| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM, is it wrong to sigh in exasperation when the players you're introducing to Pathfinder 2nd Edition FOR THE FIRST TIME show up with a lizardfolk, a leshay, and a gnelf?
I don't know how they're doing that when the APG isn't out yet.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know how they're doing that when the APG isn't out yet.
Leshy and Lizardfolk came out in the LOCG, and the Gnelf sounds like a gnome with the half elf heritage (which is possible RAW).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know how they're doing that when the APG isn't out yet.
What???
Those are from the Lost Omens Character Guide, with the Gnelf arguably being from the Core Rulebook.
EDIT: Ninja'd! XD
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM, is it wrong to sigh in exasperation when the players you're introducing to Pathfinder 2nd Edition FOR THE FIRST TIME show up with a lizardfolk, a leshay, and a gnelf?
Well, did you have your heart set on a standard races campaign? Otherwise, why not roll with it?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My party I DM for is half normal. A human and a dwarf, a character who's mechanically a human (narratively... complicated), a leshy, and a catfolk-leshy. I homebrewed a Catfolk because the player wanted to play one, and I also allow half-ancestries between any two ancestries if the player can justify it to me, so...
I don't know how they're doing that when the APG isn't out yet.Leshy and Lizardfolk came out in the LOCG
Ah, I did not know that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM, is it wrong to sigh in exasperation when the players you're introducing to Pathfinder 2nd Edition FOR THE FIRST TIME show up with a lizardfolk, a leshay, and a gnelf?
When my players selected ancestries like that, I laughed at the future possibilities.
The first four player characters in my PF2 Ironfang Invasion campaign were elf, gnome, goblin, and halfling. I mentioned that to the fifth player, and he decided to go along with the non-human theme and create a lizardfolk. The sixth player created a gnome on her own. Here's my description of them from the CHALLENGE: Describe your character using only three details thread.
Let me describe the 1st-level party in my Ironfang Invasion campaign:
• The ernest male elf Zinfandel trains under retired ranger Aubrin to become an esteemed Chernasardo ranger.
• The reclusive female gnome druid Stormdancer commands fire and lightning for her own entertainment.
• The male halfling rogue stableboy Sam, secretly an escaped slave from Nidal, supplements his meager pay by pickpocketing.
• The female gnome rogue Binny gave up her criminal career to become a messenger who runs in the dark of night.
• The male lizardfolk champion Ishmael built his own house upriver and trades dried fish in town to escape the turmoil of war.
• The pyromanic male goblin alchemist Tak used to sell fireworks to humans but fled his goblin village when the Ironfang Legion arrived.
The funny part is that the adventure starts in Phaendar in Nirmathas, a town with 305 humans, 32 half-orcs, 21 dwarves, 17 half-elves, 28 other. The entire party is in the 28 other category. Furthermore, the Ironfang Legion invading Phaendar is lead by General Azaersi, a brilliant hobgoblin with a fanatical hatred of humans. I am already anticipating her reaction to discovering that the party that will thwart her does not contain any humans. I love role playing villains flabbergasted by the PCs.
Well, did you have your heart set on a standard races campaign? Otherwise, why not roll with it?
While there's nothing inherently wrong with playing non-standard, or even homebrew races, for first timers it feels kind of like starting a new video game with a bunch of mods and cheat codes. I mean, don't you want to at least see if you like the core game first, before you start tacking on a bunch of bells and whistles?
I also worry that such creatures, that are far and away more fantastic than your traditional humanoids, would be harder to roleplay in a believable or immersive manner (or to GM for) as they likely have much more alien mindsets. If they are played without such mindsets, then what exactly are they roleplaying? I mean, what even are the basic motivations of a plant? Or an intelligent carnivorous lizard?
Guess I'm ultimately just worried they're going to shoot themselves in the feet before we even begin, not have any fun, and give up on the game before it has really had a chance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My first 2e campaigns (both started during the playtest) required me to build homebrew ancestries for tengu, lemurfolk, dragons, and flumphs, so I'm in a glass house on this one.
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
for first timers it feels kind of like starting a new video game with a bunch of mods and cheat codes.
That seems to suggest that playing a certain ancestry radically changes the fundamentals of the game or ends up being fundamentally overpowered.
Neither is really true.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, did you have your heart set on a standard races campaign? Otherwise, why not roll with it?While there's nothing inherently wrong with playing non-standard, or even homebrew races, for first timers it feels kind of like starting a new video game with a bunch of mods and cheat codes. I mean, don't you want to at least see if you like the core game first, before you start tacking on a bunch of bells and whistles?
I also worry that such creatures, that are far and away more fantastic than your traditional humanoids, would be harder to roleplay in a believable or immersive manner (or to GM for) as they likely have much more alien mindsets. If they aren't played without such mindsets, then what exactly are they roleplaying? I mean, what even are the basic motivations of a plant? Or an intelligent carnivorous lizard?
Guess I'm ultimately just worried they're going to shoot themselves in the feet before we even begin, not have any fun, and give up on the game before it has really had a chance.
Ah, I had assumed that "you're introducing to Pathfinder 2nd Edition FOR THE FIRST TIME" meant that they had already played Dungeons & Dragons or Pathfinder 1st Edition before, as is the case with my players.
Um, know does a newbie even know how to cross a gnome and an elf?
A lot of players don't get immersive with their characters. Some players don't know at first how to roleplay immersively and gradually learn from example by the other players. Yet, by having an all-weird party, the players can follow the band-of-misfits trope easily.
Also, the bells and whistles on many odd ancestries are clearer than the perks that humans get. Humans get extra feats, which means more reading. Lizardfolk heritages, in contrast, are based on species of lizards: Cliffscale, Frilled, Sandstrider, Unseen, and Wetlander, so they are easier to visualize.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And for the record, I don't care what the game is, how much I've played it (or not), I will play the furthest thing from a human that the system allows me to when I can. I'm already human, its not that interesting.
The PF2 playtest, Shadowrun, and Alpha Omega are pretty much the only exceptions (the latter two because they borderline don't have non-humans and the former so that I played a diverse assortment of what was available).
I have a player that keeps playing every animal race he can find. (PF1) His Tengu stole shiny things and hide them away his cat person kept knocking everything off shelfs. His Vanara threw well anyways I personally enjoy having the weird races. A lot of my players default to human so the variety is nice. That said I have to give your group props for already stretching out them uncommon rules in so early a product.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my experience it is less about how new they are and rather if they are the type to treat a race as
- mechanics and nothing else
- a costume over a Human to make up for lacklustre role play effort
As a result regardless of what system I run only people who show an understanding of the race when writing a background/character to present to me will be accepted.
It is harsh but it lets me set boundaries that keep me interested.
I also make sure each of the core races have interesting ethnicities or elements.
Another fun approach I will be taking soon is a planar shift where each player will be dumped to the game world and into the body of a creature on the planet. Let people have a narrative reason not to know anything.
(Still brainstorming a solution to recall knowledge though)
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO, it is totally wrong to sigh in exasperation. There are people who like the offbeat races and think that playing most humans, elves, etc. is boring and overdone (I'm one of them). The best thing about Pathfinder is that there are SO many options, you can find something you like and even if it's a little unusual, it mostly can fit in. Even if it's not your thing, it's usually better to support your players in playing how they want to have fun. That kind of reaction can be really discouraging, especially with new players.
(Obviously, if something is a deal breaker it needs to be discussed between the gm and the players asap, but I didn't get that impression here.)
As far as the RP difficulty goes, you can certainly point your players at the right material for background, and not everything is going to be perfect to lore when they're just starting, but they're likely to do a lot better with something they really want to play instead of just sticking to a common race.
Sorry for the semi-rant, this is a sticking point for me.
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t know why people still aren’t all running session 0s where you make characters together and discuss expectations.
|
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, did you have your heart set on a standard races campaign? Otherwise, why not roll with it?While there's nothing inherently wrong with playing non-standard, or even homebrew races, for first timers it feels kind of like starting a new video game with a bunch of mods and cheat codes. I mean, don't you want to at least see if you like the core game first, before you start tacking on a bunch of bells and whistles?
I also worry that such creatures, that are far and away more fantastic than your traditional humanoids, would be harder to roleplay in a believable or immersive manner (or to GM for) as they likely have much more alien mindsets. If they are played without such mindsets, then what exactly are they roleplaying? I mean, what even are the basic motivations of a plant? Or an intelligent carnivorous lizard?
Guess I'm ultimately just worried they're going to shoot themselves in the feet before we even begin, not have any fun, and give up on the game before it has really had a chance.
Eh, I dunno. Is playing an elf, who has a 300-year lifetime perspective on things, really easier than that of a plant? They're both as alien as you make them. Most of the arguments against playing lizardmen could also be made against playing dwarves or goblins, we're just used to them being the permitted options, so we gloss over that.
One of the really cool things about getting into roleplaying for the first time is the wide open realm of possibilities. You're not nearly as constrained by the exact possibilities that a video game designer came up with for player characters. So that's an argument to roll with it.
I'm fairly new to TTRPG's but recently started my first AP and I built my first character who happened to be human because I was loosely basing them off of me in some aspects. Completely original, I know! But I felt that it was a good idea for me to help get my creative spark going. OTOH if I was more confident in my roleplay ability then yeah, leshies sound fun, as do other races. I agree with what Malk_Content said
With new players your job isnt to get them playing in the "right way" its yo get them playing at all.
If they've got characters that have hooked them in, great! Their first time is meant to be wild and exciting. Focus on giving them the best first experience FROM THIER POINT OF VIEW NOT YOURS.
Basically I just have a hard time imagining my SO, who is much more creative than me, starting to play and her reading about a certain ancestry (because she likes to read a TON), and then telling her she can't play a certain ancestry even if it was something that made her super excited to play the game. Maybe some of these choices aren't ideal for a GM, but if it can fit into the AP then I say go with it.
My only argument against it would be if someone was going to be a rollplayer and min/max a certain build with the ancestry just being part of the means to an end. Then yeah huge sigh and more is warranted there. But if it's someone's first character and they're honestly excited to roleplay as a leshy or lizardfolk then sure.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly though, we have no real life reference for non human point of view, so assuming that sapient creatures aren't fundamentally different from human pov isn't wrong option, especially if creatures are part of civilization and not lion with human face that for some reason loves to stand around in ruin guarding it and waiting for people to arrive so they can ask them riddles..
What non human character should bring to role play table is having player take account in 1) what the characters' upbringing would have been like(whether they grew in their species' culture or not) 2) what innate abilities and features they have that would change how they view the world(such as elfs living much longer than anyone else) 3) how they would witness other species. Like how DOES bird person view humans?
But yeah, being too worried about newbies "roleplaying right" is unfair really :p
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Um, know does a newbie even know how to cross a gnome and an elf?
When a gnome and an elf really love each other, they give each other a very special kind of hug ...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t know why people still aren’t all running session 0s where you make characters together and discuss expectations.
In the 20-odd years I've been roleplaying, this new concept of "session zero" has only been around for at most a year or two (at least in our circles). We're still getting used to the notion.
I basically just gave them the books and told them they had a week to learn what they could before I threw them to the orcs. I also offered to help point them in the right direction, or to answer questions and the like, if needed. After that, the intent was that, like many heroes in literature, they were going to learn via trial by fire. That's how we've always done it. Scheduling games is beyond difficult for most people, so we can't waste time with a session zero. Every available moment we are all together is spent on actual roleplaying. This way, everyone can learn on their own schedule at their own pace, and coordination efforts are usually handled via mass group texting.
I've found that many players like to learn as they play anyways. In any case, these guys did not disappoint. I think they may actually know more about the rules than when I first started roleplaying.
As a GM, is it wrong to sigh in exasperation when the players you're introducing to Pathfinder 2nd Edition FOR THE FIRST TIME show up with a lizardfolk, a leshay, and a gnelf?
It is, especially if the players find cool and interesting ways to tie themselves to the story that you as a GM might have overlooked. Just as well, it is fairly difficult to make characters who are engaging and aren't just a set of stats ready to blow up some bad guys. The only thing being an "off-beat" ancestry does in this case is up the challenge of why so-and-so is a part of the story.
I mean, my character in my current campaign (Age of Ashes, we're in the second book now) is a Chaotic Neutral Cavern Elf Wizard who realized simply living in their hole in the ground for however long is a boring and lackluster existence with no ambition or pursuit of knowledge.
Exploring the world outside his comfort zone in hopes of finding a greater meaning and purpose may be difficult, but certainly more exciting and promising in the field of knowledge and prosperity, which is really all he is obsessed with. (Why that is, I'll have to configure for myself, but it's a start that can be expanded on as the campaign progresses.)
Well if you just threw the books at them I don't know why you'd expect them to stick to only one of the thrown books with no other input. Even without a Session 0 you could have said as you threw the books "only core rulebook stuff for now guys, but here is the other books if you want to look at the lore."
Shouldn't have shown them the options if you didn't want them to take them. Or you could point out that Uncommon requires GM consent, but you'd be being a bit harsh on new players that way.
I felt that understanding some of the setting lore was just as important as the rules themselves, so yeah, I didn't limit them to just the Core Rulebook.
I'm also generally not one to disparage or discourage strange or unusual characters either (quite the opposite actually, just look at my character emporiums; I've made some weird stuff over the years).
It's just that when everyone is special, no one is.
Ah, but everyone is still special compared to the vast majority of NPCs they're going to encounter, yes? ;)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well if you just threw the books at them I don't know why you'd expect them to stick to only one of the thrown books with no other input. Even without a Session 0 you could have said as you threw the books "only core rulebook stuff for now guys, but here is the other books if you want to look at the lore."
Shouldn't have shown them the options if you didn't want them to take them. Or you could point out that Uncommon requires GM consent, but you'd be being a bit harsh on new players that way.
I felt that understanding some of the setting lore was just as important as the rules themselves, so yeah, I didn't limit them to just the Core Rulebook.
I'm also generally not one to disparage or discourage strange or unusual characters either (quite the opposite actually, just look at my character emporiums; I've made some weird stuff over the years).
It's just that when everyone is special, no one is.
I think that the flaw here is that a lot of players don't actually want to be "special" for picking these ancestries, I think they just want the vibe and to express their own tastes, or they have an image of a character in their head (even if it isn't alien enough for some of the folks in this thread.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you hand people a "Core Rulebook" and a "Character Guide" and tell them to pick what characters they want without additional context, it seems logical that they'd use the book called "character guide" as their guide. Hence you end up with stuff selected out of that book.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As someone who got into TTRPGs with a homebrew race and setting, I cannot stress enough how those things helped me latch onto the game so much faster. Yeah, the default options are there for those who want them, but being able to play as a construct was interesting, and using those strange new elements helped tie my character into the story so much stronger than we expected.
Some people are able to act, to roleplay much better when they're projecting parts of themselves onto their characters. But the opposite is just as true. There's plenty of roleplayers who want to be something wholly different, with an alien perspective that allows them to anchor themselves into a new world. I think that's extremely valuable to allow the players to be able to explore.
And hey, so long as it's fun for everyone, then there's no harm in how "special" a character is. They'll learn to differentiate themselves in other ways, sure enough.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
In the 20-odd years I've been roleplaying, this new concept of "session zero" has only been around for at most a year or two (at least in our circles). We're still getting used to the notion.
Calling it “session zero” may be newer (but even that’s been awhile) but having character building sessions where the GM oversees building, answers questions and the players and GM discuss the campaign before it begins is something that game books have suggested since I began playing more than 20 odd years ago.
This is not some brand new concept in gaming.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In the 20-odd years I've been roleplaying, this new concept of "session zero" has only been around for at most a year or two (at least in our circles). We're still getting used to the notion.Calling it “session zero” may be newer (but even that’s been awhile) but having character building sessions where the GM oversees building, answers questions and the players and GM discuss the campaign before it begins is something that game books have suggested since I began playing more than 20 odd years ago.
This is not some brand new concept in gaming.
It’s been around as a normalized term for at least a decade. The Fate books describe it explicitly, and they didn’t invent it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find "4-5 weirdos find camaraderie with each other" is a lot easier for the GM to handle than "an ambulatory void, a construct, a space alien, and a human who needed the bonus feat".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am not going to say that a human reaction to unexpected situations is wrong what matters is of course what happened going forward from that point.
Oh I'm sure they're going to have a blast with their new characters.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM, is it wrong to sigh in exasperation when the players you're introducing to Pathfinder 2nd Edition FOR THE FIRST TIME show up with a lizardfolk, a leshay, and a gnelf?
I don’t think it’s wrong to sigh in exasperation, nor to turn up with those options.
The key is to talk about it and make sure you’re all trying to play the same game. RPGs have a broad range of ways to be enjoyed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it is absolutely the most wonderful thing in the world.
I find it exasperating when people playing a game where they can be anyone they want to be just choose to be a boring human, often a slightly more heroic version of themself.
It is so common! The most common class/ancestry combination is human fighter, and its really baffling.
Making an rpg character is an amazing opportunity to live out being a completely different person with a different perspective, and its a shame to waste that opportunity. It is a good chance to practice empathy as well, by literally putting yourself into someone completely different's shoes.
It's just that when everyone is special, no one is.I consider you an intelligent person. One willing to discuss their perspectives. So I want to openly ask: why do you explicitly reference an explicit villain to substantiate your stance?
It does not invalidate your point, but is it in some way intended to actually bolster its validity? I ask because it confuses me. I think national infrastructure is important, but I wouldn't try to win over anybody on the fence by pointing to the Nazi Reichsautobahn program.
I just thought it was funny. You've clearly put more thought into it than I had. :P
I'm not trying to "win anybody over." I was just curious to know how others might react in this kind of situation. I am not really even asking how they would handle it, even that is a little beyond the scope of what I'm asking about in this thread.
Well, did you have your heart set on a standard races campaign? Otherwise, why not roll with it?While there's nothing inherently wrong with playing non-standard, or even homebrew races, for first timers it feels kind of like starting a new video game with a bunch of mods and cheat codes. I mean, don't you want to at least see if you like the core game first, before you start tacking on a bunch of bells and whistles?
<snip>Guess I'm ultimately just worried they're going to shoot themselves in the feet before we even begin, not have any fun, and give up on the game before it has really had a chance.
Ultimately, as the GM, this is on you. If you wanted them to do something a little more normal, you should have limited their choices. Instead, you opened the door to wider choices and they took them. Now, help them be successful with their characters.
Now, help them be successful with their characters.
That was always the plan. That hasn't changed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's just that when everyone is special, no one is.I consider you an intelligent person. One willing to discuss their perspectives. So I want to openly ask: why do you explicitly reference an explicit villain to substantiate your stance?
It does not invalidate your point, but is it in some way intended to actually bolster its validity? I ask because it confuses me. I think national infrastructure is important, but I wouldn't try to win over anybody on the fence by pointing to the Nazi Reichsautobahn program.
I just thought it was funny. You've clearly put more thought into it than I had. :P
I'm not trying to "win anybody over." I was just curious to know how others might react in this kind of situation. I am not really even asking how they would handle it, even that is a little beyond the scope of what I'm asking about in this thread.
I mean in fairness basically that same quote comes out earlier in the movie between elastigirl and dash, driving home from school in the car.
That is all, carry on with discussion
I mean in fairness basically that same quote comes out earlier in the movie between elastigirl and dash, driving home from school in the car.
That is all, carry on with discussion
Both iterations of that line in The Incredibles are quoting Ayn Rand, which is I'm sure what Artificial 20 was directly referencing as well.
I would never again start a campaign that is expected to last a year or longer without a session zero. I think it is vitally important to make sure expectations are set before people commit and start playing. Doing so can head off a good number of problems down the road.
I think the thing worth considering is that "player characters" can be fairly rare in your version of the setting, so they don't really need to be distributed according to demographics. If there's only like 8 people in the world at any given time with this in them, it's probably weirder if 6 of them are human than if 1 is a Leshy, one is an Iruxi, one is a Tiefling, etc.
The thing to keep in mind is that it is absolutely within a player's prerogative to choose most things about the identity of one of these "special" people in the world.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's just that when everyone is special, no one is.I think that the flaw here is that a lot of players don't actually want to be "special" for picking these ancestries, I think they just want the vibe and to express their own tastes, or they have an image of a character in their head (even if it isn't alien enough for some of the folks in this thread.)
In this vein, I'll propose that very few new players choose a race to be special or for its mechanical benefits. Rather, most choose a race based on mundane reasons such as "I didn't realize there were more races in the Core Rulebook" or "I have a pet lizard" or "the iconic gnelf is hawt."
If I were to criticize anyone for playing unusual races or archetypes with zero concept of the roleplaying implications, it would be experienced players, not new players. Nobody ends up with a 5 CHA full-orc urban barbarian who doesn't speak Common by accident.
New players are always fun because they attempt things that experienced players don't even attempt. "My wizard picks up the dead ogre's large longspear and hurls it at the retreating ogre!" "My vine leshy character puts on a hat and attempts to sneak into the casino!"
ORLY.
I'm not saying these things are bad, I'm just pointing out that I never fault new players for stuff like this, and it's really up to the GM to make it fun despite the new player's utter ignorance of in-game mechanics.
Unbeknownst to the characters, tonight is Vine Leshy Nite at the casino! The vine leshy character blends right in and everyone eyes the human character suspiciously.