Jerry Wright 307's page

Thank you for the encouragement! :)

A note: the setting began life in its current form in 3.5, so there will be many assumptions that predate Pathfinder. I'm a big supporter of using everything in my campaigns, so some pretty esoteric sources are used. I didn't go into as much as I could, and there's definitely references to stuff outside the topic of warforged. Questions are welcome; I'm clearly willing to go on and on about it.

I decided to post this to a newly started blog, as I was a little leery about Paizo's legal ownership of anything I post here. I don't think they're doing anything inappropriate or abusive, for the record, but I do want to be a writer someday, and I don't want to accidentally give them legal rights to my world. :)

Plus, they might not appreciate the length. And this was the shortened version. :D

On The Nature Of Warforged

I am most impressed. I want to watch this anime.

You have a great deal of talent. :)

I almost never play non-humans.

My characters are almost universally "good guys" in the sense that they follow the ethics of the old movie heroes. (You don't torture people, you don't lie, you don't attack a helpless foe, you give aid when and where it's needed, etc.)

Sometimes my characters annoy my fellow players, but they generally don't have much of a problem with me.

A variation of my standard character type is pretty much the same thing, but female and a bit snarky. Where the square-jawed hero does things by quiet example, the heroine is gabby and a little obnoxious, and not in the slightest afraid to tell the others her opinion.

I guess that means I'm something of a goody-goody busybody.

DM Under The Bridge wrote:

Jerry Wright 307 wrote:

Scythia wrote:

TarkXT wrote:

Freehold DM wrote:

I love sex in game.

Eh, I prefer it for one gm one player games.

They have to be rules-lite and diceless.

More like a LARP than anything I have to be honest.

That sounds less like a game, and more like just sex.

Could be worse. I had to roll penis length for a character in a Harry Potter game this past Friday. And the GM's a woman.

...

Did you roll a d4, d6, d8 or d10?
Did you refuse, saying let's make this about young wizards not wand size.

It's because the rest of us men use staves.

d10. Obviously. Rolled a *cough* 7.

And no, it wasn't the metric system. Inches, not centimeters. :)

DM Under The Bridge wrote:

Hmm, that sounds pretty good to me.

So they choose their racial traits and move it around, but it has to all make sense and flow.

Well, if a player says he's an elf, then I want to hear about being an elf. None of this "I'm exactly the same as that human over there except I have a bonus to Dex, and some skill bonuses and low-light vision and... and pointed ears!"

At the very least, I want to see some fluff that explains why elves are different than humans. If I let a player run the kind of elf he wants to, at least there's a better chance at roleplaying it.

[EDIT] This, of course, applies to all non-human races (not just elves!)

[UPDATE] I have begun the character creation stage of this new game (the actual game begins tomorrow evening). The results of my experiment are completely unexpected:

Every player created a human character.

I plan to talk about it before the session tomorrow, but it seems unprecedented. Especially since I have two players who run nothing but non-humans (one is always an elf, and the other is always a halfling).

None of them expressed any negativity about the character creation method. But I suppose it's possible they just didn't want to go to the trouble of creating a non-human background.

Hmm, that sounds pretty good to me.

So they choose their racial traits and move it around, but it has to all make sense and flow.

Well, if a player says he's an elf, then I want to hear about being an elf. None of this "I'm exactly the same as that human over there except I have a bonus to Dex, and some skill bonuses and low-light vision and... and pointed ears!"

At the very least, I want to see some fluff that explains why elves are different than humans. If I let a player run the kind of elf he wants to, at least there's a better chance at roleplaying it.

[EDIT] This, of course, applies to all non-human races (not just elves!)

TarkXT wrote:

Freehold DM wrote:

I love sex in game.

Eh, I prefer it for one gm one player games.

They have to be rules-lite and diceless.

More like a LARP than anything I have to be honest.

That sounds less like a game, and more like just sex.

Could be worse. I had to roll penis length for a character in a Harry Potter game this past Friday. And the GM's a woman.

This thread has inspired me.

I'm tired of players picking races just for the bonuses they get.

So, I'll present each race with no fluff at all, just the list of racial traits.

The player has to provide the fluff. And it has to be at least the same level of detail as the fluff in the book, or no sale.

Maybe this way I can get them to roleplay something more detailed than "I'm an elf with a level of thief and a level of sorcerer." (This is an actual background write-up for one of the PCs in my last campaign.)

I have no idea what hard fantasy is.

Fantasy done with complete seriousness; magic has rigid laws and everything is geared to reinforce the suspension of disbelief.

That rug really tied the room together...

I would say I am crazy enough to drive 100 miles in a storm for a game.

Would you rather play a splendid adventure written by someone you despise, or a rather boring one by someone you respect?

I'd go with the boring one. I can get inspired by the respect, and fix the boring.

Would you rather play hard Sci-fi or hard fantasy?

That erinyes-kitten was super-adorable. I want one.

I am reminded of a certain ancient red dragon in an old AD&D campaign that was polymorphed into a puppy. It retained its intelligence and its ability to speak. Listening to a puppy roar "I am Krishnaragh the Red and you will all pay with your lives!" at the top of its squeaky puppy lungs was a hoot. And, of course, our druid wouldn't let us kill it. She wanted to raise it as a pet, and teach it the error of its ways.

So inevitably, our ranger woke up to find the puppy trying to chew up his boots of the winterlands. (Krishnaragh had the mistaken belief that consuming magic items would fuel his dragon nature and break the polymorph.)

That was the same campaign wherein a succubus, unable to enter our Daern's instant Fortress, placed a symbol of death right outside the door so that when we emerged the next morning everybody passed over it safely (too many HP) while the lowly 2nd edition bard dropped dead on the spot.

He died a lot in that campaign. :)

The point of this is that I support the occasional PC death, but I don't care much for the old "save or die" stuff. Fudging a bit is not going to destroy the game, if a PC's death would result in the player being out of the game for most of the session.

(And a fudged roll would have let the %@*#ing dragon have a low enough intelligence that it would eventually lose itself to full-on puppytude.)

I have had bad experiences with people running prewritten stuff, as it often resulted in severe railroading. I may have spoken hastily however, as I'm sure a good GM could make them enjoyable.

And a truly good GM can direct you along the path without you ever realizing he's doing it. :)

Jerry Wright 307 wrote:

Easier to lose, though. I have a box of them from my last campaign, but a few are missing. (That just happened to be the characters I wanted to use as guest stars/NPCs in a new campaign.:\)

Foul sorcery!

Quite! And these "guests" will be just a devious and obtuse as they have been in the past.... *evil chuckle*

Jerry Wright 307 wrote:

You have excellent taste in systems...

Except maybe Cyberpunk, but I think my negative reaction to it had more to do with a GM who insisted that only evil people live in that reality, rather than the game itself.

Thanks. There will always be bad GMs for any system no reason to discount a bunch of heroic medical techs who rush into bad situations to save people, and you can tell your GM that. :p

I didn't stick out my tongue, but she got an earful after the game. :)

188. "A beautiful woman, locked in a cell, in a dungeon... KILL HER!!!"

I don't remember you playing in my campaign... :)

Three things: adaptability, knowledge of the core rules, and learning to disregard the core rules in favor of fun.

And Mountain Dew. Lots and lots of Mountain Dew.

Throwback Mountain Dew, with real sugar. *drools*.

And cheesy poofs. With extra orange powder. So your character sheet gets the stains that makes it a real character sheet.

I use excel spreadsheets for my characters and like to keep my stats and combat on one sheet, my equipment on another, and spells and things on a third... That kind of thing.

I had an evolutionist summoner, which means at a certain level that I could change up every one of my eidolon's evolutions on a daily basis, which meant it could very well have vastly different stats on a day to day basis, so I had a separate character sheet for each unique build.

If I weren't doing this electronically I'd probably be using index cards for it for sure.

Index cards actually make a much more robust character sheet. The thicker stock of paper stands up better to repeated writings and erasings.

Easier to lose, though. I have a box of them from my last campaign, but a few are missing. (That just happened to be the characters I wanted to use as guest stars/NPCs in a new campaign.:\)

Kalindlara wrote:

Jerry Wright 307 wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

and I have three other campaigns to prep for. Just make it harder. :/

When do you sleep?

Too much. :)

For those who are curious, the schedule is:

Reign of Winter every other Wednesday (as a player).
Serpent's Skull every other Monday.
Wrath of the Righteous every other Friday.
Carrion Crown every other Saturday, although we try to schedule extra sessions sometimes.
Council of Thieves as a solo campaign over Skype, whenever I can be bothered.
I may be starting a campaign at a local LGBT network/ community center soon. Definitely an AP, not decided yet.

I'm a busy girl. :)

~laughs~

I did something similar when I was unemployed. I was in eight weekly games. Yes eight. I still wonder how I stayed sane. Although I only GMed one of those. Hmmm... 9 games if you count the "Magic School Bus adventures" I ran for people as spur of the moment things when we were all there and bored.

Lets see if I remember the 8 games: Heroes Unlimited (young heroes), 3.5e D&D (my amazing world campaign), Paladium Fantasy (invasion from another dimension), Cyberpunk (medical emergencies in Night City), Rifts (refugees in Chi-Town's shadow), Ninja's & Superspies (X-files game - one of these days I should actually locate and watch X-Files), 3.5e D&D (Munchkin's Evil Empire game), and Spacemaster (Mr Sexist tries a Lost in Space scenario). "magic School Bus" adventures was just whatever system people felt like and had characters ready to go for, Rifts, D&D, V&V, anything goes...

You have excellent taste in systems...

Except maybe Cyberpunk, but I think my negative reaction to it had more to do with a GM who insisted that only evil people live in that reality, rather than the game itself.

Jerry Wright 307 wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

I'm really too old to be doing so myself. I'm lucky to have someone who'll support me as I work through a difficult time. I don't deserve them. :)

*suspiciously* Gamer?

*giggle* Mother. :) Although we've been introducing her to Pathfinder. She's... learning. She always wants to play magic-users.

*nods approvingly* As long as there's no restriction in the gaming... :)

My roommate's mother always wanted to play bloodthirsty hobbits carrying their body weight in daggers. :D

I'm really too old to be doing so myself. I'm lucky to have someone who'll support me as I work through a difficult time. I don't deserve them. :)

*suspiciously* Gamer?

Air in Flying ships and such...always wanted to play such a game...came close once.

Would you rather play a Cavalier in 1st AD&D or PF?

This, for me is a no-brainer. AD&D is my favorite system, even if the Cavalier isn't my favorite character.

As far as air ships are concerned... They are a staple in my campaigns. My players treat them as the plague. Only one or two of them want to have anything to do with them.

Would you rather be taken prisoner by orcs or by an Ogre Mage?

On DriveThruRPG there's a product from The Other Game Company called the "Blank Card Collection". It includes:

- Character Cards
- Blank Monster Cards
- Blank Psionic Power Cards
- Blank Spell Cards
- GMCards: NPCs and Locations

The download is currently free (as in 0.00 cost).

In a similar vein, also on DriveThruRPG, from The Game Mechanics are "Blank Initiative Cards".

It also is free (0.00).

These things are generic D20, but they should work with Pathfinder.

I don't know if these things will help. I downloaded the Initiative Cards PDF long ago and used them in my d20 games. Instead of printing them on 3" x 5" cards, I used 4" x 6", which made the fields bigger, and gave me room for notes.

Same, and I have been impressed with side notes in adventures like Runelords where it provides some advice if the party decide to join the bad guys or take a bribe to cease the fight against evil.

I like the idea of incorporating into the adventure write-up those things the players are going to do anyway. :)

DM Under The Bridge wrote:

Yeah, I love it when players forge their own way and pick their enemies. You can tell a bad dm by someone that doesn't allow that.

So pretty much anybody who uses an adventure path is a bad GM. Got it.

I fail to see how running an adventure path removes the players' ability to do what they want to do.

<Edited for clarity>

Would you rather play games with electronic devices allowed, or without?

I'll go ahead and say with, although it truly depends greatly as to the purpose for which those devices are used. If all they are is a way to access the game books, and maybe Herolab or some other bookkeeping program, great. But texting and distracting is a no-no.

Would you rather play a campaign set entirely at sea or one set entirely on land (or, as a bonus, one set entirely in the air in flying ships or the like.)

I think this one was sort of asked, with teens and grogs, but...

I'll say the grizzled elderly. It's been a long time since I played with my peers :D.

Would you rather be plunked into a fantasy world in the body of a human or of what we used to call a demi-human (elf, dwarf, halfling, etc.), and if so, which type?

By worst enemy, I just meant a person who would make a choice that definitely wouldn't be for your benefit. Didn't get specific because I don't known what sort of Fantasy World nightmare you'd dislike.

Evil with wishes. At least I'd be happy in that scenario (and with the wishes, eventually the scenario would change!)

Would you rather play in a low-magic, low-level game set in a real historical past (your choice) or play in a high-magic, high-level game set in a magical fantasy world of your worst enemy's choice?

Jerry Wright 307 wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

and I have three other campaigns to prep for. Just make it harder. :/

When do you sleep?

Too much. :)

For those who are curious, the schedule is:

Reign of Winter every other Wednesday (as a player).
Serpent's Skull every other Monday.
Wrath of the Righteous every other Friday.
Carrion Crown every other Saturday, although we try to schedule extra sessions sometimes.
Council of Thieves as a solo campaign over Skype, whenever I can be bothered.
I may be starting a campaign at a local LGBT network/ community center soon. Definitely an AP, not decided yet.

I'm a busy girl. :)

And I was complaining the other day about gaming two nights a week. You're making me feel old...

The Harpy The players set out to kill a monster, but through the course of the combat, end up capturing it, and turning it into a pet/dependent NPC. This NPC accompanies them throughout the rest of the campaign, getting them into trouble, forcing them to rescue it, provide for it, even buy items for it, and the GM is grinning to himself throughout it all.

I admit I am very guilty of this. But they fall for it every time.

(Note: this is called "the Harpy" because that was the species of the first two DNPCs the PCs picked up in my campaign. They have yet to figure out how it keeps happening.)

BOOKS. It has to be shouted. I own lots of PDFs, especially of things I can't find in print, but I print out what I need.

Play with low powers (minimal damage and barely-there spells) or over-the-top power levels (maxed CON and HP, maxed weapon damages, spells of vast cosmic power, etc.).

I'll admit the game I described was intriguing. Immersion was near-total, especially since all we had to go on about how wounded we were were the DM's descriptions. But the uncertainty for some of the players was almost pathological. One of the guys who was known as a cut-up and a constant chatterbox was silent most of the time, clutching his note-sheet and staring at it as if he could make his stats appear on it.

As a GM, I wouldn't want the hassle. Keeping track of hit points, spells, and conditions, etc. for a bunch of monsters is bad enough. Trying to keep track of the PCs as well would split my skull.

As a player... I'd be afraid of the kind of person who could GM that way, since there's so much more to keep track of these days. The best movie serial killers are people like that... :o

Scavion wrote:

Message board troll wrote:

BUNCHA SPOILED BRATS!!! IN MY DAY WE WENT TO LEVEL 10 WITH OUR PLUS 1 DAGGERS AND WE WERE HAPPY FOR IT!!! AND NO MAGIC BOOTS EITHER WE WENT ADVENTURING TO THE DUNGEON BAREFOOT IN THE SNOW UPHILL BOTH WAYS...ZZZZZZ *SNORT* HUH WHAT WAS I SAYIN??? GIT OFF MY LAWN!!!

I miss the old Troll.

Well I miss the old goblin so there *sticks out his tongue*

Now as for the topic. The railroaders are terrible. I had one DM that made every in game decision for us.

I had a DM in OD&D who not only rolled every roll for us, he kept our character sheets. All we had was an equipment list of what we were carrying, and a sheet to write information on. If we went into our mulepacks, he'd hand us that sheet to make changes on, and then took it back. We didn't even know how many hit points we had.

I only played in three sessions with that guy. They were fun, but I can't imagine that same sort of thing flying these days.

Who sleeps?

Explains your avatar! ;)

Unexpected and strange strategies are always cool. Especially if I have to fly by the seat of my pants to deal with them!

Play an in-depth, challenging game in a system you really hate or play a loved and familiar system that devolves into the trivial and hum-drum?

and I have three other campaigns to prep for. Just make it harder. :/

When do you sleep?

Not a zombie/virus infected mouth-breather fan, but Resident Evil, definitely. I'd enjoy destroying that bratty little computer!

Game at home (or equivalent) or at a FLGS?

Legos, fer sure.

Would you rather table-top or virtual tabletop?

I'd be interested in seeing an analysis of WHY these gms do what they are doing... Surely they are doing these things for reasons they are able to at the bare minimum justify to themselves and It might not be a bad idea to also explore the method to the madness instead of simply labeling it madness... To what purpose do gms gravitate to these 'bad habits'? Instead of simply vilifying it, perhaps try to figure out not the purpose of it as perceived by the players, but the purpose of being that kind of gm from the perspective of the gms themselves.

Coming together as a community means making an attempt to understand where each other is coming from.

Hand-in-hand with this is the question of perception. Are they doing what they appear to be doing, or something just being misunderstood? As has been noted, communication seems to be key.

It has an SRD (d20herosrd.com)

I was not aware this existed. Cool.

5e is easy to understand, and requires a lot less explanation than Pathfinder or 3e.

Then, once they get used to table-topping, you can switch to a more complex game.

Jerry Wright 307 wrote:

Wow. I go do something else for a while and... wow.

Takeda, I think there are people on this thread who are going to dissect your statements for any negativity they can find, and attack you for it. If I was capable of apologizing for the community, I would.

I agree with some things you have said. I think there's a trend in modern gaming that diverges from the old school, and that makes my style of GMing clash with players of later versions of the game. But I still GM in my own style. And I still have players who play my games.

As far as the insults thrown your way are concerned... Well, I don't think being called a Grognard is really an insult, since it underlines literally decades of experience at gaming that younger players have not yet achieved. I am reminded of a lion basking in the sun while cubs chew on his tail. Eventually they'll get big enough to know better.

Everybody has a gaming style, and everybody thinks that style is the best way to play. Learning to agree to disagree is a big step forward. I wish more people would take it.

Wow, there are a lot of passive-aggressive attacks in there.

You don't know how long any of the "cubs" here have been playing, unless they tell you. I can promise you Vincent doesn't have decades of experience on me. I just fundamentally disagree with his assessment of gamers these days. Of course, I was never particularly "old school", even back in the day. Things change, but bemoaning the state of gaming and blaming it on cell phones and PF ruining gamers is a lot more like the old man ranting about "kids these days" than like the "learning to agree to disagree" you preach.

General statements about the trend of gaming have been made, but many of those who respond to the comments seem to be taking them as if they were personally attacked in broad statements about modern gaming.

The questions and statements (at least from me) are about gaming trends, not about specific gamers. And those trends are expressed in the systems being used, not in the people praising them.

The attacks on Takeda were very personal and not at all in response to his comments. They were attacking him. My comments were made in commiseration and sympathy, not intended to be "passive/aggressive". In retrospect I realize I should have made the post a private message.

The reference to the lion and the cubs was to me and similar attacks on my views. Sorry it wasn't clear.

Maybe I shouldn't have added the comment at all. It came to me when I was reading posts earlier on in the thread and the writer in me wanted to use it. I apologize for giving in to impulse. :)

183. Put on a belt that somebody has told them is magical, then immediately check their bust size to make sure nothing changed.

A player in my old AD&D game had the gender reversal thing happen to his character(s) three times before he learned to get items identified first.

Wow. I go do something else for a while and... wow.

Takeda, I think there are people on this thread who are going to dissect your statements for any negativity they can find, and attack you for it. If I was capable of apologizing for the community, I would.

I agree with some things you have said. I think there's a trend in modern gaming that diverges from the old school, and that makes my style of GMing clash with players of later versions of the game. But I still GM in my own style. And I still have players who play my games.

As far as the insults thrown your way are concerned... Well, I don't think being called a Grognard is really an insult, since it underlines literally decades of experience at gaming that younger players have not yet achieved. I am reminded of a lion basking in the sun while cubs chew on his tail. Eventually they'll get big enough to know better.

Everybody has a gaming style, and everybody thinks that style is the best way to play. Learning to agree to disagree is a big step forward. I wish more people would take it.

Arturus Caeldhon wrote:

Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:

Have a serious talk with the player. Tell him to stop being a jerk and metagame like he's doing. Don't accept 'but I'm just playing my character' because that's an excuse to continue acting like a jerk.

If he insists on playing a jerk, show him the door.

I think the metagame is a real person not being horrified by an undead creature and wanting to see it destroyed. I think metagame is investigating creatures that seem like obvious threats when you have the power to destroy them - saving your life and the lives of others.

This, as confusing as it reads, is exactly why my character actually freaked out and screamed like a little girl the first time a skeleton reached out of a tomb and tried to grab him. Had my GM laughing his ass off and half the other players looking at me like I was nuts. We were first level PCs in Sandpoint. Only the cleric had actually seen an undead creature before, but the rest of the party acted like it was normal. Not me. First level characters should freak out every so often.

I salute you, oh unpronounceable one.

Claims of victimhood...

Just because someone disagrees with you or criticizes a certain aspect of the game, it doesn't mean they are accusing you of having BADWRONGFUN! Stop whining and acting like you're a brave little martyr being oppressed by the evil munchkins who are "poisoning" this hobby!

How should you act when you're being oppressed by evil munchkins?

TarkXT wrote:

Am I missing something here? Has anyone's experience really been hurt by a practical analysis of combat and a breakdown of how to build a successful group?

I think the problem is that people forget that guides like that are general advice for defeating combat encounters, or building the Most Powerful PC, not how to play the game correctly. Viewing these guides as anything more then opinion is a recipe for problems, especially when much of the advice is about winning combats, not enjoying the game. The guides themselves often contain some text or fine print about using the advice sparingly (or not in a real game), but it is often overwhelmed by the rest of the text.

Any time you use generalities, especially ones that are supposedly based on the "math" of the rules systems, to advise people how their PC best operates, you are on really shaky ground. When you are talking about assigning "roles" or "jobs" to PCs in a game where they are supposed to be personalities, you rub many people the wrong way. Getting told that your character is doing it wrong because he isn't "tanking", "striking", "hammering" or whatever turns people off to that playstyle and sometimes the game itself.

The problem with guides and optimization, arise when people fail to separate Theoretical Optimization from Practical Optimization. One is about stretching/breaking the rules system, the other is about enjoying the game.

First time I ever heard the term "DPS" was when I was listening to the power-gamer of our group advising a newbie on how to create his ranger. And believe me, the entire conversation was about mechanics. Fortunately, the newbie was a drama major and it all went over his head. He created his ranger based on social and cultural choices, not game mechanics.

EDIT: The ranger was a Cajun-style Elven alligator hunter from a swamp the party was crossing though. He fit right into the GM's world (the GM was a recent graduate of LSU).

Jerry Wright 307 wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

In all seriousness, though, he was a ditch-digger with incidental fighter levels. We worked it out beforehand. :)

I had a monk in a 3.5 game called "Honorable Street-Washer Wu". He was a drunken fighting master who pushed around a street-cleaner's cart (secretly loaded with brandy). It was his cover as the lord's spy.

He was in the west of the world because his lord sent him to find out what happened to two trade envoys who disappeared (turned out they were living the high life in a coastal city a lot like San Francisco).

He actually died when he was hiding behind his cart from an angry dragon. The dragon breathed, the cartload of brandy (along with some thunderstones and a load of fireworks) exploded and Wu was no more.

Until his sister came out of the east looking for him and found a way to resurrect him from his ashes. He turned out to be one of my all-time favorite characters.

The point is his entire background came out of a very short conversation I had with the GM, and explained how an eastern character that absolutely didn't belong managed to fit in a decidedly western campaign, with in-game reasons for his presence.

You shouldn't have ever had to have that conversation. And wouldn't have, if the GM didn't really want to be writing a novel!!

It took longer to explain it here than to talk with the GM about it.

Finding the envoys living it up was the GM's way to get Wu to the city where the other PCs were.

The bit with the dragon was just an encounter gone bad.

The sister was the character I replaced Wu with, until he got resurrected.

There wasn't a lot of rp involved in this, honestly.

In all seriousness, though, he was a ditch-digger with incidental fighter levels. We worked it out beforehand. :)

I had a monk in a 3.5 game called "Honorable Street-Washer Wu". He was a drunken fighting master who pushed around a street-cleaner's cart (secretly loaded with brandy). It was his cover as the lord's spy.

He was in the west of the world because his lord sent him to find out what happened to two trade envoys who disappeared (turned out they were living the high life in a coastal city a lot like San Francisco).

He actually died when he was hiding behind his cart from an angry dragon. The dragon breathed, the cartload of brandy (along with some thunderstones and a load of fireworks) exploded and Wu was no more.

Until his sister came out of the east looking for him and found a way to resurrect him from his ashes. He turned out to be one of my all-time favorite characters.

The point is his entire background came out of a very short conversation I had with the GM, and explained how an eastern character that absolutely didn't belong managed to fit in a decidedly western campaign, with in-game reasons for his presence.

he plays a fighter who wields a shovel. Nothing relevant; I just want everyone to envision him slaying the end boss of that campaign... with a shovel.

Now, he did meet a gardener in-game so he can have that shovel, right?

"I am God" might be a bit ... overdramatic

...

It was the seventies.