• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Profile Deletion Requests Thread - 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
That's the thing it's all "IFs". It's not a certain thing and it's definitely not realistic, I doubt there's even one case of it ever happening in any campaign ever.

Not to mention the adventurer isn't a canon character as the campaigns are crafted by the GM with only the rules and setting standing as a backdrop for its creation.
 
It's all "IFs"?

Oh... I'll take it as "Not possible because the game breaks, so can't have a page"
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
This is explicitly a thought experiment from people trying to make bullshit builds.
Click to expand...
Captain america language meme


Also I know it's kinda silly, but it shows that having a character will all classes is feesible
 
Matt, this is a little off-topic, although this entire discussion is on the wrong thread, but why do you only have an issue with Composite Adventurer now?

Its been a very public thing for a few months now, but you only now decide to bring up issues with it instead of any other time
 
D&D has set stories. They are called modules. Barrier Peaks, Dragon Mountain, Tomb of Annihilation, Isle of Dread, so on and so forth. And many profiles contain uncertain things, such as literally any other RPG character in that you are not required or even incredibly likely to possess every piece of equipment/every spell/etc and yet there it is, all on the profile.

The blog proves the existence of such abilities, the accessibility of such abilities to the character, and it seems to me the only issue is that the theoretical character has access to all of said abilities, which I've dealt with above. The, and I quote, "bullsh*t builds" is a possibility through multi-classing. The character is the same as any other blank-slate to-be-named RPG character but simply on a vastly wider scale.
 
While it isn't "realistically possible" to build a character like Composite Adventurer, it is technically possible, although it's fair to say that you'd need Buddha-level patience to maintain all of those abilities and keep track of everything
 
Hl3 or bust said:
While it isn't "realistically possible" to build a character like Composite Adventurer, it is technically possible, although it's fair to say that you'd need Buddha-level patience to maintain all of those abilities and keep track of everything
Click to expand...
You know you can just hack your way, right?
 
Numbersguy said:
I will edit them in a bit
Click to expand...
Should I undelete the verse page that they link to as well?
 
Tabletop RPG player character classes don't count as Canon characters and still shouldn't be made as ludicrous composites.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
Tabletop RPG player character classes don't count as Canon characters and still shouldn't be made as ludicrous composites.
Click to expand...
This is simply saying "no". Let's look at facts. The games' modules consistently reference the adventurers (and are in fact built around their existence). The game also creates a vast web of abilities capable of being achieved by these players who apparently aren't existent in canon. What Matt is referring to is known as "Homebrew", which I do associate with in that it is indeed purely fan-made content that uses the systems of the game rather than the official and, one might call it, canon content. Matt, you are simply wrong in this case.


If you'd like to prove, somehow, that the star of the show (quite literally depending on whether or not you're playing Dark Sun) is somehow not canon, feel free to make a thread on that alone.
 
The Player Adventurers may exist depending on the modules, but the notion that they will all be one adventurer that will fulfill every single module ever released in every D&D edition and expansion and simultaneously be of every class ever with every ability maxed out is what I have extreme problems with.

At the very most, I could accept the profiles if you broke it down into various minor profiles, one for each class. Does that sound acceptable to you?
 
Dishonest. Inaccurate. See: cross-classing. See: other RPG protags/Rogue-likes/etc have all abilities despite that being unlikely.
 
It's not dishonest nor innacurate. To compare it to every other RPG protagonist is a false equivalency, because as I keep explaining, there's a key difference between a Video Game RPG protagonist and a Tabletop One. You cannot merge every single module, expansion, edition, rule, ability and class into one profile. It's impossible. To do so is the real dishonesty, as what you're making a profile for is effectively not a real character. It's a hypothetical imaginated merging of all possible characters one can make. One that's frankly illogical and has never nor will ever exist in D&D proper.
 
Lets take a game like Xenoblade Chronicles 2 as an example, beavuse I'm familiar with it. In that game, there are dozens of "rare blades" that are RNG dependent to unlock. People spend dozens, sometimes hundreds, of hours unlocking them. Yet XC2 characters have all their blades.

Wild Cards from Persona get all their Persona despite the vast majority of players not unlocking them. Hell, there's a tropy for unlocking the, and last time I checked it was well below 10% of players who got it.

Why do these characters get their "unrealistic" abilities but D&D shouldn't?
 
Because out of sheer number. D&D is a game that has been around for about 40 years, has dozens of editions, expansions, variations, campaign books, and has gone through numerous rule and lore changes through the years.

What the profile is effectively doing is grabbing every single variation ever released and treating it as one thing.

It's like making "Composite Final Fantasy protagonist."
 
I don't think it really matters if it's realistically attainable in one game, considering we have stuff like Link (Composite) which is objectively unattainable within the span of one game.

Regardless, this needs to be its own thread. It's gone on here long enough.
 
Doubt it, but this isn't really the thread for that sort of thing.
 
You'd probably just make a Q&A thread asking about it.

I don't think that's allowed for a profile, btw.
 
Our rule about only allowing characters with a set setting and fiction didn't change, buddy. Having feats doesn't change that.
 
@Matt

did you mean to delete the WoD Mage page? Because Bambu asked for the D&D Wizard page to be deleted.

no one asked anyone to delete the WoD Mage page
 
I think that it seems disrespectful to Mr. Bambu to delete it without further agreement.
 
Okay. Then I misread. Sorry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Locked
Slightly adjusting our rules for bolded "powers and abilities" links
Replies
32
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Jinx666
'Continuity' Section for Verse Pages
Replies
37
Views
5K
Antvasima
Antvasima
DMUA
Removing Power of the Verse from Verse pages
2 3 4
Replies
147
Views
18K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
99K
Homie890
Armorchompy
  • Locked
Minor Team Profiles Change
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
Armorchompy
Armorchompy
Back
Top