Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 TheStarkReality Oct 05, 2014 12:22:36	Hey guys, I'm going to play my first game of D&D this Wednesday. I've done text-based roleplaying before, and I'm a competent writer, so I'm not worried about the roleplaying, but I know that your character shouldn't be outstandingly special. I'm juggling a few different character concepts, some of which are tieflings. Are these automatically seen as speshul snowflake characters, or can they be well played? I'm envisioning a tiefling monk, especially a chaotic neutral one with an innate distrust of religions, on the grounds that they either dislike tieflings or exist as temptation for her to indulge her evil side (I'm religious myself, I'm not going to go euphoric fedorathist or anything), or a chaotic good one who was brought up by a religious institution/orphanage kinda thing and uses her religion as a focusing point to keep her good. Other ideas include a half-elf who hates humans and his human side, and an ascetic half-orc monk who lives the way of the warrior but without the "crass club-waving" of his kin - he is every bit a dauntless, rage-filled fighter, he just channels himself strictly rather than "weakening himself with excess." Any of these sound particularly good/bad? I have other ideas if the above are all no-gos.
#2 Lord_Avalanche Oct 05, 2014 13:18:03	Sounds like you are putting character concept and backstory first (instead of mechanical advantage) so you are on the right track, regardless of what you end up with.   I wouldn't put much stock in derogatory opinions of character races. Play a tiefling if it appeals, heck, play a drow if it suits you and forget about hackneyed archetypes. Make them your own with original backstory and genuine evolution (instead of a recognised, named "build").   Silly question: Have you looked into the Backgrounds in the PHB or Basic Rules? Your tiefling monk sounds like fun and might fit the Acolyte background well - perhaps the tiefling tries too hard to shuck off its heritage and compensates by being overly zealous and prone to proselytising. Even if you don't like the bonds/flaws etc, it could be a great starting point.   Also, may I please ask what you mean by a "euphoric fedorathist" (do you mean -atheist?) and "speshul snowflake"? I can kind of guess, but I'd rather have it from the utterer.
#3 mellored Oct 05, 2014 13:23:17	They all seem fine.   And you can be any class with any character reasonably well.
#4 Leugren Oct 05, 2014 13:41:55	TheStarkReality wrote:
(Reply to #2) TheStarkReality	Lord_Avalanche wrote:
(Reply to #4) TheStarkReality	Leugren wrote:
#7 Leugren Oct 06, 2014 6:33:33	TheStarkReality wrote:
#8 BRJN Oct 09, 2014 7:03:54	OP: Look through the "Playing the Game" section of the Players' Handbook, and pick something that sounds like fun to role-play.  Every party needs a scout.  And a damage-inflicter.  And a healer.  And a think-ahead-er.  And a "face".  Create a character that is mechanically excellent in one of these, plus better-than-average in another, and competent in most of the rest.  Then the rest of the party will have a reason to keep you around.  Work on the role-play in the group to create a reason for the rest of the party to WANT you to stick with them.    Do not create 'loner' character concepts; instead create persons who are looking for their "other half" (or "four other fifths" or whatever).  Offer to cooperate with the group on Day One; you will be surprised how things go better that way.