Niche Players

[Sound of Azure]

In my extended gaming group I have a few players who are particularly fond of their niches. Two in particular are constantly fighting over which is "better".
If I planned a generic one-shot and asked my friends to make any character for 1st level I would nearly inevitably get:
*A human or Elven Wizard (Mr Wizard has only played Wizards for the past 12 years)
*A small race (halfling, gnome, kobold, or goblin) druid
*A Dwarf of some variety (often with mechanical stuff)
*A Ninja (usually a young woman disguised as a boy)
*1 or 2 other PCs to round out the group, who have no preferences

Usually when I bring up a new campaign, these players will instantly talk about their niche with such intensity, I'm a bit taken aback, and hesitate to suggest differently. Am I being over-sensitive about this?

While I have my favourite classes and races I don't see why they are so vehemently against trying something else. I'd really like to see a bit more variety.

Any tips on trying to promote some more variation of chacter types?

 

[Henry]

In my extended gaming group I have a few players who are particularly fond of their niches. Two in particular are constantly fighting over which is "better".
If I planned a generic one-shot and asked my friends to make any character for 1st level I would nearly inevitably get:
*A human or Elven Wizard (Mr Wizard has only played Wizards for the past 12 years)
*A small race (halfling, gnome, kobold, or goblin) druid
*A Dwarf of some variety (often with mechanical stuff)
*A Ninja (usually a young woman disguised as a boy)
*1 or 2 other PCs to round out the group, who have no preferences

Usually when I bring up a new campaign, these players will instantly talk about their niche with such intensity, I'm a bit taken aback, and hesitate to suggest differently. Am I being over-sensitive about this?

While I have my favourite classes and races I don't see why they are so vehemently against trying something else. I'd really like to see a bit more variety.

Any tips on trying to promote some more variation of chacter types?

First of all, the "niche player" is what Robin Laws calls a "specialist." It's not a bad thing to identify your players' strengths and play to them. Note that while it's possible for a person to radically play against type and enjoy it, it's more likely that they will hate it. If you want some variety, it's possible to suggest to them new base or prestige classes that offer many of the same strengths as the classes they favor, and get them to expand their options slightly, a bit at the time.

However, as A DM, you need to look on their desire for being specialists as a blessing in disguise. Unlike many DM's, you already know:

--What the new party's strengths and weaknesses will be
--What they're probably going to do in a given encounter, heck, down to the LAST PERSON'S ACTIONS!
--What kinds of missions they'll excel at, and what they'll suck at.

These things allow you a heck of a lot more pre-planning that having a group who varies dramatically.

Me, I have players of many stripes. Two of these players love to play by type; one player will play roguish, or scoutish, or ninja-ish characters every chance he gets, subject to what supplements I allow. He LOVES sneaking in, and surprising the enemy and laying waste as fast as possible before getting out quickly. I try every session I can, to give him a chance to do that.

One other player loves to play what our group loving terms "greedy bastards." Every single game, his character is the one who wonders, "what do we get paid for this." "How much can we get for the beholder eyes?" "How many monetary favors can we curry as payment for this mission?" Icentive for him is amazingly easy - offer loot, or the promise of loot, and he's off to the races. He's Han Solo from the first Star Wars movie.

THe important thing, more than seeing more playing against type, is making players happy by appealing to their "emotional kick". The guy who loves to roleplay in character? Give him the (brief and easily solvable) moral dilemma. The girl who loves deep plot and story? Give her the convoluted mystery with snippets of clues found along the adventure path. The guy who is a Head-basher? It's easy to fix his needs.

If you want more out of your play experience, I'd offer them one-shots with pre-gens every once in a while, to shake things up, give them a chance to try other classes, and they might just find something they like. without committing to a character for several sessions.

 

[lukelightning]

Why do you need the variation? What's wrong with players' preferences? It might be boring for you, but the player characters aren't for you to enjoy, they are for the players.

Some players have personalities that lend themselves to certain races or classes. Mr. Goofy probaby does gnome rogues a lot better than dwarvish clerics. Ms. Kickbuttandtakenames is probably more suited to fighter types.

I'm not very good at playing fighters or rogues (even though my current character is, in fact, a fighter/rogue!) since I'm not the best tactical maneuverist (is that a word?). Also I have always had a strong preference for wizards of the traditional robes, pointy hat, staff and beard type (beard optional for female wizards...).

 

[Sound of Azure]

Hey, cheers Henry!

Ah, "specialist". Ok.

I hadn't thought of it that way, perhaps being a bit exasperated by the "X is teh cool" conversations I've been having with these guys.

Some useful suggestions of playing to type in different ways. I'll have to examine things a bit more closely to guage their preference in session types (though I have a vague idea for most of them).

hmmm. food for thought (yum! )

 

[Sound of Azure]

Lukelightning

I should clarify that I'm not completely against specialisation, and recognise I have my own tendencies in character selections. However, I do enjoy playing something a little different from time to time, just to see how it works, and challenge my perceptions. If I implied it's wrong/badfun I didn't mean to.

A good point on personality types... another thing I had not considered.

I strongly suspect I am over-reacting to the whole thing, and that players ought to play what they like and enjoy.

What I'm suggesting though, is to challenge their ingrained ideas, and perhaps expand what it is they enjoy. There's nothing wrong with any of their niches (though Elves, Dwarves, Kobolds and Ninjas may not belong in every setting), indeed I like all of those things. It seems like a shame (to me) to miss out on things due to habit, not just preference.
It'd be really cool to hear one of these guys to say how much they enjoyed playing Y or Z, instead of X, or how it was interesting to try Y for a change (though they'll go back to X next time).

The other part of it is when I am playing, not DMing. Quite often I end up needing to work out what my PCs are based on these players' preferences. If I play a Wizard, Mr Wizard will often tell me how I'm selecting spells badly, if I even get to play one at all (I prefer not to specialise the partyy too much). Meanwhile, the Druid player stares daggers in my back for supporting someone else's niche. It's kind of disconcerting!

There's been a lot of arguments over their individual niches of late, and the players who favour multiple ideas are getting a little tired of it, thus spawning this thread.

On the plus side, these players are very good at what they do, which is a definite bonus!