Odd Peeves [2002 Thread]

[buzzard]

Ok just attended the local gaming con here in Denver over the weekend. I had fun of course, but there were couple of minor things which bugged me. The feature adventure centered around a ankheg which threatened a farming area. For some reason the MM claims that ankhegs are good for the soil? Who thought that one up? I well understand that earthworms aerate soil. That is good. A 30' insectoid is not going to aerate soil. He's going to eat everything in sight leaving a barren wasteland. The thing is as big as an elephant, it ought to eat like one. Where does one get such a loopy notion that a giant acid spitting bug helps farming?

Then for my other peeves. Ok I'm playing Living Greyhawk. We have a fairly normal party (short in mages, but no big deal). We go through the intorductions: Human Fighter, Human Paladin, Human Ranger, Human Cleric, Dwarf Fighter , Human Runner. Huh? Runner? "Well everyone fights, my character is a coward, he just runs away". Why? "Well it's different, I didn't want to play something like everyone else".

At least I now know the person,so as to avoid tables where he is present. Why the heck would an avowed coward be adventuring in the first place? Nah, him staying home would be logical can't have that.

Then I had two people tell me of their half orc bards which they created to be "different". Hmmm, you guys better compare notes, the novelty appears to be wearing off.

Do posturing faux acting roleplayers get a bit old for you guys, or is it just me?

buzzard

 

[BiggusGeekus]

I suspect that whoever wrote that up in the MM played the Baldur's Gate CRPG where you're only supposed to kill 10 of them because "they are good for the soil". Such is the way rumors become law.

And just as a point of order for any fanboy who might be interested ... small holes followed by water are good for the soil. Giant holes almost two meters in diameter are not small.

 

[Henry]

I have played since Basic D&D, and every time I've ever encountered an Ankheg, they were either (A) in the wilderness and decided we were food, or (B) they were threatening the local farmers. Heck, the picture in the 1st edition Monster Manual shows one terrorizing a farmer! Any D&D commoner will tell you the description of a good Ankheg. Kind of reminds me of the "Rain Forest" Episode of South Park!

OTOH, don't earthworms also help the soil through their excrement putting processed organic matter back into the soil? Can you imagine what Ankheg Feces would do for the soil????

 

[Marius Delphus]

On Ankhegs:

Enormous burrowing predators are "good for the soil." Hmmm... I also remember that from the "Baldur's Gate" CRPG. It struck me as asinine *then*, and it doesn't make any more sense *now*. IMC, ankhegs are mistaken for dragons even by competent farmers; the fact that they're not reptilian and lack huge batlike wings tends to escape one when one is fleeing for one's life from a great big monster. Sounds like a good subject for an "Ecology of..." article.

On Cowardly PCs:

There *are* ways to keep cowardly PCs adventuring. I don't know whether the player buzzard encountered had any deeper motivations... but I wouldn't discount a cowardly character concept out of hand.

(1) The PC's belief that adventuring leads to "easy money" outweighs (but only barely) the shock and terror the PC experiences when threatened by physical danger. Or, the PC needs a large sum of cash for some reason, and believes adventuring is the only way to go about gathering it. A PC like this, if scrupulous, might take less than an "even" share in gratitude, and might even seek out opportunities for adventure (plunder); if unscrupulous, the PC might be tempted to steal from the other party members to accumulate the needed sum more quickly.

(2) The PC labors under some kind of curse that prevents a settled, comfortable life. This PC has taken up with a band of adventurers because of a firm belief that it's the only way to stay safe in a lethal, and therefore terrifying, world.

(3) The PC is "on the run," either from legitimate authorities or some villain group. This PC may have figured out some way to be of benefit to fellow PCs, and in return receives a measure of protection and anonymity. But it doesn't ameliorate the stark cold terror brought on by blood and danger....

On Identical "Different" Characters:

Not to be *too* pedantic, but (a) a limited number of character races multiplied by a limited number of character classes yields a limited number of race-class combos, so statistically speaking it's probably fairly easy to run into more than one of each, and (b) "half-orc bard" *is* a race-class combo that wasn't available in 1E or 2E, so to that extent it *is* novel and different.

That said, though, I agree the novelty *is* wearing off. More than "odd" combos, as a DM I'm entertained by players that take on an RP challenge using an "ordinary" race-class combo. Like an elf wizard that finds humans interesting. Like a dwarf fighter that has a sickeningly positive attitude, doesn't drink, and thinks combat is kind of risky. Like a morose halfling thief with a sour, acerbic comment for every situation. Like a human cleric who has serious problems with his church's doctrine. (And yes, these examples lack depth beyond "reversing a stereotype"... they're just examples, after all.)

I guess my attitude toward "different" characters, as a DM, is that I don't care what's on your character sheet... *show* me what "different" is like.

 

[Cyragnome]

I seem to remember the "Ankheg=good for soil" from at least as far back as 2eMM which significantly predates BG CRPG. Why is it? I have no freakin' idea, the 2e MM claims is the open passages and allowing the free passage of water...but it sounds like so much "bunk" to me...at least on a "Ankheg is a huge freakin' monster" scale...

 

[Pielorinho]

I play (well, played, until a tragic last session) a dwarven druid. My initial concept for the character was, I admit, influenced by the fact that dwarves don't usually go the druid route.

But I had a lot of fun coming up with a history for the character, involving disease, an early job as the clan's goatherd, and visions of bleeding mine walls, that led to his career as a druid.

It's not the fact that he's a dwarven druid that makes him fun to play: it's the weird history behind him. And i think that holds true for all weird combinations: if all you got is a weird combination, then you just have a gimmick.

At the one con I've been to, the Living Greyhawk table was unbearably twinky. The guy playing the goblin monk with a flaming morningstar, who spoke through the entire game with a squeaky voice and with his face squinted up, nearly drove me to violence. That's not roleplaying -- that's just pissing me off.

Daniel

 

[der_kluge]

I hate to say it, but some of the worst/most annoying role-players I've ever met are people that
A) I met at Cons
and
B) played Living Greyhawk

 

[buzzard]

my real beef

I suppose when I rail against the faux acting roleplayers I should state some more specific problems I have with them. It's the fact that they make a character which is "new", but in reality is generally crippled in some way. Now the dwarf druid example here doesn't fit that bill. However a "runner" does. Even a half orc bard does as well . Did any of these people ever bother to think that maybe someone has not run that character type before because it is disfunctional?

While we always hear people complaining about power gamers (and it certainly is annoying to play, and only be a prop because some godlike PC is in the game doing everything), I find it just as annoying to have some player deliberately make the character have to be carried along.

Living Greyhawk would appear to be a lousy place to be a hanger-on. The whole set up is such that making a powerful character is not particularly easy. Your equipment is tightly controlled. You have a 28 point buy for stats. Only the basic classes and feats are available. When someone joins a party in LG, and doesn't intend to contribute it does bad things for the survivability of the party- and the feeb still gets the exp award.

I often wonder if the self proclaimed elite roleplayers (often seen at cons), ever considered that a competent, well designed character can have a personality as well?

Buzzard

 

[Evil Josef]

I personally see no problem with a half-orc bard, so long as they contribute and the player doesn't amend too many tragic-heroic-truly-exceptional background details to the character. A half-orc war-drummer, for instance, is perfectly plausible though the charisma penalty might put a dent in their effectiveness eventually, while the foppish urban half-orc, crooning for his dead wife and kids that were killed by the meanest black dragon in all of dragondom might get a little old after a while. Still, it would depend on the player.

 

[buzzard]

I have the trump card

I have decided that for the next con I should design the perfect 'pure roleplaying character' that no one has done before. He will be a quadrapalegic wizzard with a mule familiar. He will travel draped on the mule's back, and cast verbal spells (like he has a choice). Maybe a sorcerer might be better since handling a spell book might be tricky.

Buzzard
(editing consisted of remembering that somatic meant moving hands- duh)