Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Players Killing Players for stupid reason
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Thyrwyn" data-source="post: 6497416" data-attributes="member: 12354"><p>There is no pretending about it: if there are no players, there is no character. </p><p></p><p>It is an idea that is part of another, larger idea. It has no agency, no will (free or otherwise), no consciousness.</p><p></p><p>But it does not exist outside of <em>someone</em> playing it. And only that part of the character that has been shared with others exists outside of the original player's portrayal of that character. If you <em>knew</em> that red was Gnoll-slayer Bill's favorite color, but had never shared that with anyone else, then no-one else would know to play Bill that way. And if someone else declared that blue was Bill's favorite color while you were out sick, ("Bill picks the blue pill - it's his favorite color."), they have not "played the role poorly".</p><p></p><p>By similar logic: <em>"RISK is a war game: I should bring a handgun and shoot my opponents; to do otherwise would be poor war-play."</em> Both examples are faulty because first and foremost both RISK and D&D are games, their genre is secondary.</p><p></p><p>Characters are not Platonic Ideals. They are not accessible to anyone, only to those with whom they have been shared. If there were one TRUE Gnoll-slayer Bill, then I could have discovered him myself; also, there would be an <em>objective</em> means of determining which actions and behavior would be appropriate interpretations of TRUE Bill, <em>without referencing previous interpretations</em>. You could not claim to have "created" Bill - he would simply be.</p><p></p><p>First of all, this Gnoll is different - it is a PC. Within the scope of the game, that is a relevant, significant difference. PCs are the protagonists, the engine that drives the game-world and the shared experience that we (the real, tangible persons) are there to enjoy. Second, who cares? So what if it were just another monster, some nameless NPC story-bound to cross your path? That Gnoll represents an opportunity, an opportunity for you to prove Bill might be a character capable of growth, capable of becoming something more. That Gnoll represents an opportunity for you to role-play Bill coming face to face with his blind, racial hatred. It could be argued, that to ignore that opportunity, to say "Nah, I'm good with Bill being immutable" is role-playing poorly. Growth is what separates characters from caricatures.</p><p></p><p><strong>TL : DR</strong> - The people playing the game should always discuss and compromise on what types of characters should be allowed at the table. If a given character would be offensive to any of said real people, then the character should not be allowed. If any given character would create a conflict with any other character, the <strong>real people</strong> should discuss it and see if there is any way to justify and explain a way for the characters to overcome their differences. Compromise whenever possible. Be excellent to each other whenever possible <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Thyrwyn, post: 6497416, member: 12354"] There is no pretending about it: if there are no players, there is no character. It is an idea that is part of another, larger idea. It has no agency, no will (free or otherwise), no consciousness. But it does not exist outside of [I]someone[/I] playing it. And only that part of the character that has been shared with others exists outside of the original player's portrayal of that character. If you [I]knew[/I] that red was Gnoll-slayer Bill's favorite color, but had never shared that with anyone else, then no-one else would know to play Bill that way. And if someone else declared that blue was Bill's favorite color while you were out sick, ("Bill picks the blue pill - it's his favorite color."), they have not "played the role poorly". By similar logic: [I]"RISK is a war game: I should bring a handgun and shoot my opponents; to do otherwise would be poor war-play."[/I] Both examples are faulty because first and foremost both RISK and D&D are games, their genre is secondary. Characters are not Platonic Ideals. They are not accessible to anyone, only to those with whom they have been shared. If there were one TRUE Gnoll-slayer Bill, then I could have discovered him myself; also, there would be an [I]objective[/I] means of determining which actions and behavior would be appropriate interpretations of TRUE Bill, [I]without referencing previous interpretations[/I]. You could not claim to have "created" Bill - he would simply be. First of all, this Gnoll is different - it is a PC. Within the scope of the game, that is a relevant, significant difference. PCs are the protagonists, the engine that drives the game-world and the shared experience that we (the real, tangible persons) are there to enjoy. Second, who cares? So what if it were just another monster, some nameless NPC story-bound to cross your path? That Gnoll represents an opportunity, an opportunity for you to prove Bill might be a character capable of growth, capable of becoming something more. That Gnoll represents an opportunity for you to role-play Bill coming face to face with his blind, racial hatred. It could be argued, that to ignore that opportunity, to say "Nah, I'm good with Bill being immutable" is role-playing poorly. Growth is what separates characters from caricatures. [B]TL : DR[/B] - The people playing the game should always discuss and compromise on what types of characters should be allowed at the table. If a given character would be offensive to any of said real people, then the character should not be allowed. If any given character would create a conflict with any other character, the [B]real people[/B] should discuss it and see if there is any way to justify and explain a way for the characters to overcome their differences. Compromise whenever possible. Be excellent to each other whenever possible :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Players Killing Players for stupid reason
Top