I am usually CG. I like being unpredictable, but my characters will generally do everything they can to avoid harming innocent people/creatures/whatnot. And they don't go in for torture, but they are as likely to obey an order from another PC as they are to do the exact opposite provided it's not harming anyone. Kind of like the Wicca thing: Do what you will but harm none. That's how I always saw CG characters.
CN I always say as characters who are trying to balance the world. If there's too much good going on, they might do something slightly evil, but if there's too much evil, they'll more likely do something good to counteract. That's how it was explained to me back when I first started playing. And yes, some of them are insane, but not all. Some just like balance.
And LN were the ones that had their own code and wouldn't break it but didn't necessarily always follow the law.
LG were the ones that also had their own code and wouldn't break it, but generally followed the laws unless they saw the law as evil.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm glad I don't include alignment for PCs anymore.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the main reason I still like alignment as much as I do is that I've never had these sorts of problems or arguments anywhere but on internet forums. These sorts of things never cause trouble in my actual games.
I'm glad I don't include alignment for PCs anymore.
I know you occasionally post house rules elsewhere, but rather than sorting through them, what did you do to divorce the core system (alignment type spells, detect, smite, the existence of paladins, etc) from the Alignment system? You can send it to me as a private message if you think it's derailing the thread too much.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of the many variations of alignment I have used the easiest one for the players was the system where I described a list of real moral attitudes and then assigned a game alignment to each one. The players could search the list or present ones I hadn't thought of yet and it made alignments clear and easy to understand without removing any of the functionality of the game's setup.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whoa! I'm tripping beards, man!
I like to play good looking, human height, non humans. I find that sooo many GMs are rigid and conservative, so I often wind up playing elves and half-elves. But I'd love to explore Aasmimar, Tieflings, Dhampir, Catfolk, but again, many GMs have a stick up their @$$ with this stuff.
When I GM (which is usually) I'm pretty open- I might place a few restrictions, but only a few- but most players are conservative anyway. I always see core stuff.
We had a catfolk in one of the games I DM'd a while back. His character drew a card from my modified Deck of Many things and ended up growing a second tail...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I know you occasionally post house rules elsewhere, but rather than sorting through them, what did you do to divorce the core system (alignment type spells, detect, smite, the existence of paladins, etc) from the Alignment system? You can send it to me as a private message if you think it's derailing the thread too much.
For a long time, I pretty much always played an elven rogue or ranger. Granted, I dm'ed a lot, so getting to play was rare, so I went with what I knew and enjoyed.
Since starting PFS though, I've branched out considerably, playing weird races (like Kitsune, goblins and...gasp, HUMANS!) and non-standard classes. Tonight will see me debuting a Witch to help me work on arcane spell casting.
When DM'ing, I used to be pretty 'boring' and only allow core races and classes, but next time, anything goes. The game gets pretty fun with all the weirdness!
I have a tendency to remake variations of the same character... essentially a swashbuckler gish going back to my love of swashbucklers and trying to mix it with magic from 2nd ed.
Oddly enough I enjoy it every time because I always end up starting similarly but evolving very differently. I've done the character under 5 different GMs.
|
We try to stick to the 'alignment is a tool, not a straightjacket' line from waaaayyyy back in AD&D.
Except that in 1st edition AD&D, if a player changed alignment (voluntarily or involuntarily), they lost a level of experience...
And here is the last line concerning alignment in the 1st edition DMG (emphasis mine):
It is recommended that you do not inform players of the penalty which will occur with alignment change, so that those who seek to use alignment as a means of furthering their own interests by conveniently swapping one for another when they deem the time is ripe will find that they have, instead, paid a stern price for their fickleness.
If alignment is just a guideline to be followed or not followed as the players wish, then why does the 1st edition Dungeon Master’s Guide a). Suggest that the DM not inform the players what happens when their characters change alignment, and b). Require a player to pay "a stern price" when their characters do change alignment?
As far as changing alignment in 2nd edition AD&D, I addressed that in another thread: HERE
Back onto the subject of what kind of characters we play: For reasons reviewed by various people (including me) in this thread, so I have to say what kind of characters I would like to play. I like to play characters that both fit with and have tension with the theme of the adventure and setting. So my ideas are in my profile (expand the Spoiler at the bottom), and ones that I have fleshed out (backgrounds and personalities, not necessarily stats other than Ability Scores) are here; apart from some APs which I list alternates for the same character concept, the character ideas are different (and I'm trying to reduce the number of instances where alternates are required). For reasons detailed in the thread linked above, this is slow going, but eventually I'd like this to grow into UnArcaneElection's Weirdo Collection.
before you get on me about being a creepy otaku and willfully denying the fact i am in a relationship, my whole table is pretty messed up. i'm like the least creepy person at my table alongside a mountain of fatalites that well, make me and my girlfriend seem tame in comparison. i mean, they make me seem like a disney movie in comparison. we all have our character archetypes we stick to i would rather not personally mention because most of them are not safe for work and make you question your sanity.
Having said what I said above, I do have to note that in the various character concepts I have (including those not yet fleshed out), Oracles are most common, because Oracle's Curse is required to make some of my character concepts, and so far no way other than being an Oracle is available to get something similar to an Oracle's Curse.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While it's not total exclusion, I have a prominent tendency to play support characters with low strength scores even if their "best" role is damage or some other thing. I guess I prefer to be out of the spotlight during a fight or something or it just might be my habit of turtleing with damage over time over direct damage in video games at work.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like to play good looking, human height, non humans. I find that sooo many GMs are rigid and conservative, so I often wind up playing elves and half-elves. But I'd love to explore Aasmimar, Tieflings, Dhampir, Catfolk, but again, many GMs have a stick up their @$$ with this stuff.
In fairness, after a lot of the Aasimars/Tieflings (ESPECIALLY Tieflings) I've seen played, I understand GM's not wanting them around. Too much of the same wangsty, special snowflake BS over and over and over. And anthros? Well, I could share some links about what turns people off to anthros, but I'd be banned from the forums.
I like to play good looking, human height, non humans. I find that sooo many GMs are rigid and conservative, so I often wind up playing elves and half-elves. But I'd love to explore Aasmimar, Tieflings, Dhampir, Catfolk, but again, many GMs have a stick up their @$$ with this stuff.
I don't have a problem with any of those except Dhampir, and I have an alternative to that race (fledgling vampire). The stick up my ass is over Small sized races. :P Not happening in my world. Ever.
I don't have a problem with any of those except Dhampir, and I have an alternative to that race (fledgling vampire). The stick up my ass is over Small sized races. :P Not happening in my world. Ever.I like to play good looking, human height, non humans. I find that sooo many GMs are rigid and conservative, so I often wind up playing elves and half-elves. But I'd love to explore Aasmimar, Tieflings, Dhampir, Catfolk, but again, many GMs have a stick up their @$$ with this stuff.
So No Gnomes, No Halflings, (I thought Tieflings were Small), no Pixie (Although they might be Tiny not small can't remember), etc?
I tend to play (85-90% of the time) Aasimar clerics or paladins. There are so many deities to choose from and so many archetypes and options, its never the same character twice, and with the added supplements, even moreso.
So No Gnomes, No Halflings, (I thought Tieflings were Small), no Pixie (Although they might be Tiny not small can't remember), etc?I don't have a problem with any of those except Dhampir, and I have an alternative to that race (fledgling vampire). The stick up my ass is over Small sized races. :P Not happening in my world. Ever.I like to play good looking, human height, non humans. I find that sooo many GMs are rigid and conservative, so I often wind up playing elves and half-elves. But I'd love to explore Aasmimar, Tieflings, Dhampir, Catfolk, but again, many GMs have a stick up their @$$ with this stuff.
Tieflings are Medium, though the Blood of Fiends/Angels added in an option for Small tieflings and aasimar.
I tend to play Good or Neutral characters, 50/50 for each sex. Most (8 out of 13) of my current (or on the road to creation) characters are humans, and the 5 others are mainly core races (plus one Tiefling)
Most of my characters have a knack for jokes and puns, because I have an hard time IRL not to say something silly for time to time.
As for classes, they are mostly martial (Fighter or Paladin) or skill monkeys (Rogue, Bard, even one Cleric/Bard). I have some arcane characters in stock too (an Elven Alchemist, an Halfling Abjurer wizard and a human wizard.).
My divine classes characters are strictly clerics, no druid or oracle (one Half elf Cleric Bard of Calistria, one human cleric of Pharasma, both female). Strangely, I just realised that I'm a Scorpio IRL, who's supposedly attracted to Death and sex.
I don't think I'll ever play a Gunslinger, because the class doesn't attract me, and I'm not into psionics either.
I'd like to try an evil cleric once, probably worshipping Zon Kuthon or Urgathoa (Scorpio again?^^). I like the pure evil of theses gods.
So No Gnomes, No Halflings, (I thought Tieflings were Small), no Pixie (Although they might be Tiny not small can't remember), etc?I don't have a problem with any of those except Dhampir, and I have an alternative to that race (fledgling vampire). The stick up my ass is over Small sized races. :P Not happening in my world. Ever.I like to play good looking, human height, non humans. I find that sooo many GMs are rigid and conservative, so I often wind up playing elves and half-elves. But I'd love to explore Aasmimar, Tieflings, Dhampir, Catfolk, but again, many GMs have a stick up their @$$ with this stuff.
I bumped halflings to a barely medium sized dwarven ethnic group, but pixies and gnomes don't exist in my world. Small sized races are that thing that makes me grar mightily. I do like halflings, though.
I don't understand why small creatures make you grar. It's not like they get huge bonuses for being small.
That's what pisses me off. I hate Small modifiers. So much. Even the presence of as all races gets my jimmies rustled. That's why halflings and gobblers get to be medium. That, and I don't like gnome culture and find pixies incredibly annoying.
Oh you want them to have more bonuses for being small? Not liking the culture is understandable. I have a pretty high tolerance for annoying things like pixies and they're so cute.
More like I don't really like the penalties, and a three foot person is problematic. I tend not to be overly caught up on combat realism, but realistic military life is important. When your legs are that short, marching is a problem. Properly handling a full sized rifle will be difficult. A lot of military vehicles are a b&&&~ to operate, given that you can't reach all the controls. You probably can't lift a wounded human, gear and all, and your own gear. If you switch the modern tech to magitech with swords and bows, it is still problematic. I like military and law enforcement games, so these issues are big. The US Army won't take people below 4'10". I lowered that limit because fantasy, but at the end of the day Small size's penalties are too much of a logical issue for military service.
Back in my 2nd Edition D&D days I tended to play either elves or half-elves with little variation (I was on a big Tolkien kick at the time). As my different systems have progressed, I pretty much play any class that I find interesting and don't necessarily limit myself. For races, I'm more of a Core race kinda guy, but I have played some of the more interesting races, but that is usually a rare occurrence.
More like I don't really like the penalties, and a three foot person is problematic. I tend not to be overly caught up on combat realism, but realistic military life is important. When your legs are that short, marching is a problem. Properly handling a full sized rifle will be difficult. A lot of military vehicles are a b$%@@ to operate, given that you can't reach all the controls. You probably can't lift a wounded human, gear and all, and your own gear. If you switch the modern tech to magitech with swords and bows, it is still problematic. I like military and law enforcement games, so these issues are big. The US Army won't take people below 4'10". I lowered that limit because fantasy, but at the end of the day Small size's penalties are too much of a logical issue for military service.
i generally don't play anything shorter than 4'10" and often stop at the 5 foot even range. but, i tend to dissalow halflings, goblins, gnomes, svirfneblin, Wayangs and Grippli because their small size generally means i have to tailor dungeons and stuff around their small sizes
Inspired by this thread to make sure I am not putting too many eggs in 1 thematic basket (Class or Race), I put a count of Class and Race of the main character concepts for all 17 released or announced Adventure Paths at the bottom of my profile, copied here for convenience:
Of 17 released or announced Adventure Paths to date, here is an approximate count of character concepts by Class and Race, counting the primary concept for each Adventure Path, except counting the next concepts after the possibly unworkable Summoner Switches and Kasatha as ties with these, and not counting Class dips:
Class
Wizard: 1
Tie between Summoner Switch or Undecided: 1
Oracle: 3
Cleric: 1
Tie between Summoner Switch or Bard: 1
Cavalier/Battle Herald: 1
Mad Cowboy (some kind of Bard or Gunslinger into {Ig}Noble Scion): 1
Witch: 2
Rogue: 2
Bard: 2
Tie between Bard or Bloodrager/Rage Prophet: 1
Tie between Summoner Switch or Alchemist: 1
Race
Dhampir: 1
Tie between Summoner Switch or Human: 3
Drow: 1
Undecided: 3
Half-Elf: 1
Human: 3
Unknown: 1
Changeling/Witchblood: 1
Tiefling: 1
Tie between Kasatha and Changeling/Witchblood: 1
Halfling: 1
So far, not too shabby; Oracle count is a bit high due to the thematic need for Oracle's Curse; full martial count is definitely low (only Cavalier/Battle Herald counts, and only mostly); Human count is a bit high but fits reasonably well with the Pathfinder Campaign Setting.
I play a lot of different things, but almost all of my characters are powerful ladies that take no guff.
|
|
Let's see.
Between PFS and home games I have 22 characters built in the PF system.
6 of those 22 are Halflings.
Discounting the 2 paladins, there is only a single prepared spellcaster among them (a magus) versus 6 spontaneous casters (1 sorc, 1 bard, 3 oracles, 1 eldritch scion magus).
Definitely some patterns there.
I play a lot of different things, but almost all of my characters are powerful ladies that take no guff.
And they don't need no man?
i play Nymphs as reskinned elves and play the 4 elemental races. my favorite classes are oracle and bard, but i play other things too. i go for cute over everything else and rarely deviate.