Difference between revisions of "Character discussions"
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:The problem with character choice is that we've got the four classic roles and four people which means that someone usually ends up filling a gap. [[User:Bert|Bert]] |
:The problem with character choice is that we've got the four classic roles and four people which means that someone usually ends up filling a gap. [[User:Bert|Bert]] |
||
:: I appreciate that obviously someone will end up with a second or third choice, but listing a few options (as both you and I have below) at least allows the team to work out a more balanced party without anyone feeling like they ended up with a class that's a total compromise for them. I also don't mean that we have to have the classic roles, two characters can partially cover a role together with alternative selections (e.g. a bard and a paladin can cover the role of a healer together). [[User:Craig|Craig]] |
:: I appreciate that obviously someone will end up with a second or third choice, but listing a few options (as both you and I have below) at least allows the team to work out a more balanced party without anyone feeling like they ended up with a class that's a total compromise for them. I also don't mean that we have to have the classic roles, two characters can partially cover a role together with alternative selections (e.g. a bard and a paladin can cover the role of a healer together). [[User:Craig|Craig]] |
||
| + | :I'd like to play some kind of fighter, because I've never really been in the front row. [[User:Notafish|Delphine]] 21:47, 25 January 2009 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
==Suggestions== |
==Suggestions== |
||
* [[User:Craig|Craig]] - Cleric, Druid (phb2 fast healing variant), Beguiler, Rogue, Bard - Depending on other party class choices |
* [[User:Craig|Craig]] - Cleric, Druid (phb2 fast healing variant), Beguiler, Rogue, Bard - Depending on other party class choices |
||
* [[User:Bert|Bert]] - Beguiler, Druid, Paladin. I've not played any of these, but preference would be in this order. |
* [[User:Bert|Bert]] - Beguiler, Druid, Paladin. I've not played any of these, but preference would be in this order. |
||
| + | * [[User:Notafish|Delphine]] - Fighter, [http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#sorcererVariantBattleSorcerer Battle Sorcerer] - I am happy to play any of these two, no preferred order, then [http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#fighterVariantThug thug] |
||
==Analysis of past characters== |
==Analysis of past characters== |
||
Revision as of 22:47, 25 January 2009
Character Discussion
What character classes are people considering? The discussion on Tuesday night seemed to end up with 3 fighters and whatever I chose to be.
I've said it before, but in my opinion although they are good to soak attacks, fighters are the least important part of an adventuring party's balance.
Fighters dominate combat (at low-mid levels) with high HP and good attack stats, but other dump stats can be ignored through roleplaying them away a lot of the time giving fighters the best of both worlds. Craig
- Well my initial choice of Swashbuckler on Tuesday was driven by wanting a bit more mobility and variation in combat than Adrin had (not difficult I hear you cry). I had been looking at the Beguiler myself as an interesting variation on the rogue as it uses magic without requiring me to go through the wrenching spell choice process I had with Belros, whom I didn't really like anyway.
- The problem with character choice is that we've got the four classic roles and four people which means that someone usually ends up filling a gap. Bert
- I appreciate that obviously someone will end up with a second or third choice, but listing a few options (as both you and I have below) at least allows the team to work out a more balanced party without anyone feeling like they ended up with a class that's a total compromise for them. I also don't mean that we have to have the classic roles, two characters can partially cover a role together with alternative selections (e.g. a bard and a paladin can cover the role of a healer together). Craig
- I'd like to play some kind of fighter, because I've never really been in the front row. Delphine 21:47, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Suggestions
- Craig - Cleric, Druid (phb2 fast healing variant), Beguiler, Rogue, Bard - Depending on other party class choices
- Bert - Beguiler, Druid, Paladin. I've not played any of these, but preference would be in this order.
- Delphine - Fighter, Battle Sorcerer - I am happy to play any of these two, no preferred order, then thug
Analysis of past characters
I appreciate that some people like to play certain types of characters, but I think that we should mix things up a bit. It seems to me looking back that there's little variation in the general party role for some players, meaning perhaps that others have to end up filling roles that seem necessary to fill skills gaps in the team. This is especially important when there are only 4 players (and one DM).
Here's a list of past characters from long-term campaigns - make of it what you will, and feel free to correct anything:
I may have got something wrong, but I count *nine* out of 17 characters are some form of fighter below. That figure becomes 8 out of 11 when you count characters started from level 1.
I'm not saying any of this because I want to play a fighter type, I am saying this because I want to play in a balanced party that has some mix for people to explore new ways of roleplaying. Craig
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||
