Hypersmurf
Moderatarrrrh...
CanadienneBacon said:
Ohhh! Not "the only players", but "only players". I misread
-Hyp.
Run away screaming or not?
- Thread starter CanadienneBacon
- Start date
Ohhh! Not "the only players", but "only players". I misread
-Hyp.
CanadienneBacon
Explorer
Right-o. Thoughts then?
Li Shenron
Legend
CanadienneBacon said:
I don't know why playing a male character is so important to you, but I thought perhaps the new DM had previous bad experiences with players playing opposite genders and wants to avoid it.
OTOH, if the new group is already becoming extremely combat-oriented while your whole reason to gather the group was to try a more RP-oriented game, I understand your frustration. It's like trying your best gathering up an alternative-rock band, finding players and organizing everything, and see them turn to play mainstream pop while you - who were the one who "created" the band - are left with the chance between doing what they want or leave. Very sad...
Last edited:
Particle_Man
Explorer
What if you play a very butch cross-dressing lesbian on a quest for a girdle of masculinity?
I'd try to find a bit of common ground in this instance, or find something that the DM will allow that I'd enjoy. As a player, it's nice to have every option available to you, but as a DM, it's acceptible to limit some options if your personal experiences have shown you it's necessary to do so. Right now, we don't know the motivations of the DM- unless there's some slim chance that he knows your reputation of playing male characters and can't abide it, it's more likely that he's had some experience in the past with a male character grossly misrepresenting a female character (or vice versa) and doesn't like to start new games with the potential of that happening again.
If you're new to him, if he's a new dm, or if a bunch of people are new to him, it's acceptible for him to set ground rules that, in time, trust can allow him to revoke. Personally I wouldn't let players roll their characters at home and bring them to the first game, but if I got to play with them enough and found them to be honest, all around trustworthy people- I can eliminate that rule. The same may be his case.
As for character focused roleplay- I wish you luck, as that requires busting down a whole slew of habits and tendencies that many DND players have. It wont be easy. The only question I'd ask is how asking about the mechanics of character-building in any given new campaign interferes with character-building. Asking about classes, asking about prcs, all of this don't necessarily point out min-maxing or a dislike of "character development." It's just the other side of the coin that has to be viewed at the same time. Asking players to be anti-munchkins, where they purposefully play weakened characters in order to focus on roleplay, isn't necessary imo.
If you're new to him, if he's a new dm, or if a bunch of people are new to him, it's acceptible for him to set ground rules that, in time, trust can allow him to revoke. Personally I wouldn't let players roll their characters at home and bring them to the first game, but if I got to play with them enough and found them to be honest, all around trustworthy people- I can eliminate that rule. The same may be his case.
As for character focused roleplay- I wish you luck, as that requires busting down a whole slew of habits and tendencies that many DND players have. It wont be easy. The only question I'd ask is how asking about the mechanics of character-building in any given new campaign interferes with character-building. Asking about classes, asking about prcs, all of this don't necessarily point out min-maxing or a dislike of "character development." It's just the other side of the coin that has to be viewed at the same time. Asking players to be anti-munchkins, where they purposefully play weakened characters in order to focus on roleplay, isn't necessary imo.
Piratecat
Sesquipedalian
Aoogah! Aoogah! This sets off warnings with me, too, but it's probably just because the DM has had problems in the past.
Here's how I'd handle it:
I'd ask for a provisional exception. I'd say "I understand that you have this rule. I'd like to break it anyways, and if you get uncomfortable with how I roleplay then we can talk about it... and if you really don't like it, I can start a new same-sex character. I'd like the chance to break some new ground for me, though."
Obviously, the hope is that everything runs smoothly and no further discussion is required. By asking for a provisional exception, though, you give him an out.
Here's how I'd handle it:
I'd ask for a provisional exception. I'd say "I understand that you have this rule. I'd like to break it anyways, and if you get uncomfortable with how I roleplay then we can talk about it... and if you really don't like it, I can start a new same-sex character. I'd like the chance to break some new ground for me, though."
Obviously, the hope is that everything runs smoothly and no further discussion is required. By asking for a provisional exception, though, you give him an out.
Viktyr Gehrig
First Post
Well, I'd say that one, given what the other player appears to be building, you're not going to get the style of roleplaying you were looking for. (Unless, of course, the other player turns it up to 11.)
Two, I am very quick to chafe under limitations about what kind of character I am allowed to create. Unless there is a very specific, very good, and specifically based in the gamestory reason that I cannot make a character decision as simple as the character's gender, I'd bail.
Honestly, I'd back out as smoothly as possible to avoid burning bridges, but I'd get out of there.
Two, I am very quick to chafe under limitations about what kind of character I am allowed to create. Unless there is a very specific, very good, and specifically based in the gamestory reason that I cannot make a character decision as simple as the character's gender, I'd bail.
Honestly, I'd back out as smoothly as possible to avoid burning bridges, but I'd get out of there.
DragonLancer
Hero
As others have said, try talking to guy preferably face to face about it. Politely ask him why he has made this decision and explain your POV. If he is a decent DM and an intelligent guy, he'll allow you a period to play said character so he can see how you play a male character.
Keep us informed.
Keep us informed.
Balsamic Dragon
First Post
Here's what I'm guessing may have happened: you want the DM to run a really intense roleplaying type of game, right? This means that there may be romantic plot lines involved. Many otherwise gender-neutral DM's have a hard time running a romantic plot-line when players are playing cross-gender characters.
I agree with you that people should be able to play cross-gender, I play both male and female characters and I wouldn't want to be told that I couldn't. But, I would talk it over with your DM and find out what his reasons are. If he would really have a hard time with it, just due to the nature of this particular game, I would go ahead and play a female character.
I would also not immediately panic about the guy who is asking a lot of system related questions about his character. Min-maxing can actually be a sign of good roleplaying! (i know, but wait, hear me out!) When a player designs his or her character to work towards a particular prestige class, it means that character a) has a concrete goal, apart from the party's goals, b) may be joining up with an organization of some kind, lots of rp opportunity there, and c) is making a more unique character than just a typical fighter or a typical wizard. So, system can lead to roleplay. I'd give the guy a chance.
I think the real problem is that you were the driving force behind starting this group, and you'll feel bad if it doesn't work out. I'd remain optimistic for now. After all, you haven't even played a single session yet! You may be pleasantly surprised
Balsamic Dragon
I agree with you that people should be able to play cross-gender, I play both male and female characters and I wouldn't want to be told that I couldn't. But, I would talk it over with your DM and find out what his reasons are. If he would really have a hard time with it, just due to the nature of this particular game, I would go ahead and play a female character.
I would also not immediately panic about the guy who is asking a lot of system related questions about his character. Min-maxing can actually be a sign of good roleplaying! (i know, but wait, hear me out!) When a player designs his or her character to work towards a particular prestige class, it means that character a) has a concrete goal, apart from the party's goals, b) may be joining up with an organization of some kind, lots of rp opportunity there, and c) is making a more unique character than just a typical fighter or a typical wizard. So, system can lead to roleplay. I'd give the guy a chance.
I think the real problem is that you were the driving force behind starting this group, and you'll feel bad if it doesn't work out. I'd remain optimistic for now. After all, you haven't even played a single session yet! You may be pleasantly surprised
Balsamic Dragon
Similar Threads
