|
And many of us feel like a GM with a fledgling campaign concept is a GM we aren't really interested in putting in charge of a game we are playing in.I was going to ask, "To what degree must a campaign concept be fleshed out before you would consider playing?"
You then answered this to a great extent in a subsequent post with, "Here is either a detailed description of the setting or a copy of a setting book. Send me some concepts for approval." That clarifies your position. Thanks.
If you don't know your world, how well are you going to be able to convey it to us?If the world has not solidified into certainty/rigidity, might your input not be invaluable in shaping a campaign you might enjoy immensely?
EDIT: Or adapt when we do the unexpected.Adapting to the unexpected is a trait required of any good GM. Some do so better with extensive background on which to draw, and others with room to maneuver.
I don't find a well fleshed out world to be rigid, in the same way I haven't found living here on earth solidified into certainty or rigidity.
I think if you don't have a good grasp on how your world works, you can quickly be thrown for a loop if the players go off the tracks, and that can lead to annoying deus machina rather than reasonable outcomes that not only make sense in the moment but going forward.
@mrsin - The fact that your group doesn't have the courtesy of sending multiple concept ideas is not a point in your favor, now is it?
Not everyone plays like you and its not the best way for everyone. Not everyone carries 5 sheets and sends it into the GM for editing and to ask which one is best. I might have several ideas over time, but I certainly don't have 5 premade for an individual campaign on the spot. I just told you how I usually did it and how I prefer it. If someone wants to do it that way, that's nice. That someone isn't everyone. Some GMs might even say "pick one, I'm not picking for you."
Its a point in neither sides favor. It is however fallacy to create a contingency that everyone plays exactly like you in a talk about multiple groups and where there are many play styles.
Except they aren't ninjas. They're bandits that jump down from the bushes using throwing knives. They might toss out some bombs I guess, but that's not really crazy. Its pretty easy to use something and keep the flavor of the setting. Ninja is merely a title.
That's a level of interchangeability I may not accept.
I don't associate smoke bombs and wall climbing and wakizashi and the black PJs with Camelot.
I've been told what Wyatt Earp also isn't appropriate in Camelot. I suppose it's not hard to say 'ok, i'll replace the 10 gallon hat with a feathered hat, replace the six-gun with a hand crossbow, and replace his horse with... well, he'll still have a horse'.
I'd contend that's not Wyatt Earp anymore. If I take all that is the ninja and change it - it's no longer a ninja.
When did the bandits have black PJs and wakazashis and when did Wyatt Earp get in here? I didn't say anything about that. Wall climbing is pretty mundane. I'd be pretty worried if only ninja's could do that.(btw, is the guy from Assassin's Creed a ninja or rogue?)
I won't disagree that Wyatt Earp probably won't meet King Arthur or Merlin in most settings.
I think if you don't have a good grasp on how your world works, you can quickly be thrown for a loop if the players go off the tracks, and that can lead to annoying deus machina rather than reasonable outcomes that not only make sense in the moment but going forward.I think this point is missed by some - a good setting should have a level of internal consistency. If we've never seen a tengu and the PC insists on playing one, the towns people are likely to attack him.
Then you'll really get the complaints of the GM 'being unfair' to the player.
I think this goes with the assumption that the setting isn't Golarion.
Just saying, there needs to be a proper context when discussing situations like this.
And really, would you attack a guy with a funny / ugly face when he shows no signs of hostility whatsoever?
Unless your character is Evil or insane, I doubt you'd say yes. Not all things unfamiliar to a character should be instantly on the kill list.
|
|
You don't carry 5 sheets. You check with your GM before you put anything on a sheet.
You get approval of concept before you start building anything. We live in a world of e-mail, how hard is it to bounce ideas off someone before you etch in stone?
It isn't just "nice". It is easy to do and basic courtesy.
EDIT: And if your GM says pick one, that is approval of concept isn't it?
You are just making up reasons you can't show basic courtesy as a player at this point.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's entirely reasonable that the citizens of a 'medieval' society would fear/attack something as non-human as a tengu if they've never seen one before.
I think it would get a lot of them killed the next time a a minotaur happened by. Or any other powerful brute.
I thought that you were continuing a previous point that was posed earlier. Another poster said ninjas in Camelot wasn't an issue because he'd change this or that and make them 'fit'. (it WAS several pages ago)When did the bandits have black PJs and wakazashis and when did Wyatt Earp get in here? I didn't say anything about that. Wall climbing is pretty mundane. I'd be pretty worried if only ninja's could do that.(btw, is the guy from Assassin's Creed a ninja or rogue?)
I won't disagree that Wyatt Earp probably won't meet King Arthur or Merlin...
I was continuing it and using his example. I've never made a ninja who wears PJs in battle. That'd probably be an armor class of what, 1 if your lucky? I mean I guess those could be really good PJs with metal inlays for 4 and some pauldrons and outer armor for 6 and be medium armor...
The flavor of a PJ wearing ninja definitely doesn't fit. The class itself can though. Gunslingers and Paladins are a good example of classes that have trouble. Paladins are always LG and have a code and Gunslingers always need a gun. I guess you could label it a crossbow with really expensive bolts. Crossbows are far from realistic in dnd though, and that's some work and not what I would suggest. Ninja class as assassins jumping out of bushes and not wearing PJs isn't really that big by comparison.
You don't carry 5 sheets. You check with your GM before you put anything on a sheet.
You get approval of concept before you start building anything. We live in a world of e-mail, how hard is it to bounce ideas off someone before you etch in stone?
It isn't just "nice". It is easy to do and basic courtesy.
EDIT: And if your GM says pick one, that is approval of concept isn't it?
You are just making up reasons you can't show basic courtesy as a player at this point.
Its not a common courtesy if not everyone does it... Not everyone does it your way. Even if you think its the best way.
You did that thing I told you to stop doing again btw. Stop telling me what I'm doing. Its not helpful. Ask me if you want, but don't tell me what I'm doing.
The flavor of a PJ wearing ninja definitely doesn't fit. The class itself can though. Gunslingers and Paladins are a good example of classes that have trouble. Paladins are always LG and have a code and Gunslingers always need a gun. I guess you could label it a crossbow with really expensive bolts. Crossbows are far from realistic in dnd though, and that's some work and not what I would suggest. Ninja class as assassins jumping out of bushes and not wearing PJs isn't really that big by comparison.That's the only point I've tried to make - it's the GM's job to determine what classes/races DO fit. I think if you were to try to 'tweak' a ninja to make it fit that genre, you'd end up with a significant rebuild. (not that you couldn't, but if the GM didn't want to, he's certainly allowed to disallow it)
I didn't realize that people felt rogues needed replacing...
Well, tbh rogues don't fit the assassin appeal because they don't get poisoning right off the back and they aren't really any better at acrobatics than anyone else. All they really get is skill points, and many of the rogue talents are meh. Ninja is a slight upgrade, but not perfect at all. You could merge the two and you still wouldn't be the best at many jobs. We have other threads on that of course.
My problem with the statement was that it infers all ninjas have to wear black PJs. It groups them together. Its not a "significant rebuild" to not wear PJs and to not call yourself a ninja in game. Believe it?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If there are no other tengu in the game world, an unwelcome response is quite reasonable.
Just as reasonable is a welcome response, as good-natured folk may choose to approach the creature to determine his intentions before avoiding or casting him out. Attacking strange travelers in a world with dragons and wizards capable of shape-changing powers is a good way to get your village wiped off the map. That's how my towns work, so long as the individual does not show himself as a threat and is not backed by a warband of like fellows known to pillage and burn.
My problem with the statement was that it infers all ninjas have to wear black PJs. It groups them together. Its not a "significant rebuild" to not wear PJs and to not call yourself a ninja in game. Believe it?I say 'ninja' and what comes to mind for most people?
Black PJs...
Looking at the SRD - the any of the choking/poison/smoke bombs don't fit my view of Camelot. I'd probably want to change feather fall and flurry of stars. The 'pressure point' power and the bulk of the weapon proficiencies don't fit. Shadow split and unbound step aren't my idea of King Arthur's court.
So yeah, that's a pretty heavy rebuild to make it fit my concept of the campaign.
Actually the black PJ thing is an awful stereotype I think. Its not what comes to my mind at all. Its not what you call the guys who jump from trees either. They are bandits who show up in normal bandit attire.
Poisons and dirty tricks were totally a medival thing. I could see someone dropping bombs and the like and still being very king Arthur's court.
Weapons are almost entirely mechanics and only the name is fluff. They're daggers or short swords, not wakasashis. Its a weapon that gives 18-20/2. Its shape is unimportant. There wasn't a long research campaign to make sure its all correct and this is mathematically sound with weight and damage to real life.
I didn't realize that people felt rogues needed replacing...
So, I take it you missed the 100+ threads on "how to make a rogue character viable" and "how to fix the rogue" and so on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I say 'ninja' and what comes to mind for most people?
Black PJs...
If those people are incapable of imagining anything else, it would imply to me that they're pretty seriously hung up on stereotypes. Out of curiosity, is it possible in your mind to have a high elf barbarian? A gnome barbarian? Or do those break the "default" flavor you're so attached to?
What if someone in an Eastern campaign does a bunch of stealthy stuff like sneaking about, assassinating people with deadly touches, using smoke and explosions to cover their escape, and wears black pajamas -- but uses the sorcerer class to achieve these things? Is that also not allowed?
At what point does your insistence on clear-cut stereotypes become a hindrance instead of an asset?
Some people don't spend all their time on the forums like we do Kirth. :)
Or actually worry about what the game rules actually say. If the flavor text says "master of stealth" under rogue, well, then, the rogue must therefore be a master of stealth! Otherwise it can only be a duck, as we all know.
It's a class based system. Classes are inherently 'stereotypes'. Wizards wear robes and ninjas wear PJs. You can have a gnome barbarian, sure. You can have a ninja who doesn't wear PJs (they are supposed to be masters of disguise and infiltrators after all).
That said, if Arthur is talking to Merlin with Lancelot sneaking off to meet the queen and a character wearing anything throws a smoke bomb and disappears - I'd call that out of place. That's no more consistent than Merlin changing Uther's appearance and him becoming an astronaut.
Stereotypes are what you make of them. Its your choice what you perceive things as. Don't get me started on all the nasty analogies we can make if stereotyping is going to be a thing in dnd...
Edit: Also, that's not the example anyone gave of someone gave of a ninja. That doesn't even make since for a normal game I don't think!
You may well be right, but i'd contend that if I remove the 'eastern flavor' and the smoke bombs, wakizashis, and pajamas - the aren't ninjas anymore.Rynjin was very insistent that it was fine to strip the flavor from these classes/races and keep the mechanics. I just don't agree. If I remove all those things, it's not a 'ninja' anymore.
So, then why don't we have a pirate class? You CAN NOT change any of the existing classes flavor to make pirate without doing the same thing to it that you are doing to ninja.
Stereotypes are what you make of them. Its your choice what you perceive things as. Don't get me started on all the nasty analogies we can make if stereotyping is going to be a thing in dnd...I'm sorry but I don't know what you are getting at?
Kirth and Sophia hit it pretty well.
I say 'ninja' and what comes to mind for most people?
Black PJs...If those people are incapable of imagining anything else, it would imply to me that they're pretty seriously hung up on stereotypes. Out of curiosity, is it possible in your mind to have a high elf barbarian? A gnome barbarian? Or do those break the "default" flavor you're so attached to?
What if someone in an Eastern campaign does a bunch of stealthy stuff like sneaking about, assassinating people with deadly touches, using smoke and explosions to cover their escape, and wears black pajamas -- but uses the sorcerer class to achieve these things? Is that also not allowed?
At what point does your insistence on clear-cut stereotypes become a hindrance instead of an asset?
So, then why don't we have a pirate class? You CAN NOT change any of the existing classes flavor to make pirate without doing the same thing to it that you are doing to ninja.
You may well be right, but i'd contend that if I remove the 'eastern flavor' and the smoke bombs, wakizashis, and pajamas - the aren't ninjas anymore.Rynjin was very insistent that it was fine to strip the flavor from these classes/races and keep the mechanics. I just don't agree. If I remove all those things, it's not a 'ninja' anymore.
Was also pointing out if we only used stereotypes our world would be a terrible, terrible place probably. That has a lot of negative things in it.
|
|
That said, if Arthur is talking to Merlin with Lancelot sneaking off to meet the queen and a character wearing anything throws a smoke bomb and disappears - I'd call that out of place.
Is it any better if he lights a stick and disappears?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Classes are inherently 'stereotypes'. Wizards wear robes and ninjas wear PJs.
Ugh. My wizard Remy used to wear a musketeer's cloak and feathered hat and carry a sword that he never used, so that people would misjudge him. Would that be banned?
What if I was playing a barbarian, and my Lou Ferrigno impression when he talked wasn't good enough. Would I be kicked out of the game? Told that I was really playing a fighter and had to change my class?
Classes are inherently 'stereotypes'. Wizards wear robes and ninjas wear PJs.Ugh. My wizard Remy used to wear a musketeer's cloak and feathered hat and carry a sword that he never used, so that people would misjudge him. Would that be banned?
What if I was playing a barbarian, and my Lou Ferrigno impression when he talked wasn't good enough. Would I be kicked out of the game? Told that I was really playing a fighter and had to change my class?
My last wizard wore a mithril light shield and a griffon mane ceremonial silk gown with spiked armor. Does he stop being a wizard?
My last barbarian was an ex samurai with the urban barbarian archetype and crane wing style. He was actually a well learned individual.
My last bard took two sawback scimitars into battle(used one at a time for dervish dance), and a breastplate. Would I be told to reroll?
I've got a ton of these... I've got many characters who are perfectly in type. These are just a few examples of the ones that don't quiet fit. The unusual character thread has a few more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've been told what Wyatt Earp also isn't appropriate in Camelot. I suppose it's not hard to say 'ok, i'll replace the 10 gallon hat with a feathered hat, replace the six-gun with a hand crossbow, and replace his horse with... well, he'll still have a horse'.
I'd contend that's not Wyatt Earp anymore. If I take all that is the ninja and change it - it's no longer a ninja.
So if you said jumped into a time machine and took away Wyatt Erp's hat, guns, and even his horse. Gaved him a feathered hat and handcrossbows...you are saying he would stop being Wyatt Erp?
I understand the point you are trying to make...I just kinda find your example...strange. I mean if I was to replace all of your clothing with furs and all of your mordern devices are removed...would you suddenly become a cave man?
Some people don't spend all their time on the forums like we do Kirth. :)
Anbd not everybody agrees with the conclusion of what is ultimately a few.
But to take this seriously the story of Alladin took plaace on Earth assuming myths were real...would it really break the story of Alladin that a tengu ninja traveled from Japan and ended up in the middle-east?Would it 'break the story' of King Arthur if Galahad battled ninjas and Merlin consulted with Egyptian-themed birdmen?
Rynjin has been sorta consistent in what he thinks is OK or not ok, it's just I draw the line in a different place. He is ok with the GM banning astromech droids in middle earth, but he's not Ok banning ninjas in Camelot.
What I've said, and continue to say, is that the GM's role is to draw that line. If I want my campaign to have the 'feel' of Arthur from the Excalibur movie (and it was Orf as the soundtrack from that scene, not Wagner, my mistake which I realized later), I can ban ninjas. I can ban pirates and Santa Claus and cyborgs too.
I think where Rynjin is drawing his line (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) is basically, if it's in the PF rules, it's to be allowed. So if this campaign has run without firearms for years, for example, and Paizo releases a book with gunpowder - POOF - I'm supposed to suddenly make that appear in my game.
I'd consider it, maybe. But I'm not going to have it forced upon me if I don't feel it is thematically appropriate.
What I am saying is....atleast how I treat the line is more of just a dotted line. It is not something that I hinge my entire campaign on.
You seem to like to keep it 'pure'...which if it not existed in the orginal souce it has no room. I like to take the orginal souce...than say 'what if?'. I also encourage my players to do the same.
Example: If I am running a Arthurian type game...I might say what if travel at that time allowed more trade with Asia...or even what if Aliens invaded.
|
|
You don't carry 5 sheets. You check with your GM before you put anything on a sheet.
You get approval of concept before you start building anything. We live in a world of e-mail, how hard is it to bounce ideas off someone before you etch in stone?
It isn't just "nice". It is easy to do and basic courtesy.
EDIT: And if your GM says pick one, that is approval of concept isn't it?
You are just making up reasons you can't show basic courtesy as a player at this point.
Its not a common courtesy if not everyone does it... Not everyone does it your way. Even if you think its the best way.
You did that thing I told you to stop doing again btw. Stop telling me what I'm doing. Its not helpful. Ask me if you want, but don't tell me what I'm doing.
So you don't use as much courtesy as you could, and arguably should, but I'm being rude pointing that out...
...what is ultimately a few.Citation needed.
How many people play PF?
Of those How many people regulary post on these boards?
Of those how many people post on those threads?
Of those how many actualy agree with the pretense that Rogues suck?
Of those how many of them are basing it on actualy play experience as opposaed to just reading the class desciption or reading it on the internet that rogues suck?
The messageboard is just a very small tip of a really big ice berg.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The messageboard is just a very small tip of a really big ice berg.
You can no more claim to know that few people believe the rogue sucks than I can claim many people do instead.
Your last post should have gone:
How many people play PF?
Of those how many actualy agree with the claim that Rogues suck?
We have no solid proof of this. Thus you cannot say it is or is not a 'few'.