|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, the issue here is that the term itself is poorly defined. Considering that different people use it for different things. At the end of the day, really, instead of finding issue with the term itself it is probably better to ask the person using the term what they mean by it and judging the offense from there.
For instance, someone could use the term "special snowflake" to mean a disruptive character that attempts to become the "main character" in a game and doesn't like to share the spotlight. With their uniqueness as their excuse.
Like this...
"My mother was a god and my father was a dragon, born on the day of prophecy to a surrogate mother, Rathia queen of the succubi. Though I appear human. It is my fate to save the world, the universe and all planes. Oh, and there are a couple other people who I keep around."
And that character would most likely be a problem for any table the player sat at.(Though this expectation can be reversed if done in jest, or in a fair manner that does not actually hog the story or spotlight.)
But it could just as easily mean, "I don't like characters who fall too far out of what I consider 'the normal population' of the world. So I'm going to attempt to hurt the feelings of someone playing one."
Now having said that, I think any derogatory term is generally a bad thing as it uses negativity to create change instead of positivity.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are there other terms that you feel are inaccurate or derogatory toward sections of the gaming community? Have you yourself made what would be considered by some to be a special snowflake? Have you as a GM run games with PCs that other GMs might have considered special snowflakes?
1) Rollplay
2) Oh, probably. A lot of my characters are fairly wacky, like my frostbitten half-orc winter oracle that worships the snow.
3) Most definitely, as I don't limit my players much. We specifically coined the term 'special snowscape' for the campaigns of GMs who complain about special snowflakes.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A term I don't like is munchkin or power player.
It is hard to not fit someone's idea of a special snowflake. Especially considering that being an adventurer is already sort of weird. Though, my worst offense was an NPC I created. An azlanti who was at ground zero for Earthfall. The event caused him to reincarnate endlessly after death. He was cursed so that he could never hold a weapon but that he must take up a cause of good and fight for it. Of course, all that was an excuse for why the party's NPC helper never died forver nor could help too much in combat.
I'm fairly free with unique abilities, odd races, adjustments and well argued reasons for why you knew the king as a child. So... yes I've GM'd for characters who would be called special snowflakes by some.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like different races, classes and concepts in my games, as long as they make sense.
Everytime a player comes to me with an uncommon character I put the concept through a test:
1) Does the character fit the campaign?
2) Can the player resume his character's oddities in no more than two lines?
3) If the character was human instead of a special race, would it affect its story?
If you answer yes to all that questions I'll probably allow you to play that character. If you have any "no" answers you can rethink a bit your concept to make it fit. If you've answered "no" to everything, you're probably playing your character just because it's cool or for the sake of being weird and I'd ask you to go for a best developed concept for it.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing that is difficult with these terms is the context. Grognard for example, is often seen as a badge of honor for being around a long time and having a lot of game knowledge built up over the years. It also gets used to denote an old curmudgeon that hates change and ruins everything for new comers and change enthusiasts. Since the term is used in a derogatory manner, many folks call for it to be banned. In fact, once a term like this is used it often ends discussion and becomes an unfortunate impasse. (This is in general, not unique to gaming community.)
I try my best not to get hung up on words and examine the ideas behind them instead. Is the person being genuinely offensive, or are they ignorant of better terms? Are they venting frustration, or trying to be incendiary on purpose? Once you determine the context you can approach the discussion in the best manner. Educate the ignorant, pacify the angry, and flag the offensive. Despite not liking the terms, it often is helpful to have them for describing legitimate occurrences and having discussions.
That's said, I like your approach to unpack the term and its usage OP. I read the blog entry and often folks do use the snowflake term to deride someone's RP choices. However, there are times like Terquem indicates that a person's RP choices become disruptive to the game. How do you differentiate the two?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe the term doesn't say so much about the PC / player it's used on - but more about the person who uses it. You could translate 'you are a special snowflake' to 'you want to steal the spotlight from me'. So, like a lot of irrational behavior, it roots in fear. More specifically, the fear of getting ignored at the game table, because the 'special snowflake' enforces attention with their built-in specialness.
But this fear is usually unjustified. Fellow players and the GM don't care that much for one's backstory, and actually, at least players with really exaggerated PC backgrounds (e.g. son of god and dragon) are usually quite bad at the game. They simply try to make that up with a fancy story.
So, often the best approach seems to be: See the weakness behind their loudness and offer unobstrusive help.
Optimizer.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
More specifically the fact that I optimize my character to fid a concept and what roles I wish them to exhibit. The fact that its also given to people who maximize their character to the nth degree is a bit annoying. My optimizing is to hopefully cover gaps and provide usefulness to a party while still holding onto the core concept for the character.
Its just a pet peeve about the usage of that term that's all.
EtG
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Fellow players and the GM don't care that much for one's backstory
I do. At least when I'm the GM. I love personalizing stories to fit character's background. That's why I ask my players making some effort in developing their characters' concepts.
And quite often a not-so-special character whose background is really fitting to the story ends feeling much more special as it's easier to fit his role in the story.
It could also be a societal backlash against the virtue of the individual versus the strength of the whole -- in the context of 'Well, if they can get away with all that, WHY CAN'T I?'
It's a full-circle thing, and it's been going on for at least thousands of years because learned sages were noting the same thing in China and other places for at least that long.
Derogatory term that really grates me is 'murderhobo'.
Between the rancid glee that some people take from living this term, there's this feeling that if one boils gaming down to just that thing, so much story and development is lost.
Contrast with 'tea party' , which was an old WoD term back in the day to deride Werewolf the Apocalypse LARPs that never seemed to do anything but sit and discuss stuff all day, and actively punished folks that were trying to, you know, do that whole 'fight the Wyrm' kinda thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
magical tea party gets my goat...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your goat ruined my magical tea party by eating all the special snowflake cookies.
| 16 people marked this as a favorite. |
The special snowflake is not the unique character, because all characters are unique to some degree.
The special snowflake is the person whom after you announced that you're running a campaign in Sandpoint is the guy who wants to play a Jedi from the Star Wars universe... Or a vampire from New York City.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think among the most special snowflaky characters on my list is just a merfolk. Class doesn't even matter. I happen to like mermaids and I know they are difficult to implement into any non-naval/aquatic campaign.
I do like to make unusual builds that frequently end up underpowered but other than my mermaid characters I can usually get them into a game. And rarely hear of them being directly referred to as special snowflakes. Although there have been general statements of such that could be applied to one or two of my builds.
I'm not a fan of the terms 'optimizer' and 'murderhobo' because the folks that use them are referring to themselves always one notch below where they're actually at... Optimizers are actually murderhobos and murderhobos are actually gamists...
Its like a guy who says he only drinks socially but when he shows up to the group you can tell he's been hitting the sauce all week. Them 'optimizers' have spent 72 hours this week scouring the books for powergame combos so lets not pretend you only do it on the weekends responsibly when other people are present.
::Pulls pin... Yells fire in the hole... Throws grenade.
This is why my name doesnt show up on the thread listing 'forum members you'd like to game with' isnt it...
My old self has been found guilty of hosting some tea parties. I was a bit scared of running combat encounters (I usually played WoD).
Fortunately I learned because action and combat are important parts of rpgs as intrigue, roleplaying and character development are.
I don't tend to get offended by any derogative terms. I hold the ones I think I fit into like a badge and I don't care a lot about the ones I don't think I fit into.
|
|
The special snowflake is not the unique character, because all characters are unique to some degree.
The special snowflake is the person whom after you announced that you're running a campaign in Sandpoint is the guy who wants to play a Jedi from the Star Wars universe... Or a vampire from New York City.
Oh, Eddie Murphy... you really were a great vampire from New York City(Vampire in Brooklyn)...
Feel free to attach such titles to me. I have certainly played murderhobos, I have played special snowflakes that make an entire blizzard by themselves. I have optimized the crap out of the rules system. I have felt the tug of power gaming. I don't really like it, but if rollplaying is what is available, fine, I will play. And I certainly don't see a problem with magical tea parties.
I suppose I am unclear on what a munchkin is.
To complete the roster, let me also say that I have been called a rules lawyer enough that I can live with that, but I have learnt some restraint.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am a rules lawyer xD
GM: Success! You hit the monster,score a critical hit and kill it.
Me: Actually... you mentioned it's dark. Shouldn't I roll for miss chance?
GM: Uh... OK.
Some of my fellow players hate me for doing that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Our group has a player, let's call him Fred. Fred again and again points out when we have forgotten penalties and such, so we fail whatever it is we thought we succeeded on. The rest of the group call this "doing a Fred". And of course, there is much rejoicing when Fred becomes the target and someone else does a Fred. We are pretty good-natured about it nowadays, and Fred has gotten more careful about it.
The funny thing is I mostly do it against myself. I like to suffer. I try not to do it against my fellow players because it's not cool... but sometimes I just cannot keep my mouth shut.
It's better than the type of rules lawyer that only remembers rules when it's to their advantage.
I really hate those! I take a cruel delight in pointing the rules on them! xD
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you're using rules lawyer techniques against yourself then you're doing it right IMO. It's fine to play that way but you need to apply your skills fairly to all participants. The rules lawyers that create a bad reputation are the ones that call the GM on every little mistake but suspiciously shut up about the players' gaffes.
I have used the term "special snowflake" in a derogatory sense...usually to refer to players who can't distinguish their characters by having a fun, unique personality but instead have to play something completely oddball and inappropriate. Like the aforementioned vampire Jedi in a fantasy Pathfinder game. I used to see players like this all the time in a local Vampire LARP - what's the new guy playing? Oh, another super-rare bloodline of which there's only 4 in the world. Yawn. Half our LARP was those - the storyteller couldn't bring himself to say "no." The funny thing is that weird rare stuff ended up being the norm, so I ended up standing out with my character made entirely from the core rulebook.
I'm not fond of "murderhobo" because it's usually used to imply some "deep" truth about the entire genre of fantasy gaming that really just isn't true for a lot of games. Groups I play with, our characters have homes, and relationships with NPCs, and we try to talk our way through encounters whenever possible.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not fond of "murderhobo" because it's usually used to imply some "deep" truth about the entire genre of fantasy gaming that really just isn't true for a lot of games. Groups I play with, our characters have homes, and relationships with NPCs, and we try to talk our way through encounters whenever possible.
This. Very much this.
In one particular home campaign this past weekend, we're playing 5E.
We encounter a big horrific party-slaying monster in one part of a crawl.
Half of the party went to go handle another encounter that had started, and the rest remained to sway the horrible monster to our side.
We friended that poor thing so hard!
After the encounter the GM (who we've been playing with for years) was shocked and confused.
Pretty much all of us: "It's like you haven't even played with us before!"
Side Note: Said GM was the one that went and convinced a rookery of wyverns to join our forces in a different campaign...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't have a problem with most of these terms. They get misused but misappropriation of terms is a human tradition going back millennia.
You want to really set me off, throw down the phrase "MMO" when complaining that a system is too gamist. The term does not accurately address the issue--I've never seen it used for rules that are unique to MMO games. Further, it's a term embedded in RP snobbery against roleplayers in MMO games.
One thing that is difficult with these terms is the context. Grognard for example, is often seen as a badge of honor for being around a long time and having a lot of game knowledge built up over the years. It also gets used to denote an old curmudgeon that hates change and ruins everything for new comers and change enthusiasts. Since the term is used in a derogatory manner, many folks call for it to be banned. In fact, once a term like this is used it often ends discussion and becomes an unfortunate impasse. (This is in general, not unique to gaming community.)
I try my best not to get hung up on words and examine the ideas behind them instead. Is the person being genuinely offensive, or are they ignorant of better terms? Are they venting frustration, or trying to be incendiary on purpose? Once you determine the context you can approach the discussion in the best manner. Educate the ignorant, pacify the angry, and flag the offensive. Despite not liking the terms, it often is helpful to have them for describing legitimate occurrences and having discussions.
That's said, I like your approach to unpack the term and its usage OP. I read the blog entry and often folks do use the snowflake term to deride someone's RP choices. However, there are times like Terquem indicates that a person's RP choices become disruptive to the game. How do you differentiate the two?
When someone called me a noob I told them I'm more of a grognard.
Every one of my eccentricities is connected to an event.I despise fumble rules because a player wasted almost all of a gaming session insisting that an orc who got a one on their confirm roll dropped their weapon and did not connect. I would not come to another gaming session till they swore they would never do that again.
A special snowflake is like Groot or Rocket Racoon. Their drawbacks have to be just as monumental or no way.
I never realized people thought special snowflake was a bad thing. I generally refer to myself as one, though it is mostly because I play against certain elements that are normally assumed, such as when all PC races being humanoids with cosmetic alterations and maybe an ability or three, I'll try to play the quadruped with no hands.
Or to phrase it with a generic metaphore, some things become the norm even within the uniqueness, such as snowflakes always being based on 6, with a unique but still hexagonal pattern of some sort. It becomes obvious to me when others take it so for granted they don't even notice. So I'll make a snowflake that is square instead. This is to me, a special snowflake. It isn't just unique, it calls attention to norms others don't even think about.
Of course, I do try to make it still fit the game, such as being an animal hit with awaken spell, a familiar that lost her master, a drow that sees the value of trustworthiness and teamwork from an intellectual pov but doesn't feel the emotions behind them, that sort of thing.
Some of the other terms are certainly interesting to see here. I've only seen grognard to refer to players from the 1st or 2nd edition era.
Munchkin I've seen used to refer to players that are all about the metagame of collecting xp and equipment, maybe loot as well. Doesn't seem inherently negative to me, even if I very much dislike that way of playing myself.
It does remind me though, of statement put out by a politician a long time ago. He couldn't find anything bad to reveal about his opponant, so he said good or neutral things but in a bad way and using rare words, so the common people would assume bad things. I.E. he mentioned his opponant's sister was a "thespian" like it was a bad thing, because most people didn't know that a thespian is an actor/actress.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you're using rules lawyer techniques against yourself then you're doing it right IMO. It's fine to play that way but you need to apply your skills fairly to all participants. The rules lawyers that create a bad reputation are the ones that call the GM on every little mistake but suspiciously shut up about the players' gaffes.
Now here's where you are wrong. Lawyers exist to either accuse or defend a single party. If you want someone to apply the rules fairly and nonpartisan, what you want is a rules judge.
Hey you can take any term and make it your own. You don't have to let other people define you! Its like how people used to call me a bag and I wore it. Now i'm a Haversack And I don't let that terminology get me down. (way more distinguished.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The special snowflake is not the unique character, because all characters are unique to some degree.
The special snowflake is the person whom after you announced that you're running a campaign in Sandpoint is the guy who wants to play a Jedi from the Star Wars universe... Or a vampire from New York City.
I have got to point out an awesome campaign journal(*) to you.
(*)Which I have unfortunately fallen behind on, as with all the other campaign journals/PbPs I have been following. I need to take a vacation and not go anywhere . . . .
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you're using rules lawyer techniques against yourself then you're doing it right IMO. It's fine to play that way but you need to apply your skills fairly to all participants. The rules lawyers that create a bad reputation are the ones that call the GM on every little mistake but suspiciously shut up about the players' gaffes.Now here's where you are wrong. Lawyers exist to either accuse or defend a single party. If you want someone to apply the rules fairly and nonpartisan, what you want is a rules judge.
I might be one of those. Specially when GM is new and more experienced players try to take advantage of him.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Specially when GM is new and more experienced players try to take advantage of him.
*shudders at some memories of this happening in the past, but what was worse was the players who insisted they could run your character better than you could, imo, when you had the requisite experience and were trying something new.
Yes, specially that kind of players who have strong ideas about how a specific class/race should be played and won't admit anything that is even slightly different from their narrow point of view.
(An elf cannot have strength as his higher stat, all dwarves must dump charisma, a wizard without fire spells is not a wizard, etc.)
I had too often to face this kind of misconceptions from players who claimed to be experts.
If they don't stand around looking stupid in and out of combat, what difference does it make?
If the game has become too much about combat, I'm gonna want to play a pure neutral Minotaur.
^Hey, don't have a cow . . . .
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Snowflake" is a fine term in theory, but it's starting to get dragged into the same "political lingo ghetto" that has claimed so many of its beloved brothers and sisters, if you take my meaning. Sometimes a word just ends up trumped by its associations.
I feel like "theorycrafting" has always been a touch on the needlessly derisive side. People mean varying things when they talk about it, and too often I see it applied as a blanket term to all optimizers or critics of "game balance".
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, specially that kind of players who have strong ideas about how a specific class/race should be played and won't admit anything that is even slightly different from their narrow point of view.
(An elf cannot have strength as his higher stat, all dwarves must dump charisma, a wizard without fire spells is not a wizard, etc.)
I had too often to face this kind of misconceptions from players who claimed to be experts.
I've noted I didn't explain myself quite right here.
I don't have any trouble if a player wants to dump charisma in all his dwarven characters. I have a problem when that player tells me my dwarf is not a dwarf because I haven't dumped charisma and starts making constant remarks about it, both IC and OC (hey, you're too pretty to be a dwarf).| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Snowflake" is a fine term in theory, but it's starting to get dragged into the same "political lingo ghetto" that has claimed so many of its beloved brothers and sisters, if you take my meaning. Sometimes a word just ends up trumped by its associations.
I see what you did there.
I feel like "theorycrafting" has always been a touch on the needlessly derisive side. People mean varying things when they talk about it, and too often I see it applied as a blanket term to all optimizers or critics of "game balance".
Most folks I know, including myself, have done theorycrafting on some level or another. It's how one understands the working of a given game, whether it be WoW, Pathfinder, Fate, or any of a multitude of other systems.
I'll also admit I've used the term in a derisive fashion DESPITE that, for the very reason you mention here. There doesn't necessarily need to be 'balance' (which is another one of those 'third rail' type terms) but there should at least be harmony.
When the rules have been so twisted and attenuated that even lifelong politicians would look at a thing and go 'That just ain't right', then there is an issue with that.
Knowing now that this is a touchy term with at least you, KC, I'll try to watch myself in the future to see if I'm using it in a perjorative fashion.
Thank you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A game I've been playing the last two days (as a gift from a friend) reminded me of this thread, actually. XD
The protagonist of this game, Rush Sykes, is almost aggressively... bumpkin, I want to say. His sister, Irina, was kidnapped, and he's desperately looking for her.
In the course of this, he sees a local nobleman, David, blast away an army of enemy monsters - and as a result of that, he accidentally gets trapped in a cave with one of David's generals, who he proceeds to annoy on the way out. When they reach the exit, David is basically kind and welcoming... so Rush shows basically no manners whatsoever, doing everything from suddenly rushing at him (freaking out his heavily armed and well-trained bodyguards) to calling him nicknames that are wholly inappropriate for their relationship and that David shows no signs of welcoming.
Later, David is still helping him - providing information, elite troops, and basically everything that he can realistically do. Rush is petulant and upset when he's told they need to gather information (especially about a flying foe, which is very difficult for them to deal with) and form a plan to get his sister back - and he stalks off in a huff because they refused to simply run out without a plan or a destination in order to save his sister.
In short, while he claims that he cares more about his sister than anything else, he is actively rejecting the help and strategy that would give him the best chance of rescuing her in favor of ignoring advice and going off on his own. He comes across not as caring about his sister, but as selfish and short-sighted.
To me, this is what a special snowflake can look like. He's been offered basically everything - and not because of any of his own merits - but it's still not enough. He doesn't seem to accept anything that isn't going his way, even when his way is obviously worse than the alternative offered by people who are going out of their way to help him and be nice to him.
As a whole, I don't mind characters who are unique and special. However, there's a difference between "unique" and "pouting when someone else has a better plan and all the help in the world isn't special enough". At the very least, player characters tend to earn their reputations by accomplishing dangerous things, while special snowflakes often want all the praise and glory without having to actually do anything to earn it.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Special snowflake" is, as touched on in the linked article in the OP, a vague term that can be interpreted in more than one way. IMO, "special snowflake" is more about deliberately choosing a character that doesn't "fit" the campaign or setting in a (IMO, misguided) attempt to be "dramatic/interesting." It's not just about being "unique" (which is not that hard, IMO), but about being so "unique/different" that they "stand out" just by existing.
Often, this causes problems, because the "special snowflake" is often unsuited for the challenges/plot-lines that they will actually face and/or will have severe difficulties in interacting with the "ordinary" NPCs and societies in the setting. Sometimes, the player will get upset that their PC can't be both "unique" and treated "just the same" as more "normal" characters in the party.
|
"Murderhobo" is a term I especially dislike because it's very much the opposite of what I strive for in roleplaying games, so especially in a context where someone says that PCs are basically all murderhobos it rubs me in a very wrong way.
Other terms are mostly ones used here in Germany to offend players that really like to get into their characters, the story and the setting, often resulting in games where combat is not front and center. not sure if there are equivalents in the english language but if you know derogatory terms for people who focus on the storytelling and simulationist aspects of roleplaying, it goes in this direction.
Oh, and the most hated term of mine might be the term "Balance".
I don't particularly mind the term "special snowflake", because I consider all my characters to belong in this category, even if they aren't particularly special in build or story background. Also I'm loving Pathinder for all those options it includes so how could I dislike other players making use of those options.
I agree with Dragonchess player though about those players he describes in his last post. This special type of special snowflake character I can't stand either.