| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
in every thread we have had about exotic races, dump stats, or power gaming. i noticed a common trend
the people advocating against such practices, always use the most extreme examples they can find, and the people advocating for allowing and defending such practices, tend to be the ones with the tame and reasonable examples, the compromises and the like.
an awakened pony wizard named steve
an advanced half fire elemental vampire minotuar
a half drider draconic dryad
an advanced half fiend tiefling
in the same thread, the tame examples i used to prove that race choice isn't to blame for disruption, it's the player
a half-nymph noble based loosely off the half-elf with a few minor tweaks
a sylph street magician
a really tall unarmed slave of giant's heritage whom worked as an attack dog, blacksmith, and carpenter
the people opposing dump stats used
a barbarian with a 7 in intelligence, wisdom and a 5 in charisma
a wizard with a 7 in strength, wisdom, and a 5 in charisma
defending dump stats, a few examples i used
an onispawn slave with 5 charisma
a sickly half-nymph with 5 strength and 7 constitution
a sylph with 7 strength
why can't we use less extreme examples instead of having to crank our exacerbation up to 11?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
LOL, you left out my favorite, the minotaur artificer riding on a mechanical elephant. Or something like that.
Oh, and as far as your own choices, whether those are disruptive or not is not a simple question. It depends on the setting. What if the setting has no nymphs and the GM doesn't want to add them? Or if the setting has nymphs but they have some connection to the plot that the GM doesn't want to reveal?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because when one considers the concept of dump statting and power gaming one is already talking of extremes.
Exotic races are always going to have entrenched religious views, and trying to change the mind of people with regards to them is a time waste.
Personally anything that would be suited to DragonballZ, MLP:FiM, or Naruto is right out of anything I'd run. YMMV.
My pet hate is the hackneyed 'Just looks like a little girl but amazingly freakish strength' trope. Actually anything where its 'some little kid' is destined to come to a bad end.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's kinda the obvious rhetorical strategy to take. If you are arguing that there exist foos which are bad, for an example, you pick an extreme example of a foo. If you picked a more mild example of a foo, then it's more likely that people will disagree that foo is actually bad. It may be that the more mild foos are much more likely to arise in practice, but bringing them up is less effective at arguing some foos are bad.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The reason that it goes to extremes is that people won't accept rebuttals. For example the whole thing blew up because it became an argument about whether a GM was being a badwrongfun GM for not accepting the supposed "reasonable" snowflakes, so people said, "Oh yeah? Well what about a spell-casting sentient mud geyser!? Huh, huh? It's the same principle!"
By the way, I'm hurt that the sentient mud geyser was left of the list. I thought that was awesome.
Was my "blue winged people" extreme or not?
Was my "blue winged people" extreme or not?
I've seen that twice now, so I guess not. Did they come with mohawks? Just want to ensure there's no convergent thinking going on.
And yes, exaggeration is done to help your argument. It creates a biased view and hyperbole is prevalent in internet discussions, unfortunately. Though we do get gems out of it, such as a sentient geyser and swarm.(made me laugh, no idea why).
The reason that it goes to extremes is that people won't accept rebuttals. For example the whole thing blew up because it became an argument about whether a GM was being a badwrongfun GM for not accepting the supposed "reasonable" snowflakes, so people said, "Oh yeah? Well what about a spell-casting sentient mud geyser!? Huh, huh? It's the same principle!"
By the way, I'm hurt that the sentient mud geyser was left of the list. I thought that was awesome.
Wasn't it you who brought up sentient mud geysers?
True that.
My view is that I take each one on a case by case basis, but always ensure my players know where the really firm borders happen to be located. Even 'core' is open to debate - so it's less about it being an exotic, but more about being 'how does that fir with what we are doing, and what might be the repercussions of that choice on the wider game'.
If the mythical half-drider roams around it is probably going to cause issues in civilised places. Even in the under-dark.
Wasn't it you who brought up sentient mud geysers?The reason that it goes to extremes is that people won't accept rebuttals. For example the whole thing blew up because it became an argument about whether a GM was being a badwrongfun GM for not accepting the supposed "reasonable" snowflakes, so people said, "Oh yeah? Well what about a spell-casting sentient mud geyser!? Huh, huh? It's the same principle!"
By the way, I'm hurt that the sentient mud geyser was left of the list. I thought that was awesome.
As parody Vivienne, which I acknowledge some people are incapable of recognizing.
Still, I think it is awesome. :-)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the mythical half-drider roams around it is probably going to cause issues in civilised places. Even in the under-dark.
Yeah, he might corner the silk market and make the best fashion statements in the world. Imagine spider silk being the new in thing? Whole new fantasy fashion world there!
Half Drider sounds cool to me for some reason... Huh.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does a half drider have four legs?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does a half drider have four legs?
Chitinous gloves and boots I'd imagine, maybe a weird skin tone and spider fangs. Who says he needs to be a monster? Extra limbs blows up the game anyway, so maybe 2 vestigial arms?
Now, Half-a-Drider is another story. That's all about where you draw the line.
I'll be over here, developing crunch & fluff for a half-drider template... that will have four legs.
I look forward to it! Though I warn you, he'll have a hard time finding good pants.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does a half drider have four legs?
Yes, but they are all on the same side bro.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
why can't we use less extreme examples instead of having to crank our exacerbation up to 11?
In your listed examples, the awakened pony wizard (whose player was Steve, rather than the name of the pony itself) was actually introduced by someone arguing for its inclusion, as an example of their belief that nothing should be seen as too extreme, and that a GM that wouldn't allow it was somehow inferior in ability to one that would.
That in turn contributed to the cranking up of exacerbation :)
However, I certainly get your point. It's somewhat of an escalating arms race, with each side using examples further and further away from what most of us would normally experience.
Something to bear in mind though - sometimes the point of the extreme example is to illustrate that only something that extreme is an issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Welcome to the internet. You think the arguments here are extreme? Go check out sports sites, political sites, or any newspaper talkback section on stories about crime and punishment. This is small potatoes by comparison.
Perhaps what is being argued against are exactly these extreme examples?
Or that most collectives are readily identified with their most extreme examples (e.g. people who have something against Christianity usually bring up examples of bad Christians--likely because this is their experience, or they don't have experience and are going by a recognizable stereotype. After all, if they knew reasonable, kind Christians, then they probably wouldn't have a problem with them.)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Was my "blue winged people" extreme or not?I've seen that twice now, so I guess not. Did they come with mohawks? Just want to ensure there's no convergent thinking going on.
Uh...if they do, we got some serious convergent thinking going on between at least three people. (blue-skinned winged race with distant elf/harpy ancestry)
in every thread we have had about exotic races, dump stats, or power gaming. i noticed a common trend
the people advocating against such practices, always use the most extreme examples they can find, and the people advocating for allowing and defending such practices, tend to be the ones with the tame and reasonable examples, the compromises and the like.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
why can't we use less extreme examples instead of having to crank our exacerbation up to 11?
You are seriously saying those on your side of the argument don't use extreme examples?
I'll stop on this thread right there.
We've had talk of tyrannical dms who won't allow anything but core races, who are unimaginative and uncreative because they won't accommodate everything.
If you want to try to out a halo on that side of the fence, then I think you need to look around you at your fellow post mates.
in every thread we have had about exotic races, dump stats, or power gaming. i noticed a common trend
the people advocating against such practices, always use the most extreme examples they can find, and the people advocating for allowing and defending such practices, tend to be the ones with the tame and reasonable examples, the compromises and the like.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
why can't we use less extreme examples instead of having to crank our exacerbation up to 11?
Also, I seem to remember quite a few responses to your posts, or many of them, of "ok, I could work with that. Or 'well, not about that but how about this which comes close?
Oh, and as far as your own choices, whether those are disruptive or not is not a simple question. It depends on the setting. What if the setting has no nymphs and the GM doesn't want to add them? Or if the setting has nymphs but they have some connection to the plot that the GM doesn't want to reveal?
if the setting has no nymphs, or whatever other race i intend to play; i look for a race that fits my tastes and maybe tweak the concept to accomodate the new race, maybe even create a whole new one from scratch. that half-nymph noble bard that got dissaproved for being half-nymph gets replaced by a sylph slum magician based loosely of a female spellcasting wannabe Aladdin tweaked for the desired culture, Shingle Running Street Urchin performers can be found in any culture. if the sylph gets dissaproved for being too animesque, i work through a few concepts, if none of my seemingly animesque bullet hell inspired concepts get approved, i'll eventually crack down on the non-compromising DM and bring in a cannabilistic elven bounty huntress raised by a tribe of human hunters from the local savage tribes, orcs, mwangi, shoanti, kuru, i can find something. either way, i will get my cute small framed female, regardless of race or class, even if it takes a bit of tweaking or reimagining
if the setting has nymphs and they have a connection to the plot he doesn't wish to reveal? simple, my half-nymph was raised by her human father and thus knows very little about proper nymph culture and acts too human to be a proper nymph. don't like that, i do the above and work on an approved concept. but i can't be the only one to compromise, the DM has to provide a compromise too.
in every thread we have had about exotic races, dump stats, or power gaming. i noticed a common trend
the people advocating against such practices, always use the most extreme examples they can find, and the people advocating for allowing and defending such practices, tend to be the ones with the tame and reasonable examples, the compromises and the like.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
why can't we use less extreme examples instead of having to crank our exacerbation up to 11?
Also, I seem to remember quite a few responses to your posts, or many of them, of "ok, I could work with that. Or 'well, not about that but how about this which comes close?
thank you
i guess i feel certain posters need to see the light as well. right now, i'm working on homebrewing a slum magician school for the wizard. it's unique for an alternate specialization in that it replaces your school with a few changes and experimental things
it gets some extra rogueish cantrips at will, some roguish skills, trapfinding, spontaneous casting of a handful of roguish spells, it doesn't get the traditional scribe scroll, school powers, or bonus slots
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Umbriere, I would probably enjoy having you as a player. I like unique races, unique builds, etc. Heck I even play a half dryad myself that sounds similar to some of what you are describing here.
But I also know that some GMs are very intimidated by these sorts of builds and are hesitant to allow them because they aren't confident in their own abilities to manage the game with a custom race at all.
I wonder if you realize how aggressive your comment would seem to such a GM. It seems like you would just keep hammering on the GM until they either just gave in from exhaustion, kicked you out of the game or decided being a GM wasn't worth dealing with you as a player.
I don't think you do.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder how many of your cute Nymph/Sylph characters ending up coming to a grimdark fate it would take before you stopped re-skinning the same character over and over and played something with some regard to the setting?
It's got nothing to do with 'comfort of handling such things' its about the relevance of those things to what is going on. Sticking Mickey Mouse into Game of Thrones would be ridiculous.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder how many of your cute Nymph/Sylph characters ending up coming to a grimdark fate it would take before you stopped re-skinning the same character over and over and played something with some regard to the setting?
Woah! That is not the way to handle things. You do not tell a player no by saying yes and killing them until they take the hint. That is a terrible thing to do and solves nothing.
Umbrierre, you would be precisely the sort I probably WOULDN'T have a problem with. From what I've seen you know what you want, but are willing to work with elements that exist within the setting to get it. For example my 'touched by the first world'. You are willing to accept that some things might just not work or exist in a given world, and work around that with other options to get to the place you want to be.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The eventual consequence of sticking out like a sore thumb in a serious setting is that it will garner attention, and a lot of that attention is unlikely to be positive. Think about it, "I want to play as an Elf living in an Orcish village" - unless the GM made sweeping and significant changes to the Orcs how is that going to work out?
At what point does the player have to sit down and ask 'how does my idea work within the context of the campaign, and what would be the likely day-to-day response I would encounter'.
When significant amounts of logic have to be handwaved to shoehorn you into the story, you have to ask are we playing your game or are you playing ours? Bear in mind that the rest of the party have a say too.
"We're heading into XYZ territory, they are XYZ type people, and the Sylphnymphanimatrix will draw a lot of attention - we leave her at home"
Whilst I the GM shouldn't arbitrarily target players, players that paint targets on their foreheads don't warrant the GM pulling punches either.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The eventual consequence of sticking out like a sore thumb in a serious setting is that it will garner attention, and a lot of that attention is unlikely to be positive. Think about it, "I want to play as an Elf living in an Orcish village" - unless the GM made sweeping and significant changes to the Orcs how is that going to work out?
Depends on the orc village? Its not impossible there's an odd family out or an adopted member. Heck, its a trait. Its not that unreasonable. In any game I run its unreasonable that anything is 100%. The evil society is 100% NE, and the orc village isn't 100% orc(they might have a goblin!).
There doesn't have to be sweeping changes unless the orcs have a 'we eat all elves' policy or something.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Think about it, "I want to play as an Elf living in an Orcish village" - unless the GM made sweeping and significant changes to the Orcs how is that going to work out?
Seen it done and it was done awesomely. /tg/'s Goldentusk is almost as heartwarming as Sandwich Stoutaxe.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
in every thread we have had about exotic races, dump stats, or power gaming. i noticed a common trend
the people advocating against such practices, always use the most extreme examples they can find, and the people advocating for allowing and defending such practices, tend to be the ones with the tame and reasonable examples, the compromises and the like.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
why can't we use less extreme examples instead of having to crank our exacerbation up to 11?
I think it's more about winning the argument than exploring the issue. After all, it's a pretty standard (and successful) rhetorical technique - politicians use it all the time. If you're defending X and I'm arguing against X it helps me win the argument if I can find something most find unacceptable and then argue it is somehow emblematic of X.
.It's easy for you to fall into the trap of implicitly accepting the rhetorical move and then you end up feebly defending a position/practise you dont really support (and more to the point, that the audience doesnt support).
FWIW, I think it happens both ways. Those against these 'out there' builds often portray the players who like them as powergamers/munchkins. Those in favor often describe those opposed as control-freak/"story hour" DMs.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There doesn't have to be sweeping changes unless the orcs have a 'we eat all elves' policy or something.
I support this policy, and ask that more cultures embrace it!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There doesn't have to be sweeping changes unless the orcs have a 'we eat all elves' policy or something.
Except for it to work without the player complaining about being 'victimised' we now have to accept that it is not just 'that village' but all the Orc villages, and that every Orc within snowflakes village is completely on board with the Elf, and the Goblin just loves them too - and no one ate them because... oh yeah, its a PC.
You would need to come up with a much better story to justify it than 'But you have to let me play what i want to play or you are Badwrongfun'. Things that stand out are targets, and it makes sense for NPC's to act accordingly.
Whats worse is the 'Little Girl' characters with epic stats from being some crazy hybrid - I'm 3' tall with 38 strength, but all they see is a little girl - cheezy mechanical advantage without paying a Feat.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder how many of your cute Nymph/Sylph characters ending up coming to a grimdark fate it would take before you stopped re-skinning the same character over and over and played something with some regard to the setting?Woah! That is not the way to handle things. You do not tell a player no by saying yes and killing them until they take the hint. That is a terrible thing to do and solves nothing.
Agreed. It's even worse than saying yes and killing their character! :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seen it done and it was done awesomely. /tg/'s Goldentusk is almost as heartwarming as Sandwich Stoutaxe.
And you know what, if a player came up and gave as much detail and septh as Sandwich Stoutaxe and did so before the game you'd be inclined to pay it.
Thats not what actually happens though; they watch Dragonpowerballblackbutlerbleachnarutoastroboy one afternoon then clone that character and insist you just adopt it.
There doesn't have to be sweeping changes unless the orcs have a 'we eat all elves' policy or something.Except for it to work without the player complaining about being 'victimised' we now have to accept that it is not just 'that village' but all the Orc villages, and that every Orc within snowflakes village is completely on board with the Elf, and the Goblin just loves them too - and no one ate them because... oh yeah, its a PC.
Or... Maybe the village isn't actually that okay with an elf. Lots of ways to do it. They don't need to suddenly love elves or anything.
Whats worse is the 'Little Girl' characters with epic stats from being some crazy hybrid - I'm 3' tall with 38 strength, but all they see is a little girl - cheezy mechanical advantage without paying a Feat.
I'm pretty okay with that. If you have 38 strength its probably magic packed with super steroids anyway. Besides, its all about the person's fun. Can't that just be a personal bias and you don't want it in your own games or something?(there also isn't a mechanical advantage mentioned anywhere I've seen so far!)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Woah! That is not the way to handle things. You do not tell a player no by saying yes and killing them until they take the hint. That is a terrible thing to do and solves nothing.Agreed. It's even worse than saying yes and killing their character! :)
Actually, come to think of it, if they keep coming back to be killed again you've got a whole different problem to solve...
Thats not what actually happens though; they watch Dragonpowerballblackbutlerbleachnarutoastroboy one afternoon then clone that character and insist you just adopt it.
Umm... Where are you getting this from and what do you have against Black Butler?
The eventual consequence of sticking out like a sore thumb in a serious setting is that it will garner attention, and a lot of that attention is unlikely to be positive. Think about it, "I want to play as an Elf living in an Orcish village" - unless the GM made sweeping and significant changes to the Orcs how is that going to work out?Depends on the orc village? Its not impossible there's an odd family out or an adopted member. Heck, its a trait. Its not that unreasonable. In any game I run its unreasonable that anything is 100%. The evil society is 100% NE, and the orc village isn't 100% orc(they might have a goblin!).
On a more serious note than my previous two replies:
Agreed totally here. That would depend on the orc culture in the setting in general, and the village in particular.
I'd be more concerned about an elf-brought-up-by-orcs character if the player insisted they be treated as a member of orcish society as a whole by implication. While I'm quite willing to consider a single family or village as an aberration, the rest of the orcs in my world are still likely to treat them as kill-on-sight.
Similarly for a monster-brought-up-amongst-humans character. Just because a farming family saw fit to raise the little goblin child, it doesn't necessarily follow that the adult goblin is going to be able to walk into any city in the country alongside the rest of the party without some difficulties (be they disguise, chained as if a prisoner, or simply having rotten fruit thrown at them).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Where the advantage is usually derived from is that the player invariably presents as 'a young human girl' or something equally inoffensive. What they invariably play for is the ability to pass themselves off as harmless (by the way, to do that costs a Halfling, arguably in a better position than a Sylph Lolly, a full FEAT to do) and by extention get away with bluffing past guards etc. That they quite often have significant starting physical scores (those melee inclined) and yet appear as sickly 10 year olds.
Can't have it both ways, unless they are ok with my barbarians sword actually looking like a teddybear to avoid making bluff or sleight of hands checks.
They usually cry foul when the nasties target their sickly 10 year old too, which frankly a lot of nasties would do as a preference.
Anyhow, play what you want, I don't care what people do in their own games - I just get annoyed when they show up in games I am a part of.
Anyhow, play what you want, I don't care what people do in their own games - I just get annoyed when they show up in games I am a part of.
Are you sure you don't? You just went on a bit of a tangent about it.
Note the part 'in their own games'?
My tangent covered my experiences of them showing up in mine.
Note the part 'in their own games'?
My tangent covered my experiences of them showing up in mine.
Also showed your biases and you did it without saying 'in my own games' until late. The first thing you said looked like you were suggesting someone should kill another person's character until they take a hint. I mean, I don't doubt you, but when you say things it comes off as a little... extreme and more than just a little hateful.
The first thing you said looked like you were suggesting someone should kill another person's character until they take a hint.
Curious you decided it could only mean that, especially when it has been clarified for you that this is not the case and further information was provided.