So tonight, I killed one of my players off. I seem to have made a bad habit of this recently, but seeing as I have only actually killed three characters since October, in a game with a changing cast of 6+ to 11+ players I think I'm doing okay.
I digress, as this player, being in such a large group, really never gets the chance to role play as there are other players at the table with more ostentatious personalities and such his character was really quiet and just hung out in the background.
He was playing a human sorcerer. That human sorcerer is now le dead, and the player decided he wanted to play a monk. I'm fine with that, but there really isn't a monastery or temple, or an order of monks in this part of my game world, so I needed to come up with a way to explain his monk's existence, and to do that I basically came up with a simple background template to apply to his background story and some roleplaying demands of mine should I let this class happen.
First, his character must be foreign. As in, his ancestors are not from this part of the world. This also opened up racial options, as Tengu don't live in this part of my world, but they do in the 'Eastern' part. As such, as part of his ancestry, his family is from the Eastern region of my game world and lives in what Ultimate Campaign describes as a Foreign Quarter in one of my major metropolitan cities. I am also going to 'force' one of his beginning languages (most likely one of his 'retraining languages' that he could choose to take, but at no charge) to be one of my own creation called 'Eastern' or 'Oriental' (I haven't decided yet). Here's the big one though, and the one that is either going to make his character the most fun, or the least fun depending on how he plays it: I want him to use an Asian accent. All racist jokes aside, because that's not where I am going with this, I feel like it would be a fun experience and he was really excited about the idea.
In the end it looks like my player is really happy with the results of his new character, and the sanctity of my game world's realm of possibility remains in tact. Mark this as a win for the good guys who promote communication between DM and player.
Now the question is: Do you place role playing requirements on your players, and how far are you willing to stretch your own gameplay world to accommodate the desires of your players?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mark my words, forcing someone to use a funny accent can only end in two ways: A very silly time, or in tears.
I'd be wary of FORCING someone to use an Asian accent, because it's going to either come out as extremely awkward, extremely racist, or both if the player's just not feeling it.
And funny voices really get old after a while if the person isn't good at it.
Now, you said he was really excited by the idea. Good. If he wants to do it, cool. But if at a later date he's like "Yeah I'm really tired of doing the funny accent man, it's getting old" I'd suggest letting him.
Everything else sounds solid though. I generally accommodate any character concept a player can come up with. It usually doesn't take a whole bunch of effort unless it's something very silly indeed ("I want to play an Awakened Gopher Clown!"), in which case The Look is usually in order.
Mark my words, forcing someone to use a funny accent can only end in two ways: A very silly time, or in tears.
I'd be wary of FORCING someone to use an Asian accent, because it's going to either come out as extremely awkward, extremely racist, or both if the player's just not feeling it.
And funny voices really get old after a while if the person isn't good at it.
Now, you said he was really excited by the idea. Good. If he wants to do it, cool. But if at a later date he's like "Yeah I'm really tired of doing the funny accent man, it's getting old" I'd suggest letting him.
Everything else sounds solid though. I generally accommodate any character concept a player can come up with. It usually doesn't take a whole bunch of effort unless it's something very silly indeed ("I want to play an Awakened Gopher Clown!"), in which case The Look is usually in order.
The racist sounding thing really isn't an issue for my group.
Funny voices I have found are a lot easier to do if you don't take them seriously, but rather if you embellish on them. As DM, I try and find a voice for every notable NPC, and try and have an accent for all the different areas for the players to tell them apart. It's also a lot easier for me because I used to do voice work. We also have instances where the player with a Grippli is super offended when other people use the word 'ribbit' to describe his race, saying "that's our word, you can't use it!" The Elf then proceeds to say "ribbit please." The grippli is also a gunslinger... Wow, I just realized how bad my group sounds.
Anyway, should my player get sick of using his accent, or forget to use it, then I will simply metagame it in so the rest of the players know. I'll say something like: "Imagine his character still using that funny accent."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If he's happy, I guess that's fine. Not something I would do.
I'm big on reflavoring classes to make it work, ex. if guns aren't part of the world, perhaps the gunslinger wields an experimental wand instead (with the same mechanics).
Well, what happens if the player slips out of his accent? I suppose it's great if the player agrees, and likes to do it.
In my old age, I've gotten away from trying to micromanage everything about my campaigns. I've been in so many games where I was told that what I wanted to be "didn't fit", or the GM banned certain races/classes. These days, I try and look for reasons to say "yes". If a player is really motivated, and wants to play an Awakened Gopher Clown, or gnome gninja in a celtic themed campaign, go for it!
On the other hand, if I feel the player is just picking something because they want an advantage in game, I'll try and talk them out of it.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Remember that Monk-The-Class is not Monk-The-Concept. Monk just means 'I fight well unarmed'; it doesn't mean he's part of any 'order', or even knows what the word 'monastery' means, or that he's some zen-spouting navel-gazer.
|
I typically dont place RP requirements on my players. Though I would totally be down with what you are setting up here.
The Asian accent thing though i'm picturing as this.
"Imagine his character still using that funny accent."
Or he's intentionally affecting the local accent.
Well, what happens if the player slips out of his accent?
Nothing, it is supposed to enhance the experience by giving his character some flavor. It's not like a paladin code or anything, I'm just trying to help him get some time in the sun compared to the other players.
No one make a joke about rising suns.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No one make a joke about rising suns.
Not even if he goes to a brothel?
"Imagine his character still using that funny accent."Or he's intentionally affecting the local accent.
Or he's being intentionally passive-aggressive, about it, and didn't say anything before, because he was afraid the DM would say no to his concept, if it didn't meet the DM's more-or-less arbitrary standards of what is acceptable and what isn't (i.e. is the whole game-world going to fall apart if there is a monastery or temple in that part of the world, or if the player doesn't come from an order of monks, but is self-trained, or anything like that? If not, then it's more-or-less arbitrary), and instead will just 'accidentally' slip out of accent every now and then...
Then again, it could just be me.
"Imagine his character still using that funny accent."Or he's intentionally affecting the local accent.Or he's being intentionally passive-aggressive, about it, and didn't say anything before, because he was afraid the DM would say no to his concept, if it didn't meet the DM's more-or-less arbitrary standards of what is acceptable and what isn't (i.e. is the whole game-world going to fall apart if there is a monastery or temple in that part of the world, or if the player doesn't come from an order of monks, but is self-trained, or anything like that? If not, then it's more-or-less arbitrary), and instead will just 'accidentally' slip out of accent every now and then...
Then again, it could just be me.
So me adding one to the game world so he can play his character concept is a bad thing because I didn't just indiscriminately say yes?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Did you actually talk to him about what his concept is? It sounds like you've just pigeonholed him based on his class name and assumed all Monks-the-class are Monks-the-concept.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember that Monk-The-Class is not Monk-The-Concept. Monk just means 'I fight well unarmed'; it doesn't mean he's part of any 'order', or even knows what the word 'monastery' means, or that he's some zen-spouting navel-gazer.
Yeah. He could be a bare knuckle boxer.
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
So tonight, I killed one of my players off.
We've really, really got to start getting all on the same page with the difference between "players" and "characters" before somebody gets tossed in jail over a misunderstanding. (Or worse.)
So tonight, I killed one of my players off.We've really, really got to start getting all on the same page with the difference between "players" and "characters" before somebody gets tossed in jail over a misunderstanding. (Or worse.)
I make a killing with my necromantic and raise dead services because of this misunderstanding.
Did you actually talk to him about what his concept is? It sounds like you've just pigeonholed him based on his class name and assumed all Monks-the-class are Monks-the-concept.
He wanted to do Zen Archer, he didn't really have a concept so we came up with one together for him.
Collaborative effort, player is happy, DM is happy, a good story for a change. Wait, this is the internet, and as DM I am always going to be the bad guy regardless of what I do.
I tend to think of RP restrictions as something like a Paladin's or Cleric's code of conduct.
I would say that encouraging the player to use an accent, with no real penalty for him slipping out of it isn't really "forcing him" or anything.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Did you actually talk to him about what his concept is? It sounds like you've just pigeonholed him based on his class name and assumed all Monks-the-class are Monks-the-concept.He wanted to do Zen Archer, he didn't really have a concept so we came up with one together for him.
Collaborative effort, player is happy, DM is happy, a good story for a change. Wait, this is the internet, and as DM I am always going to be the bad guy regardless of what I do.
No, you're the 'bad guy' for pigeonholing him based on the class' name, rather than what the player wanted from the character. If the player didn't care, then there was no 'restriction' going on; Restriction implies there was a choice that the player may have wanted, which was forbidden, because you couldn't be bothered to accept the possibility of a monk in your game world which wasn't 'eastern' and quite possibly a racist portrayal. Furthermore, after all that, you forced the player to use an accent for said possibly racist portrayal, despite what the payer may have wanted.
If it were truly collaborative, there would have been no need for 'restriction' here. Your use of 'restriction,' however, implies that the player wanted something different from the character he got from this "collaboration." True, there are times and places where the DM has to say "no" or "yes, but..." but that's usually when the concept grossly contradicts the established setting and/or feel of the game. I feel hard pressed to think of a way the character restrictions you put in place were a result of that.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
wait why does he need a monastery? why cant he just be a self taught martial artist who is creating his own path? he back story doesnt have to be an episode of Kung-Fu unless that player wants it to be so.
in conclusion let him pick his background and let it be. dont force him to do anything he doesnt want to, and suspension of disbelief is part of the game.... you know dragons and sorcerers who fart fireballs and all that.
Did you actually talk to him about what his concept is? It sounds like you've just pigeonholed him based on his class name and assumed all Monks-the-class are Monks-the-concept.He wanted to do Zen Archer, he didn't really have a concept so we came up with one together for him.
Collaborative effort, player is happy, DM is happy, a good story for a change. Wait, this is the internet, and as DM I am always going to be the bad guy regardless of what I do.
No, you're the 'bad guy' for pigeonholing him based on the class' name, rather than what the player wanted from the character. If the player didn't care, then there was no 'restriction' going on; Restriction implies there was a choice that the player may have wanted, which was forbidden, because you couldn't be bothered to accept the possibility of a monk in your game world which wasn't 'eastern' and quite possibly a racist portrayal. Furthermore, after all that, you forced the player to use an accent for said possibly racist portrayal, despite what the payer may have wanted.
If it were truly collaborative, there would have been no need for 'restriction' here. Your use of 'restriction,' however, implies that the player wanted something different from the character he got from this "collaboration." True, there are times and places where the DM has to say "no" or "yes, but..." but that's usually when the concept grossly contradicts the established setting and/or feel of the game. I feel hard pressed to think of a way the character restrictions you put in place were a result of that.
But he didn't have a concept, he just wanted to play a Zen Archer. All he cared about was the crunch, so I gave him some fluff as well. He had no background story, no character concept, nothing. I even asked him if he had any preferences.
Not that I really care to get defensive, as I'm sure at this point you are trolling, but I am actively trying to stay away from the idea that the game is just there to facilitate us playing all combat all the time.
I guess I am a sh*tty DM for not having a completely open sandbox game where you can play any race/class combination you can cheese up and also be Chaotic Evil but call yourself Chaotic Neutral so you can't get tracked or smitten by NPC paladins.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Remember that Monk-The-Class is not Monk-The-Concept. Monk just means 'I fight well unarmed'; it doesn't mean he's part of any 'order', or even knows what the word 'monastery' means, or that he's some zen-spouting navel-gazer.
Pretty much this. And getting defensive about it is silly - you posted this here looking for feedback so you should have expected this to happen.
Also, insisting that they affect an "oriental" accent just because you, the GM, can't separate the monk's mechanics from its flavor is pretty racist.
Take a step back; if your character concept resembles Mickey Rooney, you're doing it wrong.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually you're the bad guy for not talking him out of playing a monk...I mean hell, what's next, you'll let someone play a rogue?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember that Monk-The-Class is not Monk-The-Concept. Monk just means 'I fight well unarmed'; it doesn't mean he's part of any 'order', or even knows what the word 'monastery' means, or that he's some zen-spouting navel-gazer.Pretty much this. And getting defensive about it is silly - you posted this here looking for feedback so you should have expected this to happen.
Also, insisting that they affect an "oriental" accent just because you, the GM, can't separate the monk's mechanics from its flavor is pretty racist.
Take a step back; if your character concept resembles Mickey Rooney, you're doing it wrong.
Oh man, that reminds me of Hung Kung Phooey, remember that show? The stuff that was acceptable back then, geez...
Monk argument aside...
Now the question is: Do you place role playing requirements on your players, and how far are you willing to stretch your own gameplay world to accommodate the desires of your players?
The answer for me is no to role playing requirements. I see fluff as infinitely mutable so I'm more than willing to let a player refluff their mechanical choices to fit the setting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember that Monk-The-Class is not Monk-The-Concept. Monk just means 'I fight well unarmed'; it doesn't mean he's part of any 'order', or even knows what the word 'monastery' means, or that he's some zen-spouting navel-gazer.Pretty much this. And getting defensive about it is silly - you posted this here looking for feedback so you should have expected this to happen.
Also, insisting that they affect an "oriental" accent just because you, the GM, can't separate the monk's mechanics from its flavor is pretty racist.
Take a step back; if your character concept resembles Mickey Rooney, you're doing it wrong.
Badwrongfun is a really bad argument to tell someone how to play the game.
You are telling me that the mechanics of a class should always be separate from fluff, and I respectfully disagree. It is a role playing game, not a DPR cheese Olympics. Monks have ki powers and are very Asian influenced, and saying that I want to incorporate that into the role playing of characters who otherwise would be rendered walking stat blocks encourages role playing rather than having the player sit there on his phone until the fighting happens.
And if I learned anything from contemporary television, it is that purposely ignoring cultural influence and adhering to what is referred to as 'political correctness' as a means of dodging the racism bullet is itself the new form of racism. As stated by Mr. Joel McHale "I think not being racist is the new racism." There is nothing insulting about having his character having a fictional oriental background. I was trying to help my player add depth and fun role playing to his character.
Players these days.. sheesh
So racist character concepts are nullified by out of context quotes by D-list comedians? Gotcha - I missed that memo.Remember that Monk-The-Class is not Monk-The-Concept. Monk just means 'I fight well unarmed'; it doesn't mean he's part of any 'order', or even knows what the word 'monastery' means, or that he's some zen-spouting navel-gazer.Pretty much this. And getting defensive about it is silly - you posted this here looking for feedback so you should have expected this to happen.
Also, insisting that they affect an "oriental" accent just because you, the GM, can't separate the monk's mechanics from its flavor is pretty racist.
Take a step back; if your character concept resembles Mickey Rooney, you're doing it wrong.
Badwrongfun is a really bad argument to tell someone how to play the game.
You are telling me that the mechanics of a class should always be separate from fluff, and I respectfully disagree. It is a role playing game, not a DPR cheese Olympics. Monks have ki powers and are very Asian influenced, and saying that I want to incorporate that into the role playing of characters who otherwise would be rendered walking stat blocks encourages role playing rather than having the player sit there on his phone until the fighting happens.
And if I learned anything from contemporary television, it is that purposely ignoring cultural influence and adhering to what is referred to as 'political correctness' as a means of dodging the racism bullet is itself the new form of racism. As stated by Mr. Joel McHale "I think not being racist is the new racism." There is nothing insulting about having his character having a fictional oriental background. I was trying to help my player add depth and fun role playing to his character.
Players these days.. sheesh
Yes, that is exactly the point I was trying to make!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Words simply fail me. There are not enough facepalm gifs on the internet to describe this idea.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In the end it looks like my player is really happy with the results of his new character.
I find it hard to argue with the results. All that matters in this hobby is that the people around your table are happy with the game. At worst, announcing the details of it publicly may have been the only questionable idea ;)
Incidentally, I spent my first couple of gaming years thinking of "monk" in medieval western terms, and being amused by the concept of these wine-making book-inscribing guys with a ring of hair around a bald spot being unarmed combat experts...
I usually negotiate character backgrounds with my players. They come to me with an idea, I'll look it over and point out any things that aren't a good fit for the campaign, and suggest alternatives until we find something we can both agree on. I don't have a problem with reflavoring classes - for me, the campaign setting itself is far more definitive of background details than the rulebook. As long as I can see it fitting in the game world (which isn't necessarily going to be Golarion or anything with a traditional D&D feel), that's all that matters to me.
|
I just want to start by saying, in the end, it's your game, and if you're all happy, then whatever? I'm not even sure what the point of posting this was?
However, how long are you expecting him to speak with an accent? They tend to disappear relatively fast. I work with a man who was born in China, and he sounds pretty much like any other Texan after living here for the last ten years. I'm from California (obviously now living in Texas) and it took less than a year before people never referenced my accent again.
EDIT: Ahh, nevermind, I see your question at the end of your post, my bad, I had forgotten it because most of the replies didn't mention it at all.
I would let my players pick whatever, for the most part. But I usually ask for a fluff idea first and then we work through the mechanics of expressing it. So my players have gotten clever at coming up with fluff for the mechanics they want to play and presenting those first, then guiding me to the mechanical choices they actually want. Which is what I prefer anyway, so whatever? I'm probably in the group that would have just let him play the Zen Archer as "not an Eastern monk", but some weird-o archer who becomes "one with the arrow" because his father taught him that way or something similar.
As for the accent, I probably wouldn't force him to do that, but I have requested that "background players" come up with something that will make them act (i.e. hatred of another race/class/etc, desire for a particular kind of treasure, just something that their character will always respond to) in order to force them to move to the forefront occasionally. I don't mind background players (if that's how they have fun), but I've had players in the past who appreciated working on their role playing in small doses, and it's easy enough to add/remove the element as necessary if they want to do more/less.
Marshmallow i havent come up with a term for this but you have inadvertently roused the mob so im going to stick up for you. No one does when it happens to me. Yes whats wrong with monks being flavored as more than bare knuckle brawlers, since i havent seen any bar fights or pay per view matches where one guy dim mak'd the other guy ...
I tried to play a Samurai with a japanese accent and a low voice once. I dropped it pretty quickly, even though it was hilarous, considering the samurai was a goblin.
I wouldn't put any such restrictions on players, only thing i require of my players is that they play their characters plausibly, in accordance to how they wrote them.
Things like voices and accents are implied, justl ike we don't actually switch to a different language, when the characters do, unless the player actually wants to act their accent out.
As long as you and your player have fun it's alright.
But as a suggestion for a martial artist, the practitionner doesn't have to be asiatic. The master of the school I frequent is vietnamese but no one else is. He could have been a student who went to that foreign quarter to study or wathever. Also, he could be figuring these things out by himself or have found some ancient scrolls with the techniques on them and be trying to decipher them as he adventure (legend say that is how shaolin kung fu was created, monks were given scrolls that taught yogic fitness techniques from a buddhist monk).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think playing with more than 5 players is almost always a bad idea because the game was designs for 4, but I digress.
I think forcing the accent is silly, but suggesting (not forcing, because nothing about what the OP has said sounds like force to me) degree of fluff on the class is not only completely reasonable, I think it's good.
For groups not playing in Golarion, or some other well-documented setting, I've found people rarely detail backstories beyond the generic. I think it's the GM's job to work with the player to make their backstories as specific as they can to make things immersive, and to tie the characters into the story better. I have one player right now that discussed backstory a lot with me, and as a result her character is a lot more immersed in the story as the group is visiting places where she grew up, and where she knows people.
Forcing an accent is a big no, though. After all, I am a male with a fairly low voice, if I'm playing a female I physically can't make my voice sound feminine, and that doesn't seem to cause any problems, so I don't see why a lack of accent would (i do find them fun, though).
The accent thing...eh, I'm personally biased. Normally as a GM I encourage people not to try it as after 20 some odd years playing the number of people I've seen pull it off I can count on one hand, and all of those were incredibly situation.
The monk thing though, I'm right there with you. If someone wants to make Brad Pitt from Snatch in one of my games, well, now we have the Brawler, but before that it would have been a fighter. The monk isn't just a bare knuckle brawler any more than the alchemist is someone who mixes up alchemical items. I would be hard pressed to accept a character background where they self taught themselves monk abilities, just like I would be hard pressed to accept someone who self taught themselves wizard abilities. Not going to say it won't happen ever, but it's going to take a lot of work on the part of the player.
I played Shadow Run with Guy back SR 1St Edition who played Dwarven detective from Quebec. He had the thick French Canadian Accent down perfectly. I think guy lives Boston now last I heard.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, you didn't actually have a question or want a debate, you just wanted to look for validation for your questionable idea, and a chance to play the victim card if you didn't get it.
The only flavor that matters for a character is the flavor the player gives it. Not using the default fluff is not even remotely the same as having a flavorless character.
Now the question is: Do you place role playing requirements on your players, and how far are you willing to stretch your own gameplay world to accommodate the desires of your players?
Zhayne this was the point of the thread.
Basically, how involved to DMs try and get with their player's character's backgrounds and stories to help the player role play rather than be rendered a walking stat block?
Everyone at my table thought this idea was great and everyone rolled with it.
Backlash aside, the thread is going pretty well. Some DMs find it all but necessary to help players come up with fluff to support their crunch, some don't care in the slightest. Neither is wrong, I just thought it would be a good discussion that doesn't involve paladins or alignments.
Guess I'm the bad guy here....
Well one of my player made character from another side of continent without any idea how he ended there, so I decided use his adventure trait and made him a backstory. Then I played it out with extra short minigame.
So he resqued an elven mistress from revolt, who paid him to escort her safely to her homeland. The next thing he knows is that he awakened years later in never hearded land with his pay, some vague memories and gift of subtle flesh craft.
For another player, who have a halfelf, I made another background minigame, which revealed little truth of elven contracts of servitude, but neither one is interested of sharing his experiences with other PCs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now the question is: Do you place role playing requirements on your players, and how far are you willing to stretch your own gameplay world to accommodate the desires of your players?Zhayne this was the point of the thread.
Basically, how involved to DMs try and get with their player's character's backgrounds and stories to help the player role play rather than be rendered a walking stat block?
Everyone at my table thought this idea was great and everyone rolled with it.
Backlash aside, the thread is going pretty well. Some DMs find it all but necessary to help players come up with fluff to support their crunch, some don't care in the slightest. Neither is wrong, I just thought it would be a good discussion that doesn't involve paladins or alignments.
Guess I'm the bad guy here....
If all you were doing was helping the player come up with a backstory, when they didn't have one, prior, that's a far stretch from restricting their roleplaying, and I'm guessing you know that; my guess, you were baiting a negative response, so you could play the victim.
Given your current stance on what the topic is about (as opposed to what you claimed it was about in your OP), yes, a DM should work with a player to help them build a character who works fluff-wise within the setting, but it still is up to the player how they want to play their character. It is also the goal of a good DM to alter the game world, where needed, to suit what provides most fun for the table, which means tweaking some minor elements where needed to fit players' character concepts. This isn't of course an absolute. There's no reason to make huge campaign altering changes, but simple stuff, such as "Sure, there's a small monastery somewhere around this region" or "Sure, that race exists in this game world; it's extremely rare, but it exists" or the like isn't a problem, like, if the campaign is based around a certain tenet such as race or whatever. But even considering that, remember that the prototypical 'All Dwarf Party' included a Halfling and a high CR Outsider.
Now the question is: Do you place role playing requirements on your players, and how far are you willing to stretch your own gameplay world to accommodate the desires of your players?Zhayne this was the point of the thread.
Basically, how involved to DMs try and get with their player's character's backgrounds and stories to help the player role play rather than be rendered a walking stat block?
I would say get involved, but don't put your foot down. You should give advice, not restrictions.
Everyone at my table thought this idea was great and everyone rolled with it.
Glad it works, I'd have approached it differently no less because it doesn't work so well with everyone.
Not every player is equally good at roleplaying, or in your case we are actually entering voice acting territory (and putting such a requirement, as having them speak in an accent might actually even discourage some players from roleplaying because it might be too difficult, and if a player is inclined toward introversion would make them draw back even more), and not every player might want their character to be the way you might want them to play it. That's why I think you should work together with your player to figure out how he can get more involved in the role playing and find something that suits them.
While I wouldn't use the term "put my foot down", I definitely stick to my guns. I'm willign to consider virtually everything, but I'm going to keep making suggestions until the person accepts something or gives up and goes for a different character.
If you want to play a kitsune, you probably came from the Wo Pai Empire in the East.
If you don't want to be a foreigner, you're most likely an elf or druid that recieved their bestial/magical attributes as a blessing from a nature spirit.
If you don't want to be a foreigner, elf, or canine-worshipping druid, then you must be the result of some sort of arcane experiment.
If you don't like any of those options I don't know what to tell you. Kitsune don't have a culture here, people don't know what they are. I'm not making a new campaign setting for every new player.
While I wouldn't use the term "put my foot down", I definitely stick to my guns. I'm willign to consider virtually everything, but I'm going to keep making suggestions until the person accepts something or gives up and goes for a different character.
If you want to play a kitsune, you probably came from the Wo Pai Empire in the East.
If you don't want to be a foreigner, you're most likely an elf or druid that recieved their bestial/magical attributes as a blessing from a nature spirit.
If you don't want to be a foreigner, elf, or canine-worshipping druid, then you must be the result of some sort of arcane experiment.
If you don't like any of those options I don't know what to tell you. Kitsune don't have a culture here, people don't know what they are. I'm not making a new campaign setting for every new player.
i could collaberate on things like that. these could work for example races, or appropriate sorcerer bloodlines too.
Half-Nymph; Human Nobleman Charmed and Coerced a Nymph the natural way, by offering her a place to stay as a means to compensate her scorched grove, funding a revenge campaign against the bandits that scorched it, showering her with gifts, and showing her, an Urban Community can have a natural side. in fact, the nymph became his Wife and the city, her Urban Grove. she adjusted and eventually retrained a few skills and feats, and their daughter, became the heir to the manor, but due to her incurable illness, sought to adventure for a cure so that she would still live by her time to inherit.
Sylph; a pair of nomads concieved a child in a powerful unnatural storm. because of the circumstances of the conception. the child was blessed with a planar affinity for air. granting her enhanced mobility and a saavyness for detecting future storms, but at the same time, cursing her was mischievious winds that like to do crazy things like knock over glass bottles and flip skirts.
Ifrit; the child was conceived during the pinnacle of summer, by a pair of parents blessed with fiery temper. the child, blessed with their tempraments, and their flaming bloodline
-Just like you can't be a half-orc in dragon age, you can't be a skaven in Ustalav, and you can't be a dragon-newt in Middle Earth, putting race restrictions on a campaign is logical and maybe required.
-Yeah, you COULD let players justify their choices, but some people always want to play vampire drow half-unicorns that are LG.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
-Just like you can't be a half-orc in dragon age, you can't be a skaven in Ustalav, and you can't be a dragon-newt in Middle Earth, putting race restrictions on a campaign is logical and maybe required.
-Yeah, you COULD let players justify their choices, but some people always want to play vampire drow half-unicorns that are LG.
Hey man, I've been pushing for Good Vampires -before- they sparkled. So Angel was one of my favorite shows, so sue me. :P
Well technically no matter WHO you play you're always a Half-Orc in Dragon Age since Darkspawn are basically Orcs by any other name and Gray Wardens drink their blood and are mutated by it.
It just differs whether the other half is Human, Elf, or Dwarf.
There's even a Half-Orc Dog.