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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kae'Yoss" data-source="post: 3654322" data-attributes="member: 4134">Hear hear! I raise my glass (well, bottle) in salute! The first commandment of roleplaying should be "Thou shalt not other people's fun!"There is no valid excuse, whatsoever, for that.No one says that this should not be viable in roleplaying games. What we're saying is the those who play contrary characters and do stuff that gets on other people's nerves are utter jerks, and that "I want to play characters that don't go along well" is no excuse if something like this hasn't been agreed on before.Then you better talk to the rest of the party before, and see how they feel about it, or you don't just play the jerk.Which, in the case of a player being disruptive (whether he hides behind his character concept), is to tell that player to get the hell out of the party.It is. You can ask them if they'd agree to some tension between characters. If they agree, then go ahead and play a character that goes on the other characters' nerves (never the players', though). If they say they don't like it, it is you who has to let the idea go - or leave the party and look for one that agrees.Not in my experience. I've seen characters getting along great, and they talked about all kinds of things, not just tactics. They ask about each others' cultures, backgrounds, history, mannerisms, particular goals and fears and likes and dislikes. And you can find some outlooks or practises weird or even disagree with them and still get along with a player.The logical thing for characters that don't get a long at all - especially if one's a jerk - is to tell the jerk to go his own way. The DM should not force cooperation by railroading the whole thing, especially if the situation is aready generating tension between players. "Being a jerk" is no personality. It's lack of personality.</blockquote>

Verification