Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SteveC" data-source="post: 2385409" data-attributes="member: 9053">Hi everyone,Again thanks for some excellent suggestions. Taking what you’ve written into consideration, here is what I’m going to suggest to my GM:The next character can start at level 5, which is the highest level any of the characters have reached currently. My GM told me we were going to have one character level up to 6th, but that didn’t quite happen yet. Alternately, I liked the suggestion of a lower level but with extra XP until he reaches the rest of the group. I’ll see what my GM likes.With that said, this character needs to come equipped with a reason to both join the group and to stay with the group factored into their origin and background. Barring death or some other unusual circumstances, this character is the one for the game. I am also going to suggest the GM grant an unusual background request to go with this to tie strongly into the game. I think this last one will not be a problem, since our GM does such a good job of structuring the game around the group anyway.I think there have been a lot of excellent comments made, so let me take a moment to address some of them:On the group self-censoring character types. I think this is coming to pass, but it will likely end with a couple of the newer players simply leaving the game because they are getting sick of the bickering/discussions if this is not handled properly. I have to agree that the door swings both ways on accepting new characters…we have been very accepting of all of these oddball character ideas, and I think that’s been part of the problem.I think the comment about new characters coming in at the bottom of the story pile is an excellent point. When you introduce a new character, there is a story that has to be resolved right away, which kind of puts that character at the center of attention. Once it gets resolved, the group is going to keep doing what it was doing unless there is a very strong reason to the contrary, which is something I think a player with a new character is going to have to accept. That means that having goals that are consistent with what the group is already doing and a reason to stay around is paramount.On the subject of me being the rules referee, this is in response to what has happened in a previous campaign. Our GM is one of the best around in terms of story, character, pacing and conflict, but he really doesn’t have a rules-lawyer level knowledge of the rules. Most of the players in the campaign are fine with this, but we have a couple that will try to abuse the rules, and they’re also wrong about some of their rules interpretations. What I do is keep the session moving by looking up rules when necessary and also letting the GM know when there are other ways of looking at things. A lot of the time I try to find a RAW reason for what my GM wants to do anyway. What my GM would like to do is just make a ruling on something and move on, but this doesn’t sit well with all of the players: they want a RAW ruling, which is what I can give them. I think it helps that my character is a very basic and straightforward character that has not been overly tweaked. Frankly, I wish I didn’t have to be in this role, but our group kind of requires it. I almost think this could be another discussion: players who bring the game to a halt to argue rules issues. I know I’ve seen several of these on ENWorld already, and I can sympathize with the GMs.So what does everyone think? --Steve</blockquote>

Verification