The Crazy Character RPG Equation: Which Side of the Screen?

[Dannyalcatraz]

Its not so much an argument as a different POV.

JRRT's influence over modern fantasy and FRPGs is undeniably HUGE. Its just that JRRT's influence over both Fantasy literature and FRPGs is so prominent that its easy to assume that a lot of stuff that may resemble his work was inspired by him, when in fact it may not even be completely original to him.

Personally, when I see anthros, I think more of classic mythology or even JRRT's contemporary, C.S. Lewis more than seeing echoes of JRRT.

 

[steeldragons]

Its not so much an argument as a different POV.

JRRT's influence over modern fantasy and FRPGs is undeniably HUGE. Its just that JRRT's influence over both Fantasy literature and FRPGs is so prominent that its easy to assume that a lot of stuff that may resemble his work was inspired by him, when in fact it may not even be completely original to him.

Personally, when I see anthros, I think more of classic mythology or even JRRT's contemporary, C.S. Lewis more than seeing echoes of JRRT.

OK good...I'd HATE to be arguing with you. lol.

Well stated...and perhaps you may be correct...Lewis most certainly paved the way for talking animals (though, not anthros I can't think of a "classicals" that I think of when I see/think anthros.

I mean, there is the human/animal hybrids of legend...centaurs, satyrs, minotaur, harpies, merfolk/sirens, etc etc. But I don't know of anything, in classical mythology, that makes me say "anthro". Japanese myth, perhaps...the raven-folk, the fox-folk...but even they weren't entirely, anthro...per se.

I dunno...regardless, like you said..a varying POV.

Glad we're not arguing...*wipes brow* WHEW!


--Steel Dragons

 

[CuRoi]

I still had fun in both cases, but the story was less of the fun, and trying to be strategic and joke around became more important. A different feel, and one that doesn't seem to really push the storyline into prominence.

The above seems to focus on your true problem IMO. I'd agree with previous posts that I'm not sure the variety of odd races and such is what is directly affecting your enjoyment. I'd wager these crazy choices were made purely for rules mechanics reasons and less for actual story reasons. With that as a basis, there is no way you wil ever see the PCs oddities become a seamless part of the overall story.

So, the focus of the game is pretty much strategy (rules) and joking around (OOC social interaction). Both of which are fine, but you seem to be wanting an additional element your group isn't providing - collaborative storytelling.

Last night I sat down with my 10 year old son to play DnD. He flipped through the MM and the PHB and decided he wanted to play a Minotaur. I'm a fairly "vanilla rules" but "in-depth story" sort of DM and normally I'd have a whole race selection planned out for a campaign. I'd probably not have Minotaur on the list. This was just a one shot thing for fun and I was more open to the idea and since he was the only player, I didn't have to worry about keeping things balanced for a whole group. I know many players would pick something like Minotaur because they were simply tunnel visioned on the fact that the creature gets incredibly high bonuses to strength, gets con bonuses, etc. etc. and they had probably had been crunching numbers all night for what they would do with that strength. Which is fine - I'm not at all speaking out against power gaming (nor saying you can't make a fascinating character out of a Minotaur). All of that is a part of the game. But I want to see just as much if not more effort put into the non-numeric side of the character.

At any rate, my son wanted his Minotaur to use a bow as his main weapon. He wanted to have armor and wield a one-handed weapon without using a shield. All "un-optimized" choices, but the important thing was he was making his own vision of what that character should be. Nothing stereotypical about it, which inadvertently is the stuff of legends (i.e. the fat tobbaco farmer turned adventurer mentioned previously) and something you can start to develop an intriguing story around. I could have steered toward a more "optimal" character generation by letting the rules dictate things instead of his imagination - but that defeats the purpose. By letting him make those decisions and not the mechanics, he was creating something he would feel more attachment to.

As an aside - once we started playing, we reached a point where he was approached by an elf maiden in distress (I was using an old ADD module). My son had read a letter (a pull-out) which he found earlier that sort of described the elf madien's plight. He imediately said "I'll help you" when she asked for his assistance. Sometimes I miss players like that...

 

[delericho]

I'm really not a fan of gonzo characters. Basically, if people are going to play a character, then I want them to actually play the character. In particular, this means that an Elf should not just be a "human with funny ears", I want the player to bring something different to the table. And yet that happens so rarely...

Now, part of the issue here is that a lot of the races just don't have any depth to them. Elves, dwarves and the like have been around long enough, and have more than enough exposure, that people have a reasonable common ground on which to base characters of the race. And, because we have that common ground, they also have the option of not making the character a cookie-cutter example of the race - they are able to play against type, because we actually know what the type is!

But with the Shardmind, or the Raptoran, or many of the other races, there's almost nothing there to begin with. And so, unless the player goes to great lengths to make the character distinctive, then he might as well be playing a Human. (And, I'm sorry, but in my experience, very very few players can or will go to those great lengths.)

(Oddly, I haven't found the same to be true of some of the newer races. Warforged, Shifters, Tieflings and Dragonborn all seemed to immediately gain lots of traction, and now seem to be settled races. I'm actually reasonably sure that the same will be true of Shardminds with the next edition as well.)

And don't get me started on the "only good Drow/Orc/Klingon/Borg" concept...

When DMing, I only allow the 'standard' races: Human, Elf, Dwarf, Half-elf, Half-orc, Halfling and Gnome (plus, in Eberron, the Warforgerd, Shifter, Changling and Kalashtar). I don't run 4e, or I would add Tieflings and Dragonborn to the list.

When playing, I will likewise stick to the same standard races for the game/setting (and something I feel I can reasonably portray as well). My preference is that the bulk of the group do likewise; however, this is really up to the DM, so I generally won't get involved in that discussion unless asked.

Characters should be special because of what they do; they should not need to be special based solely on what they are.

 

[Mallus]

Would you find a party of an otyugh, a mongrelman, an awakened turkey, and a club-footed hunchback with the ability to tell what has visited the watering hole by tasting the water and a tendency to dig holes (thank you Spawn of Fachan) to be a bit distracting?

Not inherently, no. It would depend on how the characters were played.

Plus, it gets harder to link commonalities between characters the more they are outliers. The more motley the crew, the harder you have to work bring them together and keep them together.

Wait... according to Tolkien, elves are dwarves aren't supposed to get along, and yet they are staples of D&D adventuring parties. Ditto wizards and barbarians. Aren't most adventuring parties are held together by pure contrivance, pure metagaming --these are the PC's the players brought to table!-- not common ground in the fiction?

Actually, I find it easy to keep motley groups of characters together. My secret is to ask their players to invent reasons for working/staying together!

 

[Mallus]

Normal people tend not to kill monsters for their treasure.

Nor do they go on multi-year camping/spelunking trips with well-armed, racial diverse groups of strangers they just met in a bar!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Nor do they go on multi-year camping/spelunking trips with well-armed, racial diverse groups of strangers they just met in a bar!

You forgot "homicidal."

 

[CuRoi]

Nor do they go on multi-year camping/spelunking trips with well-armed, racial diverse groups of strangers they just met in a bar!

Please...that happens in Texas all the time.

 

[Mallus]

Basically, if people are going to play a character, then I want them to actually play the character. In particular, this means that an Elf should not just be a "human with funny ears", I want the player to bring something different to the table.

Aren't all characters, whether in games, film, or fiction, kinda by definition people? Even if outwardly they look like elves, Vulcans, or brave little toasters.

A character that isn't essentially a person is a plot device.

 

[pawsplay]

Please...that happens in Texas all the time.

Hey, I resemble that remark! So.... who's going to Scarborough this year?