Favourite way(s) of playing

[CaptainCoxwaggle]

In terms of character builds I prefer building the archtypical juggernaut weilding a two handed sword and wearing the heaviest armour he can find, who is virtually impossible to take down before he crumps the enemy squishies.

In terms of personality I generally choose options as I would IRL the first go, which generally ends with me being neutral evil, unless there is a specific meta game that forces me to RP a certain personality (either through personality bonuses or class restrictions to certain alignment). In that case I usually skirt the line of my extreme alignment, such as playing a morally dubious paladin who accepts bribery and is fanatically opposed to all non-human and magic, playing evil as a nietzschean philosopher who views material goods as wantonly corrupts and seeks beauty in adversity or playing neutral as a shizophrenic.

 

[Jaesun]

I like talky fighters. That is my usual build.

 

[Gnidrologist]

In terms of personality I generally choose options as I would IRL the first go, which generally ends with me being neutral evil

I wonder what ''neutral evil'' things you've done in your life. Stole diabetic a candy cane?

As for me, i usually take some brute with modest intelligence the first time with an aim to take a theme character if i ever play through at least one more time. Typical example brujah in Bloodlines. The sad thing is that most of the time i never play the given game second time so other builds are lost to me.

 

[bloodlover]

Why do some people like skipping quests? Even if they are fetch quests, they might contain a side-story and the usual reward/xp. It also involves exploration, possible extra goodies or NPC interaction.

 

[Gnidrologist]

Skipping quests in rpg is much like skipping shooting in a shooter. teh wat

 

[Carrion]

It adds replay value and can sometimes improve the pacing of the game. Getting stuck in some backwater town doing menial tasks just to get some XP doesn't usually make a whole lot of sense if you're on an urgent quest to stop an ancient evil. Especially if it's an open-world game with numerous factions, guilds and a ton of side content, it might make for an interesting playthrough if you just completed the quests that you feel like completing, seem important enough and fit your character. It adds another layer of choice to the game. Not that I'd be able to do it, because like many others here I'll try to complete every single quest I run into.

 

[Gnidrologist]

Main quest to stop the ancient evil is always there and there's nothing urgent about it ever. In fact, it's the last thing i ever do in any of those ancient evil games.
(and why is evil so fucking ancient?)

 

[Stainless Veteran]

Combat and mechanics habits
Sci-fi setting (and cyberpunk) — if the game allows I usually play as sniper and/or hacker (my main char if that's a party game), if there's a stealth option I generally use it whenever possible.
Fantasy setting — I usually play as a rogue (my main char if that's a party game) and backstab the shit out every applicable enemy. If there's a stealth option, then I use it, ofc. Second option — I play as a paladin or combat oriented cleric.
Generally play as high dexterity (or speed/agility, or whatever similar stat or combination thereof) and high intelligence (even if my char's build doesn't really need int, I tend to overspend points on it, or on a similar brainy stat). Strength and constitution (or their substitute) I usually tend to dump.

Plot and role-playing habits
Usually play as a human even if there's other races available, because fuck them. If there's human/other race conflict present, almost always side with humans, because see above. Prefer diplomatic approach to combat if one's present. Disliked about every "evil" path I encountered in games (especially BiowareEvil™), so I usually play as a good-aligned character (if applicable). What really bugs me is that in many RPGs you can't really be both polite and diplomatic and evil or even just self-serving.

 

[bloodlover]

I've always found humans to be the least interesting race in fantasy setting. They usually are better for every class but c'mon it's a fantasy setting. Oddly enough, my Nwn monk is still human but the decision was made mostly from a gameplay perspective.

Combat and mechanics habits
Sci-fi setting (and cyberpunk) — if the game allows I usually play as sniper and/or hacker (my main char if that's a party game), if there's a stealth option I generally use it whenever possible.

Hacking is a very interesting option to have but I've only used it in Deus Ex games. Though as it turned out later in DE:HR, the boss fights were a pain because I focused just on stealth and hacking.

Sniping is fun but I kind of have the same problem as I do with archery: it makes the game very easy.

 

[Stainless Veteran]

Hacking is a very interesting option to have but I've only used it in Deus Ex games. Though as it turned out later in DE:HR, the boss fights were a pain because I focused just on stealth and hacking.

Sniping is fun but I kind of have the same problem as I do with archery: it makes the game very easy.

If you aren't opposed to emulation and early console games - try Shadowrun (Genesis version). No relation to real-life hacking whatsoever, but hacking is really fun there, and is a real part of the mechanic (at least for random generated missions), and not just a gimmick. Uplink was pretty fun too, though not a RPG.

As for sniper/archer, game's only simple where there's bad design which lets you exploit bad pathfinding or enemy's bad ranged combat capabilities. It's common though, I have to admit.

 

[Gnidrologist]

I've always found humans to be the least interesting race in fantasy setting. They usually are better for every class but c'mon it's a fantasy setting.

But they are US. :racist:
I also usually pick humans, because i never really cared about any other race in those boring fantasy settings, which seem to always contain the same races anyway (orc, troll, elf, dwarf). They are all boring and in most games obnoxious/arrogant/hostile (elfs/dwarfs) or dumbfucks (orcs/trolls). Even the Nu Shadowrun has that. Why would anyone side with them is beyond me. Only times i have chosen a sub-human race is, when they have some exclusive advantages. Think i got a gnome-mage protag in first Baldur's Gate. DnD generally forces you to choose the ''appropriate'' race for your theme char unless you don't care about powergaming at all.

 

[Carrion]

If the alternatives are human, elf and dwarf, I'll go with the human nine times out of ten. If you've got something more exotic and nasty like Planetouched, Yuan-ti or different sub-races in the mix, then it becomes a notably more difficult choice.

 

[Zombra]

Why do some people like skipping quests? Even if they are fetch quests, they might contain a side-story and the usual reward/xp. It also involves exploration, possible extra goodies or NPC interaction.

It's both a role-playing thing and a ... "gaming liberation"? thing?

The amount of content in games nowadays can be pretty amazing. When there's so much stuff to do, even if most of it is pretty fun, it's wonderful to pick and choose. Maybe I'm not in the mood to go into some tomb, pal, how do you like that? There's other stuff I'd rather be doing instead. I'm probably going to get sick of this game after X number of hours anyway, and if not, maybe I'll come back later. It's just cool not to feel enslaved to the OCD of finding every cookie.

In the same vein, there's a lot of reactivity in a lot of games today, to the point where not seeing all of the content is kind of a given. It's more than just seeing the NPC finish a conversation with a happy smile or an angry frown - resolutions and whole sections of gameplay can be shut out. Games, and RPGs in particular, are "learning" that it's OK for the player to not see everything - they're being built that way specifically. The message is that I as the player have no choice but to make some decisions about what I will and will not see - and I can't even control it sometimes. Soon it may get to the point where saying "no" provides just as much content as saying "yes" ... content you wouldn't see if you said "yes". This is a wonderful thing. It means I can be honest in the game without cheating myself out of a good time.

All that's metagame. In terms of in-game fun, role-playing is important to me, not just for replay, but for the reasons I play RPGs in the first place. I love to realize a character and really act like that character would act. I'm an effete elven wizard in beautiful silk robes, who's racist against humans, and you want me to go into some dank, drippy caves to look for a stupid human teenager who got himself lost? Pass. It's a wonderful charge when I can transcend my normal gamer expectations of myself ("Cookie! Grab it, of course you want the cookie") and really commit to telling my own story. And frequently, a good RPG will surprise me, by anticipating my lack of cooperation, and giving me meatier consequences than "no XP then".

Main quest to stop the ancient evil is always there and there's nothing urgent about it ever. In fact, it's the last thing i ever do in any of those ancient evil games.

That was one thing I loved about Mass Effect (1). Everybody was always talking about Saren and how important it was to chase down Saren and my god we'd really better get after Saren before something really bad happens. It wasn't an "ancient evil" game per se but it was a nice spin on the traditional "go kill the evil wizard ... you know, when you get around to it". They did a good job making it feel like Saren was up to bad shit all the time and that time mattered, though of course intellectually I knew I could pussyfoot around all I wanted. Ultimately I ended up ignoring about 2/3 of the game because I was so motivated to chase his ass.

I've always found humans to be the least interesting race in fantasy setting. They usually are better for every class but c'mon it's a fantasy setting.

I used to be this way back in the P&P days too. Why make a human when you can explore something more exotic? As the years wore on though, humans stopped being the least interesting and started being the most interesting. Every other race is defined by certain personality limitations: elves are usually ethereal and in touch with nature, dwarves are stoic and greedy, etc. As a result, humans are the only race where "anything goes" and I can really feel good about sculpting their personality any way I want without worrying about whether it clashes with established culture. Other races have a lot of stereotypes attached, is what I'm saying, and whether I choose to go along with those stereotypes or go against the grain, they're usually more of a hindrance than a help to making a cool character. I still play as other races all the time for contrast, but I don't find humans nearly as boring as I used to.

 

[Stainless Veteran]

I used to be this way back in the P&P days too. Why make a human when you can explore something more exotic? As the years wore on though, humans stopped being the least interesting and started being the most interesting. Every other race is defined by certain personality limitations: elves are usually ethereal and in touch with nature, dwarves are stoic and greedy, etc. As a result, humans are the only race where "anything goes" and I can really feel good about sculpting their personality any way I want without worrying about whether it clashes with established culture. Other races have a lot of stereotypes attached, is what I'm saying, and whether I choose to go along with those stereotypes or go against the grain, they're usually more of a hindrance than a help to make a cool character. I still play as other races all the time for contrast, but I don't find humans nearly as boring as I used to.

Well, that really depends on a DM though, I was probably fortunate enough to rarely play in a group DM of which would have played all that tropes completely straight (e.g. elves = noble, beautiful, wise but arrogant; dwarves = stubborn, scottish, greedy but honorable; etc.). But then again, even in my ADnD days here Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance weren't popular, and people often played in custom settings with homerules.

As for me, I like playing as a human not because other choices are one-note, it's mainly because of that choices are so often targeted at teenage mentality (look at me, I'm so different from you, banal shit boring humans), or at people with dysphorias, or whatnot. Yes, race could provide a narrative conflict and plot hooks, sure, it's just in old games it usually didn't have any use beside class/stats bonuses, and in modern games said plot hooks and conflicts are often really juvenile.

 

[Gnidrologist]

Why are dwarves always with scottish accent? This really makes my evaluation of a game auto drop by 2 points, when i encounter this shit. Also, it seems a lot of game developers believe that brittish accent for most chars make them more memorable or smth. Most of the medieval/fantasy rpgs have these obnoxious fake or real british accent dude voices. WTF?

 

[Stainless Veteran]

Why are dwarves always with scottish accent? This really makes my evaluation of a game auto drop by 2 points, when i encounter this shit. Also, it seems a lot of game developers believe that brittish accent for most chars make them more memorable or smth. Most of the medieval/fantasy rpgs have these obnoxious fake or real british accent dude voices. WTF?

Eh, in Dragon Age Bioware made them speak with a generic USA accent. I can't say that it improved either dwarven stereotype or the game in general.

 

[Zombra]

accent dude voices. WTF?

Not gonna lie - I like it when "fantasy" voices have accents, provided that I don't have other strong associations with them. Like, if I actually hung around with Scottish sounding guys, then dwarves would sound fake when they did that. But generally making the voices sound like they're not from my backyard is a good thing, makes me feel like the game world is weird and far away. My favorite is when I can get localization files for some weird European language and play with subtitles. The farther it sounds from American English, the better for me.

Also, I think to a lot of Americans (including myself), British accents just sound more "ye olde".

 

[bloodlover]

A big issue is the fact that games haven't really moved away from the stereotypical Tolkien setting. It's easier to work with an established setting instead of making something from scratch. Besides, by now people usually associate automatically elves with trees and orcs as being brainless thugs. Seeing an elf with a giant battleaxe seems out of place even if it somehow makes sense in the game.

 

[octavius]

Main quest to stop the ancient evil is always there and there's nothing urgent about it ever. In fact, it's the last thing i ever do in any of those ancient evil games.
(and why is evil so fucking ancient?)

Because the Adventurer parties die before they get around to deal with that evil, having to complete every quest, explore every pixel and max every stat before being ready.

 

[Gnidrologist]

Only game, where you could actually fail the game if hesitating too much, was Fallout (water chip quest), so i'm unsure what you're trying to say. ALL generic fantasy games have infinite time to complete their ancient evil quests.

 

[epeli]

Main quest to stop the ancient evil is always there and there's nothing urgent about it ever. In fact, it's the last thing i ever do in any of those ancient evil games.
(and why is evil so fucking ancient?)

The evil is so fucking ancient because it's been played out. If there's a cliched "urgent quest to stop an ancient evil" with no real urgency gameplay-wise, nor at least perceived sense of urgency, that's just bad design and/or writing.

Indeed, Fallout 1 is a rare example of doing it right. Not merely the water chip quest, but also the mutant army eventually discovering your vault and player's choices that affect the timeframe of those events.

 

[octavius]

Main quest to stop the ancient evil is always there and there's nothing urgent about it ever. In fact, it's the last thing i ever do in any of those ancient evil games.
(and why is evil so fucking ancient?)

The evil is so fucking ancient because it's been played out. If there's a cliched "urgent quest to stop an ancient evil" with no real urgency gameplay-wise, nor at least perceived sense of urgency, that's just bad design and/or writing.

Besides they are just hanging around at the bottom of a dungeon, spending their time trying to sound as menacing as possible when going bwahahahaha.

 

[Abu Antar]

I start off with a goody two shoes and if the game has decent replayability, I play a cunt.

 

[octavius]

I start off with a goody two shoes and if the game has decent replayability, I play a cunt.

I always wanted to play a Halfling named Goody Twoshoes that acted like a cunt.

 

[Abu Antar]

I start off with a goody two shoes and if the game has decent replayability, I play a cunt.

I always wanted to play a Halfling named Goody Twoshoes that acted like a cunt.