Whats your favorite class/archetype/role ?!

silva · Post by **silva** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 6:30 pm

Stahl, stop citing Battletech references please. It only deepens my sadness in knowing the only rpg we have for it is that shitty mechwarrior mess.

AndreiChekov · Post by **AndreiChekov** » Tue Jul 21, 2015 5:32 pm

For the roleplaying aspect of a character I really like paladins in pretty much every game ever. (Although, in 3.5 I usually end up playing a cleric as a paladin.)

Normally, however, I try to make something where hitting it with a big stick is, at least sometimes, the right thing to do.

RelentlessImp · Post by **RelentlessImp** » Wed Jul 22, 2015 10:25 pm

silva wrote:Stahl, stop citing Battletech references please. It only deepens my sadness in knowing the only rpg we have for it is that shitty mechwarrior mess.

We've tried to get you to stop shilling *World for similar reasons, but you don't listen. What makes you think Stahl will?

More on-topic. Casters. Just... casters. It lets me explore the sort of things I like to explore, and casters are usually more fun to build a personality around. Figure out where magic fits into the life. What changes. Etc.

Darth Rabbitt · Post by **Darth Rabbitt** » Thu Jul 23, 2015 4:04 am

I tend to play one of two things in D&D (the only other games I've played in any meaningful amount are GURPS and Pokemon Tabletop Adventures and I've played a grand total of 3 characters in each, which isn't enough for me to really notice any trends) with a few exceptions (for example, Gilles in AH's 2e game):

1. Weird creatures if the game allows for it (other than maybe Gilles, the most memorable D&D character I played was a Thri-Kreen Ghoul Samurai). I've played Illithid Telepaths and Thri-Kreen [insert full BaB class here] on more than one occasion, and at one point I played an Insectile Half-Illithid Tauric Ankheg/Viletooth Lizardfolk (everyone in the game was super templated. Another player was some kind of Lich variant and a third was basically Sun Wukong. But I take some pride in having been the weirdest in a weird game.)
2. Characters who are very deceptive in one way or another (i.e. high ranks in Bluff and Disguise, usually high CHA unless a beguiler) that have something to hide. This might go in with the above category (for instance Illithids aren't going to be received well in most places without a Hat of Disguise and a good Bluff skill.)

Typically this means I play some weird melee build or some sort of caster. Sometimes it's a bit of both. And they almost always come from an unusual culture or background (sometimes because they are giant bugs, sometimes because they worship a strange god or were lieutenants in the Blood War). In fantasy I like to play characters who are fundamentally alien in one way or another, and I like coming up with crazy backgrounds for them (within the limits of the setting, of course).

Neurosis · Post by **Neurosis** » Fri Jul 24, 2015 5:54 pm

Wizard, son. Been my favorite for a decade before I learned anything about game design and realized it was also, in most editions of D&D, the best.

silva · Post by **silva** » Mon Jul 27, 2015 9:28 am

Schwarzkopf wrote:Wizard, son.

This reminds me that I also was a wizard fan once, during my first steps in the hobby. A friend of mine had bought this cool fighting fantasy book where you play duo, one player assuming the warrior prince and the other assuming the wizard prince (I think their names were Colthar and Lothar respectively). I became fascinated by that wizard for a long time.

Anyone remember that book ?

Aryxbez · Post by **Aryxbez** » Tue Jul 28, 2015 3:16 am

RelentlessImp wrote:
silva wrote:Stahl, stop citing Battletech references please. It only deepens my sadness in knowing the only rpg we have for it is that shitty mechwarrior mess.
We've tried to get you to stop shilling *World for similar reasons, but you don't listen. What makes you think Stahl will?

I think we should try to enforce a houserule, that for every time Silva shills (or tries to hide his next "obsession" as bear-shilling) that Stahlsteele is to on for a paragraph about Battletech (and such references).

Also, I think I concur with the notion that I like to play "exotic" or "alien" like PC's as well. Such as, in one FATE-ish western, I wanted to play a soul-saving Yeti, in post-calamity fantasy I played DQ-slimechef, in Dark Sun 4e I wanted to play a Gith from his original world-ish (also weird for his kind), and in one D&D campaign I wanted to play a Lumi who's trying to act as ambassador for his kind to prevent their invasion of earth-realm. I suppose its in all my DMing I've done, generally want to leave some impression with a character.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Tue Jul 28, 2015 11:55 am

I probably won't stop mentioning Battletech stuff anyway.
Because it is a game i WANT TO PLAY . . it just sucks ass!
I want there to be a better Battletech game damn it! -.-
The CBT Board-Game only goes so far sadly . .
And MWO is a piece of crap software, as well as MW:Tactics.
Both more or less dead in the virtual waters and deservedly so.
MechWarrior: Living Legends was so good untill MWO appeared and basically stole the Player-Base.
And MW:Tactics is basically just MegaMek with slightly improved graphics but less content.

angelfromanotherpin · Tue Jul 28, 2015 12:14 pm

Stahlseele wrote:I want there to be a better Battletech game damn it! -.-

What are your issues with the game?

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Tue Jul 28, 2015 1:12 pm

It tries to do everything using only 2D6, same as the CBT Board-Game.
The Character Generation System is a sort of point buy/life path system combined. So the worst of two worlds. And if you want to play as a clan mech pilot for example, you either know how to beat somebody up or how to use your mech. And if you actually do put your points into your profession of choice and a vehicle of your choice of weight class, somebody else can just challenge you to a duel outside of your mech, wipe the floor with you and take it for himself. Both by the rules of the game and the rules of the clan society/universe!
It. Just. Does. Not. Work!

angelfromanotherpin · Post by **angelfromanotherpin** » Tue Jul 28, 2015 1:47 pm

The second part sounds like a relatively easy conceptual fix. The first part, not so much, but seems like it might be challenging to do worse. I'll peer at the book, see if it gets the 'brew flowing.

silva · Post by **silva** » Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:02 pm

Even I, a firm relativist when it comes to games quality, couldn't see much to redeem in the Mechwarrior/BT RPG. Its the most objectively bad game I've played. It makes Shadowrun look like a work of genius.

angelfromanotherpin · Post by **angelfromanotherpin** » Sat Aug 01, 2015 7:56 pm

The biggest issue I can see is that the 2d6 RNG is essentially unextractable, because it's what the wargame uses, and the RPG really should just scale up to the wargame. That leaves 3 options: accept a discontinuity between scales, rewrite the wargame as well, or grin and bear it. None are ideal, but grinning involves the least work, so...

Absent an RNG-up rebuild, your issues would seem to be resolvable with some modest houserule patches. I mean, just instituting that chargen resources spent on a 'Mech aren't straight-up gone if the machine is lost is real simple. The free intro I looked at didn't detail chargen, but the characters look simple enough that ground-upping that would be easy enough. Also, the skill list seems crazy long for no good reason, trimming that would probably be good for everyone's quality of life. All totally doable things. The result wouldn't be great, but a deal more playable.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Sun Aug 02, 2015 1:07 am

not sure if the older versions of the mechwarrior RPG had it as well, but at least in ATOW there is the fucking bullshit stupid combined life path / point buy system that can and will randomly cripple your character either very directly or indirectly . .

Sanprofe · Post by **Sanprofe** » Wed Aug 26, 2015 5:45 pm

I'm interpreting this to mean the specific role that elevates itself in your mind above all the systems you've ever played. In that context then, Technos, man. They just scratch an itch. It's such a specific fantasy but it's an incredibly powerful one that speaks to me on a deep level. It's never bothered me how bad they are in basically every context. I'd much rather play a woefully under-powered but interesting character.

After that? It's probably any charisma caster because again, the flavor is tasty.

Silent Wayfarer · Post by **Silent Wayfarer** » Thu Aug 27, 2015 1:12 am

Much like aryxbez I like fighters. Fighters with magic powers sometimes, but I like people who are action heroes. If I could get through the game being a DMF (who can still kick your ass) I would.

Sakuya Izayoi · Post by **Sakuya Izayoi** » Thu Aug 27, 2015 2:38 am

I'm starting to develop a soft spot for summoners. I like mah pokeymans, and I like naming eidolons after pop music references, and they seem to be one of the magical swiss army knives that people find sufficiently "flavorful"

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Thu Aug 27, 2015 3:11 am

OK. Lets say you are a new poster. A god damn Silva thread , a particularly inane one at that, is nearly dead, but no, after a month of people finally letting it rot you decide hey, your first and only post will keep it alive... with a suspiciously trolly reply about how awesome flavor is and how you don't care about playing what is frequently mechanically the worst possible option in most games it appears in because "mmm tasty mechanically shit flavor".

Gnorman · Post by **Gnorman** » Thu Aug 27, 2015 4:13 am

Sanprofe wrote:I'd much rather play a woefully under-powered but interesting character.

You are in the wrong part of the Internet, then.

JonSetanta · Post by **JonSetanta** » Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:40 am

I love the warmage blaster sorcerer stereotype, a Dark Schneider kind of person.

And yet in Shadowrun I built and played a cyborg street sammy with .1 Essence, and recently in 5e D&D I play a Fighter and a Cleric, and my first AD&D character was a LE "dark paladin", so there is that variety of "tank" going on too.

Sanprofe · Post by **Sanprofe** » Thu Aug 27, 2015 3:53 pm

Gnorman wrote:
Sanprofe wrote:I'd much rather play a woefully under-powered but interesting character.
You are in the wrong part of the Internet, then.

Naw, y'all do the math that I otherwise wouldn't be bothered to do. Plus, I'd be kind of a jackass to ignore game design when I play so many fucking games.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Thu Aug 27, 2015 4:38 pm

Harime Nui · Post by **Harime Nui** » Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:06 pm

In D&D and similar games... Rogue/Thief/Skill-Monkey. I like being able to actually do more than one thing like a real person almost.

In other stuff.... well my group doesn't play non-D&D games often enough but I usually go with the simplest beatstick possible until I have a feel for the system.

RelentlessImp · Post by **RelentlessImp** » Wed Sep 02, 2015 12:37 am

Quit reviving bearva threads.

silva · Post by **silva** » Thu Dec 24, 2015 1:49 am

Sanprofe wrote:I'd much rather play a woefully under-powered but interesting character.

Count me in, then. Most of my characters were underpowered rules-wise, but full of instantly playable hooks. Sadly though, most GMs I played with were more interested in telling their little stories than exploring their players ones.