|
Post by rjrock85 on Dec 11, 2009 6:34:38 GMT -5
You, sir, have earned yourself an Exalt. I agree with all of your points, although not necessarily the way you have worded them (mainly the obvious dice-hate rhetoric) I applaud you, bravo! I, too, hope to improve in the aspects you have laid out.
|
|
Fenix
Journeyman
Who in the hell do you think I am?
Posts: 162
|
Post by Fenix on Dec 12, 2009 0:49:22 GMT -5
All very good and valid points. The unfortunate things is not all of us will recongize or even acknowledge our own faults and short coming in real life and in this case role play. Last just say one of reads the forums and is able to stop and think about their own faults without a colored view (hard yes, but it can be done).
Now that they see their own short comings the question will they be able to beat their old habits and find a new way to do things. Its like smoking, your are used to smoking while drinking, or while on break at work. So now you decided to quite but still want a drink, well guess what they desire to smoke will come out, not to mention that all the other smokers will make you want one.
So for a Dm to "fix" or "improve" his rp style we as players must also fix our bad habits that may cause the Dm to want to tell us to roll for every action. In my opinion the fault does not entirely rest on the Dm for this, half at the very least, cause the players are the other half of the problem. We must decide to be good role players and not just a group that gets together for a combat sim. We as players cannot ask that our Dms change unless we are willing to change and improve with them.
After talking with Rock last night I have to agree with his statement about our group, we are a pack of cats. Pure and simple. Each of use wants to do things our way, some don't even care enough to try, others try and get overwhelmed.
Until we try as players and Dms we will never know if our games can be improved to create enjoyable memories.
|
|
|
Post by Drozgul on Dec 12, 2009 5:49:56 GMT -5
So then, what makes a good role-player?
A good role-player is one who exercises his strengths, by inviting others at the game table to join his spotlight, making a cast of characters that matter to the game, and to each other somehow. Just because Elijah Wood can cry on demand and has HUGE eyes, doesn't make him a great actor. But his chemistry with Sean Astin on screen make them believable friends, who share a task a great deal larger than themselves, that there is no way they could accomplish separately. And I don't mean taking the One Ring across country, I mean playing the characters who make us believers. During this his weaker abilities will be challenged, and rightly so. I mean, he probably isn't really a rock-climber, so we may have to teach him in order to make a scene successful, right? Can't always be bringing in stunt men, and doubles.
Now, what makes a good roll-player is one who is well versed in the workings of the rules, so that when our actors (or over-actors) begin to make decisions because he is a good speaker, the roll-player can help both the players and the GM work out how the rules, plus bonuses and penalties will all apply to tell the story in a believable sense, without letting us fall too far off the page. This player has taken more time to learn, and is therefore rewarded in a sense by seeing the well written rules play out properly, as he understood them, and that even he is still challenged to either help fill out possible NPC stats quickly, or will likely be quite instrumental in helping the other players level up as he teaches them pieces of what he has learned.
Playing together is what makes role-playing games fun for most of us. So let's play together. Its not holding hands to create a story as a group, and neither do I see it as cookie cutting to fill out roles in a story. Because holding hands means we are limited within the parameters of who is pushing from one side and pulling from the other. And cookie cutting typically is used to describe making "copies" of one sound shape that works well.
We tell stories as a group, because otherwise we are novelists, and so far I haven't seen any of you cashing checks on those epic stories that are being tested on an audience such as your D&D group. We understand that telling a story together is more fun, and does not limit us to our single mind inside its own box.
We also fill out roles in a story, because (using LOTR again) if everyone was a hobbit who ate and farmed, and there was nothing else, there is very little room for conflict that is interesting outside of "usual" things like seasonal pies and hometown gossip. No, we need little curious trouble makers, sturdy and trained professionals, wiser more attuned type characters, and someone within that mess to help them steadily define their purpose. (This is an example, and while it sounds mediocre, it works, and it always has.) The roles are not limited to these, but these do vary enough to give a party options. And for that matter, give the GM options.
Good roll-players tend to choose a more professional type, showing a variety of well-pressed skills, and abilities, and plenty of chance to consult their dice and stats to help them succeed. Good role-players tend to play some sort of curious, even of not in the name of trouble, because they know they will have a pivotal role in helping to drive the story and help keep players' characters together in some fashion. Both are necessary in my opinion to balance a game to a playable standard, so that a story worth telling can be told.
I just hope no more new editions of anything rears its ugly head too soon now, because I've finally started to do some plentiful reading to get more in tune with how the games we love are played properly. So I really...and I do mean REALLY, do NOT want to learn a new version or system again any time soon. WoTC can just take a vacation from everything (except their website, which IMO is still pretty pathetic, I mean, where the hell is all the stuff we wanted out of it, and why are you charging for incomplete accessories that we have been waiting forever for, still to have no clear date of arrival for use?) and White-Wolf is on a roll, still releasing all kinds of fluffy and crunchy goodness.
|
|
|
Post by roborob on Dec 31, 2009 2:00:03 GMT -5
min/maxers do not bother me in the least. when i gm i dare you to! i will rape a min/max char in a heart beat. but i would not kill them. i don't like killing characters unless they make a really stupid decision. the barbarian, fighter, frenzied bezerker, battle rager... bring it. your will save sucks and your level 17 dwarf just got canned by the level 6 mind flayer! min/max is all or nothing and has huge holes. you excel in something but suck at everything else. the dwarf mentioned above could hit for 150 hp in a single blow but he actually cried when the mind flayer melted his face.
|
|