Too right 3.5
If a group of NPC Drow rocked up in town rolling with mail and blades it's called an 'encounter' and you are expected to roll right in there with sword and spell for xp. Magically though, your characters are supposed to know that the lone Drow they just encountered isn't really an advance scout, its the GM's SO, and you need to sling your blades or face extinction.
It's lucky that the PC's all walk around with their names in blue floating above their heads so you can tell the difference between a friendly PC and a MOB.
Can you imagine the watchman's face? The guy on the wall that sees this. The frenzy of stressed communication as they try to work out, what the hell are those things. Someone says they are drow, a learned man looks and wets himself, and the panic begins and crossbows are loaded.
If Drow are a big bad, a real danger, this causes problems; or you beat players with the stick of punishment if they dare to rp.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Running a game is about getting players and keeping them with fun and entertainment. Punishing two players for acting out their characters (which could logically hate Drow from the setting) is a good way to get them both to leave (Dave, can you believe how much of a dick that dm was? Yeah John, they totally cramped our style, everyone knows you kill Drow. For the xp, I know brah).I bolded the first part because the second contradicts it. The 'kill the other PC first thing' players seem like the type who get their enjoyment by preventing others from having fun, and are exactly the type of people I want nowhere near my game table. I've aged to the point where I realize I'd rather have no game than one that isn't fun.
Yeah, it is a problem. One player has a character that sends two players into pvp mode, kill the drow before it betrays us as they are all shifty (not you Shifty).
You can side with one, or you can side with two, or you can be neutral. Kick two and you have gutted your group. The drow never should have been approved in the first place. Especially not to join the guild of elf slayers. If two players have a problem with a drow character, that is a problem (of course you can punish/take sheets, but that is just a new problem).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Village Elder: Wait! Wait! Ceasefire, its just a group of 'Player Characters', yeah the GM's SO had their friends over and they wanted to play too, nothing to see here, back to work.
Guard 1: Geez, its getting hard to do our job, they'll let anyone into adventuring parties now. It's getting hard to tell these 'party' things from a wandering encounter.
Guard 2: Never had this when everyone just played Elves.
Conversation continues to the wee hours.
Don't forget, the village flips and joins the party of the drow, should the drow be attacked by its own party.
One day I was just doing my job, protecting the people of this town, and before I knew it I was fighting with some inhuman monster against some local heroes. It got weird...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Grizzled Guard 'But what choice did we truly have? Like I mean they were our Elven brothers believing they were acting in defence of the realm, but they were wrong man, they were wrong. No one knew it but after they struck... it was like this haze, I swear on all thats holy there was like, this voice from the heavens that compelled us to take up arms against them, I'd known them since they were boys, little Elfwad the Naughty, he used to deliver the milk when he was a boy, but the voice of the GM just came down and BAM, we all necked Elfwad like it was nothing, like it was nothing! and all along that Drow... well I'll never forget, damn it I'll try, but I never will'
Swigs whiskey and shakes.
Village Elder: Wait! Wait! Ceasefire, its just a group of 'Player Characters', yeah the GM's SO had their friends over and they wanted to play too, nothing to see here, back to work.
Guard 1: Geez, its getting hard to do our job, they'll let anyone into adventuring parties now. It's getting hard to tell these 'party' things from a wandering encounter.
Guard 2: Never had this when everyone just played Elves.
Conversation continues to the wee hours.
One priceless setup months back. Party are Isgerians after the great hobgoblin led goblin wars. They team up with a half orc fighter from another country, they generally do good and help people in very bleak situations. The half orc keeps his face mostly hidden. He is private like that.
Later, a vet gets a good look at the orc and nearly faints while being left temporarily dumbstruck, with a healthy dose of this being fear. Confronts the human monk, "do you realise what you are adventuring with?!"
"Yes, our half orc colleague, he is a..."
"He isn't an orc, he is a hobgoblin, explain yourself now."
The players did not know the difference at that stage (hobs hadn't been seen for a few years), the vet who had fought these monsters for years in times past most certainly did.
Very tense scene. The party used the fact the hob was Andoranean (his parents were refugees from Isger), lawful and good to cover and get out of punishment. The hob npc was not very hob-like, more like an Andoranean human, so he was allowed to live in this instance.
Now if there are surface drow who are not as evil as subterranean drow, and these surface drow have fought the lower drow and aided human territories, then they may be more accepted. Context matters.
Another way it could work, Dwarf setting, and the Dwarves get a few escaped slaves every year that make it to the dwarfholds looking for asylum. The acceptance may hinge on their skills and completing an education program to naturalise/assimilate them, but drow could work there.
If the foundations had been laid out then by all means, context matters.
This story just seems like the Players were railroaded.
Pays to be the GM's SO.
*Drow flashes "I'm a PC" Badge*
Players in Lensmans Game.
P1 - OK we walk into the dungeon.
GM - Cool there's four Orcs, they rush at you
P1 - Guys its a trap!
P2 - Good call, we sheathe our swords. No way he's going to punish us for fighting what looked like bad guys again!
P1 - High five guys! Remember, don't attack until we have given the enemy the initiative AND they have had time to attack us for a while, remember that Drow? I think these Orcs are the new party members.Party dies.
Good game.
I think that's using hyperbole. I've only had one idiot GM who actually expected us to do that(sheath our swords because they weren't really evil). Game withered and died. Most games expect you to fight the orcs, or humans, or demons, or angels, or whatever is rushing you with nasty things that hurt.
Anyways, depending on your game there might be an expectation that drow are okay. Taking your hatred out on every drow ever might be a tad extreme. That said, its usually best to treat your party members with some respect. They your friends in real life... right?
I try to rp so as to not play myself.
Friends? There is only the game... of Kill Drow Quest: Max Damage Chronicles
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that's using hyperbole.
It's the scenario the GM is actually running:
"The 'kill the other PC first thing' players seem like the type who get their enjoyment by preventing others from having fun, and are exactly the type of people I want nowhere near my game table."How are the characters supposed to know the 'monster' is actually another player?
The PC only gets killed 'first thing' because they have encountered what appears to be a sworn foe and act accordingly, only to be punted by the GM for doing so.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Meanwhile, groups with players that aren't dicks to each other or bully other players into never playing certain races might talk with each other pre-game about how to introduce certain characters or how they might already know each other.
Not everyone falls into those hyperbolic scenarios upthread. Most people don't.
Yeah, but in this situation it very much did.
Whats worse, we have seen several bully GM's play their hand here too.
But... there are only clubs in that hand.
*Bash*
Thank you for yours.
Culture, exposure and contamination. All good themes usable by player and dm, since both sides make the game.
Cosmodespotism, from a section discussing the Maccabee revolt: Münkler (2007: 135) asserts that ‘the Hellenistic cosmopolis was perceived and fought as a cosmodespotism’. There is also Berman and the Soviet idea of infiltrazya by the western (Berman 1988: 161).
Back on topic, I think if the drow played nice and really emphasised the, guys, I am with you, I hate drow, let's all hate drow together, it could have worked out. Race betrayal. However, because of the single drow player's relationship to the dm, they are not going to have a reason to play ball like that, or work hard, the dm will of course side with the partner and crush the other players.
Quite a lot of unfortunate pieces came together to form this problem.
I think that's using hyperbole.It's the scenario the GM is actually running:
"The 'kill the other PC first thing' players seem like the type who get their enjoyment by preventing others from having fun, and are exactly the type of people I want nowhere near my game table."How are the characters supposed to know the 'monster' is actually another player?
The PC only gets killed 'first thing' because they have encountered what appears to be a sworn foe and act accordingly, only to be punted by the GM for doing so.
How is that what lensman suggested? Is the player playing four orcs in a dungeon who rush you?
Anyways, its probably best not to play with people who jump straight to PVP. Problems like that should be resolved out of character. Taking personal problems out in character is bad mojo, though sometimes tempting.
Gotta admit, not quite sure I see exactly how some of this works...so a party has a non-traditional member, which I assume means anything outside of core...and possibly half-orcs, given they're pretty monstery, means that party will never again defend themselves against monsters unless they're allowed to kill another PC on the spot for being different?
So if a Fighter has run into evil bands of orcs and half orcs in his backstory, he has to kill the half-orc paladin he's just met or he'll never defend himself against half-orcs again? The party have to kill any Kitsune members or they can't fight back, 'cos you never know what might be a shapeshifter? Peri-blooded Aasimar need killing because, well, who cares if they have a halo - red skin and yellow eyes is more than enough to kill 'em. Or we can't fight those demons later.
Maybe it's just me, but I seem to be hitting a logic hole somewhere between step A - Not murdering another PC at random and step B -never being able to defend yourself again. Actually, no, it's not just me...no one I know has ever decided that, and I tend to play odd races all the time.
I must admit, character introductions in Shifty's games must be exciting, fun filled events full of thrill and danger. it just seems relatively unlikely anything but a party of humans gets much further.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yah, the only thing we really know is the one side, which says that a drow player was introduced into a party that had a long history of hating drow, in that game or from past game experience. We don't know if the drow player antagonized the other players, if it was only two vs 1 + DM, if it was immediately or down the road, if they discussed this much or at all before things started to happen in the game, (it sounds kind of like the DM was like "hey my girls joining and playing a drow, deal with it". Not even sure what setting or edition this is beyond older editions. Where they even elves, or specifically Drow slayers, or just had a long history (as in multiple editions worth) of being screwed with by the Drow? Do we even know what the player's characters alignments or motivations where? Or how long the game had been going on before then, etc. . .
In my opinion, it didn't at al feel like the example given was along the lines of the satire/examples posted by Shifty or theJeff earlier. It's not impossible that it went down that way, but I think it is a pretty massive jumping to conclusions that are not actually even hinted at. All in all, bad deal for everyone involved, and probably something that the DM and the Drow player could have handled a lot better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Killing fun for the two, siding with one over the two rping their characters, punishing attacks on drow and making a whole city obedient to how you think it would go, one mind, one purpose against the pc drow slayers. Pretty poor dming there. Very desperate to bring them to heel. That never goes well.
I like how the elves suddenly became defenders of the drow. Hilarious. Did you read second darkness?
I have not read second darkness and I have started as a player in that AP so I will NOT read ahead... that's cheating.
NO PVP is NO PVP. The two players violated the table rules and are punished.
OK so in your town there are no evil creatures, no thieves, no anything possiblywrong and nocrimes ever happen. Gotcha.
I guess we should all just hand in our character sheets upon arrival, as in essence the GM has strict rails upon which we must roll, and deviation is not accepted. Is the dialogue scripted too?
Next stop, temple of Iomedae where the Paladins are inviting in the local Bugbears for a trivia night.
Wow I am glad I don't play next to you in the game... you seem to have a Massive simulationist complex, MASSIVE to the point of completely blotting out all your common sense or willingness to play by the rules. If the drow is freely walking the streets of a surface elf town that MEANS several things all by itself. First that the town has already accepted her inside in a friendly manner. Did the blood crazed stupid murder hobos played by player 2&3 ask any questions? Nope. Did they attempt to role play? Nope. Did they simply engage in PvP on the thinnest of pretenses? Yep. Good example of problem players.
Then of course came the massive outflow of hyperbole between these two egging each other to new heights of foolishness.
It may not make sense to hack n slashers and murder hobos that kill first and ask questions later when in a peaceful town that for some as yet unknown reason has accepted a "normally but not always evil" race into town is BAD. But in our group's case we have a no PvP rule to stop stupid players such as these from at least ruining the fun of others at the table.
PS: In our games the town guard arrests those who attempt to commit murder, regardless of whether they grew up there or not. I guess in these two's games all towns are massively racist against certain races.
How is that what lensman suggested? Is the player playing four orcs in a dungeon who rush you?
Apparently yes, they could be player Caharcters, and if youhit one you are banned from the game. Best be sure they really are the enemy, and the only way to be truly sure is to get hit by them.
Did it? We don't know how things went down in that game. We do know that those two players had a history of hating on one race and forcing that on others.
You know that, or the guy said that? He also went on to say a few other things that brought his story into doubt.
As DA explained - "it sounds kind of like the DM was like "hey my girls joining and playing a drow, deal with it". I think DA was probably spot on.
NO PVP is NO PVP. The two players violated the table rules and are punished.
So you set the players up by putting a monster in front of them, and then punish them for attacking it. Good game.
It may not make sense to hack n slashers and murder hobos that kill first and ask questions later when in a peaceful town that for some as yet unknown reason has accepted a "normally but not always evil"...
I like how you say 'the town' a lot like it holds authority. It might not make sense to Care Bears who decide to join the Ponies and think Friendship is Magic, but don't you think that if 'the town' (you know the one that apparently now has Paladins on every corner Detecting Evil) had decided to become bestest buddies with such a classic enemy they would have ANNOUNCED TO THE TOWN what was going on?
Or do you think 'the town' would just keep the alliance a secret (your aforementioned unknown reasons) and just let the drow walk unannounced into the nearest tavern?
I like your towns that are 100% risk free where no crimes ever happen and every person there has been vetted by the Town Intelligence service and no wrong doers have been permitted entry.
I love the great assumptions people can all make in 'the town', where is this mystical utopia?
I wonder in a warzone if you see enemy troops rolling in through the town gates whether you dont open fire because if they are there, 'the town' has obviously welcomed them.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
How is that what lensman suggested? Is the player playing four orcs in a dungeon who rush you?Apparently yes, they could be player Caharcters, and if youhit one you are banned from the game. Best be sure they really are the enemy, and the only way to be truly sure is to get hit by them.
Or you could try, you know, stop taking things to a ridiculous extreme?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't take it there, I just joined the party.
Can't engage those Orcs, don't take my word for it,
"Did the blood crazed stupid murder hobos played by player 2&3 ask any questions? Nope. Did they attempt to role play? Nope.Did they simply engage in PvP on the thinnest of pretenses? Yep. Good example of problem players."
So that means no swords bud, you hadn't roleplayed enough yet to begin fighting back, because you know, you might be called a murder hobo and those might be PC's and you'd be guilty of PVP.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of those scenarios in which a wee bit of metagaming, while a regrettable necessity, is the FAR lesser of evils -- because it means people can play what they want, without their characters being cut down on appearance. That's not a bad thing.
One of those scenarios in which a wee bit of metagaming, while a regrettable necessity, is the FAR lesser of evils -- because it means people can play what they want, without their characters being cut down on appearance. That's not a bad thing.
Aye, I love it when everyone's happy and having fun. That's always the goal right?
That's always the goal right?
Fool! The goal is to win at teh Interwebz!!!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of those scenarios in which a wee bit of metagaming, while a regrettable necessity, is the FAR lesser of evils -- because it means people can play what they want, without their characters being cut down on appearance. That's not a bad thing.
Or you know, these GM's could be a little more sensible:
Approach player 2 & 3 well before the session.
Explain to them that Player 1 would like to play a Drow.
LISTEN to their concerns, both as players and characters.
ACCEPT that they might still be unhappy about that particular race/class within the context of the game they are in, if indeed they feel it is incompatible.
COLLABORATE with player 2 & 3 to find a middle ground and a sensible vector into the party IF the drow does go ahead.
Maybe, just maybe, the drow wont work in THAT campaign, but another game could be slated where it does.
What was wrong here is that the original GM simply demanded his players take it on the chin, because the GMSO wanted to play a Drow, and then rubbished those players for arguing the point.
Similarly Aranna would have us accept that despite all the conversations about realism and roleplay, anyone in Unicorn Town is perfectly safe and a good session of parley must be entered into with anything you encounter there, because bad guys never break in. That's some Heavy Meta. of course if you question it you are a 'problem player'.
I see a lot of very heavy handed GM's who are enforcing their rules their way and not having a bar of any of the players wishes.
Its like some North Korean game where you never want to be the first person who stops clapping and cheering lest the GM take umbrage.
One would hope there would have been some give and take, but that would take all the fun out of the inevitable message board arguments.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just say no
to drow
it rhymes with crow
so you have to go,
if you play a drow.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One would hope there would have been some give and take, but that would take all the fun out of the inevitable message board arguments.
One would hope indeed, but I am seeing a lot of these GM's posting to the contrary - how dare their players cry foul when run over by the GM's Fiat, especially when the GM's SO is in the passenger seat.
GM SO is a conflict of interest.
It can certainly be a conflict of interest, and hence I was very wary from the get go. The more I read, the more I became sure that it is what we are seeing.
One of those scenarios in which a wee bit of metagaming, while a regrettable necessity, is the FAR lesser of evils -- because it means people can play what they want, without their characters being cut down on appearance. That's not a bad thing.Or you know, these GM's could be a little more sensible:
Approach player 2 & 3 well before the session.
Explain to them that Player 1 would like to play a Drow.
LISTEN to their concerns, both as players and characters.
ACCEPT that they might still be unhappy about that particular race/class within the context of the game they are in, if indeed they feel it is incompatible.
COLLABORATE with player 2 & 3 to find a middle ground and a sensible vector into the party IF the drow does go ahead.
Maybe, just maybe, the drow wont work in THAT campaign, but another game could be slated where it does.What was wrong here is that the original GM simply demanded his players take it on the chin, because the GMSO wanted to play a Drow, and then rubbished those players for arguing the point.
Similarly Aranna would have us accept that despite all the conversations about realism and roleplay, anyone in Unicorn Town is perfectly safe and a good session of parley must be entered into with anything you encounter there, because bad guys never break in. That's some Heavy Meta. of course if you question it you are a 'problem player'.
I see a lot of very heavy handed GM's who are enforcing their rules their way and not having a bar of any of the players wishes.
Its like some North Korean game where you never want to be the first person who stops clapping and cheering lest the GM take umbrage.
Yeah, a tiny bit of working together could sort it all out. If the party are drow killers, then have them receive some messages from a famous drow slayer. They book a meet, and BAM, the slayer is actually a drow. Allowed inside the settlement because people love their work killing all those evil drow, and that is that. The prejudices of the players are manipulated to allow a drow in. A drow that is not really a drow, get it?
One would hope there would have been some give and take, but that would take all the fun out of the inevitable message board arguments.One would hope indeed, but I am seeing a lot of these GM's posting to the contrary - how dare their players cry foul when run over by the GM's Fiat, especially when the GM's SO is in the passenger seat.
http://i.qkme.me/3sq3kc.jpg
Being objective, fair and balanced when your partner is at the table is hard. It is helped by having a partner that is not manipulative, spiteful and jealous.
Fortunately, I rolled a 20.
To add a slight variant of an earlier point, a dm that backs a partner will feel really justified in doing this, allegiances man, but crushing two players and taking their sheets ends the game. Likely it will end friendships too (unfortunate). So we should all be wary of the "you messed with my partner's character, now you die" reflex.
Friendships, like characters, have only so much hp.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
-I once had to DM a game that included my sister, and a boy she was interested (university students) it ended with my sister trying to ask said boy to see a movie, while said boy fell asleep on the sofa. The other players were getting annoyed by the lack of interest on boy's part, and the obviously distracted sister.
One of those scenarios in which a wee bit of metagaming, while a regrettable necessity, is the FAR lesser of evils -- because it means people can play what they want, without their characters being cut down on appearance. That's not a bad thing.Or you know, these GM's could be a little more sensible:
Approach player 2 & 3 well before the session.
Explain to them that Player 1 would like to play a Drow.
LISTEN to their concerns, both as players and characters.
ACCEPT that they might still be unhappy about that particular race/class within the context of the game they are in, if indeed they feel it is incompatible.
COLLABORATE with player 2 & 3 to find a middle ground and a sensible vector into the party IF the drow does go ahead.
Maybe, just maybe, the drow wont work in THAT campaign, but another game could be slated where it does.But isn't what at least one of the "kill the Drow PC" examples started with?
"Mind if I play a Drow?"
"No, Drow are cool."
Game starts:
"A Drow walks into a bar"
"We sneak up and kill it."
More useful.
"Mind if I play a Drow?""No, Drow are near universally evil, cruel psychopaths. It won't gel with the setting, and the current players."
A Drow does not walk into a bar, and a far better character (for the setting and game) is chosen.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
it seems like it happens a lot in RPGs where people decide that their character should be a racist misogynistic d-bag, and then use the "but its in my backstory" card when i ask them about it
why does every Barbarian or other fringe type PC have to be like that?
i'm all for coming up with compelling backstories, it makes my job easier. racism and misogyny is not compelling, its just offensive and tends to put gamers in a bad mood when the Barbarian wont listen to the wizard PC because "she's a southern wench"my question is, is this a recurring problem with gamers as a whole or just in the midwest?
do gamers use their characters to act out their deep down racism and sexism, cause it kinda seems that way from my seat.and thats really, really disappointing because in my youth it seemed that gamers were a more liberal forward thinking bunch then the general populace.
do woman gamers run into this a lot, does it turn them off from gaming?
how as a GM do you deal with this?
Conan likes you once you prove your worth...
Edit: in Golarion no good drow exist, based on the published material. They are not Drizzt fans evidently.