| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 arnoldnido |
|||
|
Posts: 1347 (12/02/07 13:24:47) "Monte Hates Me" |
Blame Manifold.
I keep thinking that we had Gamorrean in that game who, after listening to some instructions from the drow, leaned over to the noble who understood the Gamorrean language and asked what an orc was. Eric |
||
|
agfang |
|||
|
Posts: 932 (12/05/07 22:29:06) Just showed up |
I have one player who tends to do this to my games.
If I'm running a game based in the desert, he wants to play an aquatic elf. If it's a game about evil characters, he wants to play an aasimar. I've found that all I have to do with this guy is get another player talking about how cool it would be to play an X in a previous game for him to pick up on that and want to play it in the next game. The rest of the players have their foibles as well. Like the player who always wants to play the mysterious characters even if I want to run a game where everyone is related. Or the player who always wants to play the wild character even if the game is totally based in a city. Basically, every one of the players offer their specific problems to coming up with a game but I've learned, over the years, to come up with ideas that will allow them all to work it out or I run the game anyway and have them deal with their specific problems along the way. |
||
|
Aelfbeorn |
|||
|
Posts: 13 (12/06/07 16:38:52) Minimum 1 pt, right? |
For DND, I simply tell the players that these are the available choices of PC races and classes. I then hand them a list of the culture(s) for each race
complete with a list of appropriate starting classes and/or class variants, common names and name structure. In some cases, I will allow for certain races to
grow up in a different culture, but then some of the racial features will change.
|
||
|
mahogani |
|||
|
Posts: 572 (12/06/07 22:25:25) Shadowy |
Benoist Poire wrote: That is a really good idea, Benoist. I should try that sometime. I usually come up with the campaign idea far ahead of time, though I don't have any of the above problems, my players will try anything I run. If I don't want evil players, I just say no. The campaign I am starting in January has just such a rule. One player went, "awwww...", but
just accepted it and moved on.
|
||
|
mahogani |
|||
|
Posts: 573 (12/07/07 06:49:31) Shadowy |
What do you folks think about rewards for playing classes/races you WANT the users to play? For instance, what if you told your players all clerics of Pelor gain an extra Feat at first level and Half-Orcs all have a +2 to CON? |
||
|
DerekDyer |
|||
|
Posts: 6296 (12/07/07 07:38:23) Just showed up |
I think you are *penalizing* me for playing an Elven Bladesinger.
|
||
|
mahogani |
|||
|
Posts: 574 (12/07/07 07:50:56) Shadowy |
But you are the one who is choosing that race/class combo so the onus is on you, not me. This rule would be in place before you create your character. If you
willing choose to play a an Elven Bladesinger after I let you know what races and classes get bonuses, then you don't get anything special. It is an
incentive for players who play something they may no want to.
|
||
|
arnoldnido |
|||
|
Posts: 1373 (12/07/07 08:01:36) "Monte Hates Me" |
I agree with the onus being on the player, mahogani, but I will admit I prefer more fluffy awards to crunchy ones (probably the same reason I like creamy
peanut butter over crunchy).
If I have a clue what I am doing with a campaign (admittedly, some of the more memorable ones have been "by the seat of the DM's pants" sort of world creation), I usually let the players know there may be some focus on certain races or classes due to the nature of the campaign. There's usually at least 2 players intrigued enough to give certain races or classes a shot, but I will admit it's probably more my players' familiarity with my DMing style then something that someone is going to get to work out of the blue. Eric |
||
|
DerekDyer |
|||
|
Posts: 6297 (12/07/07 08:28:26) Just showed up |
What makes what bonuses you give and who you give them to so much better than what I want to play? So someone who totally wants to play a Half-Orc Cleric of
Pelor, gets a double bonus... but anyone else is restricted to a list or penalized for it. It's just not something I can get onboard with.
As far as I am concerned you may as well make 4 pregenerated characters for your 4 players and then let them choose which one they want. I'm all for rewarding players for having a background, or reward them for designing characters that fit the particulars you want for a given campaign... but if you're going to simply add features to certain classes and races it just looks like unbalanced game design to me. Also I would much rather see choice given. Like give a bonus feat, or +2 stat bonus... not a set bonus. Again you penalizing any build outside your narrow list. |
||
|
mahogani |
|||
|
Posts: 575 (12/07/07 08:39:45) Shadowy |
I agree with you, Eric. I don't have a problem with my players, if I setup specific rules ahead of time, my players follow them. I was specifically
responding to Apherion's troublesome players. Perhaps they are the powergamer-type, so use a carrot to get them to follow the rules you setup, though if
they really want to play the Drow Warlock, let them, but they don't get any goodies.
|
||
|
mahogani |
|||
|
Posts: 576 (12/07/07 08:49:00) Shadowy |
DerekDyer wrote: The examples I used were just that, examples. I am addressing the issue of players going against what rules you setup at the beginning. To me, they sounds like power-gamers per Robin's Laws because they want to break the rules. In those specific cases, and you don't want to just say no, then as an alternative you can reward players who follow the rules. Maybe all players who use core classes and races get a bonus, again this is just an example. I am trying to incentivize players to play within the rules I have seth forth. |
||
|
Confused Jackal Mage |
|||
|
Posts: 5611 (12/07/07 10:17:22) Iron Liege |
Eh, I still agree with DD on this. Your incentivizing takes the form of directly unbalancing the rules. That's not something I like even if it's for a
good cause. I'd greatly prefer just using ordinary social engineering, or just saying "No".
"Observer-dependent physics undermines the gods' decision 3000 years ago to ban cats from straddling the borders of the
netherworld. We won't have it!"
"I have reservations about reconciling a quantum mechanics thought experiment with egyptian mythology." "Djinn and Juice", Dresden Codak |
||
|
Carthain |
|||
|
Posts: 12809 (12/07/07 10:23:14) Keeper of the FAQ |
In those specific cases, and you don't want to just say no, then as an alternative you can reward players who follow the rules. But, saying "No" is just so much easier on everyone. Sure, one person can't play what they wanted, and assuming you explain why not, then they'll move on and pick something else. But if you say "Ok, but these other people get extra bonuses" then you are doing worse than simply saying "no", you are saying "You can, but I'm going to make it suck compared to other things, so you will be at a disadvantage during the whole campaign." What's better from a player perspective? Simply being told "no" up front? Or being reminded and penalized throughout the whole campaign?
Carthain.
"Eschew Obfuscation." |
||
|
Ampherion |
|||
|
Posts: 918 (12/07/07 10:40:33) Shadowy |
Carthain wrote: This makes the assumption that you have rules for this before you come to the table. It would be ENTIRELY unfair and wrong to not have the rules and then say "Eric gets <some bonus> because he has <something>." Also, the bonus would never be something as significant as an attribute point or two. It would be additional Knowledge (local) points, or something that comes into play alot, but doesn't have a direct affect on combat or major events in any way. I agree, saying no is the best answer, but some groups just won't accept that. When you have to dig and hunt for a face to face game, sometimes you have to make compromises. For an online game, do whatever you like, there are more people out there.
1A1S-060412-060806-N-W-523/1000-MX
|
||
|
Carthain |
|||
|
Posts: 12810 (12/07/07 10:47:33) Keeper of the FAQ |
Ampherion wrote: Actually, I was replying to the general sub-thread started with: "What do you folks think about rewards for playing classes/races you WANT the users to play? For instance, what if you told your players all clerics of Pelor gain an extra Feat at first level and Half-Orcs all have a +2 to CON?" So, yes it would be something as significant as that to which I am referring.
I agree, saying no is the best answer, but some groups just won't accept that.Then those groups can find someone else to run it. If someone came to my group and wanted to play a Frenzied Berserker -- I'd say "no" and explain why such a class will never be at my gaming table. If they don't like it, then they can go elsewhere. If the rest of the players dislike my reasoning, then they can all find some other person to run the games. Really, if your group isn't willing to concede to your restrictions on the campaign -- then why are you bothering to put in extra work to actually run the campaign?
Carthain.
"Eschew Obfuscation." |
||
|
mahogani |
|||
|
Posts: 577 (12/07/07 11:10:58) Shadowy |
Carthain wrote: Maybe they are good friends outside of the gaming table and if you don't let them play what they want then it makes it less fun for them and the whole
point of gaming is for fun. The best answer is to say NO, I said it several times, but if that is not an option, maybe you as a DM don't like
confrontation, not everyone is an extrovert. My idea was based upon the assumtion that you cannot say NO. Adding incentives is a way to gently guide your
players to what you want without being confrontational. You are worried that giving something to a player who plays what you want them to is bad, think of it
this way, giving the player the class they want to play when you don't want them to is also a gift.
|
||
|
arnoldnido |
|||
|
Posts: 1376 (12/07/07 12:31:20) "Monte Hates Me" |
Well, back to Ampherion, who I still love in a gamer/gamer way.
Here's a bunch of different ideas. I think they cover a wide variety of gamers, and are very good by all (including pros and cons of several of them). Look and see which one you think would work best with you and your group and let us know how it goes. |
||
|
Ampherion |
|||
|
Posts: 924 (12/07/07 13:19:45) Shadowy |
arnoldnido wrote: I can't use my group for testing anything. Its so dysfunctional, the only reason why its still together is because 95% of the people only show up because its social hour. The other two (myself and one other) show up for a reason I have yet to figure out. I have been expecting the campaign to implode for quite some time. Since I retired from DMing the group (which I will NEVER EVER do again), I have less of a reason to leave, but I don't know how much longer I will put up with it. I have really spent alot of time analyzing and validating what the players want in a game, but its like herding cats. I have written down, discussed and
even pleaded for assistance in resolving the problem, but there is no help. Noone has the same expectations from game to game. To be honest, most of these
people would be as happy (or even more so) playing party games, or watching american idol (reality tv used to interrupt the game regularly until I asked for
the TV to be turned off). I warned them that when one of those things happened, I would call it my last session. Right now its worked to this point, but I
think its only a matter of time before they figure out Im there for the game, and although I like most of the players in a social setting, they are not, and
will not be (at 1 hour away from home) my social outlet.
1A1S-060412-060806-N-W-523/1000-MX
|
||
|
mahogani |
|||
|
Posts: 580 (12/07/07 13:52:59) Shadowy |
Sorry to hear that Amph. Maybe you should try finding different people to roleplay with. Does your game store have the Looking for gamers messageboard in it?
|
||
|
Ampherion |
|||
|
Posts: 925 (12/07/07 14:57:53) Shadowy |
I didn't really mean this forum to be yet another forum where I whine about my gaming group. I promise this will be the last comment on the matter unless
someone pointedly asks me.
Honestly, mahogani, I have had one too many bad experiences with public "looking for group" efforts. I need to find an online group that uses the methods that interest me. I'm just holding off because I'm lame.
1A1S-060412-060806-N-W-523/1000-MX
|
||
