Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Character Individuality
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 8532103" data-attributes="member: 7026594"><p>I'm re-quoting to bring the context back in so what's being replied to is visible.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't know, man. I'm not importing any prior discussions. I think the point here is that prior communication and establishing expectations and boundaries beforehand is helpful. If the DM or the player comes up with a plot or character concept first, and the other is aware of it, than yeah, it's not ideal to then create something which will combine with what's already been created to create intra-party conflict, or make a scenario unresolvable. If the DM says beforehand "Hey, I'm not including Dragonborn, or Clerics, or (whatever) in this world as a character option", that's generally understood as their right to do, although of course the players have the right not to play or to attempt to negotiate the boundary.</p><p></p><p>I think you were at best being uncharitable to describe the hypothetical character of Max's as a deliberately-chosen wangrod character. I don't think it's a wangrod character at all. It's a concept that's broadly compatible with most games. It just happened to conflict with the specific scenario, and we don't know which came first. In the situation Max described, he was unaware of the scenario when he designed and started playing the character. We don't know whether the DM was unaware of Max's character's principles on this issue and overlooked the potential conflict, or whether he WAS aware and looked forward to it creating dramatic tension, or some other possibility.</p><p></p><p>I'm aware that there's a greater burden of work on the DM, and personally would hope that players would be somewhat flexible in respect of the fact that we don't want the DM to have to ditch a bunch of writing and design work in deference to one player's character concept, but on the other hand, I think more interesting and fun games tend to result when character concepts complicate "optimal" problem solving.</p><p></p><p>And Max DID say that if there were three possible appropriate responses he could envision for the character, he'd go with the least disruptive option.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, you're confused. The latter half of my post was a response to the quoted remarks by Lanefan, critical of Umbran.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mannahnin, post: 8532103, member: 7026594"] I'm re-quoting to bring the context back in so what's being replied to is visible. I don't know, man. I'm not importing any prior discussions. I think the point here is that prior communication and establishing expectations and boundaries beforehand is helpful. If the DM or the player comes up with a plot or character concept first, and the other is aware of it, than yeah, it's not ideal to then create something which will combine with what's already been created to create intra-party conflict, or make a scenario unresolvable. If the DM says beforehand "Hey, I'm not including Dragonborn, or Clerics, or (whatever) in this world as a character option", that's generally understood as their right to do, although of course the players have the right not to play or to attempt to negotiate the boundary. I think you were at best being uncharitable to describe the hypothetical character of Max's as a deliberately-chosen wangrod character. I don't think it's a wangrod character at all. It's a concept that's broadly compatible with most games. It just happened to conflict with the specific scenario, and we don't know which came first. In the situation Max described, he was unaware of the scenario when he designed and started playing the character. We don't know whether the DM was unaware of Max's character's principles on this issue and overlooked the potential conflict, or whether he WAS aware and looked forward to it creating dramatic tension, or some other possibility. I'm aware that there's a greater burden of work on the DM, and personally would hope that players would be somewhat flexible in respect of the fact that we don't want the DM to have to ditch a bunch of writing and design work in deference to one player's character concept, but on the other hand, I think more interesting and fun games tend to result when character concepts complicate "optimal" problem solving. And Max DID say that if there were three possible appropriate responses he could envision for the character, he'd go with the least disruptive option. Yes, you're confused. The latter half of my post was a response to the quoted remarks by Lanefan, critical of Umbran. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Character Individuality
Top