|
Post by ilina on Mar 13, 2016 22:20:22 GMT -8
i guess the Amount of unlikely Circumstances that lead to producing a Blood Elf Shaman is a bit much, the being assigned to Warchief Vol'jin and even becoming an Honorary Windspeaker parts could be dropped. but the Blood Elf to even become a Shaman, would need an excuse to be exposed to the circumstances that develop a shaman to become a shaman.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2016 22:23:44 GMT -8
So, I have a bone to pick. The GM isn't the only person in the group and it sure as hell isn't only his decision. A famous justice once said something similar to (I'm not looking who he was or the exact phrasing up) "your right to punch stops where his nose begins". Probably butchered that, don't care. Moving on. The point is that you don't get to be a problem when you are the one asking for special dispensation. If you want to play a drow, it is your job to find a way to fit in with everyone else. The guy who made the character following the rules should not have to change to accommodate you.
Example: Vampire the Maquerade game. You make a vampire whose sire was ripped apart by werewolves. Savage beasts. No problem with that, it's within the logic of the world and the requirements of the game. The next guy wants to make a werewolf...
FUCK! *Banging of forehead against desk*
So should our werewolf hater have to change his character? The GM allowed the werewolf and your character. Did no one see this coming? Guess everyone was okay with it.mor perhaps it's time to voice an incredulous "WTF" as the player.
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Mar 13, 2016 22:32:18 GMT -8
neither player should be forced to change their character. the werewolf hater can still roleplay feeling distrust for the wereworlf, and can think of creative ways to show their distrust without having to violate any "No PVP Clauses" if you threw something that interested both the vampire and the werewolf. the key isn't to force either player to change their character, but to encourage them to collaborate on finding a common ground where they can work together. maybe the vampire who hates werewolves. can over time and lots of drama, eventually learn to trust that specific werewolf as the exception to the "werewolves are bad" philosophy.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Mar 13, 2016 22:50:42 GMT -8
neither player should be forced to change their character. Yeah, no. I'm going to disagree here. If someone shows up with a character that breaks the parameters of the game everyone agreed on, they should absolutely have to change their character. "OK. Everyone ready to play Vampire? Great. Let's see your characters. What... what's this? A werewolf? We established that all the PCs had to be vampires. Everyone agreed on that. *rip* Go make a new character. Go make a VAMPIRE like we all agreed upon, yeah?"
|
|
fredrix
Master Douchebag
Posts: 2,142
Preferred Game Systems: Fate, L5R, Pendragon, Gumshoe, Feng Shui
Currently Playing: Pendragon, Song of Ice and Fire, L5R, Feng Shui, Traveller
Currently Running: Fate, Coriolis, Nights Black Agents
Favorite Species of Monkey: 1970's NTV, dubbed by the BBC (though The Water Margin beats it)
|
Post by fredrix on Mar 13, 2016 23:03:26 GMT -8
neither player should be forced to change their character. the werewolf hater can still roleplay feeling distrust for the wereworlf, and can think of creative ways to show their distrust without If the werewolf-hater says "sure, that will be fun" then maybe, but like Hyvemind says, since the group agreed to play Vampire, (the clue's in the name), if the werewolf-hater says "I'm not cool with that" then the werewolf player can change their character or fuck off to another group.
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Mar 13, 2016 23:31:26 GMT -8
neither player should be forced to change their character. the werewolf hater can still roleplay feeling distrust for the wereworlf, and can think of creative ways to show their distrust without If the werewolf-hater says "sure, that will be fun" then maybe, but like Hyvemind says, since the group agreed to play Vampire, (the clue's in the name), if the werewolf-hater says "I'm not cool with that" then the werewolf player can change their character or fuck off to another group. truesies. that would be better than denying the werewolf outright. Parameters can be Stretched, Worlds can be expanded.
|
|
|
Post by Forresst on Mar 14, 2016 1:08:14 GMT -8
truesies. that would be better than denying the werewolf outright. Parameters can be Stretched, Worlds can be expanded. Except that's not at all what he's saying. Parameters can be stretched, sure. Worlds can expand, fine. But at a table with a group of players who came together to play X, Y, and Z, if there's 5 players and 4 of them are looking to play that thing, and one comes in and says "I want to play X, Y, Q instead", if the rest of the group isn't cool with it, it ain't happening. I said before and I'll say it again: game-by-game, table-by-table, and player-by-player. Does the system have some kind of means to do this if I want it done? Yes/No. Does the table feel comfortable with this idea? Yes/No. Does the player appear to be capable of playing the game with the table with the character they want? Yes/No. This isn't about permission or rights. It's about courtesy. Everyone at a table will want different details, but for a game to work, the Venn diagram of "what I want" has to have about an 80% ish overlap among all participants. Otherwise, there will be no way to satisfy everyone without splitting it all up and running a game for these people who want this and a game for those people who want that. And I stand behind my initial and strongest reservation if I got a pitch for a character like the example here: Is this just a way for one player to keep the plotlight firmly on themselves every moment of every session? If yes, then absolutely not.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Mar 14, 2016 2:40:42 GMT -8
FTR: a game I played in years ago was killed dead by the GM allowing an 'exotic character'. We were playing Middle Earth using the full RoleMaster rule set, the GM had two separate groups which he intended to eventually combine. When we heard he'd allowed a Dwarven Martial Artist we basically face palmed, dicked about for few sessions and then quit. The GM asked why and it was simple: 'we wanted to play in Middle Earth not freaky Ninja meets the Munchkins from Wizard of Oz'. The GM's 'defence' was that "the full RM rules allowed it", our point was that "the full RM rules were for ANY flavour of game BUT we had invested in a Middle Earth game and suddenly it wasn't a Middle Earth game anymore, it was game we no longer had any investment in and as a consequence weren't really interested in either, no matter the label slapped on it". Very much this above conversation is an 'I' conversation with no consideration to the 'us' or 'we'. The GM should certainly mediate and arbitrate but, really, it has fuck all to do with that single player and the GM: it has more to do with that single player and The Group. The GM should sensibly consider The Group when arbitrating but the defensive tone in this discussion, across several posts, is more about the player seeing their relationship with the GM as singular and attempting to get the GM to intercede on their behalf in spite of The Group. One of the big pluses for TTRPG's versus MMO's is that they truely Group experiences. That's the draw card for myself, the increased social aspect both in and out of character (because, there's fuck all, comparatively and relatively, social about sitting at a Computer and going on a 'raid'). Foresst is right on the money: it smacks of spotlight hogging. Aaron
|
|
|
Post by Forresst on Mar 14, 2016 3:17:04 GMT -8
^^ This
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Mar 14, 2016 3:34:13 GMT -8
Fuck it, I'm going to go for the jugular: Ilina, you totally missed Fredix's very blatant and italicized point . . . across several posts, across several sub-forums you propose THE SAME character type. In one thread you were even told, by several respondents, that this is what you have been doing and that maybe you should broaden your range of RPG experiences. Now we have another detailed background that would basically let you be the center of attention, resulting in some waif like spirit wielder who (loosely) smacks of being a female version of The Last Avatar - in an Azeroth campaign. Yet again you have suggested a way to 'bend' the rules of a game that is heavily tied to/invested in a very clearly defined and detailed background milieu to bring about THE SAME result. We have the anime/manga analogue now I'm just waiting for the hentai clincher . . . Aaron
|
|
|
Post by Kenigma23 on Mar 14, 2016 8:45:06 GMT -8
I don’t think I’ve been a part of this forum for even a month yet but this has been the most interesting* thread by far… I would echo Forresst that it is very game/genre/GM/player dependent how/where so called “exotic” characters fit. If everyone is good with it then go one with your bad self. However… That does not seem to be the case here so the real question I think in all of this is: “are you a team player?” The point of getting together with a bunch of people to play a game is for the shared experience. Sharing means everyone gets a chance at the spotlight, to have their “damn I’m bad ass” moments and so on. What I hear described here sounds like a Munchkin. I don’t mean that accusatory or derogatory, but it sounds like the character to be created doesn’t fit with the rest of the theme of the game, thus the conflict. You can create interesting characters without having to game breaking or theme breaking. Again, the point is to play as part of a group. *please note: I mean this in the I can't look away since of interesting
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2016 10:44:52 GMT -8
I didn't check the boards all weekend but it looks like most of you have already stated what I would have chimed in with.
We should all remember that RPGs are a type of collaborative storytelling. We get together with friends to tell a story that is shaped by everyone at the table. The GM, as the arbiter of the story, helps shape the setting which may include character limitations (beyond what the game has already set...which are usually made for game balance or world building purposes). The players then create this narrative as one.
A super exotic pc, as described, is problematic for many reasons (most already stated here) and as a player you have to realize that you are not the only one at the table. Yes, your super unique character may be filled with plot points that someone could utilize....excellent, write a fan fiction. If the gm and/or other players have issue with your character concept then you need to adjust things to be more in line with the campaign that the group previously agreed upon. This is not meant to stifle your creativity or own role playing fun...this is meant to keep a group and narrative flowing. Turn that creative mind towards a character concept that exists within the game your group has agreed upon.
Going to the Shaman, blood elf, wind talker, other thing i have no idea about because i don't play WoW...what is the exotic thing? The Blood Elf part I imagine. Why do you need to be a blood elf? Why not make an alliance race that gets adopted and trained and so on and so forth? In this particular instance, the chance of that particular blood elf surviving to puberty are slim to none, let alone training and being assigned to this prestigious place. Most alliance folk wouldn't trust her.
TLDR: This hobby is a cooperative game. Cooperate with your GM and other players...even if it means you can't be WoW Drizzt.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2016 14:18:20 GMT -8
but Drizz't and the Last Airbender are too Extreme for what i am looking for. i'm not looking to be the Only Good Aligned Drow on the Planet. i'm just looking to not be another Generic Dwarven Fighter with an Axe and Shield or Elven Ranger with a Longbow, or whatever the setting and genre's equivalents are. i guess i went too far in trying to accomplish this. Breaking molds and stretching character concepts is commendable but there are plenty of ways to challenge tropes while playing within the agreed upon setting/group. Don't want to be a Dwarven axe fighter, loud and boastful? then maybe your dwarf has been always been interested in delicate intricate things, perhaps they dislike axes and brute force opting instead for fencing or creating clockwork machines. Don't care for the tired Legolas elf ranger? Then skip the bows. A city elf was mentioned somewhere in this thread, growing up in the city would give him an entirely different outlook on life and a very different skill set....all while using setting appropriate races and classes. I am playing a knight errant in a fantasy savage worlds game. He is a half elf bastard son of a lord. The half elf race was allowed as it wasn't a min/max situation and fit a story line (lord attacked, found by elves, nursed back to health, nine months later a basket is dropped off) without being the product of extremely unlikely scenarios to create a unique snowflake. The knight is devoted to the law but lacks common sense creating a different type of character from the uptight paladin know-it-all trope. He has rushed into burning buildings to save villagers but has also tried to arrest a dragon for arson. In the same game, a druid type character doesn't actually believe in magic. He rationalizes all his spells with facts about nature ("That bear that came out of nowhere? that wasn't summoned. You can't summon bears. It is well known that bears hate dragons, it must have heard the dragon cry and rushed over.") We had a dwarf wild mage (in this world dwarves don't do magic) who was raised by a hermit mage in the woods ("The dwarf is a wizard." "Yeah Sure you are, pal"). All these characters were discussed with the group and gm so as to fit in the world and with the group so we could have fun playing together.
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Mar 14, 2016 14:32:22 GMT -8
thank you for showing me how i can break molds more easily. breaking molds is all i want to do. Mary Sue isn't what i seek. i don't need a Race that doesn't exist in the setting. and in trying too hard to break the mold, i kind of got stuck on the Legal Lolita Cosplayer Rut. Ilina Selene Young has been drawing too much influence from Ilina Selene Young and not enough from the Genre. just because Ilina Selene Young the Roleplayer might be a Short and Physically Underdeveloped Weeaboo who is obsessed with Faeries and the Lolita Fashion Subculture, doesn't mean the character played by Ilina has to be identical to Ilina in order to be relatable to Ilina. it just means Ilina is stuck in a Rut because she doesn't know the proper way to break a mold without inserting a replica of her ideal self.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Mar 14, 2016 15:05:12 GMT -8
More later (after I'm at work), but I believe every character we make is at least partially an idealized version of ourselves.
|
|