Tiefling, Dragonborn : have they gained traction ?

[Mark]

You have this backwards, or at least, you're leaving out one very important aspect, namely the group's responsibility to make things clear on their own.

Honestly, that was one of the things I initially posted but as the discussion wore on and with the admission by him that this happens a great deal to him, I think I kinda came to the realization the lack of communication (or ignoring of the signs, as he also claims to do) is something for which he seems to bare responsiblity.

Could be a bit less judgmental, don't you think? Me, I think it's important to be fair with a group, get a genuine feel for them, before you decide to leave or not. Which may happen, but if you're going to knock a guy because he didn't just up and leave, but tried to give the group a chance, then well, I'm concerned that you're the one with the bad expectations.

Sure, when it happens once or twice. To read his posts, though, this seems to be an epidemic in his game experiences. I'm all for giving someone the benefit of the doubt. His posts remove more and more doubt as he becomes more explicit.

 

[Bumbles]

Honestly, that was one of the things I initially posted but as the discussion wore on and with the admission by him that this happens a great deal to him, I think I kinda came to the realization the lack of communication (or ignoring of the signs, as he also claims to do) is something for which he seems to bare responsiblity.

Then I can only say you have misread his words, as that is not the impression I got at all.

Believe it or not, he was not saying he runs into it all the time, just that most of the time when he does, it's often because the DM said "whatever you want" instead of giving the information upfront.

See the problem there?

I'm all for giving someone the benefit of the doubt. His posts remove more and more doubt as he becomes more explicit.

Hmm, I think you came to the wrong conclusion from the start, and you're just not listening to the clarifications. See, you were totally wrong with how you understood his 99% number, and that's what has gotten you on this wrong course.

 

[Hereticus]

In over 35 years of gaming I think I may have found myself in a situation like you describe only a couple of times and both times poor communication can be blamed. Again, without making any assumptions, I can only suggest that if you seem to be in this situation as often as a "99%" figure might suggest (100+ such games?), you might need to have a bit more conversation before joining games.

I had a bad situation with a control freak DM about three years ago. I was told he was like that, but being new to the area I was jonesing for a game.

My wife and I played the first week, and I didn't see any problems. But my wife (she is an HR manager, and is trained to look for personality traits) said the guy was creepy and too controlling. I went the second week without her, and there were no incidents. But afterward a chain of emails went around and he went off the deep end blaming me for taking an elven racial mod for a stat that a core book said I had.

We we were not suppose to take those adjustments, and he accused me of trying to sneak it by him. Never mind that he collected our character sheets at the end of the game, and it was clearly marked. All the other players did it too, but he singled me out because I asked him if I could drop one stat by two to raise another by one. Heck, two other players had 18s from the racial adjustments, and the Dwarf often mentioned his 2 Charisma. you can't roll a 2 on 3d6, but it is a Dwarven adjustment.

Anyway, I try to be more careful with the groups I join, and with the players I let in to my groups.

I make it a point to avoid any group that will allow a Kender character or have one as an NPC. That is a sure sign that the group won't be for me.

 

[Mark]

Then I can only say you have misread his words, as that is not the impression I got at all.

Believe it or not, he was not saying he runs into it all the time, just that most of the time when he does, it's often because the DM said "whatever you want" instead of giving the information upfront.

See the problem there?

Yes. Your post is different from his. Twice in this thread he discounts people's experiences by posting his penchant for simply walking away from a game after having joined because of soemthing that in my experience is usually known upfront about a campaign. Then he goes into a rather convoluted rationale about communication problems but also, and here is where it seems to really stray from your conjecture, that he also joins games knowing that there is a gamebreaker for him and later leaves. It's all rather bizarre.

 

[JeffB]

I'm up front about house rules-have to be.

Running my 4E Nentir Vale game last year (currently not gaming though for life reaaons) my group knows I'm very much a grog, and they also have similar tastes. They didn't want anything to do with Dragonborn, and while I've warmed up to Tieflings (the 4E version, I cannot stand prior versions), not a one has been desired as a PC, nor did the group encounter any. So they rpetty much don't exist either.

In my homebrew world (regardless of edition or even system- I used it for RQ, T&T and other things at times), there are no dragonborn, eladrin, 1/2 races of any kind (including elves), and gnomes/halflings are extremely rare. Its very S&S and humano-centric.

Generally though I tend to play with people of similar mind/tastes and I don't tolerate power/character build gamers- thats my goal anyways I learned to avoid those kinds of players when I was in junior high. When 3E came out I had a couple players like that and I bowed out after awhile- they sucked all the fun out of the thing trying to game the system.

Maybe thats the O/AD&D 70s influence, or just makes me a control freak, but I like a certain style of game, and if I'm running it/doing all the work, I want to provide the kind of world I enjoy making/creating. :shrug:

 

[Bumbles]

yeah, those little quirks to character creation are one reason I prefer them to be written out.

 

[Bumbles]

Yes. Your post is different from his.

It's a more accurate paraphrasing than yours. I suppose his initial words were insufficiently clear, but he has since tried to explain it to you.

99% of the time where he has run into these situations, he's been told the whatever. This doesn't tell you how often he's run into these situation in general.

Sorry, but it doesn't.

I hope you've had this cleared up for you.

 

[Mark]

99% of the time where he has run into these situations, he's been told the whatever. This doesn't tell you how often he's run into these situation in general.

Of course it doesn't but it certainly implies it has either been over one hundred or close enough to one hundred that he doesn't bother using a less hyperbolic figure, like saying 'nine out of ten' or a 'the dozen or so times' or something more down-to-earth. I'd personally be astonished if it was more than a few dozen but also, now that he has elaborated, I'd be just as surprised if this doesn't happen to him with a good deal of regularity. And since he has been playing since the Eighties and has numerous reasons why he would walk away from a game, I'm inclined to take him at his more-literal word. Ironic, too, that his difficulties at communicating with DMs mirrors his difficulty at explaining his difficulty communicating with DMs. But all of that doesn't bother me as much as the admission that he's cool with regularly joining games he knows have rules that would cause him to walk. That's just bad form.

 

[Bumbles]

Of course it doesn't but it certainly implies it has either been over one hundred or close enough to one hundred that he doesn't bother using a less hyperbolic figure, like saying 'nine out of ten' or a 'the dozen or so times' or something more down-to-earth.

Then I can only say that I feel you're relying too much on your interpretation of his hyperbole as meaning something more literal. I'm afraid it's coloring your perceptions. Now I personally don't like it when people use made-up statistics, I prefer not to use them myself, but I also try not to interpret them as meaning anything significant.

But all of that doesn't bother me as much as the admission that he's cool with regularly joining games he knows have rules that would cause him to walk. That's just bad form.

He doesn't know that. What he said was that there are signs that cause concern, but is willing to give people a chance. I consider that good form, as it gives folks a chance rather than just snapping to a judgment. I'd much rather have somebody sit in a few games and leave than just up and go. If your preferences are different, well, alrighty, that's your preference, but it's not mine.

Anyway, that's enough digression for me.

Anybody think the Deva, Shifter, Goliath, or any other race is going to join the ranks of the "common races" or have any other candidates?

 

[Mark]

Then I can only say that I feel you're relying too much on your interpretation of his hyperbole as meaning something more literal. I'm afraid it's coloring your perceptions. Now I personally don't like it when people use made-up statistics, I prefer not to use them myself, but I also try not to interpret them as meaning anything significant.

I prefer people to at least attempt to communicate accurately and it has become apparent that he has trouble in that area.

He doesn't know that. What he said was that there are signs that cause concern, but is willing to give people a chance. I consider that good form, as it gives folks a chance rather than just snapping to a judgment.

He's said twice in the thread (the posts that started all of this) that barring a race causes him to walk from a game and then later says that he is quite comfortable joining a game that bars a race knowing he will just walk away later. That's bad form.