Character Comfort Levels


Gamer Life General Discussion

101 to 120 of 120 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court

Most felt like a bad session with players from dark dungeons. I mean just look at the names.

The Exchange

I will play any race. Maybe a quarter of my characters are female tops, depending on what group i play with. My characters tend to be themed around taking one personality trait out of proportion and that is more likely to be seen as offensive with gender crossing. We have 3 women in my group that freely crossdress one of which had the sorcerer that abused his high cha until we renamed him manwhore. The other 2 men in my main group are totally against playing females, but one (straight) one does have a gay cleric.


thejeff wrote:
strayshift wrote:
Wasn't a huge fan of the books, the adventures were made better by an excellent DM who really put a load of effort into making them feel 'epic'.

The books weren't bad for D&D books. The adventures felt way too scripted for me. At least reading them.

Scripted? I'll say.

Thumbed through one at a used book store a few years back and if the PCs didn't do almost exactly what had happened in the books the adventure couldn't move forward. The adventures were simply the novels set into adventure booklet format.

In fact, weren't the players supposed to use the pre-gen characters adapted straight from the novels into the D&D game mechanics?


Yes. But that was the grand idea of it if I remember my history correctly. They made the modules, then the developers played those modules, and finally they wrote that play through into novels. So it probably comes across very close to the module.


Aranna wrote:
Yes. But that was the grand idea of it if I remember my history correctly. They made the modules, then the developers played those modules, and finally they wrote that play through into novels. So it probably comes across very close to the module.

Railroad! Come'n through! :o

Works for some people though and I'm fine with that. And with the right DM it might even be fun for most people. Yeah, I'd give it a go, with the right DM...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In fairness, the Dragonlance modules really were the first of their kind. Experimental. Like a precursor to the AP concept. Yes, there had been linked modules before. Giants/Drow in particular. But this was much more character and story driven. Heavily railroaded and poorly done in many ways, but very ambitious.
A definite step forward.


DungeonmasterCal wrote:
Ya know, I may be one of the few 80s gamers who did not like the Dragonlance books. At all.
Hama wrote:
I am not from the 80s, well I was born in them, but I strongly dislike Dragonlance novels.
WitchyTangles wrote:
Count me in with the Dragonlance dislike team.

You may be the minority, but who knows?

Chronicles was the one and only D&D novelization that I loved as a teen. I read a lot of others -- mostly FR and other DL novels -- but even back then I knew those others were demonstrations of Sturgeon's Law.

It took me picking up the first of the Chronicles again as an adult to realize that it was merely second-rate in a different way. I got three or four chapters in, and thought "What did I like about this, again?"

But I may be in the minority for having loved and then lost DL, for all I know.


thejeff wrote:

In fairness, the Dragonlance modules really were the first of their kind. Experimental. Like a precursor to the AP concept. Yes, there had been linked modules before. Giants/Drow in particular. But this was much more character and story driven. Heavily railroaded and poorly done in many ways, but very ambitious.

A definite step forward.

OK, I can accept that. Taking risks can be useful to move things forward.

I remember liking the cover artwork and maps on the interior of the sleeve... and that's about it.

Anyone actually RP through some of them? If having read the books though it would be one spoiler after another as a player. Not so great.


Tequila Sunrise wrote:

Chronicles was the one and only D&D novelization that I loved as a teen. I read a lot of others -- mostly FR and other DL novels -- but even back then I knew those others were demonstrations of Sturgeon's Law.

It took me picking up the first of the Chronicles again as an adult to realize that it was merely second-rate in a different way. I got three or four chapters in, and thought "What did I like about this, again?"

But I may be in the minority for having loved and then lost DL, for all I know.

I keep pulp scifi and/or fantasy around to read when I'm not feeling like something else. I actually read one DL trilogy recently - Elven Exiles by Thompson and Cook. The 3rd book railroaded the main character for some plot point or other. Overall not bad but I don't feel like I want to read them again.

I've tried other DL books in the past and was lucky if I made it three chapters in.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber

Like a couple of other people upthread, I'm "uncomfortable" with players playing cross-gender.

Specifically, I mean that I have way too often seen straight dudes playing female lesbian characters who spend the entire game trying to have sex with every female they come across. Or playing gay males being some sort of prancing, limp-wristed, effete caricature. That stuff irritates the blazes out of me. I've seen both of these tropes so often, and they irritate me so much, that if a new player mentions that they are going to play cross gender/sex lines, I pull them aside and have a serious conversation with them about what flies at my table.

Races don't bother me as much because what is an elf *really* like? What stereotype is insulting to a dwarf? *shrugs* If by race you mean culture, I would be just as irritated with insulting portrayals of culture as I am with insulting portrayals of sex and gender, but I've never experienced it at one of my games.

Anyhow, if a person is going to play their character without being insulting/disturbing, I'm pretty cool with most things.


Well, I got to try my first female character today. She played most effectively but there was almost no RP in PFS today. :P

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
The Shining Fool wrote:
I have way too often seen straight dudes playing female lesbian characters who spend the entire game trying to have sex with every female they come across.

Would it be better if we just played straight male characters who spend the entire game trying to have sex with every female we come across?

If "no", then cross-gendering isn't the problem, it's the player's sexuality level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Samy wrote:
The Shining Fool wrote:
I have way too often seen straight dudes playing female lesbian characters who spend the entire game trying to have sex with every female they come across.

Would it be better if we just played straight male characters who spend the entire game trying to have sex with every female we come across?

If "no", then cross-gendering isn't the problem, it's the player's sexuality level.

There are two issues at hand here:

1) player plays with themes not accepted around the table (sexuality, regardless of gender or sexual orientation)
2) player makes a ungrateful parody of cultural group (in this case gay/lesbian community)

The player's sexuality level is not the only problem; there's also a matter of respect for groups/genders/cultures that are different (although I agree that both are form of lack of respect).

A jerk will be a jerk, but it's worse when its animosity is targeted toward what's different than toward what the jerk really is. Blatant disrespect aside, I can tolerate better those who make a parody of themselves.


Laurefindel wrote:
Samy wrote:
The Shining Fool wrote:
I have way too often seen straight dudes playing female lesbian characters who spend the entire game trying to have sex with every female they come across.

Would it be better if we just played straight male characters who spend the entire game trying to have sex with every female we come across?

If "no", then cross-gendering isn't the problem, it's the player's sexuality level.

There are two issues at hand here:

1) player plays with themes not accepted around the table (sexuality, regardless of gender or sexual orientation)
2) player makes a ungrateful parody of cultural group (in this case gay/lesbian community)

So it's not only about the player's sexuality level but, a matter of respect of groups/genders/cultures that are different (although I agree that both are form of lack of respect).

I think the difference is self-parody is usually less offensive than parody of others. The straight male playing a straight male who spent the entire game trying to have sex with every female he came across would be disruptive if the rest of the group was trying to get other things done, but if he's making a statement, even unintentionally, about straight males, at least he's doing it from teh perspective of a straight male.

Doing the same thing playing a female is worse because you're portraying a different group offensively and you're now saying something about them, not about you.
A female playing a male character doing the same thing would also be a problem.


I've been rpgs for two decades and have played male and female characters (although, being female, I have a preference for females).

My main group is mainly women, and we don't think twice about playing different genders - indeed, the party is about 50/50 male/female at the moment. When gaming with my husband, though, I usually only play female characters. Not only is he uncomfortable with me playing a male character, he doesn't like anyone playing against gender. I don't quite understand why, but he's the kind of person who won't even play a computer game with a female lead, as he doesn't feel he can 'relate'. He's fine with characters (and gamers!) of all sexualities though, and he is also okay with DMing different genders.

In terms of race, my characters reflect the influences on the Pathfinder game world. My Taldoran characters are Mediterranean/Byzantium-ish, and my Ulfin characters are vikings and the Chelaxians of Varisia are generically Euro-fantasy. My Aldori sword-lord is kind of Russian. I don't feel so constrained in other game systems, though. Most sci-fi games I've played I've gone for characters with Chinese or Indian names, or some kind of melting pot character that reflects what people are likely to look like in the future (I don't think 'race' will mean much 500 years anyway).

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
Laurefindel wrote:
Samy wrote:
The Shining Fool wrote:
I have way too often seen straight dudes playing female lesbian characters who spend the entire game trying to have sex with every female they come across.

Would it be better if we just played straight male characters who spend the entire game trying to have sex with every female we come across?

If "no", then cross-gendering isn't the problem, it's the player's sexuality level.

There are two issues at hand here:

1) player plays with themes not accepted around the table (sexuality, regardless of gender or sexual orientation)
2) player makes a ungrateful parody of cultural group (in this case gay/lesbian community)

The player's sexuality level is not the only problem; there's also a matter of respect for groups/genders/cultures that are different (although I agree that both are form of lack of respect).

A jerk will be a jerk, but it's worse when its animosity is targeted toward what's different than toward what the jerk really is. Blatant disrespect aside, I can tolerate better those who make a parody of themselves.

What Laurelfindel said.

I've just seen the combination of 1) and 2) so often when people say they are going to be playing cross-gender that I am a bit defensive against it. I don't ban it, it's just an alarm bell that causes me to go have a talk with them about expectations. If it turns out that they aren't going to be playing cross-gender to be nasty or mean, then it's perfectly fine.


Yeah cross gender gets dumb when it results in something really sexualized. Like can't you think about having sexual fantasies about your cross gender pc in your bedroom and not make other uncomfortable.

Also I just thought of an alchemist with gynocmastia (sp?) as a side effect of extracts. I can see a GM not wanting to let me play this.

Liberty's Edge

The Shining Fool wrote:
Laurefindel wrote:


2) player makes a ungrateful parody of cultural group (in this case gay/lesbian community)
If it turns out that they aren't going to be playing cross-gender to be nasty or mean, then it's perfectly fine.

O.O

...people play cross-gender...to be *mean*?

Wtf.

Is this a thing that actually happens? Omg, I'm so glad I only live in my own isolated bubble.

For my own part, I don't get out much to tabletop games, but in games like Bioware's computer games, I always play female characters who go for female characters, whenever possible. Considering nobody else sees what I'm doing and it's solely for my own enjoyment because I like it that way, I would like to think I'm not being mean to anyone there.


I used to play in a group with a person who tried to add sexuality to everything. It made me a bit uncomfortable to say the least. I'm a very much "and the screen fades to black and things happen" kind of person. Let your imagination flow, but at the same time if you are creeping out another player come on, ease up a bit. My comfort level is really about having fun, and if somebody is not having fun because of certain themes that keep popping up then either it is time to find a new table or ask what can be done about said level of fun and how you can raise it.

Backstory:
the player I mentioned happened to be gay and was dating my best friend the gm at the time. He treated my friend like an object and I was not a fan of them together. In addition to me not liking this person, he acted very much like he was coming out of the closet at all times. Many of my friends believe he has problems with his own sexuality but that's another story. Now my gm has a new bf and they look great together.


haruhiko88 wrote:

I used to play in a group with a person who tried to add sexuality to everything. It made me a bit uncomfortable to say the least. I'm a very much "and the screen fades to black and things happen" kind of person. Let your imagination flow, but at the same time if you are creeping out another player come on, ease up a bit. My comfort level is really about having fun, and if somebody is not having fun because of certain themes that keep popping up then either it is time to find a new table or ask what can be done about said level of fun and how you can raise it.

** spoiler omitted **

I just wrote a thread about this exact same topic, and agree with your sentiment.

101 to 120 of 120 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / Character Comfort Levels All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion