i don't mean non core races, he plays with the misconcieved idea of D&D=Medeival europe and doesn't allow most of the non european concepts. i have proposed mikos, ninjas, desert bandits, elemental mystics, and a lot of similar things. almost all of which were core classes with human as the standard race. i hate having to bleach my characters white before i can play them.That really is odd, I've never seen a DM rule out characters purely for thematics. Non-core races would be understandable, as if I'm running a Forgotten Realms game I don't really want the world's only warforged in the party, but a desert bandit? That's fairly easy to fit in even with a medieval Europe kind of setting. You seem like the type to work out solid back-stories so I'm sure you'd be able to fit in exile fro your homeland or something to explain your presence.
if given enough time, i can work out a pretty solid, though unusual backstory.
The idea of a "white dudes only" game is anathema to me.
I suppose I could understand doing it once or twice, but forcing it for all games? I couldn't do that.
|
A euro-only game seems very... limiting.
If a GM knows his player desires to play something outside the European norm, then he should try to accommodate. What invisible audience is he running a game for that would question the logic of a non-european analogue showing up?
There's no mechanical problem, and I'm sure if he worked with you he could easily incorporate your chosen culture into the world. That seems frustrating and pretentious to assume there's no room in an imaginary world for a non-European analogue.
if given enough time, i can work out a pretty solid, though unusual backstory.
Confession: As a DM, sometimes I do nerf character ideas I feel to be outside the realm of the games setting. But I usually try and leave enough option open for everyone to play a character they really like. What helps is for me to "set the scene" before the character generation starts, give the player some information about the setting, climate, culture, etc. I still end up with a Goblin druid with an ape companion in a boat heavy campaign in a south asian/polynesian inspired world, but hey, that's what swim checks are for :)
But his backstory fits the world we're playing in, and I don't have to worry about the "loner" of the group, you know? Adventurers are by nature a varied lot, but no DM really wants a bunch of guy with no cultural/linguistic/familial ties to their area. Why save the world if you don't care about it?
Then there's the control aspect: I really dislike asian inspired classes in western themed games, as much as I dislike shoe horning western classes into eastern themed games. Oh, you're a Samurai? Interesting... WTF is that? Is it really that hard for you to come up with a character you could play without trampling all over "my" settings ideas of order and culture?
Finally, If you have so many great idea for regions NOT explored by your current DM, run your own game. Sure, it's more work, but as a long time DM, it is very satisfying to see players interact with my cultures, and accept things as norms that lie well outside their personal realm of experience.
I have been pigeonholed or forced into nearly every game. I have ever played in. It flat out sucks, but I do not have time to find another group to play with. I came here to do pbp just so I can choose my own character.
Our DM refuses to tailor his adventures to not typical groups. There will always be traps and lots of them, even when no rogue, and he severly limits access to any healing items when no cleric/druid/bard. And to top it all off I have two groups one consists of 4 people and the other is 6 and all but 1 refuses to play anything with spells. So we never have a wizard or a cleric unless I play it myself, and only ever 1 and not the other.
Finally, If you have so many great idea for regions NOT explored by your current DM, run your own game. Sure, it's more work, but as a long time DM, it is very satisfying to see players interact with my cultures, and accept things as norms that lie well outside their personal realm of experience.
Is it also not interesting, and a possible great RP moment when cultures clash?
Is it also not interesting, and a possible great RP moment when cultures clash?
It can be, but too often I have seen that excuse used as a defense for selfish and obnoxious player actions. I have been burned by too many Kender :)
i don't mean non core races, he plays with the misconcieved idea of D&D=Medeival europe and doesn't allow most of the non european concepts. i have proposed mikos, ninjas, desert bandits, elemental mystics, and a lot of similar things. almost all of which were core classes with human as the standard race. i hate having to bleach my characters white before i can play them.That really is odd, I've never seen a DM rule out characters purely for thematics. Non-core races would be understandable, as if I'm running a Forgotten Realms game I don't really want the world's only warforged in the party, but a desert bandit? That's fairly easy to fit in even with a medieval Europe kind of setting. You seem like the type to work out solid back-stories so I'm sure you'd be able to fit in exile fro your homeland or something to explain your presence.I rule out non-european themes too. Not because I'm a racist or a jerk, but because it doesn't fit my gameworld which is very european. Even worse, the character would never find a magical katana or a kimono of the archmage.
Finding a ninja or samurai or shugenja or shou-lin or dervish or zulu warrior or Cherokee indian or anything else like such things would be as weird in my world as it would be in The Lord of the Rings.
Um, there were such things in the lord of the rings...The haradrim were desert people who culturally resemble arabs more then europeans. Further south their were cultures that resemble some ancient/mideval african nations. Easterlings were also non-european in nature. Not to mention Khand where the people were reminicient of the steps warriors like the mongols.
The same goes for other big worlds that are primarily european like George R R Martins Song of ice and fire. The primary story takes place in a european region but there are many regions that are very very different. There is no major source of literature where the culture is exclusively european that I can think of.
Certainly your story may center in a european world, but there are always examples of foreign odd characters in literature. Why should this be different? The players are already the exception instead of the rule. As for finding a magic katana. Certainly it makes sense that they wouldnt if you dont want it there, but they could make it themselves, or have their existing weapon/kimono enchanted no? Its not an automatic death knell for the character idea. It may be a little more difficult for them but thats no reason to shoot the character down. I think playing a foreigner with different sensebilities and norms actually presents alot of fun roleplaying situations.
Then there's the control aspect: I really dislike asian inspired classes in western themed games, as much as I dislike shoe horning western classes into eastern themed games. Oh, you're a Samurai? Interesting... WTF is that? Is it really that hard for you to come up with a character you could play without trampling all over "my" settings ideas of order and culture?
Finally, If you have so many great idea for regions NOT explored by your current DM, run your own game. Sure, it's more work, but as a long time DM, it is very satisfying to see players interact with my cultures, and accept things as norms that lie well outside their personal realm of experience.
So a goblin druid with an ape walking behind him is fine in your world, but a guy in wierd armor with an odly shaped sword and wierd sensibilities about honor is unacceptable? Your world is so small that it's culture is heterogeneous? Doesn't sound like a world that would be fun to play in.
There is no reason why outsiders cannot fit in with a game theme. There are tons of examples of it all over literature and film. Azeem in Robin Hood Prince of theives for instance. He is a moor, foreign to english culture but his presence as friend and mentor to Robin makes for a great story. Or the reverse, something like the film the last samurai, where a westerner finds himself emersed in a conflict in japan, and finds himself torn between worlds. Having a character from a different land doesnt trample over anyones setting, it adds to it. And there is zero reason for a DM not to accomodate it so long as the player is willing to accept the role play consequences of being an outsider.
They don't need fixing. How many fantasy stories feature in combat healing? I like it that healing is something to do out of combat.
In 3.5/pathfinder this isn't the case. Most times you are healing you simply heal and that healing plus some more is lost the next time a hit lands.The problem with the cure line of spells:
1. They don't heal enough to make up for the damage.
2. They don't scale well enough to justify the slots they use at higher levels.I could go into a long thing about how to fix these problems (and I have on other threads) but if you want that you'll have to pop up another thread and ask for it.
I like how you skipped everything else in that post, and the posts that it was based off of to jump right to the part where I pointed out problems and then state that these problems don't need fixed because in combat healing should be a poor choice by your estimate. As Borak would say, "Very Nice."
|
DMPCs can help. No tank, have the DM make some dumb-as-rocks Fighter with a Wookie Life Debt to a player. Understanding DMs help too. No Rogue? Well, don't toss your party into trap-filled dungeons of death. You've got a Barbarian, a Ranger, a Druid, and a Sorcerer with a nature-y Bloodline? Maybe that urban politics and diplomacy campaign you've been working on isn't the best plan for this game. Save it for later.
I always tell my players to make whatever they want, and I as DM work around that, rather than making sure they fill prescribed roles.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! DMPCs are awful, just awful. They encourage laziness in the players (instead of dealing with the lack of something the DM just fills it in. And can often step on toes even when not intending to (One game I played a cleric got all hyped about making him fill the beatstick roll instead of the cleric role, and then the DM includes a DMPC fighter because the party needs a tank) Even if the DMPC isn't stepping on toes, it's just bad to give players things instead of making them work around not having them or at least finding them themselves. I guess what I'm saying is DMPCs are always evil even when played to the best of the DMs capabilities (not stepping on toes or shining in place of the other players, fills the needed role without overstepping boundaries or making the game a cakewalk), they're just always evil.
I always let them create whatever they want and if people try to force a player to play something they don't want to play I respond by saying I'll force the person doing the convincing to play it because they're the ones insisting they need it. Then I just let people work out their lack of a role in game.
I've run a game with no divine caster, I'm running a game with 3 players right now. I've run and played in games with no spellcaster whatsoever. And I've never filled in for missing characters by running a DMPC
|
The idea of a "white dudes only" game is anathema to me.
I suppose I could understand doing it once or twice, but forcing it for all games? I couldn't do that.
I too tend to run Euro-centric campaigns and generally only allow classes and races that would make sense in that setting. Does that mean its a "white dudes only" campaign? Not by a long shot. I could see many different ethnic groups fitting into a Euro-centric game, even including northern africans, middle-easterners, and even the OCCASIONAL far easterner, but in each case the frequency of encountering such an individual would have to match the approximate real-world odds of running into such a person in medieval Europe. I like to maintain SOME level of verisimilitude and that is thrown out the window when the party consists of:
a Viking
a Mayan warrior
a Cherokee princess/shaman
a Ninja
a Desert Dervish
a Knight
Could that be interesting? Sure. Could it be fun? Certainly. Is it ethnically diverse? You betcha!
Would it make sense in the backwoods of my worlds equivalent of a tiny village in the middle of France? Come on now. I generally try to run quasi-realistic campaigns and such a mix of PC's just wouldn't make any sense.
How about if you want ethnic diversity you skip all of the stereotypical options (gee let me guess..another ninja) and go with a gypsy houri type of enchantress... or a moor sorcerer... there's options other than the generic white knight lol
We play in the same house for every game session. The biggest restrictions come from the owner of the house (who has been banned as DM for being ridiculous at times) but this is the only group we've got.
That said, I tend to kick character concepts around a bit and nobody has ever made a "firearms/explosives" user. So, I spoke to the DM at work, away from the group about a build using guns and he accepted it. Saaweeeet!
So, the next week I throw out an idea about my gunslinger and get shot down by the owner of the house. "If you wanna use guns, find a different game/group. Guns don't belong in my fantasy gaming experience. I'll have no part of it." He also browbeats people who haven't been healers into playing clerics.
Yeah, he doesn't DM. But, he's got the biggest place with plenty of parking and he calls a lot of the shots. So, I tucked my idea away for when I might find another group... The DM and I have been searching for a different group using advice from other posts. But, for now this is what we've got to work with.
Anyone have a similar situation?
Actually I would point out the amount of ethnic diversity in Europe itself at the time we are talking about. After all being English for example wasn't just your country of origin it was your race. Same for the french and the germans and just about everyone else at the time. So playing up that part of Europe could lead to a lot of fun and diversity in the group without having to bring in the outside ethnicities... not to say they should be excluded, just to point out the amount of such role playing already available.
Most the time in my experience, based on most rolpelaying campaigns I have played in being westerned theme (I have on ogoing asian theme), as long as you apply your concepts to existing classes, without trying to introduce a new one or tweak an existing one with new features, there are much less problems.
But usually when someone comes up with a concept outside the current theme the DM or world supports, they try to introduce new feats, weapons, classes, etc. and that is where the heartburn starts.
I think I really have a problem in general with DMs who restrict character choices for reasons having to do with theme, European-based nonsense or not. Restricting options for power reasons is fine, but not letting a PC play what they want just because it doesn't fit your ideal setting? That's just a pointless power trip. This is a cooperation based game and treating your DM status like some kind of license to infringe on other players' fun is just poor taste.
I don't mean to personally attack anyone who does DM this way, I just disagree with that DM style.
I think I really have a problem in general with DMs who restrict character choices for reasons having to do with theme, European-based nonsense or not. Restricting options for power reasons is fine, but not letting a PC play what they want just because it doesn't fit your ideal setting? That's just a pointless power trip. This is a cooperation based game and treating your DM status like some kind of license to infringe on other players' fun is just poor taste.
I don't mean to personally attack anyone who does DM this way, I just disagree with that DM style.
I understand where you are coming from but to an extent I think it's ok. If the entire group is wanting to run a human only campaign and you specifically want to throw an elf into it you could very well be ruining everyone's fun. Now maybe they could stand some slight alteration like you playing a half elf or a half orc but sometimes the point of the campaign is something that is tied into its setting. Perhaps part of the plot really does fall through if a certain social precedent or rule isn't in play like it would be in the particular setting.
Does this mean it should be the rule of the day? No. Does it mean that people shouldn't work together to find a way to get everyone something they want? No. But it does mean that if you want that person to DM you have to give him/her some space to set up how he feels he needs to run a game that will be fun for everyone.
That said the situation that Nikogami finds herself in seems a bit more than that to me.
I understand where you are coming from but to an extent I think it's ok. If the entire group is wanting to run a human only campaign and you specifically want to throw an elf into it you could very well be ruining everyone's fun. Now maybe they could stand some slight alteration like you playing a half elf or a half orc but sometimes the point of the campaign is something that is tied into its setting. Perhaps part of the plot really does fall through if a certain social precedent or rule isn't in play like it would be in the particular setting.Does this mean it should be the rule of the day? No. Does it mean that people shouldn't work together to find a way to get everyone something they want? No. But it does mean that if you want that person to DM you have to give him/her some space to set up how he feels he needs to run a game that will be fun for everyone.
That said the situation that Nikogami finds herself in seems a bit more than that to me.
If you are in a group of people who, DM and PC alike, would like to play a human-only setting that is very different than having a DM who just "doesn't like asian themed characters" and tells you to make your Monk into something else. If the player whose character is being changed is the one who is going against the fun of the group then it is reasonable to ask him to alter a character.
The problem I have is with DMs who are enforcing character change on their own, even when they are the only person who objects to a ronin or a desert bandit. It's just that negative DM mentality that just because he/she isn't in the party he/she doesn't have to be a team player.
Like I said, having a completely Euro-centric game is fine once or twice. Doing it regularly would drive me up the wall. As would someone who mandates that you can never have firearms of any sort in a game.
It's a bloody game about imagination. If you can't handle a game taking place outside of Europe, you've got some giant issues.
So ...And there is zero reason for a DM not to accomodate it so long as the player is willing to accept the role play consequences of being an outsider.
We really never agree on first pass do we? :)
I run mostly in my home brew world, bronze age technology, generally non-European, or at least non-Western European whenever possible. (Byzantine, Arab, Persian, Central and southern Asian history are hobbies of mine. Can't stand castles and dragons!!) I try and set a theme BEFORE anyone makes characters, so they can be part of the group, and I encourage people to try new classes, especially if they are known for being one class/race/specialty. I have disallowed core classes, core races, and core equipment, but I generally add back in a generous helping of setting specific races, classes, etc to soften the blow. That being said, if someone REALLY has their heart set on playing said Goblin druid, I let them deal with the consequences of their actions. (That particular player is mostly just trying to get a rise out of me, but I do the same to him when he DMs, so...).
A lot of this is also level dependent. If we're starting at level 1, the characters most likely come from the same village or county/willayet/whatever. They haven't traveled, so they're locals. But 5 or 6th level? Come from the moon for all I care. Just make it make sense why you pal around with this group of people, rather than your "own kind".
We really never agree on first pass do we? :)
I run mostly in my home brew world, bronze age technology, generally non-European, or at least non-Western European whenever possible. (Byzantine, Arab, Persian, Central and southern Asian history are hobbies of mine. Can't stand castles and dragons!!) I try and set a theme BEFORE anyone makes characters, so they can be part of the group, and I encourage people to try new classes, especially if they are known for being one class/race/specialty. I have disallowed core classes, core races, and core equipment, but I generally add back in a generous helping of setting specific races, classes, etc to soften the blow. That being said, if someone REALLY has their heart set on playing said Goblin druid, I let them deal with the consequences of their actions. (That particular player is mostly just trying to get a rise out of me, but I do the same to him when he DMs, so...).
A lot of this is also level dependent. If we're starting at level 1, the characters most likely come from the same village or county/willayet/whatever. They haven't traveled, so they're locals. But 5 or 6th level? Come from the moon for all I care. Just make it make sense why you pal around with this group of people, rather than your "own kind".
Why cant a first level character have traveled? Obviously they couldnt have teleported, but they could have arrived as a guard for a caravan, been in town to pick up trade goods, study at the acedemy, visiting a long lost relative, or any other host of reasons depending on the area.
Certainly I dont think there should be concequences for being an outsider. A medieval knight in the Arab controlled Holy Land for instance would have problems (besides the obvious full plate is way too hot). But that is part of the fun of playing a character far from home.
if given enough time, i can work out a pretty solid, though unusual backstory.
Confession: As a DM, sometimes I do nerf character ideas I feel to be outside the realm of the games setting. But I usually try and leave enough option open for everyone to play a character they really like. What helps is for me to "set the scene" before the character generation starts, give the player some information about the setting, climate, culture, etc. I still end up with a Goblin druid with an ape companion in a boat heavy campaign in a south asian/polynesian inspired world, but hey, that's what swim checks are for :)
But his backstory fits the world we're playing in, and I don't have to worry about the "loner" of the group, you know? Adventurers are by nature a varied lot, but no DM really wants a bunch of guy with no cultural/linguistic/familial ties to their area. Why save the world if you don't care about it?
Then there's the control aspect: I really dislike asian inspired classes in western themed games, as much as I dislike shoe horning western classes into eastern themed games. Oh, you're a Samurai? Interesting... WTF is that? Is it really that hard for you to come up with a character you could play without trampling all over "my" settings ideas of order and culture?
Finally, If you have so many great idea for regions NOT explored by your current DM, run your own game. Sure, it's more work, but as a long time DM, it is very satisfying to see players interact with my cultures, and accept things as norms that lie well outside their personal realm of experience.
i have attempted mimicking most of the concepts with core builds.
|
|
The group I play with were all military or fantasy wargamers first, then I introduced them to 3.5E and PF.
They often create their characters around a figure they want to buy and paint. As for balance, I'd like to see us play without a cleric just so they can try out some other tactics. Like talking to the NPCs first....
Cheers
Sorry, no guns.Like I said, having a completely Euro-centric game is fine once or twice. Doing it regularly would drive me up the wall. As would someone who mandates that you can never have firearms of any sort in a game.
Blanket "no" is always bad.
Even if I think an idea is goofy, I give the player a chance to make it work.
Yes, I even allow silliness like double axes.
|
Sorry, no guns.Like I said, having a completely Euro-centric game is fine once or twice. Doing it regularly would drive me up the wall. As would someone who mandates that you can never have firearms of any sort in a game.
Blanket "no" is always bad.
Even if I think an idea is goofy, I give the player a chance to make it work.
Yes, I even allow silliness like double axes.
It's not a blanket no... its a you'd better impress me with *HOW* that is going to work if I'm going to allow it. Also, it's not just for you too... it applies to my whole world and the other players. So when you ask for something like that, be aware of what exactly you're asking.
The group I play with were all military or fantasy wargamers first, then I introduced them to 3.5E and PF.
They often create their characters around a figure they want to buy and paint. As for balance, I'd like to see us play without a cleric just so they can try out some other tactics. Like talking to the NPCs first....
Cheers
Sometimes attacking first, and not talking has consequences. You may have to add those consequences into the story.
|
I don't let players make characters on their own anymore. We used to, and groups turned into "Two fighters arguing about armor, one gets screwed" or "No Clerics at all: Group dies a lot, game ends"
While other groups have issues with min-maxing, my group has the opposite problem, making characters that are somewhat fragile.
My solution: I asked them to work together to balance the group as much as possible. By explaining the benefits to working as a group, having them discuss what they wanted to play, trade group roles for each campaign/game and finally, discussing group dynamics, they created longer running characters who were more likely to live and become the built up heroes they wanted to play. I was able to run them through all of Rise of the Runelords with losing only one of the main, original characters in the party (the player wanted to retire him anyway).
In the end, any benefits of balancing and playing a fair game outshined any selfish ideals of "But I wanna play the druid this time" in the long run. And as long as the DM can give a long run situation (and the chance for changing characters, such as through death), I'd say that some if not most players will give up that old ideal.
Granted this was with a group that very rarely saw past level 5 in any game for about 6 years and is made up of late 20-year olds, so I accept this may not work every time.
It can be, but too often I have seen that excuse used as a defense for selfish and obnoxious player actions. I have been burned by too many Kender :)
Is it also not interesting, and a possible great RP moment when cultures clash?
I have never heard anything good about kendar in a game.
i got my DM to consider allowing an Asian PC in the next ongoing campaign. heck, he even said she can be a swordsage in that campaign.
he has allowed asian pigmentation before, but i had often been forced to bleach the flavor white. and they all either had to come from a western orphange, come from a western temple, or just plain be adopted by a western family when they were too young to remember thier far eastern culture. so that they could have none of thier asian flavor. i hope he doesn't force that with this pc. i hope he allows an asian PC that actually gets to keep her asian flavor and not have to soak it in bleach.
|
i got my DM to consider allowing an Asian PC in the next ongoing campaign. heck, he even said she can be a swordsage in that campaign.
he has allowed asian pigmentation before, but i had often been forced to bleach the flavor white. and they all either had to come from a western orphange, come from a western temple, or just plain be adopted by a western family when they were too young to remember thier far eastern culture. so that they could have none of thier asian flavor. i hope he doesn't force that with this pc. i hope he allows an asian PC that actually gets to keep her asian flavor and not have to soak it in bleach.
I've seen a cavalier re-flavored as a samari and it worked quite well.
I've seen a cavalier re-flavored as a samari and it worked quite well.i got my DM to consider allowing an Asian PC in the next ongoing campaign. heck, he even said she can be a swordsage in that campaign.
he has allowed asian pigmentation before, but i had often been forced to bleach the flavor white. and they all either had to come from a western orphange, come from a western temple, or just plain be adopted by a western family when they were too young to remember thier far eastern culture. so that they could have none of thier asian flavor. i hope he doesn't force that with this pc. i hope he allows an asian PC that actually gets to keep her asian flavor and not have to soak it in bleach.
but first i have to finish the last part of rise of the runelords and do the crypt of the everflame trio. then i get to play my minkan swordsage. i am denied asians for the entirity of the crypt of the everflame trio due to an unfair case of DM fiat.
I think I really have a problem in general with DMs who restrict character choices for reasons having to do with theme, European-based nonsense or not. Restricting options for power reasons is fine, but not letting a PC play what they want just because it doesn't fit your ideal setting? That's just a pointless power trip. This is a cooperation based game and treating your DM status like some kind of license to infringe on other players' fun is just poor taste.
I don't mean to personally attack anyone who does DM this way, I just disagree with that DM style.
Really?
So if I go to my local store and post a flyer saying "Starting a new campaign based on real earth history, taking place in ancient Greece. The only difference is that spells and magical items will exist but at first only as/with NPCs or monsters."
And then you show up on day 1 and want to roll up an elf sorcerer, you're telling me that I'm on a "pointless power trip" and "infringing on your fun." I set the premise and everyone else who shows up is interested in playing within that framework, but you want something totally different and I'm the bad guy here?
Really?
I admit that i do enjoy anime. but i have never seeked the "Samurai" who is as good as 5 westerners. i may take a rogue, select my talents differently and call her a ninja. but i won't build a special homebrew class that makes 5 published ones redundant. i go for the flavor and do not really seek new mechanics unless neccessary. i do optimize within the concept however. although nothing on par with the Charop Boards.
Really?
So if I go to my local store and post a flyer saying "Starting a new campaign based on real earth history, taking place in ancient Greece. The only difference is that spells and magical items will exist but at first only as/with NPCs or monsters."
And then you show up on day 1 and want to roll up an elf sorcerer, you're telling me that I'm on a "pointless power trip" and "infringing on your fun." I set the premise and everyone else who shows up is interested in playing within that framework, but you want something totally different and I'm the bad guy here?
Really?
You really should have read my second post on the subject. If there is one person going against the entire group then yes, he's wrong in that case. One person against the fun of the group is incorrect. My problem is with DMs who are that one person, who view the game as their game rather than being something that belongs to everyone who is playing. It's like those snotty girls in elementary school who dictated who everyone was when playing house.
|
|
If I'm running the game, then one of the things I get to dictate is the setting and theme of that setting. If I want that setting to be Asian-themed with classic feudal japan-style elements, and you show up wanting to play a cowboy, I'm going to put a serious hurt on your fun. Am I on a power trip? That's your call but if you want to play in my game, I get to determine the setting, not the players. The players take the setting I put before them, build characters that fit into it in some way, and then they are free to destroy it, rule it, get killed by it, or even hop on a ship and move over to a Euro-centric part of the world. But in the beginning, I get to determine the setting and theme. Call that power tripping if you like, I don't really care. I, as the GM, get to have some fun too, and part of my fun is building a setting and theme.
Honestly, the vast majority of games I'm in are more metropolitan. They start at the center of the world (figuretively) which allows for a wide and diverse cast. From there they travel to different parts that are less diverse, those parts typically being chosen to fit the characters themselves. The main HQ isn't a lone keep or fort somewhere, but rather a manor or small subset of land inside a major city.
Don't get me wrong, I can see how people enjoy D&D other ways, but for me, losing the big city and it's so varied occupants just loses too much of the game itself.
|
|
I'll usually let my players pick their poison as far as the party origin goes. Coming up with some suggested shared backstories, but encouraging them to come up with their own.
Still I feel that my job as a DM is to make sure the players get the most out of a game. If that means one person wants to be a ninja in an otherwise tolkienesque world, then we work together to make it fit. I add a shadowy organisation of spies and assassins for the player to be a member of and call it a day.
Sometimes players have someone that they REALLY want to pretend to be, and I'd rather have them be invested in their character enough for them to want to keep playing rather than trying to force feed them my setting.
I'll usually let my players pick their poison as far as the party origin goes. Coming up with some suggested shared backstories, but encouraging them to come up with their own.
Still I feel that my job as a DM is to make sure the players get the most out of a game. If that means one person wants to be a ninja in an otherwise tolkienesque world, then we work together to make it fit. I add a shadowy organisation of spies and assassins for the player to be a member of and call it a day.
Sure, me too. I call it something like Shadows of Gondor. Most are rogues but a few are fighters or monks. Some might take the assassin PrC. Some might take Improved Unarmed Strike; the rest fight with spears and swords and daggers (not with yari, shinobi, and tanto). When you take off their masks, they look just like the rest of the people who live in Gondor. And none of them take Japanese as a bonus language.
If this player and I can agree that this is his "ninja", then we can play our Tolkeinesque game in the lands of Middle Earth. If he can't agree to that, then he needs a new character concept that fits or he needs a new campaign that will better suit his preferences.
In the end, I don't want him to be unhappy that he got stuck with a character he doesn't want. But I also don't want the other players, and me, unhappy that we have a ninja running around Middle Earth, slaying uruk hai with his naginata and shuriken, shouting insults in Japanese, and eating rice with chopsticks - that's all wonderful characterization in a game with oriental cultures, but not in this (hypothetical) game.
And I'm quite sure that if Boromir had been played as a ninja, fancy ninja suit and weapons and Japanese accent, starring Jackie Chan (yeah, I know, he's not Japanese but I can't think of a famous current Japanese star - how about Masi Oka?) - if Tolkein or Peter Jackson had portrayed Boromir like that, wouldn't it have seemed really weird? Maybe broken your immersion? I definitely would have to me.
And that's what I don't want for me or my players at the gaming table.
And I'm quite sure that if Boromir had been played as a ninja, fancy ninja suit and weapons and Japanese accent, starring Jackie Chan (yeah, I know, he's not Japanese but I can't think of a famous current Japanese star - how about Masi Oka?) - if Tolkein or Peter Jackson had portrayed Boromir like that, wouldn't it have seemed really weird? Maybe broken your immersion? I definitely would have...
Perhaps the reason you disallow non-European cultural aspects is because you know dick-all about them? Seriously, your whole statement there was painfully insulting and I'm not even Japanese.
Let me put it into another light - Imagine if I was playing Legend of Five Rings and some English guy, I dunno like Chris Farley, is running around in armor next to him dressed like a knight in armor that doesn't fit, and he always whines about how he wants to eat fish and chips. Wouldn't it have seemed really weird? Maybe broken your immersion? Seirously no white people allowed in games ever.
See how stupid that sounds?
A wandering traveller who seeks to right wrongs and bring mercy and justice to the people. He hates those who use their power as a tyranny over others, and is well trained both physically and religiously. His sense of spirituality guides him, though it comes into combat with his own human nature at times, and he must wrestle with a desire for revenge and vengence when his religious beliefs instead cry out for the sanctity of all life. His martial and spiritual training allow him to pull off impossible feats of combat prowess at times, enabling him to even heal those around him with but a touch of his hands.
Paladin?
No, wuxia hero.
Tell me why one is allowed and one is not.
|
|
Let me put it into another light - Imagine if I was playing Legend of Five Rings and some English guy, I dunno like Chris Farley, is running around in armor next to him dressed like a knight in armor that doesn't fit, and he always whines about how he wants to eat fish and chips. Wouldn't it have seemed really weird? Maybe broken your immersion? Seirously no white people allowed in strongly asian themed games ever.
(slight fix)
Sounds pretty spot on, if you are trying to set a mood and and give your game a theme and someone is determined to crash your party it's going to suck regardless of how they do it.
Personally I can see it go either way. I try and find ways to say yes to my players unless they are going to really spoil things but I can understand that adding anime to a Lord of the Rings style game isn't going to work well.
Let me put it into another light - Imagine if I was playing Legend of Five Rings and some English guy, I dunno like Chris Farley, is running around in armor next to him dressed like a knight in armor that doesn't fit, and he always whines about how he wants to eat fish and chips. Wouldn't it have seemed really weird? Maybe broken your immersion? Seirously no white people allowed in strongly asian themed games ever.(slight fix)
Sounds pretty spot on, if you are trying to set a mood and and give your game a theme and someone is determined to crash your party it's going to suck regardless of how they do it.
Personally I can see it go either way. I try and find ways to say yes to my players unless they are going to really spoil things but I can understand that adding anime to a Lord of the Rings style game isn't going to work well.
My issue is that he took a really bizarre and extreme example of an "eastern character," and frankly if that's the first thing he thinks of, then I pity him.
That's why I brought up the case of the wuxia style hero. As far as tropes go, he's really almost identical to the paladin - he just has different religious trappings.
Lastly, I don't understand the comparison to LotR. Like, at all. LotR would make for an atrociously bad tabletop game. A D&D game where all your enemies are just orcs, orcs, and more orcs? Nobody gets to play a wizard or druid or cleric - just rangers, fighters, and rogues? There's a reason there was a whole webcomic devoted to mocking the idea of a LotR RPG.
Let me put it into another light - Imagine if I was playing Legend of Five Rings and some English guy, I dunno like Chris Farley, is running around in armor next to him dressed like a knight in armor that doesn't fit, and he always whines about how he wants to eat fish and chips. Wouldn't it have seemed really weird? Maybe broken your immersion? Seirously no white people allowed in games ever.
See how stupid that sounds?
Yeah, it does sound stupid. I would tell that player to get with the theme.
I didn't say anthing racist in my post, and it wasn't racial, so don't jump to conclusions about race. This thread talked heavily about ninjas, and those are, in fact, Japanese, so I used a Japanese example. It doesn't make the statement racist.
I would be just as happy playing a Toronaga campaign, and just as harsh if your example of the English Chris Farley character showed up to play.
In fact, on the subject, Shogun (the TV miniseries) is one of my favorite films ever. It also has a culture clash when Europeans arrive in Japan in the early days of (European) colonization, when these two cultures had never really seen each other before. Fortunatly, the director had the good sense to represent the Japanese people in this film by Japanese actors, depicting them living in Japanese homes, wearing Japanese clothing, and speaking Japanese. It would have been very strange indeed if Lord Yoshi Toronaga had been played by Jack Nicholson (instead of the incomparable Toshiro Mifune), or if Boromir had showed up for the fight scenes.
Side note, when I mentioned that I couldn't think of any great Japanese actors, it wasn't entirely true - Toshiro Mifune is one of my all-time favorite actors, but I didn't know how many people here on the forums would know his work.
Lastly, I don't understand the comparison to LotR. Like, at all.
Mainly, because everyone is familiar with it. Also, I used LotR because I was responding to a previous post that used the word "Tolkeinesque" so I kept on in that vein for the sake of continuity.
LotR would make for an atrociously bad tabletop game.
And yet, it was an award winning computer RPG and the LotRO is a successful MMORPG right now, making money hand over fist.
I dunno if anyone ever did an official PnP version, but if the computer versions can be far more successful than, oh, say, D&D Online ever was, then I doubt a PnP game would be too much of a flop.
A D&D game where all your enemies are just orcs, orcs, and more orcs? Nobody gets to play a wizard or druid or cleric - just rangers, fighters, and rogues?
Would it have been better if I had said King Arthur theme? All your enemies are just humans, humans, and more humans, and nobody gets to play a wizard or druid or cleric (well, maybe one with no spells) - just rangers, fighters, barbarians, and rogues.
There's a reason there was a whole webcomic devoted to mocking the idea of a LotR RPG.
Why?
Maybe because Shamus Young thought of a fun idea? Maybe because he knew everyone was familiar with the LotR story, so making a D&D spoof of it would be a big hit?
If having a webcomic is your proof that a game must be a bad game, then don't check out this Star Wars webcomic, because Star Wars has been a successful PnP, CRPG, and MMORPG:
Go to Darths & Droids.
|
|
So tonight we roll the dice for our next campaign, Kingmaker. I am lucky its the first time I'm playing in years and all because one of my players has gotten the bug and is willing to GM.
Like I mentioned before only one of the others had ever played DnD before I met them (1st Ed), or even roleplayed for that matter. But they have all taken to it and we just finished an enjoyable Temple of Elemental Evil campaign that took three years.
One wants to be a sorcerer, one a half-orc barbarian, and the third a rogue or possibly a phantom (from Kobold Quarterly) that is like a healing rogue. That leaves me and one more to decide. He may play a ranger.
But the funny thing is we are using the dice pool method and I have hinted strongly to the others how easy it is for the dice to blow your plans out the water. Even if you roll 6d6, a low charisma sorcerer happens with regularity. But we all want to roll dice, not point buy. The wayward dice is like water off a duck's back to the others though, they know what they want to play and haven't thought much about backup ideas. And the OP's is definitely in my mind when I could easily play "the healer" but I am very tempted to show them we don't need a channelling cleric every time by playing a monk or switch-hitter ranger or archer bard. The truth is I don't mind what I play, I enjoy them all.
As for the racial argument I have just read, it reminds me of the Gamers film when the loud player wants to be an elven monk in a western medieval environment and it comes down to rules versus story.
Cheers