In the rare instance where it’s not covered by either source, I’ll more often than not sit down with the player, and work something out. I’ll usually point them to either WotC’s Unearthed Arcana, or to this blog, if there’s something that matches their character concept. Maybe they want their cleric to be able to do more than cast sacred flame when they’ve run out of spell slots. Sometimes, the warlock class doesn’t offer just the right invocation to really set them apart from other warlocks, or reinforce the theme of their chosen Patron. Sometimes, it's an unarmored fighter (not a barbarian, nor a monk) without multiclassing. There’s the also the opposite side of the problem: when 5e doesn’t have mechanics that support your character concept.įrom time to time (read: quite frequently) my players come to me with a character concept which isn’t supported within the core rules of the game. Now, that’s not to say that you can’t make an interesting character using those character builds - I’ve seen it done, and done well - it’s just that mechanically, they’re often the exact same. Different classes have different ways to do this, and I’ll go over several of these methods here, because I firmly believe that a character should not suffer mechanically just because a player doesn’t want to play Great Weapon Fighter #49, or Twin/Quicken Fire Dragon Sorcerer #4,578. There’s a quick and easy fix to this: character customization.
Now, I’m not saying you should make characters who are purposely bad at what they’re supposed to be doing (looking at you, dumb wizards and weak barbarians,) but character diversity tends to suffer when the more optimized builds start looking the same. A lot of players do it - I myself do it - and you know what? After two years of playing 5e, it’s really boring.
Optimization: seeking to build the best character you possibly can so you don’t feel totally useless in battle.
Comment from the Finger: This post comes to you from the Knuckle!
0 kommentar(er)
