Finn K's page

What the title says...

currently living & working in the Monterey area... looking for a gaming group to join. It is possible that I will be able to host in a month or two, but I've got a lot of apartment organizing to do before that day comes. Until then, if there's a game already happening in the area or someone willing to host, please let me know. I've checked at the local game store, but unfortunately the main item there is Magic the Addiction (oops, I mean, The Gathering), and I'm looking for an RPG group. I'm aware that there's PFS play going on in Silicon Valley, but since that all seems to be weeknights-- I'd like to find something closer 'cause it's a real pain-in-the-neck to go to San Jose after work and get back late and try to get some sleep before work the next morning.

Experienced RPG player, have played or GM'ed many systems (including Pathfinder)-- willing to run or play in most games, just want to find (or pull together) a good group for a regular campaign.

So... I managed to get my hands on the race-boon to play an Undine character, and I've had an idea for an amphibious above- and under- water sniper/ranged combatant for a while (as a role-playing thought-- hadn't worked out the mechanics on him)--

What'cha all think-- best done with Ranger? Slayer? Gunslinger (Bolt Ace)? Or some 4th class I hadn't mentioned... any other archetypes, and-or specific feat chains and items I should be looking for?

Requesting advice for how to best pull it off in PFS...

(I'll admit, that I'm finally posting this-- was prompted by the latest string of this sort of argument, the "Clerics weaker than Oracles" thread-- but the idea goes way beyond just the Clerics vs. Oracles and Wizards vs. Sorcerers arguments):

IMO--

Which fits your character concept better? A Cleric or an Oracle?

Which are you going to enjoy playing more? An Oracle or a Cleric?

Same sorts of questions should be asked in the Wizard/Sorcerer debates, and in most of the other debates crunching numbers to compare similar classes-- maybe the idea even applies a little bit to the obsession some folks seem to have with comparing dissimilar classes (although I would agree with people who are arguing those issues as a matter of seeking better game balance and playability for all, that it's still well worth discussing for those reasons)...

To me, all the number-crunching and "which class is more powerful", determined by all the marginal arguments and scraping at finding every last mechanical advantage, smacks of min-maxing taken to the munchkinist point in a very bad way. Personally-- 'effective' in game in my experience has always depended a lot more on the imagination, ability and creativity of the player than on the 'number-crunched' differences between similar classes-- granted, there's been a few classes in the game's history that seem to be (or have been) quite ineffective, and it's possible to 'nerf' a build for almost any class (and thereby make the character ineffective for almost any player)-- but in general, I don't think Clerics, Oracles, Sorcerers, or Wizards inherently have those problems.

Why not think more about the character (concept, personality, etc) you want to play, and then build a character that is reasonably effective that fits your concept, instead of worrying about the creating the best 'tactical unit', and then seeing if you can put together a personality that matches the numbers you've thrown together?

Intro to all reading:
Okay, this issue arose in another thread, and the other poster (Scott Betts) suggested that it be made into a new thread here rather than continue to hijack the thread elsewhere, so....

Short version: In my experience with 4E (before I stopped playing it), skill challenges, in RAW for 4E, were one of the biggest hindrances to/diminishers of good role-playing (IMO/YMMV, 4E RAI may have had 'skill challenges' with the idea that they would be helpful for role-playing). Scott Betts has given his view, that "Skill Challenges" do not necessarily interfere with good role-playing, but has noted that "skill challenges" are not so easy to run well (this thread is intended for real discussion of the issue, not edition wars or flame-fests :) ).

Scott--
Here's the thread, because I would appreciate it if you'd elaborate on what you were saying over on that other thread.

(to all again):
Here's copies of the relevant posts from that other thread:

That's not true. The biggest example is, of course, the skill challenge system, which is the most robust non-combat challenge resolution support that D&D has ever been given.

The one problem I do have with your post and defense of 4E this time, is this statement you've made.

Unfortunately, experience in playing 4E showed me that the "skill challenge system" by the 4E RAW is detrimental to role=playing, since it makes non-combat resolution just like combat-- pick a skill, roll the dice, assess the result; continue with each character contributing one skill or another, until the conditions for success or failure have been met. As written, it doesn't lend itself to good PC/NPC role-playing interaction, but rather lends itself to rolling dice and some semblance of tactics (in choosing the best skills to apply, from among the group and from each character who can reasonably contribute).

Not saying 4E isn't a role-playing game, but this particular system within the game was one of the things that IMO took away, not added to, role-playing, when they explicitly wrote up the rules for applying skill challenges to social situations.

I didn't cite skill challenges as an example of something that added to the roleplaying aspect of the game. I cited them as an example of support for a theater of action that the game provided that was separate from the tactical combat theater.

Skill challenges are not easy to run well. They are, in my experience, the soundest test of some of the most important DM traits.

Remember, the skill challenge system is not a substitute for the roleplaying that you typically do in D&D. Rather, it is a framework that allows you, as the DM, to adjudicate the party's success or failure at a group effort by using the results of their skill checks. It is designed to be tacked onto the roleplaying portions of the game (and other portions of the game, too!) and when done best the players may not even realize they've been in a skill challenge.

I'd be happy to dive deeper into skill challenges, but not in this thread. If anyone wants to discuss them, just start a thread in the 4e subforum and I'll pop in.