Play Style Gripe!

[tensen]

Basically, Jeeves as a monk. Like, with the bowler hat, tuxedo, and all. In Greyhawk.

The idea of a quiet, respectful butler who can unexpectedly kick butt is a cool idea ... but anachronisms, not so cool.

It's not so egregious an example in and of itself; it's just the latest in a long series of characters who jar. Does every campaign have to be Callahan's Crosstime Saloon? How about a little Tolkienesque cliché, just to be different?

-The Gneech

Wow. Actually I don't find that a bad character. True you need to tweak it for your world. But I think your player would probably appreciate it if you explain what the equivalent clothing would be for the character in the setting, and some things that would make it fit in that aren't the anachronisms that are annoying you.

 

[boredgremlin]

Dangnabbit, why do SO many players who would otherwise be a great mesh with the group, insist on playing oddball character all the friggin' time? Are there NO players in my area who want to to play a straightforward adventuring hero without having to be a space alien, an insane gnome that thinks he's a half-orc, or "Splatto the Flatulent?"

*bangs head on the desk after yet ANOTHER oddball joke-character is proposed for what is supposed to be a very immersive, narrative-oriented campaign*

-The Gneech

EDIT:

PS: Thanks for letting me vent, everybody. I feel a bit better now.

Dude, normal people become John the farmer or Ted the bartender at the local tavern. Adventurers are wierdos in my opinion and are bound to act a little odd and either have insane motives or take normal motives to an insane degree.

Sane, rational people just dont decide its a great idea to risk dying while screaming in the dark to some creatures claws for a few bucks. Adventurers who stick with it for a while are wierd people who are at least a little crazy or fanatical (if there is a difference to you). So i dont mind wierd characters at all.

 

[Vanuslux]

I've been fairly lucky, I guess. In the campaigns I've DMed I've gotten a pretty even mix of classic archetypes and exotic concepts that are flavorful rather than off the wall. Then again I tend to uninvite people who play annoying characters from my game pretty quickly so they don't make it past a session or two.

 

[Herobizkit]

Heh, this should make the Gneech chew rocks.

Our current party uses the Gestalt rules and is comprised of:

female Dark Elven Sorceress/Favored Soul of Eilistraee
male Duergar Monk/Psion (the blaster kind, name eludes me)
male Gnoll Ranger/Rogue
male Goblin Druid/Fighter (for now)

"Normal" characters are great, but when you've played them for 15-20 years it's time to break the mold.

 

[The_Gneech]

It's not like I'm against oddball characters as a whole; I've played my share of them myself. But it's like garlic -- put in the right amount and it's wonderful, put in too much and the whole thing just stinks!

Also note that my rant was prompted by a game in which I'm a player, not the GM, so it's not like I can exert any real influence over it.

What's bugging me is lack of variety. Just for a change, I'd like to play in a game populated by more traditional fantasy heroes -- Regdar, Lidda, Tordek and the like rather than Moe, Larry, Curly, and Splatto.

But there's good news on that front: the character ended up working better at the table than he did in description. He's attached himself to the party paladin and is an admirable henchman. So it may be that this instance turns out to be one of the exceptions after all.

-The Gneech

 

[Hussar]

I gotta admit, I feel for the Gneech.

My lot tend to come up with some pretty whacked out concepts as well.

Something I'm really confused about though. How much do people play that they get tired of PHB races/classes? Maybe it's because I DM most of the time, but, jeez, with that many classes/races, you'd think there'd be SOMETHING in there that would appeal.

 

[Numion]

Dude, normal people become John the farmer or Ted the bartender at the local tavern. Adventurers are wierdos in my opinion and are bound to act a little odd and either have insane motives or take normal motives to an insane degree.

That makes sense. Until it gets twisted. About the first and last time I tried playing at a club instead of my usual group consisting of long-time friends, the club had the same idea.

Except instead of "normal" weirdos all adventurers were sexually deviant in their game. I was like 14 at that point, and the club consisted of 16-28 year olds. They were explaining their characters strange sexual habits with a glee .. needless to say, never made it to meeting no. 2. (Erics grandma wouldn't approve of the details.)

 

[rounser]

"Normal" characters are great, but when you've played them for 15-20 years it's time to break the mold.

Uh huh. It seems more likely to me that people just did it for the min/max.

 

[shilsen]

Uh huh. It seems more likely to me that people just did it for the min/max.

Could be, but if they really wanted to min/max they'd be playing dwarves or humans.

 

[rounser]

Could be, but if they really wanted to min/max they'd be playing dwarves or humans.

Sure, but some people aren't very good at min/maxing, or are in campaigns that disregard LA for races or otherwise monte haul the rules (the gestalt thing is a bit of a hint).