Interestingly, although the game uses 3d6 in order, there already are key chargen elements that are down to Player choice (and therefore potential optimization). One classic example is the oft-overlooked 2nd paragraph on pg. 21 that states that Players can select their Occupation and need not roll for it. Yep, a lot of folks assume you have to roll Occupation, but by the rules it states:
DCC RPG wrote:Note that a character’s occupation need not be determined randomly. If a player has a strong sense of the character’s background, he should feel free to use it. Starting trained weapon and trade goods can be determined thematically with the judge’s approval.
Not only can a Player choose an existing Occupation (essentially selecting background knowledge, skills, and gear, leading to potential optimization based on the class likely to be selected) but with the Judge's approval they can even make up their own Occupation based on a different concept.
Plus, of course, a Player can also choose the class their character enters (if they survive) which means that invariably most will play to whatever strengths and weaknesses the dice dealt them. "Hmm, my character has Strength 15 for their highest attribute; Fighter it is then!"
In fact, it's far from "virtually impossible" to, if not strictly build a character to concept, certainly tweak and push one in a definite direction rather strongly, using the rules. The only area it is really impossible is in terms of what attributes you roll. But then again, given that most folks run funnel intros and have a wide selection of characters rolled, there's still a reasonable chance that they have one or two decent characters they want to play anyway (and if they're really concerned about optimization, they'll probably strive to keep said characters alive at the expense of others).
It may not be optimization to the extent that "build-orientated" editions like 3e and 4e were obsessed, but there's still some possible optimization there.
Finally, I write rules that make sense to me and provide options, and rely on Judges being able to exercise their right to say, "No." to any given rule or houserule. Writing rules that assume a lack of Judge-Player trust, or that assume Players are going to be munchkins, leads to the madness of things like 4e. :shudder:
Colin
