Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.13524712 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

I don't like it when I recruit players and they want to play things like half-celestials.

I never outright say no, but I try and make them justify why they have celestial blood. When it comes to the Core Races (we play Pathfinder, no 3.5.) anybody can be anything, but it irks me when they want to play them just for the sole purpose of getting wings. At that point It's probably just player aesthetics. One of the few exceptions when I say, go right ahead, if works with their class as well as their background. For example, a Half-Celestial Sorcerer with the celestial bloodline, go right fucking ahead. Arcane bloodline? "Ehh.. justify that for me".

I have the same problem with bugbears, goblin and hobgoblin, demon, devil, and other monster races too.

I do however say that tieflings are abundant enough in the setting that they can go right ahead. Especially if they're Chelaxian.

How about you guys?

>> No.13524730

Are Aasimaar okay since they aren't half-celestial?

>> No.13524758

If it wasn't in AD&D 1st ed, it's not playable as a race.

>> No.13524763

I'm more wary of using monster races than anything else. It often leads to something undesirable.

>> No.13524780

You have a problem with devils?
Rrrrrrracist.

>> No.13524818

I had a big problem with some of the 4e races. I've finally come around with Dragonborn, as much as I hated the concept, but I can at least imagine them as somehow a part of the campaign world if players want to play them. I've even done adventures with them, but I'm never very enthused about it. The Wilden and...what are the crystal people? Those are stupid.

Tieflings, go nuts. Genasii? Sure. Half-Drow, Half Succubus? No, unless you have a really, really good story. Even then, I still might say no.

The only monster character I ever liked was the troll mercenary from FRCG 3.5. Grazz? Dunno.

>> No.13524829

Well, what the hell is there to say? Roleplay a half-celestial, roleplay a normal dude, it's all the same quality of roleplaying; and the difference comes down to petty bullshit like wings. What's the alternative? "I would be less competent or less happy roleplaying somebody who's not directly descended from angels."? How is that better than "Wings are cool"?

>> No.13524868

My Gnoll fighter was the best merc around.

He was a lot like Zaeed now that I think about it.

>> No.13525023

>>13524730
There are simply not enough of the in the setting to just have them wandering around in Golarion as everyday adventurers. I ask that they come up with something to justify why there character is one, other than "just because" or "I'm the chosen one."

>> No.13525472

bump

>> No.13525502

If someone wants to play something special, I just shrug and say "Give me stats and I'll allow it".
I think the most outlandish thing I've had so far is a half-oni in a 3.5 DnD.

I keep suggesting a cyborg psychic spider, but NOOOOOOO my players have to be boring.

>> No.13525520

>>13525023
>everyday adventurers
Well I think we have found the root of the problem here...

>> No.13525549

Right now im playing a Pixie rogue/sorceress building into an arcane trickster.

im only really playing it because of the realm were in, pixies were one of the few remaining races alive that were sentient. The DM wanted at least one person to be a native to help with party navigation.


normally though i try to stick to crazy class combinations rather then races.

>> No.13525568

>>13524712
Gnolls and kobolds are practically core PC races in our games. Tieflings are allowed, everything else that's not the base races is by approval only

>> No.13525595

>>13524868
he was always the only one to survive his missions?

>> No.13525598

How do you make an awakened housecat ridiculously overpowered?

>> No.13525607

>>13524712
Just tell me what justification doesn't work.
I can guess what's the problem, you simply are a jerk.

I'll give you a justification:

"my character is a half celestial", why is that a justification? because half celestials exist and i want to play one of them.
it doesn't matter if there are a little quantity of them, i will play one of them.

The problem is, you're trying to look like an good guy giving a chance, but giving restrictions is nothing bad if you can admit that you simply don't want certain races on the table.

just say "sorry, i want mortal races wich are on the good side" or "i only allow this set of races". And it's fine, because the campaing/story has certain limitations, or perhaps certain characters make you uncorfortable as a dm, and you must admit that the problem is in you or in the campaing, not in the issue of a player having some monstrous character.

also your excuse about lots of tieflings is incoherent. The quantity of the race rarely is an issue when making a npc, why it should be for a pc?

>> No.13525611

no.
If you don't have setting restriction for characters, why play D&D, why not freeform game were everybody is whoever.
The DM is a unique relationship, were you have to say NO sometimes, otherwise the players walk all over you, and then you aren't having fun.
Besides, if a player becomes way too attached to their character, they will get offended if shit starts to go down, and telling them they can't play as X race unless they play really well gives them a reward to do so.

>> No.13525625

>>13525607
your point about NPC quantity is a good one
i'd be even more inclined to say that PC races should specifically be allowed to be from the "rare" races in the world, i mean they are meant to be "special" people after all

>> No.13525639

>>13524780
What's with all this demon R-rolling I've been seeing lately?

>> No.13525649

>>13525625
not completely true, the "special" argument depends on the setting/dm as well.
Though "special" is the standard for d&d.

>> No.13525655

I have always had something against special races. If you are something special like a half-celestial half-drow or some weird shit like that then your character is pretty much destined for greatness (when is the last time you've seen a half-celestial half-drow homeless person). I guess what I like about role playing a human is that they are not destined for greatness they are just a normal dude and they work their way up to becoming something great, while the half-celestial half-drow becoming great is something that is expected.

>> No.13525658

Yeah, OP! How dare those faggot asshole players play what they want!

>> No.13525667

>>13525598
Wizard levels.

The cat drains you until you're level 1, then cuts you to pieces with +5 keen claws.

>> No.13525671

>>13525649
well yeah obviously it'd depend on the setting and plan for the campaign
if you're doing some sort of merchant lord campaign obviously you wouldnt want a party composed of a half-dragon, a succubus, and a gnoll that can't speak common
... unless it were a pirate ship based campaign, that'd be awesome

>> No.13525678

>>13525658
yeah, fuck that DM trying to have a concise story and have fun!

>> No.13525693

One of the best times i've ever had roleplaying came from a group of "special" races. We were, in fact, expressly forbidden from playing any standard race. The setting was Planescape, so we had a hell of a lot of room to work with.

As I recall, we had some sort of Celestial or half-celestial gnolldogwolfbird... thing. It was pretty much cut-and-dry Mary Sue furfaggotry. Our Cleric, as it were.

An awakened slime. Turned out to be our resident rogue, and was fan-fucking-tastic at it, no less.

A sentient scrap pile. Basically a Warforged wizard/monk composed of magical runoff from the local academy. Made out of rusted box springs and tin cans and discarded dinnerware and shit, and added more garbage to himself to heal. All of his magic came in the form of half-used potions and nearly spent wands. That shit was off the hook.

Then there was this sort of KAWAII UGUU frankenstien monster stitched together from a bunch of different base races that didn't know if she wanted to be a ranger or a barbarian or a paladin, and pretty much just ended up being cannon fodder. ANNOYING cannon fodder.

My character was a Lawful Evil sentient greatsword that could dominate undead and use them as its... host? Bearer? The sword itself was indestructible, so I ended up being the party's tank.

>> No.13525701

What about Giants? Or perhaps even Centaurs?
That's the sticky thing with monstorous characters is that they need to have a good motivation for doing what they are doing. That and being a monster is going to lead to A LOT of potential confusion. For instance, a Goblin character fighting other Goblins. On the one hand, this could lead to some top-notch role-playing chances for everyone involved. In most cases, the race is just some sort of label you slap on to your character.

Personally I would run an all-monster PC campaign(s) or an all-vanilla/standard race PC campaign(s). But that's me.

>> No.13525703

>>13525639
It's in the rrrruuurrrs!

>> No.13525715

good special races:
pretty much if you mentioned it in public, you might as well be muttering to yourself, like the awaken slime aforementioned
Bad Special Races:
Anything that involves a tormented back story and the pains of racism .

>> No.13525735

>>13525693
half of your group gives me faith in humanity.

>> No.13525778

>>13525715
Mmmm nope because according to that logic Tieflings are bad. Try again.

>> No.13525791

>>13525639
The villains from Panty and Stocking roll their R's.

>> No.13525810

>>13525778
thats because Tieflings are bad
stop cutting your wrists for a minute budday.

>> No.13525828 [DELETED] 

>>13525810
>Mfw you suggest emo.

>> No.13525849

>>13525693
>Then there was this sort of KAWAII UGUU frankenstien monster stitched together from a bunch of different base races that didn't know if she wanted to be a ranger or a barbarian or a paladin, and pretty much just ended up being cannon fodder. ANNOYING cannon fodder.

They call it 'Moetron'

>> No.13525867

>>13525607

You're just going off trying to paint me as a jerk because you think you're a superior GM because you go "fuck it, I allow everything."

Because Half-Celestials are very, very rare. When I write out a campaign. I want a good reason why, even among the special snowflakes of adventurers, that your character is the bastard child of a creature from another plane of existence, or a birth that is a herald to an omen. All I ask for my player is a reasonable answer why, because the background of their character is their plot for their character in the campaign. So "just because" is not a very good answer.

Tieflings, Gnolls, hobgoblins, orcs, tengu and the like are easier to come up with a reasonable background because they're from a populous race that live in the setting and commonly interact with the core races. They're also adaptable and commonly intermingle with the main population.

Goblins, trolls, drow, mermaids... Yeah justify that for me.

My complaint, if you actually read my post was playing something that does not normally make sense in the setting just because you want to have wings.

>> No.13525875

>>13525828
if you have a tormented back story along with RACISM , and you are playing a tiefling, you firmly deserve it.
Go cry about something else, the Awakened Slime doesn't even have tear ducts , but if he did, he would still be more of a man that you.

>> No.13525880

>>13525849
Die monster you do not belong in this world

>> No.13525890

>>13525849
"Flesh Moelem"

>> No.13525895

>>13525867
Goblins and Trolls are rare in your setting?

>> No.13525920

Gnolls and Hobgoblins are pretty standard with my groups. Most often, they're just accepted as "hired muscle", "bounty hunter", "mercenary", etc. In fact, it can actually be pretty funny because you could turn this cliche on it's head. Like when I played a Gnoll Wizard. The INT penalty was totally worth the fun I had roleplaying a booksmart gnoll who had never left the cloisters of his university or his cosmopolitan, but still decidedly human, city. My favorite quote from that character came from when he was using his racial stereotype to his advantage by trying (and failing) to intimidate a halfling merchant that we suspected was a fence for the thieve's guild: "I'M GOING TO BITE YOU.......RARRRRRR....I'M A GNOLL! I.....I MIGHT BE RABID OR SOMETHING! RARRRR"

>> No.13525927

>>13525849
>[DATA EXPUNGED]
oh f█████

>> No.13525928

>>13525895
Ones that are civilized enough, yes.

>> No.13525949

>>13525920
Yes, they're common in my groups as well simply because they can, and do work with other races. I especially enjoy it when they play them as actual Pathfinders rather than just mercs.

>> No.13525952

>>13525928
>implying orcs and gnolls are civilized.

>> No.13525959

>>13525867
Sorry but player's fun comes before everything else. The lore is not "sacred" and playing a "special" race doesn't harm it anyway.

>> No.13525970

>>13525875
See I didn't even read your comment cause tieflings are bad ass and you can bitch elsewhere.

>> No.13525973

>>13525895
If you're not familiar with Pathfinder goblins, they're a bit different. Imagine evil, sadistic jack-o-lanterns full of gnashing teeth with a racial addiction for violence, pyromania and catchy tunes.

>> No.13525984

>>13525959
Again, you're missing my point. Or just trolling. Either way, you're a shitty DM.

>> No.13525996

>>13525959
"sure, you can play this race that everyone in the setting hates and kills on sight or flees from, its no problem. now when you arrive in the first city the archers in the tower all shoot you as soon as they see you"

>> No.13526011

>>13525984
>Again, you're missing my point. Or just trolling. Either way, you're a shitty DM.
Again nothing, that's my first post. And pot calling kettle black, etc.

Rather it's not about your DM skill, you're just a bad person to not care about your player's fun.

>> No.13526013

>>13525996
Indirect refusal is still just a simple refusal.

>> No.13526046

>>13525973
Sounds like they'd make awesome PC alchemists.

>> No.13526056

>>13525959
So you're saying, that a player who knowingly plays something that goes against the setting should have no consequences. Because in this setting we're talking about, Half-Celestial are almost non-existent and tieflings are uncommon, but feared, hated and reviled.

>> No.13526067

>>13526056
Then just tell them they can't play it upfront, you retarded aspie

>> No.13526077

>>13526046
They also hate and fear magic and writing because "writing steals words from your head." Most commonly they're sorcerers.

But I would allow it because not only does it sound cool, but a goblin alchemist willing to work with a party of adventurers can create a deadly and unstable element to the plot. Because goblins with bombs can create oh so many plot hooks.

>> No.13526107

>>13525867
No, i don't allow everything, but i know that when there is some restriction, almost always it's because i wanted it, not because they were 100% needed.

now:

>>Because Half-Celestials are very, very rare. When I write out a campaign. I want a good reason why, even among the special snowflakes of adventurers, that your character is the bastard child of a creature from another plane of existence, or a birth that is a herald to an omen.

why bastard? perhaps is the son of a powerful cleric. Perhaps it's half celestial as a gif from certain deity.
If the reason "he is x" it's not enough, then what is it?
The problem is that you're asking for something that you could rarely answer, you can't admit that you simply don't want it, and then, when the player comes with a good excuse, you will accidentaly allow something that you don't want. Or you will put the player to work on something that he can't really accomplish.

The only "good reasons", would come from something related to the story, but players normally don't have access to the inner workings of the story. It would work better if you say. "i allow you your character if you take this in your background", you're the one that must come with an answer, not him.

>> No.13526115

>>13526107
cont.


>>Tieflings, Gnolls, hobgoblins, orcs, tengu and the like are easier to come up with a reasonable background because they're from a populous race that live in the setting and commonly interact with the core races. They're also adaptable and commonly intermingle with the main population.

Again, can't really see why quantity is a relevant value...
in a setting full of thousands and thousands of dragons, you would allow one player to be a dragon?
or perhaps in a setting full of evil undead you would allow one of them to be a lich?

really, if you just admit that YOU're the one that doesn't want x, it would be allright, you have the most difficult task on the game, you can put restrictions just because something would distract you too much. Just stop trying to justify yourself saying "but it's illogical", you will annoy everyone, because even if you could win the argument, that was not the real issue.

>> No.13526116

I play a tiefling, and my DM takes into account that most people lose their shit when they see him. I've been run out of so many towns I've lost count. To make up for it, my DM lets me use Infernal Wrath all the time, because, as he said, "This guy would be very fucking angry."

My most recent exploit saw me kill three members of a lynch mob before they could even react. The rest of the mob pissed their pants and ran at the sight of this blood-covered hellspawn with three dead people in various chunks lying in front of him.

>> No.13526117

>>13526077
I like the idea of a goblin alchemist traveling with adventurers because it lets him test bombs on enemies and his potions and chemicals on his allies. EVERYTHING IS TEST SUBJECT FOR SCIENCE.

>> No.13526165

>>13526107
Again, I have stated that the campaign takes place in X setting, make a character in that setting with a background story that ties into the setting.

If that setting has no Y, then you don't get to be a Y. If Zs' are impossibly rare, then what is your Z's origin and why are you adventuring. The only thing I'm asking from my players is an origin that fits with the setting. Especially if they're playing non-core races.

>> No.13526299

>>13525970
why are tieflings awesome?
why?

>> No.13526331

>>13526116
this seems fine to me if it's something that happens rarely in between Nosferatu like hiding and subtly.
If you are constantly big demonish guy that rips people apart. I fucking hate roleplaying with you.

>> No.13526344

>>13526299

Horns, tail, interesting background (at least for me).

>> No.13526365

>>13526344
I honestly want to hear your characters backstory. seriously.
I want to believe not all tieflings are create equal, so damn bad.

>> No.13526399

>>13526365

Well, I meant the race's background in general. For me, it offers some interesting opportunities. Are you going to try to change people's perceptions of your race by your good deeds? Will you use your kind's dark reputation to further your own desires? Or will you simply say "Fuck it" and try to find your way in a world that is often very hostile to you?

I'm >>13526116 by the way. His particular backstory is that he grew up in the slums, had to scavenge and scrape for everything, which made him a pragmatic cynic with a suppressed vicious streak.

>> No.13526606

I generally tend to be looser on the concept. I think a lot of times we're too paralyzed and restrained by fear of the Mary Sue and push ourselves too far in the opposite extreme, and any show of interesting individuality becomes anathema. I've often found that avoidance of Mary Sues and other fail is generally best achieved by playing with people who aren't massive tools. But I play with lit and drama types who are very aware of the tropes at hand and in play.

>> No.13526626

>>13526165

>>13526606 here. I think that's entirely fair.

>> No.13526668

I don't let anyone play a winged race, because that's just wankery.

>> No.13526758

While I'll never outright say no to any player. I do strongly suggest they take reasonable choices for the campaign.

I had one dude who really wanted to play a monk in L5R. I told him I'm okay with it so long as you understand the implicatations that you can be legaly killed by nearly anyone for no reason. He was okay with it and over all he played a low-key character and appeared to enjoy himself. It also forced him to read in to the lore more which is always nice to see PCs doing.

Then I had some mary-sue bullshit flying angel thing with a bow in RIFTS. Shit was annoying and he was all "special snow-flake" at every turn. It litteraly took me about 15 minutes to convince him he should use exploding arrows and a modern bow. He really wanted to be magical angel man with magic plain longbow fluttering on the wind with long golden hair blablabla.

>> No.13527222

>>13526758
>Then I had some mary-sue bullshit flying angel thing with a bow in RIFTS.

I had a player who tried to play a 4e fighter that doesn't wear armor. He rage quit when everyone call him out on his stupidity and goes around claiming that he hates us 4e gamers now because he didn't want to play a character that was "perfectly optimized."

Of course his "character" (he rolled up two of them before we told him to knock that shit off) was killed twice and the rest of the party ignored him since he was a waste of healing powers and exp.

>> No.13527259

>>13527222
I can understand wanting to play a "savage fighter" and wearing hide if you have the dex to up your AC.

>> No.13527267

>>13526758
>Then I had some mary-sue bullshit flying angel thing with a bow in RIFTS.

You're upset about something as low-key as a dude with wings in fucking RIFTS?! This is the game where a STARTING CHARACTER can have a goddamn sonic boom cannon. Next to that a guy with wings might as Goddamn well be completely normal.

>> No.13527278

>>13527222
>STR/DEX Fighter
>Unarmored Agility or Unarmored Defense or whatever it's called
>be a point or two of AC down while wearing cloth, but be perfectly viable.

>> No.13527838

>>13527222
so... you were part of a whole group of that guys.

>> No.13528078

Restricting players' options is not a way of "not caring for players' fun".
It is a *different way* of "caring for players' fun".
People really need to shut the fuck up and stop calling other people "shitty DMs" on the basis of the choices they make for their games. And I mean *game* choices. Of course if someone acts like a jerk to other people, he is a bad DM or a bad player. But that's as far as it goes.
Someone might be a bad DM because their adventures are boring, flat, uninspired. This happens, but in this case he does not deserve to be called a douche for this. Only the people that are purposefully ruining the game for others are douches.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action