I have met both types in every single phase of my involvement with the hobby.

And personally, I follow a third method: I let the randomisation create the basic character concept, and actual play develop the detailed profile.

@Sacrosanct:

I assume the character sheet's from an MMORPG?  Video games are at the point that they're going to be more popular than tabletop games for a long time.

But video games still haven't managed to capture that same feel of getting your buddies together for a good time and share stories.  There's something face to face interaction has that interface, screens, and text doesn't.

So tabletop gamers, old school gamers too, aren't dying.  It just seems that way due to MMORPG's massive growth.

Nevertheless, even in character build-heavy Editions, I still go for a character concept beyond number-crunching.  And get a strong feeling for what they're like.

Granted, my generation was raised on console games, so their tabletop characters are going to draw upon the styles of Final Fantasy and the Tales series more than Conan and the Gray Mouser:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

But we're still dungeon-crawling, sword and spell-slinging fighters, thieves, and mages.  And there's a lot of rules-lite minimalist games being produced, even for traditional fantasy fare.  Particularly if I'm getting DM fatigue from 3rd Edition.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;685003The theme is more important than the DPR in the first one.

¿Que es 'DPR'? No se.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;685012¿Que es 'DPR'? No se.

Damage Per Round.

Quote from: Libertad;685013Damage Per Round.

Gracias.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;685012¿Que es 'DPR'? No se.

don't feel bad.  I didn't hear that term until relatively recent.  The fact that it even exists in a ttrpg makes me sad.. And FWIW, I don't think this is edition specific.  I think it's more generational.

So, Sacro, is that young woman imagining a character with a magic sword? Or magic armor, perhaps?

Optimisation isn't inherently bad. Believe me, I know all of the numbers on my character sheet and how they interact with the rest of the game, and I have pretty much since I was introduced to this hobby over thirty-five years ago. I know my character's attack and parry scores, and whether to parry or use footwork to avoid an attack based on the differences in Expertise and weapon type between our characters. I know I have a better chance of stabbing an arm or a leg than I do of sticking my basket-hilted broadsword in someone's eye. I know that if I can get a stun then my opponent is reduced to a single action, meaning he must choose either to parry or to attack and reaction parry, which is much easier for me to defeat.

That doesn't mean my character is defined solely or wholly by those numbers. It means that my imagination and the rules of the game interact to create the experience of actual play. The numbers of the page describe what my character can do, not who he is, so I can see both the numbers on my character sheet and imagine him with his broadsword dangling from his hip as he confronts a bravo with a wink to the trollop at the bar.

The idea that the experience of roleplaying games is one or the other is the attitude I have trouble with much more than spreadsheets.

Quote from: jedimastert;684992Could this have been caused by the disparity between that picture you posted and how older games actually generated PCs?

I mean if the lady in the picture is dreaming up a butt-kicking warrior in shining armor, and then has to roll 3d6 for stats straight down the row (or even 4d6 drop the lowest), there is no guarantee that she will be able to play what she envisions.

I think the spreadsheet below the picture is an extreme case of ensuring the character you have envisioned, and desire to play, is what is actually represented on your character sheet.

Older D&D type games don't really allow you to ensure you get the character you want. If the lady in the picture sat down to a Basic or AD&D game and said she wanted to play a physically strong, wise, and attractive warrior before rolling her random ability scores she may be told she has to let the dice fall where they may.

"Sorry you rolled an 8 for strength so fighter is out. Maybe you could be a thief or magic user."

I think the spreadsheets, feats, daily powers, etc. in newer games are an over reaction to that lady in your picture being told "sorry you can't have that character you were dreaming of".

I am not hostile to older games or random character generation. I am merely pointing out that I think the emphasis on character customization in newer games is a reaction to the randomness in older games character generation systems.

Unfortunately with character customization comes the evils of character optimization and that spreadsheet example you gave.

When I was 12, back in 1981, and first began to GM games, I would tell my Players to put their rolls where they want them for characteristics. It was a simple, elegant, and common sense solution to this so-called "problem".

Strange, I get visual images, emotional ideas, themes. Not "stats and stuff." Frex, half the time I get frustrated with systems who encourage me to make something and then I don't have enough (or too many) points/resources/etc to do what I want.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;685027So, Sacro, is that young woman imagining a character with a magic sword? Or magic armor, perhaps?

Optimisation isn't inherently bad. Believe me, I know all of the numbers on my character sheet and how they interact with the rest of the game, and I have pretty much since I was introduced to this hobby over thirty-five years ago. I know my character's attack and parry scores, and whether to parry or use footwork to avoid an attack based on the differences in Expertise and weapon type between our characters. I know I have a better chance of stabbing an arm or a leg than I do of sticking my basket-hilted broadsword in someone's eye. I know that if I can get a stun then my opponent is reduced to a single action, meaning he must choose either to parry or to attack and reaction parry, which is much easier for me to defeat.

That doesn't mean my character is defined solely or wholly by those numbers. It means that my imagination and the rules of the game interact to create the experience of actual play. The numbers of the page describe what my character can do, not who he is, so I can see both the numbers on my character sheet and imagine him with his broadsword dangling from his hip as he confronts a bravo with a wink to the trollop at the bar.

The idea that the experience of roleplaying games is one or the other is the attitude I have trouble with much more than spreadsheets.

Generally I agree.

I don't view it as one or the other. Awareness of the math is fine.

What often bothers me, is when a character is obviously based on a mechanical premise, or max mined to absurdity.

I also don't think a character needs to be optimized to be playable; many people think that.

Classic example is charisma and or intelligence as 'dump' stats.

Certainly a character based  purely on concept that is horrid mechanically can be annoying as well.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;685027So, Sacro, is that young woman imagining a character with a magic sword? Or magic armor, perhaps?

Optimisation isn't inherently bad. Believe me, I know all of the numbers on my character sheet and how they interact with the rest of the game, and I have pretty much since I was introduced to this hobby over thirty-five years ago. I know my character's attack and parry scores, and whether to parry or use footwork to avoid an attack based on the differences in Expertise and weapon type between our characters. I know I have a better chance of stabbing an arm or a leg than I do of sticking my basket-hilted broadsword in someone's eye. I know that if I can get a stun then my opponent is reduced to a single action, meaning he must choose either to parry or to attack and reaction parry, which is much easier for me to defeat.

That doesn't mean my character is defined solely or wholly by those numbers. It means that my imagination and the rules of the game interact to create the experience of actual play. The numbers of the page describe what my character can do, not who he is, so I can see both the numbers on my character sheet and imagine him with his broadsword dangling from his hip as he confronts a bravo with a wink to the trollop at the bar.

The idea that the experience of roleplaying games is one or the other is the attitude I have trouble with much more than spreadsheets.

I agree with this.

It just reminds me of the latest Edge of the Empire group we made. Yes I bust out the math, but the math didn't get busted out until AFTER I had already decided what sounded fun to play. I started with "I'm going to play a Lando type smuggler who charms and lies his way past everything".

Then I put the math to making a character who could mechanically back up that concept.

And everyone else's characters were built the same way. Wife was "I want to be a mechanic/pilot starship captain" another friend was "I want to be a paid killer sniper who took one too many contracts the Empire didn't like and is hunted by the law."

This I'd why I feel like there are two hobbies here, and I seriously can't communicate to such people in that other hobby that the game they're playing is nothing to do with the game I'm playing, and because insecurity is the In Fad at the moment, it's always taken as a personal attack when I talk about how the game they play doesn't share the same concerns with the people who play my games. And it's not that I think that my way of playing is the penultimate, or even the "Right way" to play, it's that I'm seriously just not interested in that type of roleplaying, so of course I'm going to discuss and criticize games based on how I play, because that's what interests me.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;685025And FWIW, I don't think this is edition specific.  I think it's more generational.

It's cultural, people the same age as yourself will do it too. Why? Because this is MMO stuff, like MR GC was babbling on about. It's a set of bad habits built up through playing world of warcraft and similar.

The calculations, the number crunching, the damage per round predictions... look up the original Leeroy Jenkins video on youtube and you'll see the exact same thing happening, the group eventually ends up with a percentage chance of success based on what's inside the room they're about to attack.

It's not inevitable of course; if you don't have a system which supports that kind of prediction and calculation then players won't be able to crunch them. That doesn't mean the system has to be overly simplistic either, lots of ways to cover that base. To my mind it's a sign of serious weakness in a system if combat outcomes can be reliably predicted just by looking at the numbers, unless we're talking about a truly disproprtionate battle. And sometimes even then.

both please.... 20 years ago I started with method one, then built the character in Champions/Fantasy Hero... D&D got nothing on it as far an number crunching goes...

Quote from: Melan;685006I have met both types in every single phase of my involvement with the hobby.

And personally, I follow a third method: I let the randomisation create the basic character concept, and actual play develop the detailed profile.

WFRP taught me this method.