Why didnt the White Fang Orcs attempt to buy/barter for the food they needed from the Oakshire people instead of just raiding for it right off the bat?
i never thought of that
but i imagine it would likely be because Oakshire might possibly be Xenophobic and Refused the White Fang's Attempt
either way, there is a bad history developed between Oakshire and White Fang that started with a few failed trading attempts with a Xenophobic shire.
the people of Oakshire were thinking, "DEM FOREIGNERS WANT OUR STUFF, LETS KILLEM." because Oakshire is a Xenophobic shire in the middle of nowhere that usually keeps to themselves and saw the attempts to trade as a threat to their people.
|
Why didnt the White Fang Orcs attempt to buy/barter for the food they needed from the Oakshire people instead of just raiding for it right off the bat?i never thought of that
but i imagine it would likely be because Oakshire might possibly be Xenophobic and Refused the White Fang's Attempt
either way, there is a bad history developed between Oakshire and White Fang that started with a few failed trading attempts with a Xenophobic shire.
the people of Oakshire were thinking, "DEM FOREIGNERS WANT OUR STUFF, LETS KILLEM." because Oakshire is a Xenophobic shire in the middle of nowhere that usually keeps to themselves and saw the attempts to trade as a threat to their people.
Maybe the White Fangs are the xenophobic ones, who see poor folks of Oakenshre, a community isolated in the wilderness and in desperate need of trade, as simply a target for easy pickings.
Or perhaps both groups were innocent and simply the unfortunate victims of the local fey, led by a particularly vicious dryad who put nefarious Machiavellian machinations into play that worked better than she could have possibly dreamed.
Because plot?
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, sure, if you want to get all fancy.
<grognard curmudgeon>Back in my day we didn't have these new fangled plot lines. We had an orc in a 10' room and we liked it. The next room had bandits, followed by an owlbear and then some goblins. Weren't none of your highfalutin' "logical layout" or "dungeon ecology" nonsense ... they was monsters pure and simple ... in 10' rooms.</grognard curmudeon>
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
zylphryx,
My very first try at being a GM was with my older brothers, one of whom had been playing D&D for a couple years on ship before leaving the Navy. I was a rank beginner who had been so focused on school and work that I hadn't even HEARD of D&D before he introduced me to it.
Anyway, I do what I always do, which is I looked up all I could on the subject (not so easy in the late 70s...) and went to a store that sold the stuff and read through some "modules" a couple of which were simply xerox copies of typewritten originals.
So I laid out my first dungeon and it had a fairly standard "monster progression" with some of the standard monsters and after laying it out I looked at it and thought "waitaminute... If there's a frigging BATTLE in this room, the whole DANG DUNGEON is going to hear it..." Then I looked at the skeletons in the room next to the goblins and thought "Why aren't the skeletons attacking the goblins?"
So I threw the whole thing out, instituted what I called a "dungeon ecology" and redid the whole thing starting with the concept that whatever the PCs found had to make some sort of sense from an ecological, cultural and physical law sense.
So then the PCs (my brothers) come into the dungeon. They narrowly survive the first encounter (which was, don't laugh, I think a rat swarm or something silly today that was quite lethal then) and move on to the next room.
Which was empty. They searched it EXHAUSTIVELY. They tapped on every rotting brick. They pried up every loose floorstone. They waited.
Then they moved on to the next room, which was also empty.
"What the hell?" my brother asked. "Where are the monsters?"
"It's a big ruined castle, if you look around you might find some, but if they had been in these rooms, you'd have already fought them."
So they began a wider, less thorough scouting process and soon enough a new paradigm was in play. Instead of plodding from room to room to beat on things, they were looking for clues, trying to solve a puzzle and thinking about the story and the plot. Pretty soon they were ranging all over a wide area of country as they put the story together.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I remember B1 ... the fill in the blank module. First time I populated it, it made no sense (but I was 9 or 10 at the time). Later it evolved into a more logical progression.
That said, B2: Keep on the Borderlands still has a nostalgic allure after all these years (and yes, there are goblins, bandits and an owlbear all within earshot of one another. ;) ).
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Succubi are demons, not devils.No one implied that a succubus was a devil rather than a demon.
As for that devil being the exception, yeah.. an exception that doesn't make sense.
It makes exactly as much sense as a fallen angel. Risen demons and good intelligent undead are things explicitly noted to exist in Golarion.
Golarion also sports non-evil goblins, apparently good orcs(YES!) considering the origin of a particular NPC, an aasimar feat made specifically for aasimar born of those races to lead them out of the dark, the justifications given for the Redeemer archetype's existence, non-evil drow, Ragathiel's origins, a feat made specifically for good-aligned kobold heroes, and more.
And then there's that bit on alignment in the Bestiary itself:
Alignment, Size, and Type: While a monster's size and type remain constant (unless changed by the application of templates or other unusual modifiers), alignment is far more fluid. The alignments listed for each monster in this book represent the norm for those monsters—they can vary as you require them to in order to serve the needs of your campaign. Only in the case of relatively unintelligent monsters (creatures with an Intelligence of 2 or lower are almost never anything other than neutral) and planar monsters (outsiders with alignments other than those listed are unusual and typically outcasts from their kind) is the listed alignment relatively unchangeable.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So you're the one! :)I looked at it and thought "waitaminute... If there's a frigging BATTLE in this room, the whole DANG DUNGEON is going to hear it..." Then I looked at the skeletons in the room next to the goblins and thought "Why aren't the skeletons attacking the goblins?"
So I threw the whole thing out, instituted what I called a "dungeon ecology" and redid the whole thing starting with the concept that whatever the PCs found had to make some sort of sense from an ecological, cultural and physical law sense.
Heh, it gets worse. At that time we had minis and used them to represent our characters, but we didn't use battle grids or do detailed tactical deconstruction. We mostly did what is now called "theater of the mind". But my brothers are also analytical and logical like me, so we found ourselves in a number of debates about the dynamics of a battle here and there. One day the party found itself on the shore of a river which was blocking their path to find a dragon cave they were looking for (by now they were pretty high level and the "Dragon Wars" had begun). The area was patrolled by chromatic dragons and as they looked across the river, one of the party spotted a couple of specks in the distant sky.
"Dragons!" they cried.They quickly retreated into the trees lining that side of the river and waited, watching the dragons as they got closer and closer. Finally they realized the dragons were following the river and if they continued to do so, they would fly right past the party. Eventually they got close enough that the party could tell they were not red dragons, I don't remember what color they were, probably blue because the red and blue were the primary dragons I had rolled up.
Well, as part of their loot from an earlier fight, they had recovered a bag full of gems enchanted with the fireball spell. At that time the mechanic of the gems was that you threw them, and when they hit something, or exceeded 120 feet from the thrower, they blew up. Each gem was like a 6d6 up to a 10d6 fireball. These were things I just made up, and I was still a raw GM, it hadn't occurred to me that they would ever have a desire to throw them all at one time.
But that's what they decided. They quickly climbed a tree and said "As the dragons fly by, we toss the whole sack full of fireball gems at them!"
I looked at them, visualized the scene in my mind and realized that this was something that could turn into a major, major argument if I wasn't careful. So I did something I had never done up until then.
I drew a battle map. I drew out the river, the trees and drew them with a grid to allow them to place their miniatures. I also used bottle caps or lifesavers or something to provide a third dimension. At the time I was studying Physics in college, so drawing out objects moving around and calculating distances, velocities, intersections, etc. was second nature.
Then I explained to the players that this was going to be done one step at a time, with every detail of the fight worked out according to the rules of the game and the laws of physics that should apply.
So I calculated the speed the dragons were flying, then worked out the speed the handfuls of gems would be thrown, pre-determined the path and height the dragons would fly and worked out the size of the dragons (squares they occupied) and the radius of the fireballs.
Then I said "OK, the dragons are moving down the river at a very fast pace." I gave them the speed in terms of how fast they typically moved, I don't remember exactly but it was like "they are flying four times as fast as your party marches". Then I put some origami birds on the map to represent the dragons and said, "Here we go, tell me exactly when you throw the gems" and started moving the dragons one square at a time.
Well, they miscalculated slightly. The dragons ended up moving slightly further than they expected before the thrown gems detonated. It ended up knocking one dragon out of the sky, but the other was merely injured and circled around to fight.
We worked out the entire fight that way. The downed dragon couldn't fly, but it could still walk, so they had to fight two wounded dragons and we did the whole thing on the map. It took like a dozen pages of paper that I frantically taped together as we played out the fight.
Finally, it was over. Half the party was dead, but so were the dragons. My brothers looked up from the fight, both of them with a sort of stunned expression on their faces and said "Oh my god that was AMAZING!"
And I have been using battle grids ever since.
|
I think the 'murder' in 'murderhobo' is what annoys me most. The characters I have played have never murdered anyone that I can remember.
I started a thread a while ago after first seeing 'murderhobo' the Lexicon thread.
The thread I had started was about wheather most people considered killing something as murder. I'll find it and bump it, I think its in the gamer talk forum.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When I first started GMing PF, it was the same year as the release of Skyrim, so naturally, there was a certain expectation. While people weren't going out of their way to kill things, some of the players were being more aggressive then I feel their characters would be, and the looting was so extensive that they were cutting parts off of animals and monsters they killed in the hopes that maybe they'd be useful, like crocodile eyes and hangman tree bark. It was silly, but the latter led to an unplanned NPC witch that turned into an interesting subplot, so I liked that bit.
Over time, they fell away from that, and now we're at the point where sometimes they completely forget about looting bodies because the characters wouldn't be concerned with it.
Are all adventurers murderhobos? No. I think the only ones that turn out that way are the ones that can't, for whatever reason, think about the game their playing as an actual world and the people as actual people.
|
When I first started GMing PF, it was the same year as the release of Skyrim, so naturally, there was a certain expectation. While people weren't going out of their way to kill things, some of the players were being more aggressive then I feel their characters would be, and the looting was so extensive that they were cutting parts off of animals and monsters they killed in the hopes that maybe they'd be useful, like crocodile eyes and hangman tree bark. It was silly, but the latter led to an unplanned NPC witch that turned into an interesting subplot, so I liked that bit.
Over time, they fell away from that, and now we're at the point where sometimes they completely forget about looting bodies because the characters wouldn't be concerned with it.
Are all adventurers murderhobos? No. I think the only ones that turn out that way are the ones that can't, for whatever reason, think about the game their playing as an actual world and the people as actual people.
Or there characters just have every loose morals, or so I would say my view happens to be. Not all player characters are of good alignment, after all. Someone playing a money crazed rogue, the most cliche example I can think of right now, might be perfectly content to loot to their heart's content.
Why are people so down on that playstyle? Not everyone wants the sort of heroic campaign that seems to have long been the focus of this thread. In fact, I dare say there is a growing number of people tiring of the same old thing.
When I first started GMing PF, it was the same year as the release of Skyrim, so naturally, there was a certain expectation. While people weren't going out of their way to kill things, some of the players were being more aggressive then I feel their characters would be, and the looting was so extensive that they were cutting parts off of animals and monsters they killed in the hopes that maybe they'd be useful, like crocodile eyes and hangman tree bark. It was silly, but the latter led to an unplanned NPC witch that turned into an interesting subplot, so I liked that bit.
Over time, they fell away from that, and now we're at the point where sometimes they completely forget about looting bodies because the characters wouldn't be concerned with it.
Are all adventurers murderhobos? No. I think the only ones that turn out that way are the ones that can't, for whatever reason, think about the game their playing as an actual world and the people as actual people.
Or there characters just have every loose morals, or so I would say my view happens to be. Not all player characters are of good alignment, after all. Someone playing a money crazed rogue, the most cliche example I can think of right now, might be perfectly content to loot to their heart's content.
Why are people so down on that playstyle? Not everyone wants the sort of heroic campaign that seems to have long been the focus of this thread. In fact, I dare say there is a growing number of people tiring of the same old thing.
We're talking points where it deliberately breaks the established character.
I.E. Zack is supposedly playing a non-chaotic, studious alchemist but when he sees a group of kobolds (which are not evil in the setting I use) sitting around a campfire talking and eating he immediately starts attacking and chasing after them (because they just fled) despite the fact that one of the other party members who speaks their language being about to attempt diplomacy. When asked his only motivation was "because I was bored", not "This is what my character would do".
That was our first campaign.
Or there characters just have every loose morals, or so I would say my view happens to be. Not all player characters are of good alignment, after all. Someone playing a money crazed rogue, the most cliche example I can think of right now, might be perfectly content to loot to their heart's content.Why are people so down on that playstyle? Not everyone wants the sort of heroic campaign that seems to have long been the focus of this thread. In fact, I dare say there is a growing number of people tiring of the same old thing.
Nothing wrong with “looting the bodies”. After all, if you’re playing “Wandering Vigilantes /bountyhunters/knight Errants” then you have to support yourself. Maybe you do rescue villages from the orc raiders more for the reward and loot than for the Good it does. That’s OK. You’re still not playing a “murderhobo”. It’s when you decide it’d be easier just to kill the villagers- that’s when you have gone down that path. And only immature players enjoy that playstyle.
But even so, even if your PC is only in it for the money- after a while a experience mature roleplayer will find that’s just too one dimensional. You do get tired of "the same old thing". So, you find yourself adding nuances. Next you step up to a Bounty Hunter who is not only in it for the money, but is out for revenge, etc. Adding layers , going from a crude one dimensional PC to a fully fleshed out 3D character- that’s how a PLAYER goes up in “levels”.
Or there characters just have every loose morals, or so I would say my view happens to be. Not all player characters are of good alignment, after all. Someone playing a money crazed rogue, the most cliche example I can think of right now, might be perfectly content to loot to their heart's content.Why are people so down on that playstyle? Not everyone wants the sort of heroic campaign that seems to have long been the focus of this thread. In fact, I dare say there is a growing number of people tiring of the same old thing.
Nothing wrong with “looting the bodies”. After all, if you’re playing “Wandering Vigilantes /bountyhunters/knight Errants” then you have to support yourself. Maybe you do rescue villages from the orc raiders more for the reward and loot than for the Good it does. That’s OK. You’re still not playing a “murderhobo”. It’s when you decide it’d be easier just to kill the villagers- that’s when you have gone down that path. And only immature players enjoy that playstyle.
But even so, even if your PC is only in it for the money- after a while a experience mature roleplayer will find that’s just too one dimensional. You do get tired of "the same old thing". So, you find yourself adding nuances. Next you step up to a Bounty Hunter who is not only in it for the money, but is out for revenge, etc. Adding layers , going from a crude one dimensional PC to a fully fleshed out 3D character- that’s how a PLAYER goes up in “levels”.
I disagree to an extent- the few times ive gone over the murderhobo thing real time was when the party was something between a particularly desperate mercenary band and a hit squad. They were very vocal about their ability and desire to kill for coin and coin alone. Killing the villagers is going from murderhobo to bloodthirsty bandit.
But even so, even if your PC is only in it for the money- after a while a experience mature roleplayer will find that’s just too one dimensional. You do get tired of "the same old thing". So, you find yourself adding nuances. Next you step up to a Bounty Hunter who is not only in it for the money, but is out for revenge, etc. Adding layers , going from a crude one dimensional PC to a fully fleshed out 3D character- that’s how a PLAYER goes up in “levels”.
Characters are like onions; They have layers.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Characters are like onions; They have layers.
And sometimes there is a third, even deeper, level. And that one is the same as the top, surface one. Like with pie.
...
Characters are like onions; They have layers.
And sometimes there is a third, even deeper, level. And that one is the same as the top, surface one. Like with pie.
...
And the very best characters have a topping too, like cream or custard.
I think the 'murder' in 'murderhobo' is what annoys me most. The characters I have played have never murdered anyone that I can remember.
I started a thread a while ago after first seeing 'murderhobo' the Lexicon thread.
The thread I had started was about wheather most people considered killing something as murder. I'll find it and bump it, I think its in the gamer talk forum.
You're focusing to much on the word. It's a case of misnomer. Like someone said upthread the proper term would be "manslaughter nomad". Manslaughter because you don't have the intention to murder, but you do kill a lot of things, usually in self defense or as part of your breaking and entering with intenton of robbing and possibly desecration of dungeons. Nomad because while you travel around you are not lacking in material goods, in fact a high level adventurer is usually richer than some small countries, and you might have a homebase to come back to.
But it just doesn't roll off the tongue like murderhobo. Murderhobo is a funny word to say. Manslaughter nomad is too long, too clunky.| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want my characters to be a parfait. Nobody says "Hell no, I don't want no damn parfait."
I think the 'murder' in 'murderhobo' is what annoys me most. The characters I have played have never murdered anyone that I can remember.
I started a thread a while ago after first seeing 'murderhobo' the Lexicon thread.
The thread I had started was about wheather most people considered killing something as murder. I'll find it and bump it, I think its in the gamer talk forum.
You're focusing to much on the word. It's a case of misnomer. Like someone said upthread the proper term would be "manslaughter nomad"....
But it just doesn't roll off the tongue like murderhobo. Murderhobo is a funny word to say. Manslaughter nomad is too long, too clunky.
As I stated in another thread on this topic, I think it should be understood as a portmanteau of "murderous" and "hobo." And "murderous" can mean "dangerously violent" or "having the capability or propensity to murder", not necessarily having actually committed any murders.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I said months ago that this dumb "murder hobo" crap is a meme which needs to die quickly. But instead it seems to have become common parlance for a number of people when referring to adventurers.
Aside from the negative connotation the term applies to the adventurer genre, it strikes me that this is another instance where geeks and nerds are self-punishing themselves for liking their hobby. Just like almost every media which features gamers tends to portray them as anti-social miscreants (even the ones made by gamers themselves, like The Gamers).
I'll say that I think Paizo isn't very helpful in most of their published adventures in dispelling the myth of the murdering hobo, though. Very seldomly an adventure will devote any amount of lines to telling you what happens if you let opponents live and having a permanent base where to live also is a rarity. I appreciate Wrath of the Righteous quite much for going against that trend (although the added complexity of the mythic rules is a strike against the AP, IMO).
Actually, DrDeth, this does occur in Golarion. The exceptions to the alignment rule within Golarion off the top of my head:
** spoiler omitted **The point is, the alignments in the bestiary represent the general leaning of the creature type, but there are exceptions to every rule, usually represented via NPCs of note. But these are the "exceptions to the rule", so perhaps not quite to the extent FlySkyHigh and Umbriere are talking.
Wrath of the Righteous spoilers
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I said months ago that this dumb "murder hobo" crap is a meme which needs to die quickly. But instead it seems to have become common parlance for a number of people when referring to adventurers.
The terms been around since at least the late 80s. It's not gonna disappear because you just discovered it last week and don't like it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And the very best characters have a topping too, like cream or custard.
Cheese usually.
Just like almost every media which features gamers tends to portray them as anti-social miscreants (even the ones made by gamers themselves, like The Gamers).
If there's one thing I like about geek culture it's its own honesty in admitting that there is a core of truth in that stereotype and instead of running away from it just throws a giant neon lampshade on it.
The terms been around since at least the late 80s. It's not gonna disappear because you just discovered it last week and don't like it.
Maybe in your circles it has been common usage, but I've been an active member of the online community since 3.0 came out and never heard it before this year, on this board.
If there's one thing I like about geek culture it's its own honesty in admitting that there is a core of truth in that stereotype and instead of running away from it just throws a giant neon lampshade on it.
The problem is that all of geek culture always "throws a lampshade" on it, to the point where its become "the norm", instead of "the outlier".
I said months ago that this dumb "murder hobo" crap is a meme which needs to die quickly. But instead it seems to have become common parlance for a number of people when referring to adventurers.The terms been around since at least the late 80s. It's not gonna disappear because you just discovered it last week and don't like it.
Man, if it worked like that, imagine how quickly arrow to the knee would die...
It still gets shouted every time someone is using an archer near me. Every. Time.
The ideology of the "murder hobo" is as much out of apathy as it is poor role playing on the part of PCs. Using violence as an ends to a means is simply easier, more often then not, then entering into negotiations with sociopath entities intent on ending all intelligent life, or whatever there motivations may be.
Its also a shorthand for GMs. While most have the intent to develop overarching plot akin to Game of Thrones, with threads so thick it would an excellent topping on toast, or emphasizing immersion and actual character development beyond mere level acquisition and "looting", the point is it can be quicker to develop the generic "swing your sword at these other people who squat in dark, nasty places" crawl, particularly for inexperienced GMs unprepared for derailment or even experienced table toppers who need something on the fly.
Now I'm not saying murder hobo is a play style that should be emphasized, celebrated, or turned into a legitimate business venture. Killing everything in your path limits potential in a campaign and leaves only Nero playing his violin while Rome burns around him. But to completely excise the idea of killing things and looting there stuff is tantamount to removing one of the founding concepts of table topping itself.
That's why you have to strike a balance in different playstles
|
|
I said months ago that this dumb "murder hobo" crap is a meme which needs to die quickly. But instead it seems to have become common parlance for a number of people when referring to adventurers.The terms been around since at least the late 80s. It's not gonna disappear because you just discovered it last week and don't like it.Man, if it worked like that, imagine how quickly arrow to the knee would die...
It still gets shouted every time someone is using an archer near me. Every. Time.
It's ridiculous. Arrow to the knee means getting married.
|
I said months ago that this dumb "murder hobo" crap is a meme which needs to die quickly. But instead it seems to have become common parlance for a number of people when referring to adventurers.The terms been around since at least the late 80s. It's not gonna disappear because you just discovered it last week and don't like it.
Agreed. Except until Hobo with a Shotgun was produced certain gamers in the hobby called the hack and slashers. Same thing different name. It's not going to go away ubnfotunatley.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was a murderhobo once but then I took an arrow to the knee.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dear Mr. Mercenario,
If you had paid your union dues, you would have had health coverage for that. Hopefully, You've learned your lesson and you won't need it taught to you again. Have a nice day.
Sincerely yours,
~Jaspar "Shank Him Louis" Kahrdboordebachs~
your local GUMBO representative
|
|
Agreed. Except until Hobo with a Shotgun was produced certain gamers in the hobby called the hack and slashers. Same thing different name. It's not going to go away ubnfotunatley.I said months ago that this dumb "murder hobo" crap is a meme which needs to die quickly. But instead it seems to have become common parlance for a number of people when referring to adventurers.The terms been around since at least the late 80s. It's not gonna disappear because you just discovered it last week and don't like it.
No. I literally heard the exact term "murderhobo" as far back as the late 80s...and I suspect it had been around quite a while before I heard it.
And the style of play has existed since before the rules were actually published.
I was a murderhobo once but then I took an arrow to the knee.
How exactly did a murderhobo get married anyway?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mr. Beard,
We need to talk. Meet Louis and I at the Westport pier immediately for a private chat regarding the information disclosure policies of the Golarion Union of Murderhoboes for the Betterment of Others.
Sincerely yours,
~Jaspar "Shank Him Louis" Kahrdboordebachs~
your local GUMBO representative
[Flashes membership card]
How ya doin', brother? How's the wife and kids?
|
|
No. I literally heard the exact term "murderhobo" as far back as the late 80s...and I suspect it had been around quite a while before I heard it.And the style of play has existed since before the rules were actually published.
Well I guess I can count myself lucky that I came across murderhobo as a term in the last few years. Until then I was lucky enough not to have come across it.
Comrade Anklebiter!
My dear friend, how are you today? The wife is fine. She is taking care of the young'uns as usual. Little Timmy "Throatripper" had to have his teeth mended again, poor kiddo. He needs to learn that a bite is not a suitable way to block punches, even if you get to keep the hand afterwards. My baby girl, Suzie "the Skinniest", has done masterful work with her latest taxidermy project. The gal is so smart, she just might be ready to practice with living creatures one of these days. Oh, and I almost forgot baby Billiam "the Merciful". That kid got a Double Hackbut for his fifth birthday last week and let me tell you he is one hell of a shot with it. Nailed every one of the kobolds we launched in the air for target practice. That boy made confetti for his own birthday I tell you. So tell me, what've you been up to as of late?
Sincerely yours,
~Jaspar "Shank Him Louis" Kahrdboordebachs~
your local GUMBO representative
P.S. The wife, Myrtle "of the Black Lotus", sends her greetings and has asked that you and the folks come by to enjoy dinner some time. She makes the best gumbo you done gone ever tasted. Any Murderhobo is welcome in our home.
Is GUMBO accepting applications? I have this entire nest of kobolds who, uh, were incredibly clumsy and kept falling on my sword. And arrows. And alchemist's fire. And near them was this treasure I just, uh, found...
Playing a murderhobo campaign can be fun. Especially if you set it up that way from the start and the characters are roleplaying mercenary types.
I said months ago that this dumb "murder hobo" crap is a meme which needs to die quickly. But instead it seems to have become common parlance for a number of people when referring to adventurers.The terms been around since at least the late 80s. It's not gonna disappear because you just discovered it last week and don't like it.
My searches have shown that the term wasn't common until 2012. And I never heard it applied to adventurers until recently on this board, and I have been playing since 1974.
So yeah, it's pretty new. And, we need to stop using it.
I just went thru eleven pages of searches for "murderhobo D&D" and the earliest cite was 2011. Most are more recent.
So, unless you have a cite that it was common before then?
And the style of play has existed since before the rules were actually published.
Not according to what I know of the early Gygax/Arneson games.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I said months ago that this dumb "murder hobo" crap is a meme which needs to die quickly. But instead it seems to have become common parlance for a number of people when referring to adventurers.The terms been around since at least the late 80s. It's not gonna disappear because you just discovered it last week and don't like it.My searches have shown that the term wasn't common until 2012. And I never heard it applied to adventurers until recently on this board, and I have been playing since 1974.
So yeah, it's pretty new. And, we need to stop using it.
Well, dude, I dunno what to say. I literally heard the exact term with my own ears quite a few times as far back as the late 80s when I first began playing.
It doesn't really matter if you started playing in 1974, if Gygax and Areneson ran all their stuff past you before they published it, if you invented the thief class, or whatever. That doesn't change what I myself have heard.
You having played the game since 1974 doesn't automatically always make you right.