The Types of D&D Player

[Frathe]

From what I can tell from observation of my gaming group and this forum, there are three seven ways of playing D&D:

1. The Gamer: This person sees D&D as a game that needs to be balanced, just as any board game would. The imbalance of the classes bothers them, hence the invention of the "Tier" system; to them, you might as well start chess with an uneven number of pieces. Their focus is on optimization, and they might ask questions like "Why would anyone play a class that isn't Tier 1?"
Subtype: The Wargamer thinks D&D is a game, but a different kind of game: instead of trying to optimize their character, they just love attacking enemies and moving figures around on a grid. They tune out and barely participate in roleplay encounters and can't wait for the next combat. This is the kind of person D&D Miniatures was made for.

2. The Storyteller: To this person, the point of the game is collaborative storytelling. A Storyteller DM would do things that would be unthinkable to the strict Gamer: fudge dicerolls to advance the story; introduce questionably balanced homebrew NPCs because they fit a character concept; and allow or disallow actions on a "Rule of Cool" basis. The Storyteller wants to play the game, but cares far more about flavor than mechanical optimization. They will choose to play a low Tier class if it better fits their concept for a character.
Subtype: The Complicator is a Storyteller player who sees DM schemes where there are really just straightforward dungeons. They can add interest and depth to the game, especially when the DM decides to use their "ideas", but they can also sidetrack the party for minutes or sessions.

3. The Friend: This person is barely participating during non-combat encounters; they're just there to hang out with their friends. The sign of a true Friend is someone who, after several months of playing, still doesn't know basic information like which modifier you add to your melee attack. While there's nothing wrong with wanting to hang out with friends, be warned that this person's main objective is having a fun time, not playing, and they may slow down the game for the rest of the group. However, the more imaginative Friend may sometimes contribute random bursts of humor or roleplaying.
Subtype: The Chemically Enhanced is there as an excuse to get drunk/high, or to have something to do while drunk/high. They're a Friend with fewer inhibitions.

4. The Newbie: Still too new to the game to have settled on a style of play, the Newbie in their early stages may not be distinguishable from the Friend.

5. The Novelist: This person is similar to the Storyteller, with one major difference: a major de-emphasis on the collaborative aspect. Instead, the Novelist strives to make their characters powerful, interesting and distinctive, even if they clash with the flavor of the setting or derail the campaign in doing so. As a player, if they are refused their unusual character concept, they may cause trouble in other ways, such as trying to kill the character they were forced to play with. As DM, they tend to railroad players and become upset if things go off plan. They want to be the ones telling the story, and won't let others get in their way.
Subtype: The Realist is a Novelist player who has a single action that they consider essential predefined in their mind, and when they fail their roll, in order to advance the plot in the way they want, they try to argue that their action made logical, physical, real-world sense, and should have succeeded on that basis.

6. The Rule-Keeper: Unlike the Gamer, this person is concerned with whether the game is doing what it is "supposed" to do to create the "correct experience". They serve as a check on the Storyteller, keeping them from fudging things in ways that make the other players feel excluded, or introducing Rule of Cool if the game is "supposed" to be serious. They are likely to take an approach resembling improv, and to maintain that you should "Roll only when there is a disagreement". Unlike the Gamer, the Rule-Keeper is interested not in rebalancing the game as a whole, but in making sure that the current game "runs as it should".

7. The Organizer: This person volunteers to keep the loot log and brings a binder, laptop or notebook to every session, but isn't especially involved in the roleplaying or optimization aspects of the game.
Subtype: The Court Recorder writes down everything, including good dice rolls, useless loot, and ten-page reports with every detail of the story.


Do these ring true? Does anyone have further classifications to add?

I'm a Storyteller/Complicator. :smallbiggrin:

Changelog:
Edit: Added another.
Edit: And another.
Edit: Thanks, Urpriest! The Rule-Keeper is your Theorist renamed
Edit: Thanks, nedz! The Organizer is your Manager renamed
Edit: Thanks, Guizonde! The Newbie is pretty much yours.
Edir: Thanks, Raven777! The Wargamer is your Brawler renamed and slightly recategorized
Edit: Thanks, Certified! The Complicator is your Sideways Errant renamed
Edit: Thanks, Shaynythyryas! The Court Recorder is your Scribe renamed
Edit: Thanks, Zubrowka74! The Chemically Enhanced is your Stoner renamed
Edit: Thanks, Shaynythyryas! The Realist is your Realistic (a.k.a "Catgirls killer") renamed

[Guizonde]

i'll try and add:

4: the rejected: this guy wanted to play something with fractions (warrior 2/wizard6/ hamster 2/rogue14), but due to complicatedness was ruled out. so he plays dejectedly, trying to ruin the fun or die so he can roll his fraction warrior.

5: the mary sue: "my character is the best and should be the focus of the party! always! your character sucks!" this should be combined with any other munchkin or powergamer archetype for maximum annoyance levels when said character has a backstory that could fit on a stamp

6: the joker: his character is flavorful, but balanced solely to fill his comic relief niche. be it filling the tomb of horrors with flan or hiding a whoopie cushion in the lich's throne, he could have the potential to be gamebreaking if his need for comedy disappeared. dislikes: the 4th wall, serious campaigns

7: the team-player: his character is angled solely to help out the rest of the party. forget specializing, his job is to help out the other characters function to over 9000% efficiency. useless alone.

8: the leeroy jenkins: a powergamer gone bad, thinking his stats are enough to rush in and kill everything to death, forgetting strategy.

9: the pacifist: "hitting things is so distateful. can't we talk it out civilly?" may work on a corrupt king, less so on an undead dragon out for your souls

10: the munchkin: the gamer archetype on steroids. this is the guy who damns the fluff and creates a tier 0 character for breakfast, before hitting the negative tier levels for lunch

11: the cheater: "MY game, you all suck." to be kicked out. physically, preferrably

12: the adventurer: "i'll try this, i've never done it before" always ready to try new strategies and characters. his only problem is doing the same thing twice annoys him. a balance between a gamer and a storyteller.

13: the accidental hero: somewhere along the lines, the dice gods have favored him, and the synergies between his playstyle, character, and dice rolls have turned him into distilled awesomesauce, even though he doesn't realize it. must be stimulated to really play it through

14: the newbie: first timer, will try and get the hang of one class first before trying out another class. gets frustrated by difficulty, but willing to hang on for the rest of the team. can blossom into a paragon of roleplaying and gaming equally.

15: the grimlock: this guy will play the same character across multiple universes, never changing the backstory or stat equivalencies. although boring to others, if he's good, you know how he plays and could save your hide

16: the mr welsh: enough is said when the guy uses mr welsh's list as a bucket list to expand

(i guess you can combine a few together, but hey... i'm tired)
i'm somewhere between a storyteller and a team player, although i hate the 4th wall and survival horror. for me, rpgs without laughing are a perfect way to spend a bad evening.

[Vorr]

Allow me to refine your types a bit:

1. The Gamer. To them D&D is just a game like a board game or a video game. They feel that as a player they must absolute know all the rules of the game, before it starts. If they must ''role play out'' something in the game they will pretend like the character does not know everything, but the player must know everything at all times.

2.The Unique Experience. A role playing game is like not other activity. Period. It is a way for a group of people to create and interact with a shared alternate reality. In this game, the players are as clueless as the characters.

3. The buddy. Just there to fill up a couple hours...

I'm a Unique Experience type.

[Darth Stabber]

GM types

Mr. Conductor: this is his story, and you should be greatful to be able to see it unfold. It's funny how every option leads to the same results

Scroll Case: has everything planned to the letter, including several back-up plans for when the players go off rails. Has the stats and fluff for every random npc you are likely to run into. If you probe deep enough, you can find the whole life story of all of the city guard, the guard rotation, their kids, their pets, and which shops they frequent. You should probe that deep, since it will make this guy happy.

Saturday night at the improv: has nothing planned, never does. Often times there are no stats at all, he rolls dice and sees how he feels about them. If you roll a 22 and hit, and you buddy rolls a 23 and misses, and nothing changed inbetween, you might be dealing with this guy.

Yertle the turtle: thinks he's scroll case, but he spends so much time flipping MM pages during combat, that you can finish your turn, go to the quicktrip, buy some food, and come back before your next turn.

[Urpriest]

The Game Theorist:
Unlike the Gamer, is concerned with whether the game is doing what it is "supposed" to to create the "correct experience". Serves as a check on the Storyteller, keeping them from fudging things in ways that make the other players feel excluded, or introducing Rule of Cool if the game is "supposed" to be serious. Is likely to quote improv terms like "Yes, And" and to maintain that you should "Roll only when there is a disagreement".

[Cipher Stars]

GM types

Mr. Conductor: this is his story, and you should be greatful to be able to see it unfold. It's funny how every option leads to the same results

Scroll Case: has everything planned to the letter, including several back-up plans for when the players go off rails. Has the stats and fluff for every random npc you are likely to run into. If you probe deep enough, you can find the whole life story of all of the city guard, the guard rotation, their kids, their pets, and which shops they frequent. You should probe that deep, since it will make this guy happy.

Saturday night at the improv: has nothing planned, never does. Often times there are no stats at all, he rolls dice and sees how he feels about them. If you roll a 22 and hit, and you buddy rolls a 23 and misses, and nothing changed inbetween, you might be dealing with this guy.

Yertle the turtle: thinks he's scroll case, but he spends so much time flipping MM pages during combat, that you can finish your turn, go to the quicktrip, buy some food, and come back before your next turn.


The Creationist: The DM who plans only a few steps in any direction within a loosely defined skeleton, rules are merely suggestions and the Creationist spontaneously creates any creature, monster, NPC, or establishment in the moment on the spot, similarly to the Improvisationalist but the Creationist uses real statistics and mechanics to create their workings, even if it may not seem that way.

[sreservoir]

these categories are not unique to d&d, naturally.

[Darth Stabber]

As a player I tend toward urpriest's theorist

As a gm I would be an improviser, except that I will create the world in great detail from a political, cultural, and geographical standpoint long before the game begins. Then I proceed to make up everything else. Or I read a monster entry and go with it. Which leads me to another couple gm types:

High roller: Loves tables to roll against, random encounters tend to be really random, since he is rolling on that random encounter chart, expect inadvertent tpk due to the fact that those tables care not a wit what level you are.

MM opener: Similar to above, but his table is the monster manual, and how he opens the book is the die roll. Less likely to TPK since he can turn the page if he gets something out of left field. This how you end up fighting seacats and why occasionally a paladin will end up being attacked by archons.

[navar100]

There are the Iconic Four - Real Men, Real Roleplayers, Real Loons, and Real Munchkins. I have two more - Real Jerks and Real Lawyers.

[nedz]

The manager.
Runs a prepared spell caster, takes leadership so that they can run another prepared spell caster (If the first was a wizard this will be a cleric — or vice versa), keeps track of the parties spare loot. You can spot this guy because he has a laptop to power his spreadsheets.

[Darrin]

There are the Iconic Four - Real Men, Real Roleplayers, Real Loons, and Real Munchkins. I have two more - Real Jerks and Real Lawyers.

Yes, the classic Iconic Four came from this article (http://dragon.facetieux.free.fr/jdr/Munchkin.htm), which carries a date of 1983.

However, Robin Laws says the original article was written by Glen Blacow for Different Worlds #10 (October 1980), with a follow-up article by Greg Costikyan in November 1984. The original four categories were: "Roleplaying", "Storytelling", "Powergaming", and "Wargaming".

Robin expanded the list in "Robin's Laws of Good Game Mastering", a portion of which is posted here (http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/theory/models/robinslaws.html) (2002).

Obviously, the experts didn't get them all... lots of great examples!

[Tvtyrant]

The manager.
Runs a prepared spell caster, takes leadership so that they can run another prepared spell caster (If the first was a wizard this will be a cleric — or vice versa), keeps track of the parties spare loot. You can spot this guy because he has a laptop to power his spreadsheets.

Yeah... That never happens... >_> <_< >_>

[Raven777]

The Brawler : He wants to fight. Combat encounters are what he wants to do and what he builds and equips for. The rest of the party can manage hostage negotiations or murder investigations. Call him when it's time to draw blade and sling spells.

[Shaynythyryas]

Kinda but not exactly like the manager/organizer :

The Scribe :
Keep tracks of almost everything that happens, from trivial quotes to major informations, from garbage loot to memorable dice rolls ; and write down a hefty ten pages long report after every session just to put the story down.
Never seen without a huge notebook and a handful of pens, just in case.

That would tend to be me :D

As for GMs, on the total opposite to the Improviser :

The Reader :
Found a good campaign book, and basically use it to the letter, quoting/reading entire descriptions and actions directly from the book, letting almost no freedom because he basically not anticipated anything else.
As entertaining as reading it by yourself.

[TuggyNE]

The Reader :
Found a good campaign book, and basically use it to the letter, quoting/reading entire descriptions and actions directly from the book, letting almost no freedom because he basically not anticipated anything else.
As entertaining as reading it by yourself.

Some would say it's as entertaining as watching someone else read to themselves. :smalltongue:

[Shaynythyryas]

Yeah, it's boring as hell.

I realize I forgot one of the most annoying players I've ever met :

The Realistic (a.k.a "Catgirls killer") :
Everyone know of them. They always try to bypass missed dices by arguing about the logic, physical coherence and credibility of the action. They always try to bring on real world numbers to flat out DMs decisions.
They never succeed.

The way they "play" the game is the way their char "should, in an imaginary utopic world, inconceivebly succeed at every single time and occasion".
Of course, that never happens and then they get kicked out.

['Able' Xanthis]

Yeah, it's boring as hell.

I realize I forgot one of the most annoying players I've ever met :

The Realistic (a.k.a "Catgirls killer") :
Everyone know of them. They always try to bypass missed dices by arguing about the logic, physical coherence and credibility of the action. They always try to bring on real world numbers to flat out DMs decisions.
They never succeed.

The way they "play" the game is the way their char "should, in an imaginary utopic world, inconceivebly succeed at every single time and occasion".
Of course, that never happens and then they get kicked out.

Had to deal with those a couple of times, but thankfully the groups I run now don't have one.


GM types

Mr. Conductor: this is his story, and you should be greatful to be able to see it unfold. It's funny how every option leads to the same results

Scroll Case: has everything planned to the letter, including several back-up plans for when the players go off rails. Has the stats and fluff for every random npc you are likely to run into. If you probe deep enough, you can find the whole life story of all of the city guard, the guard rotation, their kids, their pets, and which shops they frequent. You should probe that deep, since it will make this guy happy.

Saturday night at the improv: has nothing planned, never does. Often times there are no stats at all, he rolls dice and sees how he feels about them. If you roll a 22 and hit, and you buddy rolls a 23 and misses, and nothing changed inbetween, you might be dealing with this guy.

Yertle the turtle: thinks he's scroll case, but he spends so much time flipping MM pages during combat, that you can finish your turn, go to the quicktrip, buy some food, and come back before your next turn.

I think I might be a Scroll Case... or a Creationist depending on if the game is one of my long runs or not.

The Marine; The player who tries everything once and who has an Adapt and Overcome mindset that s/he applies to the PC all the time.

Had three of those in two different states.

[Certified]

The Grid Map General
This player scrutinizes every players actions in combat, haranguing anyone taking an action that they perceive to be less than optimal. The GMG may/ or may not also "advise" other players on their builds. However, often the GMG leaves this to other players as to not to appear too controlling. The GMG often takes the role of battlefield control, or preferably blasting, denoting control to another character which they direct in combat.

The Sideways Errant
This player is focused on the game, and is generally a good player. As one of the players "paying attention" they to find plots that aren't necessarily there. Sometimes these theories work in favor of the game, adding depth and strange possibilities to stories that would have been relatively strength forward otherwise. At the same time the Sideways Errant tends to go off on wild unrelated tangents of investigation or discussion on minor details unrelated to the main story, often sidetracking the party, possibly for entire sessions.

[Darth Stabber]

The Sideways Errant
This player is focused on the game, and is generally a good player. As one of the players "paying attention" they to find plots that aren't necessarily there. Sometimes these theories work in favor of the game, adding depth and strange possibilities to stories that would have been relatively strength forward otherwise. At the same time the Sideways Errant tends to go off on wild unrelated tangents of investigation or discussion on minor details unrelated to the main story, often sidetracking the party, possibly for entire sessions.

I have a party right now with 4 of these and one "the friend". They attack window dressing with gusto. These guys pretty much require a sandbox or they aren't going to get anywhere. That is also why I have to be an improver, since any planning goes out the window as soon as the game is going.

[LTwerewolf]

We've got a sideways errant as well and all the rest of us can never figure out what his goal is. He just seems to do random things at random times and that's about it.

[Zubrowka74]

The "Friend" is a subset of the "Amoeba".

Also this variant :

The Stoner
Games sessions are only an excuse to get high/drunk. The DM's (and somethimes other players') sole purpose is to entertain them while they giggle and eat all of your snacks. Might derail the story into uther sillyness. Might also end up sleeping, using the toilet too often or trying to pick up players of the opposite/same/undefined sex. Rarely, some masters of the style have learned the art of self control and will use their enhanced imagination to contribute to the fluff / RP side of the game.

I've runned sessions with a roomfull of these Stoners, Friends and Amoebas. Really not the ideal setup for real gaming.

[Guizonde]

The "Friend" is a subset of the "Amoeba".

Also this variant :

The Stoner
Rarely, some masters of the style have learned the art of self control and will use their enhanced imagination to contribute to the fluff / RP side of the game.

I've runned sessions with a roomfull of these Stoners, Friends and Amoebas. Really not the ideal setup for real gaming.

crud... i'm a stoner, then again, so's everyone in my group. good thing we have all taken natural resistance (alcoholic beverages) and skill (endurance drinking). oh well.
*seeing the edit* yay, i participated! :elan:

[Frathe]

Hey, Playgrounders: What type are you?

[Pandiano]

Hey, Playgrounders: What type are you?

As a DM: The very definition of The Creationist

As a player: The Sideways Errant, guilty as charged

:-)

[Amphetryon]

I have a party right now with 4 of these and one "the friend". They attack window dressing with gusto. These guys pretty much require a sandbox or they aren't going to get anywhere. That is also why I have to be an improver, since any planning goes out the window as soon as the game is going.

Oddly enough, I have been accused of being a bad DM on more than one occasion because of Sideways Errant Players. In group A, I was a bad DM because I had enough wherewithal to provide a plot to go with the window dressing (so, obviously, I was railroading them), while in group B, I was a bad DM because I had to cut a session short when the PCs attacked the window dressing that was a part of the window dressing side plot they'd already leaped at (so, obviously, I was unprepared).

[russdm]

As a player: A little bit of everything, but mainly this: Link (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Cloudcuckoolander) And I usually tend to feel like this: Linky (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OnlySaneMan)

Given how messed up and dysfunctional our party is. We have three powergamers and me, plus our newbish DM who lets the powergamers get with nearly everything. Seriously, our party is messed up. It sucks alot and i keep dreaming of finding another gaming group that works in terms of availability to play with.

An Example: Our current, the party's alignment is fairly neutral all across. Through some odd fashion the party is slowing slipping into being an evil party.

I think my DM style is this:

Stark Raving Mad-Your players are uncontrollable short of murdering them. They always powergamer and despite how many times you try to make things work, they always break the game. They can take just about any class/situation and completely brake it. You can never challenge them and have it work. Your only hope is to never DM again or run screaming away. Just RUN, RUN AWAY DAMNIT!!!! Save yourself!!!! oh, and your players? They BLAME you for the game not being any more fun after they break it!!!!

[Guizonde]

Stark Raving Mad-Your players are uncontrollable short of murdering them. They always powergamer and despite how many times you try to make things work, they always break the game. They can take just about any class/situation and completely brake it. You can never challenge them and have it work. Your only hope is to never DM again or run screaming away. Just RUN, RUN AWAY DAMNIT!!!! Save yourself!!!! oh, and your players? They BLAME you for the game not being any more fun after they break it!!!!

you need my dnd dm: playgrounders, i give you:

the sadist: a dm so obviously enjoying in the suffering and torment of his players must be slightly nuts. he's the kind of guy of combining the tomb of horrors with a level one party of commoners, homebrewed freaks of nature making cthulu bow in shame, and adding 10 levels of traps. on every trap. with more traps on top of that. punishment for failing? he takes your character sheet and rips it in front of your eyes. he doesn't want you to die. he wants to shame and scorn you so bad you spontaneously combust. if (spartan if) you survive, you will reap massive benefits and (maybe) his approval. be ready for round two though.
stockholm syndrome tends to develop, however... you get used to it, i swear he's a good dm:smallredface:

my other dm is waaaaaaaaaay more lax in his playstyle, preferring to take a crazy story to its logical extreme, improvising nearly off the cuff. he's as much storyteller as he is the audience... he enjoys making us squirm though. then again, we do blunder into improbably powerful loot (the dice gods have favored us in whfrp, apparently) so it evens out.

[Darth Stabber]

you need my dnd dm: playgrounders, i give you:

the sadist: a dm so obviously enjoying in the suffering and torment of his players must be slightly nuts. he's the kind of guy of combining the tomb of horrors with a level one party of commoners, homebrewed freaks of nature making cthulu bow in shame, and adding 10 levels of traps. on every trap. with more traps on top of that. punishment for failing? he takes your character sheet and rips it in front of your eyes. he doesn't want you to die. he wants to shame and scorn you so bad you spontaneously combust. if (spartan if) you survive, you will reap massive benefits and (maybe) his approval. be ready for round two though.
stockholm syndrome tends to develop, however... you get used to it, i swear he's a good dm:smallredface:


That's not how you win as a GM! The GM wins when the PCs kill each other. Or when the mention of certain NPCs causes shudders. When the players leave a session scratching their heads because of pure mindscrew, then you have won. Getting characters to care about an NPC, and savagely ripping him to shreds. Killing a character is easy, killing part of players soul is where the action is at.

[Guizonde]

That's not how you win as a GM! The GM wins when the PCs kill each other. Or when the mention of certain NPCs causes shudders. When the players leave a session scratching their heads because of pure mindscrew, then you have won. Getting characters to care about an NPC, and savagely ripping him to shreds. Killing a character is easy, killing part of players soul is where the action is at.

weeeeell, let's just say that possession is one of his favorite effects, and whenever my mage buddy plays a barbarian equivalent he misses a lot less on our faces than against the enemy's...:smallannoyed:
he's sadistic in the sense that in hindsight it's perfectly logical, and the way out is crazy easy. he dopes us on paranoia, double-triple checking, and WHAM! surprise non-euclidian horror scene using... friggin' tanglefoot. that spits acid. then you fall in a deep pit. filling up with water. with a spiked grille blocking you, and a kraken tickling you. meanwhile the off button is hidden behind 2 punji pits, one wall-climb, 3 gas clouds, 1 dart trap, and a puzzle (and 'cause you're climbing, progressive endurance tests). by the end of the encounter, we never wanted to talk about that game session again, when we found out that out of all the tiles in the corridor, only one was trapped.
yes, we spent 6 hours on ONE trap. that's how he wins, by making us travel 20 meters in 6 hours. in the return to the temple of elemental evil.
did i mention mutant treeman chaos druids?

[Zubrowka74]

Killing a character is easy, killing part of players soul is where the action is at.

Awwwww, so cute!

[nedz]

did i mention mutant treeman chaos druids?
Wow, CN CE too I suppose ?

[Metahuman1]

As a player: A little bit of everything, but mainly this: Link (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Cloudcuckoolander) And I usually tend to feel like this: Linky (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OnlySaneMan)

Given how messed up and dysfunctional our party is. We have three powergamers and me, plus our newbish DM who lets the powergamers get with nearly everything. Seriously, our party is messed up. It sucks alot and i keep dreaming of finding another gaming group that works in terms of availability to play with.

An Example: Our current, the party's alignment is fairly neutral all across. Through some odd fashion the party is slowing slipping into being an evil party.

I think my DM style is this:

Stark Raving Mad-Your players are uncontrollable short of murdering them. They always powergamer and despite how many times you try to make things work, they always break the game. They can take just about any class/situation and completely brake it. You can never challenge them and have it work. Your only hope is to never DM again or run screaming away. Just RUN, RUN AWAY DAMNIT!!!! Save yourself!!!! oh, and your players? They BLAME you for the game not being any more fun after they break it!!!!

Eliminate the powergamer part of that and that's been my Party. Though Up till now I've referred to them as Chaotic Stupid.

Shenanigans included, among other things, attempted rape of the captured halfling sorceress while she was knocked out, playing with gunpowder on the captured pirate ship, attempting to make tequila in a temple while guarding a prisoner, and attempting to buy illegal booze to bribe the token lawful character, only to get busted by undercover guardsmen and lead a keystone cops chase through the town with your party member surfing the dwarf that's holding onto you and getting drug through the mud in the process while one player runs the theme to Benny hill on there laptop.

That last one had me laughing so hard I couldn't breath and had to stop the game for twenty minutes to pull myself together.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

The Good Type The type that I am. Spontaneously generates rainbows of happiness for the entire group.
The Bad Type The type of players with whom I disagree. Their play is physically repulsive to everyone who knows the Right way to play.

But for serious...

The paranoid optimizes not for any sort of efficiency or utility, but to make sure he has a defense or counter for any harm that may befall him, however bizarre. In combat, enemies just ignore his character in favor of targeting his higher-offense companions.

[Darth Stabber]

The paranoid optimizes not for any sort of efficiency or utility, but to make sure he has a defense or counter for any harm that may befall him, however bizarre. In combat, enemies just ignore his character in favor of targeting his higher-offense companions.

That's just about the right way to play mid to high level wizards, especially abjurers, ignoring the last part.

If I am playing a wizard, woe unto the creature that tries to steal my spellbook. They aren't going to like what happens.

[Arbane]

A variation on The Mary-Sue: Mary Mary Quite Contrary: Most Mary-Sues want to hog the spotlight by out-doing the other player characters. This player wants to hog the spotlight by doing things none of the other characters would. If everyone else is playing a White-Knight Hero, they want to play a serial-killing demon-worshipper. If everyone else is playing Viking Berserkers, they want to play a pacifist monk. No matter what the premise or setting, they make a character who will fit in about as well as a snowman in the Sahara, and who will suck up vast amounts of the GM's time with their solo antics unless the entire group bends themselves around their schtick.

[Kerilstrasz]

What would you call a Player who constantly oppose the rules with "In Reality.."
or "by the worlds physics.." or "By the real world's principles.." ? A player who
prefers to disregard and/or recreate a tested rule just because it seems not
plausible to him by modern standards, even though that brings major unbalance
on a handful of other rules?

[Shaynythyryas]

A Catgirl Killer.

[nedz]

Catgirlman

[Avilan the Grey]

Hey, Playgrounders: What type are you?

I don't play D&D, we usually play Call of Chthulu (2nd Ed, I think) or homebrew. I would be a Storyteller. The group I play in consists of 1 or 2 Sideway Errants, 1-2 Storytellers and a Scribe. Works very will with that setting.

[White_Drake]

I'm a sideways errant, although my group seems oddly unappreciative of the diversity I add to the story. I wonder why?

[Axier]

My favorite playstyle: The Nuclear Deterrent: Builds his character like a true power-gamer, insanely high-op, capable of outshining the entire group. Never uses his full power, keeps his capabilities in check, and waits untill the DM nearly nukes the team. Then, the bombs go off, and the enemy everyone was facing is now dead when it was about to kill them.

The downside, is that it can trigger an arms race unless the DM understands that he is a nuclear deterrent in the first place.

I generally perfer that one person is completely OP, as long as I know they will only do this.

I tend to perfer this for my own characters:
The Factotum: Has some kind of usefulness in any situation, but rarely does it better than someone else in the party. Perfers to support and fill gaps.

[Guizonde]

My favorite playstyle: The Nuclear Deterrent: Builds his character like a true power-gamer, insanely high-op, capable of outshining the entire group. Never uses his full power, keeps his capabilities in check, and waits untill the DM nearly nukes the team. Then, the bombs go off, and the enemy everyone was facing is now dead when it was about to kill them.

The downside, is that it can trigger an arms race unless the DM understands that he is a nuclear deterrent in the first place.

I generally perfer that one person is completely OP, as long as I know they will only do this.

I tend to perfer this for my own characters:
The Factotum: Has some kind of usefulness in any situation, but rarely does it better than someone else in the party. Perfers to support and fill gaps.

i once bumbled into having a nuclear deterrent. reminds me of one of my types (unintentional hero, i believe, but you phrased it way better). it was fun, but only when the heat was on did i see all the munchkin style combos i could pull off. shame it happened in the endgame... well, not really actually, it was way cooler being a tough adventure.
bolded for truth
would your factotum be a jack of all trades or a master of none? that's really useful, and i wish no-one ever would create a one-trick pony. a warrior who can talk, a wizard (not gitp-standard-munchkin format) who can wield a sword, a monk who can i dunno... cook? helps give everyone spotlight time

@nedz: duh! but for once, closer to CE stupid sadistic than CE cthulu style. nice change when we knew we could just kill them to death easily. just don't get tangled. seriously, tentacle-hentai ahead otherwise, and without the funny uniforms
edit:@hxolhpths a killjoy, or a target :smallbiggrin: your choice

[Eric Scott]

I am a Nuclear Deterrent, with Sideways Errant tendencies and a smidgen of Marine...

[Darth Stabber]

What would you call a Player who constantly oppose the rules with "In Reality.."
or "by the worlds physics.." or "By the real world's principles.." ? A player who
prefers to disregard and/or recreate a tested rule just because it seems not
plausible to him by modern standards, even though that brings major unbalance
on a handful of other rules?

I would call him "don't lett the door hit your @$$ on the way out"

[Certified]

If I had to call it I tend to fall into the Rule-Keeper role when GMing, if only to check the Storyteller. I try very hard to keep everyone engaged and give them ways to shine and yes, sometimes fudge the rules so my players live.

As a player, that's a bit trickier...

[Darth Stabber]

and yes, sometimes fudge the rules so my players live.

Why? Unless you set up what is supposed to be an easy encounter.

[AttilaTheGeek]

I had an epiphany about classifying D&D players when I was playing in an empty classroom one day when a freshman walks in, surveys the room, struts over to our table, slams his hands down, and shouts:

"WHAT IS THIS GAME AND HOW DO I WIN".

A lot of classic roles fit into the paradigm of examining player goals instead of player actions. There's the powergamer, who replies "You win by doing the most damage", the team player, who says "you win when everyone wins!", and the friend, who says "you win by having fun". But it also allows you to examine the manipulator, who says "You win when you're pulling the strings", the storyteller ("you win when you finish telling the story"), and the roleplayer, who was the one who responded in my group by saying "It's living life in a different world. How do you win at life?"

(The freshman then said "by being AWESOMER than EVERYONE ELSE". We kicked him out.)

[Guizonde]

I had an epiphany about classifying D&D players when I was playing in an empty classroom one day when a freshman walks in, surveys the room, struts over to our table, slams his hands down, and shouts:

"WHAT IS THIS GAME AND HOW DO I WIN".

A lot of classic roles fit into the paradigm of examining player goals instead of player actions. There's the powergamer, who replies "You win by doing the most damage", the team player, who says "you win when everyone wins!", and the friend, who says "you win by having fun". But it also allows you to examine the manipulator, who says "You win when you're pulling the strings", the storyteller ("you win when you finish telling the story"), and the roleplayer, who was the one who responded in my group by saying "It's living life in a different world. How do you win at life?"

(The freshman then said "by being AWESOMER than EVERYONE ELSE". We kicked him out.)

that was probably more eye-opening than you'd intended. duuuuuude...

how DO you win at role-playing games? (philosophy majors, that's your cue)

and to correct the freshman, i'd say it's by being awesomer than everyTHING else. so what if you're a technical pacifist who's good at absorbing damage, or a knight in shining armor, or the evilest evil necromancer of evilness. the only thing that matters is to make sure that 'til that point your character's and your party's adventure (and thus the story) are the awesomest ever.

[/smartass]

[Frathe]

I had an epiphany about classifying D&D players when I was playing in an empty classroom one day when a freshman walks in, surveys the room, struts over to our table, slams his hands down, and shouts:

"WHAT IS THIS GAME AND HOW DO I WIN".

A lot of classic roles fit into the paradigm of examining player goals instead of player actions. There's the powergamer, who replies "You win by doing the most damage", the team player, who says "you win when everyone wins!", and the friend, who says "you win by having fun". But it also allows you to examine the manipulator, who says "You win when you're pulling the strings", the storyteller ("you win when you finish telling the story"), and the roleplayer, who was the one who responded in my group by saying "It's living life in a different world. How do you win at life?"

(The freshman then said "by being AWESOMER than EVERYONE ELSE". We kicked him out.)

I don't think I realized it, but motivations are actually what I wanted to look at when I started this thread. A lot of people suggested specific combat styles, but this is more what I really wanted.

[Certified]

Why? Unless you set up what is supposed to be an easy encounter.

What do you do after a party wipe?

[RFLS]

I'm definitely a nuclear deterrent and rules keeper. I have a DM who's astounding with role play and and story, but less than competent with mechanics. I once played in a session of his where it was 3 level 7 players. He harried us with some kobolds for bit, which was less than challenging, and then BAM! Adult blue dragon to the face.

(He thought we had a good chance of winning. This was a severely unoptimized party; I hadn't learned the tricks for optimizing yet. That was my incentive, though.)

[Darth Stabber]

that was probably more eye-opening than you'd intended. duuuuuude...

how DO you win at role-playing games? (philosophy majors, that's your cue)

From an existentialist perspective there is no defined way of winning aside from that which you create for yourself.


What do you do after a party wipe?

Start over.

[Certified]

Start over.

And that sir is the answer. Although, I still hold a candle for a game, where the PCs fail, and die, and the world for their next characters is that much worse because of it.

[Darth Stabber]

And that sir is the answer. Although, I still hold a candle for a game, where the PCs fail, and die, and the world for their next characters is that much worse because of it.

Yep, that's the way to do it.

[Amphetryon]

What do you do after a party wipe?

Shout "Woohoo! New campaign!" and dance around like you scored a touchdown, of course.

[russdm]

New Campaign!!! Awesome

Then the DM says: You are all rabbits....

Umm, thanks but no thanks. I would rather play a squirrel.

[Guizonde]

New Campaign!!! Awesome

Then the DM says: You are all rabbits....

Umm, thanks but no thanks. I would rather play a squirrel.

"is it a vorpal bunny?"

"no"

"nuts!"

"no, that's for squirrels"

sorry, couldn't help myself :smallbiggrin:

[russdm]

Yep. I have always remembered the beholder squirrel. By the way, whats the stats for a squirrel or mouse? I am thinking about playing Reepicheap, from the Aslan books by cs lewis, one of these days.

I ought to start a thread about making stats/builds for famous movie characters using D&D 3.5 or something.

[Guizonde]

Yep. I have always remembered the beholder squirrel. By the way, whats the stats for a squirrel or mouse? I am thinking about playing Reepicheap, from the Aslan books by cs lewis, one of these days.

I ought to start a thread about making stats/builds for famous movie characters using D&D 3.5 or something.

isn't there a system out already where you basically play in the Redwall (brian jacques) universe?

to get back on topic though, i guess you could create another division intra-playstyle.

happy vs grim, or fantasy vs realistic.
some people like their campaigns like their coffee: gritty and grimdark, others like their rootbeer floats: tasting like diabetes. with of course the gamut between the two. some people i game with HATE jokes with a passion, others crack 'em only when the going gets real tough. is this an archetype?

[Frathe]

isn't there a system out already where you basically play in the Redwall (brian jacques) universe?


You mean the Mouse Guard RPG?

[Phaederkiel]

As a Player, I am obviously the sideways errant, and try to be the storyteller.
Is it my fault, if the plot was not LOGICAL? There where two graves empty, but only one body in the possesion of the necromancer. I smell ... a trap!

as A DM, I am Far Too Helpful (don't you think that blocking the entrance would be a swell idea?...) with more than a smidgen of You Think THAT Is A Tripping Build? Next Session, I Will Give You A TRIPPING Build!
Whenever a player of mine makes a tactical blunder, I cannot help but build a fight to showcase the better solution either in an opponents behaviour or as the only way to stop that opponent.

Oh, and I just love mean riddles. Nearly as much as I hate weakly explained riddle rooms in dungeons. Anyone now the angry DMs three door dillemma?

[TuggyNE]

Oh, and I just love mean riddles. Nearly as much as I hate weakly explained riddle rooms in dungeons. Anyone now the angry DMs three door dillemma?

Behind one door: A GIANT OOZE*! Behind another door: HORDES OF ANGRY BEES**! Behind the third door: GOLD AND JEWELS, WEALTH BEYOND YOUR WILDEST DREAMS***!

*Fully advanced Black Pudding
**Giant bees, 40+ of them
***Cursed, contact poisoned, and one of them is the jeweled skull of the demilich Acererak


How's that? :smallbiggrin:

[Ifni]

Oh dear. I am a Complicator, especially in PbP. My GMs, I'm sorry. (Although I think at least one of them likes it.)

I used to be the Manager, I'm somewhat less so these days. Playing my L16 wild mage and her L14 warweaver / sublime chord cohort (who were also the group's main social characters, and talked to everyone) in 12+-hour online sessions was fun, but also induced literal splitting headaches. (And yes, I had extensive spreadsheets on my laptop for them.) I'm glad I did it, but never again.

And I have once played the Nuclear Deterrent. She never pulled out her real nukes, but did at one point react to an onslaught of nasty incorporeals with "FINE. As my standard action, eight avorals appear. All together now: LAY ON HANDS." The GM spluttered a little. (I did point out what she could have done. He was unappeased.)

[Arbane]

Oh, and I just love mean riddles. Nearly as much as I hate weakly explained riddle rooms in dungeons. Anyone now the angry DMs three door dillemma?

"One guard lies, one tells the truth, and one stabs people who ask tricky questions?" (http://xkcd.com/246/)

[Phaederkiel]

"One guard lies, one tells the truth, and one stabs people who ask tricky questions?" (http://xkcd.com/246/)

yep, it is somewhat like that. let me see if I recall right.

there is a room, containing three options. A voice tells you: "only one thing i tell you is true. first door is trapped and deadly, second door ..."

and you have to deduce that the "only one thing i tell you is true" sentence is already part of the riddle, cannot be true, and than you can only rule out one of the doors, and have a 50/50 chance to get the right door. You just have to hope for the best, and all your deducing helps you is that you could rule out one door.

In the original riddle, getting the wrong door desintegrates your character without a saving throw. It was made as a trial for a wannabe king, to see if he is clever enough to chance his peoples life, not his own...


skull of acerak feels somewhat tame in comparision, eh?

I ran it ( allowing both door to be safe, and the danger door only did 2d6 con dmg...) in a dungeon with another such trap of my own design, and my players did it perfectly (albeit slowly, since they were still paranoid from MY riddle room)

[killem2]

Here is my group:

Me as DM: The Calculator, I prepare my sessions weeks in advance, I have future sessions already planned out with CRs figured up with items rolled out and story lines ready to go.

My Current DM: THE DM, when playing with this person, you have no doubt, that he has DMed before, he knows what he is doing, doesn't flinch when having to answer questions or play our scenarios. Cool, calm, and funny when the time calls.

The Shell: Shy teenager who in private will talk at no end about what he wants to do with his character, wants to be the big shot, the big kahuna, and then in practice tightens his mouth up like Venus fly trap and has to be cracked by other players to open up for that round.

The Roleplayer who isn't Roleplaying: He knows what his character is like, and acts like his character but in his voice and actions and demeanor. It is better than a Rollplayer but not much.

The :smallcool::smallcool: He built his character on pure flavor, not for roleplaying it, just in practice to seem himself as a little bit more complete for making it happen. The party's needs? HA!

The Detective: Will play 20 questions and when its over, ask 40 more.

[tadkins]

Hey, Playgrounders: What type are you?


15: the grimlock: this guy will play the same character across multiple universes, never changing the backstory or stat equivalencies. although boring to others, if he's good, you know how he plays and could save your hide

Admittedly, this is me. I have a necromancer/wizard character that I like to play in any game I can.

My justification is that as a wizard, she would have the means to travel between different worlds and universes. xD

[shadow_archmagi]

I feel like slotting players into types is doing an injustice to the rich tapestry of the human experience.

It's also rolling around in a big pile of stormwind fallacy.

[kladams707]

I'm the guy that will point out RAW (if I know it, and I don't need to know all the rules) when something is contradicted, but accept group decisions regarding how we want to treat (or even just ignore) those rules. I guess I'm more of a wargamer archetype, though I try to participate in rp and only care that the rules are followed unless we as a group decide should an issue with a rule arise. I try to pull back if I feel my power level is too high compared to the others.

That said, my RL group also has the friend, the true wargamer (spacing out excet during combat and when the DM prod him), and whichever player archetype is the one to initiate the arms race.