So, what breaks your suspension of disbelief?

[shilsen]

Anachronisms and silly names. If I run across Phred the ranger, or an NPC named Ash who's weilding a big chainsword on his hand, my suspension of disbelief gets stomped on.

You have got to sit in on Mallus' game sometime (the Burne story in my sig). Let's just say that last session we met an NPC named Dr. Mephisophocles and were almost hired to kill a guy named Roland and possibly his twin Charlemagne. I'd normally have the same issues with it that you do, but that campaign's proof that it works.

Actually, I think the big factor is that the anachronisms and funny names have to be used consistently. If I introduced Mephisophocles in my Eberron game, he'd stick out like a sore thumb, because there'd be absolutely nothing else like him. But in Mallus' game, he's only one among many such NPCs/references and so it works fine.

 

[Mallus]

I prefer not to think in terms of 'suspension of disbelief' being broken; as if it were a pane of glass. Rather, I think 'suspension of disbelief' as a goal, something the group works to achieve. So in that light, the one thing that harms my SoB are fellow players that fail to support my character/concept.

Its not enough for me to create a character. I can devise fairly amusing characters, but I can't provide them a context. That has to come from interaction with other people. Ergo, I need the other players help.

Nothing aids in the creation of a good PC that the rest of the table pitching in. The feeling that my distinct character exists in someone elses mind other than my own is priceless.

Mind you, I'm most certainly not talking about a group where there's no joking, mockery, and inter-character verbal abuse. That's something entirely different (and par for course). You can occasionally mock another PC while still respecting the character they're trying to play, even assisting them with characterization.

For a fine example of this, read the Story Hour in my sig. I've never seen a group that can simultaneously humiliate and support one another like my current group does. It brings tears to my eyes. Mostly from the laughter...

re: humor. I'm a little surprised my people reaction to this kind of thing. Isn't that kind of goofiness, well, a tradition? Gleep Wurp the Eyebiter? Giant, floating eyeball beasties called "Beholders"? Demigods armed with 6-shooters who conjure fire-exstinguishers?

Mainly though, I think of Joss Whedon and the Buffyverse: where silly jokes and musical numbers peacefully co-exist with tradegy and diabolism. That's what I strive for in my games.

 

[Dog Moon]

The names for me is certainly one of them [there's a player in my group who apparently can't think of any good names. Had a Vermin Druid names Bugsy, but I bugged - uh, excuse the pun - him enough for him to change it.]

However, the other time my SoD is ruined is when something like obviously off occurs. I can't think of any examples, but sometimes it's what a person says, what they do, or a description of something. It's like this character or idea wasn't thought through and because of the holes, it just ruins everything. You know, those moments when you paused to think about something cause you realize something if off, you place it, and you're like 'Wait, that doesn't make any sense.'

Ug. Can't think of a way to describe it better cause I can't think of any specific examples. Anyone know what I mean?

 

[Elf Witch]

Many things, but I'll pick two.

Inability to attempt a straigfhtforward action because my character lacks a feat. ie, "I try to shoot the rope to sever it." "Do you have Ranger Sunder?" "I have a +25 attack bonus, my bow shoots flaming arrows, and its an ordinary rope pulled tight by what its holding up!" "You need the ranged sunder feat." *headdesk*

PCs being treated as leaders because of their player's position in the group heirarchy as opposed to any mechanical RPed or backstory reason for the other PCs to do so.

Ditto on both of these. Also what just ruins a game for me is when the DM tells you something important and you forget it but there is no way your character would and the DM refuses to tell you or remind you of it.

 

[sniffles]

You have got to sit in on Mallus' game sometime (the Burne story in my sig). Let's just say that last session we met an NPC named Dr. Mephisophocles and were almost hired to kill a guy named Roland and possibly his twin Charlemagne. I'd normally have the same issues with it that you do, but that campaign's proof that it works.

Actually, I think the big factor is that the anachronisms and funny names have to be used consistently. If I introduced Mephisophocles in my Eberron game, he'd stick out like a sore thumb, because there'd be absolutely nothing else like him. But in Mallus' game, he's only one among many such NPCs/references and so it works fine.

Ow! I'd be cringing at those names, but you're right, it depends on the circumstances. I can handle joke names if it seems like the player or GM is still taking the overall tone seriously, or if they're in a game that's supposed to be humorous. For instance, I've got a friend who named his gnome druid Thor. It's short for something else that sounds very gnomish, and it's amusing to think of a tiny gnome being called Thor. But it would irritate my SoD nerve if we were playing in a campaign where Thor is a prominent deity.

My suspension of disbelief is tried by anachronisms sometimes, such as players insisting on behaving as if due process is part of the justice system in a medieval fantasy world. I just don't want fantasy characters to behave exactly like real-world people. That bugs me.

It also bothers me to describe all spells just by giving the spell name. I know it's shorthand for the players, but my character doesn't know the names of all those spells if I'm not playing a spellcaster. I like to see magic have a little sense of awe and mystery.

And I really dislike seeing character actions described entirely in terms of game mechanics.
Like the spell issue it's unavoidable sometimes, but it always takes away from my ability to be in the moment, which is what I think suspension of disbelief is.

 

[Psion]

I'll jump on the "silly names" bandwagon.


Another, for me: Puzzles that rely on English spelling or words that rhyme in English. It seems clear to me that unless your D&D setting is explicitly faux medieval, it's not any relation to Earth.

 

[shilsen]

I prefer not to think in terms of 'suspension of disbelief' being broken; as if it were a pane of glass. Rather, I think 'suspension of disbelief' as a goal, something the group works to achieve. So in that light, the one thing that harms my SoB are fellow players that fail to support my character/concept.

Its not enough for me to create a character. I can devise fairly amusing characters, but I can't provide them a context. That has to come from interaction with other people. Ergo, I need the other players help.

Nothing aids in the creation of a good PC that the rest of the table pitching in. The feeling that my distinct character exists in someone elses mind other than my own is priceless.

Mind you, I'm most certainly not talking about a group where there's no joking, mockery, and inter-character verbal abuse. That's something entirely different (and par for course). You can occasionally mock another PC while still respecting the character they're trying to play, even assisting them with characterization.

For a fine example of this, read the Story Hour in my sig. I've never seen a group that can simultaneously humilate and support one another like my current group does. It brings tears to my eyes. Mostly from the laughter...

Don't forget our M&M group. We've helped make Joseirus, the Egyptian God of Mexican Wrestlers a viable concept. That's not as easy as it sounds

 

[Mallus]

I'd normally have the same issues with it that you do, but that campaign's proof that it works.

.
Thanks Shil.

I think it works, such as it does, because the humor isn't the sole pleasure in the game (I think...). Even the most absurdly named NPC's have some semblence of personality, background, motivation, etc. They can be meaningfully interacted with. They're not just walking puns.

There's so much that factors into a campaign being involving or not. I feel that if the fundementals are there, then there's no harm in having the PC's shop for a magic sword at "Urbane Outfitters", or rescue a priestess named "Tawny Portal" --which was her stage name when she was a "dancer", I hasten to point out.

Exterior references like that become an added source of enjoyment, not a detriment.

 

[Black Omega]

Really, for me, it's silly stuff. Silly, nonsensical names or concepts just bug the heck out of me and make it hard to enjoy the game. Sounds like it works great for Mallus's group. But as for me, I know I lack that sort of sense of humor.

 

[Mallus]

Don't forget our M&M group. We've helped make Joseirus, the Egyptian God of Mexican Wrestlers a viable concept. That's not as easy as it sounds

No, it isn't...

The M&M group is another fine example. Its partly why I enjoy it so much. Ruckus's non-stop mockery of Epic is a textbook example of one player helping another build a character while superficially tearing them down.