|
I've sometimes made nods to concept over mechanics, for example, spending a skill point every level in Profession: Orcish Barbacue for my half orc alchemist. I think doing so is a good thing in general.
However, with a half elf witch I'm designing, I found myself spending both traits on concept to give me the skills she needed to survive in such an environment (bluff and sense motive) raised by an abusive mom, a winter witch, who raped her father and then sent him to the bone mill. I found myself picking the ancestors patron (i.e. father) and was considering elven spirit as her first feat or getting extra traits to get the other things I need.
Basically, I found I was using everything to justify backstory and wasn't optimizing as well as I could/would normally do.
I'm considering dropping the character concept because I was using so much on background. So my question is, to what extent do your characters use thematic choices over the 'best mechanical option'.
I feel your pain. I'd like all options to be more or less equally good, so that I'm not gimping myself.
To that end, I give my players' PCs "Secondary Skills:" 1 free rank per class level in any Knowledge, Profession, or Craft of their choice. That way you can sink a rank into Craft (pit-smoked barbecue) without having to give up Sense Motive for it.
Likewise. My WH Witch has a king crab familiar which needs water every 12 hours, or it dies. Witches don't have Create Water, so I need Two-World Magic to add it to my list. Then Serpentine Squeeze for grappling.
I'd love to get Swim as class (since I'm doing a sea witch flavor without the archetype), but I'm simply out of traits. Sometimes you have to let go.
Edit: I mean, let go metaphorically. With my king crab familiar and serpentine squeeze trait, I don't intend to ever let go.
|
I'm considering dropping the character concept because I was using so much on background. So my question is, to what extent do your characters use thematic choices over the 'best mechanical option'.
Some of my PCs have refused more optimal choices for personal reasons. Some magic items would help my bard, but the description doesn't match her sense of style, so she chooses other things. Others have been designed to specifically take advantage of the optimal choices as most logically suited to their preferences. And some just evolve their concept from the choices taken. (My rogue is a big example of this, but optimizing him is a lost cause anyway.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't have this problem because my mechanics usually come before my concept. My Monk was a Drunken Master archetype before she was a carefree wanderer who lives fully, loves happily, and drinks heavily.
Pathfinder unfortunately has a ton of flavor options that don't mesh well with how the game plays. I like Kirth's solution to the issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think you are over mechanizing the concept. Your concept actually doesn't require that bluff and sense motive are class skills because she was raised in an abusive environment. Technically, she didn't have skill points until she had a class level (and was an adult) anyway if you want to go all mechanical about it. Her dead father can be an important character motivator without the need for her have the ancestors patron.
Essentially, it seems to me that you don't consider a backstory/concept to be real unless it translates into a mechanical effect. If that is your attitude, then you will have a real difficult time with any concept that isn't mechanically strong. If instead you are more willing to realize that a concept is often strongest in non-mechanical expression I think you will find you can make your concept (perhaps with one or two minor mechanical nods) and have it come alive.
Perhaps you don't have bluff and sense motive it was impossible to successfully lie to evil mom and learning to read her psychopathic moods proved impossible. Perhaps you wish you had some connection to your dead father, but in fact you don't have one (or perhaps a different patron lied to you about having one.) Maybe your daddy issues just manifest in trusting/seeking out/etc elven males and you behave foolishly around them.
Having a concept/backstory etc for each of the mechanical aspects of a character is a really good thing to do. It doesn't follow though that every concept/backstory element needs to translate into a mechanical effect/
I've sometimes made nods to concept over mechanics, for example, spending a skill point every level in Profession: Orcish Barbacue for my half orc alchemist. I think doing so is a good thing in general.
However, with a half elf witch I'm designing, I found myself spending both traits on concept to give me the skills she needed to survive in such an environment (bluff and sense motive) raised by an abusive mom, a winter witch, who raped her father and then sent him to the bone mill. I found myself picking the ancestors patron (i.e. father) and was considering elven spirit as her first feat or getting extra traits to get the other things I need.
Basically, I found I was using everything to justify backstory and wasn't optimizing as well as I could/would normally do.
I'm considering dropping the character concept because I was using so much on background. So my question is, to what extent do your characters use thematic choices over the 'best mechanical option'.
I don't think you need to spend resources on flavor too many times, and I look at which class helps me fit the concept also.
I have said this before, but I use the guide ranger as my "ninja". Later I will probably use the Slayer when the final book is released.
Most of the time your backstory will not come up in the game so you can tell people about it, but you don't really need mechanics for it.
Of course there are exceptions that make it justifiable. If I am(or was) a lawyer then at least having ranks in bluff, diplomacy, intimidate, and sense motive might make sense.
If I say I am good at tracking people then it makes sense to have ranks in survival. Basically is it only for the background or is this part of what I am claiming to be able to bring to the party is what you should ask before spending resources on something.
One thing I also recommend is deciding what you want to be good at, and then write your background detailing how things came to be that way.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've sometimes made nods to concept over mechanics, for example, spending a skill point every level in Profession: Orcish Barbacue for my half orc alchemist. I think doing so is a good thing in general.
However, with a half elf witch I'm designing, I found myself spending both traits on concept to give me the skills she needed to survive in such an environment (bluff and sense motive) raised by an abusive mom, a winter witch, who raped her father and then sent him to the bone mill. I found myself picking the ancestors patron (i.e. father) and was considering elven spirit as her first feat or getting extra traits to get the other things I need.
Basically, I found I was using everything to justify backstory and wasn't optimizing as well as I could/would normally do.
I'm considering dropping the character concept because I was using so much on background. So my question is, to what extent do your characters use thematic choices over the 'best mechanical option'.
An important thing to remember is that not every aspect of your character needs to be mechanically represented. A lot of it is simply how you choose to roleplay the character, and many things are easy to reflavor.
+1 on what Zhayne said.
Personally, I'll always fit mechanics to concept. Whether or not that concept is derived from a mechanic, or some unique concept I came up with. That said, I don't flat out grab every mechanic that fits the back story.
Mechanics to Concept Example) Unkillable Orc. Orc, Unbreakable fighter, Deathless tree, orc favored class bonus, maxed out con. Concept sparked, or an Orc that was just so d@mn tough he could make Boromir's last stand (7 arrows and still killed the chief orc! As I recall anyways) look like a punk that went down crying. Added after initial mechanics intrigued concept include Fast Healer, Born Alone, Tenacious Survivor, etc. As such things were taken into consideration, back story was added, choices were modified, and the character was born.
Concept to Mechanics example) A gnome who happens to be insane, in a manner that non-gnomes find perfectly gnomish, but gnomes find him completely mad. This insanity comes from having went off exploring to find the First World when he was younger, slipped through some planar portals, and wound up having a very powerful though brief encounter with the horrible Cthulhu abominations. Fortunately, Dark Tapestry oracle fit this quite nicely, and started shoehorning in various things that could have an "insane alienist" feel if RP'd correctly. Everything else was RP.
That said... If it's a beer and pretzel hack-n-kill type game, I'll just bare bones a back story and mechanic the mother lovin' piss out of it.
I ran into this problem, both s a player, and as a GM trying to help a player.
I find it comfortable to remember that not all of your backstory needs to be perfectly represented in abilities.
.
For example:
Say if you play a Fire mystery oracle, and part of your backstory was to leap into a sea of fire to escape slavery, you dont HAVE to pick the Fire resistance revelation at level 3 to represent your survival, even if it is thematic.
In fact, by not having the extra fire resistance the decision to jump into the fire becomes that much more impactful.
If every part of your backstory can be translated into a simplified game mechanic, where's the intrigue?
.
Not every dead parent becomes a guardian spirit, even if you think of them every time you go to sleep at night.
Not every bakers son knows how to make bread, perhaps by not knowing anything about baking the bakers son becomes that much more interesting.
Not every Wizards apprentice becomes a spellcaster, most don't ever manage to cast even a simple cantrip.
|
People around here seem to have been dragged into a groove regarding how they can or may think about this sort of thing - it's gratuitous and potentially quite toxic. My first words of advice might be to stop thinking in terms of "balance" as though this is some linear sliding-scale affair. With the exception of glaringly obvious non-ideas like playing a Wizard with an Intelligence lower than 11, just about any character design can be made to work - if it doesn't, I'd generally blame the DM for not providing a sufficiently varied adventure/game world (the game is about creativity - a Half-Orc Alchemist spending a rank every level on Profession [Grillmaster] is a cute idea and perfectly reasonable, and should be rewarded with some kind of opportunity for creative application, although I would actually judge that cooking in a particular style should be labeled a Craft, rather than Profession, skill, which plays to an Alchemist's statistical stronger suits just fine). You can make a few assumptions (i.e. prepare for mortal combat, and plenty of it), but ultimately, everything's situational, and the real question of "balance" that comes up is much closer to "being competent in many situations versus excelling at a few"; sometimes you may want to hit some variety of 'reset' button if you find sight of that's been lost.
I don't see anything too wrong/restrictive about the character concept (in fact, come to think of it, it has quite the Grimm's Fairy Tales edge to it). Regarding the specifics of your case, if you want Elven Spirit or any other "1st-level only" feat, then you obviously have to take it at the one opportunity you're permitted and can hold out a little for the rest.
Don't feel like you have to preemptively justify everything - character creation is an art, and people who believe "if it can't be clearly explained and justified verbally to another person, it's a worthless idea you don't really understand yourself" are stupid, plain and simple.
|
|
I was thinking about and I came up with my own answer.
I've always made characters with some nods to their past history integrated into the character's build. It is things, like taking a craft or profession for my half orc alchemist, taking a trait, for example, my pitborn tiefling fighter has child of the temple because her parents are clerics of Sheyln. Saying my oracle's haunted curse is her dead brother who is also the same Zombie who shows up when I summon him (He's the guy on the cover of the PFS season 0 scenario 'Among the Living') or having my Summoner introduce his Eidolon as his wife.
There is always something.
I always need that one 'little thing' mechanically to get my head around a character. When I don't have this 'grounding' I find I'm less attached to the character.
What was happening with this witch was, I had both traits, the possibly the feat, the patron i.e. basically everything tied up in this.
What I'm going to do, is look at the idea to see what can use a little differently. Perhaps her father taught her trickery to survive in the home of her mother. Now I don't need bluff (though ancestor is pretty good). Maybe I can RP the growing ties to her elven side whether I take the feat or not.
Thanks everyone,
Kerney