• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

A request to all EN World gamers

I normaly play a character who is incredibly simler to me. The great thing about this is it helps me stay in character and learn about myself simaltously(misspelled). the biggest mental diffrents is I understand and believe that ripping a metal door off its hinges is near imposible. He doesn't (plus logic doesn't apply to him usually).
PS: I was going to write something very insitful but I forgot what it is.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I do agree that some players simply don't like playing crosscast characters. That's one reason why crosscasting really isn't meaningless - though that's only a matter of perception. For me, I do think that crosscasting is meaningless in terms of roleplaying, but not so much because of the different races - as DannyAlcatraz mentions, playing an elf or dwarf is far more significant than playing an African character in Nyambe, or an Eastern character in LotFR. Still, don't you think that players tend to think of nonhumans in terms of their own races? It's a perception largely built by experience with film...

I enjoy playing a variety of characters, and my DMs have consistently allowed them. In one incident, I played a gay character who established a committed relationship with another male character - to be honest, my wife enjoys my taking on that role :cool:
 

Grodd JoJoJo said:
Still, don't you think that players tend to think of nonhumans in terms of their own races? It's a perception largely built by experience with film.


If it's "built by experience with film", then all nonhumans would be perceived and portrayed excusively as white, except for the evil ones, which have dark skin, of course.
 

Grodd JoJoJo said:
I do agree that some players simply don't like playing crosscast characters. That's one reason why crosscasting really isn't meaningless - though that's only a matter of perception. For me, I do think that crosscasting is meaningless in terms of roleplaying, but not so much because of the different races - as DannyAlcatraz mentions, playing an elf or dwarf is far more significant than playing an African character in Nyambe, or an Eastern character in LotFR. Still, don't you think that players tend to think of nonhumans in terms of their own races? It's a perception largely built by experience with film...

I enjoy playing a variety of characters, and my DMs have consistently allowed them. In one incident, I played a gay character who established a committed relationship with another male character - to be honest, my wife enjoys my taking on that role :cool:


This is also a very interesting point. My DM would certainly allow us to make characters either male or female, however, all of my characters have so far been female. Although each character has a drastically different personality from the last (I have also played a gay character who formed a committed relationship with the halfling she saved), each one was, in fact, female. What I find facinating is that the DM is constantly changing sexes, because he/she has to be everyone else!

But here is another point for you, considering your thesis. When I'm creating a new character to play, I often start with a character from a film, so that I get the personality, intonation, and point of view from the actor. This character is then "tweaked" and moulded to what I want to play. But here's the really strange bit: I tend to start with male characters! I can't remember who it was who said that there are "no great female roles" to play in Hollywood, but I'm beginning to see their point. The bulk of roles available to women are "damsel in distress", "wide-eyed innnocent", or "sex-goddess". We see these stereotypes repeated in fantasy literature, which is also frustrating (if you've read R.A. Salvadore you'll know that Catti-brie is one of the coolest fantasy chicks alive, yet still, she needs protecting, and she'll never be on par with Drizzt as a fighter).

For instance, one of my characters was a saytre who was working with a M-6 type organization within the fey court. I wanted a smooth talking expert spy who always had some device capable of getting her out of a bad situation. I also wanted her to have a bit of grit, you know, the detective drinking whiskey at the bar with the gravely voice and the single fan rotating above her. And what female roles did I find available...well, none. So, I started with James Bond and Jesse from the Preacher series (comics). On the other hand, my latest character is a mix between Chel from Road to El Dorado, Salma Hayek's character from Once Apone a Time in Mexico, and The Bride from Kill Bill...all great female roles...or...at least...versitile.

Hope this is helping!

(T from Three Haligonians)
 
Last edited:

It was mentioned before, but I want to go into it myself. The emotions of the game are a very powerful factor in my roleplaying experience.

I've been gaming since I was 9 years old, 12 years ago. Like most, I didn't have a very detailed or complex game, but eventually I played with a professional GM (hired through a community center) and learned through him how to get into my rolls. I wasn't truely comfortable with it at the time, but his encouragement opened me up to a new understanding of the game.

When I watch movies I feel. I'm one of those people who cries at movies, but I rage and love and feel joy and terror, too. It is such an emotional experience for me that watching some movies can be draining. Roleplaying, for me, is the same way, and I love it. It's not a good session unless I can feel strong emotions that I don't often get the opportunity to feel in my everyday existance. They aren't my emotions but the emotions of my character, however, they resonate within me like characters in film. In a recent Star Wars game I got to fall in love and have a spiritual experience through the Force. It was one of the best game I've ever played in, even if I felt limited in my emotional displays by the comfort levels of the other players. It's the biggest draw to the game for me, and it's truely a fantastic experience to have some measure of control over what causes those emotions. Being able to play a character in that kind of environment is more than Film or Theater could offer me.

- Kemrain the Emotive.
 

Here's a few tidbits that might fit in with what you're looking for.

I started gaming in 1990. That probably makes me a late-comer, compared to some of the folks here. I was introduced to gaming by a friend in high school. I worked my way into two gaming groups. One I got along with very well. I don't feel that I was ever all that welcome in the other group. I stayed because I loved to play and they needed another player.

I like all kinds of games. Card games, board games, miniature wargaming, rpgs, just about anything. Of all of them, I like rpgs the most. There are probably a number of reasons. The biggest one is probably escapism. In a game, I don't have a joe-job, a mortgage, or any of the other "downer" aspects of real life. Other games are pleasant diversions, but only an rpg can actually get you into another life.

I don't really have a huge devotion to one particular system or another. I've bought, played, or run a number of systems over the years. I'm not quite the collector I used to be. At one time, most of my friends claimed I had the largest collection they'd seen outside of a game store. Now, I've whittled down my collection a bit and basically decided to limit myself more to two or three core systems that can run a number of games, rather than every genre or idea having it's own system.

Now, here's a little story about the intetactivity in gaming. For the most part, when I GM, I try to have a rather hands-off approach. When I make up adventures, I have situations and places and people and the characters interact with them. I try not to have linear storylines. The players seem to like this, even though it's a little more taxing for my mental reflexes.

Anyway, I was running a sci-fi game using TSR's short-lived Alternity system. The characters worked for a government that had discovered a method to travel to paralell universes and even limited time travel. Unfortunately, a neighbor in one of those paralell universes had developed similar technology, minus the time travel. This neighbor had also developed a powerful explosive, capable of destroying a solar system. The neighbor decided someone else that could develop dimension travel was too dangerous. He delivered an ultimatum to the star system -- destroy your dimensional travel research and become my subjects or be destroyed.

The characters were tasked with eliminating the threat, by whatever means necessary. They did some recon and discovered this interdimensional bully had become a tyrant on his own world, which was actually a cruel shadow of their own. Some tragic event in his own childhood had turned him into the man he was now. Unfortunately, he also lived in a heavily fortified citadel. The group decided, grudgingly, their only choice was to travel back in time and kill him as a child.

So, they returned home, geared up, and transported themselves back in time. They didn't have perfect control, but managed to go to a time when the tyrant was in his early teens. They found his house, laid in wait, and went in under the cover of darkness while everyone was asleep.

Then, something really cool happened in real life. While one character was searching the house to be sure everyone was asleep, he discovered they tyrant's twin sister. He turned to the other players and said, "Wait a minute guys. What if we kill him and she just grows up to be the tyrant instead?" The beautifully orchestrated assassination ground to a halt. The players proceeded to have a two-hour real-time discussion of not only the chances of history still ending up the same, but the moral problems of killing someone in their sleep for acts they won't commit until thirty years in the future. Even the player whose style can be best described as "shoot first and don't bother with questions" was deeply engrossed.

All in all, I never even had to prompt them to this. They came to it all on their own. It was probably one of my coolest moments as a GM. All I did was put them there and they did some of the finest in-character gaming I'd seen. I never even expected it to happen. I thought there might be a little moral discussion that would promptly be ended with a silenced gunshot, but not this. They were really into the situation. That's what rpgs are really about. When you're playing a battle-hardened soldier whose world is being held hostage by a madman and you're wondering if your character could really live with the knowledge he saved 6 billion people by killing a child in his sleep, you're in character.

Feel free to PM me if you want to know how the story ended. :cool:
 

A Fellow Scholar!

This is so exciting for me to hear! I am a graduate student in religious studies, and I've been toying with some ideas about projects on fantasy in general and D&D specifically (you'd be surprised what we can fit into our discipline nowadays!). It's way out of my supposed area of emphasis, but it beckons nonetheless ...

Anyhow, I'd love to hear more about your project and your supporting research. Um ... not sure how to go about asking you to contact me without posting my own e-mail address ...

Help?
 

Crosscasting is meaningless?

This might mean more to me if I had a firmer grasp of the term- I'm picking it up from context. It seems to refer to playing a character of a different Sex or Gender, though it's been tied to Race as well. Though I might be unfamiliar with the term, I know the concept well.
I don't agree that it is meaningless at all, unless there's some part of the definition I'm unaware of. Anything that pushes boundaries, makes you think or feel, or pushes someone's level of comfort in a game is far from meaningless. Playing cross-gender is a fantastic self-exploration tool, just as playing a member of another race, religion, sexuality, moral, or ethical stance can be. Roleplaying is different than literature in that regard, because you, as the author of your character, get to decide where you go in the development of that character. I don't understand how something so significant could be described as meaningless. Maybe I just don't follow.

In regards to the acting involved, the comparason between a GM portraying a character and an actor on stage dressed to appear as their character, I must agree that the difference is startling. Like an actor, my GM's voice and manner of speaking change when he switches between characters. I can often tell who's speaking even without "Sharon says," attached. Because of this, he usually doesn't bother to say who says what, he narrates actions (when he does't simply perform them) and speaks in the first person for his characters, like his players do. As for what the characters look like, well, the general description of an NPC might be the same between everyone at the table, but we all have a different idea what "A beautiful young woman with long red hair, bright green eyes, and an infectous smile" might look like. We aren't restrained by an actor, because we cast the game in our minds, and I think the game is much richer because of that, for those of us with keen imaginations.

- Kemrain the Crosscasted.
 

The comment about killing a character in her sleep reminded me of something.

It has never ceased to amaze me how deeply involved in their PCs and game worlds some people can get (myself included), even those who aren't particularly good roleplayers.

We were in a high-level campaign last year in which Evil Cult had kidnapped Archmage's wife & only kid for nefarious purposes (human sacrifice). The campaign's Evil Artifact McGuffin tended to warp the personalities of those who handled it-and my PC failed his save. The toy had to be taken away from him. While he didn't take overt action against anyone else in the party, he was definitely Gollum-esque in his desire to reaquire the dodad for the rest of the storyline.

Much action ensued as the party was fighting the Evil Cultists and rescuing the Archmage's family when the McGuffin wound up sitting alone on the altar, unatended. My PC, seeing his "precious" ran for the altar to get it...Archmage's baby in one hand, eldrich blade in the other. The LG Cleric also saw the lonely object 'o' evil and decided that the altar made the perfect anvil for his hammer. My PC continued to charge, hoping to save his latest toy, and just managed to get within about 10 yards of the altar when the hammer fell, destroying the artifact of awfulness. The release of evil energies was tremendous- the cleric and my PC barely survived, and many cultists and yes, the baby, did not.

The cleric's player was SO pissed off he was red in the face, and actually left early that night. We didn't talk for a couple of days, it took so long for him to cool down. Even with that, the campaign ended shortly thereafter.

I had heard of people getting wrapped up in soap operas and being unable to distinguish between reality and fiction, but that was as close as I've seen to that in gaming.

(For the record, he's OK, and the group is still gaming together.)
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top