If a player becomes emotionally invested in something, how does it not add to the game?Just because a player becomes emotionally invested in something does not mean that it is, necessarily, a) good for or b)appropriate at a given table.
Then again, I am for communication between the GM and player
1. ahead of time, the GM should inform players of
a. house rules (standard rules from campaign to campaign)
b. setting and setting rules specific for this campaign including available races, classes, archetypes, variant rules, deities and domains etc. (assuming that the GM has a setting built or using a specific published campaign setting)
c. degree of "optimization"
d. preplanned builds vs. organic growth
e. amount of combat vs. noncombat.
f. amount of "dungeon crawling"
g. banned supplements
The above gets people on the same page and allows players to back out if their play style preferences are incompatible2. Character creation
a. discuss concepts and background with the GM for the GM to approve, make suggestions to fit the campaign and setting, or reject.
b. discuss the mechanical build
c. present the character for review.
This ensures players create appropriate characters for the setting and table. If appropriate for the game, it allows the GM to work in backgrounds and goals.
I generally disagree that emotional investment in a character could be harmful (And the assumption that it will be as a sign of distrust), but I very much agree with your GM and player communication guidelines.
Wow, talk about a table I would leave....
The cleric, druid, and wizard are the most powerful classes in the game, and a big part of that is their ability to change their ability set on a daily basis.Plus, prep-casting just isn't how I envision magic working. If you know a spell, you KNOW a spell. You don't forget it, and you can't learn a new set overnight.
And it'd be your right to do so ... though you wouldn't be leaving, you'd never have attended, as I make my house rules available before character creation.
I'm sure the rest of my house rules are just as offensive.
In my experience, people don't play the "weeaboo" classes because of ~animes~ or whatever, they play them because those classes are the ones that let them do what they want to do. Want to hit things to death with your bare hands? You're gonna have to be a monk. Want to play a rogue but be somewhat competent? You're gonna have to be a ninja.I can attest to this. I hate most anime in general, but the historical depiction of Samurai interests me just as much as the depictions of knights, plus, I like the idea of the mechanics supporting that honorable attitude, with challenges and such. Too bad I hate using mounts. Aside from my Grippli druid who rides a Giant Frog, which was probably my best idea ever.
But I am digressing. I just dislike people who ban anything that isn't tolkien
If I ever do ban anything, I'm banning Gripplis. No you cannot play a tree frog. I have made a Vanaras monk with monkey style, and even I find tree frogs ridiculous.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I ever do ban anything, I'm banning Gripplis. No you cannot play a tree frog. I have made a Vanaras monk with monkey style, and even I find tree frogs ridiculous.
You mean someone cannot roleplay a Gripplis?
If I ever do ban anything, I'm banning Gripplis. No you cannot play a tree frog. I have made a Vanaras monk with monkey style, and even I find tree frogs ridiculous.In my experience, people don't play the "weeaboo" classes because of ~animes~ or whatever, they play them because those classes are the ones that let them do what they want to do. Want to hit things to death with your bare hands? You're gonna have to be a monk. Want to play a rogue but be somewhat competent? You're gonna have to be a ninja.I can attest to this. I hate most anime in general, but the historical depiction of Samurai interests me just as much as the depictions of knights, plus, I like the idea of the mechanics supporting that honorable attitude, with challenges and such. Too bad I hate using mounts. Aside from my Grippli druid who rides a Giant Frog, which was probably my best idea ever.
But I am digressing. I just dislike people who ban anything that isn't tolkien
255 posts in we finally reach one that is objectively wrong on every level
(tree frogs are great, nobody in their right mind can hate tree frogs)
If I ever do ban anything, I'm banning Gripplis. No you cannot play a tree frog. I have made a Vanaras monk with monkey style, and even I find tree frogs ridiculous.255 posts in we finally reach one that is objectively wrong on every level
(tree frogs are great, nobody in their right mind can hate tree frogs)
I am kneedeep in this ribbiting thread and you it "to ad"-end?
If I ever do ban anything, I'm banning Gripplis. No you cannot play a tree frog. I have made a Vanaras monk with monkey style, and even I find tree frogs ridiculous.You mean someone cannot roleplay a Gripplis?
That is officially worse than ponyfinder. Congratulations.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And Ponyfinder is awesome.
A player enthused about a character, completely, inappropriate for an established setting and its parameters is not a player that I want- especially, if the parameters were established and made known ahead of time. The player is ignoring the rules everyone else agreed to play by. If the player does not want to play what is being offered they should find another game rather than expecting the campaign setting being changed to cater to them.
I generally disagree that emotional investment in a character could be harmful (And the assumption that it will be as a sign of distrust.
Whoa whoa whoa, now when did this happen? You're pulling that straight out of nowhere.
If I ever do ban anything, I'm banning Gripplis. No you cannot play a tree frog. I have made a Vanaras monk with monkey style, and even I find tree frogs ridiculous.In my experience, people don't play the "weeaboo" classes because of ~animes~ or whatever, they play them because those classes are the ones that let them do what they want to do. Want to hit things to death with your bare hands? You're gonna have to be a monk. Want to play a rogue but be somewhat competent? You're gonna have to be a ninja.I can attest to this. I hate most anime in general, but the historical depiction of Samurai interests me just as much as the depictions of knights, plus, I like the idea of the mechanics supporting that honorable attitude, with challenges and such. Too bad I hate using mounts. Aside from my Grippli druid who rides a Giant Frog, which was probably my best idea ever.
But I am digressing. I just dislike people who ban anything that isn't tolkien
Gripplis are awesome, man! YOU CAN BE A FROG THAT RIDES ON THE BACK OF A BIGGER FROG! And you get a climb speed! Plus, finally a small creature that isn't uselessly slow on foot
I've no problem with Grippli, oddly enough. But I draw the line at Kitsune (at least in non-pseudo-Asian settings).
Apart from that, I barely ban anything. I may have problems with some stuff, but if the player and I can work it into the setting/campaign, I'll allow it.
I've no problem with Grippli, oddly enough. But I draw the line at Kitsune (at least in non-pseudo-Asian settings).
Apart from that, I barely ban anything. I may have problems with some stuff, but if the player and I can work it into the setting/campaign, I'll allow it.
I hate that so many people offhandedly ban kitsune because of Naruto. Not that I hate you. Honestly, as a Naruto fan, knowing what I know about Naruto fans, I might make the same call myself unless I know all the players exceedingly well. Euheghhgh, how I wish I never went to any online forum ever.
Still, kitsune are interesting creatures, Naruto or not! I like them, at least. Then again, I like shapeshifters in general. If people want to reskin them as swamp-things from europe, I'd find it obtuse, but I'd still probably go along with it.
That is officially worse than ponyfinder. Congratulations.If I ever do ban anything, I'm banning Gripplis. No you cannot play a tree frog. I have made a Vanaras monk with monkey style, and even I find tree frogs ridiculous.You mean someone cannot roleplay a Gripplis?
XD
I've no problem with Grippli, oddly enough. But I draw the line at Kitsune (at least in non-pseudo-Asian settings).
Apart from that, I barely ban anything. I may have problems with some stuff, but if the player and I can work it into the setting/campaign, I'll allow it.
I hate that so many people offhandedly ban kitsune because of Naruto. Not that I hate you. Honestly, as a Naruto fan, knowing what I know about Naruto fans, I might make the same call myself unless I know all the players exceedingly well. Euheghhgh, how I wish I never went to any online forum ever.
Still, kitsune are interesting creatures, Naruto or not! I like them, at least. Then again, I like shapeshifters in general. If people want to reskin them as swamp-things from europe, I'd find it obtuse, but I'd still probably go along with it.
CONVINCE HIM OF MY POSITION JUTSU!
*hand movements*~~IT WAS SUPER INEFFECTIVE!~~
That is officially worse than ponyfinder. Congratulations.If I ever do ban anything, I'm banning Gripplis. No you cannot play a tree frog. I have made a Vanaras monk with monkey style, and even I find tree frogs ridiculous.You mean someone cannot roleplay a Gripplis?XD
I've no problem with Grippli, oddly enough. But I draw the line at Kitsune (at least in non-pseudo-Asian settings).
Apart from that, I barely ban anything. I may have problems with some stuff, but if the player and I can work it into the setting/campaign, I'll allow it.
I hate that so many people offhandedly ban kitsune because of Naruto. Not that I hate you. Honestly, as a Naruto fan, knowing what I know about Naruto fans, I might make the same call myself unless I know all the players exceedingly well. Euheghhgh, how I wish I never went to any online forum ever.
Still, kitsune are interesting creatures, Naruto or not! I like them, at least. Then again, I like shapeshifters in general. If people want to reskin them as swamp-things from europe, I'd find it obtuse, but I'd still probably go along with it.
CONVINCE HIM OF MY POSITION JUTSU!
*hand movements*
~~IT WAS SUPER INEFFECTIVE!~~
I actually hate pokemon with a burning passion, so while I don't understand what your comment was trying to get across, it also made my day worse overall. This is probably the worst thing to happen since the crusades.
This is why I can't be bothered to be mad at people who hate anime fans unless they specifically call me out.
Eh, personally I find it more interesting to fit as many different and unique cultures into a setting as you can. Just sticking to Europe or something....BOOOORING.
I agree. If I'm going race-banning, I'm more likely to ban humans than anything else. And since I decouple race from culture, it's even easier; I basically just need one culture and maybe a sub-culture per nation, and whoever lives there, that's their culture. So, for example, an elf and a dwarf from Nation A will have more in common than an elf from Nation A and an elf from Nation B.
I actually hate pokemon with a burning passion, so while I don't understand what your comment was trying to get across, it also made my day worse overall. This is probably the worst thing to happen since the crusades.I don't want to make your day worse...but there were actually a lot of things worse than the Crusades that happened later.
What!? Are you serious?! Damn, now my day has just taken a nosedive in to the buttcrack of a gnome. Seriously, though? I'm PRETTY SURE that the crusades fixed everything when they were done, though. Right? Like, I'm pretty sure the whole reformation through flame thing worked.
We should ban bad things from ever happening
|
CONVINCE HIM OF MY POSITION JUTSU!
*hand movements*
~~IT WAS SUPER INEFFECTIVE!~~
I've played a kitsune gunslinger who stayed human most of the time. He'd use dancing lights the most of all, but also had a few of the dragon empire feats so he could become a fox.
So my tactics revolved around going tiny, running around as a tiny fox and pop up somewhere. I started teaming up with the druids flying animal companion to reach higher spaces and snipe from there.
I've no problem with Grippli, oddly enough. But I draw the line at Kitsune (at least in non-pseudo-Asian settings).
Apart from that, I barely ban anything. I may have problems with some stuff, but if the player and I can work it into the setting/campaign, I'll allow it.
There are Celtic stories of a transforming fox so you know.
CONVINCE HIM OF MY POSITION JUTSU!
*hand movements*
~~IT WAS SUPER INEFFECTIVE!~~I've played a kitsune gunslinger who stayed human most of the time. He'd use dancing lights the most of all, but also had a few of the dragon empire feats so he could become a fox.
So my tactics revolved around going tiny, running around as a tiny fox and pop up somewhere. I started teaming up with the druids flying animal companion to reach higher spaces and snipe from there.
Fff, see! That's what I'm talking about. Shapeshifting is awesome!
That is officially worse than ponyfinder. Congratulations.If I ever do ban anything, I'm banning Gripplis. No you cannot play a tree frog. I have made a Vanaras monk with monkey style, and even I find tree frogs ridiculous.You mean someone cannot roleplay a Gripplis?XD
I've no problem with Grippli, oddly enough. But I draw the line at Kitsune (at least in non-pseudo-Asian settings).
Apart from that, I barely ban anything. I may have problems with some stuff, but if the player and I can work it into the setting/campaign, I'll allow it.
I hate that so many people offhandedly ban kitsune because of Naruto. Not that I hate you. Honestly, as a Naruto fan, knowing what I know about Naruto fans, I might make the same call myself unless I know all the players exceedingly well. Euheghhgh, how I wish I never went to any online forum ever.
Still, kitsune are interesting creatures, Naruto or not! I like them, at least. Then again, I like shapeshifters in general. If people want to reskin them as swamp-things from europe, I'd find it obtuse, but I'd still probably go along with it.
CONVINCE HIM OF MY POSITION JUTSU!
*hand movements*
~~IT WAS SUPER INEFFECTIVE!~~I actually hate pokemon with a burning passion, so while I don't understand what your comment was trying to get across, it also made my day worse overall. This is probably the worst thing to happen since the crusades.
This is why I can't be bothered to be mad at people who hate anime fans unless they specifically call me out.
It was to be silly and fun while satirizing both Naruto and pokemon. :)
There need not be a point to things. Needing a point to everything makes life boring. Like when I wear a fursuit, go to furry cons, and attention whore to my hearts content, there isn't a point to that beyond enjoying myself.I never played pokemon, but I do know the references and how to poke fun at them.
I did was Naruto, and it followed the same coming of age story that most shoenen follows, but then the filler arcs hit and the following series was horrible so I stopped. It is just Dragon Ball Z with Ninjas--nothing more, nothing less.
Too much text for paizo to handle -- again
...Yeeeeah, worst thing since the crusades for sure.
Whoa whoa whoa, now when did this happen? You're pulling that straight out of nowhere.Yesterday, in response to maalpheron, you wrote: "If a player becomes emotionally invested in something, how does it not add to the game?"
and in response to me, you wrote: "I generally disagree that emotional investment in a character could be harmful"
I was giving examples without getting into specifics, that I have, personally, seen in which a player's emotional investment was not good but detrimental. One of my friends, both a new DM and new to D&D at the time, nearly gave up on DMing within a few sessions of taking over the DM chores after his DM quit. The players were emotionally invested in their characters and builds which were highly optimized with a few taken from CharOps boards. That my friend was ready to quit DMing means the player's investment in min-maxed builds did not add anything.
Similarly, I have seen DMs on message boards that have given up on DMing 3e and Pathfinder for having one or two players disregard the rules for building characters for the setting and show up and spring some inappropriate build or concept. Rather than not play, the DM allowed the character(s). Then, the following week someone else shows up with a different character demands to have play it, because the others did it. Suddenly, everyone is showing up with inappropriate characters and the DM just drops the game as is not a game that he or she wanted to run. On top of that, they gave up on 3e and/or Pathfinder. Again, player's being emotionally invested in an inappropriate character was not good for the game.
I asked how players being emotionally invested in a character was a bad thing. You then came out with a whole argument about players thinking they are the hottest thing since sliced jesus and disregarding rules they agreed to, which leads to the DM being a pushover and allowing it anyways, leading to a bad time, which makes them quit roleplaying games forever, thus players being invested in their characters is bad and shouldn't happen.
Pardon me if I disregard adding a entire new 5 or so concepts on to my question, but that's just insanely silly.
Too much text for paizo to handle -- again...Yeeeeah, worst thing since the crusades for sure.
Oh, I also ban PCs that have names that are basically the same as their own names but with fantasy.
Basically it goes like this:Me: Hello. What is your name?
PC: Mattheus.
Me. May I call you Matt?
PC: No. It's Mattheus.
Me: OK...Mattheus. So who is your character?
PC: His name is Mattheus the Fox. He hails from blah blah blah and fights aginst blah blah, and blah blah magic intelligent sword heirloom blah blah all 18s, rolled naturally, blah blah blah...
Me: Mattheus... you named your character Mattheus?
PC: Mattheus THE FOX.
Me: GET OFF OF MY TABLE!
That seems exceptionally rude. As a writer, I know that coming up with names is really hard. Also you roll for stats, which is silly, especially when you don't do it in front of eachother.
And intelligent swords are cool, man. Especially if you're playing as the sword which is mind controlling the character.
I asked how players being emotionally invested in a character was a bad thing. You then came out with a whole argument about players thinking they are the hottest thing since sliced jesus and disregarding rules they agreed to, which leads to the DM being a pushover and allowing it anyways, leading to a bad time, which makes them quit roleplaying...
\
You asked how it can be bad. I showed how it can be bad. That you don't like the circumstances is irrelevant. There are many times such investment is good and I have been lucky to be part of such games as they are awesome. However, you asked how it can be bad. Perhaps, you should refrain from asking silly questions in the first place.
Perhaps you should avoid bringing such worthless examples in front of me. As if I care what your friend did that was misguided.
You asked how it can be bad. I showed how it can be bad. That you don't like the circumstances is irrelevant. There are many times such investment is good and I have been lucky to be part of such games as they are awesome. However, you asked how it can be bad. Perhaps, you should refrain from asking silly questions in the first place.
Except you didn't show how character investment could be bad. You showed how being a doormat can be bad.
I don't personally like a whole bunch of restrictions (it just doesn't seem necessary to me in 99% of scenarios), but if you're gonna do it, stick to it.
That guy was a friend of a friend and didn't get invited back for a multitude of other reasons as well. (Like ... talking about how awesome the insane clown posse were
Oh jeez, yeah. Instant kick.
You can be down to clown somewhere else, thanks.
Magic everywhere in this she-wolf
|
|
I actually hate pokemon with a burning passion, so while I don't understand what your comment was trying to get across, it also made my day worse overall. This is probably the worst thing to happen since the crusades.This is why I can't be bothered to be mad at people who hate anime fans unless they specifically call me out.
Pokemon, the cartoon, or the game?
For me, there are five great loves in my life.
Johnny Cash, Black Coffee, Pokemon, Pathfinder, and something else that is too NSFW to mention here.
Magic everywhere in this she-wolfOh no you dinnt.
Water, fire, metal and wood, friggin synthesists how do they work!?
I actually hate pokemon with a burning passion, so while I don't understand what your comment was trying to get across, it also made my day worse overall. This is probably the worst thing to happen since the crusades.This is why I can't be bothered to be mad at people who hate anime fans unless they specifically call me out.
Pokemon, the cartoon, or the game?
For me, there are five great loves in my life.
Johnny Cash, Black Coffee, Pokemon, Pathfinder, and something else that is too NSFW to mention here.
I dislike both of them. Both out of general dislike for grindy games and nintendo, and partially because I was forced to be around a lot of annoying little kids who were obsessed with it, which has forever tainted my view of it.
Except you didn't show how character investment could be bad. You showed how being a doormat can be bad.I agree that the DMs were doormats (although my own friend did not know better as he had had only played a few sessions). Personally, I would tell the player to take hike as would my players.
However, for these DMs, the players in question were so tied to their investment in a concept and were also at fault. They could have been mature and backed out of the game ahead of time and allowed the DM to fill the seat(I have done this before when the game was not for me). They could have built an appropriate character if they wanted to play. However, they came with something at the last minute that they knew was inappropriate, but that they were so emotionally invested on playing that they were intent on "forcing" the DM into allow or hold the game hostage for not enough players. How is the player's emotional investment in these instances a good thing? How does it add anything good to the game being offered?
I am 80% sure it was not emotional investment. It was just the player being a dick.
|
|
I dislike both of them. Both out of general dislike for grindy games and nintendo, and partially because I was forced to be around a lot of annoying little kids who were obsessed with it, which has forever tainted my view of it.
I actually hate pokemon with a burning passion, so while I don't understand what your comment was trying to get across, it also made my day worse overall. This is probably the worst thing to happen since the crusades.This is why I can't be bothered to be mad at people who hate anime fans unless they specifically call me out.
Pokemon, the cartoon, or the game?
For me, there are five great loves in my life.
Johnny Cash, Black Coffee, Pokemon, Pathfinder, and something else that is too NSFW to mention here.
Ah.
I was one of those annoying kids, so to speak, and have played through every one since Red/Blue/Green.By the way, the newest ones are designed to be way less grindy.
Not sure why you would hate Nintendo as a whole though.
I dislike both of them. Both out of general dislike for grindy games and nintendo, and partially because I was forced to be around a lot of annoying little kids who were obsessed with it, which has forever tainted my view of it.
I actually hate pokemon with a burning passion, so while I don't understand what your comment was trying to get across, it also made my day worse overall. This is probably the worst thing to happen since the crusades.This is why I can't be bothered to be mad at people who hate anime fans unless they specifically call me out.
Pokemon, the cartoon, or the game?
For me, there are five great loves in my life.
Johnny Cash, Black Coffee, Pokemon, Pathfinder, and something else that is too NSFW to mention here.
Ah.
I was one of those annoying kids, so to speak, and have played through every one since Red/Blue/Green.By the way, the newest ones are designed to be way less grindy.
Not sure why you would hate Nintendo as a whole though.
Bahhh, I'm sure you weren't THAT annoying as a kid. Not compared to the ones I've known, at least!
And I just feel like Nintendo hasn't actually done anything in the past decade and is living off nostalgia. Which is fine, I suppose, if the people buying their games are happy with that. I just have no respect what-so-ever for them.
Ban all video games! Or better yet, ban people who play video games.
Sometimes one does lead to the other. Over at WOTC's "What is a Player to Do?" forum, it is not uncommon advice to disrupt a game when the DM has banned a concept/race/class that the player is intent on playing.
I am 80% sure it was not emotional investment. It was just the player being a dick.
If you're going at it that way, everything is horrible, because someone wants to act childish and mess stuff up. You win. Good job. What does that prove? It proves that sometimes people are dicks, and you have to live with that.
So, again, what's bad about emotional investment? Nothing. Unless, of course, you want to state that pathfinder is also bad because sometimes a DM is a dick and bans everything based on their own nonnegotiable biases. Or that air is bad because sometimes a jerk uses it to throw a petty insult. You gain nothing.
|
|
and partially because I was forced to be around a lot of annoying little kids who were obsessed with it, which has forever tainted my view of it.I knew High School and College students obsessed with it...
I know those beyond college student age obsessed with it, along with one's you mention, and younger. A number of them are my friends.
I seem to have a very wide variety of friends of different ages.