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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ravellion" data-source="post: 709854" data-attributes="member: 538">LONG, BUT PLEASE READ (optional for Casper and Jurgen)I am not entirely happy with the events that have transpired.The way I see it, Sullaf sacrificed the PCdom of his character because he would start a fight with Ilan if Ilan would provoke Roland further. There are several reasons why Ilan would do such a thing.a) Trying to taunt the paladin, knowing the paladin can't kill his prisoner, getting away with things you could otherwise never get away with, and hence gaining leeway and power over the group even though being a prisoner. This is smart thinking.b) Trying to taunt the paladin, trying to escalate the situation into a fight. Since Ilan has poor melee skills and probably a sundered bow after the first round of combat (you are indoors - outside might have been different), he would hope DW7 would help him and cocoon the paladin or something. This would in the best scenario lead to the Paladin leaving the group, and in the worst remaining PCs having to choose sides and many PC deaths.c) As B, but thinking he could win the fight on his own. Whether he could or not is debatable (though quite likely if he could lure the paladin outside), but again, this leads to a very arguable situation where it is one PC over the other. If Tristan would roleplay his character well but his tactics poorly (not very likely I know <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />), he might lose his PC as well.d) karsten knowing that Jeroen wouldn't kill someone else's character, Ilan could taunt Roland as much as he wanted. So why the hell not do it, he might just make his paladin leave because a wussy paladin isn't fun to play, greatly increasing Ilan's maneuverability in the game. This is a severe case of metagaming, even more so than B and C.Only A is acceptable. D&D is not Ludo (mens erger je niet) where you try and hit each others' pawns off the board. Besides that, both B, C and D involve extreme cases of metagaming. Now, I can handle metagaming against the DM. I can either spot it and do something about it, and often (90% of times) I modify my monsters and items anyway (so you can't go "Drow have 4 hp so I should kill them with one sword blow: Charge!")Actively Metagaming against other players however is sickening. They have no control over the "meta aspect" of the game and are hence powerless to stop it. You are hence ruining the fun for one of your fellow players.If this game can't be played by all of us without assigning an enemy, you can designate me as one. I can handle it. ("I have a random CR20 encounter table around here somewhere..." <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />)If you feel the need to "win" this game by reducing the fun of other players, I suggest you read the introduction to the 2nd edition Players Handbook and Dungeon Masters guide. What it boils down to: You can't win a roleplaying game. Not even by killing all the monsters, taking their loot and getting XP - that's like saying that you win the game in monopoly by throwing dice: You win through playing dice. In roleplaying games you win the game through killing monsters and taking their stuff. Or saving the princess. Or being Knighted by the Monarch. Or getting the girl. Or recovering the Ancient tomes with Arcane Secrets. None of these win you the game. You can't win a roleplaying game - however, there is a goal to them: The goal is to have fun with eachother.I have fun when characters interact with eachother in personalities that we gave them. Getting them involved in a story, created by the players and DM cooperatively. Matthijs and Jeroen feel more or less the same way (correct me if I am wrong). If the character dies it is often seen as a loss of a unique personality. Matthijs of course, has never lost a character unless the campaign ground to a halt, so we don't know for sure <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />.Take has fun when he kicks ass. He wants to be better at kicking ass than anyone in the game. The only reason it doesn't bother the rest much is because we are happy to fill support roles in combat so we don't care much if Takes character has a higher bodycount than the rest of us. Take is happy when his character is kneedeep in the blood of his enemies, and he is making sure his enemies spill it on the floor like tapwater. If his character dies it is no big deal. There are plenty ways to kick ass, and he hasn't yet seen them all, so bring out those 4d6s.One of the things that is a very big tendency with Karsten's characters is that they often ride the balance between falling from grace or not. Sometimes they fall, sometimes they barely hang on. He also roleplays VERY dramatically. He likes combat as well, and is slightly less happy with a support role - he too wants to kick ass. Most of all though, he wants to be an important character in the campaign (world), wielding political power. Again, correct me if I am wrong. If he loses a character it depends on whether the DM gave him enough attention with how he interacts with the political power structures in the world whether he cares or not. A character with just stats and a short background is replacable. If his King of the castle, conqueror of worlds dies, it is a sad day even if the character had only 8 CON and a limp. However, I have on occasion also seen him gloat over when he had power over other players (or their charcters). That brings me to my next point.We can all have fun together despite somewhat different ways of having fun. However, sometimes, one way of having fun conflicts with another. A session in which Karsten reaped the benefits of being knighted for the first time, DW7 met a fellow Psion with a secret agenda, and Jeroen tried to get even with an annoying treasurer springs to mind. Take only had a few Jousting matches, only the last of which was even somewhat exciting. Karsten, Matthijs and Jeroen said "Best. Session. Evar!". While Take got increasingly annoyed and said "We did nothing today. We wasted our evening."Karsten's quest for importance seems to have infringed in Jeroen's desire to do deep character immersion roleplaying. I hope Karsten, that you did not do the things you did for selfish reasons. We participate to ALL have fun. I am not telling you off, I am just trying to make sure we do all reach the goal of the game. It would be a shame if someone did not for no good reason. All we have to do to all have fun is respect eachother's playing styles. Perhaps we can even enjoy other styles from time to time as well. I know I can enjoy a good Greataxe critical from time to time.Rav</blockquote>

Verification