Favourite way(s) of playing

[bloodlover]

Good morning. The idea behind this topic is to see if people have preferred ways of playing RPGs, how did you come up with them and why? For ex. in a game with D&D rules, I always take a skill that involves talking. In fallout games I tend to do the same thing and always have high INT, regardless of the character. I usually play tank+heal+ dps in party based games and in games where I control a single character and can explore (like Morrowind), I always make sure to have a way of opening locks and chests.

Of course you can play many games differently and have a totally different experience, like a full retard char. in Fallout or solo BG2, but what is the appeal and reasoning behind these choices? How are bros over here playing out their games and why? Are there certain feats, stats, types of characters that you favour? Do you take them even if you know they turn out to be useless? (remind me to never take seduction in VtMB EVER).

 

[Carrion]

On the first playthrough it's usually some kind of fighter with a twist, for example a Swashbuckler. Sometimes I might go with a rogue if there are no interesting fighter (sub-)classes. Glass cannons are more fun than tanks. I usually like to have a relatively high charisma and a lot of dialogue skills and usually the player character becomes something of a Jack-of-All-Trades. I guess this is partly because it makes sense for the leader of the group to be someone who can talk as well as be effective in close combat. In single-character games I also usually prefer such characters, sometimes with a bit of magic thrown in as well. On the second playthrough I try to make a completely different character so I might end up with multiclass mage or something.

Usually I try to make something of a True Neutral, The-Man-With-No-Name kind of character, but most games don't really support that playstyle that well so eventually I end up being more or less Chaotic Good.

 

[kain30]

on the first playthrough i usually like to do the evil path (if the game have it and it´s interesting, not only destroying everything and killing inocents) and then i do the good guy path but being a prick

 

[Volourn]

I tend to play a 'goody good toughnut' where I try to avoid combat against intelligent beings but have no problem smacking them down if need be. I don't play a coward who flees, sneaks, or begs to avoid combat though. That's for fukkinn' wussies.

 

[Crichton]

If a game allows me to create a party of dwarves, I create a party of dwarves. If a third-person "over the shoulder" ass-cam game allows me to create a female character, I find that I'd rather stare at a female ass for a few dozen hours. In games where I can only create a single character, I usually create a priest or warrior/mage.

 

[Gregz]

I recently built a 6 sorcerer party for Icewind Dale 2, Heart of Fury Mode.

After 24 hours I gave up.

I will not be repeating this experiment.

 

[Dreaad]

I recreate myself to the best capabilities of the engine. Including making myself into a class that can talk to animals.

Actually the only quirk I guess I have, is that for whatever reason I can't stand to play as anything other than a human. Probably because I find most games depiction of 'races' that aren't human, to be essentially watered down philosophical ideas with attached beard/scales/pointy ears. Can't stand that shit.

 

[flabbyjack]

I like to setup my computer desk with a silver chalice filled with fermented goat's blood and set up my figurines next to my dice made from mice skulls.

Appeal = it's badass
Reasoning = it increases my chances of good die rolls

 

[DefJam101]

I usually try to play games as if they cannot be saved and death is permanent. I never reload to "try again" when things don't go the way I'd have liked, I don't blindly charge into dangerous situations to test the waters, and when something starts kicking my ass I try to escape without being killed. I will reload a save if I die or my party gets wiped, but before that point I do everything possible to survive.

This is pointless LARPing, yeah, but it suits my naturally cautious play style and gives me an incentive to actually use health potions and other resources (rather than hoard them in stacks of 99 so as to be extra super ultra prepared for the final boss).

 

[Gozma]

^ I want to do that but then I eventually start negligently quicksave smashing boring shit and playing the game to methodically view all content until my eyes glaze and my mouth fills with thin grey ash and then I jerk awake with a start and uninstall it like I'm Ebenezer Scrooge on Christmas morning, oh glorious day I have uninstalled Dragon Age

 

[tuluse]

Sniper-diplomat

 

[Sranchammer]

My 1st play through is as a minority who channels rage through triggering.

 

[octavius]

My 1st play through is as a minority who channels rage through triggering.

Better than brurning up car in your neighbourhood.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Focus on ranged attacks, defense and healing, because I'm a manchild who hates losing. The only way you're catching me is with a bullshit instant death, and only if your game doesn't let me get immunity to that.

 

[octavius]

My play style is usually to have my character/party finish their quest ASAP.

I don't underatnd players who always the same character in different games. I like to try different classes and different tactics, although I usually prefer stealth if possible.

 

[bloodlover]

Yeah I usually go for female characters too whenever I can.

My play style is usually to have my character/party finish their quest ASAP.

I don't underatnd players who always the same character in different games. I like to try different classes and different tactics, although I usually prefer stealth if possible.

I never rush into finishing quests. I take my time to explore every box and barrel (even if I find 1 gold coin in them), collect every quest that I can in a certain area and then start working on them. Indeed it sometimes takes forever to do this, but it's worthwhile and I don't have to do a lot of backtracking, unless the game requires that I do so.

About people playing the same character... Hm...I think that they usually try a bunch of different stuff out, see whatever they like and just roll with it. If you would have asked me 8 years ago about my fav. class the answer would have been archer. From anything like Diablo 2 or Sacred to Gothic or Baldur's Gate I'd play an archer. I liked the idea of killing the mobs from a distance, before they even managed to get close to me. But of course as I discovered later, it doesn't always work like that in every RPG and in fact, it can make the game very boring in some situations.

Indeed it's fun to try out different classes. I'm personally playing a monk for the first time in NwN and I'm having way more fun than with those sorcerers or paladins I kept rolling. But take into consideration the fact that most RPGs are long as hell and replaying with a different characters might not be possible for a lot of people

 

[Oesophagus]

settings with guns - a stealthy, silenced gun guy

medieval settings - a big fucker with a two handed sword.

I never larp being good/evil, though. If anything I usually take the path of "ok, I have some grand quest to accomplish, I have to worry about my own ass". That's on the first playthrough of course, on subsequent playthroughs you learn that being altruistic inevitably leads to greater rewards - or is that just bioware predictability?

As to the order of doing quests (and this is a rant on the decline, I admit it), in every game that has a quest compass, or something which works as one, I always ignore the main quest untill it's the only thing remaining. Which just shows you how fucking stupid the 'go here to complete quest' arrow thing is. You just look where the main quest marker is and go everywhere else. And even more irritatingly, because most rpgs are level scaled to shit, you have to do those quests right then and there, because returning later is pointless - your gear is better than the random loot that will drop, enemies offer no challenge, and the xp you'll get is minute. But, as I say, this is a rant on modern rpgs. I'm hoping the kickstarter games will change that - not knowing where to go is part of the fun

 

[octavius]

My play style is usually to have my character/party finish their quest ASAP.

I never rush into finishing quests. I take my time to explore every box and barrel (even if I find 1 gold coin in them), collect every quest that I can in a certain area and then start working on them. Indeed it sometimes takes forever to do this, but it's worthwhile and I don't have to do a lot of backtracking, unless the game requires that I do so.

I used to do that, but nowaday I no longer lose sleep if I think I missed something in a game.
Since most games tend to be on the easy side, or if I'm replaying a game, I usually make a goal to use as little in-game time to complete it. It's especially satisfactory if the game actually rewards you for it with a higher score, like in System Shock and the HoMM games.

 

[Crooked Bee]

I enjoy creating an all-magic party if there are enough magic schools/types of magic to make it feasible and interesting.

Otherwise, I like playing a Thief/Rogue if such an option is available.

 

[mondblut]

Whatever gives the most plusses. Cover the bases to unlock all content venues, the rest goes into maximizing steamrolling potential.

I usually play tank+heal+ dps in party based games

Wow, groundbreaking.

 

[MicoSelva]

My favourite way of playing any game is usually very slow, with a lot of save-scumming and looking for alternate paths to experience as much content as possible.

Playing an RPG is like eating at a fine restaurant; you are supposed to enjoy the experience, not see how fast you can finish.

And if I like the game a lot, in my second playthrough I will usually be trying to break the game, or at least min-max the hell out of it.

If I really, really, like the game, my third playthrough will be using the most quirky build I can think of to see how it works.

 

[octavius]

Playing old CRPGs like for example the Wizardries, I have learnt that I really like knowing how the game works and, for games with no in-game item descriptions, I need to know what items do.
So I'll happily play a game Iron Man (or at least a light version of it) and map every level by hand. But I hate not knowing what stats, skills and items do.

 

[Kane]

I play to win.

 

[bloodlover]

Playing old CRPGs like for example the Wizardries, I have learnt that I really like knowing how the game works and, for games with no in-game item descriptions, I need to know what items do.
So I'll happily play a game Iron Man (or at least a light version of it) and map every level by hand. But I hate not knowing what stats, skills and items do.

What does playing Iron Man mean?

 

[octavius]

Playing old CRPGs like for example the Wizardries, I have learnt that I really like knowing how the game works and, for games with no in-game item descriptions, I need to know what items do.
So I'll happily play a game Iron Man (or at least a light version of it) and map every level by hand. But I hate not knowing what stats, skills and items do.

What does playing Iron Man mean?

No reloading or save scumming. Or reload only if party death. This is what I like to call Iron Man light. Unless a game is unfairly difficult I try to play my games this way.