Video game characters in the campaign

[LivinlovinDM]

While we have all probably tried to make D&D conversions of our favorite video game characters, movie characters, etc., I have never seen one played in a real campaign. I am just starting a campaign now (we're on session 4) and one of my players has made a character that is the exact replica of the main character from the "Witcher" series.

I gently reminded him after session 1 of the game's spirit of originality, suggesting that while a similar build and fighting style to a video game character might work, he should probably make the character his own. Come session 2, and the players hand in their backstories, including, from Andy, a two-page synopsis of the "Witcher" rituals and training that he has gone through (which looks like it would result in a 15th level character, not a 2nd). As far as I can tell (and I've looked it up on IGN wiki), it's all directly from the video game.

In addition, his character keeps doing things and mentioning things about the world (my world, thank you very much) that are taken from the game, and nobody else knows about them. For example, the first tavern they stopped at, he asked if he could play "gwent" with the locals (a game from Witcher). Or, mentioning monsters they've never run into and that I've never heard of as if they were campaign-setting staples. His character tells other characters about all the cool stuff he can do (from the game) that his character can't actually do (craft a strength potion, craft a smoke bomb, etc.). I feel like there's something inherently wrong with a player trying to insert his video game into our campaign. Like, if we wanted to play Witcher, we wouldn't be playing D&D.

Do any of you have advice on how to deal with this kind of player? I want him to still have fun, and play the character he wants, without his video-game preconceptions overshadowing the rest of the game and the rest of the players.

[Âmesang]

In my younger days one of my earlier characters was more-or-less Tira from SoulCalibur, though this was for a high-level one shot; I think she ended up being a rogue/assassin/shadow dancer (dat Reflex save!) using Obtain Familiar to get a raven companion. Granted it was a less-than-serious game and I think I only did it because someone on the Wizards forums had statted out Tira's "ring blade."

Honestly my first thought is to just try and sit down and talk with him again and hope you'll be able to get through to him that he's not actually playing the Witcher; any chance you could send him a document containing basic "What the Common Man of the World Would Know" notes? Something to give him a clue regarding the general things that are and aren't in your world.

To be fair a lot of my favorite characters still have video game origins due to character creation modes (SoulCalibur, Dynasty Warriors, Adventure Quest, &c). I find it helps to not only give a character a visual appearance but also helps to develop some instant personality (at least assuming there's a voice option).

[Slipperychicken]

one of my players has made a character that is the exact replica of the main character from the "Witcher" series.

Short answer: I'd just tell him no, he has to actually make his own character. It's insulting that, even though you as the DM put a lot of hard work into a custom setting and story, he didn't even bother to write up a knock-off with the serial numbers filed off that fits into your setting. His current PC is being retconned out of existence and will be replaced by an original PC.


If he wants a character with a similar skillset and personality to Geralt, then okay, but that's as close as it gets. At the absolute bare minimum, the following applies:

• Write a backstory. His own backstory, even if it's just a few bullet points of important events in his character's life. Not a plot synopsis stolen from a website.
• All elements of the backstory (especially stuff like card games and monsters) must be fully compatible with your campaign setting and approved by you, or else the backstory will be rejected.
• All parts of the backstory must be plausible for a character with his starting stats to have gone through. If he can't brew potions or slay dragons, then none of that can be in the backstory.
• Everything must be expressly approved by the DM
• If something is not in the written backstory sent to you, then it is not canon unless he gets express approval from the DM to incorporate it into canon.
• If it's immediately obvious that this is a video-game character or otherwise not a sufficiently original character, then it's getting thrown out.

If he proves unwilling or incapable of complying with the spirit of dnd and making a semi-original character, then he's not playing DnD with you. Because frankly, if that's the case, then your gaming group will be better off without him.

As a general rule, I recommend vetting backstories long before characters are introduced, to give you time to reject inappropriate ones like these and allow players time to modify their character ideas as necessary.

[Waker]

At most, characters in a D&D game can be inspired from other sources, sorta like how Hollywood movies are "inspired" by books. If you want your character to be a duel-katana wielding smartass who wears red is one thing, but if you are also a former mercenary who underwent human augmentation to grant you regenerative abilities and routinely annoy a rageoholic Canadian with metal claws, then we need to talk.
Sit your player down and talk. Let him know that no, he doesn't know crap about the world unless his character directly experienced something or made the appropriate knowledge roll. Can he come up with a bit of history about who his family is? Sure. Detailed rituals that grant him superpowers? Not even a little.

[LivinlovinDM]

As a general rule, I recommend vetting backstories long before characters are introduced, to give you time to reject inappropriate ones like these and allow players time to modify their character ideas as necessary.

After this, I'm definitely going to start

[Red Fel]

Do any of you have advice on how to deal with this kind of player? I want him to still have fun, and play the character he wants, without his video-game preconceptions overshadowing the rest of the game and the rest of the players.

Short version? This isn't a problem of trying to inject a video game character into a tabletop game. This is a problem of a player who wants to play his specific character irrespective of the game world or the rest of the table.

I've played video game, TV, movie, or book characters in a tabletop game a few times. What I did was adapt them - take the basic original concept, adapt it to the setting and mechanics. For example, Inspector Javert (Les Miserables) works surprisingly well as a Judge Magister in the Final Fantasy setting of Ivalice - add a suit of armor and affiliation with the nobility, and you're set.

What you're seeing is a player who can't - or won't - make that transition. He loves the original concept, which is fine - most of us are inspired in some way by so many things, whether we realize it or not. The problem is that he insists that his character is in its original world, sporting its original power, despite advice and warnings to the contrary. That's not a problem with video game characters adapted to tabletop games, that's a problem of one particular player.

I said all that to get to this point: How do you deal with him? Talk to him. Take him aside either before or after a game, and explain to him that (1) his PC is not the character from The Witcher; (2) his PC cannot do what that character can do; and (3) his PC is not in the world of The Witcher. If he refuses to accept this, then he is playing a different game than everyone else at the table; they are playing poker and he brought his Uno cards. Welcome him to return to the table if and when he wants to play the same game as everyone else.

On the other hand, if he listens, or seems to, then you proceed as usual. Each time he tries to bring up something from The Witcher, remind him that it's not a thing. If he asks to play "gwent," tell him that it's not a game they know. If he says he can craft strength potions, ask him where on his character sheet he has that ability. Reinforce that he is playing in a specific setting and system, and he can't simply inject concepts or abilities into it because he wants to.

If he wants to play with everyone, he'll figure it out. He can still have fun with a character inspired by his game. If, on the other hand, he insists on playing a character with no anchor in your game, you can either have every NPC treat him like a lunatic, and refuse him when he insists he can do something unsupported by his character sheet, or un-invite him until he decides to play the same game as everyone else.

[Vitruviansquid]

I'm gonna break this down into several parts.

1. Your player is playing a character you do not find particularly imaginative or compelling.

Let him, it's his character, after all.

2. Your player is acting against the setting.

Ask yourself honestly if the experience for your game is really that hurt for yourself and the other players if one player isn't playing with the setting. Yes, there are some campaigns that can be broken or becomes very unfun if the immersion is broken like this, but not all of them. Think about whether your campaign is this way. If yes, force the player to change those aspects of his character that don't agree with your setting.

3. The player is messing with you and the other players.

If you suspect that the player made his character Geralt just to annoy you or the other characters, stop inviting him to sessions. If you get him to stop being Geralt, he will simply find another way to be annoying.

[oxybe]

As someone who frequents the D&D & RPG sides of reddit i will pull out what is basically a standard operating reply at this point when people ask about issues at the table with other players:

First of all... are they having fun and are you having fun? that's the number 1 most important thing. not realism, not sticking to your metaplot, just "is everyone at this table (both players and gm) having fun pretending to be magical elves and whatnot"? if not that's when you need to consider the next 2 things.

Second, did you have a session 0 with this group of newbies?

"Session 0" is there for multiple reasons:
-campaign introduction and the characters' place in it
-explaining themes explored, genre the game is set in
-character creation & defining a power level everyone is comfortable with
-discussion on houserules
-a more in-depth discussion of scheduling

This puts everyone on the same page when it comes to what is expected not just of the players but their characters and their place in the world. If you haven't done this, you should probably take one session (or part of one) to kinda re-orient your group.

Third... did you follow the flowchart www.imgur.com/EwiChyD.png?

Bring up your issues with them and treat them like adults. At that point, if they don't change you need to make one of two choices: replace them/quit or accept them. Simply put, if their behaviour doesn't change after a discussion, and you find their behaviour still grinds your gears, tell them to leave, If not, you'll have to accept that their behaviour is the way going forward.

of course this isn't written in stone or anything and I don't know the particulars of your group dynamics, but the TL;DR is

1 - Are the people having fun? Then it's cool. It doesn't matter if the character is ripped from a videogame, ripped from a novel, ripped from the player's mind or is a totes OC character DO NOT STEAL akin to Blonic the Hedgehog.

2 - Always start with a session 0 to make sure everyone is on the same page & are brainstorming. As a side note: this also allows you, the gm, to have an idea of what the group dynamic will be like and if the players will get along before the campaign starts proper and everyone is invested in both time and energy.

3 - if it really isn't working out, talk to them and understand that sometimes you have to cut your losses and kick people out.

[Phoenixguard09]

In this case, I would ask myself if the basic concept of the character fit in my setting. If it doesn't, I would discuss this with my player and ask them to change.

If it does fit the setting, which a magi-science altered monster hunter would in my case, but the inspiration is too blatant, I would discuss with the player how to file off the serial numbers so to speak. If the player would like to be capable of things their character is not capable of, I would suggest using an alternate class, or homebrew such an alternative.

Either way, I would definitely talk to the player about how they should stay within the setting. The business regarding playing gwent is a bit unreasonable. If asked to play gwent, I would firmly point out that it is a construct of The Witcher'verse and does not exist in my setting, but then offer some alternative tavern games instead.

Unless you're trying to create a different atmosphere and the tavern games would detract from that.

Basically I'm saying don't just say no, offer alternatives which do suit your world and game.

[RickAllison]

I would like to add that you can offer to let him keep his character as-is... The trade-off is that his character is a little insane. Write up your own (minimal) backstory for him if he won't that ends with getting too close to Cthulhu/setting-appropriate multi-planar entity that induces madness. The PC believes he is Geralt because when his mind tried to re-structure itself, it latched on to the memories of another person from another multi-verse. Every time that his character mentions things that make zero sense in-universe, RP unfamiliar NPCs appropriately.

Tavern-dwellers may ask how to play gwent, magic-users will be very curious as to how he makes those potions (and potentially angry if he is found to be wasting their time), and so on. It would be like if someone showed up in our world while acting as if they were in Shadowrun, people would be very confused, off-put, and may report the person if they were thought to be a danger.

It could make for an interesting PC at that point. My current wizard is a genius when it comes to everything Spelljammer, Eberron, FR, but he has to roll to recognize many creatures within the DM's world because he is a complete stranger to it. He is the kind of person who knows every variety of Giant Space Hamster, but would have to really think about if he knew anything about an ordinary elk. It makes for fun RP as I get to play a stranger who is learning about the world from scratch!

[icefractal]

In addition, his character keeps doing things and mentioning things about the world (my world, thank you very much) that are taken from the game, and nobody else knows about them. For example, the first tavern they stopped at, he asked if he could play "gwent" with the locals (a game from Witcher).

With the caveat that it does sound like the player is overreaching in a lot of other ways, I think this is an area you can and should compromise on a bit. The players aren't paid actors who follow a script, they've got their own ideas too, and whenever possible, they should have the chance to contribute those ideas.

Declaring that a type of monster is common in the campaign? Too much. But declaring that it exists at all? Unless that monster existing would really screw up your campaign, why not let it? Claiming they have all kinds of abilities they don't? That's either unfair to the other players (if they expect to get them) or setting themself up for disappointment when they don't. But wanting to introduce a card game into the world? That seems harmless - why not go with it?

Generally speaking, players are going to be more engaged and interested in "our world" than in "my world".

[Âmesang]

For example, Inspector Javert (Les Miserables) works surprisingly well as a Judge Magister in the Final Fantasy setting of Ivalice - add a suit of armor and affiliation with the nobility, and you're set.

And now I've the urge to go around shouting, "I'm Captain Basch!" Truly you are evil.