definiteFreakyFishGuy
Explorer
We've all heard the phrase. We've all heard the horror stories. Maybe we've used it ourselves.
How do you use it, and why?
How do you use it, and why?
D&D General What are your reasons for doing something because "It's what my character would do"?
- Thread starter definiteFreakyFishGuy
- Start date
Stormonu
NeoGrognard
I've used it to drive the singular actions of my characters sometimes, but always with the knowledge that D&D is a group game, and the group only survives when it's coherent. So, stuff like betraying the party, stealing from party members and the like are right out. Rivalrlies - like the one between Legolas and Gimli are still possible, but not the backstabbing like in Stargate: Universe.
Only time I've had my character make decisions possibly detrimental to the group is in games like Vampire, Alien (and only in certain groups) or the like where internal politics like this are encouraged.
Only time I've had my character make decisions possibly detrimental to the group is in games like Vampire, Alien (and only in certain groups) or the like where internal politics like this are encouraged.
aco175
Legend
I had a rogue that would only attack a monster if another PC was already fighting with it to gain advantage and would flee if by himself. This may have left the people in the back row out to dry once in a while.
Throwing it out as a phrase is a bit like throwing out railroading as a phrase. Most people hear it as a negative, but I think it can be also meant as a neutral or even positive.
Throwing it out as a phrase is a bit like throwing out railroading as a phrase. Most people hear it as a negative, but I think it can be also meant as a neutral or even positive.
Rabbitbait
Grog-nerd
I played an ex-Paladin desperate to redeem himself. He held the line while the rest of the party fled. I didn't have to and he probably could have escaped with the others, but it's what the character would do.
Don't believe I've ever used the phrase about a character I was playing. If my choice of action has reason enough that it required justification, the reason itself could stand loud and proud without hiding behind an unassailable wall that no other player can interact with like "no offense but..." Or "it's what my character would do"
BlackSeed_Vash
Explorer
I had a character cast Dispel Magic on any NPC he didn't like the vibe of because we kept running into Manshoon. Not a great way to start many conversations when a bard openly casts a spell on the other groups leader. It did however, eliminate about 9 of his Simulacrum.
While I might do things that negatively affect at the very least my character, I've never a make a character concept that would actively screw over my party. Even when playing a greedy and/or evil character, my characters are self aware enough to know that the party is what allows him to do what he wants, or at least is helping him to achieve his goal(s).
While I might do things that negatively affect at the very least my character, I've never a make a character concept that would actively screw over my party. Even when playing a greedy and/or evil character, my characters are self aware enough to know that the party is what allows him to do what he wants, or at least is helping him to achieve his goal(s).
pukunui
Legend
I did this when I was younger and didn't know any better. Made characters that resisted going along with the plot. One example was a non-Star Wars game using the SWSE rules. I was playing one of those high-level characters who is suffering from amnesia and so is currently low-level because they don't know they're actually high-level.
The plot involved a bunch of strangers coming together, and the others started acting a bit crazy, so I had my character disassociate herself from them. I had her decide to slink off and get a job somewhere while the others followed the GM's carefully laid tracks.
The GM humored me for a bit with a solo session that consisted of my character getting a job and working for a bit before some baddies found her and overwhelmed her, dragging her up to the starship where the others were.
Since then, I have had players who have behaved in that way when I've been DM (and have been a fellow player to people behaving that way), and I have come to intensely dislike it. Now, whenever I start a new campaign as DM, I insist that the players make a character who wants to go on the adventure I am going to run, and I make sure to provide my players with enough information about the campaign that they can do so. I also generally insist on having the PCs already know each other and be able and willing to work together to achieve their goals.
I stopped being a player earlier this year, but for the past decade or so, I would always strive to make a character to fit the campaign so I wouldn't end up with any conflict like that. Being a fellow DM, I would often be familiar with the adventures the other DM was running, so my characters tended to take more of a back seat and leave most of the decision-making up to the others anyway.
EDIT: Also: Dungeons & Doodles: Tales From the Tables - It's what my character would do!
The plot involved a bunch of strangers coming together, and the others started acting a bit crazy, so I had my character disassociate herself from them. I had her decide to slink off and get a job somewhere while the others followed the GM's carefully laid tracks.
The GM humored me for a bit with a solo session that consisted of my character getting a job and working for a bit before some baddies found her and overwhelmed her, dragging her up to the starship where the others were.
Since then, I have had players who have behaved in that way when I've been DM (and have been a fellow player to people behaving that way), and I have come to intensely dislike it. Now, whenever I start a new campaign as DM, I insist that the players make a character who wants to go on the adventure I am going to run, and I make sure to provide my players with enough information about the campaign that they can do so. I also generally insist on having the PCs already know each other and be able and willing to work together to achieve their goals.
I stopped being a player earlier this year, but for the past decade or so, I would always strive to make a character to fit the campaign so I wouldn't end up with any conflict like that. Being a fellow DM, I would often be familiar with the adventures the other DM was running, so my characters tended to take more of a back seat and leave most of the decision-making up to the others anyway.
EDIT: Also: Dungeons & Doodles: Tales From the Tables - It's what my character would do!
I ran a low-Intelligence lizardfolk fighter/barbarian PC who'd been raised his whole life in a drow slave camp. As a result, he had a rather limited understanding about how the world really was. On their first excursion on the surface world, I had my PC tackle a fellow slave - a dwarf fighter PC - because he thought the sun was a fireball. (He had no idea what the sun was, but he knew what fireballs were....) I also had him make decisions based on his limited understanding, like attacking the horse pulling a wagon when they were attacking a merchant caravan because he figured, as the largest creature around, the horse was obviously the leader of the group. He once grappled a lich because he had no idea that that was a particularly bad idea (given their ability to permanently paralyze those they touched); to him, it was just an animated skeleton who could talk, no big deal. He also initially gave away any coins he earned because he had no idea how money worked and thought they were useless (until a kind-hearted fellow PC explained the concept to him). So yeah, I've used "that's what my character would do" before, but I tried not to do so to the detriment of the other players and their PCs. And Jhasspok the lizardfolk was a blast to run through an entire 20-level campaign.
Johnathan
Johnathan
gnarlygninja
Hero
This meme (honestly, like most of the ttrpg memes) has sat uncomfortably with me for as long as I've been in the hobby, because while I get that it's used as a defense for poor behavior, it's also like...the entire appeal of the hobby to me? I like to make characters with flaws and stick to them, if I'm not doing that it's probably not a game I intend to stick around in for very long.
If you're asking for times it caused friction with the party, it's historically mostly been when I'm playing a character who is good and the rest of the party are...tabletop good, where they just want to kill bad guys. I've had a paladin who tried to redeem a plot villain, which irritate the players who just wanted to kill her, and a character who ratted the party out to the police in a World of Darkness game when one player randomly decided to murder an antagonistic NPC.
If you're asking for times it caused friction with the party, it's historically mostly been when I'm playing a character who is good and the rest of the party are...tabletop good, where they just want to kill bad guys. I've had a paladin who tried to redeem a plot villain, which irritate the players who just wanted to kill her, and a character who ratted the party out to the police in a World of Darkness game when one player randomly decided to murder an antagonistic NPC.
Similar Threads
