Author Topic: RPGs: Tell me about yours  (Read 5405 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline arthwollipot

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8844
  • Observer of Phenomena
Re: RPGs: Tell me about yours
« Reply #30 on: December 11, 2014, 06:06:18 PM »
I'd be interested in getting into a game on Roll20 or something like that. Time zones are a hassle, though.
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him.

Tarvek: There's more to being an evil despot than getting cake whenever you want it.
Agatha: If that's what you think, then you're DOING IT WRONG!

Online Harry Black

  • International Man of Mystery
  • Global Moderator
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • *****
  • Posts: 16005
Re: RPGs: Tell me about yours
« Reply #31 on: December 23, 2014, 06:41:03 PM »
Im kind of pissed. One of our GMs plays a necromancer who is a really cool and useful character, but two other players have created characters since that hate necromancers and must kill them on sight. So...they cant play the same sessions. And we need to watch what we say around them.
The GM has decided to retire his character because the conflict isnt fun. It seems like a really shitty way to play.

Offline PANTS!

  • One leg at a time.
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 11895
  • What seals? I auditioned for this job.
Re: RPGs: Tell me about yours
« Reply #32 on: December 23, 2014, 06:45:32 PM »
Im kind of pissed. One of our GMs plays a necromancer who is a really cool and useful character, but two other players have created characters since that hate necromancers and must kill them on sight. So...they cant play the same sessions. And we need to watch what we say around them.
The GM has decided to retire his character because the conflict isnt fun. It seems like a really shitty way to play.

Yeah - that's just someone being a jerkoff.  I'd tell those guys to make a new character.
Now where I come from
We don't let society tell us how it's supposed to be
-Uptown, Prince 👉

The world is on its elbows and knees
It's forgotten the message and worships the creeds

Offline Johnny Slick

  • "Goddammit, Slick."
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12767
  • Fake Ass Skeptic
Re: RPGs: Tell me about yours
« Reply #33 on: December 23, 2014, 06:51:28 PM »
Yeah, I have to agree that at some point it's up to the players themselves to figure out how they're going to integrate into a group and not turn it into a constant battle. Perhaps a player agrees to hang with a necromancer to kill a common foe, perhaps he chooses to see something good, perhaps he owes the necromancer a favor... the point is, the fact that the PCs are together and cooperating needs to be considered first and then RPing (which by the way I am a massive fan of) needs to come in after that. Otherwise, I can totally get behind RPing a good character, even having a good character conflict with a party member who is of an evil class (and necromancer generally fits the bill)... but unless you're playing with adversaries in the group, one has to wonder why said character ever signed up to hang around with a necromancer in the first place.

I remember I played a game with a guy who was like a total loner who kept trying to go off on his own while the rest of the party went into a dungeon. At one point we were just like "okay, bye! Have fun outside while we kill monsters and stuff!". He wizened up. I think he was trying to create a scene where people begged him to come along but, well, the situation didn't call for that.
Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day.

- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Offline Caffiene

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5105
Re: RPGs: Tell me about yours
« Reply #34 on: December 23, 2014, 06:55:18 PM »
Eh... yes and no. Its perfectly fine to have adversarial parties if everyone is up for it - they can be fun. (Ive heard a lot of people cite Paranoia as a great game)

The problem sounds like the party template hasnt been discussed before character creation as to what sort of game people want to play. The necromancer's player is looking for a cooperative experience and specifically doesnt want an adversarial game, while the two others seem to think adversarial sounds fun and dont realise the first player doesnt like that kind of game.

Or, option B - they do realise and theyre just jerks.

The Fear The Boot podcast does some good episodes on this sort of party creation stuff and how to deal with it, imo.
[Lurk Mode Disengage]

Offline arthwollipot

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8844
  • Observer of Phenomena
Re: RPGs: Tell me about yours
« Reply #35 on: December 23, 2014, 07:09:03 PM »
Paranoia! is a great game, but it's a totally different feel from D&D. It's just not the same game, and you can't go into a D&D game with a Paranoia mindset.
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him.

Tarvek: There's more to being an evil despot than getting cake whenever you want it.
Agatha: If that's what you think, then you're DOING IT WRONG!

Offline Johnny Slick

  • "Goddammit, Slick."
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12767
  • Fake Ass Skeptic
Re: RPGs: Tell me about yours
« Reply #36 on: December 23, 2014, 07:51:10 PM »
Eh... yes and no. Its perfectly fine to have adversarial parties if everyone is up for it - they can be fun. (Ive heard a lot of people cite Paranoia as a great game)
Right, and I specifically mentioned adversarial parties in my thing. I've story-gamed way more over the past couple years than I've classic-RPGed, and story games are pretty notorious for having that adversarial setup. The problem,here is that the people clearly want a game where the tension is generated by the players progressing through a GM-run dungeon/story/whatever, not from intraparty conflict.

I do agree that a lot of this is/should be solved by the GM flatly stating up front that you need to figure out why your character is in the party. It's not up to the game, in these cases, to accommodate you but the other way around.
Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day.

- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Offline Caffiene

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5105
Re: RPGs: Tell me about yours
« Reply #37 on: December 24, 2014, 03:29:29 AM »
Right, and I specifically mentioned adversarial parties in my thing.
Yeah, I wasnt specifically addressing you just the previous few posts (you posted when I was halfway through writing my own post)

Quote
I've story-gamed way more over the past couple years than I've classic-RPGed, and story games are pretty notorious for having that adversarial setup. The problem,here is that the people clearly want a game where the tension is generated by the players progressing through a GM-run dungeon/story/whatever, not from intraparty conflict.

I do agree that a lot of this is/should be solved by the GM flatly stating up front that you need to figure out why your character is in the party. It's not up to the game, in these cases, to accommodate you but the other way around.

I dont know if I agree exactly... Ideally, the game should be in a form that is explicitly decided by all of the players (including the GM) before it is created. By the time it gets to the game or the players accommodating each other its already a little off track. It comes down to discussing before starting the game and possibly even before choosing the system, whether you want players to be able to kill each other for fun, a bit of tension only if it doesnt entirely disrupt the plot, or to be working together etc, and then the party be created to support whichever of those is allowed.

Its ok to not have a reason for your character to be in the party, but it depends if youve agreed upon the type of game where that happens. The problem is some of the players want to try a game where the tension is generated by intraparty conflict, while others players (the GM) want a game where conflict is only generated by the plot and mechanics - often, and presumably in this case, nobody actually determines what type of game it is, and some people assume certain things are ok and "a part of the game" while others assume those same things are not ok.
[Lurk Mode Disengage]

Online Harry Black

  • International Man of Mystery
  • Global Moderator
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • *****
  • Posts: 16005
Re: RPGs: Tell me about yours
« Reply #38 on: December 24, 2014, 03:02:40 PM »
For a little more background, ours is an open table, when your character dies you make another and start from lower levels. Its really fun to be a low level character trying to get by in a battle scaled for level 6 with stronger characters.
So these guys knew the necromancer was there when they built theirs. And by all means, make a paladin, but be imaginative as to why he sticks around.
These two guys are best friends though and both GMS so I duno. Ive just been told out of character not to mention necromancy in front of the "good" characters.
We have had people commit to their characters so much in the past though that they left and retired the character mid game due to our use of torture.

Offline arthwollipot

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8844
  • Observer of Phenomena
Re: RPGs: Tell me about yours
« Reply #39 on: December 26, 2014, 11:03:32 PM »
I've occasionally thought of running a game where when a character dies they start over at Level 1.  It would be an interesting schtick for a game.

Of course, I have planned "interesting-schtick" games before, and never had the opportunity to play them. Like an all-Dwarf campaign, or an all-Cleric campaign.
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him.

Tarvek: There's more to being an evil despot than getting cake whenever you want it.
Agatha: If that's what you think, then you're DOING IT WRONG!

Online Harry Black

  • International Man of Mystery
  • Global Moderator
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • *****
  • Posts: 16005
Re: RPGs: Tell me about yours
« Reply #40 on: January 18, 2015, 06:03:49 PM »
My secondary character died today!
He didnt really have to. He was level 5 ranger/barbarian and was grappling a level 15 spell caster. I was trying to buy time for my team mate to attack him but said team mate backed away giving space for...fiery death.
But the group finally managed to get him. We bought them a few rounds.
Anyway, the character only needed 10,000gp to set his friends widow up in a bar and then he was going to work on retirement so that turned out to be more or less his share from the delve.
A nice dramatic ending. I wanted the character off my plate but I must admit to being a bit sad he is gone.
His life was pretty shitty though.

Online Harry Black

  • International Man of Mystery
  • Global Moderator
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • *****
  • Posts: 16005
Re: RPGs: Tell me about yours
« Reply #41 on: January 21, 2015, 03:17:41 AM »
Argh. Another toss up between this and the bitching thread.
Im still on my first character (deaths in our game happen alot) but I didnt know about archetypes when he was being built for me.
Just found out and asked the GM if I could pick up now. Afterall, not having one til now has been a handicap so there should be no downside right? Im not switching a pre existing archetype.
Anyway. I mentioned it in passing to the other ranger player, my ex flatmate with really really poor social skills and personality issues. He got all weird about it and I mentioned that to the GM who is also my brother.
He feels that he was happy to let me do it as it was a first character but now this guy knows and has a problem he needs to disallow it so he isnt seen to favour me and risk the group falling apart.
I TOTALLY understand his position amd really respect him for the call but damn....i lose a +4 to hit against certain enemies because this guy wants to pout?
Argh.