Pf1. Not sure if relevant to question. Regarding choosing background
A player requested to get a whole npc class level as "lvl 0" instead of background. We tried it out with the whole group (choose a Npc class, get everything then get an ordinary class as lvl 1. Dont count the npc level when calculating ECL, effective character level.)
Went super well, the group feels more heroic in the lower levels and its not super relevant at lvl 7+. Would do again
that's pretty interesting. players need more hit points and skill ranks so not a bad idea
I like to think my rules aren't sketchy, but the closest would be for character building my rules for uncommon and rare options are "tell me a story i can't say no to"
For uncommon options I'm pretty willing to take anything as long as it's not just an obvious power grab. For rare stuff i look more to see how much thought they've put into it and if it would negatively affect the rest of the party.
End result: I've had some pretty freak tables and others where everyone sticks to core ancestries.
The old "rule of cool". Highly respectable
This comes from me, before the "max 7 free actions" ruling in 1e. Throwable shields are a free action to throw, which is arguably an attack roll. Belt of returning makes thrown object return as a free action. Quick Draw, iir the right feat, lets you draw your weapon as a free action. This means you can, as a series of unlimited free actions, do unlimited attacks per round.
Throw in Hammer the Gap, Clustered Shots and one other feat I can't remember and you have unlimited damage in one "attack." Doesn't matter what the DM determines as the base damage of the thrown shield.
"This shield is designed for throwing and has specially designed straps allowing you to unclasp and throw it as a free action."
That is wild. The same amount of in-game effort as speaking. What were they thinking?
"Don't worry about sending me your builds, I trust you."
I've rolled those dice before. But I've never had players that wanted to build the characters really