PC names in your party

[Imaro]

I don't like campy, silly, or punny names, because seriously--how many times can you hear the same joke before it starts getting on your nerves?

I definitely agree with this, humor is subjective and a goofy name is usually funny for the first couple of sessions, but it quickly wears off and can totally break the mood if the DM is trying to go for something else. If the game is light-hearted or silly I can see it (though I don't think I'd run a game categorized as silly on a long term basis)... if not then I would rather everyone have normal names.

See, I went the in opposite direction starting a few year back. I realized that I as DM was in no position to judge that kind of player creativity. In the end all would be doing is rewarding people who thought like me, and while I'm terribly fond of my inner narcissist, not to mention the clever-clever names I cook up for characters ("Joseirus", "Eastwood West", "Yatagan Fracas"), I felt like that would be the wrong thing to do.

I don't know ... total creative license with 5 to 7 players usually equals chaos, not fun. I feel like you're trying to paint any type of restrictions or caveats a DM sets as narcissistic and stifling, yet I think really all it boils down to is... Mallus likes a certain style (since you named your own characters in a silly way, and now I'm wondering if you're still just catering to your particular style) but that does not equate to Mallus style = the best style for every game. In fact it seems silly or goofy names aren't the norm or majority as you seemed to posit in the other thread. As far as "judging" creativity, I think within the context of the campaign or setting the DM/GM is running he should have some say.

 

[Dragonwriter]

One game... T13K, For More Than Glory
Spingear Spindlefingers (aka Fleck) - Gnome Transmuter/Archmage
Valdir Goldenoak - Elf Ranger/Fighter/Seledyne Ranger (Special PrC for this world)
Kralic Darkmantle - Human Rogue/Shadowdancer
Argus (don't know if he has a last name) - Human Ex-Monk/Barbarian/Figher/Ranger/Druid
Aramil - Elf Druid
Fahlias Dragonson (me) - Half-Silver Dragon/Human Ranger/Horizon Walker
(coming soon) Szitha Hsst'ath - Sauran (lizardman) Cleric of Nearon with his cohort/brother Szenthras Hsst'ath the Sauran Fighter

Different game... T13K "Fall of the 14th Kingdom"
Irthos - Half-Black Dragon/Elf Ranger
Mako - Human psion (telepath)
Adoroar Darkeyes - Human Soulknife
Phyi - Elf Sorceress
Barook (me) - Hanara (monkey-man) Cleric (who makes banana-potions and practically worships bananas)
Slassz Verazzyn (also me) - Sauran Blue Dragon Shaman

Game I'm DMing, starting soon (Tonight!)... T13K "Perils of Thunder Island"
Jeralt - Human Druid
Caranthir Mithrandir - Elf Rogue/Ranger
Oain Irensoul - Dwarf Fighter
Vrukor - Half-Orc Fighter
Indolo of Stormspeakers' Guild - Human Evoker

 

[Mallus]

I don't know ... total creative license with 5 to 7 players usually equals chaos, not fun.

Not when those people are smart, creative, and trustworthy.

... Mallus likes a certain style...

Sure do!

...(since you named your own characters in a silly way, and now I'm wondering if you're still just catering to your particular style)...

Stating that I don't feel comfortable giving out in-game mechanical bonuses to players who name their characters something I like means I'm catering to a particular style of play? It means the exact opposite, I should think...

In fact it seems silly or goofy names aren't the norm or majority as you seemed to posit in the other thread.

Please don't misrepresent what I posted. I said D&D has a long tradition of silly names. That does not imply they were the norm nor the majority.

 

[Gimby]

Alara - Eladrin Rogue
Arnoff - Dwarf Paladin
Conrad - Human Wizard
Purity - Tiefling Paladin
Just - Tiefling Warlord

Yes, we like the Tiefling words-as-names thing, why do you ask?

 

[Imaro]

Not when those people are smart, creative, and trustworthy.

See and it's statements like these that cause me to have a problem with your generalizations... so there's no way people in a group can be smart, creative and trustworthy yet like things that are at odds, or have differing views on what constitutes in genre for the campaign they are playing in? IMO, not at all. It's up to the DM/GM to make it a cohesive whole and sometimes, depending on what is trying to be achieved that doesn't equate to free reign all over the place... It's not abou narcissism or stifling creativity, and I would think mature players would understand that. YMMV of course.

 

[Mallus]

... so there's no way people in a group can be smart, creative and trustworthy yet like things that are at odds, or have differing views on what constitutes in genre for the campaign they are playing in?

I should have added; 'and able to compromise'.

 

[Merkuri]

Our Savage Tide campaign (played online with OpenRPG):

Kaylankuli (me) - grippli (halfling-sized tree frog) druid
Kiba - lupin (anthro dog) fighter/ranger
Churl - tiefling scout
Halcyon Arnmin (goes by Arnmin) - human monk
Stone - human beguiler/wizard
Olero Nef (DMPC) - human cleric

I thought long and hard about my character's name. The DM added grippli to the Savage Tide world and didn't give very many details about their culture, so I decided to make them very native American (from central America) and found an Incan (well, Quechuan) dictionary online. Kaylankuli means frog in Quechua. She has a climbdog animal companion named Allqu, which means dog in Quechua.

(And doh, I was gonna link to that dictionary but it appears to be down. I hope it's temporary... occasionally I like to throw Quechua words into Kaylankuli's speech and say they're from the grippli tongue.)

 

[The Ghost]

BECMI Game:
Players:
Lord Malcolm of White Stone's Pass (Fighter)
Sir Richard the Lion (Fighter)
His Holiness Oliver, Bishop of Fallschurch (Cleric)
Angus, The Dark Dwarf of Rockhome (Dwarf)
Percy of the Woodland Realm (Elf)
Arthur, The Green Wizard of Kent (Magic-User)

Villains:
Charles, Baron of Black Eagle Bluffs (Fighter)
Mortimer, Archbishop of Kingston (Cleric)

3.5 Game:
Campbell (Dwarf Cleric/Fighter)
Hagen (Human Paladin)
Virgil (Human Wizard)
Pip (Halfling Rogue/Wizard)
Argyle (Human Cleric)
Owen (Elf Ranger)

We watched a lot of Braveheart and played a lot of Gemfire when we were younger. It still influences the style and tone of our games.

 

[CleverNickName]

I realized that I as DM was in no position to judge that kind of player creativity. In the end all would be doing is rewarding people who thought like me, and while I'm terribly fond of my inner narcissist, not to mention the clever-clever names I cook up for characters ("Joseirus", "Eastwood West", "Yatagan Fracas"), I felt like that would be the wrong thing to do.

I'm not a jerk about it, character names can be whatever the players want them to be. I'm not trying to censor anyone, or stifle anyone's artistic voice, or wield an all-powerful iron hand over my game, or whatever. I just reward good roleplaying and creativity, as any good DM should.

Turns out, people know when they are being serious and when they aren't, so nobody complains. And I don't punish or ban characters with stupid names, even blasphemous or profane ones...I will still allow the character to play, horrible name and all. (I might shorten it to an initial or nickname, though. Once, I had a player decide to name her character "Egg McMuffin." I referred to her as "Mick" for the duration of her adventuring career, and soon, everyone else was...even the player.)

 

[El Mahdi]

...Turns out, people know when they are being serious and when they aren't...

Not always true. It may be true for those whom you have, or do, game with, but there are people who really aren't "with it" enough to know when they are being overly silly or just plain dumb (not that being dumb is bad, I do it myself, on purpose even sometimes - but other times, like everyone else in the world, I don't always know I'm doing something dumb when I do it - nobody's perfect).

I don't think anyone was criticizing you for rewarding players the way you do. If someone states what they would do differently from you, and why, that isn't a criticism of you, it's simply an explanation of what they do and why - same as you explained what you do and why. I think others here, and I also, feel that if we were to reward some players in this manner, then we would in essence be penalizing those players that don't have the same artistic or creative talents as others. I could see some players being disillusioned and feeling left out because of it.

If however, it works for your group and your players, good on you and them.

If someone in my group wants to make a character with a purposefully silly or dumb name, then I make sure they pay for it throughout the course of the campaign (good naturedly, of course). But I won't penalize them by rewarding others, for their not being as creative as others. Besides, they are being creative, just not necessarily in a manner which I would have wanted or practiced myself. That's the funny thing about creativity, it's extremely subjective. Who am I to judge whether it's worthy of reward or not? But, if they were purposefully silly, I'll have NPC's say things like "awww, did your parents not like you?" throughout the course of the campaign. But, all in all, I tend to not give out a lot of individual rewards. I see the game as a cooperative effort (i.e.: a team). I will point out, and congratulate, instances of good roleplaying, creativeness, and cleverness - but everyone shares in the experience points, treasure, and success equally.


Speaking of silly names, although not from my current group, or any group I've played in or DM'd - the funniest one I ever heard was a Mystaran Rakasta (humanoid cats) Samurai from Mystara's moon named Meowa Kittycatta. I think I read that one in Dragon magazine years ago, and I just couldn't ever forget it. I guess sometimes silly names can make for very memorable characters (especially when coupled with good roleplaying).