Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5555486" data-attributes="member: 82106">So, you actually read my whole post? I'm wondering because I already answered this. Making a 'Smurphpire' class because the real thing might., GASP!, offend some hypothetical uptight player somewhere is the good design choice.Sorry, that would just be stupid. Do I get to kick and scream about your devil-pacted warlock? Your ASSASSIN (yeah, the guy who's whole shtick is based on murdering people)? Come now. Don't get me wrong, the vampire is clearly someone you can potentially have issues with. However, that can be FUN. As other people have already pointed out there are plenty of different sorts of backstory and character interrelationships which can be worked out such that the players can create an acceptable justification for why ANY particular group of adventurers might band together. Heck, literature, movies, TV, etc are replete with these kinds of stories.So, yeah, if I come to the table with MY character, then I mostly expect the other players to accept that. Likewise, I don't go out of my way to make it hard for them to play their chosen concepts even when it means I have to bend a little either. I've been playing RPGs for a LONG time, almost as long as they've existed. When I sit down at the table to run a game I expect the players can be mature and reasonable enough to make it work and make it fun. If we're going to do a game where certain character concepts won't fit in then I'm going to make sure the players know that up front. In all those years I have yet to see that fail to work. I'd also finally note that you didn't see WotC tossing vampires out there as a major character concept on day one. 3 years into the run of 4e they've covered all the nice safe standard hero themes (and a good bit more). So, they now include rules for some things they don't expect a lot of people to consider as their most obvious character choice. Yet it is a valid choice that can add an interesting dimension to the game. They're now bad game designers because they're willing to open up the range of options enough for this kind of thing? Sorry, I'm just not buying it. Don't play it if you don't want to, don't even allow it at your table if you're that bent about it, but really, some of us are capable of handling it and having fun.</blockquote>

Verification