Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2016 22:47:48 GMT -8
The theme of Happyjacks has been "Yes, And" since the first season. Given that bias toward finding a way to not block your players, why is this advice still circulating? Why can't I play a ninja?
Just why is the ninja so hated a character concept? Given a small measure of work it would seem to be easy to include a ninja type character in any game. Call it a rogue, secret agent, special forces soldier, or even a ranger. All of those concepts could be very similar to the idea of a ninja and most of them would work given the correct setting. So why the vitriol?
Is it the literal ninja from the east (even though there isn't really contact with the east in your setting) that gets your goat? Are you just tired of people creating characters without considering the setting at all? In essence, how do you defend restricting PC's who are willing to work within the framework of the setting to make their desired concept? Tell me bellow the reasons why I can't play a ninja!
|
|
|
Post by Forresst on Mar 25, 2016 23:18:21 GMT -8
You can't play a ninja because this is a cowboy game and cowboys don't have time to go to ninja school.
ok now that my little joke is done (that up there is a little joke btw, I know it's not very good so you may have missed it), you got at least part of what makes me nope out on a pc in your question. If a player plays at my table, I am deliberately quite explicit in my world or game premise. It's not a question of "oh hey Stevensw, wanna play a game at my place? Suzy and Billy will be there and it's a savage worlds game but we'll figure out what's what later". I usually pitch a game to my players as so:
"Hey guys, I've been thinking of running a somewhat gritty space adventure in the tri-imperium setting we ran the last time we all played Traveller, but I've been thinking of a short, 3-5 session idea that I'd like to give a go in Stars Without Number. This idea involves a lot of exploration, but not much in the way of combat. My little mission seed makes the most sense if all the characters are shipmates in Fleet X. I will run the games on Sundays. Is anyone interested?"
So, if someone comes to my table based on that pitch and makes a planet-bound farmer from Y colony? Nope. Not what I pitched, not what you signed up for.
Now, all of that might work, but you have to come to me with the work done. If you really want to be a space swede potato farmer who somehow got mixed up with fighter pilots from space kansas, it's your job to get from space Stockholm to space Wichita. I gave you where you have to be to start. I'm not going to get you there.
This might not be anything like anyone else's games. I might be GMing wrong. I dunno. But, that's how my table works.
|
|
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 25, 2016 23:40:57 GMT -8
I don't think the "hate" is directed towards ninjas, per se. I think the trope and Stu's song is more about that sort of player that ALWAYS plays a Ninja, no matter what system or setting the game uses. As you say, D&D can work with a rogue, and you might end up with a talented intrusion/wet worker in many a system/setting, even Traveller (as long as the dice fall the right way). But every game?
And I don't think it's all about the GM either, and if it was I'd have some sympathy for the "what happened about 'yes and'?" argument. It only becomes a problem when the whole group is tired of Bob playing Ninja's all the time.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Mar 25, 2016 23:47:25 GMT -8
Because it's not an issue of being a 'ninja' per se, it's what a 'ninja' tends to be within a given system . . . it's a faux-Mary Sue, the poor man's Batman and an excuse to better than anybody else at the table at EVERYTHING. Back in the day people would design 'Ninja' classes for DnD and ADnD and TnT etc etc and they were always hugely overpowered, good at everything and so far and away from the historical truth as to be laughable - more like 'American Ninja' (the movie) - and they tended to attract 'that guy' as players. 'That guy' also tended to want to play an Anti Paladin or a Half Vampire or anything 'that guy' saw as having only mechanical advantages and no drawbacks (except RP fluff one's which could be ignored) . . . So in the context of 'that guy' wanting to bring his/her 'ninja' to the table - the answer is no, not so much because of the character more because of the player . . . Aaron
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2016 0:02:57 GMT -8
I don't think the "hate" is directed towards ninjas, per se. I think the trope and Stu's song is more about that sort of player that ALWAYS plays a Ninja, no matter what system or setting the game uses. As you say, D&D can work with a rogue, and you might end up with a talented intrusion/wet worker in many a system/setting, even Traveller (as long as the dice fall the right way). But every game? And I don't think it's all about the GM either, and if it was I'd have some sympathy for the "what happened about 'yes and'?" argument. It only becomes a problem when the whole group is tired of Bob playing Ninja's all the time. I don't really get that arguement as it pertains to ninja. I've played with a guy who always plays a gruff asshole, who we pleaded with to stop being an asshole (gruff was fine). It wasn't that we wanted to alter his character, we were all just tired of coming up with a reason why we would hang out with his string of asshole characters. What separates the ninja as a concept to me is a mode of play. Theoretically the ninja represents the indirect approach. He operates out of sight or in plain sight, keeping out of the limelight. You can target various aspects that people would associate with a ninja, but none of them are an inherent problem to me. And if that player is fitting into the setting I don't see a reason why we should oppose his favorite mode of play. Unless there is niche protection in play and Bob is monopolizing that role so no one else can play it, why should we dictate he can't continue to do what he likes? As for the whole group, who are they to tell a fellow player how to have fun? Further, is their sickness of the players role indicative of some other problem (like the gruff asshole above)? Is this squabble really over who gets to play a ninja, or about who gets to be the lance in the group's five man band?
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Mar 26, 2016 0:05:40 GMT -8
the Concept of an Assassin who uses the Arts of Disguise and Common Sense to Blend into the Background as a means to catch their target unaware, isn't the type of ninja i have a problem with. the Ninja i have a problem with, is the Mary Sue Ninja that is badass at combat, amazing at sneaking around, dresses in black, happens to be angsty and brooding, and goes by a Steriotypical Japanese name that any Weeaboo would have thought up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2016 0:12:46 GMT -8
Because it's not an issue of being a 'ninja' per se, it's what a 'ninja' tends to be within a given system . . . it's a faux-Mary Sue, the poor man's Batman and an excuse to better than anybody else at the table at EVERYTHING. Back in the day people would design 'Ninja' classes for DnD and ADnD and TnT etc etc and they were always hugely overpowered, good at everything and so far and away from the historical truth as to be laughable - more like 'American Ninja' (the movie) - and they tended to attract 'that guy' as players. 'That guy' also tended to want to play an Anti Paladin or a Half Vampire or anything 'that guy' saw as having only mechanical advantages and no drawbacks (except RP fluff one's which could be ignored) . . . So in the context of 'that guy' wanting to bring his/her 'ninja' to the table - the answer is no, not so much because of the character more because of the player . . . Aaron This makes total sense. It is less a denial about a concept and more the players unwillingness to fit into the structure of the game. To be able to accomplish their concept they needed a higher level, more creation points, etc. rather than making a level 1 character as a squire, they insist on being a knight when they would need to cheat or unbalance the game to make that make sense. My litmus test for this sort of player is if they would be willing to accept no mechanical benefit for their choices. If it is really about being a half vampire and not about the sweet abilities, then they'll take the deal. Your responses have been spot on recently Aaron. Good job.
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Mar 26, 2016 0:27:38 GMT -8
if you want the Mechanical Advantages of a Vampire; you better be willing to accept the Mechanical Weaknesses and spend the Mechanical Resources. meaning for example, in D20. i will add the Challenge Rating Adjustment of the Vampire Template to your characters level to determine how much experience you need to actually advance. so if you start as a level 1 character and Vampire increases your Challenge rating by 2. you will have to wait till level 4 to gain your 2nd level. try surviving that long without a constitution score or a negative hit point buffer. and try finding a creative way to adventure in daylight, i will probably find a counter, such as forcing you in water where your sunblock washes off, sundering your umbrella you use to keep the sun off your face, or literally cutting a straight line down your hooded cloak that exposes you to the sun.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2016 0:38:09 GMT -8
if you want the Mechanical Advantages of a Vampire; you better be willing to accept the Mechanical Weaknesses and spend the Mechanical Resources. meaning for example, in D20. i will add the Challenge Rating Adjustment of the Vampire Template to your characters level to determine how much experience you need to actually advance. so if you start as a level 1 character and Vampire increases your Challenge rating by 2. you will have to wait till level 4 to gain your 2nd level. try surviving that long without a constitution score or a negative hit point buffer. and try finding a creative way to adventure in daylight, i will probably find a counter, such as forcing you in water where your sunblock washes off, sundering your umbrella you use to keep the sun off your face, or literally cutting a straight line down your hooded cloak that exposes you to the sun. I think I must be neurotic, because my first response to this was: "I don't think she understands CR." My second was, "Why allow someone to play something when you clearly are going to use it as an excuse to try and kill them?" In my estimation it is a dick move to allow something with the intention of singling that player out. If you weren't happy with their explanation of how they were going to manage to adventure during the day or survive to level 4 (even though that would be a cinch), why allow it? Just tell the person that sunblock isn't going to cut it and you aren't willing to hand wave the weakness, so it is not viable as a concept at this time. Bam, done. a note on CR. CR is the challenge rating. A CR of 4 means the monster should be an average challenge for a four member party of forth level characters. CR 2 is way better than 2 levels in almost all cases. CR 2 might be closer to 6-8 levels.
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Mar 26, 2016 0:52:11 GMT -8
in d20, it was easy for a character with class levels to outshine a monster of a CR equivalent to their class levels. a level 10 fighter had a 60% chance of winning a fight against a CR 10 monster. and in the Challenge Rating formulae, 1 Class level is Equivalent to 1 rank of Challenge Rating
Monsters typically had high stats and potent racial abilities, which were attributed to their challenge rating, but those high stats and potent racial abilities, generally came at the cost of levels gained later, but when a monster with class levels increases their challenge rating through class levels in a one for one trade. it makes sense that challenge rating is a fair gauge of ECL.
the monster might be stronger earlier, but the normal non monster character will probably be of a size, anatomy and class level structure better suited to adventuring and will generally have an easier time in most settlements.
it isn't singling out the vampire to explicitly use their weaknesses against them, and really, singling out the vampire is giving them the spotlight they desire, playing a vampire is bound to draw lots of NPCs who want you dead, mostly due to sheer prejudice, any negative spotlight earned is purely justified by the logic of the setting.
i used to also beleive it is a dick move to use a character's known weaknesses against them, but it isn't any more a dick move than the player asking to play a vampire because they want to one up their companions. exploiting known weaknesses is something any NPC with the knowledge is going to do.
you can come up with creative workarounds for the weaknesses, but NPCs will come up with workarounds to those particular workarounds. a living world will actually evolve, and NPCs will adapt to the threats they deal with on a regular basis.
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Mar 26, 2016 1:02:57 GMT -8
if a player plays a ghost sorcerer because they want the power of intangibility because it makes them immune to mundane weapon attacks. and that ghost enters a settlement with any intelligence at all, they will literally throw salt in the ghost's direction with the intent to harm it. i usually treat common monster weaknesses a player would default to as common knowledge. so a farmer isn't going to need a roll to know vampires burn in sunlight or ghosts are harmed by salt.
they might not know the exact science behind said weaknesses, but they definitely know the weaknesses are weaknesses. unless the species in question is a combination of entirely brand new, extremely rare, and extremely odd or unique. people will literally hang cold iron horseshoes on their doors to ward off the faeries, they will literally have homeade salt grenades for fighting ghosts, everybody will have a silver knife or few they can use to fend off a vampire or werewolf. the more commonly known the creature is for the area, the more likely people have a counter for it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2016 1:06:45 GMT -8
The theme of Happyjacks has been "Yes, And" since the first season. Given that bias toward finding a way to not block your players, why is this advice still circulating? Why can't I play a ninja? As far as advice goes, "Yes, and..." is highly controversial. It's not something which belongs in an RPG, rather being more at home in one of those hippie story-telling games that cannot be taken seriously. The ninja objection - "no, you can't be a ninja" - exists in order to call out bad players who don't care about the setting or the work that the GM has put into it, and just want to play whatever random idea crosses their mind, even (or especially) if it doesn't make sense for the world. (Like a ninja, in a pseudo-Medieval European setting.) It only pertains to actual ninjas, or to ninja-like characters, when those would be egregiously out-of-place to the game setting.
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Mar 26, 2016 1:16:55 GMT -8
you can have a ninja like character in a medieval european setting, it just wouldn't be called a ninja. but it wouldn't be much of a problem to include a shadow agent who uses a combination of disguise, common sense and acting to blend into an environment and as a means to catch a foe off guard to strike them at their weakest. the concept works in any setting. the term ninja isn't the only way to describe the concept.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2016 1:19:07 GMT -8
The theme of Happyjacks has been "Yes, And" since the first season. Given that bias toward finding a way to not block your players, why is this advice still circulating? Why can't I play a ninja? As far as advice goes, "Yes, and..." is highly controversial. It's not something which belongs in an RPG, rather being more at home in one of those hippie story-telling games that cannot be taken seriously. The ninja objection - "no, you can't be a ninja" - exists in order to call out bad players who don't care about the setting or the work that the GM has put into it, and just want to play whatever random idea crosses their mind, even (or especially) if it doesn't make sense for the world. (Like a ninja, in a pseudo-Medieval European setting.) It only pertains to actual ninjas, or to ninja-like characters, when those would be egregiously out-of-place to the game setting. Hippie games is a meaningless term like meta gaming is to most people. It's just a way to condem something you don't like. Odd to express that view here since you must know you are in the minority of happy jacks listeners. That said, your second paragraph mirrors other people's sentiments and has nothing to do with first.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2016 1:29:41 GMT -8
in d20, it was easy for a character with class levels to outshine a monster of a CR equivalent to their class levels. a level 10 fighter had a 60% chance of winning a fight against a CR 10 monster. and in the Challenge Rating formulae, 1 Class level is Equivalent to 1 rank of Challenge Rating Uh huh. Insert comment here about pigs flying. Other than high level magic users, a monster of equal CR to player level should win every time. I certainly would pick to have a monster race every time in regards to strongest character with your rules. Many monsters have more hit dice than their CR and great stat boosts. Sure, you may low out on a few features, but the raw power of the race is almost always better. See the pathfinder entry for degenerate serpentfolk if you want a good example of how honkers broken it can be.
|
|