Yes, I know it's blasphemy for many and you shouldn't be worthy of playing RPG's if you're not willing to figure everything out on your own and start over and over until you come up with decent build but that's not for me.

Just as addendum, I never blindly copy other people builds, just take parts I like from them. Because realizing my build sucks or I'm not be able to do something cool hours in the game would rather make me ditching the game all together rather than taking lesson and starting from beginning.

I'd say a healthy mixture of these two, probably with a slight tilt towards #1.

However: I don't spend hours reading the manual (usually not needed anyway, since many (most?) RPGs offer on-screen explanations as to what effect(s) the different skills have).

Honestly: last time I spent hours reading a manual was, when games still came with printed handbooks.

Edit: spelling

I think this acceptable too. The only game I've come across this is MMORPG Ragnarok Online. You can make multiple characters easily, but you could pay to reset your stats and skills for a nominal fee. 5, 7, and 10 all offer people to build hybrid red mage classes within reason, but there's often no incentive to outside of utility in battle. FF5 might be the only one that rewards hybridity once you've mastered some jobs as Freelancer, but that required initially mastering jobs in the first place. Though I do acknowledge physically enhanced WMs as cool. I was thinking of WRPGs looking at your non-battle stats (e.g., charm, intuition, and intimidation points)'s balanced spread and awarding you for that play style rather than focusing on only one of these stats.

After 30 years of CPRGs I pretty much know what I'm doing, so I don't have to put a ton of thought into it. Even if it's a new system usually the tips you get when hovering over an option are enough to tell me "oh this is their version of THAC0" or whatever.

I almost always play female rogues or mages, so I don't usually spend a ton of time considering my class. I love games like Pillars that have a good combo of those two things like Ciphers.

I also almost always play Dirty Harry style chaotic good vigilantes, so having a character concept in my head is usually easy as well.

Reading what I wrote I guess it comes across kinda like I play the same thing all the time, which sounds boring, but I never feel that way doing it. That's just how I like to roleplay.

Actually, in FF5 you don't need to be using freelancer (or mime) to have a useful hybrid set-up. In fact, I usually play without using those jobs (excluding the very beginning of the game, of course), as I find the end game more interesting without them.

One set-up that pretty much needs a hybrid character for max effectiveness is a Rune Edge user. This weapon uses both Strength and Magic Power to determine damage; of the jobs that can equip it, Blue Mage has the highest Magic Power, and the Knight's 2-Handed will give the character enough Strength to use it correctly and the ability to use it two handed for better damage. No job mastering or advanced abilities required!

Also, Blue Magic gives the character Goblin Punch, which allows the character to do full damage (but not 2x damage) from the back row, and that can be good on physical jobs, not to mention the fact that White Wind works off current HP, making it quite useful for high HP jobs. So yes, the game definitely has some nice hybrid builds.

As for WRPGs, the Elder Scrolls do one thing right here; you can raise your non-battle skills without it slowing down the growth of your combat skills simply by using them. With that said, the series still isn't without its issues:
* In Morrowind/Oblivion, the way stats increase at level up is terrible, and making optimal characters requires doing things that are just not fun, and which are counter-intuitive.
* The series as a whole (excluding Arena with its lack of skills) has a problem where higher level skills take more skill XP to level, but harder tasks don't give any more XP than easier tasks. (Even Final Fantasy 2 handled this better.)

Actually, to me reading a spoiler can have the other effect om me, giving me more ideas of what to do, and seeing foreshadowing before it comes; it also reduces the frustration that bad design decisions (like the game taking away a party member because of the plot) can cause.
In this case, I would say this is OK if it's reasonable to train in another skill, like in an Elder Scrolls or SaGa game where a high score in one skill won't hurt your gains in another skill.

However, in a typical skill point system, that's not the case; it is harder to raise a new skill late in the game, and I really don't like it when games do that.

I definitely want to have the best character possible, and won't play more than once so that sort of trial and error is out of the question, and definitely don't want to "live with" mistakes / bad choices. Playing for escapism and power trips, what's not found in "real life". At the same time, I don't want story spoilers, or puzzle solutions if applicable unless I'm really stuck, which makes checking guides quite a problem.
So definitely read any information provided, in manual and/or game, and try to make the best starting choices based on that, though I am quite stubborn in playing mages and otherwise, if applicable, characters with high mental skills, even if in some games that's a poor choice, and if creating parties I'll also tend to skew the balance towards magic, while nevertheless trying to ensure I have every role filled.
And now it depends on the game, some may not offer that much customization from the beginning, in which case how you start out is less important and the development happens as you go along (which may not be easier to choose, for that matter).
But if I fear the consequences down the line, I may also glance at a guide that has a separate skills part for a few pointers, hoping it won't spoil anything else. And, at the very most, I might just create what I think is good, try that build out in the first bit of the game, and if it looks like I really messed up, cut my losses and restart with a build based on the lessons learned. But sure hope I won't need to do that, and if it happened after IWD2, back around 2003-2004, I don't recall at the moment.

I'm like that, except that I favor healers. Even if it's a poor choice, I will generally give my character healing abilities (if possible), and in party-based games, I like having at least 2 characters who can heal. (The ideal, of course, is 2 characters who can full revive, but in many games that's not practical.)

Which is why I say every gamer needs to know themselves. Only you know what you like best, so other people can't really help a gamer decide the "most fun" way to play a game. Seeing spoilers, "wasting" skill points, losing companions all have different values for you than they do for me. Some gamers roleplay, others rollplay... we all (dis)like different things.

Well, depending on the type of RPG it is, I usually just go into it aiming for a certain type of character. I then let my decisions throughout the game change my decisions regarding the build. I mean, yeah, I don't want to just blindly pump numbers into useless skills but I usually don't stick with a singular build.

Personally, I much prefer flexible RPG skill systems such as the one in The Elder Scrolls or even The Witcher 3 (which allows you some degree of flexibility) as opposed to the kind where you pump arbitrary numbers into skills. It's for this reason that, despite the fact that I understand SOME of the complaints over Fallout 4's perk system, I still love it way more than the skill systems of the other games (even Fallout 76, to a certain degree, though its skill system is still really solid). That said, The Elder Scrolls has the greatest leveling system in RPGs, in my opinion. I like the fact that while I can choose which skills I increase to a certain degree via perks and such, leveling up my skills comes as I use them more often. I feel like that's the way ALL RPG skill systems should be.

Wasting skill points and losing companions (particularly if they're companions you've put a lot of effort into) can lead to a situation where the game becomes difficult or impossible, and that is the problem here.

I really like this particular aspect of the Elder Scrolls series growth system. With that said, there are a few things I *don't* like about the system:
* High level skills are harder to improve, but more difficult tasks don't provide more skill increases. This makes it a pain to get those last few points (especially in Oblivion where you have to max the skill to get the final perk), and there's no incentive (other than item drops) for taking on harder challenges. Also, it favors constant use of weaker spells over occasional use of stronger spells, since stronger spells are only worth the same as weaker spells for skill practice purposes.
* There's still an overall character level, and if you want to get the most out of your level ups, you have to play in rather tedious and counter-intuitive way; furthermore, the style of play needed is at odds with those who want to "role play" their characters. (For example, you *don't* want to make your main skills your Major skills.) This problem becomes especially apparent when you factor in the level scaling that's in all mainline TES games (yes, even Morrowind does this with monster respawns), and particularly bad in Oblivion.
* The way stat growth is handled is just awful in Morrowind/Oblivion. I think they should have not tied growth to skills used, or not tied it to level. (Have stats increase like skills do, or perhaps have stat items scattered through the world, perhaps as rewards for finishing dungeons (with these items not respawning when the dungeon resets).

Also, you might like Final Fantasy 2 (though be aware that the game does have some balance and pacing issues; in particular, avoid heavy armor) and the SaGa games, as they tend to do this sort of thing. (Excluding SaGa 1 and original SaGa 3; also note that in SaGa 2 and SaGa Frontier this only applies to some races, because others use completely different growth rules.)

The game I'm thinking of making will use this sort of system, though like the SaGa games and FF2 will lack global levels for characters, and like SaGa 1/2/Frontier, will use different growth rules for different races. (Of course, at this rate, the expected release date of this game, which hasn't been started, is "never".)

That's a good point of course. But then I wouldn't want to end in a situation like playing Planescape Torment with a "dumb" character, fighting through my encounters, and then wondering later why everyone always praised the games dialogue (when I was just cut out of most of it, due to choosing a character that can't participate in the conversations that well).

Then again if the game still makes it feasible (e.g. fighting your way through the game, instead of discussing), then I guess it is still ok. I just got the impression that unless you make a "talkative" and intelligent/wise lead character in PS:T, you'll be really missing out. So PS:T appears to be geared to certain playstyle and character creation... (but I could be wrong of course, that is just the view I got from a couple of character creation guides).

That reminds me how Fallout Tactics apparently had several skills (or traits or perks or whatever they were called) that were apparently fully broken, ie. wouldn't work as intended. So investing into them was apparently quite useless.

That made me happy that I had read a FAQ which happened to mention these shortcomings, so I knew not to invest on those broken elements at all. Then again, I did restart the game from scratch again, when I realized at some point of the game that I had improved "wrong" skills at "wrong" times, and for the replay, I first made an actual "roadmap" that at which point I should upgrade which points and in which order, optimizing them.

I was playing a modded version of Fallout Tactics that apparently fixed many of the broken elements, but unfortunately the mod also made the game hard as nails, maybe the author felt the original game was "too easy" or something. That extra level of difficulty was the reason I felt I couldn't live with the bad choices I had made in the first run, as they made the game even harder than with an "optimized run". It was still quite hard on the second run, but at least I felt that time I had a fighting chance...