| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
as it asks in the header, what would your alignment be, with a bit of description/explanation.
I would be LAWFUL UNPLEASANT
Lawful : due to the fact that the world will have predictable and consistent rules and standards, with not very much weirdness, and a attempt to keep the settings flavor intact with little digressions into wacky land.
Unpleasant : the world is rough, and life is hard, you have to work and fight for what you want, and nothing is on a platter, it rains and you get sniffles, rats eat your unprotected rations...watch out for chamber pots from 3rd story windows, harsh but fair since it is across the board.
Class:
indifferent overlord
The indifferent overlord cares little for the small things in life and allows the world to proceed how it will, players may succeed spectacularly or get sold for sausages in the market place, all the overlord cares for is that the adventure continues and great things occur, for good or bad.
and He rolls all combat dice where the players can see it!
well there's mine lets hear yours. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Alignment: Chaotic Philosophical
Chaotic: Although the world and the rules that govern it are internally consistent as often as possible, one feature of a world beholden to the whims of divine entities and self-absorbed archmagi is unpredictability. The unexpected should be expected. Critical failure or success is not just a number, it's a call to action.
Philosophical: Acting without thinking is rarely rewarded in a world full of danger, unless it's well justified on a meta-level. Consequences spread outward, like ripples in a pond full of submerged mines. What you did three weeks ago matters, and no adventuring party is an island. There's a world happening beyond your line of sight. Always.
Class: Indulgent Father
The Indulgent Father just wants to tell a good bedtime story, and sticking to the script has been known to get in the way of that. Sometimes the kiddies break the glass slipper, hang their cloaks on lovingly polished plot hooks, steal the emperors new clothes, ignore the trail of breadcrumbs, or let the dragon eat the maiden while they loot his hoard. These things happen, and that's okay. But... See: Philosophical.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alignment: TN
Class: Ranger (Favored Enemy: PCs)
Let the hunt begin.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Somewhere between Lawful Neutral and Lawful good.
Lawful because the world has an internal consistency, and I'm something of a rules lawyer as a player, so as a GM, definitely going in that direction. Also, because I hold players accountable for their actions, both in general, and, to a slightly lesser degree, in regards to the local laws of wherever they are.
Neutral-Good because, ultimately, I want the party to succeed, and will grant them some leeway, or even save their asses on occasion, but at the same time, I don't want to make things too easy (in fact, I like to make things fairly difficult at times), and will allow them to suffer consequences of their actions.
Class: Storyteller?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He'd be a chaotic neutral illusionist.
on several occasions he has tricked me into thinking someone killed me indiscriminately. he also told someone else to make a disintegration check after they opened a door and they almost had a heart attck but then he was line" no, im kidding."
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alignment: Chaotic Good - I like it when my players get excited about things, even if they're not strictly within the rules, so I'll let them pull something off they might normally not be able to do if it's RP-rich. I also am well-known for giving too much loot.
Class: Alchemist - I'm a geneticist, and I brew beer. No other choices on this one.
Neutral Good Bard.
I weave a story around the player characters and while I want a happy ending, they'll have to earn it from me.
Lawful Neutral Hell Knight Commander - The rules are to be followed, and where those fail I shall rule.
|
Lawful Hyperbolic Master Summoner / Daredevil Bard
I like to maintain a coherent game world where players can reasonably predict how normal behavior and actions will turn out. If you punch the bartender, there's going to be a barfight. He's not going to suddenly turn into a lich just because that would be zany. I can't stand nonsensical worlds where all the magic and magic items are custom, all the rules are touched with home-brew, and every plot requires deus ex machina. Some of that here and there is okay, but too much and the players will just sit there waiting for the DM to tell them what happens next because they can never rely on their actions having any tangible effect.
That being said, I also don't like plot lines to be boring and low-key. You're adventurers, not commoners. Your challenges are deadly, your conversations dramatic, and your goals are world-changing. Shakespeare didn't write plays about peasants, he wrote about kings, princes, sorcerers, and magical creatures.
When it comes time to do battle, it's not just my players against a band of cloned human bandits, either. No, when my games boil over it combat, they can expect a well-oiled tactical encounter against combined arms. Weather is a factor and there always seems to be some excitement factor beyond life or death: a time limit, a storm on the horizon, or rising lava.
|
|
what alignment are they actually: I've seen the gambit but honestly I have encounter far fewer neutral or good and frequent evil
What it should be: LN
what class they actually are: typically a bard, a wizard, or a barbarian (role play with the ability to handle most any situation, straight skills checks left and right with an obvious favortism towards casters, FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT {respectively})
What class they should be: Bard
Alignment: Neutral Good
I try to keep games on-track and moving towards a memorable ending for the PCs, and I'd prefer to run an adventure where the players "win". I plan ahead for future sessions and try to keep to one story, but sometimes an interesting idea comes to me during a game and I just roll with it.
Pros: Works with PCs, flexible personality, adaptable story, willing to bend rules for a character concept.
Cons: Often too forgiving with mistakes, story can become too unfocused, wastes effort with needless planning.
Class: Words of Power Arcanist into Loremaster
At first glance my options are limited and my understanding of the game's intricacies and grander workings are piecemeal at best. What at first appears to be a glaring weakness is actually my greatest strength - because I'm not fully aware of how everything works, my thought process isn't as limited by the constraints the rules provide and I can use what I know in a large variety of combinations others wouldn't think of.
What I AM good at is telling a good story. Having read so much literature in my childhood I can pull story elements from various sources unavailable to others and meld them into something new. While the tropes I use aren't always original, the combinations I come up with are memorable indeed.
Pros: Flexible, creative, experienced storyteller.
Cons: Incomplete knowledge, doesn't have every solution on hand at any given time.
|
Lawful Generous Bard.
I like the rules. I read them carefully. When I house-rule, I tend to describe the house-rule in detail and make it as consistent with the rest of the rules as possible.
However I do like to say "yes" to my players and give them things so I use generous stat generation methods, hand out custom items designed for them, and bias found treasure towards stuff the PCs will use. House-rules usually give the PCs options or power rather than taking them away. I'm not necessarily "good" because I make them suffer sometimes (it makes a good story, see below), but they get lots of toys to make up for it.
And it's all about the story. Sometimes the story needs a good fight, but I try to design them to be dramatic rather than tactical exercises - though I'm trying to dip Fighter (tactician) to keep my more tactically-minded players entertained.
Neutral Fun. At least, that's what I hope to be. : )
Oh, a class? Hmm, rogue/bard, with a bit of loremaster or chronicler.
As mine avatar:
Lawful Good Expert (Rule Lawyer) 1, Adept (Game Master) 1
I find myself to be Lawful Imposer:
The rules are important in my game, and where there are no rules, I arbitrate as I deem appropriate.
"Without rules, we might all as we be back up in the trees, throwing our crap at each other."
Its also important to keep the game on track, to the point of where I will impose myself on the group to maintain relevant continuity. No distractions.
Class: Director
I see the game as an epic movie or mini series. The heroes musts strive to achieve, progress, and triumph. It is my job to make it difficult for them, but not impossible, and make the rewards seem worthwhile.
Alignment-wise, I would be Chaotic Honeybadger, because I don't care! I try to run things awesome for PCs and GM alike and care nothing about 'rules balance' or 'unacceptable character building'. If someone wants to use a Synthesist Summoner/Paladin or Monk gestalt (In a gestalt campaign obviously...), then who am I to argue? If someone wants to use 3PP material, why not? So long as it is not COMPLETELY broken I can deal with it and most of the 3PP material of today is balanced enough, especially if you take into context how freaking broken 3.X 3PP material was! And if someone wants a silly character (You know, if they play a Gnome of any sort! :P), what does it matter? A LOT of good novels and video games have a comic relief character, so why not? And why the hate for Asian material like the Samurai and Ninja or technological material like Gunslingers, Machinesmiths, and the robot type of constructs? And why not allow evil aligned characters? So long as it is understood that their character will be butchered if they betray the party, I see no problem with it. Yes, there would be in-party conflict, but any more than say, a kill crazy Paladin trying to kill Goblin babies, only to be scolded by the freaking BARBARIAN of all people?! Of course, these same views apply to my GM style, as I am willing to use almost any of my material against PCs at any given time, often include at least one semi-humorous (If not downright ridiculous!) 'side-adventure', make BBEGs deliberately overpowered unless their relative weakness was a key facet of their character concept, use ninjas and robots (Only once were they side-by-side!), have gun-using NPCs, use good-aligned NPCs and monsters as foes in morally grey conflicts or campaigns where the PCs are evil, ect. Man that was a wall of text!
Class-wise, I would be a gestalted Mystic Godling/Machinesmith, for two reasons. Reason one, I like the classes a lot! And reason two, they are philosophical embodiments of what a GM is: a GM is deific being who shepherds his PCs according to the divine laws he sets down (Not meant literally. If you DO think it's literal, please consult the local Alchemist for signs of mercury poisoning, as you may be showing symptoms! :P) and brings magic into the campaign and the GM sets up the campaign world like a well-oiled machine, intricate and precise as well as functional and according to a preset schematic he has envisioned.
|
|
LG cleric.
To me GMing is about telling a good story and hosting a fun party for my friends. If everyone's having a good time then I'm doing it right. I cheer when my players do well and cringe when the dice go bad for them. I may have godly powers, but I rarely invoke them, the PCs are the heroes of the story, not me. I'm here to heal your wounds and pick you up when you're down. Don't think I'm going to hold your hand though. You've got to make your way through this tale by your own merits.
Somewhere between Lawful Neutral and Lawful good.
Lawful because the world has an internal consistency, and I'm something of a rules lawyer as a player, so as a GM, definitely going in that direction. Also, because I hold players accountable for their actions, both in general, and, to a slightly lesser degree, in regards to the local laws of wherever they are.
Neutral-Good because, ultimately, I want the party to succeed, and will grant them some leeway, or even save their asses on occasion, but at the same time, I don't want to make things too easy (in fact, I like to make things fairly difficult at times), and will allow them to suffer consequences of their actions.
Class: Storyteller?
I would have said something quite along these lines, but it was already taken. So I liked it instead.
