This is why I like Pathfinder 2e so much. The difference between a fully optimized and story focused character, while noticeable, won't destabilize a play group in the way you describe here. As long as you pick abilities you'll actually use (don't pick twin weapon feats if you use a halberd) you'll keep up with any party.
exactly. in PF2e, the difference between an optimized and story focused character is like 1 damage per hit and +1 to hit. and really, the easy way to optimize is to organically make your character easy to integrate into a standard campaign world. because instead of Courier and Street Urchin being ways to get Rogue Skills on a Non Rogue, despite most rogues canonically coming from either background, a Rogue is Rewarded for being a Courier or Street Urchin both with extra power and an easy backstory to incoroporate.
I think that there is nothing wrong with optimizing your character as long as you intend to operate within the bounds of the game and for the fun of everyone at the table. If you make a really well optimized, say, Battle Master fighter with a fleshed out story and go out of your way to engage others out of combat as well as going to extra mile to include your allies in your Maneuvers by calling out for the Rogue to get the BBEG after a Commander's Strike and such or using your high Athletics to boost the Wizard up to rain a Fireball down over a barrier. Use your power to shine when its your time but also use your power to uplift others. Even if you could single handled take out the group of Goblins, set them up so others can help. Plenty of ways to "crunch the numbers" and still be a good collaborative story teller.
The biggest issue to me is that D&D doesn’t balance itself very well, so those experiences really make some characters feel superior to others. And stronger balance is absolutely possible while preserving expressive and experimental play (4E, Fabula Ultima, Pathfinder 2E, SotDL, Lancer, Icon, Beacon, and I’m sure even more with people making newer projects now), it’s just that D&D 5E doesn’t do a good job of providing that gameplay.
Very much agree, and while those systems may run it better, there is this undeniability that 5e is the most popular system and the one most groups are likely to play, so I don't think it's a bad idea, knowing that about it going in, to be mindful about the group's expectations and understanding what everyone does to remedy those issues as much as possible.
Enjoyed the last story, and I wish more folks would think about "optimization" that way. Break the game to tell better stories and have more fun, just don't do it in a vacuum.
I had a bit of a different experience with optimization. I joined a gamed late as i was a guestplayer who got to stay permanently and i got to build a character on lvlv 12 which had me excited and I made a baldesinger wizard which was allowed. The problem was that there was a very clear power gap between me and the other players who only have played with phb material (they had played for 6 years with the same characters) and even a competently built character made for the difficulty ahead since the arc was about demons and devils seemed way to strong in comparison. The problem was that the players started pushing all responsibility on clearing encounters on me because I was "the strong one" and I hated it. I just wanted to play I didnt want to feel like i had to play optimally constantly so that everyone would survive it was a very stressful experience and i parted my ways with them after the campaign ended.
I've definitely been in a similar situation, feeling like I'm expected to carry the party for one reason or another. It's one of the reasons I'm so hesitant to introduce a new player in mid game, especially at such a high level. It's just less and less likely everyone will click, either in terms of personality or gameplay expectations.
@@dragonmindttrpgs agreed. We desperatly needed a sesison re zero when i joined os i could have gotten to know some basic expectations and boundaries because some steps were crossed because no one told me anything about a players triggers about angry voices as I lashed out due to the combat stressed and it became a whole mess.
I haven't completely watched through a video in a while. What a great video! I'm currently torn between a Fire/Fiend Sorlock and a Storm/Tempest Sorcleric. I already made a Gold Draconic Fiend Sorlock Tiefling. Had great fun with it but ditched it because I really want a lightning sorcerer. So then, because it just seemed so interesting to me, I created a Storm Sorcerer/Tempest Cleric. Now I'm playing the character I wanted mechanics-wise but I'm missing the identity of the Sorlock I previously played. I want to bring the Sorlock back. Maybe I can combine them. A Blue Draconic Sorlock? I don't think it's gonna be cohesive. Lightning Sorcerer/Fiend Warlock would feel similar to making a blueberry+apple flavor. It would probably taste good but it won't make sense.
something noted in the Dragonmind video above, and from my own experiences with 5E, is the idea of taking game mechanics that work for what you want a character to be capable of doing, and then building a background that explains the powers from a story standpoint. i did this last year in a long-running campaign, I used the mechanics of a clockwork sorcerer, but his story was that he was a wizard, and his magic stemmed from all the knowledge he had accumulated.
@@dragonmindttrpgs Story-wise, the sorlock I made was much more detailed than the sorcleric. I just didn't feel the Sorcleric as much as I did the Sorlock.
@@molotovdojorat6715 awesome. That's what I failed to apply when making a character. On my first character, I prioritized story, then on the second, I prioritized mechanics. I have to reimagine my character. Look through a different lens perhaps?
@@CainSuzuko Hey, sometimes that happens. I've made a fair share of characters I thought would be really cool on the outset, but for some reason they just didn't click for me. In terms of a Warlock subclass that fits the theme, Fathomless from Tasha's goes along with the Storm theme more, but not lightning specifically (that one has more water imagery). Maybe see if that one somehow fits better?
Yeah, a three-pronged multiclass can be pretty underwhelming. One level of Ranger isn't enough. What makes the 2014 ranger "good" is the natural gish-ness. Like EK, they blend spells with weapons combat. But their spells are better combinations with their weapons than EK, IMO. Ensnaring strike, hail of thorns, etc. Adding that sorcerer level does give you more magic, but also made you too scattered in your abilities (unless you rolled and rolled awesome). Sorcerer's need for Charisma, which usually a Ranger's dump stat (and a fighter's dump stat, too), it makes for a mess of a character. As you saw.
Your story with the cleric was not an optimization issue. It was a mix of a spell being to strong, 5es popcorn healing issue, and the cleric olny going with healing becomeing a one trick pony. You didn't mess up there although i think its a good thing to look out for to not ruin others fun but the issues are from bad design in 5e mixed in with a one trick pony character.
Absolutely agree, and my point with it was that it started me thinking of optimization in terms of "what's the optimal experience", which that definitely wasn't for one reason or another. Treantmonk had a somewhat similar experience which led him to his "God Wizard" build.
@@dragonmindttrpgs I'll need to watch his video on it too. Sounds interesting. Iv had similar experiences myself mostly with spell casters. I liked the video and am interested in seeing more from you.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
This is why I like Pathfinder 2e so much.
The difference between a fully optimized and story focused character, while noticeable, won't destabilize a play group in the way you describe here. As long as you pick abilities you'll actually use (don't pick twin weapon feats if you use a halberd) you'll keep up with any party.
exactly. in PF2e, the difference between an optimized and story focused character is like 1 damage per hit and +1 to hit. and really, the easy way to optimize is to organically make your character easy to integrate into a standard campaign world. because instead of Courier and Street Urchin being ways to get Rogue Skills on a Non Rogue, despite most rogues canonically coming from either background, a Rogue is Rewarded for being a Courier or Street Urchin both with extra power and an easy backstory to incoroporate.
I think that there is nothing wrong with optimizing your character as long as you intend to operate within the bounds of the game and for the fun of everyone at the table. If you make a really well optimized, say, Battle Master fighter with a fleshed out story and go out of your way to engage others out of combat as well as going to extra mile to include your allies in your Maneuvers by calling out for the Rogue to get the BBEG after a Commander's Strike and such or using your high Athletics to boost the Wizard up to rain a Fireball down over a barrier. Use your power to shine when its your time but also use your power to uplift others. Even if you could single handled take out the group of Goblins, set them up so others can help. Plenty of ways to "crunch the numbers" and still be a good collaborative story teller.
Couldn't have said it better myself
The biggest issue to me is that D&D doesn’t balance itself very well, so those experiences really make some characters feel superior to others.
And stronger balance is absolutely possible while preserving expressive and experimental play (4E, Fabula Ultima, Pathfinder 2E, SotDL, Lancer, Icon, Beacon, and I’m sure even more with people making newer projects now), it’s just that D&D 5E doesn’t do a good job of providing that gameplay.
Very much agree, and while those systems may run it better, there is this undeniability that 5e is the most popular system and the one most groups are likely to play, so I don't think it's a bad idea, knowing that about it going in, to be mindful about the group's expectations and understanding what everyone does to remedy those issues as much as possible.
Enjoyed the last story, and I wish more folks would think about "optimization" that way. Break the game to tell better stories and have more fun, just don't do it in a vacuum.
I had a bit of a different experience with optimization. I joined a gamed late as i was a guestplayer who got to stay permanently and i got to build a character on lvlv 12 which had me excited and I made a baldesinger wizard which was allowed. The problem was that there was a very clear power gap between me and the other players who only have played with phb material (they had played for 6 years with the same characters) and even a competently built character made for the difficulty ahead since the arc was about demons and devils seemed way to strong in comparison. The problem was that the players started pushing all responsibility on clearing encounters on me because I was "the strong one" and I hated it. I just wanted to play I didnt want to feel like i had to play optimally constantly so that everyone would survive it was a very stressful experience and i parted my ways with them after the campaign ended.
I've definitely been in a similar situation, feeling like I'm expected to carry the party for one reason or another. It's one of the reasons I'm so hesitant to introduce a new player in mid game, especially at such a high level. It's just less and less likely everyone will click, either in terms of personality or gameplay expectations.
@@dragonmindttrpgs agreed. We desperatly needed a sesison re zero when i joined os i could have gotten to know some basic expectations and boundaries because some steps were crossed because no one told me anything about a players triggers about angry voices as I lashed out due to the combat stressed and it became a whole mess.
@@Skimmer951 My condolences you went through that. If you have any specific topics you'd like me to cover in the future, feel free to let me know.
I haven't completely watched through a video in a while.
What a great video!
I'm currently torn between a Fire/Fiend Sorlock and a Storm/Tempest Sorcleric.
I already made a Gold Draconic Fiend Sorlock Tiefling. Had great fun with it but ditched it because I really want a lightning sorcerer. So then, because it just seemed so interesting to me, I created a Storm Sorcerer/Tempest Cleric.
Now I'm playing the character I wanted mechanics-wise but I'm missing the identity of the Sorlock I previously played.
I want to bring the Sorlock back.
Maybe I can combine them. A Blue Draconic Sorlock? I don't think it's gonna be cohesive. Lightning Sorcerer/Fiend Warlock would feel similar to making a blueberry+apple flavor.
It would probably taste good but it won't make sense.
What part of the Sorcleric's identity feels like it's missing compared to the Fiend Sorlock (if Im understanding it correctly)?
something noted in the Dragonmind video above, and from my own experiences with 5E, is the idea of taking game mechanics that work for what you want a character to be capable of doing, and then building a background that explains the powers from a story standpoint.
i did this last year in a long-running campaign, I used the mechanics of a clockwork sorcerer, but his story was that he was a wizard, and his magic stemmed from all the knowledge he had accumulated.
@@dragonmindttrpgs Story-wise, the sorlock I made was much more detailed than the sorcleric. I just didn't feel the Sorcleric as much as I did the Sorlock.
@@molotovdojorat6715 awesome. That's what I failed to apply when making a character. On my first character, I prioritized story, then on the second, I prioritized mechanics.
I have to reimagine my character. Look through a different lens perhaps?
@@CainSuzuko Hey, sometimes that happens. I've made a fair share of characters I thought would be really cool on the outset, but for some reason they just didn't click for me. In terms of a Warlock subclass that fits the theme, Fathomless from Tasha's goes along with the Storm theme more, but not lightning specifically (that one has more water imagery). Maybe see if that one somehow fits better?
Yeah, a three-pronged multiclass can be pretty underwhelming. One level of Ranger isn't enough. What makes the 2014 ranger "good" is the natural gish-ness. Like EK, they blend spells with weapons combat. But their spells are better combinations with their weapons than EK, IMO. Ensnaring strike, hail of thorns, etc. Adding that sorcerer level does give you more magic, but also made you too scattered in your abilities (unless you rolled and rolled awesome). Sorcerer's need for Charisma, which usually a Ranger's dump stat (and a fighter's dump stat, too), it makes for a mess of a character. As you saw.
Your story with the cleric was not an optimization issue. It was a mix of a spell being to strong, 5es popcorn healing issue, and the cleric olny going with healing becomeing a one trick pony. You didn't mess up there although i think its a good thing to look out for to not ruin others fun but the issues are from bad design in 5e mixed in with a one trick pony character.
Absolutely agree, and my point with it was that it started me thinking of optimization in terms of "what's the optimal experience", which that definitely wasn't for one reason or another. Treantmonk had a somewhat similar experience which led him to his "God Wizard" build.
@@dragonmindttrpgs I'll need to watch his video on it too. Sounds interesting. Iv had similar experiences myself mostly with spell casters. I liked the video and am interested in seeing more from you.