When "Roleplaying" rears its ugly head...

[Squire James]

On the flip side I have seen more than one TPK because one or two players did not want to 'roleplay' how to handle things, and talked the party into charging to their deaths. When they had all the information they needed on how to handle things, but just didn't sit down and talk about it.

The Auld Grump, twice involving the same players, with the same two talking the others into a mass suicide.

Sometimes I wonder if all those Planescape factions aren't really categorizations of players more than anything else. Act impulsively without planning things ahead. Join the Cyphers! Note that there are at least 4 factions that feature mostly anti-social characters...

 

[D+1]

D+1, some advice if you don't want people to "be silly" in future:I'd lay off using the term "ALWAYS" if you don't want people to assume you mean in every situation.And terms like "being a poor player" again seem awfully universal.

Thanks for the advice but I won't take it. I refuse to repeatedly qualify my opinion with weak phraseology so that easily offended people won't be.

 

[ForceUser]

Thanks for the advice but I won't take it. I refuse to repeatedly qualify my opinion with timid phraseology so that easily offended people won't be.

I dislike your attitude. You're entitled to your opinions, but if you choose to phrase them in a deliberately inflammatory manner you dampen the spirit of community that this forum regards as the highest priority. You have a strong opinion? Fine, but don't be a jerk about it.

 

[fusangite]

Thanks for the advice but I won't take it. I refuse to repeatedly qualify my opinion with timid phraseology so that easily offended people won't be.

I'm not asking you to repeatedly qualify anything. I'm just suggestion that typing "ALWAYS" when you don't mean "all the time" is probably unproductive. Now, if you really did mean "at all times" when you said "ALWAYS," perhaps you could have the courage to admit it because at this point you're coming off as a guy lacking either (and perhaps both) the capacity to stick to his guns and/or the capacity to use adverbs correctly. And in case you haven't noticed, I'm in no position to lecture people about being polite on ENWorld; I'm not doing that -- I'm sticking up for courage and good English usage, not for politeness.

 

[D+1]

I dislike your attitude. You're entitled to your opinions, but if you choose to phrase them in a deliberately inflammatory manner you dampen the spirit of community that this forum regards as the highest priority. You have a strong opinion? Fine, but don't be a jerk about it.

I'm sorry but this was simply something I felt strongly about and I'm not gonna candy-coat it. I think the "spirit of community" will survive. If I'm wrong in my opinion please feel free to tell me why.

 

[Hannibal King]

So We Played Yesterday

Well I ran the session yesterday and the players where able to retreive the bodies of their dead PC and NPC comrades.
The party certainly had the means to raise both characters if it meant dipping into their own pockets but was this suggested by the roleplayer? No

They raised the PC and sold some of the NPC's stuff and left his body with the church.
I expected the roleplayer to at least try and plead with his companions to pull their money to help raise the NPC but this wasn't even mentioned. Instead the roleplayer spent at least an hour or more real time of the session collecting every scrap of salvagable treasure in the dungeon and selling it. So yesterday's game had 3 combats, (1 medium, two minor) and the rest of the session was 'Advanced Accountants and Bankers'. We played for 6 hours.

So I am guessing the roleplayer has seen this thread and decided "if the group wants to meta-game, they'll get meta-game". So I have decided to stop DMing for a while. The next time I am on this board I will be as a player, don't know if it will be D&D but at least I don't have to worry about DM headaches anymore.

Later guys
Hannibal

 

[D+1]

I'm not asking you to repeatedly qualify anything. I'm just suggestion that typing "ALWAYS" when you don't mean "all the time" is probably unproductive. Now, if you really did mean "at all times" when you said "ALWAYS," perhaps you could have the courage to admit it because at this point you're coming off as a guy lacking either (and perhaps both) the capacity to stick to his guns and/or the capacity to use adverbs correctly. And in case you haven't noticed, I'm in no position to lecture people about being polite on ENWorld; I'm not doing that -- I'm sticking up for courage and good English usage, not for politeness.

Well I'm not sure which particular post/phrase you may be referring to. I've just gone back over my posts in this thread and while I have been very forceful in my statements I don't see a need to substantively change them except as I noted earlier. If I've changed my position somehow I don't see where; I don't see anything like not sticking to my guns. If anyone thinks I'm painting with an overly wide brush it seems to me that people who might have the greatest issue with what I've said are:

A) the DM in the original post since I've said that he's stepped over the line in trying to control his players characters and 'needs to get back behind his screen',
B) the player at issue who I've strenously decried as seeming pretentious and 'STUPIDLY over-dedicated to his pretentions' (of the superiority of his own roleplaying and the over-importance of roleplaying over all else), - and I have, perhaps belatedly, qualified THAT statement in acknowledging we have only one side of the story, or
C) those who identify directly with one or both of the above.

I desire verisimilitude just as much as the next roleplayer. All the more reason to ensure that everyone at the table feels the same way to the same degree or I have no business in EXPECTING it. Verisimilitude and Roleplaying are NOT the ne plus ultra of the game - and yes, that's an opinion but if anyone wishes to challenge the statement I'll do my best to convince them.

"Always" does mean "all the time", and if I've said that here it STILL is an opinion. Let those who disagree do so.

 

[fusangite]

Well I ran the session yesterday...

Congratulations! I'm glad everything worked out.

 

[fusangite]

Well I'm not sure which particular post/phrase you may be referring to.

it does mean that PC's must ALWAYS take GREATER CONSIDERATION when being dealt with than dealing with NPC's. Failure to recognize this is not just poor roleplaying - it is being a poor PLAYER.

I hope this answers your question.

 

[ThirdWizard]

This got me interested, so I took a poll of my players. Two said they would never put a PC above an NPC in a game simply because the character happened to be controlled by a player, and they both agreed vehemotly of this. The third would give the PC more room because of the player's feelings.