bobcatt
Apprentice Douchebag
Patron
An infinite number of monkeys can't be wrong...
Posts: 81
Preferred Game Systems: AD&D 1e, 2e, 5e, Top Secret/S.I., Classic Traveller
Currently Playing: nothing at all :-(
Currently Running: completely stalled doing 5e via Roll20
Favorite Species of Monkey: Barrel of
|
Post by bobcatt on Nov 6, 2017 18:12:38 GMT -8
I tuned in and was surprised to hear that I had (apparently) sent in a question/comment about New Editions by email, but it turns out that "Chris in Ontario, Canada" is someone else entirely. Glad to know that I have not started typing in my sleep; no nocturnal e-missives.
(other) Chris in (Ontario) Canada "There can be only one!"
|
|
|
Post by stork on Nov 6, 2017 19:33:02 GMT -8
no nocturnal e-missives.
Oh that's a good one.....can we use that on stage?
|
|
bobcatt
Apprentice Douchebag
Patron
An infinite number of monkeys can't be wrong...
Posts: 81
Preferred Game Systems: AD&D 1e, 2e, 5e, Top Secret/S.I., Classic Traveller
Currently Playing: nothing at all :-(
Currently Running: completely stalled doing 5e via Roll20
Favorite Species of Monkey: Barrel of
|
Post by bobcatt on Nov 6, 2017 19:59:17 GMT -8
no nocturnal e-missives. Oh that's a good one.....can we use that on stage? I would be honoured if you would do so.
(the original) Chris in Canada
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Nov 7, 2017 20:53:34 GMT -8
Still listening, so maybe more to come.
On the email from Scott "Fizzlepop"....
You guys missed something very, very important. As I understood the email, he was given two options. Resolve the RL conflict and return to his ORIGINAL character, or GTFO. He offered to retire the gnome and make another character and that option was shot down.
So, yeah, I gotta come down on the Scott isn't That Guy.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Nov 8, 2017 7:55:08 GMT -8
Yeah, I don't think Scott was that guy either, but I do have a suggestion for people in that circumstance. The fact that this artifact relevant to his god was given to what seems to be an evil character is an opportunity. Why did his goddess allow this miraculous thing to be given to this guy? This guy must be special and thus very important to his goddess, so instead of conflict we are now best buds and I'm going to drown him in redemption and be a constant annoyance about the amazingness of the goddess and her faith and how blessed he is to be so recognized by her ... You get the idea ... Loads of opportunities ... That said, I do totally get the feeling of having reached an untenable position with a character. Been there many times. I usually end up rewriting my character at that point, but that's me. In the words of gina who is far wiser than I am ... "Find a reason why the thing going on in the game fits with your character even if that means that the character has to change." (paraphrasing somewhat but that was the sentiment) Oh and my personal favorite name for a gnome character MymsackleThornhedgeRothbottomBobwhiteDenderSmythe because gnomish names are the composite of all of their ancestors. Cheers, JiB
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Nov 8, 2017 8:59:58 GMT -8
Yeah, I don't think Scott was that guy either, but I do have a suggestion for people in that circumstance. The fact that this artifact relevant to his god was given to what seems to be an evil character is an opportunity. Why did his goddess allow this miraculous thing to be given to this guy? This guy must be special and thus very important to his goddess, so instead of conflict we are now best buds and I'm going to drown him in redemption and be a constant annoyance about the amazingness of the goddess and her faith and how blessed he is to be so recognized by her ... You get the idea ... Loads of opportunities ... That said, I do totally get the feeling of having reached an untenable position with a character. Been there many times. I usually end up rewriting my character at that point, but that's me. In the words of gina who is far wiser than I am ... "Find a reason why the thing going on in the game fits with your character even if that means that the character has to change." (paraphrasing somewhat but that was the sentiment) Oh and my personal favorite name for a gnome character MymsackleThornhedgeRothbottomBobwhiteDenderSmythe because gnomish names are the composite of all of their ancestors. Cheers, JiB I usually have so many character ideas rattling around in my brain that if I feel that the situation is truly untenable I have something that I am excited to explore.... On the name front, I agree. Fizzlepop is a great gnome name. Similarly to your point, the dwarves in my world do something similar, tracing their matriarchal lineages.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Nov 8, 2017 9:54:05 GMT -8
Yeah, I don't think Scott was that guy either, but I do have a suggestion for people in that circumstance. The fact that this artifact relevant to his god was given to what seems to be an evil character is an opportunity. Why did his goddess allow this miraculous thing to be given to this guy? This guy must be special and thus very important to his goddess, so instead of conflict we are now best buds and I'm going to drown him in redemption and be a constant annoyance about the amazingness of the goddess and her faith and how blessed he is to be so recognized by her ... You get the idea ... Loads of opportunities ... That said, I do totally get the feeling of having reached an untenable position with a character. Been there many times. I usually end up rewriting my character at that point, but that's me. In the words of gina who is far wiser than I am ... "Find a reason why the thing going on in the game fits with your character even if that means that the character has to change." (paraphrasing somewhat but that was the sentiment) Oh and my personal favorite name for a gnome character MymsackleThornhedgeRothbottomBobwhiteDenderSmythe because gnomish names are the composite of all of their ancestors. Cheers, JiB I usually have so many character ideas rattling around in my brain that if I feel that the situation is truly untenable I have something that I am excited to explore.... On the name front, I agree. Fizzlepop is a great gnome name. Similarly to your point, the dwarves in my world do something similar, tracing their matriarchal lineages. Dwarves in my games tend to have as their full name: [Something chosen by their parents] son/daughter of [more significant parent] of the blood of [some great ancestor] of the clan [clan name] ... commonly known by their first name among close friends, or some derivative + [ of the dwarves ] or to elves just an menacing grunt. Cheers, JiB
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2017 10:57:34 GMT -8
About the gnome: I'm not sure we have enough information to know if he's 'That Guy', the method actor that won't compromise. It sounded like there was a heated enough argument over things that he was uninvited to the group for awhile, probably to cool down.
It does sound like he offered to change characters because of the difficulty in the situation, but I'm not sure we know if it was during a heated argument and he said 'Well, F U, I'll throw this great character I love away just to get along'.
Yes-and is great and all, but there will always be situations where it is not acceptable or even realistic for a character to stick around. A gnome priest being forced with someone who doesn't want to be redeemed, and who is using an item that was used to murder an agent of his deity is about as 'unacceptable' as it gets. Yes, we should try to compromise, but that's not really a situation I see a compromise - both characters need to be true to who they are.
In media, I think it would be like watching X-files and Mulder, after seasons of trying to prove the supernatural and that being his central character concept, just giving up on it just to make his life easier and never mentioning it again. Another example is Rorschach in Watchmen - he could compromise his central life's beliefs and his utter drive and just keep it quiet and the world would have peace. What happens? He doesn't surrender, and accepts that Manhattan will nuke him. What's his quote? “No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise.” YMMV
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Nov 9, 2017 7:14:59 GMT -8
Game systems for doing a dark heroes / villains oriented supers game, in no particular order:
Hero System / Champions GURPS Savate Worlds Mutants and Masterminds Marvel Heroic Role Playing Masks (if you want teenagers)
Personally, I would probably lean towards Marvel Heroic at this point because I've played it less than the others and it's Cortex based and I like new things, but any of them would work.
Cheers,
JiB
|
|
|
Post by chronovore on Nov 20, 2017 16:20:02 GMT -8
Yeah, my 2 copper pieces on the topic are pretty straightforward, though it's been a week since I listened to the episode: Fizzlepop is a fine name for a gnome. Depending on his backstory, just as Europeans were named after their trade, a gnomish alchemist could easily be named after the sounds created by their profession. Also, "son of a gnomish alchemist" is pretty good as far as cursing exclamations go.
About the "solve your personal problem with $player2 or get out," there was a communication problem between the players and the DM, it seems. If both players were copacetic with their roleplayed conflict, the problem is with the DM and/or other players feeling uncomfortable with it. There was also something in there about how the other player was outright evil and trying to get more power, and the author of the email was against that.
One of my stronger memories of gaming with Stu was later in the college GURPS game he brings up. One player was a megalomaniac necromancer; GURPS doesn't have alignment, but both as a player and a character, I felt he was capital-E Evil. This necromancer was gathering power, and the player frequently soliloquized on how he didn't care about the other characters, as long as he was on track to rule the world — then told other players we were metagaming if we referred to it, because his character hadn't said anything.
I couldn't rationalize my character adventuring and supporting that evil character, so I retired him, and designed another character: an assassin who killed the fucking shit out of that evil character.
In retrospect, it was a dick move. I've apologized to Stu for disrupting that game… but it was also pretty satisfying.
So I can relate to the player who doesn't want to relent, esp. since it sounds like that DM let $player2 achieve their goal, and then made the PC into an NPC… am I misremembering that?
|
|
|
HJRP 20-12
Nov 23, 2017 21:41:08 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by chronovore on Nov 23, 2017 21:41:08 GMT -8
Relistening to the segment, Stu Venable ‘s statement that “some people just want to finish the DM’s module” also has some merit. Possibly its variant, “ Why are you talking to my Experience Points?” as well. For several months I thought on how to shift a weekly D&D game in which I play to be more along the freeform roleplaying which I enjoy. This is the same game where the DM had a 3 hour tantrum. What I realized is that the other players are enjoying the game. They enjoy what their characters are doing, using abilities and rolling to hit. It’s enough for them. What I decided to do was run my own game, with blackjack and hookers.
|
|
|
HJRP 20-12
Nov 23, 2017 21:41:21 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by chronovore on Nov 23, 2017 21:41:21 GMT -8
Relistening to the segment, Stu Venable ‘s statement that “some people just want to finish the DM’s module” also has some merit. Possibly its variant, “ Why are you talking to my Experience Points?” as well. For several months I thought on how to shift a weekly D&D game in which I play to be more along the freeform roleplaying which I enjoy. This is the same game where the DM had a 3 hour tantrum. What I realized is that the other players are enjoying the game. They enjoy what their characters are doing, using abilities and rolling to hit. It’s enough for them. What I decided to do was run my own game, with blackjack and hookers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2017 0:03:49 GMT -8
So I’m normally on the side of everyone being adults at the gaming table, but I think the discussion here points out an important exception. Everyone being at the table is great for collaborative gaming, but as soon as an accusation of metagaming occurs it is 100% clear that collaboration is not the goal. When that is true, the players need to be treated in an almost hostile fashion. People need to be sent out of the room if something is happening that they can’t witness and anything said will be treated as in character.
Using this method it becomes real easy to shut down the asshole who wants to make speeches out of his inner monologue of evil. Either it stays in his head, is said to himself with no other player present to witness, or is able to be acted upon with extreme prejudice. In addition, the GM and other players will likely be less tolerant of solo activities, as it means everyone has to get up and walk out of the room. Evil McEvil will likely get shut down by peer pressure and find his well of fun has dried up.
My preferred style of gaming is where disadvantages and flaws are meant to come out. Nothing says flaw quite like capital E evil. Hence you would have to know from the outset that such a thing would be (and you should want it to be) discovered. Typically that means evil is a bad choice for a PC, because capital E evil is the primary thing the PC’s kill. But that’s just my take on it.
|
|
|
Post by chronovore on Nov 26, 2017 15:10:38 GMT -8
I hear you, @stevensw but, at the same time, it is saddening to think about the presence of a hostile player in the midst of an otherwise copacetic group. I've had it happen in my own games only one time, and I was unable to recognize it until it had tainted our game's atmosphere. As I tried to adapt to the challenges this poisonous player presented, the game became less fun for everyone, including me, the GM.
The player was brought in by another longtime friend, and under false pretenses. He asked if she could come observe. He was also driving 2~3 hours to participate in our game, and if he had company for the ride, it was less onerous.
Once she arrived, he asked if she could use an NPC, and the next thing I knew, she was attending weekly games as the NPC… which would have been OK but for her bullheaded stubbornness and inability to listen or cooperate. I had no awareness of it at the time, but ooking back, now I'm wondering if she wasn't on the autism spectrum. She had trouble communicating and when things didn't go as she'd expected she was prone to tantrums. Instead of accepting a cooperative, collaborative role in our group story, her play style put me on the defensive, and I consistently had to defend decisions which the other 5 players would not have questioned.
I let her presence change the tone of the game substantially, and for the worse.
These days, I'm just not tolerant of abusive players.
|
|