You Don't Get Brownie Points For Building Ineffective Characters


Gamer Life General Discussion

51 to 65 of 65 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I once had a near TPK because none of the characters could row a boat... or swim.

There is 'effective' and then there is, so 'optimized' that they cannot take care of themselves.

Conversely, I once played in a Star Wars d20 game with a bunch of jedi and monstrous bounty hunters where my character was an engineer who had no combat ability at all beyond tossing grenades or hitting something with a club (which he didn't have)... not proficient in ANY other weapon. Character pretty much ran the game... because he could fly a starship, plot a course, hack enemy base computers, bluff his way past guards, et cetera. The rest of the party could each individually destroy practically any threat... but nothing else.


CBDunkerson wrote:

I once had a near TPK because none of the characters could row a boat... or swim.

There is 'effective' and then there is, so 'optimized' that they cannot take care of themselves.

Conversely, I once played in a Star Wars d20 game with a bunch of jedi and monstrous bounty hunters where my character was an engineer who had no combat ability at all beyond tossing grenades or hitting something with a club (which he didn't have)... not proficient in ANY other weapon. Character pretty much ran the game... because he could fly a starship, plot a course, hack enemy base computers, bluff his way past guards, et cetera. The rest of the party could each individually destroy practically any threat... but nothing else.

Have to ask what skill/stat was needed for rowing?

Liberty's Edge

Talonhawke wrote:
Have to ask what skill/stat was needed for rowing?

Boat Pilot skill... it was a Rolemaster campaign.


Ah that explains it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CBDunkerson wrote:

I once had a near TPK because none of the characters could row a boat... or swim.

There is 'effective' and then there is, so 'optimized' that they cannot take care of themselves.

Conversely, I once played in a Star Wars d20 game with a bunch of jedi and monstrous bounty hunters where my character was an engineer who had no combat ability at all beyond tossing grenades or hitting something with a club (which he didn't have)... not proficient in ANY other weapon. Character pretty much ran the game... because he could fly a starship, plot a course, hack enemy base computers, bluff his way past guards, et cetera. The rest of the party could each individually destroy practically any threat... but nothing else.

That isn't optimization. It's specialization.


Atarlost wrote:
A well designed game wouldn't allow a player character to exist that can't fill both combat and noncombat roles.

Well, assuming the game has a mix of combat and noncombat comparable to Pathfinder. In a game in which combat is either nonexistent or just one small thing among many, a character that is useless in combat wouldn't be any more useless than other characters. In a game in which combat is the only aspect of the game, then obviously every character is unable to contribute in non-combat situations.


Waglinde wrote:

when you play, like, dude, you should, um, play the way, you know, you like to, um, play, like, the way that playing is, like fun, and DUDE you should definitely, like, never, I'm serious dude, never, like, play that way that when you play, like, dude, it isn't you know, fun.

I like what yous did there i just wish i could say beautifully put but uh . dude... lol!


BigNorseWolf wrote:
CBDunkerson wrote:

I once had a near TPK because none of the characters could row a boat... or swim.

There is 'effective' and then there is, so 'optimized' that they cannot take care of themselves.

Conversely, I once played in a Star Wars d20 game with a bunch of jedi and monstrous bounty hunters where my character was an engineer who had no combat ability at all beyond tossing grenades or hitting something with a club (which he didn't have)... not proficient in ANY other weapon. Character pretty much ran the game... because he could fly a starship, plot a course, hack enemy base computers, bluff his way past guards, et cetera. The rest of the party could each individually destroy practically any threat... but nothing else.

That isn't optimization. It's specialization.

It's specialization, yes, but it's also optimization. They were optimized for personal combat.

Optimization is how to best achieve a stated goal. Whether that goal is applicable in any given situation is another thing.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
CBDunkerson wrote:

I once had a near TPK because none of the characters could row a boat... or swim.

There is 'effective' and then there is, so 'optimized' that they cannot take care of themselves.

Conversely, I once played in a Star Wars d20 game with a bunch of jedi and monstrous bounty hunters where my character was an engineer who had no combat ability at all beyond tossing grenades or hitting something with a club (which he didn't have)... not proficient in ANY other weapon. Character pretty much ran the game... because he could fly a starship, plot a course, hack enemy base computers, bluff his way past guards, et cetera. The rest of the party could each individually destroy practically any threat... but nothing else.

That isn't optimization. It's specialization.

It is still optimization when things go wrong.


Jiggy wrote:
Majuba wrote:
*starts handing out actual brownies instead of the old point system*

I would happily tank my casting stat for actual brownies. :D

(If it weren't for this stupid medical diet I'm on...)

But Jiggy... Is life really worth living if you can't have 4d6 brownies (drop lowest)?


Lemmy Z wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Majuba wrote:
*starts handing out actual brownies instead of the old point system*

I would happily tank my casting stat for actual brownies. :D

(If it weren't for this stupid medical diet I'm on...)

But Jiggy... Is life really worth living if you can't have 4d6 brownies (drop lowest)?

I don't want to drop ANY Brownies. I want all of them!


Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:

It's specialization, yes, but it's also optimization. They were optimized for personal combat.

They were specialized for personal combat.

They gave up a lot of skill points to get there apparently.

They probably didn't need to do that.

Hence not optimized.


They were optimized for their specializations.

You can specialize in one area and still be decent in other areas, but you won't be optimized for that specialization.


Word.


A bard who uses dance to inspire courage, would not be stopped by a silence spell.

If they plan to never take a level in bard, encourage them to have a backup character. Most scenarios have a foe for each PC situation.

51 to 65 of 65 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / You Don't Get Brownie Points For Building Ineffective Characters All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion