Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8481097" data-attributes="member: 7032025">The &quot;honestly&quot; might be a bit strong here. The fact is that it's only a game, and we are only have a limited amount of time to play it. And some character types have much more appeal to us than others. Even if we are roleplaying mostly ourselves, or even if we are always roleplaying the same archetype game after game, it's still roleplaying, and not something that we have any right to look down upon. It's a matter of personal preference and taste, and in some cases a matter of simple ability, and criticising people for that is not nice in what is simply a game.We have a number of players like that, and we recognise it, and we accept it at our tables. The guy who is always mischievous and manipulative, even when playing a paladin. The guy who refuses to back down from everyone and who challenges every one even when playing a weak character, etc. What we do is discuss this openly with them and tell them that it's not a problem but that maybe some archetypes are not the best for them because they will have trouble roleplaying even what they decided to play, especially in a long campaign. And because it's done without judgment and for the fun of everyone at the table, it usually goes well.But these types of characters are perfectly legitimate, especially in a heroic game like D&amp;D. Now, you might expect more in terms of roleplay at your table, or you might have a specific setting like Ravenloft which requires characters to be terrified/horrified now and then, which might make some character types not the best for the ambiance that you are looking for. Again, it's not a question of value or (dis)honesty, it's just the fact that sometimes, some people are not suited to play well with the way a table plays.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lyxen, post: 8481097, member: 7032025"] The "honestly" might be a bit strong here. The fact is that it's only a game, and we are only have a limited amount of time to play it. And some character types have much more appeal to us than others. Even if we are roleplaying mostly ourselves, or even if we are always roleplaying the same archetype game after game, it's still roleplaying, and not something that we have any right to look down upon. It's a matter of personal preference and taste, and in some cases a matter of simple ability, and criticising people for that is not nice in what is simply a game. We have a number of players like that, and we recognise it, and we accept it at our tables. The guy who is always mischievous and manipulative, even when playing a paladin. The guy who refuses to back down from everyone and who challenges every one even when playing a weak character, etc. What we do is discuss this openly with them and tell them that it's not a problem but that maybe some archetypes are not the best for them because they will have trouble roleplaying even what they decided to play, especially in a long campaign. And because it's done without judgment and for the fun of everyone at the table, it usually goes well. But these types of characters are perfectly legitimate, especially in a heroic game like D&D. Now, you might expect more in terms of roleplay at your table, or you might have a specific setting like Ravenloft which requires characters to be terrified/horrified now and then, which might make some character types not the best for the ambiance that you are looking for. Again, it's not a question of value or (dis)honesty, it's just the fact that sometimes, some people are not suited to play well with the way a table plays. [/QUOTE]

Verification