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

/vt/ is now archived.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 141 KB, 400x317, 1338298668869.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
26748684 No.26748684 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

>your character's father and mother were not your character's real parents

>your character was actually the child of [NPC] and [other NPC]

You can have my character lose an arm and a leg, GM.
You can have my character tortured, GM.
You can have my character mind controlled, GM.
You can have all of my character's possessions burn, GM.
You can have all off my character's loved ones die before their very eyes, GM.

Under no circumstances, however, are you ever allowed to retcon my character's backstory without my permission, GM. That is sacrosanct, and you can go to hell if ever you even consider going through with it.

Does anyone else feel the same way?

>> No.26748701

That's not cool. Unless the GM created the history of your character he has no right to change it.

>> No.26748750

As a GM I make liberal use of my rights to fuck with any character to slam down on the dining room table. I will never change who a character is or a character's history.

>> No.26748757

100% agree.
Story time, OP?

>> No.26748781

I think it's alright as long as you don't make it "those guys don't matter now, love these guys".

Always make them either dicks who want you dead or dicks who think you owe them for no reason.

I ran a heavily modified game of storyteller (a buddies homebrew, which i still had a copy) and had one of my players find out he's the son of a god and a dragon once. He was dragon-born Avenger (like a paladin but with a big weapon and no armor)/Rogue and after his mum died when he was young was taught on the road by his merc dad. He really liked that part, even had a funeral in game for him. Eventually that was what drove him to be an Avenger. One of his daddies old war buddies was a cleric of the Moon Queen (death god but more Death the Endless than Grim Reaper. A cheery happy god who preached about how life is awesome and death is just a cool adventurer you get to go on after a good life lived). Now sure the player just wanted to get some divine spells but it he really enjoyed having it be a part of his pops legacy.

Well God Daddy thought since he had blessed the player with his heritage the player owed him. Fuck that bs. He immediately stopped listening to him (they were level 18 so bad things were gonna happen but they were high enough level to not care). After the fourth squad of angels were sent back after being slayed God Daddy showed up and asked why he wasn't listening to him, why he would spur the gifts a God would give him.

His answer? "You called yourself my father. Lying is a goddamn sin in my book."

>> No.26748792

Did you actually tell your DM about your mom and dad at any point before the retcon? I know as a DM I make shit up for my players if they dont go out of their way to mention a family thing.

>> No.26748794

Correct. DM controls the universe, the setting, NPCs, etc, but he has no power [other then the power of approval/disapproval], over the PCs, their backstories, or their actions.

If I say I'm Lord Shitface, then you don't say "You're not a noble, you're just insane/stupid" 6 sessions in. You say "You can't play as a noble", if you want it like that.
>Of course, I play with friends, so I do not have these problems.

>> No.26748796

Partially agree. It's ok if the GM asks your permsission but doesn't tell you what changes they're going to make, and you go along with it anyway right?

>> No.26748805

You'd hate the latest Pathfinder adventure path. Apparently, one of the campaign traits starts out with the player picking a god, and that god seeming to have an interest in them. Watching over them, a bit of a stronger connection to them, that sort of thing. Then the player becomes mythic, and the truth comes out that they're actually the son/daughter of the god they picked, and their mortal parents were just step-parents.

>> No.26748809

I've had this happen to me (the parents thing, specifically).

It was actually a pretty good twist of sorts and I quite enjoyed it.

I suppose it would depend on how well it was handled; it was handled quite well and enhanced the character and made things more interesting. I didn't mind at all and thought it was great.

>> No.26748811

And no, the player apparently doesn't get to know this before the fact.

>> No.26748817

Thats a shot in the dark I wouldn't even bother with as a DM. Really messing with players backstories, families, etc, is a dickmove most of the time. You need player permission and alot of DM skill to make it into something cool.

>> No.26748821


You seem buttmad, Anon. Maybe your DM was trying to make a kickass story.

What makes your backstory so sacred, anyway?

>> No.26748840

Its territory Anon. The DM, as a rule, sticks to controlling the entire universe. The gods, devils, monsters, cities, NPCs, everything. Exceeeeeeeeeeeept, the players. He can't tell a player "Your character goes and does this".

Because thats not his role. He doesn't control your PC, you do.

And tetiary to that, is the concept that my character is, unless good reason otherwise is given, exactly who I think he is and who his stats represent him as. If I make a Barbarian and I explain I was born in the northern wastes, the DM plain out doesn't GET to say "Oh you're actually a Wizard born in the Empire"

Its not his territory, its not how the game is played, and even making "Minor" changes, is entirely up to the PC.

>> No.26748907

I'm lucky, I guess. The two players I've asked were ok with it, saying they trust my DMing. Mind you, only one of them is that attached to the character.

>> No.26748934

If for some weird reason I've submitted infomation about the pre-adulthood period of my character's life I'd prefer any dramatic twists at least make sense. Don't be giving me parents from races my character isn't and don't be expecting me to call these new NPCs mum and dad either.

>> No.26748974

What, exactly, is the fucking problem?

The "surprise secret parents" theme is a pretty tried-and-true story device. Its really no different than any other plot hook, its just an event that your character can react to in any way you so choose. It doesn't affect your "backstory" at all, since it doesn't retroactively change any of the events in your character's life.

After all, it would have ruined the surprise if Luke Skywalker knew he was Darth Vader's son and Leia's brother from the get-go.

>> No.26748980

Climb down off your cross and use the wood to build a bridge so you can get over it, Jesus

>> No.26748982

Does it take away player agency?

Does the DM choose how you react?

If not, then no, it's not sacrosanct.

>> No.26748987

>It doesn't affect your "backstory" at all, since it doesn't retroactively change any of the events in your character's life.

But that's exactly what it does. Even if you exclude the birth and adoption(which you shouldn't) it still recontextualizes everything to do with the PCs family.

>> No.26748999

Oh, and in Luke's backstory he was an orphan. That's a far cry from your parents turning out to be only your adoptive parents.

>> No.26749003

He should have spoken to you about it first, but in a sense not being in full control of your PC's background (like you really aren't in full control of your own) opens up some doors for roleplaying.

>> No.26749016

So? Every action recontextualises every other action. You've still got control over your character in the present.

>> No.26749032

I can't, I'm busy bleeding water from the goddamn spear they stuck in me.

>> No.26749048
File: 407 KB, 500x398, US Navy.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

How do you pull a "You were adopted" plot twist if everyone knows it's coming?

To rephrase: What's the correct way to do this?

>> No.26749055

Not to mention he was no PC written by someone other than George Lucas who had entirely different ideas about what Luke should and should not be. He is part of a story with the author as only agent and the roles as his creation, which is different from an RPG in which the players have agent status limited to their characters and thus a clear interest in not losing this agency which would mean total loss of control and becoming a bystander with interest in one of the characters.

The problem is not so much factual control over your actions but the right to retroactively change what your character is and does without asking (and receiving) permission.
Communication can make all the difference in many cases.

>> No.26749056

When you know you're adopted, and your real parents are the BBEG and have been giving you orders as a double agent all along.

>> No.26749059

It's not a plot twist at all. That's just... planning. boring ole planning.

>> No.26749076
File: 28 KB, 400x320, navy-seal-4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

If there is a character with no memory or specifically unclear past, there you go.
Best ask if the player is okay with that, but generally it has the character of clarification as opposed to retconning.

>> No.26749085

By that logic the GM should be able to rewrite your character as a gypsy transvestite, because you'll still have the control of your character in the present.

>> No.26749096

As long as it becomes revealed that I am also from the planet transexual in the galaxy transelvania, Im cool with that.

>> No.26749098

It's a plot twist to EVERYONE ELSE.

>> No.26749117

>rewrite your character as a gypsy transvestite
Except that's wrong. Turning my character into a transvestite is forcing my character to take a certain set of actions, namely having to crossdress. If by gypsy you meant nomad, then that, too, is forcing my PC into certain actions.

>> No.26749247

The DM can do whatever the fuck he wants with your character and his background. He didn't change your whole character concept (from Paladin of Toussaint to Polish Prostitute Overlord) he just added some twist to your background. Deal with it (puts cool sunglasses).

>> No.26749290

For all the talk of "contextualizing" and stuff like that not having an affect on the current character, I have to say for the people it annoys its mostly due to preconceptions. They have a certain view of THEIR characters that they have made (quite literally in some cases) and when it is changed they feel threatened

babby pyschology really.

>thereat nicatics

yes capcha

>> No.26749327
File: 48 KB, 224x126, dextericon.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

No. I won't deal with it. Its against the rules/way of the game.
>Pictured: How you DM
Its not that we feel threatened, but that we don't like it. We created this character to serve as our avatar in this world. We tossed aside our mind and personality for this one. We took flesh and form in a world completely created and sustained by the deification of some nerd. We do not want to be changed except by our will.

>> No.26749476

You are entering a world and need to trust your GM to keep to a few rules.
Breaking these rules means betrayal and loss of trust as a consequence.
Most are pretty much unspoken convention and can actually be different from player to player or group to group.
Most don't want to be fed someone else's fetishes or get their characters changed around by GM fiat, especially in ways that don't mean a momentary inconvenience but the char's past as you can't go and do something about that if you don't like it.

Also I consider it bad form to have important revelations revolve around the PCs themselves. For one you do that a few times and you have a party of lost princes, spawns of darkness and messiahs roving around together for no apparent reason.
Otherwise I feel it diminishes the characters' accomplishments to have some birth right / prophecy / dark past they must live up to / atone for.

>> No.26749479

Is it an American thing, that touching a characters background is considered as heresy? Because where I live, it's done frequently and nobody complains. Actually the players are usually happy when cool/twisted stuff is added by the GM in the PC's background.

In my opinion your just some attention whore doing some pussyshit drama. Best thing you can do for your GM (and maybe for the whole group) is to stop playing with them.

>> No.26749510

I can tell you as a German that I hate it as much.
Also chances are OP is not a 'murrican, considering the time (unless he is on night shift and terribly bored).

>> No.26749512

Your dads are NPCS and I dont fucking care about what you think. They are mine. They are not backstory, are characters with their own goals and motivations. If you want a loyal normal family buy some fucking background called "Family".

I'am, however, not fucking with who you are.

>> No.26749520


I'm with you.

>> No.26749532

>This scrub doesn't think your home town, family, and past count as part of "who you are"

>> No.26749533


Also >opinions and wrongbadfun.

>> No.26749564

Really it depends on what you change and if you got the players permission. For your group, you have implied permission from your players that "You can change things, just don't be an asshat".

For group's like mine, we prefer "Don't change it unless you bring it up with me first".

Its not that we have a different system. We both don't like having our characters changed in stupid or undesirable ways, or against our good judgement.

Its just for your group, the default position is "Change what you will, just dont' ruin anything", and for my group the default position is "Don't change anything without asking"

We both think you should have player permission, its just that your group starts granting it, and mine grants it on a case by case basic.

The only asshat is the DM who changes your character's backstory without telling/asking you first, or even getting your implied permission. For example, if I leave my entire early life empty in my backstory? Its a safe bet you can change whatever the fuck you want.

If I write out a long detailed family tree and base my roleplay on upholdling tradition and family honor? Change that and you die.

>> No.26749572

If you dont know the reality about them that doesnt change who you are. If you, by playing, knows some new truth can act like before because reasons, or evolve. Do you really think that Arya Stark player write all the story about the family of Arya in his backstory?. Fucking no. Thats the work of a good GM. Your "backstory" is just what your character knows. Not the ultimate truth. The ultimate Truth is always spoken by the GM.

And is a bad GM if from the first day didnt establish his laws and rules.

>> No.26749587

I accept this.

>> No.26749590

>They are mine.
You're a total faggot and nobody with balls would ever play in one of your games.

>> No.26749591

As I say here
It all boils down to what is "established fact" before hand, and what is important.

For most of my characters, I put a history into the character, and do not want that changed. That is sacrosant. Don't touch it.

For some of them, I just put up a personality and a vague group of morals and ideas. In those cases the DM has more wiggle room to say "You're a prince/wizard/ninja Harry!"

>> No.26749592

All these things of LOL GM DEAL WITH IT are failing to realize a game like d&d is a consensual compact.

If a dm is taking it to far, well HE can deal with it and play alone when no wants play with him cause of his power trip and need for shoe horning player's characters to fit his story rather than letting the player's do it, or the story at large

Mutual, fun interaction.

And of course the great toulman qualifier.

It all depends.

I've seen it done well. But you don't always have to suprise people with it.

Say hey player, this looks cool. want to try it?

>> No.26749608

The local community seems to difer.

>> No.26749618

Well, even if your biological parent is Lord Dickstab the thirteenth, how does it change anything? You are still raised in a peaceful village, by ACTUAL parents, it's just that they turn out not to be biological ones. Not a big deal and you can freely tell lord Dickstab to fuck off.

>> No.26749620

You know, the objection was not against things happening with that family but that family being invalidated and replaced with a new heritage for reasons of lazy writing.
Not that involving the PC's family was anything approaching good form or creativity.
Especially if the family is supposed to be rather normal.
If you are offspring of paladins ten generations down, I guess you can anticipate them getting into some kind of problems sooner or later.
If you are the child of dirt farmers or advocates, you should assume that grand revelations are something that happens to other people.
Also the 'heir hidden away in a humble home' is so overdone, I get sick whenever I have to see another version of it.

>> No.26749626

Ok, regardless of whether you noticed it, saying "THEY ARE MINE, I CONTROL YOUR FATE, I AM THE GAME MASTER", makes you sound like an asshole.

Now obviously if you have a long-running group of players who have fun, chances are you aren't this kind of asshole in real life. But this kind of attitude, of "I'm the GM I do what I want", makes you SOUND like a massive asshole.
This to a large degree. If a player writes up a long backstory, obviously he cares about it, ask him before changing it. if a player writes up near nothing, just make sure you don't contradict what little he says, and get his implied or stated permission before changing anything.

Hell, for some of my groups I get my DM to tell me about the setting, and work with him to design the character and how he fits into the party/setting.

>> No.26749642

Is consensual. And all my players accept that when I gm my word is the ultimate law in everything, but the actions and thoughts of their characters. No one have complained so far. Maybe is a cultural thing, or maybe I have common sense when I incorporate something.

>> No.26749647

It changes who I thought my character was. So as I keep saying. Get my stated or implied permission before changing anything, and be sure to avoid changing much at all if its obvious I put alot of work into the backstory.

>> No.26749668

I don't RP, nor do I suffer from any autism spectrum disorder so I don't quite understand.

What's wrong in this, exactly? In reality, these circumstances would be beyond your control. Changing the genealogy of your character isn't exactly retconning anything (they still had their upbringing with their adoptive parents), it's just adding another layer to the character's development.

Used in the correct situations, it'd be a great way to add depth to a character.

Do you guys not like character development, or does losing control over a single aspect of your avatar drive you into fits of unbridled rocking in the corner? I'm aware you probably play these sort of games because you're completely fucking useless in reality and you feel the need to be somewhere where you can write every single aspect of your 'life' to specification, but come the fucking on.

>next post accuses me of being the GM that did this to OP

>> No.26749688
File: 436 KB, 1280x960, 1346974782454.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>this thread again
>all this samefagging

Disgusting. The DM changed a detail in your backstory, he didn't change your character at all. He did his job. Now you do yours. You react to it, like everything else the GM throws at you.

>> No.26749698

Not sure how stuff that happened to your character before being toilet trained counts as backstory.
Well, unless you're an elf, of course.

>> No.26749703

Your neighbor goes over to your house and starts painting your blue fence red.
It may look better and does fuck all to your house, but he better ask permission before deciding red suits your house better.

>> No.26749705

The reason being, is as I keep saying.
The thing wrong, the thing we denounce is NOT the DM changing your backstory. Its changing it without your permission. D&D is a cooperative game, and your character is an avatar that you created because you wanted to play as that character. If I want to play as the zany Wizard, I don't want the DM implying he had an abusive father or anything, it could imply the Wizard is zany because coping or something.

The base concept is the to change anything in MY PC, you must first secure my permission, even outright by asking "Hey Anon, what if your character was secretly Prince Shitface?", or implied permission "Hmm. Anon didn't right in anything on his characters early life, and this would make a great story element. I think I'll start implying he's Prince Shitface, and see if he objects".

>> No.26749710

>Do you guys not like character development
character development sucks.

>> No.26749718

Holy fuck Anon that is a perfect and eloquent way of putting it. It doesn't matter if it looks good or not, its not his place to say it looks better. At least, not without your permission.

>> No.26749720

I really, really, REALLY, wouldn't want you as a player in my group.

>> No.26749739

>Thought your whole life your dad is your dad
>Discover he's not
>Bitches to god about changing his past.

>> No.26749748

The player is not his character, the GM is not god.

>> No.26749752

Actually chances are you would, because both are positions are likely being contrived by the other as being more extreme then they really are. You probably think I'm totally opposed to GM messing with my character, as though it was some perfect art or snowflake I didn't want touched. Whereas in reality I just want the DM to make sure I'm cool with something before springing shit on me.

And I think you're being a god complex asshat who thinks "LOL IM GM, I GET TO BE GOD", whereas in reality you're probably just thinking of making the funnest game and best story possible, with the resources you have.

Tl;DR: Don't contrive my complaint/concern as a blanket "FUCK YOU DON"T TOUCH"

>> No.26749753

So basically, you're this
>or does losing control over a single aspect of your avatar drive you into fits of unbridled rocking in the corner? I'm aware you probably play these sort of games because you're completely fucking useless in reality and you feel the need to be somewhere where you can write every single aspect of your 'life' to specification

>> No.26749761

Same could easily be said of you if you're so set on your setting, strawman.

>> No.26749768

My players get pretty hyped when they don't write backstories and their relatives end up as interesting and important characters in the story.

>> No.26749777

I don't really see how you imply that without starting to turn the tables around the character.
In any case, direct permission to change the heritage seems a far easier and safer way.

What is the reaction of anyone who is told they are adopted around their 18th birthday?
Unfitting analogies for 500, please.

>> No.26749782

Your players are probably cool bros. Unlike the faggots in this thread.

>> No.26749803

>direct permission to change the heritage seems a far easier and safer way.

Oh definitely, in fact I don't think I"ve ever had a DM change my backstory without permission. I've had some DMs add some things, but those were either building off things I already wrote, or were expansions to a PC with little backstory as he was.

That is to say, I've had DMs add something, but never Retcon something. Not that I'd be against the retconning, as long as the DM either asked me first, or at least "tested the waters" to make sure that change wouldn't ruin my conception of my character.

And I think thats a reasonable request. After all, I'm the one playing the game. Its not necessary that I find my PC perfect, but I must find him tolerable.

>> No.26749808
File: 492 KB, 175x177, 0a83q.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

No, i would NOT want you in my game. At all. Go find another group, you don't get to plkay with me.

>> No.26749826 [DELETED] 

You should report this thread for rule #1 violation

>> No.26749827

Ok. So you are telling me one of two things. Either one, that your PCs don't write backstory, or dont' care much about it. That is to say, they let you reach in an change whatever you want whenever for no reason, even if they wouldn't like the change or would view the change as distasteful. Which is to say, they'd let you turn their characters into female minotaurs with a milk and diaper fetish birthed by magic fat people.

Which I highly doubt is the case.

Oooooooooooooor, you are telling me that your group has a "Don't be an asshat policy", which basically means "Change what you like, just don't change anything you know/think I would bitch about later"

Which was one of my two "Good reasons" to change a character backstory.

>> No.26749828

The GM controls the universe therefore he also controls your character's family.

You control your character's destiny, starting from a certain age (usually from teenagehood), but technically speaking you have no control of what happened when he was a infant. You can give some hints to the GM about what you would like his family to be and maybe he'll accept that (less work for him), but IMHO he's absolutely allowed to change it. Same as if your parents tell you tomorrow that you have been found in a trash bin when you were a baby and they adopted you. There's not much you can do about it.

Like I said before, you can choose your PC's friends, lovers, profession, geographic and social origin but it's ultimately to the GM to decide about the PC's background.

I guess it's a philosophy. In games like Over the Edge and Kult this is standard to do so. It helps to bind the character to the background. I can imagine that in games like AD&D it doesn't make much sense.

>> No.26749833
File: 34 KB, 400x400, 35z9g8.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

It is a sad truth you have to actually spell that out for people.
Like this specimen. >>26749782

>> No.26749846

Like I said, while you are technically correct, the DM does have the POWER to do that, I am saying it is only common COURTESY, to ensure that the PC is ok with the change, either by direct permission or implied permission [They're your friends, you should know what sends them over the edge/they value in their characters].

>> No.26749855

Fuck you you're a bad DM and you should feel bad.

>> No.26749858

I'm saying one thing: I wouldn't like to game with you and you don't get to say "You would!".

>> No.26749876 [SPOILER] 
File: 244 KB, 854x724, horse%20pussy.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I'd be okay with a female centaur. I'd even accept a diaper fetish to get that.

>> No.26749877

No no no, he's right. The GM is all powerful in the game world, and can techincally do whatever he wants. If the DM says "the planet blows up and you all die", then we all have to reroll or stop playing.

The thing though, which I think for these groups goes unstated but for mine is black and white and out in the open is "Get permission before changing anything the player values extremely, especially in the backstory"

Its the same reason you keep Fire Resist monsters to a minimum if one player is a fire Sorcerer. I mean sure, you're the DM you can make them fight whatever you want, but you're also their friend, and should want htem to have fun.

>> No.26749880

Okay, every character in a PC's backstory is now played by it's player. At all times.

Also, the character doesn't know anyone that isn't specifically mentioned in his backstory.

Am a good GM now?

>> No.26749884

I guess as long as I was talked to about it first and it didn't mess up my story too much I would be fine with it. Like in my last game, my character's main quest was finding what happened to his mother. GM talking as my mother says 'You're a homonculous" to which the GM says, 'Homonculi can't be paladins so you fall and lose your paladin abilities." i didn't stay to find out how his logic worked, I agree that homonculi being artificially created life would probably not make very good paladins. However, If I was a homonculous from the start why would I be able to become a paladin in the first place >_> Why would suddenly knowing something cause me to fall when it hadn't when I didn't know it was a thing?

>> No.26749888

Why? Are you mad someone is changing your personality and backstory without your permission?

>> No.26749900

You should see it the other way around. The gm has to deal every week (for each group) with a new, fun story, and he has to know well his players, no matter what they said about autistic people playing rpgs, a gm must have social skills to understand his players and to present his ideas. And you have to deal with lots of shit, because always someone has some problem or another, or cant get in time, and you have this guy who is pretty good guy but sometimes is too rules lawyer, and this guy who always around 2 o clock starts to get drunk and defaults his interpretation to "chaotic neutral barbarian" even though he is playing a crane courtier, or this one who tried to make an outpowered class without me noticing to be the star. They are not bad people, they are not That Guys, they dont do this everytime, but once in a while, as everyone, they can have a bad day. But this bad day can screw a good time of effort of everyone. I as a gm am trusted with dealing with this, because when a player starts arguing with other player, its drama mode on, and they turn to me.

So I need to make clear from day one, even if I may seem an asshole, that while we are gaming, my word>theirs. Because I dont care if you as a player think he is lying even if you fucked your roll, because your social skills are shit and you just know that he is lying throug metagaming, without giving me just one in-game reason. (That doesnt means "do as he says" but you cant go around saying HE IS SURE LYING when your character isnt sure. Seems honest, even if you cant trust anyone, etc. etc.) And you arent going to use that God-Killer spell and ruin everyone's fun with you being in your little spot (If the party wants him to do it, then I'm willing to fuck the entire primary general plot I had, I dont like railroading) is just when someone starts dicking with the other players.


>> No.26749902

Both these extremes are wrong.

The DM can change a players backstory, even make a radical change. He just has to make sure the player is cool with it, before he ruins his buddies time.

Why is this a hard concept?

If you're gonna change/retcon/add to backstory, don't be a dick, make sure he's cool with it. You don't have to go up and ask your friend "Hey Anon do you want to be Prince Shitface?", its enough that you're reasonably sure that Anon wouldn't mind his PC being Prince Shitface.

>> No.26749903

I love tying a PC's backstory into the campaign in surprising ways. I always tell my players that while I will never CHANGE their backstories, I WILL use elements of them later, so just know that if you feed me anything that could potentially be woven into a future conflict, it will probably come back around.

But I'd never say "haha fuck you PC everything you know is a lie" unless the player specifically left room in their backstory like, "These are lost years, he has no idea what happened during these years" or "he doesn't know his real parents" or something like that.

>> No.26749909

And if I say from day one that I could change some rules on the go if I dont like it, when someone is rules lawyering just to be a dick I can pass through it and he knew that was the deal (This is not to change the rules I want, to fuck characters or something, all of this power is just used to make the people playing have fun, AS A WHOLE.

And among those powers, there is creating the setting. I put my players in a situation and I explain how the world works, with or without him. If I, for some reason, have a plot about, I dont know, a crazy evil making a ritual that will kill every paladin in the kingdom to attack it, and your father was a paladin, well, he'll die as everyone. If everyone wants to start as wanna-be adventurers in a town, and its attacked by bandits (and thats why they become adventurers or whatever) then your parents doesnt have any special treatment. And, once in a while, you may discover that your parents lied to you. Shit happens. It must have a reason, and its not done everytime, but it can have its place.

Your battle-cry is YOU ARE SCREWING THE PLAYER'S FUN but you are not thinking that the GM is a person, too, having fun, and its about the crafting of stories. The gm has fun in it, and has a great flaw: I cant just have the story I like. I cant force anyone to do anything, I cant decide for them even when I think they arent thinking as the character, but as the player, I cant have a ploot hook and a story set in stone and then force them to make it, I must make an entire world and make him work, and then they would pop when they want, and the world will react accordingly, not with that "same quest for last town you didnt stop by" bullshit. And for that, your parents are npcs and part of the world, and I dont say I must mess with them, but if I feel that its how the things in the world should happen, then it will happen.

>> No.26749913

I never said he is wrong. I told him to FUCK off and that he is a bad DM and should feel bad.

>> No.26749915

I doesnt have a player who hasnt accepted this from day one, even if someone had his doubts, and absolotulkey no one that disliked what happened to they characters. Sometimes werent bad things, sometimes good things, but always had a reason in the setting.
Also forgive my english, its not my first language.

>> No.26749925

No, because he misjudged the reasons i don't like him for, which are unrelated to his opinion on this subject, and rather a matter of his tone.

He sounds like the third biggest asshole whose words i have ever read in the internet.

>> No.26749928

You're talking to neckbeards.

>> No.26749933

The player is not his character, but the GM is god. All the gods. And more.

>> No.26749934

>durrrr i'm an autistic fuck who must have his fantasies fulfilled, storyline be damned

If you don't trust your GM's decisions, why do you join his games, you fucking autistic cancerfuck?

>> No.26749942

My beard is offended by your dressial stereotyping and ignorance.

>> No.26749943

I am that asshole. And every assertive person sounds like an asshole, and as long as you and me are trying to figure out what the other actually thinks on a matter, we gotta be sure we aren't yelling at each other while we actually agree on most things.

And I"m pretty sure we would mostly agree on game philosophy, based on whats been said.
I have *some* slights about social skills being used on PCs, but you seem to limit it to Bluff, which is probably reasonable. All in all most of this is reasonable, but I did make more posts [scroll up], wherein I clarified my position better.
Its less "You're screwing the players!" and more "Don't screw the players"

>> No.26749948

Same reason they play 3.X/pathfinder, because they haven't found a better group!

>> No.26749969

Well, let me be the smaller person and say "FUCK YOU"

>> No.26749989
File: 259 KB, 711x546, 1376635894107.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Stop the pain /tg/.

become one with love.

>> No.26749990

Now that you'd gotten that out of your system, I believe the rest of the thread, was discussing DM/PC relations.

>> No.26749995

Well then, shouldn't the logical thing be to accept the game is mediocre and just to enjoy it as it is?

>> No.26750014
File: 25 KB, 320x239, All Is Full Of Love.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>your character is actually a les robot

All is full of love!

>> No.26750019
File: 105 KB, 450x1488, koma-comic-strip-heil-spellcheck1311528699.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

This is true for half the people here.
It is a necessary condition but no sufficient condition to not casually correct native speakers.


>> No.26750021

That, or make it better with houserules, or choose a better game.

I prefer the house rules solution.

>> No.26750034

I refuse to discuss D&D on principle.

>> No.26750038

Isn't that the robot video of les robots being dissected because of their lesdom?

>> No.26750050
File: 71 KB, 640x480, dungeon-world.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Because the "storyline" should arise from the characters, not from GM fiat. I say this as a perma-GM who never gets to play, by the way. I'm not some player who's gotten burned by railroading GMs in the past--I AM a former railroading GM who's learning to do better. I don't want to just tell people my story and let them roll things sometimes.

I'm not saying I'd never fuck with a PC's backstory, but I'd make sure at least one of these things is true first:

>the player is okay with me springing something on them
I might not even tell them specifically what. I'd just ask, maybe MONTHS before I actually pull a twist out, "Hey, would you be cool with some element of your character's backstory being different than your character remembers it? Even dramatically different?"

>the player left holes in their background
If a PC's background states that he didn't know his parents, that reads to me as an invitation for the GM to incorporate said parents into a plot twist.

And... that's it. If either of the above are true then it's cool. Otherwise, I don't want to take away a player's control over their little corner of the game's fiction.

Then again, I GM Dungeon World these days, so I'm probably some kind of a hippie.

>> No.26750057
File: 248 KB, 500x558, 1373925165270.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I always thought they were being assembled.


>> No.26750078

You're cool Anon.

>> No.26750079

If you watch the video, you'll note that the liquid's running *backwards* during the filming.

You're not watching them being assembled. You're watching their disassembly in reverse.

>> No.26750091
File: 55 KB, 720x443, bearington.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>your drink the potion
>critical failure!
>you are now a female bear sorceress

>> No.26750095

such is claiming that a pc was adopted, since then you force him to alter his behaviour to his parents and to his real parents apropriately wich was not at all intended by the player. yes, this opens a situation for roleplaying, but for a kind of forced roleplaying the player did not desire nor volunteer for.

>> No.26750100
File: 77 KB, 316x320, 1372832139807.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


Well I change my interpretation to last hurrah for love/love in the face of death then.

>> No.26750111


>> No.26750125

I never asked for this.

>> No.26750131

I agree with your points, but if OP is a fucking retard who rages with no explanation why (and is probably a fucking troll anyway), I'm not going to give that cancer cunt the benefit of the doubt.

>> No.26750135

You say that like it's a joke, but it's not too far off from the forced alignment-change items some editions of D&D have.

The second session of the first AD&D game I ever played featured my true neutral bard failing a saving throw after trying to read a book he found in some dead wizard's bag and being turned neutral evil by it. I found this rather frustrating, because I'd already started to establish a personality for him that I liked playing, and such a sharp turn in morality made that kind of difficult to keep up.

>> No.26750146

>The attack knocks you down to -10 HP

>> No.26750150

>think of a plot where a pair comes up to the PC and tells them that he's adopted and they need his support
>actually are lying about that, just want to scam him out of his money, but the PC doesn't know
>PC lets off a high pitched scream, sprays tears on everyone, bitches for a few seconds and runs out of town after tearing off his clothes
>his screams are barely intelligible, something along the lines of "MY BACKSTORY IS RUINED" and "SHIT GM"

>> No.26750153

But, you could change those baaaaack.

>> No.26750162

Incorrect. Saying that my character is a lesbian and a gypsy implies these things apply currently to my character, as in, my character is doing lesbian things and gypsy things. That's taking control of my character.

Saying my character is a evil psychopath who kills, rapes and eats puppies (not necessarily in that order) is taking control of my character.

Your character finding out that they're adopted does not force any behaviour change to their parents, adopted or not - if nothing else, one could simply disbelieve such a revelation.

It's the difference between "The BBEG was scrying the party every night and putting enemies in your path to kill you" and "You were secretly hiring enemies to kill the party".

One is the player character doing something that the player didn't know about, the other is revealing information on something the player character OR the player didn't know about.

>> No.26750167

So, how do those oranges compare?

>> No.26750171
File: 2.05 MB, 480x271, 1319174511379.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.26750177

That's fine too! Your indefagitable cheerfulness is just what this board needs to counteract all this negativity!

>> No.26750191

I understand. Probably is most a thing that you and me will not play together because you don trust me and my changes or skills and I'm not willing to craft a story without the freedom to do what I find necesary. That doesnt mean any of us I doing it wrong.

>> No.26750199

Pretty sure that's not OP's argument, though. He even says:
>You can have my character lose an arm and a leg, GM.

Changes to characters that arise through play--and thus probably in the present tense of the narrative--are fair game. Fail enough rolls or do badly enough in combat that you die? That's your fault as much as the GM's, and now it's part of the story, because it happened in the narrative.

Changing a character's backstory in a drastic way without the player's permission is just kind of a dick move. It didn't arise through play, it arose through GM fiat, the GM just saying, "The truth is this now, and you have no control over the game fiction at all." Your comparison would make more sense if the GM was outright killing a character with no rolls and no saves, rather than if a character's HP drops to -10 during combat, from a trap, or due to circumstances that arose because of the PC's actions.

>> No.26750201


>> No.26750211

True, but remember, this was my first AD&D game. I had no idea how alignment worked, and the DM made it very clear that changing alignment would be extremely difficult, especially given that it was magic that dragged me to evil.

Nope. It's part of his present, though. In fact, it's all of his present. Being dead is a full-time occupation.

>> No.26750229

>Characters can't be lied to about their backstory without OOC conscent

>> No.26750242

It's the goddamn principle of the thing, Donny!

The DM makes the world, the players make the characters. The DM should have no more pull over the already written characters than the players should have over the written facts of the game world.

The DMs job is to work with what he's given using the world, he can not and should never tailor the back story of a player character to suit his needs in any way, shape, or form. Nothing is a bigger slap in the face than that, as it shows that the players are no longer 'playing' the game, but acting out the DMs story. A very important distinction

>> No.26750243

>Saying that my character is a lesbian and a gypsy implies these things apply currently to my character, as in, my character is doing lesbian things and gypsy things. That's taking control of my character.

You have no ideas how genetical heritage and sexual orientations work, then.
It forces no actions onto your character to be either a gypsy or lesbian.
It just changes the way you see things and thus your motivations when doing things.
While being a lesbian would encourage sex with women, it doesn't necessitate it.
I won't go speculating what gypsy genes would or would not cause you to do.

>> No.26750267

Replace "can't" with "shouldn't" and yep, that's exactly the point.

Note that it's impossible to have IMPLIED consent. The example I keep bringing up is if a character has being adopted as part of their backstory already, or if they were an orphan from a young age and never knew their parents. That's a gaping hole in the backstory that the player left blank, and that means the GM has plenty of room to mess around in it. The GM is, in this case, ADDING to the backstory in a manner that the player has allowed for. That's what makes the storytelling collaborative.

Or, to put it another way: the GM has room to play around with blank spots or intentional ambiguities in a character's backstory; however, if the GM wants to change what a character remembers, he should ask the player if it's okay if their character's backstory is different than he remembers it. The GM is under no obligation to tell the player exactly what he's planning, of course.

>> No.26750268

>Gypsy genes
You are one of those people that say black men are genetically predisposed to do crime, aren't you?

>> No.26750281

>The DMs job is to work with what he's given using the world, he can not and should never tailor the back story of a player character to suit his needs in any way, shape, or form.

Why? If it makes a story that the players would enjoy better, ESPECIALLY if the players are ok with such a thing, why shouldn't a DM go ahead with it?

No-one is defined solely by their backstory. It doesn't change your PC's brain suddenly forcing him to do different stuff.

>> No.26750287

Bleh, this thread is why nobody wants to GM.

Such player entitlement.

>> No.26750302

>Nothing is a bigger slap in the face than that, as it shows that the players are no longer 'playing' the game, but acting out the DMs story. A very important distinction

But the players aren't defined by their backstory.

They're defined by their actions.

You never learned to roleplay kiddo?

>> No.26750304

Just gotta keep an eye out for players like OP. They usually give themselves away really quickly.

>> No.26750317

I'm okay with it, based on how it's handled.

I suspect that my GM is going to pull the everclassic "No Anon, you are the aliens" twist anyway.

>> No.26750319

>While being a lesbian would encourage sex with women, it doesn't necessitate it.

GM: "Dave, your character is now attracted to women."
Dave: "What? No, he's not. Stop taking control over my character's thoughts."
GM: "I'm not taking control over your character's thoughts, that's due to your character's biological status because of the backst-"
Dave: "No, that's bullshit. My character decides that they're not attracted to other women, and hits on that guy in the bar."

Saying "your character is now lesbian" is the equivalent of saying "your character now likes women" which is removing player control.

>I won't go speculating what gypsy genes would or would not cause you to do.
I was taking "gypsy" to be meaning "has a nomadic lifestyle". Having gypsy genes is fine in my view. Nothing wrong with that.

>> No.26750327
File: 181 KB, 1000x776, 1262526324542.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>ESPECIALLY if the players are ok with such a thing
That, right there, is the key. If the players are okay with it, then of course the GM can do it. The players are willing to play along with it.

If I ever wanted to do something like in the OP, I'd ask the player--maybe even weeks ahead of time--"Would you be okay with your character's backstory being different than he remembers it? Even significantly different?" I wouldn't tell him exactly what I was going to introduce, or when, or even what aspect of his backstory--after all, I'd want it to still be a surprise.

I'm >>26750050, a perma-GM and never-player.

The GM altering a character's backstory without that player's permission is a lazy GM and shouldn't GM anyway. You really can't weave a compelling narrative without pulling cheap tricks on your players? It just smacks of a GM who thinks their job is to "tell their story."

A good GM should help the players tell THEIR story, not the other way around.

>> No.26750332

I love making first half of stories profecies and shit and then players realizing this and going full I MAKE MY OWN DESTINY.

Sometimes I'd go full hurr durr that was my plan al along and they fulfill de prophecy by mistake, or I go full "Anon, your force of will have shown that the Ancient Ones were wrong, nothing is set in stone and mortals are free and can live however the choose to" etc etc.

>> No.26750350

Is that a giant penis monster?

>> No.26750363

It looks like a manatee with a cephalopod for an ass.

>> No.26750369

I am aware that back story doesn't effect how a character works, that is not my complaint here.

I am saying that the GM doing this is pretty insulting to the person who made it. If I spent time writing a character with a decent amount of backstory, just to see that the DM picked and chose what was good and what was to be edited at his whims to fit his 'vision' of how the games should go, I'd be rightfully pissed off.

Now, if the player was okay with this beforehand by the GM ASKING if this is okay, then no problem. But dropping this out of the blue and expecting you to be okay with it? That's just not cool man

>> No.26750370

The players should really just get rid of the gm and tell their own stories on their own.

>> No.26750388

Yeah! RPG's would be so cool if there weren't those dumb GM's.

>> No.26750393

That is exactly the opposite of the position I just took.
Or do you deny the existence of relatively separate gene pools with characteristic combinations within segregated parts of society?

I view emotions and thoughts as separate from actions and thus potentially without consequence within the context of an RPG when forced upon the player.
I do not say it was not taking away player agency or was the right thing to do.
It means to take control of the character but not necessarily player actions.

>> No.26750403

What site is best for playing these kind of pen and paper role playing games? I made a thread but nobody replied.

>> No.26750410

That's true.

But look at it this way: the GM's job is to construct a world and play its inhabitants, right? He has control over ALL of that, and is perfectly free to make situations arise that the PCs then have to react to. In comparison, a player has control over a very small part of the game world: his own character--both that character's history and his actions in the game. I don't think a GM should take away even a little bit of that control unless he either has the player's permission or does so by using the rules (PC dies in combat or to a trap, that kind of thing). It's just a cheap trick otherwise.

The GM does have a very important role, though: the GM plays as the world and all the NPCs. The GM is the one who makes the game world react to the PCs' actions, and in turn presents the PCs with situations and/or NPCs to react to themselves.

If you ask me, a GM who isn't willing to generate a story AROUND the PCs and instead treats the PCs as pawns in his own story should probably just write a book. If he's good at it, he might even get paid to do it.

>> No.26750418

[email protected]

>> No.26750436

>The GM does have a very important role
No, he does not. Have you ever freeform roleplayed? The GM is just getting in the way of players telling their own story.

>> No.26750482

Yes. Im making my own group. Without gms. And with whores!

>> No.26750483

That's true. Granted, I haven't done any of that in like... 12 years, but as I recall it was always a pretty tenuous balance. I think you have to have a pretty exceptional group of players to have a satisfying, fair free-form roleplay. Now, again, I was a teenager last time I tried it and so were the people I was playing with. Maybe it's better with adults.

But I also don't think the GM is "getting in the way." At least, a good GM isn't getting in the way. A good GM should introduce interesting consequences for the players' actions that those players might not impose on themselves, but would have fun reacting to. I mean, I GM Dungeon World, so that's kind of my mindset. Dungeon World isn't about the difficulty of something, but rather the consequences of doing it. When you roll the dice, the question isn't, "Are you capable of doing this?" It's, "What is it going to cost you to do this?"

>> No.26750490

>think of a plot where some fuckup in the universe is randomly reviving hundreds of dead people
>suddenly PC meets his live parents
>he wrote that his parents died in his backstory
>his mouth twitches a little as he enters a state of shock
>suddenly his eyes explode into an infinite stream of tears that fills everyone with enough water to explode them from the inside
>the player starts screaming at an ultra sonic frequency, blowing up everyone's brains in the surrounding area while still shooting tears at people
>the military is called to eliminate him
>bullets can't penetrate his fat skin, and neckbeard protects the brain
>a million people die before the united states finally decide to drop nuke on him
>instead of killing him, the radiation made the player into a demigod of whining and a paragon of backstories
>he has ascended to a higher order of being
>whenever a GM anywhere decides to do any changes to a players' backstory, he will teleport next to him, and everyone in a 5 miles radius die from the radiation emitted by pure whine
>RPGs outlawed due to high risk of sudden death

>> No.26750491

i don't have any real friends. I just wanna play online, but can't find a popular enough place...

>> No.26750501
File: 19 KB, 500x332, exorcism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I cast you out, unclean spirit, along with every Satanic power of the enemy, every spectre from hell, and all your fell companions; in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Begone and stay far from this creature of God. For it is He who commands you, He who flung you headlong from the heights of heaven into the depths of hell. It is He who commands you, He who once stilled the sea and the wind and the storm. Hearken, therefore, and tremble in fear, Satan, you enemy of the faith, you foe of the human race, you begetter of death, you robber of life, you corrupter of justice, you root of all evil and vice; seducer of men, betrayer of the nations, instigator of envy, font of avarice, fomentor of discord, author of pain and sorrow. Why, then, do you stand and resist, knowing as you must that Christ the Lord brings your plans to nothing? Fear Him, who in Isaac was offered in sacrifice, in Joseph sold into bondage, slain as the paschal lamb, crucified as man, yet triumphed over the powers of hell. Begone, then, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Give place to the Holy Spirit by this sign of the holy cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, who lives and reigns with the Father and the Holy Spirit, God, forever and ever.

>> No.26750509

People run campaigns through here sometimes, usually over IRC.

>> No.26750511

>Saying "your character is now lesbian" is the equivalent of saying "your character now likes women" which is removing player control.

as is telling someone he is adopted and his whole live was a lie. it takes away the choice if you give a fuck about the new npcs presented to you this way, the so called real parents, or not.
Unless your character is the emotionaly scarred soziopatical lord i-don't-feel-anything, you now are forced to react in some way to this new npcs while, without further unasked change of backstory, you were free to choose your reaction

>> No.26750561

I actually had something similar happen to me, although I was perfectly ok with it.
>play dawn of worlds before starting the game
>make speshul snowflake race of wolf-themed energy vampires
>make a mortal avatar named scathach
>punchy warrior lady who charges liches and doesn't afraid of undead
>disappears after a huge war, looking for immortality.
>Start a pathfinder campaign in that setting
>make a character that is essentially scathach's biggest fangirl
>looking for her twin brother who she was separated from
>told the DM that he could do whatever he liked with the brother, my character was just looking for closure
>end of campaign, following a lead on my character's brother, turns out he's working with the BBEG
>brother laughs at my character, "you mean your mentor never told you?"
>brother is actually cousin
>character's mother is actually scathach

I think at that point the DM expected some sort of "oh noes my life is a lie wah wah wah", but my character, who'd been pretty chill and also somewhat intoxicated for most of the campaign just took a moment to fangirl over this revelation and then got with the punching

>> No.26750595

>I view emotions and thoughts as separate from actions and thus potentially without consequence within the context of an RPG when forced upon the player.
So, you think it's ok to say "Your character sees X, and he feels disgust and revulsion and wants to cry like a little girl" for example, or, "Your character sees Y, and wants to strip naked and beg for her to rape him in the ass with a giant two-pronged dildo"?

Telling the players what their characters are thinking is ok with you?

>> No.26750607

You can freeform while following whatever system's rules and rolling when appropriate.

A GM is really the most unnecessary thing when roleplaying.

>> No.26750622
File: 149 KB, 864x598, 1304267877146.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Here's a related question for you all:

Is it wrong, as a GM, to put your players in a position where either one of them has to die, or they have to fail a critical part of their quest? I'll give an example:

>BBEG snags an important MacGuffin with which he can do some seriously hefty damage, and the players know this
>escapes through a portal on the other side of the dungeon
>enemies spawn in hordes too large for the players to likely defeat, but the players will be able to fight their way through to the portal with concentrated effort
>the portal will close in X number of turns
>turn number is large enough that most of the players will be able to make it to the portal, but only if someone stays behind to hold off the hordes while the other PCs escape
>player who stays behind will surely die
>it is also possible for the players to simply escape the dungeon, with everyone alive, but the BBEG will get away and the players won't know where he's gone, giving him plenty of free time to seriously fuck things up

Is that an unfair scenario? If the players have been chasing this BBEG for a long while and stopping him is vitally fucking important, is it unfair of me, as a GM, to put them in a "sacrifice someone or suffer a very serious failure" scenario? The players still have a choice: it's just that both choices suck.

>> No.26750632

20 years of RPGing. Reading:


I don't want to live in this world anymore.

>> No.26750646

Where can I sign up (as a player, not a whore).

>> No.26750648

It's all in the set up. You can have your horde, but you can't make them appear out of nowhere. They have to be there for a reason that the PCs recognize. Otherwise it looks like railroading

>> No.26750669

Telling someone he is adopted is an effect that happens as an external factor - someone can shoot your character in the leg and your character can react to it as well. You are forced to react to that, too.

The GM fiating "you are now a lesbian" is a bad example - a better example is someone telling your character that they are a lesbian. Would that have the same SHOCK HORROR effect?

Your character can choose to disbelieve such a thing. They can come to a conclusion that since he was abandoned by his biological parents he feels the same way about his REAL (foster) parents.

The GM is not taking away player control, he is introducing new information via an external source.

The main issue is not "messing with your backstory" it's doing something the player isn't comfortable with, much like any GM situation that's not expected and OK'd.

>> No.26750680

Where are you from, anon?

>> No.26750699

There's no such thing as an unfair scenario.

There's only scenarios that players will enjoy or otherwise feel have felt better over playing, and those that makes them feel like they want to stop playing.

Strive for the former. If you think it's the latter, try to avoid it unless it's necessary for something later.

>> No.26750715

Because someone doesn't want something they made edited without their consent?
You would LOVE deviantart.

>> No.26750716

You could always pull off a Gandalf Sacrifice sort of thing and keep everyone happy.

>> No.26750721

I do shit like that and I like shit like that being made.

>> No.26750723

I did something like this in D&D recently and would like to know if /tg/ thinks I have gone too far. I'm not quite sure, while my players like the changes so far I would honestly like to ask the community if it seems like I took too many liberties.
Though, this would require a story time.
Should I?

>> No.26750738


Where do you think we are? Ring it up baby, we all like a good story time.

>> No.26750741

Its up to the players, really. Maybe someone want bright fantasy play and this would be sad. I for one like dwarf fortess fun in whic I die , and lose, and Im totally fucked, but man, when I triumph, is totally awesome. I like stories with dificult chocies and deaths, and so I like games with both.

>> No.26750753

>The main issue is not "messing with your backstory" it's doing something the player isn't comfortable with, much like any GM situation that's not expected and OK'd.

>you now are forced to react in some way
>without further unasked change of backstory

i thought this would clarify that this is exactly what i am talking about.
if player willingly agree to changes in their backstory, they also agree in a possible limitation of reactions for the sake of roleplaying. thus there is no coercion of limited reaction, but a choice to it.

if that didn't show in my previous post, my bad

>> No.26750808

That made me chuckle.

>> No.26750814

Not a big problem.

Still, it's a grey area. Some GMs might not think it a big deal, some would agree it's no good.

Compare it to rape of a PC, which also some GMs would see that as obviously no good, while others are fine.

And compare to PCs being killed off after doing consistently stupid things - some GMs might see that as well being bad, keeping the PCs alive through stupid decision after stupid decision, while others will drop them to -10 when the guard fucks them up.

If there's something that you'd find obscene to do to your characters that you'd want to avoid, tell your GMs, please. That way they won't accidentally stumble onto something you don't want to happen.

>> No.26750862

>I dont want to NOT be transformed in a little girl and being pissed in the mouth by orcs because that is my fetish.

>> No.26750877

If everyone knows it's coming?
You tell them they weren't adopted first.
If they're an Orc born to humans,t he 'parents' make up a "cursed by wizards" story. Then feel bad about lying because they don't want to lose a child.

>> No.26750890

Unless you NEED the transformation part. You can just start as the little girl.

>> No.26750905

>They were actually lying to trick the PC
How about this?

>> No.26750919

You are RUINING my fetish here, bitch

>> No.26750937

I'm fine with it, as long as it's not:
I'm fine with my character being adopted, as long as it's not some hamfisted attempt at drama.

Which is good because I usually play as Halflings so it wouldn't make sense for most NPCs to be my dad.

>> No.26750938

As a player I wouldn't have any problem with this, provided it made for good story.

>> No.26750956

That's a very good point that I'll keep in mind if I ever try to pull this scenario. The enemy horde needs to come from a believable, concrete place, even if it's just that they're spewing from the BBEG's portal or something.

>> No.26750963

What if a minotaur is your dad?!?

>> No.26750968

I've already got plans to fuck with the backstory of two of my player's characters.

Especially the aasimar.

Spoiler: There aren't any aasimar in my setting.

>> No.26750994

Please, set up a camera. I would like to see if he actually breaks down into "MAH BACKSTORY"

>> No.26751029
File: 551 KB, 495x659, hawk.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

This is, like a lot of things in RPGs, completely on a case by case basis.

Was the GM a cock about it? Did he say your character would do [action] or feel [emotion] regardless of what your character would actually feel?

If so, then channel that OOC butthurt into 'no, my character would [thing] and [feel].

If not, then fucking roll with it you cunt.

>> No.26751035

I would if it wasn't an online game and that revelation's not far in the future.

I'll tell you about the other one, though.

Except both of them are ok with that kind of thing happening, because I asked in advance as well, so I'll have to be happy with their normal reactions

>> No.26751043

No, I did claim the opposite.
Assuming that taking control of PCs is understood to be out of the question.

>> No.26751051

don't be a fucking whiney, buttmad baby , anon. If you don't like it, talk to him about it and tell him it bothered you. its fine to disagree witha gms actions, but don't rage because you think he somehow overstepped his bounds. he's the stoyteller, and he was trying to come up witha story. it may not appeal toyou, and you should have some say because it retroactively affects you character, but really, why is your characters backstory so important that the changing of some details for the story matters so much? why do your biological parents matter in this case? if it's just a matter of 'principle:, cut that shit out. things should actually matter for you to get mad about them.

>> No.26751069

But you're ok with saying to your players "your character is now a lesbian, and she thinks of having sex with other women"?

>> No.26751081

It just means the GM took control of the PCs emotions as opposed to her actions.
Is that too difficult a concept to grasp?
Both are not okay. Doesn't mean they are the same.

>> No.26751108

The story may be too long for this thread and after writing it a bit I'm sure it won't be well received.

>> No.26751125

Stealing The Moon Queen concept for my next campaign

>> No.26751175

So if they're both not ok, then why are you arguing in favour of saying that "your PC is now a lesbian" is equivocable to "your PC has now been told they were adopted and these are their real parents"?

>> No.26751444

Because both are strong statements on their social situation.
Both are not things the PC can't decide on their own and change their opinion on (ruling out flip-flopping sexuality or confusion) but are externally given by the player or GM.
My point is that both are equally the player's prerogative and as such the GM has to get player permission before changing them or making any claims upon.
Unless the player intentionally left them open for that kind of thing.
Just taking amnesia for a carte blanche for the GM won't do in my opinion as it can be also taken as the express wish not to have your past used as a plot hook.
>No family = nobody to be killed by orks to drag you onto a quest for vengeance

>> No.26751463

>can decide in their own
The double negative is a typo here.

>> No.26751522

Fair enough.

>> No.26751549

Honestly, I'm surprised that /tg/ has shifted toward being less tolerant of this sort of thing. It's heartening.

Two or three years back, I posted on /tg/ about how, several meets into a campaign, the GM introduced a new NPC who was the uncle of one of the PCs and then told the player that his character had been repeatedly raped by the uncle as a child. The player had made no mention of this in his backstory, and the GM justified adding that in by claiming that "it made sense for the character and made an interesting conflict."

/tg/ was pretty supportive of the GM's ability to do that, even if they didn't like the content that was added, and proceeded to lecture me on how the GM is god and can do whatever he wants in the context of the game he's running. I'm kinda happy to see that at least now there's some push back against that sort of thing.

>> No.26751786

Why stop there? You don't even need a group. Just roleplay be yourself and live out your dreams! The group was just holding you back, anyhow.

I'm kidding. You can play without a GM but it's very difficult. You need a group of people to play with you either trust or have some sort of debt/dark secret you use to keep them under control. This group has to have read the rulebook or have a basic understanding of the system. Then you have to make sure these people meet at a certain place every few weeks to toss around ideas and roleplay and enjoy themselves without any form of authority or commitment other than their love of you or the game keeping them there. If you look at things realistically: you're lucky to have even one person with one of these prerequisites. Finding one person with all of these is like rolling a quadrupedal critical (without loaded dice).

And if you say this is easy, I curse myself for not being born under that blessed star you were.

>> No.26751991

> /tg/ was pretty supportive of the GM's ability to do that, even if they didn't like the content that was added

Because that is that right call. Sure, it was a stupid thing to put in, rape is a tired and overused method of character development, but it was well within the DM's power. He was introducing an NPC, and he has final say as to what the NPC's deal is. In a campaign, the DM is god, what he says goes.

So quit your goddamn whining and grow up. This constant bitching about "MUH CHARACTER" and "MUH BACKSTORY" is getting old real fast. It's the DM's world, and you are only guests.

>> No.26752011

I don't usually approve of this, but,

>nice b8

>> No.26752092


This is a pretty good analogy, actually.

>> No.26752094

I had my character's background changed in an AdEva game. I played as the favoured daughter of Mother Russia, hero of the working class, and symbol of Soviet might. It was hinted that I may or may not have been related to Stalin.

It was only later that I discovered that I was not a neospartan, but in fact manufactured. By the US government, no less. I'm still not sure entirely why they convinced her that she was a Russian.

Because of the kind of setting Evangelion is, it could have been kind of neat to have your background changed, but it was poorly implemented and the change was rather nonsensical.

>> No.26752122


No, the GM is the most prominent storyteller, but the PCs have a part of the story to tell themselves, and that part of the story is "who am I".

I'm sorry, but if I put forth the effort to explain who my family was, the GM does not have any right to change what I have already put on paper unless I tell him that he can.

>> No.26752170

>pick Rovagug
>become Tarrasque

>> No.26752371



>> No.26752378
File: 16 KB, 300x390, filename.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I'd disagree, if only on the grounds the the GM needs to have the ability to overwrite shitty backstories that ignore the established fluff of the setting.

As for, "not your real parents" I'd say that in principle the GM has the right to pull something like that. But on a storytelling level, a plot twist like that is usually so terrible that you'd better be damn sure you know what you're doing before doing it. And yes, in this situation, talking to the player beforehand is required for you to be damn sure you know what you're doing. Pic related, it's the face of those who think that their plot twists are always awesome.

>> No.26752514

> I'd disagree, if only on the grounds the the GM needs to have the ability to overwrite shitty backstories that ignore the established fluff of the setting.

The GM has veto power when the player makes the backstory in the first place. That is the point at which it should happen. A retcon in the middle of a campaign for the purpose of a TWEEST is different, it does not serve the same purpose.

>> No.26752528


I'm pretty sure the OP's talking about actual factual changes the DM makes and not a couple of jerkass NPCs lying to you.

>> No.26752539

A lot of people find out they were their mother and the baker's son, not their father's.

>> No.26752549


"LUKE I AM YOUR FATHER" rarely makes for good story, though. It's a long since overused trope. While it's not impossible to make good story with old, dated tropes, it's usually a telltale sign of lazy storytelling.

>> No.26752580

are you sure you mean storyteller and not 4e?
Because ALL of this reads as 4e. Don't tell me you took out the one good aspect of 4e and replaced it with ST mechanics.

That's like going "Hey, I know you guys aren't too fond of FATAL, so I'll run this in Rollmaster"

>> No.26752607


What does edition war shit have to do with this thread? Or am I missing your point?

>> No.26752609

By pissing the fuck out of the OP apparently

>> No.26752651

The entire thing was described in one system's terms, while the guy claimed he was running "his modified version" of something else.

"Look, my amazing design and mechanical skills allowed me to transform this pinto into the lincoln you see here!" Bullshit. You bought a lincoln second hand and called it "original pinto, do not steal"

>> No.26752674


oh, I see. Not really on topic, though.

>> No.26752752

Look at this fucker acting like a GM shouldn't add plot twists to a character's story.

Fuck all y'all who think this. A GM's job is to tell a story. Now, yes, there are some things that are absolutely sacrosanct - if I made your character do something, that is horribly wrong. That is, if I FORCED your character to do something, it's horribly wrong.

One of the best stories I ever told, however, was about a player discovering that his birth father wasn't the mundane dude he thought he was - it was actually the guy's best friend, who was held up by most of the rest of the setting as Superman. His biological father, in a moment of weakness, fell for his biological mother, and they carried on an affair for a year or so, resulting in the PC.

When the PC found out, he found out from the perceived big bad of the game, who had been friends with both of these people. That single event broke up the old team, shattered the bad guy's image of the world, broke a lot of people who were closer than close apart, and basically set in motion half the events of the game.

You know what the player did, when he was told this?

He ran with it. And when it came time to confront the situation, he said that his father was the man who raised him, not the man who gave birth to him, in one of the most stirring and dramatic scenes I've ever DMed.

Fuck you, you entitled twaddleswat. Fuck you and everyone who thinks like you. People like you shouldn't be playing in these games.

Your background probably wasn't that interesting anyway and your DM tried to do you a goddamn favor. Do everyone a favor and get out of this hobby.

>> No.26752821


No. If I write a concrete fact on a piece of paper, it's in poor taste to change it. If the DM takes you aside and asks, "Hey, I was thinking of throwing a few odd twists here and there on paper for some roleplaying flavor. Are you okay with something weird potentially happening to your backstory?" and you consent to this, then that's absolutely fine and dandy.

Taking liberties with written canon is frowned upon basically everywhere.

>> No.26752846

What determines if this is fair is whether or not this is a tactical or cinematic decision.

Tactical: Odds are survival will only be assured if player stays behind and risks almost certain death while the others rush the portal

Cinematic: I'll just handwave this shit right out, you're dead, roll another character, now meanwhile, you guys, you find yourselves...

I have seen spectacular feats of luck, or dice luck, or almost as often bits of equipment or spell-triggers others had forgotten get fished out in these dire circumstances, and the would-be sacrificial buddy walk out, battered but loaded on xp and loot, out of the silenced keep.

The important points are thus, for it to be fair:
-This situation arrived as a result of a string of bad luck [the fight was going that bad that long], stupidity [they REALLY screwed up there], and NOT because "lol I'll put in a 'one must fall situation cuz muh storeez".
-The situation is "certain death" the same way people say "he couldn't possibly have survived that". That is to say, generally exactly the case, but not 'decided' by the Gm. If there were four waves of enemies, they're halfway through wave three, and chances are wave four will vivisect him, that's appropriate. If you decide there will suddenly be endless reinforcements, or the enemies got stronger for reasons they had no way of ever knowing [who knows what's hidden in the depths of thine own arsehole], you need to fuck a power-saw.

Let the guy have or take his chance, you never know what he may have stashed up he either didn't want the others to know of or couldn't use with them around [undead with a neg-energy nuke or whatever in a living party], and for hell's sake let him take some of that xp, loot or whatever onto his next character.

>> No.26752855


You are so entitled it scares me, and I feel horrible for your GM, because he has the worst player I've ever heard of short of people like Little Boy Blue.

>> No.26752877


No sir, you and your shitflinging "entitlement" bullshit needs to get out of MY hobby. And I feel sorry for YOU.

>> No.26752903

Yes, I walk into your house and tell you that your parents arent your real ones, but liars and Saddam was you true father.

How will you react? How?

By your text I think you would just accept this fact and become Saddam junior.

>> No.26752956

Suppose a player writes down that his character is 25 years old and was born in X town.

The GM then "reveals" a ways into the campaign that no, the character is actually a monster that is hundreds of years old, that has been twisted to look like a 25 year old person, has had false memories implanted, and was created by nation Y as part of some plot to do whatever.

Objecting to that sort of retcon isn't entitlement. It's wanting to play a game as the character that you made. If the GM is going to make the characters himself, then he should be honest about that instead of creating the illusion of player choice and then ignoring those choices.

>> No.26752986
File: 170 KB, 640x480, 1374501864936.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Well, I feel sorry for both of you.

>> No.26753006

There's a hell of a difference between that and "Well, your daddy might not really have been the one you thought... I was REALLY good friends with mr.Johnson in the barrens at the time...." which is something grown adults find out on occasion.

>> No.26753031

That picture is fantastic so I don't regret it at all.

What is Baldur's Gate/II's core plot

>> No.26753067

Baldur's gate is an example of the game largely giving you your character, rather than you making one. All of your backstory has already been set. That's the proper way to do something like that. The GM deciding to change things in the middle of a campaign where the players actually could write their own backstory is rather different.

>> No.26753108


Well, it's archived now. Have fun debating, the future GMs will need this.

>> No.26753136

Not the point. The point is this >>26752821
Something that the player wrote down as a concrete fact for their character's backstory should be changed by the GM without their consent once the campaign is already in progress. If the GM wants to say something like "that doesn't fit with the setting, change it" he can do that before the campaign starts.

If the player hasn't said anything about it, the the GM has some leeway, but if it's fact in the character's backstory, then changing that is essentially the same thing as the example in >>26752956

>> No.26753138


Not at all. The DM probably didn't randomly decide to change things; it's entirely likely that he wrote the plot in such a way to make the character important, and that part of that import is reacting to the truth: that his parents are not his real parents.

It really isn't a case of the DM reaching down and telling the player "no, fuck you, you're playing MY CHARACTER NOW"; it shouldn't really in any way change who the person is, what they believe, how they were raised, why they became who they are, unless the player wants it to. If the player wants it to, it's an opportunity to change his worldview; it's the kind of thing that makes villains out of heroes and heroes grow stronger still.

The DM presented an opportunity, a hook, an idea. It's all about how that idea is presented.

Now, if the DM used it to make his super-speshul mary sue hero your dad, that's a different thing; that's not him trying to tell a story, that's him being a dick, and that's absolutely worth getting angry about.

>> No.26753143

>Retards saying that finding out your parents aren't your real parents is the same as a GM turning your character into a gypsy lesbian tranny.
>Basically fucking arguing that finding out something in your background/backstory is not how your character thought it was is the same thing as a going from being white to being black, or a human to orc.

Don't be fucking stupid. No, a GM should not suddenly 'reveal' that you are adopted. But in no way is that the same as a GM turning your character into a fucking futa, or changing their sexual identity.

>> No.26753156

> should be changed
Shouldn't be changed

>> No.26753207

Did this in a slight way with one of my Players. He gave me a back story to his character, he came from a lost island and he got amnesia. He didn't give me anything on his people other then they're a warrior race.

So I made them Picts. The horrible, horrible, monstrous Picts.

I will never change what a player has written down, but if you gave me nothing to work with I will give you something

>> No.26753249

So the player is supposed to, what, know everything about the plot ahead of time, in order to authorize a relatively minor change that in no way changes who raised him, and then not run around with or use or remember that knowledge, let alone let others know of it?

Honestly I think we need to see what this 'changed backstory' is before we really decide how big a change this is. The OP appears to be assburger raging in the extreme, but if we could see what it was, and thus, what really changed, we'd have a better idea.

Because sure as fuck if you come to me with a two page backstory for a level one fucking fighter, it is now "what he plans to tell everyone", as opposed to whatever, if anything at all, I'll come up with, which will be "what actually happened you metagaming little fuck".

I've had a lot of 'backstory' abuse in my earlier gming days, especially back when we played FR. "As you know, being from this northern region, as explained in novels.... It is perfectly reasonable that I do in fact know how to rework meteoric iron, despite not bothering with points in crafting, as well as having proficiency in the kukri, given my father's lineage in those islands... It's utterly nonsensical to not have these skills, as they're taught from childhood to anyone in those regions, just like chris and local history. You'll also note that that region's meteors are actually a special blend of adamantite and mithral, making a high DR, high dex, ultra light armor."

>> No.26753264

> It really isn't a case of the DM reaching down and telling the player "no, fuck you, you're playing MY CHARACTER NOW"

Only it is. It's the DM applying his ability to control the identity and history of NPCs to the PCs, after the campaign has already started and the player already determined those aspects of the character.

The player said "I' like my character to be X."
The DM said "Okay."
The campaign went on, until the DM turned around and said "actually, that character you're playing, he's Y instead."

>> No.26753270


Holy shit, that's hilarious. People actually thought they could get away with that? What did you *do* to them?

>> No.26753338


It isn't. It's not "actually he's Y." It's only that way because you're assigning that single trait - the person who birthed him - the supreme importance of his life.

Would you wail and bitch if your farmer's son turned out to be a king? His mother is who he knows; his father pretended not to know on threat of execution. Now you're a prince, and dealing with all the things that come with being a prince, even though you're wildly unsuited for it. That's interesting drama.

But maybe you didn't want that. Maybe you wanted to be a peasant who worked his way to greatness! Fine. Walk off. Tell them that's wrong, that the divinations are wrong, that your blood doesn't make you a king. Leave, go back to toiling in the dirt, and earn your glory yourself.

You are not "Y". You are still "X"; it's just the other side of the equation had a new variable added to it, and you have a chance to redefine who "X" is and what makes "X" "X", as well as what "X" believes.

I agree with you about the "suddenly you're a monster" thing, though, that's retarded.

>> No.26753343

> know everything about the plot ahead of time
No, just when the GM wants to modify the character's backstory.
> in order to authorize a relatively minor change that in no way changes who raised him, and then not run around with or use or remember that knowledge, let alone let others know of it?
If it's supposedly so minor, why are you worried about what he'll do with the knowledge? Unless it really is major, in which case why are you making a major change without the player's knowledge or consent?

>> No.26753449

> It isn't. It's not "actually he's Y." It's only that way because you're assigning that single trait - the person who birthed him - the supreme importance of his life.

It is still changing a fact that the player specifically determined when he was making the character. You may say "oh, it's just a minor thing." But why are you so insistent on changing it, if it's just a minor thing? Are you really just that obsessed with exerting power over your players that you'll intervene on even minor points and say "no, this is how it is, to hell with what you decided"?

>> No.26753463

Well, there's only two cases I recall clearly.
The first time it ever happened, given that's a hell of an eye opener. And... the third or so?

If I must...

Now, I was fourteen, and quite new to Gming [hells even if you've been doing it for four years you'd still be new at it at that age especially]. Friends were big fans of the setting, and had convinced me with no large effort to get the big atlas and all that. Okay, folks from different places, heroes and whatnot, sure, okay.

Two of them were pretty much "toss a dart at map, let's find out what it's like from there after we roll up a character". The other two? They owned novels. Lots, and lots, and lots, and lots and lots of forgotten realm novels.

The first time I was caught off my fucking guard. Here was a guy explaining to me that something I'd agreed on, after at least making sure to read the bits in the atlas, involved massive bonuses I'd never even heard of. I'd 'totally okayed' it, and his cousin was of course backing every word, they even had the damn books to show where the info and events were from [no wonder they'd asked what year it was before making their characters].

The other players were just confused and so mostly ignored all that, but I felt I had little choice at the time but to allow it. That time. It had been my fault for okaying something with apparently far more background than I'd thought.

Not that it saved them when a druid with two rust-monsters took offense to the amount of charcoal they were creating for their mass-production winter forge a few weeks later.

>> No.26753466

> That's interesting drama.
No, that's the most boring TWEEST in the book.

>> No.26753474

People are telling your character his parents are different. He is STILL the sum of his experiences. He was still raised by who he was raised by. If someone up and told you, in real life, that your parents weren't your real parents, what would you do? Start suddenly acting like a totally different person? Choose not to believe it, unless confirmed by your parents, I would assume.

>> No.26753521

>what would you do?

"Uh, okay? Am I supposed to give a fuck here?"

Anyone who freaks out even a little over the fact their biological parents are some other people is literally a retard.

If it were the "big twist" in a story I'd roll my eyes so hard they'd fall out of their sockets.

>> No.26753529

I won't fault you, given that you were 14. But yeah, you should have been like, "Well, fuck no, reroll. You know how little I knew when you asked, you were clearly trying to take advantage of your extensive knowledge of 3rd party material, and my inexperience."

>> No.26753543


The second time? A good year or so afterwards, and should show how obsessed one was with FR as a whole. I ran a game. I had maps, we'd all done character creation together, well it turns out one or two locations had similar or identical enough spellings in their names that he pulled up some bullshit about artifacts under a certain place as well. I may or may not [honestly I don't recall] have pointed out those names on purpose...

He'd been really confused, trying to figure out what year it was, was this the spellplague, what was going on, why was the whole region so wastelandish. It was really getting to him and It hadn't really clicked for me why, so at the time I was a little worried about the campaign.

Then one day it hit him. Or me. However you wanna put that. "You don't know anything about an artifact like that around here" "Of course I do. Being from...." "That means nothing to you." "Bullshit. I told you I'm from" "... Yes, and? Wrong world"

Wrong world. Wrong. World. Wrong fucking world indeed. I was probably just as shocked at the time too.

Starting at level three hadn't been a clue. THE BOX SET hadn't been a clue. THAT TWO PEOPLE IN THE PARTY WERE PSIONICISTS HAD ALSO NOT BEEN A CLUE.

You stupidass motherfucking retard, we're playing fucking Dark Sun!

>> No.26753549

GM is always right, but you can always chose not to have that person as your GM. It's a game of trust after all which should work both ways.

>> No.26753550

> But maybe you didn't want that. Maybe you wanted to be a peasant who worked his way to greatness! Fine. Walk off. Tell them that's wrong, that the divinations are wrong, that your blood doesn't make you a king. Leave, go back to toiling in the dirt, and earn your glory yourself.

Only the GM still sucked your character into one of the most played out, annoying, and downright lazy plots in the history of storytelling, without your consent. That's something that I wouldn't want my character to be anywhere near. If you want that, fine. But it should be something that happens because the player consented.

>> No.26753580

Yeah, exactly. Really, when Darth Vader told Luke that HE was Luke's father, Luke should've been like, "LOL, what? Seriously, what? Are you just fucking with me, now?"

Really, the fact that he -wasn't- just fucking with him is almost comical. You would think that trying to fuck with someone's emotions like that because they're a twisted evil fuck is exactly what a BBEG would do.

>> No.26753591

FR sucks huge ass for exactly this reason. Seriously, who the fuck reads that watered-down diet-tolkien horseshit.

>> No.26753632

The character would react however the character would react.
I personally would react by asking why the GM felt the need to step in and change my character's backstory. If it's minor, why do it at all? If it's major, why do it without my consent?

Just because something is more or less important to the character doesn't mean that it's more or less important to the player. The character doesn't even get to choose where he was born or to whom. That's one of the reasons he might not care. The player does, and the character's origin might be important to the character arc that the player was angling for, which might very well not involve the tired old "prince raised by peasants" plot.

>> No.26753648

It's a minor detail, doesn't mean that being told about it does not set off a whole fuckton of clues, dude.

If you have to explain to him the plot around it, the why around it, the who what where, THAT part is pretty fucking huge, and doing so is problematic.

All because "we probably should've told you a little earlier but yeah you're adopted, sorry." is so heretical and anathema to your character sheet that you demand the entire campaign be handed to you so you can decide whether or not this is right for you?

Do you also stop the game for half an hour for everyone to discuss as to whether or not it feels RIGHT, for the story, and for everyone's feelings, if that hit, that the dice say just blew the paladin's brains out across the floor, were to actually occur? Is everyone really... READY, emotionally, for a death in the party so early in the campaign? I mean, I know, you guys were feeling a little reckless, earlier, but, that could have been the cheetos and myspace angles speaking. Trust me, I understand. If you don't really feel up to this anymore, any of you, let's discuss what instead could happen tonight. I really don't mind if that nat 20 and six exploding damage dice against a paladin with 2hp left happens to just miss instead, what's important is how we all SHARE in our emotions and the deepness.

>> No.26753667

If it is important to the plot, then it is not minor.

>> No.26753679

Why would you ask the GM anything, instead of just continuing to play? An NPC/BBEG is telling your character something. It may or may not be true. Why stop the game? Does it REALLY change your character, even if it DOES happen to be true?

>> No.26753680

> Do you also stop the game for half an hour for everyone to discuss as to whether or not it feels RIGHT, for the story, and for everyone's feelings, if that hit, that the dice say just blew the paladin's brains out across the floor, were to actually occur?

No, because that's not backstory.

>> No.26753722

> Does it REALLY change your character, even if it DOES happen to be true?

Yes, because now my character is part of an old, played out story that I didn't want to be a part of, as evidence by the fact that I didn't choose to play that sort of character.

>> No.26753726

Is death not important to the plot? Should no character die, unless, and only maybe, it is the BBEG himself in the final encounter?

I'd say that finding out someone else birthed you or fathered you is almost, dare I suggest, of less importance than your character getting splattered because a frost giant wasn't watching where they were stepping.

>> No.26753745

But it may not even fucking be true. I don't understand why an NPC telling your character something is causing you to immediately void your bowels.

>> No.26753764

> Your character was actually repeatedly raped, then had his memory of those events wiped.
> Does it REALLY change your character, even if it DOES happen to be true?
> After all, you can just continue playing without pursuing this plot hook that I'm laying out by telling you this.

>> No.26753773

See >>26753680

>> No.26753809

Don't you know that all PC deaths are supposed to be preplanned at least two sessions in advance, with input from the entire group?

Or at least I recall some redditards being pretty convinced that it was wrong to play a different way.

>> No.26753858

That's not even remotely the same thing. The fact that you share no blood whatsoever with your parents that raised you since infancy is not the same as you having been repeatedly raped and having your memories erased.

The fact that people continuously try to validate this offense by equating this to much serious and worse incidents only goes to show how utterly irrelevant it is.

>> No.26753901

It is the same thing.
The DM is changing the backstory of a PC because he wants to create a particular plot hook.
The problem is that you don't seem to be able to understand that the player and the character are different. What is important within the setting and what is important in the context of the people playing the game are two very different things.

>> No.26753923

>Also the 'heir hidden away in a humble home' is so overdone, I get sick whenever I have to see another version of it.

What if the PC is the lowborn one adopted into a noble family and the true heir is an NPC out to get them?

>> No.26754006

Someone telling your character they were adopted is not the same as being raped repeatedly and having your mind altered.

Maybe it's somewhat similar to someone telling your character that they were repeatedly raped and had their mind altered.

My point here is that you're a fucking straight up retard.

>> No.26754045

That might make for an interesting story.
>The heir to the throne goes missing, they go out and just take a random fucking baby and raise em up to be king.
>Eventually, the original heir is found, but in the years that have passed he was raised to be a nearly-fucking-retarded filth-farming turd of a pleb.
>King dies, retard gets the throne instead of the guy born and raised and educated for it.

>> No.26754114

Read the thread. The issue is not some NPC telling the character something. The issue is the GM deciding that it is so.

Even going back to the OP, the issue was the fact that the GM retconned the character's backstory without his permission. Not that an NPC said something. That the GM said it.

>> No.26754180

Unless the GM has specifically out of character stated that it is fact, it's not. So eat a dick and get over your fucking fanfiction.

>> No.26754210

Look at the OP. Actually read this time.
> your character's
It's stated out of character.
So yes, it is an issue of the GM stating it. Which you have been defending this entire time.

>> No.26754236

No, it's not, that is referential to a situation, that is not quoted from a GM. It may as well have had 'that feel' in front of it.

>> No.26754246

This is something I really wouldn't have a problem. I made a character and related some of his history, but some of the facts as he percived them were wrong. He now gets to respond to this new understand of the world.

I would be similar to playing a character that was the champion of a glourious and good empire that latter discovers it is an evil dick tyranny. You get to overthrow what you once fought to protect (or embrace the newly revealed evil ways), not throw a bitchfit that you said your empire was a nice place.

>> No.26754325



>> No.26754331

It's also all we have to go on. That, and the fact that the question is specifically framed as an issue of the GM retconning something. Not just an NPC saying something, the GM using his authority to make it that way. NPCs say shit all the time. That's not a retcon. The GM retcons.

And by the way, where are you getting your fanatical belief that it's coming from an NPC's mouth?

>> No.26754418

> This is something I really wouldn't have a problem. I made a character and related some of his history, but some of the facts as he perceived them were wrong. He now gets to respond to this new understand of the world.

Facts as he perceived them are different from facts as they are. In OP's example, the issue is not that his character perceived his parents to be two particular people, it was that the PLAYER wrote them to be those characters, and then the GM decided to change that after he had initially approved it, without the player's consent. The characters can think whatever. The issue is when the player writes a fact, the GM lies and lets the player think that he's given it the green light, then switches it to whatever he wants after the fact.

>> No.26754452

Most people don't find out they're adopted from booming disembodied voices.

>> No.26754521

Most people aren't characters in an RPG that has a GM and players.

>> No.26754588


I also notice you're ignoring
> That, and the fact that the question is specifically framed as an issue of the GM retconning something. Not just an NPC saying something, the GM using his authority to make it that way. NPCs say shit all the time. That's not a retcon. The GM retcons

>> No.26754654

No if it is done right.

Some people show up and claim to be your parents won't you give your ailing father a kidney?
That's fine you can RP that.

If it is out of the blue "your parent are someone else and has always been" is not acceptable.

>> No.26754659

I'm not ignoring it, that's not an issue. The only way a character can learn something is from knowledge found in game, most specifically, NPCs.

In all likelihood, he has learned from an NPC that he was adopted. As you're so fond of pointing out, there is a solid distinction between player and character. The character has no reason whatsoever to believe the NPC, and has reasons to DISBELIEVE them if it's the BBEG or someone associated with them.

A whole fucking lot of nothing in this thread.

>> No.26754664

Yes and that wouldn't bother me. I basicaly consider anything in a charcters backstory that they wouldn't know for sure to be 100% true "facts as they percive them".

If my backstory included a peice about my farther giving me an axe that I treasured and kept by my side at all times and the GM later said actully that axe is a sword, then i'd be pissed. If he later said that axe bore an ancient curse then I'm fine with that. My character (and his farther had no way of knowing) and I don't mind as a player if reasonable things happen within the world.

>> No.26754679

This happened more than you think. Especially since it was a bad idea to get attached to children before they had a few years in them, given how most of them just up and died from all sorts of reasons.

You've just gotten married, and spent the rest of the winter months getting good and pregnant. Off goes your husband to the tourneys or the wars, and... he gets himself offed before you've even been together for a year.

The child is born and it's a daughter. A lineage dead without an heir, leaving you quite possibly to be booted out when some cousin takes the title and the manor?

OR you could exchange the child for the boy the seamstress just gave birth to, no more than a month or two apart.

>> No.26754698

The only way a CHARACTER can learn something is by being told by an NPC.
The PLAYER can learn it in other ways. Such as being told by the GM. There is literally no evidence that this was just an NPC talking. Your continued insistence that it was is unfounded and irrational.

>> No.26754711

So because it wouldn't bother you, no one should get to have any choice. Got it.

>> No.26754745

Actually, everyone involved kept fucking quiet. Once that switch was done, it was DONE, and you didn't say a fucking word if you knew what was good for you. No one wanted to be the criminal scum that lost or gave up the king's own child, no one wants to be the blasphemous heretic that would deign to allow a peasant to be raised as a king without the very word of the gods themselves, and by the time either's an adult most of those who know the truth were dead of complications of "old" age anyways.

>> No.26754758

I'll explain this simply:

Not NPCs talking.
That is the main issue.
That is what the OP was pissed about.
That is what this thread is about.
NPCs don't retcon.
GMs retcon.

>> No.26754778

lol I never said that. I just gave my opinion on the matter which was the point of the threads exsistence in the first place.

>> No.26754870

Hey, I think this color scheme looks better so I painted over your miniatures!

>> No.26754881

Stop using that word.

>> No.26754900


Unless you go out of your way to describe in your backstory how your parents fucked and squirted you out, it's not a fucking retcon to change your backstory. If you're a human with these two human parents and you went to wizard school or whatever, you're still all that, even if you were actually adopted or whatever.

>> No.26754956

If it doesn't matter, then why do it?

>> No.26754975

It fits, and it's the question that started the thread. You don't like talking about retcons? You don't need to be in a thread about retcons. No one is keeping you here.

>> No.26755001

I pulled a better reveal on one of my players.
>"So what you're saying is...YOU'RE my FATHER!?"
>"HAAH! No, you frivolous airhead! You are my clone!"

>> No.26755030

Well that just brings up the question of why it isn't really, really obvious that the two are related.

>> No.26755052

Maybe the original is a brain in a jar? Angling to snatch his younger clone's health body? That would make it less apparent.

>> No.26755129

I am an ancient demon that is forced to linger in every single /tg/ thread. I can only be free once every single person alive admits that 4e is bad, or I learn how to play GURPS.

So please, don't call it a retcon. That's just such a...comics and cartoons thing.

>> No.26755138

This is EXACTLY what it was. The PRIME was just a skinless head in some moving contraption while the clone had a young and supple body, and a piece of the Prime's soul, which is why he couldn't just make a new clone.

>> No.26755219
File: 2.69 MB, 350x250, 1374962183668.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

> dissing comics and cartoons
Hey you.

Fuck you.

>> No.26755253

I like /co/. I like /tg/. I do not like them to mix. The sandwich can't touch the veggies.

>> No.26755298

Oh. I see how it is.
"Separate but equal."
Is that it.
You racist.

>> No.26755313


>bad DM
>gives examples of great games that use this very philosophy to better integrate characters into the world/backstory.

Nah, fuck you mate. you're a bad player. Broaden your horizons to something other than D&D.

>> No.26755838

No. They're not equal. /tg/ is objectively better. /co/ is good in other ways, but should not mix with /tg/.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.