Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9870422" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Sure. This was all I said. Sounds like you agree? I believe in you! You can pretend whatever you want!Way to dodge the question. Twice! My understanding… which I will say is limited… is that the player is involved in setting the virtues and vices. And that they can change them over time. I had a player in Spire who incurred many Fallouts, which are consequences of different kinds that can happen as a result of play. The PC was a Knight, which are basically orders of warriors associated with different pubs. The PC’s background was that of a hired killer. He’d been forced into this life and it was all he knew. He was a hardened killer with no fear and very capable of violence. Becauae the player was open to the game and how his character evolved over time, the character changed drastically. He had a squire who was young an optimistic, and he let the squire die after he was wounded in a battle. He could have saved him by allowing the authorities to obtain him, but he didn’t want that to happen… so the Knight ran off with the dying squire, and let him die. He then started seeing the squire’s “ghost” because he received the Fallout “Permanently Weird”. We decided that seeing and hearing his squire in moments of stress made sense. He could suppress this at the cost of some Mind stress. Later, the Knight suffered fatal Blood Fallout, which has a few possible outcomes. He can take one final act with an additional die, and then die, OR he can face death and somehow return to the world of the living… changed, always changed. We decided that, based on the prior events, the fact that he was literally haunted by his dead squire, and some of the class abilities that he chose, we decided that he came back as the squire reborn in the Knight’s body. That the squire’s ghost took over. This fundamentally changed the character. Gone was the hardened killer, replaced by an optimistic dreamer tempered by the experience of “dying”. Whether this was all true or just some kind of mental breakdown, we never really determined for sure in play. However, it was one of the most memorable characters in one of the most memorable campaigns I’ve ever seen. And it never would have happened if the player wasn’t willing to go with the game… if he instead insisted on maintaining his conception of the character. Well, I find it strange to resist being traumatized in this way because it represents something that the character can’t control. So controlling it as you’re doing… and doing so in the name of character… seems… I don’t know. Paradoxical? Oxymoronic?</blockquote>

Verification