D&D Player Archetypes

[Anonymouswizard]

Crossdressing Character: Not what you think it is. This is a player who will play the opposite gender AND oversexualize the character. May or may not have humanly impossible attractiveness, but that doesn't matter, because he is hitting on a PC, and it's creepy. After all, you are sitting right next to the guy, and it's kind of weird. This is when the paladin is extremely serious about is vow of chastity.

Dressing Character: this player will play a character of the same gender and oversexualise them. The dressing in this case consists of approximately three dragon scales.

And, of course...

It's like totes hot man: this Crossdressing Character will attempt to sleep with everyone of the same gender they meet. Because apparently lesbians are hot, somehow. Invariably a guy, because women tend to be more subtle about it.

[Professor Gnoll]

Innocent Crossplayer: In response to the recent archetypes above, allow me to present a less off-putting type of player. This player plays exclusively as members of the opposite gender, but for completely non-sexual reasons. There could be a variety of reasons why they choose to do it, but they are especially defined by never playing as their own gender.

[goto124]

How is that different from a normal playe-

Oh, never plays their own gender. I see.

[Ninjaxenomorph]

Yeah, I know that player. He doesn't exclusively play women, but he plays a lot of them. Which annoys me, since he tends to roleplay less well (and less altogether) when playing one.

[8BitNinja]

Dressing Character: this player will play a character of the same gender and oversexualise them. The dressing in this case consists of approximately three dragon scales.

I think you're going off topic, this isn't about MMOs :smallsmile:

[goto124]

Players can easily and do provide artwork of scantily-dressed characters, whether said characters are in dragon scale 'armor' or are literally dragonborns :smallbiggrin:

[RyumaruMG]

Players can easily and do provide artwork of scantily-dressed characters, whether said characters are in dragon scale 'armor' or are literally dragonborns :smallbiggrin:

Nudist Dragonborn: because someone, somewhere, is into that.

[8BitNinja]

Nudist Dragonborn: because someone, somewhere, is into that.

When a Skyrim player doesn't wear armor

Oh wait, wrong dragonborn

[goto124]

When a Skyrim player doesn't wear armor

Oh wait, wrong dragonborn

This might be relevant (http://www.richardcobbett.com/codex/skyrim-week-of-madness-day-one/). Jump to the bottom of the page.

[8BitNinja]

This might be relevant (http://www.richardcobbett.com/codex/skyrim-week-of-madness-day-one/). Jump to the bottom of the page.

Oh Lydia, you were my first housecarl, and my wife. That is until you died in the battle to take Morthal for the Stormcloaks. I always think of you as a loyal fighter who is covered in not only armor, but honor.

It seems that you don't have that first one any more

[goto124]

Heheh, don't worry, the not-armor was due to one of the 200+ mods the player had blindly installed for the post :smallbiggrin:

[Legato Endless]

The Contrarian

A cousin to the reluctant gamer, the contrarian exists to blight whatever the DMs intention is. She never takes story hooks, she never abides by genre conventions. In the game of brave explorers she's the one who will not leave her car. In the nation of a strictly organized caste system she's the anarchist who mouths off to everyone in sight. In the flames of the Holy War of the Gods she is the settings only atheist. She is a troll, and she does not feel satisfied unless she has met her quota of undercutting and resisting, disputing and disrupting the Game Master to visible annoyance.

[8BitNinja]

Heheh, don't worry, the not-armor was due to one of the 200+ mods the player had blindly installed for the post :smallbiggrin:

I know

They aren't modding right. You have to blindly install mods until the game fatally crashes

[Winter_Wolf]

I know

They aren't modding right. You have to blindly install mods until the game fatally crashes

Doesn't that happen at 256 or 257 regardless of anything else?

[8BitNinja]

Doesn't that happen at 256 or 257 regardless of anything else?

I don't know, I play vanilla

[IronLionShark]

You've got nothing to fear

Unless you're evil, that is. Then I'll let you have first strike, but I will get the last.


That depends on your definition of evil.
Is achieving equality among a people regardless of species or class evil? Is starting a LG freedom of press nation in a land of monarchy evil? Is achieving resurrections through arcane means evil?

Necromancy and/or unholy blood relics may or may not have been used to achieve this. However, aren't intentions, results, and being lawful all that matter? Also, the character in question would try diplomacy and not strike. So even if it's evil I guess he'd be safe

Oh and:
The Maelstrom: Always plays chaotic acting characters, regardless of written alignment.
The Malestrom: Always plays male characters.
The Mailstorm: Always likes opening things such as mail.

[goto124]

The Malestrom: Always plays male characters.

Wouldn't this have significant overlap with "always plays character of the same sex as the player himself"?

Unless there's more to it, such as female (or male!) players playing male characters after some unfortunate gaming experiences :smalleek:, or GMs constantly playing male NPCs with not a female NPC in sight sorry, just remembered this is the thread for player archetypes, not GM archetypes :smalltongue:

[JAL_1138]

The Contrarian

A cousin to the reluctant gamer, the contrarian exists to blight whatever the DMs intention is. She never takes story hooks, she never abides by genre conventions. In the game of brave explorers she's the one who will not leave her car. In the nation of a strictly organized caste system she's the anarchist who mouths off to everyone in sight. In the flames of the Holy War of the Gods she is the settings only atheist. She is a troll, and she does not feel satisfied unless she has met her quota of undercutting and resisting, disputing and disrupting the Game Master to visible annoyance.

A cousin to the Contrarian, The Bard isn't trying to derail the campaign, but may have a secret death wish to die with a s#&%-eating grin still on their face when the DM leaps the table and strangles them. Excessive silliness at all times, and/or constant lame puns, and/or goofball plans that somehow work, and/or consistently and obscenely lucky rolls regardless of whose dice they're using, and/or having a simple solution to virtually any problem that bypasses most challenges, everything they do manages to annoy the DM, and they revel in it. (The Bard may or may not also have a tendency to consider Captain Jack Harkness to be a role model, and attempt to flirt and/or sleep with nearly anything that has an INT score high enough to reciprocate).

[8BitNinja]

Wouldn't this have significant overlap with "always plays character of the same sex as the player himself"?

Unless there's more to it, such as female (or male!) players playing male characters after some unfortunate gaming experiences :smalleek:, or GMs constantly playing male NPCs with not a female NPC in sight sorry, just remembered this is the thread for player archetypes, not GM archetypes :smalltongue:

No, GM archetypes are perfectly acceptable. If you have some, fire away

[Winter_Wolf]

For GMs, the "Puzzlemaster/Riddlemaster". This GM loves puzzles and/or riddles just a little (lot) too much. If you play in one of their games you better love those two things or you'll end up frustrated beyond belief. If you're more hack,slash,loot the corpses, you're probably going to need to play with a different GM. Some GMs are good at it; the variant Delusional Puzzle/Riddlemaster is not only smitten with them, but creates complex problems with exactly one solution that only their particular thought process ever arrives at.

Personally not opposed to having riddles and complex puzzles to some degree, but there's a reason I don't play spellcasters in D&D.

[goto124]

For GMs, the "Puzzlemaster/Riddlemaster". This GM loves puzzles and/or riddles just a little (lot) too much. If you play in one of their games you better love those two things or you'll end up frustrated beyond belief. If you're more hack,slash,loot the corpses, you're probably going to need to play with a different GM. Some GMs are good at it; the variant Delusional Puzzle/Riddlemaster is not only smitten with them, but creates complex problems with exactly one solution that only their particular thought process ever arrives at.

Personally not opposed to having riddles and complex puzzles to some degree, but there's a reason I don't play spellcasters in D&D.

Is the Puzzlemaster also a Railroader?

[Winter_Wolf]

Is the Puzzlemaster also a Railroader?

Not necessarily, but the Delusional P/RM probably is. The non delusional one might be, but if skillful will hopefully not keep you on the rails without branch lines. I like the puzzles and Riddlemaster stuff as more bonus prize gatekeepers: you get extra loot, or there's an actual useful shortcut or something. Basically it's an easy/easier button where not solving it means trying to do things the hard way. Say like a non caster party (it's doable, I promise!) getting a wand of healing or that handy amulet that can read minds so they can attempt to slyly divine who is plotting against the jarl without having to rely solely on their personal interviewing skills.

[8BitNinja]

The Pure Caster: he only plays as a wizard, sorcerer, cleric, or druid

[IronLionShark]

The Pure Caster: he only plays as a wizard, sorcerer, cleric, or druid

The just add martial caster: Always plays a caster, but always dilutes it with multi classing into a martial class

[Velaryon]

The Genre Blind: Seems to be completely unaware of the type of setting and game they're in. Wants to play a cyber-ninja in Call of Cthulhu, an uber-wizard in your gritty low-magic setting, and gets upset when they can't be their latest ridiculous archetype. Has a complete disregard for tonal consistency.

The Strange [Home]Brew Addict - This player always wants to use some weird homebrew material that they found online somewhere, probably a site you've never heard of. They usually haven't assessed it for balance, they definitely don't want to just approximate the idea using published material, and they are often the Genre Blind as well.



The Hen Pecked
He had been quite a good player until he started turning up with his non player girlfriend. This was fine until she got jealous of the DM and started asserting her dominance by asking the player to make her a cup of tea, or something, as soon as it was his initiative.

A variant of this is the Hen-Pecked GM. This player hosts and/or runs the game, and their non-gamer Significant Other is supposedly fine with that. But eventually cracks start to appear: there's a chore that needs to be done right now, even though it's game time, even though it could have been done before the game or wait until later, that's not good enough for the SO. Or "Sorry honey, you can't have your regularly scheduled game night next week because that's when we're meeting the <other couple, relatives, etc.>." Games with said GM inevitably become shorter, less frequent, and may even stop altogether.



The Wolverine: the Moody Loner Orphan who's Too Cool For You Lame-os and your Party. Usually tries to make each session at least half about their solo antics.

The Reluctant Adventurer: Really doesn't want to be doing this 'adventuring' thing, and would rather be at home where it's safe. (I was going to call this 'The Bilbo', but it was already taken.)

Closely related is the Neutroll - The Neutroll's character, inevitably some flavor of neutral alignment in a system that uses such, has no interest in <plot hook that the rest of the party is ready to pursue> unless the other players bribe them or accommodate whatever their character wants to do.


The I always have a back-up character guy: This guy spends his free time not gaming writing up literally dozens of characters just in case his group needs something new or his character dies. He creates each of these characters to be unique and writes their backstory ahead of time.

I am this guy I currently have 28 5e characters wrote up of various levels classes and races just in case someone invites me to a session.

Sometimes this one becomes Mr. Character Fatigue, because their new/backup character ideas are burning a hole in their binder, they begin to lose interest in their current character. They may not admit to it or even be conscious of it, but their current character starts to act more reckless, almost as if they were trying to get killed. Sometimes this player outright "loses" their character sheet and has to make a new character. Good thing they've been kicking around that other idea they couldn't stop talking about all week, right?



On the other side of the coin:
The DON"T KILL THE PCs DM: This DM will always avoid killing PCs. If an encounter proves more lethal than expected this DM may add in NPCs to save the PCs, weaken the enemies without notice, or use another method to save the PCs.

I try not to be this DM, but frequently I am. The narrative is just so much smoother if I don't have to introduce new characters every second or third session.

[Concrete]

The Comedian
Always goes for the choice that appears the most hilarious, regardless of what mood the GM is going for. This person’s characters can serve as welcome comic relief, or as a time-wasting, mood-ruining distraction, depending on comedic ability and timing. Works best when there is only one of them, or all of them is one.

The Co-DM
Usually a player who has experience DM’ing, a love of the game, a good understanding of the rules, and knows the challenges of keeping the momentum of a story. This player can be a great resource for an inexperienced DM, help keep the party focused, and be relied on to help another player with some obscure rule knowledge, letting the DM keep the story going by jumping on any semblance of a plot hook.

Can also overshadow the DM, and players might start to turn to this player for rulings, rather than the actual DM.

The Prickly Doormat
This player always chooses whatever kind of character they believe the party needs the most,whether he’s asked to or not, and will keep passive aggressively reminding the other players of the fact that he’s not actually playing the character he wants, but that this really isn't a big deal. Not at all.

The Chronicler
This character knows everything that has happened, and will inform, or correct, anyone about any single PC, encounter, or location. Almost always an asset to any gaming table. Can be the bane of GM’s who make things up on the fly, though.
Subclass: The quartermaster.
This player knows the exact location of every piece of loot the party has ever touched , be it a vorpal sword or the wooden spoon a player mentioned picking up, but never explicitly put down. WIll want to know the exact weight and composition of pretty much everything to be found in a game

[nedz]

The just add martial caster: Always plays a caster, but always dilutes it with multi classing into a martial class

I have one of these, but it's always two levels of Rogue - for Evasion - and a Wizard/Sorcerer who spams Magic Missile and Fireball.

[Efrate]

For DMs: The Thespian. Will play all the NPCs to amazing effect with different voices, accents, quirks, and personality that is often significantly more in depth than the players. Even if its just merchant bill at random general store in podunk nowheresville. Who has a single scene. Is often not great at rules or crunch but fluffmaster to the max.

For players The "This might sound crazy but..." This guy comes up with the most insane, weird, off the wall solution to problems. And it tends to work. The dice seem to love him when doing this, but not necessarily otherwise. Often make campaign defining moments effortlessly.


Fighting some gargoyles at the top of a 150ft bell tower. One flys by and flies out over the main street of town after an attacking. The duskblade : "I have an idea." Dimension hop next to the gargoyle in mid air, take the AoO for attempting to start a grapple, get missed, grabs gargolye and wins grapple check. Proceeds to pin and keep said gargoyle in a pin for 3 rounds in a row as it falls. They crater the main street in town, but both somehow survive and square off on the ground. The rest of the party easily handles the remaining gargoyle, and get down in time to see the duskblade barely standing finish the gargoyle. "See! It worked!" before nearly collapsing with his single digit hp remainng.

[JAL_1138]

The just add martial caster: Always plays a caster, but always dilutes it with multi classing into a martial class

Alternatively, plays a bard and focuses on weapon combat. (E.g., in 5e, variant human Valor Bard, Crossbow Expert feat, Sharpshooter feat, yoinks Swift Quiver and Volley off the Ranger spell list. You're now a fullcaster who's among the best ranged-weapon damage dealers in the game.)

Player archetype: The bard advocate. Is convinced everybody forgets about bards when talking about martial+caster combos for some reason, and wonders why you'd need to multiclass. :smalltongue:

Well, unless you're trying to become a bard in 1e, where it takes dual-classing Fighter, Thief, and eventually studying under Druids to be able to eventually triple-class into Bard.

[8BitNinja]

The just add martial caster: Always plays a caster, but always dilutes it with multi classing into a martial class

Just add martial arts caster: always plays a caster, but multiclasses as a monk as well

[Anonymouswizard]

Player archetype: The bard advocate. Is convinced everybody forgets about bards when talking about martial+caster combos for some reason, and wonders why you'd need to multiclass. :smalltongue:

Maybe I should try a 5e bard. I'm not really for all this 'martial' business though, why would anyone play one of those classes?

Ultimate Arcane Power: this player always plays a spellcaster, probably in a suboptimal fashion.

Woah!xia: this character always wants to play a monk, because martial arts are cool.

[Quertus]

For GMs, the "Puzzlemaster/Riddlemaster". This GM loves puzzles and/or riddles just a little (lot) too much. If you play in one of their games you better love those two things or you'll end up frustrated beyond belief. If you're more hack,slash,loot the corpses, you're probably going to need to play with a different GM. Some GMs are good at it; the variant Delusional Puzzle/Riddlemaster is not only smitten with them, but creates complex problems with exactly one solution that only their particular thought process ever arrives at.

Personally not opposed to having riddles and complex puzzles to some degree, but there's a reason I don't play spellcasters in D&D.

P/R - sounds fun - sign me up! No such thing as too much P/R. :smallwink:
D P/R - like any other bad "single solution" GM, sounds horrible - sign them up for the firing squad rehabilitation.



The Co-DM
Usually a player who has experience DM’ing, a love of the game, a good understanding of the rules, and knows the challenges of keeping the momentum of a story. This player can be a great resource for an inexperienced DM, help keep the party focused, and be relied on to help another player with some obscure rule knowledge, letting the DM keep the story going by jumping on any semblance of a plot hook.

Can also overshadow the DM, and players might start to turn to this player for rulings, rather than the actual DM.

The Chronicler
This character knows everything that has happened, and will inform, or correct, anyone about any single PC, encounter, or location. Almost always an asset to any gaming table. Can be the bane of GM’s who make things up on the fly, though.


The "overshadowing co-DM" - you say that as if it's a bad thing. :smalltongue: Having been in all three roles in that scenario, let me tell you that it is not. Having one GM in charge of story, and a separate one in charge of rules, works great. One might even call it ideal. All these GMs who try to gish both are not sufficiently optimized. Something, something DM action economy something.

For the Chronicler, making things up in the fly is fine, just as long as you are willing to be consistent. Those DMs who are unwilling - or unable - to be consistent are the bane of my the Chronicler's existence, regardless of their tendencies for planning vs extemporaneous creativity.


For DMs: The Thespian. Will play all the NPCs to amazing effect with different voices, accents, quirks, and personality that is often significantly more in depth than the players. Even if its just merchant bill at random general store in podunk nowheresville. Who has a single scene. Is often not great at rules or crunch but fluffmaster to the max.

For players The "This might sound crazy but..." This guy comes up with the most insane, weird, off the wall solution to problems. And it tends to work. The dice seem to love him when doing this, but not necessarily otherwise. Often make campaign defining moments effortlessly.


Fighting some gargoyles at the top of a 150ft bell tower. One flys by and flies out over the main street of town after an attacking. The duskblade : "I have an idea." Dimension hop next to the gargoyle in mid air, take the AoO for attempting to start a grapple, get missed, grabs gargolye and wins grapple check. Proceeds to pin and keep said gargoyle in a pin for 3 rounds in a row as it falls. They crater the main street in town, but both somehow survive and square off on the ground. The rest of the party easily handles the remaining gargoyle, and get down in time to see the duskblade barely standing finish the gargoyle. "See! It worked!" before nearly collapsing with his single digit hp remainng.

I had 2 characters who, between them, parallel the gargoyles story.

For their first encounter, the party was attacked, at night, by wolves. Only the person on watch was wearing their armor (obviously).

Never one to shy from combat, Balteus Battlerager (Rage for short) rolled out of his sleeping bag, knife in hand (armor and battle axe sadly put away for the night), grabbed the nearest wolf, and, figuring he could handle the damage better than the wolves could, rolled into the fire with the wolf, and held it in the fire while stabbing it to death. Once that one stopped moving, he rolled out of the fire, grabbed a second wolf, and repeated the tactic. Repeat until all the wolves were dead.

Oddly, the wolves never tried to gang up and leap on him like that did with the rest of the party... :smalltongue:

Long story, but... the party keeps rescuing prisoners from a drow-overrun dwarven fortress (as PCs die / new players join the game). The party is exhausted, lacks weapons, lacks cohesion... and, at this particular moment, lacks HP: about half of the party is unconscious.

Then we run into a drow patrol. While we outnumber them, they are, on average, more skilled than our party (the rule was, everyone starts at 1st level; the party was 7th when I joined).

To increase our numerical superiority, Armus engaged one of the drow in a grapple.

Just before the drow would have choked Armus out, the party finished up, and easily dispatched the lone drow.



Curious what people think about how crazy / sound their tactics were.

[JAL_1138]

Maybe I should try a 5e bard. I'm not really for all this 'martial' business though, why would anyone play one of those classes?

Ultimate Arcane Power: this player always plays a spellcaster, probably in a suboptimal fashion.

Woah!xia: this character always wants to play a monk, because martial arts are cool.

5e bards are a ton of fun. I've played a couple of other classes (Clerics are great, Rogues are fun) but I end up coming back to a criminal-background Bard (for Thieves' Tools) so that I can do basically everything (if sometimes/frequently not as well as a true specialist).

Unless you really, really want to do weapon damage for some reason (I usually do, personally, since it reminds me of the 2e bard), then Lore Bards are amazing because of the extra Magical Secrets and Cutting Words for their Bardic Inspiration. Cutting Words is one of the best class features in the game, IMO. As a bonus action you can penalize an enemy's saving throw by a d6 (larger die size as you level up). So you can effectively guarantee most of your best spells to land (and make a surprisingly-decent grappler, which can combo nicely with Cloud of Daggers or any other spell that affects a fixed area over time), and forcing a failed save can be absolutely brutal when combo'd with something like Hold Person or Hold Monster.

[jitzul]

Woah!xia: this character always wants to play a monk, because martial arts are cool.

I'll admit I used to be this when I first started playing. Then I actually played a monk and after almost dying during every tough encounter and having my main useful to the party ability be resisted 75% of the time. The next time I play a melee class I am definitely gonna choose barbarian or great weapon fighter.

[Anonymouswizard]

5e bards are a ton of fun. I've played a couple of other classes (Clerics are great, Rogues are fun) but I end up coming back to a criminal-background Bard (for Thieves' Tools) so that I can do basically everything (if sometimes/frequently not as well as a true specialist).

Unless you really, really want to do weapon damage for some reason (I usually do, personally, since it reminds me of the 2e bard), then Lore Bards are amazing because of the extra Magical Secrets and Cutting Words for their Bardic Inspiration. Cutting Words is one of the best class features in the game, IMO. As a bonus action you can penalize an enemy's saving throw by a d6 (larger die size as you level up). So you can effectively guarantee most of your best spells to land (and make a surprisingly-decent grappler, which can combo nicely with Cloud of Daggers or any other spell that affects a fixed area over time), and forcing a failed save can be absolutely brutal when combo'd with something like Hold Person or Hold Monster.

Yeah, my party needs a healer, so it's a choice between Cleric (for being a secondary tank) and Lore Bard (because of those extra proficiencies). I'm leaning towards the Lore Bard right now because it just looks more fun, also it'll be fun to play a chaste bard when the party has a slutty sorceress (I'm thinking of going Accolyte background and being a wandering monk*, just for the fact that I can pull off the backstory on either one and if I go human I can call myself 'Friar', where are those florist's tools...), although I think I'd play a cleric much better (Life Domain, variant human, and wielding a quarterstaff because do you think monks carry other weapons?).

* Read: guy who spent a lot of time in the monastery reading and copying books, not the monk class.

[JAL_1138]

Yeah, my party needs a healer, so it's a choice between Cleric (for being a secondary tank) and Lore Bard (because of those extra proficiencies). I'm leaning towards the Lore Bard right now because it just looks more fun, also it'll be fun to play a chaste bard when the party has a slutty sorceress (I'm thinking of going Accolyte background and being a wandering monk*, just for the fact that I can pull off the backstory on either one and if I go human I can call myself 'Friar', where are those florist's tools...), although I think I'd play a cleric much better (Life Domain, variant human, and wielding a quarterstaff because do you think monks carry other weapons?).

* Read: guy who spent a lot of time in the monastery reading and copying books, not the monk class.

If you need someone who's a really good healer, go Life Cleric. If you just need a healer at all (which is the case for nearly any party I've ever been in), Bards and non-Life Clerics work just fine, and about equally well since there's a lot of overlap in their spell list.

Healing magic is generally not as vital in 5th as in prior editions. Things that end combat faster, like Hold Person or Hypnotic Pattern, are usually better uses of a spell slot. I've never had a party actually need a Life Cleric (for a good healer instead of a merely adequate one like a Bard or non-Life Cleric), but admittedly there have been many times when I'd have really liked to have had one. Ultimately either one is a good choice for most parties. I'd actually go Lore Bard in many circumstances.

If you think you really do need the healing, like if your party's main melee combatant depends on HP more than AC (Frenzy Barbarian for instance, or a Druid using Wildshape whom you need to stay Wildshaped), or you don't get many short or long rests compared to what you might more typically expect, or you're an extremely squishy party overall, then nobody but a Life Cleric can heal worth a dang without the Healer feat before Mass Healing Word (which Bards don't get, weirdly) and Mass Cure Wounds kick in, and there are so many feats more useful than Healer it's hard to take. Again, though, generally healing any more than "enough to stand up and get to a place to take a short or long rest" is not necessary.

For a bard, my advice is don't waste a spell-known on Cure Wounds. Healing Word will get someone back on their feet, which is virtually all anybody but a Life Cleric (even other Clerics--Bards are roughly on par with non-Life clerics) can do anyway without burning through a worthwhile slot that could be better used for something else (like Hypnotic Pattern, for example), and it can do it from 60ft away as a bonus action instead of requiring you to be adjacent. Getting someone upright is usually all the healing you'll need anyway.

But if you have no other healer and are a slightly-squishy party, it might be worth taking Cure Wounds (and generally casting it with a higher slot than 1st, since otherwise Healing Word is more useful)--you can always swap it out at level-up later if you don't get much use from it. Out of combat, Bards help heal most by using Song of Rest to tack on a d6 (and eventually higher sized dice) to HP gained from spending hit dice. It can be the difference between needing a spell or potion to top off HP or not, and it's free, so in that sense it's better than many Cleric spells.


EDIT: While I favor Lore Bard generally, Knowledge Cleric fits the character background you're describing to a T and they're good skillmonkeys too--they get Expertise in two skills out of Arcana, History, Nature, or Religion (and get whichever two skills they pick for it as extras over what they get from class or background), two bonus languages, the ability to Channel Divinity into proficiency in any one skill or tool for 10 minutes at a time, and (like other Clerics) can use the Guidance cantrip for a 1d4 boost to any ability check.

[Dire Roc]

The Egoist: The person who is totally the best, contributes the most, matters the most, really. Even if the fighter does more on a normal attack then they do on a sneak attack. Often seen listing their damage by the maximum rather than the average.

The Golden Boy: Actually a phenomenal player, carries the party in combat, dynamic in role play, and pleasant to be around. Has so many groups vying for his attention its almost impossible to recruit him.

The Fixed List: They have a small roster of characters with complete stats, background, setting and plot hooks. Choose one, no they can't change any of it for the campaign's needs.

Secret Secret: They've got a secret. They've got to have a secret the darker and more secretive the better. Seems to have difficulty adding depth to characters in any other way.

Mr. Hyde: Friendly and kind person OOC. In character they will push and force down anyone who disagrees with them and attempt to dominate the group dynamic.

The Pleasant Surprise: The new player who builds an interesting, balanced character on their first try that works well with the setting and party dynamics.

Off Duty Dm: He knows the rules and is used to being able to pop in with suggestions anywhere in the group's discussion, as well as control the flow of play. (This one's me).

[8BitNinja]

The Bard: Does not have to be the bard class. Sings of legends and great battles while traveling

[No-Kill Cleric]

The Video Game Character they are desperately trying to play whatever video game in whatever game your using, usually whatever video game their currently obsessed with. This has a variant of The Movie Character where their desperately trying to emanate the last movie they watched. One of my main group's players has this. About half of this person's characters are Assassin's Creed assassins. They refuse to acknowledge assassination as evil since "Assassin's Creed assassins aren't evil." No amount of arguing will fix this.

The Oops I Forgot. They forget they have class features, especially ones that would have prevented the death of a fellow character or other horrible event.

The Novelist. They spent at least a few weeks planning every detail of their backstory. The final paper is longer than some pieces of fiction you've read. The backstory reads about as well as a 14 year old writing about their OC, with enough plot holes for swiss cheese to get jealous.




The Pure Caster: he only plays as a wizard, sorcerer, cleric, or druid

That one's me. I tried playing a rogue with a fighter companion. The fighter felt decent enough, but since my entire party is convinced either Power Attack or Sneak Attack are the only ways to do damage, I've let them take the front line.
If anyone needs me, I'll be in the back, swishing my hips or flailing my arms so you all don't die.

[Anonymouswizard]

If you need someone who's a really good healer, go Life Cleric. If you just need a healer at all (which is the case for nearly any party I've ever been in), Bards and non-Life Clerics work just fine, and about equally well since there's a lot of overlap in their spell list.

Healing magic is generally not as vital in 5th as in prior editions. Things that end combat faster, like Hold Person or Hypnotic Pattern, are usually better uses of a spell slot. I've never had a party actually need a Life Cleric (for a good healer instead of a merely adequate one like a Bard or non-Life Cleric), but admittedly there have been many times when I'd have really liked to have had one. Ultimately either one is a good choice for most parties. I'd actually go Lore Bard in many circumstances.

If you think you really do need the healing, like if your party's main melee combatant depends on HP more than AC (Frenzy Barbarian for instance, or a Druid using Wildshape whom you need to stay Wildshaped), or you don't get many short or long rests compared to what you might more typically expect, or you're an extremely squishy party overall, then nobody but a Life Cleric can heal worth a dang without the Healer feat before Mass Healing Word (which Bards don't get, weirdly) and Mass Cure Wounds kick in, and there are so many feats more useful than Healer it's hard to take. Again, though, generally healing any more than "enough to stand up and get to a place to take a short or long rest" is not necessary.

For a bard, my advice is don't waste a spell-known on Cure Wounds. Healing Word will get someone back on their feet, which is virtually all anybody but a Life Cleric (even other Clerics--Bards are roughly on par with non-Life clerics) can do anyway without burning through a worthwhile slot that could be better used for something else (like Hypnotic Pattern, for example), and it can do it from 60ft away as a bonus action instead of requiring you to be adjacent. Getting someone upright is usually all the healing you'll need anyway.

But if you have no other healer and are a slightly-squishy party, it might be worth taking Cure Wounds (and generally casting it with a higher slot than 1st, since otherwise Healing Word is more useful)--you can always swap it out at level-up later if you don't get much use from it. Out of combat, Bards help heal most by using Song of Rest to tack on a d6 (and eventually higher sized dice) to HP gained from spending hit dice. It can be the difference between needing a spell or potion to top off HP or not, and it's free, so in that sense it's better than many Cleric spells.


EDIT: While I favor Lore Bard generally, Knowledge Cleric fits the character background you're describing to a T and they're good skillmonkeys too--they get Expertise in two skills out of Arcana, History, Nature, or Religion (and get whichever two skills they pick for it as extras over what they get from class or background), two bonus languages, the ability to Channel Divinity into proficiency in any one skill or tool for 10 minutes at a time, and (like other Clerics) can use the Guidance cantrip for a 1d4 boost to any ability check.

Well currently our only tank is a Barbarian, going Path of the Berserker, who never rages. I was considering taking Cure Wounds over healing word and only doing out of combat healing to make Hit Dice stretch further, but I'll consider going the other way round.

I can't believe I forgot Knowledge Cleric, but I am afb right now. It fits the character perfectly, now I just need a background... (oh, it'll be Acolyte, come to me my spare Holy Symbol).


The Egoist: The person who is totally the best, contributes the most, matters the most, really. Even if the fighter does more on a normal attack then they do on a sneak attack. Often seen listing their damage by the maximum rather than the average.

My general rule: above a basic level, the more ego someone has the less likely they are to actually be great. It's actually rather hilarious when you look at actors or writers.


Mr. Hyde: Friendly and kind person OOC. In character they will push and force down anyone who disagrees with them and attempt to dominate the group dynamic.

I definitely have a bit of this, although I won't force down anyone who disagrees with me.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Unless you really, really want to do weapon damage for some reason (I usually do, personally, since it reminds me of the 2e bard), then Lore Bards are amazing because of the extra Magical Secrets and Cutting Words for their Bardic Inspiration. Cutting Words is one of the best class features in the game, IMO. As a bonus action you can penalize an enemy's saving throw by a d6 (larger die size as you level up).

Unless I'm missing something, you can use it on 'an attack roll, an ability check, or a damage roll'. And I'm fairly certain saving throws aren't any of these.

[Cluedrew]

I have one:

Rules Encyclopedia: Has extensive knowledge of the rule system. Lacks the ability/drive to manipulate it that would qualify them for rules lawyer.

Not sure how common this is (or if in an actual list it would be worth being different from a rules lawyer) but I thought I would put it out there.

[Anonymouswizard]

Unless I'm missing something, you can use it on 'an attack roll, an ability check, or a damage roll'. And I'm fairly certain saving throws aren't any of these.

Saving throws are Ability Checks (as are attack rolls, that should really read 'an ability check or a damage roll').

In short almost every d20 roll is an ability check, including the following subsets'
-attack rolls
-skill checks
-saving throws.

Now, 'saving throws aren't ability checks' is as valid a houserule as my 'Special Protagonist Power rules for the GM' one (essentially, if players get Fate Points/Moxie/Hero Points the GM gets one per PC per session unless the rules state they get more), and might alter the balance of some abilities, so if you want to run games like hat feel free.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Saving throws are Ability Checks (as are attack rolls, that should really read 'an ability check or a damage roll').

In short almost every d20 roll is an ability check, including the following subsets'
-attack rolls
-skill checks
-saving throws.

Now, 'saving throws aren't ability checks' is as valid a houserule as my 'Special Protagonist Power rules for the GM' one (essentially, if players get Fate Points/Moxie/Hero Points the GM gets one per PC per session unless the rules state they get more), and might alter the balance of some abilities, so if you want to run games like hat feel free.

No, they are not: http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/ability-check
(http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/ability-check).

Are attack rolls and saving throws basically specialized ability checks? They aren't. It’s easy to mistake the three rolls as three faces of the same thing, because they each involve rolling a d20, adding any modifiers, and comparing the total to a Difficulty Class, and they’re all subject to advantage and disadvantage. In short, they share the same procedure for determining success or failure.

Despite this common procedure, the three rolls are separate from each other. If something in the game, like the guidance spell, affects one of them, the other two aren’t affected unless the rules specifically say so.

[Anonymouswizard]

No, they are not: http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/ability-check
(http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/ability-check).

But there is no difference between an Attack roll, a Skill Check, and a Saving throw. The ruling makes no sense. Just because it isn't called a Dexter (Attack) roll doesn't mean that it isn't the exact same thing.

This is one of those things I hate about 5e, it doesn't simplify when it would make the rules better. Attack rolls work literally the same as an Ability Check, there is no reason to separate them (unless there is a category, say Ability Rolls, which covers both). They are fundamentally the same thing. It's like saying a Dexterity Save is fundamentally different to a Wisdom save because they are used in different situations.

The stupid thing is, if they just used 'skill check' it would be much clearer. I mean, I know that there's no underwater basket weaving skill in the books,

Stupid me, I'm confusing Ability Checks and Proficiency Checks. The name 'Ability Check' is still confusing though.

[JAL_1138]

Unless I'm missing something, you can use it on 'an attack roll, an ability check, or a damage roll'. And I'm fairly certain saving throws aren't any of these.

As I've only played Valor, rather than Lore, I've simply misremembered it being used by the Lore bard from the party to ruin enemies' day grappling (as grappling is opposed by an ability check instead of a saving throw). Derp. I forgot about grappling being a check rather than a save and conflated them.

It's still stellar to grapple and keep them held in place for Cloud of Daggers, Spirit Guardians, Moonbeam, etc., which is how the Lore player that I've run with has used it, comboing off his own spell (Cloud of Daggers) or a Cleric (Spirit Guardians) or Druid (Moonbeam).

I should really check the book before I post.

The nice thing about 5th, though, is that I've been playing VBs this long and I haven't cracked open the Bard chapter in the PhB in about three months.

[JAL_1138]

I have one:

Rules Encyclopedia: Has extensive knowledge of the rule system. Lacks the ability/drive to manipulate it that would qualify them for rules lawyer.

Not sure how common this is (or if in an actual list it would be worth being different from a rules lawyer) but I thought I would put it out there.

It's covered under the types of rules lawyer mentioned waaay earlier, the Type 2 and Type 3. IIRC, The Type 2 doesn't manipulate the rules to their own advantage, just aims for consistency. The Type 3 knows the rules as well as any other Rules Lawyer, but considers them to be useful guidelines which can be bent and broken in service of story or fun, instead of as absolutes, and basically offers their services to the DM to facilitate any of things.

[Hazrond]

The reluctant minmaxer. In almost any media in which an RPG is played, one of them is the reluctant minmaxer. This is the person who instinctively, reflexively, figures out the most optimal way to completely break the game. However, unlike your more typical minmaxer, this player really doesn't want to do that. She wants to play and enjoy the game, for once. She wants everyone to be able to have fun, for a change. But inevitably, a situation will arise where everything looks completely hopeless, and everyone will turn to her and say, "Please, save us! Break the game! We know you know how!" And she'll sigh, and take out an enormous bag of d6s. She will then proceed to completely crack the campaign open, destroy the BBEG, save the party and the world, and reduce the GM to tears, in no more than three rolls.

Howdy, that's me. It's why I tend to play gimmicks at this point.

Edit: Im also a Rules Lawyer (Advanced)

[8BitNinja]

The Man with the NPC Best Friend: Almost always has an NPC that follows them around as a part of his current and/or backstory. Usually plays a a 30/35 year old man (or the equivalent, you know how D&D races can be sometimes) who is compelled to protect a 12> year old girl so he can feel like Joel from The Last of Us.

Yes, these people do exist

[Belac93]

The Man with the NPC Best Friend: Almost always has an NPC that follows them around as a part of his current and/or backstory. Usually plays a a 30/35 year old man (or the equivalent, you know how D&D races can be sometimes) who is compelled to protect a 12> year old girl so he can feel like Joel from The Last of Us.

Yes, these people do exist

I have an entire party of these right now. Me and some of my old friends decided to get together to play D&D again, and they started adopting orphans! It was a sandbox campaign in the first place, so luckily it didn't disrupt any plot. We can't play a ton (we don't live very close), but so far they've adopted a 9 year old girl, her 15 year old sister, a 7 year old boy, and his half-demon (mechanically tiefling) twin sister. And next they are going into the mountains, where orcs, halflings, goliaths, genasi, and some elves live.

[goto124]

My PCs have a pet penguin or two (https://www.bas.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/White-gentoo-penguin.jpg) (yes, that's a leucistic penguin). Utterly useless so far, though considering I play freeform, there's no need to feed or really take care of these pets, and my PCs are already powerful enough that they don't need any more help. The penguins don't even talk, they just waddle about, make honking sounds, and do other cute stuff.

In a solo campaign I GM, I brought in a little blue penguin (http://animaliaz-life.com/data_images/little-penguin/little-penguin4.jpg) to meet a PC because I love penguins, dammit.

Which archetype is that, Has A Favorite Animal?

Okay, she's now an NPC because she helped the PC find a scroll, causing the PC decided to investigate further, but I did not expect a penguin to be of any real importance.

[Winter_Wolf]

My PCs have a pet penguin or two (https://www.bas.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/White-gentoo-penguin.jpg) (yes, that's a leucistic penguin). Utterly useless so far, though considering I play freeform, there's no need to feed or really take care of these pets, and my PCs are already powerful enough that they don't need any more help. The penguins don't even talk, they just waddle about, make honking sounds, and do other cute stuff.

In a solo campaign I GM, I brought in a little blue penguin (http://animaliaz-life.com/data_images/little-penguin/little-penguin4.jpg) to meet a PC because I love penguins, dammit.

Which archetype is that, Has A Favorite Animal?

Okay, she's now an NPC because she helped the PC find a scroll, causing the PC decided to investigate further, but I did not expect a penguin to be of any real importance.

Isn't it like a universal constant that PCs will completely disregard the "important" NPCs and latch onto the throwaway ones like sovereign glue? Introduce a garter snake and see what happens. "It must be a messenger and mentor from the gods!"

[runeghost]

The Griefer

The Griefer likes killing other PCs and important, friendly NPCs. They may or may not be a good player otherwise (usually not, but there are exceptions), but mowing down mooks and villains just isn't enough. The Griefer has a lust for the blood of team-mates, though the GM's beloved NPCs will do in a pinch. Sometimes it's "accidental", other times the Griefer may play a particularly belligerent or bloodthirsty characters and kill in-character.

It's important to not confuse the Griefer with certain flavors of Real Roleplayer, who thrive on party conflict and drama, but don't actually want to kill other PC (except as the appropriate climax to long-running story) and usually won't mind dying themselves. That's as opposed to the Griefer, who typically rages if the GM or other PCs target and kill or otherwise defeat his character instead.

[Anonymouswizard]

Isn't it like a universal constant that PCs will completely disregard the "important" NPCs and latch onto the throwaway ones like sovereign glue? Introduce a garter snake and see what happens. "It must be a messenger and mentor from the gods!"

Eh, I'm in the other kind of group, which only cares about NPCs if they have a backstory reason to, otherwise they're just treated as plot deliverers.

Speaking of which, if I get to play in a Sci-Fi campaign a friend is planning, I'll be allowed to bring along NPCs as permanent party members due to being part of the command crew of the ship. My current plans are for three characters:
-My PC, chief of communications (in game-terms a hacker), who stays on the ship. Is not willing to harm others personally, but is fine with others doing it.
-His aide, who is skilled at electronics and carries a computer that allows my PC to support the team from the ship. Dives for cover when combat starts.
-A bodyguard-type person, so I can have something to do in combat.

I feel like I need to give a backstory to this team (the current plan of which is 'male-male-female' respectively, because the most badass character I've seen was a woman*). I mean, we're taking the fight back to the martians over what they did to London 100 years ago, a good team should be together for a reason.

* Ah, Steve (real name Rowan), you are dearly missed. Literally failed a spot check to recognise you when you finally turned up looking feminine as well.

[runeghost]

The Saboteur

Initially appears to be a moderately acceptable player like The Blunderer, The Comedian, or a Rules Lawyer, to provide cover to his or her actions, but is actually a more akin to The Contrarian. Not content with merely frustrating the GM and other players, this guy (or gal) derives pleasure from making the entire gaming experience as unpleasant as possible for everyone involved. Saboteurs will typically start with small disruptions, to avoid being booted at the beginning of a campaign or from a new group, but will ramp up their behaviors as the group becomes more accustomed to it.

The Saboteur prefers to arrive late or early for game. When late, they'll call ahead to let you know they'll be "a little" late, and ask you to wait the fifteen minutes or so until they arrive. The real delay will be considerably longer. Once they arrive, they will be reluctant to immediately begin playing, inevitably having food to eat (or cook!) or something urgent to discuss with another player or the group. If arriving early, they will do their utmost to disrupt the GM or host as they try to get ready, sometimes requesting some solo play before the others arrive (which will never end by the time game is regularly scheduled to start). Experienced Saboteurs may even go for a twofer, and arrive early, disrupt things, and then leave to "grab a bite" or "run a quick errand, please wait for me".

Once play actually begins, the Saboteur will disrupt the flow of the game whenever possible - asking questions about the rules or current situation they ought to know, encouraging unrelated table-talk among players not currently acting, or being away from the table at a key moment. In addition to deploying the The Contrarian's tactics to disrupt the game, the Saboteur's character may also act in ways deliberately designed to make other players uncomfortable. Individual players may be personally harassed when alone with the Saboteur.

Saboteurs will occasionally attempt to GM games for the purposes of tormenting their players mercilessly, but being in charge leaves all their worst instincts uncapped and most such games never last more than a couple of sessions, even with the most tolerant players.

[8BitNinja]

And next they are going into the mountains, where orcs, halflings, goliaths, genasi, and some elves live.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ArsonMurderAndJaywalking

[Hazrond]

Has anyone mentioned the Wolf in Sheep's Clothing yet?


Wolf In Sheep's Clothing
This player makes pleasant and deep characters to play with, and is overall a very enjoyable addition to the table, but when the seat flips and they become GM, things are different. They instead become ruthless, antagonistic, petty, and easily angered against the other players. They refuse to step down when everyone agrees that the game isn't fun anymore and they can very quickly tear a group apart if one is not careful.

[8BitNinja]

Has anyone mentioned the Wolf in Sheep's Clothing yet?


Wolf In Sheep's Clothing
This player makes pleasant and deep characters to play with, and is overall a very enjoyable addition to the table, but when the seat flips and they become GM, things are different. They instead become ruthless, antagonistic, petty, and easily angered against the other players. They refuse to step down when everyone agrees that the game isn't fun anymore and they can very quickly tear a group apart if one is not careful.

You know my little brother?

[No-Kill Cleric]

The Artist draws for the campaign, including characters, scenery, and anything else they can manage. Usually well received, if they have time to draw such things.

[Lord Torath]

The Artist draws for the campaign, including characters, scenery, and anything else they can manage. Usually well received, if they have time to draw such things.Prime Examples (http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=68023).

[JAL_1138]

Has anyone mentioned the Wolf in Sheep's Clothing yet?


Wolf In Sheep's Clothing
This player makes pleasant and deep characters to play with, and is overall a very enjoyable addition to the table, but when the seat flips and they become GM, things are different. They instead become ruthless, antagonistic, petty, and easily angered against the other players. They refuse to step down when everyone agrees that the game isn't fun anymore and they can very quickly tear a group apart if one is not careful.

May also appear to be a rabbit sitting on a tree stump, but turn out to be a tentacled monster with quite a lot of teeth.

...sorry, had to.

[8BitNinja]

The Artist draws for the campaign, including characters, scenery, and anything else they can manage. Usually well received, if they have time to draw such things.

The Managaka (The Anime Artist): A variant of the artist. Draws for the campaign, but all the style of anime, often annoying people who want to play D&D and not Big Eyes, Small Mouth (Don't play Big Eyes, Small Mouth:smalleek:).

I see way too many of these people, and no, I don't hate anime or anything either. I actually enjoy anime, but I don't incorporate it into everything I do.

[Draconium]

The Managaka (The Anime Artist): A variant of the artist. Draws for the campaign, but all the style of anime, often annoying people who want to play D&D and not Big Eyes, Small Mouth (Don't play Big Eyes, Small Mouth:smalleek:).

I see way too many of these people, and no, I don't hate anime or anything either. I actually enjoy anime, but I don't incorporate it into everything I do.

I just want to point out that everyone has different art styles. Some people are simply used to drawing things in anime/manga style, so they'll use that style by default (unless specifically attempting another style). So this isn't necessarily a bad thing, regardless of your feelings on it.

[Winter_Wolf]

The Managaka (The Anime Artist): A variant of the artist. Draws for the campaign, but all the style of anime, often annoying people who want to play D&D and not Big Eyes, Small Mouth (Don't play Big Eyes, Small Mouth:smalleek:).

I see way too many of these people, and no, I don't hate anime or anything either. I actually enjoy anime, but I don't incorporate it into everything I do.

Nothing wrong with the TriStat system. Well that's not true; there's lots wrong with it, but it can work with some effort and cooperation. 2nd edition, anyway.

Used to be The Artist, but doing quality work every week for free no less was just too much drain on personal resources.

[Anonymouswizard]

The Managaka (The Anime Artist): A variant of the artist. Draws for the campaign, but all the style of anime, often annoying people who want to play D&D and not Big Eyes, Small Mouth (Don't play Big Eyes, Small Mouth:smalleek:).

I see way too many of these people, and no, I don't hate anime or anything either. I actually enjoy anime, but I don't incorporate it into everything I do.

Eh, as others have said, it's a style thing. I personally love the manga/anime styling, especially on occasions where artists make people look more realistic (the manga for Death Note is one of my favourites for this reason). The thing is I've noticed that people tend to be very divided on whether or not it's a good art style or not, which I think has to do more with the common stylisation than anything (thin people, big eyes, and so on).


Nothing wrong with the TriStat system. Well that's not true; there's lots wrong with it, but it can work with some effort and cooperation. 2nd edition, anyway.

Used to be The Artist, but doing quality work every week for free no less was just too much drain on personal resources.

Eh, I've looked at the TriStat system and just hated it, I just can't work out why playing at a higher power level makes everyday people worse as written* (although I know that I can change that easily), I just prefer GURPS for my generic systems (although I know why some people prefer TriStat, it's just those exact reasons turn me off, personal preference).

I could never be The Artist, I just don't have the patience to be any good at drawing. I do appreciate it when someone is though.

For GM archetypes:
I don't care what you pick: ironically in many cases more annoying than the 'you can only play X, Y, and Z' GMs, because at least there you know what's setting breaking before the game starts. This is the kind of GM who lets you bring a cleric of Kelemvor who's methods rely on people knowing of his existence, and then revealing that the entire setting follows either a monotheistic faith or nature worship. Seems determined to please the players, but is unable to get the idea of world building into their heads if it would limit the PCs possible.

The amount of grief I've had with a GM who limited character options adds up to 'okay, so we get to play 100CP non-cinematic GURPS characters? Using the default magic system, but no other powers?' His campaigns worked brilliantly due to great worldbuilding and an understanding of what we could play. Heck, I've had great fun playing a character that was semi-randomly generated for me, I ended up running him as more of a thinky type than I originally intended for that campaign (I was the only one who considered making a sling in the situation, it wasn't dangerous but my character wanted to use it to hunt).

Another GM I know gives so little advice on what's expectable that I'm wary of digging out my A grade material in case it clashes with the setting. Why play a half-elf scholastic monk** with almost every Int and Wis skill when I could just play a sword and board fighter and know that I have a place in the world? I also find it a lot harder to come up with A grade material, in several ways the more limited I am with my build the more likely I am to compensate with a character's personality, which leads my 'anything goes' characters to just be a bunch of mechanics tied together by a theme.

* No, seriously, I could not find anything that said that increasing the power level does not make a normal person less likely to successfully cook dinner.
** Yep, one of the characters I really want to play is a bookish, western-style monk with limited combat ability. I have played in maybe one setting which included that kind of monk instead of the kung-fu variety, and the party nun was a really fun addition.

[8BitNinja]

Eh, as others have said, it's a style thing. I personally love the manga/anime styling, especially on occasions where artists make people look more realistic (the manga for Death Note is one of my favourites for this reason). The thing is I've noticed that people tend to be very divided on whether or not it's a good art style or not, which I think has to do more with the common stylisation than anything (thin people, big eyes, and so on).

Tokyo Ghoul RPG exists, you should check it out (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire:_The_Masquerade)

[Anonymouswizard]

Tokyo Ghoul RPG exists, you should check it out (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire:_The_Masquerade)

I own it, thank you.

[goto124]

Draws for the campaign, but all the style of anime,

Anime-style faces tend to be rather simple, which is a godsend as faces are complicated and easy to send into Uncanny Valley. I identify people and characters more by their clothes than their faces anyway, which is why I often skimp on or completely skip faces in my drawings (check my full sig). I'm not intentionally doing anime style, sometimes things just happen to me.

What is the definition of an 'anime art style', by the way?

[Lord Gehnvaar]

The DM who just want to kill the party, even if it means the premature end of a campaign.

The DM who favors one player, either by giving him a really powerful item for no reason or declaring that that player somehow survived the killing blow or just teleported to safety or whatever.

[IronLionShark]

The DM that gets angry when you keep avoiding every single encounter and not getting any experience because you decided to play a character that was already established as a bad idea, not to be made, and would not fit in to the campaign world, but you brought pizza so they had to let you play DM: As the name implies...

[8BitNinja]

Anime-style faces tend to be rather simple, which is a godsend as faces are complicated and easy to send into Uncanny Valley. I identify people and characters more by their clothes than their faces anyway, which is why I often skimp on or completely skip faces in my drawings (check my full sig). I'm not intentionally doing anime style, sometimes things just happen to me.

What is the definition of an 'anime art style', by the way?

Any style that is considered anime. I don't know what all the styles are. In fact, if you go digging on the forum (unless you participated in the thread, I don't remember exactly who did) you will find that I just got into anime a few months ago, and I have only watched 4 short series (Record of the War, Tokyo Ghoul, Cowboy Bebop, Area 88, just started Ergo Proxy). So I don't know what every or any art style is called.

[IronLionShark]

*snip* I identify people and characters more by their clothes than their faces anyway, which is why I often skimp on or completely skip faces in my drawings (check my full sig). I'm not intentionally doing anime style, sometimes things just happen to me.
*snip*

The easiest way I find to skip faces.
A
U
H
Always Use Helmets.
I may be terrible at art (I don't draw anime style.), but A.U.H. always is helpful.
Remember A,U,H.

[8BitNinja]

The easiest way I find to skip faces.
A
U
H
Always Use Helmets.
I may be terrible at art (I don't draw anime style.), but A.U.H. always is helpful.
Remember A,U,H.

This is why you never need to draw a paladin's face

[IronLionShark]

This is why you never need to draw a paladin's face

That is why helmets are the best (Excluding paladins. I once played a silver dragonborn paladin of Bahumet)

Also, back on topic.
The rogue: This person always plays a rogue or other lightly armored, quick class.

[Winter_Wolf]

Also, back on topic.
The rogue: This person always plays a rogue or other lightly armored, quick class.

*shifty eyes*
Only when I'm not banned from doing so.

[IronLionShark]

*shifty eyes*
Only when I'm not banned from doing so.

No lightly armored quick classes (no that is not soup) for you!

[8BitNinja]

The Dungeon Crawler: He says"When are we going to explore a dungeon?" 5 minutes after selling the cool stuff from the last dungeon and buying more cool stuff

[2D8HP]

The Dungeon Crawler: He says"When are we going to explore a dungeon?" 5 minutes after selling the cool stuff from the last dungeon and buying more cool stuffWait. There's another way to play???
:smallwink:

[IronLionShark]

Wait. There's another way to play???
:smallwink:

No dungeons for you!: This DM never uses dungeons. That's all. What? Do you want me to write a book about it? Fine.
It is a two letter pronoun. The End!

[JAL_1138]

Wait. There's another way to play???
:smallwink:

Unrelated to the topic at hand, but I tried to reply to your PM earlier and it gave an error that said something to the effect that your mailbox was full.

[8BitNinja]

Wait. There's another way to play???
:smallwink:

No, I don't think there is

We are all this guy

[Clistenes]

And then the Kleptomanic. The person who either thinks its funny to steal everything, or the person who wants to steal things from the party and then hides behind rules banning PvP. If the character sheet lists a crowbar, be wary.

The DM who always tries to make the paladin fall (personal least favorite)

HATE those.


The person who always runs the same character. They've found what works for them, and they stick with it. Lemme guess - another troll-blooded arctic dwaven barbarian? DMing a whole group of these guys would probably be the easiest thing ever.

OK, I admit I kinda do this. :smallredface:

I almost always play humans or human-looking races (sometimes gnomes or dwarves too, but rarely anything else). I almost always play LG or NG characters, more rarely N, and the latter usually acting like NG ones.

I often play a version of one of these three: 1.-hungry seekers of knowledge, 2.-educated, urban citizens with a strong sense of commitement to their community, country, religion and alignment or 3.-weird loners/hermits strongly attuned to the spirits/nature/the ancestors/whatever.

I very often take a half-caster class (Paladin, Ranger or Bard), a dip in a full caster class and then levels in a Prestige Class that enhances both my character's spellcasting and class features. Or I start as a full caster, then take a dip in the Paladin/Ranger/Bard prestige class, then take another PrC.

When I play a full caster, more often that not I take levels in an Arcane and a Divine class, both with the same spellcasting ability and then levels in Mystic Theurge or similar PrC.

I'm not really interested in optimizing, and I'm not very good at it. I just like my character to brag about being good at several different things... :smallredface:

[8BitNinja]

OK, I admit I kinda do this. :smallredface:

I almost always play humans or human-looking races (sometimes gnomes or dwarves too, but rarely anything else). I almost always play LG or NG characters, more rarely N, and the latter usually acting like NG ones.

I often play a version of one of these three: 1.-hungry seekers of knowledge, 2.-educated, urban citizens with a strong sense of commitement to their community, country, religion and alignment or 3.-weird loners/hermits strongly attuned to the spirits/nature/the ancestors/whatever.

I very often take a half-caster class (Paladin, Ranger or Bard), a dip in a full caster class and then levels in a Prestige Class that enhances both my character's spellcasting and class features. Or I start as a full caster, then take a dip in the Paladin/Ranger/Bard prestige class, then take another PrC.

When I play a full caster, more often that not I take levels in an Arcane and a Divine class, both with the same spellcasting ability and then levels in Mystic Theurge or similar PrC.

I'm not really interesting in optimizing, and I'm not very good at it. I just like my character to brag about being good at several different things... :smallredface:

Confession Time

Every other character I play is a Human Paladin of Heironeous

[Professor Gnoll]

Confession Time

Every other character I play is a Human Paladin of Heironeous
No. You're kidding with me. You? Playing a Paladin? That's crazy talk.

[8BitNinja]

No. You're kidding with me. You? Playing a Paladin? That's crazy talk.

I'm pretty sure most people assumed I usually played a CE Sorcerer

[Cluedrew]

To 8BitNinja; I would of guessed some variety of ninja actually because of your username. This of course being before you started the paladin threads and the like. Do you ever go by 8BitPaladin?

I don't really have an archetype (although there is a few I come back to more often) but I know I actually replayed one character a number of times in D&D campaigns because none of them were long enough for me to do the things I wanted to do with the character. So I felt the story was unfinished.

[Anonymouswizard]

I don't really have an archetype (although there is a few I come back to more often) but I know I actually replayed one character a number of times in D&D campaigns because none of them were long enough for me to do the things I wanted to do with the character. So I felt the story was unfinished.

Mages are my Archetype, to the point where I'm tempted to ditch my planned character for a game I'm joining so I can play a warlock instead. Not that my username gives any hint as to me enjoying playing as them, definitely not. I also generally prefer to stay away from blasts of fire, favouring more subtle magic (even though my personality makes me best with blasts of fire). I have loads of D&D characters I plan to use at some point, most of them mages of one kind or another, and I rarely have the chance to use them in a campaign where they feel like part of the story.

[8BitNinja]

To 8BitNinja; I would of guessed some variety of ninja actually because of your username. This of course being before you started the paladin threads and the like. Do you ever go by 8BitPaladin?

I chose the name because it is the same name of my YouTube channel. I actually cuse the name because it was suggested by my younger brother when I didn't know what to call my channel.

[IronLionShark]

Wizward!: This player almost always plays a wizard or wizard like character. No magic? Engineer. Space with no magic. Alien technology man.

[JAL_1138]

I have a strong tendency to play bards. I like jack-of-all trades characters, mechanically--I have an answer to anything thrown at me. Bards are also a good excuse for general silliness.

[2D8HP]

I have a strong tendency to play bards. I like jack-of-all trades characters, mechanically--I have an answer to anything thrown at me. Bards are also a good excuse for general silliness.As long as you don't play a Wizard because Wizards are Jerks! :smallwink:
(Why yes I am carrying a grudge because of a couple of guys I played with in 1980. Is that wrong?)
*poof!*
"CAW", "CAW", "CAW"!

[Arbane]

(Why yes I am carrying a grudge because of a couple of guys I played with in 1980. Is that wrong?)

What's the encumbrance value on that grudge?

The Normal: In a system with special powers, this is the person who tries to excel without any. No spellcasting, no psychic powers, no cybernetics, probably baseline human with a few gadgets and every skill and 'mundane' advantage they could find.

[JAL_1138]

As long as you don't play a Wizard because Wizards are Jerks! :smallwink:
(Why yes I am carrying a grudge because of a couple of guys I played with in 1980. Is that wrong?)

That's a looooong time to hold a grudge. The thing about a grudge is that it's a bit like drinking poison and waiting for the other guy to die from it, especially if you don't interact with them anymore.

[Clistenes]

I have an entire party of these right now. Me and some of my old friends decided to get together to play D&D again, and they started adopting orphans! It was a sandbox campaign in the first place, so luckily it didn't disrupt any plot. We can't play a ton (we don't live very close), but so far they've adopted a 9 year old girl, her 15 year old sister, a 7 year old boy, and his half-demon (mechanically tiefling) twin sister. And next they are going into the mountains, where orcs, halflings, goliaths, genasi, and some elves live.

Introduce them to Mother Grotrugga, (Venerable Age Female Yo-Momma [template from Portable Hole Full of Beer magazine] Scro Orc Cleric of Zodal 20 Revered Elder 10) head nun of the G'aav'aar'oon Orphanage, and have her offer to take care of the children while they are travelling through those dangerous, dangerous mountains. If they refuse, have her lecture them and reproach their carelessness until they surrender... If they balk... the Extraordinary Attacks of the Yo Momma template aren't deadly, but they are humiliating and terrible.

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/7/7a/Nuns_confront.png/revision/latest?cb=20080409114908

[2D8HP]

That's a looooong time to hold a grudge. The thing about a grudge is that it's a bit like drinking poison and waiting for the other guy to die from it, especially if you don't interact with them anymore.
That sounds like smart advice.
Real smart.
Hmm....
LIKE SOME OF THAT FANCIFIED BOOK LEARNIN' TAUGHT AT WIZARD SCHOOL!
*cough*
DAGNABBIT! WHY IS THERE A WORM IN MY THROAT?!!

[JAL_1138]

That sounds like smart advice.
Real smart.
Hmm....
LIKE SOME OF THAT FANCIFIED BOOK LEARNIN' TAUGHT AT WIZARD SCHOOL!
Nah, learned that from an assassin I met in my bardic travels. I don't think she ever made a single simile or metaphor that didn't involve poison in one way or another...


*cough*
DAGNABBIT! WHY IS THERE A WORM IN MY THROAT?!!
Probably from the mezcal? I mean, there was one in the bottle, and there's not now, so...

[8BitNinja]

That sounds like smart advice.
Real smart.
Hmm....
LIKE SOME OF THAT FANCIFIED BOOK LEARNIN' TAUGHT AT WIZARD SCHOOL!
*cough*
DAGNABBIT! WHY IS THERE A WORM IN MY THROAT?!!

Wizards, I don't like them one bit

At best, they are wannabe heavy infantry, it don't have the muscle to do so.

At worst they are HERESY!

[Cealocanth]

The Director - This GM is an incredible worldbuilder. He has continents populated with interesting and engaging characters that all have their own special personalities. No monster is straight out of the box, and the Big Bad has an evil plot that spans centuries of well-developed history. This man would be a god among GMs except for a single flaw: his world is much more interesting, and much better, if no players are involved.

And related to The Director

The George Lucas: This GM spends his free time worldbuilding, but hasn't taken a single improv class in his life. His world seems really cool on paper, and his characters could be amazing in any other context, but he can't actually write a game to save his life. All of his characters have the same voice and the same personality when he roleplays, and where one could run a deeply interesting in-depth plot, instead he chooses to run a dungeon-crawling hack-and-slash fest.

As for players:

The "I'd Rather Be Playing" Guy Mostly applies in settings he was not involved in designing, and superhero games could be considered his natural habitat. This player creates a character that works so well in another setting it makes everyone wonder why he's being played here. This is the guy who decides to play robotic death machine in a D&D game (read:warforged, most of the time), the legendary warrior with a magic sword in a modern-day superhero game, the grizzled gunslinger with an itchy trigger finger in a Lovecraftian horror game, or the dishonored samurai in an Old West setting.

I find that the I'd Rather Be Playing Guy does remarkably well in superhero games. These settings are generally so wide-spectrum and varied that almost anything goes. It also helps that every character is a special snowflake with a codename and a bright flashy gimmick. Still, a truly experienced I'd Rather Be Playing Guy will manage to make his character out of place even in those kinds of settings.

[8BitNinja]

As for players:

The "I'd Rather Be Playing" Guy Mostly applies in settings he was not involved in designing, and superhero games could be considered his natural habitat. This player creates a character that works so well in another setting it makes everyone wonder why he's being played here. This is the guy who decides to play robotic death machine in a D&D game (read:warforged, most of the time), the legendary warrior with a magic sword in a modern-day superhero game, the grizzled gunslinger with an itchy trigger finger in a Lovecraftian horror game, or the dishonored samurai in an Old West setting.

I find that the I'd Rather Be Playing Guy does remarkably well in superhero games. These settings are generally so wide-spectrum and varied that almost anything goes. It also helps that every character is a special snowflake with a codename and a bright flashy gimmick. Still, a truly experienced I'd Rather Be Playing Guy will manage to make his character out of place even in those kinds of settings.

You don't know how many times I hear "but I would be better if I was a sorcerer"

[SirBellias]

Probably already covered, but I have one player who active tries to disrupt the plot and makes me scramble to put something together (can't shake that habit), one that constantly picks the darkest options possible (rogue assassin criminal, yadiyada) and then proceeds to (when they rarely roleplay) act in the kindest way possible at all times, a couple girls that show up for the social aspect, and my fairly normal roleplayers. I have to admit that I've only had one character that was actually a Sir, the rest are all Druids, Barbarians and Casters.

[Draconium]

Oh, here's one.

The Monsterist: This character really likes playing monster races, as opposed to your normal humans/elves/dwarves. And when I say monster races, I'm not talking about Drow or goblins - I mean races like Mind Flayers and Trolls. Or even Dragons.

And yes, this it totally me. :smalltongue:

[goto124]

That's a looooong time to hold a grudge. The thing about a grudge is that it's a bit like drinking poison and waiting for the other guy to die from it, especially if you don't interact with them anymore.

What's the lesson, to hold grudges only against myself?

[Suichimo]

As an addendum to the Old School Player archetype: they may never have played a Gygax module, and may have never looked up a result on the to-hit tables or THAC0'd. The archetype can develop in a new-ish player who's played in a game with another Old School Player teaching them, or playing with an Old School DM who lets stuff like that actually work.

This is me, though my DMs were the ones under the old school DMs that developed their habits. I'll post it later, in a spoiler, but I've got a text file on my computer of, a nearly full Bag of Holding I, that is full of so many completely inane but potentially, possibly, maybe useful items that, if the gp is there, is my standard load out of mundane gear.

P.S. To the person who brought it up, chalk is what happens to spare copper.
P.P.S. I hate keeping track of copper.

[Anonymouswizard]

Wizards, I don't like them one bit

At best, they are wannabe heavy infantry, it don't have the muscle to do so.

At worst they are HERESY!

Sorry, I can't hear you over all the ribbiting, do you want me to dismiss the baeful polymorph? :smalltongue:


The Director - This GM is an incredible worldbuilder. He has continents populated with interesting and engaging characters that all have their own special personalities. No monster is straight out of the box, and the Big Bad has an evil plot that spans centuries of well-developed history. This man would be a god among GMs except for a single flaw: his world is much more interesting, and much better, if no players are involved.

I have a GM who would be like this, except that he focuses on smaller scale stories that are easier for players to influence in fantasy (in science fiction he'll epic it up, but still focuses on only a small part). The thing is, his worlds are never the most interesting on the surface, it always feels like 'oh, that's cool, but it's not [insert setting here]', and then when you play you'll be shocked at the thought put into it and how it all works much better than most published settings, to the point where the managed to make the Warhammer setting (Old World, not this Age of Sigmar ****) logically consistent and dynamic.

The Strength Complainer: the guy who is annoyed that the party is too weak/too strong and thinks the game and story would be more interesting if it was weakened. Generally found playing D&D and complaining about how the game changes power level so much.

I'm kind of this. I mean, the character I really want to play is the ordinary guy with a sword, which makes me annoyed when it's always D&D (where I'm certain that Fighters must unconsciously use magic, they become able to survive a fall at terminal velocity). I like my fantasy low powered unless it's superhero, because it's easier for me to sort out such a world*.

Ironically, because it's always D&D, I'll play wizard, clerics, anything but the character I desperately want to play. Heck, I wouldn't say no to knowing a spell or two, but I really want to play the barbarian guy with a sword (ideally one handed with a shield).

* There are exceptions, I can deal with high powered Wuxia, although I still prefer lower powered stuff.

[goto124]

which makes me annoyed when it's always D&D (where I'm certain that Fighters must unconsciously use magic, they become able to survive a fall at terminal velocity). I like my fantasy low powered unless it's superhero, because it's easier for me to sort out such a world*.

Ironically, because it's always D&D, I'll play wizard, clerics, anything but the character I desperately want to play.

Is there no one who wants to play anything other than DnD?

[Anonymouswizard]

Is there no one who wants to play anything other than DnD?

My uni group, which is awesome, although we tend to play in settings too high tech for such characters (although it's the one group where I feel comfortable playing a Cleric). I just have so much more fun at a low power level where we're always a couple of lucky hits away from death. I could never really play a 'barbarian with a sword' in that group, but that's due to the GM running settings with at least WW1-era technology, and that's awesome and fine and actually a sacrifice I'm willing to make to get away from more ****** D&D.

[Max_Killjoy]

The George Lucas: This GM spends his free time worldbuilding, but hasn't taken a single improv class in his life. His world seems really cool on paper, and his characters could be amazing in any other context, but he can't actually write a game to save his life. All of his characters have the same voice and the same personality when he roleplays, and where one could run a deeply interesting in-depth plot, instead he chooses to run a dungeon-crawling hack-and-slash fest.


The irony here is that Lucas did eff-all for actual worldbuilding, and was pretty much making it up as he went along, making most decisions based on what he thought looked most spectacular on the big screen. A great deal of the worldbuilding was done retroactively, and much of it by people not even involved in the movie-making process (see, all the work done by the crew at WEG for their d6 RPG, that ended up becoming some level of canon after the fact).

[IronLionShark]

As long as you don't play a Wizard because Wizards are Jerks! :smallwink:
(Why yes I am carrying a grudge because of a couple of guys I played with in 1980. Is that wrong?)
*poof!*
"CAW", "CAW", "CAW"!

It's ok.
I never trust poison dragons, hp potions, or sudden mid-combat rule changes because of a DND Next DM shenanigan.

[IronLionShark]

Wizards, I don't like them one bit

At best, they are wannabe heavy infantry, it don't have the muscle to do so.

At worst they are HERESY!

What about people than play wizards and paladins. Not at the same time though.
Wizaladins: Read above.

[Cealocanth]

The irony here is that Lucas did eff-all for actual worldbuilding, and was pretty much making it up as he went along, making most decisions based on what he thought looked most spectacular on the big screen. A great deal of the worldbuilding was done retroactively, and much of it by people not even involved in the movie-making process (see, all the work done by the crew at WEG for their d6 RPG, that ended up becoming some level of canon after the fact).

Really? I didn't know that. I figured he was a guy with a lot of ideas that was just really bad at writing. He doesn't even that much credit then, I guess.

Oh, and that reminds me

The Lovecraft - One of the easiest ways to describe a monster is to say that it is indescribable. This GM's head is filled with creatures to amaze and imspire, that would create awe in even the most stoic of souls, but his description is lackluster at best. If your GM describes his custom monster and each player is imagining a ten-foot tall plant monster, a starfish of death, a giant squid, and a writhing mass of eyeballs and tentacles respectively after the same desription, your GM may belong to this archetype.

[8BitNinja]

The Rightly Paranoid: Every woman interested in any party member is a succubus, every free meal is poisoned, the boat attracts sea monsters, and the court advisor.is evil as evil can be

[Atypical_Necro]

Lord/Lady Luck: it doesn't matter when or why, this person is loved by d20s. Almost every roll is 12 or higher, regardless of whose dice are being used, what surface is being rolled on, or any other variable. Can be a nightmare for a DM if they're a player and especially so for players if they're the DM, for they succeed at almost everything they do. May or may not feel bad about it, may or may not capitalise on it.

Hated by the Dice: this archetype is the opposite of the Lord/Lady Luck. The Hated will rarely roll above average on any roll and their luck with the dice is so bad that it ruins any or all attempts at character optimisation. May or may not take it in stride.

The Luck Battery: a hybrid of the above archetypes, the Battery will have terrible luck for long stretches of time, but when the dice let go of their hate he releases all that stored luck like an atom bomb and cannot be stopped.

My wife is a Lady Luck. She feels bad about the infatuation dice seem to have with her but she's not ashamed to capitalise on it when a player.

I am a Hated by the Dice. It makes it very difficult and discouraging to DM when no level of optimisation can combat my inability to roll above 10 for any NPC in any situation for the entirety of the session. I do have a bit of the Battery in me, though, and the players/DM shake(s) in fear when that energy is unleashed.

Almost crushed the BBEG of a campaign with a 10 level advantage by myself once through the sheer power of high rolls. This BBEG was run by my wife (see above).

[8BitNinja]

Hated by the Dice: this archetype is the opposite of the Lord/Lady Luck. The Hated will rarely roll above average on any roll and their luck with the dice is so bad that it ruins any or all attempts at character optimisation. May or may not take it in.

How do you know so much about me?

[Max_Killjoy]

Lord/Lady Luck: it doesn't matter when or why, this person is loved by d20s. Almost every roll is 12 or higher, regardless of whose dice are being used, what surface is being rolled on, or any other variable. Can be a nightmare for a DM if they're a player and especially so for players if they're the DM, for they succeed at almost everything they do. May or may not feel bad about it, may or may not capitalise on it.

Hated by the Dice: this archetype is the opposite of the Lord/Lady Luck. The Hated will rarely roll above average on any roll and their luck with the dice is so bad that it ruins any or all attempts at character optimisation. May or may not take it in stride.

The Luck Battery: a hybrid of the above archetypes, the Battery will have terrible luck for long stretches of time, but when the dice let go of their hate he releases all that stored luck like an atom bomb and cannot be stopped.

My wife is a Lady Luck. She feels bad about the infatuation dice seem to have with her but she's not ashamed to capitalise on it when a player.

I am a Hated by the Dice. It makes it very difficult and discouraging to DM when no level of optimisation can combat my inability to roll above 10 for any NPC in any situation for the entirety of the session. I do have a bit of the Battery in me, though, and the players/DM shake(s) in fear when that energy is unleashed.

Almost crushed the BBEG of a campaign with a 10 level advantage by myself once through the sheer power of high rolls. This BBEG was run by my wife (see above).


At our table, we refer to a Lady Luck or Luck Battery as a "Probability Sink".

[JAL_1138]

The Rightly Paranoid: Every woman interested in any party member is a succubus, every free meal is poisoned, the boat attracts sea monsters, and the court advisor.is evil as evil can be

Hi *waves*. Although I try to avoid playing out the succubus paranoia (even if it often happens that way...wonder what that says about DMs who do that all the time?) due to it seeming sexist to me. But other than that one, yeah.

I'm also a Luck Battery. My dice go on (very) long stretches where they utterly hate me, and then I'll get a session like this:

After rolling an absurd number of high rolls over the course of the session, including several 20s, I crit yet again, and the DM now suspects me of either deliberately cheating or having an unbalanced die. I offer to re-roll with the DM's d20 and a dice-cup, to eliminate either possibility--cheating through rolling-technique, or not cheating but having an unbalanced die. I drop the DM's die into the cup and shake it for a good while...and get [i]another[i] nat 20.

Then after that I don't roll higher than 10 for the next three months.

[Cluedrew]

On Weird Luck: I'm not really lucky in any sense of the word, except for one period, about 3-4 months long, where I consistently had trouble rolling 4+ on 2d6. My other rolls were also rather lacking over that time, but that is one particular situation that came up a lot, I rolled so many 3s. Then one day I rolled 18 on 3d6 and it just stopped. Well I've had small, reasonable bursts of good and bad luck since, some timed with comments about that time, but nothing crazy.

[Anonymouswizard]

I don't believe in 'luck archetypes'. I mean, my rolls tend towards certain numbers, but I'm under no delusion, I just have dice of different degrees of fairness (I once rolled nothing but 7s and 13s in one session, that was a poor d20). I've occasionally had really bad streaks of luck, but generally in a setting that's different to normal (I have a set of metal d6s that roll a decent spread clustered around 10/11, except on a houseboat where they rolled several critical failures in a row*). In general dice tend to even out over a long period or else point to their defect, most people being 'lucky' are a mix of poor dice and confirmation bias.

No, this doesn't mean that a fair d20 that has just rolled two ones has a low chance of rolling a one, it's more to do with how often a number appears over a large sample of rolls. Probability does not care about the past,the chance of THIS roll being one is 0.05 (which is the correct way to not probability, 1 is certain and 0 is impossible, so 5% here, the decimal makes maths a Baator of a lot easier though).

* That session the GM kept switching dice due to insanely consistent rolls, the table was rather small due to nessecity

[8BitNinja]

Hi *waves*. Although I try to avoid playing out the succubus paranoia (even if it often happens that way...wonder what that says about DMs who do that all the time?) due to it seeming sexist to me. But other than that one, yeah.

You should check out a video made by Noah Antwiler (the guy who runs The Spoony Experiment) called Beware the Woman, for They Come From Hell. I would warn you though that there is frequent strong language

[MesiDoomstalker]

The Saga: A player that plays the exact same character, ad infinitum. However, unlike other similar archetypes, its literally the exact same character. Spanning game systems, alternate universes, and wildly different genre's, this player's character's backstory grows with each game and inexplicably finds itself in a totally different universe.

"My character is totally BA" guy: Must always play a BA character, by his own definition. Typically but not always falls short. Tends to pull focus and get grouchy at even the tiniest failure.

"My character is totally original, guys, I swear" guy: Despite their claims, their character is a poor rip off of a popular character in a similar media. Whether from poor ability to optimize, the system not being able to properly handle the emulated character or just a poor attempt at covering up lack of creativity, their characters are always pale imitation of other people's good characters.

The Competitor: Everything is a competition and they must win. They can only have fun when there are winners and losers and they are the winner. Typically will invent contests or competitions with other players, sometimes rigged or cherry-picked to give themselves the advantage.

"I'll be there, I swear" guy: But never is.

Cheetos Fingers: Will always bring the dirtiest, messiest snacks and proceed to dirty the game space, character sheets, dice and minis. Most egregious examples smear their flavor dust all over other player's belongings as well.

The Solo-Artist: Will build the most antisocial character every time, spend their every possible action trying to ditch the party and will get grouchy when they are expected to be a team player.

Fashionably Late: Will show up 1/3rd way through the session, despite the start time not changing in years. Even when given a false start time earlier than the actual start time will inexplicably still show up late, without intending to.

Hit-Or-Miss: Will they show up for this session? I dunno. If they do, it'll be the greatest session for months, till they bother to show up again.

[Honest Tiefling]

The Rightly Paranoid: Every woman interested in any party member is a succubus, every free meal is poisoned, the boat attracts sea monsters, and the court advisor.is evil as evil can be

...Admittedly, I was guilty of this, but he was playing a ****ing violin! That's totally evil.

Oh, and he was a werewolf, so that wasn't helping either.

[IronLionShark]

...Admittedly, I was guilty of this, but he was playing a ****ing violin! That's totally evil.

Oh, and he was a werewolf, so that wasn't helping either.

Hey, I play a shifter wizard that plays the fiddle. (Granted he's LE, but only evil in the Machiavellian sense.)

[8BitNinja]

...Admittedly, I was guilty of this, but he was playing a ****ing violin! That's totally evil.

Oh, and he was a werewolf, so that wasn't helping either.

Keep in mind that I said RIGHTLY paranoid.

You just prevented a TPK

[IronLionShark]

Keep in mind that I said RIGHTLY paranoid.

You just prevented a TPK

It's still a bigot move. You shouldn't judge people by their looks.
The Politically Correct: Exactly as it sounds.

[8BitNinja]

It's still a bigot move. You shouldn't judge people by their looks.

In real life, yes.

In D&D, it's a bit different.

[2D8HP]

It's still a bigot move. You shouldn't judge people by their looks.

In real life, yes.

In D&D, it's a bit different.
Judging by looks, a synopsis:

Pointy Ears + Fangs in D&D,
Reaction = ATTACK! :smallfurious:

Pointy Ears w/o Fangs in D&D,
Reaction = How you doin'? :smallbiggrin:

Pointy Ears in Real life,
Reaction = What the heck happened to your ears??!!!
:smallwink:

[IronLionShark]

Judging by looks, a synopsis:

Pointy Ears + Fangs in D&D,
Reaction = ATTACK! :smallfurious:

Pointy Ears w/o Fangs in D&D,
Reaction = How you doin'? :smallbiggrin:

Pointy Ears in Real life,
Reaction = What the heck happened to your ears??!!!
:smallwink:

Pointy ears aren't weird in real life. I know a few people that have them. Including me.
Also:
The Walking Crate: Carries everything or as much as possible.

[Max_Killjoy]

Pointy ears aren't weird in real life. I know a few people that have them. Including me.


Are we talking little Vulcan points, or foot-long WOW elf ears?

[Âmesang]

The Walking Crate: Carries everything or as much as possible.
Either that or a rogue who thinks he's Solid Snake. :smalltongue:

[IronLionShark]

Are we talking little Vulcan points, or foot-long WOW elf ears?

Live long and prosper. (Vulcan Style) (That's what I describe in my games as elf ears.)

[IronLionShark]

Either that or a rogue who thinks he's Solid Snake. :smalltongue:

No that is
Solid: Plays characters that think they're solid snake. Often found near boxes or in boxes.

[rooster707]

No that is
Solid: Plays characters that think they're solid snake. Often found near boxes or in boxes.

No, no, no.

The Snake: Tries to eat everything. Will often ask what things taste like when eating them.

[8BitNinja]

Solid: Plays characters that think they're solid snake. Often found near boxes or in boxes.

Colonel: The character that sits back and lets the Solid Snake do everyhing

[IronLionShark]

Colonel: The character that sits back and lets the Solid Snake do everyhing

The 8bitninja: starts threads about player archetypes and is very active on it. Occasionally derivative.

[8BitNinja]

The 8bitninja: starts threads about player archetypes and is very active on it. Occasionally derivative.

I am very much an 8BitNinja. It's like I am the embodiment of the archetype.

[IronLionShark]

I am very much an 8BitNinja. It's like I am the embodiment of the archetype.

I wonder why.

[Urpriest]

"My character is totally original, guys, I swear" guy: Despite their claims, their character is a poor rip off of a popular character in a similar media. Whether from poor ability to optimize, the system not being able to properly handle the emulated character or just a poor attempt at covering up lack of creativity, their characters are always pale imitation of other people's good characters.


In my experience, these folks don't even try to deny what they're doing. They're more like the Of course my character is from League of Legends, isn't yours? archetype.

[SirBellias]

In my experience, these folks don't even try to deny what they're doing. They're more like the Of course my character is from League of Legends, isn't yours? archetype.

I have one of those that always wants to play Batman. It doesn't matter that we're currently playing d&d. Or anything else. And when he actually did get to play Batman, it was in Apocalypse World, so he was a moderately insane Batman that butchered people for JUSTICE! Too bad that game never really got off.

Then in Monster of the Week, his character was Cam Wenchjester. Which at least fits the genre. If he ever tried to hide his antics, I really think he wouldn't do a good job of it.

[Anonymouswizard]

In my experience, these folks don't even try to deny what they're doing. They're more like the Of course my character is from League of Legends, isn't yours? archetype.

You see, I get a hilarious one.

In every other game I run (or play in) somebody wants to play an Assassin. This goes one of two ways:

-They learn Stealth and part of the game becomes them getting past the rather simple countermeasures I put in place (one of which is always an air vent designed so that a section of it drops, because with these guys it works well). It generally ends up either the party distracting security for them to reach the MacGuffin, or for them to somehow work with the team to disable security.

-The other type loads up on combat and acrobatics. Rarely any attempt at stealth beyond the air vent passageway, and certain no attempt at disguise. Their preferred style is to run at the enemy and slash with their sword (probably a katana). Think of a mix between Assassins Creed* and those non-stealthy ninjas you always see.

I have seen one person combine the two rather effectively, in that he was built as the second one but intelligently infiltrated places while we distracted the guards.

Oh, and another one, the my character wields a katana guy. His characters wield a katana (fine in itself) because they are the best sword ever (I kind of have to disagree, I think infantry sabres are generally superior**). Will ignore any attempts to point out how other swords were better, because katanas were folded nine billion times and it took weeks to make a single blade and therefore must be superior to anything that can be made in a day or two. Will refuse to accept that there might be a variety of swords to suit different situations. Is generally annoying because of this.

* Not to say that AC cannot be played as a good stealth game, it's just that the character is less of an assassin and more of a warrior to me.
** Not the overall best sword by any means, but a better general option than the katana.

[Max_Killjoy]

Katana (noun) -- a two-handed, relatively short sabre made with a special method that mainly existed to compensate for rotten iron ores, and specialized for a very specific form of combat.

[Anonymouswizard]

Katana (noun) -- a two-handed, relatively short sabre made with a special method that mainly existed to compensate for rotten iron ores, and specialized for a very specific form of combat.

Sorry, I should specify I was talking about one-handed sabres. Also, I know that the method used to forge them was used to compensate for the poor iron ore in Japan, but I've met people who insist that a katana is better than any other sword.

Other things that annoy me:
-Using a katana one-handed (although I can let it pass).
-Dual wielding katana.
-Laser katana.
-Dual wielding laser katana.
-Not enough cheese in my Ploughman's Lunch.

[Max_Killjoy]

Sorry, I should specify I was talking about one-handed sabres. Also, I know that the method used to forge them was used to compensate for the poor iron ore in Japan, but I've met people who insist that a katana is better than any other sword.

Other things that annoy me:
-Using a katana one-handed (although I can let it pass).
-Dual wielding katana.
-Laser katana.
-Dual wielding laser katana.
-Not enough cheese in my Ploughman's Lunch.

I was pretty much agreeing with your annoyance regarding "katana guy"... the Cult of the Katana makes me want to pull my hair out sometimes.

(However, as an aside, one-handed and dual-wielding techniques for the katana were not unknown in the real world -- see Miyamoto Musashi, etc.)

[Anonymouswizard]

I was pretty much agreeing with your annoyance regarding "katana guy"... the Cult of the Katana makes me want to pull my hair out sometimes.

(However, as an aside, one-handed and dual-wielding techniques for the katana were not unknown in the real world -- see Miyamoto Musashi, etc.)

Ironically I'm fine with Katana+Wakizashi, and as I said I can let wielding a katana one-handed go. I just hate dual wielding katana (and most styles that use two matched weapons).

[IronLionShark]

The guy who forgot rule 0: The player who argues against the DM about how the things aren't exactly like they are stated in the rule books. Often says things like, "The 5e Monster Manual doesn't have goblins with magic spoons and 50 AC.", or, "That's not how death saves should work." Often needs to be reminded of rule 0.

[Hazrond]

The Luck Battery: a hybrid of the above archetypes, the Battery will have terrible luck for long stretches of time, but when the dice let go of their hate he releases all that stored luck like an atom bomb and cannot be stopped.

Oh look, its me.

I literally can't roll above a 12 to save my life most of the time, ironically unless it IS to save my life, because on EVERY SINGLE Life-Or-Death roll i always Nat 20 but the vast majority of all other rolls are less than 10. Funnily enough my weird Fate-shield effect extends to others as well, they will roll absurdly good if it's to save my character's life.

(It's really amusing to roll a Nat 1 to jump through a window with a horde of zombies on my tail, then tell the summoner to have his TINY size fire beetle make a strength check to pull me out, tell him it will work, then watch him roll a Nat 20 :smallbiggrin:)

[MesiDoomstalker]

In my experience, these folks don't even try to deny what they're doing. They're more like the Of course my character is from League of Legends, isn't yours? archetype.

I've experienced both. Batman (even with secret identity Bruce Wayne) and Not-Drizt being Not-CG Drow.

That reminds me of another: "Drow are just misunderstood" guy: While not limited to Drow, these players will always play a typically evil race, specifically one that contradicts every bit of lore related to that race. They will insist that the race is simply misunderstood and "not all [race] are like that" and will make sure their character bemoans the rightful prejudice they receive from NPCs and party members alike. Will get touchy when challenged on the lore of their pet evil-race.

[8BitNinja]

Other things that annoy me:
-Using a katana one-handed (although I can let it pass).
-Dual wielding katana.
-Laser katana.
-Dual wielding laser katana.
-Not enough cheese in my Ploughman's Lunch.

Are plasma edged katanas okay?

Because if not, there goes another weapon from my game.

[Anonymouswizard]

Are plasma edged katanas okay?

Because if not, there goes another weapon from my game.

You can have whatever funky weapons you want in your game.

[Turalisj]

Bag of flour, too, in case of invisible enemies, or to check for wind direction and speed (or air currents to find secret doors), or to mark pressure plates and pit traps, or to check for tripwires. (Or to cook with, I suppose.)

Hammer and pitons, too. Got to have those. Not only do they help when climbing, you can tie a piton to some twine and throw it for trapfinding purposes as well.

And a small metal mirror, to check under doors and around corners.

And don't forget to bring bags or sacks, those are handy.

People mock, and those are the ones who never had some of the original dnd writers as a dm at one point or another.

[IronLionShark]

Are plasma edged katanas okay?

Because if not, there goes another weapon from my game.

No weapons for you.
The sad player: Is sad.

[Madbox]

The Always Says the Wrong Thing Guy: this is the guy who wants to interact with the NPCs a lot, whether trying to act as the party's face or just jumping in when another player is trying to talk an NPC into something, and always says something to mess things up. They don't do it on purpose, or anything, they just stink at it.

[IronLionShark]

The Always Says the Wrong Thing Guy: this is the guy who wants to interact with the NPCs a lot, whether trying to act as the party's face or just jumping in when another player is trying to talk an NPC into something, and always says something to mess things up. They don't do it on purpose, or anything, they just stink at it.

The smooth talker: Talks to NPCs the same, just the polar opposite result.

[8BitNinja]

No weapons for you.
The sad player: Is sad.

And I am that sad player


You can have whatever funky weapons you want in your game.

I was asking if you thought it was a cool idea. I'm not going to ditch it, I'm just wondering if it is a lame class weapon. If so, it's the second one on that list (the first is the flechette rifle, apparently a needle gun isn't cool)

[goto124]

The Always Says the Wrong Thing Guy: this is the guy who wants to interact with the NPCs a lot, whether trying to act as the party's face or just jumping in when another player is trying to talk an NPC into something, and always says something to mess things up. They don't do it on purpose, or anything, they just stink at it.

I know someone similar to this, but with NPCs replaced by RL people...

[IronLionShark]

And I am that sad player



I was asking if you thought it was a cool idea. I'm not going to ditch it, I'm just wondering if it is a lame class weapon. If so, it's the second one on that list (the first is the flechette rifle, apparently a needle gun isn't cool)

Sad player should use a dracolich bone spear.

[8BitNinja]

Sad player should use a dracolich bone spear.

But I'm sad because they said no weapons.

Don't you see? They took away weapons from a guy who really likes them

[Anonymouswizard]

I was asking if you thought it was a cool idea. I'm not going to ditch it, I'm just wondering if it is a lame class weapon. If so, it's the second one on that list (the first is the flechette rifle, apparently a needle gun isn't cool)

Eh, I can see ways why they would work. I wouldn't think of them as cool, but that's not the same as them being uncool.

Also, flechette rifles are totally cool.

[goto124]

Are plasma edged katanas okay?

There's an entire franchise (http://comicsalliance.com/files/2015/12/sw-marathon.jpg?w=630&h=420&zc=1&s=0&a=t&q=89) based around plasma edged katanas. Go figure :smalltongue:

[TheTeaMustFlow]

There's an entire franchise (http://comicsalliance.com/files/2015/12/sw-marathon.jpg?w=630&h=420&zc=1&s=0&a=t&q=89) based around plasma edged katanas. Go figure :smalltongue:

Eh, they're too straight to be katanas. More like, i dunno, Jian maybe?

[IronLionShark]

Eh, they're too straight to be katanas. More like, i dunno, Jian maybe?

I would call them rapiers.

[GreyStormcrow]

I would call them rapiers.
Because nothing screams "elegance and finesse" like a flaming metal stick.

[Honest Tiefling]

Because nothing screams "elegance and finesse" like a flaming metal stick.

You don't know me. I'm going to do me.

[Max_Killjoy]

It was a more elegant and civilized time, when space-monks with laser-swords practiced pathological levels of self-denial, suppressed the rights of the people to self-determination, and chopped body parts of anyone who crossed them, all in the name of peace and justice.

[SirBellias]

It was a more elegant and civilized time, when space-monks with laser-swords practiced pathological levels of self-denial, suppressed the rights of the people to self-determination, and chopped body parts of anyone who crossed them, all in the name of peace and justice.

... That's fair, actually.

[8BitNinja]

Eh, I can see ways why they would work. I wouldn't think of them as cool, but that's not the same as them being uncool.

Also, flechette rifles are totally cool.

Take that everyone who thinks that the flechette rifle isn't cool!

Oh wait, they don't use this forum


There's an entire franchise (http://comicsalliance.com/files/2015/12/sw-marathon.jpg?w=630&h=420&zc=1&s=0&a=t&q=89) based around plasma edged katanas. Go figure :smalltongue:

As a wise man once said, there is nothing new under the sun

[IronLionShark]

The Psion: Knows what every othe player/GM is thinking.

[Cluedrew]

It was a more elegant and civilized time, when space-monks with laser-swords practiced pathological levels of self-denial, suppressed the rights of the people to self-determination, and chopped body parts of anyone who crossed them, all in the name of peace and justice.I may be unique in this, but one of the scenes I take the biggest issue with in the prequels is the scene where the Trade Federation blow up the ship and the Jedi immediately pull out there lightsabers. I don't think they should have. I mean maybe they were immediately aware that the... four (I think it was a skeleton crew of 4) people on that ship dying but I don't think so. Even so I think the lightsabers shouldn't of appeared until at least the doors opened after the poison gas.

Compare this with Obi-Wan's scene in the catena, yes he did hurt some people but he did try to diffuse the situation first.

What? I think Jedi being more that really good fighters is what makes them interesting.

[8BitNinja]

The N00b: Not to be confused with the noob. This guy thinks he knows everything about D&D because he plays World of Warcraft

[AshfireMage]

Haven't seen this one mentioned yet:

The Soapboxer: This player has a Pet Topic. It may be a social or political issue (in my player's case it was feminism), other hobby, fandom, or just how much their job sucks, but it's tangentially related to the game at best. Somehow, a session is never complete unless this topic has come up at least once and the player has made their opinions infinitely clear, usually in a loud and long-winded fashion that makes all the other players sorry for saying whatever it was that gave the player an opportunity to talk about the Pet Topic.

[goto124]

(in my player's case it was feminism)... makes all the other players sorry for saying whatever it was that gave the player an opportunity to talk about the Pet Topic.

Did your game have any female characters afterwards?

[AshfireMage]

Did your game have any female characters afterwards?

We did before that, my Soapboxing player was playing a female character, as was the other female player. I also had multiple female npcs, including the BBEG and our cohort, and they all continued to exist as long as the campaign was going. I've been friends with her for years before introducing her to D&D, so I've kind of just learned to nod along and get on with the game. I mean, she can have whatever opinions she wants, but the middle of a fight with a dire tiger is not the time to tell us how sexist it is that Black Widow doesn't have her own movie.

Here's another:

The One Who Fades Away: This player shows up to the first several sessions, plays well and seems excited about the game. Then, one day, they say they'll be gone and give a legitimate excuse (sick, out of town, etc). Everything is fine and they show up to the next session. A few weeks later, they're gone again. The absences grow more and more frequent, until they never actually come, simply sending a message every week that they're not coming, yet they never actually drop out of the game.

[Anonymouswizard]

Haven't seen this one mentioned yet:

The Soapboxer: This player has a Pet Topic. It may be a social or political issue (in my player's case it was feminism), other hobby, fandom, or just how much their job sucks, but it's tangentially related to the game at best. Somehow, a session is never complete unless this topic has come up at least once and the player has made their opinions infinitely clear, usually in a loud and long-winded fashion that makes all the other players sorry for saying whatever it was that gave the player an opportunity to talk about the Pet Topic.

I'm so glad I haven't seen one of these, I guess I'm just lucky my groups tend to all align in views and so rants tend to get dropped. There is one player who has a tendency to tell stories about the Total War games and the like, but those generally happen during established breaks.


For another one, which I don't think has been mentioned:

The Man With Boobs: despite the name this archetype refers to someone who makes a character of the opposite gender and then fails to roleplay it properly. Possibly forgets that their character is the opposite gender, and so the character will act as the player's gender in the wrong ways.

After being in a game with a good crossplayer and a bad crossplayer, I can say that the latter can be annoying. The former was a woman playing a man, and came across as an erudite and cowardly man*, while the latter was a man where most of us forgot his character was a girl. Now, I'm definitely more towards the bad end of the spectrum myself, but I'll at least try to make a character the party will accept as female.

* Okay, part of that was due to being a Skaven, but we still knew that the character was a man.

[Max_Killjoy]

I'm so glad I haven't seen one of these, I guess I'm just lucky my groups tend to all align in views and so rants tend to get dropped. There is one player who has a tendency to tell stories about the Total War games and the like, but those generally happen during established breaks.


For another one, which I don't think has been mentioned:

The Man With Boobs: despite the name this archetype refers to someone who makes a character of the opposite gender and then fails to roleplay it properly. Possibly forgets that their character is the opposite gender, and so the character will act as the player's gender in the wrong ways.

After being in a game with a good crossplayer and a bad crossplayer, I can say that the latter can be annoying. The former was a woman playing a man, and came across as an erudite and cowardly man*, while the latter was a man where most of us forgot his character was a girl. Now, I'm definitely more towards the bad end of the spectrum myself, but I'll at least try to make a character the party will accept as female.

* Okay, part of that was due to being a Skaven, but we still knew that the character was a man.


Then again, what exactly does it mean for a character to "act like a woman"?

[Anonymouswizard]

Then again, what exactly does it mean for a character to "act like a woman"?

Less 'act like a woman' and more 'not act like a man', if that makes sense. I don't want to stereotype here but the main thing is that his character essentially acted like the player's male characters with minor differences, and didn't 'feel' like woman.

It'll vary for different people, but the problem is more when a character doesn't cross into the broad 'either gender could be that' spectrum of personalities, and the player just isn't a very good actor (which is the main cause for this, the other crossplayer was a far better actor and got into character more).

[Clistenes]

Haven't seen this one mentioned yet:

The Soapboxer: This player has a Pet Topic. It may be a social or political issue (in my player's case it was feminism), other hobby, fandom, or just how much their job sucks, but it's tangentially related to the game at best. Somehow, a session is never complete unless this topic has come up at least once and the player has made their opinions infinitely clear, usually in a loud and long-winded fashion that makes all the other players sorry for saying whatever it was that gave the player an opportunity to talk about the Pet Topic.

That's a general personality archetype rather than a player archetype. There is a certain radio show that I have always enjoyed quite a bit: It talks about science, ecologism, history, international spies, explorers, famous criminals, creepy legends and a little bit about cryptozoology, ufos and other paranormal stuff (most of the staff is quite skeptic, though).

But they changed the lead/boss whatever you call it. The replacement one ALWAYS twist EVERY issue so he can start speaking about how horrible is capitalism, how evil is US and how everybody who opposes US is right (from Maduro to Putin and from Kim Jong-Un to the Ayatollahs).

He also attacks everything popular and mainstream just because it's mainstream, and contradicts everything anybody else says... He seems to think it makes him look clever.

So I want to listen about giant squids, about Doggerland, about the Black Sea deluge hypothesis, about panspermia, about the cursed island of Poveglia, about the Aokigahara forest, about exoplanets and 3D printers and lab grown organs and peat bog natural mummies and the Flores Man, and the guy keeps interrupting and telling the others "you are WRONG! capitalism killed the Flores Man! By the way, US is evil", and I swear I can listen the others roll their eyes and bit their tonges before they answer "yes, but, as I was saying...".

[Cealocanth]

That's a general personality archetype rather than a player archetype. There is a certain radio show that I have always enjoyed quite a bit: It talks about science, ecologism, history, international spies, explorers, famous criminals, creepy legends and a little bit about cryptozoology, ufos and other paranormal stuff (most of the staff is quite skeptic, though).

But they changed the lead/boss whatever you call it. The replacement one ALWAYS twist EVERY issue so he can start speaking about how horrible is capitalism, how evil is US and how everybody who opposes US is right (from Maduro to Putin and from Kim Jong-Un to the Ayatollahs).

He also attacks everything popular and mainstream just because it's mainstream, and contradicts everything anybody else says... He seems to think it makes him look clever.

So I want to listen about giant squids, about Doggerland, about the Black Sea deluge hypothesis, about panspermia, about the cursed island of Poveglia, about the Aokigahara forest, about exoplanets and 3D printers and lab grown organs and peat bog natural mummies and the Flores Man, and the guy keeps interrupting and telling the others "you are WRONG! capitalism killed the Flores Man! By the way, US is evil", and I swear I can listen the others roll their eyes and bit their tonges before they answer "yes, but, as I was saying...".

I hate to say that I'm that guy, but I'm probably that guy. Not the anti-capitalism thing, but the soapboxer thing. I love to have discussions about controversial things with intelligent people, and this means that I often end up bringing up said things in conversation. For some reason, though, I tend to drop that when I'm roleplaying, though. I may be an opinionated man who enjoys heated debate, but my characters aren't, usually.

[AshfireMage]

That's a general personality archetype rather than a player archetype. There is a certain radio show that I have always enjoyed quite a bit: It talks about science, ecologism, history, international spies, explorers, famous criminals, creepy legends and a little bit about cryptozoology, ufos and other paranormal stuff (most of the staff is quite skeptic, though).

But they changed the lead/boss whatever you call it. The replacement one ALWAYS twist EVERY issue so he can start speaking about how horrible is capitalism, how evil is US and how everybody who opposes US is right (from Maduro to Putin and from Kim Jong-Un to the Ayatollahs).

He also attacks everything popular and mainstream just because it's mainstream, and contradicts everything anybody else says... He seems to think it makes him look clever.

So I want to listen about giant squids, about Doggerland, about the Black Sea deluge hypothesis, about panspermia, about the cursed island of Poveglia, about the Aokigahara forest, about exoplanets and 3D printers and lab grown organs and peat bog natural mummies and the Flores Man, and the guy keeps interrupting and telling the others "you are WRONG! capitalism killed the Flores Man! By the way, US is evil", and I swear I can listen the others roll their eyes and bit their tonges before they answer "yes, but, as I was saying...".

I suppose, but it's definitely come up several times in games I've played. Humorously enough, the other player I know who does this (although to a much lesser extent than the one who originally inspired the post) also has "capitalism is evil and we should all be communists" as their Favorite Topic. Again, people can have whatever opinions they want, but the merits of different real-world economic systems has literally nothing to do with the giant portal that just opened in the middle of the vampire's mansion.

How about The Shopaholic? This player's absolute favorite thing to do is buy stuff for their characters. Usually more magical items, weapons, and armor than they can ever use, but have been known to freely distribute gold pieces for fluff items such as pets and fancy outfits as well. Give them a copy of Arms and Equipment Guide and you'll never see them again, and shopping trips can easily take up an entire session or even multiple.

Often but not always overlaps with The Crafter. This guy (for some reason I usually find it's a guy) loves to build stuff with his character, again, rather without regard as to whether they actually need it or can sell it. Time between turns is taken up looking for and talking about all the cool stuff they can make and they always have at least one weird thing of their own making attached to their body somehow. Often overlaps with The Minecrafter, since all that research can distract from what's actually going on in the game.

[8BitNinja]

The Man With Boobs: despite the name this archetype refers to someone who makes a character of the opposite gender and then fails to roleplay it properly. Possibly forgets that their character is the opposite gender, and so the character will act as the player's gender in the wrong ways.

After being in a game with a good crossplayer and a bad crossplayer, I can say that the latter can be annoying. The former was a woman playing a man, and came across as an erudite and cowardly man*, while the latter was a man where most of us forgot his character was a girl. Now, I'm definitely more towards the bad end of the spectrum myself, but I'll at least try to make a character the party will accept as female.

* Okay, part of that was due to being a Skaven, but we still knew that the character was a man.

Wait, hold on.

These exist?

[YossarianLives]

Wait, hold on.

These exist?
What do you mean? People who play characters of a different gender, or those who can do it well?

[goto124]

The Man With Boobs: despite the name this archetype refers to someone who makes a character of the opposite gender and then fails to roleplay it properly. Possibly forgets that their character is the opposite gender, and so the character will act as the player's gender in the wrong ways.

After being in a game with a good crossplayer and a bad crossplayer, I can say that the latter can be annoying. The former was a woman playing a man, and came across as an erudite and cowardly man, while the latter was a man where most of us forgot his character was a girl. Now, I'm definitely more towards the bad end of the spectrum myself, but I'll at least try to make a character the party will accept as female.


Less 'act like a woman' and more 'not act like a man', if that makes sense. I don't want to stereotype here but the main thing is that his character essentially acted like the player's male characters with minor differences, and didn't 'feel' like woman.

It'll vary for different people, but the problem is more when a character doesn't cross into the broad 'either gender could be that' spectrum of personalities, and the player just isn't a very good actor (which is the main cause for this, the other crossplayer was a far better actor and got into character more).

I'm not sure why these aren't sexism (misogynism and misandrism/toxic masculinity alike), especially when not given a context of a culture with gender roles.

I wanna hear specific examples. What exactly did the female character do that a female would not do, in spite of the character's background and personality? What exactly did the male character do that a male would not do, in spite of the character's background and personality? What things would a female never do just because she's female, regardless of background and personality? What things would a male never do just because he's male, regardless of background and personality?

Erudite means "having or showing great knowledge or learning". Why is this so unusual for a male? If this male character is of the less-combaty and more-scholarly type, is it not normal for him to be on the cowardly side? If you gender-swapped him into a female, does her "erudite and cowardly" personality suddenly look more normal and acceptable? If so, how do you know it's not misandrism to demand that a male be less "erudite and cowardly"?


* Okay, part of that was due to being a Skaven, but we still knew that the character was a man.

Why is his species, race, and culture so much less important than his sex?

The last time this was discussed, the example of men sending **** pics to women was brought up. I decided to do some research, and came to the following conclusion: the men figured that they would like to see the women's bits, therefore, the women would want to see their bits. A lot of culture emphasizes on how men are always perverts, will always want to see young women's body parts no matter the context, etc. This sexism gets deep into the minds of even men.

Since we're dealing with gender-equal fantasy cultures where such sexism need not necessarily exist, we shouldn't automatically assume that the men are somehow influenced into thinking women like to see bits from random people. Or any gender-based behavior, really.

[Anonymouswizard]

I'm not sure why these aren't sexism (misogynism and misandrism/toxic masculinity alike), especially when not given a context of a culture with gender roles.

I wanna hear specific examples. What exactly did the female character do that a female would not do, in spite of the character's background and personality? What exactly did the male character do that a male would not do, in spite of the character's background and personality? What things would a female never do just because she's female, regardless of background and personality? What things would a male never do just because he's male, regardless of background and personality?

I can't really give examples from the game, because the female character was so bland. Think of an elf, and you're probably halfway to the character's personality. What I'm going to say is that, going by my experience, the character did not react or reason in the way woman usually do, although I know that experience will vary (I will never say 'a man or a woman wouldn't do X', but in my experience there is a trend).

The real difference between the two? The Skaven had a character and acted as that character, and so appeared male. The elf had a concept and happened to be female, and acted as the player. The problem is how the player acts I consider male.


Erudite means "having or showing great knowledge or learning". Why is this so unusual for a male? If this male character is of the less-combaty and more-scholarly type, is it not normal for him to be on the cowardly side? If you gender-swapped him into a female, does her "erudite and cowardly" personality suddenly look more normal and acceptable? If so, how do you know it's not misandrism to demand that a male be less "erudite and cowardly"?

You've missed the point. I wasn't saying 'men should be dumb and brave', I was describing the character. The point was not to say that men shouldn't be erudite, but that this was a character trait.


Why is his species, race, and culture so much less important than his sex?

It wasn't. I just put that in there to explain where the cowardly bit came from.


The last time this was discussed, the example of men sending **** pics to women was brought up. I decided to do some research, and came to the following conclusion: the men figured that they would like to see the women's bits, therefore, the women would want to see their bits. A lot of culture emphasizes on how men are always perverts, will always want to see young women's body parts no matter the context, etc. This sexism gets deep into the minds of even men.

Since we're dealing with gender-equal fantasy cultures where such sexism need not necessarily exist, we shouldn't automatically assume that the men are somehow influenced into thinking women like to see bits from random people. Or any gender-based behavior, really.

Sounds legit, although in this case we weren't actually dealing with a gender-equal fantasy culture. It's really more a case of in character/no character.

[Cealocanth]

In a futile attempt to get back on topic...

For freeform games, there tends to be a few types that you don't see in more controlled games.

The King of Kings - This GM doesn't understand the concept of power creep. Especially in freeform games where anything goes, he will throw the most difficult, most impossible things at his players and take absolutely every chance to make the game difficult for them. The tarrasque has darkvision and can cast epic level spells and can peer beyond the fabric of spacetime and knows the future perfectly, so good luck. All of his NPCs are gods, and if your character is not a god, then you may as well not play.

The Contingency Planner - In designing their character's background, this player has written in a tiny clause that gives them near limitless power that is difficult to notice until they pull it out as a last resort. This can range on several levels of subtelty, from "Once in her life, my character can directly channel the incarnation of her goddess in a moment of true need" to "My character is a grizzled cowboy with an itchy trigger finger, oh and also he has a big red button that can destroy the universe." (I have seen both of these in actual characters in a game.)

The Destiny Sponge - Generally not the fault of this player, but rather of their group. This player is the designated scapegoat, the butt of every joke, the target of every curse, and the plaything of the fates. All the bad stuff happens to this player so that the others don't have to suffer and can have a good time. It is a poor GM that does this to a player, but many fail to realize it until the sponge brings it up several months down the road.

The Sympathy Vampire - This player has designed their character's background to be the biggest sob story possible. The character's parents died when she was young, she was raised by a cruel stepparent and sold into slavery. On top of that, she is a horribly disfigured mutant since birth that was injured in the great war. And, as if that wasn't enough, they are 9 months pregnant with an illegitimate child of a deadbeat dad who also happens to be a troglodyte when they enter the game, and expect the other players to deliver the baby. Keep in mind, this is only for players who do this in order to keep the spotlight on them at all times, and not for players who just want to explore a character with hardship in their life.

[MesiDoomstalker]

The Sympathy Vampire - This player has designed their character's background to be the biggest sob story possible. The character's parents died when she was young, she was raised by a cruel stepparent and sold into slavery. On top of that, she is a horribly disfigured mutant since birth that was injured in the great war. And, as if that wasn't enough, they are 9 months pregnant with an illegitimate child of a deadbeat dad who also happens to be a troglodyte when they enteIr the game, and expect the other players to deliver the baby. Keep in mind, this is only for players who do this in order to keep the spotlight on them at all times, and not for players who just want to explore a character with hardship in their life.

I think I'm a bit of a Sympathy Vampire, but I definitely don't try to hog the spot light. But most of my PC's have a serious case of Dead Parents or Horrible Past or some kind of hardship. I try to make interesting characters and hardship usually brings about such characters, but I try to play them moving forward instead of stuck in the past (except the one who was stuck in the past, he was kind of boring).

[8BitNinja]

What do you mean? People who play characters of a different gender, or those who can do it well?

Those who do it well

[goto124]

I try to make interesting characters and hardship usually brings about such characters, but I try to play them moving forward instead of stuck in the past (except the one who was stuck in the past, he was kind of boring).

I try to do the same, but characters have to stay stuck in the past for a bit before moving on, otherwise the character development isn't meaningful. And my characters haven't lasted long enough for that sort of character development.


Those who do it well

I'm hard-pressed to find a character who's wrong when one gender, but right when another gender. Certain characters may come off as somewhat annoying because they fit a certain gender stereotype, but tropes are not bad (har har) and both gender-based and non-gender-based stereotypes can be played well.

Even the stereotypical "stripper lesbian ninja" is annoying whether played by a female or male player, outside the context of that kind of game.

[Anonymouswizard]

Those who do it well


I'm hard-pressed to find a character who's wrong when one gender, but right when another gender. Certain characters may come off as somewhat annoying because they fit a certain gender stereotype, but tropes are not bad (har har) and both gender-based and non-gender-based stereotypes can be played well.

Even the stereotypical "stripper lesbian ninja" is annoying whether played by a female or male player, outside the context of that kind of game.

To clarify, whether they can do it well has a relationship with a) their ability to pull of different characters of their gender and b) your perception of how men and women act. So me and my friend might both be in the same game with a crossplaying character, and I might dislike it (probably without being able to tell the exact reason) while my friend might find it done well because of different experiences.

I'll echo goto that there's no character concept that is wrong with one gender, however there might be ways that are wrong to you when playing the opposite gender. As people say, the way to write a weak male character is to write a stereotypical female character and then change all the pronouns (or is it to write a strong female character you change the pronouns on a male character?). I don't agree with it exactly, but I have a rule of thumb of 'how would this character be different if gender Y', if the answer is not 'nothing' at least 99% of the time then you have a truly bizarre cast of characters.

EDIT: thought I should mention that, except for that one elf (who's stereotype was elf), the only time I've seen stereotypical female characters played is by women, most of the time cross-players just think it fits the concept better to be the other gender (or don't want to break an all female adventuring party).

[nedz]

The Destiny Sponge - Generally not the fault of this player, but rather of their group. This player is the designated scapegoat, the butt of every joke, the target of every curse, and the plaything of the fates. All the bad stuff happens to this player so that the others don't have to suffer and can have a good time. It is a poor GM that does this to a player, but many fail to realize it until the sponge brings it up several months down the road.

Also known as The Blame Receiver. Most offices have one.

[IronLionShark]

In an attempt to get back on topic...

For freeform games, there tends to be a few types that you don't see in more controlled games.

*snip*

The Sympathy Vampire - This player has designed their character's background to be the biggest sob story possible. The character's parents died when she was young, she was raised by a cruel stepparent and sold into slavery. On top of that, she is a horribly disfigured mutant since birth that was injured in the great war. And, as if that wasn't enough, they are 9 months pregnant with an illegitimate child of a deadbeat dad who also happens to be a troglodyte when they enter the game, and expect the other players to deliver the baby. Keep in mind, this is only for players who do this in order to keep the spotlight on them at all times, and not for players who just want to explore a character with hardship in their life.

Dead parents, only child, of the only remnant of a fallen civiliztion is useful to remove DM hooks. Unless the DM pulls a Vader... BBEG says "No *insert wizard name here*, I am your father. FIREBALL. Yay inheritence of many forts and minions to use for what I want.

[MesiDoomstalker]

Dead parents, only child, of the only remnant of a fallen civiliztion is useful to remove DM hooks. Unless the DM pulls a Vader... BBEG says "No *insert wizard name here*, I am your father. FIREBALL. Yay inheritence of many forts and minions to use for what I want.

Why would one wish to remove DM hooks? Do they wish to not enjoy the game? This gaming philosophy is odd to me.

[Anonymouswizard]

Dead parents, only child, of the only remnant of a fallen civiliztion is useful to remove DM hooks. Unless the DM pulls a Vader... BBEG says "No *insert wizard name here*, I am your father. FIREBALL. Yay inheritence of many forts and minions to use for what I want.

There's a reason my characters generally have living parents that they are fairly estranged from. Also, generally in another country, I just don't trust GMs (seriously, I have to trust you to give you a good relationship with my parents, or even a one line backstory). Thinking of the last few characters I've played, in reverse order:

-Dead parents (dead clan, also different traditions to what the party is used to because I'm a Hill Dwarf*)
-Living parents, but no real relationship with them anymore (I had been shuffled off into the church, this is a GM I trust a lot)
-Ha, werewolf the apocalypse. I'm not allowed to see them.
-Living parents, good relationship but don't see them due to religious differences.
-Parents probably eaten by zombies. Didn't trust that GM enough to give him a backstory.
-Alive, but my character is too focused for them to come up.

For the record, 2, 4, and 6 were all the same GM. The didn't use backstory for plot hooks unless the players asked for it, so my old cult leader turned up in game 4 as that was important to my character's story.

* So my character doesn't have a beard, but does have both long hair and sideburns. Still playing her actually, her goal is to refound her clan because dwarf.

[arclance]

The Soapboxer: This player has a Pet Topic. It may be a social or political issue (in my player's case it was feminism), other hobby, fandom, or just how much their job sucks, but it's tangentially related to the game at best. Somehow, a session is never complete unless this topic has come up at least once and the player has made their opinions infinitely clear, usually in a loud and long-winded fashion that makes all the other players sorry for saying whatever it was that gave the player an opportunity to talk about the Pet Topic.
We had one of these at the local store once.
His thing was how cannibalism as a life style choice (bandit, it's whats for dinner), not a survival tactic (our airship crashed in the mountains), was not inherently evil under the D&D 3.5 Alignment system.

He was also one of these.

It's Legal I Swear: This player can not create a legal character under RAW or the DMs character creation rules if their life depended on it. When asked why they did not follow the rules given they often say they forgot or did not know about that rule even if it the DM printed out a copy of their character creation rules for them to keep. They often but not always "forget" to correct their character sheet when told to by the DM. Often will not let others even see their character sheet unless forced to by the DM and my read it like a poker hand to make it harder for others to glance at it. May show up late so that the DM conveniently can't check their character sheet without delaying the game for the rest of the group.

Examples include using options the DM explicitly told them not to when making a character, "forgetting" the enhancement bonus cost of a weapon enchantment ("Vorpal is a +5 Enchantment?"), "Paladins don't get their mount at level 1'?, and editing things on their character sheet between sessions ("since when did you have a 20 STR?").

He also almost pulled off the bolded and underlined part of this.

A cousin to the Contrarian, The Bard isn't trying to derail the campaign, but may have a secret death wish to die with a s#&%-eating grin still on their face when the DM leaps the table and strangles them. Excessive silliness at all times, and/or constant lame puns, and/or goofball plans that somehow work, and/or consistently and obscenely lucky rolls regardless of whose dice they're using, and/or having a simple solution to virtually any problem that bypasses most challenges, everything they do manages to annoy the DM, and they revel in it. (The Bard may or may not also have a tendency to consider Captain Jack Harkness to be a role model, and attempt to flirt and/or sleep with nearly anything that has an INT score high enough to reciprocate).
He almost always played a bard, a cannibal bard.

[Anonymouswizard]

It's Legal I Swear: This player can not create a legal character under RAW or the DMs character creation rules if their life depended on it. When asked why they did not follow the rules given they often say they forgot or did not know about that rule even if it the DM printed out a copy of their character creation rules for them to keep. They often but not always "forget" to correct their character sheet when told to by the DM. Often will not let others even see their character sheet unless forced to by the DM and my read it like a poker hand to make it harder for others to glance at it. May show up late so that the DM conveniently can't check their character sheet without delaying the game for the rest of the group.

I have played with someone who kept his character sheet on his laptop (I also had a digital character sheet, but printed it out before each session and let the GM review it). I, at the very least, never saw his sheet, and I'm not 100% sure the GM saw it past the character creation session (although I'm not certain he cheated).

He also didn't check with the GM to see if his interpretation of the rules was correct. We played in a game with a homebrew system, where we both wanted more than the 50 skill points we began with (I hate exponential skill costs, although I get why he used them). Fortunately we could take a virtue that gave us an extra 15. I asked before the character creation session if I could take it twice by taking another two points of flaws, because that was a rule in an earlier version. I was told no, and so created the character on 65 skill points (and actually it worked out for the better*). My friend? He took the virtue 3 times, taking a minor flaw each time, and then said in a later session that he didn't feel like he had enough skill points, as he didn't have all the skills he wanted with 95 (this is after he always stealthed successfully, was hit about once despite never using cover, and almost never missed). This is one of the few times another player breaking the rules has ever pissed me off, and because nobody had seen his sheet we couldn't ask the GM if he had allowed it (answer: no and he's rewriting the text to nix it).

* I still had insane social skills, but had to do it via virtue stacking, which lead to me having more diverse skills.

[Max_Killjoy]

Why would one wish to remove DM hooks? Do they wish to not enjoy the game? This gaming philosophy is odd to me.

Some people enjoy other parts of an RPG more, and thick layers of drama less. Some players like solving problems and cracking mysteries and so forth, and having a bunch of "drama hooks" feels a lot like giving the GM a way to yank them around.

[Cealocanth]

Why would one wish to remove DM hooks? Do they wish to not enjoy the game? This gaming philosophy is odd to me.

My guess is that some people see RPGs as competitive, rather than cooperative. To be fair, some games are very competitive. OD&D, for example.

[8BitNinja]

The Proxy Flirt: The player who always has a character that hits on another player's character, no matter what.

[IronLionShark]

Archetyper: The player who posts archetypes of players on a forum of a webcomic.
I have never seen an Archetyper though...

[8BitNinja]

Archetyper: The player who posts archetypes of players on a forum of a webcomic.
I have never seen an Archetyper though...

They are as elusive as the 8 Bit Ninja

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Archetyper: The player who posts archetypes of players on a forum of a webcomic.
I have never seen an Archetyper though...


They are as elusive as the 8 Bit Ninja

Archetypers of Unusual Systems? I don't think they exist. (Immediately gets jumped by an AOUS)

[IronLionShark]

Archetypers of Unusual Systems? I don't think they exist. (Immediately gets jumped by an AOUS)

I am not left handed either!

[Anonymouswizard]

I am not left handed either!

You've just fallen into one of the classic blunders! The most famous of which is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well known is this: never quote the Princess Bride when a playgrounder is watching!

[8BitNinja]

You've just fallen into one of the classic blunders! The most famous of which is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well known is this: never quote the Princess Bride when a playgrounder is watching!

The OP, he can, fuss

[GPuzzle]

My group consists of:

The Retconnect DM - since he pretty much makes everything up on the fly, he retconnected a bunch of stuff from early sessions to build the world. Most likely to be Haruhi Suzumiya in disguise.

The Russian - only plays Russian characters, no matter in which variety. Most likely to have a character drinking vodka.

The Sage with no Knowledge - will play sage-esque characters that aren't exactly the brightest. Most likely to play a Magical Girl cleric.

The Freak - his characters change every time, but every time they're some sort of freakish bastard. Most likely to be on the recieving end of fantastical racism.

The Loose Tongue - leaks every bit of information to characters he trusts. Most likely to be robbed repeatdly.

[8BitNinja]

The Anime Hero: His characters are always the chosen one, has a generic love interest, and has friends that are way better than himself.

[goto124]

The Freak - his characters change every time, but every time they're some sort of freakish bastard. Most likely to be on the recieving end of fantastical racism.


A freakish illegitimate child?

[quinron]

An all-too-common one for me and some of my other DM friends:

The Clipped-Wing Angel: A subtype of the "My character is totally original, guys, I swear" guy, this player is obviously playing a favorite character from a pre-existing IP - or at least, they would be if the game at started about 15 levels higher. Expect one of two end results: grumbling about how they "don't feel powerful" because at level 3 they aren't the demigod they expected to be, or suicidal overconfidence because they're estimating their capability and survivability from the basis character, not the info on their sheet.

[IronLionShark]

Related to "My character is totally original"
The "Inspired": They base a character on another source somewhat or fully and then forget about that and just play the character completely differently or change it to something else last minute. Oh, I'm going to make Frodo. Ends up playing a changeling cleric.

[MesiDoomstalker]

Related to "My character is totally original"
The "Inspired": They base a character on another source somewhat or fully and then forget about that and just play the character completely differently or change it to something else last minute. Oh, I'm going to make Frodo. Ends up playing a changeling cleric.

I do this all the time. I start making a character based on this or that, and then tweak this aspect, tune that one, etc. Somehow I come up with an original idea (or at least with enough unique window dressing's to be different).

[Anonymouswizard]

I do this all the time. I start making a character based on this or that, and then tweak this aspect, tune that one, etc. Somehow I come up with an original idea (or at least with enough unique window dressing's to be different).

To be perfectly honest, this is how original ideas come about. Sometimes I set out to do something really stereotypical (see my Warrior Priest), but other times I'll take a concept and throw twists at it as well as play somethings straight (my current character's an archer, because the group wanted one, which would traditionally be a human or elf Ranger or Rogue with a bow. She's a dwarf Fighter with a crossbow, and will serve as the party chronicler [no calligrapher's tools, but she's just writing it down, when we get back to town she's buying a book and bank vault).

Heck my current character's culture is entirely an attempt to make one that's original for dwarfs. The first idea was that female dwarves in this setting have beards*, so the Mountain Dwarf in the party is bearded and female, but my character is a Hill Dwarf, which means she shaves her beard but not the sideburns. Then there's the fact that the character's hold had included a lot of farmers who lived in dwellings either built from scratch or around rocky outcroppings. This caused lots of confusion when my character was introduced to the group, with the other players going 'but you're a dwarf!'

* I didn't know this when creating the character, having just come out of a game where female dwarves were essentially repressed due to not having beards (which led to the best scene where it was obvious the first female greybeard was going 'please, my hair reached the floor when you guys where using beard growth creams').

[Âmesang]

The Clipped-Wing Angel: A subtype of the "My character is totally original, guys, I swear" guy, this player is obviously playing a favorite character from a pre-existing IP - or at least, they would be if the game at started about 15 levels higher.
I actually want to do that using Sun Wukong… but half-of-the-fun is watching him start at low-level and grow into the super-powered character from myth. :smallsmile:

[Clistenes]

I actually want to do that using Sun Wukong… but half-of-the-fun is watching him start at low-level and grow into the super-powered character from myth. :smallsmile:

Well, Sun Wukong DID progress from humble beginnings. Despite being born in an unconventional way (from a magical stone), he started as just a very strong and tough monkey who became the leader of his pack. He later managed to be accepted as apprentice by a Xian (a taoist immortal super-wizard) who taught him all his tricks. He later became even more powerful by stealing a weapon from the Dragon King, had many adventures (he was both an ally and a foe to the Ox King Demon), fought the increasingly more powerful divine warriors that Heaven sent against him, and became rather indestructible by stealing the divine wine and peaches.

I can easily see him starting as a 1st level character (a CR 1 Awakened Monkey or Vanara or Monkey Hengeyokai character), fight wild animals and other monkeys until reaching mid levels, start training under the Xian, beating challenges until reaching high levels, and then defeat supernatural creatures and gain XP until reaching Epic Levels and becoming godlike. I think some Fighter/Monk/Swordsage/Shugenja/PrCs Epic build could portray him quite well.

[Blue Duke]

The George Lucas: This GM spends his free time worldbuilding, but hasn't taken a single improv class in his life. His world seems really cool on paper, and his characters could be amazing in any other context, but he can't actually write a game to save his life. All of his characters have the same voice and the same personality when he roleplays, and where one could run a deeply interesting in-depth plot, instead he chooses to run a dungeon-crawling hack-and-slash fest.


it is most depressing to me that i realize i am the Lucas....and that this was posted on my birthday. I've been told the two settings we've managed to play in more then once that were not (Ironically) Star wars were pretty good.....but i feel like they were sub-par because i couldn't make every one happy.

now my own for an entire group
The Kangaroo: they leap from setting to setting week by week (and oddly turn into Remoras in settings -i- hate) they can go two weeks at most playing the same game unless its one at least one player in the group HATES with a fiery passion. they also have different people willing to DM so every one gets a turn and the variety keeps some one from being driven nuts by monotony.

[IronLionShark]

Aboleth DM: Not that the DM is an Aboleth. This DM just throws all the Aboleths, Tarrasques, and other ancient horrors.

[Urpriest]

Aboleth DM: Not that the DM is an Aboleth. This DM just throws all the Aboleths, Tarrasques, and other ancient horrors.

Aboleth DM: The DM is literally an Aboleth, and the players are all Skum.

[IronLionShark]

Aboleth DM: The DM is literally an Aboleth, and the players are all Skum.

Shh it's a secret. Topsay ithway hetay bolethaay.

[Pugwampy]

The angry old Lion A former DM narrowminded ,who is outspoken thinking only his way is the right way . A person green with envy that a new snotty kid can actually pull off a better game.
Does his best to disrupt and sabotage games . Negotiates on everything DM offers has a tantrum when he does not get his way , Runs to the rulebooks not caring for house rules when his ego is slighted . His idea of a good game is the younger DM looking at him for "guidance" yet his advice and great wisdom will make players steamroll over his monsters. He will be the first to say to DM . I am not engaging that monster , forget it . His hero wizard is floating in the air observing the battlefield . His hero cleric will buff himself and never help a damaged team buddy because its mathematically inefficent but will order the fighter to charge the spell caster directly. Its an absolute frenzy when something he does not calculate mucks up his hero .

<It was a pleasure to boot him > :smallbiggrin:

[Anonymouswizard]

The angry old Lion A former DM narrowminded ,who is outspoken thinking only his way is the right way . A person green with envy that a new snotty kid can actually pull of a better game.
Does his best to disrupt and sabotage games . Negotiates on everything DM offers has a tantrum when he does not get his way , Runs to the rulebooks not caring for house rules when his ego is slighted . His idea of a good game is the younger DM looking at him for "guidance" yet his advice and great wisdom will make players steamroll over his monsters. He will be the first to say to DM . I am not engaging that monster , forget it . His hero wizard is floating in the air observing the battlefield . His hero cleric will buff himself and never help a damaged team buddy because its mathematically inefficent but will order the fighter to charge the spell caster directly. Its an absolute frenzy when something he does not calculate mucks up his hero .

<It was a pleasure to boot him > :smallbiggrin:

The grumpy old Lion: unlike the AOL, the GOL is actually fun to play with. They can make interesting characters and run good games. However, they prefer to run old school games and are stuck in the old school mindset, which causes them to exploit their character concept even when it goes against the story. However, he is still a great guy to play with, who will support the other players and bend his tactics to suit the group, or who will lead the party to victory from the front and advise other players on tactics. The only downside is that his games can be a little too lethal or traps a bit to hard to spot, but no matter what the situation he makes the game fun. Tends to prefer AD&D 1e or 2e to these new-fangled modern systems.

[IronLionShark]

The grumpy old Lion: unlike the AOL, the GOL is actually fun to play with. They can make interesting characters and run good games. However, they prefer to run old school games and are stuck in the old school mindset, which causes them to exploit their character concept even when it goes against the story. However, he is still a great guy to play with, who will support the other players and bend his tactics to suit the group, or who will lead the party to victory from the front and advise other players on tactics. The only downside is that his games can be a little too lethal or traps a bit to hard to spot, but no matter what the situation he makes the game fun. Tends to prefer AD&D 1e or 2e to these new-fangled modern systems.

The IronLionShark: Is awesome, plays well, DMs well and is amazing at forums about webcomics.

I'm not biased! You are!

[Dire Roc]

Related to "My character is totally original"
The "Inspired": They base a character on another source somewhat or fully and then forget about that and just play the character completely differently or change it to something else last minute. Oh, I'm going to make Frodo. Ends up playing a changeling cleric.

The Accidental Ripoff: The player who's character is almost identical to a character from fiction, but they either don't realize this, or only do so after they finished building it.

Me after I built a red headed monk for a PF game who was building for the Dragon Style feat chain, wanted to prove/discover the existence of dragons, would eventually have Elemental Fist so his unarmed strikes could be surrounded by fire and just for fun I gave him a scarf and pet cat. It was shortly after that point I realized I had build Natsu Dragneel.

[Max_Killjoy]

The Accidental Ripoff: The player who's character is almost identical to a character from fiction, but they either don't realize this, or only do so after they finished building it.

Me after I built a red headed monk for a PF game who was building for the Dragon Style feat chain, wanted to prove/discover the existence of dragons, would eventually have Elemental Fist so his unarmed strikes could be surrounded by fire and just for fun I gave him a scarf and pet cat. It was shortly after that point I realized I had build Natsu Dragneel.


When I was much much younger, I created a character from an ancient race, with white hair, and an intelligent sword.

I'd never ever heard of Elric at the time.

[2D8HP]

Aboleth DM: Not that the DM is an Aboleth. This DM just throws all the Aboleths, Tarrasques, and other ancient horrors.Whatever those newfangled critters are, I can't stress this enough; if player's want to avoid "random wandering monsters" such as the Purple worm!,
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3f/Purple_worm.JPG
they need to get pizza with the right toppings!


The grumpy old Lion:
-
Tends to prefer AD&D 1e or 2e to these new-fangled modern systems.
There's a 2e?
:smallwink:

[IronLionShark]

Whatever those newfangled critters are, I can't stress this enough; if player's want to avoid "random wandering monsters" such as the Purple worm!,
*snip*
they need to get pizza with the right toppings!
*snip*

You mean bacon pepperoni?
Also:
The Cough Cough, Right Pizza, Cough Cough extremely lucky guy: Somehow gets extremely lucky. Cough Cough, Bribe, Cough Cough

[AshfireMage]

You mean bacon pepperoni?
Also:
The Cough Cough, Right Pizza, Cough Cough extremely lucky guy: Somehow gets extremely lucky. Cough Cough, Bribe, Cough Cough

reminds me of one of the ones I fit into:

The Baker: Brings homemade cookies/brownies/pies to nearly every session. Most likely to be invited back next campaign.

[Cealocanth]

The Accidental Ripoff: The player who's character is almost identical to a character from fiction, but they either don't realize this, or only do so after they finished building it.

Me after I built a red headed monk for a PF game who was building for the Dragon Style feat chain, wanted to prove/discover the existence of dragons, would eventually have Elemental Fist so his unarmed strikes could be surrounded by fire and just for fun I gave him a scarf and pet cat. It was shortly after that point I realized I had build Natsu Dragneel.

No new characters under the sun. I don't know how many times I design a campaign setting only to have a setting with a very similar premise appear in a movie in two weeks.

[nedz]

The Accidental Ripoff: The player who's character is almost identical to a character from fiction, but they either don't realize this, or only do so after they finished building it.

Me after I built a red headed monk for a PF game who was building for the Dragon Style feat chain, wanted to prove/discover the existence of dragons, would eventually have Elemental Fist so his unarmed strikes could be surrounded by fire and just for fun I gave him a scarf and pet cat. It was shortly after that point I realized I had build Natsu Dragneel.

I once ran an entire campaign where the players accused me of basing it on a book I still haven't read (Actually an entire series of books: Julian May's Galactic Milieu Trilogy). :smallamused:

[8BitNinja]

The Accidental Ripoff: The player who's character is almost identical to a character from fiction, but they either don't realize this, or only do so after they finished building it.

Me after I built a red headed monk for a PF game who was building for the Dragon Style feat chain, wanted to prove/discover the existence of dragons, would eventually have Elemental Fist so his unarmed strikes could be surrounded by fire and just for fun I gave him a scarf and pet cat. It was shortly after that point I realized I had build Natsu Dragneel.

I have done this many, many times.

[Lord Raziere]

I have done this many, many times.

I done this with a dragon inventor who basically turned to be the fantasy version of the Doctor.

still one of my most fun characters to play.

[8BitNinja]

The Slave Driver: The guy who takes control of the party and orders everyone around.

[Cluedrew]

Pseudo-Computer Gamer: The one who treats the game like it is a computer game. For example asks for skills they can use to resolve a situation (in a game that is very much narration leads to the rules), generally assuming that the NPCs are cut-outs with no motivation other than to provide the PCs with resources and targets and wouldn't bother to tell anyone about murders that they witnessed.

... Because what is emersion? (Or group cohesion but that was a different issue.)

[8BitNinja]

Pseudo-Computer Gamer: The one who treats the game like it is a computer game. For example asks for skills they can use to resolve a situation (in a game that is very much narration leads to the rules), generally assuming that the NPCs are cut-outs with no motivation other than to provide the PCs with resources and targets and wouldn't bother to tell anyone about murders that they witnessed.

... Because what is emersion? (Or group cohesion but that was a different issue.)

This was me at the beginning of my TRPG gaming.

[Tokidoki]

The person who tries subverting fantasy cliches and ends up making me prefer the cliches.

The person who makes morally grey, brooding antiheroes. Consistently. In every single game.

[MesiDoomstalker]

The person who tries subverting fantasy cliches and ends up making me prefer the cliches.

The person who makes morally grey, brooding antiheroes. Consistently. In every single game.

Antitroper and Edge Lord respectively.

[Tokidoki]

Antitroper and Edge Lord respectively.

Hah, I'd figure they'd already be named archetypes. I have the misfortune to be friends with folks who like those stuff a lot so I encounter them quite a bit.

Not even brooding and dark edge lords, but just characters who are "ironically" good, or have every single villain be sympathetic in order to add "depth". Or have evil angels and "misunderstood" demons because ~~~different~~~

Admittedly, one of my friends that did this in a hilarious way, by making angels racist hillbillies.

[IronLionShark]

The Questionable Alignment: The alignment of their characters is always questionable on both axis.
The Diet Questionable Alignment: Same but also plays some questionable on only one axis. (Ex of what this player might make: Questionable on Good-Evil, but definitely lawful.)

[IronLionShark]

Hah, I'd figure they'd already be named archetypes. I have the misfortune to be friends with folks who like those stuff a lot so I encounter them quite a bit.

Not even brooding and dark edge lords, but just characters who are "ironically" good, or have every single villain be sympathetic in order to add "depth". Or have evil angels and "misunderstood" demons because ~~~different~~~

Admittedly, one of my friends that did this in a hilarious way, by making angels racist hillbillies.

Hillbillies? Like:"I be reckonin those flumphs shouldn't hold politicalal offish."? Or a less stereotypical kind?

[Tokidoki]

Hillbillies? Like:"I be reckonin those flumphs shouldn't hold politicalal offish."? Or a less stereotypical kind?

The first one. They hated anyone with fiendish/infernal taint, aasimars (for not being "celestial" enough), halflings, and non-chaotic folk, and not necessarily in that order. Their hatred of halflings was left ambiguous.

This was a tounge-in-cheek game so we just ran with it.

[2D8HP]

The first one. They hated anyone with fiendish/infernal taint, aasimars (for not being "celestial" enough), halflings, and non-chaotic folk, and not necessarily in that order. Their hatred of halflings was left ambiguous.

This was a tounge-in-cheek game so we just ran with it.
"Fun fact", D&D co-creator Gygax hated hobbits! (http://blogofholding.com/?p=5368)

…is there anybody who DIDN’T know Gary hated Hobbits?

“Hey, Gary, have you read Lord of the Rings?”

“GRRR! STUPID HOBBITS!”

Direct quote

[MesiDoomstalker]

Hah, I'd figure they'd already be named archetypes. I have the misfortune to be friends with folks who like those stuff a lot so I encounter them quite a bit.

Not even brooding and dark edge lords, but just characters who are "ironically" good, or have every single villain be sympathetic in order to add "depth". Or have evil angels and "misunderstood" demons because ~~~different~~~

Admittedly, one of my friends that did this in a hilarious way, by making angels racist hillbillies.

Actually, I was just giving them names for you.

[quinron]

Pseudo-Computer Gamer: The one who treats the game like it is a computer game. For example asks for skills they can use to resolve a situation (in a game that is very much narration leads to the rules), generally assuming that the NPCs are cut-outs with no motivation other than to provide the PCs with resources and targets and wouldn't bother to tell anyone about murders that they witnessed.

... Because what is emersion? (Or group cohesion but that was a different issue.)

Conversely,

The Appendix Annotator: This player ruthlessly catalogs every detail about the world, no matter how insignificant, and follows up on it later. Every NPC is assumed to be a quest-giver with valuable information and an individualized history - despite the fact that the DM just wants to get on with things and forget Ted the Farmer.

and

The Reluctant Roller: This player couldn't care less about the skills, mechanics, rules crunch, etc; they're here for the interactions. And they get annoyed any time they're forced to roll, because this is a game with rules for resolutions and not just group storytime.

[2D8HP]

The Reluctant Roller: This player couldn't care less about the skills, mechanics, rules crunch, etc; they're here for the interactions. And they get annoyed any time they're forced to roll, because this is a game with rules for resolutions and not just group storytime.This is partly me, in that I hate memorizing rules minutiae.
As a player I am interested in exploring a fantastic world, and I really don't want to think about the damn rules at all. I could be very happy with a "character sheet" that lists my PC's name, the equipment my PC is carrying, hit points left, and nothing else!
I really only want to learn what my PC is perceiving. As to "mastering the crunch" so that my PC is "an optimal build"?
Boring!
Just tell me if the DRAGONS WINGS ARE STILL FLAPPING!
But, I love rolling dice! If the GM tells me "roll over X to escape the bad guys", that's AWESOME! Just please spare me knowing why in the rules. And if I figure out that the GM made the rule up that required that roll?
RESPECT IS DUE! :biggrin:

[8BitNinja]

Antitroper and Edge Lord respectively.

I really don't like the Edge Lord. They really annoy me.

But keep in mind the only ones I met were a bunch of stupid teenagers who want to be "hip" and "cool"

Am I sounding like a cranky old man?

[Arbane]

I really don't like the Edge Lord. They really annoy me.

But keep in mind the only ones I met were a bunch of stupid teenagers who want to be "hip" and "cool"

Am I sounding like a cranky old man?

Yes, but that doesn't mean you're wrong. Now get off of my lawn.

[2D8HP]

Am I sounding like a cranky old man?
Not quite yet. It takes many years of practice to get "coot" right. But don't worry, your getting there.
:wink:

[Âmesang]

The Appendix Annotator: This player ruthlessly catalogs every detail about the world, no matter how insignificant, and follows up on it later. Every NPC is assumed to be a quest-giver with valuable information and an individualized history - despite the fact that the DM just wants to get on with things and forget Ted the Farmer.
I was certainly the first half of this whilst playing through the Shackled City Adventure Path, but mainly 'cause I have a lousy memory. :smalltongue: It's also why, even when not refereeing the game (we were taking turns; bad idea) I'd send out e-mails to the players with (relatively) short but detailed "last time on Dragon Orb Z…" bits just in case anyone else couldn't remember things, either (especially in winter months when games would be canceled due to weather and we only played one-a-week).

[Belac93]

I really don't like the Edge Lord. They really annoy me.

But keep in mind the only ones I met were a bunch of stupid teenagers who want to be "hip" and "cool"

Am I sounding like a cranky old man?

Not really. I know teenagers who play RPGs, and they hate people who do that. Annoys them so much. If you want to be 'cool,' you should make a cool, funny, awesome character. Not a brooding dark lord in training. Even if you want to do that, just make a gnome cult leader who isn't so good at his job. Much better, still dark, but with a bit of comedy, and actually memorable. Or at least a lot more so than Broody Edgy-dagger#12.

[Anonymouswizard]

Not really. I know teenagers who play RPGs, and they hate people who do that. Annoys them so much. If you want to be 'cool,' you should make a cool, funny, awesome character. Not a brooding dark lord in training. Even if you want to do that, just make a gnome cult leader who isn't so good at his job. Much better, still dark, but with a bit of comedy, and actually memorable. Or at least a lot more so than Broody Edgy-dagger#12.

Seconding this, there's more problems with teenagers creating 'generic awesome person #22' than a brooding edgy guy. I mean, sometimes they do come out with a cool, funny, awesome character, likely far more than I do (I cannot get cool to save my life), but most of them are like most older people who play RPGs: 'dude I just want to have fun stop telling me how electricity works and let me resolve my lightning bolt'.

[IronLionShark]

This is partly me, in that I hate memorizing rules minutiae.
As a player I am interested in exploring a fantastic world, and I really don't want to think about the damn rules at all. I could be very happy with a "character sheet" that lists my PC's name, the equipment my PC is carrying, hit points left, and nothing else!
I really only want to learn what my PC is perceiving. As to "mastering the crunch" so that my PC is "an optimal build"?
Boring!
Just tell me if the DRAGONS WINGS ARE STILL FLAPPING!
But, I love rolling dice! If the GM tells me "roll over X to escape the bad guys", that's AWESOME! Just please spare me knowing why in the rules. And if I figure out that the GM made the rule up that required that roll?
RESPECT IS DUE! :biggrin:

As a DM I like to use variant rules, homebrew rules, ect. to add more rolls.
The Rollkin: Can be DM or player : Loves rolling dice.

[8BitNinja]

Not quite yet. It takes many years of practice to get "coot" right. But don't worry, your getting there.
:wink:

2D4HP, If you ever say to me "get with the times old man" I will know I have truly earned your favor


Not really. I know teenagers who play RPGs, and they hate people who do that. Annoys them so much. If you want to be 'cool,' you should make a cool, funny, awesome character. Not a brooding dark lord in training. Even if you want to do that, just make a gnome cult leader who isn't so good at his job. Much better, still dark, but with a bit of comedy, and actually memorable. Or at least a lot more so than Broody Edgy-dagger#12.

Like I said, the only ones I have encountered, which were few and far between. I was implying that I may have the wrong demographic associated with these characters

[IronLionShark]

2D4HP, If you ever say to me "get with the times old man" I will know I have truly earned your favor
*snip*

Sir, you can't just halve peoples health willy nilly. That's not cool. Not cool.

[nedz]

Sir, you can't just halve peoples health willy nilly. That's not cool. Not cool.

Yeah, 4BitNinja really goofed there.

[IronLionShark]

Yeah, 4BitNinja really goofed there.

Data halving is also wrong: #StopUnnecessaryHalving

[8BitNinja]

Sir, you can't just halve peoples health willy nilly. That's not cool. Not cool.


Yeah, 4BitNinja really goofed there.

I'm sorry

*Cure moderate wounds*