.5 game I was playing in, a fellow player wanted to play a half-vampire ninja (god, I wish I was making this up). While flexibility is good, the plethora of choices and the implicit encouragement of the 3.5 rules to allow everything and the kitchen sink in has allowed such asinine concepts as this, which to my mind appeal only to powergamers. There are books and books of boutique classes out there that players are implicitly encouraged to badger their DM into allowing, even if it doesn't fit his or her campaign concept, because WoTC knows (and with $e, magic items are getting the treatment too) that means books will be bought. I had a knock-down drag-out with a paladin player who wanted to be a Knight of the Chalice, but refused to wait until he had a storyline event that would give him a chance for his character to have earned it (to wit, killing a demon single-handed). Because he wanted the goodies, including IIRC, casting searing light x number of times a day at level 12.

    And the feats! The ****ing feats killed the game for me, because it limited what I could do to challenge the players without having them argue "well, do they have such-and-such feat to do it?" even when logic would suggest they would -- the Verbeegs in Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk spring to mind -- they had halberds and had been in the dungeons for years, and so should have been able to have used them effectively in the constricted tunnels. Yet my players were moaning because they found out somehow that they hadn't the Short Haft feat and that I applied it retroactively, following a logical reasoning.

    I used to like 3.5 until stuff like this really became obnoxious. I have allowed only one boutique item in my C&C game -- as a test case, I allowed one player to have an Aasimar (using the 2e Planescape writeup adapted to Castles and Crusades).
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:41 pm  

    Players sometimes have to be helped to see that they might enjoy playing "another" type of character. Laughing As Jeminnab said, he ended up enjoying it. Cool

    But you can't force it. I, myself, always enjoyed Magic, but thought that the Magician class could be improved. Confused My thoughts on improvement? They were met! Happy Enter the Sorcerer! Cool The "innate" power is what I always wanted.

    Some people just don't want to be a Thief, or Paladin, or whatever. Sometimes a DM is looking for just that type, to fit into a game he's running. The character is needed for certain game objectives to be met. Sad

    But you will not have a good game if your players aren't happy. Mad Sometimes, even the DM has to alter his/her expectations. Sad

    Just my thoughts. Happy
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Wed Oct 08, 2008 8:19 am  

    Half-vampire ninja. That is funny, but you know, that might be fun and justified in the setting. Personally, I would only want to see it in a solo campaign and not a long one at that. Things like that are interesting when they are rare. When they are around every corner, they get booring.

    In a few campaigns I have DMed, I simple created the characters that I wanted to run and let the players pick and negotiate.

    The last character I played (I've only ever played and DMed 1ed with flex) I simply took the stats as rolled without even swapping their order as was allowed, gave it some though and picked a cleric.

    IMO the fun of the game is in the advancement and the interesting roll playing situations you end up in. You have to have restrictions (including against overspecialization) to overcome for both of those. Gaining power, rather than starting with it is obvious. Gaining character, that is developing it over time, is less so. That uniqueness and excitement of something crazy like a half-vampire ninja quickly wears off, especially if you have to share time with other PCs. Not a lot of ways to develep. A simple cleric, however has a lot of options.
    _________________
    Plar of Poofy Pants
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Wed Oct 08, 2008 11:48 am  

    Wolfsire wrote:
    Half-vampire ninja. That is funny, but you know, that might be fun and justified in the setting. Personally, I would only want to see it in a solo campaign and not a long one at that. Things like that are interesting when they are rare. When they are around every corner, they get booring.

    That uniqueness and excitement of something crazy like a half-vampire ninja quickly wears off, especially if you have to share time with other PCs. Not a lot of ways to develep. A simple cleric, however has a lot of options.


    Wolfsire! Hail and well met! Happy

    Well said. A "unique" character is no longer unique if there are more than one in any given location.

    Your basic characters; Warrior, Cleric, Magician, etc., all can be quite interesting, if they're well played. After all, we are "role playing," actors, if you will. Develop the character! In our world, everyone isn't unique -- not in the terms we're discussing. The vast majority of us are "average." Mad

    People in our world are "unique," because of what they do, or how they do it, not because of the circumstances of their birth, i.e. half-Orc, etc.

    As DM's we sometimes have trouble getting the players to see that, but they need to.

    Just my thoughts. Happy
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Thu Oct 09, 2008 7:58 am  

    Howdy, Mystic-Scholar! Welcome to CanonFire! Be sure to burn some canon in the postfost. It is loads of fun.
    _________________
    Plar of Poofy Pants
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 09, 2008 9:03 am  

    Wolfsire wrote:
    Howdy, Mystic-Scholar! Welcome to CanonFire! Be sure to burn some canon in the postfost. It is loads of fun.


    Wolfsire! Hail and well met! Happy

    Thanks for the welcome. I originally started playing P&P Greyhawk in 1979, while serving with the 82nd Airborne (North Carolina).

    In the 80's I got into truck driving, becoming an Over-the-Road driver -- home 3 days a month. Not very condusive to gaming. Sad 2nd edition was just out when I "fell away," so I've just been trying to "catch up" before offering any criticism. Wink

    The WoG I find lying before me is much different then the one I "left behind." Having "grown-up" with Greyhawk, you guys might be less inclined to notice it.

    In my time (of playing) the Egg of Coot and City of the Gods were still mysterious. Virtually nothing was known about them. Confused Now I find that there are things known about them and it all relates to science. Mad

    I can not even begin to tell you how much I hate that! Mad

    Weiss and Hickman created Krynn. I loved Tanis, Raistlin and the gang. Then, the Gods battle Chaos, its a draw, everyone leaves, no more magic. Mad I have not read a single Dragonlance book since, and never will again. And I mean NEVER!

    Allow me to ask; If everyone (relatively speaking) is so hell bent on destroying magic, why do you play? Confused There are sci-fi games out there you know. Shocked

    In my WoG, the laws of physics operate differently. Gunpowder cannot exist and the atom cannot be split, not even by Mighty Tharizdun. No damn science, period! Exclamation Please don't get me started. Cool

    I knew this would happen when I heard that WotC took over and squeezed out "our" fearless leader, EGG. (EGG may have intended to do this, eventually, I cannot speak to that. But that wasn't what any of us believed at that time) Then, "Wesley Crusher" (don't know his real name) joins the program. Who next, Aniken Skywalker!? Exclamation Question Mad

    Computers, robots and crashed space ships; My beloved Greyhawk hardly exist any more, and will not exist much longer. Sad (Maybe 4e returning to 576CY is a good thing) Confused

    None of those people are the least bit interested in magic, they're only interested in taking all my beloved games, books and stories and making them nuclear. I hate it beyond words.

    Now you know and are forwarned. Be prepared. Cool

    But, hey . . .

    Just my thoughts. Happy
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Thu Oct 09, 2008 10:34 am  

    I'm not crazy about in particular sci fi, but Gygax did write Barrier Peaks as well as the a few versions of Murlynd. I enjoy that Greyhawk is eclectic. Gygax's notion of magic fading was for down the line, not the playing dates. Still, I'm not one for the ubiquitous magic of 3e. That being said, take a look at this "magic" item, my frood: http://www.canonfire.com/cf/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=745
    _________________
    Plar of Poofy Pants
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 09, 2008 11:08 am  

    Wolfsire! Hail and well met, my friend.

    Good stuff. I gave you 5 stars for original thinking. Happy

    I haven't learned to do the "link" thing yet. I'm a computer neophyte. Embarassed

    I've written many things, but I'm not sure that I would wish to post them. I have no desire to give up any of my intellectual rights to WotC. (Though I am thinking of tackling that, "The Myth of Vatun," thing. That sounds right up my alley Cool )

    I began a book, back in the Army, but never got past the first 5 chapters. The WoG has simply changed too much since my time and, besides, without WotC's imprimatur, it would never get published. Sad

    When I was 18, my father had "another one." Happy My kid brother's 30 now. A few years back, he discovered my unfinished book and shared it with his friends. (I haven't quite gotten around to telling him that he doesn't "own" all of my stuff! Happy He digs into whatever he wants. I'm a bachelor and have no kids of my own, so . . . Aw, well, I love the "boy" and, as my Dad says, he's "the baby." Happy {He hates that! Happy })

    Anyway, he and his friends are mad because I won't finish the book. Mad But the world's changed too much. Even our own. I don't "do" Epic Fantasy, I do Sword and Sorcery, and now, that's just a sub-genre. Too bad. Sad

    I begin the book with a prophecy. After all these years the prophecy still works! Happy At least, those kids think so. I'm thinking that I might "tweak it" just a bit though.

    Ah, well, even the real world moves on.

    See you in the forums, my friend! Happy
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 17, 2004
    Posts: 924
    From: Computer Desk

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:31 pm  

    Thanks everyone for your comments - Ave Atque Vale, Mystic-Scholar Smile

    Glad to see others are concerned about the unlimited character classes Wink

    Can't wait to see the vampire/ninja/druid/paladin/assassin/monk/mage/priest
    Coming soon from a powergamer at your table

    Btw: anyone ask the PCs to explain how the character came to be.

    Most PCs start as poor peasants -
    IE: vampire/ninja - 15 years old -
    Father to son: You are not like other boys -
    After a hard day in the fields; at the door was a vampiress -
    Since my wife died I've been lonely and things happen -
    You were born but some evil creatures will not give up slaughter -
    She left to attack the next village and never returned -
    When you were around 12 years old; a ninja wandered by the house -
    I had never heard of ninjas but I knew he should teach you -
    I was lucky; he wanted to work on a farm and so it worked out -
    You have mastered exotic thief skills and your bloodthirsty heritage -
    Go out and find fame; I am so proud Question


    Last edited by Crag on Fri Oct 10, 2008 12:39 am; edited 1 time in total
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:38 pm  

    Yeah! That's it! That's how it happened! Just like that! Laughing Laughing Laughing

    There are some really inexplicable characters running around Oerth. Cool

    Just my thoughts. Happy
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 13, 2008
    Posts: 563
    From: brazil

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:53 am  

    " and so, he travelled to gnarley forest and learn the ways of the nature. eh was so in tune with the nature, that mother nature promote him as a paladin. in fact he love all plants, but in secret, hate all animals! then, he learned to kill animals with a hunter in the woods! if you can do that to animals, you can do that to humans!

    filling guilty, he decide to go to a monastery, shave his head and become a monk. the monks teach him all they know, and, having a ninja past, it wasnt so hard.

    lefting the temple by his 18, he date a mage who had a twin sister, a cleric.
    after a love afair and a 3 some, he mastered both disciplines".

    and thus, here are our druid/paladin/assassin/monk/mage/cleric
    Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:26 am  

    Not to undermine or disagree with the point you guys are making, but I think it is reasonably possible to have a half-vampire ninja, at least constant with my world. I stand by my prior qualification as to when to allow this. I would also note that only playing 1e there would have to be some changes.

    For my Zahindia, see these maps: http://www.canonfire.com/cf/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=899
    Because it incorporates elements of Indian and Chinese culture, I ripped from Myster the module series X4, 5 and 10. From X4 in the mountains between Mulwar and Hule there is a monastery haunted by a variant species of vampire. It would not be unreasonable or very difficult to extrapolate from that a reasonable background.
    _________________
    Plar of Poofy Pants
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 10, 2008 1:04 pm  

    Wolfsire! Hail and well met! Happy

    I quite agree that there are some very unique characters in the WoG, and magic is the reason. Almost anything is possible; The SB is always experimenting, or so it seems.

    Still, having been away from the game for awhile, I need to ask;

    What is a half-vampire? Question I mean, does it not drink blood? Or, it drinks blood, but can come out during the day? What? Confused

    Please bare in mind that I do not have all of the newest books and I haven't had the time (and don't have the time) to Google everything! Sad

    I really do thank all you guys/gals for your patience. Thanks! Happy
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:48 pm  

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:
    Wolfsire! Hail and well met! Happy

    ...

    What is a half-vampire? Question I mean, does it not drink blood? Or, it drinks blood, but can come out during the day? What? Confused

    Please bare in mind that I do not have all of the newest books and I haven't had the time (and don't have the time) to Google everything! Sad

    ...


    He, he, he. I don't know, nor do I care. With few exceptions, I don't have any of the new stuff either. It is likely some crazy Thirds Edition BS or a PC wannbe of the same. There are half dragons, half demons and half whatever else they want. Half orc and half elves are bad enough!
    _________________
    Plar of Poofy Pants
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2007
    Posts: 221
    From: Vancouver

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:01 pm  

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:
    What is a half-vampire? Question I mean, does it not drink blood? Or, it drinks blood, but can come out during the day? What? Confused


    Half vampires are from Libris Mortis, a book all about undead. Its a great book but the half vampire was an especially lame idea for a monster. It proposes that a vampire who has drunk enough blood may gain the ability to breed with living humanoids or monstrous humanoids, thus producing a half vampire. Half vampires are not considered undead, but do get some limited vampiric abilities (such as blood drain, charm, fast healing, and ability score increases.) They are also blood dependant, so they have to consume a little blood each day, but I don't think they have vulnerabilities to sunlight.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:49 pm  

    Wolfsire wrote:
    He, he, he. I don't know, nor do I care. With few exceptions, I don't have any of the new stuff either. It is likely some crazy Thirds Edition BS or a PC wannbe of the same. There are half dragons, half demons and half whatever else they want. Half orc and half elves are bad enough!


    Wolfsire, you keep this up and ours is going to turn into a life-long friendship! Laughing Happy Cool You're right of course, at least half-Orcs and even half-Elves were once explained by rape! Shocked Now, anything goes, or so it seems. Mad

    Luz! Hail and well met! Happy

    Thanks for the info! Cool I'll have to look into acquiring a copy of Libris Mortis.

    From what you wrote, I have to agree with you -- sounds a little lame. Confused They inherit one weakness (at least) in that they have to have at least some blood each day. Sad And yet, you don't list any outstanding strengths, just ho hum stuff. Sad Pity.

    Just my thoughts. Happy
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Dec 22, 2002
    Posts: 15
    From: NM

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 10, 2008 10:41 pm  

    Wolfsire wrote:
    Mystic-Scholar wrote:
    Wolfsire! Hail and well met! Happy

    ...

    What is a half-vampire? Question I mean, does it not drink blood? Or, it drinks blood, but can come out during the day? What? Confused

    Please bare in mind that I do not have all of the newest books and I haven't had the time (and don't have the time) to Google everything! Sad

    ...


    He, he, he. I don't know, nor do I care. With few exceptions, I don't have any of the new stuff either. It is likely some crazy Thirds Edition BS or a PC wannbe of the same. There are half dragons, half demons and half whatever else they want. Half orc and half elves are bad enough!


    Greetings to all! Long time lurker

    I guess someone thought Blade would make a good character type. My group, encompassing 3 DMs and 3 different states anymore, plays a combination of 1st/2nd ed with a smattering of 3rd ed recently added in. We do the 4d6 drop lowest and assign as desired so you at least have a chance at what you want. We have allowed some interesting character types, however there is usually one heck of a backstory and the character comes with quite a baggage train.

    Two of the three DMs myself included, played in a weekly 3rd ed game at the WOTC store in Tacoma, WA briefly and didn't much care for the fact that you almost had to roll dice to see if you could correctly blow your nose. I realize that much of that is a DM issue, however some is the profusion of rules that attempt to cover every conceivable situation.

    More recently I played 3.5 at a few RPGA weekly game days in AZ. Upon my arrival, I was happy to see about 30 or 40 players set to go. I had developed a character concept that I wanted to try and, using their point system, I was able to create the ranger I wanted. Imagine my dismay when I was taken to task by everyone at the game table (about 9 people) for worrying about character and not about taking this skill or that to maximize my damage potential and survivability. As I looked around, almost everyone in the room was talking about what bonuses their characters had in combat and how big that last monster they kicked the crap out of was. The rare exceptions were those about my age who had been playing for many years and looked about as disgusted as I was. I tried twice (just in case the first was a fluke) and found the same thing.

    I have been playing since about 1984 and I definetely prefer the older editions as well. I have yet to take a look at the 4th ed stuff as I can't see dropping that kind of green just to see if it's useful.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Sat Oct 11, 2008 7:24 am  

    Artalian wrote:
    Greetings to all! Long time lurker

    I guess someone thought Blade would make a good character type.

    Imagine my dismay when I was taken to task by everyone at the game table (about 9 people) for worrying about character and not about taking this skill or that to maximize my damage potential and survivability. As I looked around, almost everyone in the room was talking about what bonuses their characters had in combat . . . The rare exceptions were those about my age who had been playing for many years and looked about as disgusted as I was.


    Artalian! Hail and well met! Shocked

    I don't really associate Blade with a half-vampire. Wink As you'll recall, his associate (Kristofferson) explained to that girl: "Blade has all their strengths and none of their weaknesses." Also, Blade had to take a special serum to keep his bloodlust in check. That really isn't the type of character our friend Luz descibed.

    As for the rest, Amen Brother! Hack and slash, that's all those kids are good for. No story, no plot, no character (read personality developement) Its enough to make a grown man cry. Sad

    Just my thoughts.
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 17, 2004
    Posts: 924
    From: Computer Desk

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:25 pm  

    Some issues have raised about the direction of the system and as Anced_Math mentioned the DM remains the final arbiter but if you have to disallow entire sections are you really playing the system. That decision causes problems of its own as you contend with players especially powergamers that pour over the rules.

    I don't see the need for the complexity that is being developed; the system, especially the feats seem to be getting in the way rather then encouraging play. As mentioned elsewhere; the core classes can offer great varety if played well.

    This is the core problem; books have replaced imagination in many games. Characters used to be about what the player wanted - fighter could be bloody brute, refined gentlemen or salty street tough - now howerver we pour over books trying to find feats and classes. This is what bothers me; if I want to role-play my charcter as a gentlemen - allow a story based reason why he learned courtly manners not an argrument over the ettique feat. For me story and character development should come before mechanics. The player should control the actions of his character not the books.


    Just a thought...
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:49 pm  

    Crag wrote:
    Some issues have raised about the direction of the system . . . I don't see the need for the complexity that is being developed; the system, especially the feats seem to be getting in the way rather then encouraging play. As mentioned elsewhere; the core classes can offer great varety if played well.

    This is the core problem; books have replaced imagination in many games. Characters used to be about what the player wanted - fighter could be bloody brute, refined gentlemen or salty street tough - now howerver we pour over books trying to find feats and classes.

    The player should control the actions of his character not the books.


    Crag! Amen, brother! Happy
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 14, 2005
    Posts: 221


    Send private message
    Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:14 am  

    <rant>

    Crag wrote:
    Some issues have raised about the direction of the system and as Anced_Math mentioned the DM remains the final arbiter but if you have to disallow entire sections are you really playing the system. That decision causes problems of its own as you contend with players especially powergamers that pour over the rules.
    I don't see the need for the complexity that is being developed; the system, especially the feats seem to be getting in the way rather then encouraging play. As mentioned elsewhere; the core classes can offer great varety if played well.
    This is the core problem; books have replaced imagination in many games. Characters used to be about what the player wanted - fighter could be bloody brute, refined gentlemen or salty street tough - now howerver we pour over books trying to
    find feats and classes. This is what bothers me; if I want to role-play my charcter as a gentlemen - allow a story based reason why he learned courtly manners not an argrument over the ettique feat. For me story and character development should come before mechanics. The player should control the actions of his character not the books.

    Just a thought...


    I don't mean this meanly, and know Crag that I have the greatest respect for you and pretty much everyone on this thread, but this arguement that the books get in the way of creatvity is an utter crock. The books expand options. the books expand the ability to get mechanical benefit for a backstory, but in no way does it get in the way. The point at which it does is the point at which the DM needs to sit down with the player and discuss with that player exactly what they are trying to do, and explain the finer points of roleplaying. You can come up with fine backstories with no rules, so rules should not factor into backstories. "I want to be a noble born and bred knight. I want to use fighter as my class." Ok, that's perfectly fine. I might suggest taking some diplomacy to show where that schooling actually got through your head, but its not necessary, you could have just been a poor student of diplomatic speaking - you would hardly be the first one in history. Now I can suggest all kinds of ways to maximize your mechanical benefit for the backstory you've chosen, but having access to those rules does not make your choice any worse or better.

    I'm sorry if I am overly harsh on this, its not meant as such, but this is one of those discussions that gets me riled. Min-maxers will always use rules instead of story. It does not make those rules bad, only those players. People who like story and mechanical benefit (and penalty) for those stories should not be lumped in with those who only take the benefits without regards to story. And yes, I know no one was specifically aiming at this subset of gamers, but you were hitting us all the same. Having options is not bad, using them solely for maximzed benefit with no regards for story or continutity is.

    </rant>
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 14, 2005
    Posts: 221


    Send private message
    Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:17 am  

    And, for the record, 4E and 3.5 are just about the same in regards for having a lot of options so you can create any type of character you can imagine, and have two similar concepts and not exactly have the same two characters. In fact in both systems I can think of several ways to create Crag's noble warrior example, or just about anything else you can imagine, both with and without mechanical benefit.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 17, 2004
    Posts: 924
    From: Computer Desk

    Send private message
    Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:19 pm  

    No worries MikelAmroni Wink

    I love a good debate Smile

    My main complaint was highlighted within your post Shocked

    MikelAmroni wrote:
    ...you can create any type of character you can imagine, and have two similar concepts and not exactly have the same two characters.


    I don't want to create a character by picking feats to fit a concept Exclamation

    I want to play my character in whatever way I decide not a feat slot.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 14, 2005
    Posts: 221


    Send private message
    Tue Oct 14, 2008 7:18 am  

    And there's no reason why you couldn't do that. There's nothing wrong suboptimal builds, that's why they are called options - I've done my share. Its by no means required. But I, for one, enjoy the fact we could be playing thematically identical characters, and have mechanically different characters with entirely different ways of solving problems. I don't call that a problem, pretty much ever. But that's just my opinion, and we all know about them. Happy
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 17, 2004
    Posts: 924
    From: Computer Desk

    Send private message
    Tue Oct 14, 2008 9:01 am  

    I think this is a philosophical difference Wink

    No matter how many feats and boutique class abilities exist to "build" my character to accomplish my goals. I would rather not have to hinder myself and build at all.

    Rather then have a feat or ability to achieve something; why not simply roleplay. Do I really need to have a rule to decide if my character swims or can use a spear or has table manners. I find it somewhat depressing when players check their sheets to decide if they can do something - if its allowed.

    Common sense people; doesn't have to be a rule for everything and if you want to learn to do something - roleplay.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 14, 2005
    Posts: 221


    Send private message
    Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:47 am  

    I'll admit, I've had a time breaking my 4E players of this. Stop asking me if you can do something, tell me what you want to do and I'll tell you if you can or can't. Commit to it, and either succeed or fail. This is very important for skill challenges, where creative uses of skills can make for some odd ways to add to the success of a challenge. In a recent one, a player asked if they could remember hobgoblin tactics and historical battles to prepare an ambush for them adequately. History was no where in my prep, but that sort of out of the box thinking was what I had been asking them to do. It just got more animated from there. Happy

    But I suspect it is a philisophical difference. I see no problem letting mechanics reward (and punish) me for roleplaying choices I make in character. The reward or punishment is always secondary to the story, but I am a big believer in if you're willing to make it hurt in RP, it should hurt in mechanics too, and vice versa. But most of my 3.5 games (till recently) allowed flaws as per Unearthed Arcana.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 13, 2002
    Posts: 1077
    From: Orlane, Gran March

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:36 pm  

    It is for this reason that I like playing with people who don't really know or care about the rules. Mikel and I play with a few who tell you what they want to do, and have no idea if the rules will allow. It really makes the gaming more fun if people play this way.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 04, 2003
    Posts: 156
    From: Nyrond

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:02 pm  

    I've always been a fan of the point-buy system. I think it keeps all the characters near the same power level when your starting out and offers a lot of flexibility on designing your character.

    Hmm. This thread got me thinking about the differences in the various editions as D&D has evolved.

    I loved 1st edition since it's were I started and I had a wonderfully good story telling Dungeon Master that taught me the game. The edition had a lot of shortcoming that I see now after having played 2nd 3rd, and 4th but I since the later editions didn't exist yet I was happily ignorant. Still I have very fond memories of not needing battle maps, figurines, and 50 lbs of rulebooks to play the game. We would explain to the DM what we wanted to do and he'd give us a ya or nay. The game was very oriented to story-telling and imagination.

    When 2nd edition came out we gradually moved into the new rules with or original 1st edition campaign. The new edition seemed to fix a lot of 1st editions problems. I really liked giving thieves control over how they built their thieving abilities. Making the Bard and class hurt a bit because I had a 1st edition bard but was a good move for the game. The proficiencies were kind of a wash for me, it was helpful to have the mechanic to show what your character knew to do but we had been just fine working it out on the fly with the DM in 1st edition. I hated the introduction of splat books (complete this complete that, etc). The splat books were usually about a hundred pages with 10% of it being interesting material, 40% reprinting materials that were already somewhere else, and another 40% pages of instructions on how to roleplay your character (kits and personality archtypes). I thought (and still do think) that having rules defining how you roleplay your character is ridiculous. If I want to play a Fighter who is a gruff ex-soldier I don't need a kit and a personalty archtype to tell me how to do it. The game was still story-telling oriented and the rules were a bit better but TSR started treating us like idiot consumers rather than imaginative gamers.

    While 2nd edition was a refinement of 1st edition, 3rd edition and the d20 rules were a whole new game with the same names. I liked a lot of 3rd edition. Having your AC get higher rather than lower when it got better made more sense and was easier to track. Having three saves rather than five was simpler and they made more sense in how they worked. Skills and feats seemed a better system over all than 2nd editions proficiencies. Unfortunately splat was now a tradition and after several years nobody could keep track of all the masses of classes, feats, rules, erratas, faqs, etc. The mass of rules, exceptions to rule, meta rules, and all the other stuff turned the game into a metagamer's and rule's lawyer's dream but became really cumbersome for most of us. The game became less of a fantasy RPG and more of a reality simulator that just happened to be set in a fantasy setting. Everything needed to be logical and have rules to show, logically, how it was working. An amazing richness of ideas and possibilities for characters but to many options for players to argue about why they can do something when a DM tells them that they can't.

    4th edition was another radical change if how things were done. I think they did a good job in dealing with some of the issues that were problems in 3rd edition (combat options like AOOs, summoning, and grappling that really bogged combat down. Game mechanics like Hitpoints, DCs, and high level magic that became unbalanced at higher levels, and multiclassing rules that let players 'cherrypick' levels of different classes for character optimization rather than for flavor) Unfortunately from right off the bat splat was built into the system and I imagine in a year or two we will be right back to the unmanageable mess they made of 3rd edition. I also don't really like how all the characters are much more homogenized, although I understand it being done that way to try to keep things balanced. In earlier editions your character did something (cast spells, swing weapons, sneak around) and got better at it as you developed. In 4th edition everyone does everything with just some slightly different flavors or ways of going about it. Where 3rd edition had been a system to simulate reality 4th edition was a system to simulate Magic the Gathering or a MMORPG like World of Warcraft. I think that is actually pretty funny… we are playing an RPG that is simulating an MMORPG that is an outgrowth of a computer game that was simulating the earlier edition of the RPG.

    Another system to mention would be GURPS. I have always wanted to play it and have never been able to pry enough of my gaming buddies away from D&D long enough to do so, but I really like what I've seen of the mechanics of earning points and spending them however you like to build your character. Getting away from the class based system of 1-4th edition D&D. I think that it would give an amazing degree of designing your character to your taste. I also think that since its buy everything with points and everyone can buy anything depending on how they use their points that its probably a very balanced system.

    I can understand that TSR and WotC are in the business to make money which is, in large part, the reason for all the splat. I just wish that instead of spending their time coming up with new (and often poorly thought out, play-tested, and or edited) rules and mechanics that they would do a nice balanced set of simple rules and then focus on coming out with killer campaign worlds, modules, and other stuff along those lines. I think that it would be a better service to their customers although it probably wouldn't be as profitable overall.
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:17 am  

    I really like that post, Varthalon. Though, I have really looked into it, I've though GURPS might be a great system. If all my favorite modules weren't in 1e ... Maybe one of these days.
    _________________
    Plar of Poofy Pants
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 17, 2004
    Posts: 924
    From: Computer Desk

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:07 pm  

    Well written Varthalon Wink

    Perhaps it is as simple: I want the character classes to be distinct and I want to develop my character within that class without rules to define how to roleplay.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 04, 2003
    Posts: 156
    From: Nyrond

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 17, 2008 3:38 pm  

    Thanks guys
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:03 pm  

    Varthalon! Amen brother! Happy
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:19 pm  

    Varthalon sums things up pretty dang good.

    I really do think the splat books appeal just as much to long time gamers as they are experienced enough to know what and what not to use from them. If not for the OGL and d20 license, there would have only been a few modules in support of all the 3.0/3.5 splat. That is really where the OGL and d20 licenses helped WotC. Veterans can make up adventures fairly easily, but all the new folks gettin into the game with 3.0/3.5 really needed the pre-fab modules more to not only get into the game but to gain an understanding about how to create their own adventures(using the pre-fab stuff as a model usually). WotC surely did a relatively poor job in regard to this aspect of the product line.

    Fortunately there have been a good amount of well written modules from 3rd party companies.

    With regards to skill checks in 3.0/3.5, I let the players role-play to their hearts' content just so long as they don't attempt to push things too far. By that I mean trying to use a skill through role-playing that is somewhat or totally out of character for them. Or, if it is a very important situation I will require an appropriate skill check. Clever role-playing and/or ideas almost always results in a bonus to a skill role(but don't tell my players that). ;) I don't really have set system for doing this though, and just do what seems appropriate for each situation. That's what DMs are supposed to do so far as I am concerned. So you see, you can have your skill check & role-playing cake and eat it too. :D
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Oct 06, 2003
    Posts: 18
    From: Wandering the Axewood....

    Send private message
    Sat Oct 18, 2008 12:15 am  

    Crag wrote:
    IE: vampire/ninja - 15 years old -


    And yet one of the very earliest characters of fantasy rpgs was Sir Fang, a vampire in Dave Arneson's Blackmoor game. Its incumbent on the DM to see that the PC is not overpowered, not the gamer whose idea is to have a certain type of character. Especially when it concerns fantasy games, the sky is technically the limit. Want to play a Superhero, ok, we'll work that in somehow. A Gunslinger from an alternate reality or a Robot from the future? We'll give it a go. It is, after all, Clarke's Law that states any sufficiently advanced Technology is indistinguishable from Magic. There is not one dime's worth of difference between a blaster, a 6-shooter and a wand of fire when you get right down to it.

    I fail to understand the grognard rant of 'damn game has too many choices' when in fact that is EXACTLY how it originally was. We do, after all, run the kinds of games that we want to play.
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 13, 2008
    Posts: 563
    From: brazil

    Send private message
    Sat Oct 18, 2008 5:09 am  

    one thing that i saw these days was the number of books needed or "sugested" to play a adventure

    1st ed most of the times suggest just the core books, and sometimes when a adventure was part of a campaign, they mentioned the othter partes.


    2ed had the 3 core books, plus the setting boxed set, and 1-3 other books, like a wizards spell books or a set monstrous manual.

    3ed had a lot of books recomended: the 3 core, plus various "class books", books with new feats, skills, monstrous...i have deleted my 3ed books from computer, so i cant provide example, but its about 5 or more plus the 3 core.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Sat Oct 18, 2008 7:26 am  

    Keolander wrote:
    Especially when it concerns fantasy games, the sky is technically the limit. Want to play a Superhero, ok, we'll work that in somehow. A Gunslinger from an alternate reality or a Robot from the future? We'll give it a go. It is, after all, Clarke's Law that states any sufficiently advanced Technology is indistinguishable from Magic. There is not one dime's worth of difference between a blaster, a 6-shooter and a wand of fire when you get right down to it.


    Albert Einstein, Physicist and Mathematicain, based his laws/theory upon irrefutable mathematical criterion. Cool

    Arthur C. Clarke, Fantasy Writer, based his "Law" on opinion. Confused

    I don't share Clarke's opinion. Wink I do not mix science and magic in my world. No alternate realities, no six-shooter, no blaster, no Batman. Shocked

    Here, there be Dragons, not Dreadnaughts. Mad

    Just my thoughts. Happy
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Oct 06, 2003
    Posts: 18
    From: Wandering the Axewood....

    Send private message
    Sat Oct 18, 2008 7:05 pm  

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:
    Arthur C. Clarke, Fantasy Writer, based his "Law" on opinion.


    Sorry, but that is untrue. Damn near anything 'magical' could just as easily be achieved with technology.

    Quote:
    share Clarke's opinion. Wink I do not mix science and magic in my world. No alternate realities, no six-shooter, no blaster, no Batman. Shocked

    Here, there be Dragons, not Dreadnaughts. Mad

    Just my thoughts. Happy


    I realise your mileage may vary, but the simple fact is that D&D's roots clearly mixed the two. Castle Greyhawk, after all, had The Machine Level as well as a portal to the starship Warden and the crashed spaceship in The Barrier Peaks. Blackmoor had The USS Beagle (City of the Gods) as well as The Temple of the Frog and the battle armour and laser sword of The Blue Rider.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Sat Oct 18, 2008 8:05 pm  

    Keolander wrote:
    I realise your mileage may vary, but the simple fact is that D&D's roots clearly mixed the two. Castle Greyhawk, after all, had The Machine Level as well as a portal to the starship Warden and the crashed spaceship in The Barrier Peaks. Blackmoor had The USS Beagle (City of the Gods) as well as The Temple of the Frog and the battle armour and laser sword of The Blue Rider.


    Sorry, but Clarke's "Law" is an OPINION, not a fact. Opinion is opinion and fact is fact. You share Clarke's opinion. Good for you! I don't share it.

    Secondly, you were speaking of YOUR GAME and I was speaking of MY GAME. Now you've decided to talk about modules. Sorry, but I don't care about the modules. I don't care that EGG mixed science and magic. I said that I DON'T.

    Is there something about that which you don't understand?

    Do your thing. In MY GAME there is no science. Live with it.
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Display posts from previous:   
       Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
    Page 1 of 1

    Jump to:  

    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum




    Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises

    Contact the Webmaster.  Long Live Spidasa!


    Greyhawk Gothic Font by Darlene Pekul is used under the Creative Commons License.

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
    Page Generation: 0.45 Seconds