What do you do most games?

[Hanuman]

Here's a point I don't see much, but:

What are some common threads between your characters?

For instance, some players really like having a handy haversack (popular option), whenever they roll a certain type of character they do X, ect.
What choices do you see yourself returning to again and again? Does this concept translate between different classes?

[J-H]

I usually get a Belt of Healing and Handy Haversack.
Unfortunately, the other common thread is being the guy who posts in OOC "Who are we waiting on?" after 5 days.

[AmberVael]

I strongly tend towards character that avoid per day abilities, at least for the main powers and selling points. I'm one of these cautious hoarder types who'll hang on to something "in case I need it" and never use it, so its really just so much more relaxing and fun if I don't have to worry about it and can just let loose instead. So I like Binders and Warlocks, as well as the per encounter classes like Factotum and the Initiators. Per encounter still has limits, obviously, but I'm much less afraid of wasting something since it can refresh so easily.

I also just kinda refuse to play anything below level 6. I need to feel like I have options, and most classes below that level don't have nearly enough to satisfy me.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

I like to play characters that strongly optimize things that aren't necessarily top tier things. One of the characters I've yet to play, but am really excited to, is basically all about the survival skill and disarming. I also tend to build characters with the same design philosophy: I want the character to be the best at something, really good at two other things and capable of doing three useful things. That is, if I built a Wizard, I might want my character to:
1) completely control the action economy on any battlefield
2a) provide useful information in any out of combat situation through skills
2b) facilitate damage from the main damage dealers
3a) deal adequate damage if things go south
3b) assist the party face
3c) act as a back-up scout

It's easy to do with a pure caster but somewhat more difficult without casting skills.

So I have two design philosophies that are pretty universal across all the characters I make. In terms of specific characters, when I make non-casters I tend strongly towards lighter armor, above-average mentals and higher skill points. In the group I play with, I'm the person with the most experience in creating characters, so I can get away with, for instance, two-handed Power Attack fighters who prioritize Wis > Dex > Con > Str. That gives me a lot of leeway that other players might not have.

[Karl Aegis]

I do mundane things like go to the fabric store or have tea with friends. The simple stuff.

[Malimar]

The thing I tend to do is try new and different things. I don't like playing the same kind of character twice.

[atemu1234]

My characters often have backstories with symbolism no one gets.

[Susano-wo]

I tend toward idealists, and toward the Neutral and Chaotic aspects of that axis. I tend to play characters who aren't prominent within existing power and social structures (I mean, even when I made a knight, he was from a newly knighted family, only a couple of generations old). I seem to be unable to just play it straight. prominent examples include:


a Warblade/Sorc/ModdedJade Phoenix Mage who just took a level in Swordsage for story reasons. (Oh yeah, he was the aforementioned knight, who is practically a Paladin without the class restrictions/features)
a cleric (ok, he was an Exorcist from Mongoose's power classes) with a level (or maybe 2) of Scout to represent his time spent in the forests outside his village with his wolf companion(did I mention that he was using the Ravenloft Campaign setting feat Red Head which gave him a 1st level druid spell 1/day and this was back in 3.0 so you got companions by using a 1st level spell on em?). Oh yeah and his fey heritage(what the red head feat signifies) also got him psionic powers--though don't blame me for that one, the DM added those later because plot :smallamused:)
My idea for a Rogue/Paladin. Grew up on the streets until a priest showed him a better way. Now he is a champion of goodness, though he is understanding of what its like to be on the other side of them coin, and he doesn't think there's anything wrong with a dirty trick or two in combat--that's just tactics!:smallbiggrin:

[I should also note that my groups are rather low op (Made a summoner wizard, people were surprised when he barely had any blasting spells and pretty much never had any prepped.) and tend to have a class or two with possible prestige class on top of that. So having like 4 classes on that one example felt like a lot to them :smalltongue:]

[torrasque666]

I tend to play LE types, or LN if I can't be evil. I shy away from per day abilities for much the same reason as AmberVael(do I use it now or later? Is this gonna be the last encounter of the day?) and because I hate spells, I tend towards beatsticks and avoid full casters like the plauge.

[atemu1234]

I need a keyboard to type up common threads with my characters.

[Curmudgeon]

My characters will make efficient choices because that's the way I normally think, and I don't see the appeal in having to role-play inefficiency. They'll have a Heward's Handy Haversack. They'll use either no armor or a mithral breastplate. They'll use the best weapons that they're proficient with rather than wasting a feat for proficiency. They'll pick feats that scale with level (Power Attack, Craven, Savvy Rogue) rather than feat chains. They're often unseen (and thus untargetable). They won't be Good-aligned, because adventurers are bad guys who go around killing people and taking their stuff.

[Uncle Pine]

My characters will make efficient choices because that's the way I normally think, and I don't see the appeal in having to role-play inefficiency. They'll have a Heward's Handy Haversack. They'll use either no armor or a mithral breastplate. They'll use the best weapons that they're proficient with rather than wasting a feat for proficiency. They'll pick feats that scale with level (Power Attack, Craven, Savvy Rogue) rather than feat chains. They're often unseen (and thus untargetable). They won't be Good-aligned, because adventurers are bad guys who go around killing people and taking their stuff.
I like this way of thinking. :smallamused:

I'd like to say "I usually play Wizards" because I'd love to, but I rarely played as a player and when I did I always ended up as a melee type (Warblade, Commoner and Barbarian, respectively). A constant of my characters is to use wealth to buy exotic or custom magic items that I use to drastically increase my survavibility. In other words, I spend most of my time as a player tinkering with magic items rather than class features.

[Lerondiel]

My characters have a bad habit of never going the direction of individual effectiveness I made them for & instead use white raven tactics, buffs, reroll abilities, etc to keep the party in one piece!

[erok0809]

I generally play casters or other classes that use "magic" (pact magic, blade magic, incarnum, etc.), because I like having options and am a fan of magic or magic-like effects, especially those dealing lots of damage. I also tend towards chaotic characters with destructive streaks, but that's not a thing that's set in any kind of stone. Lastly, every character of mine I've ever played has collected trophies from all the enemies they killed, as long as they had a form that lent itself to trophy-taking. One collected teeth, one did extremities (but focused on hands if they were available)...and the next character I play will probably take faces.

[Corlindale]

I almost always play classes with some kind of magic. I've loved wizards since I was 4 years old, and to this day I find it hard to get excited by entirely mundane classes. It doesn't have to be spells, but they must have some supernatural powers, and ideally many options too.

[Gabrosin]

I tend to optimize towards survival. If you hit everything you face or pump out massive damage or disable every opponent, your DM will just keep scaling your opposition to challenge you until it gets out of hand. Instead, I'd rather have a dozen little things add up to keeping my character alive no matter what I face.

I also try not to devote myself to a single optimal tactic, because the repetition gets boring. At a real table, being able to do a lot of things well is more important than having one heavily optimized option, like charging or diplomacy.

[paranoidbox]

I tend to play self-sufficient and versatile characters. I like options and my characters will hoard or stockpile things they might need (and will probably forget when the time comes) just for the sake of having options. My choices in feats and classes reflect this too, always striving for different angles, immunities, modes of transportation, damage types, etc... They're usually not the best at what they do, but they are good enough to fake it and get away with it.

I've been told it's very frustrating :D

[nedz]

Normally I DM.

Oh and I soft ban the haversacks because they are too ubiquitous in many games and take yet another role away from melle characters, even if that is just the pack-mule.

When playing I like stealthy characters or Illusionists, though I will play anything. I avoid T1 characters because they're too easy and spell prep slows the game down.

Whether I'm playing or DMing I prefer strong characters, in terms of motivation: They add more to the role-play.

[Amphetryon]

I tend strongly toward debuffing gishes with a survivalist/wilderness bent. I find them interesting and useful, without making the rest of the party superfluous.

[Samalpetey]

I play characters with anger issues, usually lawful

[danzibr]

I usually drink Mountain Dew and eat Cheetos.

[Callin]

Paranoidbox hit the nail on the head with me. I try to cover as many bases as possible so I can be self sufficent. Usually a dex based semigish who can stealth and has a healing item or ability. I dont care for per day abilities so I love ToB/PoW. Its almost all I play now.

[Chronos]

Quoth AmberVael:

I strongly tend towards character that avoid per day abilities, at least for the main powers and selling points. I'm one of these cautious hoarder types who'll hang on to something "in case I need it" and never use it, so its really just so much more relaxing and fun if I don't have to worry about it and can just let loose instead. So I like Binders and Warlocks, as well as the per encounter classes like Factotum and the Initiators. Per encounter still has limits, obviously, but I'm much less afraid of wasting something since it can refresh so easily.
This is similar to what I was going to say, except that I'm not particularly drawn to the ToB classes (mostly because they don't do as much out of combat). Usually I end up playing a rogue or other skillmonkey, though I've also had great fun with a warlock. I've never had a chance to play a Binder (ToM has never been on the whitelist for any group I've played with), but I'd love to give it a try.

Another common thread with my characters is that I tend to get a whole bunch of really cheap items. My starting equipment list tends to consist of the entire mundane items section of the PHB, minus the ten-foot pole, water clock, and alchemist's lab, and as I level up, I tend to add things like the Hand of the Mage and feather tokens.

[Eldest]

Usually I play control, utility or buffing while avoiding a full vancian caster and trying for an oddball build. Psion is fine, factotum is fine, splashing sorcerer and progressing it is fine, but I don't like playing god casters even with the goals being the same. Also I like dumpster diving the rules for something odd to center the character around, like using telekinesis to mass throw great swords (with sneak attack) or a self resurrecting tattoo.

[OldTrees1]

Well normally I DM but when I am a player I focus on passive or at will abilities.
Even my casters(Cleric and Necromancer) were focused on their passive/at will abilities(Martial Spirit & Touch of Healing, or Undead respectively).

[AmberVael]

This is similar to what I was going to say, except that I'm not particularly drawn to the ToB classes (mostly because they don't do as much out of combat).

Yeah, Swordsage tends to be my favorite of them just because it has the most to contribute outside of combat, and the most variety to offer. Even it is fairly combat centeric- but at least you can give it the skills and feats to be a stealthy scout type, and it gets interesting options like Cloak of Deception and the Jaunt series.

[StreamOfTheSky]

A lot of my personal characteristics carry over to my characters. Learned long ago I can't help it, now I don't try to fight against it anymore.
- Almost all of my characters are nondrinkers. The few that are, it's a major part of the character (like, Drunken Master) and played for laughs.
- Much as I try to make different personas, almost all of my characters eventually end up being snarky and insulting.
- I can't remember a time I've ever played a character with low intelligence. Not being able to think tactically or have witty responses would be intolerable for me.
- Almost none of my characters is particularly religious, and my divine casters tend to be druids (who revere nature itself) and even those who aren't druids tend to not worship a particular god unless it's absolutely necessary. I had one character who was a cleric of a forgotten creator god condemned to being sealed away forever, with the goal of releasing him and exacting vengeance on the entire pantheon and the world before the god destroys it and recreates it in a more pure "uncorrupted form" (evil campaign)...probably my only deity-worshiping character in the past decade, and only because the entire campaign's plot was tied to it.

While I have played at least a dip of every class and like to try different things, there are certain build traits the majority of my characters (and often the ones I most enjoy playing) share. Typically, I like playing martial artists and martial adepts or front-line oriented "dodge tank" rogues ("feat rogue" is by far my most-used variant), a role I have taken to refer to as a "battle artist." A character who is acrobatic and hard to so much as touch and has all sorts of flashy moves and attacks, whether they be ToB maneuvers or some badass "knockback --> shock trooper --> trip" complicated combo. Parrying and counter-attacks, re-directing attacks into other enemies, or juggling foes in the air and sending them into each other like one would a bowling ball into pins...I love that stuff so much.
Conversely, I cannot freaking stand playing a heavily armored traditional "tank" or someone who's a one trick pony high damage machine, like a lance charger.

[Mehangel]

I would probably say that 99% of my characters were High AC PC's who specialized in adding +X to +Y. I never play the same character twice, and never use the same class more than once per GM. I generally choose to make my character last, because 1) I usually have the most experience and can make my character on the fly, and 2) I want to ensure that whatever PC I make matches up Tier-wise, or atleast helps round out the party. I dont care what role I have in the party, but one thing is understood, my characters are not hard hitters, but by the gods, they are hard to hit.

By playing a different character and class each time, it keeps me current with the abilities of each class, and it shows other players just what is out there. It also keeps the game interesting. This is because I get annoyed if when a PC dies, they roll up a new character with basically the same build with either a different race, 1 class level difference, or with different gear but sporting a different name.

[Elkad]

I like characters with LOTS of options. That generally means prepared casters, or maybe a skillmonkey.

I'll come to a session with a whole new spell loadout and try to make it work. Last week blaster, this week summoner, next week BFC, etc.

I know that annoyed the hell out of one of my DMs. He'd try to prep an encounter to work a weakness of mine, and I'd have all new spells. He sends big mobs that can out-grapple my summoned fiendish apes from last session, and I'd have a pile of ranged touch blasting spells that day. So he sends tiny fast mobs with high touch ACs, and I have some BFC and a bunch of offensive teleports memorized. Of course he's caught me as well. Mind-Affecting loadout vs undead.

The other most reliable thing you can count on me to do in a game is to be Chaotic Good. But that's a reflection of my own personality. I sometimes play LE, pretty much every other alignment gets skipped (and in 30 years play, I don't think I've ever been CE)

[Honest Tiefling]

Mages. Sometimes they are book mages, sometimes they are singing mages, sometimes they are nature mages, sometimes they are healy mages, but regardless of what is actually written down for the class, they are mages. I just have had bad experiences with purely mundane characters and really haven't enjoyed playing most of them.

My characters also tend to be neutral. They all too often try to work outside of the law, break the law, or just outright abandon all illusions of following a code to get whatever done. But I also don't play chaotic because I don't have time to overthrow government, there's money to be made/things to be rescued/people to kill. Now that I think about it, they tend to be very goal focused as opposed to be philosophical.

[ZamielVanWeber]

If my characters isn't somehow silly there will be some sub-optimal choice included for flavor. Silly characters tend to get optimized out the wazoo though.

[YossarianLives]

I usually play casters focused on both support and blasting. I also tend toward chaotic good characters who mean well and are ultimately heroes but have little respect for the law.

[Silva Stormrage]

Lets see, usually I go with some kind of logical/pragmatic character usually a caster. I almost always try to get a base or a headquarters or something similar. Wether through the landlord feat, magic or chained enveloping pits. I also would play necromancers but since my two main DM's said I could no longer do so because I upsetted game balance too much when I do :smallbiggrin:. So now I usually play either control casters or builds with minions, lots of minions :smalltongue:

[bobthehero]

I play martials with swords and shields.

Except for the cleric I ran recently, and only because we had no divine caster whatsoever. And my longsword/shield fighter was burned to a crisp.

[HurinTheCursed]

I can play very different characters but they all tend to be wiser, cunning and kind of leaders/face no matter their stats. They always have some carefully taylored equipment as customized as possible rather than the run of the mill stuff. They often keep a large array of circumstancial pieces of equipment just in case which sometimes makes the difference. Obviously, this comes from my personality. They are usually more optimized than most of the group which compensates my dice rolls, but do not belong to the most powerful class / career / ...

Unlike me, my characters often have the deepest backgroud in the group with strong motivations to adventure. They also combine a mix of defensive, offensive, buffs and crowd control abilities and do not overspecialize. Most of my characters are more pious than the average adventurer if I believe it fits the setting.

[Roga]

I don't see the appeal in having to role-play inefficiency.
Could you elaborate on that? Do you mean that you don't see the appeal in playing a character with any kind of flaw or weakness? I think if you're not getting challenged it gets boring. I might be misreading your intent, and if so, I apologize.


They won't be Good-aligned, because adventurers are bad guys who go around killing people and taking their stuff.
I have a very opposite approach to characters. Most of mine are paragons of morality. They always strive to leave an area much better off than when they found it. Be it with oafish but well-meaning brutes (Similar to The Tick) or are healers and other spellcasters who constantly use all their spells each day of downtime to improve the lives of townsfolk and the like.

[Alent]

I usually end up picking either a skill monkey or utility caster of neutral good alignment and compassionate disposition, then stuff happens and by the end of it I'm either a Chaotic Evil or lawful evil direct damage build who tortures and kills for fun and profit.

Usually it's because the rest of the party abandons the intended story for the sake of getting their greedy murderhobo on and since I don't believe in being "That guy" for the sake of a character's RP I hop onboard and contribute my own flavor of evil while using my skills and/or utility magic to manipulate the social environment since few other people in the party seem to pick up on the political ques.

It happens often enough I'm considering getting myself a copy of The Prince.

[frogglesmash]

Most of my characters generally occupy a the dark grey area of the morality spectrum. I also have a habit of wanting to create characters who have access to godlike/game breaking power, but who never actually use said power, it gives a sort of impish delight knowing that at any moment I could decide to end the universe.

[Curmudgeon]

Could you elaborate on that? Do you mean that you don't see the appeal in playing a character with any kind of flaw or weakness? I think if you're not getting challenged it gets boring. I might be misreading your intent, and if so, I apologize.
It's specific to efficient choices. Any of us can look at the Armor table and see that a breastplate is superior to scale male in any way other than cost, and a mithral breastplate (being light armor) won't keep the character from being able to Tumble. By the time you get to 6th level or so, any PC expressing angst about their scale male or their limited carrying capacity is just being annoying. I have no interest in pretending not to see (role-playing) that some choices are obviously better than others. If we players can see the obvious differences, our characters immersed in the gaming world should see the same obvious things.

[ben-zayb]

Most of my characters (extended sig for reference) tend to have skillmonkey capabilities, either a skillmonkey class or a PC with high INT, even in classes such as Binder, Warlock, Dread Necro, Druid, Ranger, and Cleric. Funny thing is that I rarely had Factotum and Beguiler PCs. I also prefer (human)s to get Able Learner flexibility.

[Jay R]

I generally want to optimize some crucial aspect, but also include a few (usually low-cost) choices just for flavor. For instance, every person I've ever met who actually lived in the woods was proud of the quality of his axe. Therefore my current Ranger has a masterwork axe, which is not his weapon. It's just a normal tool for a woodsman. He also has one point each in Perform (string instruments), Craft (Tanning) and Craft (leatherwork), simply because that's in character for somebody who has lived alone in the woods.

[Hrugner]

I grab the personality of someone I know and play them. It gives me an easy touchstone for remembering how they aught to behave. I make characters who can do something unusual really well and avoid class description based character planning. As I typically play pathfinder, I find it really really hard to pass up 0th level spells and find a way to make sure I can cast a few even at the cost of a fair bit of power. I rarely play pure casters as my groups tend to end a story around level 5 anyway, and nobody optimizes very highly.

[GreatDane]

All three of my characters have been wizards. I love magic and esoterica. Not many others in my group are willing to put up with the paperwork of a caster, but I love it.

[Jowgen]

Character characteristics: physical, fast, High-Dex, low-bookkeeping, versatile

Never-leave-home-without Equipment: Healing Belt(s), Talisman of the Disk (see my sig), Collar of Perpetual Attendance, Custom item of Prestidigitation

[Roga]

As for gear, all my characters carry a "Standard Everything Kit", which is measured out to be exactly 250lbs of gear to fit into a Type I bag of holding.
2 Flasks of Acid
2 Flask of Alchemist's fire
1 Bedroll
1 Bell
1 Blank Book
1 Blanket
1 Block and Tackle
4 Bowls
1 Bucket
48 Candles
1 Chain, 20ft.
24 Chalk pieces
1 Crowbar
6 Fishhooks
1 flint and steel
4 Forks
1 pair of heavy gloves
1 Grappling hook
1 Hammer
1 Handaxe
1 Hourglass
2 ink pens
2 vials of ink
4 knives
1 11ft. ladder
1 30ft Silk rope ladder
4 Manacles
4 Mugs
6 Needles
2 2 gallon kegs of oil
2 small steel mirrors
1 Traveler's outfit
24 sheets of parchment
12 Pitons
3 Stout 12ft. poles
1 Iron pot
1 Bullseye lantern
4 Plates
10 large sacks
1 Wood saw
1 200 ft. coil of silk rope
1 shovel
2 pounds of soap
4 spoons
1 200 ft. ball of string
1 Sunrod
1 tent
6 spools of thread
1 set thieve's tools
6 torches
1 towell
4 Days trail rations
2 water skins
1 Whetstone
1 whistle
Total cost 433 gp Total weight: 250 lbs

It's become a standard piece of gear for most of my players these days.

[Milo v3]

I often get a glove of silent image for holograms.

[Auron3991]

1) Pick a function for combat and focus on that with a couple tricks to counter things that attempt to neutralize me (in other words, I play card games too much and it bleeds into my tabletop play)

2) Characters are usually chaotic neutral (not chaotic stupid) with a very strong belief in personal freedom, to the point where it wouldn't be OOC for them to attack a party member for using a compulsion-based ability

3) Have a character behavior that forces roleplaying at the table. You'd be surprised the reactions you get when the druid attempts to make trail rations out of the just slain orcs (if it makes a difference, they attacked first).

[Extra Anchovies]

Every time I build a character, I stop at some point and ask myself "do I have room for Knowledge Devotion in this build?", even if the character can't possibly afford even a single Knowledge skill. It doesn't deter me from any builds, but it comes up every time.

[Crake]

The start of my career was "die horribly to something stupid my DM put in the game" I racked up something like 30 deaths over the course of one game, over something like 10 characters. So yeaah... that wasn't fun. More recently though, the similarity has been "they are NPCs" because I've been primarily DMing these days :smallfrown:

[Jay R]

I will no longer play a character who isn't Good, for the same reasons that I want my character to have greater strength, intelligence, etc. than I do.

Why should I try to entertain myself by pretending to be somebody who's less than I am?

[Curmudgeon]

Why should I try to entertain myself by pretending to be somebody who's less than I am?
If you think that's "less", then your role-play is self-limiting. If you think instead that you're granting yourself more freedom than you have in real life, that's empowering. Most of us IRL don't often make choices with bold consequences for those around us. Our adventuring alter-egos can and do.

[OldTrees1]

If you think that's "less", then your role-play is self-limiting. If you think instead that you're granting yourself more freedom than you have in real life, that's empowering. Most of us IRL don't often make choices with bold consequences for those around us. Our adventuring alter-egos can and do.

Um. There is plenty of freedom in trying to play characters that are more moral than oneself. While this is strictly less freedom than playing characters of any and all moral characters, it is more than enough freedom.

PS: Yes, a character that is less moral than yourself is by definition less moral. There is no need to put quotes around it.

[Jay R]

If you think that's "less", then your role-play is self-limiting.

Every time somebody chooses to play a certain type of character, or to always take a certain skill, or in any other way has preferences and tastes, then of course that choice is "self-limiting", in the same sense that reading only books I enjoy is self-limiting. I'm also "self-limiting" when I always choose chocolate ice cream. So what?


If you think instead that you're granting yourself more freedom than you have in real life, that's empowering.

Of course a person with low morals has more "freedom" than somebody with high morals. A person who lies, for instance, has many more possible answers to a question than one who tells the truth. But I do not find making tawdry, selfish, or immoral choices to be "empowering", even in gameplay.

I am empowered when I make my choices my way for my reasons.


Most of us IRL don't often make choices with bold consequences for those around us. Our adventuring alter-egos can and do.

Yes, we do. Every time we go to work to help pay the mortgage, every time we help somebody who's injured, every time we help somebody with their schoolwork, every time we take out the garbage, every time we take a first aid or lifesaving class, we are making choices with bold consequences for those around us. (Also, every time we decide not to.)

Our alter-egos get to make choices that have more immediate, and sometimes more dramatic, consequences, of course. But I find making the choice to save the village more empowering, bolder, and more fun than making the choice to burn it.

[Telonius]

Skillmonkeys and/or party faces, often with a side of comic relief.

Counter-intuitive race and class combinations, especially when I DM.

[ShaneMRoth]

Figure out what the rest of the players are not interested in playing, and play that.

No one wants to play a Cleric? I play a Cleric. Or Druid. (Or Warblade.)

No one wants to play a Fighter? I play a Fighter. Or Ranger. (Assuming the option to play a Warblade was off the table.)

No one wants to play a Rogue? I play a Rogue. Or Bard. (Or Warblade.)

No one wants to play a Wizard or Sorcerer? I... have never seen that happen.

No one wants to play an Evil or Chaotic Neutral PC? I... have never seen that happen, either. But if that happened, I would consider playing a Paladin. (If a Paladin is not a good fit? Warblade.)

If all of the traditional roles are covered, I'll see about Monk or Barbarian. (or Warblade.)

When in doubt, there's always room for one more Fighter.

And by Fighter, I mean Warblade.

[OldTrees1]

Figure out what the rest of the players are not interested in playing, and play that.
-snip-

I take it you play lots of Warblades :smalltongue:

[atemu1234]

In most games I drink four liters of Coca-Cola and wind up laughing at my players for their actions.

[torrasque666]

Most games I have a nice Rum & Coke or two. Failing that, a few liters of mountain dew/faygo (with doritos)/pepsi.

[Curmudgeon]

Every time we go to work to help pay the mortgage, every time we help somebody who's injured, every time we help somebody with their schoolwork, every time we take out the garbage, every time we take a first aid or lifesaving class, we are making choices with bold consequences for those around us. (Also, every time we decide not to.)
We appear to have different thresholds for "bold".

Our alter-egos get to make choices that have more immediate, and sometimes more dramatic, consequences, of course. But I find making the choice to save the village more empowering, bolder, and more fun than making the choice to burn it.
There's also the option to take over the village, and replace poor governance with people who won't take bribes to bypass health and safety laws. Sometimes "saving" doesn't serve the greater good.

[A_S]

I usually play characters who can do something effectively besides hit stuff. This often, but not always, means spellcasting.

I usually spend more of my WBL on consumables than the rest of the party, and typically have a Handy Haversack full of partially charged wands, scrolls, alchemical substances, obscure Wondrous Items, etc. that I pull out when the situation they're needed for just happens to finally come up.

I usually multiclass heavily.

I usually avoid tier 1-2 characters (though I sometimes use tier 1-2 classes in suboptimal ways to achieve tier 3-ish goals).

I usually play alignments tending toward neutrality (on the good/evil axis) and chaos (on the law/chaos axis), though I try to avoid the Chaotic Stupid shenanigans associated with the Chaotic Neutral alignment.

[Crake]

In most games I drink four liters of Coca-Cola and wind up laughing at my players for their actions.

That must be hell on your teeth and stomach :smalleek:

[atemu1234]

That must be hell on your teeth and stomach :smalleek:

Stomach's fine, my teeth are still there in the morning, provided I don't get into any more fist fights.

[Raezeman]

When starting a new character, i always would like to play something i haven't played before. Not necessarily in terms of a class i haven't played yet, but the concept of the build, thus meaning that a two-weapon fighter is different from a two-handed power attacker fighter. This however has not yet been the case, as the characters i've played (not counting test or one-shot sessions) all had different classes (so far). Here is a list of my characters, all are 3.5 except when noted.

Ryuk, Dwarven duskblade
Zim, Human dragonfire adept
Kethro, Raptoran sorcerer/stormcaster
Elrok, Dwarven cleric (pathfinder)
Max, Human barbarian/fighter/dervish
Halas, Elf paladin
Quarion, Elf druid (5th edition)

One thing that i would always prefer for any character is having it not be a human. I mean, in a world where you can be some many different races, a human feels bland to me since i already am one of those in real life... There are 2 exceptions (so far): if the build really needs the bonus feat to not be any good at low level (like max), and (how do is say this) if the build somehow changes the person itself. The dragonfire adept for an example, he is a human with scales, but if you look at him, the emphasis would not be on human, but on scales.
I also have a concept of a (pathfinder) human sorcerer with the undead bloodline. The story is here that he got the undead bloodline from his vampire father, but he in facts hate it himself, hates his father for being an undead, hates all about undead itself and sees his undead bloodline and associated sorcerer abilities more as a curse than a gift. And this concept just seemed to fit a human to me.

And finally, what i do prefer for each character i play itemwise:
-ring of deflection
-cloak/vest of resistance
-stat boosting items above others.

[EdrickVonHaslen]

I evaluate and reevaluate and redistribute and reredistribute my gold on a constant basis during character creation. I like toys. The character I had the most fun playing was a Pathfinder alchemist. Only ever used mutagen for a dex boost. I threw things. Lots of things. I think the only money I invested in actual weapons was enough to buy a mundane sling, bullets, and two or three daggers. My detailed list of equipment and the stuff that I could potentially make on the fly was longer than my character sheet and list of extracts. I dig that stuff and it bleeds into other characters I play. I like being the guy that can reach into his pack and pull out that thing we didn't know we'd need to get past that one trap/monster/obstacle that came out of nowhere.

My very first all-mine-nobody-helped-me-build-it character was a 3.5 Cleric of Erythnul. CN and focused more on the 'many faces' and 'constant violence' aspects of the faith. Bought a mule and cart with my starting money and carried around crap-tons of sundries for all different scenarios. We called it my a** of holding. I even had four or five different cleric's vestments and I went about masquerading as a cleric of pelor on a daily.

[Hanuman]

I appreciate all the feedback.

Here's my new homebrew pathfinder class that helps satisfy a great number of these needs. (Tier 3 Frontline Shapeshifter) Currently in beta and playtesting, only available in SRD format for now!

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DDwYQ9HxtnC-wB359XKeIkBxbZ2pd6xboLSygbijjrY/edit?usp=sharing

If your needs are not met by this, what needs are not met and why?

[martixy]

Skill monkeys! Not necessarily roguish types.
High-int Psions, Lurks, Archivists, Warblades, Factotums, etc.

I just like to put points into various skills and when the time comes for the odd skill check, I can go "Ooohhh... I have that skill!".

I like to be good at more than one thing, but have a unique shtick to the character, maybe it'll be a signature weapon or some other item, maybe a special way to fight, maybe a weird cohort or somesuch. (I don't do uberchargers and control wizards.)

And the one completely static, constant bit: Heward's Handy Haversack.

[Seto]

I make a point of diversifying my characters, but I can't deny I have a strong leaning towards acrobatic melee-types. The siren call of the ninja, I guess (the concept, not the class). Also, I like my characters to be reasonably smart, I guess I should try playing a dumb PC one day.

As for items, Healing Belt is a regular.

[Nibbens]

My characters often have backstories with symbolism no one gets.

*does that hand-raise motion that people do when they totally feel where someone else is coming from*

SHORT RACES! LOL. Gnomes, dwarves or others if they have "short size modifiers" lol.

I've never ran a human either... What's the point, I'm one in real life! And elves are just slightly-faster-and-more-prone-to-disease-humans.
I'm also the comic relief most of the time in the party. I love heavy RP.
Lastly, I find I tend toward "cover all my bases" type of gameplay. My character will have healing, damage, ac, HP, melee, ranged, and utility - and suck at all of them, but I don't care. lol.

[ahenobarbi]

I play characters built to be powerful in very inefficient ways (optimize summoning, then use summons 1 level lower then I could, because I didn't write down new summons inefficient).

[ComaVision]

I've never played the same type of character twice but so far I've always been the party leader. A lot of people that like D&D are pretty meek so it's pretty easy to just naturally rise to leadership.

[prufock]

I always get a jar of Sovereign Glue as soon as I can afford it. It's been quite useful many times.

[atemu1234]

I always get a jar of Sovereign Glue as soon as I can afford it. It's been quite useful many times.

I once saw a 20th-level wizard. He spent his entire WBL on small items from the PHB. And had the Half-Minotaur party member carry them around.

[Nibbens]

I always get a jar of Sovereign Glue as soon as I can afford it. It's been quite useful many times.


I once saw a 20th-level wizard. He spent his entire WBL on small items from the PHB. And had the Half-Minotaur party member carry them around.

That reminds me of the wizard who chugged a potion during a 2nd edition. He was mistaken, however - it was a bottle of Sovereign Glue not a potion of cure light wounds. They were pretty low level, so no access to Regenerate or Universal Solvent for awhile.

Long story short - he had his tongue and teeth cut out (to remove the sealant) and couldn't cast verbal spells for awhile... a long while. He actually grew to love the character and didn't want to get healed when he finally could.

[The Insanity]

Almost all of my characters were quite promiscuous and somewhat hedonistic. They often followed the setting's god of lust/sex/pleasure/similar.


If we players can see the obvious differences, our characters immersed in the gaming world should see the same obvious things.
Not necessarily obvious. Unlike the players, PCs don't have the luxury of knowing the exact stats.

[Curmudgeon]

Not necessarily obvious. Unlike the players, PCs don't have the luxury of knowing the exact stats.
It's scale male vs. breastplate. The better armor is the one costing 4x as much. If that weren't obvious, the price difference wouldn't be nearly as distinct.