A friend I used to game with called me last night to get my opinion on a situation. This is the situation as he gave it to me.
“…
I’ve had several times recently were I seemed pushed to act completely out of character for one reason or another. The groups really push ‘play in character’ and ‘play your own character’ (as opposed to telling others what to do with their character). I get that and can go along with that. However, the in-character supposed experts are pursuing badger stupid tactics and strategies. Both in and out of combat.
They are not terribly experienced in the game. But it seems to be more of a case of just not thinking like that.
When I suggest, ‘It might not be smart to start with threatening the king in front of witnesses.’ They just look at me like ‘What? Why?’
The personality I’ve developed and the stats I have for my character are already in place. They don’t lean themselves well toward taking charge and proposing a comprehensive tactical combat plan or knowing the proper way to approach the head of an aggressive organization diplomatically.
They don’t really like out of character discussions about tactics, I get comments about my rock stupid barbarian making those suggestions, yet they seem to get upset when things go wrong.
Should it really bother people this much to give out-of-character suggestions?
I don’t really want to quit the group, but how would you handle this?
…”
I’m not entirely sure what to tell him. He really likes the GM style. He said the group seems like ok guys.
Clearly out of character tactics do sometimes bother me. But if the guy really doesn’t know what to do and his character should, then I’m ok with it.
I think my suggestion would be to just quietly let my character die. (Raise is really difficult in their campaign.) Build a new character that it makes sense in-character to behave tactically or socially clever. See how the react to that. If they ok with that, then they really are just trying to stay in character. If they react poorly to that, might be time to leave even if you like the GM.
Do you have different suggestions, observations, or past experiences for him?
I tend to agree with your suggestion if your friend is interested in that role.
As to whether it should bother people, that is hard to say. There are all sorts of little things that people dislike, from the way someone chews to telling others how to play (no matter how polite the suggestion.)
I wouldn't quit if I were him unless he is really unhappy. Either change the character or perhaps try to talk to some of the players away from the others, slowly working with them individually to help them with their tactics and strategies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Characters often have stats, abilities, and knowledge that are far beyond that of the players that control them.
If the character in question is a seasoned fighter I wold assume that they have some sort of grasp or tactics even if the player playing him/her has none. So allowing other players to chime in can fill in the difference between the characters skill and the players lack thereof.
The party really needs a smart leader, so do it.
And as an aside, badgers are incredibly intelligent and resourceful.
D&D is really a weird game, if you step back and think about it a bit.
It's like an improve acting thing, mixed with camp-fire storytelling, with a bit of a bizarre, cooperative, dice-rolling game of chess built into it.
Jumping into another player's turn out-of-character to interrupt and suggest another way of doing things disrupts the flow of the improv and interrupts the story, which isn't very welcome for most people in those positions... but the same players might not mind so much on getting advice that will help them win the tactical game aspects of it.
A few players probably aren't going to like being told what to do at all, and I suppose a few people, bless their souls, have the patience and good humor to accept all well-intended advice and constructive criticism with a smile.
Some people who would object to being interrupted to be told they're "doing it wrong" in front of a group of friends, might not mind being given the same constructive criticism in private, after the game, if things go wrong, so that they can learn from their mistakes and improve.
I guess there's really no one-size-fits-all answer: it's one of those things you'll have to play-by-ear, if you can.
I will suggest he try:
1) To give advice out of game time, maybe that won't break the mood and they will be ok with it.
or
2) Bring in a tactical command build so it will be in-character to say those kind of things to them.
.
.
And as an aside, badgers are incredibly intelligent and resourceful.
I was quoting him. It is a common saying with his family from his grandfather's time. Apparently a badger attacked his farm tractor and got squished. From then on at any time someone might say 'dumb as a post' his grandfather would say 'badger stupid.' It kinda caught on with his family.
They're all kinda strange.
But lovably so.
People tend to take "in-character" as "stupid dramatic".
They also never learn. Which is to say they never grow as a character.
Which makes them bad characters.
How about,"Village elder said never argue with village elder."
Another tactic is to adopt the Thin Grey Line role. That means you were put on Glorion to protect mundanes from monsters and evil. Unless the king has obviously been taken over by a doppleganger, picking a fight with him just plays into the monsters claws. Even then that might be their tactic.
I am totally new to RPG. Just started my first Pathfinder Society campaign a few days ago.
I can't say I've experienced exactly what your friend is experiencing. The situation I'm in is more or less okay. At times, it feels like it might go that way.
My opinion to your friend, for what it's worth, would be: "Pick carefully who you game with. Build a 'portfolio' of players according to their ability, knowledge, literary skill, attention to detail and sense of the dramatic". Obviously, that won't help in this game.
Being new, I don't really know how easy that would be but it's what I'd want to do. It seems people get different things out of RPG: 'vicarious slaughter', 'unrestrained emotional self-expression', 'moral edification', 'artistic creativity' - and more I've yet to see. I think my gaming experience would be improved by finding players in it for the same things as me, who know how to interact with my literary style, and who share my ideas on teamwork.
If they're reading this now they should know this isn't a criticism of them: just an expression of preference. I doubt anyone starts out playing with ideally compatible team-mates. I'm sure I'm not the right team-member for many people here. That's fine.
There's nothing wrong with out of character tactics. Outside of the game, this is what is happening:
Tim (Playing an Int 8 Barbarian) is pretty good at coming up with tactics. He discusses a plan with Bob (Playing a Wizard), Joe (playing a Ranger), and Mike (playing a Bard).
Bob, Joe, and Mike agree to this plan.
What happens in character:
Tim's Barbarian goes to rush into battle without a thought for his well-being. "Wait!" cries Bob's Wizard, who lays out the plan that was discussed out of character, with input from Joe's Ranger, and occasionally the Bard.
Tim's Barbarian grudgingly agrees to follow squishy nerd's plan, and everything goes off without a hitch.
Or in a game where the GM recognizes that Int 8 is not rock stupid, just a little slow, and someone who murders things for a living probably has a solid grasp of tactics (even if he can't SPELL tactics), Tim's Barbarian says "Maybe we should get on either side of 'em and pound 'em flat" and the rest of the group says "...You mean flank them?" and all is well.