Role-playing Restrictions

[mac1504]

I was running a campaign for awhile and required role-playing goals for each of the PC's before they attained their next level. Each goal was tied to both the PC's class and his background story or motivations for being involved in the story line.

In retrospect I think I would have done away with some of the class goals and required them for the Prestige Class(es) they took.

I think you are taking the correct action with this player, I think this is an effective way to get them involved in the story as well as fill the campaign out with their own additions and give them ownership in the game.

 

[SylverFlame]

I don't think it's out of line to require the player to take interest in the object he has targeted for revenge. I am, of course, assuming that player made this family and the desire for revenge part of his concept.

Mind you, I am also one of those here's-a-hand DMs. If I were you, I'd put the family in question into the campaign in some way. The obvious one is to make the family the villains, even if only in a recurring, though not ultimate, role. The other option, and this is one I like, is that the family in question could be backers. I mean, every good baddie needs people who offer advice and aid. No one does it on their own. It would make a loose tie to the campaign, giving the PC a reasonable excuse to go after it, and also add a new level. All of a sudden the PC's aren't going after someone they can't face until 20th level, they are working up through the ranks of competent lackeys.

So, to sum up: Yup, make the PC do it.

Hmm, two paragraphs for five words. Can't you tell I'm an english major.

 

[barsoomcore]

Us English majors gots to sticks together.

Hee.

Hey thanks, folks. Some good ideas. I've put one family member right in his way and even then said member had to insult the guy pretty outrageously before any killing got happening (JD: correctamundo).

He's taken three levels of GW and while he hasn't completely agreed to my plan, he has allowed that maybe another class would be more apropos.

Thanks, gang!

Wrapping up Season Three of Barsoom in a couple more sessions -- I might actually KILL a PC. Being a Spineless Puppy DM, that's something of a big deal for me.

Except when said PC belongs to my wife. Her PCs get killed with regularity. I don't know why that is.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

Hey thanks, folks. Some good ideas. I've put one family member right in his way and even then said member had to insult the guy pretty outrageously before any killing got happening (JD: correctamundo).

He's taken three levels of GW and while he hasn't completely agreed to my plan, he has allowed that maybe another class would be more apropos.

Not to go in a different direction here, but have you asked the player what he thinks now that he's had a while to play the PC? It sounds to me like you've got a "Gaming Buddy" player as defined by Robin Laws. They don't frequently take center stage or like to be the focus of attention, and the "loner" class that you've asked him to take actually forces him to do that from time to time.

He's said that maybe another class would be more apropos. What about some sort of magical radiation accident that allows him to redo the Ghostwalker levels? Could be fun for the storyline too.

 

[Altalazar]

Maybe it is just me, but I can hear the wheels straining against the DM's tracks on this one. Character concepts sometimes go in directions that are unexpected. There is nothing in the class balance requiring it - perhaps a discussion about what other paths could be taken or how else the class might fit the character as it is actually played and evolving.

 

[Benben]

I really have no idea how to play an Evil Ghostwalker.

In my campaign I had a pair of twin brother assassins go after the party. The party killed one of the brothers and the other got away. The surviving brother gave up his name and took on his brother's name and vowed to have bloody revenge.

The Ghostwalker class worked wonderfully for me because it allowed the NPC to follow the PCs almost anywhere thanks to shadow walk, and thanks to etherealness he could drop taunting notes in the most unlikely of places.

 

[Kesh]

I'm more of a Fibonacci man myself... (1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 etc.)

AR

Gah. I can't hear that term without thinking of a parrot now. My childhood has ruined me.

"1-1-2-3! Fib-o-nacci!"

(A cookie to anyone who knows what I'm talking about.)

 

[barsoomcore]

Character concepts sometimes go in directions that are unexpected. There is nothing in the class balance requiring it - perhaps a discussion about what other paths could be taken or how else the class might fit the character as it is actually played and evolving.

Agreed, and agreed. One of the problems is campaign-specific -- for Barsoom this class' abilities at high level are pretty outrageous. So I wanted to make sure I and my player were in alignment as to where this character was going.

My philosophy is to always have the world react to however the PCs behave, regardless of what the players may think about their characters. That is, my player thinks he's playing a revenge-obsessed guy, but in fact he's playing a team supporter, cautious, not really obsessed by much of anything sort of guy -- and so THAT's how NPCs react to him. This is the second discussion I've had with him about the direction his character is taking -- and to be clear, I'm not trying to "force" him in any particular direction, I'm just trying to get he and I together on which direction.

The GW prestige class was specifically allowed to this player because of his revenge backstory. That was a conversation we had long ago when he first asked if he could take the class -- we agreed that given his revenge obsession, some of this stuff would be cool to bring into play.

So my feeling is that if he wants the cool toys, he needs to continue down the story path that initially granted them. If he doesn't want to, that's TOTALLY fine, but he in that case will be getting DIFFERENT cool toys.

 

[Psychotic Jim]

This sounds reasonable to me. Just to play devil's advocate or to offer another solution, not all blood-thirsty maniacs out to get revenge have to be visibly seeking it. The most dangerous sorts of people in fantasy are those that nobody would suspect in the first place- quiet, outwardly-calm but inwardly bitterly hateful sorts of fellows who, when the right circumstances occur- become ruthlessly violent. You could take advantage of the character's current passivity as just building up an alliance with the other PCs in order to get revenge on that family. Maintaning a low-profile outside of the limelight might even be desirable for someone wanting revenge, especially for something Ghostwalker PrC that depends on people not knowing his real identity.

Edit: Another idea would be to have his current, friendly state of mind with the party working to unconsciously suppress the character's bitter desires for revenge on the family that wronged him and have some conflict between the two states of mind.

 

[jmucchiello]

Not to go in a different direction here, but have you asked the player what he thinks now that he's had a while to play the PC? It sounds to me like you've got a "Gaming Buddy" player as defined by Robin Laws. They don't frequently take center stage or like to be the focus of attention, and the "loner" class that you've asked him to take actually forces him to do that from time to time.

This is what I wanted to say.

There is nothing in the gw class that says he has to seek revenge against anything. "Some gw represent a source of merciless justice as they right wrongs and punish the villainous. Others are more compassionate as they progress from one community to another, helping those in need." The class is not only Eastwood. It can also be the TV's Incredible Hulk, Kung Fu's Kwai Chang Caine, or Charles Bronson's Paul Kersey (Death Wish). Heck, the A-team nearly fits the bill.