>"Well, my character doesn't have any reason to

I've usually run into it when everyone makes characters before first session in isolation from each other (or maybe some of them have swapped "I might roll a bard/cleric/sorcerer/whateverthefuck" without further detail). Inevitably, everyone thinks their generic fantasy insert is the hottest shit that everyone should want, and is then upset when someone else's generic fantasy insert is more liked.

So, basically, because everyone wants to be the main character and thinks everyone else has shit taste.

>>48740307
Because some people are retarded. Or want to troll the group, which is itself a retarded idea.

People don't actually want to roleplay with others, they want others to be accessories to their own role-playing.

>>48740307
Or the Grandest form of this
>"What reason do I have to even go on adventure at all?! I already have a stable job, and their are more qualified members of society to fix problems and defend civilisation!"

So we left him behind, he told us couldn't do that. We told him he said had no reason to be here. He joined the party and sulked.

I really, really wish I was just making shit up.

>>48740307
>GM allowing the character in the first place and/or not creating an adventure that brings the party together.
The player isn't the only one to blame here.

I once had a GM introduce another PC to my thief as a "naive looking merchant", and then have him assaulted by a couple thugs whose boss I paid tribute to. Helping him would have resulted in angering the entire criminal crowd of the city. I wasn't fun for either of us.

File: 1312485016248.png (5KB, 186x347px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 186x347px

>>48740483
this

>don't do session 0
>build characters in vacuum
>player characters don't know each other
>initial setup fails to or doesn't take bringing characters together into account
>people roleplay characters as people and not automatons running on plot

File: End My Fucking Life Fam.png (186KB, 500x613px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 500x613px

>>48740307
>mfw rejecting the call to adventure is nearly impossible in tabletop RPGs
>mfw I'll never have a proper hero's journey

>>48740593
Yeah, this is another thing. I almost feel like people need some kind of pre-game checklist to help them avoid problems during the leadup to the first session.

>>48740307
Because sometimes you don't expect the other players to all be shit tier

>>48740698
The thing is, the Hero's Journey works best as a kind of fiction that you experience.

Rejecting the call but getting forced into it doesn't work since payers generally jump at the chance for adventure (it's why they play the game.)

Moreover, they don't really ever go home, they seldom receive singular important talismans, etc.

If you wanted to do a Hero's Journey it might be best to structure some sort of Apocalypse World style storygame around it.

>>48740482
Theoretically the DM shouldn't have put him in circumstances where the quest is so shit that he'd rather stay home.

Adventuring for adventuring sake is fun, but it is better if the DM and the player can make genuine reasons to do things.

>>48740482
Frankly, in WFRP, you would have a better life and more regular meals by staying on the farm and dirt farming...

>>48740698

you want to do that?
Discuss it with your DM, and have a pre-game session or two, about your character beginnings. Works best for solo campaigns.

>>48740307
You don't always know beforehand. Sometimes the character you think will be fine ends up just not gelling with the rest of the party, or the plot takes a turn you didn't expect and your character ends up being incompatible with the new new direction things are taking. The trick is not to be a jerk when you realize it's happening, and either rework your character if you can or gracefully retire them from the campaign in favour of a character that fits better. You're only That Guy if you refuse to change when it becomes necessary.

>>48740900
THIS

players who bring paladins to tomb robbing games or generally less moral parties and don't want to change classes

>>48740307
Characters with trust issues can be fine. I'm currently playing a former criminal significant trust issues, the kind of person who intentionally sabotages relationships rather than let someone get close. He does, however, have reasons to be traveling with the party, and is willing to work with them - and after a few sessions, the other characters have realized that he's standoffish asshole to everyone, not just them, and he's at least being useful. So, yeah, I totally agree that characters need reasons to work together, but they don't have to be best friends while they do it.

>no general idea of setting
>get told whatever is fine
>other players don't want to talk, at all, about what they're writing up
>GM completely incapable of using any of the hooks I purposely wrote into the character to compel him into things

Yeah, I'm the problem

>>48740825
It wasn't so, though. He was a courier getting paid like 1 gold a week, that was thoroughly concened by the dangers that the community was facing.
He just didn't see why a down payment of 2000 gold with 2000 more on completion for, admittedly dangerous work, was worth it.

Plus, as for icing on the cake, the rest of the team were a squadron working off debt caused by criminal activity. He was offered to be a new member, or an officer of the law, or a citizen of the town being attacked, a mercenary, but no.

He had to be that courier because he's a deer-centaur so he's FAST.

File: dmnightmares.jpg (415KB, 1170x1150px) Image search: [Google]

415KB, 1170x1150px

>>48740307
Usually I find this is due to a mismatch of expectations on what a role-playing game is supposed to be like. Most fantasy novels, games, and movies tend to heavily focus on a single main character or several characters pursuing separate and interwoven plot-lines.

Most players jump into a tabletop game expecting to try and recapture or recreate the feel they got from other fantasy media - and the techniques used there are fundamentally at odds with the structure and nature of RPGs.

Tabletop RPGs have a sort of fundamental dissonance between your situation as a player (sitting around a table on a couch) and the character's appraisal of the situation (running from a gelatinous cube), which is why often you get comedy rather than fear or drama.

>>48740900
>if you don't give up on having fun, you're that guy!

Nah

>>48741264
Obviously if the situation can be salvaged, then it isn't
>necessary
now is it?

>>48741276
I suppose my experience was a shit troll going out of his way to make it a problem.

But yeah, I'd rather drop a game than sacrifice my fun.

>>48740307
I used to let them all meet up and forge alliances and shit...but this is what happened.

>The brave paladin stumbles across the elven bard.
>Paladin:"uh..hi join my party"
>Bard:"yeah sure let's go"

>Rogue pops out of nowhere
>Rogue:"I have watched you for a while let us join forces"
>Bard/paladin:"K let's go."
>Cleric joins
>Cleric:"I am with the rogue let us go adventuring"
>DM:"OK. Your party. Fully grouped moves towards the bounty board to pick a job"
>Paladin:"I'm the leader I choose a bounty that involves us fighting undead."
>Rogue:"im the leader, let's guard this rich guy"
>Bard:"I'm the leader, let's rescue the princess"
>Cleric:"im the leader, let's kidnap the princess and ransom her for double.
>Paladin/bard/rogue:"OK he's the leader"

That's the shorthand of 4 hours of back and forth.

>>48741303
I guess I don't understand how playing a character that doesn't work for your game constitutes fun, or how switching to a different concept that will work better constitutes giving fun up. It's not like there's only one character I've ever wanted to play-- changing from something that interested me to something else that interested me doesn't exactly sound like a hardship.

>>48741472
>no princess impregnation going on
0/10

Sometimes characters grow separate over time or it takes time to realize that you don't mesh with the party. I didn't realize my character didn't work with the party until playing as him for six sessions. As the story currently stands, he would no longer have any reason to stay with or trust the party, so I retired him.

>>48740989
This is why I roll Druids.
>I may be neutral, but I have a velociraptor as my companion.
>Velociraptor, what do we do?
>Trust the velociraptor. Always.

>>48740989
Eh, I can figure some ways you could make workarounds with paladins

>paladin who cares more about oaths and contracts than necessarily being good
>paladin of a god of nature that doesn't give two shits about people buried in the earth
>paladin of civilization that doesn't care what the party does as long as it doesn't damage social institutions

>>48741568
My friends may be social outcasts
They may be depraved and sick minded
They may even be secretly gay

But they thankfully never go full magical realm

>>48741724
I play my paladins like judge dredd

>Judge- find the charges
>Jury - decide their fate
>Executioner - carry out the sentence

Whenever I play paladin I usually flip a coin for it, or i write up at least 4 things then roll for it.

>The bandit leader is slain, his remaining men throw down weapons and surrender.
>Paladin: " for the crimes of theft, murder. Kidnapping and banditry...death to 1/2 the remaining men, the rest shall be sent to the church to be rehabilitated."

By rehabilitated I mean indoctrinated into the church.

>>48740307
Sometimes it's a result of just not fishing for info hard enough. True story of something that happened to me:
>dude is running D:tD over the interwebs
>I make a character because he says he has space
>ask what everyone else was making so I could try to fit into the group
>"It's D:tD, do whatever"
>over 9000 memes later, Ork Sherrif
>suddenly the guy mentions that the rest of the party is basically a bunch of Chaos cultists
>"How the fuck do I fit in with this group?"
>"It'll work out somehow lol"
I think I'm gonna see if I can get him to let me refluff the Sherrif class tree into a bandit/desperado thing. Might be a bit tricky depending on how he considers Backing (Criminal Elements) to stack up to Backing (Law Enforcement).

>>48741944
I now need an enchanted weapon.
>Foehammer? No, this is the Lawgiver

>>48740307
This is why my campaigns always start out in a way that basically forces the PC's to cooperate or they'll just die and no playing for you.
I start them in prison, or some camp that quickly gets buttfucked by the BBEG's army, or that one time I started them with what was basically "would you kindly?".

>>48740307

Why didn't you as a GM do your fucking job and correct the player before the game started?

My games are successful because I make sure the characters will have motives for sticking it through.

Your games are nightmares because you're a lazy piece of shit who takes any mouthbreather who shows up to the table with a filled-in sheet.

>>48741976
>Lawbringer

>Paladin readies his weapon and uses a battlecry
>"I am the law...AND THIS BRINGS IT TO YOU"

>>48740307
Mine didn't because a lawful good dwarven cleric wasn't going to heal an elf druid omniphile, a greedy human paladin, and a murderous barbarian so I just told my DM I needed to roll a new character.

File: 1318654806493.gif (614KB, 200x136px) Image search: [Google]

614KB, 200x136px

bewcause mutual goals should be the basis for traveling together, not friendship. Friendship grows. Unless you say the party knows each other ahead of time, your asking for one dimesnional high fiving super friends and getting mad your not getting that.

A little partyconflict is good. It builds character and tension.

Heres somthing alot of people never think about till this questions posed: When was the last time, incharacter, anyone of you or your players ever actually asked anything about another characters story other then how it pertains to the current objective in your face? So many fucking times I give players the campfire conversation options and they never take it. I had a group I was in where I played an angry, almost crippled warlock. They all assumed I was just an asshole evil guy trying to be moody, but not fucking ONCE did anyone ask why I'm the way I am or try to understand.

So before you go "pfft, hes just trolling the group because he hates fun", fucking have in character development.

>>48741506
Because I've 0 interest in playing a morally void character, and that's exactly what would have been required of me to stay in the game.

So, yes, it was giving up on my fun.

And with some settings, yes, there is only one character concept that interests me.

>>48742704
I think no one asked why your angry crippled warlock was an angry crippled warlock because they had always been an angry crippled warlock to them. Did you ever break away from that at all? Have the warlock be nice to some random street urchin, get them curious about him? Did you talk about their backstory out of character at all, drop hints for them to get curious about in character?

You can't just roll around and squirm and basically go 'LOOK AT ME WHY AREN'T YOU ROLEPLAYING WITH ME' and expect people to take you up on it, especially if you're not offering any sort of mystery. The warlock is angry, and the warlock is crippled; the warlock must be angry because he is crippled.

Also, party conflict is only good for building character and tension in small amounts, and when it can eventually be worked over. Otherwise you just have a party split into a bunch of pieces that don't really want to work together.

I would much rather one dimensional high-fiving super friends than that, and saying that our characters are friends before the adventure starts is an easy way to bring them together and consider how they'd interact with each other despite their differing personalities.

File: 1422213923454.gif (743KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

743KB, 500x281px

>>48741303
>my own fun is more important than the fun of all the other players in the game
Spotted that guy.

>>48742951
Maybe it's my group but I'd hint ridiculously obviously at his mysterious backstory to the other party members half-OoC, nearly comically so.
>my warlock starts to rub his aching back, groaning and LOOKING AT HIS LOCKET LONGINGLY, PRETTY MYSTERIOUS I'D SAY HE'S GOT SOME WORDS TO SAY ABOUT IT IF ASKED I BET
Never really played a serious character in my life though, if I play a straight man it's because it bounces off someone else in the party.

>>48742985
Nah, but if I'm not having fun, I'm going to drop rather than try and 'make it work'.

Especially if I've talked about it OOC before the game.

>>48742985
>I'd rather drop a game than spoil my own fun

Clearly he's willing to leave a game instead of trying to sabotage it, so he's not really That Guy. That Guy would never drop a game.

>He wants a game where the party gets along all the time and never has drama between them

I guess internal party strife can go pretty sour if you play with a shitty group.

>>48743130
It always goes sour.

>>48743130
There's a difference between "The dwarf hates the elf, the paladin distrusts the mage, and they banter about it while fighting whatever evil draws them together" and "The cleric hates the party so much that he would rather stay behind in the nearest town than continue going on adventures"

One makes for good roleplay, the other ruins games.

>>48743189
What about when one player and the GM conspire to fuck over one of the players?

That's my experience with internal party strife.

>>48743226
Perfectly normal, basically if you're not counter-conspiring with the GM in preparations for such eventuality, you're not roleplaying hard enough.

>>48743292
Man, I'm glad I don't play with you.

>>48743189
What about "the cleric only joined the party because their goals happened to align with the groups', and now 4-5 sessions later, they've done what they set out to do, and are leaving the party on good terms"?

>>48742985
> You are not allowed to quit gaming ever if other people don't want you to.

Nigga do you have brain problems?

>>48743328
To be fair, I've done this before, but that's because I was playing a manipulative as fuck character who lived to put herself at the top and fuck everyone else over in the process to do it.

>>48743392
Again, glad I don't play with you.

>>48741022
Are you a tingling by chance?

>>48743632
Tiefling**

>>48743364
i dont think there's any problem with this. But if you're leaving on good terms, dont bring in a jackass to rile things up.

>>48743700
dont make the party wish your other character had never left, because they'll resent the new one. and that just causes unnecessary conflict

>>48740307

Because they are new.

That is literally the only reason.

>>48740307
I typically find that this happens because the player thinks the "loner who sits in the corner not interacting with people" is a cool character type, and forgets that those characters only work when other people draw them in to the action (and other players might not bother or might not realize that's what's required for the character).

Most of the time, thankfully, I get something more along the lines of >>48741472 (which still isn't perfect but it's much better).

>>48740307
If you're a good player, and you have a good group, playing someone at odds with the party can be really interesting.

Trouble is, most people are too shit to pull it off.

>>48742985
>I have to continue doing something I dislike for the sake of the people who are making me dislike it in the first place

Full retard.

>>48740307
The proper response to "My character doesn't have a motivation to adventure," is "Then roll up a character that does."

>>48744063
It's frustrating when people say they don't have any reason to adventure. Maybe you don't get along with the party, sure, but these fantasy heroes can afford to have dreams that are a little larger than life. Making a better world, spreading their doctrine, or even just getting rich.

>>48740307
Played a game of dark heresy as a scum, who was press ganged into helping an inquisitor find a smuggler of xeno tech on his home world. Proved himself so useful that he was kidnapped and brought along against his will. He spent the rest of the campaign attempting to secretly murder the inquisitor and escape from the rest of the party without getting killed for treason and/or heresy. It was a pretty fun campaign

>>48742721
>there is only one character concept that interests me.
You might have autism.

>"Then change the character so they'll want to adventure or roll a new one quickly. We only meet like once s month so please don't ruin it".

>>48744662
>with some settings

I'm not that guy, but I can totally understand not really being into the length and breadth of sci-fi or cyberpunk or fantasy settings except for one or two things, especially when they get really specific.

Just because you like a setting as a whole, doesn't mean you have to like everything in it.

>>48740307

Because every party needs a wildcard.

>>48740307
Do your players build their characters collaboratively, or seperately? Because if they're building them separately there's know way they can know what will/won't mesh with the rest of the party.
This is exactly why you hold a pre-game session if there's so much as a single fresh face; to go over the rules (which you know they won't read) and have everyone make their characters in the same room at the same time.

>>48740307
>Why the FUCKALL do players build characters they know will be at odds with the rest of the group - or even characters that have no reason to want to go on adventures at all - and then complain about how they don't fit in with the rest of the PCs?
When I play a game I usually don't have a reason for why my PC sticks around but I assume there is one and will pick one out/make one up after spending a few sessions with the party

I just don't get the mindset of "I can't think of a reason so I'll stop the game until someone gives me one"

File: wildcard.gif (2MB, 499x287px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 499x287px

>>48745915

Even Charlie Kelly has reasons to hang out with the party.

>>48740307
>hurr durr I'm a loner prima donna the whole campaign has to revolve around or else I won't engage in anything!
This is why I've banned dwarves from all my campaigns

>>48746256

I never imagined dwarves attracted that kind of player.

>>48746274
It's pretty much the only type of dwarf in existence.

>>48746284
>plays dwarf
>expects any story to revolve around him

>>48746256

Don't think I've ever experienced that the dwarf player is the loner one. Also i pity you for banning them for you will never experience the joy of an all dwarf pirate campaign and the hijinks that follows on the seven seas.

>>48740307
Ive found it to be a combo of DM and players. In general, some DMs make it part of the scenario (you guys have just escaped a prison together). If the GM is just like, "SAND BOX!" or is just unwilling to help the players ease into the adventure, the players might just be like, no way, fuck that guy.

I like to throw them into situations, or else just say, you were all hired to do this thing

However, failing all that, it IS just a game, and if youre going to say that and not be a team player then fuck you

>>48747468
>or else just say, you were all hired to do this thing
This is the least likely scenario to go wrong, I don't think it can be fucked up. Make the players already have their motivations for joining the crew, instead of meeting strangers and getting tied into a conflict they just meet their new allies whether they like them or not.

>>48746284
>>48746256

Weak bait. I can't even be bothered to post the meme.

File: mayonazeee.png (102KB, 500x319px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 500x319px

I'm nipping this in the butt by having all my players be adopted siblings. They all know each other, they're gonna make their characters together, and they are going to role play a decent four hours of childhood to get to know each other.

Before you freedomfags get triggered, they're cool with this, I can relate to OP cause I'm fucking sick of situations like this happening in my campaigns too.

The last campaign I ran I tried to do "first session is how party meets and joins forces"
>fuck these guys I'm the hero!
>entire first session is an episode of the amazing race
>have to jump between all PCs cause they're literally racing to get the same quest done first

Never again.

>player makes active effort to exclude character from party
>"why am I being excluded"
and that's the story about how I dropped that campaign like a stone.

File: sad guts.png (92KB, 283x343px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 283x343px

>>48748497
Some selfish players man. Do you play with random folks or friends? No matter what character I play in my group, I feel drawn towards them because I'm absorbed in the character development and interaction of each person. I find it kind of odd other people don't feel this way.

>>48740307
Why do people put chocolate in chili?

it makes shit tasty

File: 1422781737063.gif (913KB, 461x307px) Image search: [Google]

913KB, 461x307px

>vaguely serious group
>new players come in with characters based around gimmicks and silly ideas
>new players are treated coldly, but never leave and instead a wedge develops in a formerly united party

I don't know why it always happens this way, but it does. It's not even all the new player's fault - it's not like the original group hands out a memo.

>>48752372
>old group members don't tell him why they're treating him coldly
>new player will never fix his problems therefore

>>48740307
And this is why I like Shadowrun.

>"What reason would I have to go on this mission?"
>"Because your rent is due in a week and you've got 27¥ to your name."

>>48740307
The GM had us roll up characters without telling us what the rest of us were making.

Thusly I created an ifrit paladin and was thrust amidst a group of chaotic neutral and chaotic evil rogues and rangers.

(No, I was not given any hints as I was creating this character that it would be a bad idea.)

I did my best to be copacetic and function well with the team, but after the fifth time I had to save innocents from being slain by the party, I was forced to engage the chaotic evil dominatrix tiefling in combat because I couldn't ignore the negative effect they were having on the world amidst a conspiracy between planes of shadow and demons.

Ultimately things stopped being fair play and translated into nonsense outside of the table, so I quickly headed off any drama at the pass and decided to stop showing up to the game.

I learned later that my character had become a recurring antagonist of the group.

File: he's the best decker we could get.jpg (116KB, 240x505px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 240x505px

>>48752552
It's also great for bringing a bunch of wackos together.

>Well, you're all idiots or crazy or people I don't want to spend the rest of my life with, but we worked pretty well together in there, let's say we meet up for a job next week?

The only flaw I would say that the system has is that if people have no clue what the world is like, they just tend to make characters that have various excuses for not knowing anything past the present day. It bugs me even more when they show no curiosity about the world.

>>48752636

Yeah, there's an amazing metafiction to go along with the setting, and it's always advancing at a reasonable rate.

And your picture reminds me; I've been playing Shadowrun Hong Kong and just finished the Shadowland BBS chain about the poor group that couldn't keep a decker no matter what they tried. Had a sad ending, but it's my favorite part of the game so far.

File: ConMan.jpg (41KB, 225x350px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 225x350px

>>48748497
I think it depends my character doesn't trust anyone because he's a con artist, but everyone who is on the quest was promised their deepest desire. The catch is this group of individuals has to participate in a unknown tournament together.

He knows hes weak so he has to buddy up with them. Of course he still tries to take advantage of them but they all know his game so it hardly goes well.

>"I'll sell you this magic bow string(it just glows green when pulled) for 10 gold"

But they don't hate him because he has negotiation and deception skills that helped them get into places they otherwise wouldn't be able to. Currently the group has become closer then when it started and that's what I like about these kinda characters and campaigns it makes for a better experience.

File: heroes in the making.jpg (173KB, 733x1023px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 733x1023px

>>48740830
WFRP is kinda silly in that respect. I mean, I get adventures in RPGs who do this shit for a living but when your party can be comprised of a beggar, rat-catcher, grave robber and coachman you kind have to wonder if you're just asking to die in a ditch somewhere.

>>48740698
>Yeah, this is another thing. I almost feel like people need some kind of pre-game checklist to help them avoid problems during the leadup to the first session.

You basically need to dedicate your first session to character creation and getting the group together, especially if you have NEW players won't don't necessarily get it.

>>48743392
Got to agree with >>48743429
I am glad that I don't play with you.

>>48743181
Not always. In a dark heresy game my group was playing the campaign ended with a pretty huge inner party conflict cliffhanger.

Basically, the party leader (Noble Assassin) was looked over for promotion. To inqusitor status because the last assignment we were sent on, he was horribly disfigured (insanity/corruption points almost through the roof, which caused his fellowship to take a shit and drop down to 3) and my guardsmen character was given the nod from on high, and became the party leader. There had been clashes of rank every so often, not to mention the tech priest also peaked in corruption (I believe he hit 90) and was only allowed to continue to serve if a meltabomb was surgically implanted against his heart ( which I had the detonator for). So here we are trapped on some emperor forsaken daemon plane in a three way Mexican standoff over a lost Sister of Battle, and my only ally is the party payment, who SOMEHOW has no corruption or insanity at all, but on principle I dislike and distrust him. Shit was cash, I really wanted to get back to that game, but I don't think the group will ever be able to.

>>48744803
I'd have to agree. If my gaming group decides to play Rifts, there's a 99% chance I'm playing a robot pilot.

>>48752826
Dude, I'd buy a magic glowing bowstring for 10 gold, you could get a ton of uses out of that.

Communication is the key. I always brainstorm with my group what they want to play and I ask everyone "Why did your character join the group?" or "why would your character adventure" before the first stat is rolled or perk picked.

I have zero interest in someone trying to be the extra special, contratian snowflake that requires half of a session for his character to be convinced to join while everyone else just wants to start adventuring.

>>48740307

A lot of the time it happens because a lot of great media has a party at odds with each-other. Odd couples, allies-of-convenience and "enemy of my enemy is my friend" type relationships are tense, interesting, and fun to watch. Hell, they can be fun to play, but only in a group that's all on board and is experienced enough in the hobby to act out inter-party friction without actually contributing to it.

Players don't usually build a character like this imagining them hating (and being hated by) the rest of the group. They're imagining some great scene where he and the rest of the party have a conflict of interest, ideology, or methodology that explodes in a dramatic fashion and then is resolved, with everyone involved growing closer because of it. The problem is that, just like the guy who makes a grizzled veteran with no idea how to actually act like one, the guy who wants to make an adversarial party member with a heart of gold usually doesn't actually know how to translate that from his head to the table.

File: 1429839718496.png (186KB, 488x620px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 488x620px

>>48740307
>Why the FUCKALL do players build characters they know will be at odds with the rest of the group - or even characters that have no reason to want to go on adventures at all - and then complain about how they don't fit in with the rest of the PCs?
Nobody have them pic related.
Also, they're tools.

>>48740698
>I almost feel like people need some kind of pre-game checklist to help them avoid problems during the leadup to the first session.
See pic related

File: Did I get screwed.jpg (18KB, 210x240px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 210x240px

>>48753281
>you could get a ton of uses out of that.
.....Like what, did I get screwed in this deal.

>>48740307
>Having a person insist upon building their character in secret, leading me to build a char that would normally be at odds with theirs in any other situation
>Having a character that never assists another char or is ok with horrible things happening to them because "Im CN/lm insane"
>Having a person play almost exclusively CN characters
>Thinking lC and OOC its ok to mind control another PC
>Having a character that finds incredibly plot important items and immediatly hides them on their person without telling the rest of the party of its existance
>Having a character built exclusively for combat which just sits around moping for the rest of the session
>Having this all be the same person

Why

>>48752888
>you're just asking to die in a ditch somewhere.
That's kind of the appeal of WHFRP though. Combat isn't something that should be happening more than like once per session and those little victories are made all the more rewarding when the PCs manage to claw their way out of it barely in better shape than the dudes they killed. Humans in the Old World are so outmatched by pretty much everything around them it's a wonder they've been able to scrape by as long as they have. It's closer to CoC than it is to D&D. The PCs aren't posing heroically on the corpses of dragons, they're running to the nearest barber-surgeon praying that the nasty cut the rat catcher got during a bar fight doesn't get infected.

>>48756640
Yes, which is kinda at odds with what people associate with wish fulfillment roleplaying games. You're a big badass hero saving the day in most of them.

>>48756662
Except, like CoC, WHFRP isn't a wish fulfillment game. That's my point, the players should get the idea that the PCs aren't hot shit around the time they see "rat-catcher" as a starting class. Really the only similarity that WHFRP and D&D share is that they are both games set in fantasy settings. If the players go into either game expecting the same kind of experience they're probably gonna be disappointed.

This is a conversation for a different thread though.

>>48740307
Well, the obvious answer is because they're a narcissist. But it could be that one or more of the other players is narcissistic and created something that would be at odds with them. Or because when their characters met they ended up being assholes to each other. Or because the DM gave them a poor idea of what the campaign would be about, so the characters don't fit together.

But there's never any reason to make a character that has no reason to want to go on adventures at all, unless they've cleared with the DM that they're getting shanghaied.

File: dealing with criminal characters.jpg (305KB, 644x851px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 644x851px

>>48740307

I almost always run games where the players are working as a team for some organization. This solves a lot of problems

>Players know from the get go they must work together
>Players know there is a set of rules governing their behavior; they break them at their own risk
>Players have an obligation to actually act instead of standing around going "let me tell you about my character"

This might sound a little railroad-y but I don't use it as an excuse to force my players to do certain things. I just do it so the game has a shared objective and the players have a reason to actually join forces. It's a good way to weed out players who go "Nah I don't give a fuck about what you guys do but I'm not rerolling. Go fight the dragon while I build my merchant business".

>>48752888
I thought the idea is you were that but became an adventurer for one reason or another.
Personally, if you enter the Noble career and say "Okay, I'm retiring with my gold and life intact", that's fair enough.

>>48756023
>Thinking lC and OOC its ok to mind control another PC
In what sense do you mean this? Specifically, what form of mind control are we using, and what you mean by the act being "ok"?

As a forever GM, I've had players complain that creatures like Vampires or Ogre Mages had access to influence spells like Charm Person, which I always found very odd. Roleplaying and Theater go hand-in-hand, and there are certain parallels between the GM and stage director; the players and actors. If I give the players tenants to roleplay around, why should they refuse them? They are improv actors and mutual contributors to the story, aren't they? Moreover, influence spells like Charm Person share parallels with Sleep spells, in that a failed save results in me dictating actions their character must now perform. As for tenants to roleplay around, just by building the setting and populating it with people, I'm giving them tenants to roleplay around. Subtle alterations to those tenants should be of no great concern.

>>48740345
It's amazing just how effective a character specifically built to be a sidekick can be. Interestingly enough that character of mine ended up shining the brightest because he was so different from everyone else.

File: b9185363826caf572f5ece9281b187fd.jpg (11KB, 203x300px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 203x300px

>>48758577

>It's amazing just how effective a character specifically built to be a sidekick can be. Interestingly enough that character of mine ended up shining the brightest because he was so different from everyone else.
>pic related

>>48756662
>>48756773
Back in the day, D&D was really deadly and about sneaking around and stealing treasure. To the point that the analogy used by many players is "fantasy Vietnam."

>>48740307
Just started playing DnD with a few friends and guy who's friends with the DM that I don't really know. DM's friend immediately tried to abandon the part in combat so we told him we'd kill him if he didn't help so he helped. Next encounter our rogue started sneaking up on the enemies and he tried to sneak away but I have passive perception out the ass so I saw him and oneshotted him with a spell.

TL;DR I don't get it either but why not just kill them if they aren't of use.

File: dealing with players.png (12KB, 810x644px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 810x644px

>>48759084

>TL;DR I don't get it either but why not just kill them if they aren't of use.

In character, it's remarkably petty and violent to just murder someone who doesn't want to hang out with you. Unless you're playing an Evil character, or he is, then that's jumping the gun for just about any kind of character.

Out of character, attacking and killing another player just for doing something you don't like is dickish and a surefire way to start group drama.

I wouldn't want to be in a group with DM's friend but I certainly wouldn't want to be in a group with you either. You both are That Guy.

File: 1421318296511.png (2KB, 142x138px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 142x138px

>Make character who's got a blank personality pretty much built to be a follower type character
>Keep getting put into situations as the party leader/party face
>Staying in character means RPing them like an idiot (I stab the prisoner we should interrogate lel) because they don't know better

>>48743820
My friend did this with the people we played Pathfinder with. One guy had a female ranger character who was trying to find her father and always insisted on doing things that would lead to that and didn't want to do anything anybody else wanted to do. My friend made a draconic sorceror who was very quickly too OP for the ranger to really do much beyond arguing cause he would be instadead in a fight.

This is the same ranger that watched me die on my first character in a tabletop game ever because I was doing something slightly differently than he would have done it.

>>48756961
How can you explain so many different kinds of people in one organization though? I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but I can't see an organization being loose enough to employ both a paladin and a warlock, if that's what the players want to play.

>>48758738
There's a guy in my town who still runs games like this, I've played with him a few times and it's brilliant. Also forces you to think of characters less in terms of "how strong can I be" and more in terms of "how can I cover all my weaknesses and not be caught off guard".

>>48759293

My general assumption is when I tell players what kind of game it is and who they're working for (which I always explicitly describe at least a week in advance) then it's on them to come up with characters who should be there. Like if I say "you're playing monster-fighting knights" and some guy shows up with a CE warlock then he better have a flawless explanation for why he's there.

Granted, this is hit or miss. I've still had some problems. Here's the most egregious example:
>Game is a ME-style space opera where players are a covert black ops team working for the space government
>Set five years after devastating civil war
>player decides he's gonna play a guy who fought for the rebels (who lost)
>also decides he's a convicted criminal on the run from the people he's working for
>but it's okay because they're confusing him with someone who looks exactly like him but no one knows that
>also he's a mortar specialist and only uses mortars even though they're on a Millennium Falcon-sized space ship

I explained to him clearly this character made no sense at all and there was a snowball's chance in hell he'd be working on what was essentially a SEAL team. He could not understand why it was a problem.

But my most recent game my players were part of a Not!Grey Wardens group and they handled it perfectly. So sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. But I'd rather have some safeguards against this breed of problem player than none.

>>48759132
Well the first offense we were escorting a carriage as a job which I was driving. Arrows were fired at use from a nearby hedge. I rolled a check for something and then took cover behind the carriage. His first turn he jumped in the driver's seat and started to ride off with the carriage while the rest of us were in combat. Also he was playing a LG fighter.

Second time we coordinated a battle plan and then as soon as we initiated it and one of our PC's was behind enemy lines he tried to abandon us so he could singlehandedly bring the carriage to the guy who was gonna pay us. At this point we had told him both IC and OOC that if he tried to ditch us again we'd kill him so we kept our word.

>>48759419
Also everyone in the party supported the decision to kill him, and the DM gave him the opportunity the undo his sneak roll of 6 and not face death because he wanted the group to work.

File: 1429713434013.jpg (127KB, 400x545px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 400x545px

>>48759384
I guess if you make it clear what your players are getting into from the get go it avoids most of the problems that might come up. If it's a natural enough restriction to avoid making a cyborg in a fantasy world, a specific organization to start from probably works well enough - and it's great for getting a sense of what the players actually want to do, if you work with them before hand.

I might steal your idea, honestly. It still leaves some room for creativity, but it would help narrow things down and help the party get along amazingly. Too many games these days are sandboxy anyway.

DM should be giving some sort of a hook during character creation that the PCs can latch onto. If not then it's the DM's own darn fault.

GM can often figure something out.

>My character is an evil god of corruption, how do I integrate the party that leans toward good?
Tell her she can be trying to corrupt the stronger one in hope he'll be an ally.

>My character is a brutal orc that doesn't care about anything, why should I join a party?
Tell her she's supposed to beat her father to get his place and that the party seems like an obvious way to get stronger fast.

I mean, they're not very smart answers, but just throwing band-aid like that usually works and allows the game to resume.

File: 1446468508022.jpg (19KB, 239x207px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 239x207px

>>48759540

>My character is an evil god of corruption

In the trash right there.

>>48759552

>Too many games these days are sandboxy anyway.

The thing is it's not like I don't want players to go their own way and decide to do something other than the original "intention" of the game. Like with that sci-fi game; had it actually lasted more than one session I would've had no problem with the players going AWOL and doing their own thing instead of taking missions from Space UN.

To me the most important thing is making sure the game starts with all players having some level of mutual trust and loyalty going on between them. Even if their characters are reluctant about it.

>>48759293
it works in Dark Heresy

File: pic502318.jpg (265KB, 806x1050px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 806x1050px

>>48758738
To be fair, default mode of play for the original D&D was very clearly "players vs DM" and that fostered a more cautious play style by necessity. If your DM wasn't cackling behind his screen at his player's suffering he was doing it wrong.

>>48759897
>that one faggot who still has that attitude

We eventually stopped inviting him after he kept getting smug about "beating" the DM.

>>48740307
You know why, OP.
They wanna be special snowflakes.

>>48760207
pussies

>>48740307
My current PC is at odds with the rest of the group. mostly because I didn't know that would be the case though.

>>48759897
Eh, only kind of, though. The DM made shit the players had a chance of beating and gave them a fair chance, and just actually roleplayed the enemies as trying to defeat the party.

Does a PC motivation have to be complex?
Can it be something simple so long as it leads them from city to city?

>>48763987

You should have enough motivation to stick with the group and not abandon them the moment it's convenient.

File: max bluff, no disguise.jpg (15KB, 552x386px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 552x386px

>>48740307
>play a member of a good aligned religion in the setting and the main religion of the region we start in
>tell another player about my backstory when he's trying to come up with a concept in case he wants to tie backstories together
>he makes a member of an evil religion who are the archenemies of my religion
>my character and every NPC within 100 miles would kill them on the spot if they knew so he acts constantly edgy and sits in the corner of the tavern not interacting with the anyone

>>48740307
I didn't mean to, honest. I even put some thought into WHY he was adventuring. the only mistake I made was not making him a low moral character.

>>48752660
I'm still mad that I kickstarted Hong Kong.

I really wish I could get my money back.

File: IMG_0296.jpg (390KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

390KB, 1600x1200px

>>48760848
I don't know. I think it went more hand in hand with the fact games used to start with "you meet in front of the dungeon and go in, good luck". It took D&D, for example, a while to realize some people actually want to know HOW characters got there and not just play it for the combat aspect.

>>48768208
I don't get it, what happened?

>>48759897
>Birthright
Oh shit, I haven't thought about that in years.

>>48740307
>Why the FUCKALL do players build characters they know will be at odds with the rest of the group - or even characters that have no reason to want to go on adventures at all - and then complain about how they don't fit in with the rest of the PCs?
search me. I personally haven't had to deal with this problem as a GM myself because I often try and back-build a motivation for the party, (from when I played DH) but still I always want to follow up the comment "Well, my character doesn't have any reason to trust/follow the party!" with the question "Do you want to play or not?" Because honestly if they do not want to participate I can set up my 360 and they can play Halo or something while the rest go on an adventure.

>>48740307
This one guy in our group is like this.
CN,TN,NG, and then that guy wants to play LG.

>>48740307

They're used to playing single player rpgs where there character is a special snowflake or MMO's where roleplay doesn't matter. They have no concept of what a group game is.

If they're new obviously you need to explain to them the nature of a group game and the group contract have a robust session zero where you create characters together.

If they're not new you have a deeper issue to tackle, which again involves talking to the person.

Only had the issue once or twice. Have learned to cut it off early;
>Session 0, rolling characters, establishing setting, etc
>Someone starts describing their character as a-social, apathetic, loner, etc etc.
>Nod and smile.
>Once all characters are generally fleshed out by their players, I ask the group "Okay, so how do all of your characters know each other?"
>Player of loner character forced by peer pressure to establish some form of bond with the rest of the party.
>If they refuse to establish any connections with the rest of the group, just flatly tell them I guess that character wont be in this adventure, and as if there was another they were thinking about trying.

>>48740307
>OK so you don't go with them?
>Yeah I stay home and run my store
>OK roll a new character

>>48773189

None of those alignments are incompatible with each other.

>>48773387

>Yeah I stay home and run my store

I still do not understand people who think this is a fun way to play RPGs.

Like seriously, go play Roller Coast Tycoon or something if you just want to build businesses.

File: 1468740994664.jpg (214KB, 600x620px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 600x620px

>>48740307

Fuck if I know OP. I think some people are just creatively bankrupt.
>Start at a cool idea
>and stop where you started
>Never progress and figure out how to make said idea "work" in the setting

That's one of my players anyway. Best part is where he complains about it being the setting's fault afterwards.
>mfw I present the setting I currently got in the stove and he immediately thinks about a character that would automatically isolate him from doing anything interesting AGAIN

>>48773956

All of my recent campaigns have literally turned into this. I don't even bother making a plot anymore because the players are just get giddy at the thought of another milkrun.

>>48743989
Never go full retard.

>>48760848
>and just actually roleplayed the enemies as trying to defeat the party.
But that's unfaaaiiirrr!

>>48758577
Completely agree, I love playing the supportive side character. By not being driven by your own super personal storyline and focusing on helping others with theirs, you can make a much more developed personality and inter party relationships.

What should you do when you're one of the other members of the party where a character doesn't fit well with the group? In a rather large group (7 players), one player rolled a new character after his latest character died. The DM introduced as a potential bodyguard, so we hired him. The character is extremely stubborn and argumentative with the rest of the group. We've paid him for 2 more months, and the other party members and I have questioned if we should pay him for more time. OOC we don't want to just boot the character because this player is a friend to a few of us, the DM included.

>>48780171
You deal with IC disputes IC, make that clear before everybody sits down and you're clear to act according to your roleplaying persona.

>>48741472
That was actually pretty funny. 8/10.

>>48741969
Well I get your complaint but maybe you could've become a corrupt sheriff for the chaos cultists? Cults always have a great deal of law-enforcement in their pocket.

>>48740900

>Character got bad rolls
>Be "that guy" that clashes with the party
>Get a free reroll.

Wooow

>>48740865
IMO the GM should do a 1-on-1 adventure with every PC before the party meets for the first time as a sort of prologue to the adventure, that way the GM gets a feel for the PC's style of play in a controlled environment, and if the PC is experimenting it gives them one last chance to tweak things before the big leagues

>>48746256
Yes, I had to ban Kender from my thief campaign. Those bastards were just too law-abiding!

We have a player like this in my party. The group discussed what kind of characters we would be running before character creation, and we gave a little bit of backstory when we began the campaign. but his character just doesn't mesh well with the party.

The group consists of a Chaotic Neutral human cleric of Poseidon who was spared by his deity so he could spread his teachings, a dragonborn sorcerer out to begin his own treasure hoard, and a Chaotic Good Goliath paladin who roams the lands searching for adventure and new ways to test his abilities. We three have come up for reasons to band together, but that guy wants no part of it.

That Guy is running a Lawful Evil tiefling monk that follows his deity's laws. We've had him bitch because he thinks his character would have nothing to do with our party, even though we've given him many suggestions. For instance, a cult was responsible for the disappearance of locals. We traced them down into tunnels beneath the city, but were overwhelmed and forced to retreat. The three non-evil party members could think of a reason to deal with the cult, but That Guy walked away, claiming that one of his god's laws was to not help the weak.

How are we supposed to deal with a player like this?

File: 1449721759804.jpg (36KB, 607x608px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 607x608px

>>48784926

>claiming that one of his god's laws was to not help the weak.
>Not demanding you aid the weak to gain support/followers
>Not demanding you exploit their weakness and rally them up in opposition against his opponents
>Not demanding you take advantage of resentment and bitterness to empire-build in his name

Sounds like a shit-tier LE god.

>>48740307
D&D is a great opportunity for social rejects to learn by trial and error how to interact with other humans. Maybe if I don't go out of my way to be a disagreeable asshole, just maybe we'll get along with each other.

>>48740307
>and then complain about how they don't fit in with the rest of the PCs
I was going to say because why the fuck not, but then you added the last part. If it gets to that point, they're just fucking retarded. Nothing wrong with a little intentional derailing, but complaining like it's a problem when it's their doing is just nonsense.

>>48740307

On more than one occasion I have had the other players justify why I shouldn't kill someone. The last time was when I was playing a smite heavy paladin who was super against all undead things and those who consort with them. This guy was housing vampires who had killed some villagers including children. The party wanted him alive for connections in the next town as he was an established merchant there. They were angry when I cut his head off instead ducking up their plans.

File: Agreed.jpg (83KB, 678x751px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 678x751px

>>48740407
About 80% of the problems you encounter in this hobby basically just boil down to this.

>Had a new guy try and join my group last session.
>His bio included him being involved in and part of the gang that killed another players family.
>After being with the group a few hours the usual player recognises the new guy's pc.
>We hang him from a tree with a noose and balance him on a chair.
>When we return from scouting the town infested with the gang he convinces us he could help us so we cut him down.
>The moment he hit the ground he start's running towards the town.
>Bard cast's hold person.
>We knock him out
>He wakes up just as I drop him from my hippogriff into the centre of town to signal our attack to the local dragon born to rise up and fight the bandits from the town.

>>48740307
This is why I dedicate one whole session to just character building. Everyone sits down together to form the party.

>>48740307
>who wants to make seperated sessions in case of someone splitting the party? only one? okay steve , you can either let your character go on adventures off-screen or you make a character that might have some motivation to stay with the party. i recommend that you should fight to the death with your current party, tho

File: raichu.jpg (47KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 320x240px

>>48790397
>His bio included him being involved in and part of the gang that killed another players family.

>immediately starting shit with the party

>>48784926
Tell him to find a reason to be in the party or fuck off and find a new game

>>48748497
nip in the bud. the phrase is nip in the bud. it's about asians hiding in plants for fuck sake.

>>48790787
I dunno, considering they played it all out like that on all sides, it seems more like the group was totally alright with that level of tom foolery.

Or you know it was high on the scale of shit that never happened.

>>48790397

and then what happened?
What happened OOC?

>>48790829
>implying there aren't Asians in butts at this very moment

>>48748497
>I'm nipping this in the butt

Wow, man you're really tasting my metal. I'd say it's a mute point, but taking up the reigns like that is, for all intensive purposes, giving all That Guys they're just desserts. It's like they have this deep-seeded belief that they're the start of the game. It never seizes to amaze me. Well, they got another thing coming!

But, with all do respect, those kinds of players can be a blessing in the skies. If done well, they can really peak the group's interest in the game. But I guess in the end you reap what you sew.

Please tell me more, I'm waiting with baited breath.

>>48746256

Sounds more like an elf player.

File: 1565498145.jpg (35KB, 600x525px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 600x525px

>>48784926
Sounds like you'd be better off without that shitlord. Why don't you tell him to fucking leave if he wants to do so so badly?

>New guy joins campaign after the first couple sessions
>Sullen loner NE assassin-type guy with a skullface tattoo and a skull on his shoulder
>We're all varying shades of Good
>GM says we need to get help from New Guy who knows his way around the castle
>We go to the tavern to meet him
>His immediate reaction to us entering is to glare sullenly at us from the corner of the tavern
>Says he'll help us for a good 90% of the money we're carrying
>"Haha, no."
>We begin shopping around for someone else who can help us
>New Guy suddenly gets very insistent that we take him along
>"We're not going to pay that."
>"But you need my help!"
>"We're not going to pay that."
>GM asserts that New Guy is the only one in town who could possibly help us
>We decide that it's a shame, but we should probably give up and try a different quest
>New Guy is practically steaming

He bailed on the game a few sessions later, after he joined the party for free. Interaction mostly consisted of him sitting in the shadows, giving the stinkeye to everyone and muttering about how deluded we were for trying to be good (with one of us invariably yelling at him to stop mumbling). I think the GM knew him IRL or something, considering how he tried to sell us on the whole "New Guy is the linchpin to your quest" angle. We probably could have handled it better, but it was pretty obvious it wasn't going to work out from the get-go.

File: Decent fellow.jpg (72KB, 201x259px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 201x259px

>>48792936
You did god's work anon.

However, I also wonder: did you tell him OoC that his character was probably not going to work with the party, if he did things like that?

File: 1425705114326.jpg (62KB, 704x528px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 704x528px

>>48792936

>Evil character gets bullied by good characters for acting like a childish teenager

kek

>>48793712

After the initial jerk-around from him trying to rob us blind, yeah, we talked to both him and the GM about it. The guy was still peeved at us, though, and the GM gave us very "I understand your concern" kind of answers without much to show for it.

>>48791681
How's that grade 11 going, Ricky?

That's why I tend to have at least one character my dude knows in the group. In shadowrun, my current character is about as much of a bleeding heart moralfag as you can get in the system, and even then, he sticks with the team out of a sense of duty for a character.

>>48794262
You should just be glad that is gone, anon.

File: 13692682_10206549545006450_376663993943874611_n.jpg (35KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 800x600px

>>48791681

I'm too tired to decipher your banter but I'll answer any real questions you have to help your breathing problem.

>>48741022
>I totally agree that characters need reasons to work together, but they don't have to be best friends while they do it.
The best parties become friends over the course of the campaign. After starting out just waiting to split up they've become such a thight knit group they can't imagine life without each other.