Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TheSword" data-source="post: 8119407" data-attributes="member: 6879661">If you have a GM willing to put a lot of time and effort into creating and bringing to life a campaign, then you should try and accommodate their vision within your character concept. A lot of campaigns have themes... certainly published ones do. If the pitch of that is accepted then the players should absolutely try and create a character concept that complements that theme.I’m all for unique and interesting characters. However, while Geralt of Rivia may be unique, and Witcher’s rare, he absolutely complements the monster hunting, witch burning, superstitious  themes of that setting. They aren’t making themselves incompatible with the campaign.I once ran a Skull and Shackles campaign, a gritty, subtropical pirate campaign with a large amount of time on board ship. One player (relatively new) said be wanted to play a ranger with a wolf companion. I nixed the idea and asked him to pick a setting appropriate creature. I was later glad I did because he planned on riding a wolf when he was high enough level. (Pathfinder rules) A giant wolf riding fighter was not in keeping with the themes of the campaign. He was being influenced by a sci-fi/manga version of pirates - which while making sense to him - would have really got on my wick.The lessons I learnt from this is - what you think is clear may not be clear to everyone else, particularly if you have different sources of inspiration.You should never be afraid at the start to nix something you’re not comfortable with. These things grow, they don’t recede as you might hope. It will all work our in the wash is wishful thinking at best. It’s much harder to correct problems at level 7 when the player is invested which can either result in losing a player or the campaign ending.To the original example, if the GM expects the gods to take an active hand in the world and the players to take an active hand in the gods affairs, and the wall of the faithless exists in that world then the players should get on board with that idea. The concept is not that atheists shouldn’t exist in the FR - they clearly should. However a player creating an atheist character in that game should be prepared for and embrace the censure of the gods and the concept of the wall of the Faithless... they shouldn’t trash the idea, claim to be picked on, say it’s a crappy concept that undermines their character atheism etc etc etc.If a player creates a witch in WFRP and starts lobbing hexes at watchmen in the street they shouldn’t complain that Witch hunters are picking on them, or that corruption rolls are spoiling the fun of witches.In a samurai campaign, a low status follower could make a fascinating character in contrast to the rest of the samurai party. Able to do things the samurai players couldn’t. However they shouldn’t complain about how the Daimyo doesn’t listen to them or how they are treated with arrogance by other samurai.I’m a big fan of the Player pitch, where after the DM has pitched the campaign. The players pitch their character concept to be discussed and commented on by the other players and DM. This can avoid conflicts and duplication and make for a more enjoyable/effective party.In short by all means create a unique, interesting and in some cases contrasting character. However do it in such a way that is plausible and that leaves you enjoying the ramifications of that contrariness not railing against them.</blockquote>

Verification