What are you a minority about?

[Hairfoot]

Sorry but that is plain out wrong. We love gritty low power games, that is why we like the combat it is bloody dangerous! Only big girls blouses need superhero survival rates

Which edition are you using?

 

[Garthanos]

Hm, that's funny. I've always felt a minority for liking to start above 1st level. Go figure.

Nyah.... has been fairly common house rule an incredibly long time.
http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...-overlooked-aka-km-correct-6.html#post5167939

Wanting PCs to be fragile apprentices and farm boys is the minority

 

[MortalPlague]

I am a minority in that I like games where the pcs die a lot, whether I am playing or dming.

I am not sure about this, but I think I'm in the minority in that, as a dm, I let the dice fall where they may. Just about always.

I agree very much with these two. Mind you, my players hate games with high lethality rates, so I don't kill PCs that often. Also, I can't remember the last time I've had a PC go down swinging...

I'm in the minority in that I hate resurrection magic. Our group house rules it so that it's really hard to bring someone back from the dead... you almost can't do it till epic tier.

 

[FireLance]

I think that's probably true. It does, however, mean that combat survival becomes the #1 priority for a PC, which also leads to the power creep that I most dislike about 4E. There is no room for talented mortals; only superheroes.

Well, I think there are a number of factors at play here.

First, what kind of players do you have? If your players are dedicated combat maximizers, then they are going to tweak the maximum out of any system that you play with anyway. The only recourse is to adopt a game system with fewer player choices, possibly one with more random elements with respect to character generation and advancement (and even then there is the possibility that your players will not enjoy such games).

However, if your players are satisfied with having characters that meet some "sufficiently competent" benchmark, the issue then becomes one of bringing that benchmark to whatever level you are comfortable with. If the benchmark is high because of the perceived or actual danger level of your game, then there may be a need to lower the danger level to encourage the players to run characters with a lower power level. On the other hand, if it is a matter of the players wanting to feel more powerful and competent in a fantasy world than they are in real life, there may be very little that you can do about it.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Which edition are you using?

Umm 1st?


Dragon Age! EDIT: rules, homebrew based on GR's The Black Company world. No PC mages.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I don't know how many of these are truly minority views--it seems to vary based on who I'm talking to, or what thread I'm posing in --but some of mine might include:

1) I vastly prefer plot-heavy campaigns. Give me ongoing mysteries, recurring villains, and story arcs that last from the first or second game of the campaign all the way to the last (albeit possibly with unrelated sub-plots throughout). I dislike railroading as much as the next guy, but I'd rather a campaign with a solid story and some railroading than a campaign with no story (or a bad one) and no railroading. Just so long as the RR doesn't go beyond occasional.

2) I'd rather a session of all RP and no combat than one of all combat and no RP.

3) I hate bookkeeping. Unless there are good reasons for it (like playing an adventure where survival is an issue), I don't want to worry about tracking rations or ammunition or the like.

4) I want my combats to feel dangerous, but fast-paced, and I'd rather only (or at least primarily) have fights that exist for plot-related reasons. Few, if any, random encounters or fights "just because," and few if any dungeon crawls that don't serve a plot-advancing purpose.

5) I love stunt-based, descriptive combat. I want cool visuals, and I want the DM and the players to actually take the time to describe them. I want to see the use of funky stunts/use of terrain at least a couple of times per combat. And I'm all for the DM giving small mechanical bonuses to really creative ideas or nifty descriptions.

6) Even as a player, I don't want to be buying/choosing my own magic items. I'd rather it be up to the DM and feel like an actual "discovery" in the game; even in settings where it makes sense, I hate the feel of the magic item shop.

 

[haakon1]

Hm, that's funny. I've always felt a minority for liking to start above 1st level. Go figure.

I'm in the opposite minority (which I think is the actual MINority), and I've been told (here) many times that I'm wrongbad about it. Though I've never had players complain -- more often seen nodding at the "everyone has to pay their dues" idea.

I also have used DMPC's . . . but the last thread where I explained exactly what I was doing with them got a positive reaction, to my surprise.

Other stuff:
-- I love Greyhawk. Old school quasi-European medieval with random bits of sci fi and Cthulu -- that's where it's at for me.

-- I don't start new campaigns. I reuse and recycle, with new stories in the same world (which'd be Greyhawk), and all that stuff about old retired PC's keeps in the distance.

-- I don't like the cantina. Human is usually the most popular race in games I run, and games I'm a player in.

-- I don't ever recall being mad at a DM for "screwing" me. Most groups I've been in were friends BEFORE we started playing, and I've never played with a DM who wasn't fair, IMHO.

-- I don't care about "builds" or "char op", and I don't know anyone who does. Dual classing with two PHB classes, that's about as exotic as I've people get.

-- I like the randomness of dice. I like the unexpected to happen because of a die roll -- for character creation and otherwise.

 

[Vegepygmy]

I may be the only person who has never really been bothered by 3E's grappling rules.

I'm also in the minority who don't think high-level 3E casters are overpowered (at least, not under the core rules).

I'm pretty sure I'm also a minority because I wish alignments had never been part of the game.

 

[mach1.9pants]

There are a LOT of these I entirely agree with, but not all the time. But then I can try loads of different styles...recently:

3.5E hyper houselruled to minutiae > 4E module series to lvl11 > Fantasy Craft Sword and Sorcery > CoC 1920s > DA home campaign "The Black Company"

 

[Lanefan]

Nice to see there's some others here who are in some of the same minorities as I am; a few of which are:

• Perhaps the most significant minority I'm in is that on the whole I don't like 3e *or* 4e. However, the upside is it means I get to ignore lots of arguments about which is better...
  
  As player and DM I want bad things happening to PCs (e.g. permanent level drain, equipment loss, death, etc.) to be just as much an accepted part of the game as is good things happening. And then I want them - good and bad - to happen.
  
  I too despise point-buy (this one might not be as much of a minority as some think), fixed h.p. per level, and anything else where a bell curve via dice roll would do a better job of reflecting reality.
  
  My games use 5d6 to roll stats (I *know* I'm in the minority here).
  
  NPCs as party members are simply a part of the game.
  
  I don't want to level up any given character more than about twice a (real-time) year. If it's more frequent the accomplishment is cheapened; and if it's as frequent as 3e/4e have it I'd never get used to one set of new abilities before the next set got piled on.
  
  Party infighting doesn't bother me at all, unless the players start taking things personally.
  
  I expect at least a ten-year lifespan for any campaign I DM and at least 5 years for any I play in. (exception: things known to be one-offs going in)
  
  I want magic to be risky, spells to be interruptable, items to be breakable, and odd occurrences to be possible when any of the above take place.
  
  PCs should not be able to create magic items and adventure. It should be a choice, one or the other; effectively meaning PCs don't make magic items, which is my goal.
  
  I want and allow events to be able to happen simultaneously in combat.
  
  I want to be able to play the game without any reference to or use of a computer; while acknowledging that computers can at times make things easier.
  
  I don't care if a single combat takes all night as long as we're having fun with it.

For me, it's more a question of where might I be part of the majority? 'Round here, that might not be very often...

Lan-"...except the need for mules in the game, I'm with the herd on that one"-efan