POLL: role-playing or power-gaming

Remove all ads!

i was just wondering on what you kind of a party you played, role-playing or power-gaming?

Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 21 user(s) have voted.
Voting starts at July 11, 2003 00:28 board time.
Voting stops at July 25, 2003 00:28 board time.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

Poll Results: role-playing or power-gaming (21 votes.)

What gaming style are you? (Choose 1)
* Role Playing! - 52% (11)
* Power Gaming! - 43% (9)
* Uhm.. don't know the difference.... - 5% (1)

 

ever tried a party of 6 fighters or monks?

 

IWD2 isn't very RP-friendly in my opinion.

But there's a third option you've left out: "variant" playing.

Trying to beat the game with "odd" combinations of characters.
That's neither Role-Playing nor Power-Gaming.

 

well roleplaying could be to take only those classes and races that offer special dialog options to you ... but this is also some sort of powerplaying. don't know the difference but voted for RP.

 

It's hard to role play a computer game like IWD2, would I not be right to say that it's hard to "role-play" anything on your own?

I played a party of six, very varied. Got stuck in the time loop. Completed the game with a solo sorcerer in next to no time.

Well, would you consider sole to be power gaming? Perhaps it is, but quite challenging at some points Liked it. Most of the time after the early snags it is easy though.

 

Role-player here..I really don't see the problems with role-playing, sure IWD2's hard, but I managed to beat it with my well-rounded RP company (Although it did require excessive planning, and luck).
The problem I found was that there were so many possibilities for role-playing that I kept starting new companies, only to drop them and start new ones, only to drop them...etc.

 

Role playing (as many of you quite possibly know).
Although even though IWDII isn't very rp friendly, you have to put yourself in your character's shoes. I killed the two priests in the tent with my CN Mage because they refused to heal himm Obviously, this did not help him in the upcoming battle, but he died knowing he'd performed as he should have.

 

Roleplay with humans.

Rollplay with the machine.

Of course I would suggest that you get inside your character shoes and enjoy the game, but make decision based on effectiveness when you only have the machine in face of you and find whatever excuses for such a developpment that turn so good...with humans, roleplay is nice as long as you are not alone doing it...writting to talk limit roleplay a lot compare to talking.

I find that having 1 rogue with 18 charisma and intel at start of the game was a blessing for my group, as she cover all the talking, the traps disarming and whatever silly thing and I could focus to make the 5 others characters ultimate fighting machines(she has at least 60% of the skills, the wizard like 20% and the rest of the group have only wilderness lore outside of combat related skills). (2 warrior, 1 barbarian, 1 wizard and 1 cleric for the rest, now you could have other groups)

I only have "troubles" at the 3rd drums fight and the Guardian, the rest of the game prove to be expensive in hps at worst, never really hard anywhere else then the previous 2 fights I mentionned.

6 monks or warriors would be a very strong group, just buy a few potions and a few arrows to cover whatever healing and offensive spells you need to be covered. Having 6 tanks make no weakpoint in your line(s) and if any is to damage, gulp a lot while the others kills everything near him.

Now if you like a challenge, try with many many rogues or wizards and no class that can actually tank(no fighter, no ranger, no paladin, no monk, no barbarian). I would find such a thing to hard to enjoy it myself. Wizards have very deadly tools, but they don't stand that long either when under fire until very late in the game.

6 clerics should be fun to play...and very long fights! (Althought I can see a round with 6 protection from evil been cast and 5 fire elementals or 5 gate cast the next at a much later point)

Ano

 

Agree with Anofalye.

Roleplaying goes fine only PnP. Because human DM can (a should) act sensitively to what PCs aree doing. Computers (I know, it should be software, not computer) isn't in todays state of art able to be sensitive and adaptive in such a manner.

We can think of a very nice solution of a problem in an D&D game. But if the software does not support this solution, you can't do it this way. But if human DM "hears" a nice roleplaying decisions he should twist "the whole world" to support it. DnD should be fun.

 

am i role playing if i choose every charactor with a level adjustment,ie.snefeberin?,drow,assimar and tiefling.as well as having a half orc barbarian and a moon elf wizard?

they have very little hp early on and its really tough goin but ive jus completed the bridg,shanegarne.

 

Now, if only they would penalise parties for having members with CHA or INT 3 ala NWN.

What kind of freak would have a CHA of 1 anyway? If such an abomination was in an adventuring party, any sane townsfolk would lynch the whole lot of them, let alone offer them quests to save the day.

Ideal situation: The party spokesperson, no matter how high his CHA is, should still be penalised by the negative CHA modifiers of his fugly/disgusting comrades. Any party that has a character with a CHA of 1 to be attacked on sight by guards and have no access to stores, inns etc. Also, no quest-giving NPCs should talk to them nor should they be allowed to progress with the game's story.

If any character has an INT of 1, he/she/it should be a vegetable, incapable of wielding weapons or donning armor or even moving about at all.

Ideal situation: PCs with an INT score of 1 should not be allowed to equip any item at all. They should only respond 1% of the time to the player's commands or stand there, twitching uselessly like the idiot he/she is.

 

I don't think you meant "sane townsfolk", but rather "typical townsfolk", because it's not very sane to lynch people.

You know, a paper bag and a gag can work wonders!

I disagree.
IMHO the whole point of the stats is that regardless of how low (or high) stats you roll up you can be an adventurer. It's when a stat reaches 0 that such a character becomes unable to adventure.

 

I partly agree with everyone.

I don`t think that having a character with 6 charisma should hinder at all the group leader, as it might even be fun and teasing about the character(or 6 intel). But 1...this is beyond any common sense, I think cats have 3 intel. ? should be a bottom line for most advendurers in most stats with maybe 1 exception in the whole group, 6 is still socialy acceptable and ignored. 6 and above is within the "acceptable social limits, and would not be picked on if part of a group". Alone a 6 would be awfull as peoples would react a lot more, but to a group, humans are a lot more tolerant...and will ignore the 6 and look a the sexy front machine!

For exemple...you 18 charisma (or more) go buy stuff...the merchant look at the 6 charisma and intel warrior beside and is annoyed(WTF is he doing, he will harm himself and bleed on my stuff). The charismatic character wink and say they need to gear the animal a little like a horse, getting a smile and friendly answer that completely ignore the fact he was not happy with the jerk beside. Now, having 1(or 3) charisma mean he is OFFENSIVE to just withstand, it should have dire consequence, he is not annoying and passing customers, he is getting a strong urge to actions or moving away. 6 is the freak everyone laught around, such freaks are accepted and don`t hinder a bright leader at all, such leader can even use it to his/her advantage("hey, I am trying to train him, yet my horse answer better(the subject character glance and grumble away while farting and getting a disgusted look from the group leader)). 3 is the complete moron everyone have heard from the far away village.

As a matter of fact, you have meet in RL a lot of folks that have 6 in a "stat", yet you don`t like them or bear them much when directly dealing with them, yet if the group manager of the football team come and talk and his sexy and all, who care for the grunts?

3(or 1) should not get a lynch reaction unless the area is very aggressive...yet...it should get openly hostile and massive reaction. Peoples might not like a group of grunts, but if leaded by an awesome sex and brilliant folks...and his jerks are not beyond the scale, it should be no troubles to bear the grunts...some will even socialize with the grunts just to try to get close to the group leader. Add to the fact the grunts and jerk are obviously armed, dangerous, and effective...yet under control from that damn sexy thing...*drool*

There should be a lower limit, like only 1 stat can go under 6 and it would have dire consequence. I like giving 6 STR to my wizard and my rogue, but having a limit of weight of 30 is very limiting, of course they will bring to weightless stuff and the grunt will be a mule for all the heavy stuff, hey, who is sexy after all!

I don`t think it is a +4 and -2 = +2, but still a raw +4 reaction. But if charisma of 3(-4)...it become a +4 -4 = +0...even if that...since that creature is really annoying and a zoo in itself. We, most of us, never witness personnally a 3. We witness a 6 here and there, we dislike them, but, if they are working for someone else, all the better as you don`t get to talk with them.


Yes yes...I have a lot of 6 in intel and charisma in my group, as myself prolly range in the 12 charisma range in RL (wow, how arrogant of me) and my friends, even the most annoying, even if around 6, can be picked on when alone, but if I am doing stuff for the "group of friends", it is usually just as good as if I was alone and peoples don`t really overpick on them when I am around, they care for what I think of them even if they would not for them others. *grin* Now, I don`t think anyone would make peoples bear even on short term the 3 charisma jerk. So it is clearly not a +1 -2 = -1 but a raw +1 no matter what.

Just put it that way...

If, let say, Tom Cruise(put any nice girl/boy to your taste, don`t use mine *grin*) is talking to you, even if there is a few crude folks around...as long as they are not THAT much beyond the scale, you don`t care for a small amount of time, and the nice person will get exactly same treatment as if alone.

Now having a paladin or cleric of that or this god should change the reaction a lot no matter what is the charisma of the person, depending on his belief, because the sexy beast bear a religious extremist and that indeed does matter. If Tom Cruise is with grunt01(6 charisma in my opinion), all the better for him, he is kind and all. If Tom Cruise is with this or that religious person, I would react differently, as he prolly does believe to that religion to some extend or at least feel at ease with it. While been at ease with grunt01 don`t mean you are a grunt yourself in anyway, been at ease with the religious mean you approve it to some extend.

If I walk with a priest and spend a lot of time with a priest, peoples will react differently to me, a LOT differently(nicer or worser depending on the folks), but if I spend lot of time with non-religious folks, it is not like they care much.

But that include adding a religious factor to a NPC...like +5 for Helm, -4 for Bane and so on list, this is a lot of work.

*bla bla bla more*