|
4 years ago ::
Aug 05, 2009 - 3:13PM
#61
|
Date Joined:
Oct 20, 2007
|
So, I am pretty much both of these simultaneously.
Both my character AND the adventure are important to me.
What classification is that?
-karma
An enlightened narcissist? :P
Joe Fitzgerald | joerpga[at]yahoo[dot]com[dot]au
LFR Global Administrator
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 06, 2009 - 5:08AM
#62
|
Date Joined:
Jun 26, 2004
|
I don't mind having to "carry" someone's unoptimised character (and I do generally play optimised characters because I haven't grown out of it yet  ) but there was an occasion in LG where one of the cahracters appeared entirely willing to sabotage us horribly in an extemely dangerous situation and the player objected to our characters nobbling that character. I've found that arguments at the gaming table caused mostly by one of two things: - rules interpretations (less so with 4E) - in character disputes (these can be totally intractable on occasion): it's not the 'character player' and the 'module player' arguing that holds up the game but the two 'character players' whose characters disagree vehemently .... while the module-player(s) is(are) frustrated that their time is being 'wasted'. I think we have a much lower incidence and intensity of 'module player' 'round these parts though (compared to the hearsay from some parts of the USA for example).
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 06, 2009 - 1:27PM
#63
|
Date Joined:
Dec 28, 2005
|
I think we have a much lower incidence and intensity of 'module player' 'round these parts though (compared to the hearsay from some parts of the USA for example).
That's quite possible. I've got a tendency to take a very "module player" approach unless there's a very, very character driven reason to take the mod off the rails (or follow the rails of the mod in a battlewagon...)
It stems, I think, from a desire to see what the mod author had in mind for story... I like to play along enough that the mod's story gets to be told.
This is occasionally a bad thing - Mod Of No Value, Night of Badness, and The Raven Queen coming to mind as mods where following the 'find out what the story the author wanted to tell is' path is penalized in some fashion or other.
I find that adventures which do that violate my notion of the social contract of the RPGA. I suppose my notion of the social contract is flawed, but ACTUALLY working against the story of the mod violates my sense of what a DM (author in the case of a living campaign) is supposed to be doing with the story...
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 08, 2009 - 10:05AM
#64
|
Date Joined:
Aug 26, 2008
|
it is the rare player who won't be frustrated with the repeated missing of a character who doesn't start with an 18 in his primary stat
I don't mind dying, but if my chance to hit or beat a DC is so low that it is almost impossible, I don't consider that fun (unless I feel like playing a character like that one day).
and
(I will admit to having destroyed any hope of winning a skill challenge because I acted in a way consistent with my character, without regard for the consequences to the group. Two other members of the group took it in stride and enjoyed the role playing aspect. Three members were quite upset at the loss of xp for the night. In retrospect, I'm quite certain that I would do exactly the same things over
I wouldn't mind a rare cases like this, but consistently failing encounters would be a problem.
I'm going to call this out as hyperbole. LFR modules are not budgeted in such a way that a character who has not squeezed every single point of damage out of his build will lead to consistent failures. It's true that a character with an 8 in their primary stat is probably going to have a tough time, but is this such a serious issue? Granted I've not played in too many cons, but the only time optimization was really a problem was:
- When neither of the strikers in a 4 - 7 module had magic weapons/implements
- When a father was playing with his 10-year-old son who had difficulty focusing
While I agree with you that every character is responsible for being at least minimally effective, I think the bar for effectiveness is pretty low. I largely comprises:
- Be reasonably able to hit the enemies
- Ensure that your defenses match your playstyle
- Have something to add to a skill challenge
Optimization has a lot of definitions, but to argue that you must be optimized to hit, or must choose a class that attacks with your racial stat bonuses, or must only make rolls in a skill challenge with optimal skills is plain wrong. I have three LFR characters, none of whom have an 18 in their attack stat. I do this intentionally because I like the challenge of optimizing in unique ways. I'd rather have a -1 to hit and damage and never have to sit down at a table with some else with the exact same build. I've never failed a skill challenge or an encounter. At the same time I've played with many people for whom their race was just a funny suit that gave them a +2 to their attack stat. Nothing is more boring. So while optimization is good, be sure you're not promoting unnecessary optimization at the cost of having to play robots.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 11, 2009 - 3:00PM
#65
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2006
|
Actually...
Role playing DOES increase your chances of winning. The other day we managed to defeat an encounter via role playing a handful of skill checks rather than the normal "HULK SMASH!" routine we did in the first few encounters.
If we had taken them on, We probably would have died.
I'd get along more with people if they didn't jump onto a hyberbole every single time you say something they don't understand.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 11, 2009 - 9:42PM
#66
|
|
|
I play tested Paragon mods and I feel that the writers are purposely building the mods to screw the players (SPEC 1-2 is a good example). They know that the majority of LFR players optimize for success (which is why Tier 2 mods are so easy compared to Tier 1 or Tier 3) so they build the mods to work against those players and screw the regular LFR player.
In Paragon if you don't bring your optimized character or your cheese you are guaranteed to fail.
Forget dazed, you'll be stunned more than anything else.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 12, 2009 - 1:52AM
#67
|
Date Joined:
Nov 10, 2003
|
In Paragon if you don't bring your optimized character or your cheese you are guaranteed to fail.
I really hope the authors and admins have not chosen to go down this road.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 13, 2009 - 7:38PM
#68
|
Date Joined:
May 13, 2004
|
I wonder how many LFR games the OP has played in? There were times I have a sat down to a LFR game, and there were there were 5 strikers, and a controller? No defender, no leader...
What would the OP do then? Get up and walk away from the game because his group is not optimized?
The LFR game I played in last week almost required theiving skills-we didnt have any. We tripped everything! We still got to the end and "won" whatever that means. Half the fun was overcoming obstacles in spite of our deficiencies. Same in the 5 stiker, one controller game. We all huddled and decided "better kill it all fast." That group was highly successful (Wizard, Bow ranger, 2 Blade ranger, Scoundrel Rogue, Barbarian, & my Warlock), but it lacked a lot-no marking, limited buffing, zelch for healing...
Object is to have fun....if you had fun in LFR, you won! Ian
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 17, 2009 - 10:02AM
#69
|
Date Joined:
Dec 21, 2006
|
My take is that you should play what you want and are only responsible to play in a spirit where you want the group to be successful and the play to be fun.
Optimization can hardly be required. So much of it can lie in grey areas of the rules that can often lead to definitively unfun arguments/discussions. Also, the truest definition of optimization leads to cookie-cutter builds that really steal away alot of fun from many player's play experience. Fully optimized parties played optimally will stomp most mods which is pretty boring.
I know there are the play-to-win types who want no part of anything but a direct assualt of the adventure's objectives but, there are probably an equal amount players out there that just want to see a cool story unfold through play that merely prefer to have been successful but, not at the expense of what they view as a stale style of play.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 17, 2009 - 12:18PM
#70
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2009
|
I wonder how many LFR games the OP has played in? There were times I have a sat down to a LFR game, and there were there were 5 strikers, and a controller? No defender, no leader...
What would the OP do then? Get up and walk away from the game because his group is not optimized?
I would have played for an hour and see how the game went, especially how the DM presented the encounters. If he does not adjust the encounters to a lower difficulty, then yes, I would probably leave at that point. He is being a bad DM and is wasting my time to inflate his ego. The encounter shouldn't be ridiculously easy; it just needs to be challenging. Finding that balance is difficult, but should be well attempted.
|
|
|
