Jonesh
2008-02-05, 05:27 PM
So I'm talking to one of my players via IM about this d20-modern campaign http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70343
I was going to talk to him about two things (besides what's up and all that :smalltongue:), his ability scores and character background plus in-game reason for his character to be at a fancy dinner party.
As this PC's stats are
8 strength
17 dexterity
13 constitution
12 intelligence
16 wisdom
8 charisma
I suggested that maybe he should shave off a point or two from dex and/or wis to even out or enhance his str and/or con/int. Since his character is a Fast hero, he's had an easy time specializing in ranged weapons and dexterity-based skills. He's also claiming that he want to gain levels in the advanced class Psionic Agent as soon as he is able, which means that he's going to shoot things good and have psionics to boot.
The thing is, he is both an utter d20-newbie and I think he's a bit, eh, "damaged" when it comes to realism in RPGs.
I said that I thought than an average strength score (+ maybe other higher abilities) would help a lot more than having that 17 in dexterity. Since it costs 3 points for him to go from 16 to 17, it's more efficient to spread those points out a bit, right?
Now he's saying that he's not going to get in melee (he will most probably you know, all the PCs might tangle with thugs and stuff who wants to break their faces with lead pipes) or that he'll just shoot when he's in melee combat.
I explain the penalties for him (possible -4 to the attack roll or is that just with big ranged weapons? and that he draws AoOs from threatening foes)
and he says he'll just shoot them before they get to him and I calmly explain that might not always work, since the opponent will be rushing/moving erratically and not just running straight at him etc. i.e. hellbent on smashing his character's face and avoid getting shot.
I continue by relating thís rule to real life, e.g. when a knife wielding (or by the Planes, unarmed :smallamused:) assailant is quite dangerous to, say, a police officer with a pistol when the assailant is in the range of 3-30 feet.
Because at that distance the assailant could just rush the officer and have the advantage in melee because he's armed with a melee weapon and/or he has the intent to close in and pursue melee combat vs. the officer who might hoping to shoot the assailant before he comes close enough to hit him.
It's even worse for the officer if he has not drawn his pistol yet :smalltongue:
He's complaining that upping his str-score to an average value would make an unbalanced character, I'm arguing that he's building himself into a corner with no backup-plan if he loses his weapon or has to fight on the enemies' terms. Basically, that he's making a glass cannon and really losing it in melee and not being able to withdraw. I mean, gosh, he doesn't even have Tumble! Btw, I ought to recommend him to spend a few ranks in that skill?
I'm thinking that I'll give him a test combat, basically make him able to compare his ability in ranged vs. his ability in melee. Does that sound like a good plan, and/or what would you do in this situation?
And then we got sidetracked as we started to talk about when I joined in on his RPG-group's sucky "rollplay". I had doubts before I joined about the setting and the homebrewed rulesystem but I thought I made an interesting enough character;
A novice monk who had been a regular Brother Jacob untill he manifested some strange powers, including the ability to control mosquitoes living in his body and calling forth a two-handed sword by will alone. Then he became ostracized by his fellow monks, no matter what he did. He excelled, they scorned him. He misbehaved, they scorned him. Eventually he fell into depression and left after a drunken binge which got him expelled from his monastery. He then had a vision that he still could reach Nirvana and that he didn't need those monks, he just knew he would find what he was searching for on the road.
The powers bit was necessary. The whole setting was a rip-off from virtually every recent animeshow/manga -_-
And it didn't make any sense! THERE WAS NO VERSIMILITUDE AT ALL.
The setting was (I correct myself, it SEEMED) halfway "modern" with shopping malls, TVs, firearms, yet no advanced mode of transportation.
And it was basically minmax, powergaming freeform. The only way to do stuff was to roll a d20 against another character's d20 and then the GM would "compare", i.e. who he favored most since he hadn't set up any guidelines for his own rulesystem.
He basically wanted people to make **** up and then roll for it, no logic behind it. You even had to talk loudly (i.e. talking louder than the other players) to actually do anything. Oh, and of course there wasn't any abilities not related to combat.
Nevermind that we were on ****ing railroads and despite my workable character concept, the GM just had me wake up with amnesia in a house with everyone else. Then we had to roleplay making breakfast and one (antagonist!) PC were going shopping with her unstoppable NPC companions. The GM tried to do some "funny" stuff. Like, uh... I hardly remember. Stuff like people getting tossed at windows and then slowly (COMICALLY HAHA) sliding down to the ground.
Woohoo, inspiring
Not memorable at all.
Sure I love me sum beer & pretzels D&D now and then, but these guys/GM couldn't even do that right.
Yes, I know I probably sound like an arrogant jerk, but I gave you a truthful description of the game as I could. And they (i.e. the GM and my "player" whom I mentioned in the beginning) defend themselves by saying that I lack imagination and am bound by rules?:smallannoyed:
I'll have you know (and them, haha) that I've played in both serious and non-serious sessions of roleplaying, but it was always appropiate to the mood we as players and the GM wanted it to be.
I'm ok at playing in almost any role as a player I guess, but I've had loads of compliments about my GMing. Eh, etc. I like to think I'm a roleplayer, not a rollplayer :smalltongue:
Basically, I want them to understand where I'm coming from here. I get their point of view, but I disagree and I know they're misinformed etc.
I'm just bad at explaining what I think. Perhaps you could help me expand on my arguments or come up with some good advice on how to make this a smooth ride? :smalltongue:
Oh, dreadfully sorry for the wall of text. I guess I vented a bit.
Here's to hoping I get some response! :smallamused:
I was going to talk to him about two things (besides what's up and all that :smalltongue:), his ability scores and character background plus in-game reason for his character to be at a fancy dinner party.
As this PC's stats are
8 strength
17 dexterity
13 constitution
12 intelligence
16 wisdom
8 charisma
I suggested that maybe he should shave off a point or two from dex and/or wis to even out or enhance his str and/or con/int. Since his character is a Fast hero, he's had an easy time specializing in ranged weapons and dexterity-based skills. He's also claiming that he want to gain levels in the advanced class Psionic Agent as soon as he is able, which means that he's going to shoot things good and have psionics to boot.
The thing is, he is both an utter d20-newbie and I think he's a bit, eh, "damaged" when it comes to realism in RPGs.
I said that I thought than an average strength score (+ maybe other higher abilities) would help a lot more than having that 17 in dexterity. Since it costs 3 points for him to go from 16 to 17, it's more efficient to spread those points out a bit, right?
Now he's saying that he's not going to get in melee (he will most probably you know, all the PCs might tangle with thugs and stuff who wants to break their faces with lead pipes) or that he'll just shoot when he's in melee combat.
I explain the penalties for him (possible -4 to the attack roll or is that just with big ranged weapons? and that he draws AoOs from threatening foes)
and he says he'll just shoot them before they get to him and I calmly explain that might not always work, since the opponent will be rushing/moving erratically and not just running straight at him etc. i.e. hellbent on smashing his character's face and avoid getting shot.
I continue by relating thís rule to real life, e.g. when a knife wielding (or by the Planes, unarmed :smallamused:) assailant is quite dangerous to, say, a police officer with a pistol when the assailant is in the range of 3-30 feet.
Because at that distance the assailant could just rush the officer and have the advantage in melee because he's armed with a melee weapon and/or he has the intent to close in and pursue melee combat vs. the officer who might hoping to shoot the assailant before he comes close enough to hit him.
It's even worse for the officer if he has not drawn his pistol yet :smalltongue:
He's complaining that upping his str-score to an average value would make an unbalanced character, I'm arguing that he's building himself into a corner with no backup-plan if he loses his weapon or has to fight on the enemies' terms. Basically, that he's making a glass cannon and really losing it in melee and not being able to withdraw. I mean, gosh, he doesn't even have Tumble! Btw, I ought to recommend him to spend a few ranks in that skill?
I'm thinking that I'll give him a test combat, basically make him able to compare his ability in ranged vs. his ability in melee. Does that sound like a good plan, and/or what would you do in this situation?
And then we got sidetracked as we started to talk about when I joined in on his RPG-group's sucky "rollplay". I had doubts before I joined about the setting and the homebrewed rulesystem but I thought I made an interesting enough character;
A novice monk who had been a regular Brother Jacob untill he manifested some strange powers, including the ability to control mosquitoes living in his body and calling forth a two-handed sword by will alone. Then he became ostracized by his fellow monks, no matter what he did. He excelled, they scorned him. He misbehaved, they scorned him. Eventually he fell into depression and left after a drunken binge which got him expelled from his monastery. He then had a vision that he still could reach Nirvana and that he didn't need those monks, he just knew he would find what he was searching for on the road.
The powers bit was necessary. The whole setting was a rip-off from virtually every recent animeshow/manga -_-
And it didn't make any sense! THERE WAS NO VERSIMILITUDE AT ALL.
The setting was (I correct myself, it SEEMED) halfway "modern" with shopping malls, TVs, firearms, yet no advanced mode of transportation.
And it was basically minmax, powergaming freeform. The only way to do stuff was to roll a d20 against another character's d20 and then the GM would "compare", i.e. who he favored most since he hadn't set up any guidelines for his own rulesystem.
He basically wanted people to make **** up and then roll for it, no logic behind it. You even had to talk loudly (i.e. talking louder than the other players) to actually do anything. Oh, and of course there wasn't any abilities not related to combat.
Nevermind that we were on ****ing railroads and despite my workable character concept, the GM just had me wake up with amnesia in a house with everyone else. Then we had to roleplay making breakfast and one (antagonist!) PC were going shopping with her unstoppable NPC companions. The GM tried to do some "funny" stuff. Like, uh... I hardly remember. Stuff like people getting tossed at windows and then slowly (COMICALLY HAHA) sliding down to the ground.
Woohoo, inspiring
Not memorable at all.
Sure I love me sum beer & pretzels D&D now and then, but these guys/GM couldn't even do that right.
Yes, I know I probably sound like an arrogant jerk, but I gave you a truthful description of the game as I could. And they (i.e. the GM and my "player" whom I mentioned in the beginning) defend themselves by saying that I lack imagination and am bound by rules?:smallannoyed:
I'll have you know (and them, haha) that I've played in both serious and non-serious sessions of roleplaying, but it was always appropiate to the mood we as players and the GM wanted it to be.
I'm ok at playing in almost any role as a player I guess, but I've had loads of compliments about my GMing. Eh, etc. I like to think I'm a roleplayer, not a rollplayer :smalltongue:
Basically, I want them to understand where I'm coming from here. I get their point of view, but I disagree and I know they're misinformed etc.
I'm just bad at explaining what I think. Perhaps you could help me expand on my arguments or come up with some good advice on how to make this a smooth ride? :smalltongue:
Oh, dreadfully sorry for the wall of text. I guess I vented a bit.
Here's to hoping I get some response! :smallamused: