Are your players allowed to play 'special' characters?

[arwink]

I have no problem with it.

When I played in my friends planescape game, there were more wierd characters than normal ones. This never really seemed that big a deal, and we sure as hell didn't become accostomed to the weirdness.

In my games, it's more limited. I've allowed one gnollish fighter, and kobolds have made two or three different appearances as player character races. More powerful monsters usually appear if a character dies and the player chooses to recreat the character rather than raise it - it's the only way they can meet the ECL requirements.

 

[Synicism]

I let my players build the characters they want to build as long as they (1) work under the rules, (2) can work in a party of characters, and (3) have a good concept to back them up. I like half-dragons, lycanthropes, and the like in my games. It's cool.

The PC's are the most important people in the campaign because without them, I have a neat setting and nothing to do with it. If they want to get funky with their characters and aren't breaking the system, I let them go for it, provided they are willing to accept the in-play consequences.

 

[King_Stannis]

Generally, I discourage odd characters and encourage "common" ones. I also don't allow any monster characters.

Reasons are simply for "campaign fit".

same here. in my campaign, i think "elf" qualifies as special.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

I'm playing a gnoll barbarian/ranger that was raised from a pup by circus folk. He was the 'Amazing Talking Dog-boy' (until he got old enough for people to recognize what he was....)

 

[Decamber]

Re: Re: Are your players allowed to play 'special' characters?

Thanks for the replies. I see there's some people that prefers common characters, although most doesn't care as long it fits in the game.

Ack! Did you by chance ever run across my old Planescape campaign?

Actually, no. But I might check it out, though!

 

[Psionicist]

I prefer unique characters, yes. Nothing beats playing something "completely different", lika a Modron in your typical Forgotten Realms campaign, or a Kender in... the same setting. While I don't really like playing monsters, like huge demonic creatures with 13 legs and an Int/Str of 50, I think characters should be at least a bit different from the norm. Heck, I can read about "common" characters in fantasy novels, or meet "common" people in the real world.

Of course, I have to admit that it can be fun to play completely normal, stereotype fantasy characters (those you can buy 50 for a dime) now and then, but that rarely happens. Heck, the characters doesn't have to be that unique or weird, but there have to be *something* different about a character you cannot just apply by the rules (if so, it isn't that special or unique as the subject is already covered quite nicely by the books). As an example, my current "project" is immortal. However, for balance, he is otherwise pretty worthless. Think Marwin from the hitchhikers guide, he is quite disturbing/annoying, but in a "good" cozy way. I think this character will be a BLAST to roleplay, because that's pretty much the only thing you can do, role play him (as "not to roll play", because there's nothing to roll).

... and so on. A unique character is, to me, a character with a perk or quirk that encourage roleplaying. A unique character is not a "cool demon hunter" with a "elite big mofo of a sword" that "kills demons and oh btw pretty much everything" "like a som-o-bitch", but rather a blind, crippled old diviner with a wheelchair, who is quite fond of nature as a whole and dislikes high tech tools as everything created from iron or (possible) stone.

Anyhow, yes I'm aware of special characters from movies or books, that they "develop over time" and that a "truly" special character is a not so special character that does something special and becomes... yes exactly that, special. But then, I can read about those stories in fantasy novels, and it's pretty damn hard to game in a way this is possible. Trust me we (our gaming group) have tried many years now.

But then, this is just my personal opinion... I like it different from the start, that way, you have lots of stuff to do at lower levels (and yes, It CAN be fun to game at low levels but then again our groups have tried for some years and I just cannot stand anything lower than say level 5 for a long period of time).

This might have somthing to do with the fact that I really enjoy those small common things in real life. For two years now, I like and eat the same kind of chocolate bar as much as I did 10 years ago. I sleep to 3PM and operate my computer for 12-15 hours / day whereas I program, create things, hang out with friends in private IRC networks and moderate Swedens largest computer messageboad with 15000 members, 365 days / year, go to bed early in the morning. Two days a week I work some 4-6 hours/day at my grandfathers stable and every time I lift some 150 lbs there without problems I am as proud of myself, the geek who doesn't work out, as I were the week before. I earn some money which I use to I buy computer hardware and (sometimes) gaming material. Now repeat this over and over and over again. I love it. It's not unique or something, but I love it.

Well, that's my story.

 

[I'm A Banana]

In my PS games, hell yeah!

It's Planescape. Like Oathbound, it's semi-successor, it's VERY supportive of wierdness.

Otherwise, it depends on the campaign. I'm usually very lienient. Gimmie and explanation. Make sure they're within the ECL bonus that the party can handle. At least explain how this guy can work without using powerful magic and/or ungodly luck, and you've got yourself a character, man.

In my most recent campaign, I was a bit more stringent. I wanted a few characters, at least, to come from a small human villiage, and the story kinda centers aroud them. So I wanted at least three of five PC's to be from the village, and at least two of those three to be human. And then I gave them a bunch of new races, so they're happy ('specially with the pretty unicorn-people. I guess some girls do like stereotypes. ).

I think the reaon "why not" basically boils down to campaign style. Not everyone wants the heroes to be exotic things. Some campaigns more focus on WHO the characters are rather than WHAT they are, and this is better achieved through either limiting the PC's race, or by simply saying that race doesn't matter (like Planescape and Oathbound do).

I like weird PC's and NPC's. I use some Elfwood stuff for inspiration, even (though, if I used it too much, I think a good 90% of my characters would be elves).

My most recent party has two humans (the two mandatory ones), two unicorn-people (a homebrew race), and an orc. I currently play a kobold in a group with a halfling, a hengiyokai, a half-elf, and a human.

So....not too much wierdness. I tend to like to push the envelope (In a 2e game I had, I wanted so badly to play a Thri-Kreen ranger....still kinda do, but I haven't played in a campaign where an ECL +5 character can be used yet, and ECL +5 can contain so many frickin' awesome critters that I may not be happy with a thri-kreen. ^_^).

 

[Decamber]

Well, that's my story.

Feel like saying... Amen, to that!