| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I know this might not be the best place to mention/discuss, but has anyone ever played a character to a theme/story idea instead of to maximize every tidbit of power available to be gleaned?
I miss playing in a non-competitive, non "I win" style and just exploring what would a character with this background do/progress into.
Since many (I hesitate to say most)players are now all about the most bang for the least buck, story and theme seem to go out the window when choosing feats, level ups, and multi-classing.
How does one go about toning down a game to help with a convincing story line instead of catering to the power mongers? How does one find enough players that are more concerned about story and less about DPS and mechanics?
yes. (I may not be said person.)
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
As I understand it, "popcorn threads" like this one are frowned upon. If you use the search feature of these forums, you'll find PLENTY of people who violently agree with you. Unless your goal was to start a flame war, find those people and PM them.
Most of my groups tend to be pretty 50/50, which I imagine is actually how most games are played. On forums like this you don't see much of it, but I figure we're more a minority in the gaming community, being the people vocal enough to come on sites like this and blab about our hobby ;)
Most of my groups know their way around optimization just fine and could number-crunch their way into an optimal concept with ease; the exceptions would be my new players, who are just now learning the game. Yet I see a fair bit of sub-optimal choices, usually as a tidbit for part of their backstory or a hook for the GM. One guy specifically claims he specializes in trying to be as good as he can be with a deliberately sub-par idea or build, and considers the challenge it presents part of the fun.
I imagine most groups are actually like this, we just don't hear much of them here online because they're not as interesting as "look at my awesome build".
My goal is to get advise as to how to get players to just enjoy a story.
Any feedback on how to make this come to fruition appreciated.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
My goal is to get advise as to how to get players to just enjoy a story.
By preventing other distractions. For instance, if you make sure you know the rules well, you prevent distracting rules debates. If you prepare thoroughly, you prevent distracting delays. If you tailor encounters to the PCs strengths, you prevent distractingly long combats. And so on.
As I understand it, "popcorn threads" like this one are frowned upon. If you use the search feature of these forums, you'll find PLENTY of people who violently agree with you. Unless your goal was to start a flame war, find those people and PM them.
C'mon Jiggy, the OP was posting in good faith. "Popcorn", I thought, refers to snarky posts from forum regulars who predict that things will go a certain direction. In fact, your own post was somewhat that. Lighten up man.
Bltzkrg, a lot of posters play the game with thematic objectives. I think that the forums in particular attract a certain kind of player who has a deeper level of involvement, and perhaps therefore has special considerations when it comes to the game rules. These discussions are taking place between people who not only play the game a lot, but seek out discussions about the game and its mechanics.
Be careful not to fall into the trap of seeing system mastery and thematic mastery as opposites. You can make thematic characters that are mechanically powerful, and you can make a character that is neither thematic, nor powerful.
I think the vast majority of players strike a balance between the two. Pathfinder may skew a little bit toward players who place a lot of importance on character building, because of all RPGs it has a clear emphasis on that.
I rarely make optimized characters and my home game with my friends are similar. I tend to make more optimized characters for PFS games, and so do most of the people with whom I play.
I don't have any problems with people who do make optimized characters. Generally, I enjoy more of the RP aspect of the game, rather than the mechanics; I just use the mechanics to get the flavor I want. Others are different and enjoy the mechanics much more. Some people are special, and they not only enjoy both aspects, but are really good at both. Those who are like me are fairly decent as the RP aspect, but need help with optimization, so we used the Class Guides available online.
As far as finding people to play with who are all into the RP rather than the mechanics, the best way is to start your own game and advertise that you want RP players, not optimization players (and be prepared for the flack you'll get, because people don't like to be excluded). Advertise at your local gaming store, if they'll let you (all my local stores have a board where you can pin up game ads), or use penandpapergames.com to advertise your game and find other players (they have a great search engine for finding local players and games, and that's how I found my current group).
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
As I understand it, "popcorn threads" like this one are frowned upon. If you use the search feature of these forums, you'll find PLENTY of people who violently agree with you. Unless your goal was to start a flame war, find those people and PM them.C'mon Jiggy, the OP was posting in good faith.
Perhaps I spoke too soon. Going from the hyperbole ("maximize every tidbit of power available to be gleaned", "story and theme seem to go out the window", etc) and name-calling ("power mongers") in his post, my instincts told me he did not have rational discourse in mind.
But so far it's gone differently than I suspected, and I have therefore chimed in as well. Here's hoping. :)
My goal is to get advise as to how to get players to just enjoy a story.
Any feedback on how to make this come to fruition appreciated.
Well, you can't really make players do anything. You need them to buy in.
If you're not able to sit and have a direct discussion with the players about the group's style of play, that bodes ill for your campaign.
You might try and gradually shift their expectations during the course of the campaign, but that sounds risky and time consuming.
You might see if they have any interest in trying a new RPG system. There are a great number of systems that have more narrative elements baked into character creation. Even if you don't use those systems to play, seeing what was accomplished with those mechanics can help.
For example, in Burning Wheel, you're not really meant to have a clear division between the PCs and the game world. There's not a GM with his adventure and the players with PCs; it's not interchangeable parts. The GM starts with little more than a theme. When the Player creates their PC, they state goals and allies and enemies that the GM then uses to build the game. The players basically write the campaign by declaring what they would like to roleplay.
That kind of story-intensive system is exhausting for the GM though. I prefer to GM Pathfinder mainly because there *is* that division between the PCs and the adventure. The interchangeable parts make everything more objective, I can kill a PC without worrying about my big story.
Tell me a bit more about what your group likes. Why do they get together to play? What drives this group of people (your friends, not their characters) to sit in a room and try to play this game?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think anyone can justify picking a rusty tool over a sharpened one. And I've said more than once, "The optimized guy can survive to tell a good story. The story guy? Maybe not." So I do understand the drive to optimize. I can even do it, and well.
But I also need, really need, to care about what happens to the character. And when the char is built in an optimization-first process, I find I don't. The process, for me, needs to be 'how do I model (person)?', or 'who would (person) be in (setting)?', rather than the (perfectly valid and laudable) engineering exercise of DPS capping, or similar pursuits, and then seeing how much space was left on that machine's frame for painting a face.
So I do things like, in a world where I'm told that my char will be the only drow seen, and the campaign isn't going anywhere near drow, choosing 'drow' as a favored enemy. Backstory. Baby got Backstory. Two shortswords, even though the rules would support bastardsword and longsword, if I wanted. But I don't, wanted, because this character's happier with one on her belt, and one diagonally across her back, hilt down, under a cloak. You say that martial art is a really bad deal, and would just be a waste of eight NWP? Hmmm. But it would also get her meditation, and set her up to talk with the other martial artist in the party? Sign me up, Sensei.
It's what you do with what you got, anyway. Buy all the nerf you like, but if you're smart, you can still choke a horse with it. And then somebody will call you a powergamer. You might be 8 stat points behind the rest of the party, but your catchup can still smell like cheese.
(Like, don't use a cantrip to temporarily shape a coin into a sliver of metal, then Pick Pockets that sliver into the swordsman's scabbard, so it jams his sword when it changes back. That's a no-no, new-new.)
I play to theme all the time, because otherwise, it's really solitaire.
Players obsess over the deck-building game because they can play that one on their own. It's an important and fun part of the game, but its consequences are poorly understood. Most players mistake it for an aspect of the tactical game; "if I make the correct choices, my character will benefit." This is actually wrong.
You can start the game at 12th level, with 25 or 30 point builds, the best theoretical combos that the internet has to offer, and after playing for a few sessions be up two or three levels in wealth... what does all that get you?
If you have an uninvolved GM, the game will be dull as lead.
If you have an involved GM, he will look at your power level and select a suitable challenge for you. That's the same thing he would do if you were half as powerful, except it's a lot more work now.
This isn't just advice for an overpowered party of PCs, it is advice for an over-cerebral group of expert players. Expert players can lose sight of what makes the game fun — it isn't being powerful. It is winning against uncertain odds.
That's where the tactical game in progress comes in. No matter what happened in character creation the GM aspires to make the odds uncertain. The tactical game begins when character creation ends, and the goalposts move. It's in the rules. If your character starts to behave as though he were a higher level and demands a greater challenge, the challenge is increased. And it's a good thing, too, because otherwise you'll get bored.
So the solution, dear Blitzkreig is to train them to start thinking about the game in progress — and how it really doesn't matter what they do in character creation. The sole object of the character creation game is to get the PC to "feel" the way they want. That's it.
Once you train them up to enjoy making decisions of consequence in the game in progress, you can get them to play any old characters — commoners, sub-par builds, 15 point buy, fighters, monks. You name it. They just have to learn to enjoy winning against harder fights instead of having the GM constantly adjust the goalposts.
My goal is to get advise as to how to get players to just enjoy a story.
Depending on the individual players, you may not be able to. I have certain players that get bored without a combat every 20 minutes or so. That's just they way they are. I have others that really want to feel like their characters are walking around, interacting with their world at a detailed level. And several more that are in between the two. It really depends on the mindset of the individual how much they're going to enjoy story, RP, or combat.
To ensure that those who CAN get into the story do, make sure your story is interesting, that it doesn't lock the heroes into a single path (for long anyway), and that your NPC characters are as interesting as the monsters. Maybe try some of Paizo's Plot Twist cards to get the Players more invested in the story.
Back in the day, on those "other" forums, we had a credo of sorts called the Stormwind Fallacy, named for the forum-goer who coined it. The Stormwind Fallacy was routinely referenced to good effect during debates like this one, I'd like to repost that idea here in it's original form. Never forget! :-P
Tempest Stormwind
05-15-06, 03:58 PMI'm hereby proposing a new logical fallacy. It's not a new idea, but maybe with a catchy name (like the Oberoni Fallacy) it will catch on.
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy:
Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa.Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game.
Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse roleplayer if he optimizes, and vice versa.
Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically roleplayed better than an optimized one, and vice versa.(I admit that there are some diehards on both sides -- the RP fanatics who refuse to optimize as if strong characters were the mark of the Devil and the min/max munchkins who couldn't RP their way out of a paper bag without setting it on fire -- though I see these as extreme examples. The vast majority of people are in between, and thus the generalizations hold. The key word is 'automatically')
Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's gameplay. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Roleplaying deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else.
A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other.Claiming that an optimizer cannot roleplay (or is participating in a playstyle that isn't supportive of roleplaying) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
How does this impact "builds"? Simple.
In one extreme (say, Pun-Pun), they are thought experiments. Optimization tests that are not intended to see actual gameplay. Because they do not see gameplay, they do not commit the fallacy.
In the other extreme, you get the drama queens. They could care less about the rules, and are, essentially, playing free-form RP. Because the game is not necessary to this particular character, it doesn't fall into the fallacy.
By playing D&D, you opt in to an agreement of sorts -- the rules describe the world you live in, including yourself. To get the most out of those rules, in the same way you would get the most out of yourself, you must optimize in some respect (and don't look at me funny; you do it already, you just don't like to admit it. You don't need multiclassing or splatbooks to optimize). However, because it is a role-playing game, you also agree to play a role. This is dependent completely on you, and is independent of the rules.
And no, this isn't dependent on edition, or even what roleplaying game you're doing. If you are playing a roleplaying game with any form of rules or regulation, this fallacy can apply. The only difference is the nature of the optimization (based on the rules of that game; Tri-Stat optimizes differently than d20) or the flavor of the roleplay (based on the setting; Exalted feels different from Cthulu).
Conclusion: D&D, like it or not, has elements of both optimization AND roleplay in it. Any game that involves rules has optimization, and any role-playing game has roleplay. These are inherent to the game.
They go hand-in-hand in this sort of game. Deal with it. And in the name of all that is good and holy, stop committing the Stormwind Fallacy in the meantime.
Long live Tempest Stormwind. Long live the Stormwind Fallacy.
Long live the peaceful cohabitation of optimizing gamers and simulationist roleplayers.Daron Woodson
Abandoned Arts
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
*really insightful stuff*
I think Evil Lincoln nailed it. Making the intuitive jump from "big numbers are good" to "the best numbers are the ones that represent what I want to play" is indicative of a certain level of player maturity/experience/preference, IMO. I'm not sure there's an easy way to force it.
Also, the boards will give you a skewed idea of what some of us are really like. I enjoy a good theorycrafting exercise or rules argument as much as the next guy, but that doesn't mean I bring any of that stuff to the table with me. Concept first, then mechanics to build the best representation of my concept that I can.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
*really insightful stuff*I think Evil Lincoln nailed it. Making the intuitive jump from "big numbers are good" to "the best numbers are the ones that represent what I want to play" is indicative of a certain level of player maturity/experience/preference, IMO.
I don't recall Evil Lincoln saying anything about liking big numbers being immature.
I know this might not be the best place to mention/discuss, but has anyone ever played a character to a theme/story idea instead of to maximize every tidbit of power available to be gleaned?
I usually make my characters themed/based on story, but I also try to make those characters as good as they can be within that theme/basis.
Just re-read and should point out that I'm mostly a player and looking to start a new game soon.
We had a "wolf in sheep's clothing" player not so long ago that started out role playing his character to the background story and making decisions based off of what seemed like a theme and what a character given that background might do. By about 4-5 levels in though, when he was able to tie a few feats together, it became a race for the most DPS. His character ceased to be a character and just became a way to overcome combats as soon as humanly possible.
The fairly interesting persona he had crafted to start, was thrown out the window and every decision was based on how much damage he could do in as little time.
If I bring up that I won't be optimizing monsters so as to cause the most destruction to my players will that help? I tend to put "always on" feats on creatures so I don't have a lot of look up time spent (Skill focus perception, toughness, etc) and I have never tried to build a maximized DPS villain. I try and keep the builds for those to what would make sense TO THAT CHARACTER.
Would discussing my thoughts with YOU, as a player, put a pause in your optimization tendencies?
For instance, we had a guy who had to roll a new character recently. Better than decent stats for most folks 17,17,15,12,12,10 and he quit. Said that his character was going to be "suboptimal" and couldn't survive. I attempted to point out that you don't need all 18s to enjoy your character but he was having none of it. I'm a bit glad he's gone now that I think about it but who else would be stressed by those stats?
My favorite character right now is a Paladin with 16 STR, 10 Dex, 10 Con, 13 INT, 14 Wis and 17 CHR. He's got what most would consider mediocre stats but he ended up as the party leader.
All of his feats have been based off of what happened to him. He was saddled with a trio of monks that needed his help AND he was grappled off his horse so he asked them to teach him how to avoid that in the future (1 level dip into monk), He kept having spellcasters take those durned 5 foot steps back and casting on him so he picked up step up. He has watched another player settle disputes quickly by disarming and so he will have improved disarm next feat...
So it's organic and fits the story. I don't pore through every splat book to try and find the best way to maximize my damage output...
My goal is to get advise as to how to get players to just enjoy a story.
Any feedback on how to make this come to fruition appreciated.
Talk to them. Find out what your players want out of the game. Explain what you want. Find how those expectations can mesh. There is exactly zero reason why optimization and story cant work together, or work without eachother. It is all on you and your group to find where you lie as a group. One can optimize an interesting character who meshes with the story and develops in an interesting way. Its all about finding balance.
You cant 'train' your players not to optimize. They arent dogs, they are people. And people can be restricted, they can even be conditioned. But rational human beings tend to resent such things when they realize them. Assuming these people are your friends there are better routes to take.
Start by realizing and dropping your own bias. Obviously you have had some bad experiences, but the reality is your experiences are not universal. Some of the most indepth, story driven characters I have played in my various games have been badasses in terms of power. Some of my weakest characters in my chareer have been least involved in the story my dm presented. Like I said, one does not preclude or include the other.
After having a talk about this topic with your players, its time to set expectations and reward them being met. If a player develops a back story that fits the story you want to tell, awesome, reward that player. This is where traits come in. Campaign traits are a great way to encourage mechanically minded players to get involved in the story. Take a look at the pathfinder ap players guides for how this is done. A trait should do 3 things. First, help explain why a character is involved in the story you plan to tell. Take the Jade regent or skull and shackles campaign traits as prime examples of this. \
[Important Note: Minor spoilers are a requirement for this. If you want a story driven game characters need to be made to fit the story. You cant do this without giving away some information on what is going to happen. Going in to kingmaker I know I am founding a fledgling kingdom. It doesn't happen untill the end of the first adventure/start of the second, but it is crucial to developing a character that fits and extends the story of the game. Dont keep this a secret]
Second, they should help develop character backstory and personality. If a trait says I am romantically interested in a primary npc (see Jade regent) then that says something about my character. It gives me a reason to participate in the story, and it colors my interactions with important npcs throughout the adventure.
Third, they should give a minor mechanical bonus. Heres the carrot you reward the players with. This is important, it shouldn't be pointless but obviously you dont want to go overboard either. Again take the pathfinder ap campaign traits as examples.
Aside from traits there are other tangible rewards you can give out for the type of game you want to play. Hero points are a great example. In my game you get a hero point if you advance the story through roleplay, if you write a background for your character, if you illustrate your character, if you write a journal entry for your character etc. The point is to reward the behaviors you want. Players like rewards, if you place them (and make clear why they are getting them) on the kinds of things you want, you will see them more often.
I am also toying with the idea of using Fate Points from the fate rpg in my game (tied into hero points). Basically the players would get 'aspects' which is a story driven drawback/complication to the characters life. At appropriate moments, I 'invoke it' and if they rp the aspect, they get a hero point.
For instance, an aspect can be suspicious. Meaning they are quick to assume the worst. I might invoke it during a critical diplomatic session with an important npc. If they allow the aspect to complicate their negotiations (possible with undue or overly forward questions and accusations) they get a hero point. If they dont, we move on as normal. Accepting the aspect should always make for a more interesting story, and the player feels like they are getting something for the perceived disadvantage.