[Eberron] Why I like Warforged

[Hussar]

If "strong, silent type" characters in films and novels express themselves through their internal monologues and voice-over narration, why not adopt those conventions? There's nothing wrong with the player of the warforged reacting to their environment not with action or dialogue but with narration - and it would be interesting, as another player, to get a glimpse into the warforged character's head without being able to react to it directly.

It's that last part that really doesn't work IME. First off, it's complete metagaming to do so unless the characters are somehow telepathic. Secondly, because the other players at the table should never react to it, it's not really adding anything to the game. By and large, characters should be interacting, not simply making out of game reflections on the game itself.

I've seen it attempted on a few occasions and I find it extremely jarring.

 

[Stone Dog]

If "strong, silent type" characters in films and novels express themselves through their internal monologues and voice-over narration, why not adopt those conventions? There's nothing wrong with the player of the warforged reacting to their environment not with action or dialogue but with narration - and it would be interesting, as another player, to get a glimpse into the warforged character's head without being able to react to it directly.

Players who enjoy strong silent type characters in my games get RP bonuses from journals and notes describing internal monologues. That way they get to be terse all they want and not get gyped when bonus XP time roles around. Bonus XP can take the form of roleplaying, journal writing or drawing depending on the talents of the player.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

It's that last part that really doesn't work IME. First off, it's complete metagaming to do so unless the characters are somehow telepathic. Secondly, because the other players at the table should never react to it, it's not really adding anything to the game. By and large, characters should be interacting, not simply making out of game reflections on the game itself.

Why do you think this is necessarily so?

I get enjoyment out of my friends explaining to me, after the game, why their characters were motivated to do X and Y . . . what is the difference if they "tell" me through their PCs doing a voice-over during play?

Roleplaying isn't all about sitting at the table, speaking in character. Plenty of people play by describing what their characters are doing - how is that really different from describing what their characters are thinking?

There's more than one way to do this, is all I'm saying, and I think that quite a few people would enjoy this technique - "metagaming" is not a dirty word.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Players who enjoy strong silent type characters in my games get RP bonuses from journals and notes describing internal monologues. That way they get to be terse all they want and not get gyped when bonus XP time roles around. Bonus XP can take the form of roleplaying, journal writing or drawing depending on the talents of the player.

Would you give a similar bonus for giving a "voiceover", in-character or otherwise, during play?

 

[Hussar]

It's a good idea StoneDog, but, I still see it as more of a problem than a good thing. But, this is WAY off topic, so I'm gonna make my own.

 

[Hussar]

Roleplaying isn't all about sitting at the table, speaking in character. Plenty of people play by describing what their characters are doing - how is that really different from describing what their characters are thinking?

True. However, the other characters have no problem knowing what a given character is doing. Presumably, they can see it. You don't have to be in first person mode to present actions. And, because the other players can "see" the action, they can react to it.

There's a difference between:

Player: Ok, Jurgan the Strong slaps Biff silly.

and

Player: Jurgan thinks about slapping Biff silly.

In the first case, Biff can react and gets to play. In the second case Jurgan is essentially playing with himself.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Well, sure, but seriously: how about the point I made in my original post? If I enjoy hearing my fellow players describe their characters' feelings, thoughts, and reactions after the game, why not make the illumination of those internal processes part of play itself?

(I'm saying "I" because I'm trying to emphasise that this is something I enjoy, and that I don't want to universalise this to all players. I'm well aware there are many people who wouldn't enjoy getting any kind of insight into other PCs' thoughts and feelings that aren't revealed during play - I'm thinking of "deep immersives" primarily.)

Likewise, if one of my fellow players gets a solo scene where her PC is the only one around, I can enjoy learning what she's up to even though my PC does not know himself and may never learn about it if she chooses to keep it a secret.

(We have to leave aside the fact that solo scenes and internal monologues can, sometimes, lead to a hogging of the spotlight by one player. We can all accept, I hope, that this is not a necessary consequence of the technique, and restrict ourselves to talking about instances where it doesn't lead to the exclusion of other players.)

Given all of this - why not make this part of the regular course of play? Why avoid "metagaming" of this type on principle when it can be enjoyable?

I guess the real question at the heart of this is: Why should players always restrict themselves to enjoying only the things that their characters are aware of?

 

[Staffan]

Utlännings

Utlänning = Foreigner.

Framlings

Främling = Stranger.

Ramen

Ramen = The frame (as in, "the painting had a wooden frame"). I'm not sure how this fits into things.

Varelse

Varelse = Being.

 

[frankthedm]

I like thri-kreen, but they do have issues:
1) Powergaming. For some reason, some people see "four claws" and think "four weapons" or, worse, monks.

Even the designers think that way sadly. Every instance of multi arms leads to a butt load of attacks, favoring sneak attack built characters.

2) Thri-kreen of Athas is not a common book. It explains their motivations, behaviors, etc, quite well, but hardly anyone knows it exists.

What never sat well with me is that Thri -Kreen are Large, [long] creatures from their shape in 2e, but were made medium with a shrunken abdomen for 3e.

The balancing methods for the kreen in 2e are rarely emulated in 3e out of irrational fear of it being 'unfun'.

 

[Klaus]

Even the designers think that way sadly. Every instance of multi arms leads to a butt load of attacks, favoring sneak attack built characters.

What never sat well with me is that Thri -Kreen are Large, [long] creatures from their shape in 2e, but were made medium with a shrunken abdomen for 3e.

The balancing methods for the kreen in 2e are rarely emulated in 3e out of irrational fear of it being 'unfun'.

Despite the long abdomen, the kreen never stroke me as being Large (ie, horse-sized). I always drew them Medium (but with the classic Dark Sun Brom/Baxa shape).