PDA

View Full Version : Character Concepts that got shot down



ZeroGear
2015-05-31, 09:08 PM
This is not "things my DM told me not to do", this is specifically about character concepts that the DM/GM either shot down before they hit play or told you you were never allowed to play again.
Let me start:

I asked my Shadowrin GM if I could play an AI, and he agreed. While we were discussing what my character could use as a body, I asked if I could use an anamatronic figure from a family restaurant. He told me no.
I am not allowed to play a character based on "Five Nights at Freddie's".

Honest Tiefling
2015-05-31, 09:10 PM
"So I see you have the new Star Wars RPG. And yet, there don't seem to be many rules regarding cyborgs. See, I want to make a character like General Grievous..."

And that was about as far as I got before being booted from the game entirely.

Karl Aegis
2015-05-31, 09:57 PM
Mary Sue Elven Furry. I shot that one down.

Hawkstar
2015-05-31, 10:24 PM
Mary Sue Elven Furry. I shot that one down.

You're a monster.

Feddlefew
2015-05-31, 11:13 PM
In no particular order:

The Campaign: Eberon, save the world from deamons who seek to enslave humanity type plot.
The idea: Eldrich abomination/nature spirit trying (and failing) to pass as a human; changeling druid.
The reason for rejection: 4 out of 5 players said they'd kill my character if I didn't also play as a human, like they were. 5th player and DM didn't really care, but wouldn't stop them. I decided not to play.

The Campaign: A friend told me they needed a cleric for an upcoming campaign.
The idea: Cleric re-fluffed as a wandering witch/voodoo priestess.
The reason for rejection: Didn't fit the campaign setting.

The Campaign: Standard Ravenloft horror.
The Idea: The All Bard Party meets The Princess Bride
Reason for rejection: REALLY didn't fit the setting.

ZeroGear
2015-05-31, 11:44 PM
In no particular order:

The Campaign: Eberon, save the world from deamons who seek to enslave humanity type plot.
The idea: Eldrich abomination/nature spirit trying (and failing) to pass as a human; changeling druid.
The reason for rejection: 4 out of 5 players said they'd kill my character if I didn't also play as a human, like they were. 5th player and DM didn't really care, but wouldn't stop them. I decided not to play.


Wow, I applaud your decision. That seemed like a very jerk-like move on the group's part.

Honest Tiefling
2015-05-31, 11:50 PM
The Campaign: Standard Ravenloft horror.
The Idea: The All Bard Party meets The Princess Bride
Reason for rejection: REALLY didn't fit the setting.

Okay, I have to ask, were you (and any cohorts also making bards) know it was Ravenloft beforhand, because I think wisecracking, witty remarks and random rhymes when the DM is trying to do horror is probably a pretty good reason for rejection. It can be hard to break down players, sometimes you just cause them to giggle.

AvatarVecna
2015-05-31, 11:59 PM
My original DM says I'm never allowed to play a non-Good nihilist again. I was a fairly high-level, high-op Mystic Theurge in a party of similar, and I got ahold of a rather powerful, but limited-use Artifact. Because I was fairly certain our world was just some sort of illusion being maintained by beings beyond our understanding, and I wanted to see what would happen if I forced the simulation to end, I researched Apocalyse from the Sky, purchased some metamagic rods, rebuilt my character under the rebuilding rules (focusing on Mailman-level metamagic abuse), and then basically blew up the planet.

I've asked since then if I can play another nihilist, but I get shot down every time, even in worlds like Shadowrun and Serenity, where that kind of mystical cow poo literally isn't possible.

TheThan
2015-06-01, 12:11 AM
Two goblins in a trench coat.
I named them Mugs and Gus.
They were a Gestalt character, (obviously) I still have no idea why the Dm wouldn’t let me play them.

TheCountAlucard
2015-06-01, 12:34 AM
My original DM says I'm never allowed to play a non-Good nihilist again.So you can play a Good nihilist? :smallconfused:

Also "feel that existence is meaningless and useless" is not "blow up the planet." The problem wasn't that you played a nihilist, it's that you blew up the planet.

ZeroGear
2015-06-01, 12:37 AM
Two goblins in a trench coat.
I named them Mugs and Gus.
They were a Gestalt character, (obviously) I still have no idea why the Dm wouldn’t let me play them.

Please tell me that they weren't a 3.5 Dragonfire Adept and a Rogue. I played with a character like that before (two kobolds in a trench coat riding a pig), and it ended with an entire town on fire, my character almost dying, and the DfA dead at the bottom of the sea.

Unless each person plays two characters it usually comes down to balance in the game.

TheThan
2015-06-01, 01:13 AM
Please tell me that they weren't a 3.5 Dragonfire Adept and a Rogue. I played with a character like that before (two kobolds in a trench coat riding a pig), and it ended with an entire town on fire, my character almost dying, and the DfA dead at the bottom of the sea.

Unless each person plays two characters it usually comes down to balance in the game.

No, they wern't dragonfire adept//rogue.

However one side was a rogue. the other was.... what was it now...oh a can't recall. but it wasn't a dragonfire adept I know that much.

Feddlefew
2015-06-01, 01:52 AM
Wow, I applaud your decision. That seemed like a very jerk-like move on the group's part.

I suspect the DM was trying to use me (a lover of strange character concepts) to break up the monotony of an all human party, since the campaign was two sessions in when I was invited to join.


Okay, I have to ask, were you (and any cohorts also making bards) know it was Ravenloft beforhand, because I think wisecracking, witty remarks and random rhymes when the DM is trying to do horror is probably a pretty good reason for rejection. It can be hard to break down players, sometimes you just cause them to giggle.

No. We all wanted to play bards and liked The Princes Bride, so while we waited for the DM to arrive we hatched a crazy plan, eventually arriving on the idea of being a troupe of traveling actors and musicians, each of us based of off different characters (I picked Fezzik). The DM was probably trying to pull a surprise Ravenloft campaign*, because he kind of panicked when we told him we wanted to be an All Bard Party, said it wasn't appropriate, but wouldn't tell us what the campaign was about so that we could come up with appropriate characters. Eventually he told us that he wanted to run a Ravenloft game, and since none of us players really wanted to be in a Ravenloft game, we played Call of Cthulhu instead.

Those of you who've read my post in the worst DM thread know what happens next.

I still haven't been in (or even DMed for) an all-bard party. :smallfrown:


*Why do people do this? There are very few occasions where a surprise genera change works, and I don't think table top games are one of them.

Edit: Found the post. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18840166&postcount=671)

ZeroGear
2015-06-01, 02:30 AM
If it's any consolidation Feddlefew, I would love to run a game where the characters are all part of a performance group. Granted, I'm beginning to picture a medieval fantasy version of the Jose and the Pussycats cartoon, but I digress.
(Heck, a game idea that actually got shot down by the players was one where everyone was part of a traveling circus. Kinda wanted to run something like that at some point)

JAL_1138
2015-06-01, 02:55 AM
So you can play a Good nihilist? :smallconfused:

In D&D they're called the Bleak Cabal ("Bleakers," "Madmen") and run the hospitals and insane asylum in Sigil, among other things. Their viewpoint boils down to "The multiverse doesn't make sense and it isn't supposed to, there's no meaning to any of it--so why not be nice to people?"

IRL, several varieties of nihilism deny any grand meaning but don't imply one immediately becomes an ***hole. Many/most forms of atheism carry varying amounts of existential nihilism. E.g., "Morality may not be objectively true and may only be a human construct in an uncaring and pointless universe, but that's no reason to be a jerk."

TheCountAlucard
2015-06-01, 03:12 AM
I'm not saying there's no such thing as a Good nihilist; I'm saying it seems odd that specifically Neutral and Evil, but not Good, nihilists got banned just because a character who got ahold of some artifacts destroyed the world for the sake of disproving its reality.

JAL_1138
2015-06-01, 03:20 AM
I'm not saying there's no such thing as a Good nihilist; I'm saying it seems odd that specifically Neutral and Evil, but not Good, nihilists got banned just because a character who got ahold of some artifacts destroyed the world for the sake of disproving its reality.

...well, a good nihilist probably wouldn't make the world go foom if given the chance?

TheCountAlucard
2015-06-01, 04:26 AM
...well, a good nihilist probably wouldn't make the world go foom if given the chance?Why in hell would a DM specifically go out of his way give his players a chance to deliberately make the world go foom, and why do people not see this as the behavior in need of correction?!? What was that DM expecting when he put a dangerous artifact in the hands of an adventuring party? Did he not notice the PC researching a spell called Apocalypse from the Sky and buying metamagic rods like crazy? Why am I in a Starfleet uniform?!?

chainer1216
2015-06-01, 04:49 AM
Awakened house cat frenzied berserker.

Feddlefew
2015-06-01, 06:32 AM
Awakened house cat frenzied berserker.

I'd allow it. :smallbiggrin:

DigoDragon
2015-06-01, 07:25 AM
I've once shot down a player's idea of a T-1000 admiral of Starfleet character. Who is also an alcoholic.

Demidos
2015-06-01, 09:12 AM
Half Fey Half Minotaur Monk who liked to try to use his at will charm ability (12 cha) on enemy guards, and would wake up sleeping guards for that purpose.

....On the other hand, I did have a great movespeed XD

xroads
2015-06-01, 10:44 AM
Eventually he told us that he wanted to run a Ravenloft game, and since none of us players really wanted to be in a Ravenloft game, we played Call of Cthulhu instead.


Huh. Didn't see that one coming. What made you guys choose CoC? Especially when you were already in the mood to play a troupe of bards in a more lighthearted setting? :smallconfused:

DireSickFish
2015-06-01, 10:54 AM
I wanted to play a warlock in a 3.5 game that shot his eldrich blasts from his eyes. That was it, nothing to make it more powerful, no crazy race/class combination. He'd allow me to play the warlock if I shot them from my hands like a "normal" warlock. So I called his bluff and started printing of a character sheet to make a bland fighter. He caved and -did- let me play it, but it still counts as a shut down.

TheThan
2015-06-01, 11:44 AM
Awakened house cat frenzied berserker.

always wanted to play an awakened house cat rogue. never got around to playing Mr. Fluffy though.

Alternatively an awakened house cat sword sage focusing on desert wind. Beware my flaming claws.

DigoDragon
2015-06-01, 11:53 AM
always wanted to play an awakened house cat rogue.

I was a player in a game once that had an awakened house cat rogue. I kept some catnip handy for those times that darn cat's paws got grabby.

Feddlefew
2015-06-01, 12:03 PM
Huh. Didn't see that one coming. What made you guys choose CoC? Especially when you were already in the mood to play a troupe of bards in a more lighthearted setting? :smallconfused:

He wanted to run a "squishy mortals against unspeakable monsters" campaign. D&D 3.5 doesn't do THAT flavor of horror for me. Most of us (sans DM) saw D&D as a lighter-hearted or an epic fantasy system, which could have horror elements, but overall the system tilts so heavily in the favor of PCs that existential horror doesn't usually work. Since the DM wanted to do that kind of horror gaming, we agreed that Call of Cthulhu d20 would be a good system, since both the DM and one player were familiar with it and could help the rest of us.

JAL_1138
2015-06-01, 01:59 PM
He wanted to run a "squishy mortals against unspeakable monsters" campaign. D&D 3.5 doesn't do THAT flavor of horror for me. Most of us (sans DM) saw D&D as a lighter-hearted or an epic fantasy system, which could have horror elements, but overall the system tilts so heavily in the favor of PCs that existential horror doesn't usually work. Since the DM wanted to do that kind of horror gaming, we agreed that Call of Cthulhu d20 would be a good system, since both the DM and one player were familiar with it and could help the rest of us.

Could've used AD&D, either edition. First-level characters are fragile enough that basically anything that rolls pretty well (wins initiative, actually hits, rolls fair-to-middlin' damage) will probably kill you in 1-2 rounds. I've died to cats, goats, a couple-three squirrels, swans, horses (including but not limited to failed ride checks), lone kobold archers, lone goblins, pretty much anything in the Monstrous Compendium. And tripping on the stairs at the inn while drunk, and all manner of basic traps...

Dimers
2015-06-01, 02:45 PM
Dwarf were-dire-badger psychic warrior / Warshaper, appropriately named "Badger".

I was joining a game that had been running for years, and the party badly needed a frontliner who could soak damage. Problems: first, I'd be 10th level when some of the others were as much as 15th, and second, I'd have NPC WBL instead of PC. Riiiiight. Make an underleveled, underequipped tank. Still, I knew what kind of fights to expect, and they were the kind where DR 15/silver would help a hell of a lot.

So I came up with the toughest design I could that didn't violate the GM's or players' ideas of what classes should be frontliners. And then the GM shot it down anyway because the idea of a were-dire-badger struck him as silly. Even though the idea of an underleveled, underequipped, nonmagic-class-only tank didn't strike him as silly.

Mr.Sandman
2015-06-01, 03:40 PM
Eberron by way of Mutants and Masterminds over PBP, I pitched an Awakened Gorilla Druid. A prototype for a Gatekeeper experiment of some kind. His name? Don Ke'Kong, ancient orcish of King of Apes. I knew it was too ridiculous, but figured it was worth a shot. GM agreed it was too ridiculous, so next I piched Tinkerbelle, Half Elven Atomi Artificer whoes Elven father wrote the book on magic item creation, literally. She liked to tinker with magic items as well, hence the nickname. She didn't get it either, but I think that was more there being much better characters pitched by everyone else than her being to ridiculous.

mAc Chaos
2015-06-01, 04:59 PM
My favorite is one my friend made.

Robot Ronald Reagan. He even photoshopped a hilarious picture for it. But alas, I had to shoot it down because it just made no sense in D&D.

ZeroGear
2015-06-01, 05:05 PM
My favorite is one my friend made.

Robot Ronald Reagan. He even photoshopped a hilarious picture for it. But alas, I had to shoot it down because it just made no sense in D&D.

Not even as a warforged?

Anonymouswizard
2015-06-02, 10:23 AM
In All Flesh Must be Eaten, a Charismatic Anglican Vicar with a vow of nonviolence. No combat skills, low life points, and low essence compared to the physicals, but high Charisma and social skills for when we met up with the army, as well as a couple of powers (originally healing and visions, changed to visions and feat of strength when somebody else wanted to play our medic, I wanted a buff spell but couldn't find one). The idea was he had somehow managed to convince the world that, in a small area around him, God did give aid.

That was shot down because 1) the GM didn't want any magic in the world, despite later using zombies that generated petrol, teleported, and moved as fast as a bullet, and b) it was a combat game. I still have the character ready, including a demon-hunting version. Everyone else thinks he sounded like a great character, and I played his Catholic counterpart for a session (Father Caine smites the demons!)

Zalphon
2015-06-04, 10:48 AM
Character Concept I:

Race: Half-Elf
Class: Rogue
Concept: An investigator who was on the run, because people thought he committed a crime with a friend. Neither of them did it.
Reason: ...DM didn't like the idea of a Lawful Good Rogue.

DigoDragon
2015-06-04, 11:03 AM
Reason: ...DM didn't like the idea of a Lawful Good Rogue.

I think this (http://static.screenweek.it/2009/3/18/Up-Screencaps-Disney-Pixar-47_mid.jpg) sums up my reaction. Not a new concept (and I like it cause it makes the DM's job of coming up with antagonists easy), but just the reasoning is weird to me.

Anonymouswizard
2015-06-04, 11:12 AM
Character Concept I:

Race: Half-Elf
Class: Rogue
Concept: An investigator who was on the run, because people thought he committed a crime with a friend. Neither of them did it.
Reason: ...DM didn't like the idea of a Lawful Good Rogue.

People just don't like lawful good. I've had funny looks when explaining how it isn't more restrictive than the other alignments, and seen it used as a reason to not play a paladin. The same player decided to play a chaotic stupid rogue and then whined when I denied him sneak attack because a) the guards had a half decent idea where his crossbow bolts where coming from and b) he was the only person who was attacking the guards (another player used the grapple rules to represent being over friendly, but he had low INT and wasn't trying to harm them, so they settled for just staying 25ft away from the dwarf). The guards were simply asking a group of people he did not know to go to their guild or inn and disarm (their papers showed that they had just arrived an hour ago).

Thanks to that and a player who liked 'assassins' (read fighters with some stealth) have actually turned me off the idea of rogues as lowlifes, and I prefer them as investigators (I'd just like a replacement for trapfinding). I'd love a character you described that in one of my games instead of the standard 'brute, brute, magician, chaotic stupid' array that I normally see.

Friv
2015-06-04, 11:35 AM
Character Concept I:

Race: Half-Elf
Class: Rogue
Concept: An investigator who was on the run, because people thought he committed a crime with a friend. Neither of them did it.
Reason: ...DM didn't like the idea of a Lawful Good Rogue.

I'm reminded of an Exalted game I applied to. We were asked to create heroic Solar Exalts, so I put together a Night Caste who roamed the land, helping people from the shadows and destroying monsters, but never wanting to be recognized. His backstory was that he had been an ordinary farmer, trying to live a normal life, until a gang of Fair Folk invaded his town and started killing people. He tried to hide and ambush one of them in desperation, triggering his Exaltation, and then became involved in murderous hide-and-seek with them until they were all dead, at which point his fellow townsfolk sort of thanked him but also threw him out of town because he was a horrible demon-monster now (I mean, "threw him out" in the politest, most terrified way, but he wasn't going to stick around.).

I was told that the concept wasn't valid for the game, because "ordinary people don't Exalt, only people who are already legends do".

Hawkstar
2015-06-04, 03:25 PM
I was told that the concept wasn't valid for the game, because "ordinary people don't Exalt, only people who are already legends do".Wow... How is Batman not considered a legendary figure?

JustSomeGuy
2015-06-04, 04:13 PM
Howabout Haft, an orc P.I. from the greensploitation era? Wore a turtleneck (actual turtle's neck, obvs) and had an uncanny knack for nearby minstrels to suddenly break into some direfunk. Oh, and their lutes somehow gained a wa-waauugh pedal.

Turned out he was terrible at bloodbowl, and players don't require a backstory either. And opponents love to injure players with a backstory too.

Friv
2015-06-04, 04:27 PM
Wow... How is Batman not considered a legendary figure?

Difficult to speak for someone else, especially if I don't agree with them, but I would venture that, by this guy's logic, Batman Exalts when he returns to Gotham and faces his first villain, not when he has the inspiration to become a terror in the night in the first place. By then he's already done the world-traveller, master martial artist, ultimate dedication thing, so he's a guy with a lot of Attributes and Abilities at 5 turning his dedication to crimefighting.

Anonymouswizard
2015-06-04, 04:44 PM
I was told that the concept wasn't valid for the game, because "ordinary people don't Exalt, only people who are already legends do".

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought it didn't matter who you were. I believe the only conditions were:

Solar: achieving the impossible (you exalt in the process)
Lunar: survive the impossible
Sidereal: blah blah blah fate blah blah blah destiny blah blah
Dragon blood: by chance, as long as your great grandad was one
Abyssal: die horribly and sign a contract with the death lords
Infernal: the lack of solar exaltations meant you were ignored
Alchemical: birthing vat

Where does fame come into any of those?

Friv
2015-06-04, 05:37 PM
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought it didn't matter who you were. I believe the only conditions were:

Solar: achieving the impossible (you exalt in the process)
Lunar: survive the impossible
Sidereal: blah blah blah fate blah blah blah destiny blah blah
Dragon blood: by chance, as long as your great grandad was one
Abyssal: die horribly and sign a contract with the death lords
Infernal: the lack of solar exaltations meant you were ignored
Alchemical: birthing vat

Where does fame come into any of those?

Not legend in the famous sense, legend in the powerful and skilled sense.

There was something of an ongoing fight in the Exalted playerbase for a long time about whether or not people should have to be exceptional in some way prior to their Exaltation. Some passages in the books suggested that only those destined for greatness, or who were already great, got the shot. It tended to boil back to what a "heroic mortal" was in-setting, as opposed to what it was out-of-setting.

Under that theory, a farmboy couldn't Exalt unless they were a farmboy with tremendous potential and skill, like "everyone in town knew about shadow-hands Bill, who once stole a farmer's entire stock of chickens and hid them in the Immaculate Temple - in the middle of a service!"

(I obviously did not hold to this theory. I always felt it substantially restricted character concepts, with no real benefit.)

Inevitability
2015-06-05, 12:46 AM
I wanted to play as a warforged who had pretty much an entire brewery installed in his body. DM shot it down because warforged didn't fit his world.

Anonymouswizard
2015-06-05, 03:32 AM
I wanted to play as a warforged who had pretty much an entire brewery installed in his body. DM shot it down because warforged didn't fit his world.

Makes more sense than:

GM: pick any god from the Greek, Roman, Norse, or Egyptian pantheons to be your character's parent.
Friend: I want to play a child of the god of wine.
GM: no alcohol in game!

This caused everyone in the game to plan to have our characters meet in a brewery (nixed), take Expertise: Brewing (allowed, but couldn't get materials), or spend equipment points on beer (also nixed). At this point nobody was actually interested.

He had also refused to give us an age range for our characters, so I can with a concept for a child of Loki born in the early Renaissance, who had spent most of his time wandering and picking up skills. He only had one attack that actually hit the PL caps, instead being a support character with illusions. That was denied because he was 'too old', as was a child of Lugh from being from a weird pantheon, as was an Egyptian character because 'nobody wants to play the child of an Egyptian god'.

{scrubbed}

Kurald Galain
2015-06-05, 04:39 AM
I had a player who wanted a caped silver-age superhero in a gritty fantasy campaign; so I shot that one down. I don't recall a lot of shut-downs otherwise.

Hawkstar
2015-06-05, 07:42 AM
Some passages in the books suggested that only those destined for greatness [...] got the shot.
This justifies any Exalt concept.

Hunter Noventa
2015-06-05, 10:04 AM
Solar: achieving the impossible (you exalt in the process)


All I could think of when I read that was Do the impossible, see the invisible, row row fight the power! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-6CrK6deWo)

I guess Spiral Power would be it's own kind of Exaltation huh?

Honest Tiefling
2015-06-05, 10:24 AM
{scrubbed}

{scrubbed}

Another thing that got nixed (and me booted from the campaign again), was that the DM had the idea we could play various gods. I was interested in some party cohesion, so I suggested to the group to play gods with similar bents, so there would be a reason for all us to hang around and no one really wanted to play from the same pantheon.

"Okay, she can play Loki, you can take Coyote, and I'll play Ananzi."

YUP. Didn't even get to the first session there.

Anonymouswizard
2015-06-05, 11:35 AM
{scrubbed}

Friv
2015-06-05, 04:24 PM
All I could think of when I read that was Do the impossible, see the invisible, row row fight the power! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-6CrK6deWo)

I guess Spiral Power would be it's own kind of Exaltation huh?

Kamina = Solar, Simon = Lunar, Rossiu = Sidereal.

(Okay, getting off-track. No more comments here from me except about specific characters.)

Iamyourking
2015-06-05, 07:06 PM
On the subject of Scion, and from the ST side, I vetoed a player who wanted to make a brawl-focused Scion of Zeus named Zeus-Fu, after a running joke we have about Zeus' fighting style in God of War II, on the grounds that the name was too silly (And because I already had pretty much that exact concept planned to be my BBEG). In addition, although it wasn't exactly vetoed, I did say that I would have my eye on any Scions of Agni, Indra, Hermes, Thoth, Hera, Isis, Athena, Izanagi, Susano-O, Amaterasu, and Guanyin. Although I did get an Athena and a Guanyin, the characters themselves were fine.

BootStrapTommy
2015-06-05, 07:06 PM
D&D 5e Hermit Wizard. Discovery: the universe is just a game of D&D 5e. Trade in herbalism kit proficiency for a game set proficiency: 5e D&D.

Notes on discover? The MM and PHB.

goto124
2015-06-05, 07:23 PM
A real wizard knows the rules of the universe, silly!

Zalphon
2015-06-06, 10:54 PM
Character Concept II:

Race: Human
Class: Focused Transmuter (Wizard)
Concept: Somebody who was aware that it was all a game. That's all it was and because of that, he could change how it all worked.
Reason: While comedic and a comedic game, he wasn't overly fond of that level of silliness.

TheThan
2015-06-06, 11:43 PM
Lets see, there was Zors Igothan- the far seer , he was a Half farspawn human psychic warrior.

So yeah, I could turn myself into a tentacle monster. Dunno why it got shot down.

I actually had a really cool background. He had been abducted as a child, taken to the far-realms and experimented on (to learn human’s weaknesses); he escaped and made it back to the prime material. Now he wonders the world delivering speeches about the end of the world (from street corners naturally) because he knew these legion of incomprehensible monsters from the far realms were planning on invading.

For a BESM game I made, Izumi Wantabe, who was a sassy, trigger happy, bubble gum chewing, pink jump suit wearing gun bunny (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SmallGirlBigGun) who had a bazooka in her bra (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VictoriasSecretCompartment). Dunno why that one got shot down either.

Zalphon
2015-06-07, 01:01 AM
Lets see, there was Zors Igothan- the far seer , he was a Half farspawn human psychic warrior.

So yeah, I could turn myself into a tentacle monster. Dunno why it got shot down.

I actually had a really cool background. He had been abducted as a child, taken to the far-realms and experimented on (to learn human’s weaknesses); he escaped and made it back to the prime material. Now he wonders the world delivering speeches about the end of the world (from street corners naturally) because he knew these legion of incomprehensible monsters from the far realms were planning on invading.

For a BESM game I made, Izumi Wantabe, who was a sassy, trigger happy, bubble gum chewing, pink jump suit wearing gun bunny (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SmallGirlBigGun) who had a bazooka in her bra (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VictoriasSecretCompartment). Dunno why that one got shot down either.

...I would love to have that first character in a campaign. I wouldn't give any special perks to it or anything, but I would be greatly amused by it.

BWR
2015-06-07, 02:01 AM
A variation on a character in another L5R game, this guy is the typical big Hida brute. Coarse in both appearance and manner, crude, rather brutal and vicious, twice the size of most of the rest of the men in the empire. For political reasons he was married into the Doji (the most refined and cultured, effete family in the Empire, possibly exceeded only by the Imperials). As a basically decent guy who keeps his word he has to try to play by the rules of his new family despite having no culture or etiquette that doesn't involve alcohol, killing monsters with metal sticks and trying not to be overcome by PTSD. Apart from being a social nightmare he has two attendants, semi-retired jesters who follow him to make sure he doesn't insult anyone too badly. Their names: Kakita Sutateru and Kakita Warudorufu. For obvious reasons, they just follow him and make snide comments about him (and everyone else).
And this was just the back-up character for the game. Shot down for not being serious enough.

Ettina
2015-06-07, 09:25 AM
A Flesh Jelly playing Murder at Baldur's Gate. (Me as DM.) I said I'd be willing to run it if he roleplayed it accurately, but it would be more 'playing as Godzilla' than the intended plotline. Then he said he was joking, and built a more reasonable character.

JAL_1138
2015-06-07, 12:08 PM
Anything with "gnome" in the Race section. I am no longer allowed to play gnomes. Nor may I use them in my campaign if I'm DM'ing. (They invariably act like Kryinnish tinker gnomes (Spelljammer variant), and I know far too many ways of making things explode.)

A halfling bard based entirely on country-music legend Little Jimmy Dickens. (http://youtu.be/BYTXyUdvYaM)

Talakeal
2015-06-07, 12:43 PM
I have always wanted to play a character inspired by Mystique from the X-men movies; a changeling monk with the vow of poverty feat and the war-shaper prestige class.

Unfortunately, despite the internet insisted that this would be a terminal underpowered character, every real life DM I encounter considers Monks, particularly monks with VoP, to be ridiculously broken and banned outright. Combine that with a weird race and prestige class that is being used in a non-traditional manner and I am lucky if they even let me pitch a different character before being shown the door.

JNAProductions
2015-06-07, 12:45 PM
Shockingly, my friend's Flying Ninja Platypus was not shot down. *Shurg* Weird things happen.

boomwolf
2015-06-07, 01:19 PM
I have always wanted to play a character inspired by Mystique from the X-men movies; a changeling monk with the vow of poverty feat and the war-shaper prestige class.

Unfortunately, despite the internet insisted that this would be a terminal underpowered character, every real life DM I encounter considers Monks, particularly monks with VoP, to be ridiculously broken and banned outright. Combine that with a weird race and prestige class that is being used in a non-traditional manner and I am lucky if they even let me pitch a different character before being shown the door.

Wat.

What level of misunderstanding of basic game mechanics is required to think MONKS are overpowered?!

Talakeal
2015-06-07, 01:22 PM
Wat.

What level of misunderstanding of basic game mechanics is required to think MONKS are overpowered?!

I don't know, but I would say the vast majority of DMs I have played under, including my current one, ban them outright. It is probably a knee jerk reaction to supernatural abilities or preconceptions based on anime and wuxia.

Anonymouswizard
2015-06-07, 01:44 PM
Wat.

What level of misunderstanding of basic game mechanics is required to think MONKS are overpowered?!

Ignore DR without spending money, extra attacks per round, a lot of abilities that seem powerful due to being free even though low level spells do it better...

Monks seem powerful, it actually requires decent system mastery to see how bad they are.

Manly Man
2015-06-07, 01:56 PM
If it's any consolidation Feddlefew, I would love to run a game where the characters are all part of a performance group. Granted, I'm beginning to picture a medieval fantasy version of the Jose and the Pussycats cartoon, but I digress.
(Heck, a game idea that actually got shot down by the players was one where everyone was part of a traveling circus. Kinda wanted to run something like that at some point)

I'm pretty sure we all know what my group would be like if I was part of an all-Bard party.

boomwolf
2015-06-07, 01:57 PM
It takes decent mastery to see they are laughably bad, but to figure out spellcasters can do more in a single turn in practically every level takes simple knowledge of a few spells.


Anyway, as for shutting down - anything swiftblade. Guess many DMs don't see that despite how powerful it is, monoclass spellcasters is probably stronger.

BootStrapTommy
2015-06-07, 02:10 PM
Why is the argument that monks are horribly underpowered because spellcaster do it better? Spellcasters do everything better than everyone else. Because they are broken.

Anonymouswizard
2015-06-07, 02:36 PM
It takes decent mastery to see they are laughably bad, but to figure out spellcasters can do more in a single turn in practically every level takes simple knowledge of a few spells.


Anyway, as for shutting down - anything swiftblade. Guess many DMs don't see that despite how powerful it is, monoclass spellcasters is probably stronger.

Re. bolded part, that's a serious issue for some people. The magic system is pretty big for a part which 'only two party members will use', and so a lot of people skip anything other than the bare basics.

I haven't had the chance to pitch the game yet, but in Scioni plan to ban a few concepts for being too boring (e.g. brawler children of Thor and Thanatos, but a firefighter daughter of Thor or Assassin son of the Morrigan are fair game).

captainswift
2015-06-07, 09:00 PM
Eberron by way of Mutants and Masterminds over PBP, I pitched an Awakened Gorilla Druid. A prototype for a Gatekeeper experiment of some kind. His name? Don Ke'Kong, ancient orcish of King of Apes. I knew it was too ridiculous, but figured it was worth a shot. GM agreed it was too ridiculous, so next I piched Tinkerbelle, Half Elven Atomi Artificer whoes Elven father wrote the book on magic item creation, literally. She liked to tinker with magic items as well, hence the nickname. She didn't get it either, but I think that was more there being much better characters pitched by everyone else than her being to ridiculous.

May I, may I please steal Don Ke'Kong? That's just way too delicious.

Nerd-o-rama
2015-06-08, 10:36 AM
Why is the argument that monks are horribly underpowered because spellcaster do it better? Spellcasters do everything better than everyone else. Because they are broken.

It's more that (3.5) Monks get a whole smorgasbord of abilities that don't really synergize with each other on top of a chassis that doesn't do what it's supposed to, which is presumably hand-to-hand combat. Fighters might suck, but they can at least fight things that aren't spellcasters. Monks are alleged front-liners with d8 hit points, 3/4 BAB and anemic AC, they have to stand still and ignore their cool movement bonuses (and lose even more attack bonus) to do any more damage than a same-level schmuck with a Greatsword and finally, like every melee class, you can replace them with a better-designed version of the same thing using Tome of Battle.

Basically, they're a pile of features that sound cool but they can't do their basic job to save their lives. Full BAB and d10 or d12 HD would at least put them up to Fighter levels of fail.


May I, may I please steal Don Ke'Kong? That's just way too delicious.

Please let him do this.

Also Swift if you do this please let me play a dinosaur-riding Halfling plumber with a penchant for consumable magic items.

prufock
2015-06-08, 01:16 PM
My GM was preparing to run a "high school warriors" game using the Fight! RPG system. He vetoed my character.

MOLOCH, GOD OF FIRE, LORD OF PESTILENCE, HE-WHO-SPEAKS-IN-ALL-CAPS!

Not sure how many of you read SMBC, but you may be familiar with Moloch. He dresses like a luchador, is very immature, and played for laughs. That was exactly what I wanted. His actual powers are pretty minimal, and he has many insecurities.

The DM wrote him off as too jokey, and not really fitting with the setting. I ended up bowing out of that game because I couldn't think of another character I wanted to play (also time commitments and real life issues, etc).Too bad, really, he would have been fun.

AvatarVecna
2015-06-08, 02:45 PM
So you can play a Good nihilist? :smallconfused:

Also "feel that existence is meaningless and useless" is not "blow up the planet." The problem wasn't that you played a nihilist, it's that you blew up the planet.

As I understand it, Nihilism was originally something like "There is no afterlife, or anything other than the life you're currently getting. Therefore, nothing but your actions in this life matter. Therefore, you should be as good a person as possible for the sake of being a good person", a rather LG philosophy. Then, Chaotic murderhobos ignored everything except the basic premise, assumed that nothing they do matters, and assumed from there that they could do whatever they wanted, because nothing mattered...a very CN, borderline CE murderhobo philosophy. I was intentionally playing it goofy and over-the-top, off-his-rocker, juggling-flaming-babies-for-the-lulz evil. It was rather fun not caring, but I still want to play a more serious nihilist in the future, whether good or evil, but my DM says no. :smallannoyed:

BTW, as an uncertified Bard, my knowledge of philosophy is limited at best; if anybody with a better understanding of general philosophy or nihilism in particular notices the above simplifications being a bit off, feel free to correct me; I always like finding out new things.

AvatarVecna
2015-06-08, 03:20 PM
Why in hell would a DM specifically go out of his way give his players a chance to deliberately make the world go foom, and why do people not see this as the behavior in need of correction?!? What was that DM expecting when he put a dangerous artifact in the hands of an adventuring party? Did he not notice the PC researching a spell called Apocalypse from the Sky and buying metamagic rods like crazy? Why am I in a Starfleet uniform?!?

It was a pretty free-form, do what you want kind of game, as long as we travelled in the general direction of the plot. Also, I didn't tell him I was specifically researching Apocalypse of the Sky, just that I was researching a bunch of powerful blasting spells for the upcoming mega-battle. The rebuilding, the metamagic rods, the questions about the battlefield conditions...it was all very carefully played to avoid tipping my hand. It's not entirely my fault that he didn't read through all the blasting spells on the list I said I'd researched...it's at least a little bit on him.

BootStrapTommy
2015-06-08, 04:29 PM
As I understand it, Nihilism was originally something like "There is no afterlife, or anything other than the life you're currently getting. Therefore, nothing but your actions in this life matter. Therefore, you should be as good a person as possible for the sake of being a good person", a rather LG philosophy. Then, Chaotic murderhobos ignored everything except the basic premise, assumed that nothing they do matters, and assumed from there that they could do whatever they wanted, because nothing mattered...a very CN, borderline CE murderhobo philosophy. I was intentionally playing it goofy and over-the-top, off-his-rocker, juggling-flaming-babies-for-the-lulz evil. It was rather fun not caring, but I still want to play a more serious nihilist in the future, whether good or evil, but my DM says no. :smallannoyed:

BTW, as an uncertified Bard, my knowledge of philosophy is limited at best; if anybody with a better understanding of general philosophy or nihilism in particular notices the above simplifications being a bit off, feel free to correct me; I always like finding out new things. Philosophy degree speaking. Nihilism at its core is a rejection of knowable objective value.

Nihilism would discard the idea that actions have any value, good or evil. A nihilist would think these moral values are meaningless. They wouldn't believe in "Good" or "Evil". Thus they would be very TN or CN. Making your definition of nihilism not very nihilistic.

Feddlefew
2015-06-08, 06:16 PM
Philosophy degree speaking. Nihilism at its core is a rejection of knowable objective value.

Nihilism would discard the idea that actions have any value, good or evil. A nihilist would think these moral values are meaningless. They wouldn't believe in "Good" or "Evil". Thus they would be very TN or CN. Making your definition of nihilism not very nihilistic.

What's the proper definition of existentialism, out of curiosity?

TheCountAlucard
2015-06-08, 07:02 PM
As for a character concept that got shot down, how about one from the opposite side of the screen? :smalltongue:

In my seafaring game, the player characters have all recently met a ghost who looks like a slightly-older, black-armored version of Barbus, one of the player characters. He claims to be the ghost of a future version of Barbus, who sent his spirit back in time to stop something horrible from happening to one of the other player characters.

Naturally the players all called BS on me, and their characters are all assuming this is some sort of trickery. :smalltongue:

AvatarVecna
2015-06-08, 07:54 PM
Philosophy degree speaking. Nihilism at its core is a rejection of knowable objective value.

Nihilism would discard the idea that actions have any value, good or evil. A nihilist would think these moral values are meaningless. They wouldn't believe in "Good" or "Evil". Thus they would be very TN or CN. Making your definition of nihilism not very nihilistic.

Welp, that's me being proven totally wrong. Oh well, I'm sure I'm not the first person to not at all understand the philosophy they're talking about...

goto124
2015-06-09, 12:43 AM
Oh well, I'm sure I'm not the first person to not at all understand the philosophy they're talking about...

Your char doesn't have to understand philosophy that well either :smalltongue:

JAL_1138
2015-06-09, 05:14 AM
Philosophy degree speaking. Nihilism at its core is a rejection of knowable objective value.

Nihilism would discard the idea that actions have any value, good or evil. A nihilist would think these moral values are meaningless. They wouldn't believe in "Good" or "Evil". Thus they would be very TN or CN. Making your definition of nihilism not very nihilistic.

Another philosophy degree speaking--it depends in the type of nihilism. Epistemological nihilism, moral nihilism, existential nihilism (i.e., existentialism), etc.

Rejecting objective morality and meaning doesn't automatically preclude the notion that one should form one's own morals, follow society's current morals, or forge one's own sense of meaning and purpose in the absence of a universal one. Most of the existentialists advocated the latter, as a way to stave off anomie (aka "existential despair").

(Moral nihilism is distinct from moral relativism in that relativism gives a truth value to moral statements (though not an objective one); moral nihilism does not. An example of moral nihilism would be expressivism, which holds that morals are not statements of fact but statements of feeling, e.g., "that person's action makes me feel angry, so it was 'wrong.'" Existential nihilism doesn't automatically entail moral nihilism, although they're often intertwined. Where it gets tricky is whether all existentialists are existential nihilists; Camus (Absurdist, arguably either a branch of existentialism or a distinct philosophy altogether) didn't consider himself a nihilist, even though he espoused a lack of inherent meaning. It's probably best to say that most existentialism is derived from or a reaction to existential nihilism, although it's not always the case, and that capital-E existentialism gives greater value to constructed meaning than pure nihilism).

AvatarVecna
2015-06-09, 06:00 AM
-smart stuff that I can just barely understand

Fantastic! Let's see what I've learned today:

1. I was sort of right about nihilism.
2. I was incredibly wrong about nihilism.
3. The above statements are not necessarily contradictory.
4. The statement immediately before this one is only conditionally correct, objectively speaking.
5. Philosophy as a whole is complicated.

...maybe. Anyway, if I was barely understanding philosophy when I was bright-eyed and bushy-tailed several hours ago, there's no way I'll understand anything right now. Away!

*jumps out a nearby window*

*realizes he forgot he can't fly

*is immediately glad he lives on the ground floor*

*passes out*

JAL_1138
2015-06-09, 06:23 AM
Fantastic! Let's see what I've learned today:

1. I was sort of right about nihilism.
2. I was incredibly wrong about nihilism.
3. The above statements are not necessarily contradictory.
4. The statement immediately before this one is only conditionally correct, objectively speaking.
5. Philosophy as a whole is complicated.

...maybe. Anyway, if I was barely understanding philosophy when I was bright-eyed and bushy-tailed several hours ago, there's no way I'll understand anything right now. Away!

*jumps out a nearby window*

*realizes he forgot he can't fly

*is immediately glad he lives on the ground floor*

*passes out*

BootstrapTommy wasn't incorrect, but it depends on the type and extent. The lines get quite fuzzy and it's often interesting how far two branches of the same notion of inherent meaninglessness will go arguing at each other.

My reply is further qualified by "it's 7AM, haven't had coffee, am typing on a cell phone, and it's been a long time since college."

Existentialism: "Existence precedes essence. Our choices in effect create our essence, which we do not have ab initio."
Nihilism: "Well, not really. Even created meaning is ultimately pointless outside itself."
Absurdism: "Well yeah, but you guys are absolute jerks, I'm going to make my own meaning anyway. I know it doesn't make sense and I don't care. ("And then I'm going to call the Nazis "institutionalized nihilism" even though they had some pretty clear opinions on things" --Camus). No inherent meaning exists but I'm totally not a nihilist, you guys."

Bard1cKnowledge
2015-06-09, 11:26 PM
He's like batman but.....

All jokes aside, its not the character that got shot down, it was his actions by fellow PCs, one of which did stupid things all the time

I was playing as a ninja based of of Utsuho (from the manga Itsuwaribito)
So he barely killed, but was more about using tricks and bluffs, surprisingly got along well with the paladin

*interrogating vampires* *rolls well on a sense motive*

*pulls out a empty bomb canister *

"I packed enough sulfur and powdered metal in here to copy a daylight spell, so I suggest you tell the truth"

*the witch casts waxing image on me right there before I roll a bluff check*

After a minute of arguing the GM canceled the spell and I got no bluff check but I did get some praise

Shpadoinkle
2015-06-10, 01:16 AM
I never saw this one myself, I actually read about it in a similar thread years ago, but the idea stuck with me for some reason.

A dwarven "swordthrower." He carried around about a dozen greatswords on his back and chucked them at enemies with the Throw Anything feat.

goto124
2015-06-10, 05:02 AM
Why not axes?

Also, I think those are called Dwarven Longbows.

Spore
2015-06-10, 06:15 AM
Anything with "gnome" in the Race section. I am no longer allowed to play gnomes. Nor may I use them in my campaign if I'm DM'ing. (They invariably act like Kryinnish tinker gnomes (Spelljammer variant), and I know far too many ways of making things explode.)

So you weren't joking in the other thread!

My Halfling Paladin Knight was once nearly shut down because the DM wanted to retcon out Halflings out of his setting. After 1,5 years of game and real time he wanted to make me a Gnome.

A Vanara (Monkeyfolk) Monk was shut down because the DM didn't know licketysplit about Journey to the West and only knew Dragonball (and I didn'tr realize the connection at that time).

My Half-Elf couldn't take the Ancient Loremaster Archetype for Elves because "he is too young" with his almost 50 years. It would have allowed me to cast a few arcane spells from my divine spell list which was entirely reasonable after 20 or so years at a wizard academy. Knowledge checks ranging from 35 to 55 are ay-okay, but casting a Fireball from a 4th level divine slot is not. Okay, now.

My character now should know more about the plot than the DM can muster up (and I could push this by casting a free Commune spell with my deity daily), but that Invisibility spell is off limits. o_O


Also, I think those are called Dwarven Longbows.

Yer sappos'd to use a Repeating Crossbow, lad. This enforces our home-made rule. Only the really really weird dwarves go on adventures.

BootStrapTommy
2015-06-10, 09:49 PM
What's the proper definition of existentialism, out of curiosity? Existence precedes essence.


Another philosophy degree speaking--it depends in the type of nihilism. Epistemological nihilism, moral nihilism, existential nihilism (i.e., existentialism), etc.Distinctions I wasn't going to make when attempting to educate laymen. But important ones nonetheless.

That being said, a character defined by their nihilism in a TTRPG is most likely a moral nihilist, if some what of an existential nihilist, since those are the forms of nihilism which are most likely to be relevent to gameplay. Hence my focus there.

It would be an interesting game in which epistemological nihilism were relevent. Maybe a game of Paranoia?

Welp, that's me being proven totally wrong. Oh well, I'm sure I'm not the first person to not at all understand the philosophy they're talking about... We only pretend to know what we're talking about anyway...

JAL_1138
2015-06-10, 09:57 PM
We only pretend to know what we're talking about anyway...

This is absolutely true. I used to say I got my BA in BS. :smalltongue:

BootStrapTommy
2015-06-10, 10:03 PM
This is absolutely true. I used to say I got my BA in BS. :smalltongue: I double majored with economics. Which means I actually have a BS in BS. :smallwink:

Bard1cKnowledge
2015-06-11, 12:36 AM
Damn, my major was in procrastination, which I BSed and still passed